HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-05-2016 Agenda Packet
Tuesday, January 5, 2016
6:00 PM
REGULAR MEETING
Council Chamber
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo Page 1
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Jan Marx
ROLL CALL: Council Members John Ashbaugh, Carlyn Christianson, Dan
Rivoire, Vice Mayor Dan Carpenter, and Mayor Jan Marx
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Council Member Rivoire
PRESENTATIONS
1. PRESENTATION BY FIRE CHIEF OLSON AND PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
GRIGSBY, REGARDING WINTER STORM PREPAREDNESS (OLSON / GRIGSBY
– 10 MINUTES)
2. PRESENTATION BY DEREK JOHNSON, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER AND
INTERIM FINANCE & IT DIRECTOR, REGARDING THE GOVERNMENT
FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION (GFOA) BUDGET PRESENTATION
AWARD FOR 2015-17 FINANCIAL PLAN (JOHNSON – 5 MINUTES)
APPOINTMENTS
3. COUNCIL LIAISON SUBCOMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS 2016 (ANSOLABEHERE
/ MAIER – 5 MINUTES)
Recommendation
Approve Council Liaison Subcommittee assignments for calendar year 2016 as outlined in the
2016 Subcommittee Assignment Roster.
San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda January 5, 2016 Page 2
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA (not to exceed 15
minutes total)
The council welcomes your input. You may address the council by completing a speaker slip
and giving it to the city clerk prior to the meeting. At this time, you may address the council
on items that are not on the agenda. Time limit is three minutes. State law does not allow the
council to discuss or take action on issues not on the agenda, except that members of the
council or staff may briefly respond to statements made or questions posed by persons
exercising their public testimony rights (gov. Code sec. 54954.2). Staff may be asked to
follow up on such items.
CONSENT AGENDA
A member of the public may request the Council to pull an item for discussion. Pulled items
shall be heard at the close of the Consent Agenda unless a majority of the Council chooses
another time. The public may comment on any and all items on the Consent Agenda within the
three minute time limit.
4. WAIVE READING IN FULL OF ALL RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
Recommendation
Waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances as appropriate.
5. SCHEDULE OF CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS FOR 2016 (ANSOLABEHERE /
MAIER)
Recommendation
Cancel the Regular City Council meetings of August 2 and December 20, 2016.
6. EMERSON PROCESSING – MAINTENANCE AND SUPPORT CONTRACT
EXTENSION (JOHNSON / SCHMIDT)
Recommendation
Approve an extension of a maintenance and support contract agreement with Emerson
Process Management for two years in the amount of $64,050 and authorize the Mayor to
execute the agreement.
San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda January 5, 2016 Page 3
7. FIRE STATION 2 REMODEL, SPECIFICATION NO. 91258 (GRIGSBY / MCGUIRE)
Recommendation
1. Approve plans and specifications for “Fire Station 2 Remodel, Specification No. 91258.”
2. Authorize staff to advertise for bids and authorize the City Manager to award the contract
if the lowest responsible bidder is within the Engineer’s Estimate of $129,000.
8. LOS OSOS VALLEY ROAD/US 101 INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT,
SPECIFICATION NO. 99821 - CONTINGENCY BUDGET UPDATE (GRIGSBY /
ROWLAND)
Recommendation
1. Authorize an $800,000 increase to the US 101/LOVR Interchange project contingency
budget to cover anticipated additional contract change orders (CCO’s), including
repaving approximately 0.75 miles of Calle Joaquin.
2. Authorize the City Engineer to be responsible for construction CCO’s for the US 101 /
LOVR Interchange Project in any amount with the limitation that the sum total of all
CCO’s not exceed the budgeted contingency amount of $2,050,000.
9. RECYCLED WATER FACILITIES PLANNING STUDY (MATTINGLY / HIX)
Recommendation
Approve an agreement with Water Systems Consultants (WSC) for development of a
Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study in an amount not to exceed $150,000.
10. REVIEW OF A MILLS ACT CONTRACT FOR THE FALKENSTEIN HOUSE AT
1445 BROAD STREET (APPLICATION HIST-1990-2015) (CODRON / OETELL)
Recommendation
As recommended by the Cultural Heritage Committee, adopt a Resolution entit led “A
Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, approving a
Historic Property Preservation Agreement between the City of San Luis Obispo and owners
of the Falkenstein house at 1445 Broad Street,” under the terms described in the contract.
San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda January 5, 2016 Page 4
PUBLIC HEARINGS
11. REVIEW OF CLEANUP AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 10 (VEHICLES & TRAFFIC)
OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE - ORDINANCE INTRODUCTION (GRIGSBY /
HUDSON – 15 MINUTES)
Recommendation
Introduce an Ordinance entitled “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo, California, amending Municipal Code Title 10 regarding Vehicles and Traffic,” to
reflect the current organizational structure within the City’s Public Works Department.
BUSINESS ITEMS
12. 2014 TRAFFIC SAFETY REPORT (GRIGSBY / HUDSON/ WHEELER – 30
MINUTES)
Recommendation
Receive and file the 2014 Traffic Safety Report.
13. LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION ACTION UPDATE (OLSON / COX – 15
MINUTES)
Recommendation
Receive and file the 2014 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Action Update.
COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS
(Not to exceed 15 minutes) Council Members report on conferences or other City activities.
Time limit—3 minutes each.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
(Not to exceed 15 minutes) At this time, any Council Member or the City Manager may ask a
question for clarification, make an announcement, or report briefly on his or her activities. In
addition, subject to Council Policies and Procedures, they may provide a reference to staff or
other resources for factual information, request staff to report back to the Council at a
subsequent meeting concerning any matter, or take action to direct staff to place a matter of
business on a future agenda. (Gov. Code Sec. 54954.2)
San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda January 5, 2016 Page 5
ADJOURNMENT
Regular City Council Meetings are scheduled for Tuesday, January 19, 2016 at 4:00 p.m. and
6:00 p.m., in the Council Chamber, respectively, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California.
LISTENING ASSISTIVE DEVICES are available for the hearing impaired--please see City Clerk.
The City of San Luis Obispo wishes to make all of its public meetings accessible to the
public. Upon request, this agenda will be made available in appropriate alternative formats to
persons with disabilities. Any person with a disability who requires a modification or
accommodation in order to participate in a meeting should direct such request to the City
Clerk’s Office at (805) 781-7100 at least 48 hours before the meeting, if possible.
Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (805) 781-7107.
City Council regular meetings are televised live on Charter Channel 20. Agenda related
writings or documents provided to the City Council are available for public inspection in the
City Clerk’s Office located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, during normal business
hours, and on the City’s website www.slocity.org. Persons with questions concerning any
agenda item may call the City Clerk’s Office at (805) 781-7100.
Page intentionally left
blank.
Meeting Date: 1/5/2016
FROM: Mayor Jan Marx and Vice Mayor Dan Carpenter
Prepared by: Jon Ansolabehere, Interim City Clerk
John Paul Maier, Assistant City Clerk
SUBJECT: COUNCIL LIAISON SUBCOMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS 2016
RECOMMENDATION
Approve Council Liaison Subcommittee assignments for calendar year 2016 as outlined in 2016
Subcommittee Assignment Roster (Attachment A).
DISCUSSION
Council Policies and Procedures and the Advisory Body Handbook prescribe the method of
Council Liaison Subcommittee assignments:
The Mayor and Vice Mayor shall submit recommendations to the full Council rotating
nominations for Council Member Subcommittees, thereby ensuring an opportunity for
each member to serve as liaison at least once on each advisory body, when possible.
When terms of office do not allow each member to serve once, members with greatest
seniority shall have first right of selection. (CP&P 6.1, ABH III, C, 6)
As in past years, automatic rotation for all technical and regional committees is not being
recommended. The recommended appointments allow for continuity where appropriate as well
as permitting Council Members to develop a higher level of expertise for some of the more
complex committees.
Mayor Marx and Vice Mayor Carpenter met on December 17th to review Council Member
preferences for serving on liaison subcommittees and regional committees. The recommended
assignments are set forth in the attached worksheets (Attachments A and B). It should be noted
that there is a new San Luis Obispo Committee – the Visit San Luis Obispo County Advisory
Committee. It is recommended that the Councilmember that serves this committee be the same
individual who serves on the City’s Tourism Improvement District Board.
As a reminder, in September 2014, the Economic Vitality Corporation amended its bylaws to
remove public sector members from the Board of Directors. Instead, the public sector members
became Public Sector Liaison Representatives, with no voting rights. Pursuant to this change in
status, the Economic Vitality Corporation is listed as a special purpose committee and the
Council’s representative and alternate will serve only in a liaison capacity.
3
Packet Pg. 6
Attachments:
a a - 2016 Subcommittee Worksheet
b b - 2016 Council Subcommittee Assignments
3
Packet Pg. 7
COUNCIL SUBCOMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS 2014-2015
City Advisory Bodies
Interview/Rec. Appointment/Facilitate Comm.
CHAIR MEMBER CHAIR MEMBER CHAIR MEMBER CHAIR MEMBER CHAIR MEMBER CHAIR MEMBER CHAIR MEMBER CHAIR MEMBER
Administrative Review Board 2 1 1 2 1 1 3 3 1 2 CC DC
Architectural Review Commission Carpenter Ashbaugh Marx Rivoire 1 2 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 1 DR JA
Bicycle Committee Carpenter Smith Rivoire Christianson 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 3 3 DR JA
Construction Board of Appeals Carpenter Smith Christianson Carpenter 3 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 3 3 JA CC
Cultural Heritage Committee Ashbaugh Carpenter Rivoire Marx 1 2 1 2 2 2 3 2 1 2 JA DC
Housing Authority
(Mayor by state mandate)Mayor Marx Mayor Marx 1 Mayor Marx
Human Relations Commission Smith Ashbaugh Ashbaugh Rivoire 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 DC DR
Investment Oversight Committee
(This is not an advisory committee)Marx Marx 3 3 2 3 1 CC
Jack House Committee Carpenter Ashbaugh Carpenter Ashbaugh 2 2 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 3 CC JA
Mass Transportation Committee Smith Christianson Rivoire Carpenter 2 2 3 3 2 2 1 2 3 3 DR CC
Parks & Recreation Commission Ashbaugh Christianson Ashbaugh Rivoire 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 DR JM
Personnel Board Carpenter Christianson Carpenter Christianson 3 3 1 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 DC CC
Planning Commission Smith Marx Ashbaugh Christianson 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 CC DR
Promotional Coordinating Committee Carpenter Carpenter Rivoire Carpenter 3 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 JA CC
Revenue Enhancement Oversight Commission 3 3 1 JM JA
Tourism Business Improvement District Board Smith Carpenter Christinason Carpenter 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 2 2 DC DR
Tree Committee Ashbaugh Carpenter Ashbaugh Carpenter 2 2 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 3 JA CC
2015 Jan Marx
#1 - My Preference to Serve #2 - I am willing to serve #3 - I prefer not to serve
RecommendationJohn Ashbaugh2014 Dan Carpenter Carlyn Christianson Dan Rivoire
Page 1 of 3
COUNCIL SUBCOMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS 2014-2015
COUNTY/REGIONAL
Serves as voting representative 2014
REP ALT REP ALT REP ALT REP ALT REP ALT REP ALT REP ALT REP ALT
Air Pollution Control District (APCD) Marx Christianson Marx Rivoire 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 1 JM DR
City Selection Committee
(Mayor / V. Mayor Alternate)Marx Christianson Marx Christianson Mayor Vice Mayor
CMC Citizens Advisory Committee
*2 year term ends 12/04 Smith Carpenter 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 DR JA
Community Action Partnership Christianson Ashbaugh Christianson Rivoire 2 1 3 3 1 1 3 3 3 3 CC JA
County Water Resources Adv. Committee
(Board of Supervisors ratifies)Ashbaugh Smith Ashbaugh Carpenter 1 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 3 3 JA DC
Homeless Services Oversight Committee
(HSOC) Same Council Rep. as CAPSLO Ashbaugh Christianson Ashbaugh Rivoire 1 2 3 3 2 2 3 3 2 2 JA JM
Integrated Waste Management Authority (IWMA)Ashbaugh Smith Ashbaugh Carpenter 1 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 3 3 JA DR
LAFCO (Liaison only)Christianson Ashbaugh Christianson Rivoire 2 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 3 3 CC DC
Nacimiento Water Project Smith
MarxChristian
son Christianson Carpenter 3 1 1 1 3 3 3 3 CC DC
Paso Robles Groundwater
Basin Advisory Committee Carpenter Ashbaugh Ashbaugh
Noah Evans
WR Sup.1 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 JA DC
Performing Arts Center Commission
(Mayor / V. Mayor Alternate)Mayor Marx
Vice Mayor
Smith Mayor Marx
Vice Mayor
Christianson Mayor Vice Mayor
Performing Arts Center Commission
(City Manager / Assist. City Manager Alternate)Lichtig Codron Lichtig Codron City Manager
Asst. City
Manager
PAC Facilities Standing Committee Carpenter
Principal
Analyst Ashbaugh
Principal
Analyst 2 3 3 3 JA
Principal
Analyst
San Luis Obispo Council of Governments
(SLOCOG) Same Council Rep. as SLORTA Marx Christianson Marx Christianson 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 JM CC
San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority
(SLORTA) Same Council Rep. as SLOCOG Marx Christianson Marx Christianson 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 JM CC
Whale Rock Commission
(Mayor / V. Mayor Alternate)Mayor Marx
Vice Mayor
Smith Mayor Marx
Vice Mayor
Christianson Mayor Marx Vice Mayor
Zone 9 Advisory Committee Ashbaugh Carpenter Ashbaugh Christianson 1 2 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 JA CC
Visit SLO County Adv. Com. (Mayor/ V. Mayor Alt.)1 Mayor Vice Mayor
Visit SLO County Adv. Com. (CM/ Asst. CM)City Manager
Asst. City
Manager
John Ashbaugh2015 Jan MarxCarlyn Christianson Dan Rivoire
#1 - My Preference to Serve #2 - I am willing to serve #3 - I prefer not to serve
RecommendationDan Carpenter
Page 2 of 3
COUNCIL SUBCOMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS 2014-2015
SPECIAL PURPOSE SUBCOMMITTEES
Serves as liaison representative
MEMBERS MEMBER MEMBERS MEMBER MEMBERS MEMBER MEMBERS MEMBER MEMBERS MEMBER MEMBERS MEMBER MEMBER MEMBER
Cal Poly Campus Planning Committee
(Quarterly)Ashbaugh Johnson 3 1 JM Codron
City/University
(Quarterly, Mayor / Rotation)Mayor Marx Rotation Mayor Marx Rotation Mayor Marx Rotation Mayor Marx Rotation Mayor Marx Rotation Mayor Marx Rotation Mayor Marx Rotation Mayor Marx Rotation
Downtown Association Board
(Monthly)Christianson Smtih Christianson Rivoire 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 3 DC DR
Economic Vitality Corporation (EVC)Carpenter Ashbaugh Ashbaugh Carpenter 1 2 1 1 3 3 DC CC
Student Community Liaison Committee
(Monthly, Mayor / Rotation)Mayor Marx Rotation Mayor Marx Rotation Mayor Marx Rotation Mayor Marx Rotation Mayor Marx Rotation Mayor Marx Rotation Mayor Marx Rotation Mayor Marx Rotation
AD HOC SUBCOMMITTEES
Appointed by Council for a limited purpose
MEMBERS MEMBER MEMBERS MEMBER MEMBERS MEMBER MEMBERS MEMBER MEMBERS MEMBER MEMBERS MEMBER MEMBERS MEMBER MEMBER MEMBER
Airport Land Use Council Subcommittee Marx Christianson 2 1 1 1 3 2 1 1 JM CC
Community Choice Aggregation
Exploration Advisory Committee Ashbaugh Christianson 3 3 1 2 3 3 DR CC
Jan MarxDan Rivoire
Dan Carpenter Carlyn Christianson
2014 2015
2014 2014
John Ashbaugh Dan Carpenter Carlyn Christianson
Dan Rivoire
#1 - My Preference to Serve #2 - I am willing to serve #3 - I prefer not to serve
Recommendation
RecommendationJohn Ashbaugh Jan Marx
Page 3 of 3
List of Subcommittee Assignments
Mayor Marx
• Housing Authority
• City Selection
Committee
• Performing Arts Center
Commission
• Whale Rock
Commission
• Visit SLO County Adv.
Comm.
• City/University
Quarterly
• SCLC
• Cal ID
• CRCC
• REOC – 1
• SLOCOG – 1
• SLORTA – 1
• APCD – 1
• Cal Poly Master Plan – 1
• ALUC – 1
• HSOC – 2
• PRC – 2
Vice Mayor Dan Carpenter
• HRC – 1
• PB – 1
• TBID – 1
• EVC – 1
• ARB – 2
• CHC – 2
• PCC – 2
• WRAC – 2
• LAFCO – 2
• NACI – 2
• DA – 1
• City Selection
Committee (alternate)
• PAC Commission
(alternate)
• PRGBAC – 2
Council Mem. Ashbaugh
• CHC – 1
• PCC – 1
• TC – 1
• Zone 9 AC – 1
• WRAC – 1
• HSOC – 1
• IWMA – 1
• PRGBAC – 1
• PACFSC – 1
• ARC – 2
• BAC – 2
• JHC – 2
• REOC – 2
• CAPSLO – 2
• CBOA – 3
• CMC Cit. AC - 3
Council Member Christianson
• ARB - 1
• IOC – 1
• JHC – 1
• PC – 1
• CAPSLO – 1
• LAFCO – 1
• NACI - 1
• ALUC - 1
• CBOA – 2
• MTC – 2
• PB – 2
• TC – 2
• SLOCOG – 2
• SLORTA – 2
• Zone 9 AC – 2
• HSOC – 2
• PCC – 2
• EVC – 2
• Com. Choice
Council Member Rivoire
• BAC – 1
• ARC – 1
• MTC – 1
• DA – 1
• PRC – 1
• PC – 2
• HRC – 2
• TBID – 2
• APCD – 2
• IWMA – 2
• EVC – 2
• Com. Choice – 1
• CMC Cit. AC - 3
Rotating
• Agenda Review (Bi-
monthly)
• SCLC (Monthly)
• City/University
Quarterly
• Mayor/Advisory Chair
Quarterly
Meeting Date: 1/5/2016
FROM: Jon Ansolabehere, Interim City Clerk
Prepared By: John Paul Maier, Assistant City Clerk
SUBJECT: SCHEDULE OF CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS FOR 2016
RECOMMENDATION
Cancel the Regular City Council meetings of August 2 and December 20, 2016.
DISCUSSION
The City Council’s regular meetings are scheduled for the first and third Tuesday of every month
pursuant to Section 1.1.2.1 of the Council Meeting Guidelines & Procedures. A copy of the 2016
meeting schedule is attached as Attachment A.
Summer and Winter Council Meeting Schedule
Since 1994, it has been the practice of the City Council to cancel a regular meeting in the mo nths
of August and/or December. This practice allows the Council an opportunity to plan vacations,
reduce meeting absences, and maximize public participation. Historically the first meeting in
August has been cancelled and when the second meeting in December falls close to Christmas
the second meeting in December has been cancelled. Additionally, it is common during an
election year to schedule the December 1st City Council meeting to seat the newly elected City
Council Members and administer Oath’s of Office. The draft schedule proposes to cancel the
first meeting in August and the second meeting in December.
ALTERNATIVES
Council could choose to cancel a different date in August and/or December to cancel or choose
not to cancel either of these meetings.
Attachments:
a a - City Council Calendar 2016
5
Packet Pg. 12
S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S
1 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
24/
31 25 26 27 28 29 30 28 29 29 30 31
S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S
1 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
24 25 26 27 28 29 30 30 31 26 27 28 29 30
S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S
1 2 1 2*3 4 5 6 1 2 3
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
24 /
31 25 26 27 28 29 30 30 31 25 26 27 28 29 30
S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S
1 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
16 17 18 19 20 21 22 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 18 19 20*21 22 23 24
23 /
30
24 /
31 25 26 27 28 29 27 28 29 30 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
2016 City Council Schedule
OCTOBE R NOVE MB ER DE CE MB ER
M A R C HF E B R U A R YJ A N U A R Y
A P R I L M A Y J U N E
J U L Y A U G U S T S E P T E M B E R
27 28
28 29
29
5.a
Packet Pg. 13 Attachment: a - City Council Calendar 2016 (1222 : Schedule of City Council Meetings for 2016)
Meeting Date: 1/5/2016
FROM: Derek Johnson, Interim Finance & Information Technology Director
Prepared By: Steve Schmidt, Information Technology Manager
SUBJECT: EMERSON PROCESSING – MAINTENANCE AND SUPPORT CONTRACT
EXTENSION
RECOMMENDATION
Approve an extension of a maintenance and support contract agreement with Emerson Process
Management for two years in the amount of $64,050 and authorize the Mayor to execute the
agreement.
Background
The Utilities Department utilizes complex, computerized supervisory control and data
acquisition systems (SCADA) to operate and monitor processes in the water and wastewater
treatment plants, water distribution systems and wastewater collection systems. SCADA is used
to control the pumps and water tank levels for water distribution and controls the sewage lift
stations in the wastewater collection system as well as critical processes at both the water
treatment plant and the wastewater reclamation facilities.
The system was installed by City staff beginning in the late 1980's utilizing Bristol Babcock
equipment which is provided and serviced exclusively by Emerson Processing. The Utilities
Department depends upon this equipment to meet State mandated requirements of its critical
complex systems.
The proposed two-year maintenance agreement extension (Attachment A) will provide on-going
maintenance for all Bristol Babcock equipment as well as scheduled and non-scheduled technical
support. It also provides discounted labor rates for any additional services not falling under the
scope of the agreement.
Emerson Process Management is the sole provider of maintenance services and support for
Bristol Babcock SCADA equipment, which is currently in use throughout the Utilities
Department and has been for many years. As such, Emerson is very familiar with the City’s
complex SCADA system.
6
Packet Pg. 14
Future SCADA Upgrade
Shortly, the Utilities Department will be seeking Council approval to release a Request for
Proposals (RFP) to begin the process of upgrading the City’s aging SCADA systems in the
Water Reclamation Facility, Water Distribution System and Whale Rock Reservoir. This project
was included in the CIP for 2015-2016. These will be phased projects, which will begin next
year. This project as well as future projects will ultimately replace all of the remaining
proprietary Bristol Babcock equipment with an open architecture system which can be serviced
by several vendors through a competitively bid process.
CONCURRENCES
The Utilities Department staff has reviewed this report and concurs with the recommendation.
FISCAL IMPACT
Total cost for this two year maintenance agreement is $64,050 (Attachment B). Funding is
available in the Network Services contract services operating budget 25300-7227, as shown in
the graph below. The remaining funds will be used to fund emergency support that falls outside
the agreement.
Funding Source Amount
Network Services–Emerson Maintenance Contract
Services Account #25300-7227
$68,400
Emerson Process Management Solutions Inc.
two-year SCADA agreement
$64,050
Balance $4,350
ALTERNATIVES
Issue an RFP for SCADA maintenance services. This is not recommended. At the present
time, Emerson Processing is the only vendor that can provide services to the City’s Bristol
Babcock proprietary equipment.
Attachments:
a a - Emerson Process Proposal
b b - Agreement - Emerson Process Management
6
Packet Pg. 15
Support and Services Contract Page 1 of 10 Offer No: WAM15080626R1
August 19, 2015
Steve Schmidt
City of San Luis Obispo
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249
Subject: 2015 – 2017 Software Support and Services Agreement Renewal
Emerson Process Management Power & Water Solutions, Inc.
Offer No. WAM15080626R1
Dear Mr. Jones,
Emerson Process Management Power & Water Solutions, Inc. is pleased to submit this offer to
City of San Luis Obispo for 2015 - 2017 Software Support and Services. The agreement will cover
the period November 01, 2015 to October 31, 2017 and is subject to attached Support and
Services Agreement.
If you have any questions or require additional information please contact Cathi Bradley at 760-
405-7431.
Sincerely,
Josue Salazar /Cathi Bradley
Emerson Process Management
Power & Water Solutions, Inc.
Attachments: Emerson Hardware and Software Support and Services Agreement for City of San Luis
Obispo
Emerson Process Management
Power & Water Solutions, Inc.
200 Beta Drive
Pittsburgh, PA 15238
6.a
Packet Pg. 16 Attachment: a - Emerson Process Proposal (1193 : Emerson Processing Maintenance and Support Contract Extension)
Support and Services Contract Page 2 of 10 Offer No: WAM15080626R1
Software Support and Services Contract
This Contract, entered into as of this 1st day of November, 2015 between Emerson Process Management Power & Water
Solutions, Inc., located at 200 Beta Drive, Pittsburgh, PA 15238 (hereinafter referred to as "Emerson"), and City of San
Luis Obispo (hereinafter referred to as “Purchaser”).
WITNESSETH
In consideration of the premises, the parties hereto agree as
follows:
I. Scope of Work
Emerson will sell to the Purchaser and Purchaser will buy
from Emerson the Software Support and/or Services as set
forth in Emerson’s offer WAM15080626R1 dated August
19, 2015, and Schedule A (attached hereto).
II Definitions
“Software Support” is defined as assistance rendered to the
Purchaser’s personnel in the installation, configuration or
operation of the Software, via telephone, email, fax or
other electronic services.
“Updates” copies of new releases, upgrades and patches to
The Software which are released by Emerson during the
period covered by this Contract.
“The Software” the software that is licensed to the
Purchaser at the commencement of this Contract. A list of
The Software covered by this Contract is attached as
Schedule A.
“On Site Software Support” services beyond Software
Support that require the presence of Emerson personnel at
the Purchaser’s location.
“Equipment” The equipment covered by this Contract as
set forth in Schedule A.
“Services” The services including maintenance services
covered by this Contract as set forth in Schedule A.
“Commencement Date” The date this Contract is entered
into as set forth above or the date Emerson accepts a
purchase order for the work to be performed under this
Contract.
III. Price
The Contract price is $64,050.00.
IV. Terms of Payment
Emerson shall invoice Purchaser for installment Contract
price within thirty (30) days from the date of this Contract.
For subsequent years, the invoices for annual payments
will be issued on the Contract renewal date. Payment(s)
is/are due and payable net thirty (30) days from the date of
each invoice.
In the event “On Site Software Support” or onsite
Services are not included in the Contract price then the
price shall be agreed upon either before the work is
performed, or if performed on a time and material basis, in
accordance with Emerson’s current published price policy
in effect, plus travel and living expenses. Emerson will
invoice the Purchaser for the labor and material as
required.
When Service is provided on a per diem basis, invoices
shall be rendered upon completion of the Services and
payment of per diem charges, plus travel and living
expenses shall be due net thirty (30) days from the date of
invoice at the price in effect when the services are
provided.
V. Termination
The initial term of this Contract shall be for one (1) year
from the Commencement Date. Thereafter, this Contract
can be renewed through Emerson. Such renewals must be
in place thirty (30) days prior to the expiration date of this
Contract to ensure continuous maintenance support
without lapse. Within sixty (60) days prior to the above
date(s) Emerson will provide a price for the extension of
the Contract including any revisions to the Software and/or
Equipment list.
This Contract may be terminated for convenience by either
party, provided thirty (30) days advance written notice of
termination is given and upon payment to Emerson of
reasonable and proper termination charges, including but
not limited to all costs identified in this Contract which
have been incurred up to the date of notice of termination.
Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days from date of
invoice.
This Contract may be terminated by Emerson upon written
notice if it determines that Purchaser changes, additions,
deletions, or misuse or misapplication of the Equipment
have degraded the performance of the specified Equipment
or Software.
In the event Purchaser or Emerson commits a material
breach of its undertaking so as to prevent completion of
this Contract and thereafter fails on not less than thirty (30)
days written notice to take steps to remedy such breach,
the other party may, by written notice, terminate this
Contract and recoveries of Purchaser and Emerson shall be
determined by mutual agreement.
6.a
Packet Pg. 17 Attachment: a - Emerson Process Proposal (1193 : Emerson Processing Maintenance and Support Contract Extension)
Support and Services Contract Page 3 of 10 Offer No: WAM15080626R1
In the event that the Purchaser’s equipment or software is
altered, modified, changed, or, if any equipment or
software is added or deleted, or moved within the
premises, this Contract may be modified or terminated at
Emerson’s option. If, at any time, any such changes or
attachments create a safety hazard, or interfere with the
normal and satisfactory operation or maintenance of the
Equipment, Emerson may, upon written notice to the
Purchaser, require that such safety hazard or interference
be promptly corrected at the Purchaser’s expense.
Emerson’s continued maintenance of the Equipment
and/or Software, which has been changed or, to which
attachments have been made, does not constitute an
approval of the change or attachment and at Emerson’s
option may be removed from the Equipment or Software
listed in Schedule “A.”
VI. Taxes
The price does not include any federal, state, or local
property, license, privilege, sales, use, import duties,
tariffs, fees, imposts, excise, turnover, added value, gross
receipt, gross wages or similar taxes now or hereafter
applicable in any manner to this transaction. Purchaser
agrees to reimburse Emerson for any such taxes which
Emerson is required to pay upon submission of Emerson
invoice.
VII. Force Majeure
Emerson will not be liable for failure or delay in
performance resulting from any cause beyond its
reasonable control and for acts of God, the act or failure to
act of Purchaser’s customer, or other contractors. In the
event of such delay, the time for performance/delivery will
be extended by a period of time reasonably necessary to
overcome the effect of the delay.
VIII. Warranties
1. Software Support
Emerson warrants to the Purchaser that the disk(s)
on which the Updates are recorded is (are) free
from defects in materials and workmanship under
normal use and service for a period of ninety days
from date of delivery. The Updates and any
accompanying written materials (including
instructions for use) are provided "as is" without
warranty of any kind. Further, Emerson does not
warrant, guarantee, or make any representations
regarding the use, or the results of the use, of the
Updates, The Software, or written materials. The
entire risk as to the results and performance of
Updates and The Software is assumed by the
Purchaser. Unless stated otherwise herein, third
party software/ equipment shall be warranted and
remedied on a pass through basis in the same
manner and for the same period and extent
provided by the original software/ equipment
manufacturer.
Unless otherwise provided within this Contract,
there is no warranty of any kind included
hereunder with respect to The Software.
Applications software programs not provided by
Emerson are not covered under this warranty.
Problems related to applications software
programs provided by Emerson, including, but
not limited to, problems caused by operator errors
or lack of security procedures, virus related
problems, unqualified file deletions or
modifications, or lack of proper observance of
system backup file maintenance are not covered
under the warranty scope.
If this Contract includes On Site Software
Support Services, Emerson warrants that the
Services provided will reflect competent
knowledge and judgment.
The warranty period shall expire twelve (12)
months from completion of the Service. In the
case of a nonconformity in the warranty set forth
herein above, and if Emerson is notified in
writing of such nonconformity during the
applicable warranty period, it shall be corrected
by performance of the nonconforming portion of
the Service. If such remedies are impracticable,
Emerson may refund the purchase price for the
nonconforming Service.
2. Equipment and Services
Emerson warrants that during the term of this
Contract, the Equipment listed in Schedule “A”
will be free from defects in materials or
workmanship under normal use and care and
Services provided under this Contract will be
performed by trained personnel using proper
equipment and instrumentation as applicable for
the particular Service provided.
If Purchaser discovers any such warranty
defect(s) and such defect(s) is/are covered under
the provisions established in Schedule ”A”,
purchaser may notify Emerson of the alleged
defect(s) during the term of this Contract or the
applicable warranty period as set forth below,
Emerson shall, at its option, correct any errors
that are found by Emerson in the Services or
repair or replace F.O.B. point of manufacture that
portion of the Equipment found by Emerson to be
defective.
Equipment repaired or replaced by Emerson
pursuant to this Contract is warranted for a period
extending to the end of the term of this Contract
or for ninety (90) days from the date of delivery
of repaired or replaced Equipment, whichever is
longer. Any Service provided pursuant to this
6.a
Packet Pg. 18 Attachment: a - Emerson Process Proposal (1193 : Emerson Processing Maintenance and Support Contract Extension)
Support and Services Contract Page 4 of 10 Offer No: WAM15080626R1
Contract is warranted to the end of the term of
this Contract or for ninety (90) days from
completion the Service, whichever is longer.
All replacements or repairs necessitated by any
causes not the fault of Emerson, including but not
limited to, unsuitable power sources or
environmental conditions, lightning, fire, flood,
earthquakes, vandalism, accident, or misuse,
improper installation, unauthorized modification
or repair, or improper storage or handling by
Purchaser or any third party, are not covered by
this warranty, and shall be at the Purchaser’s
expense. Emerson shall not be obligated to pay
any costs or charges incurred by the Purchaser or
any other party except as may be agreed upon in
writing in advance by Emerson.
Materials and/or Services required due to actual
environmental or process conditions beyond the
specifications of the Equipment performance
capabilities are not part of the warranty scope.
Emerson will invoice for Services provided per
the Purchaser’s request, which are beyond the
scope of warranty coverage hereunder using its
then-current pricing policy. Payments for such
invoices shall be made within thirty days of
rendering of such Services and expenses.
Materials and/or Services required for system changes and
additional training are not part of the scope of the warranty
services. THE WARRANTIES SET FORTH IN THIS
CONTRACT ARE EXCLUSIVE AND IN LIEU OF ALL
OTHER WARRANTIES WHETHER STATUTORY,
EXPRESS OR IMPLIED (INCLUDING ALL
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND
FITNESS FOR PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND ALL
WARRANTIES ARISING FROM COURSE OF
DEALING OR USAGE OF TRADE). THE REMEDIES
SET FORTH, FOR THE TIME AND IN THE MANNER
PROVIDED ABOVE, SHALL BE PURCHASER’S
EXCLUSIVE REMEDIES FOR FAILURE OF
EMERSON TO MEET ITS WARRANTY
OBLIGATIONS, WHETHER BASED IN CONTRACT,
IN TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR STRICT
LIABILITY), OR OTHERWISE.
IX. Limitation of Liability
EMERSON SHALL NOT BE LIABLE FOR DAMAGES
CAUSED BY DELAY IN PERFORMANCE. EMERSON
SHALL NOT BE LIABLE FOR FAILURES, REPAIRS
OR DOWN TIME ON OR CAUSED BY EQUIPMENT
OR SOFTWARE COVERED IN THIS CONTRACT.
THE REMEDIES SET FORTH IN THIS CONTRACT
ARE EXCLUSIVE AND UNDER NO THEORY OF
RECOVERY, WHETHER BASED IN CONTRACT, IN
TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE AND STRICT
LIABILITY), UNDER WARRANTY OR OTHERWISE
WILL EITHER EMERSON OR ITS SUPPLIERS OF
ANY TIER: (A) BE LIABLE FOR ANY INDIRECT,
INCIDENTIAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGE
WHATSOEVER; DAMAGE TO OR LOSS OF
PROPERTY OR EQUIPMENT; LOSS OF PROFITS OR
REVENUE; LOSS OF USE OF PURCHASER’S
PROPERTY, EQUIPMENT OR POWER SYSTEM;
INCREASED COSTS OF ANY KIND, INCLUDING
BUT NOT LIMITED TO CAPITAL COST, FUEL COST
OR CLAIMS OF CUSTOMERS OF PURCHASER; AND
(B) BE LIABLE FOR AN AGGREGATE LIABILITY
EXCEEDING THE TOTAL PRICE PAID TO EMERSON
UNDER THIS CONTRACT. THIS ARTICLE SHALL
PREVAIL OVER ANY PROVISIONS IN THIS
CONTRACT.
X. Governing Law
This Contract shall be governed by the laws of the State of
Missouri, without regard to its choice or conflict of law.
XI. Survival
The Limitation of Liability and Intellectual Property
Rights provisions shall survive termination, expiration or
cancellation of this Contract or the purchase order to which
these terms and conditions apply. No amendment,
modification or alteration of these terms and conditions
shall be binding unless the same shall be in writing and
duly executed by the parties. If any term or condition is
under any circumstances deemed invalid, the remaining
terms and conditions shall be construed with the invalid
provision(s) deleted.
XII. Intellectual Property Rights/ Software License
Emerson retains for itself all of its intellectual property
rights in and to any Emerson product, software and
supporting documentation furnished hereunder.
The Updates and The Software are only licensed for
installation on that equipment on which The Software was
installed at the commencement of this Contract. Updates
may be transmitted to the Purchaser via email, on physical
media or downloaded from Emerson’s web site, at the
discretion of Emerson. The Purchaser is responsible for the
installation of all Updates supplied under this Contract.
The Updates are subject to the terms and conditions set
forth in Emerson’s applicable standard software license
agreements for The Software. Any Updates and other
information provided by Emerson under this Contract are
considered standard offerings of Emerson, and Emerson
and/or any applicable third party supplier to Emerson shall
retain all rights of ownership in their respective products
included in such Updates or other information.
Notwithstanding any other provisions herein to the
contrary, Emerson or applicable third party owner shall
retain all exclusive rights, interest and title to its respective
firmware, The Software and Updates. Purchaser’s use of
the firmware, Updates and The Software shall be governed
exclusively by Emerson’s and/or third party o wner’s
applicable license terms.
6.a
Packet Pg. 19 Attachment: a - Emerson Process Proposal (1193 : Emerson Processing Maintenance and Support Contract Extension)
Support and Services Contract Page 5 of 10 Offer No: WAM15080626R1
Information marked proprietary shall be disclosed in
confidence on a need to know basis on the condition that it
is not to be reproduced, copied or used for any other
purpose than the purpose for which it is provided and shall
not be disclosed to third parties without the written consent
of Emerson.
XIII. Changes to Supply
In the event the Purchaser or Emerson request changes in
the scope of supply, Emerson shall notify Purchaser of the
effect on price, delivery, warranty, equipment performance
or any other obligations assumed by Emerson under this
Contract. Emerson will initiate work on any such changes
upon receipt of an acceptable written change order.
All change orders shall indicate the adjustment to the
Emerson scope of supply, the contract price and other
relevant terms and conditions of the Contract.
XIV. Facilities and Access to Equipment
If this Contract includes Services to be performed on
Purchaser’s site, the Purchaser will furnish at no cost to
Emerson suitable working space, storage space, adequate
telephone, light, ventilation, regulated electric power, and
outlets for testing purposes. These facilities will be within
a reasonable distance from the Equipment covered by this
Contract. Emerson shall have full and free access to
Emerson-provided Equipment in order to provide the on-
site Services provided under this Contract. Purchaser will
identify person(s) who will interface with Emerson under
the terms of this Contract. Any maintenance or repair
services performed on the Emerson-provided Equipment
by unauthorized personnel resulting in additional material
or corrective support service requirements by Emerson will
be invoiced at applicable time and material rates and
conditions of service then in effect.
XV. Emerson Personnel
Emerson reserves the right to determine the qualifications
of and the source of Emerson personnel required to fulfill
its obligations under this Contract. Emerson personnel
used to fulfill its obligations under this agreement shall be
familiar with the Purchaser’s equipment and facilities and
will be mutually agreed. Unless agreed upon otherwise,
the Parties agree that the Purchaser may not hire a
Emerson Field Service Engineer/Technician for two years
following termination of this Contract.
XVI. Exclusions
Excluded from these contracts are obsolete software
application programs and parts or as otherwise stipulated
in Schedule “A” hereunder.
XVII. Scope Changes
All Emerson services or equipment requested by Purchaser
that are not within the scope of this Contract shall be
reimbursed by Purchaser in accordance with the then
current Emerson published rates including, if applicable,
travel and living expenses.
XVII. Assignment Clause
Neither Emerson nor Purchaser may assign this Contract in
whole or in part without the prior written consent of the
other Party.
XIX. Entire Agreement
This Contract, including the documents incorporated by
reference herein and attachments hereto constitute the
entire agreement between the parties. The terms hereof
may not be modified or amended except in writing signed
by the authorized representative of both Purchaser and
Emerson.
6.a
Packet Pg. 20 Attachment: a - Emerson Process Proposal (1193 : Emerson Processing Maintenance and Support Contract Extension)
Support and Services Contract Page 6 of 10 Offer No: WAM15080626R1
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Contract by their authorized representatives as of
the date first set forth above.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO EMERSON PROCESS MANAGEMENT
POWER & WATER SOLUTIONS, INC.
BY: ______________________________ BY: ______________________________
Title:_____________________________ Title:______________________________
Date: _____________________________ Date:______________________________
Attachments
1. Emerson Offer # WAM15080626R1 dated August 19, 2015
2. Schedule A
6.a
Packet Pg. 21 Attachment: a - Emerson Process Proposal (1193 : Emerson Processing Maintenance and Support Contract Extension)
Support and Services Contract Page 7 of 10 Offer No: WAM15080626R1
SCHEDULE “A”
Hardware & Software List
For: San Luis Obispo – Water Reuse, Water Distribution, Water Treatment Plant & Wastewater Collection System
Hardware
Item Description Qty Location Area Status
1 3330 10 Water Reclamation - Obsolete
2 CW Redundant 2 Water Reclamation - Active
3 CW PAC - 8 Slot Chassis 2 Water Reclamation - Active
4 CW PAC – PSSM 2 Water Reclamation - Active
5 CW PAC – CPU w/ Ethernet 2 Water Reclamation - Active
6 CW PAC – I/O Boards 12 Water Reclamation - Active
7 CWM – 4 Slot Chassis 1 Water Reclamation - Active
8 CWM – PSSM 1 Water Reclamation - Active
9 CWM –Ethernet CPU 1 Water Reclamation - Active
10 CWM –Mixed I/O, 6DI/O, 4AI,
2HSC, 1AO with LED’s 1 Water Reclamation - Active
11 Internal 120VAC to 24VDC Power
Supply with 7AH backup 1 Water Reclamation - Active
12 3330 4 Water Distribution - Obsolete
13 3305 2 Water Distribution - Obsolete
14 CWM – 3 Slot Chassis 1 Water Distribution - Active
15 CWM – PSSM 1 Water Distribution - Active
16 CWM –33MHz CPU 1 Water Distribution - Active
17 CWM – Mixed I/O board; 12DI,
4DO 1 Water Distribution - Active
18 3330 4 Whale Rock - Obsolete
19 330 14 Water Treatment Plant - Obsolete
20 RIO3331 17 Water Treatment Plant - Obsolete
21 NIB (389510-01-7) 16 Water Treatment Plant - Obsolete
22 3330 (Redundant) 1 Waste Water Collection - Obsolete
23 3305 10 Waste Water Collection - Obsolete
24 CWM – 8 Slot Chassis 1 Waste Water Collection - Active
6.a
Packet Pg. 22 Attachment: a - Emerson Process Proposal (1193 : Emerson Processing Maintenance and Support Contract Extension)
Support and Services Contract Page 8 of 10 Offer No: WAM15080626R1
Hard ware
Item Description Qty Location Area Status
25 CWM – PSSM 1 Waste Water Collection - Active
26 CWM –Ethernet CPU 1 Waste Water Collection - Active
27 CWM –Keypad display 4 line x 20
character 1 Waste Water Collection - Active
28 CWM –Remote 16 pt. DI module 1 Waste Water Collection - Active
29 CWM –Remote 16 pt. DO module 1 Waste Water Collection - Active
30 CWM –Remote 4 pt. AO module 1 Waste Water Collection - Active
31 CWM –Remote 8 pt. DI
remote terminal block 2 Waste Water Collection - Active
32 CWM –Remote 8 pt. DO
remote terminal block 2 Waste Water Collection - Active
33 CWM –Remote 2pt AO remote
terminal block 2 Waste Water Collection - Active
Software
Item Description QTY Location Area Status
1 Network Edition 1 Water Reclamation - Active
2 Workbench 1 Water Reclamation - Active
3 Network Edition 1 Water Distribution - Active
4 Workbench 1 Water Distribution - Active
5 Network Edition 4 Wastewater Collection - Active
6 Workbench 4 Wastewater Collection - Active
7 OPC Server – Replaced with
Object server 2 Wastewater Collection - Active
8 Network Edition 2 Water Treatment Plant - Active
9 Workbench 2 Water Treatment Plant - Active
10 OPC Server – Replaced with
Object server 2 Water Treatment Plant -
Active
1. Scope
a. Emerson will provide Services for the Equipment listed in this Schedule “A” in accordance with the
clauses set forth in this Contract.
2. Software Support
a. Emerson shall provide Software Updates which are release by Emerson during the period covered by this
agreement. Such updates are only licensed for installation on that equipment on which Software was
6.a
Packet Pg. 23 Attachment: a - Emerson Process Proposal (1193 : Emerson Processing Maintenance and Support Contract Extension)
Support and Services Contract Page 9 of 10 Offer No: WAM15080626R1
installed at the commencement of this agreement. Updates will be transmitted to the customer via email,
physical media or downloaded from Emerson web site. The customer is responsible for installation of all
updates supplied under this agreement.
3. Unscheduled Corrective Maintenance
a. Unscheduled corrective maintenance service, for the Equipment listed in Schedule “A”, is included at no
additional charge, and is limited to a maximum of five (5) visits per annum, each visit not to exceed one
(1) man-day, with each man-day being a maximum of 8 man-hours or any portion thereof. Unscheduled
corrective maintenance services are available during the normal working hours of 8:00
A.M. to 4:30 P.M. local time, Monday through Friday, with a response time of next business day (via
phone or on site) from notification by the Purchaser. Emergency services performed at the Purchaser’s
request outside of normal working hours shall be provided at Emerson’s then current premium rates, less
the published price for contract service if performed during normal working hours (If the maximum
contract service time as set forth herein is fully utilized, then such adjustment does not apply). The
Purchaser shall pay expenses and travel time in conjunction with such emergency service provided outside
of normal working hours.
b. Any services in excess of the limitations noted within this Contract shall be billed in accordance with the
Emerson published pricing policy after obtaining a written directive from the Purchaser to receive such
services beyond the covered services.
4. Equipment Replacement/Repair/Troubleshooting
a. The Purchaser must ship the defective Equipment to Emerson’s Local Service Center or to Emerson’s
Watertown Repair Facilities. All instruments listed in Schedule “A”, returned for repair will be restored to
original mechanical and electrical operation specification at no charge.
b. Unserviceable parts for Active Equipment listed in Schedule “A” will be replaced by new parts, or, at
Emerson’s option, by parts equivalent to new in performance. Such replacement parts will be furnished
AS IS, on an exchange basis. Parts that have been removed and replaced become the property of Emerson.
This Contract does not cover expendable supply items such as printer ribbons, paper, paper tape, magnetic
tape and diskettes, and paint or refinishing of the subject Equipment. If, in the joint opinion of Emerson
and the Purchaser, any Equipment not within warranty of this Contract, and still within its operating
performance specifications, is in need of factory reconditioning, an estimate of such costs will be submitted
to the Purchaser for approval and payment.
c. It is agreed that if Emerson is required to make replacements or repairs caused by negligence or misuse of
Equipment, or by any other reason of any sort beyond Emerson’s direct control, Emerson reserves the right
to charge the Purchaser for labor and material as required. These charges would be in accordance with
Emerson’s current published price policy in effect when the work is performed. This Contract does not
cover or include planning, installing, testing and documenting of expansions and modification s requested
by the Purchaser, or maintenance services or parts required to maintain accessories, attachments, machines
or devices not listed in Schedule “A”.
d. For equipment that is discontinued or obsolete, the maintenance support will be on a reasonable effort basis
and any resulting unserviceable discontinued/obsolete hardware is excluded from this agreement .
e. For equipment not manufactured by Emerson (and listed in Schedule “A”), Emerson will provide
diagnostic support services. Any repair and replacement of equipment manufactured by others is not
included hereunder.
f. Requests for Emerson to conduct safety tests, to install new attachments or additional controls, or to make
replacements with equipment of a different design, regardless of reason, are not incl uded under this
Contract.
6.a
Packet Pg. 24 Attachment: a - Emerson Process Proposal (1193 : Emerson Processing Maintenance and Support Contract Extension)
Support and Services Contract Page 10 of 10 Offer No: WAM15080626R1
5. Additional Labor Services
a. Support services for application hardware and software can be procured on an as needed basis using the
following pricing guidelines. Such support services will be during normal working hours as mut ually
coordinated.
b. Such services can include on-site update and upgrade support of application hardware and software
trouble shooting, training, system enhancements etc. Scope of services can be predefined to estimate the
time required or alternately services may be procured on a time and material basis.
Description Rate
Service Engineer - Standard Time (hour) $ 157.00
Service Engineer – Overtime (hour) $ 303.00
Service Engineer - Sunday & Holiday (hour) $ 377.00
Travel Time (hour) $ 131.00
Mileage (mile) $ 0.63
Expenses Cost + 10%
6.a
Packet Pg. 25 Attachment: a - Emerson Process Proposal (1193 : Emerson Processing Maintenance and Support Contract Extension)
AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into in the City of San Luis Obispo on this
_____________day of ____________________________________, by and between the CITY OF SAN
LUIS OBISPO, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as City, and EMERSON PROCESS
MANAGEMENT POWER AND WATER SOLUTIONS, INC,. a Delaware corporation, hereinafter
referred to as Contractor.
W I T N E S S E T H:
WHEREAS, on the City wants SCADA Maintenance and Support Services; and
WHEREAS, Contractor is qualified to perform this type of service and has submitted a proposal to
do so which has been accepted by the City.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual promises, obligations and covenants
hereinafter contained, the parties hereto agree as follows:
1. TERM. The term of this Agreement shall be from the date this Agreement is made and
entered, as first written above, until contract expiration.
2. CITY'S OBLIGATIONS. For providing services as specified in this agreement, City
will pay, and Contractor shall receive, compensation in a total sum not to exceed $64,050.
4. CONTRACTOR’S OBLIGATIONS. For and in consideration of the payments and
agreements hereinbefore mentioned to be made and performed by City, Contractor agrees with City provide
all specified services as described in Attachment A (Contractor’s Proposal and Schedule A) attached hereto
and incorporated into this Agreement by reference. Contractor further agrees to the contract and
performance terms as set forth in Attachment B attached hereto and incorporated into this Agreement by
reference.
5. AMENDMENTS. Any amendment, modification or variation from the terms of this
Agreement shall be in writing and shall be effective only upon approval by the City Administrative Officer.
6. COMPLETE AGREEMENT. This written Agreement, including all writings
specifically incorporated herein by reference, shall constitute the complete agreement between the parties
hereto. No oral agreement, understanding, or representation not reduced to writing and s pecifically
incorporated herein shall be of any force or effect, nor shall any such oral agreement, understanding, or
representation be binding upon the parties hereto.
6.b
Packet Pg. 26 Attachment: b - Agreement - Emerson Process Management (1193 : Emerson Processing Maintenance and Support Contract Extension)
Page 2
7. NOTICE. All written notices to the parties hereto shall be sent by United States mail,
postage prepaid by registered or certified mail addressed as follows:
City City Clerk
City of San Luis Obispo
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Contractor Emerson Process Management Power and
Water Solutions, Inc.
Attn: Mr. Kyle Tracy
200 Beta Drive
Pittsburgh, PA 15238
8. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT. Both City and Contractor do covenant
that each individual executing this agreement on behalf of each party is a person duly authorized and
empowered to execute Agreements for such party.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this instrument to be executed the day
and year first above written.
ATTEST: CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO:
________________________________ By: _____________________________________
City Clerk Jan Howell Marx, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: CONTRACTOR:
________________________________ By: _____________________________________
City Attorney Emerson Process Management Power and
Water Solutions, Inc.
6.b
Packet Pg. 27 Attachment: b - Agreement - Emerson Process Management (1193 : Emerson Processing Maintenance and Support Contract Extension)
Page 3
City of San Luis Obispo – General Terms and Conditions
1. Business Tax. The Contractor must have a valid City of San Luis Obispo business tax
certificate before execution of the contract. Additional information regarding the City's
business tax program may be obtained by calling (805) 781-7134.
2. Ability to Perform. The Contractor warrants that it possesses, or has arranged through
subcontracts, all capital and other equipment, labor, materials, and licenses necessary to
carry out and complete the work hereunder in compliance with any and all federal, state,
county, city, and special district laws, ordinances, and regulations.
3. Laws to be Observed. The Contractor shall keep itself fully informed of and shall
observe and comply with all applicable state and federal laws and county and City of San
Luis Obispo ordinances, regulations and adopted codes during its performance of the
work.
4. Payment of Taxes. The contract prices shall include full compensation for all taxes that
the Contractor is required to pay.
5. Permits and Licenses. The Contractor shall procure all permits and licenses, pay all
charges and fees, and give all notices necessary.
6. Safety Provisions. The Contractor shall conform to the rules and regulations pertaining
to safety established by OSHA and the California Division of Industrial Safety.
7. Public and Employee Safety. Whenever the Contractor's operations create a condition
hazardous to the public or City employees, it shall, at its expense and without cost to the
City, furnish, erect and maintain such fences, temporary railings, barricades, lights, signs
and other devices and take such other protective measures as are necessary to prevent
accidents or damage or injury to the public and employees.
8. Preservation of City Property. The Contractor shall provide and install suitable
safeguards, approved by the City, to protect City property from injury or damage. If City
property is injured or damaged resulting from the Contractor's operations, it shall be
replaced or restored at the Contractor's expense. The facilities shall be replaced or
restored to a condition as good as when the Contractor began work.
9. Immigration Act of 1986. The Contractor warrants on behalf of itself and all sub-
Contractors engaged for the performance of this work that only persons authorized to
work in the United States pursuant to the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986
and other applicable laws shall be employed in the performance of the work hereunder.
10. Contractor Non-Discrimination. In the performance of this work, the Contractor
agrees that it will not engage in, nor permit such sub- Contractors as it may employ, to
engage in discrimination in employment of persons because of age, race, color, sex,
national origin or ancestry, sexual orientation, or religion of such persons.
11. Work Delays. Should the Contractor be obstructed or delayed in the work required to be
done hereunder by changes in the work or by any default, act, or omission of the City, or
by strikes, fire, earthquake, or any other Act of God, or by the inability to obtain
materials, equipment, or labor due to federal government restrictions arising out of
defense or war programs, then the time of completion may, at the City's sole option, be
extended for such periods as may be agreed upon by the City and the Contractor.
12. Payment Terms. The City's payment terms are 30 days from the receipt of an original
6.b
Packet Pg. 28 Attachment: b - Agreement - Emerson Process Management (1193 : Emerson Processing Maintenance and Support Contract Extension)
Page 4
invoice and acceptance by the City of the materials, supplies, equipment or services
provided by the Contractor (Net 30).
13. Inspection. The Contractor shall furnish City with every reasonable opportunity for City
to ascertain that the services of the Contractor are being performed in accordance with the
requirements and intentions of this contract. All work done and all materials furnished, if
any, shall be subject to the City's inspection and approval. The inspection of such work
shall not relieve Contractor of any of its obligations to fulfill its contract requirements.
14. Audit. The City shall have the option of inspecting and/or auditing all records and other
written materials used by Contractor in preparing its invoices to City as a condition
precedent to any payment to Contractor.
15. Interests of Contractor. The Contractor covenants that it presently has no interest, and
shall not acquire any interest—direct, indirect or otherwise—that would conflict in any
manner or degree with the performance of the work hereunder. The Contractor further
covenants that, in the performance of this work, no sub-Contractor or person having such
an interest shall be employed. The Contractor certifies that no one who has or will have
any financial interest in performing this work is an officer or employee of the City. It is
hereby expressly agreed that, in the performance of the work hereunder, the Contractor
shall at all times be deemed an independent Contractor and not an agent or employee of
the City.
16. Indemnification for Professional Liability. To the fullest extent permitted by law, the
Contractor shall indemnify, protect, defend and hold harmless the City and any and all
of its officials, employees and agents (“Indemnified Parties”) from and against any
and all losses, liabilities, damages, costs and expenses, including attorney’s fees and
cost which arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful
misconduct of the Contractor.
17. Contract Assignment. The Contractor shall not assign, transfer, convey or otherwise
dispose of the contract, or its right, title or interest, or its power to execute such a contract
to any individual or business entity of any kind without the previous written consent of
the City.
18. Termination. If, during the term of the contract, the City determines that the Contractor
is not faithfully abiding by any term or condition cont ained herein, the City may notify
the Contractor in writing of such defect or failure to perform. This notice must give the
Contractor a 10 (ten) calendar day notice of time thereafter in which to perform said work
or cure the deficiency.
If the Contractor has not performed the work or cured the deficiency within the ten days
specified in the notice, such shall constitute a breach of the contract and the City may
terminate the contract immediately by written notice to the Contractor to said effect.
Thereafter, neither party shall have any further duties, obligations, responsibilities, or
rights under the contract except, however, any and all obligations of the Contractor's
surety shall remain in full force and effect, and shall not be extinguished, reduced, or in
any manner waived by the termination thereof.
In said event, the Contractor shall be entitled to the reasonable value of its services
performed from the beginning date in which the breach occurs up to the day it received
the City's Notice of Termination, minus any offset from such payment representing the
City's damages from such breach. "Reasonable value" includes fees or charges for goods
or services as of the last milestone or task satisfactorily delivered or completed by the
6.b
Packet Pg. 29 Attachment: b - Agreement - Emerson Process Management (1193 : Emerson Processing Maintenance and Support Contract Extension)
Page 5
Contractor as may be set forth in the Proposal; compensation for any other work, services
or goods performed or provided by the Contractor shall be based solely on the City's
assessment of the value of the work-in-progress in completing the overall workscope.
The City reserves the right to delay any such payment until completion or confirmed
abandonment of the project, as may be determined in the City's sole discretion, so as to
permit a full and complete accounting of costs. In no event, however, shall the
Contractor be entitled to receive in excess of the compensation quoted in its proposal.
19. Ownership of Materials. All original drawings, plan documents and other materials
prepared by or in possession of the Contractor as part of the work or services under these
specifications shall become the permanent property of the City, and shall be delivered to
the City upon demand.
20. Release of Reports and Information. Any reports, information, data, or other material
given to, prepared by or assembled by the Contractor as part of the work or services
under these specifications shall be the property of City and shall not be made available to
any individual or organization by the Contractor without the prior written approval of the
City.
21. Copies of Reports and Information. If the City requests additional copies of reports,
drawings, specifications, or any other material in addition to what the Contractor is
required to furnish in limited quantities as part of the work or services under these
specifications, the Contractor shall provide such additional copies as are requested, and
City shall compensate the Contractor for the costs of duplicating of such copies at the
Contractor's direct expense.
22. Required Deliverable Products. The Contractor will be required to provide:
2 hard copies of the draft or electronic copy (Adobe Acrobat format)
2 hard copies of the final project report, and 1 electronic copy (Acrobat Adobe format) of
the final report.
City staff will review any documents or materials provided by the Contractor and, where
necessary, the Contractor will be required to respond to staff comments and make such
changes as deemed appropriate.
Computer files must be on 3½", high-density, write-protected diskettes or CD’s formatted
for use on IBM-compatible systems. Each diskette must be clearly labeled and have a
printed copy of the directory. Alternatively, files may be emailed to the City.
23. Amendments. Any amendment, modification or variation from the terms of this
Agreement shall be in writing and shall be effective only upon approval by the City
Engineer of the City.
24. Complete Agreement. These Purchase Order Conditions and Contractors proposal shall
constitute the complete agreement between the parties hereto. No oral agreement,
understanding or representation not reduced to writing and specifically incorporated
herein shall be of any force or effect, nor shall any such oral agreement, understanding or
representation be binding upon the parties hereto.
6.b
Packet Pg. 30 Attachment: b - Agreement - Emerson Process Management (1193 : Emerson Processing Maintenance and Support Contract Extension)
Page 6
25. Insurance Requirements. The Contractor shall provide proof of insurance in the form,
coverages and amounts specified in these conditions as a precondition to contract
execution. The Contractor shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract
insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to p roperty which may arise
from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Contractor, its
agents, representatives, employees or sub-Contractors.
Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as:
1. Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence form CG
20 10 Prior to 1993 or CG 20 10 07 04 with CG 20 37 10 01 or the exact equivalent as
determined by the City).
2. Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobi le
Liability, code 1 (any auto).
3. Workers' Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's
Liability Insurance.
4. Errors and Omissions Liability insurance as appropriate to the Contractor's profession.
Minimum Limits of Insurance. Contractor shall maintain limits no less than:
1. General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and
property damage. If Commercial General Liability or other form with a general
aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this
project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence
limit.
2. Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage.
3. Employer's Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease.
4. Errors and Omissions Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence.
Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be
declared to and approved by the City. At the option of the City, either: the insurer shall reduce or
eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials,
employees and volunteers; or the Contractor shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses
and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses.
Other Insurance Provisions. The general liability and automobile liability policies are to
contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
1. The City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers are to be covered as
insureds as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the
Contractor; products and completed operations of the Contractor; premises owned,
occupied or used by the Contractor; or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by
the Contractor. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of
protection afforded to the City, its officers, official, employees, agents or volunteers.
2. For any claims related to this project, the Contractor's insurance coverage shall be
primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and
volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials,
employees, agents or volunteers shall be excess of the Contractor's insurance and shall
not contribute with it.
6.b
Packet Pg. 31 Attachment: b - Agreement - Emerson Process Management (1193 : Emerson Processing Maintenance and Support Contract Extension)
Page 7
3. The Contractor's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is
made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability.
4. Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage
shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits
except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt
requested, has been given to the City.
Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's
rating of no less than A:VII.
Verification of Coverage. Contractor shall furnish the City with a certificate of insurance
showing maintenance of the required insurance coverage. Original endorsements effecting
general liability and automobile liability coverage required by this clause must also be provided.
The endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its
behalf. All endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences.
6.b
Packet Pg. 32 Attachment: b - Agreement - Emerson Process Management (1193 : Emerson Processing Maintenance and Support Contract Extension)
Page intentionally left
blank.
Meeting Date: 1/5/2016
FROM: Daryl R. Grigsby, Director of Public Works
Prepared By: Michael J. McGuire, Engineer III
SUBJECT: FIRE STATION 2 REMODEL, SPECIFICATION NO. 91258
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Approve plans and specifications for “Fire Station 2 Remodel, Specification No. 91258”; and
2. Authorize staff to advertise for bids and authorize the City Manager to award the contract if
the lowest responsible bidder is within the Engineer’s Estimate of $129,000.
DISCUSSION
Fire Station 2, built in 1953, is the oldest fire facility of the four stations in the City and is the
only one that does not offer separate male and female restroom facilities. Designed for an all-
male staff, the toilet stalls are open and offer no privacy. Most of the existing fixtures in the
restroom are original, do not conserve water, and are not ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act)
compliant.
The proposed remodel seeks to make the necessary improvements as cost effectively as possible.
The proposal also seeks to accommodate gender separation and improve livability, privacy and
modesty to its occupants and visitors. This remodel will also accomplish the goals of ADA
accessibility to one of the two restroom facilities and to the dormitory.
CONCURRENCES
The Fire Department has been involved in the design process and supports the project as
presented. A building permit for construction has been issued by the Community Development
Department.
FISCAL IMPACT
The 2015-17 Financial Plan, Appendix B, pages 3-27 to 3-30, identifies $6,000 budget to date
and $160,000 in 2015-16 for construction, for a total construction budget of $166,000. The
upcoming construction schedule allows for staff inspection and negates the need for consultant
services for construction management. With the Engineer’s Estimate of $129,000, there is
sufficient funding available to construct the remodel.
This project is fully funded by the local half-percent sales tax measure (Measure G).
7
Packet Pg. 33
ALTERNATIVE
Deny approval to advertise. The Council could choose to deny or defer the approval for advertising
of this project. Staff does not recommend this option. Should this be denied or deferred, the
remodel of the fire station will not proceed. A lack of separate male and female restroom and
dormitory facilities will continue, along with a lack of privacy for the current staff. Having no
separate facilities at this fire station could potentially impact the hiring of gender-diverse firefighter
personnel. Also, the fire station would continue to be without ADA compliant restroom facilities.
Attachments:
a Council Reading File - Plans
b Council Reading File - Specifications
Fiscal Impact Summary 2015-16
Available Project Budget:166,000$
Engineer's Estimate Construction:129,000$
Construction Contingencies:20,000$
Total for Construction:149,000$
Testing/Inspection:1,000$
Printing & Advertising:1,000$
Staff Accomodations:15,000$
Total Cost of Project:166,000$
7
Packet Pg. 34
Meeting Date: 1/5/2016
FROM: Daryl R. Grigsby, Public Works Director
Prepared By: Kyle Rowland, Engineering Inspector, Project Manager
SUBJECT: LOS OSOS VALLEY ROAD/US 101 INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT, SPECIFICATION NO. 99821 - CONTINGENCY BUDGET
UPDATE
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Authorize an $800,000 increase to the US 101/LOVR Interchange project contingency
budget to cover anticipated additional contract change orders (CCO’s), including repaving
approximately 0.75 miles of Calle Joaquin; and
2. Authorize the City Engineer to be responsible for construction CCO’s for the US 101 /
LOVR Interchange Project in any amount with the limitation that the sum total of all CCO’s
not exceed the budgeted contingency amount of $2,050,000.
DISCUSSION
Background
December marks the completion of the fourteenth (14th) month of construction, and stage six of
eight, for the Los Osos Valley Road/U.S. 101 Interchange Improvements Project (LOVR,
Specification No. 99821). The contract was awarded to Granite Construction at the September
16, 2014 Council meeting for a total amount of $16,572,129.84. The beginning of the 350
working day schedule began on October 27, 2014. Since construction commencement,
efficiencies in scheduling and items of work have accelerated the project, which is now
anticipated to finish earlier than the expected timeframe of summer 2016.
Due to the size and scope of this project, the City Council amended the City’s normal Contract
Change Order (CCO) Policy as part of their action of September 16, 2014. This revised project
specific CCO Policy authorizes the City Engineer to approve all CCO’s of any amount as long as
the cumulative total of all approved CCO’s does not exceed the total authorized contingency
amount of $1,250,000. For CCO’s under $25,000, the Project Manager will have the authority to
approve them as necessary followed by notification to the City Engineer. This policy has proven
to be very successful by nearly eliminating idled worker and equipment costs.
Summary of Contract Change Orders (CCOs) To Date
Out of the approximately fifty CCO’s to date, there are three that account for nearly half of the
contingency balance.
8
Packet Pg. 35
1. CCO 7 - This $255,000 change is the result of errors in the earthwork quantity
calculations for the project. The actual quantities of earthwork were significantly larger
than estimated throughout various areas of the project. The plans themselves were not
changed in any significant way, rather in summing up the quantities for the various
locations, some areas were inadvertently omitted by the consulting design engineer.
2. CCO 30 - Pile driving costs were approximately $150,000 larger than anticipated when
working on the SLO Creek Bridge widening. Pile locations and lengths were designed
based on two soil borings samples that were taken during the design phase of the project.
During construction, the underground rock layer was deeper than expected in some
locations, requiring significantly longer piles to reach strong supporting earthen material.
This resulted in the City incurring additional material and equipment costs to lengthen
and drive piles to the required rock elevation.
3. CCO 41 - The project plans show an existing 18” City waterline crossing underneath a
new retaining wall at the corner of the southbound U.S. 101 off-ramp and LOVR. The
actual alignment of the waterline was discovered in a different location. This created a
major conflict with the new LOVR retaining wall installation. Therefore, a section of the
waterline was replaced in a new alignment with a retaining wall casing that allows the
City to access the line for future potential repairs. This CCO is anticipated to cost the
project approximately $150,000.
Request for Additional Contingency Budget
At this point, the project is nearly 80% complete according to the baseline schedule. Anticipated
work indicates a change to the initial Council authorized contingency amount of an additional
$800,000. Based on guidance from the consulting construction management firm, MNS
Engineers, it is anticipated that an additional $275,000 is needed through the end of the project.
This will address any unforeseen events and related CCO’s and increase the new contingency
balance to 9.2% of the project budget. This percentage aligns with other transportation projects
of this magnitude.
The project team is also requesting authorization to expend an additional $525,000 to repave a
large portion of Calle Joaquin that has been impacted by the interchange project. This extra work
will span from the northern end of Calle Joaquin to the southern end at Margie’s Diner. Over the
last year, Calle Joaquin has incurred accelerated wear due to the sewer force main project,
temporary southbound U.S. 101 off-ramp, construction equipment loading, and material staging.
By repaving Calle Joaquin now, its decline due to unusual wear and tear will be abated and the
City will save money in the long run by avoiding a reconstruction situation.
FISCAL IMPACT
This project is identified in the 2013-15 Financial Plan, Appendix B – Capital Improvement
Plan, page 3-252 through 3-255. The financing needs of the project were presented at the June
10, 2014 City Council meeting which outlined all expenses to date, in addition to the expected
costs throughout the construction phase. Since the project is grant funded, 88.53% of most
project expenses are funded by a $16,000,000 STIP RIP Grant, and the City TIF bond funds the
8
Packet Pg. 36
remaining 11.47%. The utilization of the project grant will be maximized during the construction
of this project. A summary of the construction phase funding and expenses are included in the
following table:
Table 1 -Project Construction Funding and Expenses
As the construction phase approaches completion, the consultant project management and
construction management team is being reduced due a decrease in demand. However, it is
anticipated that a contract amendment will be necessary to fund MNS Engineers throughout
project closeout. The original budget for this contract appears to be insufficient due to the
increased workload associated with design related CCO’s. Savings are expected from the project
management contract with Southstar Engineering and should offset any increase in the
construction management contract.
It appears at this time that there will be funds remaining from the bonds upon project completion.
As noted above, every effort will be made to maximize use of the grant. If funds remain after
completion, staff will provide options and a recommendation to the Council for funding other
improvements in the area. Both Los Osos Valley Road and Madonna Road are in need of
reconstruction work, which to date, there have not been adequate funds for.
ALTERNATIVE
Authorize $275,000 increase in project contingency budget, and defer paving of Calle
Joaquin. Council may decide to deny or defer the additional funding for street paving work.
Although the $525,000 for repaving of Calle Joaquin is recommended, this work is not required
to complete the project. However, with 75% of the original authorized contingency utilized and
Budget Expenses
STIP RIP Grant (9/16/2014)16,000,000$
City TIF Bond (9/16/2014)7,500,000$
Carryover from Environmental Review (7/1/2013)100,000$
Transfer from Land Acquisition (4/1/2014)759,475$
Carryover from Land Acquisition (2/28/2015)203,264$
Contract with Granite Construction (16,572,130)$
CCO Encumbrance (1,250,000)$
Project Management-Southstar Engineering (1,399,545)$
Construction Management-MNS Engineers (2,352,870)$
Design Support-Dokken Engineering (238,860)$
Misc. Printing, Permit, and Bond Expenses (69,711)$
LOVR Interchange Landscape Project (400,000)$
Total 24,562,739$ (22,283,116)$
Proposed CCO Increase to Complete Construction (1/5/2016)(275,000)$
Proposed CCO Increase to Pave Calle Joaquin (1/5/2016)(525,000)$
Total (800,000)$
Projected Balance Remaining 1,479,623$
99821 Construction Phase
8
Packet Pg. 37
additional CCO’s imminent, the request for $275,000 is needed to finish construction of the
project and should not be deferred.
Attachments:
a a - 99821 CAR Award LOVR-101 to Granite Constr.
b b - 99821 LOVR-101 Change Order Policy
8
Packet Pg. 38
City of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda Report, Meeting Date, Item Number
FROM: Daryl R. Grigsby, Public Works Director
Prepared By: Kyle Rowland, Supervising Project Manager
Jason Bennecke, Consultant Project Manager
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL OF THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS’
DECISION DENYING BID PROTESTS FILED BY JOHN MADONNA
CONSTRUCTION, INC./ SOUZA CONSTRUCTION, INC. AND (IF FILED)
CALPORTLAND CONSTRUCTION COMPANY REGARDING THE LOS
OSOS VALLEY ROAD/US 101 INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT; AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR THE LOS OSOS
VALLEY ROAD/US 101 INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT,
SPECIFICATION NO. 99821
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Adopt a resolution denying the appeal of the Public Works Director’s denial of a bid protest
filed by John Madonna Construction – Souza Construction Inc. for award of the Los Osos
Valley Road Interchange Project, Specification 99821, to Granite Construction.
2. Award a contract to Granite Construction of Santa Barbara, California in the amount of
$16,572,129.84 for the US 101 / LOVR Interchange Project, Specification No. 99821.
3. Authorize City Engineer to be responsible for construction contract change orders (CCO’s)
for the US 101 / LOVR Interchange Project in any amount with the limitation that the sum
total of all CCO’s not exceed the contingency budget amount of $1,250,000.
DISCUSSION
Background
On June 10, 2014, the City Council authorized inviting bids for the Los Osos Valley Road/US 101
Interchange Improvements Project, Specification No. 99821 (Attachment 1). Advertisement of the
project began on July 5, 2014. The City has a responsibility to award this project within six
months of the construction allocation, per State requirements (Attachment 2). The California
Transportation Commission voted on June 25, 2014 to allocate a $16,000,000 grant towards the
LOVR/US 101 Interchange Improvements Project. Therefore, the City must award a contract by
December 25, 2014 to avoid loss of grant funding. The project is scheduled to complete
preliminary work this fall, with construction which impacts traffic, to start after the holiday
season.
Five sealed bids were publicly opened on August 12, 2014. The submitted bid documents were
evaluated based on three criteria: cost, responsiveness and responsibility. Initially, all bids were
reviewed for mathematical errors and ranked from the lowest to the highest cost bid. Granite
Construction (Granite) of Santa Barbara, CA was the lowest bidder with a proposal of
September 16, 2014
B1
8.a
Packet Pg. 39 Attachment: a - 99821 CAR Award LOVR-101 to Granite Constr. (1216 : LOVR - 101 Contingency Budget Update)
Los Osos Valley Road/US 101 Interchange Improvements Project Award Page 2
$16,572,129.84. This low bid is under the Engineer’s Estimate by approximately $398,000 or
2.35% (Attachment 3).
The lowest cost bid package was reviewed to verify that requested items of information were
complete, addenda acknowledged, and reference information included. Incomplete bids or bids
found to otherwise materially not to comply with the bidding instructions are cause for the bids
to be considered as “non-responsive.” If a bid is determined to be “non-responsive,” it is no
longer considered for award, and the next lowest bid document is reviewed. Granite’s bid
documents were determined to be responsive. After reviewing Granite’s bid for responsiveness,
their qualifications and references were reviewed to determine responsibility. Granite’s
experience and references indicate that Granite is qualified to perform the work contained within
the Contract.
The bidders were also responsible to provide work for Disadvantaged Business Enterprises
(DBEs), as a condition of the grant funding. Granite indicated in their bid documents that 3.2%
($535,560) of the total project cost would be performed by DBE firms. This exceeds the
minimum goal of 3% listed in the project specifications.
It is the Public Works Director’s recommendation that the contract be awarded to Granite
Construction based on the review of the bid submittal and the findings shown above.
Bid Protest - Madonna-Souza
Madonna-Souza Joint Venture (Madonna-Souza) submitted a bid protest on August 19, 2014
protesting the award to Granite for failure to comply with the Federal Disadvantaged Business
Enterprise rules and regulations (Attachment 4).
The protest revolves around a quote Granite submitted in their supporting DBE bid
documentation from Dragon Material Transport, Inc. (Dragon) dated August 11, 2014. The
quote indicates delivery fees for liquid asphalt tonnage from Greka Energy to Paso Robles and is
addressed to CalPortland Construction (CalPortland). Madonna-Souza claims there is no
evidence given of any contractual relation, or contact between CalPortland and Granite, or
between Dragon and Granite with respect to this project. Therefore, Madonna-Souza claims that
Granite cannot use these expenses as a contribution to Granite’s DBE goal.
Granite responded by indicating that CalPortland is a listed subcontractor supplying material on
this Contract and Dragon is committed to supply and haul asphalt oil for this project as
CalPortland’s supplier. Consequently, Dragon is a second-tier supplier. The asphalt oil will be
delivered to CalPortland’s facility in Paso Robles where the asphalt is produced. Additionally,
all DBE participation (including lower tier subcontractors and suppliers) counts toward the DBE
goal (Attachment 5). Therefore, bidders were required to identify on the DBE Commitment
Form all DBE firms participating in the project regardless of tier. Dragon is listed on this form,
Exhibit 15-G.
City staff contacted Dragon and spoke with the estimator, Ms. Summer Bradford. Ms. Bradford
confirmed that the oil was to be sold to CalPortland Construction for purposes of providing
asphalt concrete to Granite Construction, all of which is intended to be used for the US 101 /
8.a
Packet Pg. 40 Attachment: a - 99821 CAR Award LOVR-101 to Granite Constr. (1216 : LOVR - 101 Contingency Budget Update)
Los Osos Valley Road/US 101 Interchange Improvements Project Award Page 3
LOVR interchange project. She also confirmed the price and understood that Dragon is to be
counted as a second-tier DBE.
Furthermore, the DBE good faith effort submitted by Granite was determined to be satisfactory.
Therefore, hypothetically even if the Dragon DBE contribution was not utilized, the minimum
DBE good faith requirements would still be met with Granite’s submitted bid.
After reviewing the protest from Madonna-Souza, the response from Granite, and input from
City’s counsel, the Public Works Director denied the protest on September 2, 2014.
On September 4, 2014 the City Clerk received an appeal from Madonna -Souza of the denial of
the bid protest (Attachment 6). The appeal cited a lack of documentation that Granite had
obtained the DBE commitment at the time of bid, and had not shown a good faith effort to
include DBEs. These are similar issues raised in the original appeal, and responded to in the
denial letter. Staff is recommending denial of the appeal and award to Granite and currently
drafting a resolution that will be distributed via memo prior to the September 16th hearing
(Attachment 7).
Bid Protest - CalPortland Construction
CalPortland submitted a bid protest on August 19, 2014 protesting the apparent second low
bidder, Madonna-Souza (Attachment 6). The protest appears to indicate three “critical errors” in
the Madonna-Souza bid and suggests that the mentioned errors deem the bid nonresponsive
because of inconsistencies with the Specifications and not meeting the intent of the Bid Books.
Additionally, they requested that CalPortland be moved to the apparent second low bidder
position, pending any potential issue with the apparent low bidder, Granite.
The CalPortland protest of Madonna-Souza bid was denied by the Public Works Director on
September 2, 2014. No appeal has been received as of the time of this writing.
Revised Change Order Policy
Due the size and scope of this project, the current Contract Change Order (CCO) Policy used for
CIP projects may result in significant delays and expenditures for the City. The interchange
project is approximately 100 times larger than the typical CIP project performed by the City. A
larger number of construction employees and equipment will be idled during delays, and
individual changes will have more significant costs. Were the construction to be stopped each
time a change order over $25,000 was deemed necessary, costs incurred by idled manpower and
equipment could be significant. A proposed project-specific change order policy has been
drafted for Council approval (Attachment 9). Expertise from the project consultant and
construction team was used to identify appropriate thresholds. The revised policy is consistent
with other public agencies that have completed similar interchange projects.
The proposed policy authorizes the City Engineer to approve all CCO’s of any amount as long as
the running total of all approved CCO’s does not exceed the total authorized contingency amount
of $1,250,000. For CCO’s under $25,000, the Project Manager will have the authority to
approve them as necessary followed by notification to the City Engineer. If the sum of all
CCO’s reaches 75% of the total authorized contingency amount, staff will notify the City
8.a
Packet Pg. 41 Attachment: a - 99821 CAR Award LOVR-101 to Granite Constr. (1216 : LOVR - 101 Contingency Budget Update)
Los Osos Valley Road/US 101 Interchange Improvements Project Award Page 4
Manager and Finance Director to address any budget concerns. Any additional funding needs
will come before the Council for consideration and direction.
CONCURRENCES
The Finance Director and City Attorney were consulted regarding the project specific change
order policy and concur with the recommendation.
FISCAL IMPACT
The financing needs of the project were presented at the June 10, 2014 City Council meeting.
This outlined all expenses to date, in addition to the expected costs throughout the construction
phase. Council directed staff to return with the following information once bids were opened:
1. Debt financing recommendations to provide up to $7.5 million in project funding to pay
the City’s remaining portion of the Los Osos Valley Road/US 101 Interchange
Improvements Project costs, Specification No. 99821.
2. Any necessary impact fee program modifications that may be needed to fund project
costs.
This debt financing recommendation will be presented at a public hearing to be held on
September 16, 2014 which will occur during the regular City Council meeting ahead of this item.
A summary of the expected projected costs can be seen below.
2014-15
Construction:
City Contingency Amount 1,839,481$
Loan/bond Origination Fee 250,000$
Construction (includes Env. Mit)17,986,302$
Construction Management 3,189,025$
23,264,808$
Misc.
GF Reimbursement for ROW 74,000$
Total All Project Costs:23,338,808$
Project Components
Table 1 - Expected Project Costs through Construction Phase
Debt Financing Needs
Based upon these estimates and the final grant amount, the amount to be borrowed needs to
generate $7,500,000 to complete the project. (the par amount of the debt will be greater than this
amount). This amount is determined by subtracting the $16,000,000 grant amount from the FY
14-15 expenses of $23,338,808 and rounding up.
Total Costs- FY 2014-15: $23,338,808
Grant Amount: $16,000,000
Subtotal: $7,338,808
8.a
Packet Pg. 42 Attachment: a - 99821 CAR Award LOVR-101 to Granite Constr. (1216 : LOVR - 101 Contingency Budget Update)
Los Osos Valley Road/US 101 Interchange Improvements Project Award Page 5
Rounded: $7,500,000
The Finance Department and the City’s Financial Advisor have developed a complete debt
financing package for the project that will be presented ahead of this item at tonight’s meeting.
Bond Financing Effects on Contract Award
Staff is recommending the award of a contract to Granite this evening to meet state funding
requirements to award a bid within 60 days of the bid opening and with the understanding that
the bond financing transaction may require up to four weeks to complete.
In the unlikely event that the bond financing is not completed in a timely manner or is not
completed due to unforeseen market conditions, the construction contract can be terminated at
the convenience of the City. However, the City would be liable for those costs incurred up to
that point which would largely be related to the contractor’s mobilization and work effort to
secure documents and permits from various agencies.
ALTERNATIVES
Award a Contract to other than Granite Construction. Council may decide to award to the
next lowest responsive, responsible bidder, if it finds, in compliance with state law regarding
public bids, that the low bidder’s bid was materially non-responsive or that the low bidder does
not meet responsibility requirements for the project. A non -responsibility determination would
need to be based on findings and would entitle the low bidder to a responsibility hearing, which
would delay project award. This alternative is not recommended because staff believes that
Granite is the lowest responsive, responsible bidder pursuant to public contracts law.
Deny the award. Council may choose to deny or defer the approval of award for this project.
Staff does not recommend this option. The current award and start of construction schedule
allows the City to meet the grant deadline for award. It also allows some necessary soil settling
work to occur during the shopping season, so significant construction efforts can get underway in
January. Critical components of work have to be performed prior to June due to environmental
permit regulations. It is unlikely that bids will be significantly different should the Council opt
to reject bids and re-advertise, and bidders have incurred expenses already to prepare their bid.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Council Agenda Report Authorizing Advertisement - June 10, 2014
2. Caltrans LAPG Guidelines for STIP Projects
3. Bid Evaluation and Analysis Report
4. Madonna-Souza Bid Protest
5. DBE Participation Standards
6. Madonna-Souza Appeal
7. Resolution Denying the Madonna-Souza Appeal [To be distributed under separate action]
8. CalPortland Bid Protest
9. LOVR/US 101 Contract Change Order Policy
10. Agreement
8.a
Packet Pg. 43 Attachment: a - 99821 CAR Award LOVR-101 to Granite Constr. (1216 : LOVR - 101 Contingency Budget Update)
Los Osos Valley Road/US 101 Interchange Improvements Project Award Page 6
t:\council agenda reports\2014\2014-09-16\lovr interchange contract award (grigsby-rowland)\99821 car award lovr-101 to granite constr..docx
8.a
Packet Pg. 44 Attachment: a - 99821 CAR Award LOVR-101 to Granite Constr. (1216 : LOVR - 101 Contingency Budget Update)
City of San Luis Obispo, Public Works, 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA, 93401-3218, 805.781.7200, slocity.org
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT CHANGE ORDERS FOR THE LOS OSOS
VALLEY ROAD INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT
Financial Management Manual - Section 225 - Revised for Referenced Project
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT CHANGE ORDERS
OVERVIEW
When the City awards a construction contract, the need for contract change orders (CCO’s) is not
unusual. CCO’s are required whenever the scope of work changes from that in the original contract
or an unknown condition of the site requires a change in the scope of work. Usually a contingency
amount is established when the project budget is finalized upon contract award to accommodate
limited CCO’s. The purpose of this policy is to establish limits of authority for approving
construction project CCO’s.
GOALS
1. Ensure appropriate authority and accountability in the approval of change orders.
2. Minimize the time needed to approve a CCO in order to avoid project delays.
3. Establish a system under which the organizational level at which approval is given is
commensurate with the size of CCO and size of project.
4. Eliminate the potential for approval of a CCO when contingency funds are insufficient.
POLICIES
Conditions for Approval of CCO's by Staff
1. Sufficient contingency funds are budgeted and available in order for the Public Works Director or
City Manager (approved designees) City Engineer to approve a CCO.
2. The nature of work in the CCO is not significantly different from that in the contract.
3. Authorization limits are based on an individual CCO amount, not the or aggregate amount of all
CCO’s where noted.
4. Authorization limits apply to CCO’s for increases in contract amounts only.
5. When the aggregate amount of CCO’s reaches 75% of the contingency, the awarding authority
City Manager and Finance Director shall be informed of the status of the project and the
sufficiency of funding to complete the project.
6. Work will not be broken up into multiple CCO’s in order to circumvent this policy.
8.b
Packet Pg. 45 Attachment: b - 99821 LOVR-101 Change Order Policy (1216 : LOVR - 101 Contingency Budget Update)
7. All CCO's must be in writing and approved by the appropriate contract parties consistent with the
authorized limits established in this policy.
8. A copy of each approved CCO will be transmitted promptly to the Finance Division.
9. The City Manager may grant approval of CCO's in excess of $100,000 under the following
circumstances (all three factors must be present):
a. Immediate approval of the CCO is necessary to avoid delay.
b. The CCO is an integral and mandatory component of the project.
c. The costs associated with delay of the project would be excessive.
The Project Manager City Engineer is responsible for carrying out this policy.
10. The City Manager is also authorized to approve CCO’s in excess of $100,000 related to Job
Order Contract Task Orders.
Authorization Limits
1. Public Works Director/Approved Designee Project Manager - Not to exceed $25,000
2. City Manager -Not to exceed $100,000 Engineer - None on individual CCO’s, with cumulative
approved CCO total, limited to approved project budget
3. City Council - Greater than contract or $100,000* approved project budget
* See circumstances above where the City Manager may approve CCO’s in excess of $100,000.
Originally Approved by the Council on August 3, 1993; Revised by the Council on April 15, 2003
Approved by the Council on September 16, 2014 for the Los Osos Valley Road Interchange
Improvements Project, Specification 99821, Exclusively.
8.b
Packet Pg. 46 Attachment: b - 99821 LOVR-101 Change Order Policy (1216 : LOVR - 101 Contingency Budget Update)
Meeting Date: 1/5/2016
FROM: Carrie Mattingly, Utilities Director
Prepared By: David Hix, Deputy Director - Wastewater
SUBJECT: RECYCLED WATER FACILITIES PLANNING STUDY
RECOMMENDATION
Approve an agreement with Water Systems Consultants (WSC) for development of a Recycled
Water Facilities Planning Study in an amount not to exceed $150,000.
DISCUSSION
Background
On February 3, 2015, the City Council received an update on the Water Resource Recovery
Facility (WRRF) Upgrade Project. At that meeting Council approved a resolution to submit a
grant application for Proposition 13 funding to study maximizing production and distribution of
recycled water.
At this same meeting, the City Council additionally authorized the Utilities Director to execute
the grant contract if the grant application was successful and approved matching grant funds in
the amount of $75,000 (Attachment A). In July of 2015, a grant application was submitted to the
State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) for a Recycled Water Facil ities Planning Study.
On November 9, 2015, the City was notified the grant had been approved and the Utilities
Director received and signed the grant document on November 16, 2015 (Attachment B).
The Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study
The Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study will evaluate five alternatives for the recycled
water produced at the WRRF.
1. Cal Poly
a. Deliver recycled water to Cal Poly
b. Construct a small scale satellite WRRF to serve Cal Poly
2. Irrigation in Edna Valley
3. Potable Reuse
a. Provide groundwater recharge for Indirect Potable Reuse (IPR)
b. Provide Direct Potable Reuse (DPR)
9
Packet Pg. 47
The scope for the project was developed to strengthen the data required to make knowledge -
based decisions for the City’s recycled water program and to provide th e basis for selection of
alternatives through a triple bottom line analysis. The five alternatives will be screened and it is
anticipated the top two will be carried forward for full evaluation. This study will collect data
and perform resource evaluations and is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA).
Consultant Selection
Staff recommends using WSC for the study. WSC possesses extensive knowledge and
experience in the recycled water discipline. WSC is currently working with West Valley Water
District on a recycled water master plan, the City of Pismo Beach’s recycled water project, and is
the City’s program manager for the WRRF Upgrade project. The WRRF upgrade project has a
goal to maximize recycled water production. WSC has submitted a scope of work which will
result in a comprehensive study of the alternatives and provide recommendations for recycled
water treatment and distribution requirements. The study will coordinate the findings with the
WRRF Upgrade project design and future recycled water capital improvements (Attachment C).
WSC was selected as an engineering consultant through the City’s on-call services Request for
Proposals (RFP) for engineering services in 2014. On-call engineering services were envisioned
to be utilized for studies of this nature.
FISCAL IMPACT
The Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study will cost $150,000, of which $75,000 is
reimbursable through the approved grant funding. A total of $450,000 remains available in
WRRF Upgrade project (2015-17 Financial Plan, Capital Improvement Plan, pages 3-72 to 3-75)
under the study phase for the City’s portion of the study amounting to $75,000.
Attachments:
a a - Feb 3, 2015 Council Report and RW Resolution
b b - Recycled Water Facilities Planning Grant
c c - WSC RWFPS Proposal 11-20-2015
9
Packet Pg. 48
9.a
Packet Pg. 49 Attachment: a - Feb 3, 2015 Council Report and RW Resolution (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
9.a
Packet Pg. 50 Attachment: a - Feb 3, 2015 Council Report and RW Resolution (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
9.a
Packet Pg. 51 Attachment: a - Feb 3, 2015 Council Report and RW Resolution (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
9.a
Packet Pg. 52 Attachment: a - Feb 3, 2015 Council Report and RW Resolution (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
9.a
Packet Pg. 53 Attachment: a - Feb 3, 2015 Council Report and RW Resolution (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
9.a
Packet Pg. 54 Attachment: a - Feb 3, 2015 Council Report and RW Resolution (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
9.a
Packet Pg. 55 Attachment: a - Feb 3, 2015 Council Report and RW Resolution (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
9.b
Packet Pg. 56 Attachment: b - Recycled Water Facilities Planning Grant (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
9.b
Packet Pg. 57 Attachment: b - Recycled Water Facilities Planning Grant (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
9.b
Packet Pg. 58 Attachment: b - Recycled Water Facilities Planning Grant (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
9.b
Packet Pg. 59 Attachment: b - Recycled Water Facilities Planning Grant (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
9.b
Packet Pg. 60 Attachment: b - Recycled Water Facilities Planning Grant (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
9.b
Packet Pg. 61 Attachment: b - Recycled Water Facilities Planning Grant (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
9.b
Packet Pg. 62 Attachment: b - Recycled Water Facilities Planning Grant (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
9.b
Packet Pg. 63 Attachment: b - Recycled Water Facilities Planning Grant (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
9.b
Packet Pg. 64 Attachment: b - Recycled Water Facilities Planning Grant (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
9.b
Packet Pg. 65 Attachment: b - Recycled Water Facilities Planning Grant (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
9.b
Packet Pg. 66 Attachment: b - Recycled Water Facilities Planning Grant (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
9.b
Packet Pg. 67 Attachment: b - Recycled Water Facilities Planning Grant (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
9.b
Packet Pg. 68 Attachment: b - Recycled Water Facilities Planning Grant (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
9.b
Packet Pg. 69 Attachment: b - Recycled Water Facilities Planning Grant (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
9.b
Packet Pg. 70 Attachment: b - Recycled Water Facilities Planning Grant (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
9.b
Packet Pg. 71 Attachment: b - Recycled Water Facilities Planning Grant (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
9.b
Packet Pg. 72 Attachment: b - Recycled Water Facilities Planning Grant (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
9.b
Packet Pg. 73 Attachment: b - Recycled Water Facilities Planning Grant (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
9.b
Packet Pg. 74 Attachment: b - Recycled Water Facilities Planning Grant (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
9.b
Packet Pg. 75 Attachment: b - Recycled Water Facilities Planning Grant (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
9.b
Packet Pg. 76 Attachment: b - Recycled Water Facilities Planning Grant (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
9.b
Packet Pg. 77 Attachment: b - Recycled Water Facilities Planning Grant (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
9.b
Packet Pg. 78 Attachment: b - Recycled Water Facilities Planning Grant (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
9.b
Packet Pg. 79 Attachment: b - Recycled Water Facilities Planning Grant (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
9.b
Packet Pg. 80 Attachment: b - Recycled Water Facilities Planning Grant (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
9.b
Packet Pg. 81 Attachment: b - Recycled Water Facilities Planning Grant (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
PO Box 4255 l San Luis Obispo, CA 93403 l Phone: (805) 457‐8833 l Fax: (805) 888‐2764 l www.wsc‐inc.com
11/20/2015
Mr. Dave Hix
Wastewater Division Manager
City of San Luis Obispo
879 Morro Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
SUBJECT: PROPOSAL TO DEVELOP A RECYCLED WATER FACILITIES PLANNING STUDY
Dear Dave,
Per your request we have prepared a proposal to develop a Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study
(RWFPS) for the City of San Luis Obispo. The purpose of the study is develop and evaluate recycled
water use alternatives, and to identify a preferred alternative with the greatest potential for beneficial
use that will help the City meet their goals. The preferred alternative for increasing recycled water use
would be selected and implemented in coordination with the Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF)
Project.
The study will focus on evaluating the following five alternatives:
1. Deliver Title 22 recycled water from the WRRF to agricultural customers in the Edna Valley;
2. Deliver Title 22 recycled water from the WRRF to Cal Poly;
3. Provide groundwater recharge within the San Luis Obispo Valley Basin for indirect potable reuse
(IPR);
4. Construct a new satellite WRRF to serve Cal Poly and the surrounding areas; and
5. Provide direct potable reuse (DPR).
The scope of the study intends to strengthen the quality and quantity of data required to make
knowledge‐based decisions about the City’s recycled water program, and to provide the basis for
selection the most beneficial alternative(s) through a triple bottom line analysis. An initial screening of
the five alternatives will be conducted and the top two alternatives will be carried forward for detailed
evaluation.
The estimated cost for this scope of services is $150,000 as shown in the attached cost proposal.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide you with this proposal. Please feel free to contact us if you
have any questions. We can be reached at 457‐8833; Jeff is ext. 101 and Jasmine is at ext. 109.
9.c
Packet Pg. 82 Attachment: c - WSC RWFPS Proposal 11-20-2015 (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
Mr. Dave Hix, page 2 11/20/2015
PO Box 4255 l San Luis Obispo, CA 93403 l Phone: (805) 457‐8833 l Fax: (805) 888‐2764 l www.wsc‐inc.com
Sincerely,
Water Systems Consulting, Inc.
Jeffery M. Szytel, PE, MBA
Program Manager
Jasmine Diaz, EIT
Assistant Program Manager
Enclosures:
Scope of Work for Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study dated 6/26/15
Cost Proposal for Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study dated 6/26/15
9.c
Packet Pg. 83 Attachment: c - WSC RWFPS Proposal 11-20-2015 (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
City of San Luis Obispo Scope of Work
Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study 6/26/2015
Page 1 of 12
Introduction
The City of San Luis Obispo (City) owns and operates a tertiary treatment Water Resource Recovery
Facility (WRRF) which discharges a portion of the effluent to San Luis Obispo Creek for habitat
enhancement and the rest to a recycled water storage tank before it is distributed to customers
throughout the City. The City is currently developing a project to upgrade the WRRF (WRRF Project) to
increase effluent water quality through complete nitrogen removal and reduction of disinfection
byproducts. During the initial planning phase of the WRRF Project, “maximizing sustainable resource
recovery” was identified as a key objective. Although the City must maintain a minimum effluent
discharge of 1.6 million gallons per day (MGD) to the creek for protection of native wildlife habitat, a
significant portion of the WRRF effluent remains available for recycled water use. The purpose of this
study is to develop and evaluate recycled water use alternatives, and to identify a preferred alternative
with the greatest potential for beneficial use that will help the City meet their goals.
Through conversations with the City, five (5) recycled water use alternatives were identified for possible
evaluation during the City’s Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study (RWFPS):
1. Deliver Title 22 recycled water from the WRRF to agricultural customers in the Edna Valley;
2. Deliver Title 22 recycled water from the WRRF to Cal Poly;
3. Provide groundwater recharge within the San Luis Obispo Valley Basin for indirect potable reuse
(IPR);
4. Construct a new satellite WRRF to serve Cal Poly and the surrounding areas; and
5. Provide direct potable reuse (DPR).
The scope of this study intends to strengthen the quality and quantity of data required to make
knowledge‐based decisions about the future of the City’s recycled water program, and to provide the
basis for selecting the most beneficial alternative(s) through triple bottom line (TBL) analysis. An initial
screening of these five alternatives will be conducted and the top two alternatives will be carried
forward for detailed evaluation. As a result of the study, it is envisioned a preferred alternative for
increasing recycled water use would be selected and implemented in coordination with the WRRF
Project, which is scheduled for completion by 2020.
9.c
Packet Pg. 84 Attachment: c - WSC RWFPS Proposal 11-20-2015 (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
City of San Luis Obispo Scope of Work
Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study 6/26/2015
Page 2 of 12
Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study Scope of Work
TASK 0.0 PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND MEETINGS
0.1 Project administration
Project schedule
(1) Prepare project schedule and update as‐required based upon actual progress and City
direction. Submit revised schedules to the City as necessary.
Progress reports
(1) Prepare progress reports to be submitted with each monthly invoice. The reports will
include: 1) summary of activities accomplished in the current month; 2) outstanding
information and/or coordination needs; and 3) schedule updates.
Deliverable: WSC will provide a preliminary project schedule at the Kickoff Meeting and will
provide updated project schedules as‐needed throughout the project. WSC will provide
monthly progress reports with project invoices.
0.2 Kickoff Meeting
WSC will plan, organize and facilitate a Kickoff Meeting with City staff.
The purpose of the meeting will be to:
(1) discuss the goals and objectives of the RWFPS including the Study Parameters identified
in the Plan of Study approval by the SWRCB;
(2) discuss the context of the RWFPS as it relates to the Utilities Department operations and
current projects;
(3) discuss how the project relates to the City’s Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF)
Project and WRRF Facilities Plan;
(4) review the scope and schedule of the project including assumptions and proposed
methodologies;
(5) identify data needs and sources;
(6) define coordination requirements;
(7) confirm level and nature of SWRCB involvement during the project;
(8) discuss and develop strategies for stakeholder involvement;
(9) discuss recycled water market/opportunities as identified in prior analyses including the
City’s 2014 Draft Recycled Water Master Plan (RWMP); and
(10) review and refine previously identified conceptual alternatives.
Budget is based on a 3‐hour meeting attended by WSC’s Project Manager, Project Engineer and
Staff Engineer, and HDR’s Senior Engineer and Project Engineer (by phone).
9.c
Packet Pg. 85 Attachment: c - WSC RWFPS Proposal 11-20-2015 (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
City of San Luis Obispo Scope of Work
Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study 6/26/2015
Page 3 of 12
0.3 Alternatives Screening Workshop
Coordinate a workshop with City staff to screen the conceptual alternatives and select two (2)
conceptual alternatives for further evaluation.
Review the proposed facility upgrades in the City’s WRRF Facilities Plan as the no project
alternative.
Review the materials prepared under Task 6.2 and perform a preliminary screening of
conceptual alternatives on the basis of volume of use, potable water supply implications, facility
requirements and costs, regulatory requirements, and benefits/beneficiaries.
Select two (2) conceptual alternatives for further evaluation.
Budget is based on a 3‐hour meeting attended by WSC’s Project Manager, Project Engineer and
Staff Engineer, and HDR’s Senior Engineer and Project Engineer (by phone).
Deliverable: Agenda and meeting materials; meeting notes.
0.4 Alternatives Evaluation Workshop
Coordinate a workshop with City staff to evaluate the two (2) conceptual alternatives selected
during the Alternatives Screening Workshop, and to select a preferred alternative.
Review the materials prepared under Task 6.3 and further develop evaluation criteria that are
consistent with the triple bottom line objectives in the WRRF Project Charter.
Evaluate and compare the conceptual alternatives by applying the selected screening/evaluation
criteria.
Select the preferred project alternative, which may combine aspects/components of more than
one conceptual alternative.
Budget is based on a 3‐hour workshop attended by WSC’s Project Manager, Project Engineer
and Staff Engineer, and HDR’s Senior Engineer and Project Engineer (by phone).
Deliverable: Agenda and meeting materials; meeting notes.
0.5 Deliverable Review Meeting
Deliverable Review Meeting: Draft Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study
(1) Plan, schedule and lead a meeting to review the draft recycled water facilities planning
study
(2) Budget is based on a 2‐hour meeting attended by WSC’s Project Manager, Project
Engineer and Staff Engineer, and HDR’s Senior Engineer and Project Engineer (by
phone).
Deliverable: Agenda and meeting materials; meeting notes.
9.c
Packet Pg. 86 Attachment: c - WSC RWFPS Proposal 11-20-2015 (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
City of San Luis Obispo Scope of Work
Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study 6/26/2015
Page 4 of 12
0.6 Quality Assurance / Quality Control (QA/QC)
WSC will provide quality control of the work items being prepared for delivery to the City.
TASK 1.0 BACKGROUND
1.1 Study area
Utilize the City’s Draft 2014 RWMP, the WRRF Facilities Plan and other references to prepare a
summary of the Study Area that includes:
(1) Narrative description of the Study Area
(2) Descriptive maps and diagrams showing vicinity, jurisdictional boundaries, proposed
annexation areas, regional topography/geography, groundwater basin boundaries,
hydrologic features, and current and projected land use.
The proposed Study Area shall include the current City limits, proposed annexation area(s),
agricultural land inside and outside of City limits and potential locations for offsite recycled
water storage.
1.2 Goals and objectives
Summarize goals and objectives defined during the Kickoff Meeting.
TASK 2.0 WATER SUPPLIES AND CHARACTERISTICS
2.1 Water supply characteristics
Summarize current and projected water supplies from the City’s 2015 Draft Water Master Plan
(2015 WMP).
2.2 Water demand characteristics
Summarize current and projected water demand from the 2015 WMP and customer data.
2.3 Water pricing
Summarize the City’s current water rate structure and any planned or upcoming rate increases.
TASK 3.0 WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS AND FACILITIES
3.1 Existing facilities
Utilize the City’s WRRF Facilities Plan, Wastewater Collection System Infrastructure Renewal
Strategy (WCSIRS) and other relevant documents to:
(1) Describe existing WRRF including capacity, current flows, description of treatment
processes and design criteria
(2) Summarize the City’s existing waste discharge requirements
(3) Characterize current and projected future influent flows
(4) Characterize current and projected effluent water quality including any seasonal
variation
(5) Summarize source(s) of industrial or other problem constituents (including high‐TDS
infiltration) and control measures
9.c
Packet Pg. 87 Attachment: c - WSC RWFPS Proposal 11-20-2015 (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
City of San Luis Obispo Scope of Work
Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study 6/26/2015
Page 5 of 12
(6) Summarize current wastewater flow variations including peaking factors for average dry
weather flow with Cal Poly (ADWFCP), average annual (AA), maximum week (MW),
maximum month (MM), maximum day (MD), and peak hour (PH)
(7) Summarize existing rights to use of treated effluent after discharge
Utilize the City’s 2014 Draft RWMP to:
(8) Describe existing recycling including infrastructure, users, quantities, and contractual
and pricing arrangements
3.2 Future facilities
Outline expected future waste discharge requirements based on the City’s Time Schedule Order
(No. R3‐2014‐0036), conversations with the City staff, review of the Basin Plan, and
conversations with staff from the Regional Water Quality Control Board
Describe plans for new wastewater treatment facilities to achieve regulatory compliance as
identified in the City’s WRRF Facilities Plan
TASK 4.0 TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS
4.1 Recycled water quality requirements
Summarize current recycled water regulations, including water qualities and/or treatment
requirements and approved uses for each category of potential recycled water use:
(1) Title 22 unrestricted use
(2) Indirect and direct potable reuse
Describe Basin Plan requirements for recycled water use
Describe water quality related requirements of the RWQCB to protect surface or ground water
Describe operational and on‐site requirements for recycled water (such as backflow prevention,
buffer zones, etc.)
Describe regulatory requirements and developments related to indirect potable reuse (IPR) and
DPR.
4.2 Tentative water recycling requirements of RWQCB
Contact RWQCB to determine how expansion or modification to the existing recycled water
treatment and distribution system would affect the existing Master Reclamation Permit and the
existing waste discharge requirements.
TASK 5.0 RECYCLED WATER MARKET/OPPORTUNITIES
5.1 Update and expand market analysis
Review and update market analysis in the 2014 RWMP for Title 22 recycled water delivery to Cal
Poly and Edna Valley, and expand market analysis to include potable reuse and groundwater
recharge use types based on discussions from the Kickoff Meeting. Describe validation and
market update methodology. For each identified user or category of potential user, summarize:
9.c
Packet Pg. 88 Attachment: c - WSC RWFPS Proposal 11-20-2015 (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
City of San Luis Obispo Scope of Work
Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study 6/26/2015
Page 6 of 12
(1) type of use;
(2) expected annual use, peak use and seasonal variation;
(3) estimated internal capital investment required (on‐site conversion costs);
(4) desire to use recycled water;
(5) date of possible initial use of recycled water;
(6) present and future source(s) of water and quality of use;
(7) cost, quality and reliability needs; and
(8) wastewater disposal methods.
Develop a tabular summary and map for existing and prospective users, their type of use and
magnitude of existing and/or projected demands.
5.2 Preliminary hydrogeological assessment
Provide description of the geology and hydrogeology of the San Luis basin, including
documented estimates of recharge, basin levels, groundwater production, groundwater quality,
and storage. Provide descriptive graphics, to the extent available, including basin cross
section(s).
Research and summarize relevant data for considering conceptual alternatives to develop a
groundwater recharge project to utilize recycled water.
Evaluate the conceptual feasibility of disposing of water through the use of injection wells.
Summarize the facilities required to accomplish the disposal/recharge through injection
concept. The discussion of conceptual facilities will include:
(1) Injection/recharge rates potential
(2) Potential well construction design and materials
(3) Potential well location(s)
(4) Well depths
(5) Well spacing
(6) Estimated construction costs
Evaluate the conceptual feasibility of disposing of water through the use of infiltration basins.
Summarize the facilities required to accomplish the disposal/recharge through surface spreading
concept. The discussion of conceptual facilities will include:
(1) Infiltration rate potential
(2) Potential infiltration basin design and materials
(3) Potential infiltration basin location(s)
(4) Required setback from municipal wells
9.c
Packet Pg. 89 Attachment: c - WSC RWFPS Proposal 11-20-2015 (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
City of San Luis Obispo Scope of Work
Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study 6/26/2015
Page 7 of 12
(5) Estimated construction costs
TASK 6.0 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
6.1 Planning and design assumptions
Develop relevant planning and design assumptions and criteria that will be used when
evaluating project alternatives. These assumptions should include:
(1) Delivery and system pressure criteria (average and peak)
(2) Use type regulatory criteria
(3) Cost basis: key assumptions; cost index; cost escalation and contingency factors;
discount rate; evaluation term for present worth analysis; etc.
(4) Planning period
(5) Conceptual infrastructure design criteria
6.2 Preliminary alternatives screening
Prior to the Alternatives Screening Workshop, develop information to support a preliminary
screening of the recycled water use alternatives identified. Compare each potential alternative.
Screening of each alternative is expected to include:
(1) Use volume
(2) Potable water supply implications
(3) Infrastructure requirements and estimated costs
(4) Regulatory requirements and/or considerations
(5) Potential benefits and beneficiaries
(6) Relevant data and conclusions from prior studies
(7) Abbreviated triple bottom line assessment
It is anticipated that the materials developed under this task will be used to conduct the
screening of conceptual alternatives during the Alternatives Screening Workshop. Materials will
be distributed to the City one (1) week prior to the workshop.
Based on results of the screening and discussions with City during the Alternatives Screening
Workshop, identify two (2) conceptual alternatives to carry forward for further analysis and
evaluation.
6.3 Alternatives analysis and evaluation
Prior to the Alternatives Evaluation Workshop, develop a preliminary list of TBL evaluation
criteria for the conceptual alternatives that align with the WRRF Project Charter, which may
include:
(1) Cost (capital, O&M, NPV, EAC and $/AF)
(2) Social benefits and impacts
9.c
Packet Pg. 90 Attachment: c - WSC RWFPS Proposal 11-20-2015 (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
City of San Luis Obispo Scope of Work
Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study 6/26/2015
Page 8 of 12
(3) Environmental benefits and impacts, including basin and watershed water quality
considerations
(4) Consistency with recycled water regulatory framework
(5) Potential impact and/or benefit to local Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP)
(6) Water supply benefits
(7) Sustainability and expandability
(8) Sequencing/phasing/schedule considerations
(9) Consistency with project goals/objectives and the WRRF Project
Evaluate two (2) conceptual alternatives identified in Task 6.2. The analysis for each alternative
will include:
(1) Summary of the anticipated end users and location of use.
(2) Description of potential use types and volume of use, including seasonal variations
(3) Storage, pumping and distribution infrastructure requirements
(a) Narrative description including summary of required infrastructure, key
considerations and land requirements
(b) Conceptual maps depicting locations and layout of necessary infrastructure
(c) Infrastructure sizing estimates with calculations
(4) Required treatment upgrades
(a) Narrative description and summary of required unit processes that were not
previously identified in the WRRF upgrades scope
(b) Simplified process flow diagram
(c) Conceptual maps depicting locations and layout for necessary improvements
(5) Summary of anticipated regulatory requirements specific to the use type of each
conceptual alternative
(6) Triple bottom line benefits to the utility, community and/or region
(7) Costs
(a) Prepare preliminary estimates of construction, non‐construction and annual O&M
costs
(b) Estimate net present value, equivalent annual cost and cost per acre‐foot of supply
(8) Discussion of advantages, disadvantages and potential limitations or concerns
It is anticipated that the materials developed under this task will be used to conduct the
evaluation of conceptual alternatives during the Alternatives Evaluation Workshop.
9.c
Packet Pg. 91 Attachment: c - WSC RWFPS Proposal 11-20-2015 (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
City of San Luis Obispo Scope of Work
Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study 6/26/2015
Page 9 of 12
6.4 Water rights considerations
Working with City water rights counsel, summarize impacts the expansion of the recycled water
program will have on the City’s water rights and the local efforts related to compliance with the
Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). WSC assumes that City water rights
counsel will be available to assist in the development of water rights considerations section.
6.5 No project alternative
Utilize the City’s WRRF Facilities Plan to define the no project alternative
Include a brief evaluation of the no project alternative based on the information presented in
the WRRF Facilities Plan and include in alternatives analysis
6.6 Water conservation/reduction analysis
Summarize the City’s current and future plans for water conservation. WSC will utilize the City’s
2010 UWMP, 2015 Draft WMP and current water conservation program documentation as basis
for water conservation summary.
Describe potential impacts to the recycled water program due to conservation.
6.7 Conceptual alternatives analysis results
Summarize the outcome from Alternatives Evaluation Workshop including:
(1) Evaluation criteria
(2) Results from the evaluation
(3) Preferred conceptual alternative
TASK 7.0 RECOMMENDED FACILITIES PROJECT PLAN
7.1 Preferred alternative
Summarize proposed facilities and basis for selection
Develop preliminary design criteria and conceptual pipeline routes for the preferred alternative
Update conceptual maps, figures, process flow diagram(s), and layouts to reflect the preferred
alternative including treatment, storage and distribution infrastructure
Update cost estimates based on final configuration and expected time of construction
Update list of all potential users, quantity of recycled water use, seasonal variations in use,
water quality considerations or concerns, and peak demand
Summarize on‐site improvements and retrofits required including cost
TASK 8.0 STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT
8.1 Stakeholder outreach
Conduct stakeholder meetings to coordinate project objectives, elements, etc. Document
stakeholder outreach efforts.
Support City in meetings and outreach to potential partners.
9.c
Packet Pg. 92 Attachment: c - WSC RWFPS Proposal 11-20-2015 (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
City of San Luis Obispo Scope of Work
Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study 6/26/2015
Page 10 of 12
Budget assumes 11 hours of WSC support.
8.2 Public outreach
Provide project updates at public meetings as requested by the City, including preparation of an
explanatory presentation and/or graphics presenting the analysis and/or conclusions contained
within the Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study
Document public outreach efforts.
Budget assumes 11 hours of WSC support.
TASK 9.0 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
9.1 Permitting requirements
Identify and summarize the probable permitting requirements for implementing recycled water
projects or retrofitting existing recycled water facilities. Utilize previously completed recycled
water studies as the basis for developing the summary of probable permitting requirements.
9.2 Environmental documentation requirements (CEQA)
Utilize the City’s WRRF Facilities Plan to summarize the necessary environmental documentation
requirements to expand a recycled water program or retrofit existing recycled water facilities.
9.3 Coordination and governance
Determine needed coordination, agreements, ordinances and/or governance for implementing
the preferred alternative recycled water system.
Discuss ability of users to make on‐site improvements and connect to the recycled water
system.
Summarize any customer assurances obtained to‐date. Provide recommendations for obtaining
remaining assurances from proposed recycled water customers.
9.4 Construction financing plan and revenue program
Summarize potential grant and loan funding opportunities for which the project may be eligible
based on the WRRF Funding and Financing Plan
Incorporate the recycled water project into the WRRF Project Funding and Financing Plan and
Cash Flow Model, based on conclusions of the Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study.
Support the City in developing a proposed pricing policy for the selected recycled water
alternative
Evaluate costs that can be allocated to water pollution control
9.c
Packet Pg. 93 Attachment: c - WSC RWFPS Proposal 11-20-2015 (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
City of San Luis Obispo Scope of Work
Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study 6/26/2015
Page 11 of 12
9.5 Conceptual schedule
Prepare a conceptual schedule for the implementation of the recycled water project and
incorporate into the WRRF Project schedule, including permitting, planning, design,
construction, critical milestones from the financing and revenue program and on‐site customer
improvements. Provide narrative description of phasing considerations/recommendations in
the preferred project plan, specifically considering implications and/or conflicts related to the
WRRF Program schedule presented in the WRRF Facilities Plan.
TASK 10.0 PREPARE RECYCLED WATER FACILITIES PLANNING STUDY
10.1 Prepare Draft Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study
Prepare draft Executive Summary and compile draft report including title page(s),
acknowledgements, table of contents, list of figures, list of tables, draft chapters, reference list
and appendices. Describe how the recommendations from this project will interface with the
ongoing WRRF Project.
Deliverable: Draft Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study
10.2 Final Draft Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study
Prepare Final Draft Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study based on comments received from
the City and any identified stakeholders on the draft Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study
Deliverable: Final Draft Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study
10.3 Final Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study
Prepare Final Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study based on comments received from the
City on the Final Draft Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study.
Deliverable: Final Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study
9.c
Packet Pg. 94 Attachment: c - WSC RWFPS Proposal 11-20-2015 (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
City of San Luis Obispo Scope of Work
Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study 6/26/2015
Page 12 of 12
Deliverable Summary
Task Deliverable Description Format/Copies Due Date
0.1 Project Schedule Emailed PDF and 11x17
hardcopies for all meeting
attendees
At Kickoff Meeting and
revised as‐needed
0.2 Kickoff Meeting Agenda and Minutes Emailed PDF See project schedule
0.3 Alternatives Screening Workshop Agenda and
Minutes
Emailed PDF See project schedule
0.4 Alternatives Evaluation Workshop Agenda and
Minutes
Emailed PDF See project schedule
0.5 Deliverable Review Meeting Agenda and
Minutes
Emailed PDF See project schedule
10.1 Draft Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study Emailed PDF and four (4)
hardcopies
See project schedule
10.2 Final Draft Recycled Water Facilities Planning
Study
Emailed PDF and four (4)
hardcopies
See project schedule
10.3 Final Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study Emailed PDF and four (4)
hardcopies
See project schedule
9.c
Packet Pg. 95 Attachment: c - WSC RWFPS Proposal 11-20-2015 (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
City of San Luis ObispoRecycled Water Facilities Planning StudyCleath‐HarrisPrincipalSenior Engineer IIISenior Engineer IIAssociate Engineer IStaff Engineer IIClerical/ AdminTotal Labor Hours Total Fee Engineer 5Engineer 5Engineer 4 Engineer 1Admin / ClericalTotal Labor HoursTotal Fee Labor Cost Total Labor Cost Expenses Total Fee0Project Management and Meetings 23 0 0 30 25 10 88 $15,807 24 0 13 2 12 51 $11,493 $0 $25,769 $1,531 $27,3000.1 Project administration15 4 10 29 $4,103 12 12 $1,628 $0$5,430 $301 $5,7310.2 Kickoff Meeting 3 4 6 13 $2,344 3 3 6 $1,459 $0$3,596 $208 $3,8040.3 Alternatives Screening Workshop 3 4 6 13 $2,344 3.5 4 1 8.5 $1,943 $0$4,043 $244 $4,2870.4 Alternatives Evaluation Workshop 3 4 6 13 $2,344 3.5 4 1 8.5 $1,943 $0$4,043 $244 $4,2870.5 Deliverable Review Meeting 2 3 3 8 $1,517 2 2 4 $973 $0$2,318 $172 $2,4900.6 Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) 1212 $3,153 12 12 $3,548 $0$6,338 $363 $6,7011 Background 0 0 0 2 9 0 11 $1,550 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $1,550 $0 $1,5501.1 Study area1 6 7 $977 0 $0 $0$977 $0 $9771.2 Goals and objectives1 3 4 $573 0 $0 $0$573 $0 $5732Water Supplies and Characteristics 0 0 0 3 16 0 19 $2,663 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $2,663 $0 $2,6632.1 Water supply characteristics1 4 5 $708 0 $0 $0$708 $0 $7082.2 Water demand characteristics1 8 9 $1,247 0 $0 $0$1,247 $0 $1,2472.3 Water pricing1 4 5 $708 0 $0 $0$708 $0 $7083Wastewater characteristics and facilities 0 0 0 1 0 0 1$168 1 0 2.5 13 0 16.5 $2,655 $0 $2,626 $197 $2,8233.1 Existing facilities0.5 0.5 $84 0.5 1.5 8 10 $1,592 $0$1,558 $118 $1,6763.2 Future facilities0.5 0.5 $84 0.5 1 5 6.5 $1,063 $0$1,068 $79 $1,1474Treatment Requirements 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 $168 2 0 4 6 0 12 $2,223 $0 $2,227 $165 $2,3914.1 Recycled water quality requirements0.5 0.5 $84 1 2 4 7 $1,256 $0$1,247 $93 $1,3404.2 Tentative water recycling requirements of RWQCB 0.5 0.5 $84 1 2 2 5 $967 $0$979 $72 $1,0515Recycled Water Market/Opportunities 1 0 0 6 16 0 23 $3,521 2 0 0 0 0 2 $591 $15,000 $18,968 $144 $19,1125.1 Update market analysis4 16 20 $2,930 0 $0 $0$2,830 $100 $2,9305.2 Preliminary hydrogeological assessment 1 2 3 $590 2 2 $591 $15,000$16,138 $44 $16,1826Project Alternatives Analysis 6 8 0 27 66 0 107 $17,468 14 0 45 69 0 128 $22,717 $0 $37,902 $2,283 $40,1856.1 Planning and design assumptions 1 2 2 5 $860 2 6 8 16 $2,895 $0$3,540 $214 $3,7556.2 Preliminary alternatives screening 2 4 8 20 34 $5,702 2 14 22 38 $6,448 $0$11,473 $678 $12,1506.3 Alternatives analysis and evaluation 2 4 8 36 50 $7,961 6 24 32 62 $10,987 $0$17,834 $1,114 $18,9486.4 Water rights considerations 1 6 2 9 $1,632 1 1 $296 $0$1,805 $122 $1,9276.5 No project alternative1 1 $168 1 1 3 5 $921 $0$1,021 $68 $1,0896.6 Water conservation/reduction analysis1 6 7 $977 1 1 $296 $0$1,251 $22 $1,2736.7 Conceptual alternatives analysis results1 1 $168 1 4 5 $875 $0$978 $65 $1,0437 Recommended Facilities Project Plan 0 0 0 4 10 0 14 $2,121 3 0 8 18 0 29 $5,020 $0 $6,669 $472 $7,1417.1 Preferred alternative4 10 14 $2,121 3 8 18 29 $5,020 $0$6,669 $472 $7,1418Stakeholder Involvement 6 0 0 6 10 0 22 $4,083 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $0 $3,883 $200 $4,0838.1 Stakeholder outreach 3 3 5 11 $2,042 0 $0 $0$1,942 $100 $2,0428.2 Public outreach 3 3 5 11 $2,042 0 $0 $0$1,942 $100 $2,0429 Implementation Plan 0 0 0 8 14 0 22 $3,432 5 0 8 14 0 27 $5,032 $0 $7,891 $573 $8,4649.1 Permitting requirements0 $0 1 4 8 13 $2,217 $0$2,053 $164 $2,2179.2 Environmental documentation requirements (CEQA)0 $0 1 2 6 9 $1,546 $0$1,432 $115 $1,5469.3 Coordination and governance3 6 9 $1,413 0.5 0.5 $148 $0$1,450 $111 $1,5619.4 Construction financing plan and revenue program 3 8 11 $1,683 0.5 0.5 $148 $0$1,720 $111 $1,8319.5 Conceptual schedule2 2 $336 2 2 4 $973 $0$1,237 $72 $1,30910 Prepare Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study 3 0 0 36 56 0 95 $14,963 5 0 48 60 0 113 $19,325 $0 $32,257 $2,031 $34,28810.1 Prepare Draft Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study 1 10 16 27 $4,292 2 14 18 34 $5,869 $0$9,526 $635 $10,16110.2 Prepare Final Draft Recycled Water Facilities Planning 1 16 24 41 $6,379 2 22 28 52 $8,843 $0$14,367 $855 $15,22210.3 Final Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study 1 10 16 27 $4,292 1 12 14 27 $4,613 $0$8,363 $542 $8,90539 8 ‐ 124 222 10 403 $65,94356 ‐ 129 182 12 378.5 $69,057 $15,000 $142,405 $7,595 $150,0006/26/2015ALL FIRMSColumn TotalsHDRWSCTask DescriptionTask No.Page 1 of 19.c
Packet Pg. 96 Attachment: c - WSC RWFPS Proposal 11-20-2015 (1219 : Recycled Water Facilities Planning Study)
Meeting Date: 1/5/2016
FROM: Michael Codron, Community Development Director
Prepared By: Walter Oetzell, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: REVIEW OF A MILLS ACT CONTRACT FOR THE FALKENSTEIN HOUSE
AT 1445 BROAD STREET (APPLICATION HIST-1990-2015)
RECOMMENDATION
As recommended by the Cultural Heritage Committee, adopt a resolution (Attachment A)
approving a Mills Act Historic Preservation Contract between the City and the owner of the
Falkenstein House at 1445 Broad Street, under the terms described in the contract.
SITE DATA
Applicant and
Property Owner Francis and Aline Cullen
General Plan Medium High Density
Residential
Zoning R-2-H (Medium-Density
Residential with Historic
Preservation Overlay)
Historic District Old Town Historic District
Environmental
Status
Not a Project under CEQA
(CEQA Guidelines §15378)
DISCUSSION
The owners of the property at 1445 Broad Street, Frances and Aline Cullen, have submitted an
application to enter into a Mills Act historic preservation agreement with the City for the
improvement and preservation of the historic Falkenstein House in exchange for property tax
relief.
The Mills Act Program
The Mills Act Property Tax Abatement Program enables California cities to enter into contracts
with owners of historical property to provide them with tax relief in exchange for an agreement
10
Packet Pg. 97
Figure 1: Falkenstein House
Broad Street (east) elevation
to actively participate in the restoration and maintenance of historical resources. A Mills Act
contract is effective for an initial 10-year period, and then is automatically extended annually for
an additional year. After the initial term, either the City or the owner may, by written notice,
decide not to renew the contract. During the effective term of the contract, the property owner
must improve or rehabilitate the property, maintain the property consistent with the Secretary of
the Interior’s Standards, and provide visibility of the historical resource from the public right-of-
way.
The Conservation and Open Space Element (COSE) of the General Plan describes the City’s
goals and policies for the protection of cultural resources. It is the City’s policy that significant
historic resources be rehabilitated and preserved (COSE §3.3). Participation in the Mills Act
Program is one of the means by which the City encourages the maintenance and restoration of
historic properties (COSE §3.6.2). A property must be on the City’s Master List of Historic
Resources in order to be enrolled in the program. Currently there are 51 properties participating
in the program, with the last request approved by the Council in September, 2014.
The Falkenstein House
The Falkenstein House is a two-story, single-
family residence, built in 1895 for J.J. and
Birdie Falkenstein, owners of the San Luis
Music Company. It is an example of the
Carpenter Gothic architectural style with
Victorian embellishment. The exterior is
sheathed in shiplap siding, and decorated with
sunburst accents, decorated brackets and fascia,
window hoods and ornamentation, and spindle
and spool porch detailing. The roof was at one
time covered with diamond-shaped shingles,
with terra cotta tiles at roof joints. It has since
been re-roofed with more conventional
rectangular shingles, without tiles. Also of note
is the extensive granite curbing around the yard
areas on the south and east side of the property,
along the Buchon Street and Broad Street
frontages.
Prior to construction of the house, the site
hosted feed lot buildings belonging to Horatio
Rogers, an influential farmer who came to San
Luis Obispo County in 1874. The property was
added to the Master List of Historic Resources
in 1983. It remains in good overall condition, though, as indicated in the list of proposed
property improvements, the house exterior and fencing suffer from some wood rot and fading
paint.
10
Packet Pg. 98
Proposed Improvements and Maintenance
The intent of the Mills Act Program is to encourage rehabilitation, restoration, and maintenance
of historic property. A property owner participating in the program receives tax relief that is, in
part, dependent upon the cost of planned improvements that are related to those purposes.
Savings from the tax relief provided under the contract are an incentive to undertake
improvements and maintenance related to the historic character of the property. The applicant
has provided an outline of the improvements proposed to be undertaken, and these improvements
are included in Exhibit A of the draft Mills Act Contract (Attachment B):
1) Repair of wood rot on house and paint the exterior with historically appropriate colors
2) Replace back deck with porch suiting age and style of home
3) Replace rotting fence on property line
4) Replace front entryway to the property to a period-appropriate appearance
5) Landscape front and back yards with period-appropriate plantings
6) Replace engineered floors on second floor with period-appropriate flooring.
7) Strip interior stairway banister and stair treads and refinish them in an historically
appropriate finish and method
8) Replace insulation in attic space; upgrade furnace in attic and basement
9) Replace heating and ductwork which has been damaged by rodent infestation
10) Maintain the building exterior and grounds to a high level, as evidenced by periodic repair of
exterior materials and surfaces, high quality landscape maintenance, and repair or
replacement of site features as necessary.
Under the terms of the agreement, all work must be completed within the initial 10 year contract
term, to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. Improvements made to the
property must be consistent with applicable historical preservation standards and guidelines. It
should be noted that the City reviews properties that are subject to Mills Act Contracts every five
years to confirm that improvements made to the property are consistent with the terms of the
contract and with the City’s historic preservation program standards and policies.
Cultural Heritage Committee Recommendation
The Cultural Heritage Committee reviewed the application and the terms of the draft contract at
a public hearing on November 23rd, 2015. The Committee, by unanimous vote, recommended
that the Council approve the contract. The staff report and the Committee’s adopted resolution
are attached to this report (Attachment D).
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Entering into a “Mills Act Contract” with the owners of historic property is not subject to the
provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because it is not a project as
defined in CEQA Guidelines § 15378 (Definitions). Implementation of the Mills Act is a
government fiscal activity which does not involve commitment to any specific project resulting
in a potentially significant physical impact on the environment.
10
Packet Pg. 99
FISCAL IMPACT
Estimated Tax Relief
Under a Mills Act Contract, the value of property is assessed using a “capitalization of income”
method described in the California Revenue and Taxation Code. The “Restricted Value” may be
significantly lower than the current assessed value of the property, resulting in tax savings to the
property owner. This tax savings represents the financial incentive to invest in rehabilitation,
restoration, and maintenance of the historic resource. By this method of valuation, it is estimated
that the property owner may realize a total tax savings of about $22,750 over the initial 10-year
period of the contract (see Attachment E). About 3.36% of property taxes are allocated to the
City for the 2015/2016 fiscal year,1 and so the tax savings may have an impact to the City of
about $765 over the initial 10-year period of the contract. This is an approximate calculation;
actual costs and values are calculated by the County Assessor after the contract is agreed upon.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Continue review of this request to a future date for additional analysis or research; or
2. Do not enter into a Mills Act Historic Preservation Contract with the property owner. This
alternative is not recommended. The contract provides a tax relief incentive that is a tool for
achieving the City’s goals for historical preservation.
Attachments:
a a - Draft Resolution
b b - Draft Historic Property Preservation Agreement
c c - Vicinity Map
d d - CHC Agenda Report and Resolution (Nov. 23, 2015)
e e - Historical Property Valuation Example
1 Property Tax Perspective, Fiscal Year July 1, 2015 to June 30, 2015 ; County of San Luis Obispo [ONLINE at
http://www.slocounty.ca.gov/Assets/AC/Digital/Property+Tax/Perspective/2015-16+Property+Tax+Perspective.pdf,
accessed December 23, 2015]
10
Packet Pg. 100
R ______
RESOLUTION NO. _______ (2016 SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A HISTORIC PROPERTY
PRESERVATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO AND OWNERS OF THE FALKENSTEIN HOUSE AT 1445
BROAD STREET
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo is authorized by California
Government Code § 50280 et seq. (known as “the Mills Act”) to enter into contracts with the
owners of qualified historical properties to provide for appropriate use, maintenance, and
rehabilitation such that these historic properties retain their historic characteristics; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted Resolution No. 9136 (2000 Series),
establishing the Mills Act Historic Property Tax Incentive Program as an on-going historic
preservation program to promote the preservation, maintenance and rehabilitation of historic
resources through financial incentives; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo has designated this
property as a historic resource of the City of San Luis Obispo pursuant to the policies in the
City’s Historic Preservation Program Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, the owners possess fee title in and to that certain qualified real property,
together with associated structures and improvement thereon, located on Assessor’s Parcel
Number 003-531-017, located at 1445 Broad Street, San Luis Obispo, California, also described
as the Falkenstein House (hereinafter referred to as the “historic property”); and
WHEREAS, the City and owners, for their mutual benefit, now desire to enter into this
agreement to limit the use of the property to prevent inappropriate alterations and to ensure that
character-defining features are preserved and maintained in an exemplary manner, and repairs
and/or improvements are completed as necessary to carry out the purposes of California
Government Code, Chapter 1, Part 5 of Division 1 of Title 5, Article 12, Sec. 50280 et seq., and
to qualify for an assessment of valuation pursuant to Article 1.9, Sec. 439 et seq. of the Revenue
and Taxation Code; and.
WHEREAS, the Cultural Heritage Committee of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted
a public hearing in the Council Hearing Room of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo,
California, on November 23, 2015, for the purpose of reviewing the proposed historic property
preservation agreement, and recommended that the Council enter into the agreement; and
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearings were made at the time and in the manner
required by law; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a hearing on January 5, 2016, in the Council
Chamber at 990 Palm Street of the City of San Luis Obispo as part o f its regularly scheduled
meeting for the purpose of considering approval of the historic preservation agreement, and has
10.a
Packet Pg. 101 Attachment: a - Draft Resolution (1213 : Mills Act Contract - Falkenstein House (1445 Broad))
Resolution No. _____ (2016 Series) Page 2
R ______
duly considered all evidence, including the record of the Cultural Heritage Committee hearing
and recommendation, testimony of the applicant and interested parties, and the evaluation and
recommendation by staff, present at said hearing.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the City Council makes the
following findings:
1. Conservation and Open Space Element program 3.6.2 states that the City will participate
in financial assistance programs such as property tax reduction programs that encourage
maintenance and restoration of historic properties.
2. The Falkenstein House, located at 1445 Broad Street, has been recognized as a historic
asset in the community by its designation as a Master List Historic Property. As such,
maintaining the structure will meet the City’s goals for historic preservation listed in
policies 3.3.1 through 3.3.5 of the Conservation and Open Space Element.
SECTION 2. Environmental Determination. The City Council has determined that the
above actions do not constitute a project, as defined by § 15378 of the California Environmental
Quality Act and are exempt from environmental review.
SECTION 3. Historic Preservation Agreement Approved . The City Council hereby
approves the "Historic Preservation Agreement Between the City of San Luis Obispo and the
Owners of the Historic Property Located at 1445 Broad Street", and entered into between the
City and owners, Francis X. and Aline V. Cullen.
SECTION 4. Community Development Director Authorized to Sign Agreement for
City. The City Council hereby authorizes the Community Development Director to execute said
agreement on behalf of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo.
SECTION 5. Recordation of the Agreement. No later than twenty (20) days after the
parties enter into said agreement, the City Clerk shall cause the agreement to be recorded in the
Office of the County Recorder of the County of San Luis Obispo.
Upon motion of Council Member ________, seconded by Council Member ________,
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 5th day of January, 2016.
10.a
Packet Pg. 102 Attachment: a - Draft Resolution (1213 : Mills Act Contract - Falkenstein House (1445 Broad))
Resolution No. _____ (2016 Series) Page 3
R ______
___________________________________________
Mayor Jan Marx
ATTEST:
__________________________________________
Jon Ansolabehere
Interim City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
____________________________________
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City
of San Luis Obispo, California, this ______ day of ______________, _________.
______________________________
Jon Ansolabehere
Interim City Clerk
10.a
Packet Pg. 103 Attachment: a - Draft Resolution (1213 : Mills Act Contract - Falkenstein House (1445 Broad))
HISTORIC PROPERTY PRESERVATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AND THE OWNERS OF THE HISTORIC
BUILDING LOCATED AT 1445 BROAD STREET, IN THE CITY AND COUNTY OF
SAN LUIS OBISPO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA.
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this ________ day of ________ , 2016, by and
between the City of San Luis Obispo, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as the
“City”), and Francis X. Cullen and Aline V Cullen (hereinafter referred to as “Owners”), and
collectively referred to as the “parties.”
Section 1. Description of Preservation Measures. The Owners, their heirs, or assigns hereby
agree to undertake and complete, at their expense, the preservation, maintenance, and
improvements measures described in “Exhibit A” attached hereto.
Section 2. Effective Date and Term of Agreement. This agreement shall be effective and
commence upon recordation and shall remain in effect for an initial term of ten (10) years
thereafter. Each year upon the anniversary of the agreement’s effective date, such initial term
will automatically be extended as provided in California Government Code Section 50280
through 50290 and in Section 3, below.
Section 3. Agreement Renewal and Non-renewal.
a. Each year on the anniversary of the effective date of this agreement (hereinafter
referred to as “annual renewal date”), a year shall automatically be added to the
initial term of this agreement unless written notice of nonrenewal is served as
provided herein.
b. If the Owners or the City desire in any year not to renew the agreement, the
Owners or the City shall serve written notice of nonrenewal of the agreement on
the other party. Unless such notice is served by the Owners to the City at least
ninety (90) days prior to the annual renewal date, or served by the City to the
Owners at least sixty (60) days prior to the annual renewal date, one (1) year shall
automatically be added to the term of the agreement as provided herein.
c. The Owners may make a written protest of the notice. The City may, at any time
prior to the annual renewal date, withdraw its notice to the Owners of nonrenewal.
d. If either the City or the Owners serve notice to the other party of nonrenewal in
any year, the agreement shall remain in effect for the balance of the term then
remaining.
Section 4. Standards and Conditions. During the term of this agreement, the historic property
shall be subject to the following conditions:
a. Owners agree to preserve, maintain, and, where necessary, restore or rehabilitate
the building and its character-defining features, including: the building’s general
10.b
Packet Pg. 104 Attachment: b - Draft Historic Property Preservation Agreement (1213 : Mills Act Contract - Falkenstein House (1445 Broad))
Historic Preservation Agreement
1445 Broad Street
Page 2
architectural form, style, materials, design, scale, proportions, organization of
windows, doors, and other openings; interior architectural elements that are
integral to the building’s historic character or significance; exterior materials,
coatings, textures, details, mass, roof line, porch, and other aspects of the
appearance of the building’s exterior, as described in Exhibit A, to the satisfaction
of the Community Development Director or his designee.
b. The building’s interior closely relates to the property’s eligibility as a qualified
historic property. The Owners agree to allow pre-arranged tours on a limited
basis, to the approval of the Community Development Director or his designee.
c. All building changes shall comply with applicable City specific plans, City
regulations and guidelines, and conform to the rules and regulations of the Office
of Historic Preservation of the California Department of Parks and Recreation,
namely the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and
Standards and Guidelines for Historic Preservation Projects. Interior remodeling
shall retain original, character-defining architectural features such as oak and
mahogany details, pillars and arches, special tile work, or architectural
ornamentation to the greatest extent possible.
d. The Community Development Director shall be notified by the Owners of
changes to character-defining exterior features prior to their execution, such as
major landscaping projects and tree removals, exterior door or window
replacement, repainting, remodeling, or other exterior alterations requiring a
building permit. The Owners agree to secure all necessary City approvals and/or
permits prior to changing the building’s use or commencing construction work.
e. Owners agree that property tax savings resulting from this agreement shall be
used for property maintenance and improvements as described in Exhibit A.
f. The following are prohibited: demolition or partial demolition of the historic
building; exterior alterations or additions not in keeping with the standards listed
above; dilapidated, deteriorating, or unrepaired structures such as fences, roofs,
doors, walls, windows; outdoor storage of junk, trash, debris, appliances, or
furniture visible from a public way; or any d evice, decoration, structure, or
vegetation which is unsightly due to lack of maintenance or because such feature
adversely affects, or is visually incompatible with, the property’s recognized
historic character, significance, and design as determined by the Community
Development Director.
g. Owners shall allow reasonable periodic examination, by prior appointment, of the
interior and exterior of the historic property by representatives of the County
Assessor, the State Department of Parks and Recreation, the State Board of
Equalization, and the City as may be necessary to determine the owners’
compliance with the terms and provisions of this agreement.
10.b
Packet Pg. 105 Attachment: b - Draft Historic Property Preservation Agreement (1213 : Mills Act Contract - Falkenstein House (1445 Broad))
Historic Preservation Agreement
1445 Broad Street
Page 3
Section 5. Furnishing of Information. The Owners hereby agree to furnish any and all
information requested by the City which may be necessary or advisable to determine compliance
with the terms and provisions of this agreement.
Section 6. Cancellation.
a. The City, following a duly-noticed public hearing by the City Council as set forth
in Government Code Section 50285, may cancel this agreement if it determines
that the Owners have breached any of the conditions of this agreement or has
allowed the property to deteriorate to the point that it no longer meets the
standards for a qualified historic property; or if the City determines that the
Owners have failed to preserve, maintain, or rehabilitate the property in the
manner specified in Section 4 of this agreement. If a contract is cancelled
because of failure of the Owners to preserve, maintain, and rehabilitate the
historic property as specified above, the Owners shall pay a cancellation fee to the
State Controller as set forth in Government Code Section 50286, which states that
the fee shall be 12 ½% of the full value of the property at the time of cancellation
without regard to any restriction imposed with this agreement.
b. If the historic building is acquired by eminent domain and the City Council
determines that the acquisition frustrates the purpose of the agreement, the
agreement shall be cancelled and no fee imposed, as specified in Government
Code Section 50288.
Section 7. Enforcement of Agreement.
a. In lieu of and/or in addition to any provisions to cancel the agreement as
referenced herein, the City may specifically enforce, or enjoin the breach of, the
terms of the agreement. In the event of a default, under the provisions to cancel
the agreement b y the Owners, the City shall give written notice of violation to the
Owners by registered or certified mail addressed to the address stated in this
agreement. If such a violation is not corrected to the reasonable satisfaction of the
Community Development Director or designee within thirty (30) days thereafter;
or if not corrected within such a reasonable time as may be required to cure the
breach or default of said breach; or if the default cannot be cured within thirty
(30) days (provided that acts to cure the breach or default may be commenced
within thirty (30) days and shall thereafter be diligently pursued to completion by
the Owners); then the City may, without further notice, declare a default under the
terms of this agreement and may bring any action necessary to specifically
enforce the obligations of the Owners growing out of the terms of this agreement,
apply to any court, state or federal, for injunctive relief against any violation by
the Owners or apply for such relief as may be appropriate.
b. The City does not waive any claim of default by the Owners if the City does not
enforce or cancel this agreement. All other remedies at law or in equity which are
not otherwise provided for in this agreement or in the City’s regulations
10.b
Packet Pg. 106 Attachment: b - Draft Historic Property Preservation Agreement (1213 : Mills Act Contract - Falkenstein House (1445 Broad))
Historic Preservation Agreement
1445 Broad Street
Page 4
governing historic properties are available to the City to pursue in the event that
there is a breach or default under this agreement. No waiver by the City of any
breach or default under this agreement shall be deemed to be a waiver of any
other subsequent breach thereof or default herein under.
c. By mutual agreement, City and Owners may enter into mediation or binding
arbitration to resolve disputes or grievances growing out of this contract.
Section 8. Binding Effect of Agreement. The Owners hereby subject the historic building
located at 1445 Broad Street, San Luis Obispo, California, Assessor’s Parcel Number
003-531-017, to the covenants, reservations, and restrictions as set forth in this agreement. The
City and Owners hereby declare their specific intent that the covenants, reservations, and
restrictions as set forth herein shall be deemed covenants running with the land and shall pass to
and be binding upon the Owners’ successors and assigns in title or interest to the historic
property. Every contract, deed, or other instrument hereinafter executed, covering or conveying
the historic property or any portion thereof, shall conclusively be held to have been executed,
delivered, and accepted subject to the covenants, reservations, and restrictions expressed in this
agreement regardless of whether such covenants, restrictions, and reservations are set forth in
such contract, deed, or other instrument.
Section 9. Notice. Any notice required by the terms of this agreement shall be sent to the
address of the respective parties as specified below or at other addresses that may be later
specified by the parties hereto.
To City: Community Development Director
City of San Luis Obispo
919 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
To Owners: Francis X. and Aline V. Cullen
1445 Broad Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Section 10. General Provisions.
a. None of the terms, provisions, or conditions of this agreement shall be deemed to
create a partnership between the parties hereto and any of their heirs, successors,
or assigns, nor shall such terms, provisions, or conditions cause them to be
considered joint ventures or members of any joint enterprise.
b. The Owners agree to hold the City and its elected and appointed officials,
officers, agents, and employees harmless from liability for damage or from claims
for damage for personal injuries, including death, and claims for property damage
which may arise from the direct or indirect use or activities of the Owners, or
from those of their contractor, subcontractor, agent, employee, or other person
10.b
Packet Pg. 107 Attachment: b - Draft Historic Property Preservation Agreement (1213 : Mills Act Contract - Falkenstein House (1445 Broad))
Historic Preservation Agreement
1445 Broad Street
Page 5
acting on the Owners’ behalf which relates to the use, operation, maintenance, or
improvement of the historic property. The Owners hereby agree to and shall
defend the City and its elected and appointed officials, officers, agents, and
employees with respect to any and all claims or actions for damages caused by, or
alleged to have been caused by, reason of the Owners’ activities in connection
with the historic property, excepting however any such claims or actions which
are the result of the sole negligence or willful misconduct of City, its officers,
agents, or employees.
c. This hold harmless provision applies to all damages and claims for damages
suffered, or alleged to have been suffered, and costs of defense incurred, by
reason of the operations referred to in this agreement regardless of whether or not
the City prepared, supplied, or approved the plans, specifications, or other
documents for the historic property.
d. All of the agreements, rights, covenants, reservations, and restrictions contained
in this agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the parties
herein, their heirs, successors, legal representatives, assigns, and all persons
acquiring any part or portion of the historic property, whether by operation of law
or in any manner whatsoever.
e. In the event legal proceedings are brought by any party or parties to enforce or
restrain a violation of any of the covenants, reservations, or restrictions contained
herein, or to determine the rights and duties of any party hereunder, the prevailing
party in such proceeding may recover all reasonable attorney’s fees to be fixed by
the court, in addition to court costs and other relief ordered by the court.
f. In the event that any of the provisions of this agreement are held to be
unenforceable or invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, or by subsequent
preemptive legislation, the validity and enforceability of the remaining provisions,
or portions thereof, shall not be affected thereby.
g. This agreement shall be construed and governed in accordance with the laws of
the State of California.
Section 11. Amendments. This agreement may be amended, in whole or in part, only by a
written recorded instrument executed by the parties hereto.
Section 12. Recordation and Fees. No later than twenty (20) days after the parties enter into
this agreement, the City shall cause this agreement to be recorded in the office of the County
Recorder of the County of San Luis Obispo. Participation in the program shall be at no cost to
the Owners; however the City may charge reasonable and necessary fees to recover direct costs
of executing, recording, and administering the historical property contracts.
10.b
Packet Pg. 108 Attachment: b - Draft Historic Property Preservation Agreement (1213 : Mills Act Contract - Falkenstein House (1445 Broad))
Historic Preservation Agreement
1445 Broad Street
Page 6
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and Owners have executed this agreement on the day
and year written above.
OWNERS
____________________________________ ______________________________
Francis X. Cullen Date
____________________________________ ______________________________
Aline V. Cullen Date
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
____________________________________ ______________________________
Mayor Jan Marx Date
ATTEST:
______________________________
John Ansolabehere, Interim City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________
Christine Dietrick, City Attorney
ALL SIGNATURES MUST BE NOTARIZED
10.b
Packet Pg. 109 Attachment: b - Draft Historic Property Preservation Agreement (1213 : Mills Act Contract - Falkenstein House (1445 Broad))
Historic Preservation Agreement
1445 Broad Street
Page 7
EXHIBIT A
MAINTENANCE AND IMPROVEMENT MEASURES
FOR THE FALKENSTEIN HOUSE LOCATED AT 1445 BROAD STREET,
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA
1. Owners shall preserve, maintain, and repair the historic building, including its character-
defining architectural features in good condition, to the satisfaction of the Community
Development Director or designee, pursuant to a Mills Act Preservation Contract with the City
of San Luis Obispo for property located at 1445 Broad Street. Character-defining features shall
include, but are not limited to: roof, eaves, dormers, trim, porches, walls and siding,
architectural detailing, doors and windows, window screens and shutters, balustrades and
railings, foundations, and surface treatments.
2. Owners agree to make the following improvements and/or repairs during the term of this
contract but in no case later than ten (10) years from the contract date. All changes or repairs
shall be consistent with the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance and the Secretary of the
Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties:
Repair of wood rot on house and paint the exterior.
Replace back deck with porch suiting age and style of home.
Replace rotting fence on property line.
Replace front entryway to the property to a period-appropriate appearance.
Landscape front and back yards with period-appropriate plantings.
Replace engineered floors on second floor with period-appropriate flooring.
Strip interior stairway banister and stair treads and refinish them in an historically appropriate
finish and method.
Replace insulation in attic space; upgrade furnace in attic and basement.
Replace heating and ductwork which has been damaged by rodent infestation.
Maintain the building exterior and grounds to a high level, as evidenced by periodic repair of
exterior materials and surfaces, high quality landscape maintenance, and repair or replacement of
site features as necessary.
OWNERS
____________________________________ ______________________________
Francis X. Cullen Date
____________________________________ ______________________________
Aline V. Cullen Date
10.b
Packet Pg. 110 Attachment: b - Draft Historic Property Preservation Agreement (1213 : Mills Act Contract - Falkenstein House (1445 Broad))
Historic Preservation Agreement
1445 Broad Street
Page 8
State of California }
County of San Luis Obispo }
On ________________, before me _________________________________________ ,
Date Name and Title of the Officer
personally appeared, ____________________________________________________ ,
Name of Signer(s)
who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose
name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that
he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by
his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of
which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the
foregoing paragraph is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature _____________________________
Signature of Notary Public Place Notary Seal Above
State of California }
County of San Luis Obispo }
On________________, before me,__________________________________________,
Date Name and Title of the Officer
personally appeared, _____________________________________________________,
Name of Signer(s)
who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose
name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that
he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by
his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of
which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the
foregoing paragraph is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature _____________________________
Signature of Notary Public Place Notary Seal Above
10.b
Packet Pg. 111 Attachment: b - Draft Historic Property Preservation Agreement (1213 : Mills Act Contract - Falkenstein House (1445 Broad))
R-2-H
O
R-2-H
R-2-H
R-2-H
R-2-H
O-H
O
R-2-H R-2-H
R-2-H O-H
R-2-H
R-2-H
R-2-H
B
R
O
A
D
BUCHONPISMOISLAYNIP
O
M
O
VIC INITY MAP HIST-1990-20151445 Broa d Street ¯
10.c
Packet Pg. 112 Attachment: c - Vicinity Map (1213 : Mills Act Contract - Falkenstein House (1445 Broad))
CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE AGENDA REPORT
SUBJECT: Review of a draft Mills Act contract for the Master List historic Falkenstein
House.
ADDRESS: 1445 Broad Street BY: Walter Oetzell, Assistant Planner
Phone: 781-7593
E-mail: woetzell@slocity.org
FILE #: HIST-1990-2015 FROM: Brian Leveille, Senior Planner
RECOMMENDATION: Forward a recommendation to the City Council to approve the
applicant’s request to be a part of the Mills Act Historic Preservation program.
SITE DATA
Applicant Aline Cullen
Historic Status Master List Resource
Submittal Date September 10, 2015
Complete Date November 2, 2015
General Plan Medium High Density
Residential
Zoning R-2-H (Medium-Density
Residential with Historic
Preservation Overlay)
Site Area 7,250 sq. ft.
Environmental
Status
Not a Project under CEQA
(CEQA Guidelines §15378)
SUMMARY & COMMITTEE PURVIEW
The owner of the Falkenstein House at 1445 Broad has submitted an application to enter into a
Mills Act historic preservation agreement with the City. The draft Mills Act contract is being
referred to the Cultural Heritage Committee (CHC) for a recommendation prior to Council
action.1
BACKGROUND
Historic preservation is an important goal, as stated in the Conservation and Open Space Element
1 As described in § 14.01.030 (B)(8) of the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance
Meeting Date: November 23, 2015
Item Number: 1
CHC1 - 1
10.d
Packet Pg. 113 Attachment: d - CHC Agenda Report and Resolution (Nov. 23, 2015) (1213 : Mills Act Contract - Falkenstein House (1445 Broad))
HIST-1990- -2015 (1445 Broad)
Page 2
(COSE) of the City’s General Plan (COSE § 3.2), and the Mills Act Program is one of the
programs the City uses to achieve this goal (COSE § 3.6.2). Originally begun in 1996 as a pilot
program, the program allows the City to enter into preservation contracts with the owners of
designated historic properties who promise to preserve, maintain and in some cases, improve the
properties in return for property tax savings. It is one of the most effective preservation tools
available to encourage the preservation of heritage properties by providing a financial incentive.
Participation in the program is limited to properties on the Master List of Historic Resources.
About 51 historic properties currently participate in this program, with the last request approved
by the Council in September, 2014.
Historic Property Contracts are prepared using standard language conforming to the Mills Act
(Govt. Code §§ 50280 – 50290), provided by the State Historic Preservation Office. The
contracts differ substantively only in the description of the historic property and the maintenance
and improvement programs planned by the property owner (Exhibit A of the contract). Standard
features of the contracts include:
Assessment of the value of the historic property’s by County Assessor using a
“Capitalization of Income” method, which can result in significant property tax
savings. If the contract is canceled, the assessment is gradually increased to market
value basis over the remaining ten year contract term.
A commitment by the property owner to preserve the building and to use the tax
savings to maintain and improve the historic building to preserve and enhance its
historical value, exterior appearance, structural condition, and longevity. Each
contract includes an exhibit listing the maintenance and improvement measures to
which the tax savings will be applied.
The contract is recorded, and is binding on subsequent owners, heirs, or assigns until
the agreement is canceled. There is a significant financial penalty if the agreement is
cancelled due to breach of performance.
Mills Act contracts have a minimum 10-year term. The agreement “self-renews”
annually for additional 10-year terms, so 10 years always remaining on the contract
until the owner or City decides not to renew it. Once written notice of cancellation is
given, the contract will remain in effect for the balance of the remaining ten year
term. The agreement may be amended by mutual consent of the City and property
owner.
The structure may be altered under the contract; however alterations must comply
with all City requirements and with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the
Treatment of Historic Properties, with the guiding objective being the long-term
preservation of the building’s original historical character and significance.
CHC1 - 2
10.d
Packet Pg. 114 Attachment: d - CHC Agenda Report and Resolution (Nov. 23, 2015) (1213 : Mills Act Contract - Falkenstein House (1445 Broad))
HIST-1990- -2015 (1445 Broad)
Page 3
Figure 1: Falkenstein House
Broad Street (east) elevation
SITE INFORMATION2
The property is a 7,250 square-foot parcel at the
northwest corner of Buchon and Broad Streets,
within the Old Town Historic District. The
neighborhood is characterized by single-family
residences, many of which are also listed
historic resources.
The Falkenstein House is a two-story, single-
family residence, built in 1895 for J.J. and
Birdie Falkenstein, owners of the San Luis
Music Company. It is an example of the
Carpenter Gothic style with Victorian
embellishment. The exterior is sheathed in
shiplap siding, and decorated with sunburst
accents, decorated brackets and fascia, window
hoods and ornamentation, and spindle and spool
porch detailing. The roof was at one time
covered with diamond-shaped shingles, with
terra cotta tiles at roof joints. It has since been
re-roofed with more conventional rectangular
shingles, without tiles. Also of note is the
extensive granite curbing around the yard areas
on the south and east side of the property.
Prior to construction of the house, the site hosted feed lot buildings belonging to Horatio Rogers,
an influential farmer who came to San Luis Obispo County in 1874. The property was added to
the Master List of Historic Resources in 1983. It remains in good overall condition, though, as
indicated in the list of proposed property improvements, the house exterior and fencing suffer
from some wood rot and fading paint.
MILLS ACT MAINTENANCE & IMPROVEMENTS
The intent of the Mills Act Program is to encourage rehabilitation, restoration, and maintenance
of historic property. A property owner participating in the program receives tax relief that is, in
part, dependent upon the cost of planned improvements that are related those purposes. Savings
from the tax relief provided under the contract are an incentive to undertake improvements and
maintenance related to the historic character of the property. Recommended improvements to be
included in the historic preservation agreement are included in Exhibit A of the draft Mills Act
Contract (Attachment 2) and summarized below.
Improvements made to the property under the agreement must be consistent with applicable
historical preservation standards and guidelines through and under the terms of the agreement all
work must be completed to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. The City
2 Description from the Historic Resources Inventory (Attachment 4).
CHC1 - 3
10.d
Packet Pg. 115 Attachment: d - CHC Agenda Report and Resolution (Nov. 23, 2015) (1213 : Mills Act Contract - Falkenstein House (1445 Broad))
HIST-1990- -2015 (1445 Broad)
Page 4
also periodically reviews properties that are subject to Mills Act Contracts to confirm that
preservation efforts are in compliance with City standards and policies.
Proposed Improvements
Repair of wood rot on house and paint the exterior with historically appropriate colors
Replace back deck with porch suiting age and style of home
Replace rotting fence on property line
Replace front entryway to the property to a period-appropriate appearance
Landscape front and back yards with period-appropriate plantings
Replace engineered floors on second floor with period-appropriate flooring.
Strip interior stairway banister and stair treads and refinish them in an historically appropriate
finish and method
Replace insulation in attic space; upgrade furnace in attic and basement
Replace heating and ductwork which has been damaged by rodent infestation
Maintain the building exterior and grounds to a high level, as evidenced by periodic repair of
exterior materials and surfaces, high quality landscape maintenance, and repair or replacement
of site features as necessary.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Entering into a “Mills Act Contract” with the owners of historic property is not subject to the
provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because it is not a project as
defined in CEQA Guidelines § 15378 (Definitions-Project). Implementation of the Mills Act is a
government fiscal activity which does not involve commitment to any specific project resulting
in a potentially significant physical impact on the environment.
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the draft resolution recommending that the City Council approve and enter into a Mills
Act Contract for the Master List Falkenstein House at 1445 Broad Street.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Continue consideration of the item with direction to the applicant and staff on pertinent
issues.
2. Recommend to the City Council that they do not enter into the proposed Historic
Property Contract, based on findings of inconsistency with the General Plan, Historic
Preservation Ordinance, or Historic Preservation Program Guidelines.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Draft Resolution
2. Historic Property Preservation Agreement
3. Vicinity map
4. Historic Resources Inventory for 1445 Broad
5. Applicant’s request letter and list of improvements
CHC1 - 4
10.d
Packet Pg. 116 Attachment: d - CHC Agenda Report and Resolution (Nov. 23, 2015) (1213 : Mills Act Contract - Falkenstein House (1445 Broad))
10.d
Packet Pg. 117 Attachment: d - CHC Agenda Report and Resolution (Nov. 23, 2015) (1213 : Mills Act Contract - Falkenstein House (1445 Broad))
10.d
Packet Pg. 118 Attachment: d - CHC Agenda Report and Resolution (Nov. 23, 2015) (1213 : Mills Act Contract - Falkenstein House (1445 Broad))
Historical Property Valuation Example 1
Falkenstein House (1445 Broad)
Determination of Restricted Value
Gross income (a)
$ 42,000.00
Anticipated vacancy and collection loss 5% $ 2,100.00
Effective Gross Income
$ 39,900.00
Anticipated operating expenses (b) 25% $ 9,975.00
Net Operating Income (c)
$ 29,925.00
Restricted Capitalization Rate 10.254%
Interest rate 4.25%
Risk 4%
Property tax 1.004%
Amortization 1%
Restricted Value (d)
$ 291,837.33
Estimated Tax Comparison
Assessed Value (e)
$ 518,319.00
Tax on Assessed Value
$ 5,203.92
Tax on Restricted Value
$ 2,930.05
Estimated tax saving, annual
$ 2,273.88
Estimated tax savings, total
$ 22,738.76
Over 10-year initial term
Notes
(a) Annual Gross Income, estimated as $ 3,500 monthly fair rent
(b) Estimated as 25% of Effective Gross Income
(c) Effective Gross Income less operating expenses
(d) Net Operating Income divided by the Restricted Capitalization Rate
(e) Value includes improvements on the property which are not related to its historic
value (e.g., garage and duplex)
1 Patterned after the example in Guidelines for the Assessment of Enforceably Restricted Historical Property,
provided by the California State Board of Equalization, accessed online December 11, 2015 at
http://www.boe.ca.gov/proptaxes/pdf/lta05035.pdf.
10.e
Packet Pg. 119 Attachment: e - Historical Property Valuation Example (1213 : Mills Act Contract - Falkenstein House (1445 Broad))
Page intentionally left
blank.
Meeting Date: 1/5/2016
FROM: Daryl Grigsby, Public Works Director
Prepared By: Jake Hudson, Transportation Manager
SUBJECT: REVIEW OF CLEANUP AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 10 (VEHICLES &
TRAFFIC) OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE
RECOMMENDATION
Introduce an ordinance to amend Municipal Code Title 10 (Vehicles & Traffic) to reflect the
current organizational structure within the City’s Public Works Department.
DISCUSSION
Various chapters and codes of the City’s Municipal Code Title 10: Vehicles & Traffic were
adopted many decades ago prior to the establishment of separate divisions and sections within
the Public Works Department. This title of the Municipal Code still has references to the Public
Services Department, which was renamed to the Public Works Department more than 40 years
ago. The proposed amendments will update the Municipal Code to be consistent with current
organizational structure. The proposed amendments are only to clarify the Department and Staff
titles which are delegated the responsibilities and authorities under Title 10 as well as create
consistency with the California Vehicle Code and Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices.
These amendments do not change those responsibilities and authorities.
Background
Under the current Title 10 Municipal Code language, the City Engineer is also defined as the
City Traffic Engineer and is assigned the responsibilities and authorities of Transportation
Manager, Parking Manager, & Transit Manager. However, that structure is no longer correct. A
separate Transportation Division overseen by the Deputy Public Works Director -Transportation
has been established. Within that organization, Fleet, Transit, Parking, and Transportation
Planning/Engineering Sections have been established along with their respective program
managers.
Staff is recommending that rather than defining all of the current Deputies and Program
Managers in the Municipal Code, Title 10 should be updated to the Public Works Director or
their designees. The Public Works Director would then maintain a declaration with the City clerk
documenting those designations and include the appropriate Deputy Director or Program
Manager. Under this model, if an organizational change occurs an update to the municipal code
will not be necessary, as it will be covered in an updated Public Works Director’s declaration.
Staff is also recommending that any references to the Public Services Department be updated to
11
Packet Pg. 120
reflect the current department name, Public Works Department.
CONCURRENCES
The City Attorney’s Office concurs with the recommendation. .
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this recommendation.
ALTERNATIVES
The Council may choose to direct staff to update the municipal code to specifically define
responsibilities delegated to each of the deputies and program managers. However this is not
recommended because any organizational change or job classification title change would require
an update to the municipal code, this model has not been sustainable to date and led to the
current ambiguity that the proposed amendments would correct.
Attachments:
a a - Title 10 Amendments
11
Packet Pg. 121
ORDINANCE NO. (2016 Series)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING MUNICIPAL CODE TITLE 10
REGARDING VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Section 10.08.010 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, entitled Office
of the city traffic engineer established – Authority to place and maintain traffic control devices,
is hereby amended to read as follows:
10.08.010 Office of city traffic engineer established—Authority to place and
maintain traffic-control devices.
The office of city traffic engineer is established. The city traffic engineer shall be the city
engineer until the council shall authorize the creation of a separate officer, and he or she
The Public Works Director or their designee(s) shall exercise the powers and duties as
provided in Section 10.08.020 and in the traffic regulations of this city. Whenever the
Public Works Director or their designee(s) is required or authorized to place or maintain
official traffic-control devices or signals, he or she may cause such devices or signals to
be placed or maintained
SECTION 2. Section 10.08.020 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, entitled Traffic
engineer’s powers and duties, is hereby amended to read as follows:
10.08.020 Traffic engineer’s pPowers and duties.
It shall be the general duty responsibility of the city traffic engineer the Public Works
Director or their designee(s) to place and maintain or cause to be placed and maintained
such traffic signals and other traffic control devices upon streets and highways as
required hereunder and may place and maintain or cause to be placed and maintained
such appropriate signs, signals, or other traffic control devices as may be authorized
hereunder or as may be necessary to properly indicate and to carry out the provisions of
this code and the California Vehicle Code to warn or guide traffic within the City of San
Luis Obispo. These duties shall generally include but are not limited to 1) determine the
installation and proper timing and maintenance of traffic-control devices and signals, 2)
to conducting engineering analyses of traffic accidents and to devise remedial measures,
3) to conducting engineering and traffic investigations of traffic conditions, 4) to
recommending traffic-control devices for inclusion in the capital improvement program
and present plans for consideration by the council, 5) and approving field modifications
of traffic control devices through work conducted by City staff or contractors, 6) to
cooperate with other city officials in the development of ways and means to improve
traffic conditions, 7) and to carry out the additional powers and duties imposed by
ordinances of this city. Whenever, by the provisions of this title, a power is granted to the
city traffic engineer the Public Works Director or their designee(s) or a duty imposed
11.a
Packet Pg. 122 Attachment: a - Title 10 Amendments (1172 : Municipal Code Title 10 Cleanup Amendments)
Ordinance No. _____ (2016 Series) Page 2
O ______
upon him or her, the power may be exercised or the duty performed by him or her. or by
his or her deputy or by a person authorized in writing by him or her.
SECTION 3. Section 10.08.030 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, entitled
Traffic-control devices and markings—Installation and maintenance, is hereby amended to read
as follows:
10.08.030 Traffic-control devices and markings—Installation and maintenance.
The physical maintenance of traffic-control devices and markings shall be handled by the
public works services department. The installation of devices, signs or markings
authorized by city traffic engineer the Public Works Director or their designee(s) will be
either by contract or through the public services works department.
SECTION 4. Section 10.12.020 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, entitled
Persons other than officials shall not direct traffic, is hereby amended to read as follows:
10.12.020 Persons other than officials shall not direct traffic.
No person other than an officer of the police department or members of the fire
department or a person authorized by the chief of police or a person authorized by law
shall direct or attempt to direct traffic by voice, hand or other signal, except that persons
may operate, when and as provided in this title, any mechanical pushbutton signal erected
by order of the Public Works Director or their designee(s) traffic engineer.
SECTION 5. Section 10.14.010 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, entitled
Authority to place and maintain, is hereby amended to read as follows:
10.14.010 Authority to place and maintain.
A. The Public Works Director or their designee(s) city traffic engineer shall have the
power and duty to place or cause to be placed official traffic-control devices when and as
required to make effective the provisions of this title.
B. Whenever the Vehicle Code requires for the effectiveness of any provision thereof that
traffic-control devices be installed to give notice to the public of the application of such
law, the Public Works Director or their designee(s) city traffic engineer is authorized to
install or cause to be installed the necessary devices subject to any limitations or
restrictions set forth in the law applicable thereto.
C. The Public Works Director or their designee(s) city traffic engineer may also place or
cause to be placed such additional traffic-control devices as he or she may deem
necessary or proper to regulate traffic or to guide or warn traffic, but he or she shall make
such determination only upon the basis of traffic engineering principles and traffic
investigations and in accordance with such standards, limitations and rules as may be set
forth in this chapter or as may be determined by ordinance or resolution of the council.
11.a
Packet Pg. 123 Attachment: a - Title 10 Amendments (1172 : Municipal Code Title 10 Cleanup Amendments)
Ordinance No. _____ (2016 Series) Page 3
O ______
SECTION 6. Section 10.14.040 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, entitled Traffic
signal installation, is hereby amended to read as follows:
10.14.040 Traffic signal installation.
A. The Public Works Director or their designee(s) city traffic engineer is directed to
install official traffic signals at those intersections and other places where traffic
conditions are such as to require that the flow of traffic be alternately interrupted and
released in order to prevent or relieve traffic congestion or to protect life or property from
exceptional hazard.
B. The Public Works Director or their designee(s) city traffic engineer shall ascertain and
determine the locations where such signals are required by field investigation, traffic
counts and other traffic information as may be pertinent and his or her determinations
therefrom shall be made in accordance with those traffic engineering and safety standards
and instructions set forth in the Traffic Manual issued by the California Department of
Transportation. C. Whenever the Public Works Director or their designee(s) city traffic
engineer installs an official traffic signal at any intersection, he or she shall likewise erect
at such intersection street name signs visible to the principal flow of traffic unless such
street name signs have previously been placed and are maintained at any such
intersection.
SECTION 7. Section 10.14.050 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, entitled Lane
marking, is hereby amended to read as follows:
10.14.050 Lane marking.
The Public Works Director or their designee(s) city traffic engineer is authorized mark
centerlines and lane lines upon the surface of the roadway to indicate the course to be
traveled by vehicles and may place signs temporarily designating lanes to be used by
traffic moving in a particular direction, regardless of the centerline of the highway.
SECTION 8. Section 10.14.060 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, entitled
Distinctive roadway markings – Authority to place, is hereby amended to read as follows:
10.14.060 Distinctive roadway markings—Authority to place.
The Public Works Director or their designee(s) city traffic engineer is authorized to place
distinctive roadway markings as described in the Vehicle Code on those streets or parts of
streets where the volume of traffic or the vertical or other curvature of the roadway
renders it hazardous to drive on the left side of such marking or signs and markings. Such
markings or signs and markings shall have the same effect as similar markings placed by
the State Department of Transportation pursuant to the provisions of the Vehicle Code.
SECTION 9. Section 10.14.070 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, entitled
Removal, relocation and discontinuance - Authority, is hereby amended to read as follows:
10.14.070 Removal, relocation and discontinuance—Authority.
The Public Works Director or their designee(s) city traffic engineer is authorized to
remove, relocate or discontinue the operation of any traffic-control device not specifically
11.a
Packet Pg. 124 Attachment: a - Title 10 Amendments (1172 : Municipal Code Title 10 Cleanup Amendments)
Ordinance No. _____ (2016 Series) Page 4
O ______
required by the Vehicle Code or this title whenever he or she shall determine in any
particular case that the conditions which warranted or required the installation no longer
exist.
SECTION 10. Section 10.14.080 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, entitled Hours
of operation, is hereby amended to read as follows:
10.14.080 Hours of operation.
The Public Works Director or their designee(s) city traffic engineer shall determine the
hours and days during which any traffic-control device shall be in operation or be in
effect, except in those cases where such hours or days are specified in this title.
SECTION 11. Section 10.16.010 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, entitled
Turning markers – Authority to place – Obedience to required, is hereby amended to read as
follows:
10.16.010 Turning markers—Authority to place—Obedience to required.
A. The Public Works Director or their designee(s) city traffic engineer is authorized to
place markers, buttons or other official traffic-control signs within or adjacent to
intersections and indicating the course to be traveled by vehicles turning at such
intersections, and the Public Works Director or their designee(s) city traffic engineer is
authorized to locate and indicate more than one lane of traffic from which drivers of
vehicles may make right or left hand turns, and the course to be traveled as so indicated
may conform to or be other than as prescribed by law or ordinance.
B. When authorized markers, buttons or other indications are placed within an
intersection indicating the course to be traveled by vehicles turning thereat, no driver of a
vehicle shall disobey the directions of such indications.
SECTION 12. Section 10.16.020 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, entitled
Restricted turn signs Authority to place, is hereby amended to read as follows:
10.16.020 Restricted turn signs Authority to place.
The Public Works Director or their designee(s) traffic engineer is authorized to determine
those intersections at which drivers of vehicles shall not make a right, left or U-turn, and
shall place proper signs at such intersections. The making of such turns may be
prohibited between certain hours of any day and permitted at other hours, in which event
the same shall be plainly indicated on the signs or they may be removed when such turns
are permitted.
11.a
Packet Pg. 125 Attachment: a - Title 10 Amendments (1172 : Municipal Code Title 10 Cleanup Amendments)
Ordinance No. _____ (2016 Series) Page 5
O ______
SECTION 13. Section 10.16.040 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, entitled No
free right turn on red light signs Obedience required—Sign posting, is hereby amended to read as
follows:
10.16.040 No free right turn on red light signs Obedience required—Sign posting.
A. No driver of a vehicle shall make a right turn against a red or stop signal at any
intersection which is sign-posted giving notice of such restriction a provided in
subsection B of this section.
B. The Public Works Director or their designee(s) city traffic engineer shall post
appropriate signs giving effect to this section where he or she determines that the making
of right turns against a traffic signal “stop” indication would seriously interfere with the
safe and orderly flow of traffic.
SECTION 14. Section 10.20.010 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, entitled Sign
posting, is hereby amended to read as follows:
10.20.010 Sign posting.
Whenever any ordinance or resolution of this city designates any one-way street or alley,
the Public Works Director or their designee(s) city traffic engineer shall place signs
giving notice thereof, and no such regulations shall be effective unless such signs are in
place. Signs indicating the direction of lawful traffic movement shall be placed at every
intersection where movement of traffic in the opposite direction is prohibited. (Prior code
§ 3205)
SECTION 15. Section 10.24.010 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, entitled Stop
signs – Erection – Removal – Obedience to required, is hereby amended to read as follows:
10.24.010 Stop signs—Erection—Removal—Obedience to required.
The Public Works Director or their designee(s) city traffic engineer is authorized to erect
stop signs at those locations where he or she deems such controls to be necessary or
remove those signs no longer warranted in order to protect the public safety. When signs
are erected giving notice thereof, drivers of vehicles shall stop at the entrance or
entrances to such intersections.
SECTION 16. Section 10.28.030 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, entitled
Riding or driving on sidewalk, is hereby amended to read as follows:
10.28.030 Riding or driving on sidewalk.
No person shall ride, drive, propel, or cause to be propelled, any vehicle or animal across
or upon any sidewalk excepting over permanently constructed driveways and excepting
when it is necessary for any temporary purpose to drive a loaded vehicle across a
sidewalk; provided further, that the sidewalk area be substantially protected by wooden
planks two inches thick, and written permission be previously obtained from the Public
Works Director or their designee(s) city traffic engineer. Such wooden planks shall not be
permitted to remain upon such sidewalk area during the hours from six p.m. to six a.m.
11.a
Packet Pg. 126 Attachment: a - Title 10 Amendments (1172 : Municipal Code Title 10 Cleanup Amendments)
Ordinance No. _____ (2016 Series) Page 6
O ______
SECTION 17. Section 10.28.060 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, entitled
Barriers and signs—Placing or erecting—Tampering with—Obedience to required, is hereby
amended to read as follows:
10.28.060 Barriers and signs—Placing or erecting—Tampering with—Obedience to
required.
No person, public utility or department in the city shall erect or place any barrier or sign
on any street unless of a type approved by the Public Works Director or their designee(s)
city traffic engineer or disobey the instructions, remove, tamper with or destroy any
barrier or sign lawfully placed on any street by any person, public utility or by any
department of this city.
SECTION 18. Section 10.32.010 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, entitled
Crosswalks - Establishment, is hereby amended to read as follows:
10.32.010 Crosswalks—Establishment.
A. The Public Works Director or their designee(s) city traffic engineer shall establish and
designate crosswalks at intersections and other places by appropriate devices, marks or
lines upon the surface of the roadway as follows:
Crosswalks shall be established and maintained at all intersections within the central
traffic district and at such intersections outside such districts, and at other places within
or outside the district where the Public Works Director or their designee(s) city traffic
engineer determines that there is particular hazard to pedestrians crossing the roadway,
subject to the limitations contained in subsection B of this section.
B. Other than crosswalks at intersections, no crosswalk shall be established in any block
which is less than four hundred feet in length and such crosswalk shall be located as
nearly as practicable at midblock.
C. The Public Works Director or their designee(s) city traffic engineer may place signs at
or adjacent to an intersection in respect to any crosswalk directing that pedestrians shall
not cross in the crosswalk so indicated.
SECTION 19. Section 10.36.010 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, entitled
Applicability of provisions – Temporary alteration of parking controls and regulations by traffic
engineer, is hereby amended to read as follows:
10.36.010 Applicability of provisions—Temporary alteration of parking controls
and regulations by Public Works Director or their designee(s) traffic engineer.
A. The provisions of this chapter prohibiting the stopping, standing or parking of a
vehicle shall apply at all times or at those times as specified in this chapter, except when
it is necessary to stop a vehicle to avoid conflict with other traffic or in compliance with
the directions of a police officer or official traffic-control device.
B. The provisions of this chapter imposing a time limit on standing or parking shall not
relieve any person from the duty to observe other and more restrictive provisions of the
11.a
Packet Pg. 127 Attachment: a - Title 10 Amendments (1172 : Municipal Code Title 10 Cleanup Amendments)
Ordinance No. _____ (2016 Series) Page 7
O ______
Vehicle Code or the ordinances of this city prohibiting or limiting the standing or parking
of vehicles in specified places or at specified times.
C. The Public Works Director or their designee(s) city traffic engineer or his or her
designated alternate may, at his or her discretion, set aside, suspend or relocate parking
controls and regulations on a temporary basis when it is found to be in the public interest
or required for traffic safety. Before any such temporary change may become effective,
the Public Works Director or their designee(s) city traffic engineer shall receive the
police department’s approval for the change and have the change posted.
SECTION 20. Section 10.36.030 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, entitled
Maintenance of no stopping an no parking zones – city traffic engineer duty – Compliance with
markings required, is hereby amended to read as follows:
10.36.030 Maintenance of no stopping and no parking zones— Public Works
Director or their designee(s) city traffic engineer duty—Compliance with markings
required.
A. Public Works Director or their designee(s) city traffic engineer is authorized to
maintain, by appropriate signs or by paint upon the curb surface, all no stopping zones,
no parking areas, and restricted parking areas, as defined and described in this chapter.
B. When the curb markings or signs are in place, no operator of any vehicle shall stop,
stand or park such vehicle adjacent to any such legible curb marking or sign in violation
of any of the provisions of this chapter.
SECTION 21. Subsection C of Section 10.36.040 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal
Code, entitled No parking areas, is hereby amended to read as follows:
C. In any area where the Public Works Director or their designee(s) city traffic engineer
determines that the parking or stopping of a vehicle would constitute a traffic hazard or
would endanger life or property, when such area is indicated by appropriate signs or by
red paint upon the curb surface;
SECTION 22. Section 10.36.090 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, entitled
Parking adjacent to schools, is hereby amended to read as follows:
10.36.090 Parking adjacent to schools.
A. The Public Works Director or their designee(s) city traffic engineer is authorized to
erect signs indicating no parking upon that side of any street adjacent to any school
property when such parking would, in his or her opinion, interfere with traffic or create a
hazardous situation.
B. When official signs are erected prohibiting parking upon that side of a street adjacent
to any school property, no person shall park a vehicle in any such designated place.
11.a
Packet Pg. 128 Attachment: a - Title 10 Amendments (1172 : Municipal Code Title 10 Cleanup Amendments)
Ordinance No. _____ (2016 Series) Page 8
O ______
SECTION 23. Subsection A of Section 10.36.100 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal
Code, entitled Parking prohibited on narrow streets, is hereby amended to read as follows:
10.36.100 Parking prohibited on narrow streets.
A. The Public Works Director or their designee(s) city traffic engineer is authorized to
place signs or markings indicating no parking upon any street when the width of the
roadway does not exceed twenty feet, or upon one side of a street as indicated by such
signs or markings when the width of the roadway does not exceed thirty feet.
SECTION 24. Section 10.36.140 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, entitled
Parking of large or commercial vehicles near intersections, is hereby amended to read as follows:
10.36.140 Parking of large or commercial vehicles near intersections.
No person shall park any vehicle greater than six feet in height, including any load
thereon, within one hundred feet of any intersection at any time. This section shall not
apply to any particular intersection until signs or markings giving adequate notice thereof
have been placed as determined appropriate by Public Works Director or their
designee(s) the city engineer.
SECTION 25. Section 10.36.190 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, entitled
Designation of residential parking permit areas – Sign posting, is hereby amended to read as
follows:
10.36.190 Designation of residential parking permit areas—Sign posting.
Upon adoption of a resolution by the council designating an area of the city as a
residential parking permit area, the Public Works Director or their designee(s) city traffic
engineer shall cause appropriate signs to be erected along the streets identified in the
resolution which shall give notice of the limitation on the parking of vehicles in the area
as provided in Section 10.36.170, and shall indicate the hours and days when such
limitations shall be in effect.
SECTION 26. Section 10.40.010 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, entitled
Timed parking, is hereby amended to read as follows:
10.40.010 Timed parking.
When authorized signs, parking meters or curb markings have been determined by the
Public Works Director or their designee(s) city traffic engineer to be necessary and are in
place giving notice thereof, no operator of any vehicle shall stop, stand or park said
vehicle between the hours established by Section 10.52.030, for a period of time longer
than designated time posted by sign, parking meter or curb marking. Green curb
markings shall mean no standing or parking of time longer than ten minutes up to one
hour. All other time designations shall be from one hour up to ten hours. Vehicle must
move a minimum of one hundred fifty meters once designated time at occupied space has
elapsed.
11.a
Packet Pg. 129 Attachment: a - Title 10 Amendments (1172 : Municipal Code Title 10 Cleanup Amendments)
Ordinance No. _____ (2016 Series) Page 9
O ______
SECTION 27. Subsection C of Section 10.40.040 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal
Code, entitled Parking parallel on one way street, is hereby amended to read as follows:
C. The Public Works Director or their designee(s) city traffic engineer is authorized to
determine when standing or parking shall be prohibited upon the left-hand side of any
one-way roadway or a highway having two or more separate roadways and shall erect
signs giving notice thereof.
SECTION 28. Subsection A of Section 10.40.060 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal
Code, entitled Parking space markings, is hereby amended to read as follows:
10.40.060 Parking space markings.
A. The Public Works Director or their designee(s) city traffic engineer is authorized to
install and maintain parking space markings to indicate parking spaces adjacent to
curbings on city streets and in municipal parking lots where authorized parking is
permitted.
SECTION 29. Section 10.40.070 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, entitled No
stopping zones, is hereby amended to read as follows:
10.40.070 No stopping zones.
A. The Public Works Director or their designee(s) city traffic engineer shall designate
established no stopping zones by placing and maintaining appropriate signs indicating
that stopping of vehicles is prohibited and indicating the hours and days when stopping is
prohibited.
B. During the hours and on the days designated on the signs, it is unlawful for the
operator of any vehicle to stop said vehicle on any of the streets or parts of streets
established by the Public Works Director or their designee(s) city traffic engineer as no
stopping zones.
SECTION 30. Subsection A of Section 10.44.010 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal
Code, entitled Loading zones – Marking - Authority, is hereby amended to read as follows:
10.44.010 Loading zones—Marking—Authority.
A. The Public Works Director or their designee(s) city traffic engineer is authorized to
determine and to mark loading zones and passenger loading zones as follows:
1. At any place in the central traffic district or any business district;
2. Elsewhere in front of the entrance to any place of business or in front of any hall or
place used for the purpose of public assembly.
11.a
Packet Pg. 130 Attachment: a - Title 10 Amendments (1172 : Municipal Code Title 10 Cleanup Amendments)
Ordinance No. _____ (2016 Series) Page 10
O ______
SECTION 31. Section 10.44.020 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, entitled Curb
marking – Meanings – Authority to place, is hereby amended to read as follows:
10.44.020 Curb markings—Meanings—Authority to place.
The Public Works Director or their designee(s) city traffic engineer is authorized, subject
to the provisions and limitations of this chapter, to place, and when required herein shall
place, the following curb markings to indicate parking or standing regulations, and the
curb markings shall have the meanings as set forth in this section.
A. “Red” means no stopping, standing or parking at any time except as permitted by the
Vehicle Code, and except that a bus may stop in a red zone marked or signed as a bus
zone.
B. “Yellow” means no stopping, standing or parking at any time between seven a.m. and
six p.m. every Monday to Saturday, and between one p.m. and six p.m. every Sunday, for
any purpose other than the commercial loading or unloading of materials by a
commercially registered and licensed vehicle or a professionally signed passenger vehicle
that displays an authorized commercial loading zone permit. The commercial loading
zone permit requirements and fee shall be established by resolution.
C. “White” means no stopping, standing or parking for any purpose other than loading or
unloading of passengers, or for the purpose of depositing mail in an adjacent mailbox,
which shall be from three minutes to a maximum of ten minutes, and such restrictions
shall apply between seven a.m. and six p.m. every Monday to Saturday, and between one
p.m. and six p.m. every Sunday, and except as follows:
1. When such zone is in front of a hotel or in front of a mailbox the restrictions shall
apply at all times.
2. When such zone is in front of a theater the restrictions shall apply at all times.
D. When the Public Works Director or their designee(s) city traffic engineer as
authorized under this chapter has caused curb markings to be placed, no person shall stop,
stand or park a vehicle adjacent to any such legible curb markings in violation of any of
the provisions of this section.
SECTION 32. Section 10.44.060 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, entitled Bus
zoned – Establishment - Authority, is hereby amended to read as follows:
10.44.060 Bus zoned—Establishment—Authority.
A. The Public Works Director or their designee(s) city traffic engineer is authorized to
establish bus zones for the loading and unloading of buses and common carriers or
passengers, and to determine the location thereof.
B. Bus zones shall normally be established on the far side of an intersection.
11.a
Packet Pg. 131 Attachment: a - Title 10 Amendments (1172 : Municipal Code Title 10 Cleanup Amendments)
Ordinance No. _____ (2016 Series) Page 11
O ______
SECTION 33. Subsection A of Section 10.44.070 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal
Code, entitled Handicapped parking, is hereby amended to read as follows:
A. The Public Works Director or their designee(s) city traffic engineer shall designate
special “blue curb” parking spaces for the purpose of providing on-street parking for
exclusive use by disabled persons.
SECTION 34. Subsection B of Section 10.44.070 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal
Code, entitled Handicapped parking, is hereby amended to read as follows:
B. The Public Works Director or their designee(s) city traffic engineer shall designate
parking stalls or spaces in publicly owned, leased or controlled off-street parking
facilities for exclusive use by disabled persons.
SECTION 35. Subsection A of Section 10.48.040 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal
Code, entitled Truck routes, is hereby amended to read as follows:
A. Whenever the city designates and describes any street or portion thereof as a street, the
use of which is permitted by any vehicle exceeding a maximum gross weight limit of five
tons, the Public Works Director or their designee(s) city traffic engineer is authorized to
designate such street or streets by appropriate signs as “truck routes” for the movement of
vehicles exceeding a maximum gross weight limit of five tons.
SECTION 36. Subsection A of Section 10.48.050 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal
Code, entitled Commercial vehicles prohibited from using certain streets – Sign posting, is
hereby amended to read as follows:
A. Whenever any resolution of the city designates and describes any street or portion
thereof as a street, the use of which is prohibited by any commercial vehicle, the Public
Works Director or their designee(s) city traffic engineer shall erect and maintain
appropriate signs on those streets affected by such designation.
SECTION 37. Subsection A of Section 10.52.020 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal
Code, entitled Installation, is hereby amended to read as follows:
A. The Public Works Director or their designee(s) city traffic engineer may cause parking
meters to be installed and maintained in all parking meter zones.
SECTION 38. Section 10.52.110 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, entitled
Motorcycle spaces, is hereby amended to read as follows:
10.52.110 Motorcycle spaces.
The Public Works Director or their designee(s) city traffic engineer may designate and
cause to be installed and maintained parking spaces for the exclusive use of motorcycles,
motorized bicycles and motor driven cycles. Parking meter rates for these spaces shall be
one-half the rate established by Section 10.52.010(B).
11.a
Packet Pg. 132 Attachment: a - Title 10 Amendments (1172 : Municipal Code Title 10 Cleanup Amendments)
Ordinance No. _____ (2016 Series) Page 12
O ______
SECTION 39. Section 10.56.010 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, entitled Speed
limit designation, is hereby amended to read as follows:
10.56.010 Speed limit designation.
Prima facie speed limits shall be determined by the Public Works Director or their
designee(s) city traffic engineer pursuant to provisions set forth in the California Vehicle
Code. A speed limit established pursuant to this section shall be effective when
appropriate signs giving notice thereof are erected upon a street.
SECTION 40. Section 10.56.020 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, entitled
Regulation of speed by traffic signals – Sign posting, is hereby amended to read as follows:
10.56.020 Regulation of speed by traffic signals—Sign posting.
The Public Works Director or their designee(s) city traffic engineer is authorized to
regulate the timing of traffic signals so as to permit the movement of traffic in an orderly
and safe manner at speeds slightly at variance from the speeds otherwise applicable
within the district or at intersections, and may erect appropriate signs giving notice
thereof.
SECTION 41. Section 10.60.020 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, entitled
Intersections, is hereby amended to read as follows:
10.60.020 Intersections.
At intersections not controlled by a stop sign or traffic signal, no plant, structure, or other
solid object over three feet high (above adjacent curb) which would obstruct visibility
may be located within the area indicated in Figure 8 as shown in
Section 17.16.020(E)(2)(f) of the zoning regulations. At controlled intersections, the
Public Works Director or their designee(s) city engineer may determine visibility
requirements for proper sight distance.
SECTION 42. Section 10.80.020 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, entitled
Permit - Required, is hereby amended to read as follows:
10.80.020 Permit—Required.
No vehicle or structure which exceeds the size and/or weight limitations established by
the California Vehicle Code shall be allowed on city streets without first obtaining a
permit issued by the Public Works Director or their designee(s) city engineer and
complying with the conditions set forth by the permit.
SECTION 43. Subsection A of Section 10.80.050 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal
Code, entitled Permit – Denial – Restrictions – Permit holders responsibilities, is hereby
amended to read as follows:
10.80.050 Permit—Denial—Restrictions—Permit holders responsibilities.
A. The Public Works Director or their designee(s) city engineer may deny the issuance of
a permit or set special requirements based upon public safety and the limitation of the
street system to handle the proposed vehicle or structure.
11.a
Packet Pg. 133 Attachment: a - Title 10 Amendments (1172 : Municipal Code Title 10 Cleanup Amendments)
Ordinance No. _____ (2016 Series) Page 13
O ______
SECTION 44. Subsection D of Section 10.80.050 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal
Code, entitled Permit – Denial – Restrictions – Permit holders responsibilities, is hereby
amended to read as follows:
D. Upon completion of a move, and as directed by the Public Works Director or their
designee(s) city engineer or the police department, the permit holder shall clear the right-
of-way of materials left by his or her operation and restore it to the condition existing
prior to the move.
SECTION 45. Section 10.80.070 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, entitled
Liability insurance required, is hereby amended to read as follows:
10.80.070 Liability insurance required.
The permit holder is responsible for personal injury or private property damage which
may occur through any act or omission when acting under a permit; and in the event any
claim is made against the city or any department, officer, agent or employee thereo f, by
reason of, or in connection with, any such act or omission, the permit holder shall defend,
indemnify and hold each of them harmless from such claim. The permit shall not be
effective for any purpose unless and until the permit holder files with the Public Works
Director or their designee(s) city engineer an insurance certificate and an “additional
insured endorsement” to the satisfaction of the city attorney. The insurance certificate
supplied shall reflect the endorsement naming the city, its officers, agents and employees,
as additional insured, and indicate that the policy will not be canceled or the coverage
reduced without ten days’ advance written notice to the city. The amount of coverage
shall not be less than that required by the California Vehicle Code for vehicles weighing
in excess of seven thousand pounds unladen weight per Section 16600.5 or such other
amount considered appropriate for unusually large or heavy loads which pose a
substantial risk to public facilities, as determined by the Public Works Director or their
designee(s) city engineer and city attorney.
SECTION 46. If any subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase of this ordinance
is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, such
invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect the validity or enforcement of the remaining
portions of this ordinance, or any other provisions of the City’s rules and regulations. It is the
City’s express intent that each remaining portion would have been adopted irrespective of the
fact that any one or more subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses, or phrases be declared
invalid or unenforceable.
SECTION 47. A summary of this ordinance, approved by the City Attorney, together
with the names of the Council members voting for and against it, shall be published at least five
days prior to its final passage, in the Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated in this City.
This ordinance will go into effect at the expiration of thirty (30) da ys after its final passage.
INTRODUCED on the 5th day of January 2016, AND FINALLY ADOPTED by the
Council of the City of San Luis Obispo on the ______ day of _______ 2016, on the following
roll call vote:
AYES:
11.a
Packet Pg. 134 Attachment: a - Title 10 Amendments (1172 : Municipal Code Title 10 Cleanup Amendments)
Ordinance No. _____ (2016 Series) Page 14
O ______
NOES:
ABSENT:
Mayor Jan Marx
ATTEST:
Jon Ansolabehere
Interim City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City
of San Luis Obispo, California, this ______ day of ______________, _________.
______________________________
Jon Ansolabehere
Interim City Clerk
11.a
Packet Pg. 135 Attachment: a - Title 10 Amendments (1172 : Municipal Code Title 10 Cleanup Amendments)
Meeting Date: 1/5/2016
FROM: Daryl Grigsby, Public Works Director
Prepared By: Jake Hudson, Transportation Manager
Bryan Wheeler, Transportation Planner-Engineer
SUBJECT: 2014 TRAFFIC SAFETY REPORT
RECOMMENDATION
Receive and file the 2014 Traffic Safety Report.
DISCUSSION
Background
The Annual Traffic Safety Program (“Program”) began in 2001 to identify high collision
locations within the City. In addition, the Program actively pursues mitigation measures that may
reduce collision rates and improve safety for the citizens of San Luis Obispo. Now in its 15th
year, the program has produced lasting and continuing outcomes. Despite increases in traffic
volumes, based on the City’s bi-annual traffic count program, injury collisions in 2014 were
down approximately 3% from the previous year and 35% since the Program began. Total
collisions in 2014 were down approximately 4% from the previous year and by over 50% since
the program began. Pedestrian and bicycle collisions were also down in 2014 as compared to the
previous year, 38% for pedestrians and 22% for bicycles.
2014 Traffic Safety Report Overview
The Traffic Safety Report (TSR) reviews all intersections and street segments in the City for
collision rates and patterns for calendar year 2014. Based on these patterns, recommendations are
made for altering or monitoring the highest collision locations of each intersection and street
segment classification. The collision data and corresponding analysis was compiled and
completed by the Public Works and Police Departments in November of 2015. It typically takes
six months or more after the end of the year for all collision reports from that year to be received
and analyzed. This is due to late collision reports filed by private parties and extended
investigation periods before collision reports are finalized.
The TSR identifies patterns at the highest collision rate for locations of similar classification for
Automobiles, Bicycles, and Pedestrians. These locations are narrowed down and the top five
locations are analyzed to identify possible mitigation strategies to address safety issues. For
example, all arterial segments are compared to each other to establish the highest rate locations
and thereby establish the priority order for mitigation or safety improvements. In order to
determine if corrective measures could reduce the likelihood of a collision type identified in the
pattern, a comprehensive review of each location is conducted. This review includes a survey of
the field conditions and travel behavior.
12
Packet Pg. 136
In 2014, there were eight high ranking locations with safety projects already underway or
recently completed as a result of being prioritized in prior safety reports and capital programs.
These locations are listed in Table 1 below.
Table 1: High Ranking Locations with Project Underway or Completed
Location Project Status
Santa Rosa & Walnut Green Bike Lanes Complete
Monterey & Santa Rosa Upgrade Pedestrain Warning Signs Complete
Broad & Higuera Upgrade Pedestrain Warning Signs Complete
Broad & Orcutt Right Turn Lane Reconfiguration & Green Bike Lanes Complete
101 SB Ramps & California Right Turn Lane Reconfiguration & Green Bike Lanes Complete
Monterey & Osos Reconstruct Traffic Signal In Design
Calle Joaquin & LOVR LOVR Interchange Construction
Chorro & Peach Bike Lane Reconfiguration Complete
In addition, there were seven new high ranking locations in 2014 new recommended safety
projects. These locations are listed in Table 2 below which can be funded under the current
traffic safety allocation.
Table 2: High Ranking Locations with New Projects
Location Project
Grand & Monterey
Convert from protected / permissive left turn phase to protected left turn
phase
Marsh & Santa Rosa Convert from permissive left turn phase to protected left turn phase
Broad & Foothill Upgrade Traffic Signal Indications
Mill & Santa Rosa Upgrade Traffic Signal Indications
California & Mill Upgrade Traffic Signal Indiciations
Monterey & Santa Rosa Investigate Flashing Yellow Arrow & Adv. Ped. Phasing
Foothill 1000-1200 Blocks Education Campain With Property Management Co.
Higuera 500-700 Blocks Reconfigure parking stalls to comply to contemporary City Standards
Unfunded Safety Projects
In 2014, there were two high collision rate locations with identified mitigation that has is not
funded at this time, California & Taft and the S. Broad Street Corridor (South St. to Orcutt).
Staff will continue to work with adjacent property owners, developing funding programs, and
conducting public outreach for both of these projects.
1. California and Taft
The intersection of California and Taft continues to be identified as a high collision rate location
due to conflicts with vehicles turning left from Taft and vehicles on California. In addition,
California and Taft’s poor operations (LOS F) are due to long delays for vehicl es turning from
Taft and the difficultly for cyclists heading towards Cal Poly to turn left and access the Railroad
Safety Trail. This intersection has been identified as an impacted intersection in the Cal Poly EIR
and the General Plan Update EIR with roundabout control as the identified mitigation. The
12
Packet Pg. 137
project is currently estimated at approximately $800,000 with Cal Poly’s fair share established at
$98,000 as specified in the certified Environmental Impact Report for the Housing South Project.
Staff will continue to pursue grant funding, local capital funding, and assess incorporation of the
project into the transportation impact fee program.
2. Broad Street Corridor (South to Orcutt)
The segment of Broad Street from South to Orcutt has been identified as a high collision rate
location with a pattern of rear end collisions and collisions with vehicles entering and exiting
driveways. Also, the segment operates below minimum level of service standards with high
vehicle volumes at peak hours. This segment has been identified for improvements in the Land
Use and Circulation Element Update, and mitigation measures are identified in the updated EIR.
The proposed projects include installation of medians, consolidation of access points, as well as
congestion relief improvements along the corridor. The cost for these improvements is estimated
at approximately $3-$5 million. Staff will continue to pursue grant funding, updates to impact
fee programs, and local capital funding.
CONCURRENCES
The Police Department has reviewed the 2014 Traffic Safety Report and concurs with its
findings.
FISCAL IMPACT
Safety projects identified in the report in Table 1 are completed or currently have adequate
funding allocated. Safety projects identified in Table 2 will be funded thru the City’s traffic
safety program which currently has a balance of $41,000. The total cost of these projects is
estimated at approximately $40,000 leaving a balance of $1,000 in the traffic safety program
fund. This remaining balance will be used to fund other minor projects as they are identified thru
2016.
ALTERNATIVE
The Council may choose not to receive and file the 2014 Traffic Safety Report. Staff does not
recommend this as these locations are currently experiencing high collision rates with injuries
and property damages, if measures are not taken these collision patterns may continue.
Attachments:
a a - 2014 Annual Traffic Safety Report
12
Packet Pg. 138
Public Works and Police Department
January 2016
2014 Annual Traffic Safety Report
12.a
Packet Pg. 139 Attachment: a - 2014 Annual Traffic Safety Report (1202 : 2014 Traffic Safety Report)
1 2014 Traffic Safety Report
December 2015
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................... 2
CITYWIDE COLLISION TRENDS ........................................................................... 3
INJURY COLLISION TREND .................................................................................................................. 3
FATAL COLLISION TREND ................................................................................................................... 3
OVERALL COLLISION TREND ............................................................................................................... 4
PEDESTRIAN COLLISION TREND ........................................................................................................... 5
BICYCLE COLLISION TREND ................................................................................................................. 5
TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT MEASURES ............................................................................ 6
CITATION TRENDS ............................................................................................................................ 6
DUI ARRESTS .................................................................................................................................. 6
CITATIONS BY VEHICLE CODE SECTION 2014 ........................................................................................ 7
TRAFFIC SAFETY EDUCATION CAMPAIGNS ................................................................... 8
2014 HIGH COLLISION RATE LOCATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS ................................ 9
PEDESTRIANS .................................................................................................................................. 9
PEDESTRIAN LOCATION RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................................................... 10
BICYCLES ...................................................................................................................................... 11
BICYCLE LOCATION RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................... 12
ARTERIAL/ARTERIAL INTERSECTIONS ................................................................................................. 13
ARTERIAL/ARTERIAL INTERSECTIONS RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................... 14
ARTERIAL/COLLECTOR INTERSECTIONS ............................................................................................... 15
ARTERIAL/COLLECTOR INTERSECTIONS RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................. 15
ARTERIAL/LOCAL INTERSECTIONS ...................................................................................................... 16
ARTERIAL/LOCAL INTERSECTIONS RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................ 17
COLLECTOR/COLLECTOR INTERSECTIONS ............................................................................................ 18
COLLECTOR/LOCAL INTERSECTIONS ................................................................................................... 18
COLLECTOR/LOCAL INTERSECTIONS RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................................... 18
LOCAL/LOCAL INTERSECTIONS .......................................................................................................... 19
ARTERIAL SEGMENTS ...................................................................................................................... 20
ARTERIAL SEGMENTS RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................ 21
COLLECTOR SEGMENTS ................................................................................................................... 22
12.a
Packet Pg. 140 Attachment: a - 2014 Annual Traffic Safety Report (1202 : 2014 Traffic Safety Report)
2 2014 Traffic Safety Report
December 2015
Executive Summary
The Public Works & Police Departments are pleased to present the 14th cycle of
the City’s annual traffic safety program. The Annual Traffic Safety Program
began in 2002 in an attempt to identify high collision locations within the City . In
addition, the program actively pursues corrective measures that may reduce
collision rates and improve safety for the citizen of San Luis Obispo. This
program has had continued success with 55% collision reduction since the
program began despite increasing traffic volumes. In 2009 the City received the
International Public Agency Achievem ent award from the Institute of Traffic
Engineers (ITE) for this program. This award is one of the highest recognitions a
public agency can receive for its traffic engineering practices.
This safety program has had long lasting success and again in 2014, total
collisions are the lowest on record, down by 4% from the previous year.
However, to ensure that the most serious collisions are analyzed, the safety
report program will begin to focus on collisions with injury. Injury collisions require
a police report to be taken, along with an investigation by a peace officer. These
reports give a clearer picture of the collision circumstances, and can establish a
more reliable year-to-year trend as policies change with regard to collision
response. In 2014, injury collisions decreased by 3% from the previous year, and
are 16% lower since the safety program began.
The program also includes thorough evaluations of bicycle and pedestrian safety.
Bicycle collision trends continue to decline since peaking in 2009, with a 21%
drop over 2013 numbers. Overall annual pedestrian collisions have been relative
static since 2008, in 2013 there was a significant peak however in 2014 the
number of pedestrian collision have returned to the historical trend. The was one
fatality in 2014 involving a pedestrian crossing S. Higuera near the County line
south of Los Osos Valley Road.
The following report displays trends in collision history, traffic safety measures
and identifies high collision rate locations in 2014. As in previous Traffic Safety
Reports, staff reviewed all high collision rate intersections and segment locations
and has recommended mitigation measures to increase safety at the top five
locations in each category. Additionally, the report tracks the enforcement of
traffic citations and DUI arrests in the City, to address trends in the types of
violations which cause collisions.
Our goal is that the combination of thorough analysis, appropriate mitigation, and
consistent and focused education and enforcement will continue to reduce traffic
collisions and injuries and improve the safety of our motoring, walking and
bicycling public.
12.a
Packet Pg. 141 Attachment: a - 2014 Annual Traffic Safety Report (1202 : 2014 Traffic Safety Report)
3 2014 Traffic Safety Report
December 2015
Citywide Collision Trends
Injury collisions are the most accurate representation of City collision trends
because these types of collision are most consistently reported and investigated.
In 2014 the sustained downward trend since the beginning of the safety program
continues with a 3% reduction from 2013.
Injury Collision Trend
It’s difficult to identify a trend in fatal collisions because these types of collisions
are typically sporadic, uncommon, and occur under unusual circumstances. The
single collision in 2014 occurred on S. Higuera Street near the City limits south of
Los Osos Valley Road and involved a pedestrian standing in the roadway during
evening hours.
Fatal Collision Trend
240 267 268 309 308 315 285 250 257 240 236 233 220 191 207 201 0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
Injury Collisions Year
2 2
1 1
4
3
2
1 1
3
1
0
1
2
3
4
5
Fatal Collisions Year
Deleted: <object>
12.a
Packet Pg. 142 Attachment: a - 2014 Annual Traffic Safety Report (1202 : 2014 Traffic Safety Report)
4 2014 Traffic Safety Report
December 2015
Overall Collision Trend
The Overall Collision chart does not represent all collisions that occur in the City,
merely all reported collisions for which a report is generated. Many collisions are
unreported by the involved parties, are reported by the parties without an officer
investigation, or there is no response to the collision by emergency services.
Therefore, the actual total collisions may vary between years. A more accurate
measure are the injury and fatal collision trends, as police always respond to
collisions where the reporting party indicates there is an injury.
910 1023 1140 1256 1097 1207 1089 873 866 793 683 598 619 594 570 548 0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
Total Collisions Year
12.a
Packet Pg. 143 Attachment: a - 2014 Annual Traffic Safety Report (1202 : 2014 Traffic Safety Report)
5 2014 Traffic Safety Report
December 2015
Pedestrian & Bicycle Collision Trends
Despite rising pedestrian volumes, pedestrian collisions have remained relatively
static since 2008. In 2013 there was an unexplained spike, however total
pedestrian collisions in 2014 have return to the historical trend.
Pedestrian Collision Trend
Despite rising bicycle volumes, bicycle collisions have actually been on the
decline since 2009, bicycle collision are down by almost 30% over the last 5
years, 20% in just the last year. These reductions can be attributed to the City’s
investment is bicycle improvements, education, and enforcement.
Bicycle Collision Trend
24 37 19 41 24 41 26 27 18 25 24 22 24 26 39 24
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Pedestrian Collisions Year
52 46 45 53 55 50 55 61 59 59 73 69 67 69 63 50
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Bicycle Collisions Year
12.a
Packet Pg. 144 Attachment: a - 2014 Annual Traffic Safety Report (1202 : 2014 Traffic Safety Report)
6 2014 Traffic Safety Report
December 2015
Traffic Enforcement Measures
Citation Trends
DUI Arrests
2001 1791 2243 2550 896 789 934 1769 3120 2098 2806 1474 1524 1571 1407 6741 7114 6508 4802 2663 3454 3585 4488 7437 5947 4686 4124 6195 5293 2992 0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
Citations Year
Hazardous Total Citations
396 502 410 304 312 412 331 339 248 213 241 256 377 445 0
100
200
300
400
500
600
DUI Arrests Year
12.a
Packet Pg. 145 Attachment: a - 2014 Annual Traffic Safety Report (1202 : 2014 Traffic Safety Report)
7 2014 Traffic Safety Report
December 2015
Citations by Vehicle Code Section 2014
Distraction and
Driving Offenses
(§23100-23135)
17%
Insurance related
(§16000-17714)
16%
Traffic Control
Devices (§21350-
21468)
15%
Driver's License
related (§12500-
15325)
13%
Speed (§22348-
22413)
12%
Stop sign (§22450-
22456)
11%
Right side of
Roadway (§21650-
21664)
4%
Turning & Signals
(§22100-22113)
4%
Bicycle related
(§21200-21212)
3%
Failure to Yield
(§21800-21809)
3%
Pedestrian Related
(§21949-21971)
2%
12.a
Packet Pg. 146 Attachment: a - 2014 Annual Traffic Safety Report (1202 : 2014 Traffic Safety Report)
8 2014 Traffic Safety Report
December 2015
Traffic Safety Education Campaigns
Partnership with the California Office of Traffic Safety
A Selective Enforcement Grant funds a full-time DUI officer position. This
officer is utilized specifically for DUI enforcement in an effort to further reduce the
number of alcohol and drug related driving incidents.
Bicycle Rodeo
The City hosts a hands-on bicycle training class targeting youth teaching
bicycle skills & operations.
Pedestrian Halloween Safety Campaign
The City provides reflective Halloween bags with safety tips to local schools
free of cost.
Impaired Driver Offender Classes
City officers attend and supplement DUI offender courses to provide a unique
positive opportunity to discuss, face to face, the impacts of driving under the
influence.
Every Fifteen Minutes Program
The City participates in a multi department and agency event simulating the
psychological effects of student fatalities as a result of traffic collisions.
Child Car Seat Instruction & Assistance
The City provides child safety seat installation and inspection free of cost.
Channel 20 Public Safety Announcements
Bicycle Safety Posters
City of SLO Partnerships:
SLO County Bicycle Coalition
Safety Education Courses
Elementary School Safety Assemblies
Safety Brown Bag Lunch at Participating Businesses
SLO Rideshare
Safe Routes to School Program
12.a
Packet Pg. 147 Attachment: a - 2014 Annual Traffic Safety Report (1202 : 2014 Traffic Safety Report)
9 2014 Traffic Safety Report
December 2015
2014 High Collision Rate Locations & Recommendations
Pedestrians
2014
Rank Prev. Rank Intersection
2014
Collisions
5 Yr.
Collisions
PH Veh.
Vol
PH Ped.
Vol REV
1 Not Ranked Santa Rosa & Walnut 2 3 2606 13 3007
2 1 Foothill & Santa Rosa 1 3 3907 87 674
3 2 Monterey & Santa Rosa 1 3 2159 128 253
4 Not Ranked Higuera & Nipomo 3 3 1115 138 121
5 3 Broad & Higuera 1 5 1052 469 56
PH = Peak Hour
REV = Relative Exposure Value
The method for evaluating pedestrian collision locations identifies all locations where at least
one pedestrian collision has occurred in 2014 and ranks those locations based on a “relative
exposure value” (REV) for the previous five year pedestrian collis ion history, with three or more
pedestrian related collisions.
12.a
Packet Pg. 148 Attachment: a - 2014 Annual Traffic Safety Report (1202 : 2014 Traffic Safety Report)
10 2014 Traffic Safety Report
December 2015
Pedestrian Location Recommendations
2014
Rank Prev. Year
Rank Intersection 5 Yr.
Collisions
PH Veh.
Vol
PH Ped.
Vol REV
1 Not Ranked Santa Rosa & Walnut 3 2606 13 3007
Pattern: Turning traffic failing to yield to pedestrians.
Recommendation: Intersection under State Jurisdiction. Forward to Caltrans for study &
continue to monitor in 2015.
2 1 Foothill & Santa Rosa 3 3907 87 674
Pattern: Turning traffic failing to yield to pedestrians.
Recommendation: Forward to Caltrans for study. Continue to monitor in 2015.
3 2 Monterey & Santa Rosa 3 2159 128 253
Pattern: Left turning traffic not yielding to pedestrians.
Recommendation: Yield to Pedestrian signs installed in April of 2011. Investigate
Flashing Yellow Arrow and Advanced Pedestrian Phasing options as part of minor signal
upgrade. Continue to monitor in 2015.
4 Not Ranked Higuera & Nipomo 3 1115 138 121
Pattern: Driving under the influence.
Recommendation: Conduct focused DUI enforcement downtown and continue to
monitor in 2015.
5 3 Broad & Higuera 5 1052 469 56
Pattern: Ped vs. Left Turns from Broad to Higuera and Higuera to Broad
Recommendation: Pedestrian warning signs upgraded in 2014, one collision since.
Continue to monitor in 2015.
12.a
Packet Pg. 149 Attachment: a - 2014 Annual Traffic Safety Report (1202 : 2014 Traffic Safety Report)
11 2014 Traffic Safety Report
December 2015
Bicycles
2014
Rank
Prev. Yr
Rank Intersection
2014
Collisions
5 yr
Collisions
PH Veh.
Volume
PHBike
Volume REV
1 unranked Santa Rosa & Walnut 2 6 2606 18 4343
2 unranked Broad & Orcutt 2 4 3276 23 2849
3 6 California & Taft 2 6 1746 19 2757
4 unranked Santa Rosa & Boysen 1 3 2750 20 2063
5 7 101 N/b On/off Ramp & California 2 4 1548 17 1821
6 3 California & Monterey 1 6 1935 40 1451
7 unranked Broad & Santa Barbara / South 1 3 2762 36 1151
8 4 Foothill & Santa Rosa 2 4 3907 71 1101
9 unranked California & Foothill 1 6 1995 88 680
10 unranked Grand & Mill 1 3 722 20 542
11 8 California & Mill 1 4 1031 47 439
12 9 California & Palm 1 3 1000 44 341
13 unranked Higuera & Garden 1 3 875 40 328
PH = Peak Hour
REV = Relative Exposure Value
The method for evaluating for bicycle collision locations identifies all locations where at least
one bicycle collision has occurred in 2014 and ranks those locations based on a “relative
exposure value” (REV) for the previous five year bicycle collision history, with three or more
bicycle related collisions. This method of evaluation is often chosen over pure numbers
because the number of collisions generally increases within proportion to bicycle volumes.
These values are used to identify locations where more collisions are occurring than would be
expected.
12.a
Packet Pg. 150 Attachment: a - 2014 Annual Traffic Safety Report (1202 : 2014 Traffic Safety Report)
12 2014 Traffic Safety Report
December 2015
Bicycle Location Recommendations
2014
Rank Prev. Year
Rank Intersection 5 yr.
Collisions
PH Veh.
Volume
PH. Bike
Volume REV
1 unranked Santa Rosa & Walnut 6 2606 18 4343
Pattern: Cyclists vs. NB Motorists turning Right onto Walnut.
Recommendation: Intersection under state jurisdiction. Green bike lane extensions thru
intersection were installed in July of 2015, monitor as part of 2015 Traffic Safety Report.
2 unranked Broad & Orcutt 4 3276 23 2849
Pattern: No discernible pattern.
Recommendation: Green bike lane extensions thru intersection were installed in August of
2015, Monitor as part of 2015 Traffic Safety Report.
3 6 California & Taft 6 1746 19 2757
Pattern: Cyclists vs. SB motorists Left Turning onto Taft.
Recommendation: Location approved for roundabout control as part of General Plan. Staff
is actively pursuing grant funding and will prepare a CIP request in the upcoming budget.
Cal Poly Housing EIR identified this as an impacted intersection and established a fair share
cost responsibility for the University. Also grant funding for Railroad Safety Trail Extension
thru this location approved, work expected to begin in Spring of 2016.
4 unranked Santa Rosa & Boysen 3 2750 20 2063
Pattern: Cyclists vs. NB Motorists turning Left onto Boysen.
Recommendation: Intersection under state jurisdiction. Forward to Caltrans for study &
continue to monitor in 2015.
5 7 101 N/b On/off Ramp
& California 4 1548 17 1821
Pattern: Cyclists vs. SB Motorists turning Left onto 101 On-Ramp.
Recommendation: Intersection under state jurisdiction. Green bike lane extensions thru
intersection were installed in Summer of 2014, monitor as part of 2015 Traffic Safety
Report.
PH = Peak Hour
REV = Relative Exposure Value
12.a
Packet Pg. 151 Attachment: a - 2014 Annual Traffic Safety Report (1202 : 2014 Traffic Safety Report)
13 2014 Traffic Safety Report
December 2015
Arterial/Arterial Intersections
Rank Intersection Control Collisions Volume Rate*
1 California & Monterey Signal 6 21,052 0.781
2 Grand & Monterey Signal 4 14,312 0.766
3 Marsh & Santa Rosa Signal 5 18,383 0.745
4 Los Osos Valley & Madonna Signal 10 38,376 0.714
5 California & 101 Nb On/Off Ramp Stop 4 15,758 0.695
6 Monterey & Santa Rosa Signal 6 26,656 0.617
7 Chorro & Marsh Signal 3 14,032 0.586
8 Foothill & Santa Rosa Signal 9 50,288 0.490
9 Broad & South / Santa Barbara Signal 6 34,841 0.472
10 California & Foothill Signal 4 23,589 0.465
11 Higuera & Madonna Signal 5 32,600 0.420
12
101 N/B On/Off Ramp & Los Osos
Valley Signal 4 27,350 0.401
13 Broad & Orcutt Signal 5 34,988 0.392
14 Higuera & Prado Signal 3 21,385 0.384
15 Higuera & Tank Farm Signal 4 29,470 0.372
16 Broad & Tank Farm Signal 5 40,333 0.340
17 101 N/B On/Off Ramp & Madonna Signal 3 27,776 0.296
18 101 S/B On/Off Ramp & Madonna Signal 3 28,518 0.288
*Rate = Collision frequency per million vehicles entering the intersection
12.a
Packet Pg. 152 Attachment: a - 2014 Annual Traffic Safety Report (1202 : 2014 Traffic Safety Report)
14 2014 Traffic Safety Report
December 2015
Arterial/Arterial Intersections Recommendations
Rank Intersection Control Collisions Volume Rate*
2 California & Monterey Signal 7 21,052 0.911
Pattern: No discernible pattern.
Recommendation: Continue to monitor in 2015.
2 Grand & Monterey Signal 4 14,312 0.766
Pattern: Permissive EB Left Vs. WB Thru
Recommendation: Evaluate conversion of permissive left turn phasing to protected left turn
phasing and continue to monitor in 2015.
3 Marsh & Santa Rosa Signal 5 18,383 0.745
Pattern: Permissive SB Left Vs. NB Thru
Recommendation: Evaluate conversion of permissive left turn phasing to protected left turn
phasing and continue to monitor in 2015.
4 Los Osos Valley & Madonna Signal 10 38,376 0.714
Pattern: EB & WB rear ends, driver inattention.
Recommendation: Continue to monitor in 2015.
5 California & 101 NB On/Offramp Stop 4 15,758 0.695
Pattern: Cyclists vs. SB Motorists turning Left onto 101 On-Ramp.
Recommendation: Intersection under state jurisdiction. Green bike lane extensions thru
intersection were installed in Summer of 2014, monitor as part of 2015 Traffic Safety Report.
*Rate = Collision frequency per million vehicles entering the intersection
12.a
Packet Pg. 153 Attachment: a - 2014 Annual Traffic Safety Report (1202 : 2014 Traffic Safety Report)
15 2014 Traffic Safety Report
December 2015
Arterial/Collector Intersections
Rank Intersection Control Collisions Volume Rate*
1 California & Mill Signal 3 11,937 0.689
2 Osos & Pismo Signal 3 14,439 0.569
3 Madonna & Oceanaire Signal 4 24,184 0.566
4 Broad & Foothill Signal 3 18,977 0.433
5 Mill & Santa Rosa Signal 3 22,889 0.359
In 2014 there were 5 Arterial/Collector intersection locations that had 3+ collisions
Arterial/Collector Intersections Recommendations
Rank Intersection Control Collisions Volume Rate*
1 California & Mill Signal 3 11,937 0.689
Pattern: Red light violations.
Recommendation: Upgrade 8” signal indications to 12” and continue to monitor in 2015.
2 Osos & Pismo Signal 3 14,439 0.569
Pattern: No discernible pattern.
Recommendation: Continue to monitor in 2015.
3 Madonna & Oceanaire Signal 5 24,184 0.566
Pattern: No discernible pattern.
Recommendation: Continue to monitor in 2015.
4 Broad & Foothill Signal 3 18,977 0.433
Pattern: EB Thru Vs. WB Left right of way violations.
Recommendation: Upgrade 8” signal indications to 12” indications & continue to monitor in
2015.
5 Mill & Santa Rosa Signal 3 22,889 0.359
Pattern: EB & WB Mill Red Light Violations.
Recommendation: Upgrade 8” signal indications to 12” indications & continue to monitor in 2015.
Continue to monitor in 2015.
*Rate = Collision frequency per million vehicles entering the intersection
12.a
Packet Pg. 154 Attachment: a - 2014 Annual Traffic Safety Report (1202 : 2014 Traffic Safety Report)
16 2014 Traffic Safety Report
December 2015
Arterial/Local Intersections
Rank Intersection Control Collisions Volume Rate*
1 Monterey & Osos Signal 5 6,822 2.008
2 Marsh & Morro Signal 4 11,222 0.977
3 California & Taft Stop 6 17,813 0.923
4 Calle Joaquin & Los Osos Valley Signal 10 33,320 0.822
5 Garden & Higuera Stop 3 10,120 0.812
6 Higuera & Osos Signal 3 12,313 0.668
7 Froom Ranch & Los Osos Valley Signal 7 37,440 0.512
8 Santa Rosa & Walnut Signal 6 33,171 0.496
9 Breck & Johnson Stop 3 17,932 0.458
10 Higuera S & Suburban Signal 4 25,792 0.425
11 Olive & Santa Rosa Signal 5 44,039 0.311
12 Auto Park & Los Osos Valley Stop 3 30,968 0.265
*Rate = Collision frequency per million vehicles entering the intersection
12.a
Packet Pg. 155 Attachment: a - 2014 Annual Traffic Safety Report (1202 : 2014 Traffic Safety Report)
17 2014 Traffic Safety Report
December 2015
Arterial/Local Intersections Recommendations
Rank Intersection Control Collisions Volume Rate*
1 Monterey & Osos Signal 5 6,822 2.008
Pattern: Red Light Violations All Directions
Recommendation: Reconstruct signal with mast arms to increase visibility of indications.
Project is funded as part of current CIP, construction is expected in 2016.
2 Marsh & Morro Signal 4 11,222 0.977
Pattern: No discernible pattern.
Recommendation: Continue to monitor in 2015.
3 California & Taft Stop 6 17,813 0.923
Pattern: Broadside Collisions.
Recommendation: Location approved for roundabout control as part of General Plan. Staff is
actively pursuing grant funding and will prepare a CIP request in the upcoming budget as
well. Cal Poly Housing EIR identified this as an impacted intersection and established a fair
share cost responsibility for the University.
4 Calle Joaquin & Los Osos
Valley Signal 10 33,320 0.822
Pattern: Rear End and Broadside Collisions.
Recommendation: Intersection being reconfigured as part of the LOVR Interchange Project,
continue to monitor after construction is complete.
5 Garden & Higuera Stop 3 10,120 0.812
Pattern: Parking Maneuvers
Recommendation: Intersection being reconfigured as part of Garden Street Terraces project.
Continue to monitor after construction is complete.
*Rate = Collision frequency per million vehicles entering the intersection
12.a
Packet Pg. 156 Attachment: a - 2014 Annual Traffic Safety Report (1202 : 2014 Traffic Safety Report)
18 2014 Traffic Safety Report
December 2015
Collector/Collector Intersections
No Locations Ranked Under this Category
Collector/Local Intersections
Rank Intersection Control Collisions Volume Rate*
1 Chorro & Peach Stop 4 6,774 1.618
In 2014 there was a single Collector/Local intersection location that had 3+ collisions
Collector/Local Intersections Recommendations
Rank Intersection Control Collisions Volume Rate*
1 Chorro & Peach Stop 4 6,774 1.618
Pattern: Pattern: EB and WB vs. SB
Recommendation: Lane reconfigurations to Chorro Street near this intersection were completed
in 2015, continue to monitor.
*Rate = Collision frequency per million vehicles entering the intersection
12.a
Packet Pg. 157 Attachment: a - 2014 Annual Traffic Safety Report (1202 : 2014 Traffic Safety Report)
19 2014 Traffic Safety Report
December 2015
Local/Local Intersections
No Locations Ranked Under this Category
12.a
Packet Pg. 158 Attachment: a - 2014 Annual Traffic Safety Report (1202 : 2014 Traffic Safety Report)
20 2014 Traffic Safety Report
December 2015
Arterial Segments
Rank Prev.
Rank Segment Collisions Volume Segment
Length Rate Type Location
1 Not
Ranked
Santa Rosa, 200-
600 Block 8 13390 0.27 6.063 Arterial Oak to Walnut
2 3 Foothill, 1000-1200
Block 12 16527 0.33 6.028 Arterial Santa Rosa to
California
3 1 Higuera, 500-700
Block 6 23991 0.25 2.763 Arterial Nipomo to Garden
4 6 Broad, 2900-3200
Block 7 27108 0.40 1.769 Arterial Sweeny to
Rockview
5 Not
Ranked LOVR, 12000 Block 13 32027 0.82 1.356 Arterial NB 101 on/off
ramps to Froom
*Rate = Collision frequency per million vehicle miles traveled along the segment
12.a
Packet Pg. 159 Attachment: a - 2014 Annual Traffic Safety Report (1202 : 2014 Traffic Safety Report)
21 2014 Traffic Safety Report
December 2015
Arterial Segments Recommendations
Rank Prev.
Rank Segment Collisions Volume Segment
Length Rate Type Location
1 Not
Ranked
Santa Rosa, 200-
600 Block 8 13390 0.27 6.063 Arterial Oak to Walnut
Pattern: Rear end collisions in congestion
Recommendation: Interchange planned for upgrade to address congestion as part of City General plan and regional
transportation plan. Intersection under state jurisdiction, forward finding to CalTrans.
2 3 Foothill, 1000-1200
Block 12 16527 0.33 6.028 Arterial Santa Rosa to
California
Pattern: Drivers entering and exiting driveways, failure to yield right of way.
Recommendation: Work with property management companies to distribute safety fliers for residents of housing
complexes along corridor.
3 1 Higuera, 500-700
Block 6 23991 0.25 2.763 Arterial Nipomo to Garden
Pattern: Parking maneuvers.
Recommendation: Update any parking stalls that do not conform to current City Standards .
4 6 Broad, 2900-3200
Block 7 27108 0.40 1.769 Arterial Sweeny to
Rockview
Pattern: Rear end collisions, attributed to vehicles turning at driveways.
Recommendation: Pursue funding for and implementation of Broad St. Median, Signalized Intersections, and Victoria
Ave. Extension as adopted under the South Broad Street Area Plan. Apply access management practices for new
development projects along corridor.
5 Not
Ranked LOVR, 12000 Block 13 32027 0.82 1.356 Arterial NB 101 on/off
ramps to Froom
Pattern: Rear end collisions. Construction of the LOVR 101 Overpass is a contributing factor.
Recommendation: No recommendation, due to construction activities. Continue to monitor in 2015.
12.a
Packet Pg. 160 Attachment: a - 2014 Annual Traffic Safety Report (1202 : 2014 Traffic Safety Report)
22 2014 Traffic Safety Report
December 2015
Collector Segments
No Locations Ranked Under this Category
12.a
Packet Pg. 161 Attachment: a - 2014 Annual Traffic Safety Report (1202 : 2014 Traffic Safety Report)
Meeting Date: 1/5/2016
FROM: Garret Olson, Fire Chief
Prepared By: Julie Cox, Administrative Analyst
SUBJECT: LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION ACTION UPDATE
RECOMMENDATION
Receive and File the 2014 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Action Update.
DISCUSSION
Background
The 2014 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) is an update to the City of San Luis Obispo’s
2006 LHMP. The LHMP analyzes the community's risk from natural hazards, coordinates
available resources, and implements actions to reduce or eliminate risks. The LHMP is prepared
before a disaster to guide risk reduction activities before an event. The LHMP is a five year plan,
reviewed and amended annually, so as to include opportunities for vulnerability reduction. This
is the first annual report for the LHMP adopted by the City Council on March 18, 2014 and
approved by FEMA on October 7, 2014. The five-year plan period begins with approval of the
plan by FEMA.
The Hazard Mitigation Team (HMT) discussed the extent to which goals, objectives, and actions
from the 2006 LHMP were implemented and whether the mitigation strategies should be revised
or continued in the 2014 LHMP. The HMT agreed to consolidate the 2006 goals from eight goals
(including hazard specific goals) to two comprehensive goals.
In establishing the 2014 LHMP Mitigation Actions, the HMT reviewed the list of mitigation
actions from the 2006 plan. Following this review, the HMT consolidated several mitigation
actions, removed a few that have become irrelevant, and identified several new actions. The
actions have been categorized as either supporting hazard mitigation efforts or disaster
preparedness efforts. While both are important to public safety in preparing for and responding
to natural disasters, the primary focus of the LHMP is to identif y actions that will minimize
threats to public health, safety, and welfare.
It is timely to note, the 2006 and 2014 LHMPs identified storm and flood related events as a risk
to San Luis Obispo. During this reporting period, storm and flood related LHMP actions include
increased staff training on the National Incident Management System (NIMS) and Emergency
Operations Center (EOC) operations; increased community outreach regarding storm and flood
preparation; focused assessment of Corporation Yard operations during heavy storms; tree
maintenance and/or removal in the creeks; and five silt removal projects.
13
Packet Pg. 162
On October 5, 2015 the City HMT convened for the first annual meeting of the 2014 LHMP to
review and discuss mitigation progress and any new concerns that may benefit from mitigation
activities. At the annual meeting, each goal and objective was reviewed to evaluate its: relevance
to the evolving situation in the City of San Luis Obispo, and consistency with changes in State
and Federal policy and relevance to current and expected conditions. In addition, the Risk
Assessment portion of the plan was reviewed and updates were provided on the various
implementation actions.
Public comment received will be documented and stored with the plan for use in the five-year
update.
FISCAL IMPACT
None at this time, the action items in the LHMP would be funded through various City
Departments budget requests.
ALTERNATIVES
Council can direct staff to revise 2014 LHMP Action Update.
Attachments:
a a - 2015 Update Goals and objectives 10.5.15
b b - Hazard Identification and Prioritization
c c - 2015 Update Actions 10.22.15 with positions 2
d Council Reading File - City of SLO - Local Hazard Mitigation Plan March 2014
13
Packet Pg. 163
2014 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
Mitigation goals are guidelines that explain what a community wants to achieve in terms
of hazard and loss prevention. Goal statements are typically long-range, policy-oriented
statements representing community-wide visions. Objectives are statements that detail
how to achieve a community’s goals. Typically, objectives define strategies, or
implementation steps, to attain identified goals. Below are the goals and objectives
established for the 2014 LHMP.
Hazard Mitigation Team will annually review each goal and objective to evaluate its:
Relevance to the evolving situation in the City of San Luis Obispo
Consistency with changes in State and Federal policy
Relevance to current and expected conditions
Goal 1. Cultivate a disaster -resistant community through
implementation of risk reduction measures and increased public
awareness to prepare for, respond to, and recover from natural and
human -caused hazard even ts.
Objective 1.A Ensure that local plans, policies, and programs are consistent with the
hazard information identified in the LHMP.
Objective 1.B. Increase City employee capacity through SIMS and NIMS compliant
training and EOC drills to identify hazards, and assist in emergency preparedness,
response, and recovery.
Objective 1.C Pursue available grant funding to implement hazard mitigation efforts.
Objective 1.D Maintain critical and essential key assets to increase resiliency and
minimize future damage from hazard events.
Objective 1.E Increase public awareness of hazards, emergency response, and
recovery.
Objective 1.F Promote public/private partnerships to increase community resiliency.
Goal 2. Reduce the severity of damage and losses due to natural a nd
human -caused hazards.
Objective 2.A Protect and enhance as practical existing assets, as well as any future
development, from the effects of natural and human-caused hazards.
13.a
Packet Pg. 164 Attachment: a - 2015 Update Goals and objectives 10.5.15 (1179 : LHMP Action Update)
Table 4-1 Hazard Identification and Prioritization Worksheet
Hazard Type Probability
Impact Survey
Rating
Survey
Score
Total
Score Affected
Area
Primary
Impact
Secondar
y Impacts
Earthquakes/Liquefaction
s 2 4 4 4 2.35 7.83 39.83
Wildland Fires 2 3 3 3 2.08 6.93 30.93
Adverse Weather 2 4 2 2 1.53 5.10 27.50
Hazardous Materials 3 1 2 2 1.67 5.57 24.77
Floods 2 2 2 2 1.63 5.43 21.43
Pandemic 1 4 4 4 1.45 4.83 20.83
Landslides 1 1 2 2 1.34 4.47 10.87
Table 4-2 Hazard Prioritization Exercise Legend
Probability Importance 2.0
Secondary
Impacts Importance 0.5
Based on estimated likelihood of
occurrence from historical data Score
Based on estimated secondary impacts to
community at large considering economic
impacts, health impacts, and crop losses
Score
Unlikely (Less than 1% probability in
next 100 years or has a recurrence
interval of greater than every 100
years.)
1
Negligible - no loss of function, downtime,
and/or evacuations 1
Somewhat Likely (Between 1 and 10%
probability in next year or has a
recurrence interval of 11 to 100 years.)
2
Limited - minimal loss of function, downtime,
and/or evacuations 2
Likely (Between 10 and 100%
probability in next year or has a
recurrence interval of 10 years or less.)
3
Moderate - some loss of function, downtime,
and/or evacuations 3
Highly Likely (Near 100% probability in
next year or happens every year.) 4
High - major loss of function, downtime,
and/or evacuations 4
Affected Area Importance 0.8
Survey Score Importance 1.0
Based on size of geographical area of
community affected by hazard Score
Survey Score = (Survey Rating / 3) x 10 where:
Isolated 1
Survey Rating is the average rating of concern
based on a scale of 1 (low concern) to 3 (high
concern) compiled from the survey responses. Small 2
Medium 3
Large 4
Total Score = (Probability x Impact) + Survey Score,
where:
Probability = (Probability Score x Importance)
Primary
Impact Importance 0.7
Impact = (Affected Area + Primary Impact +
Secondary Impacts), where:
Based on percentage of damage to
typical facility in community Score
Affected Area = Affected Area Score x Importance
Negligible - less than 10% damage 1
Primary Impact = Primary Impact Score x
Importance
Limited - between 10% and 25%
damage 2
Secondary Impacts = Secondary Impacts Score x
Importance
13.b
Packet Pg. 165 Attachment: b - Hazard Identification and Prioritization (1179 : LHMP Action Update)
1
Action
# Action Description
Status &
Priority
(A or B)
Hazard
Mitigation or
Disaster
Preparedness
2015 Progress on Action
Comments/Notes/Revision
1.A.1
Regularly review and continue to maintain
consistency between the Safety Element, Municipal
Code, zoning regulations, hazard area maps, and
LHMP implementation strategies.
Valid from
2006 LHMP
B
Hazard
Mitigation
Improved parcel flood outreach,
Supervising Civil Engineer and
Fire Marshal work with Community
Development Director on wildland
urban interface (WUI) design, hillside
design standards
1.B.1
Train all city employees including fire fighters,
police officers, building inspectors, and public works
and utilities staff to levels appropriate for their
hazard mitigation tasks and responsibilities.
Modified
from 2006
LHMP B
Disaster
Preparedness
Established minimum level of
training. National Management
Incident System (NIMS) / Standard
Emergency Management System
(SEMS) training over next year.
1.B.2
Provide training for City staff who apply its building
regulations and planning standards, emphasizing
the lessons learned in locations that have
experienced disasters.
Valid from
2006 LHMP
B
Disaster
Preparedness
Greater understanding of flood
implications at Corp yard
(Supervising Civil Engineer)
1.B.3 Conduct disaster-preparedness exercises for the
types of hazards discussed in this LHMP.
Valid from
2006 LHMP
B
Disaster
Preparedness
Exercises Public Health has
conducted: March 2014: Pan Flu
Tabletop Exercise October 2014:
Public Point of Distribution Exercise
(the two locations exercised were in
Arroyo Grande and Atascadero but
those sites were intended to cover
the whole county, including SLO)
October 2015: First Responder Point
of Distribution Exercise (4 locations:
SLO City Fire, Morro Bay Fire, Paso
Fire and Five Cities Fire in Grover)
Public Works (PW) prep for flood
13.c
Packet Pg. 166 Attachment: c - 2015 Update Actions 10.22.15 with positions 2 (1179 : LHMP Action Update)
2
Action
# Action Description
Status &
Priority
(A or B)
Hazard
Mitigation or
Disaster
Preparedness
2015 Progress on Action
Comments/Notes/Revision
season. Update to the SLO County
Pan Flu plan. The plan will go out for
authenticating signatures this week
or next.
1.B.4
Establish ongoing Disaster Service Worker training
program to include training for City staff to deal with
emergencies as well as contribute to risk reduction
measures.
Modified
from 2006
LHMP B
Disaster
Preparedness
See 1.B.1
1.B.5 Conduct EOC training for CERT members NEW
2014 B
Disaster
Preparedness
None
1.B.6 Incorporate pandemic into CERT training program NEW
2014 B
Disaster
Preparedness
None
1.C.1
Review funding opportunities and establish
centralized internal procedures to coordinate efforts
for securing funds that support risk reduction
measures.
Modified
from 2006
LHMP A
Hazard
Mitigation
Mid-Higuera Bypass
study/Environment Impact Report
(EIR). Public Health (PH)
Department receives pandemic “flu
grant” funding.
1.C.2
Identify hazard mitigation projects eligible for grants
as part of the Capital Improvement Program
planning process.
NEW
2014 B
Hazard
Mitigation
The Mid-Higuera Bypass project has
been identified as a project suitable
for grants.
1.D.1
Assess structural capacity of key assets (including
bridges) and pursue infrastructure improvements as
necessary.
NEW
2014 B
Hazard
Mitigation
Assets are reviewed and prioritized
through the City’s capital
improvement program (CIP) and
funding pursued through the
Financial Plan process.
1.D.2 Continue offering free flu vaccines to City
employees.
NEW
2014 B
Hazard
Mitigation
October 2015 First Responders
Point of Distribution flu vaccines
exercise in SLO city.
1.D.3 Establish policies to maintain health of City NEW Hazard None
13.c
Packet Pg. 167 Attachment: c - 2015 Update Actions 10.22.15 with positions 2 (1179 : LHMP Action Update)
3
Action
# Action Description
Status &
Priority
(A or B)
Hazard
Mitigation or
Disaster
Preparedness
2015 Progress on Action
Comments/Notes/Revision
employees such as discouraging employees from
coming to work when sick and encouraging
employees to develop a plan for taking care of ill
family members.
2014 B Mitigation
1.E.1
Establish a funded program or mechanism to
distribute public information regarding risk reduction
activities and projects at City-sponsored events.
Identify materials available for use at public
education workshops
Coordinate messaging with external agencies
such as the American Red Cross and
Volunteer Organizations Active in Disasters.
Modified
from 2006
LHMP B
Hazard
Mitigation
Fire Prevention Open House: smoke
detectors distributed.PW flood
awareness table at Fire Department
Open House 10/10/15.
PH outreach health related topics,
infection control. Hospital health
outreach. SLO city touchless access
and sanitizer dispensers.
1.E.2
Support the efforts and education of people with
access and functional needs to prepare for
disasters.
Modified
from 2006
LHMP B
Disaster
Preparedness
Carless collection points online.
PH Access and Functional Needs
links online.
1.E.3
Educate the community on individual preparedness
and response to deal with emergencies at times
when professional responders would be
overwhelmed.
Modified
from 2006
LHMP B
Disaster
Preparedness
Community Emergency
Response Team (CERT)
organizational meeting 10/23/15.
SLO City employees SLOWhat
quarterly newsletter articles. Week of
Welcome at Cal Poly education. PH
long term care facility preparedness
seminar.
1.F.1 Offer CERT training to local / small businesses NEW
2014 B
Disaster
Preparedness
Outreach to Downtown Association,
farmers market disaster
preparedness
1.F.2 Offer seminars and/or resources to assist local /
small businesses in planning for continuity of
NEW
2014 B
Disaster
Preparedness
None
13.c
Packet Pg. 168 Attachment: c - 2015 Update Actions 10.22.15 with positions 2 (1179 : LHMP Action Update)
4
Action
# Action Description
Status &
Priority
(A or B)
Hazard
Mitigation or
Disaster
Preparedness
2015 Progress on Action
Comments/Notes/Revision
operations and emergency preparedness.
2.A.1
Continue to enforce local codes, ordinances, and
standards pertaining to safe development and
resiliency to natural and human-caused hazards.
Modified
from 2006
LHMP A
Hazard
Mitigation
Of the 126 Unreinforced Masonry
(URM) buildings in the City 118 have
completed seismic strengthening or
were otherwise brought into
compliance with the ordinance and
six are currently under construction.
Mitigation for the remaining eight
buildings are expected as part of
pending development projects such
as the future Garden Street Terrace
and Chinatown Projects or are
proceeding independently as
required under the City’s ordinance.
Downtown fire sprinkler retrofit (Fire
Marshal)
2.A.2
Continue to implement the Unreinforced Masonry
Hazard Mitigation Plan and strengthen buildings
identified in Levels A and B.
Valid from
2006 LHMP
(almost
complete) B
Hazard
Mitigation
See above 2.A.1
2.A.3
Develop and provide managers of mobile home
parks with information on how to improve the
seismic performance of mobile homes and
awareness of flood risk.
Modified
from 2006
LHMP B
Hazard
Mitigation
Planned outreach (Supervising Civil
Engineer and PD).
2.A.4 Develop and carry out environmentally sensitive
flood reduction programs.
Valid from
2006 LHMP
B
Hazard
Mitigation
Reviewed high priority erosion sites
in the Waterway Management Plan,
cleared two of the three sites,
reviewed City owned property and
property with drainage easements
13.c
Packet Pg. 169 Attachment: c - 2015 Update Actions 10.22.15 with positions 2 (1179 : LHMP Action Update)
5
Action
# Action Description
Status &
Priority
(A or B)
Hazard
Mitigation or
Disaster
Preparedness
2015 Progress on Action
Comments/Notes/Revision
covering private properties and
conducted vegetation
management/removal as needed,
completed five silt removal projects
at key drainage locations. Reviewed
and removed as necessary
undesirable trees from creek system
with tree/landscape contractors.
Natural Resources manages
vegetation management to maintain
the riparian corridors. CIP projects
incorporate revegetation and Natural
Resources participates to minimize
impacts of the projects.
2.A.5
Continue requiring businesses that use, store, or
transport hazardous materials to ensure that
adequate measures are taken to protect public
health and safety.
Modified
from 2006
LHMP A
Hazard
Mitigation
Audit report pending (Fire Marshal).
California Accidental Release
Program (CALARP) compliant. The
California Highway Patrol (CHP)
conducts outreach training upon
request to companies that transport
HAZMAT. CHP conducted several
roadside inspections to ensure
HAZMAT transport vehicles are
compliant with applicable laws within
the city of SLO. HAZMAT terminals
are high on the priority for CHP
Motor Carrier Safety Unit. Specialist
inspect each HAZ MAT terminal
every two years.
13.c
Packet Pg. 170 Attachment: c - 2015 Update Actions 10.22.15 with positions 2 (1179 : LHMP Action Update)
6
Action
# Action Description
Status &
Priority
(A or B)
Hazard
Mitigation or
Disaster
Preparedness
2015 Progress on Action
Comments/Notes/Revision
2.A.6
Coordinate with allied agencies to prepare for
hazardous materials incidents.
Reference City EOP and Training and Exercise
Plan
Maintain participation in County hazardous
materials team
Modified
from 2006
LHMP B
Hazard
Mitigation
Seven City members on Haz Mat
team, monthly meetings.
Chemical Hazard Emergency
Medical Management (CHEMPACK)
exercise in January 2015.
PW coordinated with Fire Dept. and
Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR).
County Hazard Materials Emergency
Response Plan used for city related
information and is currently up to
date.
2.A.7
Maintain City’s web site and other outlets with
information regarding the safe handling and
disposal of household chemicals.
Modified
from 2006
LHMP B
Hazard
Mitigation
Ongoing.
2.A.8
Continue to conduct current fuel management
programs and investigate and apply new and
emerging fuel management techniques.
Valid from
2006 LHMP
A
Hazard
Mitigation
Ongoing. Laguna Lake, Terrace Hill,
Prefumo Canyon fuel reduction. (Fire
Marshal). Citywide creek
maintenance.(GIS) creek
maintenance easement maps.
2.A.9 Require an enhanced fire protection plan in Local
Very High Fire Severity Zones.
Valid from
2006 LHMP
B
Hazard
Mitigation
Ongoing
2.A.10 Enhance partnerships with CalFire and the local
Fire Safe Council for fuel reduction efforts.
NEW
2014 B
Hazard
Mitigation
Ongoing. 2014-2015 grant money
from FireSafe Council $7,000 for fuel
reduction.
2.A.11 Support ongoing urban forest maintenance and tree
trimming programs.
NEW
2014 B
Hazard
Mitigation
PW, Fire, CalFire, City arborist 68
dead trees removed. Private
Property dead tree enforcement.
Continued regular maintenance by
13.c
Packet Pg. 171 Attachment: c - 2015 Update Actions 10.22.15 with positions 2 (1179 : LHMP Action Update)
7
Action
# Action Description
Status &
Priority
(A or B)
Hazard
Mitigation or
Disaster
Preparedness
2015 Progress on Action
Comments/Notes/Revision
city arborist on existing street trees.
City arborist species replacement.
2.A.12 Add gas pipeline mapping to the City’s GIS
resources.
NEW
2014 B
Disaster
Preparedness
CAD map high pressure gas pipeline
added in Spillman. S. Higuera main
mapping forthcoming.
13.c
Packet Pg. 172 Attachment: c - 2015 Update Actions 10.22.15 with positions 2 (1179 : LHMP Action Update)
Page intentionally left
blank.