HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-19-2018 Agenda PacketTuesday, June 19, 2018
5:30 PM REGULAR MEETING Council Hearing Room
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo Page 1
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Heidi Harmon
ROLL CALL: Council Members Aaron Gomez, Andy Pease, Dan Rivoire, Vice
Mayor Carlyn Christianson and Mayor Heidi Harmon
PUBLIC COMMENT ON CLOSED SESSION ITEMS ONLY
CLOSED SESSION
A.CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
Pursuant to Government Code § 54957.6
Agency Negotiators: Monica Irons, Nickole Sutter, Rick Bolanos, Derek
Johnson, Christine Dietrick
Represented Employee
Organizations: San Luis Obispo City Employee’s Association (SLOCEA)
San Luis Obispo Police Officer’s Association (POA)
San Luis Obispo Police Staff Officer’s Association
(SLOPSOA)
International Association of Firefighters Local 3523
Unrepresented Employees: Unrepresented Management Employees
Unrepresented Confidential Employees
ADJOURNED TO THE REGULAR MEETING OF JUNE 19, 2018 TO BEGIN AT 6:00
PM IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER
San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda June 19, 2018 Page 2
6:00 PM REGULAR MEETING Council Chamber
990 Palm Street
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Heidi Harmon
ROLL CALL: Council Members Aaron Gomez, Andy Pease, Dan Rivoire, Vice
Mayor Carlyn Christianson and Mayor Heidi Harmon
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Council Member Aaron Gomez
CITY ATTORNEY REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION
PROCLAMATIONS
PROCLAMATION - JUNETEENTH (HARMON – 5 MINUTES)
Proclaiming every third Saturday of June as "Juneteenth Day," cele brating the ending of the
institution of slavery in the United States of America.
APPOINTMENTS
1.APPOINTMENT TO THE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE,
PERSONNEL BOARD, AND CONSTRUCTION BOARD OF APPEALS (HERMANN
/ GOODWIN – 5 MINUTES)
Recommendation:
In accordance with the recommendation of the Council Subcommittees:
1.Confirm the appointment of Paul Orton to the Active Transportation Committee, to
complete an unexpired term through March 31, 2019; and
2.Confirm the appointment of Judy Groat to the Personnel Board, to complete an
unexpired term through March 31, 2019; and
3.Waive Council Policy and Procedures Section 6.7.2.5 and appoint Denise Martinez to
the Construction Board of Appeals, as the representative with a disability, to complete an
unexpired term through March 31, 2022.
San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda June 19, 2018 Page 3
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
Matters appearing on the Consent Calendar are expected to be no n-controversial and will be
acted upon at one time. 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 pu blic may comment on any and all items on the
Consent Agenda within the three minute time limit.
2. WAIVE READING IN FULL OF ALL RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
(GOODWIN)
Recommendation
Waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances as appropriate.
3. MINUTES OF MAY 22, 2018 AND JUNE 5, 2018 (GOODWIN)
Recommendation
Approve the Minutes of the City Council meetings of May 22, 2018 and June 5, 2018.
4. UPDATE TO THE NACIMIENTO/WHALE ROCK EXCHANGE AGREEMENT
(MATTINGLY / FLOYD / METZ)
Recommendation:
Author ize the Mayor to execute an updated agreement with the County of San Luis Obispo
for the exchange of water from the Nacimiento Project for water from Whale Rock
Reservoir.
San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda June 19, 2018 Page 4
5. RESOLUTIONS SUPPORTING COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
GROUNDWATER BASIN MODIFICATIONS (MATTINGLY / FLOYD / METZ)
Recommendation:
1. Adopt a Resolution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo, California, Supporting San Luis Obispo County - Los Osos Valley Groundwater
Basin Modification” for inclusion with the County of San Luis Obispo Basin Boundary
Modification Request to Department of Water Resources.
2. Adopt a Resolution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo, California, Supporting San Luis Obispo County - Santa Maria Basin
Groundwater Basin Modification” for inclusion with the County of San Luis Obispo
Basin Boundary Modification Request to Department of Water Resources.
6. CENTRE FOR ORGANIZATION EFFECTIVENESS CONTRACT 2018-2019
(IRONS / SUTTER)
Recommendation:
1. Authorize the City Manager to execute a five-year sole source agreement with the Center
for Organization Effectiveness to continue a comprehensive employee and leadership
development program for the City of San Luis Obispo.
2. Approve an amount not to exceed $138,550 in fiscal year 2018-19.
3. Authorize the City Manager to annually approve a contract amount as included in the
annual budget appropriation.
7. LIEBERT CASSIDY WHITMORE CONTRACT, 2018-2019 (IRONS / SUTTER)
Recommendation:
1. Authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with Liebert Cassidy Whitmore
(LCW) to provide specialized employment and labor relations legal services to the City
of San Luis Obispo for a term of five years.
2. Approve an amount not to exceed $84,800 in fiscal year 2018-19.
3. Authorize the City Manager to annually approve a contract amount as included in the
annual budget appropriation.
San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda June 19, 2018 Page 5
8. AWARD CONTRACT FOR PARKING SECURITY GUARD SERVICES,
SPECIFICATION NO. 91625 (GRIGSBY / LEE)
Recommendation:
1. Award a contract to In House Security Service, LLC. as approved by the City Council in
an amount up to $88,000 for the provision of services as detailed in Specification
Number 91625.
2. Approve the use of working capital to fund the additional annual cost of $40,000.
9. CAPITAL FACILITIES FEE PROGRAM (AB 1600) FEE TABLE MODIFICATION
(CODRON / FOWLER)
Recommendation:
Adopt a Resolution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo, California, modifying the capital facilities fee program development impact fee
tables as set forth in Resolution No. 10879 (2018 series).”
10. ROADWAY SEALING AND LAUREL LANE COMPLETE STREETS 2018
PROJECT, SPECIFICATION NO. 91630 (GRIGSBY / NGUYEN / RICE)
Recommendation:
1. As recommended by the Active Transportation Committee, move forward with
construction of parking protected Class IV bike lanes on Laurel Lane in lieu of buffered
Class II bike lanes.
2. Award a contract to VSS International, Inc. in the amount of $2,493,000 for the Roadway
Sealing, and bulb-outs at the intersection of Laurel & Southwood and Laurel & August, and
buffered Class II bike lanes.
3. Approve budget transfers in the amount of $ 2,303,620.15 as outlined in the staff report.
4. Appropriate $793,100 of funding for the project subject to the approval of the 2018-19
Financial Plan Supplement.
San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda June 19, 2018 Page 6
11. A PUBLIC HEARING TO ADD PROPERTIES TO THE MASTER LIST OF
HISTORIC RESOURCES AND TO THE CONTRIBUTING PROPERTIES LIST OF
HISTORIC RESOURCES (CODRON / OETZELL)
Recommendation:
As recommended by the Cultural Heritage Committee, adopt a Resolution entitled, “A
Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California adding the
property located at 1568 Higuera Street to the master list of historic resources as “The Miles
Fitzgerald Home” and adding the property located at 1582 & 1592 Higuera Street and 1601
Grove Street to the contributing properties list of historic resources (HIST -1458-2018)
12. EMERGENCY SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH CALIFORNIA POLYTECHNIC
STATE UNIVERSITY (CAL POLY) (OLSON / BLATTLER)
Recommendation:
Authorize the Mayor to execute an Amendment to the Agreement with California
Polytechnic State University (Cal Poly) in a form subject to the approval of the City
Attorney, approving a three-month extension (July 1, 2018 until September 30, 2018) to the
existing agreement for emergency response services.
13. STATE ADVOCACY SERVICES FOR THE WATER RESOURCE RECOVERY
FACILITY PROJECT – CONTRACT AMENDMENT (MATTINGLY / HIX)
Recommendation:
Amend the existing contract with Balance Public Relations, Inc. and approve $40,000 to
continue advocacy services for the Water Resource Recovery Facility project and other
applicable City projects.
PUBLIC HEARING AND BUSINESS ITEMS
14. PUBLIC HEARING - 2018-19 WATER RATE STRUCTURE AND RATE
ADOPTION (MATTINGLY / FLOYD / METZ – 30 MINUTES)
Recommendation:
1. Receive and file the Comprehensive Water & Wastewater Rate Study, May 2018.
2. Adopt a resolution entitled “A Resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo,
California, Establishing the Water Rate Structure and Water Service Rates for Fiscal
Year 2018-19” provided there is no majority protest against the proposed water rate
structure or water rates.
San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda June 19, 2018 Page 7
15. PUBLIC HEARING - 2018-19 SEWER RATE STRUCTURE AND RATE
ADOPTION (MATTINGLY / HIX / METZ – 30 MINUTES)
Recommendation:
1. Receive and file the Comprehensive Water & Wastewater Rate Study, May 2018.
2. Adopt a resolution entitled “A Resolution of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo,
California, Establishing the Sewer Rate St ructure and Sewer Rates for Fiscal Year 2018-
19” provided there is no majority protest against the sewer rate structure or sewer rates.
16. PUBLIC HEARING - APPROVING THE 2017-19 FINANCIAL PLAN
SUPPLEMENT, ADOPTING THE 2018-19 BUDGET AND AMENDING THE FUND
BALANCE AND RESERVE POLICIES (JOHNSON / STANWYCK / FERREIRA – 90
MINUTES)
Recommendation:
1. Adopt a Resolution entitled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo, California, adopting the appropriations limit for 2018-19” establishing the
City’s appropriation limit for 2018-19 in compliance with Article XIII B of the State
Constitution, Gann Spending Limitation Initiative; and
2. Adopt a Resolution entitled, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo, California, approving the 2017-19 Financial Plan Supplement, adopting the
2018-19 budget, and amending the Fund Balance and Reserve Policies.”
LIAISON REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS (Not to exceed 15 minutes)
Council Members report on conferences or other City activitie s. 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)
ADJOURNMENT
The Regular City Council Meeting for Tuesday, July 3, 2018 has been cancelled. The next
Rescheduled Regular City Council Meeting will be held Tuesday, July 10, 2018 at 6:00 p.m. in
the Council Chamber, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California.
San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda June 19, 2018 Page 8
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 th e
City Clerk’s Office located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California during normal
business hours, and on the City’s website www.slocity.org. Persons with questions concerning
any agenda item may call the Cit y Clerk’s Office at (805) 781-7100.
Meeting Date: 6/19/2018
FROM: Greg Hermann, Interim Deputy City Manager
Prepared By: Teresa Purrington, City Clerk
Heather Goodwin, Deputy City Clerk
SUBJECT: APPOINTMENT TO THE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE,
PERSONNEL BOARD AND CONSTRUCTION BOARD OF APPEALS
RECOMMENDATION
In accordance with the recommendation of the Council Subcommittee s:
1. Confirm the appointment of Paul Orton to the Active Transportation Committee, to complete
an unexpired term through March 31, 2019; and
2. Confirm the appointment of Judy Groat to the Personnel Board, to complete an unexpired
term through March 31, 2019; and
3. Waive Council Policy and Procedures Section 6.7.2.5 and appoint Denise Martinez to the
Construction Board of Appeals, as the representative with a disability, to complete an
unexpired term through March 31, 2022.
DISCUSSION
Active Transportation Committee (Council Liaison Subcommittee Members Pease and
Rivoire)
Due to the resignation of Garrett Otto, effective May 16, 2018, an unscheduled vacancy occurred
on the Active Transportation Committee. Mr. Otto’s term would have expired on March 31,
2019.
The Council Liaison Subcommittee recommends the appointment of Paul Orton, effective June
19, 2018, to a term expiring March 31, 2019.
Personnel Board (Council Liaison Subcommittee Members Harmon and Gomez)
Due to the resignation of Frank Guyton, effective April 10, 2018, an unscheduled vacancy
occurred on the Personnel Board. Mr. Guyton’s term would have expired on March 31, 2019.
The Council Liaison Subcommittee recommends the appointment of Judy Groat, effective June
19, 2018, to a term expiring March 31, 2019.
Packet Pg. 9
Item 1
Construction Board of Appeals (Council Liaison Subcommittee Members Pease and
Gomez)
The Co nstruction Board of Appeals has two designated positions for representatives with
physical disabilities. One of these positions has been vacant since January 2017 and the other
since March 2018. The Council Liaison Subcommittee recommends the appointment of Denise
Martinez, effective June 19, 2018, to a term expiring March 31, 20 22.
Council Policies and Procedures Section 6.7.2.5 states that , as a general policy, an applicant shall
not be appointed to serve on more than one advisory body, except that a member may also serve
on one technical or special purpose committee. Denise Martinez has served on the Construction
Board of Appeals, as the representative with disabilities, since October 2014. During the annual
Advisory Body recruitment process, Ms. Martinez was unable to reapply, therefore her term
expired on March 31, 2018. It is noteworthy to mention that Ms. Martinez is currently serving
on the Mass Transportation Committee, as the representative with disabilities, and has since
October 2014. The Council Liaison Subcommittee request that Council consider waiving its
policy related to concurrent terms on Advisory Bodies. Ms. Martinez has expressed a
willingness and desire to serve on both advisory bodies.
RECRUITMENT
The following Advisory Bodies have vacancies and interested individuals are encouraged to
apply:
1.Citizens’ Revenue Enhancement Oversight Commission (1)
2.Construction Board of Appeals (1) – Representative with Disability
3.Jack House Committee (1) – SLO County Historical Society Representative
4.Mass Transportation Committee (2) – Alternate Representative and Cal Poly Student
Representative designated by Associated Students, Inc. (ASI)
CONCURRENCES
The Council Liaison subcommittees concur with the recommendations.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The California Environmental Quality Act does not apply to the recommended actions in this
report.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no additional fiscal impact associated with the appointments to these Advisory Bodies.
AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW IN THE COUNCIL OFFICE
All applications are available in the City Council reading file and for public review in the City
Clerk’s office.
Packet Pg. 10
Item 1
Tuesday, May 22, 2018
Special Meeting of the City Council
CALL TO ORDER
A Special Meeting of the San Luis Obispo City Council was called to order on Tuesday, May 22,
2018 at 8:15 a.m. in the Conference Room located at the Holiday Inn Express, 1800 Monterey
Street, San Luis Obispo, California, by Mayor Harmon.
ROLL CALL
Council Members
Present: Council Members Aaron Gomez, Andy Pease, Dan Rivoire, Vice Mayor Carlyn
Christianson, and Mayor Heidi Harmon.
Council Members
Absent: None
City Staff
Present: Derek Johnson, City Manager; Christine Dietrick, City Attorney; Deanna
Cantrell, Police Chief, Michael Codron, Community Development Director,
Daryll Grigsby, Public Works Director, Greg Hermann, Interim Deputy City
Manager, Monica Irons, Human Resources Director, Carrie Mattingly, Utilities
Director, Garrett Olson, Fire Chief, Shelly Stanwyck, Parks and Recreation
Director and Teresa Purrington, City Clerk; were present
Facilitator: Lynne Biddinger
PUBLIC COMMENT ONLY ON ITEMS ON THE AGENDA
None
---End of Public Comment ---
1.Welcome
Mayor Heidi Harmon and Derek Johnson, City Manager presented why are we here and
what we want to accomplish.
Packet Pg. 11
Item 3
San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of May 22, 2018 Page 2
2.Review of 2017 Council Retreat
Each Council Member provide their Top 3 Priorities, Achievements/Successes and What
Still needs work.
Priorities
•Deal with goals in a bigger long-
range way
•Housing
•Transportation
•Climate change
•Fiscal responsibility
•Sustainability
•Civility
•Council’s progress on major goals
o Have smaller “wins that the
community can grab onto and get
excited about
•CIP building conversation (things
community says they want – Bob
Jones/homelessness etc.)
•Community choice energy
•Addressing lack of diversity (city
staff & community) people feel
welcome
•Create more affordability (housing)
•Meeting lengths (put complex items
first)
•Making sure important things are
being heard earlier in the meeting
•Deal with fiscal issues & still being
competitive to recruit high level
teams
•Economic inequality
•Ways for (to make) people to feel
heard & mitigate “us & them” as
much as possible
Achievements/Successes
•Civil discourse & civil
engagement (hearing from more
people & more kinds of people)
•Focus on fewer goals but long
range in nature – housing,
transportation & climate
•Plastics policy
•Interaction
Council/staff/community
•Work project
•Proud stepping up to challenge
•Unwavering in fiscal
responsibility
•Defeating B-17
•Cannabis legislation
•Open space
•Transition of City Manger
•Civility
•Climate Action
•Mending relationships between
campus & community
•Housing plans (Avila Ranch and San
Luis Ranch) more diverse housing
•Engagement in master plan
What still needs work?
•More protected bike parking at city hall
•Strategic plan
•Meeting efficiency & process improvement
•Coordination of workload (divide & conquer)
•Ways to st ep up to move like a well-oiled machine
•Support and training
•Email coordination
•Communication on all levels
•Communicating what we do & telling the story (less municipal & more human)Packet Pg. 12
Item 3
San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of May 22, 2018 Page 3
3.Working Together Successfully
Areas where things can have better coordination or process improvement:
•Coordination of Council calendars
•Council Correspondence process
•Length of staff reports, and content is good but continue to use Council Reading file for
attachments
4.The Path Ahead
Council provided what they think are the organization and community Strengths,
Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats.
OUR STRENGTHS
•Intellectual capital
•Water resources
•Natural beauty
•Strong community bonds
•Crime down
•Green belt
•Community partnerships
•Shared vision of Council
•Committed staff
•Great city manager & legacy
•Strong financially
•Ambitious
•We get a lot of things right
•Desirable city and downtown
•History of entrepreneurial spirit
•Arts and culture
•Culture of integrity
•Cal Poly/Cuesta/Schools
OUR WEAKNESSES/CHALLENGES
•Affordability
•Cal Poly
•Toxic Engagement/Selfishness
•Distractions (organizationally)
•Council is cohesive
(strength/weakness)
•Cars/car storage
•Lack of diversity
•Elitism/wealth
•Community change/loss
•Public Transportation
•Accurate journalism – information
management
OUR OPPORTUNITIES
•Making big leaps to be innovative
•Close of Diablo Canyon
•Regionalism
•Succession planning
•Lay new norms for civility
•U-40 group and other
organizations that are engaging
younger people
•Cal Poly Master Plan
•Good governance in revenues
•Community Choice Energy
Packet Pg. 13
Item 3
San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of May 22, 2018 Page 4
OUR THREATS
•Diablo canyon
•Unmitigated Cal Poly growth
•Technology & Entrepreneur
Losses
•Lack of Housing
•Climate change & natural disaster
•Tax fairness & accountability act
•Repeal of SB1
•Possible Prop 13 reform
•Divisiveness “us” & “them”
•Election every 2 years & overturn
of Council
5.Strategic Planning and Major City Goals –
How do we respond to community request when priorities and resources have already been
established?
•Lay out a clear timeline for priorities.
•Important to set realistic expectations.
•Not encourage people to come and ask for things during public comment.
•We have a lot of ambitious workplans and can’t add to the list without compromising
other things getting done.
•Distraction is one the of the worst things to getting stuff done.
•Use the parking lot concept (I hear this is important to you but now is not the time.)
•Let Council know those that don’t have a huge impact.
How do we manage expectation in the 2017-2019 Financial Plan and fiscal constrained
environment?
•Educate the community
•Lead with what the financial position of the city is.
•Temper expectation of what they want. Everyone only gets one dot. Get feedback and
gauge
•Listening session and give responses where those things may fit in.
•Prioritize existing projects instead of coming up with new initiatives.
•Prioritization of funding the future and Parks and Recreation Element.
6.Summing It Up – Action Items and Next Steps. (11:45 am – 12:00 pm)
•Priorities are on track
•Figure out ways to celebrate wins, storytelling, and communications.
•Look at public engagement and outreach
•Council Memo process working well.
•Fiscal Year 19-21 Financial Plan education on what we are doing and projects we are
working on today.
Packet Pg. 14
Item 3
San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of May 22, 2018 Page 5
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 12:02 p.m. The next Regular City Council Meeting is scheduled
for Tuesday, June 5, 2018 at 4:00 p.m., in the Council Chamber, 990 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo, California.
__________________________
Teresa Purrington
City Clerk
APPROVED BY COUNCIL: XX/XX/2018
Packet Pg. 15
Item 3
San Luis Obispo Page 1
Tuesday, June 5, 2018
Regular Meeting of the City Council
CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo City Council was called to order on Tuesday, June 5,
2018 at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo,
California, by Mayor Harmon.
ROLL CALL
Council Members
Present: Council Members Aaron Gomez, Andy Pease, Dan Rivoire, Vice Mayor Carlyn
Christianson, and Mayor Heidi Harmon.
Council Members
Absent: None
City Staff
Present: Derek Johnson, City Manager; Christine Dietrick, City Attorney; and Teresa
Purrington, City Clerk; were present at Roll Call. Other staff members presented
reports or responded to questions as indicated in the minutes.
PUBLIC COMMENT FOR AGENDA ITEMS ONLY
None.
---End of Public Co mment---
PUBLIC HEARING AND BUSINESS ITEMS
1.NOVEMBER 6, 2018 GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION
Greg Hermann, Interim Deputy City Manager and Teresa Purrington, City Clerk provided
an in-depth staff report and responded to Council questions.
Public Comments:
None
---End of Public Comment ---
Packet Pg. 16
Item 3
San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of June 5, 2018 Page 2
ACTION: MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER RIVOIRE, SECOND BY
COUNCIL MEMBER PEASE, CARRIED 5-0 to:
1.Adopt a Resolution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo, California, calling for the ho lding of a General Municipal Election to be held on
Tuesday, November 6, 2018, for the election of certain Officers as required by the
provisions of the Charter, adopting regulations for Candidate Statements, for the
submission to the voters of a question whether to establish a Cannabis Business Tax and
requesting the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Luis Obispo to consolidate a
General Municipal Election with the Statewide General Election to be held on
November 6, 2018, pursuant to § 10403 of the Elections Code;” with the following
revised Ballot question submitted at the meeting:
“Shall the measure to maintain and improve essential City services, including without
limitation: police/fire services; senior, youth and park services; programs to r etain/attract
local jobs; addressing homelessness; and other general revenue purposes; by establishing
a cannabis business tax up to 10% of gross receipts for retail and businesses and up to
$10.00 per canopy square foot for cultivation, raising approximat ely $1,500,000
annually, until ended by voters, with all funds used locally, be adopted.”
2.Adopt two resolutions entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo, California, setting priorities for filing a written argument regarding a City
measure and directing the City Attorney to prepare an impartial analysis,” and “A
Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, providing for
the filing of rebuttal arguments for City measures submitted at municipa l elections”
3.Confirm the setting of a Special City Council Meeting on Monday, December 3, 2018 at
three o’clock to adopt a Resolution certifying the results of the election and to
administer oaths of office to the newly elected Mayor and Council Member s; and
4.Direct staff to prepare information about the proposed Cannabis Business Tax as
outlined in this report as needed.
5.Appointing Council Member Rivoire and Council Member Pease to write the primary
argument and Council Member Rivoire and Mayor Harmon to write the rebuttal
argument.
2.BOND DOCUMENTS APPROVING THE SALE OF THE WATER REVENUE
REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 2018
Brigitte Elke, Interim Finance Director provided an in-depth staff report and responded to
Council questions.
Public Comments:
None
Packet Pg. 17
Item 3
San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of June 5, 2018 Page 3
---End of Public Comment ---
ACTION: MOTION BY VICE MAYOR CHRISTIANSON, SECOND BY
COUNCIL MEMBER GOMEZ, CARRIED 5-0 to adopt a Resolution entitled, “A
Resolution of the City Council o f the City of San Luis Obispo, California authorizing the
issuance, sale and delivery of City of San Luis Obispo, California water revenue refunding
bonds; the execution and delivery of an indenture, a bond purchase agreement, a continuing
disclosure certificate; the preparation and distribution of a preliminary a nd a final official
statement relating to the aforesaid bonds; and certain other actions in connection with such
transactions.”
RECESSED AT 4:23 P.M. TO THE REGULAR MEETING OF TUESDAY JUNE 5, 2018
TO BEGIN AT 6:00 P.M.
Packet Pg. 18
Item 3
San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of June 5, 2018 Page 4
C ALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo City Council was called to order on Tuesday, June 5,
2018 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber, located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo,
California, by Mayor Harmon.
ROLL CALL
Council Members
Present: Council Members Aaron Gomez, Andy Pease, Dan Rivoire, Vice Mayor Carlyn
Christianson, and Mayor Heidi Harmon.
Council Members
Absent: None
City Staff
Present: Derek Johnson, City Manager; Christine Dietrick, City Attorney; and Teresa
Purrington, City Clerk; were present at Roll Ca ll. Other staff members presented
reports or responded to questions as indicated in the minutes.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Council Member Andy Pease led the Pledge of Allegiance.
PRESENTATIONS
3.PROCLAMATION - NET ZERO ENERGY DAY
Mayor Harmon present ed a Proclamation to Bob Hill, Natural Resources Manager,
representing the City of San Luis Obispo, proclaiming June 21, 2018 as Net Zero Energy
Day.
4.MAYOR'S AWARDS FOR COMMUNITY SERVICE
Mayor Harmon present ed the Mayor’s award for community service to San Luis Obispo
High School Students for completing at least eighty hours of community service. And
invited Colleen Martin, San Luis Obispo High School College and Career Center Specialist,
to make a presentation regarding the Mayor’s award to San Luis Obispo High School
Students for their community service.
PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
Keith Gurney
---End of Public Comment ---
Packet Pg. 19
Item 3
San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of June 5, 2018 Page 5
CONSENT AGENDA
ACTION: MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER RIVOIRE, SECOND BY VICE MAYOR
CHRISTIANSON, CARRIED 5-0 to approve Consent Calendar Items 5 thru 18.
5.WAIVE READING IN FULL OF ALL RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
CARRIED 5-0, to waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances as appropriate.
6.MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS OF MAY 15, 2018
CARRIED 5-0, to adopt the minutes of May 15, 2018 with the edits presented at the
meeting.
7.RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COLLECTION OF DELINQUENT CODE
ENFORCEMENT FINES
CARRIED 5 – 0 to adopt a Resolution entitled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the
City of San Luis Obispo, California, authorizing the San Luis Obispo County Auditor to
assess amounts due on delinquent administrative fines as special assessments against the
properties pursuant to California Government Code sections 38773.1(a), 38773.5, and
53069.4(a).” including the update Exhibit A provided prior to the meeting.
8.COLLECTION OF DELINQUENT SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND
DISPOSAL ACCOUNTS
CARRIED 5 – 0 to adopt a Resolution entitled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the
City of San Luis Obispo, California, authorizing the San Luis Obispo County Assessor to
assess amounts due on delinquent solid waste collection and disposal accounts as liens
against the properties pursuant to California Government code section 25828, et seq.”
9.MODIFICATION OF CORPORATION YARD WELL CLOSURE TIMELINE
CARRIED 5 – 0 to:
1.Adopt a Resolution entitled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo, California, amending the City’s Permit Fee and User Regulations for the use of
the Corporation Yard non-potable well.”
2.Authorize the City Manager to extend public access to the corporation yard well until
July 1, 2019, if continued progress towards an alternative water source by San Luis
Obispo County can be demonstrated, at an additional fee of $679.50.
10.REVIEW OF THE PUBLIC ART DESIGNS AND LOCATIONS PROPOSED FOR
THE 2018 UTILITY BOX ART PROJECT TO PAINT CITY-OWNED UTILITY
BOXES
CARRIED 5 – 0 to approve the proposed artwork designs and traffic signal box locations
for the 2018 Utility Box Art project .
Packet Pg. 20
Item 3
San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of June 5, 2018 Page 6
11.RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY’S COLLECTION OF FIRE AND
LIFE SAFETY INSPECTION FEES
CARRIED 5 – 0 to adopt a resolution entitled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City
of San Luis Obispo, California, authorizing the San Luis Obispo Cou nty Auditor to collect
fees for 2018-19 Fire and Life Safety Inspections of multi-dwelling properties containing
three or more dwelling units on the secured property tax roll pursuant to California
Government Code section 54988, et seq.”
12.LOS OSOS VALLEY ROAD / U.S. 101 INTERCHANGE LANDSCAPING,
SPECIFICATION NO. 91435
CARRIED 5 – 0 to:
1.Approve the project plans and specifications for the Los Osos Valley Road / U.S. 101
Interchange Landscaping Project, Specification Number 91435; and
2.Authorize staff to advertise for bids; and
3.Authorize the City Manager to award the construction contract if the lowest responsible
bid is within the Engineer’s Estimate of $400,000.
13.ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 1.24
(ADMINISTRATIVE CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES) OF TITLE 1 TO
THE SAN LUIS OBISPO MUNICIPAL CODE
CARRIED 5 – 0 to adopt Ordinance No. 1648 (2018 Series) entitled, “An Ordinance of the
City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, amending Chapter 1.24
(Administrative Code Enforceme nt Procedures) of Title 1 to the San Luis Obispo Municipal
Code,” amending late payment fee assessments, adding clarification concerning repeat
violations over multiple properties, and recording notice of violations on property titles.
14.SEWER-LINING 2016, SPECIFICATION NO. 91421
CARRIED 5 – 0 to:
1.Approve the Plans and Specifications for Sewer Lining 2016, Specification No. 91421; and
2.Authorize staff to advertise for bids and authorize the City Manager to award the
construction contract if the lowest responsible bid is within the Public Disclosed Funding
Amount of $606,500.
15.FIRE MUTUAL AID REIMBURSEMENT RESOLUTION AMENDMENT
CARRIED 5 – 0 to adopt a resolution entitled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City
of San Luis Obispo, California, identifying the terms and conditions for Fire Department
response away from their official duty station and assigned to an emergency incident.”
Packet Pg. 21
Item 3
San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of June 5, 2018 Page 7
16.POLICE PATROL VEHICLE REPLACEMENTS
CARRIED 5 – 0 to:
1.Approve the replacement of one Police Patro l Utility vehicle that was damaged beyond
repair under project specification no. 91671.
2.Appropriate $50,000 from the Fleet Contingency Fund for replacement of the vehicle in
recommendation No. 1.
3.Authorize the Finance Director to transfer $4,000 from project specification no. 90478 to
specification no. 91590 and $4,000 from project specification no. 91472 to specification
no. 91591; and
4.Authorize the Finance Director to execute a purchase order to Perry Ford of San Luis
Obispo in the amount of $154,449.93 for the purchase of three 2018 Ford Utility Police
Interceptors, including third party Police equipment installation by Emergency Vehicle
Specialists of San Luis Obispo; and
5.Authorize the surplus designation of Fleet Asset No. 1307, 1308, and 1511 by sale,
auction, trade-in or other method in accordance with the City’s policies and procedures
as prescribed in the Financial Management Manual Section 405 -L and 480.
17.UTILITY BILLING DEPOSITS
CARRIED 5 – 0 to adopt a Resolution entitled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the
City of San Luis Obispo, California rescinding and replacing Resolution No. 7080 (1992
series) to establish a reconnection fee and refundable deposit requirements.”
18.ADOPT A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE EXISTING PLEDGE TO FOLLOW
BEST PRACTICES OF CIVILITY AND CIVIL DISCOURSE
CARRIED 5 – 0 to Adopt a Resolution entitled, A Resolution of the City Council of the
City of San Luis Obispo, California, amending the existing pledge to follow best practices
of civility and civil discourse in all of its meetings.”
Public Comments
Charlene Rosales, San Luis Obispo Chamber of Commerce
Sharon Whitney, League of Women Voters
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS AND BUSINESS ITEMS
19.2018-19 SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET
City Manager Derek Johnson, Parks and Recreation Director Shelly Stanwyck, Interim
Finance Director Brigitte Elke, and Budget Manager Alex Ferreira, in-depth staff report and
responded to Council questions.
Packet Pg. 22
Item 3
San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of June 5, 2018 Page 8
Public Comments:
Gene Nelson, Californians for Green Nuclear Power, Inc.
Char lene Rosales, San Luis Obispo Chamber of Commerce
Zach Hickman
Emily Garner
Jessica Gallagher
Steve Delmartini
---End of Public Comment ---
ACTION: By consensus directed staff to bring back information regarding what impact
adding $20,000 more to the street lighting budget would have on other projects.
COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS AND LIAISON REPORTS
Council member Rivoire update the council that he will not be stepping down as Liaison the San
Luis Council of Governments.
Council member Pease indicated she participated on the panel for the “For Our Lives” Town
Hall meeting.
Council member Gomez indicated be attended the monthly SLO Downtown Plastics Group
meeting.
Mayor Harmon indicated that San Luis Coastal voted on a climate change initiative she has been
working on with students from Cal Poly. She indicated she attended the “Take Back the Night”
meeting at Cal Poly.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 9:00 p.m. The next Regular City Council Meeting is scheduled
for Tuesday, June 19, 2018 at 5:30 p.m., in the Council Chamber, 990 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo, California.
__________________________
Teresa Purrington
City Clerk
APPROVED BY COUNCIL: XX/XX/2018
Packet Pg. 23
Item 3
Page intentionally left
blank.
Packet Pg. 24
Item 3
Meeting Date: 6/19/2018
FROM: Carrie Mattingly, Utilities Director
Prepared By: Aaron Floyd, Deputy Director - Water
Jennifer Metz, Utilities Projects Manager
SUBJECT: UPDATE TO THE NACIMIENTO/WHALE ROCK EXCHANGE
AGREEMENT
RECOMMENDATION
Authorize the Mayor to execute an updated agreement with the County of San Luis Obispo for
the exchange of water from the Nacimiento Project for water from Whale Rock Reservoir.
DISCUSSION
Background
In September 2006, t he City entered into an Exchange Agreement with the County of San Luis
Obispo (County) to provide an additional water supply for the town of Cayucos. The County
serves Cayucos through County Service Area 10 (CSA 10) through the exchange of water from
the Nacimiento Project for an equivalent amount from the City’s Whale Rock Reservoir water
supply (see Attachment A). The Exchange Agreement eliminated the need to construct a pipeline
from the Nacimiento Project to Cayucos.
In October 2006, the San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
(District) and the County entered into a Nacimiento Project Water Delivery Entitlement
Contract. Under the contract, the County, on behalf of CSA 10, had an entitlement to 25 acre-feet
per year of Nacimiento Project water. The Nacimiento Project Environmental Impact Report
(EIR), certified in 2004, included potential deliveries of up to 160 acre -feet per year to portions
of Cayucos which fall within the boundary of CSA 10.
To date, the County has not drawn from the supply from Whale Rock Reservoir as part of the
Exchange Agreement as the three water purveyors currently serving Cayucos have an entitlement
of 600-acre feet per year from Whale Rock Reservoir from an agreement executed prior to the
construction of the dam in 1958.
Updated Agreement
In April 2016, the District entered into amended
agreements with both the City and the County related to
the full allocation of reserve water from Nacimiento
Reservoir. This increased the City entitlement in the
Nacimiento Project to 5,482 acre-feet annually and the
County entitlement from 25 acre-feet per year to 40 acre-
feet per year. At that time, the District also entered into a
new delivery entitlement contract with Bella Vista MHP,
LLC (BVMHP) under which BVMHP has an entitlement
Packet Pg. 25
Item 4
to 10 acre-feet per year of Nacimiento Project water, described in the agreement included as
Attachment B.
Following the full allocation of Nacimiento Reservoir, City and County staff recognized the need
to update the Exchange Agreement to align with the entitlements in the provisions of the ful l
allocation of Nacimiento. The updated agreement reduces the amount of water that could
potentially be delivered to the County from 160 acre-feet to 50-acre feet per year, coinciding
with the total County and BVMHP entitlement s. The 2018 updated Exchange Agreement is
provided in Attachment C. Other key terms of the agreement remain unchanged, including:
• The updated Exchange Agreement continues to provide a “1 to 1” exchange of water
from Nacimiento Reservoir for water from Whale Rock Reservoir.
• County and BVMHP will be responsible for all costs associated with the delivery of the
water from Nacimiento Reservoir (capital, operations, and maintenance costs) to the
City’s Water Treatment Plant.
• The City will be responsible for delivering water to the Cayuco s water treatment plant
from the existing point of connection on the Whale Rock pipeline.
The updated Exchange Agreement facilitates a successful partnership between the City and
County to meet regional water needs and minimizing cost and potential enviro nmental issues.
CONCURRENCES
City staff from the Utilities Department and the City Attorney’s office has worked with County
Public Works staff on the updated exchange agreement.
FISCAL IMPACT
There are no fiscal impacts associated with the update to the Nacimiento/Whale Rock Exchange
Agreement.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Nacimiento Project EIR was certified by the District on January 6, 2004. The EIR identified
the Nacimiento/Whale Rock exchange of water as an environmentally superior option to building
a pipeline to Cayucos. The City approved a resolution adopting an Addendum to the Final
Nacimiento Project EIR and authorizing contract amendment No. 3 to the Nacimiento Project
water delivery entitlement reflecting an additional allocation of water t o the City on March 15,
2016. The County approved Addendum No. 3 to the Nacimiento Project EIR on April 19, 2016
to align with the entitlements associated with the full allocation of Nacimiento.
Packet Pg. 26
Item 4
ALTERNATIVES
1. Not Approve the Updated Agreement. Council may elect to not enter into this agreement
at this time. Staff does not recommend this alternative as the updated agreement proposes to
limit the exchange to 50-acre feet per year in alignment with Nacimiento Project
entitlements.
2. Amend the Proposed Agreement. Council members may direct staff with changes and
suggestions to the proposed agreement. At this time, the agreement, as drafted, was
negotiated by staff and reviewed by the City Attorney’s office and County Counsel. If any
changes are desired by the Council, staff will work with County staff to obtain Board
approval before the agreement is finalized.
Attachments:
a - 2006 Water Exchange Agreement
b - Nacimiento Project Water Delivery Entitlement Contract - Third Amendment (Full
Allocation)
c - 2018 Agreement for Exchange of Water between City of SLO and County of SLO
(Service Area 10)
Packet Pg. 27
Item 4
Packet Pg. 28Item 4
Packet Pg. 29Item 4
Packet Pg. 30Item 4
Packet Pg. 31Item 4
Packet Pg. 32Item 4
Packet Pg. 33Item 4
Packet Pg. 34Item 4
Packet Pg. 35Item 4
Packet Pg. 36Item 4
Packet Pg. 37Item 4
THIRD AMENDMENT (FULL ALLOCATION)
TO NACIMIENTO PROJECT
WATER DELIVERY ENTITLEMENT CONTRACT
This Third Amendment (Full Allocation) to the Nacimiento Project Water Delivery
Entitlement Contract (“Amendment”) is entered into by and between the San Luis Obispo
County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, a Flood Control and Water Conservation
District duly established and existing under the San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and
Water Conservation District Act, Act 7205 of the Uncodified Acts of the California Water Code
(the “District”), and the City of San Luis Obispo (the “Participant”).
R E C I T A L S
WHEREAS, the Participant has contracted with the District pursuant to that certain
Nacimiento Project Water Delivery Entitlement Contract, effective August 17, 2004, and as
subsequently amended by the Memorandum of Understanding dated May 24, 2005 (First
Amendment to Nacimiento Project Water Delivery Entitlement Contract) and as subsequently
amended by the Second Amendment to Nacimiento Project Water Delivery Entitlement Contract
dated August 28, 2007 (collectively, the “Contract”) for an annual Delivery Entitlement to
Nacimiento Project Water; and
WHEREAS, the Contract is a Like-Contract that is substantially identical to the
Nacimiento Project Water Delivery Entitlement Contracts between the District and the Other
Participants; and
WHEREAS, Article 29, subdivision (A) of the Contract contains a list of priorities for
the District’s use of its Reserve Water, giving fourth priority to “adding to and supplementing the
Delivery Entitlements for the Participant and/or the Other Delivery Entitlements for the Other
Participants who are Initial Participants as provided for by Article 6(D)” and giving fifth priority
to providing a water supply to “additional and New Participants [as defined in Article 29,
subdivision (C) of the Contract] who were not Initial Participants;” and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Article 6, subdivision (D) and Article 29, subdivision (B) of the
Contract, the Participant has the right to acquire additional Delivery Entitlement from the District
by entering into an amendment to the Contract with the District subject to certain requirements,
including, without limitation, the requirement that the Participant pays the District a Purchase of
Reserve Water Delivery Entitlement and Reserved Capacity Fee which shall be applied as a
credit to the obligations of the Participant and the Other Participants based on their respective
Unit Percentage Share; and
WHEREAS, the Participant and the Other Participants (i.e. All Participants) have elected
to exercise their rights under Article 6, subdivision (D) and Article 29, subdivision (B) of the
Packet Pg. 38
Item 4
Third Amendment to Nacimiento Project Page 2
Water Delivery Entitlement Contract
Contract and each purchase a portion of the currently unsubscribed Reserve Water (6,095 acre-
feet) in accordance with their Delivery Entitlement Shares minus the combined entitlement of
two New Participants, namely SMR Mutual Water Company (80 acre feet per year) and Bella
Vista MHP, LLC (10 acre feet per year), such that the Total Delivery Entitlement Obligation
shall equal 15,750 acre feet per year and the total amount of Reserve Water shall equal 0.0 acre
feet per year; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Article 17, subdivision (B)(5) of the Contract, when there is no
longer any Reserve Water, the District will no longer have any obligation to apply any portion of
the ad valorem taxes allocated to the Nacimiento Water Fund of the District to the Reserved
Capacity Construction Cost Component; and
WHEREAS, given that the Participant and the Other Participants are simultaneously
purchasing a share of Reserve Water equal to their Delivery Entitlement Shares, the Participant’s
and each Other Participant’s Reserved Capacity Fee is equal to the credit to which they are
entitled under Article 29, subdivision (B) of the Contract; and
WHEREAS, the purpose of this Amendment is to increase the Participant’s Delivery
Entitlement consistent with Article 29, subdivision (B) of the Contract and all other contractual
requirements, including, without limitation, those set forth in Article 32 of the Contract.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY MUTUALLY AGREED by and between the
Participant and the District as follows:
Section 1. Recitals. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and are incorporated
herein by this reference.
Section 2. Defined Terms. Capitalized terms used but not otherwise defined herein
shall have the meanings ascribed thereto in Article 1 of the Contract.
For purposes of this Amendment, “Other Participants” shall exclude SMR Mutual
Water Company and Bella Vista MHP, LLC. The Nacimiento Project Water Delivery
Entitlement Contracts with SMR Mutual Water Company and Bella Vista MHP, LLC provide
that they are not entitled to any credit against their respective financial obligations as a result of
this Amendment and the Like-Amendments.
“Like-Amendment” shall mean an Amendment (Full Allocation) to Nacimiento
Project Water Delivery Entitlement Contract that is substantially identical to this Amendment,
except for Participant information, dates, Unit Participations, Participant’s Unit Percentage Share
and Delivery Entitlement Share.
Section 3. Notice. Participant acknowledges that it received the notice required by
Article 29, subdivision (B) of the Contract in connection with each Other Participant’s
acquisition of its proportionate share of Reserve Water.
Packet Pg. 39
Item 4
Third Amendment to Nacimiento Project Page 3
Water Delivery Entitlement Contract
Section 4. Amendment to Article 16, Subdivision (C)(5). The second sentence of
Article 16, subdivision (C)((5) of the Contract is hereby amended and restated in its entirety and
shall hereafter be and read as follows:
There is apportioned to the Participant 34 and 806/1000 percent (34.806%) of the
District’s said remaining costs, including the Required Additional Project Costs and Master
Water Contract Costs.
Section 5. Amendment to Table 1. Table 1 (Parametric Information for the Water
Delivery Entitlement Contract of the Nacimiento Project) is hereby replaced with the revised
Table 1 (Parametric Information for the Water Delivery Entitlement Contract for the Nacimiento
Project) attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference. Said revised
Table 1 reflects the Participant’s increased Delivery Entitlement and the Participant’s revised
cost share obligations upon the Effective Date of this Amendment.
Section 6. Effective Date. The Effective Date of this Amendment shall be the date
upon which the Participant and all Other Participants have executed and delivered this
Amendment and the Like-Amendments to the District, and the District has executed this
Amendment and each Like-Amendment.
Section 7. Severability. Any provision of this Amendment that is prohibited,
unenforceable or not authorized in any jurisdiction shall, as to such jurisdiction, be ineffective to
the extent of such prohibition, unenforceability or nonauthorization without invalidating the
remaining provisions hereof affecting the validity, enforceability or legality of such provision in
any other jurisdiction.
Section 8. Governing Law. This Amendment shall be interpreted, governed and
enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California applicable to contracts made and
performed in such State.
Section 9. Counterparts. This Amendment may be executed in several counterparts,
each of which shall be regarded as an original and all of which shall constitute one and the same
document.
Packet Pg. 40
Item 4
Third Amendment to Nacimiento Project Page 4
Water Delivery Entitlement Contract
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have each executed this Amendment on the dates
set forth below:
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
By __________________________________
Authorized Representative
Date _________________________________
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY
By ________________________________
Date _______________________________
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
By __________________________________
Date _________________________________
SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY FLOOD
CONTROL AND WATER
CONSERVATION DISTRICT
By __________________________________
Chairperson, Board of Supervisors
Date _________________________________
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
LEGAL EFFECT:
RITA L. NEAL
District Counsel
By
Deputy District Counsel
Date
ATTEST:
DISTRICT CLERK
By __________________________________
Deputy District Clerk
Date _________________________________
Packet Pg. 41
Item 4
Third Amendment to Nacimiento Project Page 5
Water Delivery Entitlement Contract
EXHIBIT A - TABLE 1
Parametric Information for the Water Delivery Entitlement Contract of the Nacimiento Project
Date Table 1 is effective:March 15, 2016
Name of Participant:
(from Contract front page)
City of San Luis Obispo
Initial or Other Participant
(Article 1 definition)
Initial Participant
Contract Amemendment Number 3
Delivery Entitlement
acre-feet each Water Year [Article 6(A)]
5482
Delivery Entitlement Share
(Article 1 definition)
34.806%
Nacimiento Project Water
acre-feet each Water Year (Article 1 definition)
15750
Total Delivery Entitlement Obligation
acre-feet each Water Year (Article 1 definition)
15750
Reserve Water
acre-feet each Water Year (Article 1 definition)
0
Maximum instantaneous rate of flow
cubic feet per second [Article 6(B)]
8.20
Maximum monthly delivery volume of water
acre-feet [Article 6(B)]
498.40
Participant's Unit Percentage Share of
Capital Reserve Costs and Operation and
Maintenance Costs
[Article 16(C)(1)]
Participant's Unit Percentage Share of All
Other Construction Costs
[Article 16(C)(3)(c)]
Project Segment
Systemwide Operating Cost 34.806%N/A
Unit No. A 34.806%34.806%
Unit No. A1 34.806%34.806%
Unit No. B 59.188%46.997%
Unit No. C 34.806%34.806%
Unit No. C1 34.806%34.806%
Unit No. D 59.188%46.997%
Unit No. E 61.902%48.354%
Unit No. F 97.684%66.245%
Unit No. F1 59.188%46.997%
Unit No. F2 97.684%66.245%
Unit No. G 97.684%66.245%
Unit No. G1 99.096%66.951%
Unit No. G2 99.096%66.951%
Unit No. H 99.096%66.951%
Unit No. H1 99.096%66.951%
Unit No. T2 N/A N/A
Unit No. T4 N/A N/A
Unit No. T6 N/A N/A
Unit No. T11 99.096%99.096%
N/A means Not Applicable
Packet Pg. 42
Item 4
Page 1 of 9
MASTER AGREEMENT FOR
EXCHANGE OF NACIMIENTO AND WHALE ROCK WATER
This Agreement for Exchange of Nacimiento and Whale Rock Water (Agreement) is
made this _____ day of ______, 2018 by and between the City of San Luis Obispo (City) and the
County of San Luis Obispo (County) (each a “Party” and collectively “Parties”).
WITNESSETH
WHEREAS, the majority of municipal water delivered to the unincorporated community
of Cayucos is generated by the Whale Rock Project and is delivered by the Whale Rock
Commission as raw water to the Cayucos Water Treatment Plant owned and operated by the
County through County Service Area 10 (CSA 10); and
WHEREAS, the Cayucos Water Treatment Plant is the only municipal water treatment
plant serving the community of Cayucos, and the CSA 10 plant treats Whale Rock Project water
to drinking water standards and delivers the treated water to public and private water
companies in Cayucos; and
WHEREAS, the boundaries of CSA 10 encompass all of the area within the Urban
Services Line of Cayucos, including the public and private water companies located therein; and
WHEREAS, on August 17, 2004, the San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water
Conservation District (District) and the City entered into a Nacimiento Project Water Delivery
Entitlement Contract (City Nacimiento Contract) under which the City had an entitlement to
3,380 acre feet per year (AFY) of Nacimiento Project water; and
WHEREAS, on April 19, 2016, the District and the City entered into an amendment to
the City Nacimiento Contract which increased the City’s entitlement to 5,482 AFY of Nacimiento
Project water (City Nacimiento Entitlement); and
WHEREAS, on October 24, 2006, the District and the County entered into a Nacimiento
Project Water Delivery Entitlement Contract (County Nacimiento Contract) under which the
County had an entitlement to 25 AFY of Nacimiento Project water on behalf of CSA 10 Zone A
(CSA 10A) located in Cayucos; and
WHEREAS, on April 19, 2016, the District and the County entered into an amendment to
the County Nacimiento Contract which increased County’s CSA 10A entitlement to 40 AFY of
Nacimiento Project water (County Nacimiento Entitlement); and
Packet Pg. 43
Item 4
Page 2 of 9
WHEREAS, on April 19, 2016, the District and Bella Vista MHP, LLC (BVMHP) entered
into a Nacimiento Project Water Delivery Entitlement Contract (BVMHP Nacimiento Contract)
under which BVMHP has an entitlement to 10 AFY of Nacimiento Project water (BVMHP
Nacimiento Entitlement); and
WHEREAS, neither CSA 10A nor BVMHP nor any other Cayucos Water Entity that has
entered into or may enter into a Nacimiento Project Water Delivery Entitlement Contract with
the District can take direct delivery of Nacimiento Project water because the Nacimiento
Project pipeline does not extend to Cayucos; and
WHEREAS, based on the foregoing, and on the Agreement for Exchange of Water
between the City and the County dated September 5, 2006 and its anticipated replacement by
this Agreement, both the County Nacimiento Contract and the BVMHP Nacimiento Contract
designate Unit T11, the City’s water treatment plant, as the place of delivery; and
WHEREAS, the City has water rights to Whale Rock Project water in accordance with the
City’s State Water Rights Board Permit Application No. 17114 (City Whale Rock Entitlement);
and
WHEREAS, it is anticipated that BVMHP will enter into an Agreement for Exchange of
Nacimiento and Whale Rock Water authorizing the County to exchange equal am ounts of City
Whale Rock Entitlement water for Nacimiento Project water on an annual basis pursuant to the
terms of this Agreement on or around the Effective Date and that other Cayucos Water Entities
may enter into similar agreements with the County in the future.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby mutually agreed between the Parties as follows:
1. Definitions.
(a) “Cayucos Area Water Organization” shall mean the County of San Luis
Obispo, the Paso Robles Beach Water Association, the Morro Rock Mutual Water Company and
the Cayucos Cemetery District.
(b) “Cayucos Water Entity” shall mean any water supplier within the
boundaries of CSA 10 that (i) has a contractual right to receive Nacimiento Project water from
the District, (ii) has signed an Agreement for Exchange of Nacimiento and Whale Rock Water
with the County that authorizes the County to exchange equal amounts of Nacimiento Project
Water for City Whale Rock Entitlement water on its behalf on an annual basis and that has been
approved by the District and City and (iii) has a contractual right to receive treated water from
the Cayucos Water Treatment Plant. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the County, by and on
behalf of CSA 10A, shall be a Cayucos Water Entity s o long as condition (i) is satisfied.
Packet Pg. 44
Item 4
Page 3 of 9
(c) “Effective Date” shall mean the date as of which both Parties have signed
this Agreement.
(d) “Nacimiento Project” shall mean the project described in the Nacimiento
Water Project Environmental Impact Report SCH# 2001061022 certified in January 2004 and as
may be amended.
(e) “Water Year” shall mean the twelve-month period from October 1 of a
calendar year to September 30 of the immediately following calendar year, both dates
inclusive.
2. Term.
This Agreement shall become effective on the Effective Date and shall remain in
effect so long as any Cayucos Water Entity is contractually entitled to receive Nacimiento
Project water from the District.
3. Exchange of Water.
(a) The City and the County hereby agree to annually exchange an equal
amount of Nacimiento Project water for City Whale Rock Entitlement water subject to the
terms and conditions set forth herein. The Nacimiento Project water subject to the exchange
will be obtained by County as described in Section 1(b)(ii) of this Agreement from the Cayucos
Water Entities that annually agree to participate in the exchange with the exception that a
separate agreement is not required for Nacimiento Project water exchanged by and on behalf
of CSA 10A.
(b) Maximum Exchange. The maximum amount of water to be exchanged
pursuant to this Agreement in any Water Year is 50 AFY of Nacimiento Project water for 50 AFY
of City Whale Rock Entitlement water. The Parties understand that the amount of water
annually exchanged may be less than the maximum and that the amount of water which can be
exchanged under this Agreement during any Water Year is limited to the amount of Nacimiento
Project water that the Cayucos Water Entities are contractually entitled to receive from the
District and that the Cayucos Water Entities have authorized the County to exchange on their
behalf.
(c) Rights Conveyed. The Parties hereby agree and affirm that only
contractual rights are created by this Agreement and that this Agreement does not create or
convey any entitlement to, or property interest in, any water, water treatment facility or water
delivery facility.
Packet Pg. 45
Item 4
Page 4 of 9
4. Point of Delivery.
(a) All City Whale Rock Entitlement water to be furnished to the County by
the City pursuant to this Agreement shall be delivered by the City to the County at the CSA 10
turnout to the Whale Rock Project transmission line located on the Cayucos/Morro Cemetery
property and/or via the existing Cayucos Area Water Organization groundwater well located
along Cabrillo Avenue. The City is not responsible for any costs incurred by County in
connection with the acceptance, measurement, conveyance, treatment or delivery of City
Whale Rock Entitlement water on behalf of the Cayucos Water Entities.
(b) All Nacimiento Project water to be furnished to the City by the County
pursuant to this Agreement shall be delivered to the City through the Nacimiento Water Project
conveyance system at the City of San Luis Obispo Water Treatment Plant Turnout (Unit T11) as
set forth in the Cayucos Water Entities’ Nacimiento Contracts. Said deliveries shall be on a 1 to
1 water exchange basis for the City’s Whale Rock Entitlement.
5. Measurement.
(a) All City Whale Rock Entitlement water furnished to the County pursuant
to this Agreement shall be measured by the County at the point of delivery specified in Section
4 of this Agreement with equipment satisfactory to the Parties. Said equipment shall be
installed, operated and maintained by the County. All determinations relative to the measuring
of the City Whale Rock Entitlement water shall be made by the County and, upon request of the
City, the accuracy of such measurement shall be investigated by the County and certified in
writing to the City. The City may inspect any such measuring equipment for the purpose of
determining the accuracy thereof, at its own expense at reasonable times upon reasonable
notice.
(b) All Nacimiento Project water furnished to the City pursuant to this
Agreement is subject to the terms and conditions of the Cayucos Water Entities’ Nacimiento
Contracts and the resolution of any delivery inaccuracies, errors or failure to deliver Cayucos
Water Entities’ Nacimiento Project water by District shall be resolved in accordance with the
Nacimiento Contracts.
6. Water Quality and Limitations of Liability.
(a) When the City takes delivery of the Cayucos Water Entities’ Nacimiento
Project water, the County assumes no responsibility for the quality of the water delivered to
City under this Agreement and the County does not warrant the quality of any such water for
any particular use. The City is aware that the delivery, quantity and quality of Nacimiento
Project water is subject to the terms and conditions of the Cayucos Water Entities’ Nacimiento
Packet Pg. 46
Item 4
Page 5 of 9
Contracts and hereby agrees that the County shall not be responsible or liable for its failure to
perform any portion of this Agreement to the extent that such failure is caused by a failure of
any Cayucos Water Entity (other than the Cou nty) to perform under its Nacimiento Contract.
(b) When the County, on behalf of the Cayucos Water Entities, takes delivery
of the City Whale Rock Entitlement water, said water shall be at a quality that is substantially
the same as the quality of said water at the time it was taken from the Whale Rock Project. The
City shall assume no further or additional responsibility for the quality of the water to be
delivered to the County under this Agreement, and the City does not warrant the quality of any
such water for any particular use. The City shall consult with the County as to which of the
Whale Rock Project’s intake withdrawal levels to utilize to best optimize the quality of the City
Whale Rock Entitlement water supplied to the County. In all such cases, the City shall retain the
right to make the final decision regarding which intake withdrawal level to use, so long as the
City Whale Rock Entitlement water delivered to the County continues to come from the same
withdrawal level as the City Whale Rock Entitlement water delivered to the City for domestic
use.
7. Costs of Delivery.
(a) The costs associated with the acquisition and delivery of the City Whale
Rock Entitlement water to the County for ultimate delivery to the Cayucos Water Entities under
this Agreement shall be born exclusively by the City.
(b) The costs associated with the acquisition and delivery of the Cayucos
Water Entities’ Nacimiento entitlements to the City shall be paid by the Cayucos Water Entities’
to the District in accordance with their Nacimiento Contracts.
8. No Financial Remuneration between Parties.
The County and the City agree that the acquisition, delivery and treatment costs
under this Agreement are reasonable relative to the benefits received under this Agreement.
The County and the City further agree that although no formal estimate or accounting has been
made of their individual costs as of the Effective Date, each of their relative costs are
reasonable in relation to each other’s costs as of the Effective Date. It is the intent that this
Agreement shall not require the transaction of any financial consideration or remuneration
between the County and the City until such time as the County and the City mutually agree that
the following conditions have been satisfied: (1) the pumping, maintenance and treatment
costs of the Party seeking financial remuneration exceed the pumping, maintenance and
treatment costs of the party from whom remuneration is sought, and (2) the relative pumping,
maintenance and treatment costs of the exchanged water under this Agreement have changed
Packet Pg. 47
Item 4
Page 6 of 9
so dramatically so as to justify the application of additional service charges for the pumping,
maintenance and treatment of exchanged water.
9. Annual Delivery Schedules.
(a) No Party is obligated to exchange any water under this Agreement for
any Water Year until the County submits a written water delivery schedule to the City as
provided in this Section 9.
(b) On or before forty-five (45) calendar days before the start of the
succeeding Water Year, the County shall submit in writing to the City a preliminary water
delivery schedule which sets forth the amounts, rate and times of the conveyance and delivery
of City Whale Rock Entitlement water as is desired by the County for each month of the next
succeeding one (1) Water Year. The amounts set forth in said schedule shall not exceed the
amount of water that the Cayucos Water Entities are eligible to receive pursuant to their
Nacimiento Contracts and that the Cayucos Water Entities have authorized the County to
exchange on their behalf. The City shall deliver the City Whale Rock Entitlement water to the
County at the amounts, rates and times specified in the schedule so long as said schedule is
consistent with the efficient and economical operation of City facilities.
(c) If the City does not believe the requested schedule is consistent with the
efficient and economical operation of City facilities, the City shall propose an alternate schedule
in writing within fourteen (14) days of the initial receipt of the preliminary water delivery
schedule. If either or both Parties do not find the proposed alternative schedule acceptable, the
Parties shall meet within thirty (30) days of submission of the alternative schedule and make
such modifications to the preliminary amounts, times and rates of the conveyance and delivery
of the requested deliveries, so as to match as closely as possible the County’s requests, but in a
manner which is consistent with the efficient and economical operation of C ounty and City
facilities. The Parties shall continue to meet and confer until an acceptable schedule is agreed
upon.
(d) In addition to the reasons set forth in Section 1 0 below, the Parties
recognize that other long term foreseen and unforeseen events may preclude the exchange and
delivery of water from occurring on a 1 to 1 basis over any number of calendar months, thereby
resulting in a water exchange imbalance. Therefore, the Parties hereby agree that in the event
such a water exchange imbalance occurs, the Party receiving less water during any calendar
month(s) shall be delivered the quantity of water which it would have been furnished in the
absence of such imbalance as expeditiously as may be feasible.
(e) The County is aware that City Whale Rock Entitlement water will only be
available when City has water available in storage. Although the other Whale Rock Commission
Packet Pg. 48
Item 4
Page 7 of 9
agencies may have water available in storage when the City does not, nothing in this
Agreement shall obligate, limit, diminish or affect in any way the water supplies of other Whale
Rock Commission agencies.
10. Curtailment of Delivery.
(a) The County acknowledges that it may temporarily experience a
discontinuance or reduction in the amount of City Whale Rock Entitlement water furnished to
the County during such time as the City is maintaining, repairing, replacing, investigating or
inspecting any of the portions of the Whale Rock Project facilities necessary for the furnishing
of water to the County. Insofar as it is feasible, the City shall give the County at least thirty (30)
days notice in advance of any such temporary discontinuance or reduction, except in the case
of emergency, in which case, while no notice need be given, the City shall inform the County of
such an emergency immediately after such emergency becomes known to the City. In the event
of such discontinuance or reduction, the City will upon resumption of service cause to be
delivered, as expeditiously as may be feasible, the quantity of the City Whale Rock Entitlement
water which would have been furnished to the County in the absence of such discontinuance or
reduction subject to the terms of 9(d) hereinabove.
(b) The City acknowledges that it may temporarily experience a
discontinuance or reduction in the amount of Nacimiento Project water furnished to the City
during such time as the District is maintaining, repairing, replacing, investigating or inspecting
any of the portions of the Nacimiento Project Facilities necessary for the furnishing of water to
the City. As the City is a party to the City Nacimiento Contract, the City will be provided notice
of any such curtailment by the District pursuant to the terms of such agreement. In the event of
such discontinuance or reduction, the County will, upon resumption of service, request that the
District cause to be delivered, as expeditiously as may be feasible, the quantity of Nacimiento
Project water which would have been furnished to the City in the absence of such
discontinuance or reduction subject to the terms of 9(d) hereinabove
11. Notices.
All notices required either expressly or by implication to be given by any Party
under this Agreement shall be signed by an authorized officer of the Party. All such notices shall
be deemed to have been given and delivered if delivered personally or if enclosed in a properly
addressed envelope and deposited with the United States Postal Service for delivery by
registered or certified mail. Unless and until formally notified otherwise, all notices shall be
addressed to the Parties as follows:
Packet Pg. 49
Item 4
Page 8 of 9
To County: County Service Area No. 10, Department of Public Works
Room 206, County Government Center
San Luis Obispo, CA 93408
Attention: Director of Public Works
To City: City of San Luis Obispo, Utilities Department
879 Morro Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Attention: Utilities Director
12. Severability.
Any provision of this Agreement that is prohibited, unenforceable or not
authorized in any jurisdiction shall, as to such jurisdiction, be ineffective to the extent such
prohibition, unenforceability or nonauthorization without invalidating the remaining provisions
hereof affecting the validity, enforceability or legality of such provision in any other jurisdiction.
13. Amendment.
This Agreement may be amended or modified at any time by written agreement
approved and executed by both of the Parties.
14. Entire Agreement.
The foregoing constitutes the full and complete agreement of the Parties. This
Agreement supersedes all prior agreements and understandings, whether in writing or oral,
related to the subject matter of this Agreement that are not set forth in writing herein,
including, without limitation, the Agreement for Exchange of Water between the City and the
County dated September 5, 2006.
15. Assignment.
The rights and duties of a Party may not be assigned or delegated without the
written consent of the other Party. Any attempt to assign or delegate such rights or duties in
contravention of this Agreement shall be null and void.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have each executed this Agreement on the
dates set forth below:
Packet Pg. 50
Item 4
Page 9 of 9
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
By __________________________________
Authorized Representative
Date _________________________________
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY
By ________________________________
Date _______________________________
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
By __________________________________
Date _________________________________
COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
By __________________________________
Chairperson, Board of Supervisors
Date _________________________________
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
LEGAL EFFECT:
RITA L. NEAL
County Counsel
By
Deputy County Counsel
Date
ATTEST:
County Clerk
By __________________________________
Deputy County Clerk
Date _________________________________
Packet Pg. 51
Item 4
Page intentionally left
blank.
Packet Pg. 52
Item 4
Meeting Date: 6/19/2018
FROM: Carrie Mattingly, Utilities Director
Prepared By: Aaron Floyd, Deputy Director-Water
Jennifer Metz, Utilities Project Manager
SUBJECT: RESOLUTIONS SUPPORTING COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
GROUNDWATER BASIN MODIFICATIONS
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Adopt a Reso lution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo, California, Supporting San Luis Obispo County - Los Osos Valley Groundwater
Basin Modification” for inclusion with the County of San Luis Obispo Basin Boundary
Modification Request to Department of Water Resources.
2. Adopt a Resolution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo, California, Supporting San Luis Obispo County - Santa Maria Basin Groundwater
Basin Modification” for inclusion with the County of San Luis Obispo Basin Boundary
Modification Request to Department of Water Resources.
DISCUSSION
In October 2015, as part of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA), the
Department of Water Resources (DWR) established a process for G roundwater Sustainability
Agencies (GSAs) or local agencies to request revisions to the boundaries of a groundwater
basin/sub-basin and/or create new sub-basins via the adoption of Basin Boundary Regulations
(Regulations) and associated Basin Boundary Modification Request (BBMR) application
requirements. The Regulations detail the required processes that a local agency must follow prior
to requesting that DWR make modifications to a basin boundary based on updated scientific
and/or jurisdictional informatio n. Additionally, if the local agency, decides to pursue the creation
of a sub-basin based on jurisdictional information, the regulations require that the requesting
agency show information demonstrating that at least three -fourths of the local affected agencies
and public water systems in the basin support the modification request.
The County of San Luis Obispo has prepared BBMRs for two groundwater basins adjacent to the
San Luis Obispo Valley Groundwater Basin (San Luis Obispo Basin) over which the City lies.
These are the Los Osos Basin and the Santa Maria Basin. The County notified the City as legally
required and further asked the City, as a local affected agency, for support of the modification
through adoption of resolutions for each proposed modification. The proposed basin boundary
modifications, shown in Figures 1 and 2, will result in more localized and effective management
strategies to be implemented to support a sustainable groundwater basin. The modifications will
not change the conditions in the adjacent San Luis Obispo Basin or impact the ability of
groundwater to be managed sustainably by the City. The requested revisions are also proposed to
improve coordination within the basin.
The proposed resolutions to support the County’s Los Osos Basin GSA’s boundary modification
request and the County-Santa Maria Basin GSA’s boundary modification request are provided as
Attachment A and B, respectively.
Packet Pg. 53
Item 5
Figure 1. Los Osos Area Basin Boundary Modifications
Packet Pg. 54
Item 5
Figure 2. Santa Maria Basin Boundary M odifications
Packet Pg. 55
Item 5
CONCURRENCE
Concurrence from other City departments is not required for this item.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The proposed adoption of resolutions supporting the County of San Luis Obispo groundwater
basin modifications is not a “project” under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
because the action does not involve any commitment to a specific project which may result in a
potentially significant physical impact on the environment, as contemplated by Title 14,
California Code of Regulations, Section 15378.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with the adoption of the resolutions in support of the County
of San Luis Obispo groundwater basin modifications.
ALTERNATIVE
Do Not Adopt the Resolutions of Support. Council may elect to not adopt the resolutions
supporting County of San Luis Obispo groundwater basin modifications if it believes this will
not improve the ability to more effectively manage these groundwater basins.
Attachments:
a - Resolution Supporting Boundary Modification for Los Osos Valley Groundwater Basin
b - Resolution Supporting Boundary Modification for Santa Maria Groundwater Basin
Packet Pg. 56
Item 5
R ______
RESOLUTION NO. _____ (2018 SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, SUPPORTING SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY -
LOS OSOS VALLEY GROUNDWATER BASIN MODIFICATION
WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo works cooperatively with the County of San
Luis Obispo on regional water planning; and
WHEREAS, the California Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, or SGMA, took
effect on January 1, 2015; and
WHEREAS, In October 2015, the Department of Water Resources adopted Basin
Boundary Emergency Regulation requiring outreach and solicitation of comments from affected
agencies, affected systems, and the public ; and
WHEREAS, In May 2017, the City of San Luis Obispo formed a Groundwater
Sustainability Agency over its jurisdictiona l boundaries; and
WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo as a Groundwater Sustainability Agency is
working in a coordinated approach with the County of San Luis Obispo to develop a Groundwater
Sustainability Plan that covers the entire San Luis Obispo Valley Groundwater Basin; and
WHEREAS, the County of San Luis Obispo – Los Osos Basin Fringe Areas Groundwater
Sustainability Agency notified the City of San Luis Obispo on April 24, 2018 of the proposed
basin boundary modification; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 344.8(b) of the DWR Basin Boundary Regulations, an
affected local agency that elects to support or oppose a BBMR shall provide the requesting agency
with either a resolution formally adopted by the decision-making body of the affected agency or a
letter from an official with requisite authority; and
WHEREAS, the Los Osos Valley Groundwater Basin is adjacent to the San Luis Obispo
Valley Groundwater Basin making the City an affected local agency.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo
as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings: Based upon the City’s Council Agenda Report, the proposed
basin boundary modifications proposed by the County of San Luis Obispo for the Los Osos Valley
Groundwater Basin will result in a more accurate boundary to support a sustainable groundwater
basin. The modifications will not change conditions in the adjacent San Luis Obispo Basin or
impact the ability of groundwater to be managed sustainably by the City. The request will also
improve coordination within the basin.
Packet Pg. 57
Item 5
Resolution No. _____ (2018 Series) Page 2
R ______
SECTION 2. Environmental Determination. The City Council hereby determines that this
Resolution is not a “project” under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because the
action does not involve any commitment to a specific project which may result in a potentially
significant physical impact on the environment, as contemplated by Title 14, California Code of
Regulations, Section 15378.
SECTION 3. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its
adoption.
Upon motion of _______________________, seconded by _______________________,
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was adopted this _____ day of _____________________ 2018.
____________________________________
Mayor Heidi Harmon
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Teresa Purrington, 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 ______________, _________.
____________________________________
Teresa Purrington, City Clerk
Packet Pg. 58
Item 5
R ______
RESOLUTION NO. _____ (2018 SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, SUPPORTING SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY -
SANTA MARIA GROUNDWATER BASIN MODIFICATION
WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo works cooperatively with the County of San Luis
Obispo on regional water planning; and
WHEREAS, the California Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, or SGMA, took
effect on January 1, 2015; and
WHEREAS, In October 2015, the Department of Water Resources adopted Basin Boundary
Emergency Regulation requiring outreach and solicitation of comments from affected agencies,
affected systems, and the public ; and
WHEREAS, In May 2017, the City of San Luis Obispo formed a Groundwater
Sustainability Agency over its jurisdictional boundaries; and
WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo as a Groundwater Sustainability Agency is
working in a coordinated approach with the County of San Luis Obispo to develop a Groundwater
Sustainability Plan that covers the entire San Luis Obispo Valley Groundwater Basin; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 344.8(b) of the DWR Basin Boundary Regulations, an
affected local agency that elects to support or oppose a BBMR shall provide the requesting agency
with either a resolution formally adopted by the decis ion-making body of the affected agency or a
letter from an official with requisite authority; and
WHEREAS, the Santa Maria Basin is adjacent to the San Luis Obispo Valley Groundwater
Basin making the City an affected local agency.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo
as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings: Based upon the City’s Council Agenda Report, the proposed
basin boundary modifications proposed by the County of San Luis Obispo for the Santa Maria
Groundwater Basin will result in a more accurate boundary to support a sustainable groundwater
basin. The modifications will not change conditions in the adjacent San Luis Obispo Basin or
impact the ability of groundwater to be managed sustainably by the City. The request will also
improve coordination within the basin.
SECTION 2. Environmental Determination: The City Council hereby determines that this
Resolution is not a “project” under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because the
action does not involve any commitment to a specific project which may result in a potentially
significant physical impact on the environment, as contemplated by Title 14, California Code of
Regulations, Section 15378.
Packet Pg. 59
Item 5
Resolution No. _____ (2018 Series) Page 2
R ______
SECTION 3. Effective Date: This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its
adoption.
Upon motion of _______________________, seconded by _______________________,
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was adopted this _____ day of _____________________ 2018.
____________________________________
Mayor Heidi Harmon
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Teresa Purrington
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 ______________, _________.
____________________________________
Teresa Purrington
City Clerk
Packet Pg. 60
Item 5
Meeting Date: 6/19/2018
FROM: Monica Irons, Director of Human Resources
Prepared By: Elizabeth Turbow, Administrative Assistant
SUBJECT: AUTHORIZE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A SOLE SOURCE
CONTRACT WITH CENTRE FOR ORGANIZATION EFFECTIVENESS
(COE) FOR EMPLOYEE AND LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Authorize the City Manager to execute a five-year sole source agreement with the COE
(Attachment A) to continue a comprehensive employee and leadership development program
for the City of San Luis Obispo.
2. Approve an amount not to exceed $138,550 in 2018-19.
3. Authorize the City Manager to annually approve a contract amount as included in the annual
budget appropriation.
DISCUSSION
At the 2013-14 Budget Supplement, the City Council authorized one-time costs of $170,000,
expended during 2014-15 and 2015-16, to fund the creation of an employee development and
leadership program for the City. In the 2016-17 fiscal year, Council authorized the City Manager
to enter a sole source agreement with COE to continue this pr ogramming and funding was
programmed in to the Human Resource Department’s budget for this purpose. The allocated
funds were spent by the end of June 2017. In 2016-17, the program provided over 100 City
employees (an employee may be a participant in multiple trainings or academies) with a variety
of training and development opportunities. During the 2017 -18 fiscal year 120 employees went
through academies or targeted trainings on a variety of topics including supervision, managing
transitions, effective meetings, emotional intelligence, and strengths-based performance. Some
offerings, including a regional Leadership Program, was deferred to 2018-19 to gain buy in from
local city managers regarding the timeframe and commitment necessary for such a program to be
successful.
The partnership with the COE has provided assessments, training, and coaching and consultation
on organizational development related issues. These comprehensive, integrated employee
development and leadership programs are based on proven public-sector competencies and have
gone a long way toward ensuring the City is preparing the next generation of employees to
seamlessly continue quality service to the community. In the 2017 -18 fiscal year, 58% of 24
employees promoted had attended at least one COE training, with 37% of those promoted
participating in an academy focused on refining supervisory and management skills. Given the
difficulty in recruiting and retaining employees in positions such as police officer, building and
safety, engineering, and municipal finance, developing internal talent is a key strategy to
ensuring the City’s ability to effectively serve the community.
Packet Pg. 61
Item 6
The past three years have been focused on establishing a strong foundation and “common
language” within the o rganization. With that foundation, the next phase is to strive towards
operational excellence by reinforcing the learning objectives and fully utilizing the tools and
theories presented in the trainings and academies. The proposed offerings in 2018 -19 are paced
to align with other priorities in the City, to build on the foundational work already accomplished,
to ensure the continued strong foundation of the competencies and principles with broad
saturation so employees are “speaking the same language,”, and to take advantage of regional
offerings for cost effectiveness. Since the City started working with the COE in 2014, almost all
of the cities in the County along with the County of San Luis Obispo and the cities of Santa
Maria and Lompoc have sent emplo yees to the academies and trainings now offered through the
COE in our region. Continued regional participation is key to ensuring the viability and cost
effectiveness of the program and sets the foundation for regional collaboration on other topics.
FISCAL IMPACT
Funding for this service is recommended to be approved in the 2018 -19 Supplemental Budget
within the Human Resources Department budget Contract Services line item as indicated in the
chart below. In addition, staff requests carrying forward existing unexpended (due to purposeful
delays) funds that were encumbered in 2017-18 for a total available balance of $138,550.
Item Account Number Amount
2018-19 Budget for COE 100.30100.7227 $90,550
2017-2018 Remaining Funds 100.30100.7227 $48,000*
Total Available Budget $138,550
Cost of Service Not to exceed
$138,550
Total Remaining Balance $0
*This estimated amount will be requested to be carried over from 2017 -2018 to 2018-19.
ALTERNATIVES
Issue an RFP for these services. Council could choose to direct staff to issue an RFP for these
services. This alternative may result in other proposals being submitted but considering the City
has experienced excellent results through this consulting group that specializes in local
government workfo rce development, it is not likely that this effort would result in a different
outcome in terms of price or the effectiveness of the program. The timeframe required to develop
and solicit proposals will further delay much needed employee development and su ccession
planning.
Attachments:
a- COE Contract 2018-2019
Packet Pg. 62
Item 6
AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into in the City of San Luis Obispo on June 5th, 2018, by
and between the CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as City,
and THE CENTRE FOR ORGANIZATION EFFECTIVENESS , hereinafter referred to as Contractor.
W I T N E S S E T H:
WHEREAS, on June 5th, 2018, City Council authorized the City Manager to execute a sole source
agreement with the Centr e for Organization Effectiveness for fiscal year 2018-19.
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 acceptance or completion of said services.
2. INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE. Contractor agrees to perform the services set
forth in the Proposal, hereinafter referred to as Exhibit C, which is incorporated herein by this reference.
Contractor further agrees to comply with the City’s standard terms and conditions and insurance
requirements which are attached hereto as Exhibits A and B, respectively, and incorporated herein by this
refer ence. Should there be any conflict between Contractor’s proposal and the City’s standard terms or
conditions, the City’s standard terms and conditions shall control.
3. CITY'S OBLIGATIONS. For providing programs offered by the Centre for Organization
Effectiveness as specified in this Agreement, City will pay and Contractor shall receive therefor
compensation in a total sum not to exceed $138,550.
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 to
Packet Pg. 63
Item 6
provide services as set forth in Exhibit C. Contractor further agrees to the contract performance terms and
requirements set forth in Exhibit A and B, respectively.
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 Council or City Manager of
the City.
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 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.
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 of San Luis Obispo
Human Resources Department
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Contractor The Centre for Organization Effectiveness
7310 Miramar Road, Suite 380
Miramar, CA 92126
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.
Packet Pg. 64
Item 6
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this instrument to be executed the day
and year first above written.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO CONTRACTOR
By:____________________________________ By: ___________________________________
City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________________
City Attorney
Packet Pg. 65
Item 6
Exhibit A
GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS
REQUIREMENTS
1. Insurance Requirements. The Contractor shall provide proof of insurance in the form, coverages
and amounts specified in Exhibit B within 10 (ten) calendar days as a precondition to contract
execution.
2. 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 busines s tax program
may be obtained by calling (805) 781-7134.
CONTRACT PERFORMANCE
3. 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.
4. Laws to be Observed. The Contractor shall keep itself fully informed of and shall observe an d
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.
5. Payment of Taxes. The contract prices shall include full compensation for all taxes t hat the
Contractor is required to pay.
6. Permits and Licenses. The Contractor shall procure all permits and licenses, pay all charges and
fees, and give all notices necessary.
7. Safety Provisions. The Contractor shall conform to the rules and regulations p ertaining to safety
established by OSHA and the California Division of Industrial Safety.
8. 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 dev ices and take
such other protective measures as are necessary to prevent accidents or damage or injury to the
public and employees.
9. 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.
10. Immigration Act of 1986. The Contractor warrants on behalf of itself and all subcontractors
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.
Packet Pg. 66
Item 6
11. Contractor Non-Discrimination. In the performance of this work, the Contractor agrees that it
will not engage in, nor permit such subcontractors 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.
12. 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. In the event that there is insufficient time to grant such extensions
prior to the completion date of the contract, the City may, at the time of acceptance of the work,
waive liquidated damages that may have accrued for failure to complete on time, due to any of the
above, after hearing evidence as to the reasons for such delay, and making a finding as to the causes
of same.
13. Payment Terms. The City's payment terms are 30 days from the receipt of an original invoice and
acceptance by the City of the materials, supplies, equipment or services provided by the Contra ctor
(Net 30).
14. 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.
15. 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.
16. 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 subcontractor 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.
17. Hold Harmless and Indemnification. The Contractor agrees to defend, indemnify, protect and
hold the City and its agents, officers and employees harmless from and against any and all claims
asserted or liability established for damages or injuries to any person or property, including
injury to the Contractor's employees, agents or officers that arise from or are connected with or
are caused or claimed to be caused by the acts or omissions of the Contractor, and its agents,
officers or employees, in performing the work or services herein, and all expenses of
investigating and defending against same; provided, however, that the Contractor's duty to
indemnify and hold harmless shall not include any claims or liability arising from the established
sole negligence or willful misconduct of the City, its agents, officers or employees .
18. 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.
Packet Pg. 67
Item 6
19. Termination. If, during the term of the contract, the City determines that the Contractor is not
faithfully abiding by any term or condition contained herein, the City may notify the Contractor in
writing of such defect or failure to perform. This notice must give the Contr actor 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 brea ch 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 valu e 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 Contractor as may be set forth in the Agreement
payment schedule; 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 work scope.
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.
Packet Pg. 68
Item 6
Exhibit B
INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
Consultant Services
The Contractor shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for
injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of
the work hereunder by the Contractor, its agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors.
Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as:
1. Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence form CG 00 01).
2. Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile 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 consultant'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 Contra ctor; 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.
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.
Packet Pg. 69
Item 6
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 curr ent 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.
Packet Pg. 70
Item 6
Exhibit C
PROPOSAL OF SERVICES
PROPOSAL
City of San Luis Obispo
Employee Development & Learning
FY 2018-2019
Project Description
The City Manager and Human Resources Director for the City of San Luis Obispo has
requested consultant services to facilitate several employee development opportunities over
the 2018-2019 Fiscal Year which will ensure City employees are well -equipped for current
and future demands by focusing on the development of proven public-sector competencies,
preparation for supervisory, program management, and leadership roles in complex
environments. This work will connect to the development programs offered in Fiscal Years
2015-2018 and support the sustainability of the groundwork that has been laid to ensure
continued conversation, collaboration, and engagement of all staff.
Project Scope
The following opportunities will be executed throughout the 2018-2019 Fiscal Years and will
be facilitated by various consultants determined to be the best fit for each engagement.
Additional Academy Programs
City of SLO employees will have the ability to partic ipate in regionally-offered academy
programs including S.T.A.R.T (Supervisors Transition and Readiness Training) and
Supervisor Academy as well as the option of the Manager or Leadership Academy, depending
on availability of offerings. These academies wil l be offered at different times throughout
the year.
• S.T.A.R.T –Fall 2018
• Supervisor Academy - Spring 2019
• Regional Management Academy – FY 2018-2019
• Regional Leadership Academy – September 2018-2019
Individual Contributor Programs
The Individual Contributor Programs are newly customized programs designed to meet the
needs of staff who do not have supervisorial responsibility but are interested in gaining
exposure to City-wide best practices.
• Foundations in Excellence – Spring 2019
Alumni Support
To support the ongoing application of tools gained from the Academy Programs, an Alumni
Day will be offered late in the Spring after all new academy cohorts have graduated. The
Centre can help with the design and set up for the day and als o facilitate the program.
Additional support for Alumni can be designed as requested (i.e. web -based spot programs,
“Ted-talk” format learning sessions, etc.).
Packet Pg. 71
Item 6
Additional Solutions to Support Integration and Alignment
Targeted Training Sessions
A total of 6 open-enrollment sessions on different topics to be offered (two sessions) on the
same day, each in a half-day format, and open to all staff. Topic suggestions:
• Change Management/Resiliency
• Operational/Performance Excellence
• DISC/Strengths Applying the Knowledge
Executive Development
As a continuation of development efforts for the executive team, it is an appropriate time to
again gather well-rounded performance feedback for the Department Heads through the
Competency Instrument. A full -day Executive Retreat will include feedback debriefing as
well as appropriately planned development/team -building content for the Executive Team.
Individual coaching will be available for each Department Head, Council, and the City
Manager (up to 2 hours of coaching each).
Proposed Costs & Invoicing Parameters
The following table represents the costs for each program or project as well as the invoicing
parameters of each activity:
City of San Luis Obispo
Learning and Organization Development Program Elements FY 2018-2019
FY 18-19 Budget Assumptions
Budget Allotted for FY 18-19 $100,000
Carryover from Leadership Academy Postponement $ 22,500
Carryover Balance from Public Works Session Payback $ 7,500
Carryover Balance from Executive Development and Coaching Delay $ 8,550
Total Budget
$138,550
Executive Development/Coaching and 360s for five Executives/DHs
• August 2018
• Next five 360s would occur in August 2019 (FY 19 -20)
$11,850
Packet Pg. 72
Item 6
Executive Offsite Retreat
• Summer 2018
• Topic: Taking our Development Investment to the Next Level…
Performance/Operational Excellence
$ 8,000
Executive Offsite Retreat
• January/February 2019
• Topic: TBD, Building on Summer session and work with City Council,
input from community meetings/goal setting work that occurs
$ 8,000
Alumni Day for 100 people (8:30am-2:30pm)
• Agenda TBD
• Likely Spring 2019
$18,000
Targeted Trainings:
• DISC/Strengths Applying the Knowledge ($8,400)
• Offered AM/PM on same day
• Possible cost savings with travel
• Change Management/Resiliency ($8,400)
• Offered AM/PM on same day
• Possible cost savings with travel
• Operational/Performance Excellence ($8,400)
• Offered AM/PM on same day
• Engaging people in bigger picture, not project
management from a technical side
• Possible cost savings with travel
$25,200
HR Consulting Support and City Council/Strategic Planning Support $13,030
For example:
• Council workshop or Executive Offsite with Council – Fall 2018
• Focus on Strategic Planning for City (major City goals and
what are the extras)
Regional Foundations in Excellence ($499/person)
• Potentially City responsible for all 30 seats to
guarantee that it is offered
• City credited if seats are filled by other organizations
$14,970
Regional START ($429/person)
$0
Regional Supervisors Academy ($1,099/person)
$0
Regional Management Academy ($2,249/person)
$0
Packet Pg. 73
Item 6
Leadership Academy ($2,999/person)
• 12 people from City ($36,000)
• 13 people from County ($39,000) – this is still
unknown
• City/County credited if seats listed above are filled by
other organizations
Presentations Workshop ($7,000 total) –
$36,000
requirement for Certified Public Manager Credential
• Potentially City pays half ($3,500)
• Potentially County pays half ($3,500)
$ 3,500
TOTAL $138,550
Packet Pg. 74
Item 6
Proposed by: Accepted by:
___________ ______
____________
Sommer Kehrli Monica Irons
Executive Director, TCFOE Director of HR, City of San Luis
Obispo
Date: ________ Date: _____________
Packet Pg. 75
Item 6
Page intentionally left
blank.
Packet Pg. 76
Item 6
Meeting Date: 6/19/2018
FROM: Monica Irons, Director of Human Resources
PREPARED BY: Elizabeth Turbow, Human Resources Administrative Assistant
SUBJECT: CONTRACT WITH LIEBERT CASSIDY WHITMORE
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with Liebert Cassidy Whitmore (LCW) to
provide specialized employment and labor relations legal services to the City of San Luis
Obispo for a term of five years.
2. Approve an amount not to exceed $84,800 in fiscal year 2018-19 (Attachment A).
3. Authorize the City Manager to annually approve a contract amount as included in the annual
budget appropriation.
Background
LCW is a full-service labor, employment, and education law firm specializing in public sector
employment law. The firm has provided employment and labor re lations legal services to the
City since 2005 following a request for proposals for labor relations services. LCW is also on
the City Attorney’s on-call attorney list for the categories of Labor Employment, Pension and
Benefits Programs as a result of a Request for Qualifications issued by the City Attorney’s office
in 2014.
LCW has provided excellent support in the critical and evolving area of labor relations,
negotiations, and employment law during the past several years. Due to their expertise they
supplement staff in the Human Resources and City Attorney departments, including representing
the City in the role of chief negotiator during several labor negotiations.
As staff completes fiscal year 2017-18 and plans for fiscal year 2018-19, it is apparent there are
several ongoing and anticipated labor relations matters that will require specialized knowledge
and services. These include: 1) continuing to advise the City Council for its role in the labor
negotiations with represented labor groups (the S an Luis Obispo Firefighters Association, Local
3523, the San Luis Obispo Police Officers Association, the San Luis Obispo Police Staff Officers
Association, and the San Luis Obispo City Employees Association), 2) providing chief
negotiator and/or advisory services for negotiations with these labor groups, 3) concluding an
internal review of the Federal Labor Standards Act (FLSA) compliance, 4) representing the City
in grievance hearings if needed, 5) advising staff on disciplinary matters as needed.
Packet Pg. 77
Item 7
FISCAL IMPACT
Sufficient funds are included in the Human Resources Consultant Services line item of the 2018 -
19 Supplement al Budget as indicated in the chart below. In addition, given that it is difficult to
predict legal costs for potential grievances, lit igation defense, disciplinary matters, and/or
personnel investigations, staff requests carrying forward existing unexpended funds that were
encumbered in 2017-18.
Item Account Number Amount
2018-19 Budget for LCW 100.30100.7227 $42,400
Budget remaining from 2017-18 100.30100.7227 $42,400*
Total Budget $84,800
Total Amount of the Contract Not to exceed
$84,800
Remaining Balance $ 0
*May use some of this amount before end of 17-18 fiscal year. Will request carry over remaining balance at that
time.
ALTERNATIVES
1) Direct staff to issue an RFP for legal services instead contracting with LCW. This is not
advised given the long-standing relationship with LCW and excellent service they have
provided.
2) Do not approve the additional funding for LCW. This is not recommended as legal
demands are difficult to predict and the funds are available for this purpose.
Attachments:
a - LCW 2018-19 Contract
Packet Pg. 78
Item 7
8112054.1 LC001-009
AGREEMENT FOR SPECIAL SERVICES
This Agreement is entered into between the law firm of LIEBERT CASSIDY
WHITMORE, a Professional Corporation (“Attorney”), and the CITY OF SAN
LUIS OBISPO, a Municipal Corporation (“City”).
1. Conditions
This Agreement will not take effect, and Attorney will have no obligation to
provide services, until City returns a properly signed and executed copy of this
Agreement.
2. Attorney’s Services
Attorney agrees to provide City with consulting, representational and legal
services pertaining to employment relations matters, including representation in
administrative and City proceedings, as requested by City or otherwise required by
law.
3. Fees, Costs, Expenses
City agrees to pay Attorney the sums billed monthly for time spent by Attorney in
providing the services, including reasonable travel time, not exceed $84,800 unless
mutually agreed upon by the parties.
The range of hourly rates for Attorney time is from Two Hundred and Ten to
Three Hundred Seventy Dollars ($210.00 - $350.00), One Hundred Ninety-Five Dollars
to Two Hundred and Thirty Dollars ($195.00 - $230.00) for time of Labor Relations/HR
Consultant and from Eighty to One Hundred
Seventy Dollars ($80.00 - $170.00) for time of paraprofessional and litigation support
staff. Attorney reviews its hourly rates on an annual basis and, if appropriate, adjusts
Packet Pg. 79
Item 7
8112054.1 LC001-009
them effective July 1. Attorneys and paraprofessional staff bill their time in minimum
units of one-tenth of an hour.
City agrees to reimburse Attorney for necessary costs (including travel expenses)
incurred by Attorney on behalf of City. Attorney bills photocopying charges at Fifteen
Cents ($.15) per page and facsimile charges at Twenty-Five Cents ($0.25) per page. A
Public Agency Fee and Cost Schedule is attached to this Agreement and is incorporated
herein by reference.
Payment by City against monthly billings is due upon receipt of statements, and is
considered delinquent if payment is not received within t hirty (30) days of the date of the
invoice.
The California Business & Professions Code requires us to inform you whether
we maintain errors and omissions insurance coverage applicable to the services to be
rendered to you. We hereby confirm that the firm does maintain such insurance coverage.
4. Arbitration of Professional Liability or Other Claims
Disputes. If a dispute between City and Attorney arises over fees charged for
services, the controversy will be submitted to binding arbitration in accorda nce with the
rules of the California State Bar Fee Arbitration Program, set forth in California Business
and Professions Code, sections 6200 through 6206. The arbitrator or arbitration panel
shall have the authority to award to the prevailing party attorne ys’ fees, costs and interest
incurred. Any arbitration award may be served by mail upon either side and personal
service shall not be required.
If a dispute arises between City and Attorney over any other aspect of the
attorney-client relationship, including, without limitation, a claim for breach of
professional duty, that dispute will also be resolved by arbitration. It is understood that
Packet Pg. 80
Item 7
8112054.1 LC001-009
any dispute as to any alleged breach of professional duty (that is, as to whether any legal
services rendered under this agreement were allegedly unnecessary, unauthorized, omitted
entirely, or were improperly, negligently or incompetently rendered) will be dete rmined
by submission to arbitration as provided by California law, and not by a lawsuit or resort
to court process except as California law provides for judicial review of arbitration
proceedings. Both parties to this agreement, by entering into it, are gi ving up their
constitutional right to have any such dispute decided in a court of law before a jury,
and instead are accepting the use of arbitration. Each party is to bear its own
attorney’s fees and costs.
5. Hold Harmless and Indemnification
Attorney agrees to indemnify, protect and hold City and its agents, officers and
employees harmless from and against any and all claims asserted or liability established
for damages or injuries to any person or property, including injury to the Attorney’s
employees, agents or officers that arise from or are connected with or are caused or
claimed to be caused by the negligent acts or omissions of Attorney, and its agents,
officers or employees, in performing the work or services herein, and all expenses of
invest igating and defending against same; provided, however, that the Attorney’s duty to
indemnify and hold harmless shall not include any claims or liability arising from the
established sole negligence or willful misconduct of the City, its agents, officers or
employees.
6. Insurance
Attorney shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance
against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in
Packet Pg. 81
Item 7
8112054.1 LC001-009
connection with the performance of the work hereunder by t he Attorney, its agents,
representatives, employees or subcontractors.
Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as:
1. Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence
form CG 0001).
2. Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile
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 attorney’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 City. City may review options with Attorney, which may
Packet Pg. 82
Item 7
8112054.1 LC001-009
include reduction or elimination of the deductible ($50,000) or self-insured retention,
substitution of other coverage, or other solutions.
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, and agents are to be covered as
additional insureds as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on
behalf of the Attorney; products and completed operations of the Attorney; premises
owned, occupied or used by the Attorney; or automobiles owned, leased, hired or
borrowed by the Attorney. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the
scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, official, employees, or agents.
2. For any claims related to this project, the Attorney’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, emp loyees, agents or volunteers shall be excess of the Attorney’s
insurance and shall not contribute with it.
3. The Attorney’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 30 (thirty) days' prior written notice has been given
to the City.
Packet Pg. 83
Item 7
8112054.1 LC001-009
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. Attorney shall furnish the City with a certificate of insurance
showing maintenance of the required insurance coverage. Original endorsements effecting
general liability 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.
7. File Retention
After our services conclude, Attorney will, upon City’s request, deliver the file for
the matter to City, along with any funds or property of City’s in our pos session. If City
requests the file for the matter, Attorney will retain a copy of the file at the City’s
expense. If City does not request the file for this matter, we will retain it for a period of
seven (7) years after this matter is closed. If City does not request delivery of the file for
this matter before the end of the seven (7) year period, we will have no further obligation
to retain the file and may, at our discretion, destroy it without further notice to City. At
any point during the seven (7) year period, City may request delivery of the file. Attorney
will endeavor to timely inform City prior to destruction of files in order that
City may elect to have them shipped to City at its expense.
8. Assignment
This Agreement is not assignable without the written consent of City.
9. Independent Contractor
It is understood and agreed that Attorney, while engaged in performing the terms
of this Agreement, is an independent contractor and not an employee of Cit y.
Packet Pg. 84
Item 7
8112054.1 LC001-009
10. Authority
The signators to this Agreement represent that they hold the positions set forth
below their signatures, and that they are authorized to execute this Agreement on behalf
of their respective parties and to bind their respective parties hereto.
11. Term
This Agreement is effective July 1, 2018 to June 30, 2019, and may be modified
by mutual agreement of the parties. This agreement shall be terminable by either party
upon thirty (30) days written notice.
LIEBERT CASSIDY WHITMORE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
A Professional Corporation A Municipal Corporation
By __________________________ By_______________________
J. Scott Tiedemann
Title: Managing Partner Title:
Date _________________________
Date
_____________________
APPROVED AS TO FORM
By ______________________
Title:
Date _____________________
I. PUBLIC AGENCY FEE SCHEDULE
Hourly Rates (As of Agreement Effective Date)
Partners $370.00
Senior Counsel $320.00
Packet Pg. 85
Item 7
8112054.1 LC001-009
Associates $210.00 - $300.00
Labor Relations/Human Resources Consultant $195.00 - $230.00
Paraprofessionals & Litigation Support $80.00 - $170.00
II. COST SCHEDULE
Photocopies $0.15 per copy
Facsimile Transmittal $0.25 per page
Packet Pg. 86
Item 7
Meeting Date: 6/19/2018
FROM: Daryl Grigsby, Director of Public Works
Prepared By: Scott Lee, Parking Services Manager
SUBJECT: AWARD CONTRACT FOR PARKING SECURITY GUARD SERVICES,
SPECIFICATION NO 91625.
RECOMMENDATION
1. Award the contract to In House Security Service, LLC. as approved by the City Council in an
amount up to $88,000 for the provision of services as detailed in Specification Number 91625.
2. Approve the use of working capital to fund the additional annual cost of $40,000.
DISCUSSION
On March 20, 2018, the City Council authorized the release of the RFP for Parking Security Guard
Services in specification Number 91625. The same action also authorized the City Manager to enter
into a contract with the successful bidder within the authorized project budget not to exceed
$48,000.
The purpose of this proposal was to continue to contract with a vendor to furnish security guard
services at each of the three existing parking structures. Parking Services has utilized outside
contracted security services since 2010. This approach is part of an ongoing crime prevention
strategy for the parking structures and provides benefit to both the parking customers and staff
who work during the evening and weekend shifts.
Bids were opened on April 9, 2018 and three responses were received. All three firms were brought
in for interviews and after evaluation and review of each response, as well as checking the
contractors’ references, the recommendation is to contract with In House Security Service, LLC.
The current contract with In House Security expired on October 31, 2017 and is operating on a
month-to-month extension basis. The new contract shall be for a period of four (4) years, with
two (2) additional two -year extensions available to the City at its sole discretion.
The vendor is currently providing the same services to the Parking division and therefore there will
be no service disruption. The current vendor has provided excellent service in the past and has
responded to changes or additional requests from the City in a timely and professional manner.
The current RFP included a roughly seventy (70%) percent increase in the total hours of service to
be provided each week over the prior contract and requires the addition of a second position on
certain days to effectively cover all three existing structures. The hourly rate provided in the bids
were also significantly higher than the prior contract which was issued in 2010 and extended as
allowed in the original contract. These factors resulted in the proposed bids being significantly
higher than the budget amount projected for the service.
Packet Pg. 87
Item 8
Each of the three proposals received contained current hourly rates at the same or slightly lower
than this vendor’s bid, however, factoring each vendor’s proposed annual CPI and other increases
specified over the four (4) year term of the contract and additional 2 two -year extensions, the total
projected cost for this vendor is lowest. See attached Bid Summary, Attachment 1.
CONCURRENCES
The police department concurs with this ser vice as a strategy to reduce calls for service for the
parking structures and as an overall crime deterrent measure.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The recommended actions are not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act.
FISCAL IMPACT
The project was approved as part of the 2017-19 Financial Plan as included in the Contract
Services line total for $48,000 within the Parking Fund. The additional $40,000 will be funded
from Parking Fund working capital.
Fiscal Summary
2017-19 Financial Plan Amount
Budget $48,000
Additional appropriation from working capital $40,000
Contract Amount $88,000
Total $88,000
Balance $0
ALTERNATIVE
Deny the award. The City Council could choose to reject all bids and direct staff to re-advertise or
re-design the scope of work. Staff does not recommend this alternative because it may pose
public safety issues at the three parking garages and increase the calls for service to the Police
Department.
Packet Pg. 88
Item 8
Meeting Date: 6/19/2018
FROM: Michael Codron, Community Development Director
Prepared By: Xzandrea Fowler, Community Development Deputy Director
SUBJECT: CAPITAL FACILITIES FEE PROGRAM (AB 1600) FEE TABLE
MODIFICATION
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution to modify the development impact fee table that is set forth in Resolution
10879 (2018 Series).
DISCUSSION
Background
On April 3, 2018 the City Council voted 5:0 to introduce Ordinance 1646 to establish and
implement the Capit al Facilities Fee Program (CFFP). The CFFP establishes development
impact fees which are imposed as a condition of approval upon all development projects for
which a building permit is issued on or after the effective date of the ordinance. Those
development impact fees are established for the following pub lic facilities:
a.General Government Impact Fee;
b.Fire Impact Fee;
c.Parkland In-Lieu Fee;
d.Parks and Recreation Development Impact Fee;
e.Police Impact Fee; and
f.Transportation Impact Fee.
The Ordinance authorizes the amount of the fees to be established by resolution.
The Ordinance was adopted by the City Council on April 17, 2018 and became effective on May
17, 2018. On April 3, 2018, the City Council approved Resolution 10879 (2018 Series)
(Attachment B) which sets the fees for each of the categories listed above. The newly adopted
development impact fees for capital improvement infrastructure associated with transportation,
parks and recreation, public safety, and general government go into effect on July 1, 2018 .
Modifying the Development Impact Fee Table
1.Parkland In-Lieu Fee - Multifamily Condominium
Following the adoption of the Ordinance and the Resolution, staff discovered that the fee
table in the Resolution inadvertently omitted the land use fee category for “Multifamily
Condominium,” which should have a different Parkland In-Lieu fee amount than the “Single
Family” or the “Multifamily Apartments” land use fee categories. To avoid overcharging
“Multifamily Condominium” developments, the appropriate Parkland In-lieu fee needs to be
included in the fee table to reflect the $3,151 fee for “Single Family,” the $2,269 fee for
Packet Pg. 89
Item 9
“Multifamily Condominium,” and the $1,457 fee for “Multifamily Apartments.” The
proposed amendment to the fee table is provided as Exhibit A in Attachment A.
2. Add-on Transportation Fees – Prado Road Interchange and LOVR Interchange
Following the adoption of the Ordinance and the Resolution, t he new “Citywide
Transportation Impact Fee (TIF)” basically consolidated the city’s base and subarea TIFs into
three components (a Citywide base TIF, a Prado Road add-on TIF, and a Los Osos Valley
Road (LOVR) add-on TIF). The Prado Road add-on funds the Highway 101/Prado Road
Interchange improvements plus related financing costs. The LOVR add -on provides
reimbursement funding for the Highway 101/Los Osos Valley Road Interchange
improvements plus applicable financing costs.
The three components of the Citywide TIF are applicable to every property in the City,
except for properties within the existing LOVR subarea and the newly adopted San Luis
Ranch (SLR) Specific Plan area. The exception is necessary because, entitled developments
within the LOVR and SLR subareas are already required to pay a set amount towards the
LOVR interchange or the Prado Road interchange improvements. To avoid charging new
development in those areas more than their fair share, the Citywide TIF was modified
accordingly.
The Capital Facilities Development Impact Fee Nexus Study (Nexus Study) included
additional tables to reflect the modified Citywide TIF, but those tables were not included in
the adopted Resolution. Only the general Citywide TIF was included in the adopted
Resolution, but the adopted Ordinance referenced the modified tables. During the community
outreach that occurred prior to the adoption of the CFFP, staff rep eatedly communicated that
the new Citywide TIF applied to new development in the SLR and LOVR areas would be
modified to account for the existing TIF arrangements/obligations in a transparent and easy
to calculate manner, as illustrated in the Nexus Study.
Therefore, the TIF fee table, as set forth in the Resolution needs to be modified to reflect the
transportation impact fee adjustments for the developments that are not subject to the
additional Prado Road Interchange Add-on or the LOVR Interchange Add-on transportation
impact fees. The proposed fee table modifications are shown as Exhibit A, Tables 2 and 3, of
Attachment A.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The adoption of the modified Resolution is (1) not a Project under the California Environmental
Quality Act (“CEQA”) and is therefore exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section
15378(b)(4); (2) statutorily exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15273(a)(4) (Rates,
Tolls, Fares and Charges for obtaining funds for capital projects necessary to maintain service
within existing service area); (3) not intended to apply to specific capital improvement projects
and as such it is speculative to evaluate such projects now and any specifically identified
transportation projects were already evaluated under CEQA and imp osed as mitigation measures
in previously certified EIRs and/or adopted mitigated negative declarations; and/or (4) not
intended to, nor does it, provide CEQA clearance for future development -related projects by
Packet Pg. 90
Item 9
mere payment of the fees. Each of the forego ing provides a separate and independent basis for
CEQA compliance and when viewed collectively provides an overall basis for CEQA
compliance.
FISCAL IMPACT
The proposed modifications to the Resolution will not alter the original fiscal impact
assumptio ns, because the assumptions included in the analysis for the CFFP nexus study
included the Parkland In-Lieu Fee – Multifamily Condominium and the Add-on Transportation
Fees for the Prado Road Interchange and LOVR Interchange improvements. Therefore, the
inclusion of those fees into the fee table will not impact the forecasted revenue and/or cost
associated with the implementation of the CFFP.
ALTERNATIVE
The following alternative is available to Council should you choose to adopt the modifications as
recommended by staff:
1. Reject the proposed modification to the Resolution. The City Council may reject the
proposed modifications to the development impact fee table(s) as set forth in Resolution No.
10879 (2018 Series). Staff does not recommend this action because it would result in the
over-charging of Parkland In-Lieu impact fees for any new multifamily condominium
development and the over-charging of Transportation Impact Fees for all development types
within the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan and the LOVR Subarea.
Attachments:
a - Amended Resolution
b - Resolution 10879
Packet Pg. 91
Item 9
R ______
RESOLUTION NO. _____ (2018 SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, MODIFYING THE CAPITAL FACILITIES FEE
PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE TABLES AS SET FORTH IN
RESOLUTION NO. 10879 (2018 SERIES)
WHEREAS, on April 17, 2018 the City Council adopted Ordinance 1646 to establish and
implement the Capital Facilities Fee Program (CFFP). The CFFP establishes development impact
fees which are imposed as a condition of approval upon all development projects for which a
building permit is issued on or after the effective date of the ordinance. The Ordinance also
authorizes the City t o set the amount of the impact fees by resolution;
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 10879 (2018 Series) set fees for the
following fee categories.
a) General Government Impact Fee;
b) Fire Impact Fee;
c) Parkland In-Lieu Fee;
d) Parks and Recreation Development Impact Fee;
e) Police Impact Fee; and
f) Transportation Impact Fee.
WHEREAS, the impact fee table exhibit in Resolution No. 10879 (2018 Series)
inadvertently omitted: the land use fee category for “Multifamily Condominium;” the Prado Road
Interchange Add-on transportation fee adjustment for development within the San Luis Ranch
Specific Plan area, which funds a significant portion of the Highway 101/Prado Road Interchange
improvements plus related financing; and the Los Osos Valley Road Int erchange Add-on
transportation fee adjustment for new development in the Los Osos Valley Road subarea, which
funds a portion of the Highway 101/ Los Osos Valley Road Interchange improvements plus related
financing; and
WHEREAS, the omitted fee information was included in the Capital Facilities
Development Impact Fee Nexus Study, dated March 20, 2018, prepared by Economic Planning
Systems, Inc., and was incorporated by reference into the findings of Ordinance 1646 and
Resolution No. 10879; and
WHEREAS, modifying the fee table exhibit in Resolution No. 10879 (2018 Series) to
include the omitted fee information, described above, will prevent the over -charging of parkland
in-lieu fees and transportation impact fees for development projects in the future.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo
as follows:
SECTION 1. Recitals. The above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein
by this reference.
Packet Pg. 92
Item 9
Resolution No. ______ (2018 Series) Page 2
SECTION 2. Findings. The City Council hereby finds as fo llows:
a) The purpose of the updated development impact fees is to further protect public
health, safety, and general welfare by providing adequate transportation, park and
recreation, fire, police, and general government facilities to satisfy the needs of new
development and to mitigate the impacts of new development on the City’s capital
facilities and improvements.
b) The updated development impact fees collected pursuant to this resolution shall be
used only to pay for facilities and improvements identified in the Capital Facilities
Development Impact Fee Nexus Study and shall not be in lieu of any other fee or
tax as may be required by the Municipal Code.
c) There is a reasonable relationship between the types of development on which the
development impact fees are imposed and the use of the development impact fees
and the need for the facilities and improvements.
d) As required by Government Code Section 66001 et seq., there is a reasonable
relationship between the amount of the updated development impact fees and the
cost of the facilities and improvements attributable to the developments on which
the development impact fees are imposed. The estimated costs of facilities and
improvements, including financing costs, to be paid for as shown in the Capital
Facilities Development Impact Fee Nexus Study, for the City of san Luis Obispo,
dated March 20, 2018, prepared by economic Planning systems, Inc. the findings
and analysis of which are hereby incorporated by reference, have been allocated to
new development.
SECTION 3. Cost Estimates. At any time, the actual or estimated costs of facilities
identified in the development impact fee analysis changes, the Finance Director shall review the
development impact fee and determined whether the change affects the amount of the development
impact fees. If the development impact fees are significantly affected, the Finance Director shall,
within thirty (30) days, recommend to the Council a revised fee for their consideration.
SECTION 4. Amount of Development Impact Fees. Effective July 1, 2018, development
impact fees for capital improvement infrastructure associated with transportation, parks and
recreation, public safety, and general government shall be in the amounts set forth in Exhibits A,
attached hereto. Unless otherwise acted upon by the Council, the amount of the development
impact fees will automatically be adjusted on July 1 of each subsequent year in accordance with
San Luis Obispo Municipal Code section 4.56.040.
SECTION 5. Amending Existing Resolution. Resolution Number 10879 (2018 Series) is
hereby amended and superseded to the extent inconsistent herewith.
SECTION 6: Environmental Review. The adoption of the modified Resolution is
(1) not a Project under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and is therefore
exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(4); (2) statutorily exempt pursuant to
CEQA Guidelines section 15273(a)(4) (Rates, Tolls, Fares and Charges for obtaining funds for
Packet Pg. 93
Item 9
Resolution No. ______ (2018 Series) Page 3
capital projects necessary to maintain service within existing service area); (3) not intended to
apply to specific capital improvement projects and as such it is speculative to evaluate such
projects now and any specifically identified transportation projects were already evaluated under
CEQA and imposed as mitigation measures in previously certified EIRs and/or adopted mitigated
negative declarations; and/or (4) not intended to, nor does it, provide CEQA clearance for future
development -related projects by mere payment of the fees. Each of the foregoing provides a
separate and independent basis for CEQA compliance and when viewed collectively provides an
overall basis for CEQA compliance.
Upon motion of _______________________, seconded by _______________________,
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was adopted this _____ day of _____________________ 2018.
____________________________________
Mayor Heidi Harmon
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Teresa Purrington
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 ______________, _________.
Packet Pg. 94
Item 9
Resolution No. ______ (2018 Series) Page 4
____________________________________
Teresa Purrington
City Clerk
Packet Pg. 95
Item 9
Resolution No. ______ (2018 Series) Page 5
EXHIBIT A
CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
Effective July 1, 2018
Table 1: Citywide Capital Facilities Fee Schedule
See Table 2 for San Luis Ranch Subarea Fee Schedule and Table 3 for Los Osos Valley Road
Subarea Fee Schedule.
Packet Pg. 96
Item 9
Resolution No. ______ (2018 Series) Page 6
Table 2: San Luis Ranch Subarea Fee Schedule
See Table 1 for Citywide Capital Facilities Fee Schedule and Table 3 for Los Osos Valley Road
Subarea Fee Schedule.
Table 3: Los Osos Valley Road Subarea Fee Schedule
Packet Pg. 97
Item 9
Resolution No. ______ (2018 Series) Page 7
See Table 1 for Citywide Capital Facilities Fee Schedule and Table 2 for San Luis Ranch Subarea
Fee Schedule.
Packet Pg. 98
Item 9
RESOLUTION NO. 10879 (2018 SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING AND ESTABLISHING CAPITAL
FACILITIES FEE, ALSO REFERRED TO AS DEVELOPMENT IMPACT
FEES
WHEREAS, existing local, state and federal resources are insufficient to meet the City of
San Luis Obispo's capital improvements infrastructure and facility needs for transportation, parks
and recreation, general government, and public safety; and
WHEREAS, new development generally increases the demand for capital infrastructure
improvements and facilities and affect the quality of the community's infrastructure; and
WHEREAS, the public interest, convenience, health, safety and/or welfare require that
fire, parks and recreation, police, and transportation infrastructure be provided for the maintenance
and enhancement of the quality of life of the City's residents; and
WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo has a critical need to ensure that impacts from
new development to transportation, fire, parks and recreation, police, and general government
hereinafter defined as "capital improvements") are addressed, and development impact fees are a
commonly -used mechanism to address this need; and
WHEREAS, Article XI, Section 5 of the California Constitution provides that the City, as
a home rule charter city, has the power to make and enforce all ordinances and regulations in
respect to municipal affairs, and Article XI, Section 7, empowers the City to enact measures that
protect the health, safety, and/or welfare of its residents; and
WHEREAS, Section 203 of the San Luis Obispo City Charter provides that the City has
the right and power to make and enforce all laws and regulations in respect to municipal affairs;
and
WHEREAS, the Mitigation Fee Act (AB 1600), codified in California Government Code
Sections 66000-66025, establishes the legal requirements for a jurisdiction to implement a
development impact fee program in conformance with constitutional standards; and
WHEREAS, many cities and counties have adopted and imposed capital improvement
impact fees on new development to ensure that impacts from new development are addressed; and
WHEREAS, policies supporting development impact fees for capital improvements are
included in the recently adopted specific plans and related General Plan amendments, for Avila
Ranch, San Luis Ranch, Orcutt Area, Margarita Area, and the Airport Area, as well as the 2014
Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) of the City's General Plan, the 2015 Housing Element,
and the 2013 Economic Development Strategic Plan; and
I' 1: 5
Packet Pg. 99
Item 9
Resolution No. 10879 (2018 Series) Page 2
WHEREAS, the City Council introduced an Ordinance to establish a Capital Facilities Fee
Program that identified the impact fees that are necessary to maintain an adequate level of capital
improvement infrastructure for transportation, parks and recreation, public safety, and general
government at a duly noticed public hearing, at a regular meeting of the City Council on April 3,
2018; and
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Ordinance 1646 amending Chapter 4.56 of the
Municipal Code to establish a Capital Facilities Fee Program that identified the impact fees that
are necessary to maintain an adequate level of capital improvement infrastructure for
transportation, parks and recreation, public safety, and general government at a duly noticed public
hearing, at a regular meeting of the City Council on April 17, 2018. The Capital Facilities Fee
Program, as codified in Chapter 4.56, states that the amount of each Capital Facilities Fee be
established by Resolution of the City Council; and
WHEREAS, an analysis of the required Capital Facilities Development Impact Fees to
support the City's capital improvement infrastructure for transportation parks and recreation,
public safety, and general government was identified in the Capital Facilities Development Impact
Fee Nexus Study, and cost information for capital projects have been completed for the fees
identified as included in the attached Exhibits A and incorporated herein by this reference.
WHEREAS, by this Resolution, the City Council intends on establishing the amount of
such rates and charges.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo
as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings
a) The purpose of development impact fees is to protect the public health, safety, and
general welfare by providing adequate transportation, park and recreation, fire,
police, and general government facilities to satisfy the needs of new development
and to mitigate the impacts of new development on the City's capital facilities and
improvements.
b) The development impact fees collected pursuant to this resolution shall be used
only to pay for facilities and improvements identified in the development impact
fee analysis and shall not be in lieu of any other fee or tax as may be required by
the Municipal Code.
C) There is a reasonable relationship between the types of development on which the
development impact fees are imposed and the use of the development impact fees
and the need for the facilities and improvements. All new development requires
adequate water supply, treatment and distribution as well as wastewater collection
and treatment facilities to protect the public health and safety.
R 10879
Packet Pg. 100
Item 9
Resolution No. 10879 (2018 Series) Page 3
d) As required by Government Code Section 66001 et seq., there is a reasonable
relationship between the amount of the development impact fee and the cost of the
facilities and improvements attributable to the developments on which the
development impact fees are imposed. The estimated costs of facilities and
improvements, including financing costs, to be paid for as shown in the Capital
Facilities Development Impact Fee Nexus Study, for the City of San Luis Obispo,
dated March 20, 2018 2018, prepared by Economic Planning Systems, Inc. the
findings and analysis of which are hereby incorporated by reference, have been
allocated to new development.
SECTION 2. Cost Estimates. At any time that the actual or estimated costs of facilities
identified in the development impact fee analysis changes, the Finance Director shall review the
development impact fee and determine whether the change affects the amount of the development
impact fees. If the development impact fees are significantly affected, the Finance Director shall,
within thirty (30) days, recommend to the Council a revised fee for their consideration.
SECTION 3. Amount of Development Impact Fees. Effective July 1, 2018, development
impact fees for capital improvement infrastructure associated with transportation, parks and
recreation, public safety, and general government shall be in the amounts set forth in Exhibits A
and B attached hereto. Unless otherwise acted upon by the Council, the amount of the development
impact fees will automatically be adjusted on July 1 of each subsequent year by the Municipal
Cost Index for the prior year.
Upon motion of Vice Mayor Christianson, seconded by Council Member Pease, and on the
following roll call vote:
AYES: Council Members Gomez, Rivoire and Pease,
Vice Mayor Christianson and Mayor Harmon
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
The foregoing resolution was adopted this 3`d day of April 2018.
ATTEST:
Teresa Purrington
Acting City Clerk
R 10879
Packet Pg. 101
Item 9
Resolution No. 10879 (2018 Series)
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
J. istine Dietrick
ty Attorney
Page 4
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City
of San Luis Obispo, California, this I D`' day of Y , 1 20 1
Teresa Purrington
Acting City Clerk
R 10879
Packet Pg. 102
Item 9
Resolution No. 10879 (2018 Series)
EXHIBIT A
CAPITAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
Effective July 1, 2018
Page 5
General Total
Land Use Transportation (1) Parks (2) Government (3) Police (4) Fire (6) Recommended Recommended Fee
Fee w/ Adimin_ (6)
Residential
Single Family (7)
1,400 Sq -Ft or Larger (per Unit)
Between 700 and 1,400 Sq. Ft
Transportation Fee is Per Sq.Ft_
Other Fees are per Unit)
Up to 699 Sq.Ft (per Unit)
Multifamily (per Unit) (8)
1,100 Sq -Ft or Larger (per Unit)
Between 550 and 1,100 Sq.Ft
Transportation Fee is Per Sq.Ft-
011w Fees are per Unit)
Up to 549 Sq.Ft (per Unit)
Non -Residential
Office (per Sq -Ft.) (9)
Service (Per Sq -Ft-) (9)
Rem (per Sq.FQ (10)
Industrial (per Sq.FL) (9)
Institutional (per Sq.Ft)
Lodging (per Room) (10)
9,828 6,030 0 668 569 17,096 17,395
7.02 6,030 0 668 569 Requires Calculation
10. 09
4,914 6,030 0 668 569 12,182 12,395
7,636 3,530 0 481 410 12,057 12,268
6.94 3,530 0 481 410 Requires Ca)cuianon
11.79
3,818 3,530 0 481 410 8,239 8,383
9.47 0 0 0.44 0.38 10.29 10.47
9.47 0 0 0.24 0.21 9.92 10. 09
13.75 0 0 0.24 021 14.20 14.45
5.82 0 0 0. 18 0.15 6.15 6.25
11.14 0 0 0.24 0.21 11.59 11.79
3,958 0 0 133 113 4,205 4,278
1) The transportation fee represents the recommended schedule that applies in most areas of the City. The exceptions are in the LOVR fee subarea and the SLR project area
where reduced Citywide, fees appty.
2) Recommended fee schedule applies the park fees to single family and multifamily development but nut commercial development Fees shown are for murttfamtly apartments.
Fee for multifamily condos vary per Chapter 4 of the Nexus Study.
3) Recormrended fee schedule does not chaW a General Government fee_
4) Ponce fees are disocunled by 54% to achieve the same fee levels that were shared at the January 2018 City Council Study Session, despite the adjustments to the maximum
allowable lee revels
5) Fire fees are not discounted
6) Reflects recommerMed fee levels with a 1.75% administrative fee_
7) The transportation single famfy fee is tiered to inoentivize smal4er, more affordable units. The maximum fee applies to single family units of 1,400 sq ft. and above Below
1,400 sq.fL, fees decrease proportionally by size of the unit A minimum fee is set at 50 percent of the maximum fee.
8) The irarrsgcrlalon multifamily fee is tiered so that the muitifan* fee never exceeds the single family fee for the same unit size_
9) The transportation fee for office, service and industrial uses are discounted by 15%. These uses pay 85% of the maximum fee_
10) The tramsportatior fee for retail and hotel uses are discounted by BO%_ These uses pay 40% of the maximum fee_
Sources: City of San Luis Obispo; Economic S Planning Systems, Inc
R 10879
Packet Pg. 103
Item 9
Page intentionally left
blank.
Packet Pg. 104
Item 9
Meeting Date: 6/19/2018
FROM: Daryl R. Grigsby, Director of Public Works
Prepared By: Timothy Scott Bochum, Deputy Director
Hai Nguyen, Engineer II
SUBJECT: ROADWAY SEALING AND LAUREL LANE COMPLETE STREETS 2018
PROJECT, SPECIFICATION NO. 91630
RECOMMENDATION
Active Transportation Committee Recommendation
1. Direct staff to move forward with a contract change order to construct parking protected Class
IV bike lanes on Laurel Lane in lieu of buffered Class II bike lanes (vote: 3-2).
Staff Recommendations
1. Award a contract to VSS International, Inc. in the amount of $2,493,000 for the Roadway
Sealing, and bulb-outs at the intersection of Laurel & Southwood and Laurel & August, and
buffered Class II bike lanes, and
2. Approve the following budget transfers:
a) $1,800,783.63 from the Street Reconstruction & Resurfacing (Street R&R) master account
to the project account; and
b) $12,600 from the Raise Valve Covers account to the project account for adjustment of
water facilities included in this project; and
c) $11,550 from the Wastewater Collection System Improvements master account to the
project account for upgrading and adjusting sewer facilities included in this project; and
d) $90,000 from the Bicycle Facility Improvements account to the project account for this
project; and
e) $81,556 from the Bicycle Transportation Implementation account to the project account
for this project; and
f) $307,130.52 from the Storm Drain System Replacement account to the project account
for this project; and
3. Appropriate $793,100 of funding for the project subject to the approval of the 2018-19 Financial
Plan Supplement.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF
On May 1 st, the City Council heard a proposal regarding the 2018-19 Road Sealing program in
Pavement Areas 2 and 3 wherein the Laurel Lane Complete Streets project would be included in
that project. Council directed staff to identify funding for the entire project, and, to consider a
Packet Pg. 105
Item 10
parking protected (Class IV) bike lane design for Laurel Lane. Staff reviewed the Capital
Projects scheduled for 2018-19 and identified projects which, due to unforeseen circumstances,
will cause delays. Those funds are recommended to be reallocated to the Sealing/Complete
Streets portion of the project.
Regarding the Separated Bike Facility, staff considered that option and is recommending – due
to inconsistent adopted design guidance, and other design and funding challenges - that council
approve the original bike path design of buffered Class II bike lanes. Bids were received for
Sealing Areas 2 and 3, and the additive alternates for the Laurel Lane Comp lete Streets Project.
In addition to the funding reallocations Council reviewed at the June 5 Supplemental Budget,
staff is recommending an additional reallocation of $307,131 from storm drains in order to
complete all three components (re-striping and bike lanes and both bulb-outs) on Laurel Lane.
The rationale for the reallocation is that a) due to changes in project scopes, lower bids on past
projects and other reasons, the storm drain account includes adequate funding to continue pipe
replacement this year, and b) this project presents a rare opportunity to complete safety
improvements in conjunction with a roadway maintenance project and enhance safe access for
schools, pedestrians, cyclists, transit and motorists.
DISCUSSION
On May 1st, the City Council authorized inviting bids for the Roadway Sealing and Laurel Lane
Complete Streets 2018 Project, Specification Number 91630. Bids were opened on May 24, 2018
and VSS International was the lowest responsible bidder with a proposal of $2,493,000 for the total
project. This bid was higher than the Engineer’s Estimate of $2,226,000 by $267,000. The
Contractor’s references, license and registration with the Department of Industrial Relations have
been verified (See attached Bid Summary, Attachment 1). It is recommended that the project be
awarded to VSS International and various budget amendments and transfers be completed to fund
the project.
Complete Streets Issues – Final Recommendation on Parking Protected Class IV Bike Lanes for
the Laurel Street Project
Also, on May 1st, the City Council approved buffered Class II bike lanes for Laurel Lane from
Johnson to Orcutt but directed staff to evaluate converting the project to include a parking protected
Class IV bike lane design (as opposed to the proposed buffered bike lanes) and return to Council
with a final recommendation.
At this time staff is recommending against Class IV bike lane design at this location. The primary
reasons for this decision are:
1) Staff does not believe there is enough time to explo re and resolve any and all issues relative
to maintaining consistency with NACTO, FHWA and ADA standards, and, maintain the
schedule necessary to take advantage including Laurel Lane Complete Streets with Sealing
Areas 2 and 3;
2) It is possible there could be additional costs related to Class IV. As noted during Budget
Supplement, staff has redirected dollars to include Laurel Lane into the Sealing Project. Bids
Packet Pg. 106
Item 10
received for the project were higher than estimated, and the budget to complete the project
has a narrow window for variance and contingency.
3) If Class IV was considered at the beginning of the project, staff believes many of the issues
noted below could be resolved satisfactorily. It should be noted that Class IV lanes on
Laurel are not part of the approved Bicycle Transportation Plan.
4) Staff recommends the revision of the Active Transportation Plan (ATP); the replacement for
the Bicycle Transportation Plan, include full analysis and consideration of future locations
of protected Class IV bike facilities.
5) Staff believes that the time constraints relative to full resolution of the Class IV issues would
require the Laurel Lane project to be removed from the Area Sealing and rescheduled for a
future time. This is not recommended because costs could increase, and we would lose the
cost savings of combining Laurel Lane Complete Streets with Area Sealing 2 & 3.
At the meeting staff assumed that the conversion would be achievable if it met National Association
of City Transportation Officials (NACTO), Caltrans, Federal Highways Administration (FHWA),
and City standard minimums. Staff has conducted additional review of these issues and based on
design guidance provided by NACTO, FHWA, Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and Public
Rights-of-Way Accessibility Gu idelines (PROWAG). Staff does not recommend installing parking
protected Class IV bike lanes on Laurel Lane as the following issues have not been fully resolved.
1. Inadequate Street Width
An important consideration for parking protected Class IV bike lanes is providing adequate
clearance width between parked cars and the curb face for cyclists as well as between
parked cars and adjacent travel vehicles. The width from vehicle to curb face must be wide
enough so that cyclists have space to maneuver and avoid a collision with car doors,
pedestrians, and other objects. Minimum design guidance calls for 8’ of clearance under
ideal conditions and 10’ of clearance under less than ideal conditions such as hills and
adjacent to transit stops - which is the case for Laurel Lane. Ultimately, Laurel Lane is 2’ -
3’ feet too narrow to accommodate 10’ clearance for parking protected Class IV bike lanes.
The effective width of the bike lane is further compromised by a concrete gutter and seam
reducing the effective riding width to approximately 3.5’ to 4’.
Similarly, the width between parked cars and adjacent travel lanes should be adequate to
accommodate pedestrians exiting parked cars from the driver side. Minimum travel and
parking lanes may lead to pedestrian conflicts in the vehicle thru lane. The parking lane is
also too narrow to accommodate buses without protruding into the vehicle lane or further
reducing the bike lane clearance width.
2. ADA Path of Travel Requirements & Accessible Platforms
ADA path of travel fo r on-street parking is typically provided by virtue of vehicles parking
adjacent to the sidewalk and pedestrian accessible ramps at the ends of street blocks. When
marked parking is provided on the outside of a Class IV bike lane, special consideration
must be made to identify accessible paths of travel from parking spaces as well as at transit
stops. For example, the FHWA design guidance recommends accessible island platforms at
transit stops and accessible spaces such as the one depicted in the figures 1 and 2 below.
Packet Pg. 107
Item 10
Providing these types of facilities are not included in the current projects scope, schedule or
budget. The current project includes the installation of bulb-outs at Augusta and Southwood.
The bulb outs would require significant redesign in order to provide additional accessibility
due to the need to provide marked ADA parking and path of travel from the parking area to
the sidewalk.
Figure 1: FHWA Protected Bike Lane at Bus Stop Planning and Design Guide
Any ADA parking provided at mid-block locations would meet minimum FHWA
requirements but would require the bike lane to be reduced to a minimum of 4’ in width,
including the 1.5 to 2’ gutter, creating a minimal effective riding width of 1.5 feet.
Figure 2: City of Seattle ADA Parking Space Treatment & Accessible Path of Travel
3. Restricted Sight Distance & Parking Removal
A critical consideration of parking protected Class IV bike lanes is maintaining adequate
visibility of oncoming vehicles from driveways and intersections. In order to maintain
adequate sight distance parking must be restricted in certain areas resulting in a net loss of a
minimum of 30 spaces on Laurel, 26 less spaces on the east side and 4 less spaces on the
Packet Pg. 108
Item 10
west side.
Figure 3: Examples of Unsafe Parking Violations at visibility triangles – Telegraph Ave.
Oakland, CA
Additionally, poorly constructed and marked parking protected facilities have resulted in
unsafe parking activities that require significant enforcement and operational maintenance
needs not necessary in curbside parking. Figures 3 and 4 depict examples of parking
violations occurring in a parking protected facility where adequate raised curbing has not
been provided. Figure 3 shows how a vehicle approaching from the side street or driveway
must encroach into the bicycle lanes to see around the visibility restriction created by the
violation.
Figure 4: Examples of Unsafe Parking Violations at visibility triangles – Telegraph Ave.
Oakland, CA
Packet Pg. 109
Item 10
Based upon the primary issues noted above, staff recommends moving forward with the initial
recommendation of the buffered bike lanes as presented to Council on May 1st.
Concurrences - Active Transportation Committee Review
As discussed at the Council meeting, obtaining public input on the potential change to the bike lanes
was a challenge – particularly since the concept had received no community input or feedback as to
impacts or concerns. Staff determined there was not adequate time for a separate noticed public
forum between the May 1st Council direction and the May 17th ATC meeting as the driver for
resolution of the design was needed in order to put Laurel Lane into the Sumer 2018 paving project
queue. Therefore, the ATC meeting was noticed to the public as their opportunity to comment on
the May 1st Council direction. In addition, a full analysis of all design issues was not possible prior
to the meeting date. The ADA access implications, additional hardscape and ramp work that may be
necessary and safety trade off issues were not fully presented as of that meeting. Staff, however,
informed the Committee that additional work was in progress that may affect the final staff
recommendation for Council consideration.
The ATC reviewed general design concepts and had difficulty arriving at a consensus on an
alternative. Ultimately the ATC voted 3-2 to recommend the parking protected Class IV bike lanes
for Council approval.
Figure 5 – Proposed Buffered Bike Lanes, Two Way Left Turn and Bulb-Outs and enhanced crosswalks
proposed on Laurel Lane
Packet Pg. 110
Item 10
FISCAL IMPACT
The total project cost for the Base Bid and Additive Alternative A, B, and C is $2,996,720. The
Council Agenda Report authorizing the advertisement of this project identifies Street R&R funds
will be available on July 1, 2018 to support this project. Additional funding to help complete this
work is planned to be obtained from the Water Distribution System Improvements Master
Account and the Collections System Improvement Master Account to fund all necessary sewer
and wat er infrastructure adjustment to the new pavement. T he Bicycle Facility Improvement
Account and the Bicycle Transportation Implementation Account will also contribute funding to
this work to support striping improvements for bicycle safety a nd sidewalk bulb-out
modifications to the sidewalk at Laurel/Southwood and Laurel/Augusta intersections.
As noted earlier, on June 5th, the City Council reviewed funding recommendations to be
reallocated to the Roadway Sealing and Laurel Lane Complete Streets project shown below in
Table 1:
Table 1: Additional Funding for Laurel Lane Complete Streets Project reviewed by Council on
June 5, 2018
Project LRM Budget
Change
Non-LRM
Funds Added
1. Mission Plaza Railing Upgrade $30,000 $0
2. Storm Drain System Replacements $317,100 $0
3. Parks and Recreation Interior Office Rehabilitation $0 $61,000
4. Laguna Lake Dredging $100,000 $100,000
5. Bike Facilities Improvement $25,000 $0
6. Downtown Renewal $160,000 $0
Sub Total $632,100 $161,000
Total $793,100
In addition to the amounts shown above, staff is recommending an additional reallocation of
$307,131 from the General Capital Outlay’s Storm Drain System Replacements existing account
balance to fully fund all the components of the Laurel Lane Complete Streets Project including
any unforeseen issue during construction. A revised funding reallocation is shown below in
Table 2:
Table 2: Revised Funding Reallocation for Laurel Lane Complete Streets Project
Project LRM Budget
Change
Non-LRM
Funds Added
1. Mission Plaza Railing Upgrade $30,000 $0
2. Storm Drain System Replacements $317,100 $307,131
3. Parks and Recreation Interior Office Rehabilitation $0 $61,000
4. Laguna Lake Dredging $100,000 $100,000
5. Bike Facilities Improvement $25,000 $0
6. Downtown Renewal $160,000 $0
Sub Total $632,100 $468,131
Total $1,100,231
The Laurel Lane project represents a rare opportunity to accomplish a long -desired traffic safety
Packet Pg. 111
Item 10
project consistent with the City’s Traffic Safety Program. That opportunity leads to staff
recommendation to reallocate storm drain funding to this project. This recommendation is based
on Staff’s assessment that reallocating funds will not impede the City’s continued effort to
incrementally improve the overall drainage system. Given the significant reallocations from the
Storm Drain program, the following is a status report on the program. The annual storm drain
CIP is to replace the approximately 22% of the pipe inventory composed of aging Corrugated
Metal Pipe (CMP) as well as other priority flood protection maintenance and replacements.
Approximately 5,290 feet of CMP pipe have been replaced to date since funding became
available. The rationale for the Storm Drain reallocation is as follows:
1) Due to changes in project scope on prior project s, delays in some projects to better
coordinate with other construction projects, and lower bids on past projects, there is
enough funding left in the Storm Drain System Replacement Account to complete
projects shown in the Fiscal Year 2018-19 Project Plan on Table 3 below:
Table 3: Fiscal Year 2018-19 Project Plan
Funding Amount
Storm Drain System Replacement Account Existing Balance $934,898
2018-19 Storm Drain Account Funding $317,100
Reallocation to Laurel Lane Complete Streets Project ($624,231)
Total Funding Available to Support 2018-19 Project Plan $627,858
Projects Estimated Cost
Southwood and Ellen Way Drainage $240,000
Bullock Storm Drain Repair $180,000
Broad Street $45,000
CMP Replacement at Sierra Way $150,000
Storm Drain Culvert Repair – Broad and Leff (Design Funds) $10,000
Total Estimate Project Cost $625,000
2) Storm Drain replacement is a City priority and thus receives an annual allocation such
that the 5-year forecast indicates future funding. That future funding, along with the
existing fund balance, will enable the city to continue with ongoing storm drain
replacement.
Concurrences – Revenue Enhancement Oversight Committee
Of the $1,100,231 reallocation noted in Table 2, $632,100 is Local Revenue Measure (LRM)
funding. Since portions of this funding is LRM, on May 22 the Revenue Enhancement Oversight
Committee (REOC) held a special meeting to review the LRM related reallocations. The REOC
approved the reallocations as consistent with the intended use of LRM. They did note that the
City should be clear in communicating that the reallocations are consistent with essential
services described in the LRM ballot language. They also noted the city should communicate its
continued commitment to storm drain replacement.
The project’s proposed construction budget, as well as funding source allocation, is shown in
Table 4.
Packet Pg. 112
Item 10
ALTERNATIVE
As recommended by the ATC, the Council could direct that a parking protected Class IV bike lane
design be used for Laurel Lane. This direction would require deferral of construction on Laurel
Lane until Summer of 2019 to allow time for redesign of ADA facilities and to address the
associated budget shortfall. If Council chooses to adopt this alternative it would not be in violation
of mandatory design standards but could have risks associated with the issues identified in the
discussions above. Staff does not recommend this alternative because it is inconsistent with adopted
design guidance which could increase liability exposure. Staff also does not recommend this
alternative because it would delay the project by approximately one year and would need additional
funding to address ADA requirements.
Attachments:
a - 91630 Bid Summary
b - 91630 Copy of original report authorizing advertising
c - 91630 Contract
Street R& R
Master
Account
Distribution
System Imp.
Wastewater
Collection
System Imp.
Bicycle
Facility Impr.
Bicycle
Trans.
Implement.
Other
Funding
Sources from
18/19 Projects
(91630)(90346)(90227)(90239)(90572)(91373)Table 2
Total Project Bid $2,493,000 $1,800,783 $10,500 $9,240 $90,000 $81,556 $500,921
Contingencies: 12%$305,220 $2,100 $2,310 $300,810
Total for Construction:$2,798,220 $1,800,783 $12,600 $11,550 $90,000 $81,556 $801,731
Construction Management $180,000 $180,000
Material Testing:$6,000 $6,000
Printing:$500 $500
Public Relations:$12,000 $12,000
Total Cost of Project $2,996,720 $1,800,783 $12,600 $11,550 $90,000 $81,556 $1,000,231
Street Lights on Laurel Lane:$100,000 $100,000
Total funding available after July
1, 2018 $3,096,720 $1,800,783 $12,600 $11,550 $90,000 $81,556 $1,100,231
Funding Sources
TABLE 4: ROADWAY SEALING AND LAUREL LANE COMPLETE STREETS 2018
Project Total
Costs
Packet Pg. 113
Item 10
Roadway Sealing 2018 and Laurel Lane Complete Streets 2018, Specification No. 91630* marks an allowanceItem # SSItem DescriptionUnit of MeasureQuantity Unit Price Item Total Unit Price Item Total Unit Price Item Total Unit Price Item Total Unit PriceItem Total1 37 SLURRY SEAL TYPE IISY 600000 $2.14 $1,284,000.00 $1.89 $1,134,000.00 $1.80 $1,080,000.00 $1.85 $1,110,000.00 $1.60 $960,000.002 85 BLUE HYDRANT REFLECTORS PER ENG. STD 7920EA500$10.00 $5,000.00 $15.75 $7,875.00 $15.75 $7,875.00 $11.00 $5,500.00 $15.00$7,500.003 84 4” WHITELF4700$1.00 $4,700.00 $3.15 $14,805.00 $3.15 $14,805.00 $2.20 $10,340.00 $2.50$11,750.004 84 4” YELLOWLF1200$1.00 $1,200.00 $3.15 $3,780.00 $3.15 $3,780.00 $2.20 $2,640.00 $2.50$3,000.005 84 8” YELLOWLF22$2.00$44.00 $5.25 $115.50 $5.30 $116.60 $3.30$72.60 $3.50$77.006 84 12” WHITELF4600$3.00 $13,800.00 $6.30 $28,980.00 $6.30 $28,980.00 $6.60 $30,360.00 $5.00$23,000.007 84 12” YELLOWLF200$3.00 $600.00 $6.30 $1,260.00 $6.30 $1,260.00 $6.60 $1,320.00 $5.00$1,000.008 84 24” WHITELF12$6.00$72.00 $12.60 $151.20 $12.75 $153.00 $22.00 $264.00 $7.00$84.009 84 BIKE LANE BUFFERLF1700$4.00 $6,800.00 $3.15 $5,355.00 $3.15 $5,355.00 $8.80 $14,960.00 $3.25$5,525.0010 84 GREEN PAINT BIKE LANE COATINGSF850$7.50 $6,375.00 $15.75 $13,387.50 $15.75 $13,387.50 $13.20 $11,220.00 $8.00$6,800.0011 84 “HI‐VIS” CROSSWALKEA8$1,200.00 $9,600.00 $3,675.00 $29,400.00 $3,700.00 $29,600.00 $2,200.00 $17,600.00 $1,200.00$9,600.0012 84 SPEED TABLE PER ENG STD 7325EA6$8,000.00 $48,000.00 $13,475.00 $80,850.00 $13,000.00 $78,000.00 $13,750.00 $82,500.00 $13,000.00$78,000.0013 84 ROAD BUMP PER ENG STD 7321EA4$5,000.00 $20,000.00 $12,862.50 $51,450.00 $12,000.00 $48,000.00 $12,650.00 $50,600.00 $12,500.00$50,000.0014 84 YIELD LINEEA4$1,200.00 $4,800.00 $157.50 $630.00 $160.00 $640.00 $1,100.00 $4,400.00 $70.00$280.0015 56 R1‐5 SIGNEA1$150.00 $150.00 $210.00 $210.00 $210.00 $210.00 $550.00 $550.00 $100.00$100.0016 56 R1‐6W/ S4‐3P SIGNEA1$150.00 $150.00 $367.50 $367.50 $370.00 $370.00 $880.00 $880.00 $250.00$250.0017 56 R10‐6 SIGN W/ POSTEA1$400.00 $400.00 $525.00 $525.00 $530.00 $530.00 $880.00 $880.00 $300.00$300.0018 56 R10‐11 SIGN W/ POSTEA1$400.00 $400.00 $525.00 $525.00 $530.00 $530.00 $880.00 $880.00 $300.00$300.0019 56 R10‐15 SIGN, MODIFIED W/POSTEA1$400.00 $400.00 $525.00 $525.00 $530.00 $530.00 $2,200.00 $2,200.00 $400.00$400.0020 56 SW24‐2(CA) SIGNEA2$400.00 $800.00 $525.00 $1,050.00 $530.00 $1,060.00 $220.00 $440.00 $250.00$500.0021 56 R4‐11 W/ POSTEA8$150.00 $1,200.00 $525.00 $4,200.00 $530.00 $4,240.00 $880.00 $7,040.00 $300.00$2,400.0022 84 DETAIL 1LF1500$0.50 $750.00 $1.05 $1,575.00 $1.05 $1,575.00 $2.20 $3,300.00 $0.60$900.0023 84 DETAIL 16LF2000$1.00 $2,000.00 $2.10 $4,200.00 $2.10 $4,200.00 $3.30 $6,600.00 $1.15$2,300.0024 84 DETAIL 21LF260$1.00 $260.00 $2.63 $683.80 $2.60 $676.00 $2.20 $572.00 $1.15$299.0025 84 DETAIL 22LF16500$1.00 $16,500.00 $3.15 $51,975.00 $3.15 $51,975.00 $2.20 $36,300.00 $1.45$23,925.0026 84 DETAIL 23LF260$1.00 $260.00 $6.30 $1,638.00 $6.30 $1,638.00 $5.50 $1,430.00 $2.30$598.0027 84 DETAIL 25LF350$1.25 $437.50 $1.84 $644.00 $1.80 $630.00 $3.30 $1,155.00 $0.85$297.5028 84 DETAIL 28LF30$1.25$37.50 $5.25 $157.50 $5.30 $159.00 $3.30$99.00 $2.30$69.0029 84 DETAIL 29LF150$1.50 $225.00 $5.78 $867.00 $5.80 $870.00 $4.40 $660.00 $2.85$427.5030 84 DETAIL 31LF550$1.25 $687.50 $5.25 $2,887.50 $5.30 $2,915.00 $4.40 $2,420.00 $2.30$1,265.0031 84 DETAIL 38LF1300$1.00 $1,300.00 $3.68 $4,784.00 $3.70 $4,810.00 $4.40 $5,720.00 $1.15$1,495.0032 84 DETAIL 38BLF90$1.00$90.00 $4.20 $378.00 $4.25 $382.50 $4.40 $396.00 $1.45$130.5033 84 DETAIL 39LF17400$1.00 $17,400.00 $1.05 $18,270.00 $1.05 $18,270.00 $2.20 $38,280.00 $1.05$18,270.0034 84 DETAIL 39ALF1600$1.00 $1,600.00 $1.05 $1,680.00 $1.05 $1,680.00 $2.20 $3,520.00 $0.70$1,120.0035 84 PAVEMENT MARKINGS (ARROWS, BIKE LANE SYMBOL, ETC.)SF6800$4.15 $28,220.00 $8.40 $57,120.00 $8.50 $57,800.00 $6.60 $44,880.00 $8.00$54,400.0036 15 GRIND/REMOVE (E) STRIPING, PAVEMENT MARKINGS & MARKERSLS1$200.00$200.00 $105,000.00$105,000.00$115,000.00 $115,000.00 $96,800.00 $96,800.00 $142,100.00 $142,100.0037 15 BIKE LANE EDGE GRINDLF7600$7.00 $53,200.00 $2.05 $15,580.00 $4.85 $36,860.00 $2.50 $19,000.00 $3.85$29,260.0038 12 TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN AND IMPLEMENTATIONLS1$42,000.00 $42,000.00 $66,118.50 $66,118.50 $342,558.40 $342,558.40 $100,000.00 $100,000.00 $570,000.00 $570,000.0039 5 COMPLY WITH CALTRANS ENCROACHMENT PERMITLS1$10,000.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $1,500.00$1,500.00Base Bid Total$1,583,658.50$1,723,000.00$1,963,421.00$1,718,778.60$2,009,222.501 37 SLURRY SEAL TYPE IISY19500$2.14 $41,730.00 $1.89 $36,855.00 $1.40 $27,300.00 $1.85 $36,075.00 $2.55$49,725.002 39 6” AC PATCH REPAIRSF28500$8.00 $228,000.00 $6.30 $179,550.00 $6.00 $171,000.00 $6.60 $188,100.00 $6.50 $185,250.003 85 BLUE HYDRANT REFLECTORS PER ENG STD 7920EA13$10.00 $130.00 $15.75 $204.75 $15.00 $195.00 $11.00 $143.00 $15.00$195.004 84 4” WHITELF4600$1.00 $4,600.00 $3.15 $14,490.00 $3.00 $13,800.00 $2.20 $10,120.00 $2.50$11,500.005 84 8” WHITELF160$2.00 $320.00 $5.25 $840.00 $5.00 $800.00 $4.40 $704.00 $3.50$560.006 84 12” WHITELF550$3.00 $1,650.00 $6.30 $3,465.00 $6.00 $3,300.00 $6.60 $3,630.00 $5.00$2,750.007 84 12” YELLOWLF80$3.00 $240.00 $6.30 $504.00 $6.00 $480.00 $6.60 $528.00 $5.00$400.008 84 BUFFERED BIKE LANELF4500$3.00 $13,500.00 $3.15 $14,175.00 $3.00 $13,500.00 $8.80 $39,600.00 $3.25$14,625.009 84 GREEN PAINT (BIKE LANE)SF2700$7.50 $20,250.00 $15.75 $42,525.00 $15.00 $40,500.00 $13.20 $35,640.00 $8.00$21,600.0010 84 “HI‐VIS” CROSSWALKEA5$1,200.00 $6,000.00 $3,675.00 $18,375.00 $3,500.00 $17,500.00 $2,200.00 $11,000.00 $1,200.00$6,000.0011 84 YIELD LINEEA1$1,200.00 $1,200.00 $157.50 $157.50 $150.00 $150.00 $1,100.00 $1,100.00 $70.00$70.0012 84 DETAIL 22LF400$1.00 $400.00 $3.15 $1,260.00 $3.00 $1,200.00 $4.40 $1,760.00 $1.45$580.0013 84 DETAIL 29LF220$1.50 $330.00 $5.78 $1,271.60 $5.50 $1,210.00 $5.50 $1,210.00 $2.85$627.0014 84 DETAIL 32LF2100$1.35 $2,835.00 $5.25 $11,025.00 $5.00 $10,500.00 $4.40 $9,240.00 $2.30$4,830.0015 84 DETAIL 37BLF120$1.00 $120.00 $5.25 $630.00 $5.00 $600.00 $4.40 $528.00 $1.15$138.0016 84 DETAIL 38LF400$1.00 $400.00 $3.68 $1,472.00 $3.50 $1,400.00 $4.40 $1,760.00 $1.15$460.0017 84 DETAIL 39LF240$1.00 $240.00 $1.05 $252.00 $1.00 $240.00 $3.30 $792.00 $1.05$252.0018 84 DETAIL 39ALF1000$1.00 $1,000.00 $1.05 $1,050.00 $1.00 $1,000.00 $2.20 $2,200.00 $0.70$700.0019 84 PAVEMENT MARKINGS (ARROWS, BIKE LANE SYMBOLS, ETC.)SF1400$4.15 $5,810.00 $8.40 $11,760.00 $8.00 $11,200.00 $13.20 $18,480.00 $8.00$11,200.0020 15 GRIND/REMOVE (E) STRIPINGLS1$500.00 $500.00 $21,000.00 $21,000.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $41,800.00 $41,800.00 $17,705.00$17,705.0021 15 ADJUST WATER VALVESEA10$1,000.00 $10,000.00 $1,050.00 $10,500.00 $1,000.00 $10,000.00 $1,100.00 $11,000.00 $1,000.00$10,000.0022 15 AJUST SEWER MANHOLESEA8$1,500.00 $12,000.00 $1,155.00 $9,240.00 $1,000.00 $8,000.00 $1,210.00 $9,680.00 $1,100.00$8,800.0023 5 BIKE LANE EDGE GRINDLF170$7.06 $1,200.00 $35.00 $5,950.00 $3.70 $629.00 $2.50 $425.00 $28.00$4,760.0024 12 TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN AND IMPLEMENTATIONLS1$15,000.00 $15,000.00 $26,448.15 $26,448.15 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $58,000.00 $58,000.00 $130,000.00 $130,000.00Additive Alternate “A” Bid Total$367,455.00$413,000.00$346,004.00$483,515.00$482,727.001 73 LAUREL LANE/ SOUTHWOOD DRIVE – NW IMPROVEMENTSLS1$33,785.00 $33,785.00 $40,800.00 $40,800.00 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 $40,000.00 $40,000.00 $42,000.00$42,000.002 73 LAUREL LANE/ SOUTHWOOD DRIVE – SW IMPROVEMENTSLS1$34,570.00 $34,570.00 $47,100.00 $47,100.00 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 $46,200.00 $46,200.00 $50,000.00$50,000.003 73 LAUREL LANE/ SOUTHWOOD DRIVE – NE IMPROVEMENTSLS1$32,560.00 $32,560.00 $34,500.00 $34,500.00 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 $33,000.00 $33,000.00 $38,000.00$38,000.004 73 LAUREL LANE/ SOUTHWOOD DRIVE – SE IMPROVEMENTSLS1$27,238.00 $27,238.00 $28,725.00 $28,725.00 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 $27,000.00 $27,000.00 $32,000.00$32,000.005 12 TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN AND IMPLEMENTATIONLS1$22,000.00 $22,000.00 $35,875.00 $35,875.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $34,500.00 $34,500.00 $34,000.00$34,000.00Additive Alternate “B” Bid Total$150,153.00$187,000.00$120,000.00$180,700.00$196,000.00173LAUREL LANE/ AUGUSTA STREET – NW IMPROVEMENTSLS1$26,797.00 $26,797.00 $30,300.00 $30,300.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $28,600.00 $28,600.00 $33,000.00$33,000.002 73 LAUREL LANE/ AUGUSTA STREET – SW IMPROVEMENTSLS1$28,015.00 $28,015.00 $32,925.00 $32,925.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $31,350.00 $31,350.00 $35,000.00$35,000.003 73 LAUREL LANE/ AUGUSTA STREET – NE IMPROVEMENTSLS1$27,357.00 $27,357.00 $37,650.00 $37,650.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $36,300.00 $36,300.00 $39,000.00$39,000.004 73 LAUREL LANE/ AUGUSTA STREET – SE IMPROVEMENTSLS1$26,535.00 $26,535.00 $34,500.00 $34,500.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $33,000.00 $33,000.00 $37,000.00$37,000.005 12 TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN AND IMPLEMENTATIONLS1$16,000.00 $16,000.00 $34,625.00 $34,625.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $34,000.00 $34,000.00 $32,000.00$32,000.00Additive Alternate “C” Bid Total$124,704.00$170,000.00$95,000.00$163,250.00$176,000.00Total Bid$2,225,970.50$2,493,000.00$2,524,425.00$2,546,243.60$2,863,949.50TELFER TECHNOLOGIESAMERICAN ASPHALT SOUTHEngineer's EstimateVSS INTERNATIONALINTERMOUNTAIN SLURRY SEALPacket Pg. 114Item 10
Packet Pg. 115
Item 10
Packet Pg. 116
Item 10
Packet Pg. 117
Item 10
Packet Pg. 118
Item 10
Packet Pg. 119
Item 10
Packet Pg. 120
Item 10
1 of 5
AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made on this ______ day of ___________, 20__, by and between the City of San Luis
Obispo, a municipal corporation and charter city, San Luis Obispo County, California (hereinafter called the
Owner) and BASIC RESOURCES, INC. DBA VSS INTERNATIONAL, INC. (hereinafter called the
Contractor).
WITNESSETH:
That the Owner and the Contractor for the consideration stated herein agree as follows:
ARTICLE 1, SCOPE OF WORK: The Contractor shall perform everything required to be performed, shall
provide and furnish all of the labor, materials, necessary tools, expendable equipment, and all utility and
transportation services required to complete all the work of construction of
ROADWAY SEALING 2018 AND LAUREL LANE COMPLETE STREETS 2018
SPECIFICATION NO. 91630
in strict compliance with the plans and specifications therefor, including any and all Addenda, adopted by the
Owner, in strict compliance with the Contract Documents hereinafter enumerated.
It is agreed that said labor, materials, tools, equipment, and services shall be furnished and said work performed
and completed under the direction and supervision and subject to the approval of the Owner or its authorized
representatives.
ARTICLE II, CONTRACT PRICE: The Owner shall pay the Contractor as full consideration for the faithful
performance of this Contract, subject to any additions or deductions as provided in the Contract Documents,
the contract prices as follows:
Base Bid
Item Item Unit of Estimated Item Price Total
No. SS(1) Description Measure Quantity (in figures) (in figures)
1 37 SLURRY SEAL TYPE II 600,000 SY $1.89 $1,134,000.00
2 85
BLUE HYDRANT
REFLECTORS PER ENG STD
7920
500 EA $15.75 $7,875.00
3 84 4” WHITE 4,700 LF $3.15 $14,805.00
4 84 4” YELLOW 1,200 LF $3.15 $3,780.00
5 84 8” YELLOW 22 LF $5.25 $115.50
6 84 12” WHITE 4,600 LF $6.30 $28,980.00
7 84 12” YELLOW 200 LF $6.30 $1,260.00
8 84 24” WHITE 12 LF $12.60 $151.20
9 84 BIKE LANE BUFFER 1,700 LF $3.15 $5,355.00
10 84 GREEN PAINT BIKE LANE
COATING 850 SF $15.75 $13,387.50
11 84 “HI-VIS” CROSSWALK 8 EA $3,675.00 $29,400.00
12 84 SPEED TABLE PER ENG STD
7325 6 EA $13,475.00 $80,850.00
13 84 ROAD BUMP PER ENG STD
7321 4 EA $12,862.50 $51,450.00
14 84 YIELD LINE 4 EA $157.50 $630.00
Packet Pg. 121
Item 10
2 of 5
Base Bid
Item Item Unit of Estimated Item Price Total
No. SS(1) Description Measure Quantity (in figures) (in figures)
15 56 R1-5 SIGN 1 EA $210.00 $210.00
16 56 R1-6W/ S4-3P SIGN 1 EA $367.50 $367.50
17 56 R10-6 SIGN W/ POST 1 EA $525.00 $525.00
18 56 R10-11 SIGN W/ POST 1 EA $525.00 $525.00
19 56 R10-15 SIGN, MODIFIED
W/POST 1 EA $525.00 $525.00
20 56 SW24-2(CA) SIGN 2 EA $525.00 $1,050.00
21 56 R4-11 W/ POST 8 EA $525.00 $4,200.00
22 84 DETAIL 1 1,500 LF $1.05 $1,575.00
23 84 DETAIL 16 2,000 LF $2.10 $4,200.00
24 84 DETAIL 21 260 LF $2.63 $683.80
25 84 DETAIL 22 16,500 LF $3.15 $51,975.00
26 84 DETAIL 23 260 LF $6.30 $1,638.00
27 84 DETAIL 25 350 LF $1.84 $644.00
28 84 DETAIL 28 30 LF $5.25 $157.50
29 84 DETAIL 29 150 LF $5.78 $867.00
30 84 DETAIL 31 550 LF $5.25 $2,887.50
31 84 DETAIL 38 1,300 LF $3.68 $4,784.00
32 84 DETAIL 38B 90 LF $4.20 $378.00
33 84 DETAIL 39 17,400 LF $1.05 $18,270.00
34 84 DETAIL 39A 1,600 LF $1.05 $1,680.00
35 84
PAVEMENT MARKINGS
(ARROWS, BIKE LANE
SYMBOL, ETC.)
6,800 SF $8.40 $57,120.00
36 15
GRIND/REMOVE (E)
STRIPING, PAVEMENT
MARKINGS & MARKERS
1 LS $105,000.00 $105,000.00
37 15 BIKE LANE EDGE GRIND 7600 LF $2.05 $15,580.00
38 12 TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN AND
IMPLEMENTATION 1 LS $66,118.50 $66,118.50
39 5 COMPLY WITH CALTRANS
ENCROACHMENT PERMIT 1 LS $10,000.00 $10,000.00
Base Bid Total $1,723,000.00
Additive Alternative “A”
Item
No. SS(1) Item Description Quantity
Unit of
Measure Unit Price Item Total
1 37 SLURRY SEAL TYPE II 19,500 SY $1.89 $36,855.00
2 39 6” AC PATCH REPAIR 28,500 SF $6.30 $179,550.00
Packet Pg. 122
Item 10
3 of 5
3
85
BLUE HYDRANT
REFLECTORS PER ENG STD
7920
13 EA $15.75 $204.75
4 84 4” WHITE 4,600 LF $3.15 $14,490.00
5 84 8” WHITE 160 LF $5.25 $840.00
6 84 12” WHITE 550 LF $6.30 $3,465.00
7 84 12” YELLOW 80 LF $6.30 $504.00
8 84 BUFFERED BIKE LANE 4,500 LF $3.15 $14,175.00
9 84 GREEN PAINT (BIKE LANE) 2,700 SF $15.75 $42,525.00
10 84 “HI-VIS” CROSSWALK 5 EA $3,675.00 $18,375.00
11 84 YIELD LINE 1 EA $157.50 $157.50
12 84 DETAIL 22 400 LF $3.15 $1,260.00
13 84 DETAIL 29 220 LF $5.78 $1,271.60
14 84 DETAIL 32 2,100 LF $5.25 $11,025.00
15 84 DETAIL 37B 120 LF $5.25 $630.00
16 84 DETAIL 38 400 LF $3.68 $1,472.00
17 84 DETAIL 39 240 LF $1.05 $252.00
18 84 DETAIL 39A 1,000 LF $1.05 $1,050.00
19 84
PAVEMENT MARKINGS
(ARROWS, BIKE LANE
SYMBOLS, ETC.)
1,400 SF $8.40 $11,760.00
20 15 GRIND/REMOVE (E) STRIPING 1 LS $21,000.00 $21,000.00
21 15 ADJUST WATER VALVES 10 EA $1,050.00 $10,500.00
22 15 AJUST SEWER MANHOLES 8 EA $1,155.00 $9,240.00
23 5 BIKE LANE EDGE GRIND 170 LF $35.00 $5,950.00
24 12 TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN AND
IMPLEMENTATION 1 LS $26,448.15 $26,448.15
Additive Alternate “A” Bid Total $413,000.00
Additive Alternative “B”
Item
No. SS(1) Item Description Quantity
Unit of
Measure Unit Price Item Total
1 73 LAUREL LANE/ SOUTHWOOD
DRIVE –NW IMPROVEMENTS 1 LS $40,800.00 $40,800.00
2 73 LAUREL LANE/ SOUTHWOOD
DRIVE – SW IMPROVEMENTS 1 LS $47,100.00 $47,100.00
3 73 LAUREL LANE/ SOUTHWOOD
DRIVE – NE IMPROVEMENTS 1 LS $34,500.00 $34,500.00
4 73 LAUREL LANE/ SOUTHWOOD
DRIVE – SE IMPROVEMENTS 1 LS $28,725.00 $28,725.00
5 12 TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN AND
IMPLEMENTATION 1 LS $35,875.00 $35,875.00
Additive Alternate “B” Bid Total $187,000.00
Packet Pg. 123
Item 10
4 of 5
Additive Alternative “C”
Item
No. SS(1) Item Description Quantity
Unit of
Measure Unit Price Item Total
1 73
LAUREL LANE/ AUGUSTA
STREET – NW
IMPROVEMENTS
1 LS $30,300.00 $30,300.00
2 73
LAUREL LANE/ AUGUSTA
STREET – SW
IMPROVEMENTS
1 LS $32,925.00 $32,925.00
3 73
LAUREL LANE/ AUGUSTA
STREET – NE
IMPROVEMENTS
1 LS $37,650.00 $37,650.00
4 73
LAUREL LANE/ AUGUSTA
STREET – SE
IMPROVEMENTS
1 LS $34,500.00 $34,500.00
5 12 TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN AND
IMPLEMENTATION 1 LS $34,625.00 $34,625.00
Additive Alternate “C” Bid Total $170,000.00
Base Bid Total $1,723,000.00
Additive Alternative “A” Total $413,000.00
Additive Alternative “B” Total $187,000.00
Additive Alternative “C” Total $170,000.00
Total Project Bid
(Base Bid + Add. Alt. “A” + Add. Alt. “B” + Add. Alt. “C”)$2,493,000.00
BID TOTAL: $2,493,000.00
Payments are to be made to the Contractor in compliance with and subject to the provisions embodied in the
documents made a part of this Contract.
Should any dispute arise respecting the true value of any work omitted, or of any extra work which the
Contractor may be required to do, or respecting the size of any payment to the Contractor, during the
performance of this Contract, said dispute shall be decided by the Owner and its decision shall be final, and
conclusive.
ARTICLE III, COMPONENT PARTS OF THIS CONTRACT: The Contract consists of the following
documents, all of which are as fully a part thereof as if herein set out in full, and if not attached, as if hereto
attached:
1. Notice to Bidders and information for bidders.
2. Standard Specifications, Engineering Standards, Special Provisions, and any Addenda.
3. Plans.
4. Caltrans Standard Specifications and Standard Plans 2010
5. Accepted Bid.
6. List of Subcontractors.
7. Public Contract Code Sections 10285.1 Statement.
8. Public Contract Code Section 10162 Questionnaire.
9. Public Contract Code Section 10232 Statement.
10. Labor Code Section 1725.5 Statements.
11. Bidder Acknowledgements.
12. Qualifications.
13. Attach Bidders Bond to Accompany Bid.
14. Non-collusion Declaration.
Packet Pg. 124
Item 10
5 of 5
15. Agreement and Bonds.
16. Insurance Requirements and Forms.
ARTICLE IV INDEMNIFICATION: Hold Harmless and Indemnification. The Contractor agrees to defend,
indemnify, protect and hold the City and its agents, officers and employees harmless from and against any
and all claims asserted or liability established for damages or injuries to any person or property, including
injury to the Contractor's employees, agents or officers that arise from or are connected with or are caused or
claimed to be caused by the acts or omissions of the Contractor, and its agents, officers or employees, in
performing the work or services herein, and all expenses of investigating and defending against same;
provided, however, that the Contractor's duty to indemnify and hold harmless shall not include any claims or
liability arising from the established sole negligence or willful misconduct of the City, its agents, officers or
employees. In the event of conflict with any other indemnification or hold harmless provisions of this
Agreement, the provision that provides the most protection to the City shall apply.
ARTICLE V. It is further expressly agreed by and between the parties hereto that should there be any conflict
between the terms of this instrument and the bid of said Contractor, then this instrument shall control and
nothing herein shall be considered as an acceptance of the said terms of said bid conflicting herewith.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties to these presents have hereunto set their hands this year and date first
above written.
ATTEST CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
A Municipal Corporation
__________________________________
Teresa Purrington
City Clerk
Heidi Harmon
Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM CONTRACTOR:
Basic Resources, Inc. DBA VSS International, Inc.
________________________________
By:________________________________
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
Jeffrey R. Reed
Its: President
Rev. 12-28-09
Rev. 2 5/12/16 DMA
Packet Pg. 125
Item 10
Page intentionally left
blank.
Packet Pg. 126
Item 10
Meeting Date: 6/19/2018
FROM: Michael Codron, Community Development Director
Prepared By: Walter Oetzell, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: ADD THE PROPERTY AT 1568 HIGUERA TO THE MASTER LIST OF
HISTORIC RESOURCES AS “THE MILES FITZGERALD HOME” AND ADD
THE PROPERTY AT 1582 & 1592 HIGUERA AND 1601 GROVE TO THE
CONTRIBUTING PROPERTIES LIST OF HISTORIC RESOURCES
RECOMMENDATION
As recommended by the Cultural Heritage Committee, adopt a resolution (Attachment A) adding
the property at 1568 Higuera Street to the Master List of Historic Resources as “The Miles
Fitzgerald Home,” and adding the property at 1582 & 1592 Higuera Street and 1601 Grove
Street to the Contributing Properties List of Historic Resources
DISCUSSION
The owner of the subject properties has requested that they be includ ed in the City’s Master List
of Historic Resources. The properties are not currently included in the City’s Inventory of
Historic Resources, nor are they located within any historic district.
On May 21, 2018 the Cultural Heritage Committee considered this request and found that both
properties meet eligibility criteria for historic listing, but that only the property at 1568 Higuera
(referred to as the “Miles Fitzgerald
Home”) qualified for designation as a
Master List Historic Resource.
Accordingly, the Committee
recommended that the City Council add
1568 Higuera to the Master List of
Historic Resources and add the other
property (1582 & 1592 Higuera and
1601 Grove) to the Contributing List of
Historic Resources.
Site and Setting
The subject properties are two parcels
at the northwest corner of Higuera and
Grove Streets, in an Office (O) Zone. The immediate surroundings are characterized by older
single-family dwellings of various styles, some converted to office use, and several small-scale
commercial buildings. Though many of the residential structures are older buildings with
historical character, no properties in these blocks of Higuera or Grove are included in the City’s
Inventory of Historic Resources.
The property at 1568 Higuera is developed with a single-family residence built in 1925,
Figure 1: Fitzgerald Home (1568 Higuera)
Packet Pg. 127
Item 11
(hereinafter referred to as the Fitzgerald Home) and a detached garage added a year later.1 The
adjacent property hosts a duplex (1582 & 1592 Higuera) built in 1928 and a single-family
residence (1601 Grove) built in 1929 (hereinafter referred to as the Steiner Residences).2
An Historic Resource Evaluation has been prepared for the property by Betsy Bertrando of
Bertrando & Bertrando Research Consultants, describing the history of the propert ies
(Attachment C), the buildings, and the people associated with them. This report summarizes
relevant information from the Bertrando Evaluation.
Building Architecture
As described in the Historic Resource Evaluation, all three of the buildings are of a Spanish
Colonial Revival style, stucco with tiled roofs. Thomas Maino, a noted local builder, is identified
as the builder of the Steiner Residences, and is presumed to be the builder of the Fitzgerald
Home.3 The architectural characteristics of the structures on these properties is more fully
discussed in the Historic Resource Evaluation submitted with this application, and summarized
in the Evaluation section of this report, below.
The Fitzgerald Family 4
Miles Andrew Fitzgerald was the second child (of six) born to Andrew F. Fitzgerald, an Irish
immigrant and Mary F. Duff, whose family came to the area in the late 19th Century. Andrew
Fitzgerald was an insurance and real estate agent, served on the Grand Jury and as City
Treasurer, and was active in the community, helping select the location of the City Library and
Cal Poly.
Miles Fitzgerald was born in San Luis Obispo in 1893. In 1923 he was elected as City Attorney,
a post he held for more than forty years,5 and served on various City committees during this
period. Echoing the work of his father, he served on the Library Board, finding a new location
for the library and arranging the use of the Carnegie Library as a museum. He was a founding
member of the San Luis Obispo County Historical Society and was instrumental in the
acquisition and preservation of the Dallidet Adobe, a local landmark and Master List Historic
1 Betsy Bertrando, “Historic Resource Evaluation: Miles Fitzgerald Home; Annie Steiner Residences” (February
2018), pg. 15
2 Ibid.
3 Ibid., pg. 22
4 Summarized from Bertrando, beginning from pg. 10
5 Bertrando, pg. 22
Figure 2: Annie Steiner Residences: 1582 & 1592 Higuera (left, center); 1601 Grove (right)
Packet Pg. 128
Item 11
Resource. Miles and his wife Emma moved into the house at 1568 Higuera in 1925 after its
completion and resided there throughout their lives (Miles died in 1967; Emma in 1982).
Anna M. Steiner6
Anna M. Steiner was an immigrant from Switzerland who settled on a ranch in Edna with her
husband Karl and, after his death, moved into the recently-completed duplex at 1582 & 1592
Higuera in 1928. She lived in the building, r enting the adjoining unit and the adjacent single-
family dwelling (completed in 1929) until her death in 1943. Among her tenants were health care
practitioners associated with Mountain View Hospital and Stover’s Sanitarium (now French
Hospital) nearby.
Evaluation of Eligibility for Listing
For a property to be eligible for listing as an historic or cultural resource, the resource must
exhibit a high level of historic integrity, be at least 50 years old, and meet one or more of the
eligibility criteria described in § 14.01.070 of the Historic Preservation Ordinance (see
Attachment D). As provided in § 14.01.050 of the Ordinance, eligible resources that maintain
their original or attained historic and architectural character, and contribute, either by themsel ves
or in conjunction with other structures, to the unique or historic character of a neighborhood,
district, or to the City as a whole, may be designated as "Contributing List Resources or
Properties." The most unique and important resources and propertie s in terms of age,
architectural or historical significance, rarity, or association with important persons or events in
the City’s past may be designated as “Master List Resources.”
Architectural Criteria
As detailed in the Historic Resource Evaluation pr epared for this application, the buildings on
both properties satisfy criteria under § 14.01.070 A (1) related to architectural style. Stucco
cladding, red clay tile roofs, wood-frame casement and double-hung windows, and arched
building features are commo n to all the buildings, embodying the distinctive characteristics of
the Spanish Colonial Revival style, popular in the early decades of the 20th Century (see
Attachment E), with several extant examples throughout the City. The Fitzgerald Home also has
a distinctive corredor, a wide porch under a low roof with exposed rafters, running across the
front of the house, and a “U-shaped” layout providing a pleasant courtyard on its east side. The
Grove Street house has wrought -iron grillwork at the base of the entry window. All of the
buildings are attributed to Thomas Maino, a noted local builder of the time, and exhibit notable
attractiveness arising from a high quality of design, detailing, and craftsmanship.
Historic Criteria
The Fitzgerald Home is closely associated with the Miles A. Fitzgerald, a person important to
local history, as summarized in this report and detailed in the Historic Resource Evaluation
prepared for this application, satisfying criteria under § 14.01.070 (B) (1) and (B) (3) related to
historical persons and context. Mr. Fitzgerald lived at 1568 Higuera for about 45 years, most of
his adult life. He was particularly significant to the community as a public servant, with a long
period of service as City Attorney and in other important funct ions in City government, through
his involvement in the foundation of the San Luis Obispo County Historical Society, and in
community organizations such as Rotary, Knights of Columbus, and the Order of the Elks.
6 Summarized from Bertrando, beginning from pg. 14
Packet Pg. 129
Item 11
Integrity
Each of the buildings on the subject properties also exhibits a high level of historical integrity, in
satisfaction of criteria set out in § 14.01.070 (C). The buildings remain in their original locations
and are unaltered, except for a minor bathroom addition having been made to the Fitz gerald
Home in 1933, and subsequent minor alterations to the kitchen. With only two noted exceptions
(two replaced windows), the interiors retain original doors, windows, fixtures, hardware, and
built -in cabinetry.
Conclusion
According to the information in the applicant’s narrative documenting the historical significance
and architectural character of the houses, both properties are eligible for inclusion in the City’s
Inventory of Historic Resources. All of the structures convey a purity of style and exh ibit
attractiveness through detailing and craftsmanship, and are associated with a notable builder,
satisfying the Architectural Criteria for Style, Design, and Architect set out in § 14.01.070 (A) of
the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance. They also o ccupy their original site, are largely
unaltered, and retain their characteristic design and materials, satisfying criteria for Integrity set
out in § 14.01.070 (B) of the Ordinance.
Notwithstanding the attractiveness and high level of craftsmanship exhib ited by the Steiner
Residences, the Spanish Colonial Style is not particularly rare, and while Ms. Steiner was a
valued member of the community, the buildings do not exhibit a rare or unique architectural style
and do not appear to have association with people or events that would qualify the property for
designation as a “Master List Resource.” Thus, it is appropriate to designate the property at
1582 & 1592 Higuera and 1601 Grove Street as a “Contributing List Historic Resource.
The Fitzgerald Home is associated with the life of Miles A. Fitzgerald, a person significant to
local history as a public servant who made important contributions to the community through his
service as City Attorney and through his efforts as a founding member of the San Luis Obi spo
County Historical Society to preserve important local historic landmarks. This association
satisfies Historic Criteria under § 14.01.070 (B) (1) of the Ordinance. The property at
1568 Higuera, therefor, qualifies for designation as a “Master List Resource.”
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA). Inclusion of the subject properties on the City’s Inventory of Historic Resources
does not have the potential for caus ing a significant effect on the environment, and so is covered
by the general rule described in § 15061 (b) (3) of the CEQA Guidelines.
FISCAL IMPACT
Listing of properties as historic resources has no fiscal impact.
Packet Pg. 130
Item 11
ALTERNATIVES
1. Do not add the propert ies to the City’s Inventory of Historic Resources, based on finding
that the they do not satisfy the criteria for designation as a listed historic resource.
2. Consider an alternative designation (“Master List” or “Contributing List”) for each
property added to the City’s Inventory of Historic Resources, based on findings related to
its uniqueness and importance, in terms of age, architectural or historical significance,
rarity, or association with important persons or events in the City’s past.
3. Continue the item for additional information or discussion.
Attachments:
a - City Council Resolution (Draft)
b - Vicinity Map
c - Historic Resource Evaluation
d - Evaluation Criteria
e - Spanish Colonial Revival Style
Packet Pg. 131
Item 11
R ______
RESOLUTION NO. _____ (2018 SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA ADDING THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1568
HIGUERA STREET TO THE MASTER LIST OF HISTORIC RESOURCES
AS “THE MILES FITZGERALD HOME” AND ADDING THE PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 1582 & 1592 HIGUERA STREET AND 1601 GROVE
STREET TO THE CONTRIBUTING PROPERTIES LIST OF HISTORIC
RESOURCES (HIST-1458-2018)
WHEREAS, the applicant, Thomas Menzie Cliff, filed an application on March 7, 2018,
for review of the inclusion of the properties at 1568, 1582, and 1592 Higuera Street, and 16 01
Grove Street on the City’s Master List of Historic Resources; 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 May 21, 2018, and recommended that the City Council add the property at
1568 Higuera Street to the Master List of Historic Resources, and to add the property at 1582 &
1592 Higuera Street and 1601 Grove to the Contributing List of Historic Resources ; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing
on June 19, 2018, for the purpose of considering the request to add the properties to the Inventory
of Historic Resources; and
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearings were made at the time and in the manner
required by law; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has 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 presented by staff.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the 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:
a) The subject properties are eligible for inclusion in the City’s Inventory of Historic
Resources because they satisfy at least one of the evaluation criteria for historic
resource listing described in the § 14.01.070 of the City’s Historic Preservation
Ordinance (HPO), exhibit a high degree of historic integrity, and are more than 50
years old.
b) The structures on the subject properties satisfy evaluation criteria related to
architectural style (HPO §14.01.070 (A)) because they convey a purity of style and
exhibit attractiveness through detailing and craftsmanship, and are associated with
Packet Pg. 132
Item 11
Resolution No. _____ (2018 Series) Page 2
R ______
Thomas Maino, a notable local builder. They occupy their original site, are largely
unaltered, and retain their characteristic design and materials, satisfying criteria for
Integrity (HPO § 14.01.070 (C)).
c) The property at 1568 Higuera Street (the Miles Fitzgerald Home) qualifies for
designation as a Master List Resource because it has maintained its original historic
and architectural character, contributes to the historic character of the City, and is
associated with Miles A. Fitzgerald, an important person in the City’s history who
served as City Attorney and was a founding member of the San Luis Obispo County
Historical Society. The association with the life of a person important to local
history also satisfies Historic Criteria set out in HPO § 14.01.070 (B) (1 ).
d) The property at 1582 & 1592 Higuera Street and 1061 Grove Street qualifies for
designation as a Contributing List Resource because it has maintained its original
historic and architectural character, and contributes to the historic character of the
City.
SECTION 2. Environmental Determination. The project is categorically exempt from the
provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Inclusion of the subject
properties on the City’s Inventory of Historic Resources does not have the p otential for causing a
significant effect on the environment, and so is covered by the general rule described in §
15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines.
SECTION 3. Action. The City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo does hereby
include the property located at 1568 Higuera Street to the Master List of Historic Resources as
“The Miles Fitzgerald Home,” and does hereby add the property at 1582 & 1592 Higuera Street
and 1061 Grove Street to the Contributing Properties List of Historic Resources.
Upon motion of _______________________, seconded by _______________________,
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was adopted this 19th day of June 2018.
____________________________________
Mayor Heidi Harmon
ATTEST:
Packet Pg. 133
Item 11
Resolution No. _____ (2018 Series) Page 3
R ______
____________________________________
Teresa Purrington
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 ______________, _________.
____________________________________
Teresa Purrington
City Clerk
Packet Pg. 134
Item 11
O
O
C-T-S
O
C-T
C-T
R-2
O
O
C-T
C/OS-5
PFHIGUERAG
R
O
V
EMONTEREY
C
A
L
I
F
O
R
N
I
A
VICINITY MAP HIST-1458-2018
1568, 1582, 1592 Higuera & 1061 Grove ¯
ATTACHMENT 2
Packet Pg. 135
Item 11
ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 136
Item 11
ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 137
Item 11
ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 138
Item 11
ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 139
Item 11
ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 140
Item 11
ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 141
Item 11
ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 142
Item 11
ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 143
Item 11
ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 144
Item 11
ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 145
Item 11
ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 146
Item 11
ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 147
Item 11
ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 148
Item 11
ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 149
Item 11
ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 150
Item 11
ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 151
Item 11
ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 152
Item 11
ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 153
Item 11
ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 154
Item 11
ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 155
Item 11
ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 156
Item 11
ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 157
Item 11
ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 158
Item 11
ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 159
Item 11
ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 160
Item 11
ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 161
Item 11
ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 162
Item 11
ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 163
Item 11
ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 164
Item 11
ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 165
Item 11
ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 166
Item 11
ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 167
Item 11
ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 168
Item 11
ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 169
Item 11
ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 170
Item 11
ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 171
Item 11
ATTACHMENT 3
Packet Pg. 172
Item 11
12
Zoning, or remove the property from historic listing if the structure on the property no longer
meets eligibility criteria for listing, following the process for listing set forth herein.
14.01.070. Evaluation Criteria for Historic Resource Listing
When determining if a property should be designated as a listed Historic or Cultural Resource,
the CHC and City Council shall consider this ordinance and State Historic Preservation Office
(“SHPO”) standards. In order to be eligible for designation, the resource shall exhibit a high
level of historic integrity, be at least fifty (50) years old (less than 50 if it can be demonstrated
that enough time has passed to understand its historical importance) and satisfy at least one of the
following criteria:
A. Architectural Criteria: Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or
method of construction, or represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic values.
(1) Style: Describes the form of a building, such as size, structural shape and details
within that form (e.g. arrangement of windows and doors, ornamentation, etc.). Building
style will be evaluated as a measure of:
a. The relative purity of a traditional style;
b. Rarity of existence at any time in the locale; and/or current rarity although the
structure reflects a once popular style;
c. Traditional, vernacular and/or eclectic influences that represent a particular social
milieu and period of the community; and/or the uniqueness of hybrid styles and how
these styles are put together.
(2) Design: Describes the architectural concept of a structure and the quality of artistic
merit and craftsmanship of the individual parts. Reflects how well a particular style or
combination of styles are expressed through compatibility and detailing of elements.
Also, suggests degree to which the designer (e.g., carpenter-builder) accurately
interpreted and conveyed the style(s). Building design will be evaluated as a measure of:
a. Notable attractiveness with aesthetic appeal because of its artistic merit, details and
craftsmanship (even if not necessarily unique);
b. An expression of interesting details and eclecticism among carpenter-builders,
although the craftsmanship and artistic quality may not be superior.
(3) Architect: Describes the professional (an individual or firm) directly responsible for
the building design and plans of the structure. The architect will be evaluated as a
reference to:
ATTACHMENT 4
Packet Pg. 173
Item 11
13
a. A notable architect (e.g., Wright, Morgan), including architects who made
significant contributions to the state or region, or an architect whose work influenced
development of the city, state or nation.
b. An architect who, in terms of craftsmanship, made significant contributions to San
Luis Obispo (e.g., Abrahams who, according to local sources, designed the house at
810 Osos - Frank Avila's father's home - built between 1927 – 30).
B. Historic Criteria
(1) History – Person: Associated with the lives of persons important to local, California,
or national history. Historic person will be evaluated as a measure of the degree to which
a person or group was:
a. Significant to the community as a public leader (e.g., mayor, congress member,
etc.) or for his or her fame and outstanding recognition - locally, regionally, or
nationally.
b. Significant to the community as a public servant or person who made early, unique,
or outstanding contributions to the community, important local affairs or institutions
(e.g., council members, educators, medical professionals, clergymen, railroad
officials).
(2) History – Event: Associated with events that have made a significant contribution to
the broad patterns of local or regional history or the cultural heritage of California or the
United States. Historic event will be evaluated as a measure of:
(i) A landmark, famous, or first-of-its-kind event for the city - regardless of whether
the impact of the event spread beyond the city.
(ii) A relatively unique, important or interesting contribution to the city (e.g., the Ah
Louis Store as the center for Chinese-American cultural activities in early San Luis
Obispo history).
(3) History-Context: Associated with and also a prime illustration of predominant
patterns of political, social, economic, cultural, medical, educational, governmental,
military, industrial, or religious history. Historic context will be evaluated as a measure
of the degree to which it reflects:
a. Early, first, or major patterns of local history, regardless of whether the historic
effects go beyond the city level, that are intimately connected with the building (e.g.,
County Museum).
b. Secondary patterns of local history, but closely associated with the building (e.g.,
Park Hotel).
ATTACHMENT 4
Packet Pg. 174
Item 11