Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
08-21-2018 Agenda Packet
Tuesday, August 21, 2018 4:00 PM SPECIAL 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 Item A: CONFERENCE REGARDING PROPERTY NEGOTIATIONS Pursuant to Government Code §54956.8 Property: APNs 002-321-003, 002-412-004; 002-412-011; 002-412-012 Agency Negotiators: Derek Johnson, Christine Dietrick, Greg Hermann, Jon Ansolabehere, Robert Hill, Tim Bochum Negotiating Part ies: Kevin Harris and Michael Simkins for the San Luis Obispo Repertory Theatre, a California non-profit corporation Under Negotiation: Price and terms of payment Item B: CONFERENCE REGARDING PROPERTY NEGOTIATIONS Pursuant to Government Code §54956.8 Property: APN 001-043-027 Agency Negotiators: Derek Johnson, Christine Dietrick, Greg Hermann, Jon Ansolabehere, Daryl Grigsby, Tim Bochum, Jennifer Rice Negotiating Parties: Kirit Chunibhai Patel and Gita Kirit Patel Under Negotiation: Price and terms of payment Property: APNs 001-042-023 & 001-042-024 Agency Negotiators: Derek Johnson, Christine Dietrick, Greg Hermann, Jon Ansolabehere, Daryl Grigsby, Tim Bochum, Jennifer Rice Negotiating Parties: Universal Management LLC Under Negotiation: Price and terms of payment ADJOURNED TO THE REGULAR MEETING OF AUGUST 21, 2018 TO BEGIN AT 4:30 PM IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda August 21, 2018 Page 2 Tuesday, August 21, 2018 4:30 PM REGULAR MEETING Council Chamber 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo Page 3 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 HEARING AND BUSINESS ITEMS 1.THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FIRE DEPARTMENT FIVE-YEAR STRATEGIC PLAN 2018-2023 (OLSON / AGGSON / BLATTLER – 30 MINUTES) Recommendation: Receive and file the Fire Department’s Five-Year Strategic P lan. 2.PUBLIC HEARING - REVIEW OF A COMMON INTEREST VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 3113 TO CREATE 8 RESIDENTIAL LOTS, A USE PERMIT TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT ON A SITE WITH A SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS OVERLAY AND A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTA L REVIEW (CODRON / COHEN – 15 MINUTES) Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution entitled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, approving a Common Interest Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 3113 to create eight (8) resident ial lots, a Use Permit to allow development on a site with a Special Considerations Overlay, and adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Review (Sbdv-1211-2017/Eid-1303-2017)” ADJOURNED TO THE REGULAR MEETING OF AUGUST 21, 2018 TO BEGIN AT 6:00 PM IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER Tuesday, August 21, 2018 6:00 PM REGULAR MEETING Council Chamber 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo Page 4 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 Andy Pease PRESENTATIONS CHARLENE ROSALES - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MANAGER (HERMANN – 5 MINUTES) 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 non-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 major ity of the Council chooses another time. The public may comment on any and all items on the Consent Agenda within the three minute time limit. 3. WAIVE READING IN FULL OF ALL RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES (PURRINGTON) Recommendation: Waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances as appropriate. 4. MINUTES OF JULY 10, 2018 AND JULY 17, 2018 (PURRINGTON) Recommendation: Approve the minutes of the City Council meetings for July 10, 2018 and July 17, 2018. 5. ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE DEVELO PMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AND MI SAN LUIS RANCH, LLC (CODRON / COREY) Recommendation: Adopt an Ordinance entitled, “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, approving the Development Agreement between the City of San Luis Obispo, a Charter City, and MI San Luis Ranch, LLC” 6. REQUEST FOR STATEMENTS OF QUALIFICATION FOR ELECTRICAL SUBCONTRACTORS FOR WATER RESOURCE RECOVERY FACILITY PROJECT (MATTINGLY / HIX) Recommendation: 1. Adopt a Resolution entitled, “A Resolution of The City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, adopting Bidder Prequalification Documents and Procedures and Establishing the Bidder Prequalification Appeals Panel for the Water Resource Recovery Facility Project;” a nd 2. Authorize the City Manager, following City evaluation of the Statements of Prequalification, to identify a final list of prequalified subcontractors to provide Electrical Subcontracting Services. 7. REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS – CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE SERVICES, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, SOILS AND MATERIALS TESTING (GRIGSBY / NELSON) Recommendation: 1. Approve the Request for Qualifications (RFQ) to provide: a. Construction Management Services, Specification No. 50410.2018.CM b. Landscape Architecture Services, Specification No. 50410.2018.LS San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda - August 21, 2018 Page 5 c. Environmental Services, Specification No. 50410.2018.ES d. Soils and Materials Testing Services, Specification No. 50410.2018.SMT 2. Authorize the City Manager to execute agreements with selected co nsulting firms. 3. Authorize the Finance Director to execute and amend Purchase Orders for individual consultant services contracts in an amount not-to-exceed the authorized project budget. 4. Authorize the City Engineer to amend or extend the agreement for serv ices in accordance with its terms and within the available annual budget. 8. CONSIDERATION OF 2018-19 HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION GRANTS- IN-AID FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS (CODRON / FOWLER / VERESCHAGIN) Recommendation: 1. As recommended by the Human Relations Commission, approve the 2018-19 Grants-in- Aid funding allocations in the amount of $139,652; and 2. Authorize the Community Development Director to execute agreements with each grant recipient. 9. MARSH STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, SPECIFICATION NO. 90480 (GRIGSBY / McGUIRE) Recommendation: 1. Authorize the Mayor to execute an agreement with 1042 Pacific Street, a California general partnership, for a temporary construction easement at 1042 Pacific Street. 2. Authorize the Mayor to execute an agreement with E lizabeth Lucille Zanoli, Surviving Trustee, for a temporary construction easement and a permanent easement at 1043 Marsh Street. 3. Authorize the Mayor to execute an agreement with the Maino Family Trusts for a temporary construction easement at 1020 Marsh Street. 4. Authorize the Mayor to execute an agreement with the Maino Family Trusts for a temporary construction easement and a permanent easement at 1080 Marsh Street. 10. AMENDMENT TO THE CURRENT AGREEMENT FOR JOINT CONSTRUCTION AND FINANCING COSTS FOR AN ANIMAL SERVICES SHELTER (HERMANN / BETZ) Recommendation: Authorize the City Manager to approve an amendment to the Agreement for Allocation of Construction and Financing Costs for an Animal Services Shelter. San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda - August 21, 2018 Page 6 11. PROGRAM AND DESIGN CONTRACT AMENDMENTS FOR THE WATER RESOURCES RECOVERY FACILITY PROJECT (MATTINGLY / HIX) Recommendation: 1. Approve a contract amendment with CH2M Hill Engineers, Inc. for $446,177 for completion of Design Services for the Water Resource Recovery Facility Project , Spec. No. 91363. 2. Approve a contract amendment with Water Systems Consulting, Inc. for $237,884 for completion of Phase 3 Program Management Services for the Water Resource Recovery Facility Project , Spec. No. 91219. 3. Approve funding of $40,000 for Project Labor Agree ment legal services/representation. 4. Approve transfer of $744,061 from Sewer Fund working capital to the Water Resource Recovery Facility project account. 12. PURCHASE OF FIRE ENGINE, SPECIFICATION NO. 91672 (OLSON / BLATTLER) Recommendation: 1. Approve the sole source lease purchase of a 2018 Pierce Arrow PUC Type 1 Fire Engine in the amount of $673,096; and 2. Authorize the City Manager or designee, Finance Director or designee and City Attorney or designee to execute all related documents on behalf of the C ity to execute a five-year (60-month) agreement with JPMorgan Chase Bank and purchase agreement with Pierce Manufacturing to accomplish the above-mentioned lease purchase; and 3. Authorize the Finance Director or designee to execute a lease-purchase purchase order in the amount noted associated with the above-mentioned fleet replacement; and 4. Authorize the appropriation of $20,000 from the Fleet Completed Projects fund for the additional funding needed to complete the engine build-up. 13. CALIFORNIA OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES HAZARD MITIGATION GRANT APPLICATION (MATTINGLY / FLOYD) Recommendation: 1. Authorize staff to prepare and submit a grant application to the State of California Office of Emergency Services (CalOES) Hazard Mitigation Grant Program. 2. Adopt a resolution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, authorizing application to the State of California Office of Emergency Services Hazard Mitigation Grant Program”. 3. Approve the use of $255,000 from Water Fund unreserved working capital for local funding match of 25 percent of the total project cost. 4. Authorize the City Manager, or designee, to execute required grant application documentation. San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda - August 21, 2018 Page 7 14. LOWER SAN LUIS OBISPO CREEK WATERSHED MODEL FUNDING (GRIGSBY / HUDSON) Recommendation: Authorize the use of $102,000 from the Completed Capital Projects and $8,000 from the Prado Road Interchange Project Account to develop a comprehensive flood model of the San Luis Obispo Creek corridor from Marsh & Higuera to app roximately the Octagon Barn. 15. RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE COUNTY-WIDE MEASURE G-18: PROTECT OUR WATER, AIR AND LAND: BAN FRACKING AND OIL EXPANSION IN SLO COUNTY INITIATIVE (HERMANN / BETZ) Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution entitled, “A Resolution of the City Council o f the City of San Luis Obispo, California, supporting Measure G-18: Protect Our Water, Air, and Land: Ban Fracking and Oil Expansion in SLO County Initiative.” 16. AUTHORIZATION TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION FOR PG&E ON-BILL FINANCING IN SUPPORT OF ENERGY EFFICIENCY LIGHTING RETROFITS (GRIGSBY / CRUCE / HILL / READ) Recommendation: Authorize the submittal of the non-binding PG&E On-Bill Financing Application. Continued on Next Page San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda - August 21, 2018 Page 8 PUBLIC HEARING AND BUSINESS ITEMS 17. PUBLIC HEARING - REVIEW OF THE PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE TO THE CITY’S ZONING REGULATIONS (TITLE 17) OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE AND ASSOCIATED ZONING AMENDMENTS (CODRON / DAVIDSON) Recommendation: As recommended by the Planning Commission: 1. Introduce an Ordinance entitled, “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California repealing and replacing Title 17 of the Municipal Code (Zoning Regulations) to implement the Land Use and Circulation Element (Luce), clarify and advance City goals and policies, provide internal consistency, and to re -organize the Zoning Code, including the adoption of a Negative Declaration of Environmental Review, as represented in the staff report and attachments dated June 27, 2018 (Zoning Regulations, GENP-0327-2017)” and; 2. Introduce an Ordinance entitled, “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, amending Ordinance No. 1130 (1989 Series), modifying the design criteria, Section 5 (Code-1630-2018; south side of Monterey Street between 103 and 2223 Monterey, inclusive”; and 3. Introduce an Ordinance entitled, “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, amending the City’s Zoning Map to designate an approximately 15.8 acre portion of the C-R Zone of the Downtown Core, the 1100 block of Higuera Street and the 1100 through 1300 block of Monterey, as C-R-D, Retail Commercial with a Downtown Overlay, Zone, to allow for Downtown Commercial Development Standards (Height, Floor Area Ration, and Parking Requirements) with Planning Commission approval (RZ-1628-2018); and 4. Introduce an Ordinance entitled, “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, amending the City’s Zoning Map to designate approximately 20.2 acres within the R-1 and C/Os-20 zones on the West Side of Broad Street, south of Serrano Drive, as R-1-S, Low-Density Residential Zone and C/Os-S-20, Conservation/Open Space with a Special Considerations Overlay (Rz-1629-2018; 159 & 161 Broad Street and 141 Bressi Place). San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda - August 21, 2018 Page 9 LIAISON REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS (Not to exceed 15 minutes) Council Members report on conferences or other City activities. 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 Adjourn to a Special City Council meeting to be held on Tuesday, August 28, 2018 at 4:30 in the City Council Hearing Room, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, for the purposes of conducting a closed session. The next Regular City Council Meeting is scheduled for September 4, 2018 at 6:00 p.m., in the Council Chamber, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, Cali fornia. 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 meet ings accessible to the public. Upon request, this agenda will be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with disabilities. Any person with a disability who requires a modification or accommodation in order to participate in a meeting should direct such request to the City Clerk’s Office at (805) 781-7100 at least 48 hours before the meeting, if possible. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (805) 781-7107. City Council regular meetings are televised live on Charter Channel 20. Agenda related writings or documents provided to the City Council are available for public inspection in the City Clerk’s Office located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California during normal business hours, and on the City’s website www.slocity.org. Persons with questions concerning any agenda item may call the City Clerk’s Office at (805) 781 -7100. San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda - August 21, 2018 Page 10 Meeting Date: 8/21/2018 FROM: Garret Olson, Fire Chief SUBJECT: THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FIRE DEPARTMENT FIVE-YEAR STRATEGIC PLAN 2018-2023 RECOMMENDATION Receive and file the Fire Department’s Five-Year Strategic Plan. DISCUSSION Purpose and context for the Fire Department’s Strategic Plan Informed by employee engagement and public input, the San Luis Obispo Fire Department has developed a five-year Strategic Plan (the “Plan”) (Attachment A) to establish priorities, guide decision making, and identify future work efforts surrounding the department’s mission in providing skilled and compassionate emergency response services and solution-focused fire prevention services facilitated by a healthy organizational culture of engaged, supported, and accountable staff. Deliberat e focus has been made to ensure that the goals, objectives, and tasks contained in this Plan are all within the authority of the Fire Department to execute. When the goals, objectives, and tasks contained in this Plan would benefit from policy direction from the City Council, the Plan is designed to integrate with and support without prejudice the authority of the Council to provide policy direction to staff. Additionally, when priorities shift due to new or emerging circumstances, the Plan can and will be adjusted to ensure staff is focused on the highest priorities for the community. When this occurs, staff will highlight these changed circumstances on an ongoing and routine basis to the community and City Council as detailed in the Plan. This Plan took several years to complete. The primary reason is based on department leadership’s respect for the integrity of the recently completed labor negotiating process. Department leadership chose to pause the development of this Plan to allow labor negotiations t o conclude without the possibility of confusing labor relations efforts with this planning effort. During this time, department leadership continued to conduct business in a highly strategic fashion, rather than waiting for the completion of this plan to execute strategic goals. Some of those intermediate strategic efforts are highlighted in the Plan. Packet Pg. 11 Item 1 Employee Engagement The Fire Department began the development of this Plan with Fire Department employee engagement. The department hired Dr. Jesse Sostrin of Sostrin Consulting to provide facilitation services that formed the foundation of the Plan. Sostrin Consulting Services is based in San Luis Obispo and the company has a knowledge and perspective of the area and its needs. With Dr. Sostrin’s guidance, department staff developed the department’s vision, mission, motivation, and the values and ethics statements. Subsequently, department staff identified the components of the SWOT analysis (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats) as well as the environmental and operational scan of current realities. Public Engagement Following employee engagement, the department reached out to the community to further inform the Plan using social media and a more traditional townhall-style engagement. The det ails and results of this effort are highlighted in the Plan and the addendum document (Attachment B). Strategic Directions and Objectives After internal and external collaboration, the Fire Department developed the following five high- level strategic directions: 1. Connecting with our community 2. Continuously evaluating programs and service delivery 3. Analyzing relevant data to inform decision making 4. Improving organizational culture, sustainability, and health 5. Supporting fiscal sustainability in department operations These five strategic directions constitute the major, overarching themes of the 13 strategic objectives for the department. The definition of and relationship between strategic directions, objectives, and strategies is detailed in the Plan. The department went to great lengths to capture the actionable strategies in a manner that did not presuppose or bias an outcome. 2018-2019 Operational Plan and Reporting Process The Strategic Plan forms the framework for the development of the department’s o ne-year Operational Plan. Staff collaborated to identify specific strategies in the Plan that would be initiated – but not necessarily completed – in the first year, 2018-2019. Approximately 75% of the identified strategies in this five-year plan will be initiated in the first year. At the end of this first year, staff will return to Council to report on major milestones, accomplishments, and priority changes over this period. At this time, staff will also provide the second-year Operational Plan, which will outline continuing and new strategies for 2019-2020. This yearly cycle of reporting pro gress and highlighting future efforts will continue to ensure the Council and community are aware of and have opportunities to inform the priorities of the Fire Depart ment on an ongoing basis. Packet Pg. 12 Item 1 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The California Environmental Quality Act does not apply to the recommended action in this report, because the action does not constitute a “Project” under CEQA Guidelines sec. 15278. FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact to receiving the Fire Department Strategic Plan. Any suggested changes in the department’s services that require additional funding will follow the City’s financial planning and budgeting processes. Attachments: a - SLO City Fire Strategic Plan 2018 to 2023 b - Open City Hall Feedback Summary Packet Pg. 13 Item 1 1 Consultfng Sales Staffing Support City of San Luis Obispo Fire Department Strategic Plan 2018-2023 Our vision: Through thoughtiul preventfon and skilled, compassionate response, we create a safer environment for all who visit, work, and live in our amazing community. August 2018 Packet Pg. 14 Item 1 21 Consultfng Sales Staffing Support Packet Pg. 15 Item 1 31 Consultfng Sales Staffing Support CONTENTS MESSAGE FROM DEPARTMENT LEADERSHIP ................................ ...........1 ORGANIZATIONAL OVERVIEW..................................................................2 VISION, MISSION, AND VALUES .................................................... ...........3 THE PLANNING PROCESS .............................................................. ...........7 STRATEGIC PLAN TERMS .............................................................. ..........10 STRATEGIC DIRECTIONS AND OBJECTIVES .................................... ..........11 1. Connectfng with our Community 2. Contfnuously Evaluatfng Programs and Service Delivery 3. Analyzing Relevant Data to Inform Decision Making 4. Improving Organizatfonal Culture, Sustainability, and Health 5. Supportfng Fiscal Sustainability in Department Operatfons STRATEGIC PLAN WORKSHEET ................................................................20 IMPLEMENTATION & EVALUATION ......................................................... 27 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................... 27 i Packet Pg. 16 Item 1 41 Consultfng Sales Staffing Support Organizatfonal Leadership Team ii Packet Pg. 17 Item 1 51 Consultfng Sales Staffing Support Protecting the citizens, businesses, and visitors of San Luis Obispo since 1876, the members of the San Luis Obispo City Fire Department are proud of our history and our ability to evolve to meet the needs of our vibrant community. While this is perhaps the first true strategic plan in department history, the department has a history of proactfvely identf fying innovatfve solutfons to delivering our community-focused mission. Examples of thinking strategically over the past few years include the following in itfatfves: • transitfon to electronic data capture for emergency response and fire preventfon actfvitfes; • implementatfon of PulsePoint smartphone applicatfon to alert citfzen-rescuers to respond to cardiac arrest victfms; • implementatfon of tfered dispatch response to licensed healthcare facilitfes; • implementatfon of progressive actfve shooter response protocols; • analysis and consolidatfon of the department’s heavy-duty fleet; • negotfatfon of a contract for services with Cal Poly that is responsive to the antfcipated impacts of Cal Poly’s Master Plan; and • 2016 Fire Master Plan update for contfnuity of services in the developing southern area of the The department is dedicated to this plan and the actfons that will follow. As such, the department will produce an annual report that includes progress updates on our Strategic Directfons and significant actfvitfes during the year. This report wil l be presented to the City Council and available for public review and feedback. It is important to acknowledge the scope of this Strategic Plan. This plan identffies prioritfes and actfons that are under the department’s authority to execute, to reprioritfze, to change, or to discontfnue. This plan does not presuppose policy decisions that may come before the City Council. Rather, our plan guides staff based on our current analysis of the opportunitfes to maximize our efforts and resources in alignment with our mission of service. In short, this plan helps answer the questfon: given our resources, skills, and dynamic environment, how will we best serve the residents, businesses, and visitors of the City of San Luis Obispo? The Fire Department is appreciatfve of the support of our community and our elected and appointed leaders. We are also appreciatfve of our City peers in other departments who assist us in so many ways. Fire Department leadership is thankful for the actfons of the men and women of this department that bring our vision, mission and values to life. Simply put: our success is predicated by our people. It is an honor to serve this amazing community. We look forward to contfnuing to build healthy relatfonships that allow us to respond to the needs of San Luis Obispo. 1 Message from our leadership team... Packet Pg. 18 Item 1 61 Consultfng Sales Staffing Support ORGANIZATIONAL OVERVIEW Our community-focused service A full-service fire department, your San Luis Obispo City Fire Department protects the lives and property of its residents and v isitors from the adverse effects of fires, medical emergencies and other dangers caused by man or nature through preventfon actfvitfes and emergency response. We fulfill our mission with commitment, courage, compassion, and a focus on creatfve solutfons. The Fire Department is an all-hazards, advanced life support (ALS) agency. In additfon to responding to fires of all types (resi dentfal, commercial, industrial, vehicle, wildland and more), the Fire Department provides paramedic -level care from all emergency response apparatus. Out-of-hospital emergency medical care accounts for the strong majority of our 9-1-1 calls for service. Other services include responses to hazardous materials emergencies, search and rescue operatfons in our Open Space, and specialty rescue operatfons that defy imaginatfon. We are the team that responds when our residents don’t know who is going to help them out of a hazardous situatfon. Our mission evolves to meet the dynamic needs of our community. The Fire Department embraces a preventfon and educatfon strategy that includes fire and life safety inspectfons, plan review services, fire investfgatfons, fire safety and preventfon public educatfon, healthy social decision -making educatfon to college students, and community disaster preparedness educatfon and informatfon. We understand that the best partnerships are forged from credible, healthy relatfonships, honest dialogue, and an eye on the big picture. We partner with the development community, businesses, and res idents with the philosophy that the most effectfve means of caring for our community’s health and welfare is to prevent harm through educatfon and engineering. We seek opportunitfes to assist our residents and development community in realizing their vision through creatfve and safe solutfons. The Fire Department provides services well beyond our City borders. Through a contract with the California State University a t San Luis Obispo (“Cal Poly”), the Fire Department provides fire, rescue and medical services to the faculty, staff, and student on campus, whose daytfme populatfon is approximately half of the City’s census populatfon. The Fire Department maintains automatfc and mutual aid agreements with surrounding departments, California Emergency Manageme nt Agency and Los Padres Natfonal Forest. Through these agreements, San Luis Obispo City firefighters regularly assist with disa sters throughout the State, with a net positfve impact on the City’s General Fund through contractual reimbursement. We are honored to extend the professional, compassionate service we provide to our residents to Cal Poly and to other communitfes in need throughout the State of California and beyond. 2 Packet Pg. 19 Item 1 71 Consultfng Sales Staffing Support ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE San Luis Obispo City Fire Department is a career fire department with 57 fulltfme staff. There are 47 suppression personnel (sworn) and ten non-sworn personnel, which include six Fire Preventfon Bureau staff, two Fire Apparatus Service staff and two administratfon staff. Part-tfme staff (interns) and volunteers also assist in Fire Administratfon and the Fire Preventfon Bureau. 3 Packet Pg. 20 Item 1 81 Consultfng Sales Staffing Support VISION, MISSION, AND VALUES OUR VISION Through thoughtiul preventfon and compassionate, skilled response, we create a safer environment for all who visit, work, and live in our amazing community. OUR MISSION AND MOTIVATION Serving your safety needs is our Mission because we care. OUR VALUES AND ETHICS The core values that guide our service to the Community include: COURAGE, COMMITMENT AND COMPASSION. The core ethics that guide our service to each other include: RESPECT, DIGNITY, HONESTY, COMPASSION, AND TRUST. 4 Packet Pg. 21 Item 1 91 Consultfng Sales Staffing Support 5 What we do... Why we serve... How we do it... We protect the lives and property of our residents and visitors from the adverse effects of fires, medical emergencies, and dangers caused by humans and nature. We focus on solutfons, and we serve you with courage, commitment, and compassion. Serving our community is our mission because we care. San Luis Obispo City Fire Department’s Target of Service Packet Pg. 22 Item 1 101 Consultfng Sales Staffing Support THE PLANNING PROCESS The evolution of this Strategic Plan has been slow, deliberate, and mindful of competing priorities. The initial phase of this plan started with input from our staff. All personnel were invited to a facilitated full-day work session. Our professional facilitator led staff through exercises and dialogue designed to focus our energies and resources on priorities that would maximize our service to the community and each other. As summarized below, the final product of this effort includes an environmental and operational scan, a SWOT analysis, and the major strategies and objectives that inform our five strategic directions. EXTERNAL CHALLENGES Growth of City stretching all City resources Demand for services of Emergency Response and Fire Prevention staff continues to increase Overcoming pockets of poor public perception and/or lack of understanding of our operations Changes in CalPERS negatively impacting the City and Department’s budget Environmental and Operatfonal Consideratfons INTERNAL CHALLENGES Perceptions, assumptions, and unequal accountability Poor state of internal trust, relationships and “old baggage,” Communication and feedback is not always direct or timely Continuing to add programs and services because it’s the right thing to do, but not always a sustainable thing to do. Lack of focused professional resources communicating "our story" via media and Internet Lack of positive messaging by all members of the Department An “everything is a priority” mindset stretches us thin 6 Packet Pg. 23 Item 1 111 Consultfng Sales Staffing Support THE PLANNING PROCESS EXTERNAL OPPORTUNITIES Make the most out of all current and potential public interaction opportunities (e.g. Farmers Market, Cal Poly WOW, fire station tours, etc.) Increase involvement with media Explore funding options via grants Use our small-town community connections to our advantage by leveraging relationships to share the story of our mission Environmental and Operatfonal Consideratfons Explore additional opportunities to generate and/or enhance revenue by leveraging existing skills, resources, and personnel or adding new skills, resources or personnel Less confusion and greater consistency would result from updating and/or expanding written guidelines and policies Implement more robust risk management, health, and fitness programs to decrease injuries and thus enhance morale Retool/prioritize our training program to align with future goals INTERNAL OPPORTUNITIES 7 Packet Pg. 24 Item 1 121 Consultfng Sales Staffing Support COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT Once our staff created a working draft of our vision in service to the community and each other, we sought community engageme nt to fully inform our plan by incorporatfng the perspectfves and ideas of our customers. We used social media and a traditfonal townhall -style meetfng to connect with our community. For six weeks, the Fire Department posted our draft Strategic Plan at the website www.slocity.org/ opencityhall. The Fire Department produced a media release to encourage engagement. Additfonally, the Open City Hall website was linked to the department’s Twitter account, which has over 3,200 followers. At the website, a brief video explained the purpose of the outreach, and a link to the draft plan was included. Based on website analytfcs, the Fire Department was pleased to receive the equivalent of 1.6 hours of public comment, including 142 site visitors and 32 responses. The Fire Department also hosted a townhall-style meetfng at Fire Statfon 1 to provide residents another opportunity to share their perspectfves on the future of their fire department. Approximately 14 members of the public attended this meetfng. The feedback from our community helped inform the components of our plan and helped identffy prioritfes and the method and me ans for accomplishing those prioritfes. For example, staff identffied a need to overhaul the logistfcs of Community Emergency Respons e Training (CERT) based on low interest in past years. Through community engagement, we learned that 81% of respondents prefer public meetfngs for sa fety educatfon and training, while only 43% expressed interest in online video-based training. That feedback informs how we will structure our objectfve to “establish strong community educatfon strategies for increased public safety ” (Objectfve 1.2). 8 Packet Pg. 25 Item 1 131 Consultfng Sales Staffing Support STRATEGIC PLAN TERMS Perhaps the best way to understand our strategic terms is understand how these components emerged. During the facilitated strategic planning session, three broad questions were examined: 1. If the Fire Department maximized its efforts over the next five years, what are we capable of accomplishing? 2. Given this vision of future success, what obstacles may be in our way? 3. Understanding the obstacles on our path, what specific action steps will lead us to our five -year vision of effective internal and external service? The answers to that last question, the specific action steps, ultimately form the “Strategies.” There are 46 Strategies in this plan. The next two terms emerge from that list of Strategies. Strategies based on similar themes are grouped together as a strategic “Objective.” There are 13 Objectives. Finally, a strategic “Direction” is a major overarching themes of this plan. There are five Directions. Some planning documents may refer to Directions as Goals, but we chose to stick with the term Direction due to the longevity of our movement toward each of these Directions. Indeed, future revisions of this plan will likely have the greatest amount of change related to Strategies, while our Directions, and even Objectives, may continue to be relevant for many planning cycles to come. Finally, this plan outlines organizational priorities for the next five years. The last section of this plan, the 2018 -2019 Operational Plan, identified the Strategies intended to be prioritized for initiation in the first year of this five-year plan. At the end of each Operation Plan period, the department will report on accomplishments from the prior year and create a new one -year Operational Plan for the coming year. Future one-year Operational Plans will be informed by the five-year Strategic Plan, as well as changes in our environment. 9 Packet Pg. 26 Item 1 141 Consultfng Sales Staffing Support CONNECTING WITH OUR COMMUNITY STRATEGIC DIRECTION #1 10 Packet Pg. 27 Item 1 151 Consultfng Sales Staffing Support 1.1. OBJECTIVE: Enhance Community Involvement and Communicatfons 1.1.1. Enhance opportunitfes for the community to provide feedback to the Department (initfate 2018-2019) 1.1.2. Explore optfons to implement a formalized Public Informatfon Officer functfon for proactfve media relatfons (initfate 2019-2020) 1.1.3. Work with the Public Informatfon Officer or communicatfons specialists to develop “our service story,” a consistent and credible message about our purpose, mission, values and performance measures/outcomes (initfate 2018 -2019) 1.1.4. Increase utflizatfon of website to communicate “our service story” (initfate 2018-2019) 1.1.5. Ensure all department members are capable of telling “our service story” (initfate 2019-2020) 1.2. OBJECTIVE: Establish Strong Community Educatfon Strategies for Increased Public Safety 1.2.1. Re-vision disaster preparedness programs (formerly Community Emergency Response training or “CERT”) to meet current community needs for increased citfzen and business preparedness and self -sufficiency during a disaster (initfate 2018-2019) 1.2.2. Develop multfmedia educatfon and communicatfons plan based on assessment of local emergency response actfvity and environmental issues (initfate 2018-2019) 1.2.3. Implement citfzen fire academy with a goal of increasing public knowledge and understanding of fire department service s (initfate 2019- 2020) 1.2.4. Implement a fire academy for local media with a goal of creatfng a foundatfonal understanding of fire department servi ces and operatfonal prioritfes (initfate 2021-2022) 1.2.5. Explore expansion of lay person medical training program such as public CPR and first aid (initfate 2018-2019) 1.2.6. Expand fire crew / City facilitfes educatfon program to increase meaningful cross-department relatfons and enhance City employee emergency and disaster planning preparedness (initfate 2018-2019) 1.3. OBJECTIVE: Establish Meaningful Fire Preventfon Educatfon and Programs 1.3.1. Partner with Downtown Associatfon and vendors to enhance safety and preparedness at Farmers ’ Market (initfate 2018-2019) 1.3.2. Partner with property owners, renters, and allied City Departments to enhance fire safety in the home and workplace (i nitfate 2018-2019) 1.3.3. Partner with business owners to increase awareness and business-initfated actfons to support safe practfces in businesses, including but not limited to occupancy loading adherence, safe practfces, and maintenance (initfate 2018-2019) 11 Packet Pg. 28 Item 1 161 Consultfng Sales Staffing Support CONTINUOUSLY EVALUATING PROGRAMS AND SERVICE DELIVERY STRATEGIC DIRECTION #2 2.1.1. Partner with City Administratfon, Community Development, Parks & Recreatfon, Public Works, regional stakeholders and p roperty owners to develop open space and defensible space inspectfon and mitfgatfon program (initfate 2018-2019) 2.1.2. Partner with Community Development, Public Works, and Utflitfes to maximize efficiencies and customer satfsfactfon in development related actfvitfes such as plan check and building inspectfons (initfate 2019-2020) 2.1.3. Maximize use of grant funding and other partnerships to reduce the local cost of fuel reductfon efforts (initfate 2018 -2019) 2.1.4. Contfnue to enhance community safety by evaluatfng the fire preventfon efficacy of current codes and ordinances, and b ringing forward optfons for further enhancement to the community and City Council, as appropriate (initfate 2020 -2021) 2.1.5. Partner with all City departments and the County of San Luis Obispo to create a regional Local Hazard Mitfgatfon Plan (LHMP) (initfate in 2018-2019) 2.1. OBJECTIVE: Collaborate to implement programs to reduce instance and severity of fires and to enhance survivability 12 Packet Pg. 29 Item 1 171 Consultfng Sales Staffing Support 2.2. OBJECTIVE: Maximize efficiencies through technology and reengineering 2.2.1. Implement electronic records system for all emergency response, plan review, and fire constructfon and fire life -safety inspectfon actfvitfes (for Fire Preventfon and Emergency Response inspectfon programs) (initfate 2018-2019) 2.2.2. Implement online fire preventfon self-inspectfon program for low-risk occupancies (initfate 2018-2019) 2.2.3. Develop peer-review program to ensure completeness of emergency response reports and partner with City Attorney’s Office to develop documentatfon best practfces guidelines and training (initfate 2018-2019) 2.2.4. Contfnue to propose updates to local codes that will enhance community safety (initfate 2020 -2021) 2.3. OBJECTIVE: Enhance and engage staff professional development 2.3.1. Explore opportunitfes to increase quality training programs to staff (initfate 2018-2019) 2.3.2. Implement strategies and technologies to provide training to emergency response crews without negatfve impacts to resp onse tfmes (2019-2020) 2.3.3. Explore optfons for offering increased fire service training for dispatch personnel (2020-2021) 2.4. OBJECTIVE: Assess and implement internal process improvement 2.3.1. Develop and maintain clear, current written standards with healthy, productfve partnership between Labor and Departmen t leadership (initfate 2018-2019) 2.3.2. Explore optfons with medical directfon to implement community-based medicine or other pilot programs that maximize effectfve medical service delivery (initfate 2020-2021) 2.3.3. Revise after-actfon incident assessment and implementatfon of lessons learned (initfate 2018-2019) 2.3.4. Assess expanded use of all apparatus, including Medic-Rescue 1 (initfate 2019-2020) 2.3.5. Partner with County Emergency Medical Services Agency and San Luis Ambulance to assess emergency response mode efficac y to more critfcally assess when the use of lights and sirens are necessary based on incident type (initfate 2018 -2019) 13 Packet Pg. 30 Item 1 181 Consultfng Sales Staffing Support ANALYZING RELEVANT DATA TO INFORM DECISION MAKING STRATEGIC DIRECTION #3 14 Packet Pg. 31 Item 1 191 3.1. OBJECTIVE: Analyze emergency response and fire preventfon services data trends 3.1.1. Assess workload impacts on emergency response crews given steady increase in emergency response call volume (initfate 2018-2019) 3.1.2. Create a system for prioritfzing competfng workday expectatfons for emergency response crews (initfate 2019 -2020) 3.2.1. Develop inventory and budget forecast plan for all durable equipment (initfate 2018-2019) 3.2.2. Evaluate light and heavy duty fleet to maximize use (initfate 2018-2019) 3.2. OBJECTIVE: Establish and/or confirm apparatus and equipment replacement plan 15 Packet Pg. 32 Item 1 201 Consultfng Sales Staffing Support 4. STRATEGIC DIRECTION IMPROVING ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE, SUSTAINABILITY, AND HEALTH 16 Packet Pg. 33 Item 1 211 4.1. OBJECTIVE: Establish an open, respectiul, inclusive and healthy work environment throughout the entfre department 4.1.1. Establish a trust-based relatfonship between Labor and Department leadership with enhanced consistency and formality of m eetfngs with candid, forthright, regular dialogue and collaboratfon (initfate 2018-2019) 4.1.2 Partner with Human Resources and prioritfze training funds to implement programs designed to improve organizatfonal cul ture (initfate 2018-2019) 4.1.3. Partner with Human Resources to maximize the recruitment and retentfon of employees who embrace our service -focused mission and aspiratfonal healthy workplace culture (initfate 2018-2019) 4.1.4. Instftutfonalize department-wide expectatfons for shared accountability and honesty embraced by all employees and thoughtiully enforced by all supervisors (initfate 2018-2019) 4.1.5. Establish a system to reward retentfon and employees and/or work teams who make significant contributfons (initfate 20 18-2019) 4.1.6. Establish an annual employee recognitfon program to capture acts of heroism, significant contributfons, promotfons, an d other employee milestones to be celebrated (initfate 2018-2019) 17 Packet Pg. 34 Item 1 221 Consultfng Sales Staffing Support SUPPORTING FISCAL SUSTAINABILITY IN DEPARTMENT OPERATIONS 5. STRATEGIC DIRECTION 18 Packet Pg. 35 Item 1 231 19 5.2.1. Analyze and propose staffing and resource levels to meet plan review and constructfon inspectfon service delivery goal s, or amend goals to align with staffing levels (initfate 2018-2019) 5.2.2. Explore cooperatfve agreements to maximize training fund effectfveness (initfate 2018-2019) 5.3.1. Support certfficatfon training that facilitates revenue generatfng mutual aid deployments (initfate 2018 -2019) 5.3.2. Expand fee-for-service medical standby for local events that have the potentfal to significantly impact normal daily staffing (initfate 2018-2019) 5.3.3. Explore optfons to bring to Council regarding fee for services related to non-emergency assistance provided to care facilitfes (initfate 2018-2019) 5.3. OBJECTIVE: Maximize Revenue Generatfon 5.1. OBJECTIVE: Reduce Internal Costs 5.1.1. Implement robust risk management, health, and fitness programs designed to reduce preventable employee injuries and im prove morale (initfate 2018-2019) 5.1.2. Assess hiring practfces based on current CALPERS data, to include assessment of entry-level firefighter recruitment, hiring, and training (initfate 2018-2019) 5.2. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate New Ways of Doing Business Packet Pg. 36 Item 1 241 Consultfng Sales Staffing Support SLO CITY FIRE OPERATIONAL PLAN 2018-2019 20 The Strategic Plan forms the framework for the development of the department’s one-year Operatfonal Plan. Staff collaborated to identffy specific strategies in the Plan that would be initfated – but not necessarily completed – in the first year, 2018-2019. Approximately 75% of the identffied strategies will be initfated in the first year of this five-year plan. The worksheets that follow capture those Strategies intended to be initfated in 2018-2019. Packet Pg. 37 Item 1 251 Consultfng Sales Staffing Support 21 2018-2019 OPERATIONAL PLAN Strategy Leader Strategic Directfon 1 Connectfng with our Community Strategic Objectfve 1.1 Enhance Community Involvement and Communicatfons Strategy 1.1.1 Enhance opportunitfes for the community to provide feedback to the Department Olson Strategy 1.1.3 Work with communicatfons specialists to develop “our service story,” a consistent and credible message about our purpose, mission, values and performance measures/outcomes Olson Strategy 1.1.4 Increase utflizatfon of website to communicate “our service story” McGee Strategic Objectfve 1.2 Establish Strong Community Educatfon Strategies for Increased Public Safety Strategy 1.2.1 Re-vision disaster preparedness programs (formerly Community Emergency Response Training or “CERT”) to meet current community needs for increased citfzen and business self-sufficiency during a disaster Aggson Strategy 1.2.2 Develop multfmedia educatfon and communicatfons plan based on assessment of local emergency response actfvity and environmental issues Aggson Strategy 1.2.5 Explore expansion of lay person medical training program such as public CPR and first aid Berryman Strategy 1.2.6 Expand fire crew / City facilitfes educatfon program to increase meaningful cross-department relatfons and enhance City employee emergency and disaster planning preparedness Hais 2018-2019 OPERATIONAL PLAN WORKSHEETS Packet Pg. 38 Item 1 261 Consultfng Sales Staffing Support 22 2018-2019 OPERATIONAL PLAN Strategy Leader Strategic Directfon 1 (contfnued) Connectfng with our Community Strategic Objectfve 1.3 Establish Meaningful Fire Preventfon Educatfon and Programs Strategy 1.3.1 Partner with Downtown Associatfon and vendors to enhance safety and preparedness at Farmers’ Market Maggio Strategy 1.3.2 Partner with property owners, renters, and allied City Departments to enhance fire safety in the home and workplace Maggio Strategy 1.3.3 Partner with business owners to increase awareness and actfons to support safe practfces in businesses, including but not limited to occupancy loading adherence, safe practfces, and maintenance Maggio Strategic Directfon 2 Contfnuously Evaluatfng Programs and Service Delivery Strategic Objectfve 2.1 Collaborate to implement programs to reduce instance and severity of fires and to enhance survivability Strategy 2.1.1 Partner with City Administratfon, Community Development, Parks & Recreatfon, Public Works, regional stakeholders and property owners to develop open space and defensible space inspectfon and mitfgatfon program Maggio Strategy 2.1.3 Maximize use of grant funding and other partnerships to reduce the local cost of fuel reductfon efforts Blatter Strategy 2.1.5 Partner with all City departments and the County of San Luis Obispo to create a regional Local Hazard Mitfgatfon Plan (LHMP) Blattler 2018-2019 OPERATIONAL PLAN WORKSHEETS Packet Pg. 39 Item 1 271 Consultfng Sales Staffing Support 23 2018-2019 OPERATIONAL PLAN Strategy Leader Strategic Directfon 2 (contfnued) Contfnuously Evaluatfng Programs and Service Delivery Strategic Objectfve 2.2 Maximize efficiencies through technology and reengineering Strategy 2.2.1 Implement electronic records system for all emergency response, plan review, and fire constructfon and fire life-safety inspectfon actfvitfes (for Fire Preventfon and Emergency Response inspectfon programs) Maggio Strategy 2.2.2 Implement online fire preventfon self-inspectfon program for low-risk occupancies Maggio Strategy 2.2.3 Develop peer-review program to ensure completeness of emergency response reports and partner with City Attorney’s Office to develop documentatfon best practfces guidelines and training Aggson Strategic Objectfve 2.3 Enhance and engage staff professional development Strategy 2.3.1 Explore opportunitfes to increase quality training programs to staff Aggson Strategic Objectfve 2.4 Assess and implement internal process improvement Strategy 2.4.1 Develop and maintain clear, current written standards with healthy, productfve partnership between Labor and Department leadership Olson Strategy 2.4.3 Revise after-actfon incident assessment and implementatfon of lessons learned Hais Strategy 2.4.5 Partner with County Emergency Medical Services Agency and San Luis Ambulance to assess emergency response mode efficacy to more critfcally assess when the use of lights and sirens are necessary based on incident type Olson 2018-2019 OPERATIONAL PLAN WORKSHEETS Packet Pg. 40 Item 1 281 Consultfng Sales Staffing Support 24 2018-2019 OPERATIONAL PLAN Strategy Leader Strategic Directfon 3 Analyzing Relevant Data to Inform Decision Making Strategic Objectfve 3.1 Analyze emergency response and fire preventfon services data trends Strategy 3.1.1 Assess workload impacts on emergency response crews given steady increase in emergency response call volume Aggson Strategic Objectfve 3.2 Establish and/or confirm apparatus and equipment replacement plan Strategy 3.2.1 Partner with business owners to increase awareness and actfons to support safe practfces in businesses, including but not limited to occupancy loading adherence, safe practfces, and maintenance Maggio Strategy 3.2.2 Evaluate light duty fleet to maximize use Vargas Strategic Directfon 4 Improving Organizatfonal Culture, Sustainability, and Health Strategic Objectfve 4.1 Establish an open, respectiul, inclusive and healthy work environment throughout the entfre department Strategy 4.1.1 Establish a trust-based relatfonship between Labor and Department leadership with enhanced consistency and formality of meetfngs with candid, forthright, regular dialogue and collaboratfon Olson & Gutferrez Strategy 4.1.2 Partner with Human Resources and prioritfze training funds to implement programs designed to improve organizatfonal culture Aggson Strategy 4.1.3 Partner with Human Resources to maximize the recruitment and retentfon of employees who embrace our service focused mission and aspiratfonal healthy workplace culture Aggson Strategy 4.1.4 Instftutfonalize department-wide expectatfons for shared accountability and honesty embraced by all employees and thoughtiully enforced by all supervisors Olson Strategy 4.1.5 Establish a system to reward retentfon and employees and/or work teams who make significant contributfons Blattler Strategy 4.1.6 Establish an annual employee recognitfon program to capture acts of heroism, significant contributfons, promotfons, and other employee milestones to be celebrated Aggson 2018-2019 OPERATIONAL PLAN WORKSHEETS Packet Pg. 41 Item 1 291 Consultfng Sales Staffing Support 25 2018-2019 OPERATIONAL PLAN Strategy Leader Strategic Directfon 5 Supportfng Fiscal Sustainability in Department Operatfons Strategic Objectfve 5.1 Reduce Internal Costs Strategy 5.1.1 Implement robust risk management, health, and fitness programs designed to reduce preventable employee injuries and improve morale Aggson Strategy 5.1.2 Assess hiring practfces based on current CALPERS data, to include assessment of entry-level firefighter recruitment, hiring, and training Olson Strategic Objectfve 5.2 Evaluate New Ways of Doing Business Strategy 5.2.1 Analyze and propose staffing and resource levels to meet plan review and constructfon inspectfon service delivery goals, or amend goals to align with staffing levels Maggio Strategy 5.2.2 Explore cooperatfve agreements to maximize training fund effectfveness Aggson Strategic Objectfve 5.3 Maximize Revenue Generatfon Strategy 5.3.1 Support certfficatfon training that facilitates revenue generatfng mutual aid deployments Aggson Strategy 5.3.2 Expand fee-for-service medical standby for local events that have the potentfal to significantly impact normal daily staffing Aggson Strategy 5.3.3 Explore optfons to bring to Council regarding fee for services related to non -emergency assistance provided to care facilitfes Olson 2018-2019 OPERATIONAL PLAN WORKSHEETS Packet Pg. 42 Item 1 301 Sponsorship & Accountability The Department’s leadership team is committed to the successful implementatfon of the Strategic Plan. The Fire Chief is responsible for the oversight of the Strategic Plan Objectfves and the “Strategy Leaders” work together as a team to balance resources as the Department moves forward with the Plan. Strategic Plan Review, Tracking & Measurement Progress toward the Strategic Plan is reviewed and tracked using an internal collaboratfon tool that is updated by Strategy L eaders on a monthly basis. The tracking tool contains detailed informatfon about each Strategy Area, and includes key accomplishments, percent complete, cur rent status, tfmelines, history of extensions and any issues that need to be addressed. The internal tracking tool is used to produce reports that are reviewed by Department leaders and top staff at least quarterl y during status updates meetfngs. These meetfngs provide a forum for recognizing accomplishments and open discussion if a Sponsor or Strategy Leader indicates they need resolutfon of issues or resource assistance to keep the Strategy “on-schedule”. Annual Review & Update of the 5-Year Plan The Strategic Plan is reviewed and updated on an annual basis. The Department ’s overall Objectfves and Strategies are assessed and reprioritfzed if necessary, based on operatfng expenses, service indicators, industry statfstfcs, or special initfatfves. A revised One Year Operatfonal Plan is created each year based upon the outcome of the Department ’s annual review. This process ensures reliability of the Strategic Plan as a tool that can be used for annual operatfng budget development, Capital Improvement Project (CIP) deve lopment, and equipment and personnel planning. A complete review of the 5-Year Strategic Plan will occur at three year intervals. Annual Performance Report An Annual Performance Report is prepared each year and is published to the Department ’s website. The report provides informatfon on the progress and status of each Strategy initfated and/or contfnued each fiscal year. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS IMPLEMENTATION & EVALUATION This plan would not be possible if not for the contributfons of our professional staff and actfve community members as well a s the support of all City departments and our elected leaders. It is truly an honor to serve our community. 26 Packet Pg. 43 Item 1 311 Serving your safety needs is our Mission because we care. Packet Pg. 44 Item 1 321 Consultfng Sales Staffing Support San Luis Obispo City Fire Department 2160 Santa Barbara Avenue San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 805.781.7380 www.slocity.org/fire Twitter: @SLO_City_Fire Packet Pg. 45 Item 1 Summary Of Responses As of July 11, 2018, 12:21 PM, this forum had: Attendees:143 Responses:32 Hours of Public Comment: 1.6 This topic started on March 29, 2018, 2:03 PM. What core services do you expect from the San Luis Obispo City Fire Department? Answered 27 Skipped 5 What other service needs would you like to see from the San Luis Obispo City Fire Department? Answered 23 Skipped 9 What method(s) would you prefer that the Fire Department utilizes to deliver safety and education information to you? (select all that apply) % Count Fire Department Twitter feed @SLO_City_Fire 27.6% 8 Fire Department website www.slocity.org/fire 55.2% 16 Radio, including Fire’s weekly appearance on KVEC radio 31.0% 9 Online educational and informational videos via YouTube 34.5% 10 Fire Department Strategic Plan Please share your thoughts... Fire Department Strategic Plan As of July 11, 2018, 12:21 PM http://www.opentownhall.com/6129 Page 2 of 34 Packet Pg. 46 Item 1 % Count Public meetings, gatherings, and/or training sessions, AKA face-to-face 75.9% 22 Have you ever requested service from the San Luis Obispo City Fire Department? % Count Yes 38.7% 12 No 61.3% 19 How many times have you requested service in the past year? % Count 0 83.3% 25 1 16.7% 5 How would you rate our service? Select One % Count Extremely Satisfied 66.7% 14 Slightly Satisfied 4.8% 1 Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied 23.8% 5 Extremely Dissatisfied 4.8% 1 What do you recall most about the service we provided you? Answered 18 Fire Department Strategic Plan Please share your thoughts... Fire Department Strategic Plan As of July 11, 2018, 12:21 PM http://www.opentownhall.com/6129 Page 3 of 34 Packet Pg. 47 Item 1 Skipped 14 Do you know about the free PulsePoint App for smartphones % Count Yes, and I have it loaded on my smartphone 24.1% 7 Yes, but I don’t have it loaded on my smartphone 41.4% 12 No because I don’t have a smartphone 6.9% 2 No I’ve never heard of this life saving free application 27.6% 8 What would you like to share with us as we develop our five-year vision of providing service to our community? Answered 20 Skipped 12 Fire Department Strategic Plan Please share your thoughts... Fire Department Strategic Plan As of July 11, 2018, 12:21 PM http://www.opentownhall.com/6129 Page 4 of 34 Packet Pg. 48 Item 1 Meeting Date: 8/21/2018 FROM: Michael Codron, Community Development Director Prepared By: Rachel Cohen, Associate Planner SUBJECT: REVIEW OF A COMMON INTEREST VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 3113 TO CREATE 8 RESIDENTIAL LOTS, A USE PERMIT TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT ON A SITE WITH A SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS OVERLAY AND A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW. RECOMMENDATION Adopt a resolution approving a Vesting Tentative Tract Map (VTM) No. 3113, a use permit to allow development on a site with a special consideration s overlay and adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Review (see Attachment A, Draft Resolution). REPORT-IN-BRIEF The applicant is proposing common interest Vesting Tentative Tract Map (VTM) No. 3113 for an eight -parcel, residential project located within the Medium Density Residential zone with a Special Considerations Overlay (R-2-S) and the Conservation Open Space (C/OS) zone located at 3063 Rockview Place. The Architectural Review Commission approved the final design on June 18, 2018. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed subdivision, use permit and the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental review on July 11, 2018 and voted 5:0 to recommend the City Council approve the project as proposed. BACKGROUND On June 18, 2018 the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) provided an architectural review of the eight two-story residential units with a request for a fence height exception and a front yard setback exception as part of the proposed common-interest subdivision (Attachment B, Architectural Plans). The ARC determined that the project was consistent with the Community Design Guidelines and development standards and approved the architectural design, the eleven - foot street yard setback exception to allow the installatio n of a trellis feature within the front yard, and a. 2.5-foot fence height exception within the front yard (Attachment D, ARC Resolution). On July 11, 2018, the Planning Commission (PC) reviewed the proposed Use Permit to allow development of a site with Special Considerations (S-overlay), the Common Interest Subdivision, and Initial Study of Environmental Review. The PC recommended the City Council approve the proposed common interest subdivision, use permit for the S -overlay and adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) of environmental review (Attachment E, PC Resolution). Packet Pg. 49 Item 2 PROJECT INFORMATION Applicant Teixiera Capital Partners III LLC Representative Heidi Gibson, Studio 2G Architects Zoning R-2-S (Medium Density Residential, Special Considerations) & C/OS (Conservation / Open Space) General Plan Medium Density Residential/Open Space Site Area 45,366 square feet (1.04 acres) Environmental Status Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) Site Information/Setting The project site currently contains three residential structures and a detached garage. The site is located in an urbanized area of the City and is adjacent to multi-family zoned residential structures and Conservation / Open Space zoned land. The special considerations o verlay identifies that projects on this site should evaluate any substandard street width, drainage concerns and slope. Table 1: Site Information PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant is proposing an eight -lot common interest subdivision for a multi-family residential project located within the Medium Density Residential zone with a Special Considerations Overlay (R-2-S) and the Co nservation Open Space (C/OS) zone located at 3063 Rockview Place called the Rockview Moderns (Attachment B, Vesting Tentative Map). Site Size 45,366 square feet (1.04 acres) Present Use & Development Three Residential units and Open Space Topography 15% slope Access Rockview Place Surrounding Use/Zoning North: Multi-family properties zoned R-2-S. South: Multi-family development zoned R-2-S. East: Developed multi-family properties zoned R-2-S. West: Conservation / Open Space Packet Pg. 50 Item 2 As shown in the Architectural Plans (Attachment C), the project includes the following: 1. An eight -lot common interest subdivision, 2. The construction of six detached, and two attached (total eight) two-bedroom, residential units (approximately 1,200 square feet each), 3. A street yard setback reduction to 11 feet, where a 20-foot setback is required, to allow for a trellis/patio st ructure, 4. A fence height exception of approximately 2.5 feet, where normally a 4.36 -foot-tall fence is allowed, and 5. Frontage improvements along Rockview Place including curb, gutter and sidewalk upgrades. The structures on each lot will be two -stories with a maximum height of approximately 24 feet and provide two enclosed parking spaces for each unit and three guest spaces on the site. The project is extensively landscaped and provides a 1,230 square foot common picnic area that all the residents may acce ss. The parcels will be accessed from Rockview Place by a common driveway. The project is proposing to meet its affordable housing requirements by paying the in- lieu fee (5% of the total project valuation). Table 2: Project Statistics Statistics Item Proposed 1 Ordinance Standard 2 Street Yards 11 feet3 20 feet Other Yards 5-9 feet 5-9 feet Max. Height of Structure(s) 24 feet 35 feet Density 8 density units 8 density units Building Coverage (footprint) ~32% 50% Parking Spaces (for residents) 8 spaces (2 per unit) 8 spaces (2 per unit) Parking Spaces (for guests) 3 spaces 1 space Private Open Space 910 – 1125 sf per unit Common Open Space 1230 sf 1200 sf Notes: 1. Applicant’s project plans 2. City Zoning Regulations 3. ARC approved a street yard reduction to 11 feet Figure 1: The proposed eight-lot common interest subdivision Packet Pg. 51 Item 2 DISCUSSION The project analysis summarized below focuses on the project’s consistency with the City’s General Plan Policies, Subdivision Regulations and Zoning Regulations. General Plan Consistency The site is designated as “Medium Density Residential” and “Open Space” on the General Plan Land Use Element (LUE) map and the site currently has three residential units. The General Plan anticipated compact residential development within the medium density residential portion of the site. The proposed subdivision is consistent with numerous General Plan policies. The policies are listed below and staff’s analysis follows in italics. 1. General Plan LUE Policy 2.3.7 (Natural Features) states: “Residential deve lopments should preserve and incorporate as amenities natural site features, such as land forms, views, creeks, wetlands, wildlife habitats, and plants”. Staff Analysis: The project is an infill development that has been designed to be built into the hillside reducing the overall profile and height of the structures on the hillside. Additionally, the project is an “acceptable” design according to Figure 8 of the COSE because the project, as proposed, adequately respects existing constraints and includes easements that preserve the open space portion of the site. 2. General Plan LUE Policy 2.2.6 (Neighborhood Pattern) states: “All residential development should be integrated with existing neighborhoods. Where physical features make this impossible, the new development should create new neighborhoods.” Staff Analysis: This section of Rockview Place has been developed with a mixture of single family homes and small condominium and common-interest subdivisions, including either small- lot detached or attached units. Consistent with other similar developments, units fronting Rockview Place have features that address the street and at the same time address one another at the interior of the site. The consistent architectural style, color palate and landscaping provide a cohesive visual setting and integrate into the neighborhood. 3. General Plan HE Policy 6.10 states: “To help meet the Quantified Objectives, the City will support residential infill development and promote higher residential density where appropriate.” Staff Analysis: Along with this policy, the City has a Major City Goal to encourage construction of additional housing. The project maximizes the density allowed on the site and adds a net increase of five units to the City’s residential unit total. Packet Pg. 52 Item 2 4. General Plan COSE Policy 8.3.1 (Open space within the urban area) states: “The City will preserve the areas listed in Goal 8.2.2, and will encourage individuals, organizations, and other agencies to do likewise. The City will designate these areas as Open Space or Agriculture in the General Plan.” Staff Analysis: The proposed project proposes to develop the R-2 portion of the site and place the Conservation / Open Space portion of the site within an open space easement. This is consistent with Goal 8.2.2 (K)1 of the Conservation and Open Space Element because it preserves a portion of the hillside that is contiguous with the undeveloped South Hills area. Consistency with Subdivision Regulations The applicant is requesting a common interest subdivision that includes easements for shared driveways, yards, and visitor parking spaces. As proposed, the map is consistent with the subdivision regulations and includes the minimum 150 square feet per residential unit of common open space for a total of 1,230 square feet2 (see Attachment C, Project Plans, Sheet AC1.0). The VTM does not show this area under an easement and staff is recommending Condition of Approval No. 2 which requires the applicant to include this area under easement in the Final Map submittal. The project will also include a private open space easement for the portion of the property that is zoned C/OS (see Attachment A, Council Resolution - Condition of Approval No. 3). Special Consideration Overlay The Special Consideration Overlay (S -overlay) was added to identify that a project on this site would need to evaluate any substandard street width, drainage concerns, and slope. The project proposes to dedicate approximately 300 square feet for sidewalk, street trees and street improvements along Rockview to be completed with the project. The slope and drainage of the site have been addressed as part of the project design in conjunction with the soils report and stormwater control plan that show the proposed project is consistent with the City standar ds. CONCURRENCES The proposed project has been reviewed by the City Community Development (Planning, Building, and Engineering), Public Works Department (Transportation), Utilities Department, Fire Department, City Arborist, and Natural Resources Manager . Staff comments provided during review of the proposed project are incorporated into the presented evaluation and conditions of approval. 1 General Plan COSE 8.2.2 (K) GOAL: Open space within the urban area. Within the urban area, the City will secure and maintain a diverse network of open land encompassing particularly valuable natural and agricultural resources, connected with the landscape around the urban area. Particularly valuable r esources are: K. Hills, ridgelines and the Morros. 2 Subdivision Regulations Section 16.17.030. Property improvement standards for common interest subdivisions. A. Common Open Space. There shall be provided in each project of five or more units a minimum of one hundred square feet of qualifying open space per unit for projects in the R-3 or R-4 zones and one hundred fifty square feet for projects in the R-2 zone. To qualify, open space shall have a minimum dimension in every direction of ten feet for open space provided at ground level or six feet for open space provided on a balcony or elevated deck, and must be located outside the street yard required by zoning regulations. Common open space need not be located with each unit. Packet Pg. 53 Item 2 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The proposed project has been analyzed pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) based on an Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) prepared and circulated from June 9, 2018 through July 2, 2018, which analyzes the proposed project (refer to Attachment F, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration). No comments were provided during the 20-day public comment period. The applicant has agreed to all mitigation measures proposed specific to this project. The IS/MND shall constitute the complete environmental determination for the project. FISCAL IMPACT When the General Plan was prepared, it was accompanied by a fiscal impact analysis, which found that overall the General Plan was fiscally balanced. Since the project does not propose to change the General Plan designations of the site, it has a neutral fiscal impact. ALTERNATIVES 1. Deny the Vesting Tentative Tract Map #3113 and the use permit for a site with a special considerations overlay. Staff does not recommend this alternative, because the project complies with the City’s Subdivision Regulations and Zoning Regula tions and would help meet the City’s housing objectives. Findings of the City Council concerning such a recommendation would require development of findings to support the recommendation. 2. Continue the item. An action to continue the item should include a detailed list of additional information or analysis required. Attachments: a - Council Resolution b - VTM 3113 c - Project Plans d - ARC Resolution 6-18-2018 e - PC Resolution 7-11-2018 f - Initial Study MND Packet Pg. 54 Item 2 R ______ RESOLUTION NO. _____ (2018 SERIES) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A COMMON INTEREST VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 3113 TO CREATE EIGHT (8) RESIDENTIAL LOTS, A USE PERMIT TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT ON A SITE WITH A SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS OVERLAY, AND ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (SBDV-1211-2017/EID-1303-2017) WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing on June 18, 2018 in the Council Hearing Room of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, for the pur pose of considering ARCH-1209-2017, an architectural review of e ight residential units; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing on July 11, 2018 in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, for the purpose of considering SBDV-1211-2017, a vesting tentative tract map subdividing an approximately 1.04-acre site into 8 lots, a use permit, and considered an Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS-MND) analyzing the proposed vesting tentative tract map; WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing on August 21, 2018 in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, for the purpose of considering SBDV-1211-2017, a vesting tentative tract map subdividing an approximately 1.04-acre site into 8 lots, a use permit and considered an Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS-MND) analyzing the proposed vesting tentative tract map; and WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner required by law; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. CEQA Findings, Mitigation Measures, and Mitigation Monitoring Program. Based upon all the evidence, the City Council hereby adopts the following CEQA findings in support of the project: a) The proposed project, as conditioned herein, is consistent with the requirements of the Orcutt Area Specific Plan Final Environment al Impact Report (FEIR) certified and adopted by the City Council on March 2, 2010, and this action incorporates those FEIR mitigation measures as detailed herein. b) A supplemental initial study has been prepared for the project, which addresses potential environmental impacts which were not identified or detailed in the FEIR for the Orcutt Area Specific Plan. The Community Development Director has recommended that the results of that additional analysis be incorporated into a Packet Pg. 55 Item 2 Resolution No. _____ (2018 Series) Page 2 Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) of environmental impacts, and recommends adoption of additional mitigation measures to those imposed by the FEIR, all of which are incorporated below. c) All potentially significant effects were analyzed adequately in the referenced FEIR and IS/MND, subject to the following mitigation measures being incorporated into the project and the mitigation monitoring program: Air Quality AQ-1: Prior to grading plan approval, the project proponent shall ensure that a geologic evaluation should be conducted to determine if NOA is present within the area that will be disturbed. If NOA is not present, an exemption request must be filed with the District. If NOA is found at the site, the applicant must comply with all requirements outlined in the Asbestos ATCM. This may include development of an Asbestos Dust Mitigation Plan and an Asbestos Health and Safety Program for approval by the APCD. Technica l Appendix 4.4 of this Handbook includes a map of zones throughout SLO County where NOA has been found and geological evaluation is required prior to any grading. More information on NOA can be found at http://www.slocleanair.org/rules- regulations/asbestos.php. AQ-1 Monitoring Plan: All mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and building plans. In addition, the contractor shall designate a person or persons to monitor compliance with APCD requirements. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD, Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to commencement of construction. The applicant shall provide documentation of compliance with APCD requirements to City staff prior to issuance of any grading or building permits. AQ-2: Any scheduled demolition activities or disturbance, removal, or relocation of utility pipelines shall be coordinated with the APCD Enforcement Division at (805) 7 81-5912 to ensure compliance with NESHAP, which include, but are not limited to: 1) written notification, within at least 10 business days of activities commencing, to the APCD, 2) asbestos survey conducted by a Certified Asbestos Consultant, and, 3) applicable removal and disposal requirements of identified ACM. More information on NOA can be found at http://www.slocleanair.org/rules- regulations/asbestos.php. AQ-2 Monitoring Plan: All mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and building plans. In addition, the contractor shall designate a person or persons to monitor compliance with APCD requirements. Their duties shall include holiday and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD, Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to commencement of construction. AQ-3: During construction/ground disturbing activities, the applicant shall implement the following particulate (dust) control measures. These measures shall be shown on grading and building plans. In addition, the contractor shall designate a person or persons to monitor the dust control program and to order increased watering, modify practices as necessary, to prevent Packet Pg. 56 Item 2 Resolution No. _____ (2018 Series) Page 3 transport of dust off site. Their duties shall include holiday and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to commencement of construction. a. Reduce the amount of disturbed area where possible. b. Use water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site and from exceeding the APCD’s limit of 20% opacity for no greater than 3 minutes in any 60-minute period. Increased watering frequency will be required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 m.p.h. and cessation of grading activities during periods of winds over 25 m.p.h. Reclaimed (no n- potable) water is to be used in all construction and dust -control work. c. All dirt stock pile areas (if any) shall be sprayed daily and covered with tarps or other dust barriers as needed. d. Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation and landscape plans shall be implemented as soon as possible, following completion of any soil disturbing activities. e. Exposed grounds that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month after initial grading shall be sown with a fast germinating, non-invasive, grass seed and watered until vegetation is established. f. All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation shall be stabilized using approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in advance by the APCD. g. All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. In addition, building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used. h. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 m.p.h. on any unpaved surface at the construction site. i. All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials, are to be covered or shall maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with California Vehicle Code Section 23114. j. Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site. k. Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers shall be used with reclaimed water where feasible. Roads shall be pre-wetted prior to sweeping when feasible. l. All PM10 mitigation measures required shall be shown on grading and building plans. m. The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the fugitive dust emissions and enhance the implementation of the measures as necessary to minimize dust complaints, reduce visible emissions below the APCD’s limit of 20% opacity for no greater than 3 minutes in any 60-minute period. Their duties shall include holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD Compliance Division prior to the start of any grading, earthwork or demolition. Packet Pg. 57 Item 2 Resolution No. _____ (2018 Series) Page 4 AQ-3 Monitoring Plan: All mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and building plans. In addition, the contractor shall designate a person or persons to monitor the dust control program and to order increased watering, as necessary, to prevent transport of dust off site. Their duties shall include holiday and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD, Community Develop ment and Public Works Departments prior to commencement of construction. AQ-4: Prior to any construction activities at the site, the project proponent shall ensure that all equipment and operations are compliant with California Air Resource Board and APCD permitting requirements and shall contact the APCD Engineering Division at (805) 781 -5912 for specific information regarding permitting requirements. AQ-4 Monitoring Plan: All mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and building plans. In addition, the contractor shall designate a person or persons to monitor compliance with APCD requirements. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD, Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to commencement of construction. The applicant shall provide documentation of compliance with APCD requirements to City staff prior to issuance of any grading or building permits. AQ-5: To reduce sensitive receptor emissions impact of diesel vehicles and equipment used to const ruct the project and export soil from the site, the applicant shall implement the following idling control techniques: 1. California Diesel Idling Regulations a. On-road diesel vehicles shall comply with Section 2485 of Title 13 of the California Code of regulations. This regulation limits idling from diesel-fueled commercial motor vehicles with gross vehicular weight ratings of more than 10,000 pounds and licensed for operation on highways. It applies to California and non-California based vehicles. In general, the regulation specifies that drivers of said vehicles: 1. Shall not idle the vehicle’s primary diesel engine for greater than 5 minutes at any location, except as noted in Subsection (d) of the regulation; and, 2. Shall not operate a diesel-fueled auxiliary power system (APS) to power a heater, air conditioner, or any ancillary equipment on that vehicle during sleeping or resting in a sleeper berth for greater than 5.0 minutes at any location when within 1,000 feet of restricted area, except as noted in Subsection (d) of the regulation. b. Off-road diesel equipment shall comply with the 5-minute idling restriction identified in Section 2449(d)(2) of the California Air Resources Board’s In-Use Off-road Diesel regulation. c. Signs must be posted in the designated queuing areas and job sites to remind drivers and operators of the state’s 5-minute idling limit. 2. Diesel Idling Restrictions Near Sensitive Receptors (residential homes). In addition to the State required diesel idling requirements, the project applicant shall comply with these more restrictive requirements to minimize impacts to nearby sensitive receptors: Packet Pg. 58 Item 2 Resolution No. _____ (2018 Series) Page 5 a. Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors. b. Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors shall not be permitted. c. Use of alternative fueled equipment is recommended. d. Signs that specify the no idling areas must be posted and enforced at the site. 3. Soil Transport. It is estimated that 16,000 cubic yards of cut material (i.e., soils) will be cut from the site, but the final volume of soil that will be hauled off-site, together with the fleet mix, hauling route, and number of trips per day will need to be identified for the APCD. Specific standards and conditions will apply. AQ-5 Monitoring Plan: All mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and building plans. In addition, the contractor shall designate a person or persons to monitor that idling control techniques are being implemented to reduce sensitive receptor emissions impact of diesel vehicles and equipment during construction. Their duties shall include holiday and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD, Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to commencement of construction. The applicant shall provide documentation of compliance with APCD requirements to City staff prior to issuance of any grading or building permits. Cultural and Tribal Resources CR-1: Preservation of Archeological Resources. A monitoring plan shall be prepared and approved by the City prior to building permit approval. The plan shall include survey results that outline where monitoring is required on the site and note when a Native American monitor is required. The plan shall provide protocols for stoppage of work and treatment of human remains, staff education requirements, and a data recovery plan to be implemented in case significant deposits are exposed. CR-1 Monitoring Plan: Building/grading plans shall show and outline all details and requirements of the monitoring plan prepared by a City qualified Registered Professional Archeologist to be implemented during construct ion. The monitoring plan shall specify methods and procedures for identifying those deposits during construction; standards for assessing the significance and integrity of any deposits so identified; and methods and procedures for mitigating impacts on sig nificant deposits. The plan also shall identify the qualified professional who will conduct the monitoring and circumstances where a Native American tribal representative or qualified site monitor may be required. SECTION 2. Environmental Review. The City Council hereby adopts the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact that finds that with incorporation of mitigation measures, environmental impacts will be less than significant. SECTION 3. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the City Council adopt s the following findings in support of the project : Packet Pg. 59 Item 2 Resolution No. _____ (2018 Series) Page 6 a) As conditioned, the design of the Vesting Tentative Tract Map is consistent with the General Plan because the proposed subdivision respects existing site constraints and will incrementally add to the City’s residential housing inventory. b) The site is physically suited for the type of development allowed in the medium-high density (R-2-SP) and conservation /open space (C/OS) zone. c) The tentative map, as conditioned, will comply with all environmental mitigation measures prescribed herein, and therefore is consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act and the Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS- MND). d) The design of the vesting tentative tract map and the proposed improvements are not likely to cause serious health problems or substantial environmental damage since further development or redevelopment of the proposed parcels will occur consistent with the City’s Development Standards, Mitigation Measures, and Conditions of Approval. e) The project insures safe, orderly development along Rockview Place because the project complies with the City’s housing goals and the City’s General Plan for maintaining compact urban form. Findings for Special Considerations f) Necessary public improvements are being secured through the permitting of the proposed project, including frontage improvements and street trees. g) Site drainage has been designed consistent with the stormwater control plan post construction requirements. h) The proposed project conforms to the Zoning Regulations requirement with the approval of the use permit because the special considerations overlay that pertains to substandard street width, slope, and drainage concerns site are addressed as part of the project design. SECTION 4. Action. The City Council approves applications SBDV-1211-2017 (VTM No. 3113) and EID-1303-2017, a vesting tentative tract map to create up to eight (8) residential lots, subject to the following conditions: Planning Division – Community Development Department 1. The project shall comply with the mitigation measures outlined in the Initial Study Mitigated Negative Declaration. Packet Pg. 60 Item 2 Resolution No. _____ (2018 Series) Page 7 2. The subdivider shall include the common open space area within an easement as a part of the Final Vesting Tract Map to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director and the Public Works Director. Natural Resources Division - Administration Department 3. The subdivider shall dedicate a Private Open Space Easement encumbering the open space area shown on the Vesting Tentative Tract Map to the satisfaction of the Natural Resources Manager and in a form approved by the City Attorney. Engineering Division – Public Works/Community Development Department 4. The subdivision shall be recorded with a final map. The map preparation and monumentation shall be in accordance with the City’s Subdivision Regulations, Engineering Standards, and the Subdivision Map Act. The map shall use U.S. Customary Units in accordance with the current City Engineering Standards. A separate application, checklist, and final map review fee shall be paid at the time of final map processing. 5. Park in-lieu fees shall be paid for each new dwelling unit prior to map recordation. The fees shall be based on the fee resolution in effect at the time of map recordation. Credit for the removal of any lawful unit will be applied to the final fee. 6. Building demolitions and utility abandonments shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City prior to map recordation. Utility abandonments related to the required subdivision improvements may be deferred if covered with the subdivision agreement and app ropriate surety. 7. Any easements including but not limited to provisions for all public and private utilities, access, grading, drainage, slope banks, construction, common driveways, common areas, and the maintenance of the same shall be shown on the fina l map and/or shall be recorded separately prior to map recordation if applicable. Said easements may be provided for in part or in total as blanket easements. 8. The required dedications for street purposes (curb, gutter, and sidewalk) and for the public pedestrian easement for the ADA sidewalk extension at the driveway approach shall be based on the approved subdivision improvement plans and shall be shown and noted on the final map. 9. The street improvement plans shall detail any transition from the new integral curb, gutter, and sidewalk back to the adjoining sections of 4’ sidewalk where a transition is practical. The northerly transition shall consider and provide a minimum 4’ clearance around the existing utility pole to remain in accordance with ADA and City Engineering Standards. 10. The subdivider shall dedicate a 10’ wide street tree easement and public utility easement (P.U.E.) across the frontage of each lot bordering Rockview Place. Packet Pg. 61 Item 2 Resolution No. _____ (2018 Series) Page 8 11. Separate utilities, including water, sewer, gas, electricity, telephone, and cable TV shall be served to each lot/parcel to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director and serving utility companies. A private common sewer main may be proposed to the satisfaction of the Building Official, Utilities Engineer, and Public Works Director. Wire utilities to new residences/structures shall be underground. 12. Unless otherwise required by the Fire Department for an on-site fire hydrant or NFPA 13-R fire sprinkler system, the project should be designed with residential NFPA 13-D fire sprinkler systems served through the individual domestic meters. The common 4” fire service lateral and double-check assembly shown on the tentative plans should be removed. 13. A separate subdivision improvement plan submittal is not required . The building plan submittal may be used to show all required public and private subdivision improvements. Improvements located within the public right -of-way will require a separate encroachment permit and associated inspection fees based on the fee sc hedule in effect at the time of permit issuance. A separate subdivision improvement plan review fee and subdivision map check fee will be required for the review of subdivision improvements and map in accordance with the most current fee resolution. 14. These lots shall be considered a common plan of development in relation to the Post Construction Stormwater Requirements as promulgated by the Regional Water Quality Control Board for redeveloped sites. The building plan submittal shall show compliance with t he Post Construction Stormwater Requirements. The replaced sidewalk shall be considered in the compliance documentation and improvement plan design. The runoff from the sidewalk shall be treated for water quality in accordance with the PCR's. 15. An operations and maintenance manual (O&M) will be required for the post construction stormwater improvements. The manual shall be provided at the time of building permit application and shall be accepted by the City prior to building permit issuance. A private stormwater conveyance agreement will be required and shall be recorded prior to final inspection approvals. The O & M manual shall include provisions for the management and maintenance of any nuisance created within the public right -of-way as a result of the discharge of stormwater or groundwater to the public right -of-way. 16. In accordance with City Engineering Standard 1010 Section 5.3.1 (formerly 1010.B), the developer shall retain any collected groundwater or stormwater on-site. If retention on-site is impractical or infeasible, the developer shall provide for an alternate solution to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Such solution may include but is not limited to, the extension of a public storm drain connection, a private storm drain system, or enhanced private off-site maintenance requirements of the developer and/or Homeowners Association. A Notice of Requirements may be required in conjunction with the map recordation. Indemnification 17. Pursuant to Government Code § 66474.9(b), the subdivider shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and /or its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or Packet Pg. 62 Item 2 Resolution No. _____ (2018 Series) Page 9 proceeding against the City and /or its agents, officers or employees to attack , set aside, void or annul, the approval by the City of this subdivision, and all actions relating thereto, including but not limited to environmental review. 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 hereu nto 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. 63 Item 2 Project:Revisions:Proj. Engr.:Proj. Mngr.:Date:A&V Job No.:Scale:PER PLANABCDEFGHIABCDEFGHI1234567C:\Egnyte\Shared\Sun\All Jobs\2017 All Jobs\17110 - Rockview Moderns (Civil) - VHI\02_Working Drawings\Preliminary or Construction\02_ONSITE\TENTATIVE MAP.dwg, C-1.1 VESTING TENTATIVE MAP, May 03, 2018 9:24pm, ZachPlan Prepared By:The use of these plans and specifications shall berestricted to the original site for which they wereprepared and publication thereof is expressly limited tosuch use. Reproduction or publication by any method, inwhole or in part, is prohibited. Title to these plans andspecifications remain with Ashley & Vance Engineering,Inc. without prejudice. Visual contact with these plansand specifications shall constitute prima facie evidenceof the acceptance of these restrictions.Ashley&VanceG, Cwww.ashleyvance.comC I V I L S T R U C T U R A L113 W. Chestnut StreetBellingham, WA 98225(360) 746-8020 (805) 545-0010Phone Ext.:Phone Ext.:THE ROCKVIEW MODERNS3063 ROCKVIEW PLACESAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401ZRBKBB05.03.201817110VESTING TENTATIVEMAPC-1.11.2.3.4.5.226119020 20 40HORIZONTAL SCALE: FEETNLOT 5LOT 4LOT 6LOT 7LOT 8LOT 3LOT 2LOT 1ROCKVIEW PLACETHE ROCKVIEWMODERNS -VESTING TENTATIVEMAPPROPOSED 10.50' ACCESSAND UTILITY EASEMENTPROPOSED 10.50' ACCESSAND UTILITY EASEMENTVICINITY MAPPROJECT SITENPROPOSED 5.25'ACCESS EASEMENTFOR THE BENEFIT OFLOT 7PROPOSED 5.25'ACCESS EASEMENTFOR THE BENEFIT OFLOT 6PROPOSED 5.25'ACCESS EASEMENTFOR THE BENEFIT OFLOT 2PROPOSED 5.25'ACCESS EASEMENTFOR THE BENEFIT OFLOT 3CLIENT:TEIXEIRA CAPITAL PARTNERS III LLC755 SANTA ROSA, SUITE 300SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401ARCHITECT:STUDIO 2G ARCHITECTS, LLP1540 MARSH STREET, SUITE 230SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401GEOTECHNICAL: GEOSOLUTIONS, INC.PATRICK MCNEILL220 HIGH STREETSAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401SURVEYOR:JON McKELLAR2605 SOUTH MILLER STSUITE 107SANTA MARIA, CA 93455805.680.1895APN: 004-584-004ZONING:R-2-STRACT NUMBER: 3113LEGAL DESCRIPTION:THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, COUNTY OFSAN LUIS OBISPO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:LOT 29 AND 30 OF THE YOAKUM POULTRY UNITS, IN THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, COUNTY OF SANLUIS OBISPO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP RECORDED MARCH 11, 1927 IN BOOK 3,PAGE 89 OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY.EXISTING SURVEY INFORMATION FROM PLAN PREPARED BY JON McKELLAR DATEDMAY 2017.BASIS OF BEARINGS: BASIS OF BEARINGS IS THE CENTERLINE OF ROCKVIEWPLACE.BENCHMARK: THE LOCAL BENCHMARK IS THE MONUMENT LOCATED IN THE TOP OFTHE WESTERLY CURB NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF ROCKVIEW PLACE ANDSWEENEY, (BM #345)ELEVATION 243.41', NAVD 88NOTE:1. SURVEY INFORMATION IN THIS PLAN SET IS NOT A BOUNDARY SURVEY.PROPERTY LINES, SETBACKS, AND EASEMENT INFORMATION SHOWN IS FORREFERENCE ONLY.2. CONFIRM BENCHMARK DATA AND CONDITION WITH PROJECT SURVEYOR PRIORTO USE. THE SURVEYOR MUST PROVIDE THE ENGINEER WITH THE SURVEYCONTROL NOTES, CONTROL COORDINATES, AND SURVEY NOTES.SURVEY MONUMENT PROTECTION:PROTECT AND PRESERVE, IN PLACE, ALL SURVEY MONUMENTS AND BENCHMARKS.DO NOT DISTURB, MOVE, OR RELOCATE MONUMENTS OR BENCHMARKS WITHOUTTHE PRIOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE AGENCY HAVING JURISDICTION OVERTHE MONUMENT OR BENCHMARK. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTRACT WITH ALICENSED SURVEYOR FOR MONUMENTS REQUIRING DISTURBANCE OR REMOVAL,AND THE SURVEYOR SHALL RESET THE MONUMENTS OR PROVIDE PERMANENTWITNESS MONUMENTS AND FILE THE REQUIRED DOCUMENTATION WITH THEAUTHORITY HAVING JURISDICTION, PURSUANT TO ALL APPLICABLE BUSINESS ANDPROFESSIONAL CODES.SURVEY NOTESPROJECT INFORMATION004-584-005004-584-016004-584-015004-584-014004-584-013004-584-012PROPOSED SIDEWALKDEDICATIONPROPOSED ACCESS ANDUTILITY EASEMENTPROPOSED OPENSPACE EASEMENTPROPOSED OPENSPACE EASEMENTEASEMENT INFORMATION PER PRELIMINARY TITLE REPORT BY:FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE COMPANY,2222 S. BROADWAY, SUITE G,SANTA MARIA, CA 93454EFFECTIVE JULY 11, 2017. TITLE NO. FSLC-531700246DWL.EASEMENTS:EASEMENT(S) FOR THE PURPOSE(S) SHOWN BELOW AND RIGHTS INCIDENTAL THERETO, AS GRANTED IN A DOCUMENT:GRANTED TO:THE PACIFIC TELEPHONE & TELEGRAPH COMPANYPURPOSE:PUBLIC UTILITIES AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSESRECORDING DATE:APRIL 10, 1920RECORDING NO.:BOOK 137 OF DEEDS, PAGE 63LIMITATIONS ON THE USE, BY THE OWNERS OF SAID LAND, OF THE EASEMENT AREA AS SET FORTH IN THE EASEMENT DOCUMENT SHOWN HEREINABOVE. REFERENCE IS HEREBY MADE TO SAID DOCUMENT FOR FULL PARTICULARS.EASEMENT(S) FOR THE PURPOSE(S) SHOWN BELOW AND RIGHTS INCIDENTALTHERETO, AS GRANTED IN A DOCUMENT:GRANTED TO:COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPOPURPOSE;PUBLIC HIGHWAYRECORDING DATE:NOVEMBER 9, 1933RECORDING NO.:4674 IN BOOK 144 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS PAGE 84AFFECTS:NORTHEDY 10 FEETLIMITATIONS ON THE USE, BY THE OWNERS OF SAID LAND, OF THE EASEMENT AREAAS SET FORTH IN THE EASEMENT DOCUMENT SHOWN HEREINABOVE. REFERENCE ISHEREBY MADE TO SAID DOCUMENT FOR FULL PARTICULARS.EASEMENT INFORMATIONPROPOSED 2.00'SIDEWALKDEDICATIONSETBACK LINES, TYP.Packet Pg. 64Item 2 ARCHITECTSTUDIO 2G ARCHITECTS, LLPARCHITECT: HEIDI GIBSON1541 MARSH ST SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401P:805.594.0771OWNER / CLIENTCONTACT: KEVIN TEIXIERA755 SANTA ROSA STREET, STE 300SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401P: 805.698.3520PROJECT TEAMSYMBOL LEGENDSheet NumberSection Cut Reference Indicates Direction Of ViewA7.0-AExit SignRefer to Life Safetly Plans and'E' sheets for locations and requirements.A7.0-ASheet NumberInterior Elevation Reference NumberIndicates Direction Of ViewEXITDoor ID - Refer To Sheet A3.0#Window ID - Refer To Sheet A3.1AROCKVIEW MODERNSVICINITY MAPSCALE: NTSPROJECT INFOSITE SUMMARYPROJECT DESCRIPTIONAPN:004-584-004ZONE:R-2CONSTRUCTION TYPE:ADDRESS: 3063 Rockview Place San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 STRUCTURAL AND CIVIL ENGINEERASHLEY & VANCE ENGINEERINGENGINEER:1413 MONTEREY STSAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401P:805.545-0010BUILDING MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONAt the time of final inspection, a manual, compact disc, web-based reference or other media acceptable to the enforcing agency, which includes all of the following shall be placed in the building:1. Directions to the owner or occupant that the manual shall remain with the building throughout the life cycle of the structure.2. Operation and maintenance instructions for the following:A. Equipment and appliances, including water-saving devices and systems, HVAC systems, water-heating systems and other major applicances and equipment.B. Roof and yard drainage, including gutters and downspoutsC. Space conditioning systems, including condensers and air filtersD. Landscape irrigation systems.E. Water reuse systems3. Information from local utility, water and waste recovery providers on methods to further reduce resource consumption, including recycle programs and locations.4. Public transportation and/or carpool options available in the area.5. Educational material on the positive impacts of an interior relative humidity between 30-60% and what methods an occupant may use to maintain the relative humidity level in that range.6. Information about water-conserving landscape and irrigation design and controllers which conserve water7. Instructions for maintaining gutters and downspouts and the importance of diverting water at least 5'0" away from the foundation8. Information on required routine maintenance measures, including, but not limited to, caulking, painting, grading around the building....etc.9. Information about state solar energy and incentive programs available.10. A copy of all special inspection verifications required by the enforcing agency or this code.AGENCIES & UTILITIESCITY BUILDINGCOUNTY GOVERNMENT CTR.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401805.781.5600CITY PLANNINGCOUNTY GOVERNMENT CTR.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401805.781.5600CITY LAW ENFORCEMENT1585 KANSAS AVE.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA805.781.4550PG & E4325 HIGUERA STREETSAN LUIS OBISPO, CA805.546.5247CDF / SLO COUNTY FIRE635 N. SANTA ROSA ST.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA805.543.4248SBC / AT&TSERVICE CENTER1.800.310.2355 (RESIDENTIAL)1.800.750.2355 (BUSINESS)THE GAS COMPANYBUILDER SERVICES750 INDUSTRIAL WAYSAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 934011.818.700.3693CITY HEALTH2191 JOHNSON AVE.SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA805.781.5500UNDERGROUND SERVICES1.800.642.2444PROJECT REQUIREMENTSThis project shall comply with the 2016 California Building Code (CBC) and/or the California Residential Code (CRC).Codes: All construction shall conform to the following codes: 2016 California Building Code Vol. 1 & 2 (2015 IBC) 2016 California Residential Code (2015 IRC) 2016 California Electrical Code (2014 NEC) 2016 California Mechanical Code (2015 UMC) 2016 California Plumbing Code (2015 UPC) 2016 California Energy Code 2016 California Fire Code (2015 IFC) 2016 Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen Code) San Luis Obispo County Buildling and Construction Ordinance Title 19 San Luis Obispo County Coastal Zone Land Use Ordinance Title 23 San Luis Obispo County Fire Code Ordinance Title 16 San Luis Obispo County Land Use Ordinance Title 22NFPA National Fire Codes, all other codes and ordinances adopted by the agencies having jurisdiction over this project.All Amendments to the CA Codes adopted by the County of San Luis Obispo, and all other codes, regulations, and approvals established by the County of San Luis Obispo. this project is primarily governed by the CA Residential Code; only engineered structural components are subject to the CBC.All work located within the public right of way or within the jurisdiction of the County Utilities and Public Works Departments shall comply with the most current edition of the engineering standards and standards specifications.SOILS REPORTThe geotechnical engineering report prepared by Geo Solutions, Inc for Rockview Moderns subdivision at 3063 Rockview Place San Luis Obispo CA 93401PERMITS & SPECIAL INSPECTIONS:Structural Special Inspections: Refer to Structural Sheet Green Point Rated Checklist Verification provided by Central Coast Energy Compliance.STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCEThis project has been designed in accordance with and meets the City of San Luis Obispo Adopted code and ordinance requirements including, but not limited to the California State Accessibility Standards and I/We will be responsible for all clarifications deemed necessary during the construction phases.SignatureDateCLIMATE ZONE:SITE*ELECTRIAL ENGINEERTHOMA ENGINEERINGENGINEER: JAMES DEAN3562 EMPLEO STE CSAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401P:805.543.3850SOILSGEOSOLUTIONS, INCENGINEER: PATRICK B MCNEILL220 HIGH STREETSAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401P:LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTPLIEN AIRELANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: KEVEN SMALL2615 SKYWAY DRIVE STE BSANTA MARIA CA 93455P:805.349.9695§§MECHANICAL/PLUMBING ENGINEERBRUMMEL MYRIC & ASSOCIATESARCHITECT: BEN BABB100 CROSS STREETSAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401P:805.544.42693063 ROCKVIEW PLACE, SAN LUIS OBISPO CA 93401ENERGY COMPLIANCECCEC ENGINEER: MICHELLE DUNN1675 GRANACHE WAYTEMPLETON CA 93465P:805.434.3844BOTANICAL SURVEYTERRA VERDE ENVIRONMENTALBOTANIST: BROOK LANGLE3765 SOUTH HIGUERA ST STE 102SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401P:805.896.5479Type VZone 5AREASPROPERTY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS SIDEWALK 301 SQ FT. DENSITYHILLSIDE SUBDIVISION §16.18.130OPEN SPACE EASEMENT §18.18.130APacket Pg. 65Item 2 25"X51"25"X51"25"X51"25"X51"25"X51"25"X51"25"X51"25"X51"25"X51"25"X51"25"X51"25"X51"2AC22AC23AC23AC24AC24AC21AC21AC22AC22AC2Packet Pg. 66Item 2 Packet Pg. 67Item 2 Overall Max. Roof Ht.+26'-0"Roof Height+22'-0"F.F.246.10'Overall Max. Roof Ht.+26'-0"Roof Height+22'-0"F.F.246.10'Overall Max. Building Height+35'-0" Above Natural GradeN.G.245.50'Overall Max. Allowable Roof Ht.+22'-0"Max. Eave Ht.+22'-0"222222Packet Pg. 68Item 2 Packet Pg. 69Item 2 25"X51"25"X51"TVPacket Pg. 70Item 2 25"X51"25"X51"TVPacket Pg. 71Item 2 RESOLUTION NO. ARC-1012-2018 A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION GRANTING FINAL ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW APPROVAL OF EIGHT (8) TWO-STORY RESIDENTIAL UNITS WITH A FENCE HEIGHT AND A FRONT YARD SETBACK EXCEPTIONS AS PART OF A COMMON-INTEREST SUBDIVISION AS REPRESENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS DATED JUNE 18, 2018; 3063 ROCKVIEW PLACE (R-2-S & C/OS ZONE; ARCH 1209-2017) WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission 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 June 18, 2018, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under ARCH-1209-2017, Teixiera Capital Partners III LLC, applicant; and WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission ,of the City of San Luis Obispo has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing. WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner required by law; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Architectural Review Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Findings. The Architectural Review Commission hereby grants final approval to the project (ARCH-1209-2017), based on the following findings: 1. The project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or welfare of those working or residing in the vicinity since the proposed project is consistent with the intention of the site's Medium Density Residential zoning designation and will be subject to conformance with all applicable building, fire, and safety codes. 2. The project design maintains consistency with the Community Design Guidelines by providing architectural design that complements the character, height and scale of the surrounding neighborhood. 3. The project is consistent with the Community Design Guidelines because it provides a cohesive cluster of residences with articulation and a mix of finish materials that create interest and compatibility with the architecture in the neighborhood. 4. The project is consistent with the Hillside Development guidelines because the project minimizes the visibility of the project and preserves the natural character of the hillside. Packet Pg. 72 Item 2 Resolution No. ARC-1012-2018 3063 Rockview Place, ARCH-1209-2017 Page 2 5. As proposed, no public purpose is served by strict compliance with the City's fence height standards because the fence poses no sight distance problems. 6. The subject fence stands at a maximum height of 6.5 feet. According to the City's Zoning Regulations, this is 2.14 feet taller than would be allowed by right along the other yard property line. 7. No useful purpose would be realized by requiring full setbacks because no significant fire protection, emergency access, privacy or security impacts are anticipated. 8. The proposed eleven-foot front yard setback exception from the front property is warranted to allow a trellis feature that adds architectural interest and enjoyment of the property. SECTION 2. Action. The Architectural Review Commission (ARC) hereby grants final approval to the project with incorporation of the following conditions: Community Development Department -Planning 1. The applicant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and/or its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City and/or its agents, officers or employees to attack, set aside, void or annul, the approval by the City of this project, and all actions relating thereto, including but not limited to environmental review ("Indemnified Claims"). The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any Indemnified Claim upon being presented with the Indemnified Claim and the City shall fully cooperate in the defense against an Indemnified Claim. 2. Final project design and construction drawings submitted for a building permit shall be in substantial compliance with the project plans approved by the ARC. A separate, full-size sheet shall be included in working drawings submitted for a building permit that lists all conditions of project approvals listed as sheet number 2. 3. Reference shall be made in the margin oflisted items as to where in plans requirements are addressed. Any change to approved design, colors, materials, landscaping, or other conditions of approval must be approved by the Director or Architectural Review Commission, as deemed appropriate. 4. Plans submitted for a building permit shall call out the colors and materials of all proposed building surfaces and other improvements. The plans shall include more variety in the color palette. Plans shall clearly note that all stucco surfaces are not a sprayed-on product and have a smooth hand-troweled or sand finish appearance to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. 5. The locations of all exterior lighting, including bollard style landscaping or path/parking lighting, shall be included in plans submitted for a building permit. All wall-mounted lighting fixtures shall be clearly called out on building elevations included as part of Packet Pg. 73 Item 2 Resolution No. ARC-1012-2018 3063 Rockview Place, ARCH-1209-2017 Page 3 working drawings. All wall-mounted lighting shall complement building architecture, subject to the approval of the Community Development Director. The lighting schedule for the building shall include a graphic representation of the proposed lighting fixtures and cut- sheets on the submitted building plans. The selected fixture(s) shall be shielded to ensure that light is directed downward consistent with the requirements of the City's Night Sky Preservation standards contained in Chapter 17 .23 of the Zoning Regulations. 6. Plans submitted for a building permit shall clearly depict the type of bicycle racks proposed, location and dimensions of all short and long-term bicycle parking. Sufficient detail shall be provided about the placement and design of bike racks to demonstrate compliance with relevant Engineering Standards and Community Design Guidelines, to the satisfaction of the Public Works and Community Development Directors. 7. Plans submitted for a building permit shall include window details indicating the type of materials for the window frames and mullions, their dimensions, and colors. Plans shall include the materials and dimensions of all lintels, sills, surrounds recesses and other related window features. Plans shall demonstrate the use of high quality materials for the windows that reflect the architectural style of the project and are compatible with the neighborhood character, to the approval of the Community Development Director. 8. Mechanical and electrical equipment shall be located internally. With submittal of working drawings, the applicant shall include sectional views of the building, which clearly show the sizes of any proposed condensers and other mechanical equipment. If any condensers or other mechanical equipment is to be placed on the roof, plans submitted for a building permit shall confirm that parapets and other roof features will adequately screen them. A line-of-sight diagram may be required to confirm that proposed screening will be adequate. This condition applies to initial construction and later improvements. 9. The location of any required backflow preventer and double-check assembly shall be shown on all site plans submitted for a building permit, including the landscaping plan. Construction plans shall also include a scaled diagram of the equipment proposed. Where possible, as determined by the Utilities Director, equipment shall be located inside the building within 20 feet of the front property line. Where this is not possible, as determined by the Utilities Director, the back-flow preventer and double-check assembly shall be located in the street yard and screened using a combination of paint color, landscaping and, if deemed appropriate by the Community Development Director, a low wall. The size and configuration of such equipment shall be subject to review and approval by the Utilities and Community Development Directors. 10. A final landscaping plan, including irrigation details and plans, shall be submitted to the Community Development Department along with working drawings. The legend for the landscaping plan shall include the sizes and species of all groundcovers, shrubs, and trees with corresponding symbols for each plant material showing their specific locations on plans. Street trees species shall comply with City standards. Packet Pg. 74 Item 2 Resolution No. ARC-1012-2018 3063 Rockview Place, ARCH-1209-2017 Page 4 11. Plans submitted for a building permit shall show the proposed fencing for the project with a more open guardrail design. 12. The project will be required to provide a plan for the disposal, storage, and collection of solid waste material for the project. The development of the plan shall be coordinated with San Luis Garbage Company. The plan must be submitted for approval by the City's Utilities Services Manager and the Community Development Director. Community Development Department -Engineering 13. Complete frontage improvements and utility services shall be provided as a condition of development. The building plan submittal shall show and note compliance with the City Engineering Standards in effect at the time of submittal. The most current Standards were updated and adopted in May of 2018. 14. The building plan submittal shall show and note compliance with any pertinent subdivision conditions of approval. 15. An offer of dedication for the sidewalk widening to 6' along with a public pedestrian access easement for the ADA sidewalk extension behind the driveway approach will be required prior to building permit issuance or in conjunction with the map recordation. 16. A separate 10' PUE and Street Tree easement will be required in conjunction with the development project and/or map recordation. 1 7. All new wire utilities to serve the proposed units shall be underground from the existing overhead service. Unless otherwise approved to the satisfaction of the of the Public Works Director and Community Development Director, the undergrounding to serve the new units shall be completed with no net increase in wood utility poles. 18. Existing water and sewer services shall be shown to comply with City Engineering Standards or shall be abandoned at the main in accordance with the standards. The building and/or subdivision improvement plan submittal shall clarify whether a separate common landscape irrigation meter or sub-meter is required for this development. The City Engineering Standards limit meter manifold construction to 4 -1" meters. 19. Excavations along the property lines and adjacent to neighboring development property shall comply with any applicable sub-adjacent excavation and notification provisions of the California Building Code and prevailing State law. 20. An OSHA excavation permit will be required prior to grading and/or building permit issuance. 21. A separate demolition permit application will be required for the removal of the existing structures. The application and permit process is subject to the prescriptive requirements Packet Pg. 75 Item 2 Resolution No. ARC-1012-2018 3063 Rockview Place, ARCH-1209-2017 Page 5 of the demolition regulations including the required legal notices (during a period of 90 days) offering the buildings for relocation if over 50-years old. 22. A complete grading and drainage plan, final drainage report, and Post Construction Stormwater Regulation compliance documentation will be required in conjunction with the building permit plan submittal. 23. The drainage report shall include an analysis of the existing upslope watershed that is tributary to this property. The project shall show how any existing run-on will be received and conveyed to an approved outlet. The collection and conveyance of the offsite drainage shall include analysis and provisions for a safe-overflow system. 24. The final Post Construction Stormwater Regulation documentation shall show and note compliance with the harvesting, infiltration, or evapotranspiration provisions for · Performance Requirement 2 or shall justify the inability to use these BMP's before dropping down to the bio-filtration option. A treatment train including a mix of BMP's could be supported. Fire Department 25. This project appears to be comprised ofR3 occupancy single family and duplex dwellings. Fire spririklers conforming to NFPA 13D are required of the domestic meter. The building plan submittal shall remove the reference to 4" fire line. On motion by Commissioner Beller, seconded by Commissioner Withers, and on the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Beller, Withers, and Nemch NOES: Commissioners Soll and Rolph REFRAIN: ABSENT: Chair Root and Commissioner Smith The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 1 gth day of June 2018. Doug Davids 1 Secretary ArchiteCtural Review Commission Packet Pg. 76 Item 2 RESOLUTION NO. PC-1012-2018 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A COMMON INTEREST VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 3113 TO CREATE EIGHT (8) RESIDENTIAL LOTS, A USE PERMIT TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT ON A SITE WITH A SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS OVERLAY, AND A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (SBDV- 1211-2017/EID-1303-2017) WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing on June 18, 2018 in the Council Hearing Room of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, for the purpose of considering ARCH-1209-2017, an architectural review of eight residential units; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing on July 11, 2018 in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, for the purpose of considering SBDV-1211-2017, a vesting tentative tract map subdividing an approximately 1.04-acre site into 8 lots; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered an Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS-MND) analyzing the proposed vesting tentative tract map; and WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner required by law; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. CEQA Findings, Mitigation Measures. and Mitigation Monitoring Program. Based upon all the evidence, the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact that finds that with incorporation of mitigation measures, environmental impacts will be less than significant as follows: Air Quality AQ-1: Prior to grading plan approval, the project proponent shall ensure that a geologic evaluation should be conducted to determine if NOA is present within the area that will be disturbed. IfNOA is not present, an exemption request must be filed with the District. If NOA is found at the site, the applicant must comply with all requirements outlined in the Asbestos ATCM. This may include development of an Asbestos Dust Mitigation Plan and an Asbestos Health and Safety Program for Packet Pg. 77 Item 2 Resolution No. PC-1012-2018 (2018 Series) Page 2 approval by the APCD. Technical Appendix 4.4 of this Handbook includes a map of zones throughout SLO County where NOA has been found and geological evaluation is required prior to any grading. More information on NOA can be found at http://www .sl oc lean air.org/rule s- regul at ion s/as bestos .php. AQ-1 Monitoring Plan: All mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and building plans. In addition , the contractor shall designate a person or persons to monitor compliance with APCD requirements. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD , Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to commencement of construction. The applicant shall provide documentation of compliance with APCD requirements to City staff prior to issuance of any grading or building permits. AQ-2: Any scheduled demolition activities or disturbance, removal, or relocation of utility pipelines shall be coordinated with the APCD Enforcement Division at (805) 781-5912 to ensure compliance with NESHAP, which include, but are not limited to: 1) written notification, within at least 10 business days of activities commencing, to the APCD, 2) asbestos survey conducted by a Certified Asbestos Consultant, and, 3) applicable removal and disposal requirements of identified ACM. More information on NOA can be found at http://www .slo cleanair.org/rules- regul at i on s/as bes to s. php . AQ-2 Monitoring Plan: All mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and building plans. In addition, the contractor shall designate a person or persons to monitor compliance with APCD requirements. Their duties shall include holiday and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD, Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to commencement of construction. AQ-3: During construction/ground disturbing activities, the applicant shall implement the following particulate (dust) control measures. These measures shall be shown on grading and building plans. In addition, the contractor shall designate a person or persons to monitor the dust control program and to order increased watering, modify practices as necessary, to prevent transport of dust off site. Their duties shall include holiday and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to commencement of construction. a. Reduce the amount of disturbed area where possible. b. Use water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site and from exceeding the APCD 's limit of 20% opacity for no greater than 3 minutes in any 60-minute period. Increased watering frequency will be required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 m.p.h. and cessation of grading activities during periods of winds over 25 m.p.h. Reclaimed (non- potable) water is to be used in all construction and dust-control work. c. All dirt stock pile areas (if any) shall be sprayed daily and covered with tarps or other dust barriers as needed. d . Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation and landscape plans shall be implemented as soon as possible, following completion of any soil disturbing activities. Packet Pg. 78 Item 2 Resolution No. PC-1012-2018 (2018 Series) Page 3 e. Exposed grounds that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month after initial grading shall be sown with a fast germinating, non-invasive, grass seed and watered until vegetation is established. f. All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation shall be stabilized using approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in advance by the APCD. g. All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. In addition, building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used. h. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 m.p.h. on any unpaved surface at the construction site. i. All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials, are to be covered or shall maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top ofload and top of trailer) in accordance with California Vehicle Code Section 23114. J. Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site. k. Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers shall be used with reclaimed water where feasible. Roads shall be pre-wetted prior to sweeping when feasible. 1. All PM 10 mitigation measures required shall be shown on grading and building plans. m. The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the fugitive dust emissions and enhance the implementation of the measures as necessary to minimize dust complaints, reduce visible emissions below the APCD's limit of 20% opacity for no greater than 3 minutes in any 60-minute period. Their duties shall include holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD Compliance Division prior to the start of any grading, earthwork or demolition. AQ-3 Monitoring Plan: All mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and building plans. In addition, the contractor shall designate a person or persons to monitor the dust control program and to order increased watering, as necessary, to prevent transport of dust off site. Their duties shall include holiday and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD, Community Development and Public W arks Departments prior to commencement of construction. AQ-4: Prior to any construction activities at the sit~, the project proponent shall ensure that all equipment and operations are compliant with California Air Resource Board and APCD permitting requirements and shall contact the APCD Engineering Division at (805) 781-5912 for specific information regarding permitting requirements. AQ-4 Monitoring Plan: All mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and building plans. In addition, the contractor shall designate a person or persons to monitor compliance with APCD requirements. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be Packet Pg. 79 Item 2 Resolution No. PC-1012-2018 (2018 Series) Page 4 provided to the APCD, Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to commencement of construction. The applicant shall provide documentation of compliance with APCD requirements to City staff prior to issuance of any grading or building permits. AQ-5: To reduce sensitive receptor emissions impact of diesel vehicles and equipment used to construct the project and export soil from the site, the applicant shall implement the following idling control techniques: 1. California Diesel Idling Regulations a. On-road diesel vehicles shall comply with Section 2485 of Title 13 of the California Code ofregulations. This regulation limits idling from diesel-fueled commercial motor vehicles with gross vehicular weight ratings of more than 10,000 pounds and licensed for operation on highways. It applies to California and non-California based vehicles. In general, the regulation specifies that drivers of said vehicles: 1. Shall not idle the vehicle's primary diesel engine for greater than 5 minutes at any location, except as noted in Subsection ( d) of the regulation; and, 2. Shall not operate a diesel-fueled auxiliary power system (APS) to power a heater, air conditioner, or any ancillary equipment on that vehicle during sleeping or resting in a sleeper berth for greater than 5.0 minutes at any location when within 1,000 feet of restricted area, except as noted in Subsection (d) of the regulation. b. Off-road diesel equipment shall comply with the 5-minute idling restriction identified in Section 2449(d)(2) of the California Air Resources Board's In-Use Off-road Diesel regulation. c. Signs must be posted in the designated queuing areas and job sites to remind drivers and operators of the state's 5-minute idling limit. 2. Diesel Idling Restrictions Near Sensitive Receptors (residential homes). In addition to the State required diesel idling requirements, the project applicant shall comply with these more restrictive requirements to minimize impacts to nearby sensitive receptors: a. Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors. b. Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors shall not be permitted. c. Use of alternative fueled equipment is recommended. d. Signs that specify the no idling areas must be posted and enforced at the site. 3. Soil Transport. It is estimated that 16,000 cubic yards of cut material (i.e., soils) will be cut from the site, but the final volume of soil that will be hauled off-site, together with the fleet mix, hauling route, and number of trips per day will need to be identified for the APCD. Specific standards and conditions will apply. AQ-5 Monitoring Plan: All mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and building plans. In addition, the contractor shall designate a person or persons to monitor that idling control techniques are being implemented to reduce sensitive receptor emissions impact of diesel vehicles and equipment during construction. Their duties shall include holiday and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD, Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to commencement of construction. The applicant shall provide Packet Pg. 80 Item 2 Resolution No. PC-1012-2018 (2018 Series) Page 5 documentation of compliance with APCD requirements to City staff prior to issuance of any grading or building permits. Cultural and Tribal Resources CR-1: Preservation of Archeological Resources. A monitoring plan shall be prepared and approved by the City prior to building permit approval. The plan shall include survey results that outline where monitoring is required on the site and note when a Native American monitor is required. The plan shall provide protocols for stoppage of work and treatment of human remains, staff education requirements, and a data recovery plan to be implemented in case significant deposits are exposed. CR-1 Monitoring Plan: Building/grading plans shall show and outline all details and requirements of the monitoring plan prepared by a City qualified Registered Professional Archeologist to be implemented during construction. The monitoring plan shall specify methods and procedures for identifying those deposits during construction; standards for assessing the significance and integrity of any deposits so identified; and methods and procedures for mitigating impacts on significant deposits. The plan also shall identify the qualified professional who will conduct the monitoring and circumstances where a Native American tribal representative or qualified site monitor may be required. SECTION 2. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt the following findings in support of the project: a) As conditioned, the design of the Vesting Tentative Tract Map is consistent with the General Plan because the proposed subdivision respects existing site constraints and will incrementally add to the City's residential housing inventory. b) The site is physically suited for the type of development allowed in the medium-high density (R-2-SP) and conservation /open space (C/OS) zone. c) The tentative map, as conditioned, will comply with all environmental mitigation measures prescribed herein, and therefore is consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act and the Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS- MND). d) The design of the vesting tentative tract map and the proposed improvements are not likely to cause serious health problems or substantial environmental damage since further development or redevelopment of the proposed parcels will occur consistent with the City's Development Standards, Mitigation Measures, and Conditions of Approval. e) The project insures safe, orderly development along Rockview Place because the project complies with the City's housing goals and the City's General Plan for maintaining compact urban form. Packet Pg. 81 Item 2 Resolution No. PC-1012-2018 (2018 Series) Page 6 Findings for Special Considerations f) Necessary public improvements are being secured through the permitting of the proposed project, including frontage improvements and street trees. g) Site drainage has been designed consistent with the stormwater control plan post construction requirements. h) The proposed project conforms to the Zoning Regulations requirement with the approval of the use permit because the special considerations overlay that pertains to substandard street width, slope, and drainage concerns site are addressed as part of the project design. SECTION 3. Action. The Planning Commission does hereby recommend the City Council approve application SBDV-1211-2017 (VTM No. 3113), a vesting tentative tract map to create up to eight (8) residential lots, subject to the following conditions: Planning Division -Community Development Department 1. The project shall comply with the mitigation measures outlined in the Initial Study Mitigated Negative Declaration. 2. The subdivider shall include the common open space area within an easement as a part of the Final Vesting Tract Map to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director and the Public Works Director. Natural Resources Division -Administration Department 3. The subdivider shall dedicate a Private Open Space Easement encumbering the open space area shown on the Vesting Tentative Tract Map to the satisfaction of the Natural Resources Manager and in a form approved by the City Attorney. Engineering Division -Public Works/Community Development Department 4. The subdivision shall be recorded with a final map. The map preparation and monumentation shall be in accordance with the City's Subdivision Regulations, Engineering Standards, and the Subdivision Map Act. The map shall use U.S. Customary Units in accordance with the current City Engineering Standards. A separate application, checklist, and final map review fee shall be paid at the time of final map processing. 5. Park in-lieu fees shall be paid for each new dwelling unit prior to map recordation. The fees shall be based on the fee resolution in effect at the time of map recordation. Credit for the removal of any lawful unit will be applied to the final fee. 6. Building demolitions and utility abandonments shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City prior to map recordation. Utility abandonments related to the required subdivision Packet Pg. 82 Item 2 Resolution No. PC-1012-2018 (2018 Series) Page 7 improvements may be deferred if covered with the subdivision agreement and appropriate surety. 7. Any easements including but not limited to provisions for all public and private utilities, access, grading, drainage, slope banks, construction, common driveways, common areas, and the maintenance of the same shall be shown on the final map and/or shall be recorded separately prior to map recordation if applicable. Said easements may be provided for in part or in total as blanket easements. 8. The required dedications for street purposes (curb, gutter, and sidewalk) and for the public pedestrian easement for the ADA sidewalk extension at the driveway approach shall be based on the approved subdivision improvement plans and shall be shown and noted on the final map. 9. The street improvement plans shall detail any transition from the new integral curb, gutter, and sidewalk back to the adjoining sections of 4' sidewalk where a transition is practical. The northerly transition shall consider and provide a minimum 4' clearance around the existing utility pole to remain in accordance with ADA and City Engineering Standards. 10. The subdivider shall dedicate a 1 O' wide street tree easement and public utility easement (P.U.E.) across the frontage of each lot bordering Rockview Place. 11. Separate utilities, including water, sewer, gas, electricity, telephone, and cable TV shall be served to each lot/parcel to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director and serving utility companies. A private common sewer main may be proposed to the satisfaction of the Building Official, Utilities Engineer, and Public Works Director. Wire utilities to new residences/structures shall be underground. 12. Unless otherwise required by the Fire Department for an on-site fire hydrant or NFPA 13-R fire sprinkler system, the project should be designed with residential NFPA 13-D fire sprinkler systems served through the individual domestic meters. The common 4" fire service lateral and double-check assembly shown on the tentative plans should be removed. 13. A separate subdivision improvement plan submittal is not required. The building plan submittal may be used to show all required public and private subdivision improvements. Improvements located within the public right-of-way will require a separate encroachment permit and associated inspection fees based on the fee schedule in effect at the time of permit issuance. A separate subdivision improvement plan review fee and subdivision map check fee will be required for the review of subdivision improvements and map in accordance with the most current fee resolution. 14. These lots shall be considered a common plan of development in relation to the Post Construction Stormwater Requirements as promulgated by the Regional Water Quality Control Board for redeveloped sites. The building plan submittal shall show compliance with the Post Construction Stormwater Requirements. The replaced sidewalk shall be considered in the compliance documentation and improvement plan design. The runoff from the sidewalk shall be treated for water quality in accordance with the PCR's. Packet Pg. 83 Item 2 Resolution No. PC-1012-2018 (2018 Series) Page 8 15. An operations and maintenance manual (O&M) will be required for the post construction stormwater improvements. The manual shall be provided at the time of building permit application and shall be accepted by the City prior to building permit issuance. A private stormwater conveyance agreement will be required and shall be recorded prior to final inspection approvals. The 0 & M manual shall include provisions for the management and maintenance of any nuisance created within the public right-of-way as a result of the discharge of stormwater or groundwater to the public right-of-way. 16. In accordance with City Engineering Standard 1010 Section 5.3.l (formerly 1010.B), the developer shall retain any collected groundwater or storm water on-site. If retention on-site is impractical or infeasible, the developer shall provide for an alternate solution to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Such solution may include but is not limited to, the extension of a public storm drain connection, a private storm drain system, or enhanced private off-site maintenance requirements of the developer and/or Homeowners Association. A Notice of Requirements may be required in conjunction with the map recordation. Indemnification 17. Pursuant to Government Code § 66474.9(b), the subdivider shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and /or its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City and /or its agents, officers or employees to attack, set aside, void or annul, the approval by the City of this subdivision, and all actions relating thereto, including but not limited to environmental review. Upon motion of Commissioner Jorgensen, seconded by Commissioner Dandekar, and on the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Jorgensen, Dandekar, Wulkan, McKensie and Vice-chair Stevenson NOES: ABSENT: Commissioner Osterbur and Chair Fowler ABSTAIN: The foregoing resolution was adopted this 11th day of July 2018. Doug Davidson, Secretary Planning Commission Packet Pg. 84 Item 2 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM For EID-1303-2017/ARCH-1209-2017/SBDV-1211-2017 1. Project Title: Rockview Moderns 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Rachel Cohen, Associate Planner rcohen@slocity.org (805) 781-7574 4. Project Location: 3063 Rockview Place, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 APN: 004-584-004 5. Project Representative Name and Address: Heidi Gibson Studio 2G Architects, LLP 1540 Marsh street, suite 230 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 6. General Plan Designation: Medium-Density Residential and Conservation Open Space 7. Zoning: Medium-Density Residential (R-2-S) zone with the Special Consideration Overlay and Conservation Open Space Packet Pg. 85 Item 2 Project location Figure 1: Regional Location Figure 2: Project Location Packet Pg. 86 Item 2 8. Description of the Project: The applicant is proposing an eight-parcel common interest subdivision for a single-family residential project located within the Medium Density Residential zone with a special considerations overlay (R-2-S) and the Conservation Open Space (C/OS) zone located at 3063 Rockview Place, San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 (APN: 004-584-004). The residential project will be constructed on the R-2-S portion of the site and C/OS portion of the site will be placed under a preservation easement (see Figure 3). The project includes the following: 1. An eight-lot common interest subdivision, 2. The construction of 6 detached, and 2 attached (total 8) two-bedroom residential units (approximately 1,200 square feet each), 3. A street yard setback reduction to 11 feet, where normally a 20-foot setback is required, to allow a trellis/patio structure, 4. A fence height exception of approximately 6.5 feet, where normally a 4.36-foot-tall fence is allowed, and 5. Frontage improvements along Rockview Place including curb, gutter and sidewalk upgrades (Attachment 1, Project Plans). The structures on each lot will be two-stories with a maximum height of approximately 24 feet and provide two enclosed parking spaces for each unit and three guest spaces on the site. The parcels will be accessed from Rockview Place by a common driveway. The project will be R-2-S C/OS Figure 3: Zoning of the site Packet Pg. 87 Item 2 conditioned to include an easement or restrictive covenant for the portion of the property that is zoned Conservation Open Space (C/OS). 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Settings: The project site encompasses one lot; 3063 Rockview Place (~43,995 square feet). The project site is located on the west side of Rockview Place. The project site area that is being considered for development has an approximate average cross slope of 15% and is developed with four structures (three single-family residences and a detached garage). The C/OS portion of the site has an approximate average cross slope of 26%. The parcel is located in the Medium-Density Residential zone with the Special Considerations Overlay (R-2-S) and the Conservation/Open Space (C/OS) zone. The site is surrounded by R-2-S zoning with single & multi-family residences and open space. Adjacent land uses and zoning are provided in the table below: Zoning Land Use North R-2-S Single-family residences West C/OS South Hills Open Space South R-2-S Multi-Family Development East R-2-S Multi-Family Residence 10. Project Entitlements Requested: Architectural Review: Architectural Review Commission (ARC) approval is required for the site layout and structure designs. The ARC will also take action on the requested setback reductions. Tentative Tract Map: Tentative Tract Map approval will be required for the proposed eight lot common interest subdivision. The vesting tentative tract map will require Planning Commission review and City Council approval. The Council will also take action on allowing development of a site with Special Considerations. 11. Other public agencies whose approval is required: None. 12. Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources code section 21080.3.1? If so, has consultation begun? Native American Tribes have been notified about the project and two tribes requested additional information be provided but they did not specifically request a consultation. A discussion on their requests is included in Section 17: TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES of the initial study. Packet Pg. 88 Item 2 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Aesthetics Greenhouse Gas Emissions Population and Housing Agricultural Resources Hazards & Hazardous Materials Public Services X Air Quality Hydrology/Water Quality Recreation Biological Resources Land Use and Planning Transportation & Traffic X Cultural Resources Energy & Mineral Resources Utilities and Service Systems Geology/Soils Noise Tribal Cultural Resources Mandatory Findings of Significance FISH AND GAME FEES There is no evidence before the Department that the project will have any potential adverse effects on fish and wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. As such, the project qualifies for a de minimis waiver with regards to the filing of Fish and Game Fees. X The project has potential to impact fish and wildlife resources and shall be subject to the payment of Fish and Game fees pursuant to Section 711.4 of the California Fish and Game Code. This init ial study has been circulated to the California Department of Fish and Game for review and comment. STATE CLEARINGHOUSE This environmental document must be submitted to the State Clearinghouse for review by one or more State agencies (e.g. Cal Trans, California Department of Fish and Game, Department of Housing and Community Development). The public review period shall not be less than 30 days (CEQA Guidelines 15073(a)). Packet Pg. 89 Item 2 DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made, or the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet(s) have been added and x agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant" impact(s) or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact(s) on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENT AL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR of NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Date For: Michael Codron Tyler Corey, Principal Planner Community Development Director CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2018 6 Packet Pg. 90 Item 2 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the i mpact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact' is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR i s required. 4. “Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section 19, "Earlier Analysis," as described in (5) below, may be cross- referenced). 5. Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration (Section 15063 (c) (3) (D)). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal sta ndards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,” describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they addressed site-specific conditions for the project. 6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8. This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project’s environmental effects in whatever format is selected. 9. The explanation of each issue should identify: a) The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance Packet Pg. 91 Item 2 1. AESTHETICS. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 1,2,5 X b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, open space, and historic buildings within a local or state scenic highway? 1,2, 17 X c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? 1,14, 17 X d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely effect day or nighttime views in the area? 1,18, 32 X Evaluation The City is located eight miles from the Pacific Ocean and lies at the convergence of two main drainages: The Los Osos Valley which drains westerly into Morro Bay via Los Osos Creek, and San Luis Valley which drains to the south-southwest into the Pacific Ocean at Avila Beach via the San Luis Obispo Creek. The topography of the city and its surroundings is generally defined by several low hills and ridges such as Bishop Peak and Cerro San Luis. These peaks are also known as Morros and provide scenic focal points for much of the City. The Santa Lucia Mountains and Irish Hills are the visual limits of the area and are considered the scenic backdrop for much of the City. The surrounding hills have created a hard, urban edge where development has remained in the lower elevations. The project site is within a residential neighborhood west of Broad Street that exhibits a more suburban character. The street pattern is irregular due to the neighborhood’s location at the base of South Hills. The neighborhood enjoys the benefits of mature street trees and the unique visual backdrop provided by South Hills. a) The proposed project is in an urbanized section of the City on an elevated site that has topography that slopes from the west down to the east. Although the project site is adjacent to the open space area of South Hills, the project site is surrounded by other medium-density (R-2) single-family and multi-family residential development to the north, south, and east. The project site is surrounded by urban uses and is not located in the area of a scenic vista. Less than a significant impact. b), c) The proposed project will not damage or alter any scenic resources that are visible from a local or state scenic highway. The project site does not contain any historic buildings (see discussion in Section 5 – Cultural Resources below). Visual resources in the vicinity of the site include views of the South Hills (open space). The applicant proposes development of single-family residences with maximum peak heights of approximately 24 feet that are well below the maximum allowed of 35-feet for the zone. The proposed project is consistent with the scale of neighboring development and will not obstruct views of the South Hills. Additionally, the project will be reviewed by the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) for consistency with the Community Design Guidelines, specifically, guidelines for hillside development. Less than significant impact. d) The project is located in an already urbanized area with light sources from neighboring residential uses, and light from vehicular circulation along neighboring streets. The proposed project will not create a new source of substantial l ight or glare or affect nighttime views in the area because it will be required to conform to the Night Sky Preservation Ordinance (Zoning Regulations Chapter 17.23) and General Plan Policies 9.2.1 and 9.2.3 which sets operational standards and requirement s for lighting installations, including requiring all light sources to be shielded and downward facing. The project applicant would also be required to provide an overall lighting plan that demonstrates that the project complies with the requirements of Ci ty of San Luis Obispo Ordinance No. 17.18.030, which prohibits lighting or illuminated devices that would create glare which results in a hazard or nuisance on other properties (City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code). This plan is required to be reviewed by the ARC prior to issuance of building permits. Adhering to these existing regulations and ordinances, as well as the City’s Community Design Guidelines, would ensure that exterior lighting and finish is designed to minimize impacts on neighboring properties and other light and glare sensitive uses. Less than significant impact. Conclusion: Less Than Significant Impact Packet Pg. 92 Item 2 2. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? 19 X b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? 12 X c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? 19 X Evaluation The city is located in the heart of San Luis Obispo County and the Central Coast Region, both of which are important key agricultural centers within the State of California. The region’s agricultural industry is an important part of the local economy. It provides employment and income directly for those in agriculture, and it helps drive growth in the tourism industry, which in turn generates further economic activity and consumer spending. a) The project site is not designated as Prime or Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency. The site has not been actively farmed and is not zoned for agricultural use. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in conversion of suc h agricultural resources to nonagricultural use. b) The project site is not located on active farmland, nor is it under a Williamson Act contract. The project sit e is designated for residential uses in the General Plan. The project site is surrounded by developed properties and public streets. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract. c) Redevelopment of the site will not contribute to conversion of active farmland. No impacts to existing on site or off site agricultural resources are anticipated with development of the project site. Conclusion: No impact. 3. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? 20,21 X b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? 20,21 X c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed qualitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? 20,21 X d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? 20,21, 32 X e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? 32 X Evaluation Air quality in the San Luis Obispo region of the County is characteristically different than other regions of the County (i.e., Packet Pg. 93 Item 2 the Upper Salinas River Valley and the East County Plain), although the physical features that divide them provide only limited barriers to transport pollutants between regions. The County is designated non-attainment for the one‐hour California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) for ozone and the CAAQS for respirable particulate matter (PM10). The County is designated attainment for national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). Measurements of ambient air quality from the monitoring station at 3220 South Higuera Street are representative of local air quality conditions. a) The San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District (SLOAPCD) adopted the 2001 Clean Air Plan (CAP) in 2002. The 2001 CAP is a comprehensive planning document intended to provide guidance to the SLOAPCD and other local agencies, including the City, on how to attain and maintain the state standards for ozone and PM10. The CAP presents a detailed description of the sources and pollutants which impact the jurisdiction, future air quality impacts to be expected under current growth trends, and an appropriate control strategy for reducing ozone precursor emissions, thereby improving air quality. The proposed project is consistent with the general level of development anticipated and projected in the CAP. The project is consistent with the CAP’s land use planning strategies, including locating medium density residential within an urban area proximate to an existing roadway, near transit services and shopping areas. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant. b), c), d) Both the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) have established ambient air quality standards for common pollutants. These ambient ai r quality standards are levels of contaminants representing safe levels that avoid specific adverse health effects associated with each pollutant. The ambient air quality standards cover what are called “criteria” pollutants because the health and other effects of each pollutant are described in criteria documents. Areas that meet ambient air quality standards are classified as attainment areas, while area s that do not meet these standards are classified as nonattainment areas. As mentioned above, San Luis Obispo is currently designated as nonattainment for the 1-hour and 8-hour State standards for ozone and the 24-hour State standard for PM10. CEQA Appendix G states the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make significance determinations. Assessment of potential air quality impacts that may result from the proposed project was conducted using the April 2012 CEQA Air Quality Handbook, which is provided by the APCD for the purpose of assisting lead agencies in assessing the potential air quality impacts from residential, commercial and industrial development. Under CEQA, the APCD is a responsible agency for reviewing and commenting on projects that have the potential to cause adverse impacts to air quality. Construction Significance Criteria: Temporary impacts from the project, including but not limited to excavation and construction activities, vehicle emissions from heavy duty equipment and naturally occurring asbestos, have the potential to create dust and emissions that exceed air quality standards for temporary and intermediate periods. Naturally occurring asbestos (NOA) has been identified by the state Air Resources Board as a toxic air contaminant. Serpentine and ultramafic rocks are very common throughout California and may contain naturally occurring asbestos. The SLO County APCD has identified that NOA may be present throughout the City of San Luis Obispo (APCD 2012 CEQA Handbook, Technical Appendix 4.4), and under the ARB Air Toxics Control Measure (ATCM) for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining Operations (93105) are therefore required to provide geologic evaluation prior to any construction activities. As such, impacts are considered potentially significant but mitigable. The project will include demolition of non-historic structures and grading, which has the potential to disturb asbestos that is often found in older structures as well as underground utility pipes and pipelines (i.e. transite pipes or insulation on pipes). Demolition can have potential negative air quality impacts, including issues surrounding proper handling, demolition, and disposal of asbestos containing material (ACM). As such, the project may be subject to variou s regulatory jurisdictions, including the requirements stipulated in the National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants (40CFR61, Subpart M – asbestos NESHAP). Impacts related to the proposed demolition of existing structures on the subject site a re considered to be potentially significant but mitigable. Packet Pg. 94 Item 2 Construction activities can generate fugitive dust, which could be a nuisance to local residents and businesses in close proximity to the proposed construction site. Because the project is within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors, impacts related to fugitive dust emissions during proposed construction activities are considered potentially significant but mitigable. Construction equipment itself can be the source of air quality emission impacts, including sensitive receptor exposure to diesel particulates and other air pollutants, and may be subject to California Air Resources Board or SLO APCD permitting requirements. This includes portable equipment, 50 horsepower (hp) or greater or other equipment listed in the SLO APCD’s 2012 CEQA Handbook, Technical Appendices, page 4-4. Truck trips associated with the proposed excavated site material (i.e., soils) that will be cut from the site may also be a source of emissions subject to SLO APCD permitting requirements, subject to a specifically selected truck route. The specific requirements and exceptions in the regulations can be reviewed at the following web sites: https://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/truck-idling/factsheet.pdf and https://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2007/ordiesl07/frooal.pdf. Impacts related to vehicle and heavy equipment emissions are considered potentially significant. Operational Screening Criteria for Project Impacts: Table 1-1 of the SLOAPCD CEQA Air Quality Handbook indicates that the construction of condos / townhouses with less than 103 dwelling units would not exceed the threshold of significance for the APCD Annual Bright Line threshold (MT CO2e). The threshold for reactive organic gases (ROG) and oxides of nitrogen (NO x) would not be exceeded by the proposed project (maximum size for exemption stated at 93 dwelling units). Therefore, operational phase air quality impacts are considered less than significant. e) The project includes the development of multiple single-family units, as anticipated in the R-2 Medium Density Residential zone, and therefore would not include any potential land uses that would have the potential to produce objectionable odors in the area. There are no uses in the area that generate objectionable odors that may significantly affect future residents, employees, or visitors. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant. Conclusion: Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. Mitigation Measure AQ-1: Prior to grading plan approval, the project proponent shall ensure that a geologic evaluation be conducted to determine if NOA is present within the area that will be disturbed. If NOA is not present, an exemption request must be filed with the District. If NOA is found at the site, the applicant must comply with all requirements outlined in the Asbestos ATCM. This may include development of an Asbestos Dust Mitigation Plan and an Asbestos Health and Safety Program for approval by the APCD. Technical Appendix 4.4 of this Handbook includes a map of zones throughout SLO County where NOA has been found and geological evaluation is required prior to any grading. More information on NOA can be found at http://www.slocleanair.org/rules-regulations/asbestos.php. Mitigation Measure AQ-2: Any scheduled demolition activities or disturbance, removal, or relocation of utility pipelines shall be coordinated with the APCD Enforcement Division at (805) 781 -5912 to ensure compliance with NESHAP, which include, but are not limited to: 1) written notification, within at least 10 business days o f activities commencing, to the APCD, 2) asbestos survey conducted by a Certified Asbestos Consultant, and, 3) applicable removal and disposal requirements of identified ACM. More information on NOA can be found at http://www.slocleanair.org/rules-regulations/asbestos.php. Mitigation Measure AQ-3: During construction/ground disturbing activities, the applicant shall implement the following particulate (dust) control measures. These measures shall be shown on grading and building plans. In addition, the contractor shall designate a person or persons to monitor the dust control program and to order increased watering, modify practices as necessary, to prevent transport of dust off site. Their duties shall include holiday and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to commencement of construction. Packet Pg. 95 Item 2 a. Reduce the amount of disturbed area where possible. b. Use water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site and from exceeding the APCD’s limit of 20% opacity for no greater than 3 minutes in any 60-minute period. Increased watering frequency will be required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 m.p.h. and cessation of grading activities during periods of winds over 25 m.p.h. Reclaimed (non-potable) water is to be used in all construction and dust- control work. c. All dirt stock pile areas (if any) shall be sprayed daily and covered with tarps or other dust barriers as needed. d. Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation and landscape plans shall be implemented as soon as possible, following completion of any soil disturbing activities. e. Exposed grounds that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month after initial grading shall be sown with a fast germinating, non-invasive, grass seed and watered until vegetation is established. f. All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation shall be stabilized using approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in advance by the APCD. g. All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. In addition, building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used. h. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 m.p.h. on any unpaved su rface at the construction site. i. All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials, are to be covered or shall maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with Calif ornia Vehicle Code Section 23114. j. Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site. k. Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacen t paved roads. Water sweepers shall be used with reclaimed water where feasible. Roads shall be pre-wetted prior to sweeping when feasible. l. All PM10 mitigation measures required shall be shown on grading and building plans. m. The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the fugitive dust emissions and enhance the implementation of the measures as necessary to minimize dust complaints, reduce visible emissions below the APCD’s limit of 20% opacity for no greater than 3 minutes in any 60-minute period. Their duties shall include holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD Compliance Division prior to the start of any grading, earthwo rk or demolition. Mitigation Measure AQ-4: Prior to any construction activities at the site, the project proponent shall ensure that all equipment and operations are compliant with California Air Resource Board and APCD permitting requirements and shall contact the APCD Engineering Division at (805) 781 -5912 for specific information regarding permitting requirements. Mitigation Measure AQ-5: To reduce the sensitive receptor emissions impact of diesel vehicles and equipment used to construct the project and export soil from the site, the applicant shall implement the following idling control techniques: 1. California Diesel Idling Regulations a. On-road diesel vehicles shall comply with Section 2485 of Title 13 of the California Code of regulations. This regulation limits idling from diesel-fueled commercial motor vehicles with gross vehicular weight ratings of more than 10,000 pounds and licensed for operation on highways. It applies to California and non-California based vehicles. In general, the regulation specifies that drivers of said vehicles: 1. Shall not idle the vehicle’s primary diesel engine for greater than 5 minutes at any location, except as noted in Subsection (d) of the regulation; and, 2. Shall not operate a diesel-fueled auxiliary power system (APS) to power a heater, air conditioner, or any ancillary equipment on that vehicle during sleeping or resting in a sleeper berth for greater than 5.0 minutes at any location when within 1,000 feet of restricted area, except as noted in Subsection (d) of the regulation. b. Off-road diesel equipment shall comply with the 5-minute idling restriction identified in Section 2449(d)(2) of the California Air Resources Board’s In-Use Off-road Diesel regulation. c. Signs must be posted in the designated queuing areas and job sites to remind drivers and operators of the state’s 5-minute idling limit. 2. Diesel Idling Restrictions Near Sensitive Receptors (residential homes). In addition to the State required diesel Packet Pg. 96 Item 2 idling requirements, the project applicant shall comply with these more restrictive requirements to minimize impacts to nearby sensitive receptors: a. Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors. b. Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors shall not be permitted. c. Use of alternative fueled equipment is recommended. d. Signs that specify the no idling areas must be posted and enforced at the site. 3. Soil Transport. The final volume of soil that will be hauled off-site, together with the fleet mix, hauling route, and number of trips per day will need to be identified for the APCD. Specific standards and conditions will apply. 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? 5,28 X b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? 5,28 X c) Have a substantial adverse effect on Federally protected wetlands as defined in Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marshes, vernal pools, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? 28 X d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? 28 X e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? 5,10 X f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? 5,10 X Evaluation The urbanized area of the City of San Luis Obispo lies at the convergence of two main geologic features: Los Osos Valley, which drains westerly into Morro Bay via Los Osos Creek, and San Luis Valley, which drains to the south‐ southwest into the Pacific Ocean at Avila Beach via San Luis Obispo Creek. San Luis Obispo, Stenner, Prefumo, and Brizzolara Creeks, and numerous tributary channels pass through the city, providing important riparian habitat and migration corridors connecting urbanized areas to less‐developed habitats in the larger area surrounding the City. Much of the areas outside the city limits consist of open rangeland grazed year-round, along with agricultural lands dominated by annual crop rotations and vineyards. A variety of natural habitats and associated plant communities are present within the City and support a diverse array of native plants and resident, migratory, and locally nomadic wildlife species, some of which are considered as rare, threatened, or endangered species. However, the largest concentrations of natural and native habitats are located in the larger and less developed areas outside the city limits. The following discussion, as outlined in the LUCE Update EIR, provides a general overview of the habitat type found on the project site: Packet Pg. 97 Item 2 Urban/Developed Habitats: Based on a project site visit and observations of the property, the site exhibits the characteristics associated with the “Urban/Developed” habitat commonly found concentrated within and adjacent to the developed portions of the City, and in discrete areas adjacent to Highway 1 and Broad Street/Highway 227. The LUCE update EIR discussed that these areas typically provide low potential to support native plant or animal species occur rences. Within the City limits, occurrences of sensitive natural habitats are present in low‐lying areas (riparian and wetland areas), and on undeveloped hills and steep slopes above the Urban Reserve or development limit lines (coastal scrub, chaparral, woodlands, and grasslands). Wildlife occurrences within urban/developed areas typically consists primarily of urban‐ adapted avian species such as house sparrow (Passer domesticus) and Eurasian collared dove (Streptopelia decaocto) utilizing the abundant tree canopy and concentrated food sources, common animal species adapted to human presence such as raccoon (Procyon lotor), opossum (Didelphis virginiana), and striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis), and aquatic, semi‐aquatic, and terrestrial species resident in or utilizing riparian areas. a-d) The site does not support riparian or wetland areas. The project site contains areas that have been developed and a sloped portion of the site that contains grassland is zoned conservation/open space. Terra Verde Environmental Consulting (2018) visited the site and conducted a botanical survey of the site to identify any sensitive plant species on the site. The following species were determined to have a potential to occur on the site: Miles’ milkvetch (Astragalus didymocarpus var. milesianus) (California Rare Plant Rank) Club-haired mariposa lily (Calochortus clavatus var. calvatus) San Luis mariposa lily (Calochortus obispoenis) La Panza mariposa lily (Calochortus simulans) Cambria morning glory (Calystegia subacaulis subsp. episcopalis) San Luis Obispo owl’s clover (Castilleja densiflora subsp. obispoensis) Brewer’s spineflower (Chorizanthe breweri) Palmer’s spineflower (Chorizanthe palmeri) Mouse-gray dudleya (Dudleya abramsii subsp. murina) Blochman’s dudleya (Dudleya blochmaniae subsp. blochmaniae) Jone’s Layia (Layia jonesii) Adobe sanicle (Sanicula maritima) (California Rare) The study was conducted on April 30, 2018 during the typical fruits and/or blooming period of most of the regionally- occurring, special status species determined to have the potential to occur on site. For those species that were not in bloom it was determined that vegetative parts were visible that allowed for identification to the genus level. No special status species were identified within the survey area and no unknown or unidentifiable plants were observed on site. The site is not near any natural waterway and will therefore have no adverse effect on Federally protected wetlands. The property is surrounded by urban development on three sides and the proposed construction of the residential units and the common interest subdivision will not interfere with the movement of any wildlife species or migratory wildlife corridor. Less than a significant impact. e) The site does not contain any heritage trees or any biological resources that are protected by local policies or ordinances. The project proposal includes the removal of five trees (three fruit trees, a small ornamental tree, and a pepper tree). The proposed landscape plans that show the trees will be replaced with 12 new trees (Attachment 1, Project Plans, Sheets CLP1- 3). The City Arborist has reviewed the proposal and supports the removal of the five trees and determined that the planting of four street trees and eight on-site trees is appropriate for the project. Less than significant impact. f) The project site is not part of a local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan and therefore would have not have an impact. No impact. Conclusion: Less than Significant Impact. 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historic resource? (See CEQA Guidelines 15064.5) 12,24, 25 X b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource? (See CEQA Guidelines 15064.5) 12,24, 25 X c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource 12,24, X Packet Pg. 98 Item 2 or site or unique geologic feature? 25 d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? 26 X Evaluation Pre-Historic Setting: As outlined in the City’s LUCE Update EIR, archaeological evidence demonstrates that Native American groups (including the Chumash) have occupied the Central Coast for at least 10,000 years, and that Native American use of the central coast region may have begun during the late Pleistocene, as early as 9000 B.C., demonstrating that historical resources began their accumulation on the central coast during the prehistoric era. The City of San Luis Obis po is located within the area historically occupied by the Obispeño Chumash, the northernmost of the Chumash people of California. The Obispeño Chumash occupied much of San Luis Obispo County, including the Arroyo Grande area, and from the Santa Maria River north to approximately Point Estero. The earliest evidence of human occupation in the region comes from archaeological sites along the coast. Historic Resource Setting: The area of San Luis Obispo became colonialized by the Spanish Incursion initially in 1542, with the first official settlement on Chumash Territory occurring in 1772, when the Mission San Luis Obispo de Tolosa was established. By the 1870s (after the earliest arrivals of Chinese immigrants in 1869), a Chinatown district had been established in the downtown area near Palm and Morro Street. By 1875, 2,500 residents were documented in a 4 -square mile area around what is now the City of San Luis Obispo. By 1901, the City was served by the Pacific Coast Railway and mainline Southern Pacific, and in 1903 the California Polytechnic State University was established. The last era of growth generally lasted from 1945 to the present. Many of the residential subdivisions in the Foothill and Laguna Lake area were developed between 1945 and 1970 and the city’s population increased by 53% during this time. a) The project site is not designated or listed as a historic resource and not located within a historic district. The current structures on the site are older than 50 years but are not connected to history or a personage or unusual enough to qualify as significant cultural resources. b-d) The project site is not located within a designated burial sensitivity area and the project is not considered an archaeologically sensitive site as described in the City’s Archaeological Resource Preservation Program Guidelines. Two local tribal representatives contacted the City in their outreach per AB 52. One representative requested that the project provide a Phase I study as a part of the Initial Study review. The other representative requested that the project be required to provide archeological monitoring during ground disturbances during construction. Based on these requests the applicant has indicated that the project will conduct archeological monitoring during ground disturbances in the unlikely event that any materials are encountered. Therefore, with the proposed mitigation the project would have a less than significant impact. Conclusion: Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. Mitigation Measure CR-1: Preservation of Archeological Resources. A monitoring plan shall be prepared and approved by the City prior to building permit approval. The plan shall include survey results that outline where monitoring is required o n the site and note when a Native American monitor is required. The plan shall provide protocols for stoppage of work and treatment of human remains, staff education requirements, and a data recovery plan to be implemented in case significant deposits are exposed. 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including risk of loss, injury or death involving: I. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated in the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area, or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of 4,29 X Packet Pg. 99 Item 2 Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. II. Strong seismic ground shaking? 4 X III. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? 4 X IV. Landslides or mudflows? 4 X b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? 29 X c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on or off site landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? 4 X d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? 4,14 X e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? 7,33, 34 X Evaluation As discussed in the recent City LUCE Update EIR, San Luis Obispo lies within the southern Coast Range Geomorphic Province. This province lies between the Central Valley of California and the Pacific Ocean and extends from Oregon to northern Santa Barbara County. The Coast Range province is structurally complex and is comprised of sub‐parallel northwest‐southeast trending faults, folds, and mountain ranges. Rock types in the San Luis Obispo area are mainly comprised of volcanic, metavolcanics, and a mixture of serpentinite and greywacke sandstone. These rocks are highly fractured and are part of the Mesozoic aged Franciscan Formation. Intrusive and extrusive volcanic deposits of Tertiary age and marine sedimentary deposits of the Miocene aged Monterey Formation are also found in the area. The most distinctive geomorphological feature of the San Luis Obispo area is the series of Tertiary aged volcanic plugs (remnants of volcanoes) which extend from the City of San Luis Obispo northwesterly to Morro Bay. Hollister Peak, Bishop Peak, Cerro San Luis Obispo, Islay Hill, and Morro Rock are al l comprised of these volcanic plugs. Faulting and Seismic Activity: The predominant northwest‐southeast trending structures of the Coast Range Province are related to the San Andreas Fault Transform Boundary. Other faults in the San Luis Obispo area that are considered active or potentially active include the San Juan Fault, the East and West Huasna Faults, the Nacimiento Fault Zone, the Oceano Fault, the Oceanic Fault, Cambria Fault, the Edna Fault, the Hosgri Fault, and the Los Osos Fault. The East and West Huasna Faults, the Nacimiento Fault Zone, the Cambria Fault, and the Edna Fault have not yet been officially classified by the California Division of Mines and Geology. The Alquist‐Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone (formerly known as a Special Studies Zone) is an area within 500 feet from a known active fault trace that has been designated by the State Geologist. Per the Alquist‐Priolo legislation, no structure for human occupancy is permitted on the trace of an active fault. The portion of the Alquist‐Priolo fault zone closest to the city is located near the southern flank of the Los Osos Valley, northwest of Laguna Lake, but lies just outside of the city limits. Seismically Induced Ground Acceleration: Seismically induced ground acceleration is the shaking motion that is produced by an earthquake. Probabilistic modeling is done to predict future ground accelerations, taking into consideration design basis earthquake ground motion, applicable to residential or commercial, or upper‐bound earthquake ground motion, applied to public use facilities like schools or hospitals. Landslides: Landslides occur when the underlying support can no longer maintain the load of material above it, causing a slope failure. Ground shaking and landslide hazards are mapped by the City and are shown in the General Plan. Much of the development in San Luis Obispo is in valleys, where there is low potential for slope instability. However, the city contains extensive hillsides. Several are underlain by the rocks of the Franciscan group, which is a source of significant slope instability. The actual risk of slope instability is identified by investigation of specific sites, including subsurface samp ling, by qualified professionals. The building code requires site‐specific investigations and design proposals by qualified professionals in areas that are susceptible to slope instability and landslides. Packet Pg. 100 Item 2 Liquefaction: Liquefaction is defined as the transformation of a granular material from a solid state to a liquefied state as a consequence of increased pore water pressure. As a result, structures built on this material can sink into the alluvium, buri ed structures may rise to the surface or materials on sloped surfaces may run downhill. Other effects of liquefact ion include lateral spread, flow failures, ground oscillations, and loss of bearing strength. Liquefaction is intrinsically linked with t he depth of groundwater below the site and the types of sediments underlying an area. The soils in the San Luis Obispo area that are most susceptible to ground shaking, and which contain shallow ground water, are the ones most likely to have a potential for settlement and for liquefaction. The actual risk of settlement or liquefaction is identified by investigation of specific sites, including subsurface sampling, by qualified professionals. Previous investigations have found that the risk of settlement for new construction can be reduced to an acceptable level through careful site preparation and proper foundation design, and that the actual risk of liquefaction is low. Differential Settlement: Differential settlement is the downward movement of the land surface resulting from the compression of void space in underlying soils. This compression can occur naturally with the accumulation of sediments over porous alluvial soils within river valleys. Settlement can also result from human activities including improperly placed artificial fill, and structures built on soils or bedrock materials with differential settlement rates. This phenomenon can alter local drainage patterns and result in structural damage. Portions of the City have been identified as possibly being underlain by soft organic soils, resulting in a high potential for settlement (General Plan Safety Element). Subsidence: Ground subsidence occurs where underlying geologic materials (typically loosely consolidated surficial silt, sand, and gravel) undergo a change from looser to tighter compaction. As a result, the ground surface subsides (lowers). Where compaction increases (either naturally, or due to human activity), the geologic materials become denser. As a result, the ground surface overlying the compacting subsurface materials subsides as the underlying geologic materials settle. Ground subsidence can occur under several different conditions, including: • Ground‐water withdrawal (water is removed from pore space as the water table drops, causing the ground surface to settle) • Tectonic subsidence (ground surface is warped or dropped lower due to geologic factors such as faulting or folding); and • Earthquake‐induced shaking causes sediment liquefaction, which in turn can lead to ground‐surface subsidence. Expansive Soils: Expansive soils are soils that are generally clayey, swell when wetted and shrink when dried. Wetting can occur in a number of ways (i.e., absorption from the air, rainfall, groundwater fluctuations, lawn watering, broken water or sewer lines, etc.). Soil expansion can cause subtle damage that can reduce structural integrity. Portions of the city are known to exhibit the soil types (refer to General Plan Safety Element) identified as having a moderate to high potential for expansion. a, c, d) Although there are no fault lines on the project site or within close proximity, the site is located in an area of “High Seismic Hazards,” specifically Seismic Zone D, which means that future buildings constructed on the site will most likely be subjected to excessive ground shaking in the event of an earthquake. A soils engineering report by GeoSolutions (July 7, 2017) states that based on the consistency and relative density of the in-situ soils, the potential for seismic liquefaction of soils at the site is not a concern. Structures are required to be designed in compliance with seismic design criteria established in the California Building Code for Seismic Zone D and City Codes require new structures be built to resist such shaking or to remain standing in an earthquake. The Safety Element of the General Plan indicates that the project site has a high potential for liquefaction, which is true f or most of the City. Development will be required to comply with all City Codes, including Building Codes, which require proper documentation of soil characteristics for designing structurally sound buildings to ensure new structures are built to resist such shaking or to remain standing in an earthquake. Incorporation of required California Building Code, City Codes, and development in accordance with the General Plan Safety Element will reduce impacts related to seismic hazards to less than significant levels. b) This is a previously developed infill site, located in an urbanized area of the City. The most significant source of potential erosion of on-site soils would be during initial site ground disturbance/construction and from stormwater runoff. The project applicant has prepared a Stormwater Control Plan (Ashley and Vance Engineering, Inc., May 4, 2018) and a Conceptual Landscape Plan. Development in accordance with the Stormwater Control Plan will address stormwater flow across the site, Packet Pg. 101 Item 2 and landscaping planting will help ensure the natural retention of stormwater and help address potential erosion. Additionally, the dust reduction measures of Mitigation Measure AQ 3 will also minimize soil erosion. Therefore, erosion impacts are considered less than significant. e) The proposed project will be required to connect to the City’s sewer system. Septic tanks or alternative wastewater system s are not proposed and will not be used on the site. No impact. Conclusion: Less than significant impact. 7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? 13,20, 21 X b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. 13,20, 21 X Evaluation As outlined in the City LUCE Update EIR, prominent GHG emissions contributing to the greenhouse effect are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). Anthropogenic (human‐caused) GHG emissions in excess of natural ambient concentrations are responsible for intensifying the greenhouse effect and have led to a trend of unnatural warming of the earth’s climate, known as global climate change or global warming. Global sources of GHG emissions include fossil fuel combustion in both stationary and mobile sources, fugitive emissions from landfills, wastewater treatment, agricultural sources, deforestation, high global warming potential (GWP) gases from industrial and chemical sources, and other activities. The major sources of GHG emissions in the City are transportation‐related emissions from cars and trucks, followed by energy consumption in buildings. These local sources constitute the majority of GHG emissions from community‐wide activities in the city, and combine with regional, statewide, national, and global GHG emissions that result in the cumulative effect of global warming, which is causing global climate change. A minimum level of climate change is expected to occur despite local, statewide, or other global efforts to mitigate GHG emissions. The increase in average global temperatures will result in a number of locally‐important adverse effects, including sea‐level rise, changes to precipitation patterns, and increased frequency of extreme weather events such as heat waves, drought, and severe storms. Statewide legislation, rules and regulations that apply to GHG emissions associated with the Project Setting include the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (Assembly Bill [AB] 32), Climate Pollution Reduction Beyond 2020 Healthier Communities and a Stronger Economy (Senate Bill [SB] 32), the Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008 (Senate Bill [SB] 375), Advanced Clean Cars Rule, Low Carbon Fuel Standard, Renewable Portfolio Standard, California Building Codes, and recent amendments to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to SB 97 with respect to analysis of GHG emissions and climate change impacts. Plans, policies and guidelines have also been adopted at the regional and local level that address GHG emissions and climate change effects in the City. The San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (APCD) adopted a CEQA Review Handbook, as well as guidance on GHG emission thresholds and supporting evidence, that may be applied by lead agencies within San Luis Obispo County (APCD 2012a, 2012b). The City also adopted a Climate Action Plan (CAP) that includes a GHG emissions inventory, identifies GHG emission reduction targets, and includes specific measures and implementing actions to both reduce community‐wide GHG emissions and help the city build resiliency and adapt to the effects of climate change. a, b) The proposed project will result in infill development, located in close proximity to transit, services and employment centers. City policies recognize that compact, infill development allows for more efficient use of existing infrastructure and aids Citywide efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The City’s CAP also recognizes that energy efficient design will result in significant energy savings, which result in emissions reductions. Packet Pg. 102 Item 2 The emissions from project-related vehicle exhaust comprise the vast majority of the total project CO2 emissions. The remaining project CO2 emissions are primarily from building heating systems and increased regional power plant electricity generation due to the project’s electrical demands. Short Term Construction-Related GHG Emissions: Construction activities would generate GHG emissions through the use of on‐ and off‐road construction equipment in new development. Mitigation Measures AQ 3, AQ 4, and AQ 5 address vehicle and equipment exhaust, and include provisions for reducing those impacts to less than significant levels. Long-Term Operational GHG Emissions: Additional long-term emissions associated with the project relate to indirect source emissions, such as electricity usage. State Title 24 regulations for building energy efficiency are enforced with new construction. Table 1-1 of the SLOAPCD CEQA Air Quality Handbook indicates that the construction of condos / townhouses with less than 103 dwelling units would not exceed the threshold of significance for the APCD Annual Bright Line threshold (MT CO2e). Therefore, operational phase air quality impacts are considered less than significant. Conclusion: Less than significant impact. 8. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? 4, 9 X b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? 4, 9 X c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? 9,10 X d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, it would create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? 9,31 X e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? 1,4 X f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? 1,4 X g) Impair implementation of, or physically interfere with, the adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? 4, 17 X h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death, involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residents are intermixed with wildlands? 4,9,17 X Evaluation As outlined in the recent City LUCE Update EIR, the analysis of hazards and hazardous material impacts relates to hazards regarding safety risks posed by airport flight patterns, impeding of adopted emergency response/evacuation plans, and wildland fires where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas; and hazardous materials or substances regarding routine Packet Pg. 103 Item 2 transport or disposal of substances, explosion or release of substances, and emissions or handling of substances within one‐quarter mile of an existing or planned school. The following is a brief outline of the primary identified hazards: Fire Hazards: Fires have the potential to cause significant losses to life, property, and the environment. Urban fire hazards result from the materials that make up the built environment, the size and organization of structures, and spacing of buildings. Additional factors that can accelerate fire hazards are availability of emergency access, available water volume and pressure for fire suppression, and response time for fire fighters. Fire hazard severity in rural areas, including areas on the edge between urban and rural land (commonly called the wildland interface), are highly influenced by the slope of the landscape and site vegetation and climate. This risk is somewhat amplified by the native, Mediterranean vegetation common to the rural setting in which the City is located that has evolved to rely on wildfires for its ecological sustainability. Where wildland fires may be a threat, plant fuels are often managed by replacement planting, grazing, plowing, or mechanical clearing. Hazardous Materials: Hazardous materials are defined as substances with physical and chemical properties of ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, or toxicity which may pose a threat to human health or the environment. This includes, for example, chemical materials such as petroleum products, solvents, pesticides, herbicides, paints, metals, asbestos, and other regulated chemical materials. Additionally, hazards include known historical spills, leaks, illegal dumping, or other methods of releas e of hazardous materials to soil, sediment, groundwater, or surface water. If a historical release exists, then there is a risk associated with disturbing the historical release area. The potential for risks associated with hazardous materials are varie d regionally. The primary risk concerns identified by the City, as stipulated in the City’s General Plan Safety Element, include radiation hazards and the transportation of hazardous materials in and around the city. Most of these incidents are related to the increasing frequency of transport of chemicals over road ways, railways or through industrial accidents. Highway 101 and a rail corridor are major transportation corridors through the San Luis Obispo area. Airport Hazards: The San Luis Obispo County Airport provides commuter, charter, and private aviation serv ice to the area. The primary hazard associated with land uses near the airport is the risk of aircraft incidents on approach and take ‐off. Aircraft flight operations are determined largely by the physical layout of the airport and rules of the Federal Aviation Administration. The County manages activities on the airport property through the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC). As the means of fulfilling these basic obligations, the ALUC must prepare and adopt Airport Land Use Plans (ALUPs) for each airport within their jurisdiction. The policies in the ALUP are intended to minimize the public’s exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards while providing for the orderly expansion of airports (Public Utility Code Section 21670(a)(2). The ALUC has developed an ALUP for the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport that was first adopted in 1973, was updated in May 2005 and is currently being updated. The ALUP has identified safety zones with associated land use density and intensity restrictions. The ALUP defines these as: • Runway Protection Zones – Areas immediately adjacent to the ends of each active runway, within which the level of aviation safety risk is very high and in which, consequently, structures are prohibited and human activities are restricted to those which require only very low levels of occupancy. • Safety Areas S‐1 a through c – The area within the vicinity of which aircraft operate frequently or in conditions of reduced visibility at altitudes less than 500 feet above ground level (AGL). • Safety Area S‐2 – The area within the vicinity of which aircraft operate frequently or in conditions of reduced visibility at altitudes between 501 and 1000 feet above ground level (AGL). Because aircraft in Area S ‐2 are at greater altitude and are less densely concentrated than in other portions of the Airport Planning Area, the overall level of aviation safety risk is considered to be lower than that in Area S‐1 or the Runway Protection Zones. a) The proposed project would not create a significant hazard to the public or to the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Construction of the proposed project would be required to comply with applicable building, health, fire, and safety codes. Hazardous materials would be used in varying amounts during construction and occupancy of the project. Construction and maintenance activities would use hazardous materials such as fuels (gasoline and diesel), oils, and lubricants; paints and paint thinners; glues; cleaners (which could include solvents and corrosives in addition to soaps and detergents); and possibly pesticides and herbicides. The amount of materials used would be small, so the project would not create a significant hazard to the public or to the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, as such uses would have to comply with applicable federal, state, and local regulations, including but not limited to Titles 8 and 22 of the CCR, the Uniform Fire Code, and Chapter 6.95 of the California Health and Packet Pg. 104 Item 2 Safety Code. With respect to operation of the project, residential units do not generate significant amounts of hazardous materials, and only a minimal amount of routine “household” chemicals would be stored on-site. These materials would not create a significant hazard to the public or to the environment. This impact would be considered less than significant. b) As discussed in Impacts a and c, the proposed project would not result in the routine transport, use, disposal, handling, or emission of any hazardous materials that would create a significant hazard to the public or to the environment. Implementation of Title 49, Parts 171–180, of the Code of Federal Regulations and stipulations in the General Plan Safety Element would reduce any impacts associated with the potential for accidental release dur ing construction or occupancy of the proposed project or by transporters picking up or delivering hazardous materials to the project site. These regulations establish standards by which hazardous materials would be transported, within and adjacent to the p roposed project. Where transport of these materials occurs on roads, the California Highway Patrol is the responsible agency for enforcement of regulations. The project also includes demolition of existing structures on the property including structures that are over 50 years old that could contain asbestos and lead. Asbestos, a naturally occurring fibrous material, was used as a fireproofing and insulating agent in building construction before being banned by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) i n the 1970s. Because it was widely used prior to discovery of its negative health effects, asbestos can be found in a variety of building material s and components including sprayed-on acoustic ceiling materials, thermal insulation, wall and ceiling texture, floor tiles, and pipe insulation. Asbestos is classified into two main categories: friable and non-friable. Friable asbestos can release asbestos fibers easily when disturbed and is considered Regulated Asbestos-Containing Material (RACM). Friable (easily crumbled) materials are particularly hazardous because inhalation of airborne fibers is the primary mode of asbestos entry into the bod y, which potentially causes lung cancer and asbestosis. Non-friable asbestos will release fibers less readily than RACM and is referred to as Category I or Category II, non-friable. Non-friable asbestos and encapsulated friable asbestos do not pose substantial health risks. The California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Cal/OSHA) considers asbestos- containing building materials (ACBM) to be hazardous when a sample contains more than 0.1 percent asbestos by weight; Cal/OSHA requires it to be handled by a licensed, qualified contractor. Lead can be found in paint, water pipes, plumbing solder, and in soils around buildings and structures with lead-based paint. In 1978, the federal government required the reduction of lead in house paint to less than 0.06 percent (600 parts per millio n [ppm]). However, some paints manufactured after 1978 for industrial uses or marine uses legally contain more than 0.06 percent lead. Exposure to lead can result in bioaccumulation of lead in the blood, soft tissues, and bones. Children are particularly susceptible to potential lead-related health problems because lead is easily absorbed into developing systems and organs. Prior to any building demolition, CCR Title 8 Section 5208 requires that a state-certified risk assessor conduct a risk assessment and/or paint inspection of all structures constructed prior to 1978 for the pres ence of asbestos. If such hazards are determined to exist on site, the risk assessor would prepare a site-specific hazard control plan detailing ACBM removal methods and specific instructions for providing protective clothing and gear for abatement personn el. If necessary, the project sponsor would be required to retain a state-certified ACBM removal contractor (independent of the risk assessor) to conduct the appropriate abatement measures as required by the plan. Wastes from abatement and demolition activities would be disposed of at a landfill(s) licensed to accept such waste. Once all abatement measures have been implemented, the risk assessor would conduct a clearance examination and provide written documentation to the City that testing and abatement have been completed in accordance with all federal, state, and local laws and regulations. Several regulations and guidelines pertain to abatement of and protection from exposure to lead -based paint. These include Construction Safety Order 1532.1 from Title 8 of the CCR and lead-based paint exposure guidelines provided by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). In California, lead-based paint abatement must be performed and monitored by contractors with appropriate certification from the California Department of Health Services. Compliance with existing regulations would ensure impacts related to hazardous materials exposure would be less than significant. Packet Pg. 105 Item 2 c) The proposed project is a single-family residential development with parking and associated amenities and is approximately 0.68 miles southwest of Sinsheimer Elementary School. As discussed in Impacts a and b, the proposed project a residential use that would not result in the routine transport, use, disposal, handling, or emission o f any hazardous materials that would create a significant hazard to the public or to the environment, including at the existing school, and this impact would be considered less than significant. d) The project site is not on a parcel included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 (DTSC 2012) and, as a result, would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. No impact. e, f) The project site is located in the vicinity of the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport and is located within the S-2 Safety Area of the County Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP). The project site is subject to the City’s Airport Overlay Zone (AOZ) which allows development based on the development standard s for the zone (Table 10, Zoning Regulations). The proposed project complies with the density (12 density units per acre) and development standards for the R-2 zone. The project site is not in the vicinity of a private airstrip. Less than significant impact. g, h) The Fire Marshal has reviewed the design of the project and determined that the project would not interfere with any emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plans. The proposed project site is not within or adjacent to a wildland area and will not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death. Less than significant impact. Conclusion: Less than significant impact. 9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? 5,9, 15, 16,27 X b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g. The production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses for which permits have been granted)? 5,9, 15, 16,27 X c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation onsite or offsite? 5,9, 15, 16,27 X d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area in a manner which would result in substantial flooding onsite or offsite? 5,9, 15, 16,27 X e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? 5,9, 15, 16,27 X f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? 5,9, 27 X g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? 5,9, 15, 16,27 X h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? 5,9, 27 X i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? 4,5,9, 27 X j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? 4,9 X Packet Pg. 106 Item 2 Evaluation As discussed in the City’s LUCE Update EIR, the project site is located within the San Luis Obispo Creek Hydrologic Subarea of the Estero Bay Hydrologic Unit, an area that corresponds to the coastal draining watersheds west o f the Coastal Range. The Estero Bay Hydrologic Unit stretches roughly 80 miles between the Santa Maria River and the Monterey County line and includes numerous individual stream systems. Within the Estero Bay Hydrologic Unit, the San Luis Obispo Creek watershed drains approximately 84 square miles. The City of San Luis Obispo is generally located within a low‐lying valley centered on San Luis Obispo Creek. San Luis Obispo Creek is one of four major drainage features that create flood hazards in the city, with the others being Stenner Cree k, Prefumo Creek, and Old Garden Creek. In addition, many minor waterways drain into these creeks, and these can also present flood hazards. Because of the high surrounding hills and mountains in the area, the drainage sheds of these creeks are relatively small, but the steep slopes and high gradient can lead to intense, fast moving flood events in the city. According to the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (Central Coast RWQCB), water quality in the San Luis Obispo Creek drainage system is generally considered to be good. However, the water quality fluctuates along with seasonal changes in flow rates. In summer months, when the flows decrease, and dilution is reduced, water quality decreases. According to the RWQCB Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Project for San Luis Obispo Creek, the creek has been reported to exceed nutrient and pathogen levels. Groundwater within the San Luis Obispo Valley Sub‐basin flows toward the south‐southwest, following the general gradient of surface topography. Groundwater within the San Luis Obispo area is considered suitable for agricultural water supply, municipal and domestic supply, and industrial use. a, f) The project does not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or substantially degrade water quality because the project is required to comply with the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) requirements set forth in their Post-Construction Stormwater Management Requirements for Development Projects in the Central Coast Region. The project includes a Stormwater Control Plan (SWCP) (Ashley and Vance Engineering, Inc., May 4, 2018). The plan states that the project will result in over 5,000 square feet of impervious surface and will be subject to SWCP Performance Requirements 1 and 2 as follows: 1) Site Design and Runoff Reduction and 2) Water Quality Treatment. To meet these requirements the project includes the following design features: 1) direct roof runoff to vegetated planters in areas that are near paved surfaces, and to vegetated swales in areas that are further away, 2) installation of permeable surfacing wherever appropriate for walkways, driveways, and parking areas to reduce runoff, and 3) implementation of infiltration pits and bioinfiltration swales. b) The project will be served by the City’s sewer and water systems and will not deplete groundwater resources. No impact. c, d, e) Physical improvement of the project site will be required to comply with the drainage requirements of the City’s Waterways Management Plan. This plan was adopted for the purpose of ensuring water quality and proper drainage within the City’s watershed. The Waterways Management Plan and Low Impact Development (LID) stormwater treatment requires that site development be designed so that post-development site drainage does not significantly exceed pre-development run-off. In addition, the project is required to comply with the City’s engineering standards, water pollution control plan requirements, Post Construction Stormwater Requirements, and adopted building and grading codes for water quantity/quality analysis. Less than significant impact. g, h) The project site is located at the base of the South Hills and is not within the boundaries of an area subject to inundation from flood waters in a 100-year storm per the Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map. The project will not impede or re-direct the flow of any waters. No impact. j) The proposed development is outside the zone of impacts from seiche or tsunami, and the existing upslope projects do not generate significant storm water runoff such to create a potential for inundation by mudflow. The Soils Engineer ing Report prepared by GeoSolutions, Inc. (July 7, 2017) has not identified upslope or on-site slope instability. No impact. Packet Pg. 107 Item 2 Conclusion: Less than significant impact 10. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? 1, 9,11 X b) Conflict with applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? 1,9, 10 X c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plans? 5,9, 10 X Evaluation a) The proposed infill development project is consistent with the development anticipated for the project site under the site’s General Plan and zoning designation, since the site is designated for medium density residential land uses and is designed to fit among existing multi-family and single family residential development surrounding it and will not physically divide an established community. Less than significant impact. b) The proposed project will not conflict with applicable land use plans, policies, or regulations for the purpose of avoidin g or mitigating an environmental effect. The project is proposed to be consistent with City regulations and development stan dards, with the exception of a request for a reduced front yard setback to allow a trellis structure in the front yard, as depicted within Attachment 1, Project Plans, Sheets AC1.0 -1.1. The project is required to be reviewed by the ARC to review the front yard setback for consistency with the Community Design Guidelines. Less than significant impact. c) As discussed in subsection 4, Biological Resources, the proposed project would not conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat conservation plan, natural community conservation plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. No impact. Conclusion: Less than Significant Impact. 11. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? 5,9 X b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? 5,9 X Evaluation a), b) No known mineral resources are present at the project site. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource. The projec t site is not designated by the general plan, specific plan, or other land use plans as a locally important mineral recovery site. No impact. Conclusion: No Impact. 12. NOISE. Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? 3,9, 10,11 X b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? 3,9, 10,11 X Packet Pg. 108 Item 2 c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? 3,9, 10,11 X d) A substantial temporary, periodic, or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? 3,9, 10,11 X e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? 1,3,9, 10,11 X f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? 3, 9,10 X Evaluation As analyzed in the City’s LUCE Update EIR, a number of noise ‐sensitive land uses are present within the City, including various types of residential, schools, hospitals and care facilities, parks and recreation areas, hotels and transient lodgin g, and place of worship and libraries. Based on ambient noise level measurements throughout the City, major sources of noise include traffic noise on major roadways, passing trains, and aircraft overflights. a) Residences are designated as noise sensitive by the Noise Element. The Noise Element indicates that noise levels of up to 60 dB are acceptable for outdoor activity areas and noise levels of up to 45 dB are acceptable for indoor areas. Exterior noi se levels will be less than 60 dB when attenuation afforded by building features and elevation is taken into account. The project location has not been identified as an area subject to noise sources above the City’s thresholds. In addition, interior nois e levels of less than 45 dB will be achievable with standard building materials and construction techniques. Impacts associ ated with exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noi se ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies, would be less than significant. b) Long-term operational activities associated with the proposed project would be from residential uses, which would not involve the use of any equipment or processes that would result in potentially significant levels of ground vibration. Increa ses in groundborne vibration levels attributable to the proposed project would be primarily associated with short -term construction-related activities. Construction activities would likely require the use of various types of heavy equipment, such as forklifts, concrete mixers, and haul trucks. Because construction activities are restricted to the days, hours, and sound levels allowed by City ordinance (Chapter 9.12 of the Municipal Code), impacts associated with groundborne vibration and noise would be less than significant. c) As discussed above, long-term operation of the project involves residential use, which is consistent with existing uses in the project vicinity. Residential uses would not result in substantial changes to the existing noise environment. Operation of the project would be consistent with the existing uses in the vicinity of the project site and would not result in substantial changes to the existing noise environment. Other noise sensitive uses in the vicinity include other neighboring residential developments. These uses will be partially shielded from noise generated by residential uses by distance (over 50 feet from the single-family units to the south of the site) and by the structures themselves. The proposed project would therefore have a less than significant impact related to producing a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. e, f) The project is not within the vicinity of a private airstrip. The project site is located approximately 1.5 miles from the end of San Luis Obispo Airport Runway 29 and outside of the 50 dB contour identified in Figure 1 of the San Luis Obispo County Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP). Table 1 of the General Plan Noise Element states that the maximum noise exposure for outside residential activities is 60 dB. Interior noise levels of less than 45 dB will be achievable with standard building materials and construction techniques. Less than significant impact. Conclusion: Less than significant Impact. Packet Pg. 109 Item 2 13. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example by proposing new homes or businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? 2,6,9 X b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing or people necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? 1,6,9 X c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? 6,9 X Evaluation a) The project site is designated for multi-family residential development under the General Plan and is zoned R-2 (medium density residential). The proposed project includes development consistent with the anticipated land use and residential density of the site. New employment generated by the proposed project would not be considered substantial. Considering the project area is currently developed, and the proposed project would utilize existing infrastructure at the subject location, the project woul d not induce additional growth that would be considered significant. The proposed project would not involve any other components that would induce further growth not already anticipated under the General Plan. Impacts are considered less than significant. b, c) The project proposes to demolish three residential structures and construct eight new residences, a net increase of five additional units. Removal of the residential structures would not be considered a substantial loss of housing, nor displace substantial numbers of people, since new housing is proposed as part of the project description. Impacts are considered less than significant. Conclusion: Less than significant impact. 14. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision, or need, of new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services: a) Fire protection? 9,12 X b) Police protection? 9,12 X c) Schools? 9,12 X d) Parks? 12 X e) Roads and other transportation infrastructure? 2,9,12 X f) Other public facilities? 12 X Evaluation a), b), d), e), f) As an infill site, adequate public services (fire, police, roads and other transportation infrastructure, and ot her public facilities) are available to serve the project. Future development must comply with applicable City codes and State regulations and building permits will be issued to ensure consistency with these requirements. Less than significant impact. c) The school districts in the state have the authority to collect fees at the time of issuance of building permits to offset the costs to finance school site acquisition and school construction and are deemed by State law to be adequate mitigation for all school facility requirements. Any increases in demand on school facilities caused by the project are considered to be mitigat ed by the district’s collection of adopted fees at the time of building permit issuance. Less than significant impact. Packet Pg. 110 Item 2 Conclusion: Less than significant impact. 15. RECREATION. Would the project: a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? 35 X b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? 35 X Evaluation a), b) The project will add incrementally to the demand for parks and other recreational facilities. However, given the size of the project (eight new residences) and expected number of residents, no significant recreational impacts are expected to occur with development of the site. Park Land In-Lieu fees will be required to be paid to the City to help finance additional park space, maintenance or equipment in the vicinity, per existing City policy. Should the map not be recorded and the project developed as for-rent units on one parcel, the City also collects a Dwelling Unit Construction tax that goes to a Park Improvement Fund with building permits for multi-family projects. Collection of these fees helps offset the impacts of new projects on the City’s recreational facilities. Less than significant impact. Conclusion: Less Than Significant Impact. 16. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? 2,9, 10,22 X b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? 1,2, 4,9 X c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? 9,10 X d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? 2,9, 22,32 X e) Result in inadequate emergency access? 4,9 X g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? 2,9 X Evaluation a), b) The project does not conflict with any applicable circulation system plans and does not add to demand on the circulation system or conflict with any congestion management programs or any other agency’s plans for congestion management. The project will add vehicular trips to local and a rea streets which lead out of the neighborhood to uncontrolled intersections. The existing streets have sufficient unused capacity to accommodate the added vehicular traffic without Packet Pg. 111 Item 2 reducing existing levels of service. The proposed project would not result in a significant impact with regard to increased vehicular trips and does not conflict with performance standards provided in City adopted plans or policies. The project will also contribute to overall transportation infrastructure by participating in the Citywide Transportation Impact Fee program. Less than significant impact. c) The project will not result in any changes to air traffic patterns and does not conflict with any safety plans of the Airp ort Land Use Plan. No impact. d) The project has been designed to meet City Engineering Standards and will not result in safety risks. The project will include curb, gutter, and sidewalk per City Engineering Standards, which will improve pedestrian and vehicle safety along Rockview Drive. No impact. e) The project has been reviewed by the City Fire Marshal to ensure adequate emergency access has been provided. No impact. f) The project is consistent with policies supporting alternative transportation due to the site’s location within the City’s urban center, and its proximity to transit stops, shopping, parks and services. No impact. g) The project will not result in any changes to air traffic patterns, nor does it conflict with any safety plans of the Airport Land Use Plan. No impact. Conclusion: Less Than Significant Impact. 17. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or 12,23 X b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. 23,24 X Evaluation On February 22, 2018, local Native American tribal groups were formally noticed that an Initial Study of Environmental Impact was being completed for the proposed project at 3063 Rockview Place and invited to provide consultation on the proposed project. No tribal representatives requested a formal consultation; however, one representative requested a Phase I archaeological survey be completed for the site and if the results were positive for cultural resources that all ground disturbing activities for the project be monitored by a qualified archaeologist. Another representative requested that an archeological monitoring plan be incorporated as mitigation for the project. Based on these requests the applicant has indicated that the project will conduct archeological monitoring during ground disturbances in the unlikely event that any materials are encountered (see Section 5: Cultural Resources for further discussion and Mitigation Measure CR-1). a) The project site does not contain any structures that are listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources or local register as defined in Public Resources Section 5020.1(k). No impact. Packet Pg. 112 Item 2 b) The site does not contain any known resources considered significant by any California Native American tribe. As discussed in Section 5: Cultural Resources, Mitigation Measure CR-1 requires an archeological monitoring plan to be in place prior to any ground disturbances in the unlikely event that any materials are encountered. Therefore, with the proposed mitigation the project would have a less than significant impact. Conclusion: With incorporation of the required mitigation measure (Section 5: MM CR-1) impacts are considered less than significant. 18. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? 7,9, 16 X b) Require or result in the construction or expansion of new water treatment, waste water treatment, water quality control, or storm drainage facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? 7,9, 16,27, 33,34 X c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? 7,9, 16,27 X d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new and expanded water resources needed? 7,9, 16 X e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitment? 5,7,9, 16, 33,34 X f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs? 5, 8, 9 X g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? 5, 8, 9 X Evaluation Water: As discussed in the City’s LUCE Update EIR, the City of San Luis Obispo Utilities Department provides potable and recycled water to the community and is responsible for water supply, treatment, distribution, and resource planning. The City is the sole water provider within the city limits and most of the City’s water is supplied from multiple surface water source s. However, the City also uses groundwater to supplement surface water supplies and recycled water is used to supplement irrigation demand. With the update of the City’s Water and Wastewater Element in 2018, the City Council reaffirmed the policy for a multi‐source water supply. Consistent with the multi‐source water supply concept, the City obtains water from five sources: • Salinas Reservoir (Santa Margarita Lake) and Whale Rock Reservoir: Combined Safe Annual Yield 4,910 AF/year • Nacimiento Reservoir: 5,482 AF/year dependable yield/ contractual limit • Recycled water from the City’s Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF): 238 AF/year Wastewater: The wastewater system for the City includes facilities for wastewater collection and treatment. The City’s collection system serves residential, commercial, and industrial customers. Sewer service is provided only to properties within the city limits, with the exception of a few residential properties located just outside of the city limits, Cal Poly San Lui s Obispo, and the County of San Luis Obispo Airport. There are approximately 12,000 service connections. The City’s Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) processes wastewater in accordance with the standards set by the State’s RWQCB. The WRRF removes solids, reduces the amount of nutrients, and eliminates bacteria in the treated Packet Pg. 113 Item 2 wastewater, which is then discharged to San Luis Obispo Creek. The WRRF is designed for an average dry weather flow capacity of 5.4 million gallons per day (MGD) and a peak wet weather flow capacity of 19 MGD. In 2017, annual average flows to the WRRF were approximately 3.30 MGD. Solid Waste: The City’s Utilities Department is responsible for administering an exclusive franchise agreement with San Luis Garbage Company to collect and dispose solid waste generated by residential, commercial, and industrial customers in San Luis Obispo. This agreement also includes curbside recycling, and green waste service. There are three solid waste disposal facilities within San Luis Obispo County. Most solid waste collected in the city is disposed of at the Cold Canyon Landfill. Cold Canyon Landfill is currently (2016) permitted to receive up to 1,650 tons of solid waste per day, with an estimated remaining capacity of 14,500,000 cubic yards (60.1 perce nt remaining capacity). In 2015, the Cold Canyon Landfill operator estimated the landfill is expected to reach capacity in 2040. a, b, c, e) The proposed project would result in an incremental increase in demand on City infrastructure, including water, wastewater and storm water facilities. Development of the site is required to be served by City sewer and water service, which both have adequate capacity to serve the use. Existing storm water facilities are present in the vicinity of the project site , and it is not anticipated the proposed project will result in the need for new facilities or expansion of existing facilities whi ch could have significant environmental effects. The developer will be required to construct private sewer facilities to convey wastewater to the nearest public sewer. The on-site sewer facilities will be required to be constructed according to the standards in the Uniform Plumbing Code and City standards. Impact fees are collected at the time building permits are issued to pay for capacity at the City’s Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF). The fees are set at a level intended to offset the potential impacts of each new residential unit in the project. This project has been reviewed by the City’s Utilities Department and no resource/infrastructure deficiencies have been identified. Less than significant impact. d) The proposed project would result in an incremental increase in demand on water supplies, as anticipated under the recent General Plan Update. As analyzed in the LUCE Update EIR, the City has sufficient water supplies for build-out of the City’s General Plan. The incremental change created by the proposed project would be less than significant. This project has been reviewed by the City’s Utilities Department and no resource/infrastructure deficiencies have been identified. Less than significant impact. f), g) The proposed project will be served by San Luis Garbage Company, which maintains standards for size and access to ensure that collection is feasible, both of which will be reviewed by the Architectural Review Commission. The location and size of trash enclosures proposed for the project have been reviewed by the City and it has been determined that the trash enclosures are sufficient in size to handle the demands of the proposed project. The Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939) requires each city and county in California to reduce the flow of materials to landfills by 50% (from 1989 levels) by 2000. The proposed project is required to reduce the waste stream generated by development consistent with the City’s Conservation and Open Space Element policies to coordinate waste reduction and recycling efforts (COSE 5.5.3), and Development Standards for Solid Waste Services (available at http://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=4384 ). A solid waste reduction plan for recycling discarded construction materials is a submittal requirement with the building permit application. The incremental additional waste stream generated by this project is not anticipated to create significant impacts to solid waste disposal. This impact would be considered less than significant. Conclusion: Less Than Significant Impact. 19. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of X Packet Pg. 114 Item 2 the major periods of California history or prehistory? The project is an infill residential development in an urba nized area of the city. Without mitigation, the project could have the potential to have adverse impacts on all of the issue areas checked in the Table on Page 3. As discussed above, potential impacts to air quality and cultural resources will be less than significant with incorporation of recommended mitigation measures. b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of the past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects) X The impacts of the proposed project are individually limited and not considered “cumulatively considerable.” The proposed project is consistent with the existing Land Use Element and Zoning for medium density residential development and the cumulative impacts of developing this site were analyzed as a part of the Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) E IR. Although incremental changes in certain issue areas can be expected as a result of the proposed project, all environmental impacts that could occur as a result of the proposed project would be reduced to a less than significant level through compliance with existing regulations and incorporation of recommended mitigation measures as discussed in this Initial Study. c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X Implementation of the proposed project would result in no environmental effects that would cause substantial direct or indirect adverse effects on human beings, all environmental impacts that could occur as a result of the proposed project would be reduced to a less than significant level through compliance with existing regulations and incorporation of recommended mitigation measures as discussed in this Initial Study. 20. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration. Section 15063 (c) (3) (D). In this case a discussion should identify the following items: a) Earlier analysis used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. City of San Luis Obispo Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) Update EIR, available for review at the City Community Development Department (919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401), o r at the following web site: http://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/community-development/planning-zoning/general-plan b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. Applicable excerpts, analysis and conclusions from the LUCE Update EIR have been added to each impact issue area discussion. Where project specific impacts and mitigation measures have been identified that are not a ddressed in the LUCE Update EIR, original analysis has been provided and mitigation has been recommended to reduce impact levels as needed. c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site -specific conditions of the project. N/A 21. SOURCE REFERENCES. 1. City of SLO General Plan Land Use Element, December 2014 2. City of SLO General Plan Circulation Element, December 2014 3. City of SLO General Plan Noise Element, May 1996 4. City of SLO General Plan Safety Element, March 2012 5. City of SLO General Plan Conservation & Open Space Element, April 2006 Packet Pg. 115 Item 2 6. City of SLO General Plan Housing Element, January 2015 7. City of SLO General Plan Water and Wastewater Element, March 2018 8. City of SLO Source Reduction and Recycling Element, on file in the Utilities Department 9. City of SLO General Plan EIR 2014 for Update to the Land Use and Circulation Elements 10. City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code (which includes the City Zoning Regulations, Chapter 17) 11. City of San Luis Obispo Community Design Guidelines, June 2010 12. City of San Luis Obispo, Land Use Inventory Database 13. City of SLO Climate Action Plan, August 2012 14. 2013 California Building Code 15. City of SLO Waterways Management Plan 16. Water Resources Status Report, July 2012, on file with in the Utilities Department 17. Site Visit 18. Staff Knowledge 19. Website of the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency: http://www.consrv.ca.gov/dlrp/FMMP/ 20. CEQA Air Quality Handbook, Air Pollution Control District, April 2012 21. Clean Air Plan for San Luis Obispo County, Air Pollution Control District, 2001 22. Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition, on file in the Community Development Department 23. City of San Luis Obispo, Historic Resource Preservation Guidelines, on file in the Community Development Department 24. City of San Luis Obispo, Archaeological Resource Preservation Guidelines, on file in the Community Development Department 25. City of San Luis Obispo, Historic Site Map 26. City of San Luis Obispo Burial Sensitivity Map 27. Stormwater Control Plan. Ashley & Vance Engineering, Inc. May 4, 2018 28. Focused Spring Botanical Survey. Terra Verde Environmental Consulting. May 1, 2018 29. Soils Engineering Report. GeoSolutions, Inc. July 7, 2017 30. San Luis Obispo County Airport Land Use Plan 31. Website of the California Environmental Protection Agency, Cortese List: https://calepa.ca.gov/SiteCleanup/CorteseList/ 32. Project Plans 33. 2012 Sanitary Sewer Flow Monitoring and Inflow/Infiltration Study 34. 2016 Wastewater Collection System Infrastructure Renewal Strategy 35. City of SLO General Plan Parks & Recreation Element, April 3, 2001 Note: All documents listed above are available for review at the City of San Luis Obispo Community D evelopment Department, 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California (805) 781-7101. Attachments: 1.Project Plans 2.Botanical Survey 3.Soils Engineering Report 4.Stormwater Control Plan Packet Pg. 116 Item 2 REQUIRED MITIGATION AND MONITORING PROGRAMS Air Quality Mitigation Measure AQ-1: Prior to grading plan approval, the project proponent shall ensure that a geologic evaluation should be conducted to determine if NOA is present within the area that will be disturbed. If NOA is not present, an exemption request must be filed with the District. If NOA is found at the site, the applicant must comply with all requirements outlined in the Asbestos ATCM. This may include development of an Asbestos Dust Mitigation Plan and an Asbestos Health and Safety Program for approval by the APCD. Technical Appendix 4.4 of this Handbook includes a map of zones throughout SLO County where NOA has been found and geological evaluation is required prior to any grading. More information on NOA can be found at http://www.slocleanair.org/rules-regulations/asbestos.php. ➢ Monitoring Plan, AQ-1: All mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and building plans. In addition, the contractor shall designate a person or persons to monitor compliance with APCD requirements. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD, Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to commencement of construction. The applicant shall provide documentation of compliance with APCD requirements to City staff prior to issuance of any grading or building permits. Mitigation Measure AQ-2: Any scheduled demolition activities or disturbance, removal, or relocation of utility pipelines shall be coordinated with the APCD Enforcement Division at (805) 781-5912 to ensure compliance with NESHAP, which include, but are not limited to: 1) written notification, within at least 10 business days of activities commencing, to the APCD, 2) asbestos survey conducted by a Certified Asbestos Consultant, and, 3) applicable removal and disposal requirements of identified ACM. More information on NOA can be found at http://www.slocleanair.org/rules-regulations/asbestos.php. ➢ Monitoring Plan, AQ-2: All mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and building plans. In addition, the contractor shall designate a person or persons to monitor compliance with APCD requirements. Their duties shall include holiday and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD, Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to commencement of construction. Mitigation Measure AQ-3: During construction/ground disturbing activities, the applicant shall implement the following particulate (dust) control measures. These measures shall be shown on grading and building plans. In addition, the contractor shall designate a person or persons to monitor the dust control program and to order increased watering, modify practices as necessary, to prevent transport of dust off site. Their duties shall include holiday and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to commencement of construction. Packet Pg. 117 Item 2 a. Reduce the amount of disturbed area where possible. b. Use water trucks or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site and from exceeding the APCD’s limit of 20% opacity for no greater than 3 minutes in any 60-minute period. Increased watering frequency will be required whenever wind speeds exceed 15 m.p.h. and cessation of grading activities during periods of winds over 25 m.p.h. Reclaimed (non-potable) water is to be used in all construction and dust-control work. c. All dirt stock pile areas (if any) shall be sprayed daily and covered with tarps or other dust barriers as needed. d. Permanent dust control measures identified in the approved project revegetation and landscape plans shall be implemented as soon as possible, following completion of any soil disturbing activities. e. Exposed grounds that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month after initial grading shall be sown with a fast germinating, non-invasive, grass seed and watered until vegetation is established. f. All disturbed soil areas not subject to revegetation shall be stabilized using approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods approved in advance by the APCD. g. All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. In addition, building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used. h. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 m.p.h. on any unpaved surface at the construction site. i. All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials, are to be covered or shall maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with California Vehicle Code Section 23114. j. Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site. k. Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers shall be used with reclaimed water where feasible. Roads shall be pre-wetted prior to sweeping when feasible. l. All PM10 mitigation measures required shall be shown on grading and building plans. m. The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the fugitive dust emissions and enhance the implementation of the measures as necessary to minimize dust complaints, reduce visible emissions below the APCD’s limit of 20% opacity for no greater than 3 minutes in any 60-minute period. Their duties shall include holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD Compliance Division prior to the start of any grading, earthwork or demolition. ➢ Monitoring Plan, AQ-3: All mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and building plans. In addition, the contractor shall designate a person or persons to monitor the dust control program and to order increased watering, as necessary, to prevent transport of dust off site. Their duties shall include holiday and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone Packet Pg. 118 Item 2 number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD, Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to commencement of construction. Mitigation Measure AQ-4: Prior to any construction activities at the site, the project proponent shall ensure that all equipment and operations are compliant with California Air Resource Board and APCD permitting requirements and shall contact the APCD Engineering Division at (805) 781-5912 for specific information regarding permitting requirements. ➢ Monitoring Plan, AQ-4: All mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and building plans. In addition, the contractor shall designate a person or persons to monitor compliance with APCD requirements. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD, Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to commencement of construction. The applicant shall provide documentation of compliance with APCD requirements to City staff prior to issuance of any grading or building permits. Mitigation Measure AQ-5: To reduce sensitive receptor emissions impact of diesel vehicles and equipment used to construct the project and export soil from the site, the applicant shall implement the following idling control techniques: 1. California Diesel Idling Regulations a. On-road diesel vehicles shall comply with Section 2485 of Title 13 of the California Code of regulations. This regulation limits idling from diesel-fueled commercial motor vehicles with gross vehicular weight ratings of more than 10,000 pounds and licensed for operation on highways. It applies to California and non-California based vehicles. In general, the regulation specifies that drivers of said vehicles: 1. Shall not idle the vehicle’s primary diesel engine for greater than 5 minutes at any location, except as noted in Subsection (d) of the regulation; and, 2. Shall not operate a diesel-fueled auxiliary power system (APS) to power a heater, air conditioner, or any ancillary equipment on that vehicle during sleeping or resting in a sleeper berth for greater than 5.0 minutes at any location when within 1,000 feet of restricted area, except as noted in Subsection (d) of the regulation. b. Off-road diesel equipment shall comply with the 5-minute idling restriction identified in Section 2449(d)(2) of the California Air Resources Board’s In-Use Off-road Diesel regulation. c. Signs must be posted in the designated queuing areas and job sites to remind drivers and operators of the state’s 5-minute idling limit. 2. Diesel Idling Restrictions Near Sensitive Receptors (residential homes). In addition to the State required diesel idling requirements, the project applicant shall comply with these more restrictive requirements to minimize impacts to nearby sensitive receptors: a. Staging and queuing areas shall not be located within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors. b. Diesel idling within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors shall not be permitted. c. Use of alternative fueled equipment is recommended. d. Signs that specify the no idling areas must be posted and enforced at the site. Packet Pg. 119 Item 2 3. Soil Transport. It is estimated that 16,000 cubic yards of cut material (i.e., soils) will be cut from the site, but the final volume of soil that will be hauled off-site, together with the fleet mix, hauling route, and number of trips per day will need to be identified for the APCD. Specific standards and conditions will apply. ➢ Monitoring Plan, AQ-5: All mitigation measures shall be shown on grading and building plans. In addition, the contractor shall designate a person or persons to monitor that idling control techniques are being implemented to reduce sensitive receptor emissions impact of diesel vehicles and equipment during construction. Their duties shall include holiday and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the APCD, Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to commencement of construction. The applicant shall provide documentation of compliance with APCD requirements to City staff prior to issuance of any grading or building permits. Mitigation Measure CR-1: Preservation of Archeological Resources. A monitoring plan shall be prepared and approved by the City prior to building permit approval. The plan shall include survey results that outline where monitoring is required on the site and note when a Native American monitor is required. The plan shall provide protocols for stoppage of work and treatment of human remains, staff education requirements, and a data recovery plan to be implemented in case significant deposits are exposed. ➢ Monitoring Plan, CR-1: Building/grading plans shall show and outline all details and requirements of the monitoring plan prepared by a City qualified Registered Professional Archeologist to be implemented during construction. The monitoring plan shall specify methods and procedures for identifying those deposits during construction; standards for assessing the significance and integrity of any deposits so identified; and methods and procedures for mitigating impacts on significant deposits. The plan also shall identify the qualified professional who will conduct the monitoring and circumstances where a Native American tribal representative or qualified site monitor may be required. Packet Pg. 120 Item 2 San Luis Obispo Page 1 Tuesday, July 10, 2018 Rescheduled 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, July 10, 2018 at 5:30 p.m. in the Council Hearing Room, 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 ON CLOSED SESSION ITEMS None ---End of Public Comment --- CLOSED SESSION CONFERENCE REGARDING PROPERTY NEGOTIATIONS Pursuant to Government Code §54956.8 Property: APNs 002-436-005; 002-436-008; 002-436-012; 002-436-013; 002-436-018 and 002-436-019 Agency Negotiators: Derek Johnson, Christine Dietrick, Daryl Grigsby, Michael Codron, Greg Hermann, Jon Ansolabehere, Tim Bochum, Scott Lee Negotiating Parties: Nick Thompkins and County of San Luis Obispo Under Negotiation: Price and terms of payment RECESSED AT 5:50 P.M. TO THE RESCHEDULED REGULAR MEETING OF TUESDAY, JULY 10, 2018 TO BEGIN AT 6:00 P.M. Packet Pg. 121 Item 4 San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of Tuesday, July 10, 2018 Page 2 CALL TO ORDER A Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo City C ouncil was called to order on Tuesday, July 10, 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 Call. Other staff members pre sented reports or responded to questions as indicated in the minutes. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Council Member Aaron Gomez led the Pledge of Allegiance. CITY ATTORNEY REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION City Attorney Dietrick stated that negotiating direction was pro vided for the Closed Session Item but there was no action to report. PRESENTATIONS 1. POLICE DEPARTMENT SERVICE AWARDS Chief Cantrell presented Officer Greg Benson, Officer Jeff Middleton and Officer Jeff Koznek with the Distinguished Service award. 2. SOUTH COUNTY TRANSIT CONSOLIDATION INTO THE REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY (RTA) Geoff Straw presented a PowerPoint regarding the consolidation of South County Transit into RTA. PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA Donna Pulling Mary White ---End of Public Comment --- Packet Pg. 122 Item 4 San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of Tuesday, July 10, 2018 Page 3 CONSENT AGENDA ACTION: MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER PEASE, SECOND BY VICE MAYOR CHRISTIANSON, CARRIED 5-0 to approve Consent Calendar Items 3 thru 12. 3. WAIVE READING IN FULL OF ALL RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES CARRIED 5 – 0 to waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances as appropriate. 4. MINUTES OF JUNE 19, 2018 CARRIED 5 – 0 to approve the minutes of the City Council meeting of June 19, 2018. 5. 2018-19 COMMUNITY PROMOTIONS PROGRAM – TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (TBID) & PROMOTIONAL COORDINATING COMMITTEE (PCC) CARRIED 5 – 0 to: 1. Authorize the City Manager to enter into various contracts and program expenditures for the Tourism Business Improvement District (TBID) not to exceed the 201 8-19 program budget of $1,473,400. 2. Authorize the carryover of $230,000 from the remaining 2017-18 program budget for various contracts and program expenditures in 2018-19. 3. Authorize the City Manager to enter into contracts utilizing the TBID Fund un- appropriated fund balance from the 2017-18 fiscal year, following the completion of the City’s financial statements audit, for tourism marketing expenditures in 2018-19. 4. Authorize the City Manager to enter into contracts utilizing the TBID Fund Reserve of $100,000 for tourism marketing expenditures in 2018-19 in accordance with the TBID reserve policy 5. Authorize the City Manager to enter into various contracts and program expenditures for Community Promotions not to exceed the 2018-19 program budget of $403,386. 6. EQUIPMENT SURPLUS DESIGNATION AND AUTHORIZATION OF SALE CARRIED 5 – 0 to authorize the designation and disposal of surplus items in accordance with the City’s policies and procedures. 7. REVISIONS TO THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO TRAVEL & MEETING GUIDELINES CARRIED 5 – 0 to: 1. Adopt the revised City travel and meeting guidelines related to the implementation of the City’s new Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) financial system. Packet Pg. 123 Item 4 San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of Tuesday, July 10, 2018 Page 4 2. Rescind Resolution No. 9850 (2006 Series) and adopt a Resolution No. 10913 (2018 Series) entitled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, amending the City’s Travel and Meeting Expense Policy Guidelines.” 8. CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL AGREEMENT FOR BACKFILL REIMBURSEMENT - FY 2018 CARRIED 5 – 0 to adopt Resolution No. 10914 (2018 Series) entitled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, authorizing the Chief of Police or Designee to enter into a contract with the California Highway Patrol.” 9. OCTAGON BARN CENTER GRANT AGREEMENT AMENDMENT NO. 1 CARRIED 5 – 0 to authorize a grant agreement between The Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo County (LCSLO) and the City of San Luis Obispo allowing an additional two - year term for the Octagon Barn Cent er project. 10. ALLOCATION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING FUNDS FOR THE SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY HOUSING TRUST FUND CARRIED 5 – 0 to adopt Resolution No. 10915 (2018 Series) entitled, “A Resolution of t he City Council o f the City of San Luis Obispo, California, allocating affordable housing funds to support the ongoing operating expenses of the San Luis Obispo County Housing Trust Fund in the amount of $80,000.” 11. SILT REMOVAL 2018 CARRIED 5 – 0 to: 1. Approve Plans and Specifications Silt Removal 2018, Specification No. 91523; and 2. Authorize staff to advertise for bids; and 3. Authorize the City Manager to award the construction contract of up to $120,000 to the lowest responsible bidder. 12. GRAND JURY RESPONSE REGARDING RESIDENTIAL DETOXIFICATION IN SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY. CARRIED 5 – 0 to receive and file the County of San Luis Obispo Grand Jury response regarding evaluation of a pre-booking substance abuse diversion program. STUDY SESSION ITEMS 13. WATER RESOURCE RECOVERY FACILITY (WRRF) PROJECT LABOR AGREEMENT EVALUATION City Attorney Christine Dietrick, Utilities Director Carrie Mattingly and Justin XXX provided an in-depth presentation of the staff report and responded to Council questions. Packet Pg. 124 Item 4 San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of Tuesday, July 10, 2018 Page 5 Public Comments: Adam Hill Gary Madonna Paul Hendrickson Trevor Ranlett Kevin Dayton David Baldwin Debra Stakes Daniel Mora Larry Murray Trydyn Meacham Scott Zimmerman Sean Perry Cheryl Conway James Conway Blake Berkeley Jack Johnson Dylan Keldsen Alison Ordille Robert Gilliland David Gilliland Bill Leslie Cherie Cabral Tyler Scheidt Rich Niday Derek Jenkins Andrew Gaebel David Baldwin Nick Andre Dan Miller Susan Devine Cordelia Perry Rosemary Wrenn ---End of Public Comment --- RECESS Council recessed at 8:00 p.m. and reconvened at 8:12 p.m., with all Council Members present. By consensus the following direction was provided: 1. Direct staff to proceed with the negotiation of a PLA for inclusion with the bid package for the WRRF, including local hiring preference components. a. PLA shall be negotiated by October 12, 2018 and incorporate the PLA agre ement and requirements into WRRF bid documents and return to the City Council for approval. b. If a PLA is not negotiated by October 12, 2018, direct staff to proceed with incorporating local hire preference requirements into WRRF bid documents and return to the City Council for approval. c. Direct staff to pursue contract provisions to directly or indirectly control schedule cost and quality. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS AND BUSINESS ITEMS 14. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER CONDUIT FINANCING FOR THE JUDSON TERRACE HOMES APARTMENTS AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT Community Development Director Michael Codron and Assistant Planner Cara Vereschagin provided an in-depth presentation of the staff report and responded to Council questions. Public Comments: Linda Robertson Robert Kile ---End of Public Comment --- Packet Pg. 125 Item 4 San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of Tuesday, July 10, 2018 Page 6 ACTION: MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER RIVOIRE, SECOND BY VICE MAYOR CHRISTIANSON, CARRIED 5-0 to adopt Resolution No. 10916 (2018 Series) entitled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City o f San Luis Obispo, California, approving the issuance of revenue bonds by the California Municipal Finance Authority in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $44,000,000 to finance a 107-unit multifamily rental housing facility for the benefit of Judson Terrace Senior Ho using, L.P. (or an affiliate), and certain other matters relating thereto.” 15. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER EXPANSION OF THE FERRINI RESIDENTIAL PARKING PERMIT DISTRICT Public Works Director Daryl Grigsby and Parking Services Supervisor Alex Fuchs provided an in-depth presentation of the staff report and responded to Council questions. Public Comments: Mary Parker Laura Kirschner ---End of Public Comment --- ACTION: MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER RIVOIRE, SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER GOMEZ, CARRIED 5-0 to adopt Resolution No. 10917 (2018 Series) entitled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, modifying the residential parking permit district for the Ferrini Area of the city, establishing days and hours of operation of said district and time of renewal for a parking permit.” 16. PUBLIC HEARING TO REQUEST TO MODIFY A CONDITION OF APPROVAL AND MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING TO ALLOW FOR THE SHORT- TERM RENTAL OF SIX RESIDENTIAL UNITS IN THE GARDEN STREET TERRACES (HOTEL SERRA) PROJECT (MOD-1499-2018; 736 MARSH STREET) Council Member Gomez indicated he had a conflict of interest because the project is within 500 feet of his business and left the dais. Community Development Director Michael Codron and Senior Planner Shawna Scot t provided an in-depth presentation of the staff report and responded to Council questions. Carol Florence, Applicant’s Representative and Hamish Marshall, Applicant/Developer provided an overview of the request. Public Comments: None ---End of Public Comment --- ACTION: MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER PEASE, SECOND BY VICE MAYOR CHRISTIANSON, CARRIED 4-0-1 (COUNCIL MEMBER GOMEZ ABSENT) to adopt Resolution No. 10918 (2018 Series) entitled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City Packet Pg. 126 Item 4 San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of Tuesday, July 10, 2018 Page 7 of San Luis Obispo, California, denying an application for a modification to a condition of approval and associated Memorandum of Agreement that would allow for the short -term rental of six units within the approved Garden Street Terraces project located at 736 Marsh Street (MOD-1499-2018)” Council Member Gomez returned to the Dais. 17. PUBLIC HEARING TO AUTHORIZE THE USE OF AUTOMATED LICENSE PLATE RECOGNITION (ALPR) Public Works Director Daryl Grigsby and Parking Services Manager Scott Lee provided an in-depth presentation of the staff report and responded to Council questions. Public Comments: ---End of Public Comment --- ACTION: MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER RIVOIRE, SECOND BY VICE MAYOR CHRISTIANSON, CARRIED 5-0 to approve the use of Automated License Plate Recognition (ALPR) technology in accordance with all State law and City policies . COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS AND LIAISON REPORTS Mayor Harmon expressed appreciation for those that attended the Homeless Town Hall Meeting and indicated that she attended the County Mayor’s meeting, and the signing of the civility pledge. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9:45 PM. to next Regular City Council Meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, July 17, 2018 at 4:30 p.m. and 6:00 p.m., in the Council Chamber, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo, California. __________________________ Teresa Purrington City Clerk APPROVED BY COUNCIL: XX/XX/2018 Packet Pg. 127 Item 4 San Luis Obispo Page 1 Tuesday, July 17, 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, July 17, 2018 at 4:30 p.m. in the Council Chamber Room, 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 ON AGENDA ITEMS ONLY None ---End of Public Comment --- 1. APPROVE COMPREHENSIVE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WITH THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FIREFIGHTERS, LOCAL 3523 Human Resources Director Monica Irons and Human Resources Analyst Nickole Sutter provided an in-depth presentation of the staff report and responded to Council questions. Public Comments: Armando Gutierrez Renn Strong ---End of Public Comment --- Packet Pg. 128 Item 4 San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of Tuesday, July 17, 2018 Page 2 ACTION: MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER RIVOIRE, SECOND BY VICE MAYOR CHRISTIANSON, CARRIED 5-0 to approve a comprehensive settlement agreement with the International Association of Firefighters, Local 3523 (Fire Union) that includes: a. Dismissal of a pending grievance with prejudice. b. A court approved Settlement of Eric Baskin, et al. v. City of San Luis Obispo, United Stated District Court, Central District of California, Case No. 2:16-cv-08876-DSF-JPR. c. Resolution of a dispute as to the exempt status of Fire Battalion Chiefs under the overtime provisions of the Federal Labor Standards Act. d. Adopting a Resolution No. 10919 (2018 Series) entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, adopting and ratifying the Memorandum of Agreement between the City of San Luis Obispo and the San Luis Obispo Firefighters Local 3523 for the period of January 1, 2018 through December 31, 2020 ´ratifying the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the City of San Luis Obispo and the Fire Union.” 2. ADJUSTMENTS TO THE COMPENSATION OF THE UNREPRESENTED MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEES INCLUDING APPOINTED OFFICIALS EVALUATIONS Human Resources Director Monica Irons and Human Resources Analyst Nickole Sutter provided an in-depth presentation of the staff report and responded to Council questions. Public Comments: None ---End of Public Comment --- ACTION: MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER PEASE, SECOND BY GOMEZ, CARRIED 5-0 to: 1. Adopt a Resolution No.10920 (2018 Series) entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, regarding management compensation for Appointed Officials, Department Heads, and Management Employees and superseding previous resolutions in conflict” with a three-year term (July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2021) adjusting the compensation of the Unrepresented Management Employee. 2. Adopt two Resolutions Nos. 10921(2018 Series) and 10922 (2018 Series) entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, amending a contract of employment for City Attorney” and “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo , California, amending a contract of employment for City Manager” approving amendments to the City Attorney and City Manager’s contracts. 3. PUBLIC HEARING - REVIEW OF THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) PREPARED FOR THE PROPOSED PALM NIPOMO PARKING STRUCTURE PROJECT, WHICH INCLUDES FIVE LEVELS OF PARKING FOR UP TO 445 PARKING SPACES, 5,000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL SPACE, A NON-PROFIT THEATRE WITH APPROXIMATELY 24,000 SQUARE FEET Packet Pg. 129 Item 4 San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of Tuesday, July 17, 2018 Page 3 AND UP TO 290 THEATRE SEATS, A ZONE CHANGE AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FROM THE CURRENT OFFICE (O) ZONE AND MEDIUM -HIGH RESIDENTIAL (R-3) ZONE TO PUBLIC FACILITY (PF) ZONE. Council Member Pease recused herself since her office is located across the street from the proposed project and left the dais. Public Works Director Daryl Grigsby, Assistant Planner Rachel Cohen and Parking Services Manager Scott Lee provided an in-depth presentation of the staff report and responded to Council questions. Public Comments: Dave Hannings ---End of Public Comment --- ACTION: MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER GOMEZ, SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER RIVOIRE, CARRIED 4-0-0-1 (COUNCIL MEMBER PEASE ABSENT) to adopt a Resolution No. 10923 (2018 Series) entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, certifying the Final EIR for the proposed Palm Nipomo Parking Structure Project, which includes five levels of parking for up to 445 parking spaces, 5,000 square feet of commercia l space, a nonprofit theatre with approximately 24,000 square feet and up to 290 theatre seats, a Zone Change and General Plan Amendment from the current Office (O) Zone and Medium High Residential (R -3) Zone to Public Facility (PF) Zone, for property located at 609, 610, 614, 630, 633 Palm Street and 970, 972 Nipomo Street (EID-0349-2017)” certifying Final EIR for the proposed parking structure project. ADJOURNED TO THE REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 17, 2018 TO BEGIN AT 6:00 PM Packet Pg. 130 Item 4 San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of Tuesday, July 17, 2018 Page 4 CALL TO ORDER A Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo City Council was called to order on Tuesday, July 17, 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 Call. Other staff members presented reports or responded to questions as indicated in the minutes. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Vice Mayor Carlyn Christianson led the Pledge of Allegiance. PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA Jan Marx Doug Rion Alexandria Zewiski Elizabeth Demsetz Dominque Dashwood Fred Starbuck Tom Perry Charles Varni Patrick Vo well Bob Wilson Don Hedrick Bill Almas Jill Bonneson Renn Strong Cristy Ecklund ---End of Public Comment --- CONSENT AGENDA ACTION: MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER PEASE, SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER GOMEZ, CARRIED 5-0 to approve Consent Calendar Items 4 thru 10. Packet Pg. 131 Item 4 San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of Tuesday, July 17, 2018 Page 5 Public Comment Item #8 – Don Hedrick 4. WAIVE READING IN FULL OF ALL RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES CARRIED 5-0 to waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances as appropriate. 5. SELECTION OF VOTING DELEGATE AND ALTERNATES – LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES ANNUAL CONFERENCE CARRIED 5-0 to appoint Vice Mayor Carlyn Christianson as the voting delegate and Council Members Gomez and Pease as alternate voting delegates to vote on the City’s behalf at the Annual Business Meeting of the League of California Cities on Friday, September 14, 2018. 6. EASEMENTS WITH PG&E FOR ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS CARRIED 5-0 to: 1. Authorize the City Manager to sign two easements for Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) to provide the right to construct, reconstruct, install, inspect, maintain, replace and remove conduits and cables in the parking structures located at 919 Palm Street and 871 Marsh Street for the purpose of providing the necessary infrastructure to install electric vehicle (EV) charging stations at each of these locations. 2. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate with ChargePoint for purchase and installation of the EV charging equipment. 7. ADOPTION OF CLASSIFICATION AND COMPENSATION PLAN AND REGULAR AND SUPPLEMENTAL SALARY SCHEDULES CARRIED 5-0 to 1. Adopt a Resolution No. 10924 (2018 Series) entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, establishing a Classification and Compensation Plan” and 2. Adopt a Resolution No. 10925 (2018 Series) entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, adopting the Regular and Supplemental Salary Schedules” effective July 26, 2018 and the Regular Salary Schedule effective August 9, 2018, as required by California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS). 8. ADOPT A RESOLUTION TO JOIN THE INSTITUTE FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT’S BEACON PROGRAM FOR SUSTAINABILITY SUPPORT CARRIED 5-0 to adopt a Resolution No. 10926 (2018 Series) entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, to approve participation in the Institute for Local Government’s Beacon Program” to support local sustainability initiatives. Packet Pg. 132 Item 4 San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of Tuesday, July 17, 2018 Page 6 9. REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR COMMUNITY OUTREACH AND COMMUNICATIONS SUPPORT SERVICES, SPECIFICATION NO. 91677 CARRIED 5-0 to: 1. Authorize the issuance of a Request for Proposals (RFP) for contract services for community outreach and communications support services; and 2. Authorize the City Manager to award the contract if proposals are within the project budget of $120,000. 10. BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUEST FOR TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE FUNDED ORCUTT/TANK FARM ROUNDABOUT DESIGN (GRIGSBY/RICE) CARRIED 5-0 to approve a Budget Amendment Request for the Orcutt & Tank Farm Roundabout, increasing the budget by $114,000 from the Transportation Impact Fee Fund. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS AND BUSINESS ITEMS 11. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A REVISION TO THE PREVIOUSLY- APPROVED SAN LUIS RANCH PROJECT, INCLUDING 1) THE CERTIFICATION OF THE FINAL SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SEIR); 2) APPROVAL OF AN ADDENDUM TO THE PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT; 3) SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT TO ADDRESS MODIFIED PROJECT PHASING; AND 4) INTRODUCTION OF AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. THE APPROVED SPECIFIC PLAN FOR THE SITE INCLUDES UP TO 580 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, 150,000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL, 100,000 SQAURE FEET OF OFFICE, 200-ROOM HOTEL, 2.8 ACRES OF PARKS, WITH 60 ACRES OF THE SITE TO REMAIN IN AGRICULTURE OR OPEN SPACE. Community Development Director Michael Codron and John Rickenbac h, Contract Planner, Jake Hudson, Transportation Manager provided an in-depth presentation of the staff report and responded to Council questions. Applicant Representative Marshal Ochyliski, and Rachel Kovesdi provided an overview of the project. Public Comments: Jan Marx Don Hedrick Andrew Hackleman Kevin Houber Brad Brechwed Evan Barnard Brett Cross Aaron Steed Graham Updegrove Ian Ferguson E. Jud John Smigelski Audrey Bigelow ---End of Public Comment --- Packet Pg. 133 Item 4 San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of Tuesday, July 17, 2018 Page 7 ACTION: MOTION BY VICE MAYOR CHRISTIANSON, SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER RIVOIRE, CARRIED 5-0 to adopt a Resolution No. 10927 (2018 Series) entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, certifying the Final Supplemental EIR, approving the addendum to the Final EIR for, and approval of, the revised San Luis Ranch Project, including a Specific Plan Amend ment for property located at 1035 Madonna Road (SPEC/ANNX/ER-1502-2015 a.k.a. “San Luis Ranch”)” and introduce an Ordinance No. 1649 (2018 Series) entitled “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, approving the Development Agreement between the City of San Luis Obispo, a Charter City, and Mi San Luis Ranch, LLC” to certify the Final SEIR, approve an Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR), approve the Specific Plan Amendment (“Revised Project”) and appro ve a Development Agreement. RECESS Council recessed at 8:30 p.m. and reconvened at 8:40 p.m., with all Council Members present. 12. PUBLIC HEARING - ANHOLM RESIDENTIAL PARKING PERMIT DISTRICT Parking Services Manager Scott Lee and Parking Services Supervisor Alex Fuchs provided an in-depth presentation of the staff report and responded to Council questions. Public Comments: Elizabeth Nicholson Bill McLeman Steve Barasch Don Hedrick Diana Raj ---End of Public Comment --- ACTION: MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER PEASE, SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER RIVOIRE, CARRIED 5-0 to adopt a Resolution No. 10928 (2018 Series) entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, establishing a Residential Parking Permit District for the Anholm Neighborhood, establishing days and hours of operation of said district, and time of renewal for a parking permit” establishing the Anholm Residential Parking Permit District. 13. SAN LUIS OBISPO MUNICIPAL CODE 6.20.010 -- KEEPING NOISY ANIMALS Police Chief Deanna Cantrell provided an in-depth presentation of the staff report and Eric Anderson, County Animal Services responded to Council questions. Public Comments: Cedric Payne Bruce Faecher ---End of Public Comment --- Packet Pg. 134 Item 4 San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of Tuesday, July 17, 2018 Page 8 By Consensus, the Council agreed not to make changes to the City’s current Ordinance at this time in favor of the alternative approaches being suggested by County Animal Services. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS AND LIAISON REPORTS Mayor Harmon indicated she attended the Showcase of Cities exhibit ribbon cutting at the County Fair in Paso Robles, and also did a hike with the Mayor of the South Hills trail, Council Member Rivoire indicated he has chosen not to run for re-election. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9:45 PM. to next Regular City Council Meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, August 21, 2018 at 4:00 p.m. 4:30 p.m. and 6:00 p.m., in the Council Chamber, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo, California. __________________________ Teresa Purrington City Clerk APPROVED BY COUNCIL: XX/XX/2018 Packet Pg. 135 Item 4 Page intentionally left blank. Packet Pg. 136 Item 4 Meeting Date: 8/21/2018 FROM: Michael Codron, Community Development Director Prepared By: Tyler Corey, Principal Planner SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AND MI SAN LUIS RANCH, LLC RECOMMENDATION Adopt Ordinance No. 1649 (2018 Series) approving the Development Agreement between the City of San Luis Obispo and MI San Luis Ranch, LLC. DISCUSSION On July 17, 2018, the City Council voted 5-0 to introduce Ordinance No. 1649, approving the Development Agreement between the City of San Luis Obispo and MI San Luis Ranch, LLC. The Development Agreement adopts the negotiated agreement between the applicant and the City on important areas related to the orderly development of the San Luis Ranch project. The agreement includes extended vesting of development entitlements and reimbursement for public infrastructure and improvements beyond project requirements, which will enable the development of 580 residential units, 150,000 square feet of commercial, 100,000 squar e feet of office, 200-room hotel, 2.8 acres of parks, with 60 acres of the site to remain in agriculture or open space. Ordinance No. 1649 is now ready for adoption. The Development Agreement will become effective 30 days after its adoption. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW On July 18, 2017, the City Council adopted a resolution certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the San Luis Ranch project and adopting CEQA findings and a statement of overriding considerations and a mitigation and monitoring plan. On July 17, 2018, the City Council adopted a resolution certifying the Final Supplemental EIR to address a modified phasing approach reflected in both the Specific Plan and as needed within the Development Agreement. The Development Agreement for the project implements the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan and related entitlements as evaluated in the Final EIR and Final Supplemental EIR and does not introduce any new potential environmental impacts. Packet Pg. 137 Item 5 FISCAL IMPACT A fiscal impact analysis for the San Luis Ranch project was prepared by Applied Development Economics. This is the same firm that prepared the fiscal and economic analysis for the General Plan update in 2014. In summary, the analysis shows that the project at full buildout will generate about $2.5 million per year in General Fund revenues and $1.5 million per year in municipal service costs (in 2017 dollars). The project is expected to have a net positive fiscal impact on the City, however, a portion of those revenues will be needed for infrast ructure that is expected to benefit the City as a whole. In addition, the establishment of a Community Facilities District would ensure that the City has sufficient resources to provide urban services and maintain public facilities prior to project build-out. ALTERNATIVES 1. Continue consideration of the Development Agreement. The City Council may continue its review of the Development Agreement to a date certain if additional time or information is needed to make a decision. If additional information is needed, direction should be provided to staff so that it can be presented on that date. 2. Direct changes to the Development Agreement. The City Council may direct staff and the applicant to make specific changes to the Development Agreement. Direction on changes should be specific and within the scope of the environmental documents prepared for the project. 3. Deny the Development Agreement. The City Council may deny the Development Agreement, based on findings that the agreement is not consistent with the Gene ral Plan or other policy document. This action is not recommended because the Development Agreement implements the orderly development of the San Luis Ranch project. Attachments: a - DA Ordinance Packet Pg. 138 Item 5 O ______ ORDINANCE NO. _____ (2018 SERIES) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, A CHARTER CITY, AND MI SAN LUIS RANCH, LLC WHEREAS, on April 1, 2014, the City Council authorized the project applicant, now known as MI San Luis Ranch, LLC (“Applicant”) to initiate an application to develop the San Luis Ranch (Dalidio) area; and WHEREAS, the applicant submitted a Specific Plan proposal for a new, primarily residential development with up to 580 dwelling units (“the Project”) on a 131-acre site northeast of U.S. Highway 101 and southeast of Madonna Road, known as the San Luis Ranch area. The Project also includes 150,000 square feet of neighborhood-serving retail, 100,000 square feet of office, a 200-room hotel and a 2.8-acre park, as well as the preservation of agricultural uses and open space. The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan (“Specific Plan”) contains the specific development proposal for the site, including a land use framework, design guidelines and concepts, circulation plan, and infrastructure plan. The Project as proposed is envisioned to implement the policies and development parameters as articulated in the Land Use and Circulation Elements (LUCE) update, other elements of the General Plan, the AASP, and the City’s Community Design Guidelines; and WHEREAS, on April 1, 2014, the City Council authorized the City Manager to initiate discussions with the Applicant for a Development Agreement and to execute a third-party reimbursement Agreement for the Applicant to reimburse the City for the costs of any outside legal or technical consultants the City may require to assist with the ne gotiation or review of the San Luis Ranch application for a Development Agreement; and WHEREAS, the City retained both outside legal and financial consultants to assist with negotiations and analysis of the proposed development agreement at the Applicant’s expense; and WHEREAS, the financial analysis prepared for this project concludes that the City will receive approximately $14,250,000 in extraordinary public benefits from the Development Agreement; and WHEREAS, a Final Environmental Impact Report (“FEIR”) dated May 2017 was prepared analyzing the environmental effects of the proposed development Project; and WHEREAS, on July 18, 2017, the City Council adopted a resolution certifying the Final Environmental Report for the Project and adopting CEQA findings and a statement of overriding considerations and a mitigation monitoring plan; and WHEREAS, on July 18, 2017, the City Council adopted a resolution approving the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan and related entitlements, including a Term Sheet intended to form as the basis for a Development Agreement; and Packet Pg. 139 Item 5 Ordinance No. _____ (2018 Series) Page 2 O ______ WHEREAS, a Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (“FSEIR”) dated June 2018 was prepared analyzing the environmental effects of a revised development Project with modified phasing from previously approved, and was certified on July 17, 2018; and WHEREAS, the proposed Development Agreement provides for the orderly development of the Revised San Luis Ranch Project and outlines the financing mechanisms to fund construction of the infrastructure, and identifies funds for potential reimbursement for certain infrastructure costs, requires sustainable building features and technology that have the potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, establishes an on and offsite agricultural mitigation strategy, and incorporates affordable housing standards that exceed those required under the City’s applicable housing policies, ordinances and programs; and WHEREAS, the Development Agreement for the project implements the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan and related entitlements as evaluated in the certified Final Environment al Impact Report (“Final EIR”), as well as in the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (“Final SEIR”), and does not introduce any new potential environmental impacts; and WHEREAS, the Development Agreement does authorize the project to accelerate buildout of the project above the phasing schedule so long as in doing so is necessary to facilitate construction of beneficial public facilities and infrastructure as determined by findings by the Community Development Director and that the buildout above the cumulative maximum shown for each year in the phasing schedule will not exceed the City’s Growth Management Ordinance; and WHEREAS, an acceleration in the buildout of the project schedule will not introduce any environmental impacts because: 1) the acreage, boundaries, land use pattern, and density of development will remain the same as that analyzed in the Final EIR and Final SEIR; 2) project components such as road improvements that serve to mitigate impacts as well as mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR and Final SEIR will continue to apply to each component of development; 4) the cumulative buildout of the project was analyzed in combination with other projects under development and analyzed with the full buildout of the City as forec asted in the 2014 LUCE General Plan Update and related Final Environmental Impact Report for that project; and 5) all applicable mitigation measures for each component of development would also be accelerated to coincide with any phased portion of development under construction; and WHEREAS, on May 23, 2018 and June 28, 2018, the City's Planning Commission held duly noticed public hearings on the revised Project and the Development Agreement. On June 28, 2018, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council: 1) certify the FSEIR, adopt appropriate updated CEQA findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations, and adopt an updated Mitigation and Monitoring and Reporting Plan; 2) approve a Specific Plan Amendment; 3)approve the Development Agreement; and WHEREAS, on July 17, 2018, the City Council adopted a resolution certifying the FSEIR for the revised Project and adopted CEQA Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations and an updated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan; and Packet Pg. 140 Item 5 Ordinance No. _____ (2018 Series) Page 3 O ______ WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan of the City of San Luis Obispo, as described below, and as further detailed in the accompanying City Council staff report prepared for this project and the exhibits thereto: a)The proposed Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the general plan and any applicable specific plan, in that Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) Policy 8.1.4. SP-2, San Luis Ranch (Dalidio) Specific Plan Area. Specifically, the project: i.Provide land and appropriate financial support for development of a Prado Road connection. Appropriate land to support road infrastructure identified in the Final Project EIR (overpass or interchange) at this location shall be dedicated as part of any proposal and any area in excess of the project’s fair share of this facility shall not be included as part of the project site area used to calculate the required 50% open space. ii.Circulation connections to integrate property with surrounding circulation network for all modes of travel. iii.Connection to Froom Ranch and Calle Joaquin, if proposed, shall not bifurcate on- site or neighboring agricultural lands. Any connection to Calle Joaquin shall be principally a secondary / emergency access by design. iv.Development shall include a transit hub. Developer shall work with transit officials to provide express connections to Downtown area. v.Maintain agricultural views along Highway 101 by maintaining active agricultural uses on the site, and maintain viewshed of Bishop Peak and Cerro San Luis. vi.Maintain significant agricultural and open space resources on site. Land dedicated to Agriculture shall be of size, location and configuration appropriate to maintain a viable, working agricultural operation. vii.Where buffering or transitions to agricultural uses are needed to support viability of the agricultural use, these shall be provided on lands not counted towards the minimum size for the agriculture / open space component. Provide appropriate transition to agricultural uses on-site. viii.Integrate agricultural open space with adjacent SLO City Farm and development on property. ix.Site should include walkable retail and pedestrian and bicycle connections to surrounding commercial and residential areas. x.Commercial and office uses shall have parking placed behind and to side of buildings so as to not be a prominent feature. xi.Neighborhood Commercial uses for proposed residential development shall be provided. xii.Potential flooding issues along Prefumo Creek need to be studied and addressed without impacting off-site uses. xiii.All land uses proposed shall be in keeping with safety parameters described in this General Plan or other applicable regulations relative to the San Luis Obispo Regional Airport. xiv.Historic evaluation of the existing farm house and associated structures shall be included. Packet Pg. 141 Item 5 Ordinance No. _____ (2018 Series) Page 4 O ______ b)Furthermore, the Project is consistent with LUCE’s overall land use policies by providing community benefits for the area, including but not limited to, affordable and workforce housing, and contributions that would support transportation, parks and recreation, multi modal infrastructure, and recycled water infrastructure programs in the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Findings. In addition to the findings set forth in the recitals, which are incorporated herein by this reference, the City Council hereby finds based on evidence described above, as follows: a)The proposed Development Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit “1” is consistent with the General Plan and the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan, both as adopted in July 2017 and as amended; b)The proposed Development Agreement complies with zoning, subdivision and other applicable ordinances and regulations; c)As described in the recitals above, the proposed Development Agreement promotes the general welfare, allows more comprehensive land use planning and provides substantial public benefits and necessary public improvements for the region, making it in the city’s interest to enter into the Development Agreement with the applicant; and d)The proposed San Luis Ranch project and Development Agreement: i.) Will not adversely affect the health, safety or welfare of persons living or working in the surrounding area; and ii.) Will be appropriate at the proposed location and will be compatible with adjacent land uses. SECTION 2. Action. The Development Agreement is hereby approved subject to such minor, confirming and clarifying changes consistent with the terms thereof as may be approved by the City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, prior to the execution thereof. SECTION 3. Upon the effective date of this Ordinance as provided in Section 7 hereof, the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to execute the Development Agreement and, upon full execution, record the Development Agreement in the Official Records of San Luis Obispo County. SECTION 4. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to perform all acts authorized to be performed by the City Manager in the administration of the Development Agreement pursuant to the terms of the Development Agreement. Packet Pg. 142 Item 5 Ordinance No. _____ (2018 Series) Page 5 O ______ SECTION 5. CEQA determination. The City Council hereby finds that the Development Agreement has been environmentally reviewed pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Sections 21000, et seq. (“CEQA”), the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Sections 15000, et seq.) and the City’s local standards. The City prepared an Initial Study and, based on information contained in the initial study, concluded that there was substantial evidence that the Project might have a significant environmental impact on certain resources. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064 and 15081, and based upon the information contained in the Initial Study, the City ordered the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) for the Project to analyze potential impacts on the environment. The City Council certified the EIR on July 18, 2017, pursuant to Resolution No. 10822 (2017 Series) made certain CEQA Findings and determinations and adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation and Monitoring Program. The City Council also certified a Final Supplemental EIR on July 17, 2018, for a revised project, pursuant to Resolution No. _____ (2018 Series), and made certain CEQA Findings and determinations and adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations and updated Mitigation and Monitoring Program. These documents are incorporated herein by this reference, and made a part hereof as if fully set forth herein. The City Council finds that accelerated buildout of the project as authorized by the Development Agreement will not cause any new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects because, among other things: 1) the acreage and boundaries of each phase of development will remain the same as that analyzed in the FEIR and FSEIR; 2) buildout development will remain the same as that analyzed in the FEIR and FSEIR; 3) project components such as road improvements that serve to mitigate impacts as well as mitigation measures identified in the FEIR, as updated in the FSEIR, will continue to apply to all aspects of development; 4) the cumulative buildout of the project was analyzed in combination with other projects under development and analyzed with the full buildout of the City as forecasted in the 2014 LUCE General Plan Update and related Final Environmental Impact Report for the project; and 5) all applicable mitigation measures for each phase of development would also be accelerated to coincide with any portion of development under construction. The documents and other material that constitute the record on which this determination is made are located in the Community Development Department located at 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California. The City Council hereby directs staff to file a Notice of Determination with the San Luis Obispo County Clerk Recorder’s Office. SECTION 6. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of any competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance, and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of the Ordinance would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION 7. A summary of this ordinance, together with the names of Council members voting for and against, shall be published at least five (5) days prior to its final passage, in The Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated in this City. This ordinance shall go into effect at the expiration of thirty (30) days after its final passage. Packet Pg. 143 Item 5 Ordinance No. _____ (2018 Series) Page 6 O ______ INTRODUCED on the 17th day of July, 2018, AND FINALLY ADOPTED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo on the 21st day of August, 2018, on the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ____________________________________ 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. 144 Item 5 071928\9447955 Recording Fees Exempt Pursuant to Government Code § 27383 Recording Requested By And When Recorded Mail to: City of San Luis Obispo c/o City Clerk 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, California 93401 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AND MI SAN LUIS RANCH, LLC RELATING TO THE SAN LUIS RANCH (The “SAN LUIS RANCH DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT”) As Adopted by the San Luis Obispo City Council on __________ by Ordinance No. -________ Packet Pg. 145 Item 5 071928\9447955 i TABLE OF CONTENTS RE CITALS AND DEFINITIONS ............................................................................................ 1 AGREEMENT ............................................................................................................................. 4 ARTICLE 1. GENERALLY .......................................................................................................... 4 Section 1.01. Developer. ........................................................................................................ 4 Section 1.02. Effective ........................................................................................................... 4 ARTICLE 2. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT ....................................................................... 6 Section 2.01. In General......................................................................................................... 6 Section 2.02. Project Approvals. ............................................................................................ 6 Section 2.03. Subsequent Approvals. ..................................................................................... 7 Section 2.04. Subsequent Approval Documents. The Subsequent Approvals ...................... 7 Section 2.05. Processing Subsequent Approvals ................................................................... 7 Section 2.06. Approvals ......................................................................................................... 8 ARTICLE 3. DEVELOPMENT OF PROJECT IN GENERAL ................................................... 8 Section 3.01. Consideration to Developer ............................................................................. 8 Section 3.02. Consideration to City ....................................................................................... 8 Section 3.03. Rights of Developer Generally. ....................................................................... 8 Section 3.04. Rights of City Generally. ................................................................................. 8 Section 3.05. Project Parameters. .......................................................................................... 8 ARTICLE 4. APPLICABLE LAW ............................................................................................... 9 Section 4.01. In General......................................................................................................... 9 Section 4.02. Application of Other City Laws ....................................................................... 9 Section 4.03. Uniform Codes and Standard Specifications ................................................. 11 Section 4.04. State and Federal Law .................................................................................... 11 ARTICLE 5. FINANCIAL COMMITMENTS OF CITY AND DEVELOPER ......................... 12 Section 5.01. In General....................................................................................................... 12 Section 5.02. Establishment of Financing Mechanisms ...................................................... 14 Section 5.03. Imposition of and Increases in Fees, Taxes, Assessments and Other Charges ............................................................................................................................................... 14 Section 5.04. Other Financing Commitments ...................................................................... 18 ARTICLE 6. COMMITMENTS RELATED TO PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS ........................ 23 Section 6.01. Backbone Infrastructure Improvement Plan ................................................... 23 Section 6.02. Construction and Dedication of Project Facilities and Infrastructure ............ 24 Section 6.03. Cooperation as to Project Facilities and Infrastructure .................................. 25 Packet Pg. 146 Item 5 071928\9447955 ii ARTICLE 7. OTHER COMMITMENTS OF CITY AND DEVELOPER ................................. 28 Section 7.01. Mutual Cooperation for Other Governmental Permits .................................. 28 Section 7.02. Timing of Development ................................................................................. 28 Section 7.03. Dedication of Park Lands............................................................................... 29 Section 7.04. Dedication of Open Space/Agricultural Lands .............................................. 29 Section 7.05. Affordable Housing ........................................................................................ 30 Section 7.06. Energy ............................................................................................................ 30 Section 7.07. Water .............................................................................................................. 31 Section 7.08. Wastewater ..................................................................................................... 31 Section 7.09. Recycled Water Facilities ............................................................................... 31 Section 7.10. Storm Drain Facilities .................................................................................... 32 Section 7.11. Floodplain Management ................................................................................ 32 Section 7.12. Traffic and Circulation Improvements ........................................................... 32 Section 7.13. Miscellaneous ................................................................................................ 32 ARTICLE 8. CONSIDERATION OF PERMITS AND APPROVALS ..................................... 33 Section 8.01. Review and Action Generally ........................................................................ 33 Section 8.02. Applicable Law .............................................................................................. 33 Section 8.03. General Plan and San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Amendments ..................... 34 Section 8.04. MMRP Application ........................................................................................ 34 Section 8.05. Life of Approvals ........................................................................................... 34 Section 8.06. Vesting Maps ................................................................................................. 34 ARTICLE 9. AMENDMENTS ................................................................................................... 34 Section 9.01. In General....................................................................................................... 34 Section 9.02. Future Approvals Do Not Require Amendments to Agreement .................... 35 Section 9.03. Operating Memoranda ................................................................................... 35 Section 9.04. Administrative Amendments ......................................................................... 35 ARTICLE 10. ANNUAL REVIEW ............................................................................................ 35 Section 10.01. In General..................................................................................................... 35 Section 10.02. Other Investigations and Evaluations .......................................................... 36 ARTICLE 11. MMRP EVALUATION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT REVIEW .... 36 Section 11.01. MMRP Evaluation ....................................................................................... 36 Section 11.02. MMRP Implementation ............................................................................... 36 Section 11.03. Enforcement ................................................................................................. 36 Section 11.04. Development Agreement Review ................................................................ 36 Packet Pg. 147 Item 5 071928\9447955 iii Section 11.05. Director’s Findings of Compliance .............................................................. 36 Section 11.06. Finding of Development Agreement Noncompliance ................................. 36 ARTICLE 12. DEFAULT, REMEDIES, TERMINATION OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT .............................................................................................................................. 37 Section 12.01. Notice and Cure ........................................................................................... 37 Section 12.02. Actions during Cure Period .......................................................................... 37 Section 12.03. Remedies of Non-Defaulting Party .............................................................. 37 Section 12.04. Administrative Remedies ............................................................................. 38 Section 12.05. Judicial Remedies ........................................................................................ 38 Section 12.06. Termination Due to Default ......................................................................... 38 Section 12.07. Judicial Reference ........................................................................................ 39 ARTICLE 13. ASSIGNMENT, TRANSFER AND NOTICE .................................................... 40 Section 13.01. Assignment of Interests, Rights and Obligations ......................................... 40 Section 13.02. Transfers In General ..................................................................................... 40 Section 13.03. Non-Assuming Transferees .......................................................................... 41 ARTICLE 14. MORTGAGEE PROTECTION ........................................................................... 42 Section 14.01. In General..................................................................................................... 42 Section 14.02. Impairment of Mortgage or Deed of Trust ................................................... 42 Section 14.03. Notice of Default to Mortgagee ................................................................... 42 Section 14.04. Right of Mortgagee to Cure ......................................................................... 42 Section 14.05. Mortgagee Liability for Past Defaults or Obligations .................................. 42 Section 14.06. Technical Amendments to this Article 14 ................................................... 43 ARTICLE 15. GENERAL PROVISIONS .................................................................................. 43 Section 15.01. Incorporation of Recitals.............................................................................. 43 Section 15.02. Project is a Private Undertaking .................................................................. 43 Section 15.03. Cooperation in the Event of Legal Challenge .............................................. 43 Section 15.04. Defense and Indemnity ................................................................................ 44 Section 15.05. Governing Law; Attorneys’ Fees ................................................................. 44 Section 15.06. Force Majeure .............................................................................................. 44 Section 15.07. Waiver .......................................................................................................... 45 Section 15.08. Notices ......................................................................................................... 45 Section 15.09. No Joint Venture or Partnership ................................................................... 46 Section 15.10. Severability .................................................................................................. 46 Section 15.11. Estoppel Certificate ...................................................................................... 47 Section 15.12. Further Assurances ....................................................................................... 47 Packet Pg. 148 Item 5 071928\9447955 iv Section 15.13. Construction ................................................................................................. 47 Section 15.14. Other Miscellaneous Terms ......................................................................... 47 Section 15.15. Counterpart Execution ................................................................................. 48 Section 15.16. Time ............................................................................................................. 48 Section 15.17. Good Faith/Fair Dealing .............................................................................. 48 Section 15.18. List of Exhibits ............................................................................................. 48 Packet Pg. 149 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 1 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AND MI SAN LUIS RANCH, LLC RELATING TO THE SAN LUIS RANCH THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT is entered into this ___ day of ________, 2018 (“Execution Date”), by and between the CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, a municipal corporation and charter city (“City”), and MI SAN LUIS RANCH, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (“Developer”), hereinafter referred to in this Development Agreement individually as a “Party” and collectively as the “Parties.” RECITALS AND DEFINITIONS A. The “Project,” as referenced in this Development Agreement, consists of the development of housing, neighborhood commercial, commercial retail, park, and agricultural and open space uses located within the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan area on the southwestern boundary of the City, as further described in Section 2.01 below. The “Property,” as referenced in this Development Agreement, consists of approximately 131 acres of land designated for development under the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan (“SLR SP”). The Property is depicted on Exhibit A and legally described on Exhibit B, both attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. B. Developer represents and warrants to City that as of the Execution Date, Developer owns or otherwise has legal interest in the Property. C. The Property has an entitled development project that was the subject of the Dalidio Ranch Initiative Measure (“Measure J”) that was submitted to, and approved by, the voters of San Luis Obispo County on November 7, 2006. Among other uses, Measure J authorizes Developer to proceed with development on the Property of 530,000 square feet of commercial/retail, 198,000 square feet of business/office, and 60 residential units. D. On December 9, 2014, City adopted an update to the Land Use and Circulation Elements (“LUCE”) of the City’s General Plan that included the area subject to the SLR SP (the “SLR SP Area”). The City’s General Plan designates the SLR SP Area for a variety of land uses to benefit the City and its residents including residential, neighborhood commercial, open space, and agricultural, and the City has found that this Development Agreement is consistent with the applicable provisions of the General Plan and the SLR SP. E. City and Developer have engaged in a cooperative and successful relationship to establish a specific plan for the future of the SLR SP Area. These efforts culminated in the City’s adoption and approval of the following entitlements: (1) The Final Environmental Impact Report and associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (including all mitigation measures therein) for the Project certified and adopted, respectively, by Resolution No. 10822, on July 18, 2017, and the Supplemental Final Environmental Impact Report for the Project certified Packet Pg. 150 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 2 and adopted by Resolution No. _________, on _____, 2018, as further identified in Recital F, below. (2) An amendment to the General Plan (Resolution No. 10822), adopted on July 18, 2017, including amendments to the LUCE (“LUCE Update”) adopted by Resolution No. 10586 (2014 Series) on December 9, 2014. (3) The SLR SP adopted by Resolution No. 10822, on July 18, 2017, as amended by Resolution No. ____, adopted on _____, 2018. (4) The City’s Zoning Ordinance as amended by Ordinance No. ___, adopted _____, 201_. (5) The Development Plan approved by Resolution No. 10822, on July 18, 2017. (6) The Vesting Tentative Map #3096 approved on July 18, 2017. (7) The Annexation Agreement approved by Resolution No. ___, adopted on _____, 2018. (8) Ordinance No. ____ dated _____, 2018 adopting this Development Agreement (the “Adopting Ordinance”). (9) The conditions of approval of each of the foregoing. (10) The resolution of Application to the San Luis Obispo County Local Area Formation Commission (“LAFCO”) initiating the annexation of the Property into the City. These approvals are collectively referred to herein as the Project Approvals (as further defined in Section 2.02). F. Before approving the Project Approvals, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo: (i) reviewed and considered the significant environmental impacts of the Project and several alternatives to the Project, as described in that certain Final Environmental Impact Report (the “Project EIR”) and (ii) adopted Resolution No. 10822 on July 18, 2017 to certify the Project EIR, making Findings Concerning Mitigation Measures and Alternatives (the “Findings”), adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and adopting a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (the “MMRP”), all in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, California Public Resources Code section 21000 et seq. (“CEQA”). Subsequently, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo reviewed and considered the significant impacts of certain changes to the Project in that certain Supplemental Final Environmental Impact Report (the “SEIR”) and adopted Resolution No. ______ on _______, 2018 to certify the SEIR in accordance with CEQA. G. A principal purpose of this Development Agreement is to further the cooperative relationship between City and Developer for the benefit of the City and the residents of the City during the implementation of the SLR SP. The City and Developer join as Parties to this Packet Pg. 151 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 3 Development Agreement to ensure the requirements of the Development Agreement statute (California Government Code section 65864 et. seq.) and the City’s Development Agreement ordinance, chapter 17.94 of its Zoning Ordinance, are satisfied. As more fully set forth below, this Development Agreement contains covenants and/or servitudes that run with the title to the Property. H. In conjunction with the negotiation of this Development Agreement, the Parties have developed a Financial Plan, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit C, and which the City’s economic consultant used as a basis to develop a Financial Feasibility Memorandum, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit D. I. The Parties intend this Development Agreement to achieve the following purposes: (1) that the City shall be kept and/or made “whole” by Developer as to the Property and by other property owners, in regard to their respective properties, with respect to all aspects, including without limitation, fiscal impacts, of the planning, development, maintenance and operation of the SLR SP Area including the costs to the City of providing public services and facilities to the Project, the payment of City’s costs associated with the implementation of this Development Agreement, the Project Approvals, all other planning and environmental efforts described and envisioned by this Development Agreement, the Subsequent Approvals (as defined in Section 2.03 below), and the mitigation of the Project’s environmental impacts; (2) that once this Development Agreement has taken legal effect, Developer shall have a full and vested right, throughout the term of this Development Agreement, to the Rights and Obligations as to the Property; (3) to reduce the uncertainty in planning and implementation of the Project and to secure the orderly development thereof, ensure a desirable and functional community environment, provide effective and efficient development of public facilities, infrastructure and services appropriate for the development of the Project, ensure maximum effective utilization of resources within the City, and provide other significant benefits to the City and its residents; (4) to secure Project features and development conditions above and beyond those that may be levied by the City under existing zoning and development regulations and the Project EIR; (5) to provide Developer with a reliable and definitive form of reimbursement or fee credits for offsite and onsite infrastructure beyond its fair share; (6) to be consistent with and to implement the City’s General Plan, the SLR SP and, more particularly, to achieve the community’s development objectives for the Property as set forth in Policy 8.1.4 of the Land Use Element; Packet Pg. 152 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 4 (7)to enable the City to potentially capture sales taxes that are being leaked to other communities because of the jobs-housing imbalance; and (8) to provide 580 residences that would help capture a substantial amount of commuters currently heading to jobs in the City. The Rights and Obligations of the Parties to this Development Agreement shall be construed and interpreted so as to give full effect to each and all of these purposes. J. As used in this Development Agreement, “Rights” shall mean all of the vested and other rights and benefits of this Development Agreement, and the term “Obligations” shall mean all of the duties, obligations, responsibilities and other burdens of this Development Agreement. References to lot numbers in this Development Agreement refer to lots as numbered in Vesting Tentative Tract Map. No. 3096 dated July 18, 2017. K. As used in this Development Agreement, the terms, phrases and words shall have the meanings and be interpreted as set forth in this Development Agreement (the meaning given the term in the singular shall include the term in the plural and vice versa) unless the context clearly indicates the Parties intended another meaning. To the extent any capitalized terms contained in this Development Agreement are not defined within it, then such terms shall have the meaning ascribed to them in Applicable Law or, if no meaning is given a term in such sources, the most common understanding of the term, in light of the terms and conditions of this Development Agreement, shall control. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises, covenants and provisions set forth in this Development Agreement, the Parties hereby agree as follows: ARTICLE 1. GENERALLY Section 1.01. Developer. As used herein, “Developer” means MI San Luis Ranch, LLC, as that business entity existed on the Effective Date and any permitted successor, assign, or transferee of MI San Luis Ranch, LLC. Section 1.02. Effective, Vesting and Annexation Dates. This Development Agreement is entered into by and between the City and Developer and takes legal effect on the date that it is signed by the later of them to do so (the “Effective Date”), although the rights and obligations of this Agreement with respect to the development of the Site are not effective until the later of (i) ______, 2018, the date that Ordinance No.__-___ approving this Development Agreement takes legal effect (the “Vesting Date”), or (ii) the date upon which the Property is annexed into the City (the “Annexation Date”). The terms and conditions of this Development Agreement shall be for the benefit of or a burden upon the Property, shall run with title to the Property, and shall be binding upon Developer and its successors, assigns and transferees during their respective ownerships of any portion of the Property from and after the later of those two dates. Packet Pg. 153 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 5 Section 1.03. Term. Section 1.03.1. In General. (a) Although this Agreement shall legally bind the Parties upon the Effective Date, the term of this Development Agreement shall commence upon the Annexation Date defined in section 1.02 above and shall continue until, and terminate upon, the earliest of the following dates (“Termination Date”): (1) 12:01 a.m. on the 20th anniversary of the Annexation Date (the “Initial Termination Date”), unless Developer requests, and the City approves, an extension of the Term for an additional 10-year period, in which case the Termination Date shall be 12:01 on the 30th anniversary of the Annexation Date. Such request for an extension shall be submitted, in writing, to the City Manager at least 60 days, but no earlier than 180 days, before the Initial Termination Date. The City may deny the request for an extension if Developer is not in substantial compliance with all of its Obligations under this Development Agreement. Any disputes regarding or relating to any extensions under this Section shall be resolved in accordance with Article 12 hereof; (2) 12:01 a.m. on the 15th anniversary of the Annexation Date, should Developer fail to complete the Backbone Infrastructure for the Project (except for any fair share payments related to the Prado Overpass and related ramps, including the payment of the Prado Road Interchange Mitigation Fee (defined and governed by Sections 5.04.5 and 5.04.6, below)) in accordance with the SLR SP, SEIR and Section 6.01, below, prior to such date. (3) This Development Agreement may be terminated with respect to property included in a recorded final subdivision map creating residential lots on any portion of the Property, provided that no further on-site or off-site infrastructure is required and no conditions or mitigation measures remain to be satisfied before building permits may issue for the development of those lots. Concurrently with or following recordation of such a subdivision map as to any portion of the Property, Developer may request in writing, and the Community Development Director shall be authorized to execute and shall not unreasonably withhold, a certificate of termination of this Agreement in recordable form solely as to the property included in such a final recorded map; provided that no such certificate need issue if Obligations to the City under this Development Agreement remain unfulfilled which are not made conditions of approval of the subdivision map. Upon the Community Development Director’s recordation of such a certificate, this Development Agreement shall terminate as to the land covered by such final map. If Developer does not request or the Community Development Director does not issue such a certificate, this Development Agreement shall continue to apply to any lot depicted on such a subdivision map until this Development Agreement otherwise expires or terminates according to its terms. Notwithstanding the foregoing, this Development Agreement shall automatically terminate with Packet Pg. 154 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 6 respect to any lot intended for residential development upon final sign-off of the building permit for a residential structure on such lot. (4) Notwithstanding the foregoing, this Development Agreement shall terminate in accordance with Government Code Section 65865(b) if the annexation is not completed within five years of the Vesting Date defined by section 1.02 above, unless such date is extended by mutual agreement of the Parties. (b) This Development Agreement shall be of no further force, effect or operation upon the Termination Date. Subject to the provisions of Section 8.05 below, in no event shall the expiration or termination of this Development Agreement result in expiration or termination of any Approval without further action of City. Section 1.04. Execution and Recordation of Agreement. Section 1.04.1. Execution and Recordation. Developer shall execute this Development Agreement in conformance with Section 15.17 below within five business days following the adoption of the Adopting Ordinance referenced in Recital E above. Provided Developer has so executed this Agreement, City shall execute this Agreement, in conformance with Section 15.15 of this Agreement, within five business days of Developer’s execution of this Development Agreement. Section 1.04.2. Recordation. City shall deliver this Agreement to the County Recorder for recordation within 10 days following its execution. ARTICLE 2. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT Section 2.01. In General. As used herein, “Project” means the development of the Property as described in the Project Approvals (defined in Section 2.02 below), including all on-site and off-site “Project Facilities and Infrastructure” (defined in Section 5.01.1 below). Section 2.02. Project Approvals. As used herein, “Project Approvals” include, but are not limited to: (i) those provisions of City’s General Plan that relate to or affect the Property, as the General Plan existed on the Vesting Date and as it may be amended from time to time consistently with this Development Agreement (the “General Plan”); (ii) those provisions of the SLR SP (including the Design Guidelines) that relate to or affect the Property, as the SLR SP existed on the Vesting Date and as it may be amended from time to time consistently with this Development Agreement; (iii) the zoning of the Property, as it existed on the Vesting Date and as it may be amended from time to time consistently with this Development Agreement thereafter (the “Zoning”); and (iv) the other entitlements listed in Recital E above; Packet Pg. 155 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 7 provided, however, that “Project Approvals” shall not mean or include amendments to the General Plan, SLR SP or Zoning of the Property that conflict with the Project Approvals as they existed on the Vesting Date, unless Developer consents in writing to such conflicting amendments. Section 2.03. Subsequent Approvals. As used herein, “Subsequent Approvals” are those permits and approvals (other than the Project Approvals and amendments thereto) necessary or desirable for the development of the Project including, without limitation, those identified in Section 2.04 below. Section 2.04. Subsequent Approval Documents. The Subsequent Approvals defined in Section 2.03 above include, but are not limited to: (i) subdivision maps (including phased final maps) and related or similar approvals issued under the California Subdivision Map Act; (ii) development permits (including Site Plan Reviews and Conditional Use Permits as described in the SLR SP); (iii) architectural review and design review approvals (as described in the SLR SP); (iv) any other discretionary or ministerial permits or approvals of City necessary or appropriate for build-out of the Project and Property; and (v) any amendments to any of the foregoing necessary or appropriate for the development of the Project. Section 2.05. Processing Subsequent Approvals. Section 2.05.01. Processing of Subsequent Approvals. City will accept, make completeness determinations, and process, promptly and diligently to completion, all applications for Subsequent Approvals for the Project in accordance with the terms of this Development Agreement and Applicable Law. Section 2.05.02. Scope of Review of Subsequent Approvals. By approving the Project Approvals, City has made a final policy decision that the Project is in the best interests of the public health, safety and general welfare. Accordingly, City shall not use its authority in considering any application for a discretionary Subsequent Approval to change the policy decisions reflected by the Project Approvals or otherwise to prevent or delay development of the Project as set forth in the Project Approvals. Instead, the Subsequent Approvals shall be deemed to be tools to implement those final policy decisions. The scope of the review of applications for Subsequent Approvals shall be limited to a review of substantial conformity with the Applicable Law and Rights vested hereunder (the “Vested Elements”) (except as otherwise provided by Sections 4.02 through 4.04), and compliance with CEQA and other Applicable Law. Where such conformity/compliance exists, City shall not deny an application for a Subsequent Approval for the Project. Packet Pg. 156 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 8 Section 2.05.03. Conditions of Subsequent Approvals. City shall have the right to impose reasonable conditions upon Subsequent Approvals including, without limitation, normal and customary dedications for rights of way or easements for public access, utilities, water, sewers, and drainage necessary for the Project; provided, however, such conditions and dedications shall not be inconsistent with the Applicable Law or Project Approvals, nor inconsistent with the development of the Project as contemplated by this Agreement except to the extent required by Applicable Law. Developer may protest any conditions, dedications or fees while continuing to develop the Property. Such a protest by Developer shall not delay or stop the issuance of building permits or certificates of occupancy for any aspect of the Project not related to the condition protested. No conditions imposed on Subsequent Approvals shall require dedications or reservations for, or construction or funding of, public infrastructure or public improvements beyond those already included in the SLR SP and the MMRP except to the extent required by CEQA. Section 2.06. Approvals. Project Approvals, amendments to Project Approvals, and Subsequent Approvals are sometimes referred to in this Development Agreement collectively as the “Approvals” and each individually as an “Approval.” ARTICLE 3. DEVELOPMENT OF PROJECT IN GENERAL Section 3.01. Consideration to Developer. The Parties acknowledge and agree that City’s agreement to perform and abide by the Rights and Obligations of City set forth herein is material consideration for Developer’s agreement to perform and abide by the Rights and Obligations of Developer set forth herein. Section 3.02. Consideration to City. The Parties acknowledge and agree that Developer’s agreement to perform and abide by the Rights and Obligations of Developer set forth herein is material consideration for City’s agreement to perform and abide by the Rights and Obligations of City set forth herein. Section 3.03. Rights of Developer Generally. Developer shall have a fully vested right to develop the Project and to use the Property consistently with this Development Agreement and Applicable Law. Section 3.04. Rights of City Generally. City shall have a right to regulate development of the Project and use of the Property consistently with this Development Agreement and Applicable Law. Section 3.05. Project Parameters. The permitted uses of the Property, the density and intensity of use of the Property, the maximum height and size of buildings included in the Project, and provisions for the reservation and dedication of land shall be as set forth herein and in the Project Approvals. Packet Pg. 157 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 9 ARTICLE 4. APPLICABLE LAW Section 4.01. In General. Section 4.01.1. Applicable Law Defined. Except as the Parties may otherwise agree in writing, the rules, regulations and official policies applicable to the Project and the Property during the Term of this Development Agreement shall be those set forth in this Development Agreement and, except as otherwise set forth herein, the rules, regulations and official policies of City (including the plans, municipal codes, ordinances, resolutions and other local laws, regulations, capital facilities fees and policies of City) in force and effect on the Vesting Date as well as state and federal law applicable to the Project (collectively, “Applicable Law”). Section 4.01.2. Approvals as Applicable Law. Applicable Law shall include, without limitation, Approvals as they may be issued from time to time consistently with this Agreement. Section 4.02. Application of Other City Laws. Section 4.02.1. No Conflicting City Laws. (a) City may apply to the Project and the Property any rule, regulation or official policy of City (including any plan, municipal code, ordinance, resolution or other local law, regulation, capital facility fee or policy of City) (each a “City Law”) that does not conflict with Applicable Law or this Agreement. City shall not, however, without the written consent of Developer apply to the Project or the Property (whether by initiative, referendum, imposition of mitigation measures under CEQA or otherwise) any City Law that is in conflict with Applicable Law or this Agreement. (b) Any changes by the City to the General Plan or any Specific Plan, Zoning Ordinance, or other rules, regulations, ordinances, or policies of the City (whether adopted by ordinance, initiative, referendum, resolution, policy, order, or other means) (collectively “Future Rules”) that are not in conflict with the Vested Elements shall apply to the Project. For purposes of this Section, “in conflict” means Future Rules would (i) alter the Vested Elements, or (ii) significantly frustrate the intent or purpose of the Vested Elements, or (iii) materially increase (e.g., by an amount more than 10%) the cost of performance of, or preclude compliance with, any provision of the Vested Elements, or (iv) significantly delay development of the Project, or (v) limit or restrict the availability of public utilities, services, infrastructure or facilities (for example, without limitation, water rights, water connection or sewage capacity rights, sewer connections, etc.) to the Project, or (vi) impose limits or controls in the rate, timing, phasing or sequencing of development of the Project beyond those existing on the Vesting Date, or (vii) increase or adopt new impact fees levied against the Project, except as provided in this Development Agreement, or (viii) limit or control the location of buildings, structures, grading, or other improvements of the Project Packet Pg. 158 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 10 inconsistently with or more restrictive than the Project Approvals; or (ix) apply to the Project any Future Rule otherwise allowed by this Agreement that is not uniformly applicable to all substantially similar development projects and project sites in the City; (x) require the issuance of additional permits or approvals by the City other than those required by Applicable Law; or (xi) establish, enact, increase, or impose against the Project or Property any fees, assessments, or other monetary obligations other than those specifically permitted by this Agreement; (xii) impose against the Project any condition, dedication or other exaction not specifically authorized by Applicable Law; or (xiii) limit the processing or procuring of applications and approvals of Subsequent Approvals. To the extent that Future Rules conflict with the Vested Elements, the Future Rules shall not apply to the Project, except as provided in this Section. To the maximum extent permitted by law, City shall prevent any Future Rules from invalidating or prevailing over all or any part of this Agreement, and City shall cooperate with Developer and shall undertake such actions as may be necessary to ensure this Agreement remains in full force and effect. City shall not support, adopt or enact any Future Rule, or take any other action which would violate the express provisions or spirit and intent of this Agreement or the Project Approvals. Developer reserves the right to challenge in court any Future Rule that would conflict with the Vested Elements or this Agreement or reduce the development rights provided by this Agreement. A Future Rule that conflicts with the Vested Elements shall nonetheless apply to the Property if, and only if: (i) consented to in writing by Developer; (ii) it is determined by City and evidenced through findings adopted by the City Council that the change or provision is reasonably required to prevent a condition dangerous to the public health or safety; (iii) it is required by changes in State or Federal law as set forth in Section 4.04 below; (iv) it consists of revisions to, or new Uniform Codes permitted by Section 4.03; or (v) it is otherwise permitted by this Development Agreement. Prior to the Vesting Date, the Parties shall have prepared two sets of the Project Approvals and Applicable Law (exclusive of state and federal law), one for City and one for Developer. If it becomes necessary in the future to refer to any of the Project Approvals or Applicable Law, the contents of these sets are presumed for all purposes of this Development Agreement, absent clear clerical error or similar mistake, to constitute the Project Approvals and Applicable Law. (c) No City-imposed moratorium or other limitation (whether relating to the rate, timing, or sequencing of the development or construction of all or any part of the Project, whether imposed by ordinance, initiative, resolution, policy, order, or otherwise, and whether enacted by the City Council, an agency of City, the electorate, or otherwise) affecting parcel or subdivision maps (whether tentative, vesting tentative, or final), building permits, occupancy certificates or other entitlements to use or service (including, without limitation, water and sewer) approved, issued, or granted within City, or portions of City, following the Packet Pg. 159 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 11 approval of the SLR SP, shall apply to the Project to the extent such moratorium or other limitation is in conflict with this Development Agreement; provided, however, the provisions of this subsection shall not affect City’s compliance with moratoria or other limitations mandated by other governmental agencies or court- imposed moratoria or other limitations, including without limitation City action to impose a moratorium on water or sewer service connections required by Applicable Law. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, in the event (i) the City declares an “Extreme” or “Critical” water shortage, as described in the City’s 2015 Urban Water Management Plan and as may be later codified in the City’s Municipal Code, and (ii) the Citywide average potable water use falls below 95-gpcd, then any new water connections within the Project may be required to provide a net positive water offset prior to issuance of a building permit. (d) If City attempts to apply to the Project a City Law which Developer believes to conflict with Applicable Law or this Agreement, Developer shall give City written notice describing the legal and factual basis for Developer’s position. The Parties shall meet and confer within 30 days of City’s receipt of that notice to seek to resolve any disagreement. If no mutually acceptable solution can be reached, either Party may take such action as may be permitted under Article 12 below. Section 4.03. Uniform Codes and Standard Specifications. (a)Nothing herein shall prevent City from applying to the Project standards contained in uniform building, construction, fire or other uniform codes, as the same may be adopted or amended from time to time by City, provided: (1)That the provisions of any such uniform code shall apply to the Project only to the extent that such code is in effect on a City-wide basis; and (2)With respect to those portions of any such uniform code that have been adopted by City without amendment, that the provisions of any such uniform code shall be interpreted and applied consistently with the generally prevailing interpretation and application of such code in California. (b)Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, public improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the public works standard specifications in effect at the time that such improvements are constructed. Section 4.04. State and Federal Law. (a)Nothing herein shall prevent City from applying to the Project or the Property any change in City Law required by: (a) state or federal law; or (b) any governmental agency that, due to the operation of state law (and not the act of City through a memorandum of understanding, joint exercise of powers or other agreement entered into after the Vesting Date), has binding legal authority over City. (b)If the application of such changes prevents or precludes performance of one or more provisions of this Agreement, City and Developer shall take any and all such actions as may be necessary or appropriate to ensure the provisions of this Development Agreement are implemented to the maximum extent practicable. Packet Pg. 160 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 12 Section 4.05. Expansion of Development Rights. If any Future Rule or State or Federal law expands, extends, enlarges or broadens Developer’s rights to develop the Project, then, (a) if such law is mandatory, the provisions of this Development Agreement shall be modified as may be necessary to comply or conform with such new law, and (b) if such law is permissive, the provisions of this Development Agreement shall be modified, upon the mutual agreement of Developer and City, as may be necessary to comply or conform with such new law. Immediately after enactment of any such new law, upon Developer’s request, the Parties shall meet and confer in good faith for a period not exceeding 60 days (unless such period is extended by mutual written consent of the Parties) to prepare such modification. Developer shall have the right to challenge City’s refusal to apply any new law mandating expansion of Developer’s rights under this Development Agreement pursuant to Article 12 of this Development Agreement, and if such challenge is successful, this Development Agreement shall be modified to comply with, or conform to, the new law. ARTICLE 5. FINANCIAL COMMITMENTS OF CITY AND DEVELOPER Section 5.01. In General. This Article 5 establishes a framework for the imposition and allocation to the extent permitted by law of fees, assessments and other revenues to be generated and/or paid by the Project and/or the Property. The provisions of this Article 5 are intended to prevent the Project from resulting in negative fiscal impacts on City; to facilitate the construction, operation and maintenance of infrastructure and facilities to avoid or limit the physical impacts of development; and to assist in the development of the Project so as to provide long-term fiscal and other benefits to City, including increased employment opportunities, an increased City tax base, and an enhanced quality of life for the City’s residents. In consideration of, and in reliance upon City agreeing to this Development Agreement, Developer will provide the community benefits (“Community Benefits”) described in Exhibit C attached hereto, which are over and above those dedications, conditions and exactions required by Applicable Law other than this Agreement. Section 5.01.1. Basic Principles. (a) This Article 5 is intended to implement the following conceptual framework: that the City shall not incur costs for construction of new public facilities and infrastructure needed to serve the Project or the Property or for the provision of municipal services to the Project or the Property including the operation and maintenance of facilities and infrastructure to serve the Project (collectively, the “Project Facilities and Infrastructure”), except to the extent necessary to address existing infrastructure deficits. Any costs of any Project Facilities and Infrastructure beyond the Project’s fair share of such Project Facilities and Infrastructure shall be borne by other property owners and/or developers served by such Project Facilities and Infrastructure or the City if needed to address an existing operational deficit to be addressed by such Project Facilities and Infrastructure. Nothing herein shall either require or prevent the City from contributing to the cost to develop such Project Facilities and Infrastructure from any lawfully available funds, in the City’s sole discretion. Packet Pg. 161 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 13 (b)The cost of providing Project Facilities and Infrastructure shall be consistent with the following principles, except as otherwise specifically permitted by this Development Agreement: (i) there shall be a reasonable relationship between any municipal cost required to be borne by the Project and the type of development within the Project to which such cost is attributable; (ii) there shall be a reasonable relationship between the need to incur any such municipal cost and the type of development within the Project to which such cost is attributable; (iii) no municipal cost required to be borne by the Project shall exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service or facility to which such municipal cost relates; and (iv) with respect to any fee required to finance Project Facilities and Infrastructure, there shall be a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of the Project Facilities and Infrastructure funded by such fee. (c) Whenever this Development Agreement requires a “reasonable relationship” between the Project and any requirement imposed thereon, there shall be required an essential nexus between the Project and such requirement and rough proportionality in the allocation of a municipal cost or fee both internally to various portions of the Property and as between the Project and other projects within the City. (d) As used herein, the term “Project Facilities and Infrastructure” shall include public facilities and infrastructure only to the extent they serve the Project or the Property, and shall not include public facilities or infrastructure to the extent such facilities or infrastructure serve projects or areas other than the Project or the Property, unless the public facilities and infrastructure serving the Project or Property are required to be oversized to serve other projects or areas in accordance with the provisions of Section 6.02.2 below. Section 5.01.2. Financing of Infrastructure; Operation and Maintenance. City shall exhaust all reasonable efforts and diligently pursue and utilize all mechanisms which may be appropriate to finance Project Facilities and Infrastructure and Project-related municipal services or the operation and maintenance of the Project Facilities and Infrastructure, such as Mello-Roos Districts, Enhanced Infrastructure Financing Districts, Landscaping and Lighting Districts, and other Maintenance Assessment Districts, in accordance with the following principles: (a) The level of municipal services provided to the Project, including the level of operation and maintenance of Project Facilities and Infrastructure, shall be equal or superior to the level of service provided elsewhere in the City. Packet Pg. 162 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 14 (b)Any costs associated with such mechanism shall be borne by the financing mechanism or the Project. (c) The City may require as a condition of approval of a future tentative subdivision or parcel map a financing mechanism or mechanisms to finance the operation and maintenance of Project Facilities and Infrastructure to serve the development of the land depicted on that map. Section 5.02. Establishment of Financing Mechanisms. Section 5.02.1. Procedures for Establishment. The establishment of any mechanism to finance the construction, operation or maintenance of Project Facilities and Infrastructure (each a “Financing Mechanism”) and the issuance of any debt in connection therewith (“Project Debt”) shall be initiated upon Developer’s written request to the City’s Finance Director. Such request shall include the purposes for which the Financing Mechanism is to be established and/or the Project Debt issued, and the general terms and conditions upon which the establishment of the Financing Mechanism and/or the issuance of the Public Debt will be based. City’s consideration of Developer’s request shall be consistent with the principles set forth in Section 5.01.2 above. If Developer requests the City to form a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District or an Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District to finance Project Facilities and Infrastructure, City shall use its best efforts to cause such district to be formed and bonds to be issued and, in the case of a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District, special taxes to be levied to the extent permitted by Applicable Law. Section 5.02.2. Nature of City Participation. City’s participation in the formation of any Financing Mechanism, its operation thereafter, and in the issuance of any Project Debt, shall include all of the usual and customary municipal functions associated with such tasks, including, without limitation, the formation and administration of special districts; the issuance of Project Debt; the monitoring and collection of fees, taxes, assessments and charges such as utility charges; the creation and administration of enterprise funds; the enforcement of debt obligations and other functions or duties authorized or mandated by Applicable Law. Section 5.03. Imposition of and Increases in Fees, Taxes, Assessments and Other Charges. Section 5.03.1. Taxes and Assessments. (a) During the Term of this Development Agreement, Developer shall be bound to and shall not protest, challenge or cause to be protested or challenged, any City tax in effect on the Vesting Date. (b) City may apply to the Project or the Property any assessment or fee not in effect on the Vesting Date only if such assessment or fee is: (1) An assessment or fee levied in connection with the establishment or implementation of a Financing Mechanism in accordance with Sections 5.01 and/or 5.02 above; or Packet Pg. 163 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 15 (2)An assessment or fee to which Developer agrees. (c) No assessment shall be imposed on the Project or the Property other than through a Financing Mechanism as set forth above unless lawfully applied on a City-wide basis. (d) No new debt shall be issued that affects the Project or the Property without Developer’s approval, unless the approvals otherwise conform with the requirements of Articles XIII A, C and D of the California Constitution and any requisite voter approval is achieved, in which case the City may issue debt even if Developer votes against the matter. (e) Following the establishment of the initial Financing Mechanism for the Project, nothing herein obligates Developer to approve any particular future funding source (e.g., a CFD) or to assist the City, including financial assistance, in establishing a new financial mechanism that requires a vote of the public without Developer’s prior written consent, in Developer’s sole discretion. Section 5.03.2. Other Fees and Charges; Credits and Reimbursements. (a) City shall impose against or apply to the Project or the Property only those financial obligations (other than taxes and assessments) described in this Section 5.03.2. Except as otherwise specifically stated below, any financial obligation imposed against or applied to the Project under this Section 5.03.2 shall be consistent with the provisions of controlling California law, including California Constitution article XIII A and Government Code sections 66000 to 66025. (b) Developer has obtained vested rights pursuant to the VTTM as to the rate of all City-wide and Project-specific development impact fees (“DIF” or “DIFs”) in effect as of the date that the VTTM was deemed complete. Developer shall pay all such DIF fees in effect as of the date that the VTTM was deemed complete (the “Vested DIF”). On April 17, 2018, the City adopted a comprehensive update of the City’s DIF program (the “2018 DIF Update”), which is not applicable to the Project in light of the Project’s existing vested rights under the VTTM. Notwithstanding the application of such vested rights, Developer has agreed to voluntarily pay additional DIFs as set forth in this Section 5.03.2(b). All DIFs shall be calculated at the time of issuance of a building permit for the applicable structure and be due and payable at the time of the issuance of the certificate of occupancy of the applicable structure or, if no certificate of occupancy is issued, upon the final sign-off of the building permit. (1) DIFs for Residential Units. (i) DIFs related to Transportation, Water and Waste Water 1 shall remain at the amount of the Vested DIF until the earlier of: (1) the first 1 City and Developer acknowledges that the 2018 DIF Update currently uses the term “Capacity and Connection Charges” to refer to DIFs related to Waste Water. Packet Pg. 164 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 16 anniversary of the date of recordation of the first Final Map, subject to the Parties working in good faith to diligently process the approval and recordation of the Final Map; or (2) two years after Annexation (the “Reset Date”). Thereafter, the amount of the initial Vested DIF shall be increased by ten percent (10%) each of the following years on the anniversary of the Reset Date until the earlier of the following to occur: (i) the amount of such adjusted Vested DIFs equal the amount established under the 2018 DIF Update, as adjusted annually in accordance with the 2018 DIF Update; or (ii) ten (10) years following the Effective Date (the “Residential DIF Vesting Termination Date”). Thereafter, DIFs shall be adjusted in accordance with the then applicable City law. (ii) DIFs related to Fire, Police, and General Government fees, which do not exist under the Vested DIF but are proposed under the 2018 DIF Update, will be applied, if adopted, at the rate established in the 2018 DIF Update and adjusted annually in accordance with the then applicable City law. (iii) Developer shall pay all DIFs related to Parklands as provided in Section 7.03. (2) DIFs for Non-Residential Development (including without limitation commercial, retail, hotel, and office). (i) DIFs related to Transportation, Water and Waste Water shall remain at the amount of the Vested DIF until the Reset Date. Thereafter, the amount of the Vested DIFs shall be increased by ten percent (10%) each of the following years on the anniversary of the Reset Date until the earlier of the following to occur: (i) the amount of such adjusted Vested DIFs equal the amount established under the 2018 DIF Update, as adjusted annually in accordance with the 2018 DIF Update; or (ii) ten (10) years following the Effective Date (the “Non-Residential DIF Vesting Termination Date”). Thereafter, DIFs shall be adjusted in accordance with the then applicable City law. (ii) DIFs related to Fire, Police, and General Government fees, which do not currently exist but are proposed under the 2018 DIF Update, shall not apply for one (1) year following the Reset Date. Thereafter, such DIFs shall be applicable to any non-residential structure within the Project area at the rate established in the 2018 DIF Update and adjusted annually in accordance with the then applicable City law. (iii) The Developer shall pay any DIFs related to Parklands at the rate established in the 2018 DIF Update and adjusted annually in accordance with the then applicable City law. Packet Pg. 165 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 17 (3)Minimum Excess DIF Payment and True-Up. On the tenth anniversary of the Effective Date (the “True Up Date”), the City shall calculate the amount of DIFs related to Transportation, Water and Waste Water related to all permits issued prior to the True Up Date as of the date of when such DIFs for each permit was calculated: (1) the amount of such DIFs that would have been paid under the Vested DIFs (the “Vested DIFs Amount”); (2) the amount of such DIFs actually paid (the “Actual DIFs Amount”); and (3) the amount of such DIFs that would have been paid under the 2018 DIF Update (the “2018 DIFs Amount”). The difference between the Actual DIFs Amount and the Vested DIFs Amount shall be referred to as the “Excess DIF Payments”. Developer has agreed that in no event shall the total amount of Excess DIF Payments be less than the lower of (i) Two Million Seven Hundred Thousand Dollars ($2,700,000) or (ii) the 2018 DIFs Amount (the “Minimum Excess DIF Amount”). In the event that the Excess DIF Payments paid prior to the True Up Date is less than the Minimum Excess DIF Amount, the City shall deliver an invoice to Developer in the amount of such underpayment together with supporting documentation establishing such amount, and Developer shall remit payment of such amount to City within thirty (30) days. Any disputes related to such calculations shall be resolved in accordance with Section 12.07. (c) Costs of service fees imposed by City, such as planning, engineering, building permit, and fire plan check fees shall be in accordance with the fees in effect as of the date the fee is due. (d) The Developer shall pay all then-current processing fees for any subsequent planning applications and permits as adopted by the City Council. (e) City acknowledges that Developer may install infrastructure improvements beyond its “fair share” obligation. In such event, the City agrees to provide credits against any fees charged by the City for such improvements beyond the Project’s “fair share” obligation and to provide reimbursements, funded by Development Impact Fees paid by other developers, including traffic impact fees, or funded from other sources, but excluding sewer and water connection fees. Nothing in this Development Agreement shall preclude City and Developer from entering into infrastructure-item-specific reimbursement agreements for the portion of the cost of any dedications, public facilities and/or infrastructure the City may require the Developer to construct as conditions of the Project Approvals to the extent that they exceed the Project’s “fair share.” Packet Pg. 166 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 18 (f)Developer shall pay City reasonable staff and consultant time and other reasonable costs (including reasonable consultant costs) associated with: (1) the MMRP Evaluation, and the Development Agreement Review, (2) Developer’s fair share of the establishment of any Financing Mechanism (to the extent such costs are not recovered from the Financing Mechanism), including any necessary election costs, and (3) All other administrative tasks associated with City’s adoption and implementation of this Development Agreement and the SLR SP. The parties acknowledge that Developer’s fair share of the establishment of any Financing Mechanism may be 100% if the Financing Mechanism is limited to land owned or controlled by the Developer and used to fund public facilities and infrastructure to the extent necessary to serve development of that land. (g) City acknowledges that Developer has paid all required fees of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (“CDFW”) related to posting of the Notice of Determination under CEQA for the Project EIR as well as the fee required by the County Clerk/Recorder. To the extent that any additional fees are due to the County Clerk/Recorder in the future related to Subsequent Approvals, the City may require proof of payment of such fees before issuing building permits or accepting the filing a Final Subdivision Map. (h) During the term of this Development Agreement, fees and charges other than those specifically described in subsections (a) through (g) above may be imposed against or apply to the Project or the Property only as City and Developer agree in writing. Section 5.04. Other Financing Commitments. Section 5.04.1. Arrangements with Other Governmental Agencies. City and Developer acknowledge and agree that City may from time to time enter into joint exercise of power agreements, memoranda of understanding, or other agreements with other governmental agencies consistent with and to further the purposes of this Development Agreement. Section 5.04.2. Other Funding Sources. (a) City and Developer agree to pursue actively outside sources of funding for the construction, operation and maintenance of Project Facilities and Infrastructure including, in particular, facilities and infrastructure which serve the region. City shall not unreasonably object to any request from Developer to apply for county, state or federal funds that may be used to support the development of Project Facilities and Infrastructure. For purposes of this Section 5.04.2, it is reasonable for City to object to a request from Developer to apply for county, state or federal funds for the Project if there are established funding priorities from administering Packet Pg. 167 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 19 agencies (i.e. San Luis Obispo Council of Governments) which are in conflict with the Project Facilities and Infrastructure. (b) Any obligation of Developer under this Development Agreement to fund or otherwise bear the costs of the construction of improvements, the provision of services or any other item, whether or not the sole obligation of Developer, may be satisfied through the use of funds provided by, from or through any third party (including other non-City, governmental) sources. Section 5.04.3. Reimbursement. (a) City shall reimburse the costs associated with Developer’s funding or construction of that portion of any oversized or accelerated improvement or facility that is attributable to a project or area other than the Project or Property. Costs eligible for reimbursement shall include hard costs, such as the reasonable direct costs of construction and materials; and soft costs, such as bond, architecture, engineering, and professional fees, the reasonableness of which shall be determined by the City, in its discretion. Such reimbursement shall be based on a fair share allocation of costs determined by calculating the pro rata share of the capacity in such oversized or accelerated improvements that is attributable to other projects or properties based on the percentages set forth in the Financing Plan in Exhibit C. On- and off-site, over-sized improvements are depicted in Exhibit C; provided, however, that the City and Developer acknowledge that the amounts specified in Exhibit C for each improvement are estimates only and that total reimbursable costs shall be based on Developer’s actual costs as set forth in this Section 5.04.3. Reimbursement shall be provided timely, in accordance with Applicable Law, following City’s collection of funds from the following sources: (1) Development Impact Fees paid by the Project for the improvements specified with respect to the SLR SP impact fees or the City-wide transportation impact fees, as applicable; (2) Development Impact Fees paid to the City for other development in the SLR SP Area that are not committed to repayment obligations under other Reimbursement Agreements; (3) Development Impact Fees paid to City from developers who contribute, or have contributed, to the impact associated with the improvements installed by Developer; (4) Capital Facilities taxes or assessments in a Community Facilities District; and (5) Property tax increment revenue in an Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District. (b) Backbone infrastructure that is larger than the minimum size or standard as identified in the Standard Specifications and Engineering Design Standards may Packet Pg. 168 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 20 be considered to be oversized and shall be subject to review and approval by the City prior to being included in a separate reimbursement agreement. The Developer may be reimbursed by other private development(s) for that developments’ Fair Share of the cost to construct sewer and water infrastructure per San Luis Obispo Municipal Code sections 16.20.100 and 16.20.110. The Developer will provide a study identifying the benefit area for each such reimbursement agreement, conforming to San Luis Obispo Municipal Code section 16.20.110, for review and approval of the City Utilities Department, and may provide for reimbursement for segments of infrastructure which meet a utility’s minimum size standard if the study shows those minimally sized facilities to benefit identified additional developments. (c) To the extent permitted by law, City shall impose as a condition of approval on any project that benefits from the oversized or accelerated improvements or facilities described in this Section 5.04.3(a) such project’s proportionate fair share of the cost of the improvements eligible for reimbursement as set forth in Exhibit C. (d) Under no circumstances shall the City be obligated to fund reimbursement from its General Fund or other discretionary resources or from funds which may not be lawfully used for that purpose or to advance funds to Developer as reimbursement before those funds are collected from others. (e) Failure by the City to collect funds, or error by the City in calculating the amount to collect, from the sources identified in subsection 5.04.3(a) above shall not subject the City to any liability, obligation, or debt to Developer. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the City shall reimburse Developer pursuant to the terms of this Development Agreement with respect to all such funds actually collected by the City. Failure by the City to reimburse Developer after the City collects such funds shall entitle Developer to exercise its remedies under Article 12. For any improvement subject to reimbursement under this section, Developer shall provide City with evidence of the actual hard and soft costs of each of the improvements in the form of receipted bills, canceled checks, and contracts. Approval of reimbursement may occur in phases as projects are accepted by City. Regardless of Developer’s claimed costs incurred in constructing the reimbursable improvements, City has the authority, through its Director or designee, in the exercise of his or her reasonable discretion, to determine the amount subject to possible reimbursement for each improvement. (f) In the event any owner or developer pays all or a portion of the fees or assessments identified in subsection 5.04.3(a)(1)–(5) above under protest, the City need not make reimbursements under this Development Agreement until the limitation period for suit for a refund of such funds paid under protest has passed, and no court action (“Action”) has been instituted. If an Action is instituted seeking refund of funds paid under protest, or to prevent the City from collecting such funds, or challenging any provision of this Development Agreement, the City shall not pay over such funds to Developer until the Action has been Packet Pg. 169 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 21 concluded and the authority of the City to collect such funds and reimburse the Developer has been sustained. The City shall promptly notify Developer in writing of any Action. The City shall reasonably support Developer’s efforts to participate as a party to an Action, to defend an Action or settle an Action. Furthermore, the City may tender defense of an Action to Developer. If, within 15 days of the City’s mailing a notice in compliance with Section 15.08 below requesting that Developer defend the Action, should Developer thereafter fail to undertake the defense of the Action at Developer’s sole cost and expense, the City may stipulate to return of the funds collected under protest, to cease collecting such funds, or enter into any other settlement of the Action acceptable to the City, and Developer shall lose any right to reimbursement under this Development Agreement of the amount contested in the Action. Developer shall further reimburse the City for its costs and attorneys’ fees incurred in defense of the Action, including reasonable payment for legal services performed by the City Attorney or City’s outside counsel, and for any liability the City incurred in the Action. In addition, if the City fails to impose a requirement upon development projects to pay their respective prorated share of the improvements specified in Exhibit “C” or fails to collect such funds, Developer may exercise all of its legal rights to attempt to collect such funds from the owners or developers of the benefitted properties, which legal rights shall not be interpreted to include an action against the City. If Developer attempts to collect such funds from such owners or developers, the City shall assign to Developer all of its rights to collect such funds under this Development Agreement. (g) The City reserves the right to offset any funds it collects from the sources identified in this Section 5.04.3 against any unpaid fees, debts or obligations of Developer to the City. The City shall provide Developer with notice, in accordance with Section 15.08 and Article 12, of its intent to offset any collected funds against unpaid fees, debts or obligations described in the notice, and provide Developer with a reasonable opportunity to pay such fees, debts, or obligations. (h) Developer’s right to reimbursement under this Section 5.04.3 shall survive termination of this Development Agreement until the earlier of (i) Developer having been fully reimbursed or (ii) 25 years following the Effective Date. Such obligations shall survive the termination of this Development Agreement. Section 5.04.4. Other Shortfalls of City. Developer understands and acknowledges that in the event that the residential portions of the Project are developed in advance of the commercial portions of the Project, the costs to City of serving the residential portions of the Project may exceed the fees, charges and revenues generated by or as a result of the residential portions of the Project. Accordingly, in order to mitigate potential shortfalls to the City’s General Fund resulting from such event, the Parties agree to implement an early residential development fee (the “Early Residential Development Fee”) to cover the costs of such municipal services. Each year in conjunction with the annual review of this Development Agreement, Developer shall pay to the City an Early Residential Development Fee in the amount of two hundred sixty-two dollars ($262.00) per residential unit for which the City has previously Packet Pg. 170 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 22 approved the final sign-off of the building permit for such residential unit (other than for a Model Home, as contemplated by Section 7.13.07, below). Upon the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy for any commercial use in the Project, the obligation to pay the Early Residential Development Fee shall terminate and shall thereafter no longer be collected by or paid to the City in conjunction with the annual review of this Development Agreement. Prior to the first anniversary of the Effective Date, Developer shall post a bond in the amount of Three Hundred Thousand Dollars ($300,000.00) in favor of the City to secure Developer’s performance of its obligations under this Section 5.04.4, which such bond shall be maintained for one (1) year after issuance of the first certificate of occupancy for any commercial use in the Project. Adjustments to Early Residential Development Fee - Commencing upon the fifth anniversary of the Reset Date, and upon the day that immediately follows the passage of each sixty month period thereafter (hereinafter collectively the “Adjustment Date(s)”), the Early Residential Development Fee payable hereunder shall be adjusted in direct relation to the same ratio of the percentage change, if any, in the Consumers Price Index for all Urban Consumers (CPI-U) All Items, 1978 Revised, (1982-84=100) Los Angeles, as issued by the U. S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, for the month immediately preceding the Adjustment Date (the “adjustment date index”), over said index for the month of the date of the annexation of the Property (the “beginning index”). The parties acknowledge that the indexes herein referenced are not always published in a fashion which allows for adjustment exactly upon each annual adjustment date. If the described adjustment index shall no longer be published, another index generally recognized as authoritative shall be substituted by agreement of the parties. If they are unable to agree within thirty (30) days after demand by either party, a substituted index shall, upon application by either party, be selected by the Chief Officer of the Los Angeles Regional Office of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, its successor, or another entity providing similar services as mutually agreed by the parties. If the index is changed so that the adjustment date index differs from the beginning index, the index shall be converted in accordance with the conversion factor published by the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Section 5.04.5. Subsidy for Third Party City Costs Related to Prado Overpass. In the event that (i) the first Final Map for the Project has been approved for recordation by the City Council prior to September 1, 2018, and (ii) as of July 1, 2019, the Developer has not paid the Mitigation Measure fair share fee (the “Prado Road Interchange Mitigation Fee”) related to the construction of the Prado Overpass and related facilities (the “Prado Road Interchange”), then Developer shall pre-pay up to One Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000) of the Prado Road Interchange Mitigation Fee to reimburse City for documented third-party costs related to the planning, entitlement, and/or construction of the Prado Road Interchange. Section 5.04.6. Timing of Payment for Balance of Prado Road Interchange Mitigation Fee. The balance of the Prado Road Interchange Mitigation Fee shall be paid prior to the issuance of occupancy permits when any combination of land uses with permitted occupancy within the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Area generate a cumulative total of 233 “PM Peak Hour Trips” or more based upon Table 25 of the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Multimodal Transportation Impact Study, as summarized in the table below (the “Initial Trigger Date”). Packet Pg. 171 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 23 For example, if occupancy permits have been issued for 200 Single Family Residential Units and 77 Multi-Family Residential Units the total PM peak hour trip generation would be at 232.97 and no further occupancy permits for any land uses in the SLR SP Area would be issued until the balance of the Prado Road Interchange Mitigation Fee is paid. As an alternative to paying the Prado Road Mitigation Fee upon the Initial Trigger Date, as specified above, prior to the PS&E Trigger Date, defined below, Developer may deposit an irrevocable letter of credit (“Letter of Credit”) with the City, in a form subject to the reasonable approval of the City Attorney, for the then current estimate of the balance of the Prado Road Interchange Mitigation Fee. Upon sixty percent (60%) design submittal of CalTrans’s Plans, Specifications and Estimate for the Prado Road Interchange (the “PS&E Trigger Date”), the remaining balance of the Prado Road Interchange Mitigation Fee shall be fully due and payable. At any time prior to the PS&E Trigger Date, the City may request, and Developer shall pay, the amount reasonably estimated by the City as necessary to cover any anticipated third-party pre-construction costs for the Prado Road Interchange. In the event Developer fails to pay such costs within thirty (30) days of City’s written demand, City may call the Letter of Credit due and payable. Following Developer’s payment upon City’s demand, Developer may deposit a revised Letter of Credit with the City, with a principal balance reduced in the amount of such payment. ARTICLE 6. COMMITMENTS RELATED TO PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS Section 6.01. Backbone Infrastructure Improvement Plan. The SLR SP Backbone Infrastructure (“Backbone Infrastructure”) is planned to be designed and constructed in accordance with the SLR SP, EIR and SEIR. The Parties acknowledge that further analysis may result in a more cost-effective approach to the provision of the planned infrastructure to adequately serve development of the SLR SP Area, and that Figures [__] of the SLR SP may be modified in accordance with Section 9.03 without the need for amendment of this Development Agreement. Section 6.01.1. Specific Plan Improvements. The improvements described in the SLR SP and Resolution No. 10822 (2017 Series) certifying the EIR, constitute the SLR SP “Improvement Plan.” Packet Pg. 172 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 24 Section 6.01.2. The Improvement Plan may be amended by agreement of the Parties to take advantage of new technologies, to respond to changes in the underlying land use assumptions upon which the plan is based, or for such other reasons as the Parties may agree, consistent with the Project EIR, SEIR or a subsequent environmental review, if required. Section 6.02. Construction and Dedication of Project Facilities and Infrastructure. Section 6.02.1. Construction and Funding by Developer. The City may, in any manner consistent with the terms and provisions of this Development Agreement, require Developer to construct or to fund the construction of any Project Facilities and Infrastructure when needed to satisfy the Backbone Infrastructure Improvements Plan, the EIR, and SEIR. Section 6.02.2. Oversizing of Project Facilities and Infrastructure. (a) In addition to requiring Developer to construct or to fund the construction of Project Facilities and Infrastructure, City may require any Project Facilities and Infrastructure constructed or funded by Developer under Section 6.02.1 above to be oversized to serve projects or areas other than the Project or the Property, provided that: (1) City shall cooperate with Developer and shall exhaust all reasonable efforts and diligently pursue all necessary or appropriate actions related to the establishment of a Financing Mechanism to provide such additional funding; (2) City shall grant a fee credit, enter into private reimbursement agreements, or reimburse the costs associated with Developer’s funding or construction of that portion of any such oversized improvements that is attributable to projects or areas other than the Project or the Property, pursuant to subsection 5.03.2(e) above. (b) If the incremental construction of facilities required by the SLR SP would involve significant inefficiencies for a component of the Project that the City reasonably finds unacceptable, it may require Developer to construct or provide advance funding for the construction of oversized improvements required by the SLR SP. For example, if the Project generates a need for an 18-inch sanitary sewer line, but other projects reasonably may be expected to use that sewer line and thereby increase the required capacity of such line to 24 inches, City may require Developer to construct or fund the construction of a 24-inch sewer line (but shall provide reimbursement as described in subsection 5.04.2(b) above and as otherwise required under the Subdivision Map Act). Section 6.02.3. Dedications. (a) To the extent rights-of-way or other interests in real property owned by Developer within the Property are needed for the construction, operation or maintenance of Project Facilities and Infrastructure, Developer shall dedicate or otherwise convey such rights-of-way or other interests in real property to City by the earlier of Packet Pg. 173 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 25 (i) when such rights are actually needed for Project Facilities and Infrastructure or (ii) before approval of a final subdivision map for the Project that includes such rights-of-way or other interests in real property. Such rights-of-way or interests shall be dedicated or otherwise conveyed in the widths set forth in the SLR SP or as depicted on the tentative map. (b) Any public improvements constructed by Developer and conveyed to City, and any rights-of-way or other real property interests conveyed to City, shall be dedicated or otherwise conveyed: (i) free and clear of any liens unacceptable to the City and (ii) except as otherwise agreed to by City, in a condition free of any toxic materials; provided, however, that, City shall be responsible for the condition of any real property acquired by eminent domain. Nothing herein shall affect or prevent City’s right to pursue claims against third parties under applicable law. Section 6.03. Cooperation as to Project Facilities and Infrastructure. Section 6.03.1. In General. City shall cooperate with Developer and take all actions necessary or appropriate to facilitate the development of Project Facilities and Infrastructure. Such cooperation shall include, without limitation: (i) the diligent, timely and lawful exercise by City of its power of eminent domain to acquire any rights-of-way or other real property interests City and Developer agree are needed for Project Facilities and Infrastructure (provided that the costs of any such acquisition shall be borne by the Project); and (ii) City’s diligent efforts to work with other landowners and governmental and quasi-governmental agencies to allow timely approval and construction of such Project Facilities and Infrastructure. (a) Developer shall exhaust all reasonable efforts and diligently pursue acquisition of all necessary easements and/or rights of way not currently owned or controlled by City or Developer which are required to construct the Off-Site Improvements. For purposes of this Section 6.03.1, the term “reasonable efforts” shall mean that the Developer has made a commercially reasonable written offer to purchase the property interest at fair market value, in accordance with an appraisal conducted by an MAI appraiser. (b) If after exercising reasonable efforts Developer is unable to acquire the necessary easements and/or rights of way, City, upon written request of Developer, shall, in City’s sole discretion: (1) require Developer to construct functionally equivalent alternative improvements to those previously approved, provided that such alternative improvements are equally or more effective in addressing the impact; (2) pursue acquisition of the real property interests by means of eminent domain; or (3) if the City declines to exercise powers of eminent domain, abandon or defer the Obligation in accordance with Section 66462.5 of the Subdivision Map Act. City and Developer acknowledge that eminent domain is a discretionary process and that City cannot commit to its use unless and until all appropriate notifications, hearings and proceedings have been undertaken. If City chooses to pursue acquisition of the real property interests by means of eminent domain, City shall take all reasonable steps necessary towards that endeavor, including Packet Pg. 174 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 26 undertaking appraisals, noticing property owners, noticing and holding required public hearings and meetings, and following any other procedures required for pre-judgment possession and Developer shall pay all costs reasonably incurred by City related to, arising from, or associated with such acquisition or condemnation proceedings, including but not limited to, attorneys’ fees, expert witness fees, and jury awards of any kind. In addition, Developer shall indemnify, defend and hold City harmless from and against any and all claims, liabilities or causes of action of any kind associated with City’s acquisition of such real property interests, excluding therefrom any claims, liabilities or causes of action arising from City’s gross negligence or willful misconduct. (c) City shall not unreasonably delay the recordation of the Final Map or the issuance of any grading and building permits for private improvements on the Property during the pendency of any activities under this Section except as necessary to protect public health and safety. In addition, and not by way of limitation, City shall not delay the processing, approval, or recordation of any Final Map for the Project due to Developer’s inability to obtain any off-site land acquisitions or easements; provided, however, that (i) City shall not require any engineering other than conceptual plans until the areas of such acquisitions or easements are obtained or the improvements are waived or alternative improvements are identified, as described above, and (ii) Developer and City shall include such land acquisitions or easements within the scope of any subdivision improvement agreement and related bonds. In order for the Developer to satisfy financing requirements and to complete approval and recordation of the Final Map while Developer is attempting to acquire any remaining off-site acquisitions, City shall allow feasible interim alternatives that do not require offsite acquisitions in order for the Project to function, including but not limited to a controlled intersection in lieu of a roundabout at the intersection of Dalidio Drive and Froom Ranch Way, in accordance with Applicable Law, including CEQA, and subject to approval by the City Manager, which shall not be unreasonably withheld, delayed or conditioned. (d) Upon acquisition of the necessary interest in land, or upon obtaining right of entry, either by agreement or court order, Developer shall commence and complete the public improvements. This requirement shall be included, and, if necessary, detailed, in any subdivision improvement agreement entered between the Developer and the City pursuant to Government Code section 66462. (e) If and to the extent this Section 6.03.1 demands more of Developer than does Section 66462.5 of the Subdivision Map Act, this Section shall apply in addition to the Developer’s obligations under that statute. (f) City acknowledges that the execution and recordation of this Development Agreement satisfies the requirements of Condition of Approval 36 related to recordation of an agreement between City and Developer. Packet Pg. 175 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 27 (g) City acknowledges that Condition of Approval 70, which states, “Easements and encroachment permits from Caltrans shall be secured to cross the highway, and shall include the installation of a new sewer casing per requirements of the encroachment permit” may be satisfied following recordation of the Final Map, but prior to occupancy of any structure in the Project. (h) City acknowledges that Condition of Approval 95, which states, “The project plan and reports shall show compliance with the City’s Floodplain Management Regulations and FEMA requirements. This project is located within an unstudied A zone and adjacent to an AE zone. The required conditional Letter of Map Revisions Based on Fill (CLOMR-F) shall be processed and approved by FEMA prior to commencement of construction or placement of fill within the Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA). The final LOMR-F shall be submitted to FEMA, along with the required Community Acknowledgement form, within 6 months of the completion of the grading. The LOMR-F shall be approved by FEMA prior to acceptance of the final building pad and development grades by the City of San Luis Obispo and prior to building permit issuance” may be satisfied by posting a bond for grading restoration costs, in an amount subject to the approval of the City Engineer and in a form subject to the approval of the City Attorney, which will allow limited improvements within the current boundaries of the floodplain area to be constructed, as follows: (i) site grading and backbone infrastructure improvements may be undertaken and completed that are consistent with a submitted CLOMR-F covering the area of the proposed grading; (ii) following approval of such CLOMR-F by FEMA, the grading shall be confirmed as consistent with the approved CLOMR-F and, if necessary, any remedial work shall be undertaken; (iii) following certification that grading is consistent with an approved CLOMR-F, City and Developer shall work in good faith with one another towards allowing Developer to proceed with additional improvements within the current boundaries of the floodplain area taking into consideration: (i) the status of the LOMR-F and any feedback received from FEMA; and (ii) compliance with the City’s Floodplain Management Regulations. The Parties acknowledge that there may be more than one CLOMR-F or LOMR-F for the Project Site. Section 6.03.2. Temporary Access Licenses. City agrees to grant to Developer a temporary non-exclusive access license in a form and in a location subject to the approval of the City Attorney, the City’s Natural Resources Director, and Developer, across the property commonly known as the “City Farm Property” (APNs: 053-152-006, 053-152-007, and 053-152-008) to allow reasonable access for Project construction and for agricultural operations on the Property. Said license shall be subject to the consent and approval of any current lessee on said property, whose leases shall also be subordinated to the related easement to be granted by City to Developer. In return, Developer shall grant the City a temporary non-exclusive access license in a mutually agreeable location to serve the agricultural operations of the City Farm Property. Prior to Developer’s use of the temporary access license for construction purposes, Developer shall, at its sole cost and expense, design and install an all-weather road along the entirety of the access roadway area. During the term of this temporary non-exclusive access license, Developer shall, at its sole cost and expense, maintain the roadway and the all-weather Packet Pg. 176 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 28 surface in good and passable condition. This temporary non-exclusive access license shall automatically terminate and be replaced by the below referenced Permanent Access Easements upon completion of Project construction. Section 6.03.3. Permanent Access Easements. City agrees to grant to Developer a permanent non-exclusive access easement in a form and in a location subject to the approval of the City Attorney, the City’s Natural Resources Director, and Developer across the City Farm Property to allow access for agricultural operations on the Property. Said easement shall be subject to the consent and approval of any current lessee on the property, whose leases shall be subordinated to the easements to be granted by City to Developer. In return, Developer shall grant City a permanent non-exclusive access easement in a mutually agreeable location to serve the agricultural operations of the City Farm Property. City and Developer shall have mutual responsibility for maintenance of the access easements and the all-weather road which shall be allocated as follows: 25% City and 75% Developer. Section 6.03.04. Cooperation Related to Off-Site Improvements. To the extent that Developer is required to construct any Off-Site Improvements that require work on land outside of the control of Developer, including without limitation related to compliance with Conditions of Approval 9, 12, and 12.a, Developer may apply for approval from the City Public Works Director to extend the timeline for completion of such improvements upon posting of appropriate security, such as bonding, for the completion of such improvements, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. ARTICLE 7. OTHER COMMITMENTS OF CITY AND DEVELOPER Section 7.01. Mutual Cooperation for Other Governmental Permits. City and Developer, as appropriate, shall each be responsible to apply to the respective governmental or quasi- governmental agencies for necessary permits and approvals for development and use of the Property (e.g., agencies having jurisdiction over water supply; wastewater treatment, reuse and disposal; access to the Property; wetlands-related and other biological issues). City and Developer shall each take any and all actions as may be necessary or appropriate to process successfully such permits and approvals, provided such permits and approvals are consistent with the SLR SP and agreed by the City and Developer to be reasonably necessary or desirable for the construction, maintenance or operation of the Project. Section 7.02. Timing of Development. Section 7.02.1. Timing Requirements. (a) Developer shall be obligated to comply with the terms and conditions of the Project Approvals, the SLR SP, and this Development Agreement when specified in each. The Parties acknowledge that the rate at which the Project will develop depends upon numerous factors and market conditions that are not entirely within Developer’s or the City’s control. The Parties wish to avoid the result of Pardee Construction Co. v. City of Camarillo, 37 Cal.3d 465 (1984), where the failure of the parties there to expressly provide for the timing of development resulted in the court’s determination that a later-adopted initiative restricting the timing of Packet Pg. 177 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 29 development prevailed over the parties’ agreement. Accordingly, the Parties acknowledge that Developer shall have the right to develop the Project at such time Developer deems appropriate in the exercise of its subjective business judgment except as provided in subsections (b) and (c), below. (b) Developer may proceed with the development of any portion of the Project consistent with the Project Approvals, or make any financial commitment associated with any such development when, in Developer’s sole and absolute discretion, Developer determines it is in Developer’s best financial or other interest to do so. The foregoing sentence shall not, however, limit any obligation of Developer under this Development Agreement with respect to any development activities that Developer chooses to undertake hereunder, nor shall anything herein be interpreted to relieve Developer from compliance with any condition of approval, environmental mitigation compliance measure or other applicable regulatory requirement under Applicable Law. (c) In accordance with Section 17.88.020.B of the City’s Municipal Code, the City has found that the SLR SP and this Development Agreement are consistent with the policies and intent of the City’s Growth Management Ordinance. Section 7.7.1 of the SLR SP relating to timing of improvements is hereby incorporated by reference. Section 7.03. Dedication of Park Lands. Developer shall dedicate land to satisfy its obligations under the Quimby Act, the General Plan Park Element, and Applicable Law. At a minimum, Developer shall dedicate 2.8 acres of land within the Property for use as public park land. Developer shall construct all park and recreation improvements as required by the conditions of approval subject to the City’s Parks and Recreation Commission’s review and approval. Ongoing maintenance and operation of the park facilities shall be funded by the Project residents pursuant to one or more of the Funding Mechanisms described in Section 5.02 above and/or assessments under homeowner CC&Rs, and shall not be payable from the City’s General Fund or other community-wide resources. Should the land the Developer offers for dedication be insufficient to meet Developer’s obligation under Applicable Law, Developer shall dedicate sufficient additional land off-site or pay an lieu fee in the maximum amount of Three Million One Hundred Seventy Five Thousand Twenty Six Dollars ($3,175,026) to meet its requirement after applicable credits for additional park lands provided. Any in lieu fee assessments shall be based upon the amount of the fees in place as of the date of the approval of this Development Agreement. City shall prioritize any in lieu fees paid by Developer for improvements at Laguna Lake Park, subject to City’s review of its funding constraints and obligations. Section 7.04. Dedication of Open Space/Agricultural Lands. To compensate for the loss of onsite agricultural lands and to meet the open space objectives of the General Plan, Developer shall dedicate, in a form subject to the approval of the City Attorney and the City’s Natural Resources Director, a conservation easement or series of conservation easements in accordance with the SLR SP, the Project Approvals, and subsections (a) through (h) below. (a) Land designated in the Specific Plan as “Open Space” shall be subject to an “Open Space Easement”. Packet Pg. 178 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 30 (b) Land designated as “Agriculture Heritage Facilities and Learning Center” shall be subject to a “Historic Preservation and Agricultural Easement”. (c) Land designated as Agriculture shall be restricted by an “Agricultural Easement”. (d) Developer shall mitigate a portion of the agricultural/open space obligations for the Project by obtaining a perpetual Agricultural Easement off-site: (i) on approximately 30 acres within a larger parcel of land identified as Assessor Parcel No. 067-181-010; or (ii) on comparable land subject to the approval of the City’s Natural Resources Manager. (e) Developer shall offer for dedication the above-referenced easements in accordance with the requirements of the Project Approvals. (f) Developer may use land subject to the above-referenced easements in accordance with the restrictions of those easements, the Project Approvals, and Applicable Law. (g) Prior to issuance of any grading permits for the Property, Developer shall provide that for every one (1) acre of on-site Important Farmland (Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, and Unique Farmland) that is permanently converted to non-agricultural use as a result of the Project’s development, that one (1) acre of land of comparable agricultural productivity shall be preserved through a perpetual Agriculture Easement. (h) Developer shall comply with the Operational Guidelines, terms and conditions for the Agricultural Land as set forth in Exhibit E, which are incorporated herein by this reference. Section 7.05. Affordable Housing. In furtherance of the City’s inclusionary housing goals, Developer shall provide affordable housing within the Project as set forth in Exhibit F. The Developer shall integrate affordable units into neighborhoods as required for the on-site residential development. Developer may provide the affordable units required for the commercial portion of the development on-site, off-site or through the payment of in-lieu fees. Section 7.06. Energy. (a) Developer shall provide for accelerated compliance with the City’s Energy Conservation Goals and its Climate Action Plan by implementing energy conservation measures significantly above City standards and norms by providing for solar PV energy generation for 100 percent of onsite electrical demand at build-out. The Project shall also include energy efficiency standards in excess of the Building Code in effect in the City on the Vesting Date and implement the feasible strategies set forth in Section 5.4.2 of the SLR SP. (b) Developer shall provide sustainability features including: (i) housing that meets the 2019 net zero building and energy codes or, if the 2019 building and energy codes are not yet adopted upon building permit application, equivalent energy Packet Pg. 179 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 31 features shall be provided to the approval of the Community Development Director, (ii) implementing any future City-wide policy regarding zero carbon emissions, (iii) solar electric panels, (iv) integrated power outlets for electric vehicles and electric bicycles, (v) building design that maximizes grey water usage, and (vi) work-at-home options with high-speed fiber-optic connectivity. Section 7.07. Water. Developer shall provide for accelerated compliance with the Climate Action Plan by implementing special water conservation measures to reduce the use of potable water by Project households to 35 percent below the City-wide average as of July 18, 2017 (95-gpcd). (a) Developer shall install water improvements necessary to serve the Project as shown in Figure 7.1 of the SLR SP. (b) Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, Developer shall comply with the California Water Code and the regulations imposed by the City in its capacity as the Groundwater Sustainability Agency pursuant to the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (“SGMA”) in all matters related to the Project. Developer acknowledges that SGMA regulations will be implemented after the Vesting Date of this Development Agreement and likely throughout its term and nevertheless agrees to comply with them as to the Project. (c) Developer reserves all groundwater or other water rights with respect to the Property and shall be entitled to irrigate agricultural or open space land with ground or well water, to the extent that such reservation and action does not violate Applicable Law and so long as such water meets or exceeds all applicable water quality standards. (d) Any and all tentative subdivision maps approved for the Project shall comply with Government Code Section 66473.7 if, and to the extent, required by Government Code Section 65867.5(c). Section 7.08. Wastewater. Developer shall provide sufficient wastewater capacity in the force main between Laguna Lift Station and the plant’s headworks structure to convey the wastewater generated by the Project as shown in Figure 7.3 of the SLR SP and as documented in the Project’s sewer design narratives. The City has approved a sewer design exception for the Project, and, to offset such exception, prior to recordation of the Final Map, Developer shall pay City Three Hundred Thousand Dollars ($300,000) (the “Capacity Offset Fee”). The City shall use the Capacity Offset Fee to establish a grant program for existing City residents to replace or upgrade existing sewer laterals equivalent to 66,000 gallons per day of sewer capacity. Each linear foot of replaced private lateral under such grant program shall have a credit of 17 gallons per day, or approximately 64 residential laterals having an average length of 60 feet within the Laguna Sewer Service Area. Section 7.09. Recycled Water Facilities. Developer shall provide the recycled water improvements shown in Figure 7.2 of the SLR RP. Packet Pg. 180 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 32 Section 7.10. Storm Drain Facilities. Before approval of a Final Subdivision Map or building permit for a use that does not require a map, Developer shall provide storm drain facilities as set forth in Figure 7.4 of the SLR SP adequate to accommodate the storm water runoff from the area subject to such Map or building permit. Section 7.11. Floodplain Management. Before approval of a Final Subdivision Map or building permit for a use that does not require a map, Developer shall construct or make all necessary grading and drainage improvements in accordance with the SLR SP Floodplain Management Plan and EIR. The City shall allow building permits to be issued in areas that are within a mapped floodplain upon: (i) certification of compliance with the SLR SP Floodplain Management Plan and (ii) a covenant by the Developer to purchase flood insurance or other similar measure until such time as FEMA has approved a Letter of Map Revision for the Property. Section 7.12. Traffic and Circulation Improvements. Developer shall construct improvements to satisfy the traffic mitigation measures and bicycle and multimodal improvements as set forth in Resolution No. 10822, conditions of approval and for backbone infrastructure for the Project, as modified by Sections 5.04.5 and 5.04.6, hereof. For any improvements required prior to initial occupancy, such improvements may be secured through the posting of a bond, which will allow building permits to be issued concurrent with construction of such improvements; provided, however, that final occupancy shall be permitted only upon full completion of all such improvements. Section 7.13. Miscellaneous. Section 7.13.01. Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs). CC&Rs for each subdivision within the Property shall state substantially the following: “This project is within the boundaries of the SLR SP and, as such, is subject to design guidelines and development standards incorporated into the SLR SP and the SLR SP Design Guidelines, both on file with the Community Development Department of the City of San Luis Obispo.” Before the City need approve a Final Subdivision Map or issue a building permit for a land use that does not require a map, the CC&R disclosure statement referenced above shall be provided to the City Attorney for review and approval. Section 7.13.02. Public Improvements. Unless the Parties otherwise mutually agree, the City shall own and maintain, or cause to be maintained, the following public improvements: (a) Potable water system and water tank, within public properties or public easements; (b) Sanitary sewer system, within public properties or public easements; (c) Recycled water system, within public properties or public easements; (d) Storm drain system, including continuous deflective separation (CDS) vaults or other best management practices (BMP) facilities, within public properties or public easements; Packet Pg. 181 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 33 (e) Public roadways; (f) Public parks; and (g) Public access, landscape, and utility easements. Section 7.13.03. Public Utilities Easements. All land subject to public utilities easements (PUEs); public water, sewer, or storm drain easements; and public access easements shall be open and accessible to the City at all times. Section 7.13.04. Design Review of Major Surface Public Facilities. Design Review shall be completed for all major surface public facilities before construction. Section 7.13.05. Design and Construction Standards for Sewer and Water Facilities. All sewer, water and recycled water facilities shall conform to the Design and Construction Standards in effect for the Project when improvement plans are submitted. The submittal shall include all pertinent engineering analysis and design calculations. The plans shall be subject to the Director of Public Works’ review and approval. Section 7.13.06. Cable/Fiber Networking. Developer shall provide cable or suitable conduit to each City facility, public park, or other lot designated for City or public use within the Project for fiber networking. The cable or suitable conduit shall be shown on the joint trench improvement plans and constructed before the final lift of asphalt is placed on adjacent streets. Section 7.13.07. Model Homes. Prior to recordation of any final map, City agrees to issue building permits and occupancy certificates for the construction of model homes (and related model home complex structures) that will be used by Developer for the purpose of promoting sales of single-family residential units within the Project; provided, however, in no event shall City be required to issue more than twenty-four (24) building permits for the construction of model homes, and in no event shall Developer be permitted to sell or transfer any model home until a Final Map has been recorded on that portion of the Project where the model home is located. ARTICLE 8. CONSIDERATION OF PERMITS AND APPROVALS Section 8.01. Review and Action Generally. Upon Developer’s submission of any complete application for an Approval together with any fees required under Article 5 and required by City in accordance with Applicable Law, City shall use its best efforts to commence and complete promptly and diligently all steps necessary to act on the application. Developer shall promptly provide to City all information reasonably requested by City for its consideration of any such application. Section 8.02. Applicable Law. Except as otherwise specifically provided in this Article 8, all applications for Approvals submitted by Developer shall be considered by City in accordance with Applicable Law. To the extent Developer applies for an approval that would have the effect of amending a component of Applicable Law as defined in Section 4.01.1, the Packet Pg. 182 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 34 aspect of Applicable Law to be amended shall not apply to the City’s consideration of the application for such request. Section 8.03. General Plan and San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Amendments. The Parties anticipate that Developer may request amendments to the General Plan or the SLR SP to respond to changing circumstances and conditions. City is not obligated to approve any such application and may, in the exercise of its legislative discretion, approve, deny or propose conditions or modifications thereto, including conditions or modifications that might otherwise be prohibited by the vested rights provided by this Development Agreement. Developer shall be afforded a reasonable opportunity to review any such proposed conditions and modifications and to withdraw its application for a General Plan amendment or Developer Specific Plan amendment (in which case neither Developer’s proposed amendments nor the City’s proposed modifications shall become effective). Section 8.04. MMRP Application. When conducting an environmental review of any application for an Approval, City shall review the MMRP to determine if any mitigation measure contained in the MMRP as to the portion of the Property subject to this Development Agreement should be incorporated into the design of, or made a condition of approval of, such Approval. Section 8.05. Life of Approvals. Any Approval issued by City, including any Tentative Tract Maps, shall continue in effect without expiration until the later of: (i) the expiration or earlier termination of this Development Agreement or (ii) the date upon which such Approval would otherwise expire under California law. Section 8.06. Vesting Maps. The ordinances, standards and policies applicable to any vesting tentative map, vesting parcel map, vesting subdivision map or any other type of vesting map (“Vesting Map”) under California Government Code section 66474.2, and the ordinances, policies and standards vested under any Vesting Map pursuant to California Government Code section 66498.1(b) shall be those established as Applicable Law under this Agreement. If this Development Agreement terminates before the expiration of any Vesting Map or the vested rights provided thereby, such termination of this Development Agreement shall not affect Developer’s right to proceed with development under such Vesting Map in accordance with the ordinances, policies and standards so vested under the Vesting Map. In accordance with California Government Code section 66456.1, Developer and the City have concurred that multiple final maps may be filed. ARTICLE 9. AMENDMENTS Section 9.01. In General. This Development Agreement may be amended from time to time only upon the mutual written consent of City and Developer and in compliance with section 17.94.190 of the City’s zoning ordinance; provided, however, that in connection with the transfer of any portion of Developer’s Rights and/or Obligations under this Development Agreement to another person, entity, or organization pursuant to Article 13 below, Developer, such transferee and City may agree that the signature of such transferee may thereafter only be required to amend this Development Agreement insofar as such amendment would materially alter the Rights and/or Obligations of such transferee. In no event shall the signature or consent Packet Pg. 183 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 35 of any “Non-Assuming Transferee” (as defined in Section 13.03 below) be required to amend this Development Agreement. Section 9.02. Future Approvals Do Not Require Amendments to Agreement. Except as the Parties may otherwise agree, no amendment of this Development Agreement shall be required in connection with the issuance of any Approval or an amendment to the MMRP. Any Approval issued after the Vesting Date as to a portion of the Property shall be incorporated automatically into this Development Agreement and vested hereby. Unless otherwise permitted by this Development Agreement, however, City shall not amend or issue any Approval unless Developer requests such an amendment or Approval. Section 9.03. Operating Memoranda. The provisions of this Development Agreement require a close degree of cooperation between City and Developer. The Parties acknowledge that clarifications may be necessary with respect to the details of performance of City and Developer. If and when, from time to time during the term of this Development Agreement, the Parties agree that such clarifications are necessary and appropriate, the Parties shall effectuate such clarifications through operating memoranda, approved in writing by each of them, which, after execution, shall be attached hereto as addenda and become a part hereof. No such operating memoranda shall constitute an amendment to this Development Agreement requiring public notice or hearing. The City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, shall make the determination on behalf of City whether a requested clarification may be effectuated pursuant to this Section 9.03 or whether the requested clarification is of such a character as to constitute an amendment hereof pursuant to Section 9.01 above. The City Manager shall be authorized to execute any operating memoranda hereunder on behalf of City. Section 9.04. Administrative Amendments. Upon the request of Developer for an amendment or modification of any Project Approval, the Planning Director or his/her designee shall determine: (a) whether the requested amendment or modification is minor when considered in light of the Project as a whole; and (b) whether the requested amendment or modification substantially conforms with the material terms of this Development Agreement and the Applicable Law. If the Planning Director or his/her designee finds that the requested amendment or modification is both minor and substantially conforms to the material terms of this Development Agreement and the Applicable Law, the amendment or modification shall be determined to be an “Administrative Amendment,” and the Planning Director or his/her designee may approve the Administrative Amendment without public notice or a public hearing. ARTICLE 10. ANNUAL REVIEW Section 10.01. In General. The Community Development Director shall annually and concurrently conduct: (i) the MMRP Evaluation as set forth in Section 11.01; and (ii) the Development Agreement Review as set forth in Section 11.04 (collectively, the “Annual Review”). With respect to the MMRP Evaluation, if the Community Development Director determines that mitigation measures adopted by City in connection with its approval of the SLR SP and the Zoning are not being implemented as set forth in the MMRP, he or she shall take any appropriate remedial action as described in Section 11.01 below. Further, the Community Development Director shall incorporate the results of the MMRP Evaluation into the review of any applications for Approvals submitted thereafter. Packet Pg. 184 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 36 Section 10.02. Other Investigations and Evaluations. City may from time to time, whether or not as a part of an Annual Review, investigate or evaluate any matter that is properly the subject of an Annual Review. ARTICLE 11. MMRP EVALUATION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT REVIEW Section 11.01. MMRP Evaluation. During its Annual Review, City shall conduct the MMRP Evaluation by evaluating whether the mitigation measures the City adopted upon its approval of the SLR SP and the Zoning are being implemented as to the Property as set forth in the MMRP. Section 11.02. MMRP Implementation. As set forth in the MMRP, City shall consider in connection with any application for an Approval the extent to which mitigation measures described in the MMRP should be incorporated into the design of the project under consideration or made conditions of the approval of the project. During an MMRP Evaluation, the City shall evaluate its overall success over the previous year in implementing such mitigation measures and consider any additional steps that may be appropriate to ensure, as Approvals are considered over the following year, successful implementation of such mitigation measures (including, in particular, mitigation measures that are the responsibility of City or other agencies with regulatory authority over the Project). Section 11.03. Enforcement. Developer shall be responsible only for those mitigation measures the City requires to be incorporated into the design of the Project, including those that are made conditions of any Approval. Failure to comply with any such design requirement or any condition of approval shall be enforced in any manner authorized by Applicable Law. Section 11.04. Development Agreement Review. The Community Development Director shall review this Development Agreement annually to ascertain Developer’s good faith compliance as to the Property (the “Development Agreement Review”). The Development Agreement Review shall be conducted concurrently with the MMRP Evaluation as part of the Annual Review pursuant to Article 10. In connection with the Development Agreement Review, Developer shall provide information reasonably requested by City. Section 11.05. Director’s Findings of Compliance. If the Community Development Director finds good faith compliance by Developer with this Agreement, the Community Development Director shall issue a “Finding of Development Agreement Compliance,” which shall be in recordable form and may be recorded by Developer or any “Mortgagee” (as defined in Section 14.01 below). Issuance of a Finding of Development Agreement Compliance and expiration of the appeal period specified below without appeal, or confirmation by the City Council of the issuance of the Finding of Development Agreement Compliance upon such appeal, shall finally determine the Development Agreement Review for the applicable period. Section 11.06. Finding of Development Agreement Noncompliance. If the Community Development Director finds that Developer and/or a Transferee has not complied in good faith with this Agreement, the Community Development Director shall proceed as specified in sections 17.94.200–17.94.220 of the City’s Zoning Ordinance. Packet Pg. 185 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 37 ARTICLE 12. DEFAULT, REMEDIES, TERMINATION OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Section 12.01. Notice and Cure. (a) Any failure by a Party to perform any term or provision of this Development Agreement, which failure continues uncured for 60 days following written notice of such failure from the other Party (unless such period is extended by written mutual consent), shall constitute a default under this Agreement. Any such notice shall specify the nature of the alleged failure and, where appropriate, how such alleged failure may be cured. If the nature of the alleged failure is such that it cannot reasonably be cured within 60 days, then commencement of the cure within that time, and diligent prosecution to completion of the cure thereafter, shall be timely. If the alleged failure is cured, then no default shall exist and the noticing Party shall take no further remedial action and shall acknowledge the cure in writing to the other Party. If the alleged failure is not cured, then a default shall exist under this Development Agreement and the noticing Party may exercise any of the remedies available under sections 12.03 through 12.05 below. (b) No failure or delay in giving notice of default shall constitute a waiver of default; provided, however, that the provision of notice and opportunity to cure is a prerequisite to the enforcement or correction of any default. Section 12.02. Actions during Cure Period. (a) During any cure period specified under Section 12.01 and before delivery of a notice of failure or default, the Party charged shall not be considered in default of this Development Agreement. If there is a dispute as to the existence of a default, the Parties shall otherwise continue to perform their obligations hereunder, to the maximum extent practicable in light of the disputed matter, pending its resolution or termination of this Development Agreement. (b) City shall continue to process in good faith applications for Approvals during any cure period, but need not approve any such application if it relates to a project as to which there is an alleged default hereunder. Section 12.03. Remedies of Non-Defaulting Party. Section 12.03.1. In General. If any Party is in default under the terms of this Agreement, the non-defaulting Party may elect, in its sole and absolute discretion, to pursue any of the following courses of action: (i) waive such default; (ii) in City’s case, pursue administrative remedies as provided in Section 12.04 below, (iii) pursue judicial remedies as provided for in Section 12.05 below; and/or (iii) terminate this Development Agreement as and to the extent permitted by Section 12.06 below and consistently with section 17.94.210 and 17.94.220 of the City’s Zoning Ordinance. In no event shall City modify this Development Agreement as a result of a default by a defaulting Party except in accordance with the provisions of Section 9.01 above. Packet Pg. 186 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 38 Section 12.03.2. Severability of Default. City acknowledges that the development of the Project may be carried out by more than one person, entity or organization under this Development Agreement (e.g., portions of Developer’s interest in the Property and this Development Agreement may be transferred to another person, entity or organization, a “Transferee” under Article 13 below). The Parties acknowledge and agree that, in accordance with Article 13 below, more than one Transferee may be responsible for certain actions required or forbidden by this Development Agreement and that more than one Transferee therefore may be in default with respect to that action. Accordingly, if City determines to terminate or exercise any remedy under this Development Agreement due to a default by Developer or by any Transferee (hereinafter “Defaulting Developer”), such termination or other remedy shall apply only with respect to the Rights and Obligations of such Defaulting Developer and any termination of this Development Agreement as to any Defaulting Developer shall be deemed to terminate only those Rights and Obligations arising hereunder between City and such Defaulting Developer. City shall, to the extent possible, refrain from seeking any termination of this Development Agreement or other remedy if such remedy would affect materially the ability of a non-defaulting Developer and/or a non-defaulting Transferee (hereinafter “Non-Defaulting Developer”) to realize the Rights provided hereunder. The Parties further acknowledge and agree that in certain instances it may not be possible for City to exercise remedies against the Defaulting Developer of one portion of the Project without affecting in some way a Non- Defaulting Developer of the same or of some other portion of the Project. Section 12.04. Administrative Remedies. Except as otherwise specifically stated in this Development Agreement, City may exercise any and all administrative remedies to the extent necessary or appropriate to secure compliance with this Agreement. Such administrative remedies may include, among others, withholding building permits, certificates of occupancy or other Approvals relating to that portion of the Project in default of this Agreement. Section 12.05. Judicial Remedies. Except as otherwise specifically stated in this Development Agreement, either Party may, in addition to any other rights or remedies, institute legal action to cure, correct, or remedy any default, enforce any covenant or agreement herein, enjoin any threatened or attempted violation hereof, enforce by specific performance the Obligations and Rights of the Parties hereto or obtain any other remedy consistent with this Agreement; provided, however, that in no event shall any person be entitled hereunder to monetary damages for any cause, including breach of contract by a Party to this Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, City may enforce payment obligations under Applicable Law, including under this Agreement and Developer may enforce City’s obligations under this Agreement to pay or transfer money to the Developer by a writ of mandate or action for specific performance. Nothing in this Section 12.05 shall be deemed to limit either Party’s rights under the Government Claims Act, California Government Code section 810 et seq. For purposes of instituting a legal action under this Agreement, any City Council determination under this Development Agreement shall be deemed final agency action unless expressly stated otherwise. Section 12.06. Termination Due to Default. Section 12.06.1. In General. Either Party may terminate this Development Agreement pursuant to Section 12.06.2 below and sections 17.94.190–17.94.220 of the City’s Zoning Ordinance in the event of a default by the other Party, provided: (i) such default is Packet Pg. 187 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 39 prejudicial to the interests of the non-defaulting Party and is neither minor nor technical and (ii) in the case of any termination by City, City first shall have exercised any and all administrative or other remedies short of filing suit available to secure Developer’s compliance with this Agreement; provided, however, that City shall not be required, as a prerequisite to initiating the termination of this Agreement, to exercise its administrative and other non-judicial remedies for a period of more than 180 days or such longer period to which the Parties may have agreed. Termination of this Development Agreement by Developer or a Transferee as to any portion or portions of the Property shall not affect the Rights or Obligations of Developer or any other Transferee as to any other portion or portions of the Property. Section 12.06.2. Procedures for Termination. (a) Before any proposed termination of this Development Agreement pursuant to this Section 12.06, and following the 180-day or longer period specified in Section 12.06.1 above, if applicable, a non-defaulting Party intending to seek termination of this Development Agreement shall deliver to the defaulting Party (or Parties) a written “Preliminary Notice of Intent to Terminate” this Agreement, and all Parties shall meet and confer in good faith effort to agree upon an alternative to termination that will afford the non-defaulting Party the benefit of its bargain under this Agreement. If those discussions are not successful in resolving the dispute, the non-defaulting Party desiring to terminate this Development Agreement shall deliver to the defaulting Party a written “Final Notice of Intent to Terminate”. (b) Within 60 days after the City delivers a Final Notice of Intent to Terminate to a defaulting Party, the City Council shall review the matter at a noticed public hearing as set forth in California Government Code sections 65865, 65867, and 65868 and in sections 17.94.190–17.94.220 of the City’s Zoning Ordinance. Termination shall be effective 30 days after such City Council review, unless the default is sooner resolved to the mutual satisfaction of the Parties. (c) Within 60 days after Developer delivers a Final Notice of Intent to Terminate to City, the City Council shall consider whether City should take any further curative action. Termination shall be effective 30 days following such City Council consideration (or 90 days following delivery by Developer of a Final Notice of Intent to Terminate if the City Council fails to complete its consideration by that date), unless the default is sooner resolved to the mutual satisfaction of the Parties. Section 12.07. Judicial Reference. Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 638 et seq., all legal actions shall be heard by a referee who shall be a retired judge from either the San Luis Obispo County Superior Court, the California Court of Appeal, the United States District Court or the United States Court of Appeals, provided that the selected referee shall have experience in resolving land use and real property disputes. Developer and City shall agree upon a single referee who shall try all issues, whether of fact or law, and report a finding and judgment thereon and issue all legal and equitable relief appropriate under the circumstances. If Developer and City are unable to agree upon a referee within ten (10) days of either Party’s written request Packet Pg. 188 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 40 to do so, either Party may seek to have a referee appointed pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 640. The cost of such proceeding shall initially be borne equally by the Parties. Any referee selected pursuant to this Section 12.07 shall be considered a temporary judge appointed pursuant to Article 6, Section 21 of the California Constitution. Notwithstanding the provisions of this Section 12.07, either Party shall be entitled to seek declaratory and injunctive relief in any court of competent jurisdiction to enforce the terms of this Agreement, or to seek to enjoin the other Party from an asserted breach thereof, pending the selection of a referee on a showing that the moving party would otherwise suffer irreparable harm. Upon the mutual agreement by both Parties, any legal action may be submitted to mediation in accordance with rules to be mutually agreed upon by the Parties. ARTICLE 13. ASSIGNMENT, TRANSFER AND NOTICE Section 13.01. Assignment of Interests, Rights and Obligations. Developer may transfer or assign (“Transfer”) all or any portion of its Rights and Obligations under this Development Agreement as to any portion of the Property (the “Transferred Property”) to any person acquiring an interest in such Transferred Property, including, without limitation, purchasers or ground lessees of lots, parcels or facilities on such Transferred Property (a “Transferee”). Any such Transfer shall relieve the transferring party (a “Transferor”) of any and all Rights and Obligations under this Development Agreement insofar as they pertain to the Transferred Property, as provided in this Article 13. Section 13.02. Transfers In General. Section 13.02.1. In General. In connection with any Transfer of all or any portion of the Project or the Property, other than a transfer or assignment to a “Non-Assuming Transferee” as described in Section 13.03 below or a “Mortgagee” as defined in Section 14.01 below, the Transferor and the Transferee may enter into a written agreement regarding their respective Rights and Obligations in and under this Development Agreement (a “Transfer Agreement”). Any such Transfer Agreement may contain provisions: (i) releasing the Transferor from any Rights and Obligations under this Development Agreement that relate to the Transferred Property, provided the Transferee expressly assumes all such Rights and Obligations, (ii) transferring to the Transferee rights to improve the Transferred Property and any other Rights and Obligations of the Transferor arising under this Agreement, and (iii) addressing any other matter deemed necessary or appropriate in connection with the Transfer. Section 13.02.2. City Review of Release Provisions. (a) A Transferor shall have the right, but not the obligation, to seek City’s consent to those provisions of any Transfer Agreement purporting to release such Transferor from any Rights and Obligations arising under this Development Agreement (the “Release Provisions”). If a Transferor fails to seek City’s consent or City does not consent to any such Release Provisions, then such Transferor may nevertheless transfer to the Transferee any and all Rights and Obligations of such Transferor arising under this Development Agreement (as described in Sections 13.02.1(i) and (ii) above) but, with respect to City, shall not be released from those Rights and Obligations described in the Release Provisions to which City Packet Pg. 189 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 41 has not consented. If City consents to any Release Provisions, then: (i) the Transferor shall be free from any and all Rights and Obligations accruing on or after the date of any Transfer with respect to those Rights and Obligations described in such Release Provisions and (ii) no default hereunder by Transferee with respect to any Rights and Obligations from which the Transferor has been released shall be attributed to the Transferor nor may such Transferor’s Rights be canceled or diminished in any way by any such default. City may consent, or conditionally consent, to all, none, or some of the Release Provisions. (b) City shall review and consider promptly and in good faith any request by a Transferor for City’s consent to any Release Provisions. City’s consent to such Release Provisions may be withheld only if: (i) reliable evidence supports a conclusion that the Transferee will be unable to perform the Rights and Obligations proposed to be assumed by the Transferee pursuant to the Transfer Agreement, (ii) the Rights and Obligations may not reasonably be allocable among particular portions of the Project and Property, such as the Transferred Property, (iii) the Transferor or Transferee fails to provide acceptable security, as and if reasonably requested by City, to ensure the performance of the Rights and Obligations proposed to be assumed by the Transferee pursuant to the Release Provisions, or (iv) the Transferor or Transferee fails to provide information reasonably requested by the City to assist it in making the determinations described in this paragraph. In no event shall City unreasonably withhold consent to any Release Provisions. City shall respond within 30 days to any request by a Transferor for consent to any Release Provisions, and, if the City fails to respond during such 30 day period, the City shall be deemed to have consented to the Release Provisions. (c) Subject to the provisions of paragraph (b) above, because and to the extent certain Obligations arising under this Development Agreement may not reasonably be allocable among portions of the Project, City may refuse to consent to release the Transferor of one portion of the Project from such Rights and Obligations under this Development Agreement even though the Rights and Obligations are being or have been assumed by the Transferee of some other portion of the Project. Section 13.03. Non-Assuming Transferees. Except as otherwise required by a Transferor, the Obligations of a Transferor shall not apply to any purchaser of any property that has been established as a single legal parcel for nonresidential use that does not require any further on-site or off-site infrastructure. The Transferee in such a transaction and the successors and assigns of such a Transferee (“Non-Assuming Transferees”) shall be deemed to have no Obligations under this Agreement, but shall continue to benefit from the Rights provided by this Development Agreement for the duration of its term. Nothing in this section shall exempt any Transferred Property transferred to a Non-Assuming Transferee from payment of applicable fees, taxes and assessments or compliance with an Approval or Applicable Law. Packet Pg. 190 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 42 ARTICLE 14. MORTGAGEE PROTECTION Section 14.01. In General. The provisions of this Development Agreement shall not limit Developer’s right to encumber the Property or any portion thereof, or any improvement thereon by any mortgage, deed of trust or other device securing financing with respect to such portion. City acknowledges that lenders providing such financing and other “Mortgagees” (defined below) may require certain interpretations and modifications of this Development Agreement and agrees upon request, from time to time, to meet with Developer and representatives of such lenders to negotiate in good faith any such request for an interpretation or modification. City shall not unreasonably withhold its consent to any such requested interpretation or modification provided such interpretation or modification is consistent with the intent and purposes of this Agreement. Any person holding a mortgage, deed of trust or other security instrument on all or any portion of the Property made in good faith and for value (each, a “Mortgagee”), shall be entitled to the rights and privileges of this Article 14. Section 14.02. Impairment of Mortgage or Deed of Trust. Except as otherwise specifically stated in any security instrument held by a Mortgagee, no default under this Development Agreement shall defeat, render invalid, diminish, or impair the lien of any mortgage or deed of trust on the Property made, or other interest in the Property acquired, by any Mortgagee in good faith and for value. Section 14.03. Notice of Default to Mortgagee. If a Mortgagee has submitted to the City a written request for notice as specified herein, City shall exercise its best efforts to provide to such Mortgagee written notification of any failure or default by Developer in the performance of Developer’s Obligations concurrently with the written notice provided to Developer. If the City fails to deliver written notification to any Mortgagee that has submitted a written request to City as provided herein, then any period for such Mortgagee to remedy or cure any alleged failure or default shall not commence until the City’s actual delivery of such written notification to such Mortgagee. Section 14.04. Right of Mortgagee to Cure. Any Mortgagee shall have the right, but not the obligation, to cure any failure or default by Developer during the cure period allowed Developer under this Agreement, plus an additional 60 days if, to cure such failure or default, the Mortgagee must obtain possession of the property as by seeking appointment of a receiver or other legal process. Any Mortgagee that undertakes to cure any such failure or default shall provide written notice to City of that fact; provided that no initiation of any such efforts by a Mortgagee shall obligate such Mortgagee to complete or succeed in any such curative efforts. Section 14.05. Mortgagee Liability for Past Defaults or Obligations. Except as otherwise specifically provided in this Article 14, any Mortgagee, including a successful bidder at a foreclosure sale, who comes into possession of the Property or any part thereof, shall take such property subject to the Rights and Obligations of this Development Agreement and in no event shall any such property be released from any Obligations. Nothing in this Article 14 shall prevent City from exercising any remedy it may have for a default under this Development Agreement; provided, however, that in no event shall such Mortgagee be liable personally for any defaults or monetary obligations of Developer arising before such Mortgagee acquires or possesses such property. Packet Pg. 191 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 43 Section 14.06. Technical Amendments to this Article 14. City agrees to reasonably consider and approve interpretations and/or technical amendments to the provisions of this Agreement that are required by lenders for the acquisition and construction of the improvements on the Property or any refinancing thereof and to otherwise cooperate in good faith to facilitate Developer’s negotiations with lenders. The Parties acknowledge and agree that such technical amendments shall be processed in accordance with Section 9.04 of this Development Agreement. ARTICLE 15. GENERAL PROVISIONS Section 15.01. Incorporation of Recitals. The Recitals set forth above are incorporated herein as though set forth in full. Section 15.02. Project is a Private Undertaking. The development Developer proposes to undertake is a private development, and Developer shall exercise full dominion and control over the Project subject only to Developer’s Obligations contained in this Agreement, the Approvals and Applicable Law. Section 15.03. Cooperation in the Event of Legal Challenge. Section 15.03.1. In General. If any person not a Party to this Development Agreement institutes any administrative, legal or equitable action or other proceeding challenging the validity of any provision of this Agreement, any Approval or Subsequent Approval, or the sufficiency of any review of this Development Agreement or any Approval or Subsequent Approval under CEQA (each a “Third Party Challenge”), the Parties shall promptly meet and confer as to the most appropriate response to such Third Party Challenge; provided, however, that any such response shall be consistent with Sections 15.03.2 and 15.03.3 below. Section 15.03.2. Tender to and Conduct of Defense by Developer. City shall tender the complete defense of any Third Party Challenge to Developer, and upon acceptance of such tender by Developer: (i) Developer shall indemnify City against any and all fees and costs arising out of the defense of such Third Party Challenge and (ii) Developer shall control the defense and/or settlement of such Third Party Challenge and may take any and all actions it deems necessary and appropriate in its sole discretion in connection therewith; provided, however, that Developer shall seek and secure City’s consent to any settlement of such Third Party Challenge, which consent shall not unreasonably be withheld or delayed. Section 15.03.3. Defense by City. If Developer should fail to accept City’s tender of defense under Section 15.03.2 above, City shall defend such Third Party Challenge and control the defense and/or settlement of such Third Party Challenge as City decides (in its sole discretion), and City may take any and all actions it deems necessary and appropriate (in its sole discretion) in connection therewith; provided, however, that City shall seek and secure Developer’s consent to any settlement of such Third Party Challenge, which consent shall not unreasonably be withheld or delayed. Developer shall indemnify City against any and all fees and costs arising out of the City’s defense of such Third Party Challenge including the reasonable value of the services of its City Attorney and outside counsel, if any. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if Developer determines for any reason that it no longer intends to develop the Packet Pg. 192 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 44 Project, then it may deliver notice of such determination to City and shall not be liable for any defense costs incurred by City more than 90 days following the delivery of such notice. Section 15.04. Defense and Indemnity. Developer shall defend and indemnify City from and against any and all damages, claims, costs and liabilities arising out of the personal injury or death of any person, or damage to the property of any person, to the extent such damages, claims, costs or liabilities result from the construction of the Project by Developer or by Developer’s contractors, subcontractors, agents or employees, except to the extent caused by the negligence or willful misconduct of City, or any of City’s officers, employees, contractors or agents. Nothing in this Section 15.04 shall be construed to mean that Developer shall defend or indemnify City from or against any damages, claims, costs or liabilities arising from, or alleged to arise from, activities associated with the maintenance or repair by City or any other public agency of improvements that have been offered for dedication and accepted by City or such other public agency. City and Developer may from time to time enter into subdivision improvement agreements, as authorized by the Subdivision Map Act, which agreements may include defense and indemnity provisions different from those contained in this Section 15.04. If any conflict appears between such provisions in any such subdivision improvement agreement and the provisions set forth above, the provisions of such subdivision improvement agreement shall prevail. Section 15.05. Governing Law; Attorneys’ Fees. This Development Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California. Venue for any dispute arising under this Development Agreement lies in the county of San Luis Obispo and Developer hereby consents to personal jurisdiction there for that purpose. The Parties will cooperate to facilitate venue for any Third Party Challenge described in Section 15.03 above in San Luis Obispo County. Should any legal action be brought by either Party because of any default under this Development Agreement, to enforce any provision of this Agreement, or to obtain a declaration of rights hereunder, the prevailing Party shall be entitled to such reasonable and actual attorneys’ fees, and costs as may be fixed by the Court. The standard of review for determining whether a default has occurred under this Development Agreement shall be the standard generally applicable to contractual obligations in California. The terms and provisions of this Section 15.05 shall survive any termination of this Agreement. Section 15.06. Force Majeure. Performance by any Party of its Obligations hereunder shall be excused and the Term of and any dates under this Development Agreement shall be extended day for day during any period of “Permitted Delay” as hereinafter defined. For purposes hereof, Permitted Delay shall include delay beyond the reasonable control of the Party claiming the delay (and despite the good faith efforts of such Party) including, but not limited to: (i) acts of God; (ii) civil commotion; (iii) riots; (iv) strikes, picketing or other labor disputes; (v) shortages of materials or supplies; (vi) damage to work in progress by reason of fire, floods, earthquake or other casualties; (vii) failure, delay or inability of the other Party to act; (viii) as to Developer only, the failure, delay or inability of City to provide adequate levels of public services, facilities or infrastructure to the Property; (ix) as to City only, with respect to completion of the Annual Review or to processing applications for Approvals, the failure, delay or inability of Developer to provide adequate information or substantiation as reasonably required to complete the Annual Review or process applications for Approvals; (x) restrictions imposed or mandated by governmental entities other than the City, including without limitation, Packet Pg. 193 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 45 any development moratorium for any purpose; (xi) enactment of conflicting state or federal laws or regulations, (xii) judicial decisions or similar legal incapacity to perform, and (xiii) litigation brought by a third party attacking the validity of this Agreement. A party’s inability to make a payment when due shall not be the basis of a Permitted Delay. Any Party claiming a Permitted Delay shall notify the other Party (or Parties) in writing of such delay within 30 days after the commencement of the delay, which notice (“Permitted Delay Notice”) shall include the estimated length of the Permitted Delay. A Permitted Delay shall be deemed to occur for the time set forth in the Permitted Delay Notice unless a Party receiving the Permitted Delay Notice objects in writing within 10 days after receiving the Permitted Delay Notice. Upon such an objection, the Parties shall meet and confer within 30 days after the date of the objection in a good faith effort to resolve their disagreement as to the existence and length of the Permitted Delay. If no mutually acceptable solution can be reached, either Party may take action as may be permitted under Article 12 above. Section 15.07. Waiver. Section 15.07.1. Legal Rights. Developer acknowledges and agrees that the terms and provisions of this Development Agreement specifically permit City in some instances to impose requirements upon the Project that City would not otherwise be able to impose due to a lack of nexus, rough proportionality, or reasonable relationship between the Project and such requirement, or other reasons. To the extent any such requirement is imposed by City upon the Project consistently with the terms and provisions of this Agreement, Developer waives any right to challenge judicially the imposition of such requirement by City. Except as otherwise provided in this Section 15.07.1, City shall comply with Applicable Law. Section 15.07.2. Other Rights. While Section 15.07.1 prohibits Developer from challenging judicially certain City requirements imposed consistently with this Agreement, nothing in this Development Agreement shall be deemed to abrogate or limit, nor be deemed to waive, any right of Developer (whether arising under the United States Constitution, the California Constitution or otherwise) to request City to refrain from imposing upon Developer, the Project or the Property any requirement that this Development Agreement permits City so to impose or otherwise petition City with respect to any matter related to the Project or the Property. Section 15.08. Notices. Any notice or communication required hereunder between the Parties shall be in writing, and may be delivered either personally, by facsimile (with original forwarded promptly by regular U.S. Mail) or by Federal Express or other similar courier promising overnight delivery. If personally delivered, a notice or communication shall be deemed to be received when delivered to the Party to whom addressed. If delivered by facsimile transmission, a notice or communication shall be deemed to be received upon receipt of the entire document by the receiving Party’s facsimile machine. Notices transmitted by facsimile after 5:00 p.m. on a business day or on a Saturday, Sunday or holiday shall be deemed to have been received on the next business day. If delivered by Federal Express or similar courier, a notice or communication shall be deemed to be received when delivered as shown on a receipt issued by the courier. Such notices or communications shall be delivered to the Parties at their addresses set forth below: Packet Pg. 194 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 46 If to City to: City Manager City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Telecopy/Facsimile: (209) 941-7449 With a courtesy copy to: City Attorney City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 95330 If to Developer to: MI San Luis Ranch, LLC C/O Coastal Community Builders, Inc. 330 James Way, Suite 270 Pismo Beach, CA 93449 Attn: Gary Grossman With courtesy copies to: Cox, Castle & Nicholson LLP 2029 Century Park East, Suite 2100 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Attn: Andrew K. Fogg, Esq. or Ronald I. Silverman, Esq. and Spierer, Woodward, Corbalis & Goldberg 707 Torrance Blvd, Suite 200 Redondo Beach, CA 90277 Attn: Steven F. Spierer, Esq. Any Party may at any time, change its address or facsimile number for notice by giving 10 days’ written notice to the other in accordance with this Section 15.08. Section 15.09. No Joint Venture or Partnership. Nothing in this Development Agreement or in any document executed in connection with it shall be construed as creating a joint venture, partnership or any agency relationship between City and Developer. City shall have no responsibility for public improvements unless and until they are accepted by City in the manner required by law. Section 15.10. Severability. If any provision of this Development Agreement is held invalid, void or unenforceable but the remainder of this Development Agreement can be enforced without failure of material consideration to any Party, then the remainder of this Development Agreement shall not be affected and shall remain in full force and effect, unless amended by mutual consent of the Parties. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if any material provision of this Development Agreement, or the application of such provision to a particular situation, is held to be invalid, void or unenforceable, Developer (in its sole and absolute discretion) may terminate this Development Agreement by providing written notice of such termination to City. Packet Pg. 195 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 47 Section 15.11. Estoppel Certificate. Any Party and any Mortgagee may, at any time, and from time to time, deliver written notice to the other Party or Parties requesting such Party or Parties to certify in writing that, to the knowledge of the certifying Party: (i) this Development Agreement is in full force and effect and a binding obligation of the Parties; (ii) this Development Agreement has not been amended or modified either orally or in writing, but if so amended or modified, identifying those amendments and modifications; and (iii) as of the date of the most recent Annual Review, the requesting Party (or any Party specified by a Mortgagee) is not in default in the performance of its Obligations under this Development Agreement, or if in default, describing the nature and amount or extent of any such defaults. A Party receiving a request hereunder shall execute and return such certificate or give a written, detailed response explaining why it will not do so within 30 days of receipt of a request. Each Party acknowledges that such a certificate may be relied upon by third parties acting in good faith. A certificate provided by City establishing the status of this Development Agreement shall be in recordable form and may be recorded at the expense of the recording Party. Section 15.12. Further Assurances. Each Party shall execute and deliver to the other Party or Parties all such other further instruments and documents and take all such further actions as may be reasonably necessary to carry out this Development Agreement and the Approvals and to provide and secure to the other Party or Parties the full and complete enjoyment of its Rights hereunder. Section 15.13. Construction. (a) All Parties have been represented by counsel in the preparation of this Development Agreement and no presumption or rule that ambiguity shall be construed against a drafting party shall apply to its interpretation or enforcement. Captions of sections and subsections are provided for convenience only and shall not be deemed to limit, amend, or affect the meaning of the provisions to which they pertain. If any conflict appears between this Development Agreement and the rules, regulations or official policies of City, the provisions of this Development Agreement shall prevail and be deemed to have amended any such conflicting rules, regulation or official policy as of the Vesting Date to the extent permitted by Applicable Law. In the event of a direct conflict between any provision of this Development Agreement and any of the Project Approvals, the provisions of this Development Agreement shall control. (b) The Parties intend this Development Agreement to be consistent with the requirements of Chapter 17.94 of the City’s Zoning Ordinance and it shall be construed consistently with that intent. Should any conflict arise between this Development Agreement and Chapter 17.94 as it exists on the Vesting Date, this Development Agreement shall control. Section 15.14. Other Miscellaneous Terms. In construing this Agreement, the singular includes the plural; the masculine gender includes the feminine and the neuter; “shall” is mandatory and “may” is permissive. Packet Pg. 196 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 48 Section 15.15. Counterpart Execution. This Development Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts and shall be deemed duly executed when each of the Parties has executed such a counterpart. Section 15.16. Time. Time is of the essence of each and every provision of this Development Agreement. Section 15.17. Good Faith/Fair Dealing. The Parties agree that a covenant of good faith and fair dealing shall apply to all actions of the Parties. As used herein, this covenant shall mean that the Parties shall act reasonably, and no Party shall do anything which shall have the effect of destroying or injuring the rights of any other Party to receive the benefit of its bargain in this Development Agreement. Nothing in this Section 15.17 shall detract from the principle of Section 12.05 that neither Party shall be entitled to monetary damages for breach of this Development Agreement. Section 15.18. List of Exhibits: A – San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Site Plan/Depiction of Property B – Legal Description of Property C – Financing Plan D – Feasibility Memorandum E – Agricultural Land Operations & Guidelines F – Affordable/Workforce Housing Plan Packet Pg. 197 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 49 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Development Agreement as of the Execution Date above. CITY: CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, a municipal corporation By: ___________________________________ Heidi Harmon, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: ___________________________________ J. Christine Dietrick, City Attorney (signatures continued on next page) Packet Pg. 198 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 50 DEVELOPER: MI SAN LUIS RANCH, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company By: MI ENTITLEMENT IV, LLC a Delaware limited liability company Its: Manager By: Presidio Merced Land IV Passive, LLC a Delaware limited liability company Its: Co-Manager By: ___________________________________ Michael Sullivan Its: Authorized Representative By: GGCCB, LLC a California limited liability company Its: Co-Manager By: ___________________________________ Gary Grossman Its: Managing Member Packet Pg. 199 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 Notary - 1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss: COUNTY OF ) On ______________, 2018 before me, _____________________________________________ Notary Public (insert name and title of the officer), personally appeared , who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature: _______________________________________ [Seal] A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document. Packet Pg. 200 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 Notary - 2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss: COUNTY OF ) On ______________, 2018 before me, _____________________________________________ Notary Public (insert name and title of the officer), personally appeared , who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature: _______________________________________ [Seal] A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document. Packet Pg. 201 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 Notary - 3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss: COUNTY OF ) On ______________, 2018 before me, _____________________________________________ Notary Public (insert name and title of the officer), personally appeared , who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature: _______________________________________ [Seal] A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document. Packet Pg. 202 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 Exhibit A-1 EXHIBIT A SAN LUIS RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN SITE PLAN (attached) Packet Pg. 203 Item 5 Packet Pg. 204Item 5 071928\ 9447955 Exhibit B-1 EXHIBIT B LEGAL DESCRIPTION (attached) Packet Pg. 205 Item 5 Page 1 of 2 EXHIBIT B ANNEXATION No. ?? To the City of San Luis Obispo, County of San Luis Obispo, State of California A portion of Lot 64 and 65 of the Subdivision of the Rancho Canada de Los Osos and La Laguna, as filed in Book A, at Page 83 and 84 of Maps, and Lot L and a portion of Lots K, M, and N of the Re-subdivision of Lots 58, 61, 62, 63, 64 and 65, per J. Stratton’s Survey and Map of the Subdivisions of the Rancho Canada de Los Osos and La Laguna, as filed in Book A, at Page 161 of Maps in the office of the Recorder, San Luis Obispo County, California, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the most Northerly corner of Lot K (Corner “EE”) as shown on said map filed in Book A, at Page 161 of Maps, being on the existing City Limit boundary of the City of San Luis Obispo at the Northern terminus of course No. 62 of the “Los Osos Road No. 1 Annexation” as approved by Resolution No. 1728 of the legislative body of said City, and being on the Southeasterly line of Madonna Road right-of-way, known formerly French Road; Thence, leaving said Road, along the Southwesterly line of said Lot J as shown on said map filed in Book A, at Page 161 of Maps, and along the existing City Limit boundary of said Los Osos Road No. 1 Annexation, South 45° 36’ 37” East, 393.00 feet to the True Point of Beginning; 1. Thence, continue along the Southwesterly line of said Lot J, and along the existing City Limit boundary of said Los Osos Road No. 1 Annexation, South 45° 36’ 37” East, 1088.13 feet; 2. Thence, along the Southeasterly line of said Lot J, North 42° 52’ 03” East, 145.28 feet; 3. Thence, along the Southwesterly line of Lot I as shown on said map filed in Book A, at Page 161 of Maps, South 54° 08’ 17” East, 558.56 feet to the Westerly boundary of the State Highway 101 right-of-way; 4. Thence, continue along the existing boundary of said Los Osos Road No. 1 Annexation, Southerly, and along the Westerly boundary of State Highway 101 right-of-way on a curve that is concave to the West from a radial bearing North 62° 47’ 19” West, with a radius of 2420.00 feet, through a central angle of 00° 33’ 58”, an arc length of 23.91 feet; 5. Thence, continue along the Westerly boundary of State Highway 101 right-of-way, and along the existing boundary of said Los Osos Road No. 1 Annexation, South 27° 46’ 39” East, 2557.88 feet to the Northeasterly boundary of Lot “EE” as designated according to said map filed in Book A, at Page 161 of Maps; 6. Thence, leaving the Westerly boundary of State Highway 101 right-of-way, along the Northeasterly boundary of said Lot EE, being the existing City Limit boundary of Annexation No. 71 as approved by Resolution No. 2005-09 of the legislative body of said City, North 54° 25’ 52” West, 1349.74 feet; 7. Thence, continue along the Northeasterly boundary of said Lot “EE”, and along the existing City Limit boundary of said Annexation No. 71, North 53° 35’ 32” West, 733.70 feet to the most Northerly corner of said Lot EE, being the Northeast corner of Lot O (corner “AE”) as designated according to said map filed in Book A, at Page 161 of Maps, and being the most Eastern corner of the existing City Limit boundary of the “Lakewood Addition” as approved by Resolution No. 924 of the legislative body of said City; 8. Thence, along the Northeasterly line of said Lot O, and along the existing City Limit boundary of said “Lakewood Addition”, North 35° 34’ 51” West, 41.45 feet to the most Southern corner of Tract No. 169 as filed in Book 6, at Page 45 of Maps in the office of the Recorder for said County, and the most Southern Packet Pg. 206 Item 5 Page 2 of 2 corner of the existing City Limit boundary of the “Johnson Annexation” as approved by Resolution No. 627 of the legislative body of said City; 9. Thence, leaving said Northeasterly line of Lot O, along the Easterly line of said Tract No.169, and along the existing City Limit boundary of said “Johnson Annexation”, North 8° 50’ 11” East, 116.07 feet; 10. Thence, continue along the Easterly line of said Tract No.169, and along the existing City Limit boundary of said “Johnson Annexation”, North 0° 24’ 24” East, 154.15 feet; 11. Thence, North 11° 04’ 38” East, 128.26 feet; 12. Thence, North 15° 46’ 21” East, 267.07 feet; 13. Thence, North 5° 15’ 56” East, 228.66 feet; 14. Thence, North 12° 39’ 30” East, 101.44 feet; 15. Thence, North 18° 07’ 07” East, 207.14 feet; 16. Thence, North 1° 51’ 40” East, 100.02 feet; 17. Thence, North 18° 32’ 56” West, 215.02 feet; 18. Thence, North 4° 24’ 05” West, 201.66 feet; 19. Thence, North 13° 15’ 08” West, 71.55 feet to the Southerly line of the Madonna Road right-of-way, known formerly as French Road; 20. Thence, along the Southerly line of said Madonna Road right-of-way, along the existing City Limit boundary of said “Johnson Annexation”, and along the existing City Limit boundary of “Parcel E-1” of the Annexation of Territory to the City of San Luis Obispo, as approved by Resolution No. 81-41 of the legislative body of said City, North 63° 34’ 05” East, 817.33 feet to the most Western corner of that parcel of land designated Parcel 1 in the Correction Deed as conveyed to United States Postal Service by Grand Deed filed in Book 2332, at Page 318 of Official Records in the office of the Recorder for said County; 21. Thence, along the Southwesterly boundary of said parcel of land conveyed to United States Postal Service, and along the existing City Limit boundary of “Parcel E-1” and “Parcel E-2” of said Annexation of Territory to the City of San Luis Obispo, as approved by Resolution No. 81-41, South 38° 48’ 08” East, 464.31 feet; 22. Thence, continue along the existing City Limit boundary of “Parcel E-1” and “Parcel E-2” of said Annexation of Territory to the City of San Luis Obispo, and along the Southeasterly line of said parcel of land conveyed to United States Postal Service, North 47° 13’ 35” East, 475.60 feet to the point of beginning; Containing 131.38 acres more or less. Prepared by: ___________________________________ Dan Hutchinson, LS 5139 Dated: ____________________________ Packet Pg. 207 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 Exhibit C-1 EXHIBIT C FINANCING PLAN (attached) Packet Pg. 208 Item 5 San Luis Ranch Financing Plan Prepared for: City of San Luis Obispo Prepared by: Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. June 2018 EPS #161142 Packet Pg. 209 Item 5 Table of Contents 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................ 1 2. SAN LUIS RANCH PROJECT OVERVIEW ......................................................................... 4 San Luis Ranch Specific Plan ...................................................................................... 4 3. INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS TO BE FUNDED ............................................................ 7 4. FUNDING AND FINANCING SOURCES .......................................................................... 11 San Luis Ranch Funding Sources ............................................................................... 11 City Funding Sources ............................................................................................... 12 Funding Strategy for Regional Improvements ............................................................. 13 Economic Considerations ......................................................................................... 17 5. IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES AND RELATED ACTIONS ...................................................... 18 List of Tables Table 1 San Luis Ranch Infrastructure Financing Plan Summary ......................................... 3 Table 2 San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Residential Use Summary .......................................... 5 Table 3 San Luis Ranch Regional Improvement Cost Allocation ........................................... 9 Table 4 San Luis Ranch Proposed Community Benefits Program Developers Proposal .......... 10 Table 5 Funding Sources for Regional Improvements ...................................................... 13 Table 6 Funding Strategy for Prado Road/US 101 Interchange ......................................... 16 Packet Pg. 210 Item 5 1 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The San Luis Ranch Financing Plan (Financing Plan) identifies the services and infrastructure improvements required to serve the San Luis Ranch Project and describes how these items will be funded and/or financed over time. The Financing Plan conforms with the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan, Subdivision Map, and financial terms included in the San Luis Ranch Development Agreement and provides implementing actions for the major funding sources identified. Upon annexation to the City, the San Luis Ranch Project, which consists of 131.4 acres, will create a new neighborhood located west of Highway 101 in the southwest quadrant of the City. The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan allows up to 580 dwelling units and commercial development including a 200-room hotel, 100,000 square feet of office space, and 150,000 square feet of retail and service commercial space. The Project also includes 7.8 acres of parks, waterways, and other interior open space, as well as 52.3 acres of farmed agricultural land. The Financing Plan addresses how the infrastructure and services needed to serve the San Luis Ranch Project will be funded, as the new neighborhood is constructed and occupied by new residents and businesses: Municipal services include “Citywide” services within the Project area. The Citywide services will be fully funded by municipal revenues derived from the Project area assuming that the proposed commercial development occurs.1 Prior to occupancy of the commercial development, a fiscal mitigation payment is stipulated by the terms of the Development Agreement. Infrastructure needed for the San Luis Ranch Project includes contributions to Citywide and other subarea development impact fee programs, mitigating impacts upon regional (off-site) infrastructure, and funding “backbone” and subdivision-related improvements within the Project area. The largest cost infrastructure item is the Project’s “fair share” of the proposed Prado Road/Highway 101 Interchange. Funding for required infrastructure improvements will be derived from a variety of sources including developer equity investments to build or contribute to building needed infrastructure improvements. Table 1 presents an overall financing strategy for the San Luis Ranch Project. Developer equity will be a key source of overall infrastructure funding. It is estimated that the developer will invest an estimated $22.8 million in project-related infrastructure, including paying the City’s development impact fees as specified in the Development Agreement. Some of the developer’s equity investment in City or Region-Serving Infrastructure will be offset by credits or reimbursement from the City’s development impact fee programs or private reimbursement from other benefitting properties because the developer is “oversizing” the improvement relative to its nexus-based “fair share” costs, correcting existing deficiencies, or advancing the improvement before its actual need. At the same time, major improvements required also benefit other development, the City as a whole, or the region. 1 San Luis Ranch Fiscal Analysis, ADE, September 11, 2017. Packet Pg. 211 Item 5 San Luis Ranch Financing Plan June 2018 2 The City’s, other development’s, and the region’s share of City or region-serving infrastructure in the vicinity of the Project will be funded by the City’s development impact fee programs (levied on other development in the City), exactions on other developers, and a range of other City and regional funding grant sources. This Financing Plan provides details regarding funding of each of the major infrastructure types listed in Table 1. This information, in turn, requires a series of implementation actions needed to secure the funding for fulfilling the requirements of the related entitlement documents including the Specific Plan, the Project Environmental Impact Report, the Fiscal Impact Report, the Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map, and the Development Agreement. The preparation of the Financing Plan occurred through a cooperative effort between the Developer and its team of advisors and City staff and their consultants and advisors. Packet Pg. 212 Item 5 San Luis Ranch Financing Plan June 2018 3 Table 1 San Luis Ranch Infrastructure Financing Plan Summary TypeDescriptionDeveloper or Builder EquityDeveloper Equity Subject to Credits or ReimbursementCommunity Facilities District Special TaxesCity SourcesRegional, State, and Federal SourcesIn‐tract InfrastructureDeveloper builds neighborhood streets and facilities shown in Subdivision MapYesNoneNoneNoneNoneBackbone Infrastructure and CEQA Mitigations and other CostsDeveloper builds major infrastructure serving Specific Plan Area shown in Subdivision MapYesYes, for qualifying infrastructure items only (items listed in DIF programs and other items deemed eligible by City)NoneNoneNoneRegional Infrastructure, Developer "Fair Share"Nexus‐based share of major infrastructure (EIR Mitigation, etc.)Yes, "fair share" allocationYes, for oversizing of improvements beyond "fair share" allocationYesNoneNone, but available allocations beyond regional share will decrease funding needs from other sources proportionallyRegional Infrastructure, City/Region Share of Infrastructure CostsImprovements required for Project but benefitting other parts of City and regionNoneReimbursement or credit for oversizing infrastructure / funding beyond requirementNoneYes, City may apply "property tax increment" funding proportional to special increment received from CountyYes, for City/Regional share of infrastructure costs not funded by impact fee programsCommunity Benefits Offered by DeveloperDevelopment Agreement requires an offering of Community Benefits Commensurate with value of Development AgreementYes, funding above "fair share" for regional infrastructure considered as "community benefit"NoneNoneNoneNoneFiscal Shortfalls and Facility Operating GuaranteesFiscal Analysis shows deficits until commercial development occurs. Operating cost for farm, etc.Yes, as needed to assure City's positive fiscal (operating cost) balance (proposed $262 per unit "Early Residential Development Fee" based on Fiscal Analysis until commercial occupancy). Additional bond offered for 1.5x projected fiscal deficit for each year.NoneYes, but only as tertiary backstop for positive fiscal impact beyond Fee and 1.5x BondNoneNoneCitywide or Areawide Development Impact Fee Program Infrastructure ImprovementsDevelopment Impact Fees cover new development's "fair share" of new infrastructure, paid when building permits issued Negotiated combination of fees vested at Tentative Tract Map and then‐current fees adopted by City.Fee credits for building infrastructure up to "fair share", reimbursement or credit for beyond "fair share" NoneYes, as may be specified in the Impact Fee Program to keep fees within reasonable economic limitsYes, for portion of infrastructure cost not "fair share" linked to new development onlyInfrastructure ItemFunding Source CategoryPacket Pg. 213Item 5 4 2. SAN LUIS RANCH PROJECT OVERVIEW The San Luis Ranch Project is the development of a major new City neighborhood. The project includes a mix of residential, commercial, and office uses while preserving nearly half of the site as open space and agriculture on a 131.4-acre property, as described in the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan. The Project site is located west of U.S. Highway 101, east of Madonna Road, and south of Dalidio Drive in the southwestern part of the City. The property includes a single parcel (APN 067-121-022). The Specific Plan area would require annexation to the City of San Luis Obispo. The project is within the City’s Sphere of Influence and Urban Reserve Line and is designed to be consistent with both City and Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) policies, including the requirement that the annexation be compatible with the City’s General Plan and supportable by the City’s infrastructure. The intent is for the project to be consistent with the development parameters described in the City’s 2014 Land Use Element. Following annexation of the area and development, the San Luis Ranch Project will create a new neighborhood along the southern border of the City. Development will be regulated by various controlling documents including the Development Agreement and the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan and Vesting Tentative Map adopted by the City in July of 2017. San Luis Ranch Specific Plan The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan (Specific Plan) allows up to 580 dwelling units; a commercial area with up to 250,000 square feet of neighborhood-serving retail and office uses; a 200-room hotel, 7.8 acres of internal open space; and 52.3 acres of permanently protected farmed agricultural land. The Project includes an Agricultural Heritage Facilities and Learning Center which will serve as an agri-tourism destination with seasonal attractions and promote the region’s agricultural history. Uses allowed in the open space and agricultural areas include educational uses, urban agriculture, crop production, agricultural accessory uses, produce stands, and temporary events. These features are described in the Specific Plan text and its appendices. The Specific Plan is organized around the principles of 1) maintaining and promoting San Luis Obispo’s agricultural heritage; 2) providing open space and recreational areas; 3) delivering diverse housing opportunities, including workforce housing; and 4) creating a multimodal community. There are several key infrastructure improvements specified in the Specific Plan, including the Prado Road/Highway 101 Interchange, Froom Ranch Way, Dalidio Road Improvements, Madonna Road Improvements, and related multimodal improvements, consistent with the City’s Circulation Element and Bicycle Transportation Plan. Residential Uses The Specific Plan includes up to 580 residential units of varied density and type, including single family attached and detached housing on a range of lot sizes and multifamily housing, as shown on Table 2. Residential uses are generally to be located on the western portion of the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Area, west of Froom Ranch Way and south of Dalidio Drive. Residential land uses will be accessible from local streets, with connections to Froom Ranch Way, Madonna, and Packet Pg. 214 Item 5 San Luis Ranch Financing Plan June 2018 5 Prado roads. The single-family units are proposed to consist of a mix of traditional lot layouts and small lot layouts with front- and alley-loaded garages. The multifamily units are proposed to be compact homes, which will be located at the northwest portion of San Luis Ranch, effectively transitioning between the existing neighborhood to the west, and Madonna Road to the North. There also will be multifamily flats in buildings of 12 units or larger. These units will be designed as townhouses or apartments with up to 4 bedrooms per unit. The affordable housing located within the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Area will provide 34 units on site for Very Low, Low-, and Moderate-income households, and fourteen additional units affordable to workforce households (121-160 percent of Area Median Income). Table 2 San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Residential Use Summary Neighborhood Commercial Uses The commercial area of the San Luis Ranch will allow for up to 100,000 square feet office buildings and 150,000 square feet of retail and service business buildings focused on Prado Road. The commercial-retail center will offer a variety of uses that will both provide for the needs of the residential neighborhood in San Luis Ranch, as well as complement the overall retail offerings within the City. Allowed commercial uses include retail, services, restaurants, office, and hotel. It is anticipated that the planned 200-room hotel could include conference facilities, meeting space, and restaurants. Commercial areas will be accessible by automobiles, transit riders, pedestrians, and bicyclists. Regional transit services will connect residents and visitors throughout the area. Open Space Uses With half of the site set aside for agriculture, open space, and parks, San Luis Ranch takes an integrated, comprehensive approach to planning and managing open and recreational spaces. The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan enhances the City’s open space by introducing new amenities, including adding a key link in the Bob Jones Trail and active linear parks. Residential Category Amount Estimated Assessed Value per Unit Low-Medium Density 192 $730,000 Medium Density 77 $520,000 High Density 277 $425,000 Affordable Housing 34 $142,200 Total Residential 580 Source: San Luis Ranch; ADE Fiscal, 9/11/2017. Packet Pg. 215 Item 5 San Luis Ranch Financing Plan June 2018 6 Parks and Recreation Uses San Luis Ranch will provide park and open space amenities consistent with the values set forth in the General Plan. Parklands will include an active linear park with a fitness loop and multi-use trails, a central neighborhood park featuring both active and passive recreational opportunities, and pocket parks interspersed throughout the residential areas to provide enhanced pedestrian connectivity and visual openness. Pocket parks provided throughout the San Luis Ranch community will provide both recreational and pedestrian amenities and open space breaks, allowing connectivity between residential areas and creating a more open feel to the neighborhood. A key linear park element of the Specific Plan will be the San Luis Ranch Preserve and Trailhead that will link the Bob Jones Trail and connect the linear park behind Target to Laguna Lake. Agricultural Preservation The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan will preserve a significant piece of San Luis Obispo agriculture as well as integrate the site’s historical agriculture into the community, with farm operations to be provided by a private lease agreement. The agricultural land will be contiguous with the adjacent San Luis Obispo City Farm to allow for integration and will include the community learning center. The Agricultural Heritage Facilities and Learning Center will be a destination for residents and tourists alike and will provide the community with local food, education, and a connection to agriculture. Packet Pg. 216 Item 5 7 3. INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS TO BE FUNDED The San Luis Ranch Project, as a largely undeveloped area, will require the full complement of local infrastructure to serve the Project area including streets and in-street utilities, drainage, parks and trails and bikeways. Infrastructure and municipal facilities required to serve the Project include “backbone” and “in-tract” infrastructure as well as “City-serving and region- serving” infrastructure, which is typically located beyond the Project boundary but is required (at least in part) to accommodate the Project development. In-Tract Infrastructure “In-tract” improvements typically include the neighborhood streets and utilities serving the developed portions of development. These improvements will be installed by the developer or subsequent builders at their expense in conformance with the Subdivision Map requirements and dedicated to the City in the typical fashion. Backbone Infrastructure “Backbone” infrastructure improvements include collector and arterial streets, major wet-utility improvements, and other public facilities such as parks that service the entire Project area or beyond. San Luis Ranch backbone infrastructure will be built by the developer at their expense and dedicated to the City. Insofar as these individual backbone improvements have been identified in City master facility plans or development impact fee programs the developer may qualify for fee credits or reimbursement. Citywide or Region-Serving Infrastructure A significant investment in region-serving transportation and other infrastructure improvements is required to provide adequate transportation capacity for San Luis Ranch, reduce existing congestion, and provide capacity for other pending nearby development projects as well as the remaining development potential in the City broadly. As a part of the broader environmental impact and traffic analysis for the San Luis Ranch Project the City has identified approximately $54.2 million of improvements. Table 3 provides a listing of these improvements and shows a technically-derived cost allocation for each infrastructure item, as summarized below: San Luis Ranch cost allocation. Approximately $22.8 million of these costs are attributable to the San Luis Ranch Project based upon the City’s “fair share” cost allocation and/or other agreements. City/regional share cost allocation. This leaves a net amount to be funded of $31.4 million. Funding sources to fund this “net” cost are discussed below. San Luis Ranch “up-front” costs. Approximately $25.5 million in up-front costs are required by San Luis Ranch to build or participate in project specific infrastructure. Community Benefits As a part of adopting a Development Agreement, the City is obligated to identify “community benefits” that are offered by the developer as consideration for the City’s willingness to enter into the Development Agreement. Community benefits, in this context, are “extraordinary,” Packet Pg. 217 Item 5 San Luis Ranch Financing Plan June 2018 8 meaning they are items that exceed the general nexus-based benefits of the project (e.g., net- positive fiscal flows, economic development benefits, and achieving other General Plan policies) and items that are required by City policy or regulations or EIR mitigations. At the minimum, the dollar value of these extraordinary community benefits should exceed the estimated nexus-based value of the Development Agreement to the developer, including the value of vesting the entitlements, offering to provide financing mechanisms, and other financial considerations. The City and the San Luis Ranch Developer have discussed a program of extraordinary community benefits summarized on Table 4 that sums to $14.25 million. Analysis has shown that this amount exceeds the value of the Development Agreement to the developer. Packet Pg. 218 Item 5 San Luis Ranch Financing Plan June 2018 9 Table 3 San Luis Ranch Regional Improvement Cost Allocation Percent Amount Percent Amount ROADWAYS 1 Froom Ranch Way (Prado to Oceanaire) Including Bridge Build & Fund $7,071,277 100% $7,071,277 0% $0 2 Froom Ranch Way (Oceanaire to Target Driveway) Design & Pay Fees - Built By Others $423,561 15% $63,534 85% $360,027 3 Froom Ranch Way & LOVR Intersection Widening Build w/ Potential Private Reimbursement $450,000 20% $90,000 80% $360,000 4 Prado Road/US 101 Interchange and North Bound Ramps Financing of Project improvements; Net Fees - Built By City $25,000,000 28% $7,000,000 72% $18,000,000 5 Prado Road Southbound Ramps Pay Fees - Built By Others $10,000,000 28% $2,800,000 72% $7,200,000 6 Madonna & Dalidio/Prado Intersection Widening Build & Fund $2,000,000 100% $2,000,000 0%$0 OTHER AREA ROADWAYS (MITIGATIONS) 7 Madonna & SB 101 Off Ramp - Lengthen EB Left Turn Pocket Build & Fund $50,000 100% $50,000 0%$0 8 Madonna & Oceanaire Pedestrian X-ing Enhancements Build & Fund $300,000 50% $150,000 50% $150,000 9 Madonna & San Luis Ranch Way Pedestrian X-ing Enhancement Build & Fund $150,000 100% $150,000 0%$0 10 LOVR & SB 101 Off Ramp - Lengthen Left Turn Pocket Build & Fund $250,000 100% $250,000 0%$0 11 LOVR & Higuera - Lengthen EB Right Turn Pocket Build & Fund $25,000 100% $25,000 0%$0 12 Higuera & South - Lengthen NB Right Turn Pocket Build w/ Potential Private Reimbursement $250,000 50% $125,000 50% $125,000 OTHER AREA ROADWAY MITIGATIONS - FEE ONLY PROJECTS 13 Prado & Higuera Widening Pay Fees - Built By Others $750,000 10% $75,000 90% $675,000 14 Madonna Rd @ LOVR - Signal Timing Optimization Pay Fees - Built By Others $2,500 0%$0 100% $2,500 15 Madonna & Oceanaire Turn Lane Extensions Pay Fees - Built By Others $25,000 100% $25,000 0%$0 16 Madonna & LOVR - Turn Lane Extensions Pay Fees - Built By Others $25,000 100% $25,000 0%$0 17 LOVR & Auto Park Way Signalization Pay Fees - Built By Others $200,000 11% $22,000 89% $178,000 18 Higuera & Tank Farm - Lengthen NB Right Turn Pocket Pay Fees - Built By Others $850,000 5% $42,500 95% $807,500 SLR BIKEWAYS 19 Prado Road Class I Path (Madonna to Froom)Build & Fund $1,500,000 100% $1,500,000 0%$0 20 Madonna Road Class I Path / Protected bikeway (Hwy 101 to Oceanaire)Build & Fund $800,000 60% $480,000 40% $320,000 21 Bob Jones Trail (Calle Joaquin to Froom Ranch Road) Build w/ Potential Private Reimbursement $1,000,000 16% $160,000 84% $840,000 SLR BIKEWAYS - FEE ONLY PROJECTS 22 Prado Road Class I Path (NB Ramps to Higuera)Pay Fees - Built By Others $500,000 28% $140,000 72% $360,000 23 Bob Jones Trail (Madonna to Prado)Pay Fees - Built By Others $1,500,000 3% $45,000 97% $1,455,000 UTILITIES 24 Install new 24" HDPE Sewer Line 50% developer share for the sewer system $1,078,700 50% $539,350 50% $539,350 Cost Totals $54,201,038 $22,828,661 $31,372,377 Source:City Staff Regional Infrastructure database dated October 9, 2017, with agreed-upon costs for the Prado Road/US 101 Interchange (Item #4) and the Bob Jones Trail (Item #21). City/Regional ShareItem #Item Developer Role/Participation Preliminary Cost Total Estimate Cost Allocation Developer Share Packet Pg. 219 Item 5 San Luis Ranch Financing Plan June 2018 10 Table 4 San Luis Ranch Proposed Community Benefits Program Developers Proposal Dollar Value Beyond SLR's Fair Share1.0Land and Building Dedications1.1Agricultural Heritage and Learning Center - Building Costs (Net of Mitigation Requirements) $2,025,0002.0Multi-Modal Transportation 2.1Bike Share/Rental$290,0002.2Car Sharing/Park & Ride$290,0002.3Electric Car Charging Stations$240,0003.0Energy and Water Conservation Features3.1Solar PV [1]$3,204,5003.2Building Efficiency/Net Zero$725,0004.0Affordable and Workforce Housing Programs4.0Priority for SLO Residents, Workers (1.5% of Initial Sales Value) $4,468,8754.2Owner Occupancy Restriction on NG-10 and NG-23 Units (1.5% of Initial Sales Value)$2,703,0004.3Local Heroes Program - Minimum of $1,500 Incentive per Home (Assuming Approx. 200 Homes)$300,000$14,250,000[1]Sources: San Luis Ranch; City of San Luis Obispo; Kosmont Companies; Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.Extraordinary Community Benefit Items Offered by San Luis RanchTotal Extraordinary Community Benefits (Rounded)Total cost of Item 3.1 is $4,930,000. San Luis Ranch's fair share is 35%, or $1,725,500. The balance of $3,204,500 represents value to the City beyond San Luis Ranch's fair share. Packet Pg. 220Item 5 11 4. FUNDING AND FINANCING SOURCES San Luis Ranch Funding Sources Developer or Builder Equity Developer equity, including revenue from a Community Facilities District (CFD) bond issue, is one of the primary sources of funding for infrastructure improvements needed to serve the San Luis Ranch area. Developer (or builder) equity will pay City development impact and mitigation fees, fund construction of all “in-tract” and “backbone” improvements located within the San Luis Ranch area, fund the Project’s “fair share” allocation of off-site “regional” improvements, of which some will be subject to fee credits, and advance funding over and above the “fair share” costs, a portion of which will be subject to reimbursement by the City. It is estimated that total developer equity necessary to fund the backbone and in-tract infrastructure and region-serving infrastructure (including the amount beyond the nexus-based “fair share” amount) is $25.5 million. Participation in Area and Citywide Development Impact Fee Programs The San Luis Ranch Project will be subject to the City’s various development impact fee programs, as specified in the Development Agreement. Per the Development Agreement, the San Luis Ranch Project will pay transportation fees and water and wastewater connection charges, as of the date of the Vesting Tentative Map (July 2017), except these fees will escalate at 10 percent per year beginning one year after the annexation and recordation of the first Final Map creating a developable residential (or commercial) lot until the fees reach the maximum fees approved and adopted by the City Council as part of the 2018 update.2 The residential component of the San Luis Ranch Project will pay the fire and police fees as approved and adopted by the City Council in 2018. The commercial component of the San Luis Ranch Project will pay the fire and police as approved and adopted by the City Council in 2018, except these fees will be phased in as described in the Development Agreement. Additional development impact fees are charged by the local school district. Per the terms of the Development Agreement, the difference between the fees that would be paid per the 2018 update and the July 2017 “vested” fees is referred to as the “excess” development impact fee payment. Both the developer and the City have agreed that in no event will the total amount of excess fee payments be less than $2,700,000. Construction and Dedication of “In-tract” Improvements As is common practice, the developer of San Luis Ranch will build in-tract and backbone infrastructure within, and on the periphery of, the San Luis Ranch area to the specification of the City as documented in the Tentative Subdivision Map and subsequently dedicate these improvements and underlying lands to the City. 2 During 2017 and 2018 the City engaged in a comprehensive effort to update and reorganize its impact fees, and the updated fee program was adopted in January 2018 Packet Pg. 221 Item 5 San Luis Ranch Financing Plan June 2018 12 “Fair Share” Allocation of Other Improvement Costs The development of the San Luis Ranch Project will increase traffic on existing roadways and create demand for other City/County infrastructure. Many of these improvements are facilities located beyond the project boundary. This additional demand was studied in detail as part of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and the mitigation measures identified to maintain policy- based levels of service on these facilities. One of the most significant improvements is the construction of an overcrossing from the San Luis Ranch site across U.S. Highway 101 via an overpass that will connect to the existing section of Prado Road on the east side of the freeway. This overpass will serve the expanded commercial and residential development of San Luis Ranch and will provide an additional east/west connection in San Luis Obispo that would reduce congestion at the Los Osos Valley Road and Madonna Road interchanges and route traffic to and from the Airport Area via the Prado Road connection. The overpass will also have a Class I Bike path, on-street bike lanes, and sidewalks. This improvement is to be constructed as a separate project from the Specific Plan as it is developed, and the Specific Plan would pay a fair share contribution to the design and construction. Consequently, the project will construct improvements that are necessary to correct existing deficiencies and to accommodate traffic and other impacts above and beyond its own impacts. Community Facilities District The owners of the property have requested and the City has agreed to form a CFD subject to Council action for the San Luis Ranch area. Such a CFD, pursuant to the Community Facilities District Act of 1982, allows for the levy of a special tax on real property located within the designated boundary of the CFD for a range of purposes including providing funding for municipal services, local area maintenance, and infrastructure. It is common for the special taxes to be used to service municipal bonds issued for the CFD to fund new development-related infrastructure. The San Luis Ranch CFD will primarily be used as a source of funding for the Prado Road/Highway 101 Interchange improvements and either directly fund or reimburse developer funding of regional improvements. City Funding Sources Development Impact Fee or Exaction Revenue Insofar as other developers/builders are obligated to pay their “fair share” of infrastructure improvements by paying the Citywide and area development impact fees or additional nexus- based “exactions,” a portion of this revenue will be used for reimbursement for investments above “fair share” made by the San Luis Ranch developer (or other nearby developers that may advance funding for construction of fee-funded facilities and improvements). Other Funding Sources Funding for the City’s share of non–San Luis Ranch improvement costs may be derived from a variety of sources typically used by the City to fund infrastructure. These include private funding from other development, public grants and use of eligible and available impact fee revenue. Packet Pg. 222 Item 5 San Luis Ranch Financing Plan June 2018 13 Funding Strategy for Regional Improvements A key aspect of the San Luis Ranch Financing Plan is providing funding for a range of improvements required for its development but also needed to meet needs of other nearby development and development throughout the City and region. Overall, these improvements are estimated to cost $54.2 million. As shown in Table 3, above, these costs are dominated by the Prado Road/US 101 Interchange. Table 3 also shows the cost allocation to the San Luis Ranch developer and the remainder that is the share that must be funded by the City or others. A key consideration regarding these improvements is their phasing and linkage, (i.e., when the individual improvements need to be constructed as new development occurs). At the present time it is expected that the improvements will need to be constructed over the next 10 years or more, depending on the rate of actual development and other factors. Table 5 shows the sources of funding that the developer will rely upon to pay for San Luis Ranch’s cost allocation, as further described below. Table 5 Funding Sources for Regional Improvements Developer Fair Share Allocation Total "Fair Share" Cost Allocation $22,828,661 Developer Funding Sources SLR Developer Equity $6,000,000 Mello Roos Community Facilities District (CFD) – SLR Parcels $14,000,000 San Luis Ranch to determine allocation between residential and commercial. Credits/Reimbursements/Adjustments City Adjustments $2,000,000 City to determine sources of adjustments (e.g., credits, reimbursements, other). Totals Estimated Total Funding $22,000,000 Value of Fee Deferral or Other Considerations $828,661 Reflects fee deferral to certificate of occupancy or other considerations. Funding Gap $0 Additional Negotiated Housing Commitment Total Workforce Units 14 Provided in consideration of the City Adjustments shown above. Distribution of units will be per Housing Element Policy. Funding Sources SLR Cost Allocation Notes Packet Pg. 223 Item 5 San Luis Ranch Financing Plan June 2018 14 Phasing of Regional Improvements The Regional Improvements will be phased in a manner that meets increasing travel demand and also the availability of necessary funding from development-based or City sources. Up-front Developer Obligation The Developer’s up-front obligation to build improvements and/or pay fees, before accounting for credits/reimbursements or other adjustments, is estimated to be $25.5 million. This is above and beyond the Developer’s Fair Share of Costs, and the City is committing to providing credits/ reimbursements or other adjustments to address the $2.7 million difference. Developer Pays Fair Share Costs Funding of Regional Improvements Developer will provide funding for its “fair share” of regional infrastructure improvement costs as exaction cash payments, through direct construction, subject to credits and reimbursements from the City where justified and issuance of CFD bonds. Estimated cost of the developer’s fair share is $22.8 million, just over 40 percent of total regional infrastructure project costs. This developer funding or construction will occur on a schedule consistent with Subdivision Map requirements or as specified in the Development Agreement. City and Regional Funding or Construction of Regional Improvements The larger portion of the regional infrastructure costs, $31.4 million, nearly 60 percent of the total, falls to the City (and the region) to fund. The City has identified a range of sources for this purpose as described below. Due to some uncertainty, including what the actual costs are and also variations in the amounts received from the individual funding sources, it will be prudent to have a funding contingency, (i.e., identify total funding in excess of the currently estimated cost of the improvements). Future Citywide Impact Fee Funding A number of the infrastructure projects included in the Regional Improvements list are also included in the City’s updated development impact fee program. These impact fees will generate fee revenues over time that will be available to fund the regional improvements associated with the San Luis Ranch development. Some of these fees may not fully recover the total costs of project improvements, and SLO Ranch may not be paying the total of new fees that are established, therefore final reimbursement calculations will be necessary when the City does final adoption of this program. Contributions from other Benefitting Developers There are several pending development projects that will benefit from the regional improvements and thus will contribute funding either as entitlement-related exactions to the City, building part of the improvement themselves, or through private reimbursement agreements with the Developer. It is currently estimated that approximately $845,027 in transportation costs3 will be 3 See Item #2, #3, and #12 on Table 3. Packet Pg. 224 Item 5 San Luis Ranch Financing Plan June 2018 15 available over time from these sources and $539,000 in potential private reimbursement4 for wastewater utility improvements will be sought. San Luis Obispo Council of Governments Grant Funding The San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) administers the major State and federal transportation grant programs for jurisdictions in San Luis Obispo County. To date SLOCOG has identified approximately $6,000,000 that may be used to assist with construction of the Prado Road/Highway 101 Interchange Phase I. Additional funding will be needed as Phase II proceeds. Other Funding Approximately $953,000 in funding will be needed from other funding sources, including the City’s General Fund, to help complete projects that are needed to be built by San Luis Ranch.5 These funds are not able to be passed on to the impact fee programs or reimbursed through public grant sources. Because the regional improvements benefit San Luis Obispo County, accommodating trips starting or ending in the unincorporated portions of the County, there is an obligation to fund a proportional amount of the region-serving infrastructure, specifically components of the Prado Road/Highway 101 Interchange. The County will make a one-time contribution of $1,435,260 toward this project, which is intended to supplement the amount of regional share that will be paid by the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG). Tax Increment Funding The City is currently in the process of seeking annexation of the San Luis Ranch territory to the City. As a part of this annexation process, a property tax exchange agreement (“Tax Exchange Agreement”) is necessary to establish a property tax base and increment for the City. The Tax Exchange Agreement was approved by the County Board of Supervisors on May 1, 2018. The City will receive one-third of all future property tax increment, after transfers to the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF), beginning in Fiscal Year 2019-20 and each year thereafter. This financial agreement is contingent upon approval of the annexation by LAFCO. Property taxes are one of the main revenue sources the City uses to fund its municipal services as shown in the San Luis Ranch Fiscal Impact Report.6 The City and/or County could decide each year to appropriate some or all of the property tax increment from development of the San Luis Ranch Project to a special “tax increment fund” that would fund their cost allocations. This pledge of tax increment would be for a predetermined period of years required to accumulate or pay debt service on a related debt issue or loan. Funding Strategy for Prado Road/US 101 Interchange As described above, the Developer and the City have agreed to obligations towards the funding of the Prado Road/US 101 Interchange based upon a 28 percent “nexus-based” allocation of cost 4 See Item #24 on Table 3. 5 Per City staff analysis dated 2/8/18. 6 Ibid. Packet Pg. 225 Item 5 San Luis Ranch Financing Plan June 2018 16 to the developer. The balance is funded with City and regional sources to address the existing deficiency and to provide improved capacity for future Citywide and regional development. Table 6 illustrates the Prado Road improvement cost-sharing agreement and shows the specific sources of funding that the developer and the City will use. In addition to direct equity investment as part of project development, the developer has agreed to the formation of a CFD. Together, these two sources will fund the bulk of the developer’s $9.8 million obligation. The City will draw upon a variety of sources including funding from the recently updated Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) Program and contributions from San Luis Obispo County and SLOCOG reflecting the regional benefits of the Prado Road/US 101 Interchange improvements. Other grant funding sources may also be obtained. Table 6 Funding Strategy for Prado Road/US 101 Interchange Regarding the substantial contribution to the Prado Road/US 101 Interchange improvements from the City’s TIF, there likely will be imbalances between the timing of the needed improvements and the availability of funding. This is often the case with impact fee programs where improvement costs are often needed “upfront” and fee revenues accumulate over time as Total Cost of Prado Road/US 101 Interchange Prado Road/US 101 Interchange and North Bound Ramps $25,000,000 See Table 3 Prado Road Southbound Ramps $10,000,000 Appendix A of the Capital Facilities Fee Program Nexus Study Financing $11,023,545 Appendix A of the Capital Facilities Fee Program Nexus Study Total Cost $46,023,545 Direct Developer Funding Developer Contribution $9,800,000 Fair Share Allocation (28%), See Table 3 Transportation Development Impact Fee Program Transportation Impact Fees $28,663,545 Appendix A of the Capital Facilities Fee Program Nexus Study Regional Funding Sources County of San Luis Obispo $1,435,260 One-time contribution towards Prado Road/Highway 101 Interchange Project as described in the Tax Exchange Agreement San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG)$6,000,000 STIP Funding for Prado Road/Highway 101 Interchange Project (secured) Future SLOCOG Allocation $124,740 Requested but not yet secured Totals Estimated Total Funding $46,023,545 Funding Gap (General Fund or Other)$0 Funding Sources City Cost Allocation Notes Packet Pg. 226 Item 5 San Luis Ranch Financing Plan June 2018 17 development of the project area (and in the City as a whole) occurs. In this event the City may need to loan the TIF Program funds to assure timely delivery of roadway improvements, to be paid back by the subsequently accruing fee revenues. Funding for such a loan could be derived from the City’s General Fund reserves or through a loan (e.g., from the State Infrastructure Bank), through financing (e.g., a certificate of participation), or through a pledge of City tax increment revenue. Economic Considerations Project Feasibility As a part of achieving new development as envisioned in the City’s General Plan and specified in specific plans or other zoning actions, it is in the interest of the City to cooperate with developers and builders to promote feasibility of new development, (i.e., that new development generates economic returns sufficient to attract necessary private equity investment and commercial lending). While market conditions can constrain investment at low points in the business cycle, over the longer terms the type and amount of development authorized by the City and the costs imposed for needed infrastructure and facilities should balance so as not to unnecessarily impede desired development. Financial Burden Measures A variety of methods are used to determine the cost burden placed upon new development associated with providing the necessary infrastructure including in-tract and backbone infrastructure improvements and contributions to City-serving infrastructure through payment of impact fees or other mechanisms. The San Luis Ranch Project, given the real estate values created and the total cost of infrastructure improvements, is shown to fall within reasonable market levels of financial burden. Incidence of Burdens Depending upon the type of funding relied upon to develop a project, the “incidence” of the burden (who pays?) varies. Equity provided by the developer for project costs including contributions to public infrastructure and facilities is a burden on the equity investors in the project. Special taxes or assessments on real property are a burden on the local homeowners or businesses subject to these taxes or assessments. Excise taxes (e.g., sales taxes, utility taxes, transient occupancy taxes) are a burden on those engaging in purchases of these goods. The City has established CFD policies which place a 1.8 percent “cap” on property tax burdens. The San Luis Ranch project is located in County Tax Rate Area (TRA) 112-002 which has a total current tax rate of 1.07225 percent, reflecting the basic 1 percent as well as voter-approved overrides.7 Future additional tax overrides related to voter-approved general obligation bonds and special taxes or assessments may be approved in the future. 7 San Luis Obispo County Auditor-Controller. Packet Pg. 227 Item 5 18 5. IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES AND RELATED ACTIONS The Financing Plan will be implemented concurrent with approval and subsequent development of the San Luis Ranch area. Key components of implementation will include the following. 1. Adopt Development Agreement The Entitlement Documents for the San Luis Ranch Project include a Development Agreement, which is a contract between the Developer and the City that vests the entitlement over a long term (20 years) as consideration for extraordinary benefits to be received by the City for granting the vesting. The San Luis Ranch Development Agreement largely provides a framework and security for funding the regional infrastructure improvements and the related reimbursement to the Developer for investments that exceed the “fair share” cost allocation for these improvements. 2. Administer Subdivision Map Conditions A vesting tentative map was adopted for the San Luis Ranch in July 2017. The Subdivision Map includes an extensive set of conditions that must be met by the Developer as the project is developed, including construction of all “in-tract” infrastructure improvements and other obligations. 3. Adopt and Administer City Development Impact Fees The City of San Luis Obispo levies a range of development impact fees on new development. These currently include fees for transportation improvements, parks and recreation improvements, and water and wastewater connection charges.8 These fees are levied on a citywide basis and also additional fees are charged within specific subareas of the City where additional local infrastructure is required. In 2018 the City completed a major update to its impact fee program that includes new fee categories for public safety and revisions to existing fees. The San Luis Ranch Project will be charged the fees that were in place at the time the vesting tentative map was adopted, subject to the adjustments specified in the Development Agreement. If the developer builds improvements that are funded by the impact fees they will be eligible for a credit against the respective fee liability that will be passed on to subsequent builders otherwise subject to the fees. If infrastructure is oversized with respect to the developer’s “fair share” cost allocation, the value of the oversizing will be reimbursed with fee revenue received from other development subject to the fee. 4. Prepare and Administer Reimbursement Agreement(s) The San Luis Ranch Development Agreement will enable and specify the terms and security for reimbursement agreements that will be created for each of the individual regional improvements. 8 In addition, the City charges in-lieu fees for park land, public art, and affordable housing; however, these in lieu fees are often the subject of specific negotiations. Packet Pg. 228 Item 5 San Luis Ranch Financing Plan June 2018 19 Projects Eligible for Private Reimbursement Three projects have been identified that may be eligible for private reimbursement. Alternatively, these improvements may be incorporated into the updated Impact Fee Program. Froom Ranch Way: Oceanaire to Target Driveway (Item #2 on Table 3) Froom Ranch Way and LOVR Intersection Widening (Item #3 on Table 3) Higuera & South: Lengthen North Bound Right Turn Pocket (Item #12 on Table 3) Projects Eligible for Impact Fee Credits Insofar as the Developer builds or directly funds infrastructure improvements that are included in one of the City’s development impact fees, the Developer is eligible to receive credit against its fee obligations for these improvements. The Development Agreement will specify the precise terms of these fee credits. Currently, the following projects may be eligible for impact fee credits (see Table 3). Madonna and Dalidio/Prado Intersection Widening US SB Ramp at Los Osos Valley Road LOVR and Higuera Intersection Turn Lane extensions at Madonna and Oceanaire, and Madonna and LOVR Prado Road Class I Bike Path US 101 to South Higuera Additionally, some projects may be eligible for crediting under the City’s updated Mitigation Fee Act Transportation Impact Fee program. Final credit amounts are subject to final Council approval. Potential projects that may receive crediting under the revised program include: Madonna Road Class I Path (US 101 to Oceanaire) Madonna and Oceanaire Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements Prado Road and South Higuera Widening Prado Road Class I Bike Path in front of US Post Office Bob Jones Trail (Calle Joaquin to Froom Ranch Road) It is estimated that approximately $2,142,000 in potential impact fee credit for project construction and mitigation fee requirements will be available to assist in delivering the improvements needed by the San Luis Ranch development.9 Source of Reimbursement Agreement Funding A number of infrastructure improvements are specified in the City’s development impact fee programs and Environmental Impact Fee mitigation measures that the San Luis Ranch Developer will fund or build beyond its “fair share” allocation of cost. These contributions will be eligible for reimbursement from fees paid by other developers benefiting from these improvements or from other sources. Community Facilities District A CFD, as enabled by the Community Facilities District Act of 1982, allows a local jurisdiction to levy a special tax within a specified area to pay for public services and/or infrastructure needed 9 Per City staff analysis, dated 2/8/18. Packet Pg. 229 Item 5 San Luis Ranch Financing Plan June 2018 20 within the area. Over the past three decades, CFDs have become a common mechanism for cities to fund services and finance development-related infrastructure. The levy of any special tax and any related bond issuance is subject to voter approval, and if the area is inhabited, approval by two-thirds of the voters in the area is required. If fewer than 12 voters are located in the area, approval by the landowners is required (San Luis Ranch area currently has no residential uses). City Policy and Approach The City of San Luis Obispo has not, before this San Luis Ranch Project, created any CFDs to fund capital improvements. The City has, in anticipation of San Luis Ranch and other development-related financing requirements, adopted policies and procedures related to CFDs that guide formation of the San Luis Ranch CFD. A key policy adopted by the City is that “aggregate” property tax burden within the City should not exceed 1.8 percent of assessed value annually. Funding Capacity The funding capacity of a CFD is based upon the type and amount of development within the bounds of the CFD and the amount of the special tax levied against each parcel. Special taxes levied as part of a CFD must clearly specify a “rate and method of apportionment” which defines the amount of the tax levied on each parcel and how the amount may be increased (indexed) over time to account for inflationary cost increases. Generally, CFD special taxes are limited to a fraction of the 1 percent property tax allowed under Article 13 A of the State Constitution. The funding capacity of the San Luis Ranch Project, taking account of the market value of development being created, the existing general and special taxes, and the City’s established special tax “cap” of 1.8 percent, is estimated to be approximately $2.9 million annually. Given market conditions and maximum equivalent HOA rates in the community of $200 per month, and the significant amount of smaller multifamily units, the aggregate tax burden on residential units may limit this capacity to below this maximum, resulting in a funding capacity of approximately $1.7 million per year. Special Tax Components The San Luis Ranch CFD is primarily being formed to provide a source for infrastructure funding to be allocated at the Developer’s discretion. The “Rate and Method of Apportionment” that will be developed as part of CFD adoption will specify how the San Luis Ranch special taxes shall be allocated. Based upon current cost analysis, the allocation of CFD special tax funding at full development of the San Luis Ranch Project area would include $14 million towards infrastructure funding. Within this total, there will be a component for administration. CFD Administration The City will be required to administer the CFD from year to year. Given the nature of the special tax (a fixed tax rate plus an index-based inflator), this administration is quite simple, involving sending documentation to the County Tax Collector as the annual property tax bills are prepared. This service is typically provided by consultants to the City and costs approximately $10,000 to $20,000 per year depending upon the size of the CFD and complexity of the special tax. There will be some additional administration required by the Finance Department to control CFD funds consistent with the terms of the Rate and Method of Apportionment and related financial reporting (in the CAFR, etc.). Packet Pg. 230 Item 5 San Luis Ranch Financing Plan June 2018 21 Formation Process It is anticipated that the CFD formation will be initiated at the time the San Luis Ranch annexation is adoption by the City Council. The following steps must be accomplished as part of the CFD formation process: Develop CFD concept and document costs to be funded Map CFD Boundary and conduct voter determination (area occupied area or unoccupied?) Prepare Rate and Method of Apportionment Adopt Resolution of Intention Adopt Resolution of Formation and set date for election Conduct election (or obtain landowner approval) Adopt Ordinance to Levy Special Tax Packet Pg. 231 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 Exhibit D-1 EXHIBIT D FEASIBILITY MEMORANDUM (attached) Packet Pg. 232 Item 5 M E M O R A N D U M To: Derek Johnson, City Manager Michael Codron, Director of Community Development From: Walter Kieser and Ashleigh Kanat Subject: San Luis Ranch Financial Feasibility and Funding of Region- Serving Improvements; EPS #161142 Date: May 17, 2018 As a part of our broader scope of financial services related to the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Project, Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. (EPS) has been asked to evaluate the financial feasibility of the Project from a private sector “developer” perspective, explore how the costs for the regional infrastructure beyond the “fair share” of costs attributable to San Luis Ranch can be funded through combined private and City sources, and also explore the community benefits deriving from the development of the Project, including the general benefits expected to occur and also the “extraordinary” benefits offered by the Developer in connection with the City’s willingness to enter into a development agreement. It is important to document feasibility to assure that the Project, as planned, can meet its infrastructure financing obligations while remaining competitive and feasible in the marketplace. Regarding the extraordinary community benefits offered, it is necessary to find that these benefits to the community equal or exceed the value of the Development Agreement to the Developer. This Memorandum documents this financial review effort which has included a careful and cooperative effort involving City staff and representatives of the Developer Team to identify Project-related infrastructure items and their cost estimates, estimating the value of community benefits, preparing and reviewing confidential financial information from the Developer (i.e., information subject to a non- disclosure agreement), and identification and evaluation of funding options available to the Developer and the City to fund needed regional- serving infrastructure. Packet Pg. 233 Item 5 Memorandum May 17, 2018 San Luis Ranch Financial Feasibility Page 2 Findings 1. San Luis Ranch Project has the potential to achieve the financial returns necessary to attract the needed equity and commercial credit. Based upon our review of the Developer’s pro forma financial analysis it is our opinion that the San Luis Ranch Project can be financially feasible as indicated by the measures of financial return applied and the Developer’s willingness to accept the indicated level of return. This finding is highly sensitive to the market pricing ultimately achieved and the respective absorption rates of proposed residential and commercial development, the actual overall project development costs, and the Project’s actual “fair share” allocation of region- serving infrastructure costs. As the average home price increases within the range of pricing indicated by market analysis, financial returns improve proportionately. It is noted that the Developer is not providing a “guarantee” on the pricing of the homes (other than deed restrictions on the inclusionary and 14 workforce housing units secured by the Development Agreement). 2. The City has a range of options for funding region-serving infrastructure beyond the “fair share” allocated to San Luis Ranch. As a part of the broader environmental impact and traffic analysis for the San Luis Ranch Project the City has identified some $54.2 million of improvements that are needed to serve the Project while also alleviating existing traffic congestion and serving other future development in the southern area of the City and nearby unincorporated portions of the County as development occurs over the coming decades. Of this amount, approximately $25.5 million in upfront costs are required of the project to complete project specific improvements. Approximately $22.8 million of these costs are attributable to the San Luis Ranch Project based upon the City’s “fair share” cost allocation technical analysis.1 This leaves a net amount to be funded from other City, private or regional sources of $31.4 million to fully complete the $54.2 million of total projects required for the San Luis Ranch development. There are a range of funding and financing options to pay for the non-project share of these improvements, including private reimbursements, integrating these projects into the City’s development impact fee programs as part of ongoing update efforts, working with the County to ensure the County pays its “fair share” allocation and obtaining a portion of future regional funding. 3. The San Luis Ranch Project will create a range of community benefits and offers “extraordinary” community benefits that exceed the value of the Development Agreement to the Developer. The San Luis Ranch has been designed to achieve a high development standard and as such will confer a range of community benefits to the City including implementation of General Plan policies, creation of construction and permanent employment, providing parks and open space areas in an area of town that is deficient of public parks, and funding needed improvements to region-serving infrastructure. Additionally, extraordinary community benefits (beyond those items that occur as the result of Project development or are otherwise required by City regulation or policy) are being offered including funding infrastructure beyond the Developer’s “fair share” cost allocation, providing home sales preferences for 1 The fair-share allocation analysis is based on the City’s transportation model and represents a collaborative effort between the City’s transportation department and the Project developer. Packet Pg. 234 Item 5 Memorandum May 17, 2018 San Luis Ranch Financial Feasibility Page 3 local workers and owner occupants, providing a workforce housing program, providing land and building an Agricultural Heritage and Learning Center, exceeding State and City’s energy efficiency standards and thereby accelerating compliance with the City’s Climate Action Plan, and exceeding the City’s multimodal goals and objectives. Based upon our analysis, the extraordinary community benefits are estimated to be $14.25 million and the value of the Development Agreement to the Developer is estimated to be $7.05 million, thus the benefits to the community outweigh the Developer’s benefits. Project Revenues The San Luis Ranch Project revenue will be derived primarily from building and selling homes. Additional revenue will be derived from sale of parcels to other builders. The residential pricing assumptions used in the pro forma financial analysis reflect a market range of average prices for single-family for-sale housing from $525,000 to $625,000 (the top of the market range indicated by market analysis for the expected residential prototypes). The pro forma financial analysis shows sales of housing and the commercial parcels occurring (following site work that begins in 2018/19) from 2020 through 2026. Pricing and absorption assumptions are consistent with current and expected future market conditions, and considered conservative for purposes of the pro forma analysis. The Project’s Affordable and Workforce Housing Program is reflected as a discount on Project average home pricing and beyond these price-restricted units, as noted above, no other price restrictions will occur. Project Costs Project costs shown in the pro forma financial analysis include the full range of costs required to develop the Project Site and construct the residential component of the San Luis Ranch Project: • Land acquisition • Pre-development costs • Site improvements • City development impact fees and permitting fees • Offsite improvements including the “fair share” allocation of regional improvement costs • Financing costs, including returns on initial equity invested and construction loan interest • Vertical construction costs and contingency These costs as reflected in the pro forma financial analysis all appear to fall within a range typical for such large development projects, with the exception of the “fair share” allocation of the regional improvements, as has been noted. Rate o f Return to Equity Investment The San Luis Ranch Project, as is the case for all major development projects, requires substantial equity investment as well as commercial credit for both site “horizontal” development and building “vertical” construction costs. Real estate finance became considerably more difficult as the result of the Great Recession due to increased standards and costs for commercial credit including higher equity requirements to obtain credit. The San Luis Ranch Project also carried a significant land acquisition cost since its purchase in 2015. These higher equity investments and requirements increase the need for equity investment and also contribute to overall costs due to the greater risks involved in equity investment. Our review of the pro forma financial analysis involves review of all data and assumptions regarding their veracity and also viewing resulting financial returns from a variety of perspectives. In this instance we have concluded that Packet Pg. 235 Item 5 Memorandum May 17, 2018 San Luis Ranch Financial Feasibility Page 4 the “internal rate of return” method indicated in the San Luis Ranch pro forma financial analysis, given the use of leverage involved, meets typical real estate industry standards and is acceptable to the Developer as a basis for moving forward with the Project development. San Luis Ranch Infrastructure Financing Strategy In cooperation with City staff and the Project Developer Team, EPS has documented infrastructure needs and costs and options for funding this infrastructure as part of the broader effort to prepare a Financing Plan for the San Luis Ranch Project. As a part of this overall Financing Plan there are two components for fund region-serving infrastructure: 1) assuring that the San Luis Ranch Project commits developer equity to funding infrastructure costs within th e Project and also their “fair share” of offsite regional improvements and 2) funding the portion of offsite regional improvements not allocated to San Luis Ranch. Our analysis has determined that the funding for both the project-related “fair share” and the City and regional “fair share” can be secured. Table 1 presents the strategy for funding region-serving infrastructure. Table 1 San Luis Ranch Infrastructure Financing Strategy Developer Fair Share Allocation Total "Fair Share" Cost Allocation $22,828,661 Developer Funding Sources SLR Developer Equity $6,000,000 Mello Roos Community Facilities District (CFD) – SLR Parcels $14,000,000 San Luis Ranch to determine allocation between residential and commercial. Credits/Reimbursements/Adjustments City Adjustments $2,000,000 City to determine sources of adjustments (e.g., credits, reimbursements, other). Totals Estimated Total Funding $22,000,000 Value of Fee Deferral or Other Considerations $828,661 Reflects fee deferral to certificate of occupancy or other considerations. Funding Gap $0 Additional Negotiated Housing Commitment Total Workforce Units 14 Provided in consideration of the City Adjustments shown above. Distribution of units will be per Housing Element Policy. Funding Sources SLR "Fair Share" Cost Allocation Notes Packet Pg. 236 Item 5 Memorandum May 17, 2018 San Luis Ranch Financial Feasibility Page 5 Community Benefits The San Luis Ranch Project, by virtue of its development and conforming to City planning policies, regulatory standards, and mitigating potential environmental impacts, will confer a range of community benefits in the City of San Luis Obispo. These positive effects of the project including community development objectives or social, economic and/or fiscal benefits, while a precondition for a development agreement, are considered as extraordinary community benefits: 1. Creating a new residential neighborhood and commercial district in the City consistent with General Plan policies. 2. Providing a range of housing prototypes that include small, higher density units that will be “affordable by design”. 3. Providing new housing targeted at the City’s lower income and working families and including 34 contractually price-restricted affordable (inclusionary) housing units, and an additional 14 price-restricted workforce housing units. 4. Achieving “net-zero” energy consumption and other energy efficiency standards. 5. Generating employment opportunities for the City’s construction-related companies and workers. 6. Financing infrastructure that in addition to meeting travel demands created by the Project relieves existing congestion and provides additional capacity for other future development. 7. Providing more than 50 acres of open space including land set aside for continued agricultural use preserving the area’s agricultural heritage. Extraordinary Community Benefits “Extraordinary” community benefits of a development project are public improvements or other material offerings that cannot be required by the City based on its code requirements or CEQA mitigation, each which must meet Constitutional statutory standards to achieve the “rational nexus” test. A complete listing of the extraordinary community benefits being offered by the San Luis Ranch Developer is shown in Table 2. Specifically, the developer has committed to constructing or funding improvements or mitigating impacts that exceed the mitigation measures specified in the project environmental impact report or other City-determined requirements. The developer has also agreed to build a public improvement in advance of when it might otherwise be required. For example, an intersection improvement that may not be required to mitigate project-induced congestion until five years in the future could be built in advance, assuring that the improvement is constructed and conferring congestion reduction immediately. These improvements include the following: 1. Land and Building Dedications 2. Multi-Modal Transportation Improvements and Programs 3. Energy and Water Conservation Features 4. Affordable and Workforce Housing Programs Taken as a whole these cited community benefits total $14.25 million. The estimates were prepared by the Developer’s financial consultant, Kosmont Companies, and have been reviewed for the reasonableness of the assumptions used and computational accuracy by EPS. Packet Pg. 237 Item 5 Memorandum May 17, 2018 San Luis Ranch Financial Feasibility Page 6 Table 2 Summary of Extraordinary Community Benefits Comparing the Value of Community Benefits with Value Received by Developer As part of reaching a Development Agreement it is customary that the community benefits offered by the Developer meet or exceed the value(s) conferred on the Developer by the City. As a general measure the extraordinary community benefits offered should meet or exceed the estimated value of the vested entitlement to the developer combined with the additional benefit to the developer from other special terms granted by the City (e.g., infrastructure financing contributions, formation of financing districts, etc.). Value of Vesting the Entitlement As a part of this effort a review of the Developer’s pro forma financial analysis was conducted by EPS, subject to the terms of a non-disclosure agreement. Applying the standard method of measuring a reduction in the “threshold IRR” associated with reduced risks and costs to the San Luis Ranch project associated with two vesting assurances: 1) elimination of future planning or regulatory changes (i.e., rezoning of the Project area) and 2) assuring project development phasing through a fixed allocation of housing units pursuant to City’s Growth Management Ordinance. These two considerations are estimated to confer a value of approximately $2.75 million to the Developer. Dollar Value Beyond SLR's Fair Share 1.0 Land and Building Dedications 1.1 Agricultural Heritage and Learning Center - Building Costs (Net of Mitigation Requirements)$2,025,000 2.0 Multi-Modal Transportation 2.1 Bike Share/Rental $290,000 2.2 Car Sharing/Park & Ride $290,000 2.3 Electric Car Charging Stations $240,000 3.0 Energy and Water Conservation Features 3.1 Solar PV [1]$3,204,500 3.2 Building Efficiency/Net Zero $725,000 4.0 Affordable and Workforce Housing Programs 4.0 Priority for SLO Residents, Workers (1.5% of Initial Sales Value)$4,468,875 4.2 Owner Occupancy Restriction on NG-10 and NG-23 Units (1.5% of Initial Sales Value)$2,703,000 4.3 Local Heroes Program - Minimum of $1,500 Incentive per Home (Assuming Approx. 200 Homes)$300,000 $14,250,000 [1] Sources: San Luis Ranch; City of San Luis Obispo; Kosmont Companies; Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. Extraordinary Community Benefit Items Offered by San Luis Ranch Total Extraordinary Community Benefits (Rounded) Total cost of Item 3.1 is $4,930,000. San Luis Ranch's fair share is 35%, or $1,725,500. The balance of $3,204,500 represents value to the City beyond San Luis Ranch's fair share. Packet Pg. 238 Item 5 Memorandum May 17, 2018 San Luis Ranch Financial Feasibility Page 7 Value of Terms Offered Conferring Additional Benefit to the Developer As noted, the developer has requested other considerations intended to lower costs or improve project revenues in pursuit of adequate financial returns. In this instance, the additional benefits to the Developer offered in the Development Agreement include the willingness to establish and administer a Community Facilities District (CFD) to finance a portion of the Developer’s share of regional infrastructure costs. The value of the CFD to the Developer has been estimated by comparing the interest rate available through municipal bonds to commercial credit. Given the expected $14 million bond issuance, it is expected that over the 30-year term of the bond interest rate savings would be in the range of $4.3 million. In summary, it is concluded that the Development Agreement extraordinary community benefits offered to the City by the Developer, estimated to be $14.25 million, exceed the estimated $7.05 million of benefit received by the San Luis Ranch Developer by approximately $7.2 million. Packet Pg. 239 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 Exhibit E-1 EXHIBIT E AGRICULTURAL LAND OPERATIONS & GUIDELINES (attached) Packet Pg. 240 Item 5 Revised 12-08-2017 Exhibit E Operational Requirements and Guidelines for the Agricultural Land on San Luis Ranch In addition to the conditions of the Project Approvals and the terms of the Development Agreement, San Luis Ranch agrees to the following: Agricultural Heritage Facilities and Learning Center: The Agricultural Heritage Facilities and Learning Center (the “Agricultural Heritage Learning Center”) will include the historically significant Dalidio Home, Racetrack Viewing Stand and Hay Barn. The restored agricultural setting will allow San Luis Ranch residents and visitors to experience the working farm much as it operated in decades past, and learn about current organic farming practices. The Agricultural Heritage Learning Center will be a destination for the San Luis Obispo community and will feature local food, farming and cooking education and build a lasting connection to our agricultural heritage. Operational Milestones: (a) Prior to issuance by the City of any grading permits for the Property, the Developer shall submit a draft Organic Farm Management Plan (the “Farm Plan”) to the City for review and approval. At a minimum, the Farm Plan shall have the following components: i. A preliminary operations plan for the Agricultural Land (as defined in the Development Agreement) which shall include: a description of the necessary licenses and permits for all agricultural operations on the Agricultural Land covered by the permanent Agricultural Easement; a description of practices and procedures to be performed and maintained to achieve compliance with the Specific Plan, including progress toward and attainment of organic certification, and to ensure continued agricultural operations on the Agricultural Land covered by the permanent Agricultural Easement; a description of the monitoring practices and procedures to be performed and maintained, including the frequency with which they will be performed, to verify that the plan is effectively implemented; a description of the accounting and recordkeeping system; any additional information deemed necessary by the City to evaluate compliance with the Specific Plan and to ensure continued agricultural operations. ii. A preliminary education plan for the Agricultural Heritage Learning Center, outlining potential educational opportunities on the permanent Agricultural Easement area and Agricultural Heritage Learning Center. (b) Prior to issuance of grading permits for the multi-family component of the Project, the Developer shall restore and relocate the three existing on-site historic structures to the Agricultural Heritage Learning Center at the northeast corner of the farm, maintaining Packet Pg. 241 Item 5 Revised 12-08-2017 their approximate original solar orientation and relation to one another. These historically significant structures will include an agricultural processing center and a farm stand for local goods and products. These structures will be open to the public for community gatherings and educational programs. Prior to the construction of the Prado Road overcrossing, these facilities shall only be open for use by the residents of the Project and the lessee of the adjacent City Farm Property. (c) No later than one year after completion of on-site grading on the Agricultural Land covered by the permanent Agricultural Easement, or prior to the execution of a lease of that Land, whichever occurs first, the Developer shall submit a final Farm Plan to the City’s Natural Resources Manager for review and approval, which shall not be unreasonably withheld, and the developer shall enroll the area within the permanent Agricultural Easement in the USDA organic certification program or an equivalent. The parties acknowledge that the Farm Plan is subject to change and/or amendment and that any such modifications shall be subject to review and approval by the City’s Natural Resources Manager, which shall not be unreasonably withheld. All annual organic reports and operational statements shall be provided to City upon request. (d) Developer agrees to incorporate the Farm Plan in any lease entered into for agricultural operations on the Agricultural Land. Any such lease shall contain a clause terminating that lease if there is continuing non-compliance with the Farm Plan after sixty (60) days of receipt of notice and otherwise empowering the developer to take steps sufficient to enforce the Farm Plan. City’s Remedies (a) If Developer fails to submit the draft Farm Plan or the final Farm Plan when and as set forth above, or if City determines that the Agricultural Land is not operating in accordance with the approved plan, City shall provide written notice to the Developer of such violation and demand corrective action sufficient to cure the violation. (b) Developer shall have ten (10) working days to submit a Farm Plan or ninety (90) calendar days after notice from City to bring the farm operations into compliance with the Farm Plan. (c) After conclusion of the ten (10) working day or ninety (90) calendar day period, as applicable and following the termination of any existing lease and the eviction of any tenant, City shall have the right to require the Developer to execute a lease with an organic farmer of City’s choice, subject to approval by Developer which shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. City shall have the right to dictate the terms and conditions of said lease. Developer acknowledges and agrees that, should Developer refuse to approve such tenant or refuse to execute such lease, City shall have the right to seek specific performance to compel Developer to execute such lease. In addition to the foregoing remedy, City may seek an injunction prohibiting Developer from using or further leasing the Agricultural Land. City may also seek appointment of a receiver to take control of the Agricultural Land pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure §§ 564 et seq. Developer acknowledges that the continued agricultural operation of the Agricultural Land is a critical community value and an important component of the City’s approval of Packet Pg. 242 Item 5 Revised 12-08-2017 the San Luis Ranch project and developer agrees that a receivership is an appropriate remedy per Code of Civil Procedure § 564(a)(9) in order to preserve the Agricultural Land and the rights of the City should Developer, or its successors and assigns, fail to comply with this Agreement and the conditions of the Project Entitlements relative to the use, operation and care of the Agricultural Land, including the requirements of in this Exhibit F. Developer acknowledges the remedies set forth herein are cumulative to each other and to any other remedy afforded to City in law or in equity and that no election of remedies shall apply. (d) The Developer shall bear any and all expenses, costs and liabilities the City incurs to enforce this Agreement and the conditions of the Project Entitlements relative to the use, operation and care of the Agricultural Land, including the requirements of this Exhibit F, including, without limitation, costs of suit and attorneys’ fees. (e) For purposes of ensuring the City has legal standing to enforce these remedies, all leases of the Agricultural Land shall include language granting City the Special Power of Attorney to enforce any defaults under the terms of the lease. Packet Pg. 243 Item 5 071928\ 9447955 Exhibit F-1 EXHIBIT F AFFORDABLE/WORKFORCE HOUSING PLAN (attached) Packet Pg. 244 Item 5 Exhibit F Affordable & Workforce Housing Plan Affordable Housing Plan The San Luis Ranch project will encourage long term housing affordability by including design and devel- opment strategies that provide lower cost housing, by including a range of housing sizes and types that are not typically provided in the community, including deed-restricted workforce units, and by providing lower income inclusionary units as required by the City Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. Since the price of houses over time is most closely related to the size of the dwelling unit, the size of the lot, and costs of maintenance, the project has concentrated on lowering the overall size of market rate dwelling units, and reducing lot size for market rate units. Within each of the residential zones there will be dwelling unit sizes ranging from 220 square foot studios to 2,200 square foot single family detached units. Lot sizes range from air-space studios to 3,200 square feet. Consequently, the average size of the units and lots across the development is far smaller (less than ½ the size) of existing residential housing stock in the City. Maintenance expenses, to the extent feasible, may be included in a Community Facilities District to reduce the necessity for Homeowner’s Association fees and other costs associated with that maintenance and governance structure. Landscape maintenance and cost of water and utilities will also be reduced through the use of drought tolerant landscaping, smaller lots and other sustainable and cost reducing features. The City’s Housing Element provides incentives to develop housing in a denser pattern, with smaller unit sizes to encourage affordability across the low, moderate and workforce income ranges. These incentives include reduced inclusionary housing requirements for denser projects and for projects with lower dwell- ing unit square footages. Conversely, more inclusionary housing is required for projects with dwelling units that exceed unit sizes of 2,000 square feet. Table 2A of the Housing Element contains these adjust- ment factors. According to the City’s Inclusionary Housing Ordinance and Table 2A, the inclusionary housing require- ment for the residential component of the San Luis Ranch project is a total of 34 units, with 26 very low, 4 low, and 4 moderate income units. These inclusionary units will be integrated throughout the project in the single-family detached, townhome, studio, 1 and 2-bedroom condominium products. In addition, the commercial component of the project requires a total of 34 inclusionary units. The project proposes to meet the commercial component requirement by either constructing these units on-site or paying an af- fordable housing in-lieu fee. City Residential Requirements The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan includes locations for on-site units to fulfill the affordable housing re- quirement for the residential development planned for the Specific Plan Area. Including residential uses only, the Specific Plan Area must provide a total of 34 deed restricted affordable units in the development, and must provide at least 5% low and 10% moderate income affordability per Table 2 of the Housing Packet Pg. 245 Item 5 __________________________________ San Luis Ranch March 6, 2018 Affordable & Workforce Housing Plan Page 2 of 7 Element. Any additional units provided above the inclusionary requirement could be sold or rented at market rate. See residential calculation below. Residential Inclusionary Requirement Calculation # of Units Density (units/acre) Unit S.F. Build 5% (very low income) Build 10% (moderate income) Total Base Required Adjust Factor Required Inclu- sionary Units 200 NG-30 1,000 10 20 30 0 0 100 NG-23 1,300 5 10 15 0.25 3.75 200 NG-10 1,500 10 20 30 1 30 80 NG-30 NA Total 34 City Commercial Requirements The commercial uses envisioned in the Specific Plan Area will be required to provide an additional 34 units of affordable housing. The commercial inclusionary calculations for the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan are as follows: Commercial Inclusionary Requirement Calculation Use Acreage x 2 Required Inclusionary Retail 9.45 2 18.9 Hotel 3.5 2 7 Office 3.7 2 7.4 Total 34 Packet Pg. 246 Item 5 __________________________________ San Luis Ranch March 6, 2018 Affordable & Workforce Housing Plan Page 3 of 7 The San Luis Ranch project will address housing affordability in several ways, most notably through the design itself, which includes medium and high-density housing with lot sizes and floor areas that are well below the typical average for existing single-family detached units in the community. The City’s Inclusionary Housing Requirement will be addressed through deed restrictions on very low, low income and moderate-income units to be constructed by San Luis Ranch, and/or provided by dedicating and donating improved land to a non-profit affordable housing provider. However, should an affordable housing provider fail to construct the units, the obligation to provide for the 34 deed-restricted affordable housing units remains with San Luis Ranch to complete. The following highlights are summarized from the Specific Plan: • Mix of Residential Densities and Small Lots. There is an intentional mix of residential densities in the San Luis Ranch project that includes a range of small lot sizes, attached townhomes, and multifamily dwellings, with an emphasis on higher density units. Floor plans ranging from 220 to 2,200 square feet in studio, 1 BR/1BA, 2BR/1BA, 2BR/2BA and 3BR/2BA configurations. The average unit size across the entire project is less than 1,330 square feet. • NG-10 Zoning. The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan includes 200 small-lot, single family units, which are intended to meet the needs of young professionals, empty nesters and young families. These smaller units, ranging in size from 1,300 square feet to 2,150 square feet, have one-or two car garages with limited guest parking spaces. This parking reduction is justified by the lower expected occupancy for these smaller units and the multimodal features of the overall development. The four inclusionary moderate-income units will be provided on in Phase 1 of the project on Lots 53, 64, 174, and 191. • NG-23 Zoning. The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan includes 100 attached and detached townhome units, close to services and open spaces. Units will range in size from 1,300 square feet to 2,110 square feet. Four of these 2- bedroom units will be deed restricted for low-income families. The inclusionary units will be provided on Lots 261, 267, 283, and 293. • NG-30 Zoning. Finally, the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan includes 272 studio, one to three-bedroom multi-family units adjacent to open space and Madonna Road. Like other portions of the project, this multi-family zone will be directly served by an on-street transit stop and located within easy walking distance of nearby shopping. 26 of these units will be deed restricted as inclusionary housing for very low income families. Inclusionary and other multi-family units may be either dedicated to an afforda- ble housing provider or managed by the San Luis Ranch. Multi-family unit sizes will range from 220 square foot studios to 1,100 square foot units for larger families. • Neighborhood Commercial. The 19.6-acre Neighborhood Commercial portion of the Specific Plan area will generate a requirement for 34 additional inclusionary units. Development of this portion of the project site will be based on market demand. Approximately half of the NC area is currently lo- cated in ALUP Safety Zone S1-b that precludes residential development; however, the area outside of the S1-b zone can accommodate the required 34 units. Alternatively, the project may pay an afforda- ble housing in-lieu fee per the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance and Table 2 of the Housing Element to satisfy this requirement. Overall, the project will provide a total of twenty-six (26) very low, four (4) low, and four (4) moderate Income inclusionary units. The inclusionary housing product mix has been intentionally skewed toward Packet Pg. 247 Item 5 __________________________________ San Luis Ranch March 6, 2018 Affordable & Workforce Housing Plan Page 4 of 7 very low-income units to ensure that this income group is adequately represented in the project, and to recognize that the moderate-income groups have adequate market rate opportunities in the NG-10, NG- 23 and NG-30 neighborhoods. Table 2 shows the distribution of the affordable units, and Exhibit 1 shows the location of the moderate and low-income units. Distribution of the 26 very low-income units will be included in NG-30 neighborhood as described below. Inclusionary Housing Phasing Plan Neighborhood Distribution Program NG-10 NG-23 NG-30 Commercial Total Moderate Income (Sale) 4 4 8 Low Income (Sale) 4 4 8 Very Low Income (Rental) 26 26 52 Units in Phase 4 4 26 34 68 Total - Inclusionary Very Low 52 Total - Inclusionary Low 8 Total - Inclusionary Moder- ate 8 Total 68 *The Commercial Development and associated Inclusionary Housing Requirement will be determined by the Com- munity Development Department of the time of submittal of detailed plans for that component of the project. This requirement will be met either by development of units within the commercial project, off-site construction, or by payment of affordable housing in-lieu fee, or a combination thereof. Inclusionary Housing Program Synopsis: The affordable housing located within the residential portion of the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan Area will provide 34 units on site for very low, low, and moderate income households. The applicant is committed to including at least 5% very low income units in the project. Per Section 17.90.040.D of the City's Afford- able Housing Incentives which follows State law, a developer that agrees to construct 5% of the total units of a housing development for very low income households qualifies for a 20% density bonus. In this case, 5% of the allowed 500 units under the LUCE requires 25 very low income units. The project is proposing 26 very low income units. The tables above show the required inclusionary units as well as the proposed density bonus units. Me- dian and low income units (SFR and Townhomes) are intended to be for sale units. The applicant will retain the flexibility to either rent or sell the very low income units. Deed-restricted, affordable units will be located throughout the residential portion of the Specific Plan Area, as illustrated in the above table. Packet Pg. 248 Item 5 __________________________________ San Luis Ranch March 6, 2018 Affordable & Workforce Housing Plan Page 5 of 7 Workforce Housing Plan The City of San Luis Obispo has a recognized need for workforce housing (121-160 of Area Family Median Income). The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan aims to help meet the City’s housing needs by providing a highly desirable new home type to the San Luis Obispo housing market: small lot (1,000 to 3,200 square feet) single family and multi-family housing types. A primary goal of the City of San Luis Obispo, realized and implemented through the San Luis Ranch pro- ject, is to create workforce housing and increase the supply of housing available to local employees. A special five-point program will be provided to create workforce housing and increase the supply of hous- ing available to local employees. This program includes 1) 14 deed-restricted workforce housing units for eligible households earning 121-160% of the Area Median Income. Two of these workforce housing deed- restricted units will be located in the NG10 Zone on Lots 105 and 121, two will be located in the NG23 Zone on Lots 251 and 257, and ten will located in the NG30 Zone (See Exhibit 1 for unit locations); 2) providing local priority preferences for individuals who work within the City of San Luis Obispo to purchase or rent a residence within the Project; 3)) Owner Occupied Restrictions; 4) “Local Heroes” discount for public safety, hospital workers and teachers; and 5) participation in the City Equity Share program, These housing programs seeks to target the Project to local employees, reduce the influence of investors in the limitation of housing choice and availability, and provide for 14 deed-restricted units. Notwithstanding anything set forth below, all preferences and/or priorities for workforce housing units will be administered in accordance with, and subject to, all applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations, including Fair Housing rules. Subject to applicable law, the elements of the workforce housing programs are as follows: • Local Preference (“SLO Workers First”). Program 10.4 of the City’s Housing Element encourages resi- dential developers to “…sell or rent their projects to those residing or employed in the City first before outside markets.” Further, the City and project applicants recognize that one of the principal reasons for the designation of additional residential land in the community in the 2014 Land Use and Circula- tion Element update was to address the current jobs-housing imbalance. One direct and effective way of achieving this is to provide priority for existing employees to rent or purchase residences within the Project. To that end, San Luis Ranch will give first preference to rent or purchase a residence within the Specific Plan area to local employees identified on the interest list. These areas include the City’s corporate limits and areas outside the City limits such as Cal Poly, California Men’s Colony, Cuesta College, agricultural lands within the Edna Valley area and business parks on South Broad Street. Specifically, for purposes of this program, the term “local employees” shall include individuals who are employed in business that are located in geographic areas that are customarily included in the City’s annual jobs-housing balance analysis in its General Plan Status Report, including the follow- ing zip codes: 93401, 93405 and 93407. New employees to businesses in these geographic areas with bona fide employment offers will be considered “local employees” as well. San Luis Ranch will main- tain and update the interest list through full build-out of the Project. San Luis Ranch will operate and administer this program as follows: a. San Luis Ranch shall maintain the interest list and shall separate and prioritize names of local employees based on interest in product type. Packet Pg. 249 Item 5 __________________________________ San Luis Ranch March 6, 2018 Affordable & Workforce Housing Plan Page 6 of 7 b. When product becomes available, usually 270-360 days prior to certificate of occupancy (assuming a 180-day construction period), San Luis Ranch shall notify those individuals of the opportunity to purchase a residence on a lottery basis. Once notified, those individu- als shall have approximately 60 days to get pre-qualified to purchase the residence and to provide San Luis Ranch with proof that the individual is a local employee and the time notice (i.e. paycheck or bona fide offer of employment from a local employer.) c. If an individual fails to get pre-qualified or fails to provide San Luis Ranch with proof of local employment within the time periods above, then San Luis Ranch may remove or put that name at the end of the interest list. d. San Luis Ranch agrees not to sell any units within the Project to any individual without first offering the unit to a local employee who is on the interest list for that product type. Upon exhausting all local employees on the interest list for a product type, San Luis Ranch agrees to give priority in the sale of such units to individuals employed in the County, and finally to individuals from outside the county. Nothing herein shall preclude San Luis Ranch from notifying multiple individuals with the opportunity to purchase a residence and prioritizing the purchase and sale based on a lottery basis. Nothing herein shall preclude San Luis Ranch from taking all reasonable actions necessary in order to facilitate the sale of units within the Project provided such actions are consistent with the “SLO Workers First” program described herein. San Luis Ranch shall, upon request, update the City on its implementation of this program and provide City with the interest list and proof of employment for all sales made under this program. City and San Luis Ranch acknowledge that this program described above will accomplish three im- portant objectives: 1) use new housing to address the current imbalance between existing jobs and housing; 2) ensure that, to the maximum extent practicable, that the increased housing in San Luis Obispo results in a decline in the current commute traffic; and, 3) reduce competition from outside buyers in the initial offering and sales. • Owner-Occupancy Restrictions. San Luis Ranch agrees to include restrictions in the purchase agree- ment and Covenants Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) for all single family detached units (NG-10) and (NG-23) (total of 300 dwelling units) requiring these units to be restricted to owner-occupants for the first five years after sale. In the case of units with Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs), the Principal Dwelling or the ADU will need to be occupied by the property owner. The final form of these agree- ments will be determined at the time of development of the first final map, and will provide for ap- propriate monitoring and enforcement. Enforcement and monitoring of the owner occupancy re- quirement on all single-family dwellings will be controlled by the San Luis Ranch Owners’ Association, or in coordination with a qualified housing non-profit. • Local Heroes: San Luis Ranch will offer a special program for buyers who are considered “Local He- roes.” These Local Heroes are Police, Firefighters, Active and Retired Military, Teachers, EMTs, Nurses and City or County Employees. Qualification for this incentive is verified on the loan application re- viewed by our Preferred Lender. (This provision is included to ensure consistent review parameters. Buyers are not obligated to finance home purchase with Preferred Lender.) Military, Active or Packet Pg. 250 Item 5 __________________________________ San Luis Ranch March 6, 2018 Affordable & Workforce Housing Plan Page 7 of 7 Veterans submit separate evidence. San Luis Ranch will provide a minimum $1,500 incentive that is credited to the buyer at closing and can be used at the design center for upgrades and/or closing costs. Packet Pg. 251 Item 5 Page intentionally left blank. Packet Pg. 252 Item 5 Meeting Date: 8/21/2018 FROM: Carrie Mattingly, Director of Utilities Prepared By: David Hix, Deputy Director, Wastewater Jennifer Metz, Utilities Projects Manager SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR STATEMENTS OF QUALIFICATION FOR ELECTRICAL SUBCONTRACTORS FOR WRRF PROJECT RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Adopt “A Resolution of The City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo Adopting Bidder Prequalification Documents and Procedures and Establishing the Bidder Prequalification Appeals Panel for the Water Resource Recovery Facility Project;” and 2. Authorize t he City Manager, following City evaluation of the Statements of Prequalification, to identify a final list of prequalified subcontractors to provide Electrical Subcontracting Services. DISCUSSION Section 20101 of the California Public Contract Code authorizes cities to prequalify contractors for bidding on the construction of public works projects. On April 17, 2018, the City Council adopted Resolution 10882 entitled “A Resolution of The City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo Adopting Bidder Prequalification Documents and Procedures and Establishing the Bidder Prequalification Appeals Panel for the Water Resource Recovery Facility Project” (Attachment A). The Resolution included requests for qualification for general contractors, electrical subcontractors, and control systems integration subcontractors. Resolution 10882 outlined the prequalification process and procedures consistent with Section 20101 of the California Public Contract Code. The electrical component of the Water Resource Recovery Faci lity (WRRF) project is substantial and complicated. The requirements identified in the City’s Request for Statements of Prequalification reflect the experience and knowledge that staff believes is required to deliver a successful project. Prior to the release of the Request in April, staff conducted outreach to 13 prospective electrical subcontractors to identify a qualified pool of candidates and had expected to receive five proposals from electrical subcontractors meeting the requirements identified in the City’s Request . On June 5, 2018, the City received 14 Statements of Prequalification, with two from electrical subcontractors. One electrical subcontractor was a subsidiary to a general contractor that also submitted its Statement of Prequalification. With only two potential prequalified electrical subcontractors, competition would be limited and there is a risk that one or both of the electricians will decline to bid on the WRRF project when it is advertised. There is also a risk of price escalation wit h reduced competition. Packet Pg. 253 Item 6 Staff is proposing to reissue its Request for Statements of Prequalification from Electrical Subcontractors with Council approval of the attached Resolution (Attachment s B-D). Changes to the Request for Statements of Prequalification for Electrical Subcontractors include updating project bidding and construction schedule and modifying the project and key personnel experience requirements. With these modifications the City anticipates a broader pool of electrical subcontractors will meet the prequalification requirements. The proposed prequalification process would enable the City to assess a bidder’s experience, financial situation, and past performance. This process ensures the bids the City receives are only from serious, qualified bidders, making the bidding process more efficient. The prequalification process is separate from the City’s typical bid evaluation procedure, which concentrates on the price and merits of the bid itself. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The City Council adopted Resolution 10740 (2016 Series) certifying the environmental impact report (EIR) for the WRRF Project (SCH #2015101044) on August 16, 2016. Recommendations described here are for electrical subcontractor prequalification for construction of the WRRF Project analyzed under that EIR. These actions do not trigger the need for additional environmental review. FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact associated with this action. This request is to authorize staff to prequalify electrical subcontractors who will be eligible to submit a bid for the construction of the WRRF Project. The project cost will be known later this year after Council authorization to release construction bid documents for the project and evaluation of the lowest responsible bidder. Total construction cost for the WRRF Project has been estimated to be $114 million and will take approximately three years to complete. The use of this prequalification process streamlines the bidding process, saving staff and Council time and saving potential subcontractors the time and money it takes to prepare construction bids. ALTERNATIVE Elect Not to Approve the Resolution. Council may elect not to approve the resolution to adopting bidder prequalification documents and procedures and establishing the b idder prequalification appeals panel for the WRRF project to prequalify electrical subcontractors. Should Council choose this alternative, staff would prepare bid documents for the WRRF Project for City Council approval. This approach is not recommended as it would lengthen the bidding process and could lead to additional cost. Packet Pg. 254 Item 6 Attachments: a - April 17, 2018 Council Agenda Report b - Resolution Electrical Subcontractor Prequalification c - Council Reading File - Exhibit A SLO WRRF RFQ - Electrical Subcontractors d - Council Reading File - Exhibit B Reference Drawings Electrical Packet Pg. 255 Item 6 Meeting Date: 4/17/2018 FROM: Carrie Mattingly, Director of Utilities Prepared By: David Hix, Deputy Director, Wastewater Jennifer Metz, Utilities Projects Manager SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR STATEMENTS OF QUALIFICATION FOR GENERAL CONTRACTING AND SUBCONTRACTORS FOR WRRF PROJECT RECOMMENDATION 1.Adopt “A Resolution of The City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California Adopting Bidder Prequalification Documents and Procedures and Establishing the Bidder Prequalification Appeals Panel for the Water Resource Recovery Facility Project;” and 2.Authorize the City Manager, following City evaluation of the Statements of Prequalification, to identify final lists of prequalified contractors and subcontractors to provide: a) General Contracting Services b) Subcontractors to provide Electrical Subcontracting Services, and c) Subcontractors to provide Control System Integration Subcontracting Services. DISCUSSION Section 20101 of the California Public Contract Code authorizes cities to pre-qualify contractors for bidding on the construction of public works projects. A Request for Statements of Prequalification documents and procedures has been developed for this process. The proposed prequalification process enables the City to assess a bidder’s experience, financial situation, and past performance. This process ensures the bids the City receives are only from serious, qualified bidders, making the bidding process more efficient. The prequalification process, which provides a desirable level of certainty to both contractors and the City, will: 1.Reduce the amount of work and time involved in evaluating bids from unqualified contractors. 2.Encourage local firms to form joint ventures with other local or international firms, thereby benefiting from their resources and experience. 3.Reduce significantly, if not eliminate, problems associated with low prices submitted by bidders of doubtful capability. 4.Establishes minimum experience requirements for the contractors and their key personnel. Only contractors with experienced staff and a proven track record of successfully building projects of similar size and complexity as the WRRF Project will be pre-qualified to submit bids. 5.Establishes minimum safety metrics for the contractor. Contractors with a history of unsafe work practices will not be allowed to submit bids on the WRRF Project. Packet Page 25 6 Packet Pg. 256 Item 6 6. Increases bidder confidence and bidder participation as qualified contractors do not have to compete against low bids from inexperienced and unqualified contractors. 7. Generates interest in the City’s WRRF Project before the bid advertisement is issued, allowing contractors to place the WRRF Project on their pursuit list and increasing contractor participation in the bid process. The request for statements of qualification documents and procedures provide a clear basis upon which prospective bidders can be evaluated, following an objective process based on fair and transparent criteria. The qualification of a contractor, or subcontractor, is a separate process from the City’s typical bid evaluation procedure, which concentrates on the price and merits of the bid itself. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The City Council adopted Resolution 10740 (2016 Series) certifying the environmental impact report (EIR) for the WRRF Project (SCH #2015101044) on August 16, 2016. Recommendations described here are for contractor and subcontractor prequalification for construction of the WRRF Project analyzed under that EIR. These actions do not trigger the need for additional environmental review. FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact associated with this action at this time. This request is to authorize staff to pre-qualify contractors who will be eligible to submit a bid for the construction of the WRRF Project. This cost will be known later this year after Council authorization to release construction bid documents for the project and evaluation of the lowest responsible bidder. Total construction cost for the WRRF Project is estimated to be $90-$110 million and will take approximately three years to complete. The use of this prequalification process streamlines the bidding process, saving staff and Council time and saving potential contractors the time and money it takes to prepare construction bids. ALTERNATIVE Elect Not to Approve Resolution. The City Council may elect not to approve the resolution to prequalify general contractors or subcontractors. Should Council choose this alternative, staff would prepare bid documents for the WRRF Project for City Council approval. This approach is not recommended as it would lengthen the bidding process and could lead to additional cost. Attachments: a - Resolution Adopting Bidder Prequalification Procedures b - Council Reading File_Exhibit A_Request for SOQ_GeneralContractors c - Council Reading File_Exhibit B_Request for SOQ_Electrical Subcontractors d - Council Reading File_Exhibit C_Request for SOQ_Control System Integration Packet Page 26 6 Packet Pg. 257 Item 6 Resolution No. _____ (2018 Series) Page 1 R _______ RESOLUTION NO. _____ (2018 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING BIDDER PREQUALIFICATION PROCEDURES AND DOCUMENTS AND ESTABLISHING THE BIDDER PRE-QUALIFICATION APPEALS PANEL FOR THE WATER RESOURCE RECOVERY FACILITY PROJECT WHEREAS, Section 20101 of the California Public Contract Code established procedures for certain local agencies wishing to pre-qualify bidders on public works projects; and WHEREAS, the Department of Industrial Relations (“DIR”) has developed standardized questionnaires and model guidelines for rating bidders pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 20201 (hereafter “Model Guidelines”); and WHEREAS, under Section 20101, the City Council may formally adopt bidder pre- qualification procedures and documents modeled after the Model Guidelines and establish a process by which disqualified bidders may appeal; and WHEREAS, the City has modeled the “Request for Statements of Qualification of General Contractors for Construction of the Water Resource Recovery Facility Project for the City of San Luis Obispo,” attached hereto as Exhibit “A”, after the Model Guidelines; and WHEREAS, the City has modeled the “Request for Statements of Qualification of Electrical Subcontractors for Construction of the Water Resource Recovery Facility Project for the City of San Luis Obispo” attached hereto as Exhibit “B”, after the Model Guidelines; and WHEREAS, the City has modeled the “Request for Statements of Qualification of Control System Integration Subcontractors for Construction of the Water Resource Recovery Facility Project for the City of San Luis Obispo” attached hereto as Exhibit “C”, after the Model Guidelines; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that adopting bidder pre-qualification procedures and establishing an appeal committee will streamline the formal bidding process for the Water Resource Recovery Facility Project and further the City Council’s goals to operate efficiently and in a businesslike manner. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. The City Council hereby adopts the “Request for Statements of Qualification of General Contractors for Construction of the Water Resource Recovery Facility Project for the City of San Luis Obispo” attached hereto as Exhibit “A,” “Request for Statements Packet Page 27 6 Packet Pg. 258 Item 6 Resolution No. _____ (2018 Series) Page 2 R _______ of Qualification of Electrical Subcontractors for Construction of the Water Resource Recovery Facility Project for the City of San Luis Obispo,” attached hereto as Exhibit “B”, “Request for Statements of Qualification of Control System Integration Subcontractors for Construction of the Water Resource Recovery Facility Project for the City of San Luis Obispo ,” attached hereto as Exhibit “C,” and incorporated herein by reference (“Pre-Qualification Guidelines”). The City Manager, or his or her designee, is hereby authorized to pre-qualify bidders on the public works contract with the City of San Luis Obispo for the Water Resource Recovery Facility Project pursuant to the attached Pre-Qualification Guidelines. The City Manager may use the scoring system provided in the attached Pre-Qualification Guidelines consistent with the requirements of the Public Contract Code. SECTION 2. The City Council hereby establishes the Bidder Pre-Qualification Appeals Panel ("Appeal Panel") consisting of the following, or their designee(s): the City Manager, the City Engineer, and the Director of Utilities. Except as otherwise provided for herein, appeals shall be conducted by the Appeal Panel in accordance with the rules set forth in the Uniform Administrative Code. The sole issue before the Appeals Panel shall be the scoring of a prospective bidder. The decision of the Appeals Panel shall the City's final administrative decision and any judicial review thereof shall be instituted no later than the time period referred to in section 1094.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure. SECTION 3. The City Council hereby determines that this Resolution is exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (California Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.) because the Resolution, pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines section 15378, subdivision ( b), constitutes a continuing administrative activity and the creation of a governmental fiscal activity that does not involve any commitment to any specific project that may result in a potentially significant physical impact on the environment. SECTION 4. 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 Packet Page 28 6 Packet Pg. 259 Item 6 Resolution No. _____ (2018 Series) Page 3 R _______ 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 Page 29 6 Packet Pg. 260 Item 6 Resolution No. _____ (2018 Series) Page 4 EXHIBIT “A” Request for Statements of Qualification of General Contractors for Construction of the Water Resource Recovery Facility Project for the City of San Luis Obispo Packet Page 30 6 Packet Pg. 261 Item 6 Resolution No. _____ (2018 Series) Page 5 EXHIBIT “B” Request for Statements of Qualification of Electrical Subcontractors for Construction of the Water Resource Recovery Facility Project for the City of San Luis Obispo Packet Page 31 6 Packet Pg. 262 Item 6 Resolution No. _____ (2018 Series) Page 6 EXHIBIT “C” Request for Statements of Qualification of Control System Integration Subcontractors for Construction of the Water Resource Recovery Facility Project for the City of San Luis Obispo Packet Page 32 6 Packet Pg. 263 Item 6 Packet Pg. 264 Item 6 Packet Pg. 265 Item 6 Packet Pg. 266 Item 6 Meeting Date: 8/21/2018 FROM: Daryl R. Grigsby, Director of Public Works Prepared By: Brian Nelson, Supervising Civil Engineer SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS – CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE SERVICES, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, SOILS AND MATERIALS TESTING RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Approve the Request for Qualifications (RFQ) to provide: a. Construction Management Services, Specification No. 50410.2018.CM b. Landscape Architecture Services, Specification No. 50410.2018.LS c. Environmental Services, Specification No. 50410.2018.ES d. Soils and Materials Testing Services, Specification No. 50410.201 8.SMT 2. Authorize the City Manager to execute agreements with selected consulting firms. 3. Authorize the Finance Director to execute and amend Purchase Orders for individual consult ant services contracts in an amount not-to-exceed the authorized project budget. 4. Authorize the City Engineer to amend or extend the agreement for services in accordance with its terms and within the available annual budget. DISCUSSION Background The Cit y’s Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) implements Council priorities by including projects that build, maintain, and improve infrastructure. The CIP includes a mix of projects designed and managed exclusively by City staff, and projects that use consultant ser vices. This on-call service approach has been used successfully for many years, starting with survey services in 1998 and in 2007 expanding to engineering, architecture, and other disciplines. The City’s CIP projects are mostly modest in size, and the Request for Qualifications (RFQ) generally draws local consulting firms. For example, 75 percent of the City’s current on-call design and construction service contracts are with firms from San Luis Obispo and northern Santa Barbara County. Packet Pg. 267 Item 7 The existing consultant contracts for Construction Management , Landscape Architecture, Environmental Services, and Soils and Materials Testing expire this year. Therefore, it is recommended that the City re-advertise for these services through the RFQ process. The RFQ model is used to identify the skill set of the consultants submitting qualifications. RFQs enable City staff to determine how those qualifications align with future City projects. This is different from the project -specific Request for Proposals (RFP) model. After evaluating the RFQ submittal packages, the top consultants in each specialized area will be selected to enter into an agreement with the City. Consultant s selection is based on their demonstrated ability to provide the services proposed in a time ly manner with qualified staff. Once the selected consultants enter into an agreement with the City, their services on an individual project are implemented rapidly, without the need for an individual RFP. The selected consultant firms will remain on contract for four years, with the option to extend the contract one additional year. The consultants will operate under the conditions of the agreement included in the RFQ. Individual projects will be scoped by the City department most involved. The City’s Project Manager will work with the consultant to determine the final cost for the services. The specific project work will then be authorized via a Purchase Order through the Finance Department, referencing the signed agreement for the terms and conditions. FISCAL IMPACT The RFQ process, in and of itself, does not obligate any funds for CIP consultant work. After the agreements are executed by the City Manager, scoping meetings and Purchase Order issuance will follow, obligating CIP funds. Work will b e billed to individual project accounts, within the authorized project budget. ALTERNATIVE Individual Project RFPs. Council can direct staff to proceed in a more traditional fashion by issuing RFPs for each individual project in the process outlined by the City’s Purchasing Guidelines. In this case, a company with greater experience in the specific work might be attracted; however, this process is very time consuming and increases the work required for an individual project, reducing overall project pro duction. Staff does not recommend this approach because it increases the time to implement individual contracts, while providing minimal benefit. RFPs can still be issued on a case-by-case basis when specialized skills, not available through on-call contracts, are needed. Attachments: a - Council Reading File - CM Services RFQ 50410.2018.CM b - Council Reading File - Landscape Architecture RFQ 50410.2018.LA c - Council Reading File - Environmental Services RFQ 50410.2018.ENV d - Council Reading File - Soils and Material Testing RFQ 50410.2018.SMT Packet Pg. 268 Item 7 Meeting Date: 8/21/2018 FROM: Michael Codron, Community Development Director Prepared By: Cara Vereschagin, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF 2018-19 HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION GRANTS-IN-AID FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS RECOMMENDATIONS 1. As recommended by the Human Relatio ns Commission, approve the 2018-19 Grants-in-Aid funding allocations in the amount of $139,652 (Attachment A); and 2. Authorize the Community Development Director to execute agreements with each grant recipient. DISCUSSION Background The City’s Grants-in-Aid (GIA) program, overseen by the Human Relations Commission (HRC), provides financial support to non-profit organizations that promote the economic and social well- being of the citizens of San Luis Obispo. Grants are made to local organizations or agencie s based in neighboring communities who serve a significant number of City residents. The HRC advises the City Council on community needs and funding recommendations. Community Needs Workshop On October 4, 2017, the HRC hosted a Community Needs Workshop to inform the public about upcoming grant programs and funding amounts, as well as to solicit public comments on community development and human service needs. A total of nine speakers addressed a wide variety of community needs during the public comment period. Representatives from non-profits pointed to an increase in demand for services including proper nutrition for seniors, economic development opportunities for women, mental health services for previously incarcerated individuals, and affordable housing. Due to the decrease in funding at the federal and state level over the past several years, the increase in demand and decrease in grant funding has strained providers’ ability to deliver core services. The service providers stressed the importance of the GIA program and encouraged the HRC to continue its support. Packet Pg. 269 Item 8 Council Priority Setting On November 7, 2017, Council adopted homelessness prevention, including affordable and alternative housing, support services and transitional housing as the primary funding priority for allocating GIA funds for the 2018-19 Program. However, to allow maximum flexibility for funding recommendations dependent upon the received applications, the following were not ranked, but were agreed to be important priorities: • Hunger and malnutrition prevention • Supportive physical and mental health services for those in need • Services for seniors and/or people with disabilities in need • Supportive and development services for children and youth in need GIA Application Process In October of 2017, the HRC formally launched its annual GIA process by advertising the availability of grant funds and information regarding the upcoming GIA timeline. GIA applications were due to the City on January 31, 2018. The City received grant funding requests from 28 agencies requesting funding for 30 different programs totaling $248,650 which amount ed to $108,998 more than the available funding. Attachment A includes a list of the applications submitted to the City for GIA funding and the HRC’s recommended funding amounts. Attachment B further describes each program and recommendation reasoning. HRC Subcommittee Review Process On February 7, 2018, the HRC convened the GIA subcommittee of Commissioners Welts, Hughes, and Clayton to review grant applications and make preliminary funding recommendations. After discovering a conflict of interest, Commissioner Clayton recused himself from the subcommittee. The remaining subcommittee members utilized the endorsed GIA funding priorities set by Council to guide their funding recommendations. As a part of the application review and recommendation process, the subcommittee considered whether grant funds would be used to provide direct services to clients or staff operating costs, collaboration with other agencies, the estimation of people to be served by the programs, and/or the prioritization of multiple funding requests from the same agency. The Subcommittee also paid close attention to how GIA funds would be leveraged and how specific programs’ funding has changed over the past few years. Funding Recommendation On April 4, 2018, the subcommittee presented preliminary grant recommendations to the full HRC. The HRC reviewed each grant recommendation in detail and requested access from staff to review the applications and preliminary recommendations before the next meeting (Attachment C). Packet Pg. 270 Item 8 On May 2, 2018, the HRC held a public hearing to review the recommended funding for the 2018-19 GIA applications in consideration of Council’s adopted funding priorities, to finalize its recommendations to the City Council. Prior to the May 2nd meeting, GIA applicants were informed of the HRC’ s preliminary funding recommendations. A total of nine representatives from various non-profit organizations provided testimony in support of the GIA program and preliminary funding recommendations, during public comment (Attachment D). While many thanked the HRC for its support, several speakers requested reconsideration of the preliminary funding recommendations for their programs. After hearing public testimony, the HRC continued the item to the next Regular Meeting on June 6, 2018. One member of the public attended the hearing to speak in support of the funding recommendations (Attachment E). After the public testimony, the HRC recommended to move the GIA funding allocations to City Council for final approval, with minor adjustments to the previously recommended grant awards. The HRC’s 2018-19 GIA funding recommendations are as follows: 1. Provide for the disbursement of $139,652 as budgeted in the 2017-19 Financial Plan. 2. Provide funding to 27 programs with grants ranging from $1,500 to $14,182. Complete funding recommendations and discussion of programs not recommended for funding can be found in Attachment B. Grant Contracts Upon Council approval of GIA funding allocations, the City will enter into a contract with each organization that has been awarded grant funding. The HRC and City staff will monitor the contracts throughout the year. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Consideration and approval of the GIA funding allocations for this purpose is not a project under CEQA and is otherwise exempt from environmental review in pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) General Rule Exemption. FISCAL IMPACT The City designates a portion of General Fund monies to the GIA program and the Council has the final authority over how those grants are awarded. The total amount budgeted to the GIA program in the 2017-19 Financial Plan for the 2018-19 fiscal year is $ 139,652. The HRC recommends allocating the full amount (Attachment A). Packet Pg. 271 Item 8 ALTERNATIVES 1. The Council may modify the proposed grant funding amounts. 2. The Council may choose to fund an eligible GIA application not recommended by the HRC. 3. The Council may continue consideration of funding for the 2018-19 GIA Program Year. Direction should be given to staff regarding additional information necessary to make a final funding decision. Attachments: a - 2018-19 Grants in Aid HRC Funding Recommendations b - 2018-19 GIA Program Application Summary c - Human Relations Commission April Minutes d - Human Relations Commission May Minutes e - Human Relations Commission DRAFT June Minutes Packet Pg. 272 Item 8 2018-19 GIA HRC Funding Recommendations Human Relations Commission 2018-19 Grants-in-Aid (GIA) Funding Recommendations Total Budget = $139,652 App. Non-Profit Organization Program/Project Description Grant Request HRC Grant Recommendation 1 Access Support Network HIV/HCV Homeless Prevention and Supportive Housing Program $5,000 $4,500 2 Access Support Network Hepatitis C Project - Access to Health Benefits & Counseling $5,000 $2,500 3 Alliance for Pharmaceutical Access, Inc. Reducing Disparities in Medication Access for a Healthier Community $10,000 $2,500 4 Assistance League of SLO County Operation School Bell $5,000 - 5 Big Brothers Big Sisters of San Luis Obispo County Community Based Youth Mentoring $7,500 $1,875 6 CASA Child Advocacy $8,500 $4,250 7 Community Action Partnership of San Luis Obispo (CAPSLO) Homeless Prevention/Stable Housing Program $7,500 $6,750 8 Community Action Partnership of San Luis Obispo (CAPSLO) Adult Wellness and Prevention Screening Program $7,500 $3,750 Packet Pg. 273 Item 8 City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subtitle 2018-19 GIA HRC Funding Recommendations Page 2 9 Community Counseling Center Affordable, Professional and Transformative Counseling for the Low Income and Uninsured $5,000 $4,500 10 Cuesta College Foundation SLO Campus Food Pantry $5,000 $2,500 11 Family Care Network, Inc. Supporting Foster Youth as They Transition to Independence $5,000 $4,500 12 Food Bank Coalition of San Luis Obispo County Fresh Produce and No-Cook Bags $15,000 $8,182 13 Jack's Helping Hand Jack's Helping Hand Assistance Program $10,000 $2,500 14 Learn.Connect. Play.Foundation. Cooking on a Budget $12,450 - 15 Literacy for Life Literacy Program $5,000 $2,500 16 LTC Ombudsman Services of SLO County Ombudsman Services $5,000 $2,500 17 Meals that Connect/Senior Nutrition Program Meals that Connect $10,000 $5,682 18 People's Self- Help Housing Homeless Prevention & Housing Special Needs Groups in SLO $15,000 $13,500 19 Restorative Partners Inc. RP Recovery Home for Women $10,000 $9,000 20 RISE SLO County Sexual Assault & Domestic Violence Programs $6,000 $3,000 Packet Pg. 274 Item 8 City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subtitle 2018-19 GIA HRC Funding Recommendations Page 3 21 San Luis Obispo Legal Assistance Foundation Senior Legal Services Project $3,500 $1,750 22 San Luis Obispo ALPHA, Inc Essential Infant Nutrition $7,200 $4,282 23 Senior Volunteer Services Central Coast Community Volunteers $10,000 - 24 SLO Noor Foundation SLO Noor Clinics: Healthcare for the Uninsured $15,000 $7,500 25 Smart Share Housing Solutions DBA HomeShareSLO HomeShareSLO Housing Solutions $8,500 $7,650 26 Tolosa Children's Dental Center Tolosa Children's Dental Center - SLO $10,000 $5,000 27 Transitional Food and Shelter Transitional Food and Shelter Program $15,000 $14,182 28 Transitions- Mental Health Association (TMHA) Homeless Outreach - Library Project $5,000 $2,500 29 United Way of San Luis Obispo 2-1-1 SLO County $3,000 $1,500 30 Women's Shelter Program of San Luis Obispo County DBA Stand Strong Homeless Prevention & Self-Sufficiency Program for DV Survivors $12,000 $10,800 Total $248,650 $139,652 Packet Pg. 275 Item 8 2018-19 GIA Program Application Overviews and Funding History Human Relations Commission PROGRAMS RECOMMENDED FOR FUNDING 1. Access Support Network (ASN): HIV/HCV Homeless Prevention and Supportive Housing Program 2016 Grant Award: $5,000 2017 Grant Award: $4,000 2018 Grant Request: $5,000 2018 HRC Recommendation: $4,500 To maintain the highest level of health, a person living with HIV/AIDS or HCV (PLWH) must have: access to medical care, adequate nutrition, and, perhaps most importantly, adequate and stable shelter and living conditions. To ensure that clients maintain stable and supportive housing, the ASN established a housing program, including 13 agency‐ owned units. The ASN's Housing Program is a well‐established and crucial aspect of the agency. The ASN request s funds to provide utility subsidies and facilities operational support to operate the 13 agency‐owned low‐income housing units. All units are located in the City of San Luis Obispo, thus providing a 100% City user rate. Ten of the 13 rental units are part of the Housing Authority of SLO’s Housing Choice Voucher program which grants ASN residents at these 10 units a portable voucher after a year of residence. ASN is requesting $5,000 to pay for utility costs of Agency-owned rental units for 12 months. 2. Access Support Network: Hepatitis C Project – Access to Health Benefits & Counseling 2016 Grant Award: $4,000 2017 Grant Award: $5,000 2018 Grant Request: $5,000 2018 HRC Recommendation: $2,500 The ASN seeks funding to support and sustain the San Luis Obispo Hepatitis C Project (SLOHCP). For 18 years, the ASN has delivered essential services ‐ through SLOHCP ‐ that provide persons living with the hepatitis C virus (HCV) increased access to medical care and improvements in quality of life through outreach, education, health & benefits counseling, linkages to resources in the community, and invaluable access to the ASN Food Pantry. The agency also provides educational opportunities to train local medical providers with the most up-to-date HCV treatment information and guidelines. The SLOHCP provides a unique and cost ‐effective approach to addressing the needs of people living with HCV by connecting them to benefits entitlement programs and access to health care, as well as providing social support. ASN is requesting $5,000 for personnel costs of the health counselor and benefits counselor of the Program. Packet Pg. 276 Item 8 City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subti tle 2018-19 GIA Program Application Overviews and Funding History Page 2 3. Alliance for Pharmaceutical Access, Inc. (APA): Reducing Disparities in Medication Access for a Healthier Community 2018 Grant Request: $10,000 2018 HRC Recommendation: $2,500 Alliance for Pharmaceutical Access, Inc. (APA) bridges the gaps in medication coverages and helps alleviate the burden of high priced pharmaceuticals by providing direct medication-access and patient advocacy services, at no cost. This project will expand APA’s program operations to better serve the uninsured and underinsured in the community, including seniors and/or individuals afflicted with chronic health condistions in the City of San Luis Obispo and unicorporated City of Los Osos. APA is requesting $10,000 of GIA monies for personnel expenses for the San Luis Obispo Client Advocate and Grant Admininstrator salaries. 4. Big Brothers Big Sisters of San Luis Obispo County: Community Based Youth Mentoring 2016 Grant Award: $6,500 2017 Grant Award: $5,000 2018 Grant Request: $7,500 2018 HRC Recommendation: $1,875 Big Brothers Big Sisters is a donor and volunteer supported organization proven to help vulnerable children of single, low-income, and/or incarcerated parents succeed. They create one-to-one relationships that match children facing adversity with trained and supervised volunteer role models. They propose to provide positive mentors through the Community Based Program for 70 kids living in the City of San Luis Obispo. They are requesting $7,500 in funding for professional staff salaries to enroll and support volunteers working with at -risk youth. 5. Court Appointed Special Advocates of San Luis Obispo County, Inc. (CASA): Child Advocacy 2016 Grant Award: $7,000 2017 Grant Award: $8,500 2018 Grant Request: $8,500 2018 HRC Recommendation: $4,250 The CASA program recruits, trains and supervises volunteer community members to become child advocates for kids who have been removed from their home due to abuse and neglect. These children become placed under the Juvenile Dependency Court and are often placed in foster care. CASA volunteers are assigned to a child’s case until it is resolved, averaging about 1.4 years. Volunteers oversee all information concerning the child, including reports form social workers, law enforcement, medical provid ers, mental Packet Pg. 277 Item 8 City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subti tle 2018-19 GIA Program Application Overviews and Funding History Page 3 health professionals, and school personnel. This grant request of $8,500 will be used to cover a portion of their operating costs for their San Luis Obispo -based office. 6. Community Action Partnership of San Luis Obispo County, Inc. (CAPSLO): Homeless Prevention/Stable Housing Program 2016 Grant Award: $6,500 2017 Grant Award: $7,500 2018 Grant Request: $7,500 2018 HRC Recommendation: $6,750 The Homeless Prevention/Stable Housing Program provides emergency financial assistance to City of San Luis Obispo households that are at -risk of being evicted and need assistance with a rental payment, or need assistance securing housing with first month’s rent and/or security deposit. The request of $7,500 of GIA monies will be used to fund the Program, thus providing financial assistance payments to cover rent or security deposits for low-income City households. 7. Community Action Partnership of San Luis Obispo County, Inc. (CAPSLO): Adult Wellness and Prevention Screening Program 2016 Grant Award: $5,000 2017 Grant Award: $4,000 2018 Grant Request: $7,500 2018 HRC Recommendation: $3,750 Since 1978, Adult Wellness and Prevention Screening (Adult Wellness) has continuously provided mobile and no-cost preventive and maintenance health screening, education, advocacy, and referrals to over 275 low-income and vulnerable adults per year in SLO County. Adult Wellness services include a part -time Program Coordinator/Registered Nurse (RN) and part-time Aide Clerk that use an agency vehicle to bring equipment, supplies, and a laptop computer for confidential data collection to 12 countywide sites on a pre-designated, advertised day of the month. GIA monies will be distributed by $5,337 for a portion of personnel expenses for the Program Coordinator/RN , $1,608 for some of the costs of medical and program supplies, and $555 for 8% federally-approved administrative overhead cost s. 8. Community Counseling Center (CCC): Affordable, Professional and Transformative Counseling for the Low Income and Uninsured 2018 Grant Request: $5,000 2018 HRC Recommendation: $4,500 CCC is a mental health safety net contributor and preventative care provider of premium, affordable counseling for individuals, children, couples, and families who are financially constrained and underinsured. Clients pay sliding scale fees based on their net household Packet Pg. 278 Item 8 City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subti tle 2018-19 GIA Program Application Overviews and Funding History Page 4 monthly income and are never refused services due to an inability to cover cost. The request of $5,000 GIA monies will specifically be used for agency personnel costs of $1,600, client sponsorship/fellowship in the amount of &2,250, facilities rent in the City totaling $650, and $500 for testing materials for comprehensive psychological evaluation. 9. Cuesta College Foundation: SLO Campus Food Pantry 2018 Grant Request: $5,000 2018 HRC Recommendation: $2,500 The Cuesta College Foundation found that food insecurity was a growing problem on their college campus. In 2015, the Student Life and Leadership Department conducted a survey and found that more than 75% of respondents confirmed that, not only would they be interested in a food assistance program, but they would also qualify based on age and income guidelines. In response, this GIA funding will establish a Campus Food Pantry on the San Luis Obispo campus. Funding in the amount of $1,500 is requested to pay additional hours to the Activities Assistant who will establish relationships with community partners. Grant funds of $1,000 will also provide reusable bags and $2,500 will be used to purchase healthy, grab-and-go foods that accommodate the needs of college students. 10. Family Care Network, Inc.: Supporting Foster Youth as They Transition to Independence 2018 Grant Request: $5,000 2018 HRC Recommendation: $4,500 Family Care Network Inc. (FCNI) provides Transitional Housing Services to youth who are aging out of the foster care system, commonly referred to as Transitional Age Youth (TAY). Participating youth reside in FCNI supported housing while receiving wrap- around like services designed to assist them in successfully transitioning from system dependence to adult independence. An award of $5,000 would help FCNI ensure that approximately 10 program participants are provided the life necessit ies, including: fees related to securing housing, such as application fees; initial housing set up costs, such as kitchen goods and other household supplies; transportation assistance for work and/or school; proper work and/or school clothing; educational and/or vocational training supplies; childcare assistance; and incentives for program completion and success. 11. Food Bank Coalition of San Luis Obispo County: Fresh Produce and No -Cook Bags 2018 Grant Request: $15,000 2018 HRC Recommendation: $8,182 This project secures fresh fruits and vegetables to distribute to San Luis Obispo residents through the Food Bank’s distributions and community partners. Produce purchases and donations together (GIA grant request of $7,800) provide approximately 330,000 pounds Packet Pg. 279 Item 8 City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subti tle 2018-19 GIA Program Application Overviews and Funding History Page 5 of fresh, high-quality produce distributed to residents of the City of San Luis Obispo each year to reduce food insecurity and improve nutrition. This project will also provide pilot funding in the amount of $7,200 for No-Cook Bags, 6-10 pound bags of portable foods designed for a homeless residents who do not have access to a kitchen and so cannot benefit from typical Food Bank distribution items. This program has been very successful in South County through a grant for that region and wishes to expand it to the City of San Luis Obispo. 12. Jack’s Helping Hand: Jack’s Helping Hand Assistance Program 2017 Grant Award: $7,000 2018 Grant Request: $10,000 2018 HRC Recommendation: $2,500 Jack's Helping Hand (JHH) helps children with special needs and their families whose resources have been exhausted. The JHH Assistance Program provides a range of services, therapies, medical products, transportation and lodging costs to qualified children with special needs in the County; however, the majority of grant recipients, staff, and volunteers of JHH live in the City of San Luis Obispo . The GIA grant, will be used entirely for services for children and their families, including: $2000 for medical equipment (lifts, chairs, etc.), $1000 for food (out of town trips to specialists), $2000 for housing (for trips out of town for surgery and to see specialists), $2000 for medical treatment (cancer, chemo, transfusion, rehab therapies), and $3000 for transportation (air, train, bus fares or gasoline for out -of-area trips). 13. Literacy for Life: Literacy Program 2016 Grant Award: $1,000 2017 Grant Award: $3,500 2018 Grant Request: $5,000 2018 HRC Recommendation: $2,500 Literacy for Life teach adults sixteen and older to read, write, and speak English. Their one-on-one instruction is free to all and provides a non-threatening learning environment which empowers individuals to learn English communication skills. The GIA grant will fund $1,000 for program coordination, $2,000 for books & materials, and $2,000 for volunteer tutors. 14. LTC Ombudsman Services of SLO County: Ombudsman Services 2018 Grant Request: $5,000 2018 HRC Recommendation: $2,500 The Long Term Care Ombudsman Services are requesting funds to provide Ombudsman services, including resident advocacy, facility monitoring visits, complaint investigation and resolution, information and consultation and systemic advocacy for residents of long Packet Pg. 280 Item 8 City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subti tle 2018-19 GIA Program Application Overviews and Funding History Page 6 term care facilities located within the City of San Luis Obispo . Their advocacy services include preventing low income/low asset nursing facility residents from eviction to homelessness or to inappropriate or inadequate levels of care. The funding request of $5,000 will specially be used to cover staff salaries for the Ombudsman and Program manager to resolve inappropriate facility discharges, and to recruit, train and supervise volunteers who m provide the majority of facility visits in the City. 15. Meals that Connect/Senior Nutrition Program: Meals that Connect 2016 Grant Award: $10,000 2017 Grant Award: $10,000 2018 Grant Request: $10,000 2018 HRC Recommendation: $5,682 Meals That Connect serves free, hot, noontime meals, Monday through Friday, to seniors aged 60 or older at two community sites in San Luis Obispo in congregate dining . They also deliver meals, with frozen meals for Saturday and Sunday, to qualified seniors who are homebound. Half of the requested grant funding ($5,000) will be used to purchase food, supplies, and other operating costs. The other $5,000 will be used for labor and personnel costs. 16. People’s Self-Help Housing: Homelessness Prevention & Housing Special Needs Groups in SLO 2016 Grant Award: $8,000 2017 Grant Award: $10,000 2018 Grant Request: $15,000 2018 HRC Recommendation: $13,500 People’s Self-Help Housing (PSHH) is requesting funding to assist with moving low- income San Luis Obispo individuals and families (including homeless placements) into permanent affordable housing, stabilizing these households, and preventing homelessness for those at risk. Free clinical case management services include counseling, job search assistance, coordinating medical, dental, and mental health services, as well as linkage to benefits, transportation, and emergency financial assistance. Grant funding of $15,000 will support a portion of salary and benefits for social workers that provide these direct clinical case management services to residents living in PSHH rental properties in the City. 17. Restorative Partners Inc.: RP Recovery Home for Women 2018 Grant Request: $10,000 2018 HRC Recommendation: $9,000 Restorative Partners (RP) has been working with inmates at the County jail since 2011 to provide programing designed to assist individuals in getting their lives back on track once Packet Pg. 281 Item 8 City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subti tle 2018-19 GIA Program Application Overviews and Funding History Page 7 they leave custody. It was found that the best-case scenario for success includes housing upon release. Those ex-offenders who become ho meless after release soon become hopeless about the future. The funding request of $10,000 would make it possible to hire a residential House Manager (HM) who would provide guidance and oversight for recently incarcerated women and their children. 18. RISE San Luis Obispo County: Sexual Assault & Domestic Violence Programs 2016 Grant Award: $2,000 2017 Grant Award: $2,000 2018 Grant Request: $6,000 2018 HRC Recommendation: $3,000 RISE is an organization created from the merger of two longstanding agencies operating in San Luis Obispo County. Over the years, both the SARP Center of SLO County and the North County Women’s Shelter & Resource Center expanded their services, and in 2013 merged in an effort to better serve victims of sexual and domestic violence and their loved ones. RISE maintains two office locations, one of which is in the City of San Luis Obispo. The grant request of $6,000 is for funds that will support operational expenses necessary to provide crisis intervention, peer counseling, case management, and individual and group therapy for survivors of sexual assault and domestic violence and their loved ones as well as prevention and education efforts in the SLO office located on Zaca Lane. Specifically, the monies will pay for answering service expenses; audit expenses; insurance policies; copier maintenance, rent, and utility expenses for the SLO office; and dues/memberships. 19. San Luis Obispo Legal Assistance Foundation: Senior Legal Services Project 2016 Grant Award: $2,000 2017 Grant Award: $2,000 2018 Grant Request: $3,500 2018 HRC Recommendation: $1,750 The Senior Legal Services Project is the only program in the County providing free legal services to residents aged 60 years and older. The Project sees clients out of their main office in San Luis Obispo, makes home visits to homebound and institutionalized clients, and provides community outreach and education throughout the City. The grant award of $3,000 will provide matching funds for the Project’s grant from the Area Agency on Aging and will allow for volunteer recruitment and coordination so that the Project’s attorney volunteers can efficiently and effectively provide free legal services to clients. 20. San Luis Obispo ALPHA, Inc.: Essential Infant Nutrition 2016 Grant Award: $5,000 2017 Grant Award: $5,000 2018 Grant Request: $7,200 Packet Pg. 282 Item 8 City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subti tle 2018-19 GIA Program Application Overviews and Funding History Page 8 2018 HRC Recommendation: $4,282 Pregnancy & Parenting Support of San Luis Obispo County (ALPHA) is a resource for parents and provides an important safety net for women during pregnancy and through their child’s second year. Pregnancy & Parenting Support distributes infant formula to low and very low income families and nutritional supplements to pregnant women. As part of a countywide network aiding with infant nutrition to families alongside their agency partner, WIC (Women Infants & Children), their barrier-free services are available to all families wit h infants and toddlers. All $7,200 requested in GIA funding will be used to buy infant formula to these families. 21. SLO Noor Foundation: SLO Noor Clinics: Healthcare for the Uninsured 2016 Grant Award: $10,500 2017 Grant Award: $10,000 2018 Grant Request: $15,000 2018 HRC Recommendation: $7,500 The SLO Noor Foundation provides free healthcare to uninsured adult residents of SLO and northern Santa Barbara Counties. Their free clinics and volunteer medical providers prioritize working with these populations, which requires a high level of patient engagement to insure that more patients finish treatments and advance to prevention and well care status instead of crisis care. They are asking for GIA monies to expand the medical clinic to be open six days per week (currently five) and the satellite medical clinic to three days per week (currently one). Specifically, they would like to apply $7,500 toward medical expenses and supplies, $3,500 for dental expenses and supplies, and $4,000 for payroll expenses. 22. Smart Share Housing Solutions DBA HomeShareSLO: HomeShareSLO Housing Solutions 2017 Grant Award: $6,385 2018 Grant Request: $8,500 2018 HRC Recommendation: $7,650 HomeShareSLO creates new housing units by facilitating matches between providers with unused rooms and seekers in the need of affordable housing. While clients are not limited to seniors or low income, the program provides the majority of benefit to those demographics. Homesharing enables clients to afford the cost of basic needs while providing companionship and security. The program fills a gap, avoids duplication of services by partnering with local government and service organizations while leveraging and expanding the use of existing housing. The Program is requesting GIA funding in the amount of $6,000 for outreach and marketing, $780 for training events, and $1,720 for background screening. Packet Pg. 283 Item 8 City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subti tle 2018-19 GIA Program Application Overviews and Funding History Page 9 23. Tolosa Children’s Dental Center (TCDC): Tolosa Children’s Dental Center – San Luis Obispo 2016 Grant Award: $5,500 2017 Grant Award: $5,500 2018 Grant Request: $10,000 2018 HRC Recommendation: $5,000 TCDC-SLO delivers dental services to children age infant to 18. TCDC-SLO helps alleviate a t ravel barrier many children experience due to the lack of providers within the Central Region of the County – the nearest providers who accept uninsured, underinsured and/or Denti-Cal patients are in North and South County. Operating one day per week in the City of San Luis Obispo has enabled TCDC to provide care to approximately 900 individual children who would otherwise have to travel from Central County to receive services. They are requesting $10,000 to cover a portion of the unreimbursed costs associated with providing continued care to patients residing in the City. Specifically, $3,400 to help cover the pediatric dentist, $1,680 for dental supplies, and $4,920 of rent in their downtown San Luis Obispo location. 24. Transitional Food and Shelter (TFS): Transitional Food and Shelter 2016 Grant Award: $13,000 2017 Grant Award: $15,000 2018 Grant Request: $15,000 2018 HRC Recommendation: $14,182 TFS provides temporary, emergency, around-the-clock shelter, food, and extensive supportive services for medically fragile homeless people in San Luis Obispo City and County. TFS defines “medically fragile” as clients whom are too ill or injured for their needs to be adequately served in an overnight -only shelter. Every client is referred by a hospital or social services agency and has a letter from a doctor documenting need for around-the-clock shelter. TFS is requesting $15,000 of GIA funds to provide temporary emergency shelter and supportive services to medically fragile homeless clients in the City, which would specifically be used to pay for rental of temporary apartme nts, motel vouchers, and the fees of their contracted caseworker. 25. Transitions-Mental Health Association (TMHA): Homeless Outreach – Library Project 2018 Grant Request: $5,000 2018 HRC Recommendation: $2,500 TMHA provides innovative mental health services in San Luis Obispo County and is requesting funds for their Homeless Outreach – Library Project. The San Luis Obispo Library is a well-known hub for many homeless citizens in the County, since admittance and computer/internet access are free, and the facility is located by multiple bus stops. Packet Pg. 284 Item 8 City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subti tle 2018-19 GIA Program Application Overviews and Funding History Page 10 THMA has recently began to visit the library to outreach to homeless individuals and has been very successful thus far. They are requesting $5,000 of GIA monies to expand their program to twice-monthly outreach events. The goal is to make contact with members of the City’s homeless population, provide links and referrals to behavioral, medical, and social services as needed, and distribution of supplie s for clients such as bus passes, food, gift cards and clothing. 26. United Way of San Luis Obispo County: 2-1-1 SLO County 2016 Grant Award: $3,000 2017 Grant Award: $3,000 2018 Grant Request: $3,000 2018 HRC Recommendation: $1,500 The 2-1-1 SLO County Program of the United Way is a free, confidential way to get timely access to health and human services information and referrals 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Calls and text messages are answered by knowledgeable, bil ingual contract specialists who provide 24-hour referrals and support to those in need of health and human services. When possible, callers are given three referrals for each need they present; this could include shelter, housing, food, health care, transportation, or information pertaining to a local disaster. Callers in crisis or with immediate mental health needs are connected via a warm transfer to appropriate support lines, where trained volunteers and staff are prepared to give more personal help. Individuals a nd families are connected with important services and programs, giving them the support they need to be productive and healthy community members. The United Way is requesting funding of $3,000 for ongoing operating expenses of the interface call center co ntract. 27. Women’s Shelter Program of San Luis Obispo County DBA Stand Strong: Homeless Prevention & Self-Sufficiency Program for DV Survivors 2018 Grant Request: $12,000 2018 HRC Recommendation: $10,800 Stand Strong is requesting GIA funds to pay for needed staffing to support the Homeless Prevention & Self-Sufficiency Assistance Program for domestic violence victims. The project will seek to address unmet needs of homeless domestic violence victims by providing weekly case management services that focus on clients’ individualized self- sufficiency goals, including obtaining employment , vocational training, financial planning, and ultimately the acquisition and retention of housing. The request of $12,000 in GIA monies will be used for salaries of direct client service staff working in the Program. Packet Pg. 285 Item 8 City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subti tle 2018-19 GIA Program Application Overviews and Funding History Page 11 PROGRAMS NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FUNDING 28. Assistance League of San Luis Obispo County: Operation School Bell 2018 Grant Request: $5,000 2018 HRC Recommendation: $0 Operation School Bell was established in 1995 to provide school-appropriate clothing to disadvantaged K-12th grade children living in poverty in San Luis Obispo County. Volunteer members assist the students by selecting school-appropriate attire during a retail shopping experience. This program has an indirect relationship to the criteria, therefore it was not recommended for funding. 29. Learn.Connect.Play.Foundation: Cooking on a Budget 2018 Grant Request: $12,450 2018 HRC Recommendation: $0 Learn.Connect.Play.Foundation is seeking funding for their monthly Cooking on a Budget classes, which will address food insecurity for the low income and homeless families in a fun, and functional manner while also infusing literacy, math and science concepts that parents can use to facilitate academic growth in their children. Although a new program related to the funding criteria, it was felt the program was not fully established to be recommended for funding. 30. Senior Volunteer Services: Central Coast Community Volunteers 2018 Grant Request: $10,000 2018 HRC Recommendation: $0 Senior Volunteer Services (SVS) requests funding to develop a pilot project to address the specific challenges associated with homeless prevention and to provide support services for seniors. Phase I of the project will be to identify the specific needs o f seniors that enable them to remain in their homes that can be collected and addressed by trained volunteers. Phase II will use the collected data to develop a plan to link and match the service needs of a partner agencies with volunteer recruitment effo rts. SVS will use the funding to develop and disseminate outreach materials. Although a new program, related to the funding criteria, it was felt that the program was not fully established to be recommending for funding. Packet Pg. 286 Item 8 Minutes Human Relations Commission Wednesday, April 4, 2018 Regular Meeting of the Human Relations Commission CALL TO ORDER A Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo Human Relations Commission was called to order on Wednesday, April 4, 2018 at 5:00 p.m. in the Council Hearing Room, located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, by Chair Clayton. OATH OF OFFICE City Clerk Teresa Purrington administered the oath of office to newly appointed Commissioners Michael Hopkins and Emily Rosten. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Barrie DuBois, Michael Hopkins, Samuel Hughes, Emily Rosten, Carol Sexton, Vice-Chair Nancy Welts, and Chair Clayton Staff: Cara Vereschagin, Planning Technician; Xzandrea Fowler, Deputy Director; Teresa Purrington, City Clerk; Deanna Cantrell, Police Chief; Jeff Smith, Police Captain ELECTION OF CHAIR OF AND VICE-CHAIR ACTION: MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DUBOIS, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HOPKINS CARRIED 7-0-0 to approve the election of Commissioner Carol Sexton as Vice- Chair and Commissioner Nancy Welts as Chair. PUBLIC COMMENT None PRESENTATIONS 1. Police Department 2017 Annual Report Chief Cantrell and Captain Smith gave a presentation to the Commission on Police Department updates for the 2016-17 Fiscal Year. Various topics were discussed, such as crime, traffic, noise, homelessness, types of calls for service, mental health-related responses, current strategies being used, crime reduction, upcoming challenges, and new policies and programs. Packet Pg. 287 Item 8 City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subtitle Minutes - Human Relations Commission Meeting of April 4, 2018 Page 2 CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES 2.ACTION: MOTION BY COMMISSIONER CLAYTON, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HUGHES CARRIED 4-0-3 to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Human Relations Commission of March 7, 2018. BUSINESS ITEMS 3.Preliminary 2018-19 Grants-in-Aid Subcommittee Recommendations Vice Chair Welts and Commissioner Hughes described the process that went into the subcommittee recommendations for the 2018-19 Grants-in-Aid Applications. Both Commissioner Hopkins and Commissioner Clayton identified that they had a conflict of interest and would only participate in the broader discussion. Following the description of the process, the Subcommittee answered questions and went through the recommendations. The Commission requested to review the applications and preliminary recommendations before the next meeting. 4.Diversity Planning Effort This item was briefly discussed. The Commission talked about potentially utilizing members of the Police and Community Together (PACT) program within the City, and was continued to a later date uncertain. COMMISSION & STAFF COMMUNICATIONS Chair Clayton reminded the Commission about the Advisory Body Training occurring on Wednesday, April 18, 2018 and encouraged members to attend. Planning Technician Vereschagin announced that the City Council approved the 2018 Community Development Block Grant funding recommendations, and will now move forward to the Board of Supervisors for review on April 17, 2018. ADJOURNMENT Chair Welts adjourned the meeting at 7:21 p.m. The next Regular meeting of the Human Relations Commission is scheduled for Wednesday, May 2, 2018 at 5:00 p.m., in the Council Hearing Room, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California. Respectfully Submitted, Cara Vereschagin Recording Secretary APPROVED BY THE HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION ON 05/02/2018 Packet Pg. 288 Item 8 Minutes Human Relations Commission Wednesday, May 2, 2018 Regular Meeting of the Human Relations Commission CALL TO ORDER A Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo Human Relations Commission was called to order on Wednesday, May 2, 2018 at 5:00 p.m. in the Council Hearing Room, located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, by Chair Welts. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Barrie DuBois, Robert Clayton (arrived at 5:10 p.m.), Michael Hopkins, Samuel Hughes, Emily Rosten, Vice-Chair Carol Sexton (arrived at 5:05 p.m.), and Chair Nancy Welts Staff: Cara Vereschagin, Planning Technician; Xzandrea Fowler, Deputy Director Guest: Roy Hanley, Assistant City Attorney for the City of Solvang and City of Pismo Beach PUBLIC COMMENT None CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES 1. ACTION: MOTION BY VICE-CHAIR SEXTON, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HOPKINS CARRIED 6-0-1 to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Human Relations Commission of April 4, 2018. PUBLIC HEARINGS 2. Consideration of the 2017-18 Neighborhood Matching Grant recommendations Planning Technician Vereschagin went through a summary of the applications and provided a brief overview of the program. Ms. Vereschagin discussed the staff recommendations for the three applications submitted including, $1,000 for Mary Lou Johnson representing the Islay Park neighbors, $4,185 to the Friends of Laguna Lake/Laguna Lake Neighborhood, and $2,785 for the Vista del Lago/Laguna Lane Neighborhood Community. Public Comment Packet Pg. 289 Item 8 City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subtitle Minutes - Human Relations Commission Meeting of May 2, 2018 Page 2 Chair Welts opened the public comment for the public hearing. Mary Lou Johnson, representing the Islay Park Neighborhood, mentioned her excitement to be considered for a neighborhood matching grant and provided a brief overview of her project. Ms. Johnson also stated that she would like to establish a “Friends of Islay Park” group. There being no others desiring to speak on this item, the public comment was closed. ACTION: MOTION BY COMMISSIONER CLAYTON, SECOND BY VICE-CHAIR SEXTON CARRIED 7-0-0 to approve the 2017-18 Neighborhood Matching Grant funding recommendations. ***Chair Welts ordered a two minute recess at this point in the meeting and then called the meeting back to order at 5:30 p.m.*** 3. Consideration of the 2018-19 Grants-in-Aid (GIA) funding recommendations Commissioner Hopkins recused himself from this item and left the Hearing Room. Chair Welts opened the item and stated that Commissioner Clayton had recused himself and was no longer in the Hearing Room. Planning Technician Vereschagin provided a brief overview of process and applications received for the funding year. Commissioner Welts stated that two letters were received from the Alliance for Pharmaceutical Access regarding the funding recommendations. Commissioner Welts also provided information on the criteria used to develop the recommendations, which included the 2017-19 Major City Goals. Commissioner Barrie Dubois disclosed that she had previously been a CASA volunteer, and had volunteered with HomeShareSLO. Commissioner Emily Rosten disclosed that she was a CASA volunteer, and had volunteered with Restorative Partners, the SLO Noor Foundation, and TMHA. Commissioner Samuel Hughes disclosed that he had volunteered with RISE. Public Comment Chair Welts opened the public comment for the public hearing. The following provided comments regarding the recommendations for Grants-in-Aid (GIA) Funding: Jane Pomeroy, RISE Stephanie Barclay, SLO Legal Assistance Foundation Donna Fioravanti, CAPSLO Rachel Cementina, United Way Packet Pg. 290 Item 8 City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subtitle Minutes - Human Relations Commission Meeting of May 2, 2018 Page 3 Andrea Keisler, Food Bank Coalition Juliane McAdams, Meals that Connect Marcia Alter, HomeShareSLO Sarah Reinhart, Alliance for Pharmaceutical Access Jenny Luciano, San Luis Obispo Big Brothers and Big Sisters There being no others desiring to speak on this item, the public hearing was closed. The Commission then deliberated and requested that perhaps for next year the funding priorities would be clearer. The item was continued to the next regular scheduled meeting on June 6, 2018. COMMISSION & STAFF COMMUNICATIONS 4. Diversity Planning Effort This item was briefly discussed amongst the Commission. A subcommittee was formed consisting of Chair Welts, Commissioner Clayton, and Commissioner Hopkins to connect with representatives to SLO PACT, City Council, and other contacts throughout the City. ADJOURNMENT Chair Welts adjourned the meeting at 6:39 p.m. The next Regular meeting of the Human Relations Commission is scheduled for Wednesday, June 6, 2018 at 5:00 p.m., in the Council Hearing Room, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California. Respectfully Submitted, Cara Vereschagin Recording Secretary APPROVED BY THE HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION ON 06/06/18. Packet Pg. 291 Item 8 Minutes - Draft Human Relations Commission Wednesday, June 6, 2018 Regular Meeting of the Human Relations Commission CALL TO ORDER A Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo Human Relations Commission was called to order on Wednesday, June 6, 2018 at 5:00 p.m. in the Council Hearing Room, located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, by Chair Welts. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Barrie DuBois, Robert Clayton, Michael Hopkins, Samuel Hughes, Emily Rosten, and Chair Nancy Welts Absent: Vice-Chair Carol Sexton Staff: Cara Vereschagin, Assistant Planner; Xzandrea Fowler, Deputy Director PUBLIC COMMENT None CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES 1. ACTION: MOTION BY COMMISSIONER CLAYTON, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HUGHES CARRIED 6-0-1 to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Human Relations Commission of May 2, 2018, with the following correction to the Call of Order that reads: “A Regular Meeting of the….by Chair Clayton.” To Read: “A Regular Meeting of the…by Chair Welts.” PUBLIC HEARINGS 2. Consideration of the 2018-19 Grants-in-Aid (GIA) funding recommendations This item was continued from the May 2, 2018 Regular Meeting. Packet Pg. 292 Item 8 City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subtitle Minutes - Human Relations Commission Meeting of June 6, 2018 Page 2 Chair Welts opened the item. Commissioners Clayton and Hopkins disclosed a conflict of interest, recused themselves from the item, and left the Hearing Room. Public Comment Chair Welts opened the public comment for the public hearing. Susan Graves, from Court Appointed Special Advocates of San Luis Obispo County, provided comments regarding the recommendations for GIA Funding. There being no others desiring to speak on this item, the public hearing was closed. The Commission then deliberated and decided to adjust the recommendations based on the adopted funding priorities. Chair Welts reminded the HRC that these funding recommendations would move forward to City Council for final approval, thus allowing time for non-profit representatives to continue advocating for their respective organizations. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HUGHES, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER DUBOIS, CARRIED 4-0-3, to recommend that the City Council approve the revised 2018-19 Grants-in-Aid funding recommendations. COMMISSION & STAFF COMMUNICATIONS 3. Consider Cancellation of July 5, 2018 Meeting MOTION BY COMMISSIONER ROSTEN, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER DUBOIS, CARRIED 4-0-3, to cancel the July 5, 2018 meeting. Chair Welts spoke about the diversity subcommittee meeting held and informed the commission that the topic will be agenized for future meetings. Commissioner Rosten discussed future ideas for the City and suggested installing wayfinding signs in Spanish. Assistant Planner Vereschagin informed the Commission that the HRC approved Grants-in-Aid funding recommendations will move to City Council as a consent item, and she explained what that process involved. ADJOURNMENT Chair Welts adjourned the meeting at 6:30 p.m. The next Regular meeting of the Human Relations Commission is scheduled for Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 5:00 p.m., in the Council Hearing Room, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California. Respectfully Submitted, Cara Vereschagin, Recording Secretary Packet Pg. 293 Item 8 Page intentionally left blank. Packet Pg. 294 Item 8 Meeting Date: 8/21/2018 FROM: Daryl R. Grigsby, Public Works Director Prepared By: Michael J. McGuire, Senior Civil Engineer SUBJECT: MARSH STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, SPECIFICATION NO. 90480 RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Authorize the Mayor to execute an agreement with 1042 Pacific Street, a California general partnership, for a temporary construction easement at 1042 Pacific Street. 2. Authorize the Mayor to execute an agreement with Elizabeth Lucille Zanoli, Surviving Trustee, for a temporary construction easement and a permanent easement at 1043 Marsh Street. 3. Authorize the Mayor to execute an agreement with the Maino Family Trusts for a temporary construction easement at 1020 Marsh Street. 4. Authorize the Mayor to execute an agreement with the Maino Family Trusts for a temporary co nstruction easement and a permanent easement at 1080 Marsh Street. DISCUSSION Background The Marsh Street Bridge, located near the intersection of Marsh and Santa Rosa Streets, was approved by the City Council in January 2013 for removal and replaceme nt. This followed a determination by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) that the bridge, built in 1909, is structurally deficient. In addition, the City contracted with Dokken Engineering to conduct a bridge assessment . This assessment concluded that a complete replacement of the existing bridge was the most prudent and cost-effective alternative given the age of the structure. Dokken Engineering began the design process at the start of 2013 and has proceeded with development of the plans, specifications and construction cost estimate for the bridge , which are nearly complete. Dokken has also nearly completed the environmental permitting process, culminating with the City Council adoption of the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the Marsh Street Bridge Replacement project on May 2, 2017. Right of Way Acquisition One of the most critical components for the Marsh Street Bridge Replacement is obtaining the Temporary Construction Easements (TCE s) from the property owners adjacent to the bridge. The TCEs are necessary for equipment accessibility to San Luis Obispo Creek to conduct construction activities within the creek, provide a staging and equipment area for the bridge contractor, and provide vehicular and emergency access for a medical services business adjacent to the bridge. There will also be permanent easements acquired from two of the owners for construction of a wing wall for the bridge. Packet Pg. 295 Item 9 The TCEs and permanent easements are also necessary for obtaining clearance from Caltrans to enter into the construction phase. This phase releases the Highway Bridge Program (HBP) grant funds for construction, allows advertising the project for construction bidding, enables award of the project to a responsive and responsible bridge contractor, and provides for construction of the bridge. The construction of the Marsh Street Bridge is anticipated to start in Summer 2019. Temporary Construction Easements There are four parcels of property adjacent to the Marsh Street Bridge that r equire TCEs and permanent easements in order for the replacement project to go forward. Hamner Jewell, one of the City’s on-call consultants for right of way acquisition, has researched the parcels based on fair market values, conferred and negotiated with the owners (with approval by the City Council to make the offers on January 9, 2018) and prepared agreements for the easement acquisitions. All easement acquisitions are based on negotiations with the owners and valued for the temporary use of the property by the City, loss of use by the owner and special considerations mentioned below. Also, the offers take into account the duration of the TCE, which go into effect when it is expected that Caltrans certifies the right of way acquisitions and extend to an additional two months beyond the anticipated construction time. The TCEs are for a 12-month period. The property at 1042 Pacific Street, a commercial office building with multiple tenants, requires a temporary easement through the property’s parking lot to provide patient and emergency vehicle access to the DaVita Dialysis Center. The negotiated agreement with the owners is $10,196. 1043 Marsh Street, site of the DaVita Dialysis Center , will lose the entrance/exit to their parking lot for the duratio n of construction. Given the critical nature of the services provided by DaVita to the community, access to the Center is a top priority during the course of construction. Also, construction activities will be closely monitored so as to have little or no impact to the day-to- day operations of the Center. The expected negotiated agreement with the owner for loss of use of entrance and parking stalls, occasional utility shutdowns and property restoration is $13,798. There is also a permanent easement negotiated with the owner for a small area of property near the bridge. Two properties, 1020 & 1080 Marsh Street, are owned by several family trusts. These properties require TCEs for accessibility to the creek bed and the area of construction work. The negotiated agreement for 1020 Marsh Street is $20,145 and for 1080 Marsh Street is $111,415. The offer for 1080 Marsh Street also includes the loss of 20 leased parking stalls and the replacement of the parking lot after construction is completed. A permanent easement has been negotiated for a small area of property, that through the construction of the new bridge , will move a wingwall in order to serve not only the bridge structure but provide additional space for the owner to add a stall to the parking lot . Packet Pg. 296 Item 9 Property Address Easement Acquisition 1042 Pacific Street $10,196 1043 Marsh Street $13,798 1020 Marsh Street $20,145 1080 Marsh Street $111,415 TOTAL $155,554 CONCURRENCES The acquisitions have the concurrence of the trustees and owners of the four properties involved in the right of way acquisition activities. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The City Council approved adoption of the F inal Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) on May 2, 2017. In addition to National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) approval with the FEIR, environmental permitting should be completed by August 2018 with the Department of Fish & Wildlife, the Regional Water Quality Control Board, the Army Corps of Engineers and the State Historic Preservation Office. FISCAL IMPACT The project was approved as part of the 2015-17 Financial Plan. Currently, there is $274,463 available for Land Acquisition which is sufficient to fully fund the total costs of right of way acquisitions and consultant fees. This project is 89% funded by the HBP grant funding with a 11% City Local Revenue Measure match. ALTERNATIVE Deny executing the contracts. The City Council could choose to not authorize the acquisition contracts. Staff does not recommend this alternative. The City would not obtain the right of way certification from Caltrans, resulting in the City unable to proceed with the construction phase. Construction would be delayed until 2020 and the acquisition of easements would most likely need to be renegotiated with increased cost amount s, and increased appraisal and consultant fees. Attachments: a - 1042 Pacific Agreement b - Zanoli Agreement c - Maino 1020 Marsh Agreement d - Maino 1080 Marsh Agreement Packet Pg. 297 Item 9 APN: 002-443-017 City of SLO/Marsh Street Bridge/1042 Pacific/Agreement/rev.7-17-18 Page 1 of 4 PARCEL NO.: 002-443-017 PROJECT: Marsh Street Bridge Replacement Project RIGHT OF WAY AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between 1042 Pacific Street, a California general partnership, hereinafter called “Grantor”, and The City of San Luis Obispo, a municipal corporation and a charter city in the County of San Luis Obispo, State of California, hereinafter called "City". A Temporary Non-Exclusive Access Easement Deed (“Deed”) covering the property rights particularly described therein in the form attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein by reference (hereafter the “Property”), has been executed concurrently with this Agreement and delivered to City representatives. In consideration of which, and other considerations hereinafter set forth, it is mutually agreed as follows: 1. The parties have herein set forth the whole of their agreement. The performance of this Agreement constitutes the entire consideration for said document and shall relieve the City of all further obligation or claims on this account, or on account of the location, grade or construction of the proposed public improvements consisting of the Marsh Street Bridge Replacement Project (collectively referred to herein as the “Project”), except as stated in Paragraphs 2.E. and 3. below. 2. The City shall: A. PAYMENT - Pay to the order of the Grantor the sum of $10,196 (TEN THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED NINETY-SIX DOLLARS) as consideration in full for the herein real property interests, for the loss, replacement, moving of any improvements and for entering into this Agreement. Said sum shall be paid upon the deed recording, which shall occur when title to said real property has vested in City. B. RECORDATION OF INSTRUMENT - Accept the Deed herein referenced and at City’s option may record it in the office of the San Luis Obispo County Recorder. C. MISCELLANEOUS COSTS - Pay any escrow, title insurance, and recording fees incurred in this transaction. Packet Pg. 298 Item 9 APN: 002-443-017 City of SLO/Marsh Street Bridge/1042 Pacific/Agreement/rev.7-17-18 Page 2 of 4 D. CLEARANCE OF BONDS, ASSESSMENTS, OR DELINQUENT TAXES - Have the authority to deduct and pay from the amount shown in Clause 2.A. above any amount necessary to satisfy any bond demands and delinquent taxes due in any year except the year in which this escrow closes, together with penalties and interest thereon, and/or delinquent and unpaid nondelinquent assessments which have become a lien at the close of escrow. E. INDEMNIFICATION - Defend, indemnify, and hold harmless Grantor from any and all claims, damages, costs, judgments, or liability caused by City or its officers, employees or agents which arise from or are related to City construction and restoration work on Grantor's real property during the temporary easement period specified in the referenced Deed. 3. Construction Coordination and Easement Restoration Requirements: A. NOTICE OF CONSTRUCTION COMMENCEMENT - City agrees to provide Grantor with 30 days advance written notice of the anticipated date of construction commencement of the Project. B. RESTORATION – Except for landscaping and irrigation; upon completion of construction of City’s project, said Temporary Access Easement area shall be generally restored by City to the condition that existed prior to construction, to the extent reasonably practical, except that the bollards placed during the project to protect the electrical pole and the sign regarding compact cars will remain in place permanently at the request of the Grantor, and become the property of the Grantor. 4. The Grantor: A. LEASE INDEMNIFICATION - Warrants there are no oral or written leases on all or any portion of the herein referenced real property exceeding a period of one month, or if there are such leases, Grantor agrees to hold the City harmless and reimburse City for any and all of its losses and expenses occasioned by reason of any lease of said property held by tenant of Grantor. B. PERMISSION TO ENTER - Hereby grants to the City, its agents and contractors, permission to enter upon the subject lands described in the Deed upon receipt of payment subject to all applicable terms and conditions contained in this Agreement and the associated Deed. 5. The Parties agree: A. JUDGMENT IN LIEU OF DEED - In the event Grantor does not deliver title in a reasonable time under the terms of the Agreement, the City may file an action in eminent domain to pursue the acquisition of the real property interests described in the referenced Deed, and this Agreement shall constitute a stipulation which may be filed in said proceedings as final and conclusive evidence of the total amount of damages for the taking, including all of the items listed in Section 1260.230 of the Code of Civil Procedure, regarding said property rights. B. ARTICLE HEADINGS - Article headings in this Agreement are for convenience only and are not intended to be used in interpreting or construing the terms, covenants and conditions of this Agreement. Packet Pg. 299 Item 9 APN: 002-443-017 City of SLO/Marsh Street Bridge/1042 Pacific/Agreement/rev.7-17-18 Page 3 of 4 C. COMPLETE UNDERSTANDING - This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, superseding all negotiations, prior discussions, and preliminary agreements or understandings, written or oral. This Agreement may not be amended except in writing by the parties hereto or their successors or assigns. D. CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL - This Agreement is subject to and conditioned upon approval and ratification by the San Luis Obispo City Council. This Agreement is not binding upon the City until executed by the appropriate City official(s) acting in their authorized capacity. E. COUNTERPARTS - This agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which so executed shall, irrespective of the date of its execution and delivery, be deemed an original, and all such counterparts together shall constitute one and the same instrument. F. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS - This Agreement shall apply to and bind the heirs, executors, administrators, assigns and successors of the parties hereto. G. FACSIMILE SIGNATURES – In the event that the parties hereto utilize facsimile documents which include signatures, such documents shall be accepted as if they bore original signatures provided that documents bearing ORIGINAL SIGNATURES are provided following transmittal of the facsimile signature, except that funds shall not be released upon a facsimile signature nor shall facsimile signed documents be accepted for recordation by the Clerk Recorder of the County of San Luis Obispo. H. NOTICES - All notices shall be in writing, addressed as set forth below, and deposited in the U.S. Mail, postage prepaid. Any party may change its address for future notices by complying with the provisions of this paragraph. GRANTOR’S MAILING ADDRESS: 1042 Pacific Street, a California general partnership Attn: General Partner 1694 Knoll Drive San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 CITY’S MAILING ADDRESS: City of San Luis Obispo Public Works Department 919 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 No Obligation Other Than Those Set Forth Herein Will Be Recognized. Packet Pg. 300 Item 9 APN: 002-443-017 City of SLO/Marsh Street Bridge/1042 Pacific/Agreement/rev.7-17-18 Page 4 of 4 GRANTOR: 1042 Pacific Street, a California general partnership By: ___________________________________ Date: _________________________ Name: Jon E. Hollister Title: General Partner By: ___________________________________ Date: _________________________ Name: Lee F. Hollister Title: General Partner By: ___________________________________ Date: _________________________ Name: Lynn A. Hollister Title: General Partner By: ___________________________________ Date: _________________________ Name: Maronee M. Hollister Title: General Partner By: ___________________________________ Date: _________________________ Name: Holly Tremper Title: General Partner By: ___________________________________ Date: _________________________ Name: Lisa Borba Title: General Partner CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, A municipal corporation and charter city By: ___________________________________ Date: _________________________ Heidi Harmon, Mayor ATTEST: By: _______________________________ City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: By: _______________________________ By: _______________________________ J. Christine Dietrick Michael McGuire City of San Luis Obispo, Attorney Senior Civil Engineer City of San Luis Obispo Packet Pg. 301 Item 9 Page 1 of 6 City of SLO/Marsh Street Bridge/1042 Pacific/deed rev. 7/17/18 Recording requested by: Hamner, Jewell & Associates When recorded, return to: City of San Luis Obispo Department of Public Works Attn: Michael McGuire 919 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 _____________________________________________________________________________ APN: 002-443-017 No Fee pursuant to Gov. Code sec. 6103 No Documentary Transfer Tax per R&T Code sec. 11922 No Recording Fee per Gov. Code sec. 27383 TEMPORARY NON-EXCLUSIVE ACCESS EASEMENT DEED (Marsh Street Bridge Replacement Project) For a valuable consideration, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, 1042 Pacific Street, a California general partnership (hereinafter referred to as “Grantor”), hereby grants to the CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, a municipal corporation and a charter city, (hereinafter referred to as “City”), A Temporary Non-Exclusive Easement for Vehicular Ingress and Egress, with the right but not obligation to grade, use, maintain, repair, and replace at any time a vehicular access route, in, on, over, along, through, and across the Easement Area of the Real Property as defined in this paragraph. The “Real Property” is in the City of San Luis Obispo, County of San Luis Obispo, State of California and is described in Exhibit “A”, attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein. The “Easement Area” which comprises the Temporary Access Easement is described and depicted in Exhibit “B”, attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein. The City shall have the right of ingress and egress for vehicles to, from, and along the Easement Area at any time in order to provide access for occupants and clientele of the property at 1043 Marsh St., San Luis Obispo. Said Temporary Construction Easement shall commence on November 1, 2018, and shall automatically terminate upon completion of City’s construction, or November 1, 2019, whichever occurs first. Grantor shall have use of the property until City takes physical possession. In case of unpredictable delays in construction, upon written notification, the terms of the Temporary Easement may be extended by an amendment to this deed. Grantor shall be compensated based on the fair market value at the time of the extension. Payment shall be made to the Grantor for the extension prior to the expiration of the original period. Exhibit A Page 1 of 9 Packet Pg. 302 Item 9 Page 2 of 6 City of SLO/Marsh Street Bridge/1042 Pacific/deed rev. 7/17/18 Except for landscaping and irrigation, upon completion of construction of City’s project, said Temporary Access Easement area shall be generally restored by City to the condition that existed prior to construction, to the extent reasonably practical, except that the bollards placed during the project to protect the electrical pole and the sign regarding compact cars placed in the parking lot will remain permanently in place at the request of the Grantor and become the property of the Grantor. The provisions hereof shall inure to the benefit of the City, its successors and assigns, and shall bind the heirs, executors, administrators, assigns and successors in interest of the respective parties hereto, and all covenants shall apply to and run with the above-described property. GRANTOR: 1042 Pacific Street, a California general partnership By: ___________________________________ Date: _________________________ Name: Jon Hollister Title: General Partner By: ___________________________________ Date: _________________________ Name: Lee F. Hollister Title: General Partner By: ___________________________________ Date: _________________________ Name: Lynn A. Hollister Title: General Partner By: ___________________________________ Date: _________________________ Name: Maronee M. Hollister Title: General Partner By: ___________________________________ Date: _________________________ Name: Holly Tremper Title: General Partner By: ___________________________________ Date: _________________________ Name: Lisa Borba Title: General Partner Exhibit A Page 2 of 9 Packet Pg. 303 Item 9 Page 3 of 6 City of SLO/Marsh Street Bridge/1042 Pacific/deed rev. 7/17/18 ACKNOWLEDGMENT A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document. State of California County of ________________ On ______________________ before me, _______________________________________, Notary Public, personally appeared Jon E. Hollister, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signatures(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature __________________________ (Seal) ACKNOWLEDGMENT A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document. State of California County of ________________ On ______________________ before me, _______________________________________, Notary Public, personally appeared Lee F. Hollister, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signatures(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature __________________________ (Seal) Exhibit A Page 3 of 9 Packet Pg. 304 Item 9 Page 4 of 6 City of SLO/Marsh Street Bridge/1042 Pacific/deed rev. 7/17/18 ACKNOWLEDGMENT A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document. State of California County of ________________ On ______________________ before me, _______________________________________, Notary Public, personally appeared Lynn A. Hollister, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signatures(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature __________________________ (Seal) ACKNOWLEDGMENT A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document. State of California County of ________________ On ______________________ before me, _______________________________________, Notary Public, personally appeared Maronee Hollister, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signatures(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature __________________________ (Seal) Exhibit A Page 4 of 9 Packet Pg. 305 Item 9 Page 5 of 6 City of SLO/Marsh Street Bridge/1042 Pacific/deed rev. 7/17/18 ACKNOWLEDGMENT A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document. State of California County of ________________ On ______________________ before me, _______________________________________, Notary Public, personally appeared Holly Tremper, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signatures(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature __________________________ (Seal) ACKNOWLEDGMENT A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document. State of California County of ________________ On ______________________ before me, _______________________________________, Notary Public, personally appeared Lisa Borba, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signatures(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature __________________________ (Seal) Exhibit A Page 5 of 9 Packet Pg. 306 Item 9 Page 6 of 6 City of SLO/Marsh Street Bridge/1042 Pacific/deed rev. 7/17/18 CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE This is to certify that the City of San Luis Obispo hereby accepts for public purposes the real property, or interest therein, described in that Temporary Non-Exclusive Access Easement Deed dated ______________________, from 1042 Pacific Street, a California general partnership, Grantor therein, to the City, and consents to the recordation thereof. In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand this ___ day of __________________, 2018. CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO By_______________________________________ Heidi Harmon, Mayor ATTEST: ________________________________ City Clerk Exhibit A Page 6 of 9 Packet Pg. 307 Item 9 Exhibit A Page 7 of 9Exhibit APacket Pg. 308Item 9 B Exhibit A Page 8 of 9 Packet Pg. 309 Item 9 B Exhibit A Page 9 of 9 Packet Pg. 310 Item 9 APN: 002-443-016 City of SLO/Marsh Street Bridge/Zanoli/Agreement rev. 2018-06-14 Page 1 of 7 PARCEL NO.: 002-443-016 PROJECT: Marsh Street Bridge Replacement Project RIGHT OF WAY AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between Elizabeth Lucille Zanoli, Surviving Trustee of the Zanoli Revocable Trust dated June 30, 1993, hereinafter called “Grantor”, and The City of San Luis Obispo, a municipal corporation and a charter city in the County of San Luis Obispo, State of California, hereinafter called "City". A Temporary Construction Easement Deed (“Deed”) covering the property rights particularly described therein in the form attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein by reference (hereafter the “Property”), has been executed concurrently with this Agreement and delivered to City representatives. In consideration of which, and other considerations hereinafter set forth, it is mutually agreed as follows: 1. The parties have herein set forth the whole of their agreement. The performance of this Agreement constitutes the entire consideration for said document and shall relieve the City of all further obligation or claims on this account, or on account of the location, grade or construction of the proposed public improvements consisting of the Marsh Street Bridge Replacement Project (collectively referred to herein as the “Project”), except as stated in Paragraphs 2.E. and 3. below. 2. The City shall: A. PAYMENT - Pay to the order of the Grantor the sum of $13,798 (THIRTEEN THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED NINETY-EIGHT DOLLARS) as consideration in full for the herein real property interests, for the loss, replacement, moving of any improvements and for entering into this Agreement. Said sum shall be paid upon deed recordation, which shall occur when title to said real property has vested in City free and clear of all liens, encumbrances, assessments, easements and leases recorded or unrecorded, except for recorded public utility easements and public right of way. B. RECORDATION OF INSTRUMENT - Accept the Deed herein referenced and at City’s option may record it in the office of the San Luis Obispo County Recorder at such time as when clear title to City’s satisfaction can be conveyed. C. MISCELLANEOUS COSTS - Pay any escrow, title insurance, and recording fees incurred in this transaction. D. CLEARANCE OF BONDS, ASSESSMENTS, OR DELINQUENT TAXES - Have the authority to deduct and pay from the amount shown in Clause 2.A. above any amount necessary to satisfy any bond demands and delinquent taxes due in any year except the year in Packet Pg. 311 Item 9 APN: 002-443-016 City of SLO/Marsh Street Bridge/Zanoli/Agreement rev. 2018-06-14 Page 2 of 7 which this escrow closes, together with penalties and interest thereon, and/or delinquent and unpaid nondelinquent assessments which have become a lien at the close of escrow. E. INDEMNIFICATION - Defend, indemnify, and hold harmless Grantor from any and all claims, damages, costs, judgments, or liability caused by City or its officers, employees or agents, or any contractor working on the Project, which arise from or are related to City construction and restoration work on Grantor's real property both during and after the temporary easement period specified in the referenced Deed. In addition thereto, City shall be liable to Grantor, and Grantor’s tenants, and their guests and invitees, as their interest may appear, for any and all damages to Grantor’s real property, including any and all improvements, fixtures and personalty located thereon. City shall require its contractor and sub-contractors to add Grantor as an additional insured under the contractor’s and sub-contractor’s commercial general liability insurance policy for work to be done on this project, which polices shall contain “products and completed operations” endorsements with combined single limits of Five Million Dollars ($5,000,000) for each loss or occurrence. Each contractor and sub-contractor shall furnish certificates of insurance to Grantor before each contractor and sub-contractor performs any services under its contract with the City. The certificates shall provide that there will be no cancellation, reduction or modification of coverage without thirty (30) days prior written notice to Grantor. 3. Construction Coordination and Easement Restoration Requirements: A. NOTICE OF CONSTRUCTION COMMENCEMENT - City agrees to provide Grantor with 30 days advance written notice of the anticipated date of construction commencement of the Project. Thereafter during construction of the Project, City shall keep an open line of communication with Grantor and its tenants regarding construction scheduling so as to minimize disruption of Grantor’s and its tenants’ use and enjoyment of the Grantor’s real property. B. RESTORATION - City will provide any mitigation revegetation as required under its environmental requirements and City standards. In addition, at the conclusion of construction, City shall restore any impacted asphalt areas of the temporary construction easement to the condition as good or better as when construction started and shall restore any pre-construction improvements, without limitation, access [ingress and egress improvements / modifications], utilities, irrigation or vegetation near the building that were impacted by the Project construction or use of the easement and emergency gate. Grantor grants City permission to enter its property for these restoration purposes. In addition, Grantor grants to City the right to water any revegetation City plants in the creek bed and banks for a period of one year without access rights, such that the watering will be done from City right of way. C. VIBRATION MONITORING – The City shall provide for a continuous survey / vibration monitoring plan in its construction specifications as set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein. In addition, the City shall provide for a continuous level survey to track any potential settlement issues during the course of construction as identified on Exhibit B. Such continuous survey shall consist of, at a minimum, establishment of baseline elevations prior to bridge demolition and monitoring at least every two weeks or when the bridge foundation is being monitored by the contractor. The monitoring devices with an established data point shall be placed in two places: the basement; and the first floor nearest the bridge. City shall, at no cost to Grantor, provide Grantor with results of all vibration monitoring and level surveys upon request by Grantor. Grantor grants City permission to enter the building and access Packet Pg. 312 Item 9 APN: 002-443-016 City of SLO/Marsh Street Bridge/Zanoli/Agreement rev. 2018-06-14 Page 3 of 7 areas outside the temporary construction easement for purposes of accomplishing this monitoring plan. D. EMERGENCY ACCESS PROVISIONS – City shall provide for an emergency access route as set forth in Exhibit C and shall provide that a fence be installed during construction to restrict access from Grantor’s parking lot to Marsh Street, including a gate for use by emergency personnel. Grantor grants City permission to install the emergency gate as described. E. CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT WORK – ACCESS – City Fire Department will have a private access route from Marsh Street to the front door of the Dialysis building. A chain link gate will prohibit the public from using said access route, for which the Fire Department will have a key. City will install a temporary fence near the subject’s driveway which will block the public’s access to Marsh Street. Such provisions are shown on the attached Exhibit C Emergency Vehicle Access Exhibit. Except in the creek bed, any impacted landscaping, irrigation or other improvements will be protected in place or restored in kind. It is not anticipated that any property utilities will be interrupted by the project construction. In the event of any potential interruption of utilities to the Grantor’s real property, no such interruption shall occur without first coordinating with Grantor and Grantor’s tenant so as minimize any material adverse effect on the tenant’s business requirements. F. DUST CONTROL. City and its contractors shall take all reasonable measures to control dust migration into the renal care facility and Grantor’s real property’s parking lot. G. NOISE MITIGATION. City and its contractors shall take all reasonable measures to control noise levels during construction so as to not unreasonably disturb the day to day operations of the renal care facility. 4. The Grantor: A. LEASE INDEMNIFICATION - Grantor agrees to hold the City harmless and reimburse City for any and all of its losses and expenses occasioned by reason of any lease of said property held by tenant of Grantor. B. PERMISSION TO ENTER - Hereby grants to the City, its agents and contractors, permission to enter upon the subject lands described in the Deed on or after the close of escrow for the purposes of preparation for construction of the City’s Project, subject to all applicable terms and conditions contained in this Agreement and the associated Deed. C. GRANTOR’S KNOWLEDGE OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS OF THE PROPERTY - Grantor hereby represents and warrants, except as to the normal operations of its tenant and the historic uses of the Grantor’s real property by others, that to the best of Grantor’s knowledge and belief that (1) there has been no spill, discharge, release, cleanup or contamination of or by any hazardous or toxic waste or substance on or around the Property at any time, and (2) throughout the period of ownership of the Property by Grantor, no hazardous or toxic material has been used, generated, treated, stored, disposed of or handled in or around the Property. Further, Grantor agrees to disclose to City, prior to the close of escrow, all studies, reports, and investigations known to Grantor concerning any pollution, toxic building materials or toxic hazardous substances or wastes located at, on, or under the Property. 5. The parties agree: Packet Pg. 313 Item 9 APN: 002-443-016 City of SLO/Marsh Street Bridge/Zanoli/Agreement rev. 2018-06-14 Page 4 of 7 A. ESCROW - At City’s option, to open escrow in accordance with this Agreement at an escrow company of City’s choice. Opening an escrow shall be at City’s sole discretion and City may decide to process this transaction without the use of an escrow agent. However, if an escrow agent is utilized, this Agreement constitutes the joint escrow instructions of City and Grantor, and Escrow Agent to whom these instructions are delivered is hereby empowered to act under this Agreement. The parties hereto agree to do all acts necessary to close this escrow in the shortest possible time. If an escrow is utilized, as soon as possible after opening of escrow, City will deposit the executed Deed by Grantor, with Certificate of Acceptance attached, with Escrow Agent on Grantor's behalf. City agrees to deposit the purchase price upon demand of Escrow Agent. City and Grantor agree to deposit with Escrow Agent all additional instruments as may be necessary to complete this transaction. All funds received in this escrow shall be deposited with other escrow funds in a general escrow fund account(s) and may be transferred to any other such escrow trust account in any State or National Bank doing business in the State of California. All disbursements shall be made by check or wire transfer from such account. Any taxes which have been paid by Grantor prior to opening of this escrow shall not be pro-rated between City and Grantor, but Grantor shall have the sole right after close of escrow to apply to the County Tax Collector of said County for any refund of such taxes which may be due Grantor for the period after City's acquisition. i) ESCROW AGENT DIRECTIVES - Escrow Agent is authorized to, and shall: a) Pay and charge Grantor for any unpaid delinquent taxes and/or any penalties and interest thereon, and for any delinquent assessments or bonds against that portion of Grantor's property subject to this transaction as required to convey clear title. b) Pay and charge City for any escrow fees, charges and costs payable under Paragraph 2.C. of this Agreement; c) Disburse funds and deliver Deed when conditions of this escrow have been fulfilled by City and Grantor. d) Following recording of Deed from Grantor if recording is instructed by City, provide City with a CLTA Standard Coverage Policy of Title Insurance in the amount of $13,798 issued by First American Title Company showing that title to the herein real property is vested in City, subject only to the following exceptions, and the printed exceptions and stipulations in said policy: 1) Real Property Taxes for the fiscal year in which escrow closes. 2) Public utility easements and public rights of way; and 3) Other items that may be approved by City in writing in advance of the close of escrow. Packet Pg. 314 Item 9 APN: 002-443-016 City of SLO/Marsh Street Bridge/Zanoli/Agreement rev. 2018-06-14 Page 5 of 7 ii) CLOSE OF ESCROW - The term “close of escrow,” if and where written in this Agreement, shall mean the date necessary instruments of conveyance are recorded in the office of the County Recorder or when payment under Paragraph 2A is distributed to Grantor, whichever occurs first. Recordation of instruments delivered through this escrow is hereby authorized. B. JUDGMENT IN LIEU OF DEED - In the event Grantor does not deliver title in a reasonable time under the terms of the Agreement, the City may file an action in eminent domain to pursue the acquisition of the real property interests described in the referenced Deed, and this Agreement shall constitute a stipulation which may be filed in said proceedings as final and conclusive evidence of the total amount of damages for the taking, including all of the items listed in Section 1260.230 of the Code of Civil Procedure, regarding said property rights. ARTICLE HEADINGS - Article headings in this Agreement are for convenience only and are not intended to be used in interpreting or construing the terms, covenants and conditions of this Agreement. C. COMPLETE UNDERSTANDING - This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, superseding all negotiations, prior discussions, and preliminary agreements or understandings, written or oral. This Agreement may not be amended except in writing by the parties hereto or their successors or assigns. D. CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL - This Agreement is subject to and conditioned upon approval and ratification by the San Luis Obispo City Council. This Agreement is not binding upon the City until executed by the appropriate City official(s) acting in their authorized capacity. E. COUNTERPARTS - This agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which so executed shall, irrespective of the date of its execution and delivery, be deemed an original, and all such counterparts together shall constitute one and the same instrument. F. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS - This Agreement shall apply to and bind the heirs, executors, administrators, assigns and successors of the parties hereto. G. FACSIMILE SIGNATURES – In the event that the parties hereto utilize facsimile documents which include signatures, such documents shall be accepted as if they bore original signatures provided that documents bearing ORIGINAL SIGNATURES are provided following transmittal of the facsimile signature, except that funds shall not be released upon a facsimile signature nor shall facsimile signed documents be accepted for recordation by the Clerk Recorder of the County of San Luis Obispo. H. ATTORNEYS FEES - Should any litigation be commenced between the parties hereto concerning this Agreement, or the rights and duties of any party in relation thereto, or should any attorney be retained to enforce any provision herein, whether or not any litigation commences, the party determined by a court of law to be the prevailing party in such litigation or other action, shall be entitled, in addition to such other relief as may be granted to a reasonable sum as and for his attorney's fees. Packet Pg. 315 Item 9 APN: 002-443-016 City of SLO/Marsh Street Bridge/Zanoli/Agreement rev. 2018-06-14 Page 6 of 7 I. TIME OF ESSENCE - Time is expressly declared to be of the essence of this Agreement. J. NOTICES - All notices shall be in writing, addressed as set forth below, and deposited in the U.S. Mail, postage prepaid. Any party may change its address for future notices by complying with the provisions of this paragraph. GRANTOR’S MAILING ADDRESS: Elizabeth Lucille Zanoli, Trustee Zanoli Revocable Trust dated June 30, 1993 2021 Skylark Lane San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 With Copy to: Charles Zanoli E-Mail: Czanoli@charter.net Matthew S. Kennedy, Esq. E-Mail: msk@KennedyLawRealty.com CITY’S MAILING ADDRESS: City of San Luis Obispo Public Works Department 919 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 No Obligation Other Than Those Set Forth Herein Will Be Recognized. GRANTOR: By: ___________________________________ Date: _________________________ Elizabeth Lucille Zanoli, Surviving Trustee of the Zanoli Revocable Trust dated June 30, 1993 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, A municipal corporation and charter city By: ___________________________________ Date: _________________________ Heidi Harmon, Mayor ATTEST: By: _______________________________ Packet Pg. 316 Item 9 APN: 002-443-016 City of SLO/Marsh Street Bridge/Zanoli/Agreement rev. 2018-06-14 Page 7 of 7 City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: By: _______________________________ By: _______________________________ J. Christine Dietrick Michael McGuire City of San Luis Obispo, Attorney Senior Civil Engineer City of San Luis Obispo Packet Pg. 317 Item 9 Page 1 of 3 City of SLO/Marsh Street Bridge/Zanoli/TCE 2018-7-12 Recording requested by: Hamner, Jewell & Associates Government Real Estate Services When recorded, return to: City of San Luis Obispo Department of Public Works Attn: Michael McGuire 919 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 _____________________________________________________________________________ APN: 002-443-016 No Fee pursuant to Gov. Code sec. 6103 No Documentary Transfer Tax per R&T Code sec. 11922 No Recording Fee per Gov. Code sec. 27383 TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT DEED (Marsh Street Bridge Replacement Project) For a valuable consideration, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, Elizabeth Lucille Zanoli, Surviving Trustee of the Zanoli Revocable Trust dated June 30, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as “Grantor”), hereby grants to the CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, a municipal corporation and charter city, (hereinafter referred to as “City”), A temporary easement for construction, including the right to pile earth thereon, store materials, supplies and equipment thereon, and utilize said temporary construction easement for all other related activities and purposes in conjunction with the San Luis Obispo City Marsh Street Bridge Replacement Project, in, on, over, under, along, and across that certain property described and depicted in Exhibits “A” and “B” attached hereto and incorporated herein (the “Temporary Construction Easement”). Said Temporary Construction Easement shall commence on November 1, 2018, and shall automatically terminate upon completion of City’s construction, or November 1, 2019, whichever occurs first. Grantor shall have use of the property until City takes physical possession. In case of unpredictable delays in construction, upon written notification, the terms of the Temporary Easement may be extended by an amendment to this deed. Grantor shall be compensated based on the fair market value at the time of the extension. Payment shall be made to the Grantor for the extension prior to the expiration of the original period. Upon completion of construction of City’s project, said Temporary Construction Easement area shall be generally restored by City to the condition that existed prior to construction, to the extent reasonably practical. All easement areas within the creek will be restored in compliance with regulatory environmental requirements, including revegetation, and Packet Pg. 318 Item 9 Page 2 of 3 City of SLO/Marsh Street Bridge/Zanoli/TCE 2018-7-12 Grantor grants City the right to conduct such revegetation program within the Temporary Construction Easement. The provisions hereof shall inure to the benefit of the City, its successors and assigns, and shall bind the heirs, executors, administrators, assigns and successors in interest of the respective parties hereto, and all covenants shall apply to and run with the above-described property. In addition, Grantor grants to City the right to maintain and water any revegetation City plants in the creek bed and banks for a period of one year after planting without access rights, such that the watering will be done from City right of way. Such revegetation shall become the property of Grantor thereafter. GRANTOR: Elizabeth Lucille Zanoli, Surviving Trustee of the Zanoli Revocable Trust dated June 30, 1993 By: ____________________________________ Date: _________________________ Elizabeth Lucille Zanoli, Surviving Trustee ACKNOWLEDGMENT A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document. State of California County of ________________ On ______________________ before me, _______________________________________, Notary Public, personally appeared Elizabeth Lucille Zanoli, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signatures(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature __________________________ (Seal) Packet Pg. 319 Item 9 Page 3 of 3 City of SLO/Marsh Street Bridge/Zanoli/TCE 2018-7-12 CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE This is to certify that the City of San Luis Obispo hereby accepts for public purposes the real property, or interest therein, described in that Temporary Construction Easement Deed dated ______________________, from Elizabeth Lucille Zanoli, Surviving Trustee of the Zanoli Revocable Trust dated June 30, 1993, Grantor therein, to the City, and consents to the recordation thereof. In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand this ___ day of __________________, 2018. CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO By_______________________________________ Heidi Harmon, Mayor ATTEST: ________________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 320 Item 9 A Packet Pg. 321 Item 9 B Packet Pg. 322 Item 9 1 APN: 002-443-016 Recording requested by: Hamner, Jewell & Associates Government Real Estate Services When recorded, mail to: City of San Luis Obispo Department of Public Works Attn: Michael McGuire 919 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ No fee pursuant to Government Code § 6103 No Documentary Transfer Tax per R&T Code § 11922 No Recording Fee per Government Code § 27383 EASEMENT DEED (Bridge) APN: 002-443-016 For a valuable consideration, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, Elizabeth Lucille Zanoli, Surviving Trustee of the Zanoli Revocable Trust dated June 30, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as “Grantor”), hereby grants to the CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, a municipal corporation and charter city, (hereinafter referred to as “City”), A permanent easement for the present and future construction, reconstruction, operation, repair, maintenance, streetscaping and landscaping of bridge infrastructure and appurtenances, as Grantee or its successors in interest, from time to time, deem necessary to install over, upon, under, through, along and across that certain real property situated in the County of San Luis Obispo, State of California, legally described in Exhibit "A" and depicted in Exhibit “B”, each attached hereto and made a part hereof (the “Easement Area”). The easement granted herein includes the right to construct and maintain a wingwall and abutment within the Easement Area. Additionally, Grantor does hereby further grant to Grantee, its successors and assigns, the necessary rights of entry to and from the Easement Area for future construction, reconstruction, operations, repair, and maintenance. Packet Pg. 323 Item 9 2 APN: 002-443-016 Executed this _____ day of _____________________, 20__ GRANTOR: Elizabeth Lucille Zanoli, Surviving Trustee of the Zanoli Revocable Trust dated June 30, 1993 By: ____________________________________ Date: _________________________ Elizabeth Lucille Zanoli, Surviving Trustee ACKNOWLEDGMENT A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document. State of California County of ________________ On ______________________ before me, _______________________________________, Notary Public, personally appeared _____________________________, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signatures(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature __________________________ (Seal) Packet Pg. 324 Item 9 3 APN: 002-443-016 CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE This is to certify that the City of San Luis Obispo hereby accepts for public purposes the real property, or interest therein, described in that Temporary Construction Easement Deed dated ______________________, from Elizabeth Lucille Zanoli, Surviving Trustee of the Zanoli Revocable Trust dated June 30, 1993, Grantor therein, to the City, and consents to the recordation thereof. In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand this ___ day of __________________, 2018. CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO By_______________________________________ Heidi Harmon, Mayor ATTEST: ________________________________ City Clerk Packet Pg. 325 Item 9 A Packet Pg. 326 Item 9 B Packet Pg. 327 Item 9 Packet Pg. 328Item 9 Packet Pg. 329Item 9 Packet Pg. 330Item 9 Packet Pg. 331Item 9 Packet Pg. 332Item 9 Packet Pg. 333Item 9 Packet Pg. 334Item 9 Packet Pg. 335Item 9 Packet Pg. 336Item 9 Packet Pg. 337Item 9 Packet Pg. 338Item 9 Packet Pg. 339Item 9 Packet Pg. 340Item 9 Packet Pg. 341Item 9 Packet Pg. 342Item 9 Packet Pg. 343Item 9 Packet Pg. 344Item 9 Packet Pg. 345Item 9 Packet Pg. 346Item 9 Packet Pg. 347Item 9 Packet Pg. 348Item 9 Packet Pg. 349Item 9 Packet Pg. 350Item 9 Packet Pg. 351Item 9 Packet Pg. 352Item 9 Packet Pg. 353Item 9 Packet Pg. 354Item 9 Packet Pg. 355Item 9 Packet Pg. 356Item 9 Packet Pg. 357Item 9 Packet Pg. 358Item 9 Packet Pg. 359Item 9 Packet Pg. 360Item 9 Packet Pg. 361Item 9 Packet Pg. 362Item 9 Packet Pg. 363Item 9 Page intentionally left blank. Packet Pg. 364 Item 9 Meeting Date: 8/21/2018 FROM: Greg Hermann, Interim Deputy City Manager Prepared By: Ryan Betz, Interim Assistant to the City Manager SUBJECT: AMENDMENT TO THE CURRENT AGREEMENT FOR JOINT CONSTRUCTION AND FINANCING COSTS FOR AN ANIMAL SERVICES SHELTER RECOMMENDATION Authorize the City Manager to approve Amendment #1 to the Agreement for Allocation o f Construction and Financing Costs for an Animal Services Shelter. DISCUSSION On February 7, 2017 the City Council approved a contract with the County of San Luis Obispo, and the Cities of Arroyo Grande, Atascadero, Grover Beach, Morro Bay, Pismo Beach and Paso Robles to jointly finance and construct a replacement of the County animal services shelter. The existing shelter was found not to conform to current industry standards and public expectations of animal shelters, as many of the shelter's original design features and characteristics are now outdated. In April 2015, the County Board of Supervisors concluded, based on the totality of factors, that remodeling the existing facility would be imprudent, therefore directed staff to pursue the development of a replacement facility. Under this service contract, all seven cities and the County share the cost of animal services based on a formula that factors the agencies' proportionat e use of field services and shelter services. The agreement provides a mechanism to: 1. Share costs based on proportionate use. 2. Clarifies service and shelter governance. 3. Contains mechanisms to control construction costs and is a more efficient way to construct a shelter consistent with state law and local service preferences and standards. Since that time, the costs for animal services increased with some partners considering withdrawal from the agreement . Those partners, the cities of Paso Robles and Atascadero, have since approved the Amendment with the County to continue their partnership for construction of the animal services shelter. Based upon additional collaboration efforts between the County and the participating cities, a contract amendment is being proposed that specifically addresses the increase in costs, adds clarity for shared governance, and a new service approach to the shelter operations. Contract Amendment This Amendment aims to keep the collaborative nature of the original agreement which will mutually benefit both the County and regional City partners. The proposed Amendment allows the County to move forward with the construction of the new animal services shelter, adopt Packet Pg. 365 Item 10 shared governance practices, and sets the stage for lower futu re costs by reducing animal intakes and overnight stays. Capital and Financing Costs The Project construction costs to be shared by the partners were estimated at $13,176,500 at the time the Agreement was signed. To combat rising costs of the project the County has committed to solely pay the first $1,000,000 of the joint project to construct and finance in the animal service shelter. The County's first $1,000,000 will thereby reduce the total shared contributions to $12,176,500. There are no additiona l financing costs to the cities from the County to complete this commitment and after completion of the project there are no expected additional capital costs for the cities for the joint use of the shelter. The City currently has an annual service agreement with the County that only covers the City’s share of operational expenses. Animal Shelter Operations As part of the agreement, an Operations Committee and an Executive Board will be formed to ensure that all shelter policies and operations equitably reflect and benefit the needs of all parties. The Operations Committee is comprised of the County’s Health Agency Director or his/her designee and a subset of City Managers or their designees. The Executive Board will be composed of the County Administrative Officer (CAO) and a subset of the City Managers or their designees (2-3) for each of the cities to consider significant policy or budget changes and make recommendations prior to policy implementation or budget adoption for the shelter. Any conflicts that cannot be successfully resolved by the Operations Committee or the Executive Board will be addressed by a five-person ad hoc committee, comprised of County Supervisors and City Mayors. The County agrees to adopt goals and take action steps to reduce animal intakes and total animal nights by an average of five percent (5%) per year for the next five years, in an attempt to reduce operation costs. The targeted reductions are to be accomplished primarily by reducing the need for services and the costs o f those services, not by reducing or denying needed services. The County agrees to undertake a cost/benefit analysis related to services and operations of the shelter and present the findings to the Operations Committee. Client Services Approach Working collaboratively with the Operations Committee and Executive Board, the County agrees to adopt a client -oriented services approach for shelter operations. Kennel Permits The County will not issue kennel permits inside city limits without written approval of that city. CONCURRENCES The cities of Arroyo Grande, Atascadero, Grover Beach, Morro Bay, Pismo Beach, and Paso Robles have either approved the MOA or are in the process of approving it. In addition to the cities listed above, the Police Department concurs with the proposed amendment to the existing agreement. Packet Pg. 366 Item 10 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The County of San Luis Obispo is the lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and will complete all required environmental review for the project. The City, as a responsible agency, relies on the County’s environmental determination to meet the City’s statutorily required CEQA mandates. FISCAL IMPACT The Amendment does not result in a cost increase to the City. Under this amendment , the County is funding the first $1,000,000 in the joint partnership to move the animal shelter project forward. The additional construction costs identified in the MOU will be paid by the County in order to reduce the shared costs for the cities. As part of the original contract, the City Council approved an annual payment of approximately $100,000 to $130,000 for construction costs over the next 25 years. The County estimates that the first annual payment will be $124,100, which includes a n additional, one-time construction cost of $34,100, with an annual cost of $90,000 thereafter. This annual payment was approved as part of the 2017-19 Financial Plan and will be included in the proposed 2019-21 Financial Plan. ALTERNATIVE The City Council may choose not to approve this amendment. Per the original agreement , only through unanimous consent among the parties can the measure be amended. This is not recommended as an alternative because the amendment poses no additional costs to the City and will help to collaboratively address and resolve the issue of rising costs for animal services. Attachments: a - Animal Services Shelter MOA - Amendment 1 b - Animal Services Shelter MOA - Original Packet Pg. 367 Item 10 Page 1 of 4 AMENDMENT NUMBER 1 TO THE AGREEMENT FOR ALLOCATION OF CONSTRUCTION AND FINANCING COSTS FOR AN ANIMAL SERVICES SHELTER AT 865 OKLAHOMA AVENUE IN SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, BETWEEN THE CITIES OF ATASCADERO, ARROYO GRANDE, GROVER BEACH, MORRO BAY, PASO ROBLES, PISMO BEACH, AND SAN LUIS OBISPO AND THE COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO THIS AMENDMENT (“Amendment”), dated for reference as of June 5, 2018, to the Agreement (defined below), is entered into by and between the COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO (the “County”), and the cities of ATASCADERO, ARROYO GRANDE, GROVER BEACH, MORRO BAY, PASO ROBLES, PISMO BEACH, AND SAN LUIS OBISPO (each, a “City,” and collectively, the “Cities,” and, together with the County, the “Parties”, or individually “Party”). RECITALS The County and each of the Cities previously entered into an Agreement (“Agreement”) for allocation of construction and financing costs for a new Animal Service Shelter at 865 Oklahoma Avenue in San Luis Obispo, California (“Shelter” or “Project”). The Agreement was dated as of February 1, 2017. The Parties acknowledge the benefit of collaborative and joint efforts in constructing, financing, and managing the Shelter. The Parties enter into this Amendment to memorialize changes regarding the Parties’ participation and corresponding obligations with regard to the management and allocation of construction and financing costs for the Shelter. This Amendment memorializes the Parties’ joint commitment to collaboratively address and resolve the issue of rising costs for animal services. The Parties recognize that the operating philosophy and operating model by which the shelter has been operated is not the model that will best serve the Parties going forward. The model going forward views all parties as partners, and is based on the needs of all Parties, with all Parties being incentivized to find creative ways to reduce the costs of those services. The model going forward also demonstrates the County’s commitment to seeking opportunities to be more nimble, and open to change. The Agreement and this Amendment represent the entire agreement between the Parties. NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties agree as follows: 1. Recitals. The above Recitals are true and correct. 2. Capital and Financing Costs a) The Project construction costs to be shared by the Parties were estimated at the time the Agreement was signed to be Thirteen Million One Hundred Seventy Six Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($13,176,500). Pursuant to this Amendment, the County shall reduce the costs allocated to the Cities as follows: i. The County will solely pay the first one million dollars ($1,000,000) of the project, moving $1,000,000 in shared Estimated Project Construction Costs in Exhibit D to County-Only Costs. ii. The shared Estimated Project Construction Costs will thereby be reduced to Twelve Million One Hundred Seventy-Six Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($12,176,500). Packet Pg. 368 Item 10 Page 2 of 4 b) The County further agrees to pass through any financing costs to the Cities with no additional points, administrative fees, or charges. c) After all construction and related financing costs are retired, the Parties then participating in the Shelter program may continue their joint use of the Shelter for the life of the building, at no additional capital or financing costs. 3. Animal Shelter Operations a) Shared Governance. The Parties agree that further clarification of the intended s hared governance model is appropriate. The intent of the Operations Committee and the Executive Board created by the Agreement is to ensure all Shelter policies and operations reflect the needs of all Parties and equitably benefit all Parties. The Operations Committee and the Executive Board are authorized to ensure the policies and operations of field services policies and operations also reflect the needs of all Parties and equitably benefit all Parties. Any conflicts that cannot be successfully resolved by the Operations Committee or the Executive Board will be addressed by a 5-person ad hoc committee, comprised of County Supervisors and City Mayors. b) Targeted Reductions in Operation Costs. The County agrees to adopt goals and take action steps to reduce animal intakes and total animal nights by an average of five percent (5%) per year for the next five (5) years. The resulting cost savings will be shared by all parties in accordance with the Animal Care and Control Services contract in place at the time. The targeted reductions are to be accomplished primarily by reducing the need for services and the costs of those services, not by reducing or denying needed services. Steps undertaken may include, but are not limited to: i. Targeted education campaigns ii. Pro-active and targeted programs such as catch, spay/neuter, and release programs iii. Pro-active licensing and licensing enforcement iv. Community-based approaches that involve the community in activities and donations v. Active pursuit of grants and donations vi. User fees set at a strategic level to minimize subsidy from general taxes. c) Cost Benefit Analysis. The County agrees to undertake a cost/benefit analysis related to services and operations of the Shelter and present the findings to the Operations Committee. The County will also propose needed actions to the Operations Committee and, as necessary, the Executive Board, and implement changes identified and agreed to by the Parties to achieve reductions in operating costs. 4. Client Services Approach a) Working collaboratively with the Operations Committ ee and Executive Board, the County agrees to adopt a client-oriented services approach for Shelter operations. Elements of this approach may include, but are not limited to: i. Mobile spay/neuter programs ii. Pet owner education programs iii. Outreach to constituents iv. Offering micro-chipping 5. Kennel Permits a) The County will not issue kennel permits inside city limits without written approval of that city. 6. In the event of a conflict between the terms of the Agreement and the Amendment, the terms of this Amendment shall prevail. Packet Pg. 369 Item 10 Page 3 of 4 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, by their execution below, the Parties agree to be bound by the provisions of this Amendment, and the Board of Supervisors of the COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO has authorized and directed the Chairperson of the Board of Supervisors to execute this Agreement for and on behalf of the County, and the Cities of ATASCADERO, ARROYO GRANDE, GROVER BEACH, MORRO BAY, PASO ROBLES, PISMO BEACH, AND SAN LUIS OBISPO have caused this Agreement to be subscribed by each of their duly authorized officers and attested by their Clerks. Dated: _______________ COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO _____________________ ____________________________ Clerk of the Board Dated: _______________ CITY OF ATASCADERO _____________________ ____________________________ City Clerk By: Dated: _______________ CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE _____________________ ____________________________ City Clerk By: Dated: _______________ CITY OF GROVER BEACH _____________________ ____________________________ City Clerk By: Dated: _______________ CITY OF MORRO BAY _____________________ ____________________________ City Clerk By: Dated: _______________ CITY OF PASO ROBLES _____________________ ____________________________ City Clerk By: Dated: _______________ CITY OF PISMO BEACH _____________________ ____________________________ City Clerk By: Packet Pg. 370 Item 10 Page 4 of 4 Dated: _______________ CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO _____________________ ____________________________ City Clerk By: Packet Pg. 371 Item 10 Page 1 of 12 AGREEMENT FOR ALLOCATION OF CONSTRUCTION AND FINANCING COSTS FOR AN ANIMAL SERVICES SHELTER AT 865 OKLAHOMA AVENUE IN SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, BETWEEN THE CITIES OF ATASCADERO, ARROYO GRANDE, GROVER BEACH, MORRO BAY, PASO ROBLES, PISMO BEACH, AND SAN LUIS OBISPO AND THE COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO THIS AGREEMENT, dated for reference as of February 1, 2017 (the “Agreement”), is entered into by and between the COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO (the “County”), and the cities of ATASCADERO, ARROYO GRANDE, GROVER BEACH, MORRO BAY, PASO ROBLES, PISMO BEACH, AND SAN LUIS OBISPO (each, a “City,” and collectively, the “Cities,” and, together with the County, the “Parties”, or individually “Party”). RECITALS The County and each of the Cities are parties to a separate but similar Contract for Animal Care and Control Services (“Services Contract”) effective as of July 1, 2016 and expiring, unless sooner terminated, on June 30, 2019, pursuant to which the County provides animal control services throughout San Luis Obispo County, including within the jurisdictional boundaries of each of the Cities. In conjunction with and pursuant to the Services Contract, the County operates an existing Animal Services Shelter located at 885 Oklahoma Avenue in San Luis Obispo, California. Owing to the obsolescence of the existing shelter, it is necessary to construct a new Animal Services Shelter (“Shelter ” or “Project”) as generally described in Exhibit A, at an address preliminarily identified as 865 Oklahoma Avenue, and as generally depicted in Exhibit B (“Shelter Property”). The Parties acknowledge the benefit of collaborative and joint efforts in constructing the Shelter. The Parties enter into this Agreement to memorialize their participation and corresponding obligations with regards to the allocation and repayment of the construction and financing costs for the Shelter. NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties agree as follows: 1. Recitals. The above Recitals are true and correct. 2. Estimated Project Construction Costs. a) The Project construction costs, excluding the portion of the Oklahoma Ave./Utility Extension costs to be borne solely by the County, and excluding the County-only costs of the remaining depreciation valu e of the existing facility, demolition of the existing facility, and land costs, and ex cluding costs to be shared proportionally only by the Cities, for the Shelter are estimated at this time to be Thirteen Million One Hundred Seventy Six Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($13,176,500) as shown in Exhibit D (the “Estimated Project Construction Costs”). The Estimated Project Construction Costs include expenses for soft costs, such as architectural and engineering services; County costs for administration, project management service, environmental review, planning and building fees, and inspections; and hard costs, such as actual construction costs. b) The Estimated Project Construction Costs shall only include those expenses and costs generally described above, which are incurred by the County specifically for the Shelter construction project. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary below, the total Project Costs, as defined in Paragraph 5(a) below shall not exceed Fourteen Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($14,500,000) without a written amendment to this agreement signed by all Parties. Packet Pg. 372 Item 10 Page 2 of 12 c) The Project will be managed as a “Design / Build” project, as approved by the County of San Luis Obispo Board of Supervisors on April 12, 2016. 3. Excess Construction Costs a) Prior to Authorization for Construction to Begin (“Construction Contract”). (i) If the County receives information in the design or bidding process indicating that the Estimated Project Construction Costs for the Shelter will exceed $13,176,500 by less than ten percent (10%), the County shall provide written notice to each member of the Executive Board (as defined in Section 9(b) below) of the revised estimated construction costs within a reasonable period of time before such additional construction costs are incurred. The Executive Board shall either approve or disapprove the additional construction costs, if any, by written notice to the County, delivered within ninety (90) days after receipt of the County’s notice of the revised construction costs. If any Executive Board member fails to timely approve in writing, the Executive Board shall be deemed to have not approved and the County shall promptly confer with all Cities regarding the additional construction costs and any means by which such additional construction costs may be minimized. (ii) If the County receives information as part of the design or bidding process indicating that the Estimated Project Construction Costs for the Shelter will exceed $14,500,000, the County shall immediately provide written notice to each City of the revised estimated construction costs (“Excess Construction Costs”) and confer with the Cities as to whether to authorize the Construction Contract or reject all bids. Each City shall either approve or disapprove the Excess Construction Costs resulting in Estimated Project Construction Costs exceeding $14,500,000 by written amendment delivered to the County within ninety (90) days after receipt of the County’s written amendment. If the decision is to authorize the contract, the County shall prepare and deliver to the Cities a written amendment to this Agreement amending Section 2(b) to increase the not-to-exceed amount. If any City fails to timely approve in writing, the City shall be deemed to have disapproved. Should a City(ies) disapprove the Excess Construction Costs, the County will immediately confer with all Cities in an attempt to reconcile the disagreement. Should the Parties be unable to reach agreement, the measures shall be taken to reduce the costs below $14,500,000 and in no such event shall the Parties be liable for Excess Construction Costs absent a written amendment to this agreement. (iii) If a City chooses to not participate in the shelter construction at that time, the City is allowed to withdraw from this agreement and pay its proportionate share of all costs incurred as of the date of withdrawal. The date of withdrawal shall be defined as the date that written notice is received by the County of the City's desire to withdraw due to Excess Construction Costs beyond amounts previously agreed. The County will recalculate future payments of the remaining Parties using revised percentages of shelter use with the methodology in Section 6(a). b) Authorization for Construction to Begin (i) Upon County’s authorization for Construction to begin, total costs for the Project including any incurred or future hard costs, soft costs, contingencies, and other miscellaneous costs related to Shelter construction will be added to the estimated final co nstruction costs (“Estimated Final Construction Costs”). The Estimated Final Construction Costs will not exceed the Estimated Project Construction Costs (or Excess Construction Costs), unless agreed to in writing by all of the Parties in a written amendment to this Agreement. Should the Parties be unable to reach agreement, measures shall be taken to reduce the costs below $14,500,000 and in no such event Packet Pg. 373 Item 10 Page 3 of 12 shall the Parties be liable for Excess Construction Costs absent a written amendment to this agreement. (ii) If a City chooses to not participate in the shelter construction at that time, the City is allowed to withdraw from this agreement and pay its proportionate share of all costs incurred as of the date of withdrawal. The date of withdrawal shall be defined as the date that written notice is received by the County of the City's desire to withdraw due to Excess Construction Costs beyond amounts previously agreed. The County will recalculate future payments of the remaining Parties using revised percentages of shelter use with the methodology in Section 6(a). c) After Authorization for Construction to Begin (i) If the County becomes aware, after its authorization for Construction to begin, that the costs of construction will exceed the Estimated Final Construction Costs due to unforeseen or other conditions, the County shall provide written notice, to each City of the revised estimated construction costs within a reasonable period of time before such additional construction costs are incurred. Each City shall either approve or disapprove the additional construction costs, if any, by written notice to the County, delivered within ninety (90) days after receipt of the County’s notice of the revised construction costs. If any City fails to timely approve in writing, the City shall be deemed to have not approved and the County shall promptly confer with all Cities regarding the additional construction costs and any means by which such additional construction costs may be minimized. No additional construction costs shall be incurred that exceed $14,500,000 without a written amendment signed by all the Parties. Should the Parties be unable to reach agreement, measures shall be taken to reduce the costs below $14,500,000 and in no such event shall the Parties be liable for Excess Construction Costs absent a written amendment to this agreement. (ii) If a City chooses to not participate in the shelter construction at that time, the City is allowed to withdraw from this agreement and pay its proportionate share of all costs incurred as of the date of withdrawal. The date of withdrawal shall be defined as the date that written notice is received by the County of the City's desire to withdraw due to Excess Construction Costs beyond amounts previously agreed. The County will recalculate future payments of the remaining Parties using revised percentages of shelter use with the methodology in Section 6(a). 4. Financing a) County Advance of Funds. The County shall advance funds required to pay for the costs of construction of the Shelter. The County intends to finance the funds it advances, including County in house soft costs. i) County Sole Discretion as to Financing Terms. The Cou nty, at its sole discretion, shall determine financing terms based on market rates and terms available at the time of financing. The anticipated financing interest rate is estimated to be between 3.5%-5%, based on a 25-year term, see Exhibit D. The Count y may finance the Estimated Final Construction Costs (hard, soft, design, etc.) for the Shelter in addition to customary out of pocket costs to obtain financing, if any. The County may choose to provide in-house financing, provided the interest rate charged to the Cities does not exceed commercially available rates for like projects and terms of financing are equal to or more favorable to Cities than terms otherwise available to the County. (1) The County will provide notification to the Shelter Executive Boa rd of its intentions regarding external or in-house financing at least 30 days prior to taking action on Packet Pg. 374 Item 10 Page 4 of 12 financing. Said notification will include final estimates of financing costs and anticipated interest rates. (2) Should the Cities desire to have costs identified as “Costs Shared Proportionally by Cities Only” in Exhibit D included in any financing, the Cities shall provide written notification to the County by October 31, 2017. Should all Cities fail to provide written notice, the “Costs Shared Proportionally by Cities Only” will be proportionally allocated to each of the Cities as shown in Exhibit C and billed accordingly, with a payment due date of January 1, 2018. ii) Estimated Project Financing Costs. The financing costs are estimated to range from $7,556,392 to $11,618,328, as shown in Exhibit D, depending on the applicable interest rate and whether there are out of pocket costs to obtain financing (collectively “Estimated Project Financing Costs”). If the actual interest rate is higher or lower than that estimated on Exhibit D, the actual financing costs will vary. 5. Total Estimated Project Costs/Total Project Costs. a) The Estimated Final Construction Costs and the Estimated Project Financing Costs are jointly referred to as the Total Estimated Project Costs. Once the Shelter has been constructed and financed, the County will prepare a final cost summary of the actual construction and financing costs incurred by County in connection with the Shelter, excluding any costs that this Agreement expressly provides shall be excluded from the calculation, to establish the total project costs and annual repayment schedule based on the financing. Upon request, a City may review back up material for the summary. After review and adjustment (if any) of the final cost summary by all Parties, the approved final cost summary shall be known as the Total Project Costs. No City shall unreasonably delay or disapprove the Total Project Costs. 6. Allocation of Total Project Costs. a) Allocation Based on Percentage of Shelter Use. Each Party shall pay its share of the Total Project Costs, based on the annual repayment schedule associated with the financing. Each Party’s share shall be based upon that individual Party’s percentage of shelter use. Shelter use is defined as the number of shelter services (impounds, quarantines, animal surrenders, confiscations, euthanasia requests, etc.) originating from, or requested by, an individual Party’s jurisdiction and/or its residents. Each Party’s share shall be determined annually by the County as part of their normal record keeping processes. The individual Party’s shelter use percentage shall be calculated using the total number of shelter services allocated to an individual Party over the preceding three full fiscal year periods, divided by the total number of all shelter services provided to all Parties over the same preceding three full fiscal year periods. %𝑆�𝑒𝑙𝑟𝑒𝑟 𝑆𝑟𝑒=( 𝑃𝑎𝑟𝑟𝑦#𝑆�𝑒𝑙𝑟𝑒𝑟 𝑆𝑒𝑟𝑣�ℎ𝑐𝑒𝑟 𝑌𝑒𝑎𝑟1 +𝑃𝑎𝑟𝑟𝑦 #𝑆�𝑒𝑙𝑟𝑒𝑟 𝑆𝑒𝑟𝑣�ℎ𝑐𝑒𝑟𝑌𝑒𝑎𝑟 2 +𝑃𝑎𝑟𝑟𝑦 #𝑆�𝑒𝑙𝑟𝑒𝑟 𝑆𝑒𝑟𝑣�ℎ𝑐𝑒𝑟𝑌𝑒𝑎𝑟 3 ) (𝑆𝑜𝑟𝑎𝑙#𝑆�𝑒𝑙𝑟𝑒𝑟 𝑆𝑒𝑟𝑣�ℎ𝑐𝑒𝑟𝑌𝑒𝑎𝑟 1 +𝑆𝑜𝑟𝑎𝑙 #𝑆�𝑒𝑙𝑟𝑒𝑟 𝑆𝑒𝑟𝑣�ℎ𝑐𝑒𝑟𝑌𝑒𝑎𝑟 2 +𝑆𝑜𝑟𝑎𝑙 #𝑆�𝑒𝑙𝑟𝑒𝑟 𝑆𝑒𝑟𝑣�ℎ𝑐𝑒𝑟𝑌𝑒𝑎𝑟 3 ) Exhibit C indicates the percentage of each Party's actual use of the existing Animal Services shelter for the Fiscal Years 2013-14, 2014-15, and 2015-16. Adjustments to each Party’s annual allocation of Total Project Costs shall be adjusted annually based on the previous 3-year trailing average of the percentages of shelter use. b) Reallocation in the Event of Withdrawal or Termination. In the event that a Party withdraws or terminates under Section 8 below, the allocation of each Party’s share of Total Project Costs shall be adjusted upward for the remaining parties for the subsequent calendar year. The annual calculation and any associated adjustments shall be made by December 31st of each year and shall be due on July 1st of the next fiscal year. Packet Pg. 375 Item 10 Page 5 of 12 7. Use of Shelter a) The Shelter shall only be used as an Animal Services facility. No other County department or agency or other person or entity shall use any portion of the Shelter without the prior written consent of the Operations Committee (as defined in Section 9 (a) below). Such use shall be accompanied by the payment of an appropriate rental charge. 8. Termination and Withdrawal a) Withdrawal Prior to Authorization of Construction/Payment of Allocation of Soft Costs. i) Any Party may withdraw from this Agreement prior to County’s authorization of the Construction to begin by giving a minimum of one (1) year’s written notice to all Parties and by payment of its share, based on the allocation set forth in Section 6, above, of costs incurred by County prior to date of receipt of notice of withdrawal. Notice shall be deemed received on the date of personal delivery, or if mailed by U.S. mail, five (5) days after date of mailing. Such costs shall be reasonably determined by County and a majority of the Parties of the Executive Board, excluding any Party(ies) electing to withdra w. Any withdrawing Party shall pay its share by the effective date of its withdrawal. A withdrawing Party who withdraws prior to October 31, 2017 shall not be required to pay any portion of financing costs, regardless of whether outside financing or in -house County financing is ultimately provided. Any payment of soft or hard costs by a withdrawing Party shall be deleted from the amount to be financed. The County will recalculate future payments of the remaining Parties using revised percentages of shelter use with the methodology in Section 6 a). b) Withdrawal After Construction Begins /Payment of Allocation. i) Any Party may withdraw from this Agreement after the County’s authorization of construction begin, by providing a minimum of one (1) year’s written notice to all of the other Parties and prepaying its entire allocation of the Total Project Costs by the effective date of its withdrawal. If a Party withdraws from this Agreement prior to October 31, 2017, any estimated financing costs shall be deducted from the Total Project Costs before calculating the withdrawing Party’s Total Project Costs share. If County provides in-house financing, any finance or interest charge accruing or payable after the withdrawal shall be deducted from the Total Proj ect Costs before calculating the withdrawing Party’s share of the Total Project Costs. Withdrawal from the Agreement shall be effective as of December 31 of the year stated in the written notice. The County will recalculate future payments of the remaining Parties using revised percentages of shelter use with the methodology in Section 6 a). c) The County shall not terminate a City’s access to or use of the Shelter if the City is not in default of its payment obligations. For the purposes of this Agreement, a City shall be deemed to be in default if said City is sixty (60) calendar days or more in arrears on any payment required under this Agreement. (i) Should the County desire to terminate a City’s access or use of the Shelter for default of its payment obligations, the County shall include any non-defaulted Cities, at the non-defaulted Cities’ sole discretion, in negotiations with the defaulted City, prior to their termination. (ii) The County shall retain final decision authority to terminate any City’s access to or use of the Shelter for default of said City’s payment obligations. 9. Animal Shelter Operations a) An Operations Committee comprised of the County’s Health Agency Director or his/her designee and a subset of City Managers or their designees shall be formed. At their sole discretion, all Parties may be represented on the Operations Committee. Packet Pg. 376 Item 10 Page 6 of 12 b) An Executive Board composed of the County Administrative Officer (CAO) and a subset of the City Managers (2-3) for each of the three Cities, or their designees, shall consider significant policy or budget changes and make recommendations prior to policy implementation or budget adoption for the Shelter. c) The Executive Board meetings shall be held as needed and in conjunction with the existing monthly City Manager/CAO meeting. At a minimum, “Animal Services” shall be a standing item that is considered twice in a calendar year. While any Party may request that “Animal Services” be added to the agenda of any City Manager/CAO monthly meeting, it wi ll be the responsibility of the chair of the meeting to ensure Animal Services is placed on the agenda and satisfies the minimum number of meetings required by this Agreement. d) If the City Managers’ recommendation is different from that of the CAO on budget or policy matters, the County shall include the City Managers’ recommendation in any related staff report to the Board of Supervisors and provide a summary of the nature of any disagreement. e) Final policy and budgetary authority for Shelter operations reside with the County Board of Supervisors. f) Future Services Contracts shall be for 3-year terms. g) If a City chooses to provide its own field services, it must provide to all Parties, a one (1) year’s written notice of its intent to provide its own services and to terminate, or (if applicable) not to renew, its Services Contract with the County, except as otherwise expressly provided in its Services Contract with the County, h) Service Contracts shall be separate from the Parties’ obligations to finance and pay their proportional and allocated shares of Total Project Costs for the Shelter. i) The County’s repayment obligation of its share of the Total Project Costs shall not be included in the calculation of the Shelter’s operating costs. The County shall charge no rent for the Shelter or Shelter Property or otherwise attempt to obtain compensation from the Cities for those items identified in Appendix D as “County Only Costs”. j) Any City shall have the ability to provide its own separate field services. The costs for accessing the Shelter shall be reasonably determined by the County after consulting with the Executive Board and shall only be for the fair share reasonable operating costs for Shelter operations. k) Any City that elects to not participate in Shelter Total Project Costs shall immediately cease as a Party to this Agreement and the County shall not be required to provide any animal services to such City. Such City shall be required to provide its own animal services and shelter, in accordance with all applicable laws and statues, effective on a date mutually agreed to by the City and the County. If the City and the County are unable to mutually agree to a date, termination will be effective upon the expiration of the City’s existing Service Contract or the date a Certificate of Occupancy is issued for the new Shelter, whichever occurs first. 10. Animal Shelter Planning a) The Parties agree to form an ad-hoc value engineering team consisting of up to three (3) City representatives and a minimum of two (2) County representatives. City representatives shall fully participate with the County to assist with investigating and identifying the most effective and efficient methods to construct a Shelter that meets all Parties’ existing and fut ure animal service’s needs. The value engineering team shall meet as needed and provide input with architects, designers, construction managers, and engineers during the development of plans and specifications for the Shelter. b) Prior to the authorization of the Construction Contract, the Executive Board shall be presented project plans and estimated budgets, and provide a recommendation that will be included in the CAO staff report to approve the contract by the Board of Supervisors. Packet Pg. 377 Item 10 Page 7 of 12 11. Effective Date a) Except as set forth above, this Agreement shall be effective for the period from January 5, 2017 until each Party has made the last payment required under Section 6 or, if applicable, Section 8, of this Agreement 12. Entire Agreement a) This is the entire agreement among the Parties with respect to the Project and supersedes any prior written or oral agreements with respect to the Project. In the event of a conflict between the terms of this Agreement and the Services Contract, the terms of this Agreement shall p revail. 13. Assignability a) Except as otherwise expressly provided for herein, no Party shall assign any of its obligations or rights hereunder without the written consent of all Parties. 14. Notices a) Any notices required to be given pursuant to this Agreement shall be given in writing and shall be mailed to all Parties to the Agreement, directed to the County Administrative Officer and County Counsel, and to the City Manager or City Administrative Officer and City Attorney of each City. 15. Audit a) The Cities may inspect and/or audit all records and other written materials used by County in preparing the Total Project Costs and annual invoices to each City. 16. Good Faith Efforts a) The Parties shall each act in good faith in performing their respective obligations as set forth in this Agreement and shall work diligently to maintain their longstanding cooperative relationships. 17. Amendment a) This Agreement may only be amended in writing, signed by all Parties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, by their execution below, the Parties agree to be bound to the obligations stated herein, and the Board of Supervisors of the COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO has authorized and directed the Chairperson of the Board of Supervisors to execute this Agreement for and on behalf of the County, and the Cities of ATASCADERO, ARROYO GRANDE, GROVER BEACH, MORRO BAY, PASO ROBLES, PISMO BEACH, AND SAN LUIS OBISPO have caused this Agreement to be subscribed by each of their duly authorized officers and attested by their Clerks. Dated: _______________ COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO _____________________ ____________________________ Clerk of the Board Dated: _______________ CITY OF ATASCADERO _____________________ ____________________________ City Clerk By: Packet Pg. 378 Item 10 Page 8 of 12 Dated: _______________ CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE _____________________ ____________________________ City Clerk By: Dated: _______________ CITY OF GROVER BEACH _____________________ ____________________________ City Clerk By: Dated: _______________ CITY OF MORRO BAY _____________________ ____________________________ City Clerk By: Dated: _______________ CITY OF PASO ROBLES _____________________ ____________________________ City Clerk By: Dated: _______________ CITY OF PISMO BEACH _____________________ ____________________________ City Clerk By: Dated: _______________ CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO _____________________ ____________________________ City Clerk By: Packet Pg. 379 Item 10 Page 9 of 12 EXHIBIT A Animal Services Facility The quantities listed below were derived from a review of the existing Animal Services facility, the 2010 "Needs Assessment, Feasibility, and Building Program Study" by Shelter Planners of America, and meetings with Animal Services Manager Eric Anderson. Building Floor Area: 16,000 square feet Outdoor Runs: 3,000 Incinerator, Cold Storage: 2,000 Sally Port, Truck Wash, Truck Parking (8 trucks): 4,200 Disaster Response Equipment: 1,200 Visitor Parking (15 spaces): 5,300 Staff Parking (20 spaces): 7,000 Large Animal Pens: 27,000 Subtotal: 65,700 Additional 20% for Circulation, Landscaping: 13,140 TOTAL: 78,840 square feet Packet Pg. 380 Item 10 Page 10 of 12 EXHIBIT B 865 Oklahoma Ave Packet Pg. 381 Item 10 Page 11 of 12 EXHIBIT C (Number of Shelter Service Provided) Cities City Name 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 Total Percent Full Yr. Full Yr. Full Yr. 1 Arroyo Grande 286 7% 427 11% 291 8% 1,004 8.39% 2 Atascadero 476 12% 600 15% 643 17% 1,719 14.37% 3 Grover Beach 167 4% 142 4% 135 4% 444 3.71% 4 Morro Bay 126 3% 143 4% 118 3% 387 3.23% 5 Paso Robles 724 18% 734 18% 792 21% 2,250 18.81% 6 Pismo Beach 57 1% 61 2% 54 1% 172 1.44% 7 San Luis Obispo 482 12% 486 12% 479 12% 1,447 12.09% 99 Unincorporated 1,745 43% 1,464 36% 1,332 35% 4,541 37.96% 4,063 4,057 3,844 11,964 100.00% Packet Pg. 382 Item 10 Page 12 of 12 EXHIBIT D Packet Pg. 383 Item 10 Page intentionally left blank. Packet Pg. 384 Item 10 Meeting Date: 8/21/2018 FROM: Carrie Mattingly, Utilities Director Prepared By: David Hix, Deputy Director, Utilities – Wastewater SUBJECT: PROGRAM AND DESIGN CONTRACT AMENDMENTS FOR THE WATER RESOURCES RECOVERY FACILITY PROJECT RECOMMENDATION 1. Approve a contract amendment with CH2M Hill Engineers, Inc. (CH2M) for $446,177 for completion of Design Services for the Water Resource Recovery Facility Project , Spec. No. 91363 (Attachment A). 2. Approve a contract amendment with Water Systems Consulting, Inc. (WSC) for $237,884 for completion of Phase 3 Program Management Services for the Water Resource Recovery Facility Project , Spec. No. 91219 (Attachment B). 3. Approve funding of $40,000 for Project Labor Agreement legal services/representation. 4. Approve transfer of $744,061 from Sewer Fund working capital to the Water Resource Recovery Facility project account. DISCUSSION Several key items of the Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) project have recently experienced significant change from the original scope of work for the design and program consulting firms. Two of these, a Motor Control Center (MCC), and the Prado Road Overpass and Elks Lane design are the result of studies and plans that are just now being finalized. Additional costs for managing the Prado Road Overpass design, pre-qualification of contractors, assisting in the procurement of construction management services, assistance in grant funding, Project Labor Agreement (PLA) assistance, and other identified support services are also resulting in out-of-scope costs. Design The Prado Road Overpass will require the entrance to the WRRF, Corporation Yard (Corp Yard), and Bus Facility to be realigned to match grade with the eastern segment of Prado Road and the realignment of Elks Lane. This has resulted in the entra nce to the facility being shifted east from the original entrance and portions of the WRRF frontage moving south to accommodate the final design of Prado Road including additional travel lanes, sidewalks and bike paths. This layout for the Prado Road Overpass and subsequent design changes were not anticipated in the original scope and required significant additional work from the consultants to accommodate the wider road section. These improvements necessitated significant effort to modify site grading and drainage while the alignment and grade of the overpass have yet to be finalized . The entrance has been designed to accommodate not just WRRF access, but the Corp Yard and bus facility, as the Prado Road Overpass will close all existing access to these facilities. Appropriate cost sharing among funds for frontage improvements associated with the construction of the Prado Road Overpass will be addressed at a later date. Packet Pg. 385 Item 11 Realigned Elks Lane The WRRF Prado Road Overpass New WRRF Entrance Flood Control Required flood modeling for the WRRF has revealed significant challenge s to ensure construction of the project will not result in potential flooding of adjacent properties while also enabling the design to protect critical processes. Two-dimensional (2D) flood modeling has been completed and resulted in many design changes and modifications that will protect the entire campus and surrounding areas. One unanticipated change in flood elevation affected Motor Control Center A, which houses the electrical and control equipment for the WRRF headworks (which screens and pumps wastewater through the plant). After in-depth study, it was determined the MCC would have to be moved and redesigned. The recommended CH2M contract amendment includes a technical contingency of $50,000 to provide additional support for any remaining design costs related to the final flood model, support for the addition of a PLA or local hiring requirements in the bidding documents, and additional services such as, but not limited to, the development of a drainage report, and schedule development and analysis t o ensure detailed and accurate bidding documents. Program Management The design modifications and additional out-of-scope work have resulted in cost impacts to the Program Management work scope. Below is a list of the requested amendments: 1. Prado Road Overpass/Elks Lane coordination. The design is a condition of the project, has schedule impacts, and is important for the approval of the project. 2. Prequalification of contractors to ensure that vetted, qualified contractors may provide bids for the construction phase of the WRRF project. This process has resulted in several general contractors and two control systems integration subcontractors being qualified. The City will be re-advertising the prequalification request for electrical subcontractors. 3. Assistance and support in the procurement of a qualified and experienced construction manager for the WRRF project. 4. California Office of Emergency Services (CalOES) grant support. The City has been tentatively approved for a $3-million grant for flood mitigation which is now in the process Packet Pg. 386 Item 11 of approval by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). This grant continues to require support to provide information and technical details. 5. PLA study session, negotiations, document development, and local hiring requirements. This work scope funds the July 10, 2018 study session with the Council and supports the anticipated document development, forthcoming negotiation, and alternative local hiring requirements. 6. Significant additional flood modeling has been required to achieve a design that meets the City’s flood requirements and preserves the integrity of adjacent properties from flood hazards. 7. The 95 percent design submittal consists of a substantial volume of plans and specifications that the City is committed to review and return to CH2M to preserve the project schedule. Project Labor Agreement (PLA) This request is for the transfer of $40,000 from sewer fund working capital for counsel/representative for the PLA. Staff has retained Michael Vlaming, of Vlaming and Associates, who possesses extensive experience representing municipalities and developing PLAs. Mr. Vlaming brings years of experiences in negotiating PLAs, has working relationships with trade organizations, and understands the intricac ies of construction labor and public works projects. City staff continues to focus the scope of the PLA to understand future costs of not only development, but ongoing management and labor compliance throughout the WRRF project. Additional requests for PLA funding will likely be presented to Council during the additional phases of program management and the construction management agreements later this year or in the first half of 2019. PLA costs are eligible for reimbursement through the State Revolving Fund (SRF) loan for the WRRF project. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The City Council adopted Resolution 10740 (2016 Series) certifying the environmental impact report (EIR) for the WRRF project (SCH #201510144) on August 16, 2016. The proposed contract amendme nts for additional design services is consistent with the project analyzed under that EIR and this action does not trigger the need for additional environmental review at this time. FISCAL IMPACT Program Management Services This amendment to WSC’s Phase 2 and 3 program management contract will cost $237,884. With a projected balance of $12,183,561 for FY 2018-19, the Sewer Fund has sufficient unreserved working capital to pay for the requested program, design, and PLA expenditures. Original WSC Contract for Phase 2 and 3 $3,435,453 Amendment for Phase 3 + $237,884 Total WSC Contract for Phase 2 and 3 $3,673,337 Packet Pg. 387 Item 11 Industry average for total program related services for a p roject such as the WRRF are six percent of the entire project co st. Total project costs for the WRRF are estimated to be $140 million, which places WSC’s anticipated total program management contract for Phases 1 through 5 within an acceptable range. Design Services This amendment to CH2M’s design contract will cost $446,177. As described above, the Sewer Fund has sufficient unreserved working capital to pay for this expenditure. CH2M Contract for Design Services $8,539,139 Amendment for Phase 3 + $446,177 Total CH2M Contract for Design $8,985,316 Industry average for design related services for a project such as the WRRF range from eight to 15 percent of the entire project cost. Total construction cost for the WRRF is estimated to be $114 million, which places CH2M’s anticipated total design contract at the lower end of the industry standard. Project Labor Agreement Vlaming and Associates’ proposal for PLA representation and development will cost $40,000. The cost has been encumbered within the WRRF project account but was not previously budgeted for. This request will replenish the WRRF project account for these services and ensures the best documentation for SRF loan reimbursement. Total costs for the project will continue to be refined as bids and proposals are authorized for project construction, construct ion management, engineering services during construction, contingencies, Phases 4 and 5 of program management, labor compliance, and other related professional services. ALTERNATIVE Elect not to approve the contract amendments or approve PLA funding. The City Council may elect not to approve the contract amendments and/or funding at this time. Council may select this alternative if it believes that the program, design and PLA development may be accomplished in a different manner. Staff does not recommend this alternative due to complicated nature of the project, project schedule and minimal time to accomplish these tasks, and the lack of in-house experience. Attachments: a - CH2M Amendment and Scope b - WSC Amendment and Scope Packet Pg. 388 Item 11 AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT NO. 3 THIS AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT is made and entered in the City of San Luis Obispo on ______________________, by and between the CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, a municipal corporation, herein after referred to as City, and CH2M Hill Engineers, Inc., hereinafter referred to as Contractor. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, on November 23, 2015 the City entered into an Agreement with Contractor for Design Services for the Water Resources Recovery Facility per Specification No. 91363; and WHEREAS, the City desires to amend the scope of services related to: new MCC A electrical building relocation additions, Prado Road frontage improvements, flood mitigation revisions and a technical contingency, and Contractor has submitted a proposal for this purpose that is acceptable to the City. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual promises, obligations and covenants hereinafter contained, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. The scope of services and related compensation is hereby amended as set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto. 2. All other terms and conditions of the Agreement remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this instrument to be executed the day and year first written above. ATTEST: CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ____________________________________ By: ____________________________________ City Clerk Mayor Heidi Harmon APPROVED AS TO FORM: CONTRACTOR _____________________________________ By: ____________________________________ City Attorney Packet Pg. 389 Item 11 CH2M 1501 W. Fountainhead Pkwy Suite 401 Tempe, AZ 85282 (480) 966-8188 (T) (480) 966-9450 (F) www.ch2m.com July 27, 2018 Mr. Dave Hix Deputy Director - Wastewater Public Utilities City of San Luis Obispo 879 Morro Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-2710 Subject: City of San Luis Obispo – Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Revised Amendment No. 3 Request Dear Mr. Hix, As we progress towards the Construction Document Development (95%) Stage of the Project, there are three changes that have occurred resulting in additional scope for the project. The additional scope of the project has developed in the following areas: •Item No. 1 – MCC-A Electrical Building Flood Mitigation •Item No. 2 – Prado Road Frontage Revisions •Item No. 3 – Flood Mitigation Revisions In addition to the changes to the scope of work, the duration of the design portion of the Contract needs to be revised. Item No. 1 – MCC-A Electrical Building Flood Mitigation Existing MCC-A provides power and control to the influent pump station, headworks and grit systems at the head of the treatment process. The finish floor of the building is below the predicted 100-year flood elevation across the site. The Facilities Plan recommended that flood protection measures be included in the project to protect the building during a flood event. Several options were considered during the design development, however due to the existing building construction and floor slab, it was determined that the facility could not be provided with robust flood protection to prevent infiltration during the 100-year event. The City has decided to provide a new MCC-A building which can be constructed to provide the required flood protection. The existing MCC-A building will be retained as a terminal junction box to minimize cost of recircuiting the existing loads. The 95% design deliverable will include the following drawings associated with this change: •Civil Partial Plan •Architectural Plan, Elevations and Section •Architectural Code Summary •Structural Plans •Structural Sections •Structural Sections Packet Pg. 390 Item 11 • HVAC Plans • Fire Protection Plan • PLC Panel Modification • Network Diagram • Electrical Facility Plan • One-line Diagram MCC A1 • One-line Diagram MCC A2 • Demolition One-line Diagram MCC A1/A2 • Demolition Existing MCC-A Bldg. • Electrical Site Plan • Panel Board Schedule • Terminal Jct Box Details • Motor Control and Interconnection Diagrams • Motor Control and Interconnection Diagrams • Motor Control and Interconnection Diagrams • Motor Control and Interconnection Diagrams Item No. 2 – Prado Road Frontage Revisions As a condition of approval resulting from the Architectural Review Committee (ARC) review, the Project is required to provide frontage improvements along Prado Road. Through a series of coordination meetings with the various City departments, it was determined that the Prado Road frontage must also consider the future Right of way (ROW) configuration and not preclude future traffic projects including the re-routing of Elks Lane and Hwy 101 interchange. To allow the final design to progress, the design team is required to develop the following conceptual plans for approval by the City: - Conceptual plan for future Prado Rd./WRRF access road /Elks Lane intersection. This conceptual plan will be based on a signalized intersection as shown in the preliminary layout (CAD file) provided by City. - Conceptual plan for interim Prado Rd./WRRF access road intersection based on existing conditions and edge of pavement. Conceptual plan will include temporary pedestrian improvements connecting to existing sidewalks east and west of the project. Approval of the interim conceptual plan will be the basis for the completion of the 95% and 100% construction documents. The following drawings will be affected by this change: • 05-CL-1000, Site Plan Overall Key Plan • 05-CL-1001, Location Plan Area 1 • 05-CL-1002, Location Plan Area 2 • 05-CG-1000, Grading and Drainage Plan Overall Key Plan • 05-CG-1001, Grading and Drainage Plan Area 1 • 05-CG-1002, Grading and Drainage Plan Area 2 • 06-Y-1000, Yard Piping Plan Overall Key Plan • 06-Y-1001, Yard Piping Plan Area 1 • 06-Y-1002, Yard Piping Plan Area 2 • 09-E-1000, Electrical Site Plan Overall • 09-E-1001, Electrical Site Plan Area 1 • 09-E-1002, Electrical Site Plan Area 2 Packet Pg. 391 Item 11 The Prado Road improvements will include the design for the interim improvement. Future final improvements for Prado Road are not included in this design. Those improvements will be designed in the future after the final alignment for Prado Road has been completed. We have provided a credit for the Prado Road design work that would have been required to take the original design to completion. To date, we have taken the original design to approximately 90% complete. Item No. 3 – Flood Mitigation Revisions Following completion of the 60% design submittal, it was determined that the proposed final grading, including an earthen berm around the equalization (EQ) pond, was contributing to off-site impacts during a 100-year flood event. The 95% deliverable has progressed with removal of the berm and regrading of the EQ pond to maintain the required 8.75 million gallons of storage. Subsequent flood modeling analysis by the City’s consultant has identified additional grading changes required at the plant entry road and northern access road at the EQ pond. In addition to the required revisions to the grading in these areas, the yard piping and duct bank models and wetland design are affected and require revisions. This Amendment includes the work to support the flood modeling and provide grading modifications based on the July 10, 2018 meeting. Further changes to the grading plans in support of the flood modeling will be performed under the Technical Contingency budget. The following drawings are affected by this change: • 01-G-0055, Flood Mitigation – Site Plan • 05-CL-1001, Location Plan Area 1 • 05-CL-1002, Location Plan Area 2 • 05-CG-1000, Grading and Drainage Plan Overall Key Plan • 05-CG-1001, Grading and Drainage Plan Area 1 • 05-CG-1002, Grading and Drainage Plan Area 2 • 06-Y-1000, Yard Piping Plan Overall Key Plan • 06-Y-1001, Yard Piping Plan Area 1 • 06-Y-1002, Yard Piping Plan Area 2 • 09-E-1001, Electrical Site Plan Area 1 • 09-E-1002, Electrical Site Plan Area 2 • 10W-L-1000, Wetland Overall Plan • 10W-L-1001, Wetland Plan Area 1 • 10W-L-1002, Wetland Plan Area 2 • 10W-P-1001, Planting Plan Area 1 • 10W-P-1002, Planting Plan Area 2 • 10W-L-3001, Wetland Sections • 10W-L-3002, Wetland Cell Sections • 10W-L-3003, Planting Details • 14-C-1001 Civil Plan • 14-C-3001 Civil Section Item No. 4 – Technical Contingency Packet Pg. 392 Item 11 Upon request of the City, the Consultant will provide additional engineering services that are not described herein. A Technical Contingency budget has been established for these services. For any such work, the Consultant will first furnish a written scope and cost estimate that the City shall approve in writing before the Consultant proceeds with the work. Technical Contingency Services may include, but are not limited to, the following: • Support services for the Project Labor Agreement • Additional support for the flood mitigation process • Other services deemed appropriate by the City and Consultant • Development of a detailed construction schedule The fee estimates for performing Item Nos. 1-3 is $396,177. Please see Attachment No. 1 for the fee details. The total budget for this Amendment No. 3, including the Item No. 4 - Technical Contingency, is $446,177. In addition to the changes to the scope of work, the duration of the design portion of the Contract needs to be revised. The following are recommended changes to the Contract: Under the AGREEMENT – WITNESSETH, replace: 3. Start and Completion of the Work. Work on this project shall begin within 3 calendar days after contract execution and shall be completed within 685 calendar days thereafter. With 3. Start and Completion of the Work. The Design Engineering Scope of Work on this project shall begin within 3 calendar days after contract execution and shall be completed within 1262 calendar days thereafter. We look forward to discussing the details of this amendment at your earliest convenience. Regards, CH2M HILL Engineers, Inc. Julian Hoyle, P.E. Vice President C: Jeff Szytel, WSC Jasmine Diaz, WSC Lianne Westberg, WSC Jennifer Phillips, CH2M Barb Engleson, CH2M Emilio Candanoza, CH2M Packet Pg. 393 Item 11 Attachment No. 1 – Amendment No. 3 Fee Estimate Packet Pg. 394 Item 11 2018 $260 $177 $167 $154 $136 $156 $177 $110 1 180 $46,803 40 $7,081 30 $5,011 233 $35,884 155 $21,081 258 $40,250 40 $7,081 20 $2,200 956 $165,390 $1,200 $15,800 $0 $15,800 $182,390 2018 180 $46,803 40 $7,081 30 $5,011 233 $35,884 155 $21,081 258 $40,250 40 $7,081 20 $2,200 956 $165,390 $1,200 $15,800 $0 $15,800 $182,390 2 24 $6,240 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 24 $6,240 $0 $35,000 $0 $35,000 $41,240 2018 24 $6,240 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 24 $6,240 $0 $35,000 $0 $35,000 $41,240 3 103 $26,782 15 $2,655 25 $4,176 86 $13,245 58 $7,888 96 $14,977 21 $3,717 16 $1,760 420 $75,200 $0 $90,687 $6,660 $97,347 $172,547 2018 103 $26,782 15 $2,655 25 $4,176 86 $13,245 58 $7,888 96 $14,977 21 $3,717 16 $1,760 420 $75,200 $0 $90,687 $6,660 $97,347 $172,547 4 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 $0 $0 0 $0 $50,000 2018 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $50,000 307 $79,825 55 $9,736 55 $9,186 319 $49,128 213 $28,970 354 $55,226 61 $10,798 36 $3,960 1400 $246,830 $1,200 $141,487 $6,660 $148,147 $446,177 Total Labor Hours Total Labor Costs ($) Travel and Other Expenses ($) Cannon Corp. Project Professional 1 Subconsultant Costs ($) TOTAL Flood Mitigation Revisions Technical Contingency Project Manager/Design Manager Prado Road Frontage Revisions New MCC-A Electrical Bldg Relocation Additions TOTAL Estimated Cost ($) MWA Architects Subconsultant Total Amendment No. 3 Detailed Fee Estimate Water Resource Recovery Facility City of San Luis Obispo Engineering Technician Technician Office / ClericalSr. Professional 2 Sr. Professional 1Task Nos.Task/Activity Description Labor Classification Project Professional 2 Packet Pg. 395 Item 11 Classification 2016 Rate 2017 Rate 2018 Rate Project Manager $256 $258 $260 Process Optimization $256 $258 $260 Principal-In-Charge $224 $226 $228 Principal Professional 2 $224 $226 $228 Principal Professional 1 $194 $196 $198 Sr. Professional 2 $173 $175 $177 Sr. Professional 1 $163 $165 $167 Project Professional 2 $152 $153 $154 Project Professional 1 $134 $135 $136 Staff Professional 2 $109 $110 $111 Staff Professional 1 $101 $102 $103 Engineering Technician $154 $155 $156 Technician $92 $93 $94 Office/Clerical $108 $109 $110 EXPENSES Expense Type Estimating Method Rate Auto Mileage Travel Current IRS Rate Auto Rental Travel Actual Other Travel Travel Actual Equipment Rental Operating Expense Actual Postage/Freight Operating Expense Actual Reprographics Outside Service Actual Subcontractors Outside Service Actual + 5% CH2M HILL Professionals and Technicians Hourly Billing Rate Schedule Packet Pg. 396 Item 11 AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT NO. 3 THIS AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT is made and entered in the City of San Luis Obispo on ______________________, by and between the CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, a municipal corporation, herein after referred to as City, and Water Systems Consulting Inc, hereinafter referred to as Contractor. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, on November January 29, 2014 the City entered into an Agreement with Program Manager Services for the Water Resources Recovery Facility per Specification No. 91219; and WHEREAS, the City desires to amend the scope of services related to; contractor prequalification, construction manager procurement, construction manager coordination, CalOES Grant responses, PLA study session, negotiation and development, additional flood modeling and design submittal review and the Contractor has submitted a proposal for this purpose that is acceptable to the City. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual promises, obligations and covenants hereinafter contained, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. The scope of services and related compensation is hereby amended as set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto. a. Program Management Services per proposal dated July 27,2018 at a cost not to exceed $237,884.00 2. All other terms and conditions of the Agreement remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this instrument to be executed the day and year first written above. ATTEST: CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ____________________________________ By: ____________________________________ City Clerk Mayor Heidi Harmon APPROVED AS TO FORM: CONTRACTOR _____________________________________ By: ____________________________________ Packet Pg. 397 Item 11 City Attorney Packet Pg. 398 Item 11 PO Box 4255 l San Luis Obispo, CA 93403 l Phone: (805) 457‐8833 l Fax: (805) 888‐2764 l www.wsc‐inc.com 7/27/2018 Mr. Dave Hix Deputy Director – Wastewater City of San Luis Obispo 879 Morro Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 SUBJECT: PROPOSAL FOR ADDITIONAL PHASE 3 PROGRAM MANAGEMENT, ENGINEERING AND FUNDING SUPPORT FOR THE WRRF PROJECT Dear Dave, As program manager for the Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) Project, WSC has provided program management, engineering support, and funding support among other services to meet the needs of the project, maintain project schedule and support City staff. This proposal summarizes additional scope that will be performed by WSC in Phase 3 – Final Design. The proposal includes the following primary activities: (1) Contractor Prequalification: Prepare three prequalification packages, perform contractor outreach and conduct prequalification process. Revise and reissue electrical contractor prequalification package to increase participation. (2) Construction Manager Procurement: Lead procurement of the Construction Manager for the WRRF Project. (3) Construction Manager Coordination: Support onboarding of selected Construction Manager and review early deliverables. (4) California Office of Emergency Services (CalOES) Grant – Round 1 Request for Information (RFI) Response: Prepare response package for the flood improvements grant application, including updated scope of work and cost estimate. (5) Project Labor Agreement (PLA) Study Session: Prepare presentation materials and participate in Council Study Session on PLAs and local hire preferences. (6) PLA Negotiation and Development: Support the City with negotiating a PLA and incorporating the PLA into the WRRF Project contract documents. (7) Additional Flood Modeling: Collaborate with Design Engineer on civil design to meet 100‐year flood criteria in Drainage Design Manual (DDM), run additional flood modeling scenarios, and complete flood report. (8) Design Submittal Review: Facilitate review and completion of the front‐end documents. A detailed scope of work which describes each activity is attached. The estimated cost for this scope of services is $237,884, as shown in the attached cost proposal. Thank you for the opportunity to provide you with this proposal. Please feel free to contact us if you have any questions. We can be reached at 457‐8833; Jeff is ext. 101 and Lianne is at ext. 108. Packet Pg. 399 Item 11 Mr. Dave Hix, page 2 7/27/2018 Sincerely, Water Systems Consulting, Inc. Jeffery M. Szytel, PE, MBA Program Manager Lianne S. Westberg, PE Assistant Program Manager Enclosures: Scope of Work dated 7/27/18 Cost Proposal dated 7/27/18 Packet Pg. 400 Item 11 WRRF Project ‐ Phase 3 7/27/18 Scope of Work for Additional Phase 3 Program Management, Engineering and Funding Support 1 TASK 1.0 CONTRACTOR PREQUALIFICATION 1.1 Contractor Prequalification Lead development of the prequalification packages for the general contractor, electrical subcontractor and I&C integrator subcontractor utilizing a template provided by the City’s contract legal support, BB&K. Conduct multiple meetings/calls with the project team to develop the minimum qualification criteria and finalize packages. Prepare for and conduct the outreach meeting with potential contractors. Administer the prequalification process, including responding to questions, preparing addenda, and reviewing prequalification packages. Prepare short list of contractors and notify unsuccessful proposers. 1.2 Contractor Outreach In order to inform development of the minimum qualification criteria for each prequalification package and generate project interest, perform outreach to potential contractors and subcontractors. Summarize outreach results for review by City. 1.3 Electrical Contractor Prequalification Due to limited response to the initial Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for electrical subcontractors, revise and reissue the electrical subcontractor prequalification package. Prepare for and conduct the outreach meeting or conference call with potential electrical subcontractors. Perform outreach to potential electrical subcontractors to refine the minimum experience requirements included in the RFQ and generate interest in the project. Administer the prequalification process, including responding to questions, soliciting DBE participation, preparing addenda, and reviewing prequalification packages. Prepare short list of contractors and notify unsuccessful proposers. Deliverables: Prequalification packages for General Contractor, Electrical subcontractor, and I&C subcontractor (3 packages); Summary of outreach results; Outreach Meeting presentation; Addenda; Revised prequalification package for electrical subcontractor TASK 2.0 CONSTRUCTION MANAGER PROCUREMENT 2.1 Construction Manager Procurement Review Request for Proposal (RFP) for Construction Manager, which has been prepared by the City. Provide changes for consideration by the City, including changes to comply with SRF requirements. Prepare addenda for changes that are agreed upon by the City. Scope assumes up to 2 addenda. Packet Pg. 401 Item 11 WRRF Project ‐ Phase 3 7/27/18 Scope of Work for Additional Phase 3 Program Management, Engineering and Funding Support 2 Perform prioritized outreach to CM firms to solicit interest and participation. Provide support to City during solicitation of RFP, including preparing responses to questions. Prepare materials and conduct pre‐proposal meeting for proposers at the SLO WRRF. Coordinate and participate in proposal evaluation, including: (1) Review proposals (assumes 4 proposals and 4 hours of review per proposal per reviewer); (2) Contact references for each respondent; (3) Prepare evaluation/scoring template; (4) Plan, organize, conduct and document one four (4) hour workshop to evaluate proposals and select top candidates for interviews. Coordinate and prepare for interviews with selected firms. Participate in up to one (1) day of interviews and conduct one two (2) hour debrief meeting with evaluation committee after interviews. Prepare award recommendation letter based on evaluation committee’s review of the proposals and interview. Prepare letters/emails to those proposers not selected. Support the City in scope and contract negotiations with the selected Construction Manager. It is difficult to estimate the effort it will take to negotiate a contract with selected proposer, thus scope assumes 32 hours total. Support the City in debriefs with the unsuccessful proposers. Deliverable: Pre‐Proposal Meeting PowerPoint Presentation; Evaluation/Scoring Template; Award Recommendation Letter TASK 3.0 CONSTRUCTION MANAGER COORDINATION 3.1 Construction Manager Coordination Participate in a kick‐off meeting with the City and the selected Construction Manager as detailed in the Construction Management and Inspection Services scope of work. Provide Procore training to the selected Construction Management Team. 3.2 Construction Manager Deliverable Review Review and provide comments on the Construction Manager’s Pre‐Construction Conference agenda, PowerPoint presentation, and meeting minutes. Review and provide comments on the Construction Manager’s Construction Management Plan (CMP). Assume review of a draft and final CMP. Packet Pg. 402 Item 11 WRRF Project ‐ Phase 3 7/27/18 Scope of Work for Additional Phase 3 Program Management, Engineering and Funding Support 3 Review Construction Manager’s comments on the bid documents. Participate in one (1) coordination meeting with the City, Design Engineer, and Construction Manager to review and discuss Construction Manager’s bid document review comments. Coordinate with the City, the Design Engineer, and the Construction Manager to resolve comments on the bid documents. Review and provide comments on the Construction Manager’s Quality Control and Quality Assurance (QA/QC) Plan. Assume review of a draft and final QA/QC Plan. TASK 4.0 CALOES GRANT – ROUND 1 RFI RESPONSE 4.1 RFI Response for Flood Improvements Project Prepare and submit response package to CalOES to address all items listed in the RFI received by the City in April 2018. The response package includes: updated scope of work and cost estimate to remove the Equalization Pond berm from the grant request and add in the new MCC‐A; detailed loss of service information; and supporting data and invoices for pre‐awards costs. Support the City in on‐going coordination with CalOES and responding to any follow‐up RFIs from CalOES and/or FEMA. The scope assumes an allowance of 16 hours for on‐going support with the CalOES grant. TASK 5.0 PROJECT LABOR AGREEMENT (PLA) STUDY SESSION 5.1 Preparation, Support and Council Presentation Participate in conference calls and in‐person meetings to prepare for a City Council Study Session on local hire preferences and Project Labor Agreements (PLAs). Prepare materials for City Council Study Session including a PowerPoint presentation. Contract general contractors and electrical subcontractors who submitted prequalification packages to solicit feedback to City Council on potential local hire and PLA requirements. Review agenda correspondence and other materials in preparation for City Council Study Session. Participate in City Council Study Session. Deliverables: City Council Study Session PowerPoint Presentation TASK 6.0 PLA NEGOTATION AND DEVELOPMENT 6.1 PLA Negotiation Assist the City Attorney’s office and City Utilities staff in the negotiation of a PLA with the Tri‐ Counties Building and Construction Trades Council (BTC) and other craft unions not represented by the BTC. Coordination with the City Attorney’s office and City Utilities staff to develop a negotiating plan including a matrix identifying key negotiating points; cost, schedule, and quality considerations; priorities; and desired negotiating outcomes. Packet Pg. 403 Item 11 WRRF Project ‐ Phase 3 7/27/18 Scope of Work for Additional Phase 3 Program Management, Engineering and Funding Support 4 Review the draft agreement provided by the BTC and Master Labor Agreements (MLAs) provided by individual construction trades and provide review comments. Review PLAs from other projects/agencies to identify provisions that might potentially be included in the WRRF PLA. Participate in negotiations with the City Attorney’s office, City Utilities staff and the BTC on proposed PLA provisions. Assist City Attorney’s office and City Utilities staff in the preparation of a staff report detailing the outcome of PLA negotiations. Participate in City Council meetings regarding PLA negotiations. This scope of work assumes a two‐hour kickoff meeting with the City, 24 hours for document review and analysis, up to four meetings with the BTC, up to three meetings with trades not represented by the BTC, eight hours to support development of a staff report to City Council, and participation in one City Council meeting. 6.2 Contract Document Development (PLA) Coordinate with the City Attorney’s office, City Utilities staff, outside legal counsel, and the design engineer to incorporate PLA requirements into the contract documents Prepare Division 01 specification detailing local worker and targeted worker participation requirements including staffing projections, monthly reporting requirements, and penalties for non‐compliance in accordance with the PLA. 6.3 Contract Document Development (Local Hire) In the event PLA negotiations are unsuccessful, coordinate with the City Attorney’s office, City Utilities staff, outside legal counsel, and the design engineer to incorporate local hire requirements into the contract documents. Prepare Division 00 and Division 01 specifications detailing local worker requirements including enhanced outreach, good faith effort documentation, reporting, and penalties for non‐ compliance. Deliverables: Division 01 Local Hire Specification (PLA); Division 0 and Division 01 Local Worker Requirements (local hire preference in lieu of PLA) TASK 7.0 ADDITIONAL FLOOD MODELING 7.1 Flood Modeling and Memo Iterate with Design Engineer to identify civil design solution for the northern portion of the WRRF site that meets the City’s DDM criteria. Perform interim analyses using GIS. Participate in conference calls as required to work through potential design changes. Run two additional flood modeling scenarios using updated civil surfaces from Design Engineer. Complete technical memorandum summarizing analysis. Packet Pg. 404 Item 11 WRRF Project ‐ Phase 3 7/27/18 Scope of Work for Additional Phase 3 Program Management, Engineering and Funding Support 5 Deliverables: Flood Analysis Memorandum TASK 8.0 DESIGN SUBMITTAL REVIEW 8.1 Front‐End Document Review Coordinate with the City, the Design Engineer, and outside counsel to review and provide comments on additional iterations of the Division 00 and Division 01 (“front‐end”) documents, over and above the anticipated review of the 95% and 100% front‐end document submittals. Review the interim 95% front‐end document submittal provided by the Design Engineer. Coordinate with outside counsel to compile review comments and return to the Design Engineer. Coordinate with the Design Engineer to address the review comments on the interim 95% front‐ end document submittal. Review the interim 100% front‐end document submittal provided by the Design Engineer. Coordinate with outside counsel to compile review comments and return to the Design Engineer. Coordinate with the Design Engineer to address the review comments on the interim 100% front‐end document submittal. Deliverables: Tabulated Review Comments Packet Pg. 405 Item 11 City of San Luis Obispo WRRF Project ‐ Additional Phase 3 Program Management, Engineering and Funding Support Cost Proposal 7/27/2018 WSC Labor Hours WSC Fee Labor Fee Total Fee 1 Contractor Prequalification SUBTOTAL 224 44,429$ ‐$ 44,429$ 2Construction Manager Procurement SUBTOTAL 147 35,926$ ‐$ 35,926$ 3Construction Manager Coordination SUBTOTAL 71 16,802$ ‐$ 16,802$ 4CalOES Grant ‐ Round 1 RFI Response SUBTOTAL 62 10,812$ ‐$ 10,812$ 5PLA Study Session SUBTOTAL 35 8,284$ ‐$ 8,284$ 6PLA Negotiation and Development SUBTOTAL 176 41,792$ ‐$ 41,792$ 7 Additional Flood Modeling SUBTOTAL 0 ‐$ 67,941$ 67,941$ 8Design Submittal Review SUBTOTAL 50 11,898$ ‐$ 11,898$ COLUMN TOTALS 765 169,943$ 67,941$ 237,884$ Task No.Task Description ALL FIRMSWSCHDR Packet Pg. 406 Item 11 Meeting Date: 8/21/2018 FROM: Garret Olson, Fire Chief Prepared By: James Blattler, Administrative Analyst Rico Pardo, Accounting Manager SUBJECT: PURCHASE OF FIRE ENGINE, SPECIFICATION NO. 91672 RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Approve the sole source lease purchase of a 2018 Pierce Arrow PUC Type 1 Fire Engine in the amount of $673,096; and 2. Authorize the City Manager or designee, Finance Director or designee and City Attorney or designee to execute all related documents on behalf of the City to execute a five-year (60- month) agreement with JPMorgan Chase Bank and purchase agreement with Pierce Manufacturing to accomplish the above-mentioned lease purchase; and 3. Authorize the Finance Director or designee to execute a lease -purchase purchase order in the amount noted associated with the above-mentioned fleet replacement ; and 4. Authorize the appropriation of $20,000 from the Fleet Completed Projects fund for the additional funding needed to complete the engine build-up. DISCUSSION Background Emergency vehicles are a vital part of the service delivery for the San Luis Obispo City Fire Department. The Fire Department responds to over 6,000 emergency service calls annually. A fire engine pumper (“fire engine”) is staffed with emergency response personnel and is equipped to provide all-hazards emergency services. These services include advanced life support emergency medical services, special and complex rescue services, and fire suppression services to protect the lives and property of the City’s residents, visitors, and businesses. Staff developed a fire engine specification committee that took into account the unique features of the community and sought the best overall fire engine to complement the existing fleet of apparatus. In accordance with the City’s established fleet replacement cycle and after consulting with the Fire Vehicle Mechanic, the new fire engine will replace a 16-year-old fire engine, which will be transitioned to reserve status. The new fire engine provides the same capabilities as the fire engine transitioning to reserve st atus but with greater reliability and less cost and time associated with repair and maintenance. This new fire engine will also include the latest environmental features and systems which significantly reduce adverse emissions-related environmental impacts when compared with the current fire engine. Over the past 16 years, there have been significant improvements in diesel-powered heavy equipment to reduce negative environmental impacts. Packet Pg. 407 Item 12 Lease Purchase Staff is seeking the authorization to execute a lease-purchase agreement for the sole source acquisition of the new fire pumper currently budgeted and approved for replacement as part of the adopted 2017-19 Financial Plan. Following extensive analysis, staff has concluded that the 2018 Pierce Type 1 PUC Pumper would meet the City’s needs. The Pierce fire engine has been the dependable workhorse fire engine of the City for more than a quarter of a century. Features Include: • A more efficient pump system (Pierce PUC Pumper) with a fuel-efficient, low maintenance engine and transmission • A 500-gallon water tank • A foam system (Husky 3 Foam Proportioner) designed to handle structure, wildland, and automobile fires with Class B capabilities • Roof mounted light tower (Will-Burt Night Scan Chief 2.3) that provides greater nighttime visibility • Independent front suspension (Pierce TAK-4) providing better control, braking performance and maneuverability Sole Source Purchase Recommended Staff recommends a sole source purchase award to South Coast Fire Equipment in the amou nt of $673,096 for the purchase of a 2018 Pierce Arrow XT PUC Fire Engine Pumper. City purchasing guidelines allow for sole source when supplies or equipment in use have been uniformly adopted by the City or otherwise standardized. The Pierce fire engine has been the standard apparatus for the City of San Luis Obispo for the last quarter century. While there are other vendors that could provide apparatus, staff is recommending Pierce due to a variety of factors including; equipment standardization and familiarity by both fire suppression and mechanics staff, production time reduction resulting from working experience the City has established with Pierce’s manufacturing staff and the benefits of utilizing local vehicle vendors like Southern California based South Coast Fire Equipment, who has a facility located within the County. South Coast Fire Equipment is providing the purchasing quote (Attachment A) for the pumper at the base price reflective of a nationally utilized cooperative purchasing agreement. Used as a pricing standard throughout the fire service, this master contract is commonly known as the HGAC, or Houston Galveston Area Council Cooperative Purchasing Agreement. While the City is not purchasing through the HGAC, the City’s price for this appara tus is the same as this cooperative purchasing agreement. The Fire Department has a significant equipment and training investment with maintaining Pierce manufactured apparatus. Fire fleet already has an inventory of spare parts, filters and maintenance items specific to the Pierce fir e apparatus platform. This inventory would be costly to retrofit to accommodate another make of apparatus. Additionally, the Fire Department ’s Fire Vehicle Mechanic is specially trained and equipped to provide maintenance to Pierce manufactured fire apparatus. All current front -line and reserve heavy-duty fire apparatus are manufactured by Pierce. Continuing with Pierce heavy duty apparatus maximizes the training and specialty tools already provided to staff, thus controlling costs. Finally, the cost for the Pierce fire engine is competitive compared to that of other manufacturers. Packet Pg. 408 Item 12 CONCURRENCES The Finance Department concurs with Fire Department staff to finance the apparatus purchase and to utilize the Fleet Completed Projects fund to complete the project. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The California Environmental Quality Act does not apply to the recommended action in this report, because the action does not constitute a “Project” under CEQA Guidelines sec. 15278. FISCAL IMPACT Funding for the fire pumper replacement was included in the 2017-19 Financial Plan in the amount of 624,000, with $135,000 coming from the Local Revenue Measure. Equipment Replacement Fund 410 & Local Bond Revenue Fund 101 Project Costs (91672) Adopted Budget (FY 2018-19) $ 624,000 Base Unit Cost $ 622,871 Performance Bond $ 1,941 Sales Tax (7.75%) $ 48,273 California Tire Fee $ 11 Cost from Dealer: $ 673,096 Internal Vehicle Assembly Cost $ 20,000 Total Vehicle/Project Cost $ 693,096 2017-19 Budget Funding Source Cost Increases The total project cost is higher than the original ly projected and budgeted amount of $624,000 due to unexpected increases in steel and aluminum costs, which is partially attributed to recent tariffs. The recent increases in commodity pricing applies to the industry as a whole and is not unique to staff’s recommended vendor. Staff recommends financing the cost of the apparatus purchase in the amount of $673,096 and utilize the Fleet Completed Projects Fund for the additional $20,000 needed to complete in-house equipment purchase and installation. Cost Savings Staff identified two cost saving strategies for the purchase of the fire pumper. First, Pierce offered a total of $26,037 in savings for utilizing its pre-payment incentive program which can be awarded through a lease-purchase, as recommended by staff in this report. Secondly, staff identified several build-up items that can completed in-house for an additional $7,000 in savings. Lease Purchase and Fleet Completed Project Fund Appropriation Staff received a purchasing quote totaling $673,095.08 for the fire engine apparatus. Staff recommends financing the fire engine through a lease-purchase in the quoted amount and appropriate an additional $20,000 from the Fleet Completed Projects Fund to complete the vehicle build-up. Packet Pg. 409 Item 12 Lease-Purchase Terms Staff reviewed financing offers from various financing entities. Staff is recommending that the City enters into a lease agreement with JPMorgan Chase Bank (the City’s bank on record) (Attachment B) to provide financing of the apparatus. JPMorgan Chase Bank offered the most competitive terms and the final interest rate for the lease is set at 3.185%. The following table reflects the annual payments for the lease agreement. Amount Borrowed 673,096$ Annual Payments*: (1)146,157$ (2)146,157$ (3)146,157$ (4)146,157$ (5)146,157$ Total Amount Paid:730,783$ Annual Inerest Rate:3.185% JPMorgan Chase Bank *Annual payment includes debt service ALTERNATIVE Deny Funding Transfer and Purchase. The City Council could choose to deny or defer the fire engine. Staff does not recommend this option as the pumper replacement was approved as part of the 2017-19 Financial Plan. The existing fire engine has met its useful target life in both years and mileage. Denying or deferring the purchase could result in costly maintenance and repairs due to the aging of this vehicle. The reliability of this vehicle has been degraded to the point of being unpredictable. Attachments: a - Proposal Letter_South Coast_Engine Purchase b - Municipal Lease Proposal - City of San Luis Obispo Packet Pg. 410 Item 12 Packet Pg. 411Item 12 Packet Pg. 412Item 12 Proposal Option List Line Option Type Option Description Qty 1 0766589 Boiler Plates, PUC Pumper 1 Fire Department/Customer - San Luis Obispo City Operating/In conjunction W-Service Center - Operating Miles - 50 Miles Number of Fire Dept/Municipalities - 5 Bidder/Sales Organization - South Coast Delivery - Delivery representative Dealership/Sales Organization, Service - South Coast 2 0661794 Single Source Compliance 1 3 0584456 Manufacture Location, Appleton, Wisconsin 1 4 0584452 RFP Location: Appleton, Wisconsin 1 5 0588609 Vehicle Destination, US 1 6 0764706 SP BMP Truck 1 Fill in Blank - * 7 0610784 Comply NFPA 1901 Changes Effective Jan 1, 2016, With Exceptions 1 8 0533347 Pumper/Pumper with Aerial Device Fire Apparatus 1 9 0588611 Vehicle Certification, Pumper 1 10 0661778 Agency, Apparatus Certification, Pumper/Tanker, U.L.1 11 0537375 Unit of Measure, US Gallons 1 12 0529326 Bid Bond, 10%, Pierce Built Chassis 1 13 0540326 Performance Bond, Not Requested 1 14 0000007 Approval Drawing 1 15 0667955 Drawing, Pump Operator's Panel, Match Previous Unit, Reference Only 1 Fill in Blank - Job# 31202 16 0002928 Electrical Diagrams 1 17 0624892 Arrow XT Chassis, PUC 1 18 0000110 Wheelbase 1 Wheelbase - 177.00 to 179.00 19 0000070 GVW Rating 1 GVW rating - 43,500 20 0000203 Frame Rails, 13.38 x 3.50 x .375, Qtm/AXT/Imp/Vel/DCF 1 21 0050817 Frame Liner, Inv "L" 12.68" x 3.00" x .25", AXT, Front Reinforcement 1 22 0030262 Axle, Front, Oshkosh TAK-4, Non Drive, 19,500 lb, Qtm/AXT/DCF 1 23 0030264 Suspension, Front TAK-4, 19,500 lb, Qtm/AXT/Imp/Vel/Dash CF/Enf 1 24 0087572 Shock Absorbers, KONI, TAK-4, Qtm/AXT/Imp/Vel/DCF/Enf 1 25 0000322 Oil Seals, Front Axle 1 26 0677584 Tires, Front, Goodyear, G296 MSA, 385/65R22.50, 18 ply, Fire Service Load Rating 1 27 0019611 Wheels, Front, Alcoa, 22.50" x 12.25", Aluminum, Hub Pilot 1 28 0530468 Axle, Rear, Meritor RS24-160, 24,000 lb 1 29 0602744 Top Speed of Vehicle, Non-NFPA 2016 Compliant 1 Top Speed of Vehicle - 75 30 0515564 Suspen, Rear, Standens, Spring, 27,000 lb 1 31 0000485 Oil Seals, Rear Axle 1 32 0587216 Tires, Rear, Goodyear, G622 RSD, 12R22.50, 16 ply, Single 1 33 0019625 Wheels, Rear, Alcoa, 22.50" x 8.25", Aluminum, Hub Pilot, Single 1 34 0568081 Tire Balancing, Counteract Beads 1 35 0620570 Tire Pressure Monitoring, RealWheels, AirSecure, Valve Cap, Single Axle 1 Qty, Tire Pressure Ind - 6 36 0003245 Axle Hub Covers w/center hole, S/S, Front Axle 1 37 0001960 Axle Hub Covers, Rear, S/S, High Hat (Pair)1 38 0057936 Covers, Lug Nut, Chrome 1 Customer:City of San Luis Obispo Bid Number: 431 Representative Holmes, Jon Job Number: Organization:South Coast Fire Equipment, Inc Number of Units:1 Requirements Manager: Bid Date:06-01-2018 Description: Arrow XTV PUC Stock Number: Body: Pumper, PUC, Aluminum Price Level:37 (Current: 37) Chassis:Arrow XT Chassis, PUC 6/27/2018 6/27/2018 4:35 PM Page 1431Bid #:Packet Pg. 413 Item 12 Line Option Type Option Description Qty 39 0002045 Mud Flaps, w/logo front & rear 1 40 0544802 Chocks, Wheel, SAC-44-E, Folding 1 Qty, Pair - 01 41 0544806 Mounting Brackets, Chocks, SAC-44-E, Folding, Horizontal 1 Qty, Pair - 01 Location, Wheel Chocks - Left Side Rear Compt 42 0010670 ABS Wabco Brake System, Single rear axle 1 43 0030185 Brakes, Knorr/Bendix 17", Disc, Front, TAK-4 1 44 0000740 Brakes, Meritor, Cam, Rear, 16.50 x 8.63"1 45 0058463 Air Compressor, Brake, Bendix 15.8 CFM 1 46 0000785 Brake Reservoirs, Three 1 47 0587034 Air Dryer, Bendix, AD-IP w/Heat, 2010 1 48 0678701 Brake Lines, Nylon, Special Color 1 49 0020851 Not Required, Air Inlet 1 50 0000845 Air Tank, Additional for Extra Capacity 1 51 0610877 Engine, DDC DD13, 470 hp, 1650 lb-ft, W/OBD, EPA 2016, REPTO, AXT 1 52 0001244 High Idle w/Electronic Engine, Custom 1 53 0590300 Engine Brake, Jacobs Compression Brake, DD13 1 Switch, Engine Brake - f) DD13 54 0552334 Clutch, Fan, Air Actuated, Horton Drive Master 1 55 0037145 Heater, 1000 watt Immersion, Connect to Shoreline 1 56 0043422 Air Intake, w/Ember separator, AXT 1 57 0565965 Exhaust System, 5", 2010 DD13, ISX engine, Horizontal, Right Side 1 58 0683310 Diffuser, Exhaust, Modified For Extraction, 5"x7"x5", Flush With Rub Rail, CARE 1 59 0013278 Exhaust, Modified for Plymovent System, CARE 1 60 0797727 Radiator, Arrow XT 1 61 0001090 Cooling Hoses, Rubber 1 62 0001125 Fuel Tank, 65 Gallon, Left Side Fill 1 63 0001129 Lines, Fuel 1 64 0662965 DEF Tank, 4.5 Gallon, DS Fill, Rear of Axle, Common Air Bottle Door 1 65 0552777 Fuel Pump for Repriming 1 66 0552567 Shutoff Valve, Fuel Line @ Fuel Tank 1 67 0553019 Cooler, Engine Fuel, Imp/Vel, AXT/Qtm/Sab/DCF/SFR/Enf 1 68 0690880 No Selection Required From This Category 1 69 0642579 Trans, Allison 5th Gen, 4000 EVS P, w/Prognostics, Arrow XT 1 70 0621262 Transmission, Shifter, 6-Spd, Push Button, 5+1 Mode, 4000 EVS 1 71 0517604 Transmission Programming, Park to Neutral, PUC 1 72 0797722 Transmission Oil Cooler, Modine, External, AXT 1 73 0001375 Driveline, Spicer 1810 1 74 0669988 Steering, Sheppard M110 w/Tilt, TAK-4, Eaton Pump, w/Cooler 1 75 0001544 Not Required, Steering Assist Cylinder on Front Axle 1 76 0509229 Steering Wheel, 2 Spoke 1 77 0690274 Logo/Emblem, on Dash 1 Text, Row (1) One - S.L.O Text, Row (2) Two - CITY Text, Row (3) Three - FIRE DEPT 78 0606501 Bumper, 16" Extended, Arrow XT 1 79 0640199 Tray, Hose, Center, 16" Bumper, Outside Air Horns 1 Grating, Bumper extension - Grating, Aluminum Capacity, Bumper Tray - 19) 100' of 1.75" 80 0624826 Hose Restraint, Bumper Tray, 2.00" Straps, Fasteners, Pair 2 Type of fastener - seat belt buckle Qty, Pair - 02 81 0510226 Lift & Tow Package, Imp/Vel, AXT, Dash CF 1 82 0522573 Tow Hooks Not Required, Due to Lift and Tow Package 1 83 0786885 SP Coating, Top Flange, Front Bumper, Outside Extr, Line-X Premium w/UV Prot, Black 1 84 0564248 Cab, Arrow XT 2010, 6710 Raised Roof, PUC 1 85 0614530 Engine Tunnel, DD13, Arrow XT 1 86 0677478 Rear Wall, Exterior, Cab, Aluminum Treadplate 1 87 0562666 Cab Lift, Elec/Hyd, Remote, Manual Override, AXT 1 88 0640431 Grille, Bright Finished, Front of Cab, Arrow-XT 1 6/27/2018 4:35 PM Page 2431Bid #:Packet Pg. 414 Item 12 Line Option Type Option Description Qty 89 0002224 Scuffplates, S/S At Cab Door Jambs, 4-Door Cab 1 Material Trim/Scuffplate - c) S/S, Polished 90 0012226 Scuffplates, S/S Corner Guard, Polished, Rear Cab Corners 1 91 0647932 Not Required, Trim, S/S Band, Across Cab Face, AXT/Dash CF/Saber/Enforcer 1 92 0015440 No Chrome Molding, On side of cab 1 93 0521669 Mirrors, Retrac, West Coast Style, Htd/Rmt, w/Htd/Rmt Convex 1 94 0563095 Door, Half-Height, Arrow-XT 4-Door Cab, 10" Raised Roof 1 95 0655608 Door Panel, Polished Stainless Steel, Arrow XT Cab 1 96 0554537 Controls, Electric Roll-Up Windows, 4dr, 3 Driver Controls, AXT 1 97 0563603 Steps, 4-Door Cab, AXT 1 98 0770194 Handrail, Exterior, Knurled, Alum, 4-Door Cab 1 99 0509649 Lights, Cab and Crew Cab Access Steps, P25, LED w/Bezel, 1Lt Per Step 1 100 0005772 Fenders, S/S on cab, w/Radius corner, 2.00" wide 1 101 0557023 Handrail, 10", Below Cab Windshield, Pair 1 102 0042105 No Windows, Side of Crew Cab 1 103 0568043 Windows, front only of CC, 10" raised roof, AXT 2010 1 104 0012094 Windows, Delete Rear of Crew Cab 1 105 0638117 Mounting Provisions, 3/16" Alum, Eng Tnl, Include Blister Ang/Raceway, Color,AXT 1 Color, Cab Interior Paint - a) gray Mounting Provision Spacing - .25" 106 0636428 Motion Device for Gamber Johnson Computer Docking Station, 9" Locking Slide Arm 1 Location - TBD at PRE-CON 107 0797262 Cab Interior, Vinyl, Arrow XT, CARE 1 Color, Cab Interior Vinyl/Fabric - d) Red Cab Interior Rear Wall Material - Painted Aluminum 108 0012430 Cab Interior, paint color 1 Color, Cab Interior Paint - i) fire smoke gray 109 0032100 Floor, Rubber Padded Cab & Crew Cab - AXT 1 110 0689370 Defroster, No Heater, AXT 1 111 0603353 Air Conditioning, Arrow-XT 2010 1 Paint Color, A/C Condenser - Painted by OEM 112 0660960 Dual Condensate Drain Tubes for A/C Drip Pan, AXT 1 113 0683927 Cover, A/C lines and Connections, Painted 1 114 0012122 Fans, Window Defrost, One (1) Fan on Each Side 1 115 0627914 Sun Visor, Smoked Lexan, Rubber Trim, AXT, Dash CF, Imp/Vel, SFR/Enf 1 Sun Visor Retention - No Retention 116 0507764 Grab Handles, Driver Side Low and Officer Door Post 1 117 0583938 Lights, Engine Compt, Custom, Auto Sw, Wln 3SC0CDCR, 3" LED, Trim 1 Qty, - 01 118 0631830 Fluid Check Access, Saber FR/Enforcer, Arrow XT 1 119 0583039 Not Required, Side Roll and Frontal Impact Protection 1 120 0622617 Seating Capacity, 6 Seats 1 121 0697004 Seat, Driver, Pierce PSV, Air Ride, High Back 1 122 0642282 Seat, Officer, Pierce PSV, Air Ride, High Back, Slides 1 123 0002517 Not Required, Radio Compartment 1 124 0763617 SP Cabinet, Rear Facing, LS, 25.5 W x 29 H x 22 D, Web, Ext Acc, AXT 1 Type of fastener - 1" cam buckle Restraint Location - Top (towards roof of truck) Light, Short Cabinet - Amdor, Interior, White, Left Side Scuffplate, Door Pan, Material/Finish - S/S, Polished Material Finish, Shelf - Painted - Cab Interior Shelf/Tray, Cabinet - (1) Shelf, Adjustable, 0.75" Up-Turned Lip Door, Cab Exterior Cabinet - Double Pan, Non-Locking Door, Exterior Stop - Cable Louvers, Cabinet - Louvers, Back 125 0102783 Not Required, Seat, Rr Facing C/C, Center 1 126 0763611 SP Cabinet, Rear Facing, RS, 20 W x 29 H x 23.5 D, Web, Ext Acc, Sp Mtg, AXT 1 Type of fastener - 1" cam buckle Restraint Location - Top (towards roof of truck) Light, Short Cabinet - Amdor, Exterior, White, Left Side Scuffplate, Door Pan, Material/Finish - S/S, Polished Material Finish, Shelf - 0-No Shelving 6/27/2018 4:35 PM Page 3431Bid #:Packet Pg. 415 Item 12 Line Option Type Option Description Qty 126 Shelf/Tray, Cabinet - (0) None Door, Cab Exterior Cabinet - Double Pan, Non-Locking Door, Exterior Stop - Bumper Louvers, Cabinet - 0-No Louvers 127 0565238 Seat, Forward Facing C/C, DS Outboard, Pierce PSV, Hi-Back, Foldup 1 128 0103319 Not Required, Seat, Forward Facing C/C, Center 1 129 0565248 Seat, Forward Facing C/C, PS Outboard, Pierce PSV, Hi-Back, Foldup 1 130 0690233 Scuffplate, Polished S/S, External EMS Cabinet, Bottom of Door Frame 2 Location - TBD at PRE-CON Qty, - 02 131 0042359 Upholstery, Seats In Cab, All Vinyl, CARE 4 Color, Cab Interior Vinyl/Fabric - d) Red Qty, - 04 132 0511471 No SCBA Brackets Required In Cab Seats, Imp/Vel, AXT 2010, Qtm 2010, Dash CF 1 133 0603867 Seat Belt, ReadyReach 1 Seat Belt Color - Red 134 0553381 Seat Belt Height Adjustment, Arrow XT 1 135 0602464 Helmet Storage, Provided by Fire Department, NFPA 2016 1 136 0647638 Lights, Dome, Weldon Dual LED 4 Lts 1 Color, Dome Lt - Red & White Color, Dome Lt Bzl - Black Control, Dome Lt White - Door Switches and Lens Switch Control, Dome Lt Color - Lens Switch 137 0631779 Light, Map, Overhead, Round Halogen, AXT/Imp/Vel/Dash CF, Hawk EX 1 12vdc power from - Battery switched 138 0626097 Light, Map, Sunnex HS76*-00 Series, Swivel Joint, Clear Lens, Ceiling Mount 1 Location - to the left of the officer's seat same as #26761 Qty, - 01 12vdc power from - Battery switched Control, Map Light - On/Off Base, Map Lt, Sunnex - Square Accessories, Map Lt, Sunnex - No Accessory 139 0650357 Spotlight, Golight/RadioRay, Model 20**4, LED, 2 Lts 1 Location - Just behind lightbar Color, GoLt - White Bracket, Spotlight - Pedestal - 2 Lts 140 0650030 Controller, Spotlight, Golight, Wired Dash Mount, 2 Lts 1 141 0778698 SP Location, Spotlight Controller, Special, Engine Tunnel, Officer's Side 1 142 0610639 Portable Hand Light, Provided by Fire Department, Pumper ULC 1 143 0567652 Cab Instruments, Blk Gags, Blk Bez, AXT MUX 2010 1 144 0509511 Air Restriction Indicator, Imp/Vel, AXT, Dash CF, Enf MUX 1 145 0543751 Light, Do Not Move Apparatus 1 Alarm, Do Not Move Truck - Pulsing Alarm 146 0509042 Messages, Open Door/Do Not Move Truck, MUX w/Color Display 1 147 0551600 Switching, Cab, Rocker MUX, Impel/Velocity, AXT MUX, Dash CF 1 Location, Emerg Sw Pnls - Driver's Side Overhead 148 0617961 Wiper Control, 2-Speed with Intermittent, MUX, AXT/Dash CF 1 149 0548015 Wiring, Spare, 30 A 12V DC 1st 4 Qty, - 04 12vdc power from - Battery direct Wire termination - Butt Splice Location, Spare Wiring - Rear Wall, Crew Cab - DS, Rear Wall, Crew Cab - PS, Engine Tunnel - Driver's Side 2 Sets and This is for custoemr install Handlights 150 0548004 Wiring, Spare, 15 A 12V DC 1st 2 Qty, - 02 12vdc power from - Battery direct Wire termination - Butt Splice Location, Spare Wiring - Officer Dash 151 0548009 Wiring, Spare, 20 A 12V DC 1st 6 Qty, - 06 12vdc power from - Battery direct Wire termination - Butt Splice 6/27/2018 4:35 PM Page 4431Bid #:Packet Pg. 416 Item 12 Line Option Type Option Description Qty 151 Location, Spare Wiring - Center Console 152 0568617 Recess, Dash Panel, Officer Side, AXT 1 153 0655679 Remote Control, Wired, Programmable 3 Button 1 Location - Mounted on the driver side on the unuderside of the overhead 154 0615386 Vehicle Information Center, 7" Color Display, Touchscreen, MUX 1 System Of Measurement - US Customary 155 0606247 Vehicle Data Recorder w/CZ Display Seat Belt Monitor 1 156 0594900 Intercom, Sigtronics US-45S, 5-Pos, 3-Radio, D,O,2C,P 1 Location, Intercom, C Cab - 2) 2 forward facing seats 157 0006288 Cable, Radio to Intercom Interface, Sigtronics, 1 Radio 1 Radio, First Two-Way Model - Motolrola Radio, First Two-Way Make - Motorola High Power 158 0586744 Headset, Sigtronics, SE-48 Over The Head, Flex Mic, Standard 4 Qty, - 04 Location - iNSIDE OF DRIVER AND OFFICER SIDE bACK TO INSIDE THE MIDDELE SEATS 159 0634408 Switcher, Dual Audio, Sigtronics SRS-4 1 160 0633620 Speakers In Cab/Crew, Pairs Panasonic w/Spacers, Wiring and Location Features 2 Location - In are STD location 2 in the forward cab area and rear cab area (corners) Qty, - 02 Location, Wiring - a) driver side instrument panel 161 0640003 Install Customer Provided Modem 1 Location - * Qty, - 162 0559156 Install Customer Provided Two-Way Radio(s)2 Location - in switch panel locations #8 and #9. Qty, - 02 163 0559508 Install Customer Provided Two-Way Radio Remote Head Cable 1 Location - Install cable between area behind officer seat to pump panel. Qty, - 01 164 0687904 Antenna Mount, Custom Chassis, Cable Routed to Behind Officer Seat 1 Location - TBD at PRE-CON Qty, - 01 165 0696439 Antenna Mount, Custom Chassis, Cable Routed to Instrument Panel Area 1 Qty, - 01 Location, Antenna Mount - Right Side 166 0647320 Antenna, Antenna Plus AP-NAV-CWG, AP-Cell/LTE/WiFi/GPS 1 Qty, - 01 Color, Antenna - White Device, Cellular Make & Model - Panasonic Device, GPS Make & Model - TBD at PRE-CON Device, WiFi - TBD at PRE-CON 167 0653520 Camera, Pierce, Mux, R, RS Cameras 1 Camera System Audio - Not Provided 168 0683718 Recess, Rear Vision Camera Into Lightstick Housing 1 169 0615115 Pierce Command Zone, Advanced Electronics & Control System, Diag LEDs, AXT, WiFi 1 170 0624265 Electrical System, Arrow XT MUX 1 171 0034352 Batteries, (6) Odyssey Grp 31, 810 CCA each, SAE Post 1 172 0008621 Battery System, Single Start, All Custom Chassis 1 173 0622896 Battery Compartment, Arrow XT 1 Battery Trays - Roto-Molded Trays 174 0528020 Not Required at Battery, Receptacle, Battery Charging, w/Inverter & Charger 1 175 0012778 No Pick Required, Battery Charger Location 1 176 0530960 Not Required, Remote Battery Charger Indicator 1 177 0016857 Shoreline, 20A 120V, Kussmaul Auto Eject, 091-55-20-120, Super 1 Qty, - 01 Color, Kussmaul Cover - b) red Shoreline Connection - Battery Charger 178 0026800 Shoreline Location 1 Location, Shoreline(s) - DS Cab Side 6/27/2018 4:35 PM Page 5431Bid #:Packet Pg. 417 Item 12 Line Option Type Option Description Qty 179 0647728 Alternator, 430 amp, Delco Remy 55SI 1 180 0092582 Load Manager/Sequencer, MUX 1 Enable/Disable Hi-Idle - e)High Idle enable 181 0648596 Headlights, Rectangular Halogen, AXT/Dash CF/Saber/Enforcer 1 182 0648425 Light, Directional, Wln 600 Cmb, Cab Crn, Imp/Vel/AXT/Qtm/DCF 1 Color, Lens, LED's - m)match LED's 183 0620054 Light, Directional/Marker, Intermediate, Weldon 9186-8580-29 LED 2lts 1 184 0648074 Lights, Clearance/Marker/ID, Front, P25 LED 7 Lts 1 185 0647929 Lights, Directional/Marker, Cab Front Side, Truck-Lite 19036YLED,AXT/EnfMUX/DCF 1 186 0088869 Lights, Clearance/Marker/ID, Rear, Truck-Lite 26250R LED 7Lts 1 187 0766200 SP Lights, Tail, Wln M6BTT* Red LED Stop/Tail & M6T* Am LED Dir, No Trim/Housing 1 Color, Lens - Colored 188 0551758 Lights, Backup, Wln M6BUW, LED, Flange Feature 1 Flange Kit - w)with flange 189 0664481 Bracket, License Plate & Light, P25 LED 1 190 0589905 Alarm, Back-up Warning, PRECO 1040 1 191 0578264 Flash Pattern, California Title13, LED Warning Lights 1 192 0769420 Lights, Perimeter Cab, Amdor AY-LB-12HW020 LED 4Dr 1 Z location - 193 0769572 Lights, Perimeter Pump House, Amdor AY-LB-12HW020 LED 2lts 1 194 0770056 Lights, Perimeter Body, Amdor AY-LB-12HW020 LED 2lts, Rear Step 1 Control, Perimeter Lts - Cab Doors Open and Command Sw Panel Control, Perimeter Lts - Cab Doors Open and Command Sw Panel 195 0556337 Lights, Step, P25 LED at Rear Tailboard, 2lts Perm Lts 1 196 0692056 Light, FRC, 12V SPA530-Q20* LED, Push Up, Side Mount 1st 1 Location, Lights - Left -side back of cab Mount so the Light head sits just above cab facing outward Qty, - 01 To Do Not Move Truck Lt - Not Connected to Lt Switch, Lt Control 1 DC,1 - a) DS Switch Panel Switch, Lt Control 2 DC,2 - f) Pump Operator's Panel Switch, Lt Control 3 DC,3 - d) No Control Switch, Lt Control 4 DC,4 - d) No Control Color, FRC/Rom Lt Housing - FRC, White 197 0692054 Light, FRC, 12V SPA530-Q20* LED, Push Up, Side Mount 2nd 1 Location, Lights - Right-side back of cab Mount so the Light head sits just above cab facing outward Qty, - 01 To Do Not Move Truck Lt - Not Connected to Lt Switch, Lt Control 1 DC,1 - a) DS Switch Panel Switch, Lt Control 2 DC,2 - g) PS Switch Panel Switch, Lt Control 3 DC,3 - d) No Control Switch, Lt Control 4 DC,4 - d) No Control Color, FRC/Rom Lt Housing - FRC, White 198 0776075 Light, Visor, Wln, 12V P*H1* Pioneer LED 1 Qty, - 01 Location, driver's/passenger's/center - centered Color, Wln Lt Housing - White Paint Control, Scene Lts - Cab Sw Panel DS and Pump Panel Sw DS Scene Light Optics - Flood 199 0532358 Not Required, Deck Lights, Other Hose Bed & Rear Lighting 1 200 0645877 Lights, Hose Bed, Sides, Dual LED Light Strips 1 Control, Hose Bed Lts - Cup Switch At Rear 201 0602609 Lights, Not Required, Rear Work, Provided By Dealer, Non-NFPA 2016 1 202 0645683 Lights, Rear Scene, Wln, M9LZC LED 2 Qty, - 02 Control, Rear Scene Lts - Cab Switch Panel DS Location, Scene Lights - DS Rear Body Bulkhead, High, 1lt and PS Rear Body Bulkhead, High, 1lt 203 0709438 Light, Walking Surface, FRP Flood, LED 1 204 0518282 Pumper, PUC, Aluminum 1 205 0554271 Body Skirt Height, 20"1 206 0515259 Tank, Water, 500 Gallon, Poly, Rectangle, PUC 1 6/27/2018 4:35 PM Page 6431Bid #:Packet Pg. 418 Item 12 Line Option Type Option Description Qty 207 0003405 Overflow, 4.00" Water Tank, Poly 1 208 0028104 Foam Cell Required 1 209 0633066 Sleeve through Tank 2 Qty, Sleeve - 2 Water Tank Sleeve - Plumbing/Hydraulic Diameter - 3" Plumbing 210 0553729 Not Required, Restraint, Water Tank, Heavy Duty 1 211 0003429 Not Required, Direct Tank Fill 1 212 0003424 Not Required, Dump Valve 1 213 0048710 Not Required, Jet Assist 1 214 0030007 Not Required, Dump Valve Chute 1 215 0514778 Not Required, Switch, Tank Dump Master 1 216 0597043 Body Height, PUC 1 Body Height - 89.00" 217 0199241 Hose Bed, Aluminum, Pumper, PUC 1 218 0003481 Hose Bed Capacity, Special 1 Capacity, Hosebed - 800' of 4" 800' of 2.5" 200' of 2.5" Attack Line 219 0003488 Divider, Hose Bed, Unpainted 3 Qty, Hosebed Dividers - 3 220 0530804 Cover, Hose Bed, Alum Treadplate 1 221 0525658 Running Boards, PUC 1 222 0685333 Tailboard, 16" Deep, Full Width, PUC 1 223 0690029 Wall, Rear, Body Material, PUC, PUC Tanker, PRM 1 224 0003531 Tow Bar, Under Tailboard 1 225 0656764 Construction, Compt, Alum, Pumper, PUC 1 226 0518345 LS 177" Rollup, (1) 50" Fwd, (1) 52" Rr, FH/FD Frt&Rr, PUC 1 227 0518346 RS 177" Rollup, (1) 50" Fwd, (1) 52" Rr, FH/FD Frt&Rr, PUC 1 228 0692733 Doors, Rollup, Gortite, Side Compartments 6 Qty, Door Accessory - 06 Color, Roll-up Door, Gortite - Painted to Match Lower Body Latch, Roll-up Door, Gortite - Non-Locking Liftbar 229 0599445 Rear - Rollup Dr/33.50" FF, w/Tailboard, PUC 1 230 0692743 Door, Gortite, Rollup, Rear Compartment, PUC 1 Color, Roll-up Door, Gortite - Satin finish Latch, Roll-up Door, Gortite - Non-Locking Liftbar 231 0616670 Lights, Compt, Pierce LED, Dual Light Strips, Each Side of Door, Pumper/Tanker 7 Qty, - 07 Location, Compartment Lights - All Body Compts 232 0520220 177" Hatch, (2) Lift-up, 14" Wide, Both Sides, PUC 1 Size, Hatch Compt, Height - 19.00" 233 0687514 Lights, Hatch Compt, LED Strip Light, 177", Both Sides 1 234 0771274 Cargo Compt, Floor Lowered, Rearward Section Over Pump, For OAH, PUC 1 235 0546797 SP Notches, Delete PUC Front Body, Square Off Top Front Corners, PUC 1 236 0687145 Shelf Tracks, Recessed, PUC/3rd Generation 1 237 0600350 Shelves, Adj, 500 lb Capacity, Full Width/Depth, Predefined Locations 9 Qty, Shelf - 09 Material Finish, Shelf - Painted - Spatter Gray Location, Shelves/Trays, Predefined - .Location To Be Determined 238 0647091 Tray, Floor Mounted, Slide-Out, 500lb, 2.00" Sides 1 Qty, - 01 Location, Tray Slide-Out, Floor Mounted - R1 Material Finish, Tray - Painted - Spatter Gray 239 0673867 Toolboard, Swing-out, Alum, .188", Peg Board, 3G, Add'l 2 Qty - 2 Location, Pivot - Front Mounting, Toolboard - Adjustable Frt-back Hole Diameter, Pegboard/Toolboard - .203" diameter Finish, Pegboard/Toolboard - Painted - Spatter Gray Location, Toolboard - P2 240 0654369 Recess, Partition, Right of Pump Opertor's Panel, PUC 1 241 0784673 SP Equip Storage, Trans Above Xlays, PUC, 4-way Dr Hinged Fwd, No Divider 1 242 0063064 Rub Rail, Aluminum Extruded, Side of Body, 3rd Gen Body 1 6/27/2018 4:35 PM Page 7431Bid #:Packet Pg. 419 Item 12 Line Option Type Option Description Qty 243 0515441 Fender Crowns, Rear, S/S, W/Removable Fender Liner, Pumper, 3rd Gen 1 244 0519849 Not Required, Hose, Hard Suction 1 245 0527021 Handrails Located @ Front Body 1 246 0664688 Handrails, Rear, PUC 1 247 0000941 No Rear Hose Bed Handrail Required 1 248 0601760 Compt, Air Bottle, Single, Common Triple Dr (DEF/Fuel),Flanged Edge,Fender Panel 1 Door Finish, Fender Compt - Polished Latch, Air Bottle Compt - Southco M1 Series 25 Push to Close Latch Insert, Air Bottle Compt - Rubber Matting 249 0657522 Compt, Air Bottle, Triple, Fender Panel 3 Qty, Air Bottle Comp - 3 Door Finish, Fender Compt - Polished Location, Fender Compt - Triple - DS Fwd, Triple - PS Fwd and Triple - PS Rear Latch, Air Bottle Compt - Southco M1 Series 25 Push to Close Latch Insert, Air Bottle Compt - Rubber Matting 250 0004225 Ladder, 24' Duo-Safety 900A 2-Section 1 251 0004230 Ladder, 14' Duo-Safety 775A Roof 1 252 0638385 Rack, Ladders, in RS Full Depth Body, PUC, Special Ladder Mount 1 Fill in Blank - Ladder storage Door, Material & Finish, Ladder Storage - c) smooth aluminum Latch, Door Ladder Storage - D-Handle latch 253 0014245 Ladder, 10' Duo-Safety Folding 585A, w/Mounting 1 Location, Folding Ladder - Ladder Compartment 254 0004259 Slides, Dura-Surf, Ladder Storage Rack 1 255 0633473 Pike Pole, 8' Fire Hooks Unlimited, New York Roof Hook, Steel, Ram Knob End,RH-8 1 Qty, - 01 256 0084347 Pike Pole, 6' Nupla, Featherlight, w/D Handle, YPDH-6 1 Qty, - 01 257 0539402 Compt, Pike Poles/Fld Ldr In Upper Bdy (1) LS, Long Storage (1) RS, Sm Alum, PUC 1 258 0081834 Trough for D-Handled Trash Hook, Qty 1 Location - In officer's side hatch compartment inside wall next to hosebed Qty, - 01 259 0553862 Stop, Tool Storage Compt.1 Location - Driver's side long tool storage 5' in from the door 260 0787032 Step, Folding, Front of Body, Right Side Only, Trident, PUC 1 Coating, Step - black 261 0794171 Ladder, Top Access, Alum, Rear, PUC, Opposite Ladder Storage 1 262 0591915 Step, Folding - Extra, Body Only, Black, Trident 4 Qty, Folding Step - 04 Location, Additional Step - at the PS rear of the truck below placard Addtional 3 shall be mounted on the left and Right front bulkhead wall 2 per -side 263 0791474 I Zone Bracket, Pair, Retractable, Catwalk/Hatch Compartment 1 Fill in Blank - Location TBD at PRE-CON 264 0515695 Pump, Pierce, 1500 GPM, Single Stage, PUC 1 265 0515822 Seal, Mechanical, Silicon Carbide, PUC Pump 1 266 0515705 Gear Case, Pierce Pump, REPTO-Clutch Drive 1 267 0521309 Pumping Mode, Pump and Roll/Stationary, Basic, PUC 1 268 0515829 Pump Shift, Sure-Shift 1 269 0515833 Transmission Lock-up, Not Req'd, Park to Neutral, Pump, PUC 1 270 0515835 Auxiliary Cooling System, PUC 1 271 0014486 Not Required, Transfer Valve, Stage Pump 1 272 0777650 Valve, Relief Intake, Akron, w/Pressure Features 1 Pressure Setting - 125 psig 273 0515838 Controller, Pressure, Pierce, PUC 1 274 0516742 Primer, Pierce, for PUC 1 275 0658266 Thermal Relief Valve, w/Amber Warning Light and Alarm, PUC Pump 1 Location, Thermal Relief Discharge - Ground 276 0780359 Manuals, Pump, (2) Total, Electronic Copies, Pierce PUC Pump 1 277 0602496 Plumbing, Stainless Steel and Hose, Single Stage Pump, PUC 1 6/27/2018 4:35 PM Page 8431Bid #:Packet Pg. 420 Item 12 Line Option Type Option Description Qty 278 0795135 Plumbing, Stainless Steel, w/Foam System 1 279 0517852 Inlets, 6.00" - 1500 GPM, Pierce PUC Pump 1 280 0004646 Cap, Main Pump Inlet, Long Handle, NST, VLH 1 281 0084610 Valves, Akron 8000 series- All 1 282 0004660 Inlet, Left Side, 2.50"1 283 0029147 Not Required, Inlet, Right Side 1 284 0520002 Valve, Inlet(s) Recessed, Side Cntrl, PUC 1 Qty, Inlets - 1 285 0521137 Anode, Zinc, Pair, Pump Inlets, PUC 1 286 0004700 Control, Inlet, at Valve 1 287 0092569 No Rear Inlet (Large Dia) Requested 1 288 0092696 Not Required, Cap, Rear Inlet 1 289 0064116 No Rear Inlet Actuation Required 1 290 0009648 No Rear Intake Relief Valve Required on Rear Inlet 1 291 0092568 No Rear Auxiliary Inlet Requested 1 292 0563738 Valve, .75" Bleeder, Aux. Side Inlet, Swing Handle 1 293 0520277 Tank to Pump, (1) 3.00" Valve, 4.00" Plumbing, PUC 1 294 0595508 Outlet, Tank Fill, 1.50", PUC 1 295 0516755 Outlet, Left Side, 2.50" (2), PUC 1 296 0766761 Outlet, Right Side, 2.50", (1), Electric Akron 9335 Controller, PUC 1 Qty, Discharges - 01 297 0766992 Outlet, Right Side, 4" w/4" Valve, Akron 9335 Elec Controller, PUC 1 298 0648906 Outlet, Front, 2.50" w/2.50" Plumbing 1 Fitting, Outlet - 2.50" NST with 90 degree swivel Drain, Front Outlet - Automatic Location, Front, Single - top of left bumper 299 0516777 Outlet, Rear, 2.50", (1), Thru Tank, PUC 1 Qty, Discharges - 01 Location, Outlet - b) driver's side 300 0537394 Not Required, Outlet, Rear, Additional, PUC 1 301 0516824 Outlet, Front of Hose Bed, 2.50", PUC 1 Qty, Discharges - 01 location - Location Left-side Final TBD at PRE-CON 302 0085076 Caps for 1.50" to 3.00" Discharge, VLH 1 303 0563739 Valve, 0.75" Bleeder, Discharges, Swing Handle 1 304 0055095 Not Required, Elbow, Left Side Outlets, 2.50"1 305 0021134 Not Required, Elbow, Right Side Outlets 1 306 0045091 Elbow, Rear Outlets, 45 Degree, 2.50" FNST x 2.50" MNST, VLH 1 307 0537395 Not Required, Elbow, Rear Outlets, Additional 1 308 0527969 Cap, Large Dia Outlet, 4.00", IPO Elbow 1 309 0766944 Control, Outlets, Swing Handle, Elec Right Outlets Akr 9333 w/Analog Gauge, PUC 1 310 0661481 Outlet, 3.00" Deluge w/TFT Extend-a-Gun XG18 riser, 2.50" Valve, Spl. Loc. PUC 1 311 0777124 Monitor, Manual, Customer/Dealer Furnished, Pierce to Install 1 Fill in Blank - TBD at PRE-CON 312 0092086 Nozzle, Akron 499, Triple Stacked Chrome Deluge Tips 1 313 0005070 Deluge Mount, NPT 1 314 0516874 Crosslays, (3), Low (2), Upper (1), 1.50", Std. Cap, W/Poly Trays, PUC 1 315 0029196 Not Required, 2.50" Crosslay 1 316 0533672 Not Required, Hose Restraint, Crosslay, PUC 1 317 0015216 Reel, Booster, Aluminum - Over Pump, Right Side 1 318 0011060 Switch, Reel Rewind - One at Pump Panel 1 319 0055302 Hose, Booster - 200' of .75"/800 PSI 1 320 0005245 Capacity, Hose Reel ,Special 1 Capacity, Reel - 200' of 3/4" 321 0007428 Nozzle for Booster Reel Not Req'd 1 322 0025028 Cutout for Reel Access, W/ Roller Assembly 1 Location - Officer's side above crosslay Qty, - 1 6/27/2018 4:35 PM Page 9431Bid #:Packet Pg. 421 Item 12 Line Option Type Option Description Qty 323 0676021 Foam Sys, Husky 3, Single Agent, PUC, Multi Select Feature 1 Discharge, Foam Locations - Crosslay Lower Rear, Rear in Hosebed, Crosslay Lower Front, Crosslay Upper Front and Hose Reel in Dunnage Right Side Discharge, Foam Locations - Crosslay Lower Rear, Rear in Hosebed, Crosslay Lower Front, Crosslay Upper Front and Hose Reel in Dunnage Right Side 324 0012126 Not Required, CAF Compressor 1 325 0592527 Refill, Foam Tank, Integral, Husky 3 1 326 0031896 Demonstration, Foam System, Dealer Provided 1 327 0005446 Foam Cell, 20 Gallon, Not Reduce Water 1 Type of Foam - Class "A" 328 0697589 Drain, 1.00", Foam Tank #1, Husky 3 Foam System, Quarter Turn 1 329 0091079 Not Required, Foam Tank #2 1 330 0091112 Not Required, Foam Tank #2 Drain 1 331 0515692 Pump Operators Panel, 31", Control Zone, PUC 1 332 0519215 Pump Panel Configuration, Control Zone, Special Layout Information 1 Fill in Blank - As close to job # 31202 333 0516975 Material, Pump Panels, Operators Brushed Stainless, Sides Brushed Stainless, PUC 1 334 0516978 Pump and Plumbing Access, Simple Tilt Service, PUC 1 335 0520016 Not Required, Pumphouse Structure, PUC 1 336 0618458 Light, Pump Compt, Wln 3SC0CDCR LED White, PUC 1 Qty, - 01 337 0516983 Gauges, Engine, Included With Pierce Pressure Controller, PUC 1 338 0005601 Throttle Included w/ Pressure Controller 1 339 0549333 Indicators, Engine, Included with Pressure Controller 1 340 0005780 Control, Air Horn At Pump Panel w/Button 1 341 0511078 Gauges, 4.00" Master, Class 1, 30"-0-600psi 1 342 0511100 Gauge, 2.00" Pressure, Class 1, 30"-0-400psi 1 343 0602710 Gauge, Water Lev, Pierce, In pressure Control, No Mini Slave, PUC, Non-NFPA 2016 1 344 0060753 Water Level Gauge, Wln PSTANK, LED 1-Light, 4-Level 2 Qty, - 02 Activation, Water Level G - pg) pump in gear Location, Water Level Gauge - Each Side Custom Cab 345 0687477 Gauge, Foam Level, Pierce, PUC, PP 1 346 0653081 Light, Pump Operator & Panel, Side Ctrl, PUC, 60354C LED Cab & LED OH Chr Cvr 1 347 0606696 Air Horns, (2) Grover, Stutter Tone, In Bumper 1 348 0606834 Location, Air Horns, Bumper, Each Side, Outside Frame, Inboard (Pos #2 & #6)1 349 0014021 Control, Air Horn, Horn Ring, DS Foot Sw, PS Push Button 1 350 0525667 Siren, Wln 295SLSA1, 100 or 200 Watt 1 351 0016133 Location, Electronic Siren, Swivel Mount Centered Overhead 1 352 0076156 Control, Elec Siren, Head Only 1 353 0601306 Speaker, (1) Wln, SA315P, w/Pierce Polished Stainless Steel Grille, 100 watt 1 Connection, Speaker - siren head 354 0601555 Location, Speaker, Frt Bumper, Recessed, Left Side, Outside Frame,Outbrd (Pos 7)1 355 0056084 Wiring & Mount, Siren, Federal Q2B, Cust Installed 1 356 0006097 Location of Siren, Recessed in Bumper 1 Location, Siren, Mech - a) Left 357 0026161 Control, Mech Siren, DS Foot Sw 1 358 0006086 Switch, Second Siren Brake 1 359 0605191 Lightbar, Wln, Freedom IV-Q, 72", RRRWBR_Opt_RBWRRR 1 Opticom Priority - b) High Opticom Activation - Cab Switch & E-Master Momentary Opticom Activation - DS Switch Filter, Whl Freedom Ltbrs - No Filters 360 0016380 No Additional Lights Req'd, Side Zone Upper 1 361 0540460 Light, Front Zone, Wln M6*C LED, Clear Lens, 4lts Q Bezel 1 Color, Lt DS Frnt Outside - DS Front Outside Red Color, Lt PS Frnt Outside - PS Front Outside Red Color, Lt DS Front Inside - r) DS Front Inside Red 6/27/2018 4:35 PM Page 10431Bid #:Packet Pg. 422 Item 12 Line Option Type Option Description Qty 361 Color, Lt PS Front Inside - r) PS Front Inside Red 362 0058128 Daytime Running Lights, Headlights, Qtm, Vel/Imp, Enf/AXT-MUX, DCF (High Beam) 1 363 0653937 Flasher, Headlight Alternating 1 Headlt flash deactivation - a)w/high beam 364 0540692 Lights, Side Zone Lower, Wln M6*C LED, Clear Lens, 3pr, Ovr 25 1 Location, Lights Front Side - b)each side bumper Color, Lt Side Front - Red Color, Lt Side Middle - Red Color, Lt Side Rear - Red Location, Lights Mid Side - Rearward of Crew Cab Doors Location, Lights Rear Side - Over Rear Wheels 365 0669155 Lights, Door Interior Flash, 4 Dr Cab, Wln M2* LED 1 Color, Lights, Warning - gla) red Color, Lens, LED's - m)match LED's 366 0540774 Lights, Side, Wln M9*C LED, Clear Lens 2 Location, Lights - front of the body each side on hatch compartment Qty, - 02 Color, Lights, Warning - gla) red 367 0564655 Lights, Rear Zone Lower, Wln M6*C LED, Clear Lens, For Tail Lt Housing 1 Color, Lt DS Rear - r) DS Rear Lt Red Color, Lt PS Rear - r) PS Rear Lt Red 368 0535742 Mounting, Light, Recess in D/S Rear Bulkhead, Each 1 369 0541155 Lights, Rear/Side Up Zone, Wln M9*C LED, Clear Lens 4lts 1 Color, Lt, Side Rear Upper DS - Side Rear Upper Red Color, Lt, Side Rear Upper PS - Side Rear Upper Red Color, Lt, Rear Upper DS - r) DS Rear Upper Red Color, Lt, Rear Upper PS - r) PS Upper Rear Red 370 0006551 Not Required, Lights, Rear Upper Zone Blocking 1 371 0590000 No Hose Bed Warn Light Brackets Req'd, Lights Mtd on Hatch/Body Compts, PUC 1 372 0790763 SP Inverter/Bat Charger, Xantrex Freedom 807-2055, 1500W, 120VAC 1 Location, Vanner Inverter - Pump House Location, Inverter Switch - Pump Panel 373 0772906 Light Twr, W-B Chf NS2.3-300 WHL, 2-P*H2 12DC Lts Cld 7.5'1 Color, Tower, Wlb - White Paint Scene Light Optics - Flood 374 0664474 Location, Light Tower, Cab Roof 1 375 0617750 Controller, Light Tower, W-B, Wired Handheld, E-STOP Chf, Chf Pr, Pow Pr 1 376 0664791 Location, Light Tower Controller, Driver's Side Front Body Compartment 1 377 0006790 Receptacle, 20A 120V 3-Pr 3-Wr TL, L5-20R Wtrprf 1 Qty, - 01 AC Power Source - Generator Location, Receptacle(s) - EMS Cabinet(s) 378 0519934 Not Required, Brand, Hydraulic Tool System 1 379 0649753 Not Required, PTO Driven Hydraulic Tool System 1 380 0649750 Not Required, Hydraulic Reels 1 381 0007150 Bag of Nuts and Bolts 1 Qty, Bag Nuts and Bolts - 1 382 0602516 NFPA Required Loose Equipment, Pumper, NFPA 2016, Provided by Fire Department 1 383 0519913 Not Required, Soft Suction Hose 1 384 0027023 No Strainer Required 1 385 0602538 Extinguisher, Dry Chemical, Pumper NFPA 2016 Class, Provided by Fire Department 1 386 0602360 Extinguisher, 2.5 Gal. Pressurized Water, Pumper NFPA 2016,Provided by Fire Dept 1 387 0602679 Axe, Flathead, Pumper NFPA 2016 Classification, Provided by Fire Department 1 388 0602667 Axe, Pickhead, Pumper NFPA 2016 Classification, Provided by Fire Department 1 389 0559682 Paint, Two Tone, Cab, w/Shield, Custom Cab 1 Paint Color, Predefined - #70 Red Paint Color, Upper Area, Predefined - #10 White 390 0646901 Paint Chassis Frame Assy, With Liner, E-Coat, Standard 1 Paint Color, Frame Assembly, Predefined - Standard Black 391 0693797 No Paint Required, Aluminum Front Wheels 1 6/27/2018 4:35 PM Page 11431Bid #:Packet Pg. 423 Item 12 Line Option Type Option Description Qty 392 0693792 No Paint Required, Aluminum Rear Wheels 1 393 0007230 Compartment, Painted, Spatter Gray 1 394 0544129 Reflective Band, 1"-6"-1"1 Color, Reflect Band - A - a) white Color, Reflect Band - B - l) white Color, Reflect Band - C - w) white 395 0007356 Reflective across Cab Face 1 396 0593732 Stripe, Chevron, Rear, Diamond Grade, Pumper, PUC 1 Color, Rear Chevron DG - fluorescent yellow green 397 0065687 Stripe, Reflective, Cab Doors Interior 1 Color, Reflective - e) black 398 0027372 Lettering Specifications, (GOLD STAR Process)1 399 0686428 Lettering, Gold Leaf, 3.00", (41-60)1 Outline, Lettering - Outline and Shade 400 0686084 Lettering, Reflective, 3.00", Each 18 Qty, Lettering - 18 Outline, Lettering - Outline and Shade 401 0530793 Emblem, American Flag, Flat (Not Moving), Pair, Mirror Images 2 Qty, - 02 Location, Emblem - Between the Cab doors Height, Emblem - h) 11" 402 0769765 Lettering, Numerals, Grille, Painted w/ Outline (2)1 403 0772003 Manual, Fire Apparatus Parts, USB Flash Drive, Custom 1 Qty, - 01 404 0772037 Manual, Chassis Service, USB Flash Drive, Custom 1 Qty, - 01 405 0773381 Manual, Chassis Operation, One (1) USB Flash Drive, Custom 1 406 0030008 Warranty, Basic, 1 Year, Apparatus, WA0008 1 407 0595239 (No Pick Required)1 408 0696696 Warranty, Engine, Detroit DD13, 5 Year, WA0180 1 409 0684953 Warranty, Steering Gear, Sheppard M110, 3 Year WA0201 1 410 0596017 Warranty, Frame, 50 Year, Custom Chassis, WA0013 1 411 0595698 Warranty, Axle, 3 Year, TAK-4, WA0050 1 412 0777368 Warranty, Axle, 2 Year, Meritor, General Service, WA0328 1 413 0652758 Warranty, ABS Brake System, 3 Year, Meritor Wabco, WA0232 1 414 0019914 Warranty, Structure, 10 Year, Custom Cab, WA0012 1 415 0595813 Warranty, Paint, 10 Year, Cab, Pro-Rate, WA0055 1 416 0524627 Warranty, Electronics, 5 Year, MUX, WA0014 1 417 0695416 Warranty, Pierce Camera System, WA0188 1 418 0647720 Warranty, Pierce LED Strip Lights, WA0203 1 419 0046369 Warranty, 5-year EVS Transmission, Standard Custom, WA0187 1 420 0685945 Warranty, Transmission Cooler, WA0216 1 421 0688798 Warranty, Water Tank, Lifetime, UPF, Poly Tank, WA0195 1 422 0596025 Warranty, Structure, 10 Year, Body, WA0009 1 423 0693127 Warranty, Gortite, Roll-up Door, 6 Year, WA0190 1 424 0516693 Warranty, Pump, Pierce, PUC, 6 Year Parts, 1 Year Labor, WA0039 1 425 0648675 Warranty, 10 Year S/S Pumbing, WA0035 1 426 0657990 Warranty, Foam System, Husky 3, WA0231 1 427 0595820 Warranty, Paint, 10 Year, Body, Pro-Rate, WA0057 1 428 0595421 Warranty, Goldstar, 3 Year, Apparatus, WA0018 1 429 0683627 Certification, Vehicle Stability, CD0156 1 430 0610841 Certification, Engine Installation, Arrow XT, Detroit DD13, 2016, CD0144 1 431 0686786 Certification, Power Steering, CD0098 1 432 0543934 Certification, Cab Integrity, AXT, CD0011 1 433 0548949 Certification, Cab Door Durability, AXT, CD0002 1 434 0548968 Certification, Windshield Wiper Durability, AXT, CD0006 1 435 0548952 Certification, Electric Window Durability, AXT, CD0003 1 436 0549275 Certification, Seat Belt Anchors and Mounting, AXT, CD0019 1 437 0694929 Certification, Cab Heater and Defroster, AXT, CD0094 1 438 0609805 Certification, Cab Air Conditioning Performance, Arrow XT 2010, CD0140 1 439 0545073 Amp Draw Report, NFPA Current Edition 1 6/27/2018 4:35 PM Page 12431Bid #:Packet Pg. 424 Item 12 Line Option Type Option Description Qty 440 0002758 Amp Draw, NFPA/ULC Radio Allowance 1 441 0799248 Appleton/Florida BTO 1 442 0000048 Engineering Attribute - PUMPER/TANKER, 3rd Gen 1 443 0000012 PIERCE CHASSIS 1 444 0562778 DD13 ENGINE 1 445 0046396 EVS 4000 Series TRANSMISSION 1 446 0520324 PIERCE PUMP, PUC 1 447 0020009 POLY TANK 1 448 0028048 FOAM SYSTEM 1 449 0020006 SIDE CONTROL 1 450 0020007 AKRON VALVES 1 451 0020015 ABS SYSTEM 1 452 0658751 Manufacturing Attribute 1 6/27/2018 4:35 PM Page 13431Bid #:Packet Pg. 425 Item 12 JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. Submission to City of San Luis Obispo Bid for Tax-Exempt Bank Qualified Lease Purchase Financing For Acquisition of a Fire Truck July 17, 2018 J. P. Morgan Equipment Finance Contact: Rebecca Lowe, Executive Director Senior Territory Manager JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. 560 Mission St., FL 04, San Francisco, CA 94105 Telephone: 925-212-1065 rebecca.a.lowe@jpmorgan.com JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. Contact: Lou Mastro, Executive Director Relationship Executive JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. 3 Park Plaza Floor 09-STE 900, Irvine CA 92614 Telephone: 949-833-4746 lou.mastro@jpmorgan.com Packet Pg. 426 Item 12 July 17, 2018 Rico Pardo City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Dear Rico: J.P. Morgan (the “Bank”), is pleased to propose for discussion indicative terms to the City of San Luis Obispo (the "Lessee”) for a tax-exempt bank qualified municipal lease purchase agreement in an amount up to $673,096, subject to the following terms and conditions described herein (the “Proposal”). J.P. Morgan has been the market leader in municipal equipment finance credit for over 20 years. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. ranks among the largest providers of credit facilities in the Municipal market today. Our deep familiarity with this sector is viewed as a strong benefit by the Municipal clients with whom we do business. We believe that our experience in providing credit support, coupled with our long experience in deal execution, will ensure an efficient, cost-effective transaction for the City of San Luis Obispo. Client references are available upon request. The proposed indicative terms provided here for discussion do not represent an offer or commitment to lend and are subject to further due diligence, credit analysis and approval, and documentation of detailed terms and conditions satisfactory to J.P. Morgan. Should any part of this proposal conflict with your structuring parameters, we would be happy to discuss mutually acceptable alternatives. The proposed indicative terms are submitted to you in our capacity as a Lessor in an arm’s length commercial transaction. J.P. Morgan is acting solely as a principal and not as a “Municipal Advisor” as defined in Section 15B of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the related final rules (the "Municipal Advisor Rules") or any other agent or fiduciary capacity. JPMorgan is providing this information to you in reliance on the Bank exemption in the Municipal Advisor Rules and is not recommending that you take action or refrain from taking action or providing any advice. See “Municipal Advisor Disclosures and Disclaimers” in the Summary of Terms for further information relating to same. Should you have any questions about any aspect of this proposal, please do not hesitate to contact me at (925) 212-1065. Thank you and we look forward to working with the City of San Luis Obispo and your financing team. Yours sincerely, Rebecca Lowe Rebecca Lowe Executive Director Equipment Finance 560 Mission Street, Floor 04 San Francisco, CA 94105-2907 Email – rebecca.a.lowe@jpmorgan.com Rebecca Lowe Executive Director Lou Mastro Executive Director Packet Pg. 427 Item 12 City of San Luis Obispo Tax-Exempt Bank Qualified Municipal Lease Purchase Summary of Terms and Conditions July 17, 2018 J.P. Morgan is pleased to submit the following equipment financing proposal. This document is for discussion purposes only and is contingent upon the Lessee’s compliance with the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (“Code”), as amended, and all applicable state laws related to Lessee’s ability to enter into a tax-exempt lease-purchase financing for the intended purposes. The final terms and conditions are subject to credit approval and may be different from the terms and conditions outlined below. TRANSACTION SUMMARY Lessee: City of San Luis Obispo Lessor: JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. or any affiliate of JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., its successors and/or assigns (“JPMorgan Chase”/“Lessor”/ or “Bank”). Transaction: Fixed-rate, fully amortizing, tax-exempt lease-purchase agreement (“Agreement”). Use of Proceeds: To finance a Fire Truck, the legal title of which will vest with Lessee during the term of the Agreement. All equipment proposed for financing will be subject to final review and acceptance by Lessor prior to closing. Financing Amount: Estimated to be $673,096 (Additional Financing Amount shall be available upon mutual consent of Lessee and Lessor) Bank Qualified: This proposal assumes that Lessee will not issue more than $10 million in tax- exempt obligations this calendar year and that the Lessee will designate this lease as a “qualified” tax-exempt obligation. Commencement Date: Anticipated to be on or around August 15, 2018 or a mutually agreed upon date. TRANSACTION DETAILS Financing Term: A) Five (5) Years B) Seven (7) Years C) Ten (10) Years Payment / Frequency: Equal quarterly payments of principal and interest in arrears, commencing August 15, 2018, which allows for the equipment to be delivered . Please see sample amortization schedules attached. Interest Rate: A) 3.185% B) 3.199% C) 3.272% Adjustment to Rate: The Interest Rate and Payment will be subject to the index below based upon the then current 3-year Interest Rate Swap (mid) (“Index Rate”) for Option A, the then current 4-year Interest Rate SWAP (mid) (“Index Rate”) for Option B, and the then current 5-year Interest Rate SWAP (mid) (“Index Rate”) for Option C as published in Bloomberg, which was 2.875%, 2.885% & Packet Pg. 428 Item 12 2.885% as of July 17, 2018. The Interest Rate will be the applicable Swap Rate multiplied by the Bank’s Tax Exempt Factor of 79.00% plus a Spread, as outlined below. For every change (increase or decrease) in the Index Rate a corresponding adjustment will be made to the Interest Rate to maintain Lessor’s economics. The final Interest Rate and Payment will be agreed to 3 days prior to closing. Option A Interest Rate = (Index Rate x 79.00%) + spread 3-Year Swap = (2.875% x 79.00%) + 0.9138% = 3.185% Option B Interest Rate = (Index Rate x 79.00%) + spread 4-Year Swap = (2.885% x 79.00%) + 0.9199% = 3.199% Option C Interest Rate = (Index Rate x 79.00%) + spread 5-Year Swap = (2.885% x 79.00%) + 0.9929% = 3.272% Upon request, if the City would like to secure the Interest Rate, a Rate Lock transaction is available and can be discussed. Lessor reserves the right to adjust the pricing proposed in order to maintain Lessor’s anticipated economic return as a result of material adverse change. Prepayment: The Financing may be prepaid without penalty, in whole but not in part, prior to maturity, on any payment date after the initial 12 months from Commencement, subject to 30 days prior written notice. If Lessee prepays the financing prior to the 12th month from Commencement, the payment may be subject to a fixed rate / “make whole” break funding charge. Disbursement of Proceeds: The transaction will fund via an initial escrow deposit, to a mutually agreeable escrow agent, equal to the full Financing Amount. Disbursements will be made to vendors or as reimbursements to Lessee (in compliance with Treasury Reg. 1.150-2) as funds are required. Security: Lessee will grant Lessor a first priority security interest in the financed equipment. UCC I and UCCII filings will be completed as applicable. Appropriation: This Agreement shall be subject to appropriation. The Agreement will require appropriation for payment for any and all equipment on a lease schedule. Appropriation for partial payment or for select assets within a schedule will not be permitted. OTHER TERMS Documentation: The terms of this financing will be evidenced by agreements, instruments and documents (“Lease Documents”) usual and customary for a Tax-Exempt Lease Purchase. The Lease Documents must be acceptable to Lessor and its counsel. Lessee shall be responsible for its own expenses related to review of the lease documents and delivery of opinion of counsel. Conditions Precedent: Usual and customary conditions to issuance of the financing including acceptable legal documentation which will include an opinion of counsel that the financing is valid, binding and enforceable . Additionally, documentation will provide that interest earned by the Lessor in this transaction will be excluded from gross income for federal tax purposes. Packet Pg. 429 Item 12 Representations and Warranties: Usual representations and warranties for like situated Lessees and the Facility’s type and tenor, including, without limitation, absence of material adverse change, absence of material litigation, absence of default or potential default and continued accuracy of representations. Representations and warranties relating to Absence of Sovereign Immunity (or waiver of sovereign immunity, if applicable) will also be required for all governmental entities. Maintenance & Insurance: All maintenance and insurance are the responsibility of Lessee. Lessee shall bear all risk of loss or damage of the Equipment and will be responsible for keeping the Equipment insured with companies satisfactory to Lessor. Lessor, its parent and/or affiliates, its successors and ass igns must be named as loss payee and additional insured as applicable, on all insurance policies. Evidence of such insurance must be satisfactory to Lessor. Waiver of Jury Trial: The Lessee hereby consents to the adjudication of any and all claims pursuant to Judicial Reference as provided in California Code of Civil Procedure Section 638, and the judicial referee shall be empowered to hear and determine any and all issues in such Reference whether fact or law. Anti-Corruption Laws and Sanctions: The documentation shall contain representations and warranties that the Lessee has implemented and maintains in effect policies and procedures designed to ensure compliance by the Lessee, its subsidiaries and their respective directors, officers, employees and agents with Anti-Corruption Laws and applicable Sanctions, and the Lessee, its subsidiaries and their respective officers and employees and to the knowledge of the Lessee, its directors and agents, are in compliance with Anti -Corruption Laws and applicable Sanctions in all material respects. None of (a) the Lessee, any subsidiary or any of their respective directors, officers or employees, or (b) to the knowledge of the Lessee, any agent of the Lessee or any subsidiary that will act in any capacity in connection with or benefit from the credit facility established hereby, is a Sanctioned Person. No Borrowing or credit facility, use of proceeds or other transaction contemplated by this Agreement will violate any Anti-Corruption Law or applicable Sanctions. Waiver of Immunity: Lessee hereby expressly and irrevocably waives any immunity (including sovereign, crown or similar immunity) and any defenses based thereon from any suit, action or proceeding or from any legal process in any forum with respect to Lease. Governing Law: All aspects of the credit(s) being discussed including this Term Sheet and any Lease Documents would be governed by the laws of the State of California. Proposal Expiration: This proposal will expire if acceptance does not occur by July 31, 2018 (unless extended in writing by Lessor). Confidentiality Statement: J.P. Morgan confirms that it will not use confidential information obtained from you by virtue of the potential transaction contemplated by this proposal or our other relationships with you in connection with the performance by J.P. Morgan of such services for other companies. You also acknowledge that J.P. Morgan will not use in connection with the potential transaction contemplated by this preliminary proposal, or furnish to you, confidential information obtained from other companies. Packet Pg. 430 Item 12 Municipal Advisor Disclosures and Disclaimers: The Lessee acknowledges and agrees that (i) the transaction contemplated herein is an arm’s length commercial transaction between the Lessee and the Bank, (ii) in connection with such transaction, the Bank is acting solely as a principal and not as an advisor including, without limitation, a “Municipal Advisor” as such term is defined in Section 15B of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the related final rules (the "Municipal Advisor Rules"), agent or a fiduciary of the Lessee, (iii) the Bank is relying on the Bank exemption in the Municipal Advisor Rules, (iv) the Bank has not provided any advice or assumed any advisory or fiduciary responsibility in favor of the Lessee with respect to the transaction contemplated hereby and the discussions, undertakings and procedures leading thereto (whether or not the Bank, or any affiliate of the Bank, has provided other services or advised, or is currently providing other services or advising the Lessee on other matters), (v) the Bank has financial and other interests that differ from those of the Borrower, and (vi) the Lessee has consulted with its own financial, legal, accounting, tax, and other advisors, as applicable, to the extent it deemed appropriate. Please feel free to contact me at (925) 212-1065 if you have any questions, or would like to discuss this proposal in greater detail. Upon receipt of the accepted proposal, we will promptly begin the approval process so that we may be in a position to finalize this transaction with you. Thank you for allowing us to be of service! Yours sincerely, Rebecca Lowe Lou Mastro Executive Director Executive Director City of San Luis Obispo Accepted Date: _____________________________ By: ________________________________________ Title: ______________________________________ Option: ______________________________________ SAMPLE AMORTIZATIONS TABLES Option A - 60-month Packet Pg. 431 Item 12 L o a n A m o r t i z a t i o n Average rate.....................................................3.185% starting debt ending Date balance takedowns service interest principal balance 8/15/2018 - 673,095.08 - - - 673,095.08 11/15/2018 673,095.08 - 36,539.14 5,359.52 31,179.62 641,915.46 2/15/2019 641,915.46 - 36,539.14 5,111.25 31,427.89 610,487.57 5/15/2019 610,487.57 - 36,539.14 4,861.01 31,678.13 578,809.44 8/15/2019 578,809.44 - 36,539.14 4,608.77 31,930.37 546,879.07 11/15/2019 546,879.07 - 36,539.14 4,354.52 32,184.61 514,694.46 2/15/2020 514,694.46 - 36,539.14 4,098.25 32,440.88 482,253.58 5/15/2020 482,253.58 - 36,539.14 3,839.94 32,699.19 449,554.38 8/15/2020 449,554.38 - 36,539.14 3,579.58 32,959.56 416,594.82 11/15/2020 416,594.82 - 36,539.14 3,317.14 33,222.00 383,372.82 2/15/2021 383,372.82 - 36,539.14 3,052.61 33,486.53 349,886.29 5/15/2021 349,886.29 - 36,539.14 2,785.97 33,753.17 316,133.12 8/15/2021 316,133.12 - 36,539.14 2,517.21 34,021.93 282,111.19 11/15/2021 282,111.19 - 36,539.14 2,246.31 34,292.83 247,818.36 2/15/2022 247,818.36 - 36,539.14 1,973.25 34,565.88 213,252.47 5/15/2022 213,252.47 - 36,539.14 1,698.02 34,841.12 178,411.36 8/15/2022 178,411.36 - 36,539.14 1,420.60 35,118.54 143,292.82 11/15/2022 143,292.82 - 36,539.14 1,140.97 35,398.17 107,894.65 2/15/2023 107,894.65 - 36,539.14 859.11 35,680.03 72,214.62 5/15/2023 72,214.62 - 36,539.14 575.01 35,964.13 36,250.49 8/15/2023 36,250.49 - 36,539.14 288.64 36,250.49 - Total 730,782.77 57,687.69 673,095.08 Option B - 84-month L o a n A m o r t i z a t i o n Packet Pg. 432 Item 12 Average rate.....................................................3.199% starting debt ending Date balance takedowns service interest principal balance 8/15/2018 - 673,095.08 - - - 673,095.08 11/15/2018 673,095.08 - 26,926.62 5,383.08 21,543.54 651,551.54 2/15/2019 651,551.54 - 26,926.62 5,210.78 21,715.83 629,835.71 5/15/2019 629,835.71 - 26,926.62 5,037.11 21,889.51 607,946.20 8/15/2019 607,946.20 - 26,926.62 4,862.05 22,064.57 585,881.63 11/15/2019 585,881.63 - 26,926.62 4,685.59 22,241.03 563,640.60 2/15/2020 563,640.60 - 26,926.62 4,507.72 22,418.90 541,221.70 5/15/2020 541,221.70 - 26,926.62 4,328.42 22,598.20 518,623.50 8/15/2020 518,623.50 - 26,926.62 4,147.69 22,778.93 495,844.57 11/15/2020 495,844.57 - 26,926.62 3,965.52 22,961.10 472,883.47 2/15/2021 472,883.47 - 26,926.62 3,781.89 23,144.73 449,738.74 5/15/2021 449,738.74 - 26,926.62 3,596.79 23,329.83 426,408.91 8/15/2021 426,408.91 - 26,926.62 3,410.21 23,516.41 402,892.50 11/15/2021 402,892.50 - 26,926.62 3,222.13 23,704.49 379,188.01 2/15/2022 379,188.01 - 26,926.62 3,032.56 23,894.06 355,293.95 5/15/2022 355,293.95 - 26,926.62 2,841.46 24,085.15 331,208.79 8/15/2022 331,208.79 - 26,926.62 2,648.84 24,277.78 306,931.02 11/15/2022 306,931.02 - 26,926.62 2,454.68 24,471.94 282,459.08 2/15/2023 282,459.08 - 26,926.62 2,258.97 24,667.65 257,791.43 5/15/2023 257,791.43 - 26,926.62 2,061.69 24,864.93 232,926.50 8/15/2023 232,926.50 - 26,926.62 1,862.83 25,063.79 207,862.71 11/15/2023 207,862.71 - 26,926.62 1,662.38 25,264.24 182,598.47 2/15/2024 182,598.47 - 26,926.62 1,460.33 25,466.29 157,132.19 5/15/2024 157,132.19 - 26,926.62 1,256.66 25,669.95 131,462.23 8/15/2024 131,462.23 - 26,926.62 1,051.37 25,875.25 105,586.98 11/15/2024 105,586.98 - 26,926.62 844.43 26,082.19 79,504.80 2/15/2025 79,504.80 - 26,926.62 635.84 26,290.78 53,214.02 5/15/2025 53,214.02 - 26,926.62 425.58 26,501.04 26,712.98 8/15/2025 26,712.98 - 26,926.62 213.64 26,712.98 - Total 753,945.30 80,850.22 673,095.08 Option C - 120-month L o a n A m o r t i z a t i o n Average rate.....................................................3.272% Packet Pg. 433 Item 12 starting debt ending Date balance takedowns service interest principal balance 8/15/2018 - 673,095.08 - - - 673,095.08 11/15/2018 673,095.08 - 19,798.32 5,505.91 14,292.40 658,802.68 2/15/2019 658,802.68 - 19,798.32 5,389.00 14,409.32 644,393.36 5/15/2019 644,393.36 - 19,798.32 5,271.13 14,527.18 629,866.17 8/15/2019 629,866.17 - 19,798.32 5,152.30 14,646.02 615,220.16 11/15/2019 615,220.16 - 19,798.32 5,032.49 14,765.82 600,454.34 2/15/2020 600,454.34 - 19,798.32 4,911.71 14,886.61 585,567.73 5/15/2020 585,567.73 - 19,798.32 4,789.94 15,008.38 570,559.35 8/15/2020 570,559.35 - 19,798.32 4,667.17 15,131.15 555,428.21 11/15/2020 555,428.21 - 19,798.32 4,543.40 15,254.92 540,173.29 2/15/2021 540,173.29 - 19,798.32 4,418.61 15,379.70 524,793.58 5/15/2021 524,793.58 - 19,798.32 4,292.81 15,505.51 509,288.07 8/15/2021 509,288.07 - 19,798.32 4,165.97 15,632.34 493,655.73 11/15/2021 493,655.73 - 19,798.32 4,038.10 15,760.22 477,895.51 2/15/2022 477,895.51 - 19,798.32 3,909.18 15,889.14 462,006.38 5/15/2022 462,006.38 - 19,798.32 3,779.21 16,019.11 445,987.27 8/15/2022 445,987.27 - 19,798.32 3,648.17 16,150.14 429,837.12 11/15/2022 429,837.12 - 19,798.32 3,516.06 16,282.25 413,554.87 2/15/2023 413,554.87 - 19,798.32 3,382.87 16,415.44 397,139.43 5/15/2023 397,139.43 - 19,798.32 3,248.60 16,549.72 380,589.71 8/15/2023 380,589.71 - 19,798.32 3,113.22 16,685.10 363,904.62 11/15/2023 363,904.62 - 19,798.32 2,976.74 16,821.58 347,083.04 2/15/2024 347,083.04 - 19,798.32 2,839.14 16,959.18 330,123.86 5/15/2024 330,123.86 - 19,798.32 2,700.41 17,097.91 313,025.95 8/15/2024 313,025.95 - 19,798.32 2,560.55 17,237.77 295,788.18 11/15/2024 295,788.18 - 19,798.32 2,419.54 17,378.77 278,409.41 2/15/2025 278,409.41 - 19,798.32 2,277.39 17,520.93 260,888.48 5/15/2025 260,888.48 - 19,798.32 2,134.07 17,664.25 243,224.23 8/15/2025 243,224.23 - 19,798.32 1,989.57 17,808.74 225,415.49 11/15/2025 225,415.49 - 19,798.32 1,843.90 17,954.42 207,461.07 2/15/2026 207,461.07 - 19,798.32 1,697.03 18,101.29 189,359.78 5/15/2026 189,359.78 - 19,798.32 1,548.96 18,249.35 171,110.42 8/15/2026 171,110.42 - 19,798.32 1,399.68 18,398.63 152,711.79 11/15/2026 152,711.79 - 19,798.32 1,249.18 18,549.14 134,162.66 2/15/2027 134,162.66 - 19,798.32 1,097.45 18,700.87 115,461.79 5/15/2027 115,461.79 - 19,798.32 944.48 18,853.84 96,607.95 8/15/2027 96,607.95 - 19,798.32 790.25 19,008.06 77,599.88 11/15/2027 77,599.88 - 19,798.32 634.77 19,163.55 58,436.33 2/15/2028 58,436.33 - 19,798.32 478.01 19,320.31 39,116.03 5/15/2028 39,116.03 - 19,798.32 319.97 19,478.35 19,637.68 8/15/2028 19,637.68 - 19,798.32 160.64 19,637.68 - Total 791,932.64 118,837.56 673,095.08 Packet Pg. 434 Item 12 Meeting Date: 8/21/2018 FROM: Carrie Mattingly, Utilities Director Prepared By: Aaron Floyd, Deputy Director Utilities - Water SUBJECT: CALOES HAZARD MITIGATION GRANT APPLICATION RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Authorize staff to prepare and submit a grant application to the State of California Office of Emergency Services (CalOES) Hazard Mitigation Grant Program. 2. Adopt a resolution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, authorizing application to the State of California Office of Emergenc y Services Hazard Mitigation Grant Program” (Attachment A). 3. Approve the use of $255,000 from Water Fund unreserved working capital for local fund ing match of 25 percent of the total project cost. 4. Authorize the City Manager, or designee, to execute requir ed grant application documentation. BACKGROUND A result of a Presidential Disaster Declaration, FEMA’s Hazard Mitigation Grant Program funds plans and projects that reduce the effects of future natural disasters. In California, these funds are administered by the CalOES Hazard Mitigation Grant Program Unit. Eligible applicants include state agencies, local governments, special districts, and some private non-profits. On July 2, 2018, staff prepared a Notice of Intent (NOI) through the CalOES Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP). The program aims to reduce loss of life and property by lessening the impact of disasters, with an emphasis on mitigation before the next disaster to reduce human and financial consequences later. On July 20, 2018 staff received confirmation from the Governor’s Office of Emergency Services that the City’s NOI for the Water and Wastewater System Standby Generator Improvements project had been reviewed and determined to represent an eligible HGMP activity. After further discus sion with CalOES staff, and due to the timing of the Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) Upgrade Project construction, it is highly unlikely the City would be eligible for this portion of the grant opportunity. However, staff is prepared to pursue grant funding for the Water System Standby Generator Improvements, as described in more detail below. Water Treatment Plant, Transfer Pump Station Packet Pg. 435 Item 13 DISCUSSION The City seeks to improve water system reliability by installing a new, permanent 300-kW standby generator and supporting infrastructure at the City’s Water Treatment Plant (WTP). The Water System Standby Generator Improvements project would provide power to the Transfer Pump Station (TPS) in the event of a power outage, which will reduce the following risks: 1. Insufficient water supply in the City’s high-pressure zone during an extended power outage (greater than two to three days, depending on seasonal water demand). 2. Insufficient fire protection during a power outage. 3. Health and safety impacts during power outage caused by insufficient water distribution system pressure. The WTP standby generator would be a 300-kW, permanent standby generator installed on the north-west side of the existing TPS building. The generator will be connected to the TPS’s motor control center and capable of powering all four pumps. The project will include an automatic transfer switch and supporting electrical infrastructure to integrate the new generator into the existing electrical distribution system and into the supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) system for monitoring. The generator was sized based on analysis performed by Southland Energy, as documented in the Preliminary Energy Assessment Report for the Water Energy Efficiency Project. The generator would be implemented with the larger Water Energy Efficiency Project which is in the design phase. The construction schedule is in development but it is expected to take less than 36 months. The CalOES Hazard Mitigation Grant Program application process is comprehensive and will require a detailed descript ion and cost breakdown for the Water System Standby Generator Improvements project. The application for this funding opportunity is due to CalOES by September 4, 2018. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW A grant application is not a “project” as defined under CEQA. The Water System Standby Generator project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15301 (Existing Facilities). FISCAL IMPACT As shown in Table 1, the local match portion for these grants w ould total $255,000. Funding is available in the Water Fund unreserved working capital, which has a current balance of $7,707,236. Packet Pg. 436 Item 13 Table 1: CalOES Hazard Mitigation Grant Opportunities Project Name Grant Amount Local Match Water System Standby Generato r Improvements $765,000 $255,000 ALTERNATIVE Deny the authorization to prepare and submit the grant application to CalOES . The Council may decide not to authorize staff to submit the grant application. Staff does not recommend this option, as there is a favorable likelihood that the City will secure this grant. Attachments: a - CalOES Grant Resolution Packet Pg. 437 Item 13 RESOLUTION NO. _____ (2018 SERIES) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING APPLICATION TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES HAZARD MITIGATION GRANT PROGRAM WHEREAS, on July 2, 2018 the City of San Luis Obispo prepared a Notice of Interest through the California Governor's Office of Emergency Services Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP); and WHEREAS, the California Governor's Office of Emergency Services Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) aims to reduce loss of life and property by lessening the impact of disasters, with an emphasis on mitigation before the next disaster to reduce human and financial consequences later; and WHEREAS, on July 20, 2018 staff received confirmation from the California Governor's Office of Emergency Services that the City’s Notice of Interest had been reviewed and determined to represent an eligible HGMP activity; and WHEREAS; the City seeks to improve water system reliability by installing a new, permanent standby generator and supporting infrastructure at the City’s Water Treatment Plant to power the Transfer Pump Station in the event of a power outage. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. The Director of Utilities, or Deputy Director Utilities – Water, is hereby authorized to execute for and on behalf of the City of San Luis Obispo, a public entity established under the laws of the State of California, this application and to file it with the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Service. SECTION 2. This is a Grant specific resolution and is effective for only #DR-4434-0507 (Water and Wastewater System Standby Generator Improvements). Packet Pg. 438 Item 13 SECTION 3. Environmental Review. The City Council hereby determines that a grant application is not a “project” as defined under CEQA. The Water System Standby Generator project is categorically exempt from environmental review per CEQA Guidelines, Section 15301 (Existing Facilities). 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. 439 Item 13 Page intentionally left blank. Packet Pg. 440 Item 13 Meeting Date: 8/21/2018 FROM: Daryl Grigsby, Public Works Director Prepared By: Jake Hudson, Transportation Manager SUBJECT: LOWER SAN LUIS OBISPO CREEK WATERSHED MODEL FUNDING. RECOMMENDATION Authorize the use of $102,000 from the Completed Capital Projects and $8,000 fro m the Prado Road Interchange Project Account to develop a comprehensive flood model of the San Luis Obispo Creek corridor from Marsh & Higuera to approximately the Octagon Barn. DISCUSSION There is a unique opportunity created by the scope and timing of two critical infrastructure projects located in the same area. The Prado Road Interchange is entering into its flood analysis study phase while the Water Resource Reclamation Facility (WRRF) project’s design is essentially complete and the project is working its way towards construction. A current and in- depth understanding of the floodplain along the San Luis Obispo Creek corridor is warranted at this time. A comprehensive, two-dimensional (“2D") Flood Control model will enable current and future City projects in the area to mutually benefit from the potential application of flood control solutions, in tandem with targeted areas for conservation, habitat and stream bank restoration, and pro -active contemporary stormwater best management practices, to be examined comprehensively. Currently, individual projects study their own floodplain impacts and incorporate impact mitigation on a project by project basis. With a common model (similar to others the City already has such as the Transportation Model) a se t of recommended floodplain management measures can be developed with greater levels of technical specificity and inform a more holistic and proactive approach. As the City moves forward with the Prado Road Interchange and WRRF projects , it is critical to complete a comprehensive flood study rather than an incremental and fragmented analysis. Information already developed for the WRRF project and background work done for the interchange will be used to jumpstart the model development with background infor mation. A comprehensive flood model, utilizing the same accurate and best practice methodology, will use existing data from the WRRF project while providing the information necessary to identify the best overall set of solutions for flood control and advance mitigation planning along a broader regional area. This will help to coordinate better long-term solutions rather than have an incremental approach along the corridor so that management of the floodplain can be analyzed comprehensively and in context with other potential future projects in the corridor. Packet Pg. 441 Item 14 CONCURRENCES The City Utilities Department concurs with this recommendation. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Development of this model in and of itself is not considered a project under CEQA. Even if develop ment of this model was a project under CEQA it would be categorically exempt per CEQA Guidelines Section 15306, Information Collection. Once completed, this model will ideally be come the basis for flood analysis in the environmental review for all projects along this creek corridor. FISCAL IMPACT Staff is proposing to fund this model development with $102,000 with remaining funds from completed capital projects and $8,000 from the Prado Road Interchange Account , which is derived from Transportation Impact Fees. The Prado Road Interchange account has a current balance of $225,000, sufficient to fund the proportion proposed from this account. As part of the next financial plan staff will proposed to augment this remaining balance of the Prado Road Interchange account with Impact Fee Funds, San Luis Ranch Fair Share Mitigation Funds, SLOCOG Funds, and County Tax Sharing funds per the adopted San Luis Ranch Development agreement to complete the Interchange Project Engineering, Right -Of-Way, and Construction. ALTERNATIVE Council may choose to not approve the use of these funds for development of this model. Staff does not recommend this as there is no other funding source at this time and the work would not move forward. Flood analysis for the WRRF and Prado Road Interchange would move forward isolated to their respective areas and as a result costly flood control measures upstream and downstream of these projects could result if a comprehensive, holistic approach is not taken. Packet Pg. 442 Item 14 Meeting Date: 8/21/2018 FROM: Robert A. Hill, Interim Deputy Director, Office of Sustainability Prepared By: Ryan Betz, Interim Assistant to the City Manager Chris Read, Sustainability Manager SUBJECT: RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE COUNTY-WIDE MEASURE G-18: PROTECT OUR WATER, AIR AND LAND: BAN FRACKING AND OIL EXPANSION IN SLO COUNTY INITIATIVE RECOMMENDATION Adopt a resolution supporting the County-wide Measure G-18: Protect Our Water, Air and Land: Ban Fracking and Oil Expansion in SLO County Initiative on the November 6, 2018 General Election Ballot. DISCUSSION Background On July 17, 2018, the City Council directed staff to draft a resolution supporting Measure G -18: Protect Our Water, Air and Land: Ban Fracking and Oil Expansion (Measure). The Measure proposes the adoption o f an ordinance through the initiative process and will be placed on the voter ballot for the November 6, 2018 General Election. The Measure, if passed by 51% of voters in the County, would adopt an ordinance amending the San Luis Obispo County General P lan to prohibit well stimulation treatments (such as fracking) and any new petroleum (such as oil) extraction on all land within the unincorporated area of the County. Currently, oil drilling and fracking is not an allowed use within the City of San Luis Obispo City limits. Specifically, the ballot language states: Shall an ordinance be adopted amending the San Luis Obispo County General Plan and County Code to prohibit any new petroleum extraction and all well stimulation treatments, as defined in the full-text of the measure, including hydraulic fracturing and acid well stimulation, on all lands within the unincorporated area of the county? The City has a recent history of supporting efforts related to banning fracking and limiting oil drilling expansion due to health and safety, environmental, and climate concerns: 1. On March 6, 2018 the City Council approved the City’s Legislative Action Platform for 2018 (Resolution No. 10873), including the support of legislation to improve and enhance the safety of transport volatile crude oil (#62), supporting the expansion of National Marine Sanctuary off the coast of San Luis Obispo County to limit offshore oil and gas development (#80), and opposing any development under existing or new offshore oil and gas leases off the Coast of San Luis Obispo County (#81). Packet Pg. 443 Item 15 2. On October 3, 2017, the City Council adopted Resolution 10836, which opposes new or expanded offshore oil and gas leases off the coast of San Luis Obispo County and supporting measures to prohibit discharge of pollutants into the ocean. 3. On June 23, 2015, the City Council committed to fossil fuel divestment through the adoption of the City of San Luis Obispo Investment Management Plan, which includes the following restriction, “No investments are to be made to support the direct production of drilling of fossil fuels.” 4. In February 2015, City Council directed staff to write a letter to the County of San Luis Obispo opposing the Phillips 66 oil train project due to health, safety, and environmental issues. If passed by the voters in November, the Measure would 1) ban new oil extraction while permitting existing oil extraction operations to remain in place , and 2) prohibit all well stimulation treatments, including fracking and acidizing (acid well stimula tion), which can be used to enhance recovery of oil and other petroleum products in unincorporated areas within the County. Draft Resolution In response to input from the community, the attached resolution supports Measure G-18 to ban new o il wells, fracking, and protect groundwater quantity and quality. The resolution recognizes groundwater as a fundamental resource, that expanded or intensified oil extraction would significantly increase the dema nds on the County’s limited water supplies and that the protection of this resource is the primary responsibility of all levels of government. The resolution is also consistent with the City’s commitment to climate action, meets the intent of the City’s 2018 Legislative Action Platform, and is consistent wit h recent actions to restrict new fossil fuel extraction. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Passing a Resolution that supports the banning of fracking and oil expansion is not subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because it is not a project as defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15378 (Definitions – Project). FISCAL IMPACT There is no direct fiscal impact associated with the recommended action. ALTERNATIVE The City Council could decide to alter the draft Resolution or decide not to adopt a Resolution. Packet Pg. 444 Item 15 Attachments: a - Draft Resolution b - Approved County Resolution and draft ballot language c - LegislativeActionPlatform Packet Pg. 445 Item 15 R ______ RESOLUTION NO. _____ (2018 SERIES) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, SUPPORTING MEASURE G-18: PROTECT OUR WATER, AIR, AND LAND: BAN FRACKING AND OIL EXPANSION IN SLO COUNTY INITIATIVE WHEREAS, groundwater is a fundamental resource and the protection of its quantity and quality a primary responsibility of all levels of government ; and WHEREAS, expanded or intensified petroleum extraction would significantly increase the demands on the County’s limited water supplies; and WHEREAS, the wastewater and chemicals from petroleum operations could contaminate San Luis Obispo County’s surface water, groundwater, and soil through improper storage or disposal, surface spills, or accidents, which could have devastating impacts on agriculture, the local economy, and residential uses ; and WHEREAS, the County and the incorporated cities therein plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and stimulate local businesses and the economy by supporting new renewable energy development ; and WHEREAS, expansion and intensification of petroleum extraction operations, which are non-renewable and carbon-emitting, contradict and impede these goals ; and WHEREAS, climate change poses serious risks to San Luis Obispo County and the incorporated cities therein; and WHEREAS, limiting additional fossil fuel extraction is a critical action required to achieve State of California and local greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets; and WEHREAS, this Initiative does not prohibit routine maintenance of existing petroleum extraction operations, wastewater disposal, or the exercise of any vested right , and therefore, will not substantially impact existing petroleum extraction jobs nor County taxes on such operations. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Action. The City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo hereby supports the Measure G-18: Protect Our Water, Air, and Land: Ban Fracking and Oil Expansion in SLO County Initiative on the November 6, 2018 ballot. SECTION 2. Environmental Determination. The City Council has determined that the above actions do not constitute a project, as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act and is not subject to environmental review. Packet Pg. 446 Item 15 Resolution No. _____ (2018 Series) Page 2 R ______ 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. 447 Item 15 Packet Pg. 448 Item 15 Packet Pg. 449 Item 15 Packet Pg. 450 Item 15 RESOLUTION NO. 10873 (2018 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING THE CITY LEGISLATIVE ACTION PLATFORM FOR 2018 AND APPOINTING THE COUNCIL MEMBER AND STAFF PERSON TO ACT AS LIAISON BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AND THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES WHEREAS, a major objective of the City Council is to adopt an aggressive legislative action platform which strengthens local government, promotes City goals and defends the City against legislative actions by State and Federal governments that would weaken local government and/or take away traditional revenue sources; and WHEREAS, it is vital to the fiscal health and the self determination of the City to effectively communicate with State Legislators and Federal representatives in order to favorably influence State and Federal legislation, regulations and grant requests; and WHEREAS, the League of California Cities conducts a legislative analysis and advocacy program on behalf of cities for State issues and major Federal issues; and WHEREAS, the City desires to be proactive and involved in the governmental decision- making processes directly affecting the City legislative priorities identified in Exhibit "A," and other selected issues as may from time to time be recommended by the League of California Cities; and WHEREAS, a key component of the City's Legislative Action Platform is face-to-face meetings between City representatives and elected officials at the Federal, State, and County levels, and coordination with similar efforts made by other local government entities. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo does hereby: SECTION 1. Establish the Legislative Action Platform for 2018 as set forth in the attached Exhibit "A" and authorize the Mayor and designated staff to take positions on legislation generally consistent with the Legislative Action Platform and such other resolutions and recommendations of the League of California Cities as may be from time to time presented to the City; and R 10873 Packet Pg. 451 Item 15 Resolution No. 10873 (2018 Series) Page 2 SECTION 2. Appoint Mayor Heidi Harmon to act as Council Member legislative liaison and City Manager Derek Johnson and City Attorney Christine Dietrick to act as staff legislative liaisons with the League of California Cities. Upon motion of Council Member Rivoire, seconded by Vice Mayor Christianson, and on the following vote: AYES: Council Members Gomez, Pease and Rivoire, Vice Mayor Christianson and Mayor Harmon NOES: None ABSENT: None The foregoing resolution was adopted this 6th day of March 2018. ATTEST: 4Caetallagher City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney 14-, - XVI_, - - ay r Heidi Harmo V IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, this 2Z day of , 201 <? Carrie Gallagher City Clerk R 10873 Packet Pg. 452 Item 15 Resolution No. 10873 (2018 Series) EXHIBIT A CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO LEGISLATIVE ACTION PLATFORM FOR 2 018 Community Development 1. Promoting reforms of the entire State mandated HCD Regional Housing Need Allocations process to recognize local resource limitations. 2. Providing funding (i.e. through Cap and Trade or other sources) for communities to pay for public infrastructure that meet mandated greenhouse reduction goals. 3. Providing funding to implement programs and related action items contained in Climate Action Plans to quantitatively reduce greenhouse gases. 4. Providing communities broad authority to form and administer Community Choice Energy programs. 5. Promoting funding for the transition to clean technologies and low or zero -carbon energy. 6. Promoting funding sources to accomplish retrofitting of unreinforced masonry buildings. 7. Promoting funding of on -campus housing at Cal Poly for student and faculty housing and University acquisition of single family residences for staff and faculty housing. 8. Preserving local control of planning and zoning matters. 9. Supporting efforts to increase funding for affordable housing and supportive housing services for very low, low and moderate income individuals and/or families for all cities and communities and opposing the erosion of local inclusionary housing and in -lieu fee programs. 10. Supporting continued funding of National Housing Trust Fund and streamlined and efficient implementing regulations at the state level. 11. Promoting additional state funding to implement AB 32 (The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006) and SB 375 (The Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008) through local general plan updates that implement the regional sustainable communities plan and alternative planning strategy, if needed. 12. Promoting funding for the identification, acquisition, maintenance and restoration of historic sites and structures. Packet Pg. 453 Item 15 Resolution No. 10873 (2018 Series) EXHIBIT A 13. Supporting continued or expanded funding for CDBG program. 14. Supporting reinstatement of protections from imposition of additional building or site conditions prior to issuance of a building permit for seismic related improvements to buildings subject to a mitigation program established according to state law (City URM Program) as previously provided in Government Code Section 8875.10 (this section was repealed effective January 1, 2009). 15. Supporting continued local control over mobile home park rent stabilization and the conversion of mobile home parks to other uses. Encourage the amendment of Section 66427.5 of the California Government Code and other relevant law for the purpose of ensuring that mobile home park residents are not involuntarily removed from homes or otherwise economically impacted if parks are subdivided or converted. 16. Resolving and addressing regulatory or financial barriers to implement AB 811 property -assessed clean energy districts. 17. Encouraging continued viability of inclusionary housing provisions and avoidance of conflicts with Costa -Hawkins Act. 18. Encouraging consistency in state legislation dealing with transportation, housing and land use issues and eliminating potential conflicts between regional housing requirements, smart growth mandates and environmental legislation. 19. Enabling the issuance of parking citations on private property. 20. Supporting State funding to achieve state mandated affordable housing programs and an equal and fair distribution to rural and suburban counties and cities. 21. Advocating full funding of authorized programs under the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act, including providing more flexibility in the use of Federal funds on the local level to address housing for the homeless. 22. Supporting legislation that provides funding sources for appropriate human service agencies that support the mission of the Human Relations Commission. 23. Supporting responsible review and revision of CEQA to ensure sound environmental determinations. 24. Promoting pragmatic and clarifying actions to implement Proposition 64, support for increased funding for education related to that same proposition, and the preservation of local land use decision making related to cannabis regulations. LEGISLATIVE ACTION PLATFORM FOR 2 018 Page 4 Packet Pg. 454 Item 15 Resolution No. 10873 (2018 Series) EXHIBIT A 25. Supporting modern and cost-efficient, thorough and accurate methods for the population to exercise its civic obligation to be counted in the 2020 Census. Economic Develo ment 26. Promoting funding and/or legislation using tax credits or other incentive programs to encourage research and development by businesses in California. 27. Supporting funding and policies for the promotion of California as a place to locate businesses. 28. Supporting funding for the state tourism promotion program. 29. Supporting the effective and efficient use of all communications technologies including voice, video, data, and information services over wired and wireless transmission technologies. 30. Supporting telecommunications reform legislation and other measures that preserve local control over public rights-of-way, protect local resources and guarantee access to, funding for, and local flexibility in utilizing funds for public, educational and government (PEG) access television. 31. Supporting the expansion of public infrastructure financing tools and funding for infrastructure to provide economic development opportunities. 32. Promoting development of green business and head of household jobs. 33. Supporting factual analyses of impacts and associated mitigations for losses of major regional employers that provide significant head of household jobs. 34. Supporting net neutrality. Finance 35. Supporting meaningful fiscal reform that allows each level of government to adequately finance its service responsibilities while continuing to support efforts to protect the City from loss of revenues due to State take-aways and unfunded State or Federal mandates. 36. Advocating against initiatives that unduly burden and/or prohibit local government ability to support essential services to the community. LEGISLATIVE ACTION PLATFORM FOR 2 018 Page 5 Packet Pg. 455 Item 15 Resolution No. 10873 (2018 Series) EXHIBIT A 37. Endorsing legislation that provides local government with a fair share tax on catalog and Internet sales; and opposing legislation that limits state or local authority to tax catalog or Internet sales. 38. Supporting efforts to collect the full amount of local transient occupancy tax from online sales of lodging. 39. Supporting the continuation of California Specialized Training Institute activities within San Luis Obispo County. 40. Opposing legislation that removes the municipal bond tax exemption. 41. Supporting local regulatory control and revenue equity for cities in statewide regulation or permitting process for marijuana establishments or uses. 1.1unian Resources/Employee Relations 42. Supporting additional workers' compensation reforms that lower employers' costs while still protecting workers and opposing legislation that would restrict appropriate cost controls in the workers' compensation system. 43. Supporting pension and retiree health benefits reform efforts, policy changes, and permissible administration decisions aimed at reducing unfunded liabilities, reducing costs, and ensuring the long-term viability of the defined benefit pension system in concert with the League of California Cities and the California Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) Board of Directors. 44. Opposing the expansion of the "Peace Officers' Bill of Rights," "Firefighters' Bill of Rights," or other attempts to curtail management rights. 45. Supporting legislation to protect the City's continued ability to administer its Cafeteria Benefit Plan and maintain comprehensive health care coverage for eligible employees, in a financially sustainable manner. 46. Supporting reforms that limit the financial impacts of joint and several liability on public entities. 47. Supporting the clarification, modification or repeal of AB 646 fact finding requirements and opposing measures that reduces local control over public employee disputes. LEGISLATIVE ACTION PLATFORM FOR 2 018 Page 6 Packet Pg. 456 Item 15 Resolution No. 10873 (2018 Series) EXHIBIT A 48. Opposing the expansion of procedural rights and requirements in administrative disciplinary proceedings that increase costs and expand the timeframe and scope of administrative processes. 49. Opposing measures that impose local government mandated employee benefits that should be directly negotiated between labor groups and employers. 50. Supporting Federal legislation to modify, refine, or eliminate Federal Labor Standards Act (FLSA) requirements on public agencies. 51. Opposing legislation applying joint and several liability to agencies who have entered into Joint Powers Agreements (JPAs). Public Safety 52. Continuing State and Federal funding support for school safety, disaster preparedness, earthquake preparedness, Homeland Security, hazardous material response, State COPS program and other local law enforcement activities. 53. Preserving the City's authority to investigate police misconduct. 54. Supporting efforts to expand the scope of parental responsibility for crimes committed by minors. 55. Preserving the authority of local control on issuance of concealed weapons permits. 56. Supporting legislation to help curb alcohol-related criminal behavior and underage drinking. 57. Opposing new or increased state fees for state provided law enforcement services. 58. Supporting the fair and efficient allocation of radio spectrum that provides quality frequencies, free from interference, for all local public safety communication needs. 59. Supporting efforts to enhance radio and data system(s) stability and interoperability among public safety agencies and jurisdictions. 60. Supporting efforts to reduce retention periods for video monitoring data not related to an identified incident or operation. LEGISLATIVE ACTION PLATFORM FOR 2 018 Page 7 Packet Pg. 457 Item 15 Resolution No. 10873 (2018 Series) EXHIBIT A 61. Preserving the City's right to regulate activities with adverse health and safety impacts on local streets, sidewalks and right-of-ways. 62. Supporting legislation to improve and enhance the safety of cargo transported via rail, including but not limited to: safety enhancements for rail vessel construction with an emphasis on efforts to rapidly improve the safe transport of volatile crude oil and limit the use of older, "grandfathered" containers and vessels; enhancements in remote monitoring and control of railcar speeds; reduction of railcar speeds in populated areas like San Luis Obispo; enhancements in communications, notifications and information dissemination to local governments, especially public safety agencies. 63. Supporting and expanding funding and programs to proactively reduce fire risk attributed to heavy vegetative fuels loads, high tree mortality, drought, and climate change to remove diseased, dead and/or down combustible vegetation, thin forests to improve forest health, and create effective defensible space between the undeveloped and developed environments. 64. Supporting grants and aid to land/property owners with properties one mile or less from natural vegetation, which are threatened by wind -driven fire events, to harden structures again fire impingement and create sustainable defensible spaces. 65. Supporting grants and aid to local governments to develop modern evacuation communications systems to effectively reach all residents in a timely fashion via voice, text, email, and other electronic means. 66. Supporting legislation that would result in the implementation of a statewide modern evacuation communications system to effectively reach all residents in a timely fashion via voice, text, email, and other electronic means, which is available for use by local governments at the discretion of local governments. 67. Supporting legislation to preserve and enhance local control, at the City level, for the provision of public safety services, including the scope and provision of medical and non-medical emergency services. 68. Supporting uniformity of state and federal regulations of drones and the study and adoption of appropriate local airport protections and public safety exemptions. 69. Supporting legislation regarding the safe transport and storage of nuclear waste. 70. Supporting legislation to address the education, funding and treatment of opioid addiction. LEGISLATIVE ACTION PLATFORM FOR 2 018 Page 8 Packet Pg. 458 Item 15 Resolution No. 10873 (2018 Series) EXHIBIT A Public Works 71. Supporting increased availability of grant funding to replace aging infrastructure of all types, e.g. streets, bridges, water, sewer, parks, and storm sewer systems, etc. 72. Supporting increased funding for projects that improve flood protection for the City. 73. Supporting funding for implementation of clean stormwater / low impact infrastructure replacement. 74. Ensuring cooperation and prompt approval from Federal and State regulatory agencies (such as the Department of Fish & Game, Regional Water Quality Control Board and the Army Corps of Engineers) for necessary projects involving the City's creek system. 75. Supporting monetary incentives or grant funding for alternative fuel vehicles for replacement of municipal fleet equipment. 76. Supporting monetary incentives or grant funding for retrofitting municipal buildings with Energy Management Systems to centrally control all lighting and HVAC systems. 77. Supporting realistic municipal clean stormwater requirements at the State Board or legislative level. 78. Supporting legislation that reduces implementation timeframe for Public Projects in a cost-effective manner. Parks and Recreation and Natural Resources 79. Supporting State and Federal funding and other measures to promote the acquisition, protection, preservation and restoration of natural resources, open space, coastal resources, signature land forms, wetlands and park development, including continued funding for the Land and Water Conservation Grant Program and for the California Conservation Corps. 80. Supporting the expansion of National Marine Sanctuary off the coast of San Luis Obispo County to protect this fragile habitat from offshore oil and gas development. 81. Opposing any development under existing or new offshore oil and gas leases off the Coast of San Luis Obispo County. 82. Supporting measures to prohibit discharge of pollutants into the ocean (e.g. selenium contaminated waters from the San Joaquin valley). LEGISLATIVE ACTION PLATFORM FOR 2 018 Page 9 Packet Pg. 459 Item 15 Resolution No. 10873 (2018 Series) EXHIBIT A 83. Encouraging the Resources Agency and its departments to expedite the distribution of remaining Proposition 1 bond funds to take advantage of the many favorable opportunities for land and easement acquisition and enhancement project contracting that exist at this time. 84. Seeking legislative exemption from property taxes on lands dedicated to open space purposes which are outside the boundaries of the jurisdiction owning such lands. 85. Protecting funding for vital regional and community services that negatively impact Californian's access to parks, open space, after school programming, senior services, facilities that promote physical activity, protect natural resources, and strengthen safety and security. 86. Promoting policies that recognize the benefits of parks and recreational facilities in the advancement of "sustainable communities" and curbing greenhouse gas emissions, including: strengthening policies that fund parks, open -space, bike lanes and non -motorized trails through the development and implementation of a carbon credit and offset program, and advocating for the strong integration of local and regional park and non -motorized transportation improvements into "Smart Growth Scenarios" pursuant to SB 375. 87. Supporting access to joint use of schools; parks and open space; development of streets and trails that encourage physical activity and healthy living. 88. Supporting extension or permanent legislation at the federal level of enhanced tax deductions for charitable donations of Conservation Easements 89. Supporting legislation to limit the opening of national parks (or other protected public lands, e.g. Carrizo Plain) to fossil fuel extraction. Transportation 90. Supporting changes in gas tax laws that allow local tax for transportation purposes based on a majority vote of the public. 91. Supporting the continuation of, and increased funding sources for street maintenance projects, transportation improvements, transit operations and multimodal facility projects. LEGISLATIVE ACTION PLATFORM FOR 2 018 Page 10 Packet Pg. 460 Item 15 Resolution No. 10873 (2018 Series) EXHIBIT A 92. Supporting clean air transit funding for San Luis Obispo County, in particular fu n d i n g that provides for alternative modes of transportation with clean air benefits. 93. Supporting actions to: (1) promote cooperation and mutual support between metropolitan planning organization (MPO) agencies and local transit providers, and 2) discourage trends toward " MPO agencies/regional "control" of local transit providers. 94. Encouraging private transportation companies (such as Union Pacific Railroad) to reach agreements for sharing of properly secured right of way corridors for other compatible uses such as bicycle and pedestrian facilities. 95. Opposing the proposed diversion of any funding source for transportation that reduces amounts designated for transit operations. 96. Supporting funding for projects to implement adopted complete street plans demonstrated to improve public health and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. 97. Supporting provision of Cap and Trade funding for intercity rail. 98. Supporting increased funding for existing Active Transportation Program (ATP). 99. Preserving funding for existing and future transportation needs. Utilities 100. Supporting clean water funding programs. 101. Supporting recycling and waste diversion programs and enhancing local government's ability to comply with solid waste reduction requirements. 102. Supporting measures that require the State Water Resources Control Board and Regional Water Quality Control Boards establish a process to evaluate, in advance of adoption, the costs of compliance for pending and future regulatory actions on NPDES permittees. 103. Supporting legislation that requires the State's environmental agencies to conduct peer review of proposed regulations to ensure that the proposal is based on sound science. LEGISLATIVE ACTION PLATFORM FOR 2 018 Page 11 Packet Pg. 461 Item 15 Resolution No. 10873 (2018 Series) EXHIBIT A 104. Supporting the elimination of mandatory in i n i in u m penalties for violations of NPDES Requirements and returning discretionary control to the Regional Water Quality Control Board Executive Officers (i.e. repeal SB 709). 105. Supporting measures to ensure reasonableness in the administration of NPDES permit governing City operations, including pursuing a municipal representative on the Regional Water Quality Control Board 106. Promoting the safe, responsible, and cost-effective reuse of Exceptional Quality or better biosolids. 107. Supporting any appropriate streamlining of the state regulatory processes. 108. Supporting sustainable energy programs. 109. Supporting incentives for distributed energy generation projects such as solar power. 110. Supporting legislation allowing cities/agencies to establish fees for the costs of operating mandated water quality programs such as, but not limited to, municipal storm water and total maximum daily loading. 111. Supporting federal legislative action to transfer Salinas Reservoir from Army Corps of Engineers Military Project to Army Corps of Engineers Civil Works Project. 112. Supporting the implementation of the California Urban Water Conservation Council's Best Management Practices regarding urban water conservation and compliance with AB 1420. 113. Supporting amendments to the Urban Water Management Planning Act to recognize past investment in water conservation and the City's ability to comply with SBx7-7 and other water conservation regulations. 114. Opposing legislation that requires recycled water to be included in water conservation regulations. 115. Promoting legislation that expands or encourages the expansion of recycled water production and use. 116. Supporting legislation eliminating departing load charges which discourage the use of alternative energy resources. 117. Allowing the use of Public Goods Funds for the development and installation of energy saving or green energy generating projects to benefit local government. LEGISLATIVE ACTION PLATFORM FOR 2 018 Page 12 Packet Pg. 462 Item 15 Resolution No. 10873 (2018 Series) EXHIBIT A 118. Opposing legislation that diminishes the City's existing water rights. 119. Promoting the protection of water resources. 120. Supporting the protection of our natural resources from invasive species. 121. Promoting sustainability of our water resources through the use of recycled water and other best practices. 122. Supporting regional water resiliency initiatives 123. Supporting one water initiatives. CountyIRe Tonal Priorities 124. Supporting legislation and other policy considerations to expand funding for the delivery of case management, drug, alcohol, and detoxification services, mental health services, and the establishment of shelter facilities. 125. Working with the County to assure land use practices that are consistent with the Memorandum of Agreement adopted by the City Council and County Board of Supervisors in 2016 regarding development near the edges of the City. 126. Encouraging participation by County in providing nearby parking for County employees and clients, and alternate transportation and parking demand reduction. 127. Supporting County development of a local ordinance providing additional local oversight and regulation of the land application of Pollutant Concentration (PC) or better biosolids. 128. Working cooperatively with the County to solve City/County flood problems. 129. Supporting the San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District's legislative program, where consistent with the City's adopted policies and platform. 130. Supporting the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments' legislative advocacy activities, where consistent with the City's adopted policies, platform and public project objectives. 131. Supporting efforts to enhance dangerous animal regulation and enforcement. 132. Supporting the streamlining, clarification and simplification of conflict of interest regulations applicable to local officials. LEGISLATIVE ACTION PLATFORM FOR 2 018 Page 13 Packet Pg. 463 Item 15 Page intentionally left blank. Packet Pg. 464 Item 15 Meeting Date: 8/21/2018 FROM: Robert Hill, Interim Deputy Director, Office of Sustainability Prepared By: Chris Read, Sustainability Manager SUBJECT: AUTHORIZATION TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION FOR PG&E ON-BILL FINANCING IN SUPPORT OF ENERGY EFFICIENCY LIGHTING RETROFITS RECOMMENDATION Authorize the submittal of the non-binding PG&E On-Bill Financing Application DISCUSSION Background Climate Action Major City Goal & Fiscal Health Response Plan In June of 2017, the City Council adopted the 2017-2019 Financial Plan, which identifies Climate Action as a Major City Goal. Task 9 and Task 10 of the Climate Action Major City Goal Action Plan directs staff to perform energy audits on City-owned facilities and to implement related energy and cost saving measures and projects. In April of 2018, the City Council adopted the Fiscal Health Response Plan (FHRP) to address an annual budget shortfall of $8.9 million as a result of changing California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS) funding requirements. As part of the FHRP, the C ity committed to “new ways of doing business”, including a commitment to energy efficiency and investments in sustainable infrastructure with short -term paybacks on investment. The FHRP identifies $293,000 in savings as the result of energy efficiency and other resource consumption reduction. SLO EnergyWatch Partnership Report and Project Resources In April of 2018, the SLO EnergyWatch Partnership provided an overview of the City of San Luis Obispo municipal operations energy use by building/facility. The overview identified non- utility buildings and facilities with either a high overall energy consumption or a high rate energy consumption (e.g., an unexpected amount of consumption given the building/facility size). Utilities (water and wastewater) facilities were excluded because they are already under evaluation as components of other energy efficiency projects. The primary buildings and facilities identified in the report as energy efficiency opportunities include: •Parking Structure at 842 Palm Street •Parking Structure at 871 Marsh Street •Parking Structure and Office at 919 Palm Street •Corporation Yard at 25 Prado Road •Fire Station 1 and Emergency Operations Center at 2160 Santa Barbara Road Packet Pg. 465 Item 16 •Police Department and Annex at 1043 Walnut Street •City Hall at 990 Palm Street EnergyWatch Partnership staff also provided access to resources for further assessment and lighting energy efficiency project implementation, including introduction to Eco Green Solutions. Eco Green Solutions is a PG&E certified “Trade Professional and Authorized Agent” and is able to provide energy efficiency audits, install products consistent with an approved project, and provide access to PG&E rebates and financing tools. Importantly, Eco Green Solutions provides access to and assistance with utilizing PG&E’s “on- bill financing” (OBF). OBF is a financing mechanism provided by PG&E that allows the City to receive a 0% loan for energy efficiency projects with no up -front costs. The City then amortizes the debt using monthly bill savings achieved through the project. During the payback period, the City’s bill would appear unchanged. Upon full payback, the City’s energy bill will reflect the savings. Proposed Project Staff has engaged the Energy Watch Partnership and Eco Green Solutions to assess and audit the seven City buildings/facilities listed above. Staff has communicated that the City desires a lighting retrofit project that provides excellent lighting quality, reduces greenhouse gas emissions, lower electricity use and cost, and lower operations and maintenance needs. Initial audits and quotes are provided as Attachment A. Additionally, Eco Green is providing an assessment of lighting retrofit potential at several park facilities, including Sins Heimer Park, Damon-Garcia Fields, and the Ludwick Center. Staff will return to City Council with parks facilities project information as part of final project approval in the Fall of 2018. Project Timeline If Eco Green Solutions proposes a project that meets the criteria listed above, the timeline would proceed as follows: 1.Eco Green Solutions surveys facilities and specifies replacement fixtures and retrofits to create audit (completed, Attachment a). 2.City signs non-committal applications to begin securing a loan through the OBF process (August 21, 2018 City Council Meeting). 3.PG&E confirms OBF program eligibility with the City. 4.PG&E provides Eco Green notice to proceed; PG&E performs a pre-inspection to confirm Eco Green Solution’s assessment. 5.Eco Green Solutions provides de monstration installations for certain fixtures to ensure performance and quality is consistent with staff expectations. 6.City provides Eco Green Solutions a notice to proceed via City Council action. 7.Eco Green Solutions orders equipment and installs all projects. 8.PG&E does a “post-inspection” to ensure installation was done correctly. 9.PG&E provides the City with the OBF loan agreement to sign. Packet Pg. 466 Item 16 On-Bill Financing Process As identified in Step 2, above, the City is required to sign a non-committal application to begin the OBF process, which allows PG&E to confirm City eligibility and to put a hold on available funds. Attachment B through Attachment E include the documents required to complete the application, including: 1.PG&E Energy Efficiency Rebate (Custom P roject) Application (Attachment B) – This application component provides the basic components of the potential project. Due to the complicated nature of the project (hundreds of lighting fixtures at multiple facilities), it is classified as a “Custom Project” in PG&E’s rebate protocol. 2.PG&E Energy Efficiency Rebate (Deemed Rebate Project) Application (Attachment C)– Several components of the potential project may be included on PG&E’s “Deemed Rebate” equipment list. This is a technical program distinction for facilities whose energy savings are vetted prior to installation. 3.PG&E On-Bill Financing Application (Attachment D) – This form is the non-binding application that initiates the OBF process. 4.PG&E Authorization to Access Energy Data (Attachment E) – This component allows Eco Green Solutions to access energy meter data for sites where projects may occur. This allows for a more detailed audit. The access is revocable by the City. To proceed with its engagement with Eco Green Solutions, staff is requesting authorization to execute and submit the non-committal applications for OBF for the potential projects. The applications will secure funding for the City should the City decide to move forward with project implementation. In this case, staff will bring t he contract with Eco Green Solutions to City Council for approval. If the Eco Green Solutions proposed project does not meet the City’s expectations, the City may cancel the project at no cost or impact to the City. It should be noted that California Government Code 4217.10 et seq. provides significant flexibility for the procurement of energy efficiency or renewable energy services. Should the City decide to pursue a project with Eco Green Solutions, the City will adopt a resolution at a public hearing co nfirming that the process is consistent with California Government Code 4217.10 et seq. CONCURRENCES Greg Cruce (Building Supervisor, Public Works) and Scott Lee (Parking Manager, Public Works) concur with the form and intent of the project ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Preliminary energy savings assessment and survey work is statutorily exempt from CEQA per CEQA Guidelines Section 15262, Feasibility and Planning Studies and any retrofit work which stems from such study is categorically exempt from environment al review per CEQA Guidelines section 15301, Existing Facilities. Packet Pg. 467 Item 16 FISCAL IMPACT The initial energy efficiency audits are being completed at no -cost. Should the City proceed with a project using OBF, no capital outlay funding would be required. Payback of loan amounts will be realized in each facility’s utility bill based on the savings calculated by Eco Green Solutions and PG&E. Once the loan amount is paid off via the utility bill, savings will be realized from then forward. Table 1 provides an overview of projected savings by project site based on the preliminary analysis. As currently estimated, once the payback period has concluded, the project would save the Parking Fund approximately $7,800 per month and would save the General Fund approximately $4,600 per month, for a total monthly savings of approximately $12,400. Table 1. Preliminary Projected Lighting Retrofit Savings Project Site Estimated Cost Estimated Monthly Energy Savings Payback Period (Years) Annual GHG Reduction (Metric Tons of CO2) Parking Structure at 842 Palm Street $104,691.88 $2,083.33 4.19 109 Parking Structure at 871 Marsh Street $213,569.12 $4,334.82 4.11 194 Parking Structure and Office at 919 Palm Street $61,567.40 $1,428.73 3.59 71 Corporation Yard at 25 Prado Road $210,882.47 $1,810.32 9.71 81 Fire Station 1 and Emergency Operations Center at 2160 Santa Barbara Road $98,131.82 $853.25 9.58 36 Police Department and Annex at 1043 Walnut Street $115,395.58 $1,153.42 8.34 49 City Hall at 990 Palm Street $87,491.90 $797.90 9.14 34 Total $891,730.17 $12,461.77 5.96 574 ALTERNATIVES 1.The City could pursue an alternative financing mechanism for funding lighting retrofits. 2.The City could choose not to pursue lighting retrofits at this time. Packet Pg. 468 Item 16 Attachments: a - Initial Facility Audits b - PG&E Energy Efficiency Rebate (Custom Project) Application c - PG&E Energy Efficiency Rebate (Deemed Rebate Project) Application d - PG&E On Bill Financing Application e - PG&E Authorization to Access Energy Data Packet Pg. 469 Item 16 EcoGreen Sales Rep:Riley Detrick Customer Contact:Chris Read Title of Contact:Sustainability Manager Approx Building Size - SF Customer Phone:805-781-7151 Energy Rate 0.18 KWh Customer Email:cread@slocity.org In Reference to Quote #600821 KWh Saved CFL, CAN, u tube 33 w 8 11 7 /4015 ENTRANCE TO BLDG Skip 33 w 8 0 w 0.0%- $0.00 CFL, CAN 66 w 5 24 7 /8760 SECOND STAIRCASE LED 6" Downlight Indoor/Outdoor Rated 10 w 5 280 w 84.8%2,453 $441.50 CFL, WP, u tube 66 w 16 24 7 /8760 STAIRCASE IN FRONT AND BACK LED Wallpack 17.91 w 16 769.44 w 72.9%6,740 $1,213.25 CFL, décor CPY 34 w 3 24 7 /8760 STAIRCASE 2 LED G25 Globe 5 w 3 87 w 85.3%762 $137.18 4' LIN,31 w 4 24 7 /8760 ELEVATOR 2 &1 Skip 31 w 4 0 w 0.0%- $0.00 1 X 4, W2 59 w 2 24 7 /8760 TOLL BOOTH LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 2 56 w 47.5%491 $88.30 1 X 4, W2 59 w 1 24 7 /8760 BASEMENT CORNER LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 1 28 w 47.5%245 $44.15 1 X 4, W2 59 w 1 24 7 /8760 ELECTRICAL ROOM LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 1 28 w 47.5%245 $44.15 HPS, CPY 188 w 16 24 7 /8760 BASEMENT LED Canopy Light 60 w 16 2048 w 68.1%17,940 $3,229.29 HPS, CPY 188 w 7 24 7 /8760 1ST FLOOR LED Canopy Light 60 w 7 896 w 68.1%7,849 $1,412.81 HPS, CPY 188 w 14 24 7 /8760 2ND FLOOR LED Canopy Light 60 w 14 1792 w 68.1%15,698 $2,825.63 HPS, CPY 188 w 15 24 7 /8760 3RD FLOOR LED Canopy Light 60 w 15 1920 w 68.1%16,819 $3,027.46 HPS, CPY 188 w 15 24 7 /8760 4TH FLOOR LED Canopy Light 60 w 15 1920 w 68.1%16,819 $3,027.46 HPS, HL 188 w 4 11 7 /4015 TOP OF PARKING LED Area Light 45 w 4 572 w 76.1%2,297 $413.38 HPS, AL 188 w 12 11 7 /4015 TOP OF PARKING LED Area Light 45 w 12 1716 w 76.1%6,890 $1,240.15 MH, DECO 128 w 14 11 7 /4015 EXT Skip 128 w 14 0 w 0.0%- $0.00 0 0 w 0 0 0 /0 0 0 0 w 0 0 w - $0.00 Totals 137 121180 w 137 12112.44 w 69.5%95,248 $17,144.72 12,112 Watts Saved Total Project Cost After Rebate $61,567.40 Approximate Energy Savings Per Month $1,428.73 95,248 Annual KWh Saved ****Payback Period Yrs 3.59 Energy Savings Per Year $17,144.72 11.5 Avg Annual Res Powered by Savings Average Estimated Life of LED 24.65 **Total Savings Over 5 Years $106,632.69 71 Annual CO2 Savings (MT)Average Estimated Life of Existing Lighting 2.73 **Total Savings After 10 Years $245,953.66 69.5%Average Electrical Savings Estimated Energy Rebate $2,017.52 27.8%ROI During Payback IRS Tax Deduction 179D Available $0.00 3.71 Payback Period Yrs - Out of Pocket - No Rebates/Program ***Estimated Federal Tax Savings $0.00 3.22 Payback Period Yrs W/ Rebates & Yearly Bulb Replacement Savings Btu Savings Per Month 3,512,341,479 3.59 Payback Period Yrs W/Rebates & Federal Tax Savings Bulb Replacement Savings Per Year $1,997.27 3.22 Payback Period Yrs Fully Comprehensive^Bulb Replacement Savings Per Avg. Est. Life of LED $64,090.24 *Loan Payment $1,428.73 Total Year 1 12,313 NOTE: Attached calculations do not include depreciation deduction for project cost. Year 2 12,313 *Payment is based on a 3.59 0%interest OAC, actual my vary. Year 3 12,313 ** Reflects 6% per year cost of energy increase + Bulb Replacement Year 4 #NUM!*** Based on IRS 179D Deduction @ 35% federal tax rate Year 5 #NUM!****Payback Period Yrs = (Total Project Cost - Rebate) / Estimated Savings per Year Totals #NUM!^Payback Period Yrs =(Total Project Cost - Rebate - Tax Deduction - Tax Savings )/(Estimated Savings Per Year + Bulb Replacement Savings Per Yr) year loan at ENERGY AUDIT San Luis Obispo, CA, 93401 920 Palm ST 920 Palm Structure and Offices Customer# 0 , SA# 0 919 Palm Parking Garage EXISTING Suggested Replacements & Savings # of Fixtur # of Fixtures Annual SavingsWatts/bulbs Saved Usage SavedLocation Interest Operating Hours-Day / Yr Watts/FixReplacement Bulb #NUM! #NUM! 12,313 $61,567.40 0 0 0 12,313 Existing Bulb Watts/Fix 12,313 12,313 #NUM! 12,313 Potential Write-Off Amount Capital Packet Pg. 470 Item 16 27611 La Paz Rd, Suite A2 Laguna Niguel, CA. 92677 600821 info@ecogreen.cc 8/6/2018 (949) 364 - 6800 Reservation # Program: Account Number Quotes are valid for 30 days from the above date. EGCL-AE10-6"-2700-120v-X-REC-REC-PLT-X:X-X-X-X-X-INT-INT LED 6" Downlight Indoor/Outdoor Rated 10 w 5 $225.00 $1,125.00 EGWP-HL17.91-5000-UNV-X-X-X-X-X-X-INT-INT LED Wallpack 17.91 w 16 $245.00 $3,920.00 EGLA-TCG255-2700-UNV-X-X-X-X-INT-INT LED G25 Globe 5 w 3 $32.50 $97.50 EG14-TC31-4100-UNV-XXX-REC-D-X-X-X-INT-INT LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 2 $265.00 $530.00 EG14-TC31-4100-UNV-SMK-SMT-D-X-X-X-INT-INT LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 1 $305.00 $305.00 EG14-TC31-4100-UNV-X-SUS-D-X-X-X-INT-INT LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 1 $255.00 $255.00 EGCP-CR60-4000-UNV-X-X-X-X-X-INT-INT LED Canopy Light 60 w 67 $397.00 $26,599.00 EGAL-SA45-5000-UNV-X-X-X-X-PH-X-X-EXT-EXT LED Area Light 45 w 16 $400.00 $6,400.00 0 0 0 0 w 0 $0.00 $0.00 SUBTOTAL $39,231.50 LABOR $13,530.00 SALES TAX $2,977.12 Misc. CHARGES (Brackets, Wiring, Sockets, Travel, Tiewire, Screws, Lifts, Lamp Recycling / Disposal, Shipping, Package, ETC.)$7,846.30 TOTAL PROJECT COST $63,584.92 * All quanities to be verified by owner IRS Tax Cert, Inspection, Report $0.00 Estimated k/w Power Saved Rebate Total:$2,017.52 Estimated IRS Federal Tax Deduction per 179D:$0.00 Estimated Annual Energy Savings:$17,144.72 Quote Quote # DATE 920 Palm Structure and Offices Customer# 0 , SA# 0 San Luis Obispo, CA, 93401 920 Palm ST 919 Palm Parking Garage Light EPN DESCRIPTION QTY Unit Price AmountINT/EXT 1 of 1Packet Pg. 471 Item 16 EcoGreen Sales Rep:Riley Detrick Customer Contact:Chris Read Title of Contact:Sustainability Manager Approx Building Size - SF Customer Phone:805-781-7151 Energy Rate 0.21 KWh Customer Email:cread@slocity.org In Reference to Quote #600825 KWh Saved SIGN, FLD 17 w 2 11 7 /4015 FRONT PARKING LOT Skip 17 w 2 0 w 0.0%- $0.00 CAN 31 w 7 10 7 /3650 DORM RM 1-7 LED 6" Downlight Indoor/Outdoor Rated 10 w 7 147 w 67.7%537 $112.68 CAN 31 w 1 11 7 /4015 DISPATCH CENTER Skip 31 w 1 0 w 0.0%- $0.00 CAN 31 w 3 10 7 /3650 UPSTAIRS KITHCEN LED 6" Downlight Indoor/Outdoor Rated 10 w 3 63 w 67.7%230 $48.29 CAN 31 w 1 11 7 /4015 POLE ROOM LED 6" Downlight Indoor/Outdoor Rated 10 w 1 21 w 67.7%84 $17.71 WP 17 w 13 11 7 /4015 EXT OF MUSEUM AND DISPATCH Skip 17 w 13 0 w 0.0%- $0.00 WP 17 w 5 11 7 /4015 AROUND EXT OF MAIN BLDG Skip 17 w 5 0 w 0.0%- $0.00 FLOOR LIGHT 10 w 6 11 7 /4015 UPSTAIRS DORMS Skip 10 w 6 0 w 0.0%- $0.00 CPY 21 w 8 10 7 /3650 CLOSET AND SHOWER Skip 21 w 8 0 w 0.0%- $0.00 4' LIN, W1 32 w 4 10 7 /3650 UNDER CABINET IN KITCHEN Skip 32 w 4 0 w 0.0%- $0.00 4' LIN, W1 32 w 16 10 7 /3650 BACK OF MUSEUM Skip 32 w 16 0 w 0.0%- $0.00 1 X 4, W2 59 w 1 11 7 /4015 OFFICE MNGR OFFICE LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 1 28 w 47.5%112 $23.61 1 X 4, W2 59 w 4 11 7 /4015 UPSTAIRS OF SHOP LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 4 112 w 47.5%450 $94.43 1 X 4, W2 59 w 4 11 7 /4015 SHOP OFFICE LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 4 112 w 47.5%450 $94.43 1 X 4, W2 59 w 1 10 7 /3650 HALLWAY UPSTAIRS LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 1 28 w 47.5%102 $21.46 1 X 4, W2 59 w 1 10 7 /3650 MENS UPSTAIRS RESTROOM LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 1 28 w 47.5%102 $21.46 1 X 4, W2 59 w 1 10 7 /3650 WOMENS UPSTAIRS RESTROOM LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 1 28 w 47.5%102 $21.46 1 X 4, W2 59 w 4 8 7 /2920 BOYS UPSTAIRS RESTROOM LOCKER LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 4 112 w 47.5%327 $68.68 1 X 4, W2 59 w 1 10 7 /3650 EQUIPMENT ROOM LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 1 28 w 47.5%102 $21.46 1 X 4, W2 59 w 7 10 7 /3650 DORM RM 1-7 LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 7 196 w 47.5%715 $150.23 1 X 4, W2 59 w 2 10 7 /3650 GIRLS RESTROOM UPSTAIRS LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 2 56 w 47.5%204 $42.92 1 X 4, W2 59 w 3 10 7 /3650 UPSTAIRS KITCHEN LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 3 84 w 47.5%307 $64.39 1 X 4, W2 59 w 6 8 7 /2920 GYM LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 6 168 w 47.5%491 $103.02 1 X 4, W2 59 w 1 8 7 /2920 EMS STORAGE LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 1 28 w 47.5%82 $17.17 1 X 4, W2 59 w 1 8 7 /2920 GARAGE RESTROOM LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 1 28 w 47.5%82 $17.17 1 X 4, W2 59 w 1 8 7 /2920 NEAR LOCKER ROOM ENTRANCE LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 1 28 w 47.5%82 $17.17 1 X 4, W2 59 w 6 11 7 /4015 LOCKER ROOM DOWNSTAIRS LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 6 168 w 47.5%675 $141.65 1 X 4, W2 59 w 2 10 7 /3650 AIR ROOM LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 2 56 w 47.5%204 $42.92 1 X 4, W2 59 w 21 11 7 /4015 THE SHOP LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 21 588 w 47.5%2,361 $495.77 1 X 4, W2 59 w 2 10 7 /3650 BACK OF MUSEUM LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 2 56 w 47.5%204 $42.92 1 X 4, W2 59 w 18 11 7 /4015 GARAGE LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 18 504 w 47.5%2,024 $424.95 2 X 4, W2 59 w 1 10 7 /3650 BACK OF GARAGE NEAR AIR ROOM LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 1 28 w 47.5%102 $21.46 2 X 4, W2 59 w 8 10 7 /3650 UPSTAIRS DORMS LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 8 289.6 w 61.4%1,057 $221.98 2 X 4, W2 59 w 5 10 7 /3650 SIDE HALLWAY LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 5 140 w 47.5%511 $107.31 2 X 4, W2 59 w 7 11 7 /4015 STAIRWAYS LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 7 196 w 47.5%787 $165.26 2 X 4, W2 59 w 18 10 7 /3650 MUSEUM LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 18 504 w 47.5%1,840 $386.32 2 X 4, W3 89 w 2 10 7 /3650 CAPTAINS OFFICE LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 132.4 w 74.4%483 $101.48 2 X 4, W3 89 w 4 10 7 /3650 ENGINEERING OFFICE LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 4 264.8 w 74.4%967 $202.97 2 X 4, W3 89 w 8 10 7 /3650 HANGOUT AREA LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 8 529.6 w 74.4%1,933 $405.94 2 X 4, W3 89 w 2 10 7 /3650 TRAINING ROOM LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 132.4 w 74.4%483 $101.48 2 X 4, W3 89 w 4 10 7 /3650 BOBS OFFICE LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 4 264.8 w 74.4%967 $202.97 2 X 4, W3 89 w 2 10 7 /3650 KIETH AGGSON LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 132.4 w 74.4%483 $101.48 2 X 4, W3 89 w 2 10 7 /3650 SIDE LOBBY LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 132.4 w 74.4%483 $101.48 2 X 4, W3 89 w 4 10 7 /3650 ADMIN ANALYST LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 4 264.8 w 74.4%967 $202.97 2 X 4, W3 89 w 2 10 7 /3650 COPY ROOM LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 132.4 w 74.4%483 $101.48 2 X 4, W3 89 w 2 10 7 /3650 KERRY BOYLE LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 132.4 w 74.4%483 $101.48 2 X 4, W3 89 w 2 10 7 /3650 ROGER MAGGIO LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 132.4 w 74.4%483 $101.48 2 X 4, W3 89 w 2 10 7 /3650 JASON BERES LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 132.4 w 74.4%483 $101.48 2 X 4, W3 89 w 10 10 7 /3650 GREGOTTO TRAINING ROOM LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 10 662 w 74.4%2,416 $507.42 2 X 4, W3 89 w 2 10 7 /3650 SERVER RM LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 132.4 w 74.4%483 $101.48 2 X 4, W3 89 w 4 10 7 /3650 GARRETT OLSEN LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 4 264.8 w 74.4%967 $202.97 1 X 8, W4 219 w 7 11 7 /4015 THE SHOP LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 7 1316 w 85.8%5,284 $1,109.59 2 X 4, W4 112 w 8 11 7 /4015 GARAGE LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 8 648 w 72.3%2,602 $546.36 1 X 12, W6 175 w 5 10 7 /3650 LOBBY CUBICLES Skip 175 w 5 0 w 0.0%- $0.00 FLD 1000 w 1 3 7 /1095 ON MAIN BLDG LED Area Light 240 w 1 760 w 76.0%832 $174.76 FLD 1000 w 2 7 7 /2555 TOP OF SHELF LED Area Light 240 w 2 1520 w 76.0%3,884 $815.56 PAR38 60 w 2 10 7 /3650 LOBBY CUBICLES LED PAR38 14.4 w 2 91.2 w 76.0%333 $69.90 AL, FLD 188 w 2 7 7 /2555 EXT OF SHOP LED Area Light 60 w 2 256 w 68.1%654 $137.36 WP 188 w 4 11 7 /4015 ON MAIN BLDG LED Wallpack 40 w 4 592 w 78.7%2,377 $499.14 WP 188 w 10 11 7 /4015 EXT OF MUSEUM AND DISPATCH Skip 188 w 10 0 w 0.0%- $0.00 AL 295 w 4 11 7 /4015 BACK PARKING LOT LED Area Light 85 w 4 840 w 71.2%3,373 $708.25 AL 295 w 3 11 7 /4015 BACK AND FRONT PRKING LOT LED Area Light 85 w 3 630 w 71.2%2,529 $531.18 ENERGY AUDIT San Luis Obispo, CA, 93408 2160 Santa Barbara St City of SLO - FS1 Customer# 0 , SA# 0 Fire Station 1 EXISTING Suggested Replacements & Savings # of Fixtur # of Fixtures Annual SavingsWatts/bulbs Saved Usage SavedLocationOperating Hours-Day / Yr Watts/FixReplacement BulbExisting Bulb Watts/Fix Packet Pg. 472 Item 16 EcoGreen Sales Rep:Riley Detrick Customer Contact:Chris Read Title of Contact:Sustainability Manager Approx Building Size - SF Customer Phone:805-781-7151 Energy Rate 0.21 KWh Customer Email:cread@slocity.org In Reference to Quote #600825 KWh Saved ENERGY AUDIT San Luis Obispo, CA, 93408 2160 Santa Barbara St City of SLO - FS1 Customer# 0 , SA# 0 Fire Station 1 EXISTING Suggested Replacements & Savings # of Fixtur # of Fixtures Annual SavingsWatts/bulbs Saved Usage SavedLocationOperating Hours-Day / Yr Watts/FixReplacement BulbExisting Bulb Watts/Fix 0 0 w 0 0 0 /0 0 0 0 w 0 0 w - $0.00 Totals 292 224840 w 292 13920.2 w 68.2%48,757 $10,238.98 13,920 Watts Saved Total Project Cost After Rebate $98,131.82 Approximate Energy Savings Per Month $853.25 48,757 Annual KWh Saved ****Payback Period Yrs 9.58 Energy Savings Per Year $10,238.98 5.9 Avg Annual Res Powered by Savings Average Estimated Life of LED 12.17 **Total Savings Over 5 Years $66,311.36 36 Annual CO2 Savings (MT)Average Estimated Life of Existing Lighting 5.69 **Total Savings After 10 Years $152,144.46 68.2%Average Electrical Savings Estimated Energy Rebate $4,262.54 10.4%ROI During Payback IRS Tax Deduction 179D Available $0.00 10.00 Payback Period Yrs - Out of Pocket - No Rebates/Program ***Estimated Federal Tax Savings $0.00 8.21 Payback Period Yrs W/ Rebates & Yearly Bulb Replacement Savings Btu Savings Per Month 4,220,830,521 9.58 Payback Period Yrs W/Rebates & Federal Tax Savings Bulb Replacement Savings Per Year $1,718.65 8.21 Payback Period Yrs Fully Comprehensive^Bulb Replacement Savings Per Avg. Est. Life of LED $21,104.49 *Loan Payment $853.25 Total Year 1 19,626 NOTE: Attached calculations do not include depreciation deduction for project cost. Year 2 19,626 *Payment is based on a 9.58 0%interest OAC, actual my vary. Year 3 19,626 ** Reflects 6% per year cost of energy increase + Bulb Replacement Year 4 19,626 *** Based on IRS 179D Deduction @ 35% federal tax rate Year 5 19,626 ****Payback Period Yrs = (Total Project Cost - Rebate) / Estimated Savings per Year Totals $98,131.82 ^Payback Period Yrs =(Total Project Cost - Rebate - Tax Deduction - Tax Savings )/(Estimated Savings Per Year + Bulb Replacement Savings Per Yr) year loan at Interest $0 0 19,626 $98,131.82 0 0 0 19,626 19,626 19,626 0 19,626 Potential Write-Off Amount Capital Packet Pg. 473 Item 16 27611 La Paz Rd, Suite A2 Laguna Niguel, CA. 92677 600825 info@ecogreen.cc 8/4/2018 (949) 364 - 6800 Reservation # Program: Account Number Quotes are valid for 30 days from the above date. EGCL-AE10-6"-2700-120v-X-REC-REC-PLT-X:X-X-X-X-X-INT-INT LED 6" Downlight Indoor/Outdoor Rated 10 w 11 $205.00 $2,255.00 EG14-TC31-4100-UNV-SMK-SMT-D-X-X-X-INT-INT LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 91 $279.00 $25,389.00 EG14-TC31-4100-UNV-XXX-REC-D-X-X-X-INT-INT LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 3 $225.00 $675.00 EG14-TC31-4100-UNV-X-SUS-D-X-X-X-INT-INT LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 39 $215.00 $8,385.00 EG24-AT22.8-4000-UNV-X-REC-X-X-X-X-INT-INT LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 60 $205.00 $12,300.00 EGAL-SA240-4000-UNV-X-X-X-X-PH-X-X-EXT-EXT LED Area Light 240 w 3 $1,097.00 $3,291.00 EGLA-TCP3814.4-3000-X-X-D-X-X-INT-INT LED PAR38 14.4 w 2 $39.00 $78.00 EGAL-SA60-4000-UNV-X-X-X-X-PH-X-X-EXT-EXT LED Area Light 60 w 2 $497.00 $994.00 EGWP-AT40-5000-UNV-X-X-X-X-X-EXT-EXT LED Wallpack 40 w 4 $325.00 $1,300.00 EGAL-SA85-5000-UNV-X-X-X-X-PH-X-X-EXT-EXT LED Area Light 85 w 7 $585.00 $4,095.00 0 0 0 0 w 0 $0.00 SUBTOTAL $58,762.00 LABOR $27,520.00 SALES TAX $4,359.96 Misc. CHARGES (Brackets, Wiring, Sockets, Travel, Tiewire, Screws, Lifts, Lamp Recycling / Disposal, Shipping, Package, ETC.)$11,752.40 TOTAL PROJECT COST $102,394.36 * All quanities to be verified by owner IRS Tax Cert, Inspection, Report $0.00 Estimated k/w Power Saved Rebate Total:$4,262.54 Estimated IRS Federal Tax Deduction per 179D:$0.00 Estimated Annual Energy Savings:$10,238.98 Quote Quote # DATE City of SLO - FS1 Customer# 0 , SA# 0 San Luis Obispo, CA, 93408 2160 Santa Barbara St Fire Station 1 Light EPN DESCRIPTION QTY Unit Price AmountINT/EXT 1 of 1Packet Pg. 474 Item 16 EcoGreen Sales Rep:Riley Detrick Customer Contact:Chris Read Title of Contact:Sustainability Manager Approx Building Size - SF Customer Phone:805-781-7151 Energy Rate 0.21 KWh Customer Email:cread@slocity.org In Reference to Quote #600826 KWh Saved CFL CAN PAR 38 33 w 5 11 7 /4015 Back of the building LED PAR38 14.4 w 5 93 w 56.4%373 $78.41 CFL CAN 27 w 4 11 7 /4015 EXTERIOR FRONT OF BUILDING Skip 59 w 4 -128 w -118.5%(514) -$107.92 CFL WP 27 w 3 11 7 /4015 EXTERIOR FRONT OF BUILDING LED Wallpack 17.91 w 3 27.27 w 33.7%109 $22.99 CFL WP 11 w 4 11 7 /4015 Side of Building Skip 11 w 4 0 w 0.0%- $0.00 CFL CAN 23 w 3 11 7 /4015 Women's restrooms above showers LED 6" Downlight Indoor/Outdoor Rated 10 w 3 39 w 56.5%157 $32.88 CFL CPY 23 w 1 11 7 /4015 Restrooms Downstairs LED Lowbay Deco 12" Round Fixture - Glass 18 w 1 5 w 21.7%20 $4.22 FL linear T12 31 w 5 11 7 /4015 Chief's Office Skip 31 w 5 0 w 0.0%- $0.00 FL Linear T8 31 w 1 11 7 /4015 Women's restrooms above mirrors Skip 31 w 1 0 w 0.0%- $0.00 FL 1x4w2 T8 59 w 1 11 7 /4015 Stairs (in the back)Skip 59 w 1 0 w 0.0%- $0.00 FL 1x4w2 T8 59 w 5 11 7 /4015 Women's restroom LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 5 140 w 47.5%562 $118.04 FL 1x4w2 T8 59 w 2 11 7 /4015 Records Stationary LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 2 56 w 47.5%225 $47.22 FL 1x4w2 T8 59 w 2 11 7 /4015 Breakroom (upstairs)LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 2 56 w 47.5%225 $47.22 FL 1x4w2 T8 59 w 1 11 7 /4015 Annex Kitchen LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 1 28 w 47.5%112 $23.61 FL 1x4w2 T8 59 w 4 11 7 /4015 Weight Room LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 4 112 w 47.5%450 $94.43 FL 1x4w2 T8 59 w 4 11 7 /4015 Back Lockers LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 4 112 w 47.5%450 $94.43 FL 1x4w2 T8 59 w 8 11 7 /4015 Main Lockers LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 8 224 w 47.5%899 $188.87 FL 1x4w2 T8 59 w 1 11 7 /4015 Main Showers Below LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 1 28 w 47.5%112 $23.61 FL 1x4w2 T8 59 w 2 11 7 /4015 Restrooms Mens LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 2 56 w 47.5%225 $47.22 FL 1x4w2 T8 59 w 7 11 7 /4015 CAR PORT Skip 59 w 7 0 w 0.0%- $0.00 FL 2x4w2 T8 59 w 2 11 7 /4015 Programs LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 2 56 w 47.5%225 $47.22 FL 2x4w2 T8 59 w 3 11 7 /4015 Restroom Lobby & back restroom LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 3 84 w 47.5%337 $70.82 FL 2x4w2 T8 59 w 4 11 7 /4015 Boiler Room LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 4 112 w 47.5%450 $94.43 FL 2x4w2 T8 59 w 8 11 7 /4015 Hallway Bottom Floor LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 8 224 w 47.5%899 $188.87 FL 2x4w2 T8 59 w 2 11 7 /4015 Annex Kitchen LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 2 56 w 47.5%225 $47.22 FL 2x4w2 T8 59 w 1 11 7 /4015 Office Annex LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 1 28 w 47.5%112 $23.61 FL 2x4w2 T8 59 w 1 11 7 /4015 Annex Back room LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 1 28 w 47.5%112 $23.61 FL 2x4w2 T8 59 w 1 11 7 /4015 Second annex backroom LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 1 28 w 47.5%112 $23.61 FL 2x4w2 T8 59 w 5 11 7 /4015 Property Office LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 5 140 w 47.5%562 $118.04 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 2 11 7 /4015 Admin Cpt LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 132.4 w 74.4%532 $111.63 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 2 11 7 /4015 Ops CPT LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 132.4 w 74.4%532 $111.63 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 2 11 7 /4015 Neighborhood Outreach LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 132.4 w 74.4%532 $111.63 FL 2x4 w 4 T8 112 w 9 11 7 /4015 Main Lobby LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 9 802.8 w 79.6%3,223 $676.88 FL 2x4w4 112 w 16 11 7 /4015 Breifing Hearing Room Bottom Floor LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 16 1296 w 72.3%5,203 $1,092.72 FL 2x4w4 T8 112 w 2 11 7 /4015 Upstairs IT LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 178.4 w 79.6%716 $150.42 FL 2x4w4 T8 112 w 2 11 7 /4015 Writing Room Upstairs LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 178.4 w 79.6%716 $150.42 FL 2x4w4 T8 112 w 14 11 7 /4015 Records RM LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 14 1248.8 w 79.6%5,014 $1,052.93 FL 2x4w4 T8 112 w 1 11 7 /4015 Admin Office LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 1 89.2 w 79.6%358 $75.21 FL 2x4w4 T8 112 w 1 11 7 /4015 Cell RM Office LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 1 89.2 w 79.6%358 $75.21 FL 2x4w4 T8 112 w 6 11 7 /4015 Crime Lab LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 6 535.2 w 79.6%2,149 $451.25 FL 2x4w4 T8 112 w 1 11 7 /4015 Interview #1 RM front of building LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 1 89.2 w 79.6%358 $75.21 FL 2x4w4 T8 112 w 1 11 7 /4015 INTERVIEW #2 room front of building LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 1 89.2 w 79.6%358 $75.21 FL 2x4w4 T8 112 w 2 11 7 /4015 Admin Assistant LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 178.4 w 79.6%716 $150.42 FL 2x4w4 T8 112 w 7 11 7 /4015 Back Office LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 7 624.4 w 79.6%2,507 $526.46 FL 2x4w4 T8 112 w 1 11 7 /4015 Storage (Upstairs)LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 1 89.2 w 79.6%358 $75.21 FL 2x4w4 T8 112 w 2 11 7 /4015 (NO name) Office LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 178.4 w 79.6%716 $150.42 FL 2x4w4 T8 112 w 2 11 7 /4015 Melissa Ellsworth LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 178.4 w 79.6%716 $150.42 FL 2x4w4 T8 112 w 1 11 7 /4015 Interview rm #1 back room top floors LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 1 89.2 w 79.6%358 $75.21 FL 2x4w4 T8 112 w 1 11 7 /4015 Interview rm #2 back room top floors LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 1 89.2 w 79.6%358 $75.21 FL 2x4w4 T8 112 w 8 11 7 /4015 Conference Room upstairs LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 8 713.6 w 79.6%2,865 $601.67 FL 2x4w4 T8 112 w 2 11 7 /4015 Field Supervisor upstairs LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 178.4 w 79.6%716 $150.42 FL 2x4w4 T8 112 w 2 11 7 /4015 Admin Sergeant LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 178.4 w 79.6%716 $150.42 FL 2x4w4 T8 112 w 2 11 7 /4015 Night Watch LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 178.4 w 79.6%716 $150.42 FL 2x4w4 T8 112 w 2 11 7 /4015 Field Watch LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 178.4 w 79.6%716 $150.42 FL 2x4w4 T8 112 w 2 11 7 /4015 Day Watch LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 178.4 w 79.6%716 $150.42 FL 2x4w4 T8 112 w 2 11 7 /4015 Night Watch #2 LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 178.4 w 79.6%716 $150.42 FL 2x4w4 T8 112 w 2 11 7 /4015 Admin Lietenant LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 178.4 w 79.6%716 $150.42 Fl 2x4w4 T8 112 w 3 11 7 /4015 Administration LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 3 267.6 w 79.6%1,074 $225.63 FL 2x4w4 T8 112 w 1 11 7 /4015 Bottom of Stairs (in the back)LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 1 89.2 w 79.6%358 $75.21 FL 2x4w4 T8 112 w 2 11 7 /4015 Sleeping Room LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 178.4 w 79.6%716 $150.42 FL 2x4w4 T8 112 w 6 11 7 /4015 Briefing Room LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 6 535.2 w 79.6%2,149 $451.25 FL 2x4w4 T8 112 w 4 11 7 /4015 Writing RM Downstairs LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 4 356.8 w 79.6%1,433 $300.84 FL 2x4w4 T8 112 w 2 11 7 /4015 OLD IT LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 178.4 w 79.6%716 $150.42 ENERGY AUDIT San Luis Obispo, CA, 93408 4042 Walnut St City of SLO Police Department and Annex Customer# 0 , SA# 0 POLICE DEPARTMENT EXISTING Suggested Replacements & Savings # of Fixtur # of Fixtures Annual SavingsWatts/bulbs Saved Usage SavedLocationOperating Hours-Day / Yr Watts/FixReplacement BulbExisting Bulb Watts/Fix Packet Pg. 475 Item 16 EcoGreen Sales Rep:Riley Detrick Customer Contact:Chris Read Title of Contact:Sustainability Manager Approx Building Size - SF Customer Phone:805-781-7151 Energy Rate 0.21 KWh Customer Email:cread@slocity.org In Reference to Quote #600826 KWh Saved ENERGY AUDIT San Luis Obispo, CA, 93408 4042 Walnut St City of SLO Police Department and Annex Customer# 0 , SA# 0 POLICE DEPARTMENT EXISTING Suggested Replacements & Savings # of Fixtur # of Fixtures Annual SavingsWatts/bulbs Saved Usage SavedLocationOperating Hours-Day / Yr Watts/FixReplacement BulbExisting Bulb Watts/Fix FL 2x4w4 T8 112 w 3 11 7 /4015 Prop Office LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 3 267.6 w 79.6%1,074 $225.63 FL 1x8w2 T8 109 w 6 11 7 /4015 Evidence #1 tank RM LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 12 282 w 43.1%1,132 $237.77 FL 1x8w2 T8 109 w 3 11 7 /4015 Armory LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 6 141 w 43.1%566 $118.88 FL 1x8w2 T8 109 w 1 11 7 /4015 Annex Restroom LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 2 47 w 43.1%189 $39.63 FL 1x8w2 T8 109 w 2 11 7 /4015 Annex Garage LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 4 94 w 43.1%377 $79.26 CFL 2x2w2 UTUBE 59 w 9 11 7 /4015 Upstairs Hallway LED Troffer 2x2 22.7 w 9 326.7 w 61.5%1,312 $275.46 FL 2x2w2 U lamps 59 w 1 11 7 /4015 Locker Hallway LED Troffer 2x2 22.7 w 1 36.3 w 61.5%146 $30.61 FL 2x2w2 U lamps 59 w 21 11 7 /4015 Hallways Continued LED Troffer 2x2 22.7 w 21 762.3 w 61.5%3,061 $642.73 FL 2x2w2 U lamps 59 w 21 11 7 /4015 Back door stairs LED Troffer 2x2 22.7 w 21 762.3 w 61.5%3,061 $642.73 H PAR 30 72 w 1 11 7 /4015 Bike Locker LED PAR30 14.5 w 1 57.5 w 79.9%231 $48.48 H FLD PAR 38 75 w 3 11 7 /4015 OUTSIDE MAIN OFFICE LED PAR38 14.4 w 3 181.8 w 80.8%730 $153.28 HPS AL 66 w 5 11 7 /4015 EXTERIOR FACING MAIN STREET LED Deco Post Top 19 w 5 235 w 71.2%944 $198.14 MH WP 190 w 2 11 7 /4015 Back of the building LED Wallpack 40 w 2 300 w 78.9%1,205 $252.95 MH AL 458 w 2 11 7 /4015 PARKING LOT LED Area Light 110 w 2 696 w 76.0%2,794 $586.83 MH AL 458 w 1 11 7 /4015 PARKING LOT LED Area Light 110 w 1 348 w 76.0%1,397 $293.42 MH WP 72 w 1 11 7 /4015 Back evidence room LED Wallpack 17.91 w 1 54.09 w 75.1%217 $45.61 MH WP 95 w 3 11 7 /4015 OUTSIDE MAIN OFFICE LED Wallpack 17.91 w 3 231.27 w 81.1%929 $195.00 0 0 w 0 0 0 /0 0 0 0 w 0 0 w - $0.00 Totals 290 317185 w 302 16415.93 w 73.4%65,910 $13,841.09 16,416 Watts Saved Total Project Cost After Rebate $115,395.58 Approximate Energy Savings Per Month $1,153.42 65,910 Annual KWh Saved ****Payback Period Yrs 8.34 Energy Savings Per Year $13,841.09 8.0 Avg Annual Res Powered by Savings Average Estimated Life of LED 13.22 **Total Savings Over 5 Years $90,620.79 49 Annual CO2 Savings (MT)Average Estimated Life of Existing Lighting 5.40 **Total Savings After 10 Years $207,631.13 73.4%Average Electrical Savings Estimated Energy Rebate $4,588.28 12.0%ROI During Payback IRS Tax Deduction 179D Available $0.00 8.67 Payback Period Yrs - Out of Pocket - No Rebates/Program ***Estimated Federal Tax Savings $0.00 7.05 Payback Period Yrs W/ Rebates & Yearly Bulb Replacement Savings Btu Savings Per Month 5,703,966,996 8.34 Payback Period Yrs W/Rebates & Federal Tax Savings Bulb Replacement Savings Per Year $2,519.45 7.05 Payback Period Yrs Fully Comprehensive^Bulb Replacement Savings Per Avg. Est. Life of LED $33,306.99 *Loan Payment $1,153.42 Total Year 1 23,079 NOTE: Attached calculations do not include depreciation deduction for project cost. Year 2 23,079 *Payment is based on a 8.34 0%interest OAC, actual my vary. Year 3 23,079 ** Reflects 6% per year cost of energy increase + Bulb Replacement Year 4 23,079 *** Based on IRS 179D Deduction @ 35% federal tax rate Year 5 23,079 ****Payback Period Yrs = (Total Project Cost - Rebate) / Estimated Savings per Year Totals $115,395.58 ^Payback Period Yrs =(Total Project Cost - Rebate - Tax Deduction - Tax Savings )/(Estimated Savings Per Year + Bulb Replacement Savings Per Yr) year loan at Interest $0 0 23,079 $115,395.58 0 0 0 23,079 23,079 23,079 0 23,079 Potential Write-Off Amount Capital Packet Pg. 476 Item 16 27611 La Paz Rd, Suite A2 Laguna Niguel, CA. 92677 600826 info@ecogreen.cc 8/4/2018 (949) 364 - 6800 Reservation # Program: Account Number Quotes are valid for 30 days from the above date. EGLA-TCP3814.4-3000-X-X-D-X-X-EXT-EXT LED PAR38 14.4 w 8 $39.00 $312.00 EGWP-HL17.91-5000-UNV-X-X-X-X-X-X-EXT-EXT LED Wallpack 17.91 w 7 $189.00 $1,323.00 EGCL-AE10-6"-2700-120v-X-REC-REC-PLT-X:X-X-X-X-X-INT-INT LED 6" Downlight Indoor/Outdoor Rated 10 w 3 $215.00 $645.00 EGLB-EN18-12"-4000-UNV-RND-X-X-X-X-INT-INT LED Lowbay Deco 12" Round Fixture - Glass18 w 1 $105.00 $105.00 EG14-TC31-4100-UNV-SMK-SMT-D-X-X-X-INT-INT LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 92 $285.00 $26,220.00 EG24-AT22.8-4000-UNV-X-REC-X-X-X-X-INT-INT LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 102 $215.00 $21,930.00 EG14-TC31-4100-UNV-X-SUS-D-X-X-X-INT-INT LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 4 $235.00 $940.00 EG22-AT22.7-4000-UNV-X-REC-X-X-X-X-INT-INT LED Troffer 2x2 22.7 w 52 $215.00 $11,180.00 EGLA-TCP3014.5-3000-X-X-X-X-X-EXT-EXT LED PAR30 14.5 w 1 $42.00 $42.00 EGPT-NLS19-4000-UNV-X-X-X-X-EXT-EXT LED Deco Post Top 19 w 5 $415.00 $2,075.00 EGWP-AT40-5000-UNV-X-X-X-X-X-EXT-EXT LED Wallpack 40 w 2 $325.00 $650.00 EGAL-SA110-5000-UNV-X-X-X-X-PH-X-X-EXT-EXT LED Area Light 110 w 3 $689.00 $2,067.00 0 0 0 0 w 0 $0.00 0 0 0 0 w 0 $0.00 SUBTOTAL $67,489.00 LABOR $33,965.00 SALES TAX $5,032.06 Misc. CHARGES (Brackets, Wiring, Sockets, Travel, Tiewire, Screws, Lifts, Lamp Recycling / Disposal, Shipping, Package, ETC.)$13,497.80 TOTAL PROJECT COST $119,983.86 * All quanities to be verified by owner IRS Tax Cert, Inspection, Report $0.00 Estimated k/w Power Saved Rebate Total:$4,588.28 Estimated IRS Federal Tax Deduction per 179D:$0.00 Estimated Annual Energy Savings:$13,841.09 Quote Quote # DATE City of SLO Police Department and Annex Customer# 0 , SA# 0 San Luis Obispo, CA, 93408 4042 Walnut St POLICE DEPARTMENT Light EPN DESCRIPTION QTY Unit Price AmountINT/EXT 1 of 1Packet Pg. 477 Item 16 EcoGreen Sales Rep:Riley Detrick Customer Contact:Chris Read Title of Contact:Sustainability Manager Approx Building Size - SF Customer Phone:805-781-7151 Energy Rate 0.17 KWh Customer Email:cread@slocity.org In Reference to Quote #600820 KWh Saved 1 X 4, W2 59 w 1 27 7 /9855 TOLL BOOTH LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 1 28 w 47.5%276 $46.91 1 X 4, W2 59 w 5 24 7 /8760 BELOW STAIR CASE 3 ENTRANCE TO SPACE LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 5 140 w 47.5%1,226 $208.49 2 X 4, W2 59 w 4 24 7 /8760 STAIRS 3 AND 1 LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 4 112 w 47.5%981 $166.79 2 X 4, W2 59 w 2 24 7 /8760 STAIRS LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 2 56 w 47.5%491 $83.40 2 X 4, W2 59 w 2 24 7 /8760 STAIRS Skip 59 w 2 0 w 0.0%- $0.00 4' LIN 32 w 10 24 7 /8760 FLOORS 1 AND 2 Skip 32 w 10 0 w 0.0%- $0.00 AL 465 w 6 11 7 /4015 TOP OF STRUCTURE LED Area Light 110 w 6 2130 w 76.3%8,552 $1,453.83 AL 465 w 4 11 7 /4015 TOP OF STRUCTURE LED Area Light 110 w 4 1420 w 76.3%5,701 $969.22 CPY 188 w 38 24 7 /8760 LEVEL 1 LED Canopy Light 60 w 38 4864 w 68.1%42,609 $7,243.47 CPY 188 w 36 24 7 /8760 LEVEL 2 LED Canopy Light 60 w 36 4608 w 68.1%40,366 $6,862.23 CPY 188 w 38 24 7 /8760 LEVEL 3 LED Canopy Light 60 w 38 4864 w 68.1%42,609 $7,243.47 WP 66 w 2 11 7 /4015 EXT OF STRUCTURE LED Wallpack 17.91 w 2 96.18 w 72.9%386 $65.65 WP 66 w 20 11 7 /4015 EXT OF STRUCTURE LED Wallpack 17.91 w 20 961.8 w 72.9%3,862 $656.48 0 0 w 0 0 0 /0 0 0 0 w 0 0 w - $0.00 0 0 w 0 0 0 /0 0 0 0 w 0 0 w - $0.00 0 0 w 0 0 0 /0 0 0 0 w 0 0 w - $0.00 Totals 168 95995 w 168 19279.98 w 68.6%147,058 $24,999.93 19,280 Watts Saved Total Project Cost After Rebate $104,691.88 Approximate Energy Savings Per Month $2,083.33 147,058 Annual KWh Saved ****Payback Period Yrs 4.19 Energy Savings Per Year $24,999.93 17.8 Avg Annual Res Powered by Savings Average Estimated Life of LED 28.51 **Total Savings Over 5 Years $147,332.20 109 Annual CO2 Savings (MT)Average Estimated Life of Existing Lighting 2.99 **Total Savings After 10 Years $342,329.50 68.6%Average Electrical Savings Estimated Energy Rebate $5,252.56 23.9%ROI During Payback IRS Tax Deduction 179D Available $0.00 4.40 Payback Period Yrs - Out of Pocket - No Rebates/Program ***Estimated Federal Tax Savings $0.00 3.98 Payback Period Yrs W/ Rebates & Yearly Bulb Replacement Savings Btu Savings Per Month 7,241,588,693 4.19 Payback Period Yrs W/Rebates & Federal Tax Savings Bulb Replacement Savings Per Year $1,281.05 3.98 Payback Period Yrs Fully Comprehensive^Bulb Replacement Savings Per Avg. Est. Life of LED $39,367.26 *Loan Payment $2,083.33 Total Year 1 20,938 NOTE: Attached calculations do not include depreciation deduction for project cost. Year 2 20,938 *Payment is based on a 4.19 0%interest OAC, actual my vary. Year 3 20,938 ** Reflects 6% per year cost of energy increase + Bulb Replacement Year 4 20,938 *** Based on IRS 179D Deduction @ 35% federal tax rate Year 5 20,938 ****Payback Period Yrs = (Total Project Cost - Rebate) / Estimated Savings per Year Totals $104,691.88 ^Payback Period Yrs =(Total Project Cost - Rebate - Tax Deduction - Tax Savings )/(Estimated Savings Per Year + Bulb Replacement Savings Per Yr) year loan at ENERGY AUDIT San Luis Obispo, CA, 93401 842 Palm St 842 Palm St Parking Structure Customer# 0 , SA# 0 842 Parking Structure EXISTING Suggested Replacements & Savings # of Fixtur # of Fixtures Annual SavingsWatts/bulbs Saved Usage SavedLocation Interest Operating Hours-Day / Yr Watts/FixReplacement Bulb $0 0 20,938 $104,691.88 0 0 0 20,938 Existing Bulb Watts/Fix 20,938 20,938 0 20,938 Potential Write-Off Amount Capital Packet Pg. 478 Item 16 27611 La Paz Rd, Suite A2 Laguna Niguel, CA. 92677 600820 info@ecogreen.cc 7/30/2018 (949) 364 - 6800 Reservation # Program: Account Number Quotes are valid for 30 days from the above date. EG14-TC31-4100-UNV-SMK-SMT-D-X-X-X-INT-INT LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 12 $297.00 $3,564.00 EGAL-SA110-5000-UNV-X-X-X-X-PH-X-X-EXT-EXT LED Area Light 110 w 10 $725.00 $7,250.00 EGCP-CR60-4000-UNV-X-X-X-X-X-INT-INT LED Canopy Light 60 w 112 $497.00 $55,664.00 EGWP-HL17.91-5000-UNV-X-X-X-X-X-X-EXT-EXT LED Wallpack 17.91 w 22 $205.00 $4,510.00 0 0 0 0 w 0 $0.00 $0.00 0 0 0 0 w 0 $0.00 $0.00 SUBTOTAL $70,988.00 LABOR $19,500.00 SALES TAX $5,258.84 Misc. CHARGES (Brackets, Wiring, Sockets, Travel, Tiewire, Screws, Lifts, Lamp Recycling / Disposal, Shipping, Package, ETC.)$14,197.60 TOTAL PROJECT COST $109,944.44 * All quanities to be verified by owner IRS Tax Cert, Inspection, Report $0.00 Estimated k/w Power Saved Rebate Total:$5,252.56 Estimated IRS Federal Tax Deduction per 179D:$0.00 Estimated Annual Energy Savings:$24,999.93 Quote Quote # DATE 842 Palm St Parking Structure Customer# 0 , SA# 0 San Luis Obispo, CA, 93401 842 Palm St 842 Parking Structure Light EPN DESCRIPTION QTY Unit Price AmountINT/EXT 1 of 1Packet Pg. 479 Item 16 EcoGreen Sales Rep:Riley Detrick Customer Contact:Chris Read Title of Contact:Sustainability Manager Approx Building Size - SF Customer Phone:805-781-7151 Energy Rate 0.21 KWh Customer Email:cread@slocity.org In Reference to Quote #600814 KWh Saved CFL CAN 33 w 1 11 5 /2868 Under Finance Staircase LED 8" Downlight Recessed 9.7 w 1 23.3 w 70.6%67 $14.03 CFL CAN 33 w 2 11 7 /4015 Entrance to Finance Building Skip 33 w 2 0 w 0.0%- $0.00 CFL CPY 33 w 1 11 7 /4015 Door by conference room 12 LED G16 Globe Dimmable 4 w 1 29 w 87.9%116 $24.45 CFL CPY 33 w 2 11 7 /4015 Back Entrance LED G16 Globe Dimmable 4 w 2 58 w 87.9%233 $48.90 CFL CPY 27 w 1 5 5 /1304 Back IT Closet LED G25 Globe 5 w 1 22 w 81.5%29 $6.02 FL Linear T12 51 w 1 5 5 /1304 Back IT Closet Skip 51 w 1 0 w 0.0%- $0.00 FL linear T8 31 w 1 11 5 /2868 Upstairs Mens Restroom Skip 31 w 1 0 w 0.0%- $0.00 FL linear T8 31 w 1 11 5 /2868 Upstairs Woman's restroom Skip 31 w 1 0 w 0.0%- $0.00 FL Linear T8 31 w 1 11 5 /2868 Restrooms Downstairs Skip 31 w 1 0 w 0.0%- $0.00 FL 1x4w2 T8 59 w 2 11 5 /2868 Admin Back Storage LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 2 56 w 47.5%161 $33.73 FL 1x4w2 T8 59 w 5 11 5 /2868 Restrooms Downstairs LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 5 140 w 47.5%402 $84.32 FL 1x4w2 T8 59 w 2 11 5 /2868 Chris Read LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 2 56 w 47.5%161 $33.73 FL 1x4w2 T8 59 w 2 11 5 /2868 Upstairs Mens Restroom LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 2 56 w 47.5%161 $33.73 FL 1x4w2 T8 59 w 2 11 5 /2868 Upstairs Woman's restroom LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 2 56 w 47.5%161 $33.73 FL 1x4w2 T8 59 w 2 5 5 /1304 Server Room LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 2 56 w 47.5%73 $15.33 FL 1x4w2 T8 59 w 1 11 5 /2868 Electrical RM 2 LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 1 28 w 47.5%80 $16.86 FL 1x4w2 T8 59 w 4 11 7 /4015 entrance and side entrance Skip 59 w 4 0 w 0.0%- $0.00 FL 1x4w2 T8 59 w 8 11 5 /2868 Map RM LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 8 224 w 47.5%642 $134.90 FL 1x4w2 T8 59 w 2 11 5 /2868 Electrical RM LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 2 56 w 47.5%161 $33.73 FL 1x4w2 T8 59 w 20 11 5 /2868 Council Chambers LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 20 560 w 47.5%1,606 $337.26 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 2 11 5 /2868 HR Main Office LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 2 116 w 65.2%333 $69.86 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 2 11 5 /2868 HR conference RM LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 2 116 w 65.2%333 $69.86 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 2 11 5 /2868 Stinton Seitz LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 2 116 w 65.2%333 $69.86 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 2 11 5 /2868 Nickole Sutter LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 2 116 w 65.2%333 $69.86 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 2 11 5 /2868 Greg Courer LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 2 116 w 65.2%333 $69.86 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 9 11 5 /2868 HR Conference RM 2 LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 9 595.8 w 74.4%1,709 $358.82 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 1 11 5 /2868 Brittani Rottgani LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 1 58 w 65.2%166 $34.93 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 3 11 5 /2868 Amy Fletcher LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 3 174 w 65.2%499 $104.79 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 2 11 5 /2868 Monica irons LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 2 116 w 65.2%333 $69.86 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 2 11 5 /2868 Copy RM upstairs LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 2 116 w 65.2%333 $69.86 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 4 11 5 /2868 Breakroom upstairs LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 4 232 w 65.2%665 $139.72 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 4 11 5 /2868 IT computer room upstairs LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 4 232 w 65.2%665 $139.72 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 2 11 5 /2868 Greg's office (downstairs) LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 132.4 w 74.4%380 $79.74 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 2 11 5 /2868 Troy Shagen's office LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 132.4 w 74.4%380 $79.74 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 12 11 5 /2868 Finance Payments Hallway LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 12 794.4 w 74.4%2,278 $478.43 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 18 11 5 /2868 Finance Left Wing LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 18 1191.6 w 74.4%3,417 $717.64 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 2 11 5 /2868 Vinay Tathanna LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 132.4 w 74.4%380 $79.74 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 2 11 5 /2868 Rico Pardo LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 132.4 w 74.4%380 $79.74 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 2 11 5 /2868 Zyrin Coven LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 132.4 w 74.4%380 $79.74 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 2 11 5 /2868 Alex ferreira LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 132.4 w 74.4%380 $79.74 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 20 11 5 /2868 IT work space LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 20 1324 w 74.4%3,797 $797.38 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 1 11 5 /2868 Printer RM LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 1 66.2 w 74.4%190 $39.87 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 10 11 5 /2868 Middle Back Office (downstairs)LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 10 662 w 74.4%1,899 $398.69 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 8 11 5 /2868 Joe Pazanese cubicle area LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 8 529.6 w 74.4%1,519 $318.95 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 3 11 5 /2868 Hallway by IT conference Room LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 3 198.6 w 74.4%570 $119.61 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 4 11 5 /2868 FIT Conference RM LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 4 264.8 w 74.4%759 $159.48 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 1 11 5 /2868 Back Closet LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 1 66.2 w 74.4%190 $39.87 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 4 11 5 /2868 IT Wing LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 4 264.8 w 74.4%759 $159.48 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 2 11 5 /2868 Eric morales LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 132.4 w 74.4%380 $79.74 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 4 11 5 /2868 Miguel Guadado LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 4 264.8 w 74.4%759 $159.48 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 2 11 5 /2868 Collaboration Space LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 132.4 w 74.4%380 $79.74 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 3 11 5 /2868 (no name) office LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 3 198.6 w 74.4%570 $119.61 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 9 11 5 /2868 Finance Space LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 9 595.8 w 74.4%1,709 $358.82 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 2 11 5 /2868 Break Room (downstairs)LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 132.4 w 74.4%380 $79.74 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 2 11 5 /2868 Greg Horman LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 132.4 w 74.4%380 $79.74 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 2 11 5 /2868 Bill Hill LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 132.4 w 74.4%380 $79.74 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 6 11 5 /2868 PW meeting room/lobby area LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 6 397.2 w 74.4%1,139 $239.21 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 2 11 5 /2868 Freddy in PW office LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 132.4 w 74.4%380 $79.74 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 2 11 5 /2868 molly cano LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 132.4 w 74.4%380 $79.74 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 8 11 5 /2868 Admin Office LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 8 529.6 w 74.4%1,519 $318.95 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 4 11 5 /2868 Admin Office HAN LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 4 264.8 w 74.4%759 $159.48 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 1 11 5 /2868 Admin City Council RM LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 1 66.2 w 74.4%190 $39.87 ENERGY AUDIT San Luis Obispo, CA, 93401 990 Palm St SLO City Hall Customer# 0 , SA# 0 SLO City Hall EXISTING Suggested Replacements & Savings # of Fixtur # of Fixtures Annual SavingsWatts/bulbs Saved Usage SavedLocationOperating Hours-Day / Yr Watts/FixReplacement BulbExisting Bulb Watts/Fix Packet Pg. 480 Item 16 EcoGreen Sales Rep:Riley Detrick Customer Contact:Chris Read Title of Contact:Sustainability Manager Approx Building Size - SF Customer Phone:805-781-7151 Energy Rate 0.21 KWh Customer Email:cread@slocity.org In Reference to Quote #600814 KWh Saved ENERGY AUDIT San Luis Obispo, CA, 93401 990 Palm St SLO City Hall Customer# 0 , SA# 0 SLO City Hall EXISTING Suggested Replacements & Savings # of Fixtur # of Fixtures Annual SavingsWatts/bulbs Saved Usage SavedLocationOperating Hours-Day / Yr Watts/FixReplacement BulbExisting Bulb Watts/Fix FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 1 11 5 /2868 Small Admin Office LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 1 66.2 w 74.4%190 $39.87 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 2 11 5 /2868 Heidi hamon LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 132.4 w 74.4%380 $79.74 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 3 11 5 /2868 Derek johnson LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 3 198.6 w 74.4%570 $119.61 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 2 11 5 /2868 Teresa Purrington LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 132.4 w 74.4%380 $79.74 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 4 11 5 /2868 Council Conference Rm LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 4 232 w 65.2%665 $139.72 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 3 11 5 /2868 upstairs server room LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 3 174 w 65.2%499 $104.79 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 6 11 5 /2868 Attorney RM LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 6 348 w 65.2%998 $209.58 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 6 11 5 /2868 Law Library LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 6 348 w 65.2%998 $209.58 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 2 11 5 /2868 Ryan Betz LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 2 116 w 65.2%333 $69.86 FL 2x4w3 T8 89 w 1 11 5 /2868 Unassigned office in PW LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 1 58 w 65.2%166 $34.93 MH AL 295 w 4 11 7 /4015 Back Parking Lot LED Area Light 85 w 4 840 w 71.2%3,373 $708.25 0 0 w 0 0 0 /0 0 0 0 w 0 0 w - $0.00 Totals 272 210396 w 272 15570.1 w 70.5%45,594 $9,574.78 15,570 Watts Saved Total Project Cost After Rebate $87,491.90 Approximate Energy Savings Per Month $797.90 45,594 Annual KWh Saved ****Payback Period Yrs 9.14 Energy Savings Per Year $9,574.78 5.5 Avg Annual Res Powered by Savings Average Estimated Life of LED 17.43 **Total Savings Over 5 Years $62,835.24 34 Annual CO2 Savings (MT)Average Estimated Life of Existing Lighting 8.08 **Total Savings After 10 Years $143,925.85 70.5%Average Electrical Savings Estimated Energy Rebate $4,322.07 10.9%ROI During Payback IRS Tax Deduction 179D Available $0.00 9.59 Payback Period Yrs - Out of Pocket - No Rebates/Program ***Estimated Federal Tax Savings $0.00 7.71 Payback Period Yrs W/ Rebates & Yearly Bulb Replacement Savings Btu Savings Per Month 3,491,854,587 9.14 Payback Period Yrs W/Rebates & Federal Tax Savings Bulb Replacement Savings Per Year $1,772.26 7.71 Payback Period Yrs Fully Comprehensive^Bulb Replacement Savings Per Avg. Est. Life of LED $30,109.30 *Loan Payment $797.90 Total Year 1 17,498 NOTE: Attached calculations do not include depreciation deduction for project cost. Year 2 17,498 *Payment is based on a 9.14 0%interest OAC, actual my vary. Year 3 17,498 ** Reflects 6% per year cost of energy increase + Bulb Replacement Year 4 17,498 *** Based on IRS 179D Deduction @ 35% federal tax rate Year 5 17,498 ****Payback Period Yrs = (Total Project Cost - Rebate) / Estimated Savings per Year Totals $87,491.90 ^Payback Period Yrs =(Total Project Cost - Rebate - Tax Deduction - Tax Savings )/(Estimated Savings Per Year + Bulb Replacement Savings Per Yr) year loan at Interest $0 0 17,498 $87,491.90 0 0 0 17,498 17,498 17,498 0 17,498 Potential Write-Off Amount Capital Packet Pg. 481 Item 16 27611 La Paz Rd, Suite A2 Laguna Niguel, CA. 92677 600814 info@ecogreen.cc 8/2/2018 (949) 364 - 6800 Reservation # Program: Account Number Quotes are valid for 30 days from the above date. EGCL-EA10-8"-3000-UNV-X-REC-REC-PLT-X:X-X-X-X-X-INT-INT LED 8" Downlight Recessed 9.7 w 1 $215.00 $215.00 EGLA-TCG164-2700-X-D-X-X-X-EXT-EXT LED G16 Globe Dimmable 4 w 3 $22.50 $67.50 EGLA-TCG255-2700-UNV-X-X-X-X-INT-INT LED G25 Globe 5 w 1 $23.50 $23.50 EG14-TC31-4100-UNV-SMK-SMT-D-X-X-X-INT-INT LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 62 $205.00 $12,710.00 EG14-TC31-4100-UNV-X-SUS-D-X-X-X-INT-INT LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 12 $179.00 $2,148.00 EG14-TC31-4100-UNV-XXX-REC-D-X-X-X-INT-INT LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 20 $185.00 $3,700.00 EG24-AT22.8-4000-UNV-X-REC-X-X-X-X-INT-INT LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 159 $175.00 $27,825.00 EGAL-SA85-5000-UNV-X-X-X-X-PH-X-X-EXT-EXT LED Area Light 85 w 4 $565.00 $2,260.00 0 0 0 0 w 0 $0.00 SUBTOTAL $48,949.00 LABOR $30,484.00 SALES TAX $3,570.15 Misc. CHARGES (Brackets, Wiring, Sockets, Travel, Tiewire, Screws, Lifts, Lamp Recycling / Disposal, Shipping, Package, ETC.)$8,810.82 TOTAL PROJECT COST $91,813.97 * All quanities to be verified by owner IRS Tax Cert, Inspection, Report $0.00 Estimated k/w Power Saved Rebate Total:$4,322.07 Estimated IRS Federal Tax Deduction per 179D:$0.00 Estimated Annual Energy Savings:$9,574.78 Quote Quote # DATE SLO City Hall Customer# 0 , SA# 0 San Luis Obispo, CA, 93401 990 Palm St SLO City Hall Light EPN DESCRIPTION QTY Unit Price AmountINT/EXT 1 of 1Packet Pg. 482 Item 16 EcoGreen Sales Rep:Riley Detrick Customer Contact:Chris Read Title of Contact:Sustainability Manager Approx Building Size - SF Customer Phone:805-781-7151 Energy Rate 0.20 KWh Customer Email:cread@slocity.org In Reference to Quote #600816 KWh Saved CFL, AL 33 w 1 11 7 /4015 ENTRANCE Skip 33 w 1 0 w 0.0%- $0.00 1 X 4, W1 32 w 1 11 5 /2868 WOMENS LOCKER Skip 32 w 1 0 w 0.0%- $0.00 1 X 4, W2 59 w 8 11 5 /2868 UPPER MOTOR REPAIR LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 8 224 w 47.5%642 $128.48 1 X 4, W2 59 w 2 11 5 /2868 TOILET LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 2 56 w 47.5%161 $32.12 1 X 4, W2 59 w 16 11 5 /2868 DESIREE KENNEDY LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 16 448 w 47.5%1,285 $256.96 1 X 4, W2 59 w 10 11 5 /2868 TRAFFIC SIGNAL LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 10 280 w 47.5%803 $160.60 1 X 4, W2 59 w 3 11 5 /2868 MENS RESTROOM LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 3 84 w 47.5%241 $48.18 1 X 4, W2 59 w 20 11 5 /2868 MENS LOCKER LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 20 560 w 47.5%1,606 $321.20 1 X 4, W2 59 w 4 11 5 /2868 WOMENS LOCKER LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 4 112 w 47.5%321 $64.24 1 X 4, W2 59 w 4 11 5 /2868 JANITORS CLOSET LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 4 112 w 47.5%321 $64.24 1 X 4, W2 59 w 12 11 5 /2868 MECH RM LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 12 336 w 47.5%964 $192.72 1 X 4, W2 59 w 4 11 5 /2868 ELECTRICAL LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 4 112 w 47.5%321 $64.24 1 X 4, W2 59 w 16 11 5 /2868 BLDG F LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 16 448 w 47.5%1,285 $256.96 1 X 4, W2 59 w 8 11 5 /2868 TREE MAINTENANCE LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 8 224 w 47.5%642 $128.48 1 X 4, W2 59 w 16 11 5 /2868 WATER MAINTENANCE LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 16 448 w 47.5%1,285 $256.96 1 X 4, W2 59 w 16 11 5 /2868 WATER MAINTENANCE LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 16 448 w 47.5%1,285 $256.96 1 X 4, W2 59 w 16 11 5 /2868 PARK MAINTENANCE LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 16 448 w 47.5%1,285 $256.96 1 X 4, W2 59 w 8 11 5 /2868 HALLWAY PARKS AND STREETS LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 8 224 w 47.5%642 $128.48 1 X 4, W2 59 w 6 11 5 /2868 BLDG C LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 6 168 w 47.5%482 $96.36 2 X 4, W2 59 w 19 11 5 /2868 CARPENTRY LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 19 532 w 47.5%1,526 $305.14 2x4w4 T5 234 w 23 11 5 /2868 MOTOR REPAIR LED Highbay 77 w 23 3611 w 67.1%10,356 $2,071.17 2 X 4, W3 89 w 22 11 7 /4015 FUEL STATION Skip 89 w 22 0 w 0.0%- $0.00 1 X 4, W4 112 w 3 11 5 /2868 JEAN NSTONGE LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 3 243 w 72.3%697 $139.38 1 X 4, W4 112 w 3 11 5 /2868 JASON HOCT LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 3 243 w 72.3%697 $139.38 1 X 8, W4 219 w 1 11 5 /2868 MENS LOCKER LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 2 157 w 71.7%450 $90.05 2 X 4, W4 112 w 1 5 5 /1304 FUEL STATION SPILL LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 1 81 w 72.3%106 $21.12 2 X 4, W4 112 w 30 11 5 /2868 CONFERENCE ROOM LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 30 2676 w 79.6%7,674 $1,534.88 2 X 4, W4 112 w 6 11 5 /2868 MAIN BLDG ADMIN LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 6 535.2 w 79.6%1,535 $306.98 2 X 4, W4 112 w 2 11 5 /2868 SIDE CONFERENCE ROOM LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 178.4 w 79.6%512 $102.33 2 X 4, W4 112 w 2 11 5 /2868 ANDREW MONA LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 178.4 w 79.6%512 $102.33 2 X 4, W4 112 w 4 11 5 /2868 BEN MARQUAT LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 4 356.8 w 79.6%1,023 $204.65 2 X 4, W4 112 w 3 11 5 /2868 HALL BETWEEN BACK AND FRONT LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 3 267.6 w 79.6%767 $153.49 2 X 4, W4 112 w 2 11 5 /2868 JEREMY GOSCHE LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 178.4 w 79.6%512 $102.33 2 X 4, W4 112 w 2 11 5 /2868 LAURA MATTHEWS LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 178.4 w 79.6%512 $102.33 2 X 4, W4 112 w 4 11 5 /2868 MARCUS HENDERSEN LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 4 356.8 w 79.6%1,023 $204.65 2 X 4, W4 112 w 8 11 5 /2868 HALLWAY CONNECTING LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 8 713.6 w 79.6%2,047 $409.30 2 X 4, W4 112 w 3 11 5 /2868 SHEILA LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 3 267.6 w 79.6%767 $153.49 2 X 4, W4 112 w 2 11 5 /2868 JEFF K LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 178.4 w 79.6%512 $102.33 2 X 4, W4 112 w 2 11 5 /2868 ANDREW COLLINS LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 178.4 w 79.6%512 $102.33 2 X 4, W4 112 w 1 11 5 /2868 SIDE ROOM REAR BACK LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 1 89.2 w 79.6%256 $51.16 2 X 4, W4 112 w 4 11 5 /2868 JEFF HENDRICK LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 4 356.8 w 79.6%1,023 $204.65 2 X 4, W4 112 w 8 11 5 /2868 COMPUTER ROOM LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 8 713.6 w 79.6%2,047 $409.30 2 X 4, W4 112 w 4 11 5 /2868 RON COMBS LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 4 356.8 w 79.6%1,023 $204.65 2 X 4, W4 112 w 4 11 5 /2868 ADAM BESDEN LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 4 356.8 w 79.6%1,023 $204.65 2 X 4, W4 112 w 4 11 5 /2868 BRIAN BASSLER LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 4 356.8 w 79.6%1,023 $204.65 2 X 4, W4 112 w 2 11 5 /2868 STREETS LIBRARY LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 178.4 w 79.6%512 $102.33 1 X 8, W2 109 w 34 11 5 /2868 UPPER MOTOR REPAIR LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 68 1598 w 43.1%4,583 $916.57 2 X 8, W2 109 w 4 11 5 /2868 MOTOR REPAIR Skip 109 w 4 0 w 0.0%- $0.00 HPS, AL 295 w 3 11 7 /4015 PARKING LOT LED Area Light 85 w 3 630 w 71.2%2,529 $505.89 HPS, AL 295 w 16 11 7 /4015 PARKING LOT LED Area Light 85 w 16 3360 w 71.2%13,490 $2,698.08 HPS, FLD 465 w 2 11 7 /4015 AROUND BLDG MAIN LED Area Light 120 w 2 690 w 74.2%2,770 $554.07 MH 128 w 2 11 5 /2868 FLA LO PARK??Skip 128 w 2 0 w 0.0%- $0.00 MH, WP 190 w 23 11 7 /4015 AROUND BLDG LED Wallpack 40 w 23 3450 w 78.9%13,852 $2,770.35 MH, CPY 295 w 6 11 7 /4015 FUEL STATION LED Highbay 110 w 6 1110 w 62.7%4,457 $891.33 MH, CPY 295 w 3 11 7 /4015 FUEL BAY LED Highbay 110 w 3 555 w 62.7%2,228 $445.67 HB 458 w 12 11 5 /2868 BLDG C LED Highbay 120.2 w 12 4053.6 w 73.8%11,625 $2,325.03 MH, WP 72 w 4 11 7 /4015 AROUND BLDG SHED LED Wallpack 17.91 w 4 216.36 w 75.1%869 $173.74 0 0 w 0 0 0 /0 0 0 0 w 0 0 w - $0.00 Totals 449 172228 w 484 33914.36 w 69.1%108,619 $21,723.86 33,914 Watts Saved Total Project Cost After Rebate $210,882.47 Approximate Energy Savings Per Month $1,810.32 Existing Bulb Watts/Fix # of Fixtures Annual SavingsWatts/bulbs Saved Usage SavedLocationOperating Hours-Day / Yr Watts/FixReplacement Bulb ENERGY AUDIT San Luis Obispo, CA, 93401 25 Prado Rd City of SLO Corp Yard Customer# 0 , SA# 0 Corporation Yard EXISTING Suggested Replacements & Savings # of Fixtur Packet Pg. 483 Item 16 EcoGreen Sales Rep:Riley Detrick Customer Contact:Chris Read Title of Contact:Sustainability Manager Approx Building Size - SF Customer Phone:805-781-7151 Energy Rate 0.20 KWh Customer Email:cread@slocity.org In Reference to Quote #600816 KWh Saved Existing Bulb Watts/Fix # of Fixtures Annual SavingsWatts/bulbs Saved Usage SavedLocationOperating Hours-Day / Yr Watts/FixReplacement Bulb ENERGY AUDIT San Luis Obispo, CA, 93401 25 Prado Rd City of SLO Corp Yard Customer# 0 , SA# 0 Corporation Yard EXISTING Suggested Replacements & Savings # of Fixtur 108,619 Annual KWh Saved ****Payback Period Yrs 9.71 Energy Savings Per Year $21,723.86 13.1 Avg Annual Res Powered by Savings Average Estimated Life of LED 18.69 **Total Savings Over 5 Years $148,533.57 81 Annual CO2 Savings (MT)Average Estimated Life of Existing Lighting 7.42 **Total Savings After 10 Years $338,486.06 69.1%Average Electrical Savings Estimated Energy Rebate $9,540.75 10.3%ROI During Payback IRS Tax Deduction 179D Available $0.00 10.15 Payback Period Yrs - Out of Pocket - No Rebates/Program ***Estimated Federal Tax Savings $0.00 7.83 Payback Period Yrs W/ Rebates & Yearly Bulb Replacement Savings Btu Savings Per Month 14,255,332,158 9.71 Payback Period Yrs W/Rebates & Federal Tax Savings Bulb Replacement Savings Per Year $5,214.83 7.83 Payback Period Yrs Fully Comprehensive^Bulb Replacement Savings Per Avg. Est. Life of LED $91,377.05 *Loan Payment $1,810.32 Total Year 1 42,176 NOTE: Attached calculations do not include depreciation deduction for project cost. Year 2 42,176 *Payment is based on a 9.71 0%interest OAC, actual my vary. Year 3 42,176 ** Reflects 6% per year cost of energy increase + Bulb Replacement Year 4 42,176 *** Based on IRS 179D Deduction @ 35% federal tax rate Year 5 42,176 ****Payback Period Yrs = (Total Project Cost - Rebate) / Estimated Savings per Year Totals $210,882.47 ^Payback Period Yrs =(Total Project Cost - Rebate - Tax Deduction - Tax Savings )/(Estimated Savings Per Year + Bulb Replacement Savings Per Yr) 42,176 42,176 0 42,176 Potential Write-Off Amount Capital $0 0 42,176 $210,882.47 0 0 0 42,176 Interest year loan at Packet Pg. 484 Item 16 27611 La Paz Rd, Suite A2 Laguna Niguel, CA. 92677 600816 info@ecogreen.cc 7/27/2018 (949) 364 - 6800 Reservation # Program: Account Number Quotes are valid for 30 days from the above date. EG14-TC31-4100-UNV-X-SUS-D-X-X-X-INT-INT LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 180 $245.00 $44,100.00 EG14-TC31-4100-UNV-SMK-SMT-D-X-X-X-INT-INT LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 85 $285.00 $24,225.00 EGHB-PH77-4ft-4000-X-X-X-X-X-INT-INT LED Highbay 77 w 23 $485.00 $11,155.00 EG24-AT22.8-4000-UNV-X-REC-X-X-X-X-INT-INT LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 97 $215.00 $20,855.00 EGAL-SA85-5000-UNV-X-X-X-X-PH-X-X-EXT-EXT LED Area Light 85 w 19 $585.00 $11,115.00 EGAL-SA120-5000-UNV-X-X-X-X-PH-X-X-EXT-EXT LED Area Light 120 w 2 $675.00 $1,350.00 EGWP-AT40-5000-UNV-X-X-X-X-X-EXT-EXT LED Wallpack 40 w 23 $315.00 $7,245.00 EGHB-VT110-2ft-5000-X-X-X-X-EXT-EXT LED Highbay 110 w 9 $189.00 $1,701.00 EGHB-PH120.2-4ft-5000-X-X-X-X-INT-INT LED Highbay 120.2 w 12 $497.00 $5,964.00 EGWP-HL17.91-5000-UNV-X-X-X-X-X-X-EXT-EXT LED Wallpack 17.91 w 4 $189.00 $756.00 0 0 0 0 w 0 $0.00 SUBTOTAL $128,466.00 LABOR $56,750.00 SALES TAX $9,514.02 Misc. CHARGES (Brackets, Wiring, Sockets, Travel, Tiewire, Screws, Lifts, Lamp Recycling / Disposal, Shipping, Package, ETC.)$25,693.20 TOTAL PROJECT COST $220,423.22 * All quanities to be verified by owner IRS Tax Cert, Inspection, Report $0.00 Estimated k/w Power Saved Rebate Total:$9,540.75 Estimated IRS Federal Tax Deduction per 179D:$0.00 Estimated Annual Energy Savings:$21,723.86 Light EPN DESCRIPTION QTY Unit Price AmountINT/EXT Quote Quote # DATE City of SLO Corp Yard Customer# 0 , SA# 0 San Luis Obispo, CA, 93401 25 Prado Rd Corporation Yard 1 of 1Packet Pg. 485 Item 16 EcoGreen Sales Rep:Riley Detrick Customer Contact:Chris Read Title of Contact:Sustainability Manager Approx Building Size - SF Customer Phone:805-781-7151 Energy Rate 0.21 KWh Customer Email:cread@slocity.org In Reference to Quote #600815 KWh Saved CFL, CAN 17 w 6 8 5 /2086 INT OF 1260 CHORRO BLDG LED 6" Downlight Indoor/Outdoor Rated 10 w 6 42 w 41.2%88 $18.40 CFL, AL, CAN 33 w 8 11 7 /4015 CHORRO ST SIDE Skip 33 w 8 0 w 0.0%- $0.00 CFL, CAN 33 w 8 8 5 /2086 CONFERENCE ROOM LED 6" Downlight Indoor/Outdoor Rated 10 w 8 184 w 69.7%384 $80.59 CFL, CAN 33 w 10 11 7 /4015 CHORRO STREET SIDE Skip 33 w 10 0 w 0.0%- $0.00 2 X 2, W2 33 w 2 8 5 /2086 SCOTTS OFFICE LED Troffer 2x2 22.7 w 2 20.6 w 31.2%43 $9.02 1 X 2, W4 61 w 3 24 7 /8760 STAIR CASE 3 Skip 61 w 3 0 w 0.0%- $0.00 1 X 4, W1 32 w 2 11 7 /4015 ENTRANCE TOLL BOOTH Skip 32 w 2 0 w 0.0%- $0.00 1 X 4, W1 32 w 4 24 7 /8760 TOLL BOOTH EXIT Skip 32 w 4 0 w 0.0%- $0.00 1 X 4, W1 32 w 4 24 7 /8760 STAIR CASE 1 Skip 32 w 4 0 w 0.0%- $0.00 2 X 4, W1 32 w 2 24 7 /8760 ELEVATOR 1 Skip 32 w 2 0 w 0.0%- $0.00 1 X 4, W2 59 w 1 24 7 /8760 ELAVATOR 2 LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 1 28 w 47.5%245 $51.51 1 X 4, W2 59 w 1 8 5 /2086 LOCKER ROOM LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 1 28 w 47.5%58 $12.26 1 X 4, W2 59 w 1 8 5 /2086 MENS RESTROOM LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 1 28 w 47.5%58 $12.26 1 X 4, W2 59 w 1 8 5 /2086 WOMENS LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 1 28 w 47.5%58 $12.26 1 X 4, W2 59 w 4 11 7 /4015 PARKING STRUCTURE RESTROOMS LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 4 112 w 47.5%450 $94.43 1 X 4, W2 59 w 4 24 7 /8760 BULBROOM LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 4 112 w 47.5%981 $206.04 1 X 4, W2 59 w 12 24 7 /8760 STAIRCASES LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 12 336 w 47.5%2,943 $618.11 1 X 4, W2 59 w 3 24 7 /8760 STAIR CASES LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 3 84 w 47.5%736 $154.53 1 X 4, W2 59 w 5 24 7 /8760 STAIR CASE 1 LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 5 140 w 47.5%1,226 $257.54 1 X 4, W2 59 w 2 8 5 /2086 SUPPLY CLOSET LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 2 56 w 47.5%117 $24.53 2 X 4, W3 89 w 11 8 5 /2086 FILE BACK LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 11 728.2 w 74.4%1,519 $318.95 2 X 4, W3 89 w 4 8 5 /2086 SAFE ROOM LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 4 264.8 w 74.4%552 $115.98 2 X 4, W3 89 w 2 8 5 /2086 ALEX FUSCHS OFFICE LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 132.4 w 74.4%276 $57.99 2 X 4, W3 89 w 1 8 5 /2086 HVAC LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 1 66.2 w 74.4%138 $29.00 2 X 4, W3 89 w 6 8 5 /2086 CREW ROOM LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 6 397.2 w 74.4%828 $173.97 2 X 4, W3 89 w 4 8 5 /2086 CONFERENCE ROOM LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 4 264.8 w 74.4%552 $115.98 2 X 4, W3 89 w 2 8 5 /2086 SCOTTS OFFICE LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 2 132.4 w 74.4%276 $57.99 2 X 4, W3 89 w 12 8 5 /2086 INT OF 1260 CHORRO BLDG LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 12 794.4 w 74.4%1,657 $347.95 1 X 8, W1 58 w 2 11 7 /4015 MAIN MARSH ENTRANCE Skip 58 w 2 0 w 0.0%- $0.00 AL 188 w 1 11 7 /4015 ENTRANCE TOLL BOOTH LED Area Light 40 w 1 148 w 78.7%594 $124.79 AL 188 w 20 11 7 /4015 UPPER PARKING LOT LED Area Light 45 w 20 2860 w 76.1%11,483 $2,411.41 CPY 188 w 54 24 7 /8760 1ST FLOOR LED Canopy Light 60 w 54 6912 w 68.1%60,549 $12,715.32 CPY 188 w 57 24 7 /8760 2ND FLOOR LED Canopy Light 60 w 57 7296 w 68.1%63,913 $13,421.72 CPY 188 w 57 24 7 /8760 3RD FLOOR LED Canopy Light 60 w 57 7296 w 68.1%63,913 $13,421.72 CPY 188 w 3 11 7 /4015 CHORRO ST SIDE LED Canopy Light 60 w 3 384 w 68.1%1,542 $323.77 WP 188 w 3 11 7 /4015SIDE ENTRANCE NEXT TO SHOE PALACE ENTRANCE TO PARKING STRUCTURE LED Wallpack 40 w 3 444 w 78.7%1,783 $374.36 WP 188 w 7 11 7 /4015 NEAR EXIT Skip 188 w 7 0 w 0.0%- $0.00 WP 188 w 1 11 7 /4015 MAIN MARSH ENTRANCE LED Wallpack 40 w 1 148 w 78.7%594 $124.79 WP 188 w 6 11 7 /4015 SIDE OF EXT LED Wallpack 40 w 6 888 w 78.7%3,565 $748.72 AL 95 w 1 11 7 /4015 ENTRANCE NEAR FOUNDERS LED Area Light 30.29 w 1 64.71 w 68.1%260 $54.56 CPY 95 w 1 24 7 /8760 ENRANCE NEAR FOUNDERS LED Canopy Light 24.67 w 1 70.33 w 74.0%616 $129.38 WP 95 w 1 11 7 /4015 UPPER PARKING LOT LED Wallpack 17.91 w 1 77.09 w 81.1%310 $65.00 WP 95 w 12 11 7 /4015 EXTBY BACK ENTRANCE LED Wallpack 17.91 w 12 925.08 w 81.1%3,714 $779.98 FLOOD 190 w 36 11 7 /4015 SURROUNDING EXT LED Area Light 40 w 36 5400 w 78.9%21,681 $4,553.01 0 0 w 0 0 0 /0 0 0 0 w 0 0 w - $0.00 0 0 w 0 0 0 /0 0 0 0 w 0 0 w - $0.00 Totals 387 209406 w 387 36892.21 w 69.5%247,704 $52,017.82 36,892 Watts Saved Total Project Cost After Rebate $213,569.12 Approximate Energy Savings Per Month $4,334.82 247,704 Annual KWh Saved ****Payback Period Yrs 4.11 Energy Savings Per Year $52,017.82 30.0 Avg Annual Res Powered by Savings Average Estimated Life of LED 29.50 **Total Savings Over 5 Years $315,333.58 184 Annual CO2 Savings (MT)Average Estimated Life of Existing Lighting 3.57 **Total Savings After 10 Years $729,844.81 69.5%Average Electrical Savings Estimated Energy Rebate $6,513.22 24.4%ROI During Payback IRS Tax Deduction 179D Available $0.00 4.23 Payback Period Yrs - Out of Pocket - No Rebates/Program ***Estimated Federal Tax Savings $0.00 3.78 Payback Period Yrs W/ Rebates & Yearly Bulb Replacement Savings Btu Savings Per Month 25,328,135,017 4.11 Payback Period Yrs W/Rebates & Federal Tax Savings Bulb Replacement Savings Per Year $4,420.86 ENERGY AUDIT SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA, 93401 1260 CHORRO ST City of SLO - Marsh structure and office Customer# 0 , SA# 0 871 MARSH PARKING STRUCTURE EXISTING Suggested Replacements & Savings # of Fixtur # of Fixtures Annual SavingsWatts/bulbs Saved Usage SavedLocationOperating Hours-Day / Yr Watts/FixReplacement BulbExisting Bulb Watts/Fix Packet Pg. 486 Item 16 EcoGreen Sales Rep:Riley Detrick Customer Contact:Chris Read Title of Contact:Sustainability Manager Approx Building Size - SF Customer Phone:805-781-7151 Energy Rate 0.21 KWh Customer Email:cread@slocity.org In Reference to Quote #600815 KWh Saved ENERGY AUDIT SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA, 93401 1260 CHORRO ST City of SLO - Marsh structure and office Customer# 0 , SA# 0 871 MARSH PARKING STRUCTURE EXISTING Suggested Replacements & Savings # of Fixtur # of Fixtures Annual SavingsWatts/bulbs Saved Usage SavedLocationOperating Hours-Day / Yr Watts/FixReplacement BulbExisting Bulb Watts/Fix 3.78 Payback Period Yrs Fully Comprehensive^Bulb Replacement Savings Per Avg. Est. Life of LED $176,544.28 *Loan Payment $4,334.82 Total Year 1 42,714 NOTE: Attached calculations do not include depreciation deduction for project cost. Year 2 42,714 *Payment is based on a 4.11 0%interest OAC, actual my vary. Year 3 42,714 ** Reflects 6% per year cost of energy increase + Bulb Replacement Year 4 42,714 *** Based on IRS 179D Deduction @ 35% federal tax rate Year 5 42,714 ****Payback Period Yrs = (Total Project Cost - Rebate) / Estimated Savings per Year Totals $213,569.12 ^Payback Period Yrs =(Total Project Cost - Rebate - Tax Deduction - Tax Savings )/(Estimated Savings Per Year + Bulb Replacement Savings Per Yr) year loan at Interest $0 0 42,714 $213,569.12 0 0 0 42,714 42,714 42,714 0 42,714 Potential Write-Off Amount Capital Packet Pg. 487 Item 16 27611 La Paz Rd, Suite A2 Laguna Niguel, CA. 92677 600815 info@ecogreen.cc 8/2/2018 (949) 364 - 6800 Reservation # Program: Account Number Quotes are valid for 30 days from the above date. EGCL-AE10-6"-2700-120v-X-REC-REC-PLT-X:X-X-X-X-X-INT-INT LED 6" Downlight Indoor/Outdoor Rated 10 w 14 $225.00 $3,150.00 EG22-AT22.7-4000-UNV-X-REC-X-X-X-X-INT-INT LED Troffer 2x2 22.7 w 2 $215.00 $430.00 EG14-TC31-4100-UNV-SMK-SMT-D-X-X-X-INT-INT LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 29 $305.00 $8,845.00 EG14-TC31-4100-UNV-XXX-REC-D-X-X-X-INT-INT LED Troffer 1x4 31 w 5 $225.00 $1,125.00 EG24-AT22.8-4000-UNV-X-REC-X-X-X-X-INT-INT LED Troffer 2x4 22.8 w 42 $250.00 $10,500.00 EGAL-SA40-4000-UNV-X-X-X-X-PH-X-X-EXT-EXT LED Area Light 40 w 37 $397.00 $14,689.00 EGAL-SA45-5000-UNV-X-X-X-X-PH-X-X-EXT-EXT LED Area Light 45 w 20 $400.00 $8,000.00 EGCP-CR60-4000-UNV-X-X-X-X-X-INT-INT LED Canopy Light 60 w 168 $497.00 $83,496.00 EGCP-CR60-4000-UNV-X-X-X-X-X-EXT-EXT LED Canopy Light 60 w 3 $497.00 $1,491.00 EGWP-AT40-5000-UNV-X-X-X-X-X-EXT-EXT LED Wallpack 40 w 10 $315.00 $3,150.00 EGAL-SA30-4000-UNV-X-X-X-X-PH-X-X-EXT-EXT LED Area Light 30.29 w 1 $297.00 $297.00 EGCP-ML24.67-5000-UNV-WH-X-X-X-X-X-X-X-X-EXT-EXT LED Canopy Light 24.67 w 1 $297.00 $297.00 EGWP-HL17.91-5000-UNV-X-X-X-X-X-X-EXT-EXT LED Wallpack 17.91 w 13 $245.00 $3,185.00 0 0 0 0 w 0 $0.00 SUBTOTAL $138,655.00 LABOR $43,125.00 SALES TAX $10,571.34 Misc. CHARGES (Brackets, Wiring, Sockets, Travel, Tiewire, Screws, Lifts, Lamp Recycling / Disposal, Shipping, Package, ETC.)$27,731.00 TOTAL PROJECT COST $220,082.34 * All quanities to be verified by owner IRS Tax Cert, Inspection, Report $0.00 Estimated k/w Power Saved Rebate Total:$6,513.22 Estimated IRS Federal Tax Deduction per 179D:$0.00 Estimated Annual Energy Savings:$52,017.82 Quote Quote # DATE City of SLO - Marsh structure and office Customer# 0 , SA# 0 SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA, 93401 1260 CHORRO ST 871 MARSH PARKING STRUCTURE Light EPN DESCRIPTION QTY Unit Price AmountINT/EXT 1 of 1Packet Pg. 488 Item 16 Packet Pg. 489Item 16 Packet Pg. 490Item 16 Pacific Gas and Electric Company Energy Efficiency Retrofit Loan Program Financing Supplement to the Energy Efficiency Retrofit Program Application The Energy Efficiency Retrofit Loan Program (the “Program”) is funded by California utility customers and administered by Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) under the auspices of the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). The Program provides qualified PG&E customers with a means to finance energyefficient (EE) retrofit projects implemented under select PG&E EE Programs (the "Qualified Program"). The loans issued under the Program are interestfree, unsecured loans to fully or partially reimburse qualified PG&E customers for the costs they incur in connection with a qualified retrofit project (the "Retrofit Project"), which term shall mean the energy efficiency retrofit project described in Customer's relevant Energy Efficiency Program Application. 1.Conditions for Eligibility: Participation in the Program is limited to PG&E customers that meet the following conditions and satisfy these conditions throughout the duration of the Retrofit Project up to and including the date of Final Verification (defined below in Section 8): (a) the PG&E customer must be a business (“Commercial Customer”) or a federal, state, county or local government agency (“Government Customer”).* Commercial Customers and Government Customers are collectively referred to as “Customer;” (b) Customer currently receives service from PG&E at the location of the Retrofit Project (the “Location”); (c) Customer has continually maintained an active PG&E account for the previous 24 months and has a minimum of 12 months of historical metered energy usage at Customer’s current Location; (d) at the time the Customer's Program Application is Approved and Customer’s Loan Agreement is executed, and at the time the loan is to be funded following completion of the Retrofit Project and satisfaction of all other requirements of the Loan Agreement, Customer must be in good credit standing, as determined by PG&E through credit review which may include a commercial credit check and a bill history review, which may be based upon the following and other criteria: a. No 24hour disconnection notices in the last 12 months; b. No returned payments within the last 12 months; c.No more than 1 payment arrangement in the last 12 months; d. No broken payment arrangements within the last 12 months; e. No deposit assessed within the last 12 months; and f.The Retrofit Project qualifies and Customer is eligible for an incentive under the Qualified Program. Loan Amount and Term Limitations Interest 0%, with no additional fees or charges Minimum Loan Amount $5,000 Maximum Loan Amount Commercial Customer: $100,000 / premises Government Customer: $250,000 / meter Maximum Loan Term, not Commercial Customer: 60 months to exceed the Expected Government Customer: 120 months Useful Life (EUL) of the measures 2.Loan Features: The loans offered under the Program are interest free (0%) and free of any fees, late payment penalties or other charges. The loan terms and conditions are set to provide simple payback from energy savings during the maximum allowed loan term, and are calculated by dividing the loan amount (eligible project cost less Qualified Program Incentives) by the estimated monthly energy savings resulting from the Retrofit Project. The ensuing number of monthly payments must not exceed the Maximum Loan Term set forth in chart below ("Loan Amount and Term Limitations"). 3.Eligibility: Prior to purchasing and installing any energyefficient measures or equipment under the Qualified Program, Customer must satisfy the eligibility requirements of both the Program and Qualified Program. Because energy efficiency projects in progress are ineligible under the Program, Customer must have an inspection of the Retrofit Project and Location conducted and completed by PG&E before commencing any work or purchasing any equipment for the Retrofit Project. 4.Inspection: PG&E will assist Customers in understanding the energy efficiency measures available under the Qualified Program and will answer their questions concerning this Program. After Customer has decided upon the measures that comprise the Retrofit Project, PG&E will request an engineering review, perform an inspection of the Location, calculate the Loan Terms and prepare the Loan Documents. Thereafter, PG&E will provide Customer with a copy of the inspection report, a Loan Agreement, the Application, the applicable OnBill Financing (OBF) Gas and/or Electric Rate Schedule and Loan Calculation Summary Sheet (collectively, the “Loan Documents”). 5.Loan Documents: If the terms of the loan are acceptable, Customer shall execute the Loan Documents and return them to PG&E prior to the commencement of the Retrofit Project. Incomplete or incorrect applications cannot be processed and may result in the delay of PG&E’s approval and possible disqualification from the Program. Customer may withdraw this Application for any reason without penalty by sending written notice to PG&E. 6.Customer’s Responsibilities for Contractor and Vendor: Upon PG&E’s notification to Customer that the Retrofit Project is eligible for the Program, Customer may begin the Retrofit Project pursuant to the contract agreed upon by Customer, its contractor or vendor. PG&E does not endorse or recommend any particular contractor or vendor nor does PG&E review any contractor or vendor proposals. Rather, Customer shall be solely responsible for reviewing the feasibility of the contractor’s and vendor’s proposal(s) and verifying their respective qualifications, pricing, energy savings, warranties and the terms and conditions of the contractor’s and/or vendor’s contract with Customer. *Residential customers are ineligible. Page 1 of 2Packet Pg. 491 Item 16 7.PG&E Disclaimers: CUSTOMER’S DESIGN OF THE RETROFIT PROJECT AND SELECTION AND USE OF ENERGY EFFICIENCY EQUIPMENT, MEASURES AND SELECTION OF CONTRACTORS AND VENDORS IS AT CUSTOMER’S SOLE DISCRETION AND AT CUSTOMER’S SOLE RISK. TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, PG&E EXPRESSLY AND SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS ANY LIABILITY IN RESPECT OF ANY ADVICE, INFORMATION OR OTHER INSTRUCTION PROVIDED BY OR ON BEHALF OF PG&E TO CUSTOMER IN CONNECTION WITH THE QUALIFIED PROGRAM, PROGRAM OR RETROFIT PROJECT. PG&E DOES NOT WARRANT OR BEAR ANY RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY OF THE FOLLOWING: a. THE WORK PERFORMED BY CUSTOMER’S CONTRACTOR(S) OR VENDOR(S), THAT THE RETROFIT PROJECT IS APPROPRIATE FOR THE LOCATION; b. THE RETROFIT WILL RESULT IN OR YIELD ANY ENERGY EFFICIENCY SAVINGS OR A SPECIFIC AMOUNT OF ENERGY EFFICIENCY SAVINGS OR OTHER REDUCTION IN CUSTOMER’S PG&E UTILITY BILL AFTER COMPLETION OF THE RETROFIT PROJECT; c. THE CONTRACTOR’S OR VENDOR’S SERVICES WILL BE TIMELY, COMPLETE OR ERRORFREE, OR THAT DEFECTS IN THE RETROFIT PROJECT WILL BE CORRECTED BY SUCH INDIVIDUALS; d. ANY ERRORS, OMISSIONS, DEFECTS OR DELAYS IN THE DESIGN OR CONSTRUCTION OF THE RETROFIT PROJECT OR THE OPERATION OF ANY ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES INSTALLED AT THE LOCATION. 8.Verification: Upon completion of the Retrofit Project, Customer shall request PG&E’s postcompletion inspection and final verification that the Retrofit Project has been completed in conformity with the requirements of the Qualified Program and that customer remains eligible (the “Final Verification”). a. If there has been any change to the Retrofit Project’s scope, cost and/or incentives available under the Qualified Program or energy savings, Customer will be required to enter into a Loan Modification Agreement with PG&E, which may include new contract terms reflecting the changes in the Retrofit Project. (If a Loan Modification Agreement is required, it shall be deemed part of the “Loan Documents.”) b. If the changes to the Retrofit Project are such that it no longer meets the Program’s payback criteria or other conditions, the Retrofit Project will be considered ineligible, the Loan Agreement will be terminated and no loan proceeds will be disbursed. c. IF PG&E DETERMINES, IN ITS ABSOLUTE DISCRETION, THAT CUSTOMER’S CREDIT HAS DETERIORATED OR HAS OTHERWISE PLACED CUSTOMER’S REPAYMENT OF THE LOAN AT RISK, THE LOAN PROCEEDS SHALL NOT BE ISSUED, EVEN THOUGH THE RETROFIT PROJECT MAY HAVE BEEN SATISFACTORILY COMPLETED AT CUSTOMER’S EXPENSE. 9.Disbursements: Subject to and following PG&E’s satisfactory Final Verification, an incentive check and the loan proceeds will be issued to Customer or, at Customer’s written direction, to Customer’s contractor or vendor. 10.General Provisions: a. Applications for loans under the Program will be accepted from qualified Customers on a firstcome, firstserved basis until the funds allocated by PG&E for the Program are no longer available. The Program may be modified or terminated by the CPUC or PG&E at any time and without prior notice. However, termination of the Program following execution of a Loan Agreement by Customer will not affect that Loan Agreement, or, if Customer thereafter satisfies all Program conditions, the disbursement. b. The loan proceeds may only be used to pay or reimburse Customer for implementing or installing energyefficient measures or equipment through the Qualified Program. c.If there is any conflict between the terms of any document relating to the Program, the Loan Documents shall control. d.For all retrofit projects, including but not limited to streetlight, HVAC and lighting retrofits, Customer acknowledges and understands that Customer is able to use the installation vendor or contractor of their choice. I have read, understand and agree to all of the Energy Efficiency Retrofit Loan Program requirements and terms and conditions set forth in this Program description. I understand that loan calculations will be based on preinspection results and on the applicable program documentation, and that my agency/company must meet all eligibility criteria and requirements in order to participate in the Program. Any unapproved changes to project scope, costs or run hours, or to my agency’s/company’s creditworthiness, between the time the Loan Documents are accepted and signed and the Retrofit Project is completed and the project’s and my agency’s/company’s continued eligibility are verified, could result in loan ineligibility. Legal Name of Business (i.e., the formal name on your tax return) Authorized Representative's Printed Name Authorized Representative's Signature Tax identification information (select one): □ Federal Tax ID Number: ____________________________________ □ Social Security Number: ____________________________________ FOR PG&E USE ONLY: Title Date PG&E OBF Administrator Printed Name Date Retrofit Program Application Number OBF Application Number "PG&E" refers to Pacific Gas and Electric Company, a subsidiary of PG&E Corporation. ©2011 Pacific Gas and Electric Company. All rights reserved. These offerings are funded by California utility customers and administered by PG&E under the auspices of the California Public Utilities Commission. PG&E prints its materials with soy based inks on recycled paper. April 2011 CTM07100660 Page 2 of 2Packet Pg. 492 Item 16 Packet Pg. 493 Item 16 Packet Pg. 494 Item 16 Meeting Date: 8/21/2018 FROM: Michael Codron, Community Development Director Prepared By: Doug Davidson, Deputy Director SUBJECT: REVIEW OF THE PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE TO THE CITY’S ZONING REGULATIONS (TITLE 17) OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE AND ASSOCIATED ZONING AMENDMENTS RECOMMENDATION As recommended by the Planning Commission: 1)Introduce an ordinance repealing and replacing Title 17 of the Municipal Code (Zoning) to implement the Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE), including the adoption of an Initial Study/Negative Declaration, GENP-1327-2017 (Attachment A); and 2)Introduce an ordinance approving amendments to Ordinance 1130 (1989 Series) modifying the design criteria, Section 5, south side of Monterey Street between 1603 and 2223 Monterey Street, CODE-1630-2018 (Attachment D); and 3)Introduce an ordinance amending the City’s Zoning Map to designate an approximately 15.8 - acre portion of the C-R Zone in the Downtown Core, the 1100 block of Higuera Street and the 1100 through 1300 block of Monterey Street, as C-R-D, Retail Commercial with a Downtown Overlay Zone to allow for Downtown Commercial development standards with Planning Commission approval, RZ-1628-2018 (Attachment E); and 4)Introduce an ordinance amending the City’s Zoning Map to designate an approximately 20.2- acre portion of the R-1/C/OS Zone on the west side of Broad Street, south of Serrano Drive as R-1/C/OS-S, Low Density Residential/Conservation and Open Space Zone with a Special Considerations Overlay Zone, 159/161 Broad Street and 141 Bressi Place, RZ-1629-2018 (Attachment G). REPORT-IN-BRIEF In December 2014, the City adopted the new General Plan Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE). The land use component sets direction for “the orderly development of land within the City’s planning area” (Land Use Element, p. 1-11), and the circulation component describes “how transportation will be provided in the community envisioned by the Land Use Element” (Circulation Element, p. 2-9). The Zoning Regulations (Title 17 of the Municipal Code) are the key to ol used to implement land use policy, as well as circulation policies related to parking management, transit, bicycling, and pedestrian accommodation. Following adoption of the LUCE, Planning staff in consultation with residents, architects, contractors, developers, advisory bodies and the Council began the process of identifying which land use policies would be most effectively implemented via changes to the Zoning Regulations. That analysis identified the policies listed in Attachment I and also indicates how policies have been addressed in the Zoning Regulations Update. In February 2017, the City entered into a contract with MIG, Inc. to assist with the update effort. Packet Pg. 495 Item 17 The MIG team has supported Planning staff with public engagement activities and has wo rked in close coordination with City staff to prepare the updated Zoning Regulations based on input from decision makers and the community. In addition to focusing on updating the Zoning Regulations to implement LUCE goals and policies, staff has also t aken this opportunity to update the Regulations to: 1.Address changes in State law 2.Resolve issues and concerns that City staff and the public have identified that hinder effective and efficient implementation of the Zoning Regulations 3.Reorganize the Regulations to create a code structure that is easier to navigate, administer and interpret 4.Update the development standards to respond to the direction provided by the Council and Planning Commission and that reflect modern, forward -thinking development practices. The staff report begins with an overview of the three Planning Commission meetings in June, which culminated on the 27th with a unanimous recommendation to Council to adopt the updated Zoning Regulations and included three parallel zoning amendments which are being processed in conjunction with the project. The report goes on to describe the public community engagement process that was key and drove the details of the substantive revisions to the Zoning Regulations. The report provides an overview of directional items from the City Council April 10, 2018 study session, and identifies subsequent work tasks City staff will complete once the updated Regulations have been adopted. SUMMARY OF THE JUNE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGS On June 13, 2018, the P lanning Commission received the staff report and presentation on the Draft updated Zoning Regulations and received public comments. After closing the public hearing, the Commission reviewed Articles 1 (Enactment, Applicability, and Enforcement), 5 (Nonconformities), 7 (Administration of Zoning Regulations), and 8 (Housing -Related Regulations). In addition to minor edits on these Articles, the Commission revised Article 5 to allow a nonconforming structure to be rebuilt if more than 75% of its replacement value has been involuntarily damaged (up from 50%). On June 14, 2018 the Commission continued its review of the project and focused on Article 2 (Zones, Allowable Uses, and Development and Design Standards), Article 3 (Regulations and Standards Applicable to all Zones), Article 4 (Regulations for Specific Land Uses and Activities), and Article 6 (Permit Procedures). The Commission provided minor edits to the sections on mixed-use development, S-Overlay zones, hillside development, lighting, rooftop uses, fencing (driveway gates), and parking reductions. The Commission also revised the Edge Conditions standards to eliminate balconies facing R-1 and R-2 zones and recommended that Accessory Dwelling Units of up to 450 sq. ft. to be exempt from lot coverage requ irements. On June 27, 2018, the Commission recommended the adoption of the Zoning Regulations Update, including the adoption of the Initial Study/Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact. The Commission provided final minor edits to various sections, including but not Packet Pg. 496 Item 17 limited to; requiring a visual study for downtown development, amendments to Floor Area Ratio (FAR) and second story parameters in R-1 zones, broadened the definition of convenience stores, and required “story poles” for taller buildings which could impact their surroundings. The Planning Commission action on July 27th also recommended the City Council approve the three parallel Ordinances as described in the following section. PARALLEL AMENDMENT TASKS Three additional ordinances are proposed in conjunction with update the Zoning Regulations Update; 1) amending Ordinance 1130; 2) Upper Monterey (from Santa Rosa to Pepper Street) rezone from C-R (Retail Commercial) to C-R-D (with a Downtown Overlay zone); and 3) rezone property located on north Broad Street from R-1/C/OS to R-1/C/OS-S (Special Considerations Overlay). Ordinance 1130 LUCE program 8.3 calls the City to “review and update Ordinance 1130 and involve residents to ensure that neighborhood concerns are addressed.” Staff and the San Luis Drive neighborhood identified and discussed revisions to Ordinance 1130 from the beginning of the Zoning Regulations Update. The San Luis Drive neighborhood group presented revisions to the Planning Commission on January 10, 2018. City staff and representatives of the San Luis Drive neighborhood met on May 30, 2018 to consider proposed revisions based on the Planning Commission feedback from January 10th. After making some minor amendments, staff and the neighbors agreed to an updated vers ion of Ordinance 1130. The updated Ordinance 1130 is included in Attachment B. A subsequent effort will fold Ordinance 1130 into the Zoning Regulations, this will be done as a comprehensive update to the City’s S-Overlay zone provisions. Upper Monterey Overlay Zone The Planning Commission and City Council supported the extensions of downtown development standards to Upper Monterey Street (i.e. up to the railroad trestle at Pepper Street). The Downtown Overlay facilitates development within the Downtown Core, during the interim period while a full Upper Monterey Area Plan is developed, as called for in LUCE Program 8.2.2 (the area along Monterey from Santa Rosa to Pepper Street is located in the Downtown Core of the LUCE, while the Specific Planning Area for Upper Monterey extends all the way to Loomis near the Highway 101 on-ramp). Applicants may choose to take advantage of the Downtown development standards for more intensive development with approval from the Planning Commission with a finding that the project is consistent with the standards for downtown core development. The Ordinance to modify the Zoning Map is included as Attachment C. North Broad Street Overlay Zone On September 23, 2015, the Planning Commission discussed and initiated a “S” overlay for the R-1 property located at 159 Broad Street. The application of the S-Overlay is part of the approved scope of work for this project . The Planning Commission recommends the S-Overlay also be applied to the C/OS portion of the property (the “remain der” parcel of the subdivision) after hearing public testimony. The S-Overlay zone provides for the protection of creek habitat, Packet Pg. 497 Item 17 wildlife corridors (i.e. as indicated in the Conservation and Open Space Element), and includes grading, compatibility with surrounding neighborhood, and fire safety development standards. The Ordinance to modify the Zoning Map is included as Attachment D. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT The project work program included a variety of public engagement opportunities for the public to provide input on how to implement LUCE policies through the Zoning Regulations and how to address other land use issues of interest to the community. Public engagement activities included: ▪Stakeholder and resident interviews during February and March 2017 (more than 50 community members in group and one-on-one sessions) ▪Chamber of Commerce presentations March 2017 ▪Joint City Council/Planning Commission study session on April 12, 2017 ▪Developer’s Roundtable presentations February and December 2017 ▪Two community workshops (June 3, 2017 and May 3, 2018) ▪Information presented to the Planning Commission at regularly scheduled meetings (total of 15 working sessions) ▪Bicycle Advisory Committee hearing on December 14, 2017 ▪City Council study session on April 10, 2018 ▪Airport Land Use Commission hearing on May 16, 2018 and June 26, 2018 ▪Three Planning Commission meetings devoted to the project in June 2018 From the engagement activities, City staff received many suggestions and support of proposed revisions that are incorporated into the draft regulations. Examples include (and described in greater detail in other sections of this staff report): ▪Accommodating tiny homes on wheels in the backyards of R-1 properties ▪Simplifying the regulation of land uses ▪Encouraging mo bility mode shift ▪Promoting a broader array of home-based businesses and corner stores ▪Addressing climate change initiatives ▪Providing regulations to address neighborhood compatibility for infill development and edge conditions Copies of summary reports o f the stakeholder interviews, study sessions, and workshops have been provided previously to the Planning Commission as well as the legislative draft ordinance (red line/track changes) are available on the City’s website: http://www.slocity.org/government/department -directory/community-development/planning- zoning/zoning/zoning-regulations-update DISCUSSION Key revisions made to the Zoning Regulations are as follows: 1)Restructured the document to improve ease of use 2)S implified land use tables to consolidate similar uses (e.g., offices), reflect modern land use practices, and create flexibility over time 3)Created more o bjective standards for the review of multi-unit residential development and Packet Pg. 498 Item 17 mixed-use developments (in response to recent State law) 4)Created new development standards for the R-1 and R-2 zones to address neighborhood compatibility concerns outlined in LUCE policies 2.12 and 2.13 ▪Edge Conditions regulations for higher intensive zones adjacent to lower density zones ▪FAR limitations within the R-1 zone 5)Revised parking regulations for motor vehicles and bicycles to achieve the City’s 50 % mode shift objective and to provide more precise shared parking provisions ▪Parking requirements revised to reflect ITE demand ▪Bicycle parking reflective of square-footage rather than vehicle parking requirements ▪Consolidated parking reduction opportunities 6)Codified conditions ro utinely applied to specific uses (e.g., alcohol establishments, bed and breakfast establishments) 7)Clarified provisions for mixed-use developments and required usable and purposeful ground- floor commercial space for mixed-use developments 8)Included specific regulations to address the City’s current Climate Action Plan (CAP), with the understanding that the CAP is being updated and subsequent follow-up will likely be required (and that many CAP programs are implemented through avenues other than the Zoning Regulations) 9)Responded to policy direction from the City Council at the April 10, 2018 study session regarding: ▪Redefined density calculations ▪Regulations for rooftop uses ▪Reviewed adequacy of alcohol outlet regulations ▪Provided tiny homes on wheels ▪Consolidat ed and streamlined the development review process Reorganization of the Zoning Regulations The first step taken to update the Zoning Regulations was to develop an outline indicating how the regulations would be restructured. The new structure is organized to respond to three key questions a person asks regarding property development potential; 1)How can I use my property in the zone in which it is located? Or in which zone can I establish a particular use? 3)What are the development standards and use r egulations for my proposed use? 4)What permits are required, and how do I get them? The overall structure is as follows: ▪Article 1: Enactment, Applicability, and Enforcement ▪Article 2: Zones, Allowable Uses, and Development and Design Standards ▪Article 3: Regulations and Standards Applicable to All Zones ▪Article 4: Regulations for Specific Land Uses and Activities ▪Article 5: Nonconformities ▪Article 6: Permit Procedures ▪Article 7: Administration of Zoning Regulations ▪Article 8: Housing-Related Regulations ▪Article 9: Definitions Packet Pg. 499 Item 17 Figure 1: Setback requirements for properties subject to Edge Conditions. Use Regulations Table 2-1 in the Zoning Regulations establishes use regulations for all zones in the City. Key revisions to Table 2-1 (previously known as Table 9) have focused on: ▪Consolidating office uses by collapsing seven off ice categories down to two ▪Consolidating several categories of retail uses based on size into two categories: General Retail and Large-scale Retail ▪Ensuring flexibility of uses in industrial and commercial zones to accommodate emerging markets and technolo gies ▪Allowing for schools to be established in the O, C-C, and C-S zones with a Conditional Use Permit ▪Defining and allowing handicraft manufacturing in most commercial zones ▪Allowing RV parks with a Conditional Use Permit in the C-T zone ▪Allowing for select uses currently permitted with a Use Permit to by allowed via Director’s Action provided they comply with codified performance standards in Article 4 Objective Standards for Review of Multi-Unit Residential and Mixed-use Developments In January 2018, several new State housing-related laws took effect to reduce the discretion of local governments to deny housing and mixed-use projects (consisting of at least two -thirds residential) that comply with objective development standards. In response, the Cit y has amended the development standards to include clearer standards and more specific setback requirements, that address privacy concerns, and size, bulk and scale issues adjacent to lower- density neighborhoods, see Figure 1 (see Chapters 17.20 and 17.22 regarding the R-3 and R-4 zones and Article 3, Edge Conditions1). Mixed-use developments are required to adhere to the Edge Conditions standards in Article 3. Example of Edge Condition regulations include requiring the greater setbacks than the R-1 zone where non-R-1 properties abut an R-1 zone, including upper stories and restricting window and balcony placement facing R-1 zones, and locating trash collection areas to minimize impacts to adjacent R-1 zones. New standards provide greater upper story setba cks for structures that abut a creek setback2, addressed in Article 3. 1 Zoning Regulations 17.70.050A Purpose. Where multi-unit residential zones or commercial zones are adjacent to lower intensity residential or open space zones, development shall incorporate elements in the site design and building design to soften its impact and to result in a compatible transition to the sensitive zone. 2 Zoning Regulations 17.70.030E.3 Edge Conditions. Additional Upper Story Setbacks. Where the zone allows more than two stories, an additional 10-foot step back (upper story building setback) shall be provided beginning at the third story level. The upper story step back shall be provided along all building elevations with creek-facing frontage. Packet Pg. 500 Item 17 New Standards for Neighborhood Compatibility LUCE Policies 2.12 and 2.133 call for sensitive and compatible infill development in Low- Density and Medium-Density (R-1 and R-2) residential areas. The updated Zoning Regulations use three approaches to achieve neighborhood preservation goals: 1) limiting building height to 25 feet (compared to the current allowance of up to 35 feet with an administrative use permit), 2) increasing setbacks based on building height (a sliding scale, with the setback increasing with each incremental increase in building height), and 3) applying floor-area ratio (FAR)4 standard to limit the total square footage of building permitted on a lot. The proposed FA R standard is 0.40, with up to 0.50 FAR permitted for single-story homes, greater second story setbacks, or lots under 5,000 sq. ft. Implementing the Climate Action Plan (CAP) As a Major City Goal, coordinated policy and program initiatives to implement climate actions are occurring in several Departments; the Climate Action Plan (CAP), Zoning Regulations Update, Community Choice Energy (CCE) , Power Purchase Agreements, the installation of EV Charging stations. A study session is scheduled o n September 4, 2018 to review a draft ordinance to implement a CCE program. On September 18, 2018, the Council will review the CAP Update, including greenhouse gas (GHG) emission targets, commitment to CAP principles, and other climate action efforts. The City has historically been proactive regarding climate mitigation strategies and has adopted measures to reduce the City’s carbon footprint . Examples of these strategies include; requiring extensive tree canopy in parking lots (which reduces heat island effects and improves carbon sequestration), requiring wiring for electric vehicle charging stations in garages in new single - family homes, and requiring LEED Silver or equivalent development as an incentive in the C -D zone. Also, the State is moving forward with climat e change initiatives, such as requiring solar installations on new development beginning in 2020, through building code requirements. The current CAP includes several policy directives that can be implemented now via the Zoning Regulations5. The Planning Commission reviewed a White Paper of possible implementation strategies and at the May 3rd community workshop, participants suggested additional strategies that should be included in the Zoning Regulations Update. 3 LUE 2.13 Neighborhood Compatibility. The City will consider new regulations for Low-Density and Medium- Density Residential areas, to require special review for (1) incompatibly large houses, (2) replacement or infill homes in existing neighborhoods… 4 Zoning Regulations 17.158.016. Floor Area Ratio (FAR). The net floor area of a building or buildings on a lot divided by the lot area. 5 Climate Action Plan. Transportation and Land Use Strategies. Strategies to reduce transportation-related GHG emissions focus on supporting alternative modes of travel, and making it easier for people to get to jobs, goods and services without traveling long distances in a vehicle. •TLU 2: Alternative Vehicles. Promote clean air vehicles (CAV), and expand the network of electric car charging stations and car-sharing parking spaces. •TLU 5: Land Use Diversity and Density. Encourage compact urban form and mixed-use developments. •TLU 7: Shared Parking. Reduce VMT and associated GHG emissions by further reducing parking requirements for land uses that share the same parking lot. •TLU 8: Reduce the Need for Commuting. Increase local housing options for workers in the community that include variety in location, type, size, tenure and style of dwellings. Packet Pg. 501 Item 17 Current, new and future strategies related to implementing the CAP through the Zoning Regulations Update and Building Code are shown in the following table: Examples of Current City Regulations Examples of Initiatives in the Updated Zoning Regulations Future Initiatives under CAP and/or Building Code ▪Parking lot tree canopy ▪Wiring for EVs in garages in new subdivisions ▪LEED Silver or equivalent in C-D zone ▪Large development projects require green building and LID checklists ▪Solar access standards ▪PV solar collectors required for common use facilities for multi-unit housing of 20+ ▪Water-efficient landscaping standards ▪Corner stores in residential neighborhoods ▪Mandatory tree planting for new development and tree removals ▪Incentive for net-zero energy for increase to the height in the C-D zone and PD overlay ▪Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program incentive for increased height in the C-D zone and PD overlay ▪Extending C-D zone standards to upper Monterey Street ▪Allowing car sharing spaces to be in required parking spaces ▪Requiring parking for EV in multi-family and commercial projects ▪Unbundled parking accommodation ▪Requirements for showers, lockers and changing rooms for large developments ▪Reducing car parking requirements and increasing bike parking ▪Allow solar canopies in parking lots by waiving the tree planting requirement ▪EV parking requirements for substantial redevelopments and reconfigured parking lots in addition to new developments. ▪Building electrification ▪Solar installations in all new developments in 2020 (Title 24 update) ▪Allow small-scale renewable energy systems as part of any new development ▪Net zero energy requirements for new residential (Title 24 update) ▪Broader-based and formal TDM program aimed toward permanent preservation of open spaces ▪Shared bike and electric scooter programs ▪Specify minimum requirements for EV charger types and electric panel capacity ▪Net zero energy requirements for new nonresidential in 2022 (Title 24 update) ▪Energy storage requirements ▪Switch to electric buses. ▪Simplify permit process for solar power and rainwater recovery systems. ▪Require events to be zero- waste. ▪Allow and encourage composting toilets. ▪Require new construction require to include a water harvesting system. City Council Policy Direction During this update, City staff identified and discussed eight issue areas that required policy direction at the April 10, 2018 study session (at the meeting the Council provided direction for two additional issues): 1)Evaluate how density is calculated and consider changes to implement LUCE objectives 2)Encourage flexible density in Downtown (discussed further under section: Planned Packet Pg. 502 Item 17 Subsequent Zoning Regulations Amendments) 3)Consider regulation of rooftop uses 4)Review adequacy of the City’s alcohol outlet regulations 5)Consider tiny homes on wheels 6)Remove barriers to the construction of accessory dwelling units (ADUs) 7)Consolidate and streamline the development review process 8)Update the parking regulations to reflect modern practices and mode shift objectives 9)Conditionally allow schools in more zones within Table 9 (addressed in Table 9 “Allowed Uses Per Zone” within Article 2) 10) Explore land use regulations for micro business within residential districts The items listed above (excluding items 2 & 9) are summarized below to update the Council on t he changes made per the direction from the study session. Calculating Density The LUCE contains policies for future revisions to development standards to appropriately address student housing preferences in multiple-family zones near Cal Poly and to evaluate alternatives to the current maximum densities allowed in residential zones 6. At the Council study session, staff proposed a revision to the City’s bedroom density-based approach and establish a minimum density unit count in multi-unit zones. The Council supported the concept , which will allow at least two units (a unit being defined as one two -bedroom unit) in a R-2 zone regardless of the lot size, and similar for R-3 and R-4 lots (a minimum of three and four units, respectively). This will modify the current situation whereby a R-2 property cannot achieve the same density as a R-1 property (a three-bedroom home may not be allowed on a small R-2 property, while it is allowed by right in the R-1 zone). These revisions are incorporated into the Zo ning Regulation Update, addressed in Article 3. As directed by the Council at the April 2018 study session, the Downtown will be evaluated for flexible, higher density projects with residential units under 600 sq. ft. As discussed below under Subsequent Amendments section of this report , staff will return with specific Zoning Regulations amendments after further traffic and environmental review has been completed. Rooftop Uses At the study session, the Council agreed that rooftop uses are appropriate and desirable, if the regulations include sufficient controls to avoid potential impacts, including compliance with privacy concerns and the City’s Noise Ordinance. The regulations are addressed in Article 3 and include performance standards, such for lighting, noise, and hours of operation. Alcohol Outlet Regulations The Council indicated that the current regulations adequately address alcohol outlets. To more 6 LUE 2.15. Residential Densities. The City will evaluate alternatives to the current maximum number of dwelling units per acre (based on bedroom count) and height, parking, and setback standards, to regulate residential building intensity, and bulk and mass. Floor area limits will be considered. Packet Pg. 503 Item 17 fully implement Policy 4.327, Article 4 in the Zoning Regulations Update includes specific criteria for Use Permits by incorporating the late-night alcohol standard conditions of approval (developed during the Alcohol Outlet Amendments process). These operational standards include noise control, hours of operation, employee training, security, and compliance with the proper ABC (Alcoholic Beverage Control) license. Tiny Homes on Wheels Tiny ho mes have been a policy focus area in the Housing Major City Goal. The scope of work developed for the Zoning Regulations Update included specific outreach and discussion about how to evaluate whether tiny homes and in particular, tiny ho mes on wheels should be regulated in the City. Staff has focused on how existing regulations should be revised to accommodate tiny homes on wheels in backyards of single-family homes as a temporary housing alternative. The critical issues for tiny homes on wheels centers around how to address basic health and public safety considerations such as wastewater connections/disposal, electric power/natural gas provision, and potable water. Lastly, the location of tiny homes on wheels is a significant issue in terms community and neighborhood compatibility. The Council considered these issues at the study session and gave direction for the concerns to be addressed in a manner that would allow tiny homes on wheels to be established in the back yards of R-1 lots. New regulations are included in Article 4 and do not require a separate meter or connection to all utility systems if the applicant can prove provisions of safe and sa nitary conditions. A building permit is required for the utility hook ups and to document the tiny home location. The building permit will be the lowest level and cost of permit and include a requirement for a covenant agreement to ensure owner occupancy and allow for an annual review/inspection of the property. Remove Barriers to Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) At the April 2018 study session, the Council did not direct any changes to the recently adopted ADU Ordinance. There was public testimony at the study session about the importance of the owner occupancy requirement, particularly for protection of the R -1 single-family neighborhoods. The City Council discussion confirmed the importance of the owner occupancy requirement and since the study sessio n. More Efficient Development Review Processes As reviewed by the Council at the study session, staff proposes to consolidate the multitude of current review processes into three processes for project review ▪Tier I – Director’s Action: An administrative (staff-level) process that includes a legal ad and posting of the property, but no public hearing unless the Director determines it is warranted (currently referred to as several different terms). ▪Tier II – Director’s Hearing: Action at the Director level that includes a public notice and a hearing conducted by the applicable advisory body or review authority. This would include, for example, Development Review - Moderate, Minor Use Permits, Variances, and any development standard exceptions as requiring a Director’s Hearing. ▪Tier III – Planning Commission Permits and Actions: A permit or project review 7 LUE 4.32 Use Permit Requirements. The City shall incorporate into its zoning regulations specific criteria for evaluating use permits for bars/taverns, night clubs and late night drinking establishments. Packet Pg. 504 Item 17 requiring Planning Commission action involving public notice and a hearing. New application types have been introduced as Development Review (Minor, Mod erate, or Major) for projects that require architectural review: Tier I – Development Review Minor a.Small residential development projects b.Minor additions or alterations to existing structures Tier II – Development Review Moderate a.Residential developments with up to 10 units b.Nonresidential development of up to 10,000 gross square feet of new construction c.Hillside development Tier III – Development Review Major a.Residential developments with more than 10 units b.Nonresidential development of more than 10,000 gross square feet of new construction c.All new development and significant additions in the C-D zone d.All projects requiring an EIR Packet Pg. 505 Item 17 The revised process allows the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) to focus on architecture and design as covered in the Community Design Guidelines. The current policy framework sometimes requires the ARC to make environmental CEQA determinations which are by best practice more appropriate for the Planning Commission. The ARC (and Cultural Heritage Committee) will continue t o conduct public hearings and these hearings will be held after the project is deemed complete. The decisions of the ARC will be forwarded in the form of a recommendation to the Planning Commission or Community Development Director, depending upon the project tier. These process changes are anticipated to increase review efficiency by reducing the number of multiple discretionary decisions and appeals for a single project. Also, this revised process will be less confusing to the public and applicant since all components of the project’s entitlement will be consolidated into one linear process, as opposed to bifurcated hearings and decisions with separate advisory bodies. Parking Regulations LUCE policy calls for a gradual move toward reduced use of private cars and trucks, with a goal of a 50 percent travel mode shift to biking, walking, and use of transit and other shared services. The CAP establishes a framework through immediate and future actions to substantially reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Encouraging and accommodating use of electric vehicles are a key means to reduce emissions since transportation sector is the largest generator of emissions. Thus, efforts for the Zoning Regulations Update have focused on the parking regulations that: 1) generally reduce the amount of parking required for new development, 2) encourage shared parking, 3) require and promote increased parking for bicycles, and 4) require facilities for electric vehicle parking/recharging equipment. As directed at the Council st udy session, the parking requirements have been adjusted to be more consistent with the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) standards and rely on a project - specific parking study for a parking reduction instead of the six possible scenarios under t he current Zoning Regulations for parking reductions. This will result in more specific information and better decision making by determining the actual impacts of a parking reduction based on the unique circumstances of a particular project . The updated parking standards are contained in Article 3. Home-Based Businesses and Neighborhood Commercial Uses At the May 3, 2018 community workshop, a station was provided to introduce more intensive home-based businesses in residential neighborhoods, as well as where neighborhood commercial uses are currently allowed to provide increased walkability of residential areas (in response to Council direction from the study session). These changes have been addressed in Article 4 under the Home Occupation regulations and include reduced standards for customer visitation, employees, hours of operation, and recognition of uses such as cottage food operation and personal services, intended to be compatible with residential neighborhoods. Parking requirements have been decreased for neighborhood uses, particularly to accommodate a corner deli and the definition of a convenience store was broadened to include sales of fresh meat and produce. Packet Pg. 506 Item 17 PLANNED SUBSEQUENT ZONING REGULATIONS AMENDMENTS Planning staff has identified additional amendments to the Zoning Regulations to pursue following the adoption of this update. The purpose for these follow-up amendments as subsequent tasks are explained below. Downtown Density During the process of preparing the comprehensive update, staff investigated the option for implementing LUCE policy 4.28, which calls for allowing variable residential densities as a key strategy to encourage and increase housing production in the Downtown. Staff proposed an approach to eliminate any density standards for units 600 square feet and smaller. The City Council expressed support of this approach during the public hearing process. However, because the LUCE EIR did not address the potential impacts associated with the possible level of housing production associated with this policy change, staff determined that more in-depth policy and CEQA investigation is required before any action can occur. Staff determined the scope of work for the traffic study, including the methodology and downtown build-out scenarios. Staff anticipates returning to the Council in March 2019 upon completion of the traffic report and environmental analysis. Special Considerations (S) Overlay The S-Overlay zone provides a means to protect unique, environmentally sensitive and/or neighborhood conditions on properties citywide. Each S -Overlay is unique to site-specific conditions, which are documented in the individual ordinances for each overlay. The current Zoning Regulations (Chapter 17.56) provide limited guidance as to how to review projects subject to an overlay and do not indicate where S -Overlays have been applied. The updated S- Overlay provisions (Article 2) somewhat remedy these conditions by establishing required findings to protect the resources/conditions identified in each S-Overlay. However, the updated provisions do not identify each S-Overlay area, nor does the existing Zoning Map assign a unique S-Overlay identification number to each one. As a follow-up task, staff will develop a consistent system for tracking the S-Overlays and identifying them on the Zoning Map. Airport Overlay Zone After adoption of the LUCE, the City Council approved Ordinance 1610 (2014 Series) establishing the Airport Overlay Zone (AOZ) in response to LUCE Programs 17.16 and 17.17. The purpose of the AOZ is to ensure that all land uses within the zone are consistent with State and Federal laws and to ensure that land uses within the AOZ are compatible with the existing and future airport operations. City staff has been working wit h County ALUC (Airport Land Use Commission) staff to ensure that the new Zoning Regulations are consistent with the Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP). On May 16, 2018, the ALUC continued the matter to June 13th to allow the County and City staff more time to identify any inconsistencies of the Zoning Regulations with the ALUP regarding land uses, definitions, and noise policies. On June 26th, the City withdrew its referral to the ALUC by confirming with the Commission and County staff that no changes to the Zon ing Regulations affecting the AOZ or density within the Airport Safety Areas will be proposed at this time. Packet Pg. 507 Item 17 Instead, the City pledged to actively participate with the County to update the ALUP in a timely manner. After the ALUP is updated, the City will r efer the Zoning Regulations to the ALUC to gain a consistency determination within the areas of the City affected by airport operations. CONCURRENCES Updating the Zoning Regulations is a City team effort. The City Attorney’s office has been regularly involved in the Update since the project’s inception. The Public Works, Utilities, and Administration Departments, including Natural Resources, provided subject matter expertise. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW On September 16, 2014, the City Council certified the Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) Final Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (State Clearinghouse Number 2013121019) and adopted findings and a statement of overriding considerations pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The LUCE EIR is available for view online: http://www.slocity.org/government/department - directory/community-development/planning-zoning/general-plan The final Resolution, CEQA Findings, and Statement of Overriding Considerations is available for view online: http://opengov.slocity.org/weblink/1/doc/26033/Page1.aspx The LUCE EIR analyzed the environmental impacts of future changes that would reasonably occur with implementation of the LUCE. In accordance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, preparation of a Negative Declaration (ND) may occur if the City, as lead agency, finds that there is no evidence that the Project would not have a significant effect on the environment. Such a determination can be made only if “there is no substantia l evidence, in light of the whole record before the lead agency, that such an effect may occur (Section 21080 (c), Public Resources Code). State CEQA Guidelines Section 15152 (Tiering) allows an EIR or ND to tier from the environmental analysis of an earlier EIR or ND as follows: “Tiering refers to using the analysis of general matters contained in a broader EIR with later EIRs and negative declarations on narrower projects; incorporating by reference the general discussions from the broader EIR; and concentrating the later EIR or negative declaration solely on the issues specific to the later project….Tiering is appropriate when the sequence of analysis is from an EIR prepared for a general plan, policy or program to an EIR or negative declaration for anoth er plan, policy, or program of lesser scope, or to a site-specific EIR or negative declaration.” Additionally, according to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15168(c) (Program EIR, Use with Later Activities), a Program EIR can be used in compliance with CEQA to address the effects of a subsequent activity so long as the activity is within the scope of the project covered by the Program EIR (such as the LUCE EIR) and no new effects are found and no new mitigation measures would be required. Pursuant to CEQA, t he City prepared an Initial Study/Negative Declaration (IS/ND) to evaluate the potential environmental effects of the proposed Zoning Regulations Update. This IS/ND Packet Pg. 508 Item 17 addresses all environmental issues listed in Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. As the Zoning Regulations Update is consistent with the 2014 LUCE, the IS/ND tiers with and incorporates, by reference, the City’s previously certified Program Environmental Impact Report [EIR] (September 2014) prepared for the LUCE pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15150 (Incorporation by Reference),15152 (Tiering), and 15168 (Program EIR). The 30 -day public review period for the IS/ND ran from June 20, 2018 to July 19, 2018 and no public or agency comments were received, with the exception of agenda correspondence received for the June 27, 2018 Planning Commission hearing. As directed by the Planning Commission, minor text and formatting amendments are incorporated into the Initial Study / Negative Declaration (IS/ND) in order to clarify the use of the IS/ND in relation to the LUCE Program EIR8, to provide additional source information, and to specifically reference specific performance standards regulated by the Municipal Code . Such minor amendments are indicated by underlined and italicized text and these clarifications do not include any substantial revisions and do not change the analysis or conclusions of the publicly circulated IS/ND. Based on comments and direction received by the Planning Commission on June 27, 2018, minor amendments have been made to the IS/ND in order to clarify the use of the IS/ND in relation to the LUCE Program EIR, and to provide additional source information. As documented in the revised IS/ND, these clarifications do not include any substantial revisions and do not change the analysis or conclusions of the publicly circulated IS/ND. The Planning Commission recommended that the City Council adopt the IS/ND, inclusive of these minor clarifications. The Draft Zoning Regulations Update would make revisions, additions, cor rections and clarifications to various sections of the Zoning Regulations to ensure consistency with and successful implementation of the LUCE, as described in this agenda report. Future land uses allowed pursuant to the Draft Zoning Regulations would be subject to further entitlement review and project -specific use, development, and design standards as required by the Zoning Regulations, as updated. Additionally, future land uses would be subject to review on a project - specific basis to determine complia nce with CEQA. If necessary, project -level CEQA review will be required to determine project -specific impacts. Evaluation of future project -level impacts would be too speculative to include in the IS/ND; State CEQA Guidelines Section 15145 (Speculation) states that “If after thorough investigation, a Lead Agency finds that a particular impact is too speculative for evaluation, the agency should note its conclusion and terminate discussion of the impact”. Based on the analysis provided within the Initia l Study/Negative Declaration, the City has concluded that adoption of the Zoning Regulations Update would not result in new significant impacts on the environment that have not been previously examined or adequately addressed in the LUCE EIR. No new mitigation measures would be required, and mitigation measures that were adopted for the LUCE EIR continue to remain applicable, as such measures were incorporated into the General Plan following City Council’s adoption of the LUCE. 8 Attachment A. Exhibit A. Refer to IS/ND page 9, Coversheet Item #13. Use of this Initial Study as a tiered document and additional formatting throughout the IS/ND Packet Pg. 509 Item 17 FISCAL IMPACT When the General Plan Update was adopted in 2014 it was accompanied by a Fiscal Impact Report prepared by Applied Development Economics, Inc. The purpose of the report was to determine if the City’s General Plan Land Use Element was fiscally balanced, or if the demand for services created by new residences, for example, would outpace the ability of new revenues to support the cost of those services. The report concluded that the City’s General Plan was fiscally balanced and that new revenues expected from property tax, sales tax, and transient occupancy tax, as examples, would provide sufficient resources for the City to cover its costs , such as for public safety, parks and recreation, and general government administration. This study was not updated as part of the Zoning Regulations Update because there are no changes proposed that were not anticipated as part of the prior report. The Zoning Regulations Update is an implementation measure of the Land Use Element update, and therefore is expected to have a neutral fiscal impact. ALTERNATIVES 1. Modify the Proposed Ordinances – The Council may make modifications to the proposed Ordinances for staff to incorporate into the final documents. 2. Continue Consideration of Ordinances to a Future Date – The Council could direct staff to conduct additional research on one of more of recommended ordinance components. The Council should provide direction to staff if this alternative is chosen. 3. Direct Staff not to Move Forward with Changes to the Zoning Regulations – The Council could decide to direct staff to focus on other priorities and not pursue changes to the Zoning Regulations at this time. This alternative is not recommended because this is the culmination of an 18-month work effort and the Council approved the scope and budget on July 5, 2016 to update the Zoning Regulations to implement the LUCE. Attachments: a - Draft Ordinance b - Council Reading File - Exhibit A to Attachment a (Initial Study) c - Council Reading File - Exhibit B to Attachment a (Zoning Regs) d - CODE-1630-2018 (Ordinance 1130 modifications) e - Draft Ordinance - RZ-1628-2018 (D overlay) f - Exhibit A to Attachment e (Map) g - Draft Ordinance - RZ-1629-2018 (Bressi Rezone) h - Exhibit A to Attachment g (Map) i - LUCE Policy Implementation Table Packet Pg. 510 Item 17 ORDINANCE NO. _____ (2018 SERIES) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA REPEALING AND REPLACING TITLE 17 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE (ZONING REGULATIONS) TO IMPLEMENT THE LAND USE AND CIRCULATION ELEMENT (LUCE), CLARIFY AND ADVANCE CITY GOALS AND POLICIES, PROVIDE INTERNAL CONSISTENCY, AND TO RE-ORGANIZE THE ZONING CODE, INCLUDING THE ADOPTION OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIROMENTAL REVIEW, AS REPRESENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND ATTACHMENTS DATED JUNE 27, 2018 (ZONING REGULATIONS, GENP-0327-2017) WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a series of public hearings in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California on October 21, 2014, December 2, 2014, and December 9, 2014, for the purpose of final adoption of the Land Use and Circulation Element update project (LUCE) Resolution No. 10586 (2014 Series); and WHEREAS, on July 5, 2016, the City Council reviewed the Zoning Regulations Update scope of work, approved the project budget, and authorized issuance of a Request for Proposals (RFP) for consultant services; and WHEREAS, the City Council and Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a joint public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California on April 12, 2017, for the purpose of providing direction to the Community Development staff on particular issues to address during the Zoning Regulations Update process; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California on April 10, 2018, for t he purpose of providing policy direction regarding key issues; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a series of regular public hearings in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California from August 23, 2017, through May 23, 2018 and final hearings on June 13, 2018, June 14, 2018, and June 27, 2018, for the purpose of recommending amendments to Title 17 of the Municipal Code to implement the LUCE; and WHEREAS, City staff has conducted extensive public outreach in the form of news releases, stakeholder interviews, regular ly scheduled public hearings with the Planning Commission, and two community workshops held on June 3, 2017 and May 3, 2018; and WHEREAS, after review of the information gathered by staff during public outreach and public hearings, staff recommends the draft amendments to Tile 17 of the Municipal Code. Packet Pg. 511 Item 17 Ordinance No. _____ (2018 Series) Page 2 O ______ NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the Commission makes the following finding: 1. The Zoning Regulations Update comprehensively implements many policies and programs of the LUCE. As represented in the staff report, additional follow up actions are needed in order to further implement LUCE policies and programs not addressed by this Zoning Code Update. 2. The proposed amendments to Title 17 will not cause significant health, safety, or welfare concerns, since the amendments are consistent with the General Plan and directly implement City goals and polices. SECTION 2. Environmental Review. Pursuant to CEQA, the City prepared an Initial Study/Negative Declaration (IS/ND) to evaluate the potential environmental effects of the proposed Zoning Regulations Update, as set forth in Exhibit A. This IS/ND addresses all environmental issues listed in Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. As the Zoning Regulations Update is consistent with the 2014 LUCE, the IS/ND tiers with and incorporates, by reference, the City’s previously certified Program Environmental Impact Report [EIR] (September 2014) prepared for the LUCE pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15150 (Incorporation by Reference),15152 (Tiering), and 15168 (Program EIR). The 30 -day public review period for the IS/ND ran from June 20, 2018 to July 19, 2018 and no public or agency comments were received. Based on the analysis provided within the IS/ND, the City has concluded that adoption of the Zoning Regulations Update would not result in new significant impacts on the environment that have not been previously examined or adequately addressed in the LUCE EIR. No new mitigation measures would be required, and mitigation measures that were adopted for the LUCE EIR continue to remain applicable, as such measures were incorporated into the General Plan following City Council’s adoption of the LUCE. SECTION 3. Action. The City Council hereby repeals and replaces, in its entirety, Title 17 (Zoning) of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code as set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein. SECTION 4. Severability. If any subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect the validity or enforcement of the remaining portions of this Ordinance, or any other provisions of the city' s rules and regulations. It is the city' s express intent that each remaining portion would have been adopted irrespective of the fact that any one or more subdivisions , paragraphs, sentences, clauses, or phrases be declared invalid or unenforceable SECTION 5. A summary of this ordinance, together with the names of Council members voting for and against, shall be published at least five (5) days prior to its final passage, in The Packet Pg. 512 Item 17 Ordinance No. _____ (2018 Series) Page 3 O ______ Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated in this Cit y. This ordinance shall go into effect at the expiration of thirty (30) days after its final passage. INTRODUCED on the ___ day of ___, 2018, AND FINALLY ADOPTED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo on the ___ day of ___, 2018, on the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ____________________________________ 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. 513 Item 17 O ______ ORDINANCE NO. _____ (2018 SERIES) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING ORDINACE NO. 1130 (1989 SERIES), MODIFYING THE DESIGN CRITERIA, SECTION 5 (CODE- 1630-2018; SOUTH SIDE OF MONTEREY STREET BETWEEN 103 AND 2223 MONTEREY, INCLUSIVE) WHEREAS, on February 7, 1989, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo adopted Ordinance 1130, amending the official zoning map from C-T to C-T-S for properties on the south side of Monterey Street between 1603 and 2223 and amending the official zoning map to expand the C/OS-5 zone along San Luis Creek Drive between Monterey Street and San Luis Drive ; and WHEREAS, Ordinance 1130 (1989 Series) established design criteria for any new development or use or expansion of any existing development or use within the C -T-S zone; and WHEREAS, the Land Use Element of the City’s General Plan, Program 8.3, calls for the City to review and update Ordinance 1130 and involve residents to ensure that neighborhood concerns are addressed ; and WHEREAS, City staff has coordinated review of possible changes to Ordinance 1130 with residents of the adjacent San Luis Drive neighborhood ; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on June 27, 2018 for the purpose of considering amendments to ordinance NO. 1130; and WHEREAS, the amendments were scheduled to be considered at regular, duly noticed meeting of the City Council on August 21, 2018. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Environmental Review. Based upon all the evidence, the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt the Initial Study / Negative Declaration as prepared for the comprehensive Zoning Regulations Update (GENP-0327-2018). The initial study addresses all environmental issues listed in Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines, and tiers with and incorporates, by reference, the Land Use and Circulation Element Final Program Environmental Impact Report pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15150 (Incorporation by Reference), 15152 (Tiering), and 15168 (Program EIR). SECTION 2. Action. The City Council of San Luis Obispo herby amends the Ordinance 1130 to replace the design criteria (previously referred to as Section 5) with following criteria described below. Packet Pg. 514 Item 17 Ordinance No. _____ (2018 Series) Page 2 O ______ SECTION 3. Land Use and Design Criteria. That any new development or use or expansion of any existing development or use approved after the effective date of this ordinance shall be subject to the following design criteria: 1.All new structures approved aft er adoption of this ordinance shall be setback a minimum 20 feet from the existing top of creek bank or edge of riparian vegetation, whichever is farther from the creek flow line (subsequently called the “creek setback reference line”). The setback area may be occupied by landscaping and fencing. No new facilities for parking, active recreation or noise generating equipment may occupy the creek setback area. 2.The number and size of building openings facing the creek shall be minimized. Windows shall be no larger than the minimum required by public safety. Glazing shall not reflect sunlight toward the creek nor allow internal lighting to shine toward the creek. Balconies and/or attendant doors are prohibited. 3.Screening shall be provided between the buildings and the creek which may include fencing, decorative walls and landscaped berms, said screening shall at a minimum include restoration and enhancement of the creekside vegetation, and shall also be designed and built so as to block view corridors of the building visible from residential neighbors. 4.Lighting between the buildings and the creek shall be limited in intensity and scale to the minimum necessary for security and identification and shall be designed so as not to shine offsite. 5.The expansion or redevelopment of properties shall make maximum use of common driveways. 6.All new uses must be found by the Planning Commission to be compatible with the riparian habitat and adjacent residential uses, considering such variables as light and glare, privacy, noise and traffic. In all cases, uses shall be adequately buffered from the creek and adjacent residences in a manner which mitigates potential offsite impacts. 7.Noise generating uses such as parking and active outdoor recreation uses, such as swimming pools, outdoor bars, and gathering areas shall be located on the interior of the site, using buildings as a buffer. 8.All drainage to the creek shall be directed in a manner which does not erode the creekba nk, harm the creekside vegetation or degrade the quality of the creek and its riparian habitat. Appropriate systems may include the use of debris and rubbish screens, oil and grease traps and erosion control/energy dissipaters subject to the approval of t he City Engineer and the State Department of Fish and Wildlife. 9.Building height shall be restricted as follows: a)Between 20 and 50 feet, of the creek setback reference line, maximum height shall be 25 feet. Packet Pg. 515 Item 17 Ordinance No. _____ (2018 Series) Page 3 O ______ b)Between 50 and 80 feet of the creek setback reference line, maximum height shall be 35 feet. c)Beyond 80 feet from the creek setback reference line, maximum height shall be 45 feet. 10.Grading within the creek setback area shall be limited to that necessary to stabilize the creekbank and to accommodate landscaping, and shall be done in a manner which does not increase erosion of the creekbank or result in the removal of or significant damage to creekside vegetation. 11.As a condition of every new use established or expansion of existing use, that portion of a commercial lot which lies within the C/OS-5 zone shall be dedicated as a perpetual open space easement. 12.In special circumstances, the Planning Commission may lower the height and/or increase the setback standards established by this ordinance. 13.The revised C/OS-5 boundary and design criteria contained in this ordinance shall be recorded and referenced on the title of all affected parcels. 14.The creekside setback area and/or the area beneath the high berm on the creekside shall not be used for a public or urban trail. 15.Any structure that functions primarily as a conference or convention center shall not be allowed. Meeting and conference rooms ancillary to other approved uses are allowed. Rooms whose primary use is for social gatherings (ballrooms, etc .) shall not be located creekside. 16.Openings associated with and resulting from underground, ground, or above ground parking, oriented toward the creek or that occur on the sides of the structures within 100 feet of the creek setback reference line are prohibited. 17.During all stages of planning and building, design and engineering plans and over -the- counter- changes to the approved plans and permit shall be a matter of public record (as defined in California Government Code Section 6520), shall be noted on the official packet of material, and shall be readily available to the public upon demand. 18.Any new proposal or significant alteration to an existing development shall be subject to a use permit approved by the Planning Commission. In approving a use permit, the Planning Commission shall find that the proposed conforms to all the criteria listed in Section 3. SECTION 4. Severability. If any subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect the validity or enforcement of the remaining portions of this Ordinance, or any other provisions of the city' s rules and regulations. It is the city' s express intent that each remaining portion would have been Packet Pg. 516 Item 17 Ordinance No. _____ (2018 Series) Page 4 O ______ adopted irrespective of the fact that any one or more subdivisions , paragraphs, sentences, clauses, or phrases be declared invalid or unenforceable SECTION 5. A summary of this ordinance, together with the names of Council members voting for and against, shall be published at least five (5) days prior to its final passage, in The Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated in this City. This ordinance shall go into effect at the expiration of thirty (30) days after its final passage. INTRODUCED on the ___ day of ___, 2018, AND FINALLY ADOPTED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo on the ___ day of ___, 2018, on the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ____________________________________ 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. 517 Item 17 O ______ ORDINANCE NO. _____ (2018 SERIES) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE CITY’S ZONING MAP TO DESIGNATE AN APPROXIMATELY 15.8 ACRE PORTION OF THE C-R ZONE IN THE DOWNTOWN CORE, THE 1100 BLOCK OF HIGUERA STREET AND THE 1100 THROUGH 1300 BLOCK OF MONTEREY, AS C- R-D, RETAIL COMMERCIAL WITH A DOWNTOWN OVERLAY, ZONE, TO ALLOW FOR DOWNTOWN COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS (HEIGHT, FLOOR AREA RATION, AND PARKING REQUIREMENTS) WITH PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL (RZ- 1628-2018) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, Californ ia, on June 27, 2018; and WHEREAS, said public hearing was held for the purpose of formulating and forwarding recommendations to the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo regarding amending the zoning map; and WHEREAS, the amendments were scheduled to be considered at regular, duly noticed meeting of the City Council on August 21, 2018. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Environmental Review. Based upon all the evidence, the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt the Initial Study / Negative Declaration as prepared for the comprehensive Zoning Regulations Update (GENP-0327-2018). The Initial Study addresses all environmental issues listed in Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines, and tiers with and incorporates, by reference, the Land Use and Circulation Element Final Program Environmental Impact Report pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15150 (Incorporation by Reference), 15152 (Tiering), and 15168 (Program EIR). SECTION 2. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the Council makes the following findings: 1.The proposed “D” overlay zoning is intended to implement the vision of the Downtown and the community’s center as articulated in the General Plan Land Use Element within the Downtown Core, subject to Chapter 17.54 of the Zoning Regulations. SECTION 3. Action. The City Council of San Luis Obispo herby amends the City’s Zoning Map to designate an approximately 15.8-acre portion of the C-R zone in the downtown core, the 1100 block of Higuera Street and the 1100 through 1300 block of Monterey Street, as C- R-D, Retail Commercial with a Downtown Overlay, zone, to allow for Downtown Commercial Packet Pg. 518 Item 17 Ordinance No. _____ (2018 Series) Page 2 O ______ development standards (height, floor area ration, and parking requirements) with Planning Commission approval. SECTION 4. Severability. If any subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect the validity or enforcement of the remaining portions of this Ordinance, or any other provisions of the city' s rules and regulations. It is the city' s express intent that each remaining portion would have been adopted irrespective of the fact that any one or more subdivisions , paragraphs, sentences, clauses, or phrases be declared invalid or unenforceable SECTION 5. A summary of this ordinance, together with the names of Council members voting for and against, shall be published at least five (5) days prior to its final passage, in The Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated in this City. This ordinance shall go into effect at the expiration of thirty (30) days after its final passage. INTRODUCED on the ___ day of ___, 2018, AND FINALLY ADOPTED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo on the ___ day of ___, 2018, on the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ____________________________________ 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. 519 Item 17 Ordinance No. _____ (2018 Series) Page 3 O ______ ______________________________ Teresa Purrington City Clerk Packet Pg. 520 Item 17 O O C-C O O C-R O C-R O C-D O C-R O C-R C-R C-R C-R R-3 R-2 R-2-H R-3-H R-2-H R-3-H C-D R-3-H C-R R-2 O-H O R-3-H C-R R-2-H O R-2-H O-S PF R-2 PF OR-3 R-2 C-D-H R-2-H O-S C-D R-3 O R-2-H R-2 R-2 T O R O PALMMARSHHIGUERAJ O H N S O N MONTEREYMILLP E P P E R S A N T A R O S A Exhibit - A RZ-1628-2018 Rezone from C-R to C-R-D ¯ Packet Pg. 521 Item 17 O ______ ORDINANCE NO. _____ (2018 SERIES) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE CITY’S ZONING MAP TO DESIGNATE APPROXIMATELY 20.2 ACRES WITHIN THE R-1 AND C/OS-20 ZONES ON THE WEST SIDE OF BROAD STREET, SOUTH OF SERRANO DRIVE, AS R-1-S, LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ZONE AND C/OS-S-20, CONSERVATION/OPEN SPACE WITH A SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS OVERLAY (RZ-1629-2018; 159 & 161 BROAD STREET AND 141 BRESSI PLACE) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo, conducted a public hearing on September 23, 2015, to review of Minor Subdivision 32 -14 and identified concerns related to possible future development on the remainder parcel of the subdivision, the property known as 159 & 161 Broad Street and associated adjacent properties previously known as Bressi Ranch; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission requested that staff evaluate the possibility of designated the area as a sensitive site and adding a special consideration overlay to the properties, to ensure impacts related to hillside development, identified wildlife corridor, and creek protection are properly evaluated for any proposed new development; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on June 27, 2018; continuing the project to July 11, 2018 to revise the project to include the C/OS-20 portions of the property; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on Ju ly 11, 2018 for the purpose of considering amendments to the City’s Zoning Map to designate approximately 20.2 acres within the R-1 and C/OS-20 zones on the west side of Broad street, south of serrano Drive, as R-1-S, Low-Density Residential zone with a Special Considerations Overlay and C/OS-S-20, Conservation/Open Space with a Special Considerations Overlay, and making recommendations to the City Council regarding such amendments; and WHEREAS, the amendments were scheduled to be considered at regular, duly noticed meeting of the City Council on August 21, 2018. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Environmental Review. Based upon all the evidence, City Council adopt s the Initial Study / Negative Declaration as prepared for the comprehensive Zoning Regulations Update (GENP-0327-2018). The Initial Study addresses all environmental issues listed in Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines, and tiers with and incorporates, by reference, the Land Use and Circulation Element Final Program Environmental Impact Report pursuant to State CEQA Packet Pg. 522 Item 17 Ordinance No. _____ (2018 Series) Page 2 O ______ Guidelines Sections 15150 (Incorporation by Reference), 15152 (Tiering), and 15168 (Program EIR). SECTION 2. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the Council makes the following findings: 1.The proposed “S” overlay zoning will assure that any new development or use of the site will be subject to a Conditional Use Permit to be reviewed by the Planning Commission to address the special considerations for the site which are: protection of the wildlife habitat and corridors, preservation of hillside open space, geologica l constraints including slope stability and grading, aesthetic concerns of visually prominent sites, creek protection, and fire protection issues. SECTION 3. Action. The City Council of San Luis Obispo herby amends the City’s Zoning Map to designate the property as depicted in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein, to be R-1-S, Low-Density Residential, and C/OS-S-20, Conservation/Open Space with a Special Considerations Overlay,. SECTION 4. Severability. If any subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect the validity or enforcement of the remaining portions of this Ordinance, or any other provisions of the city' s rules and regulations. It is the city' s express intent that each remaining portion would have been adopted irrespective of the fact that any one or more subdivisions , paragraphs, sentences, clauses, or phrases be declared invalid or unenforceable SECTION 5. A summary of this ordinance, together with the names of Council members voting for and against, shall be published at least five (5) days prior to its final passage, in The Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated in this City. This ordinance shall go into effect at the expiration of thirty (30) days after its final passage. INTRODUCED on the ___ day of ___, 2018, AND FINALLY ADOPTED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo on the ___ day of ___, 2018, on the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ____________________________________ Mayor Heidi Harmon ATTEST: Packet Pg. 523 Item 17 Ordinance No. _____ (2018 Series) Page 3 O ______ ____________________________________ 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. 524 Item 17 BROADSERRANO MI S S IONBRESSIPALOMAR MURRAY MISSION R-1 C/OS-20 R-1 R-1 R-1 R-1 R-1-PD R-1 R-1 R-1 R-1 R-1 Exhibit - A RZ-1629-2018 Rezone from R-1 to R-1-S &C/OS-20 to C/OS-S-20 ¯ Packet Pg. 525 Item 17 City of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda Report, Meeting Date, Item Number Policy Number Policy Statement How Addressed in Updated Zoning Regulations 2.10. Updating & Enforcing Standards 2.10.1. Enforcing Standards. The City shall review, revise if deemed necessary, and actively enforce noise, parking, and property development and property-maintenance standards. This relates largely to enforcement. Enforcement provisions are contained in Chapter 1.24 of the SLO Municipal Code. 2.10.2. Property Maintenance Standards. The City shall implement, and regularly review and update property- maintenance regulations focused on proper enclosure of trash, appearance of yards and buildings from the street, and storage of vehicles. Property maintenance standards have been modified slightly to address concerns. 2.11. Multifamily Preferences and Standards 2.11.1. Preferences. The City shall evaluate student housing preferences and consider revising development standards to better meet them in multifamily housing near campus. Mixed use regulations have been amended. No other changes proposed at this time. 2.11.2. Multifamily Open Space and Storage Standards. The City shall review, and revise, if deemed desirable, its standards for multifamily housing so that apartments will provide usable open space and storage similar to the requirements for condominiums. Open space standards for all multi- unit developments have been standardized. 2.12. Downtown Residential Development. The City shall adopt special development standards to guide addition of dwellings within Downtown residential areas to implement Policy 2.8. The following should be included when evaluating new standards for this area: A. Requirements that new dwellings on lots with existing houses be above or behind the existing houses, and that the added building area be modestly sized and of similar architecture in comparison with the principal residences on the site and in the surrounding area; B. Requiring new buildings to reflect the mass and spacing of existing, nearby buildings; C. Requiring special parking and coverage standards; D. Requiring minimum amounts of usable open space. A and B. New setback and other standards have been established for the R-1 and R-2 zones to address compatibility concerns. C. Parking regulations have been revised to reduce auto parking requirements generally and encourage additional bike parking. D. Standards included in Article 2. 2.13. Neighborhood Compatibility. The City will consider new regulations, for Low-Density and Medium-Density Residential areas, to require special review for (1) incompatibly large houses, (2) replacement or infill homes in existing neighborhoods, and (3) accessory buildings with plumbing facilities allowing easy conversion to illegal second dwellings. The City will periodically update Community Design Guidelines for larger homes, infill housing and accessory single-story buildings. New setback and other standards have been established for the R-1 and R-2 zones to address compatibility concerns. Also, edge condition standards have been prepared to address transitions between higher density and lower density developments. 2.15. Residential Densities. The City will evaluate alternatives to the current maximum number of dwelling units per acre (based on bedroom count) and height, parking, and setback standards, to regulate residential building intensity, and bulk and mass. Floor area limits will be considered. Alternatives have been evaluated for Downtown, with direction to have FAR dictate for developments with units smaller than 600 sf. Staff will implement this direction as part of a subsequent amendment once appropriate CEQA review has been completed. 2.16. Use of Downtown Parking by Residents. The City shall evaluate the potential to use portions of City-owned parking lots and structures for residents’ parking. This issue will be addressed as part of a subsequent study. Packet Pg. 526 Item 17 Policy Number Policy Statement How Addressed in Updated Zoning Regulations 3.9. Zoning Regulations. The City shall amend its Zoning Regulations to implement the changes included in the 2014 General Plan update program. This update process and planned follow-on amendments address this policy. 3.10. Noise Control. Zoning Regulations and Community Design Guidelines will include measures such as the following to prevent unacceptable noise exposure for residential areas or other noise-sensitive uses: location and shielding of mechanical equipment; location of truck loading, trash collection areas, and loudspeakers; noise attenuation measures along property lines. New standards have been included to address mechanical equipment noise along property lines location of loading and trash collection areas. 3.13. Zoning Update for Visitor Services Uses. The City shall review zoning regulations to consider allowing visitor - service uses in office zones adjacent to community commercial zones in the Downtown and adjacent to Monterey Street between Johnson and Santa Rosa. Upper Monterey is proposed to be rezoned C-D. 3.14. Zoning Update for Emerging Technologies. The City will investigate emerging technologies and trends to evaluate whether updates to zoning regulations are needed. The use regulations have been simplified to provide flexibility over time. 4.28. Allowing Efficiency Units and Variable Density in Downtown. The City shall modify zoning regulations to allow efficiency units and variable density in the Downtown Core. Alternatives have been evaluated for Downtown, with direction to have FAR dictate for developments with units smaller than 600 sf. Staff will implement this direction as part of a subsequent amendment once appropriate CEQA review has been completed. 4.32. Use Permit Requirements. The City shall incorporate into its zoning regulations specific criteria for evaluating use permits for bars/taverns, night clubs and late night drinking establishments. Standard condition and findings have been included for such uses (in Article 4). 7.16. Airport Overlay Zone. The City shall create an Airport Overlay Zone to reflect the boundaries of the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport Land Use Plan within the City limits. The purpose of the Airport Overlay Zone is to codify airport compatibility criteria in areas for which the City may override the Airport Land Use Commission determination to ensure compliance with the requirements of the California State Aeronautics Act (Cal. Pub. Utilities Code, Section 21670, et. seq.) which establishes statewide requirements for airport land use compatibility planning, guidance from the California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook, which is published by the California Department of Transportation Division of Aeronautics to support and amplify the State Aeronautics Act requirements, and other related federal and state requirements relating to airport land use compatibility planning. Implementation of the compatibility policies will be accomplished through the Zoning Code. This zone and accompanying regulation are now in the Zoning Regulations. 7.17. Airport Land Use and Zoning Code. The City shall update its Zoning Regulations to address allowable uses and development standards for areas in which the City may override a determination of inconsistency. Zoning regulations shall be consistent with the requirements of the The City is working with the County to address consistency requirements. Packet Pg. 527 Item 17 Policy Number Policy Statement How Addressed in Updated Zoning Regulations State Aeronautics Act, use guidance from the Caltrans Airport Land Use Planning Handbook and comply with related state and federal requirements relating to airport land use compatibility. These development standards will include, but not limited to, intensity and density limitations, identification of prohibited uses, infill development, height limitations, obstructions, and other hazards to flight, noise insulation requirements, buyer awareness measures, nonconforming uses and reconstruction and the process for airport compatibility criteria reviews by the City consistent these development standards. 7.18. Review of Local General Plan and implementing Development Standards. Unless previously referred and acted upon by the City, review of General and Specific Plans and Amendments, Zoning ordinance or amendments, or Building code changes within the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport Land Use Plan boundary (Figure 9) shall include referral to the Airport Land Use Commission as specified in Section 21676(b) of the Public Utilities Code for a determination of consistency with the San Luis Obispo County Airport Land Use Plan. Per State law, this provision is in the regulations. 12.1. Zoning Regulations. Zoning Regulations consist of the zoning map, lists of uses allowed in certain zones, property-development standards such as maximum building height and minimum parking, and procedures intended to give th e interests of development applicants and other citizens fair consideration. The updated Zoning Regulations achieve all of these policy directives. Packet Pg. 528 Item 17