HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-08-2020 City Council PresentationsCity Council: Attendee Participation
Open and close your control panel using
the orange arrow
Join audio:
•Choose Computer Audio to use
computer Mic &Speakers
•Choose Telephone and dial using
the information provided
Your Participation
•Please submit your name and Item
#in the Questions panel
•When Public Comment is opened
for the Item your name will be
called and your mic unmuted
•Please do not use raise hand option.
Public Comment
City Council
Rescheduled Regular Meeting
December 8, 2020
•Verbal Public Comment
➢Participants of the webinar:
•Submit a ‘question’that includes their name
and item number (or public comment)for the
item they would like to speak on.
•Once public comment for the item is
called,your microphone will be unmuted and
you will have three minutes to speak.
3
Amendment Item A
UPDATE FROM THE EMERGENCY
SERVICES DIRECTOR ON COVID-19
____________________________________________________
Recommendation:
Receive an update from Derek Johnson, Emergency Services Director, related
to COVID-19.
4
City Manager Report
•Downtown Sweeping
•Marsh Street Bridge
•CIP Projects
•Downtown Holiday Activation
•WRRF
•Homeless
•DTSLO/CAPSLO/City Partnership
•Downtown Paving Project
•Public Art
•Housing Projects
•Avila
•San Luis Ranch
•Orcutt
•Misc. Projects
•Business Vacancies
•Task Force
•Budget Items
Emergency Services Director
Update
December 8, 2020
5
Recommendation
1.Receive an update from the
Emergency Services Director, Derek
Johnson related to COVID-19
6
EOC DIRECTOR
EOC DEPUTY DIRECTOR
LEGAL
LIAISON SAFETY
OPERATIONS SECTION
COORDINATOR
PLANNING SECTION
COORDINATOR
LOGISTICS SECTION
COORDINATOR
FINANCE SECTION
COORDINATOR
PUBLIC INFORMATION
EOC STAFF ORGANIZATION CHART
POLICY GROUP
Derek Johnson
Shelly Stanwyck
Greg Hermann
Christine Dietrick
Rodger Maggio
Disaster Council
Brigitte ElkeAaron FloydMichael CodronKeith Aggson
REOPENING SECTION
COORDINATOR
Shelly Stanwyck
EOC Structure: Incident Action Plan
Emergency Services Director: Roles & Responsibilities
Lead the Emergency Operations Center (EOC) for response to natural disasters and other
emergencies
Emergency Services-Chapter 2.24
ESD Director
Disaster Council
Powers, Duties, Offices,
Emergency Operations Plan
Expenditures
Bob Hill
8Previous Disaster Council Actions:
1.3-17-20: Proclaimed a local emergency in the City of San Luis Obispo
regarding the COVID-19 pandemic
2.3-27-20: Proclaimed the continuance of the local emergency
3.4-7-20: Resolution (11106) affirming the City will enforce all public
health restrictions imposed by the State and County.
4.7-7-20: Temporarily closed all bars and other on-sale alcohol
establishments (7/2-7/6)
5.7-21-20: Authorized the City to award public projects and to purchase
necessary equipment, supplies, and services related to supporting the
modified continued operations of businesses impacted
6.8-18-20: Allowed for the temporary expansion or establishment of Safe
Parking locations
Recent Activity at the State Level
9
COVID-19 By the
Numbers
•California
•Cases: 1.39M
•Available ICU Beds: 1,679
(As of 12/7)
State Action
•12/3/20 –Announced Regional
Stay at Home Order
•Effective within 24 hours in
Regions with less than 15% ICU
availability
•5 State Regions -County of SLO
is part of the Southern California
Region
•Prohibits Private Gatherings of
any size
•Closes sector operations except
for critical infrastructure and retail
•Remains in effect for at least 3
weeks before re-evaluation
Regional Stay at Home Order
SLO County: Effective Sunday, Dec. 6 th at midnight
Restricted Activities
•Gatherings with members of other households
•Activity not associated with the operation, maintenance, or usage of critical
infrastructure
•Non-Essential Travel
•The sale of food, beverages, and alcohol for in -store consumption
•Overnight stays at campgrounds
•All operations in the following sectors:
•Indoor and outdoor playgrounds
•Hair salons and barbershops
•Personal care services
•Museums, zoos, and aquariums
•Movie theaters (except drive-in)
•Wineries, bars, breweries, and distilleries
•Family entertainment centers
10
Regional Stay at Home Order
SLO County: Effective Sunday, Dec. 6 th at midnight
Allowed Activities
With Safety Precautions:
•Critical Infrastructure
•Schools
•Non-urgent medical and dental care
•Childcare and Pre-K
Additional modifications in addition to 100% masking and physical distancing:
•Outdoor Recreational Facilities -for the purpose of facilitating physically distanced personal
health and wellness
•Retailer / Shopping Centers -20% capacity max (35% grocery stores)
•Hotels & Lodging -allow for COVID-19 mitigation containment and treatment measures,
essential worker accommodations, or providing housing solutions
•Outdoor Worship and Political Expression
•Restaurant Take Out / Delivery
•Entertainment Production
11
Regional SAHO ICU % Availability as of December 8th
12
COVID-19 Case Count in SLO County
*As of 12/8/20 at 1:00 pm
13
1.Cases: 6,965
2.Regional ICU Capacity: 10.1%
14
City Actions
15
Expanding Business Assistance (Consideration for Tonight)
•Tenant Improvement Grant
•Business Relief Grant
•Homeless Services Support
Increased Proactive Patrols & Enforcement
Business Support & Resources
•Community and Business Hot Line
•Business Help Form
•Virtual Retail, Wellness and Dining Maps
•Business Resource Web Page
Small Business Relief Fund (Round 1)
Open SLO (Tenant Improvement Permitting Process)
Fitness in the Parks Program
Support Local Advertising Campaign
Light Up Downtown
Communications
Communication Efforts
16
Outlook
17
Regional
Status Vaccine Cal Poly
Schedule
Flu
Season
18ENFORCEMENT
1.Safety Enhancement Zone
1.Process
2.Fines
2.Citations
1.Over 150+
3.Business Compliance
1.535+ contacts & enforcement
4.Social Media
1.Don’t Post-Report!
2.The phone number is 805-783-7835 and is staffed during regular
business hours.
5.Business Support
1.The City has implemented an online Business Reopening Inquiry
form which allows business owners to ask for clarifications on what
operations can be performed at this time.
19
Recommendation
Receive an update from the Emergency
Services Director, Derek Johnson
related to COVID-19
20
Item #1
ADVISORY BODY APPOINTMENTS FOR
UNSCHEDULED VACANCIES
____________________________________________________
Recommendation:
Confirm the following appointments to the Human Relations Commission (HRC)and Mass
Transportation Committee (MTC),as recommended by the Council Liaison
Subcommittees:
Advisory Body Council Liaison Subcommittee Appointee
HRC Council Member Stewart Dusty Colyer-Worth
HRC Chair Campbell-Monza
MTC Council Member Christianson Trevor Freeman
Council Member Pease
Items #2 –#15
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 majority of the Council
chooses another time.The public may comment on
any and all items on the Consent Agenda within the
three-minute time limit.
____________________________________________________________
Recommendation:
1.Receive the staff report and presentation on proposed policy framework for Shared
Bicycle Services ("Bike Share");and
2.Authorize the issuance of a Request for Proposals (RFP)for qualified vendors to
provide and operate a Bike Share system in San Luis Obispo,at no direct cost to the
City;and
3.Authorize the City Manager to execute agreements with the selected Bike Share
vendor,if the selected proposal requires no direct expenditures by the City,and the
documents are to the satisfaction of the City Attorney;and
4.If no qualifying proposals are received,direct staff to continue monitoring the state of
the Bike Share industry,develop a funding plan for a potential Bike Share system,and
return to the Council within the next year for further direction.
Item #16
PROVIDE BIKE SHARE POLICY DIRECTION
AND AUTHORIZE A REQUEST FOR
PROPOSALS FOR A BIKE SHARE PROVIDER
Staff Presentation By:
Matt Horn, Public Works Director
Luke Schwartz, Transportation Manager
Adam Fukushima, Active Transportation Manager
Bike Share Services
Adam Fukushima
Active Transportation Manager
Luke Schwartz
Transportation Manager
December 8, 2020
Recommendation
1.Receive staff report and presentation on Policy Framework
for Shared Bicycle Services (“Bike Share”)
2.Authorize issuance of a Request for Proposals (RFP) for
vendors to provide and operate a bike share system at no
direct cost to the City.
3.If a qualified vendor is selected, authorize City Manager to
execute agreement with a vendor to begin a program
4.If no qualified proposals are received, direct staff to continue
monitoring the state of the bike share industry and return with
a funding plan within the next year for further direction.
Policy Context
•Circulation Element calls for the
evaluation of a bikeshare policy in
coordination with Cal Poly and other
educational institutions (Policy 4.2.1)
•DRAFT Active Transportation Plan
recommends development of a bike
share program
Why Consider Bikeshare?
•Currently just over 8% for
commute trips.
General Plan Circulation Element –Mode Share Targets
October 2019 Council Study
Session Direction to Staff
Develop a policy framework for bike share to
include the following:
A hybrid system allowing bikes to be docked
to stations but allow locking to standard bike
racks (no dockless)
Electric bikes should be prominent
Ideally, accommodate variety of needs
(cargo, recumbent, child seats)
Include equity considerations for low-income
and disadvantaged communities
October 2019 Council Study
Session Direction to Staff
Identify potential costs and funding model
Prepare a Draft RFP to solicit potential
vendors
With Council support and as funding allows,
initiate a bike share pilot program including
access to Cal Poly
State of the Bike Share Industry (Entering 2020)
State of the Bike Share Industry (Entering 2020)
•Several companies ended operations
nationally including Zagster (Cambria
and Arcata)
Signs of Bike Share Decline in
late 2019
•COVID-19
accelerated
economic woes
Today most existing bike share
operations are:
•Large metropolitans
•Self funded or have major
corporate sponsorship such as
Ford or Hulu
•Funded by Clean Mobility
Grants
Are Any Bike Share Systems
Still Thriving?
Case Study: Santa Cruz and
Davis
Hybrid system with all electric bikes
Vendor: Jump Bikes (with no significant city
investment)
Santa Cruz: 300 bikes; 1,800 daily trips (June
2019)
In early 2020, Jump Bikes acquired by Lime
and required scooters in order to continue
No longer a program in Santa Cruz and Davis
Is Santa Barbara Sign of
Recovery?
In 2020, Gotcha Bikes ends dockless system
UCSB
City of Santa Barbara signs agreement with
Bcycles later in 2020
No commitment of city funds (funded by Trek)
Test pilot
Too soon to draw conclusions
Rapid
Assessment
of Bike Share
in San Luis
Obispo (Alta)
System Size
& Costs
Scale
20-30 Stations
160-360 Bikes
Start-up Costs
Equipment including bikes,
payment kiosks, docks
Operating Costs
Staffing costs (including city
staff time), bike maintenance,
rebalancing of bikes, customer
service, insurance, admin
oversight
Potential Program Costs
Cost Type Unit Cost 20 Stations / 160
Bikes
30 Stations / 360
Bikes
Launch Costs $2,000 per bike $320,000 $720,000
Capital Costs $3,000 per bike $480,000 $1,080,000
Total Start-Up
Costs
$5,000 per bike $800,000 $1,080,000
Operating Costs
per year
$2,000 per bike $320,000 $720,000
Unclear if SLO market supports low/no subsidy system
(Typical Service Life of Bikes 5 -8 years)
Funding
Currently, no City funds programmed
User fees
Partnership with Cal Poly
State Grants and Public Funding
Active Transportation Program, Cap and Trade
Competitive
Is Bike Share our best use of State Grants?
Advertising
Difficult to estimate for SLO (example of SLO Transit)
Indirect Costs: Staffing Resources
Potential Users:
SLO employees who
commute in from
elsewhere
Cal Poly
Transit users
Visitors & Tourists
Events with high parking
demand
Try an Electric Bike
Will Bikeshare Help Achieve Our Mode
Shift Goals?
Not all Micromobility Trips are Equal: Less
than 50% of new trips replace trips that would have been
made by personal car, taxi, or ride hailing
Location Matters: small-medium cities with less
robust transit service saw greatest shift with micromobility
than large ones.
User Demographics: data show likely users are
disproportionately young, white, college-educated men
with higher incomes, which is similar to the current
demographic of bicycle users in general. Strategies to
target less-advantaged groups help.
Will Bikeshare Help Achieve Our
Mode Shift Goals?
Greatest Barrier Remains…
Bike Share RFP & Policy
Framework
Draft RFP Prepared: Invites proposals from
qualified bike share vendors to operate a
citywide bike share system at no direct cost
to City
One vendor to be selected for 2 -year pilot, w/
option to reevaluate after first year
Vendor proposals to be evaluated based on
ability to satisfy key criteria identified in City’s
Bike Share Policy Framework
Bike Share Policy Framework
Criteria Description
Bike Share System Type Hybrid System
(Pref for cargo, child seats,
recumbent)
Fleet Size Min 20 stations and 160 bikes
Requirement to rebalance
Equity Considerations Options for subsidized or free
bike share membership for
low-income as well as
stations installed equitably
Integration with Transit + Points for ability to integrate
with transit, combined with
subscriptions, bus passes, etc
Preference for Local Labor + Points for working with local
businesses for maintenance
and operations
Bike Share Policy Framework
Criteria Description
Public Safety & Nuisance
Issues
Plan for addressing nuisance
issues in a timely manner
(removing bikes, repair,
maintenance) and promoting
safe usage
Start-up Strategy Select one vendor through a
competitive RFP. Negotiate
contract for two-year pilot with
option to reevaluate at 1 year.
Open Data Operator is required to
provide useful data that
enables City to better
understand user behavior to
make necessary adjustments.
What Would Next Steps Look Like?
Schedule Task
1st Quarter 2021 Release RFP
1 month after RFP Select vendor, negotiate contract
3-6 months after award •Finalize system specifications (# and
type of bikes, # of stations, etc.)
•Confirm station locations & infra.
•Finalize maintenance & operations plan
6-9 months after award •Begin 2-year pilot program
•Install stations & deploy bikes
12 months after start-up Evaluate & refine program
12 months after start-up Evaluate pilot, consider extension
Concurrence
Cal Poly: City staff has had ongoing discussions with
Cal Poly (ASI & Staff). Cal Poly remains interested in
bike share; prefers to participate in City-initiated and
managed system (similar to SLO Transit service)
City Active Transportation Committee (11/19/20):
Recommend denying issuance of an RFP and to
monitor the state of shared micromobility including
conducting more study on local barriers to bike
access
Justification for Recommendation: Staffing and
financial resources would better be focused on
implementing highest priority bike/ped
infrastructure projects in Active Transportation
Plan
Recommendation
1.Receive staff report and presentation on Policy Framework
for Shared Bicycle Services (“Bike Share”)
2.Authorize issuance of a Request for Proposals (RFP) for
vendors to provide and operate bike share at no direct cost to
the City.
3.If a qualified vendor is selected, authorize City Manager to
execute agreement with a vendor to begin a program
4.If no qualified proposals are received, direct staff to continue
monitoring the state of the bike share industry and return with
a funding plan within a year for further direction.
Alternatives
1) ATC Recommendation:Do not issue RFP at
this time. Focus resources on highest priority
bike/ped infrastructure projects
2) Recommend modifications to the proposed
policy framework and approve issuance of the
RFP after modifications are incorporated
3) Defer approval of the RFP until funding
identified, perhaps as part of the FY 2021 -23
Financial Plan
PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEM #16
•Verbal Public Comment
➢Participants of the webinar:
•Submit a ‘question’that includes their name
and item number (or public comment)for the
item they would like to speak on.
•Once public comment for the item is
called,your microphone will be unmuted and
you will have three minutes to speak.
_______________________________________________________________
Recommendation:
1.Receive requested information for the Dana Street Parking District;and
2.Direct staff to survey Multi-Family Properties along Dana Street to ensure a
majority of these properties wish to be included in the Dana Street Parking
District;and
3.Direct staff to return to Council with municipal code amendments and an
update to the Dana Street Parking District Resolution based upon Multi-
Family Properties survey results.
Item #17
FOLLOW-UP ON DIRECTION PROVIDED
BY CITY COUNCIL AS PART OF THE DANA
STREET PARKING DISTRICT APPROVAL
Staff Presentation By:
Matt Horn, Public Works Director
Alex Fuchs, Parking Services Supervisor
Dana Street Parking District
Follow-up
City Council 12-8-2020
Recommendations
1.Receive requested information for the Dana Street Parking
District;and
2.Direct staff to survey Multi-Family Properties along Dana
Street to ensure a majority of these properties wish to be
included in the Dana Street Parking District;and
3.Direct staff to return to Council with municipal code
amendments and an update to the Dana Street Parking
District Resolution based upon Multi-Family Properties survey
results.
Background on Dana Street
▪Dana Street is located just west of the downtown area and has
long been used by visitors and employees for their downtown
parking needs.
▪Dana Street Residential Parking Permit District (District)was
established by Council on January 14,2020 and implemented in
May 2020.
Properties on Dana Street
▪Dana Street is comprised of 41 non-multifamily
properties,5 multifamily properties,and 2 commercial
properties.
▪Dana Street can accommodate parking for 78 vehicles
on-street;58 of which are included within the existing
District boundaries.
January 2020 Direction from Council
▪MULTI-FAMILY PERMITS.Explore the
concept of providing one parking permit for
each unit of a Multi-Family Property when the
property has eight units or less;
▪FULL STREET.Explore expanding the District
to include the entire length of Dana Street from
Nipomo Street to easterly terminus of Dana
Street;and
▪SPECIAL EVENT PROCESS.Explore the
formation of a special event process that
addresses reoccurring events that increase
parking demand.
Item 1:Explore the concept of providing 1
parking permit for each unit of a Multi-Family
Property when the property has 8 units or less
▪Availability of on-street spaces within the
District;
▪Adherence to the Municipal Code section;and
▪One multi-family property that contains more
than eight units and would not qualify to
receive parking permits.
Municipal Code Section 10.36.170,that governs the residential parking district
process,limits participation to residential properties of four dwelling units or less.The
Municipal Code would need to be amended to allow for multi-family properties
with eight units or less to be eligible for permits.
Item 2.Explore expanding the District to
include the entire length of Dana Street from
Nipomo Street to easterly terminus of Dana
Street
▪Extending eliminates open on-
street parking for residents and
visitors that do not possess a valid
parking permit
▪The addition of multi-family
properties and expansion of the
District would result in the same
capacity issue with about 40%
more permits issued for the
spaces available.
Item 3:Explore the formation of a special event
process that addresses reoccurring events that
increase parking demand.
Municipal Code Section 10.36.200(D)allows for district
residents to receive special one-day temporary permits for
events.However,there is no provision that allows special event
permits to be issued to non-residential properties.This would
require a new procedure be established that includes limits on
the number of special event parking permits provided and
frequency of special events.
Staff does not recommend pursuing a new
commercial permit process since there are
only two commercial properties within the
expanded District boundaries and there is
ample metered parking one block away on
Nipomo Street and in surface parking lot 14
(future site of Palm-Nipomo parking structure)
Another Item for Discussion -
Timed Parking Overlay Evaluation
▪The Dana Street District request also included a
recommendation to implement a pilot two-hour timed
parking overlay on top of the district.
▪Residents were initially supportive of the idea;however,
residents have stated that the timed parking overlay has not
been effective at deterring vehicles from parking within the
District beyond the two-hour time limit.
▪No Council action is required to remove the timed parking
overlay as Municipal Code Section 10.40.010 authorizes the
Public Works director or their designee(s)to determine the
location of timed parking areas in the City.
Next Steps and Council Comment
Sought
1.Does Council want to direct staff to pursue changing the
Municipal Code to allow multi-family properties of five to eight
units to participate in the district process?
2.Does Council want staff to survey the multi-family properties
of eight units or less on Dana Street to determine if a majority
wish to be included in the District?
3.Does Council want staff to expand the existing District to the
entire street if a majority of multi-family properties of eight
units or less wish to be included in the District?
4.Does Council want staff to eliminate the timed parking overlay
on Dana Street?
Recommendations
1.Receive requested information for the Dana Street Parking
District;and
2.Direct staff to survey Multi-Family Properties along Dana
Street to ensure a majority of these properties wish to be
included in the Dana Street Parking District;and
3.Direct staff to return to Council with municipal code
amendments and an update to the Dana Street Parking
District Resolution based upon Multi-Family Properties survey
results.
PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEM #17
•Verbal Public Comment
➢Participants of the webinar:
•Submit a ‘question’that includes their name
and item number (or public comment)for the
item they would like to speak on.
•Once public comment for the item is
called,your microphone will be unmuted and
you will have three minutes to speak.
____________________________________________________________
Recommendation:
Adopt a Resolution entitled “A Resolution of the Council of the City of San
Luis Obispo,California,Establishing the Water and Sewer Rates for Fiscal
Year 2020-21,”effective February 1,2021.
Item #18
WATER AND SEWER RATE REVIEW
Staff Presentation By:
Aaron Floyd, Utilities Director
Jennifer Thompson, Utilities Business Manager
Water and Sewer Rate Review
Presented by Jennifer Thompson, Utilities Business Manager
December 8, 2020
Rate Changes
Fiscal Year WATER SEWER
2019-20
July 1, 2019 5.5%5.5%
2020-21
July 1, 2020 5.5%5.0%
2020-21
February 1, 2021 3.6%3.6%
Implemented
Deferred
Proposed
Aging Infrastructure
Water
Supply
as far as
50 Miles
Away
Reduce I &
I
Continua
l
Maintena
nce
190+
Miles
pipeline
Increase
Capacity
Water Fund Credit Rating
Credit
Rating
Indicates
overall Fund
health
Reflects
ability meet
debt
obligations
Reflects
ability to
meet
operating
costs
Allows access
to loans at
lower interest
rates
Results in
savings to
ratepayers
Near Term Sewer Project Costs
WRRF Upgrade Debt Payment
WRRF Upgrade Operations
Wastewater Collections
Facility
Construction Costs
3.6%
Ozone
Generator
WTP Energy
Efficiency
Project (SST)
California
Construction
Cost Index (CCCI)
Impact to Average Customer Bill
Total Impact:
$4.76
Sewer:
$2.49
Utility Users Tax (General Fund-5% of
Water):$0.11
Water:
$2.16
COVID Customer Accommodations
Actions
taken to
Assist with
Financial
Hardships
Deferred:
Sending past
due accounts to
collections
Deferred:
July 2020 Rate
Increases to
February 2021
Suspended:
Water service
shut off for non-
payment &
related fees Waived:
Four late
charges per year
instead of one
Waived:
Industrial User
Fees
Account Delinquencies
2019
$215,000
2020
$384,600
79%
IncreaseAccounts
Over 60 Days
Past Due
Additional Customer Services
At no charge
Utility Billing
Adjustment
Committee
(UBAC)
Conservation &
Leak
Identification
Outreach and
Customer
Service
Working with 6
local charities who
provide Financial
Assistance to
customers
From
$88
To
$38
Reduced Customer Fees
Saved
customers:
$88,000
Account
Set-up
Fee Saved
customers:
$90,000
Master
Accounts
Water & Wastewater Low Income Assistance
General Fund Subsidized to Comply with Proposition 218
15% Discount
To Qualify Must Receive One:
1.Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (CalWORKS)
2.Cal Fresh (Food Stamps)
3.Supplemental Social Security Income
4.Veteran Survivor Pension Benefits
www.slowater.org
805-781-7133
Water and Sewer Grants Overview
Since 2018
Fund Type of Grant Project Awarded Amount
Sewer SRF Loan Forgiveness WRRF Upgrade $4,000,000
Sewer CalOES WRRF Upgrade $2,077,100
Sewer IRWM Implementation WRRF Upgrade $1,314,530
Sewer IRWM DAC Involvement WRRF Upgrade $78,125
Water CalOES WTP Generator $800,000
Water Prop 1B Groundwater Plume
Characterization Study
$1,196,575
Water SGMA Sustainable Groundwater
Management Act
$256,395
TOTAL $9,002,725
Customer Outreach
Future Rate Increases
Number
of
months
between
increase
s
19
Number
of
months
between
increase
s
5
Historical
number of
months
between
increases
12
Questions?
Recommendation
Adopt a resolution (Attachment A) entitled “A Resolution of the
Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, Establishing
the Water and Sewer Rates for Fiscal Year 2020 -21,” effective
February 1, 2021.
PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEM #18
•Verbal Public Comment
➢Participants of the webinar:
•Submit a ‘question’that includes their name
and item number (or public comment)for the
item they would like to speak on.
•Once public comment for the item is
called,your microphone will be unmuted and
you will have three minutes to speak.
_______________________________________________________________
Recommendation:
1.Adopt a Resolution entitled,“A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo,
California,to appropriate $3,425,000 in FY 2018-19 General Fund Unassigned Fund Balance for
immediate investment in economic development efforts and homeless services and to replenish the
appropriation with unbudgeted Local Revenue Measure Funds resulting from the passage of
Measure G-20 for Fiscal Year 2020-21”to address public health and safety related to homelessness
in response to the immediate and long-term impacts of the Covid-19 Pandemic;and
2.Authorize the City Manager,per Resolution No.11117 (2020 Series),to appropriate $3,425,000 in
unbudgeted Local Revenue Measure Funds for the 2020-21 Fiscal Year to replenish the General
Fund Unassigned Fund Balance for the efforts described above,subject to concurrence of the
Revenue Enhancement Oversight Commission.
Item #19
AUTHORIZE IMMEDIATE INVESTMENT IN
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT EFFORTS &
HOMELESS SERVICES
Staff Presentation By:
Derek Johnson, City Manager
Ryan Betz, Assistant to the City Manager
Authorize Immediate Investment In Economic
Development Efforts & Homeless Services
City Council Meeting
December 8, 2020
Recommendation
1.Adopt a Resolution entitled, “A Resolution of the City Council of
the City of San Luis Obispo, California, to appropriate
$3,425,000 in FY 2018-19 General Fund Unassigned Fund
Balance for immediate investment in economic development
efforts and homeless services and to replenish the
appropriation with unbudgeted Local Revenue Measure Funds
resulting from the passage of Measure G -20 for Fiscal Year
2020-21” to address public health and safety related to
homelessness in response to the immediate and long -term
impacts of the Covid-19 Pandemic; and
2.Authorize the City Manager, per Resolution No. 11117 (2020
Series), to appropriate $3,425,000 in unbudgeted Local
Revenue Measure Funds for the 2020 -21 Fiscal Year to
replenish the General Fund Unassigned Fund Balance for the
efforts described above, subject to concurrence of the
Revenue Enhancement Oversight Commission.
91
Background
March 17, 2020
City proclaims a local emergency in response to the
COVID-19 health emergency
November 16, 2020
County of San Luis Obispo transitions backwards from
Tier 2 (Substantial) to Tier 1 (Widespread)
December 3, 2020
Governor announces new Regional Stay Home Order.
Counties in the region will be subject to new
restrictions.
92
93
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Not Started
10% complete
25% complete
75% complete
Completed
Ongoing
Number of Actions
Meta Goal Action Status Update
Local
Business
Support
Cal Poly City
Organization Community Community
Partners Downtown Impacted
Industries
Quality of
Life Resiliency
10
Strategies
Infrastructure
& Capital
73 total
Actions
Proposed Continued Investment in
Economic Development Efforts
Expand the SLO City Small
Business Relief Grant Program
($500,000)
Implement an Economic
Development Shop Local Incentive
($200,000)
95
Proposed Continued Investment in
Economic Development Efforts
Create Grant Funding Opportunities
for Tenant Improvements (TIs)
($2,000,000)
Continued Efforts to Support Open
SLO including Downtown Vitality
($425,000)
96
Proposed Continued Investment
Homelessness Services
SLO is a Caring Community and provides significant
General Fund support to Homeless Services
Health and Social Services is a Country responsibility, and they
receive funding for that.
Cities do not receive direct funding for these services.
Cities do not have staff whose primary mission is to focus on this
issue –many of our staff are pulled in on today
The problem is acute, growing, impactful on the unsheltered,
residents, neighborhoods and businesses.
2-Year Contract Resource (Homelessness Response
Manager) to focus on the City’s role in the region,
identify funding and grants, coordinate
communications, partnerships, roles and
responsibilities, and address the crisis with current
staff
Homeless Services Support and Coordination
($300,000)
97
Recommendation by the Revenue
Enhancement Oversight
Commission
Thursday, December 3, 2020: The Revenue
Enhancement Oversight Commission (REOC), voted
5-0, to recommend to the City Council to appropriate
$3,425,000 in unbudgeted Local Revenue Measure
Funds for the 2020-21 Fiscal Year for immediate
investment in economic development efforts and
homeless services.
98
Recommendation
1.Adopt a Resolution entitled, “A Resolution of the City Council of
the City of San Luis Obispo, California, to appropriate
$3,425,000 in FY 2018-19 General Fund Unassigned Fund
Balance for immediate investment in economic development
efforts and homeless services and to replenish the
appropriation with unbudgeted Local Revenue Measure Funds
resulting from the passage of Measure G -20 for Fiscal Year
2020-21” to address public health and safety related to
homelessness in response to the immediate and long -term
impacts of the Covid-19 Pandemic; and
2.Authorize the City Manager, per Resolution No. 11117 (2020
Series), to appropriate $3,425,000 in unbudgeted Local
Revenue Measure Funds for the 2020 -21 Fiscal Year to
replenish the General Fund Unassigned Fund Balance for the
efforts described above, subject to concurrence of the
Revenue Enhancement Oversight Commission.
99
PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEM #19
•Verbal Public Comment
➢Participants of the webinar:
•Submit a ‘question’that includes their name
and item number (or public comment)for the
item they would like to speak on.
•Once public comment for the item is
called,your microphone will be unmuted and
you will have three minutes to speak.
_____________________________________________________________
Recommendation:
1.Receive a presentation on the Draft Active Transportation Plan;and
2.Provide comments and direction to staff to guide the final Draft Active
Transportation Plan to be considered for adoption.
Item #20
STUDY SESSION ON DRAFT ACTIVE
TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Staff Presentation By:
Matt Horn, Public Works Director
Luke Schwartz, Transportation Manager
Adam Fukushima, Active Transportation Manager
102
Active Transportation Plan
Council Study Session: December 8, 2020
Luke Schwartz
Transportation
Manager
Adam Fukushima
Active Transportation
Manager
Study Session Recommendation
1.Receive staff report and presentation on
the Draft Active Transportation Plan
2.Provide comments and direction to staff to
guide development of the Final Active
Transportation Plan to be considered for
adoption.
Why are we creating an Active
Transportation Plan?
First comprehensive plan on both bicycling
and walking transportation (CE Policy 5.2.5)
Increase readiness for State grants which
have added a focus on Disadvantaged
Communities
ATP at a Glance
Foundational Principles:
Sustainability & Climate Action
Equity
Community Resilience & Economic Vitality
4 Major Goals:
1.Build it.
2.Safety.
3.Accessibility
4.Equity
Structure of the Plan
Chapter 1: Introduction
Chapter 2: Vision and Goals
Chapter 3: Bicycling and Walking in SLO Today
Chapter 4: Community Engagement
Chapter 5: Recommended Bicycle and Pedestrian
Projects
Chapter 6: Bicycle and Pedestrian Programs
Chapter 7: Implementation
Appendices: Detailed Project Information and Design
Guidelines
Changes from the 2013 Bicycle
Transportation Plan
Pedestrians!
New design tools and best practices
Protected Bike Lanes
Protected Intersections
New Crossing Devices (RRFBs,
HAWKs)
Focus on intuitive routes with more
direct connections to key destinations
Climate Action Plan Goals
•Goal of carbon neutrality
by 2035
•Transportation largest
producer of GHG
•C.A.P. Pillar #4
(Connected Community)
•Achieve GP Mode
Split Goals by 2030
Climate Action Plan Goals
8%
7%
Active Transportation Plan an
important blueprint towards
achieving our Climate Action
goals
Barriers to Walking?
Barriers to Bicycling?
Types of Bicyclists in SLO
60% of SLO
Residents
Would Bike
More If More
Low -Stress
Routes and
Crossings Were
Available
Bicycle Facilities Toolkit
New to the Design
Toolbox:
Protected Bike Lanes
New to the Design Toolbox:
Protected Intersections
Bike and Ped Network
Over 240 projects of routes and crossing
improvements
Existing and Proposed Bicycle and
Shared-Use Path Network
Facility Type Existing (miles)Proposed (miles)
Shared Use Path 11 31
Bicycle Lane 37 13
Bicycle Route 26 0.4
Neighborhood
Greenway
0.5 10
Protected Bike
Lane
0 25
63 Crossing Improvements
30 Grade Separated Crossings
Cost Estimate: $50 million (low) -$406 million (high)
Project Prioritization
Priority Funding
Tier 1 Highest-priority projects
with the greatest potential to
increase bicycling and
walking
Actively pursue
funding for these
projects first
Tier 2 Moderate-priority projects
that play an important role in
the future bike and walk
network but with less
potential than Tier 1 projects
Pursue as
opportunities arise
but not at the
expense of delaying
Tier 1 projects
Tier 3 Lower-priority projects that
help complete the bike and
walking network but not
likely to generate
measurable increases in
bike and walk trips.
Mostly through grants
and where required
as a condition of new
development
Tier 1 Network: Highest priority with
greatest potential to increase citywide use with
potential to be built in a timely manner
70-80%
trips
Safety and
collisions
Disadvantaged
communities
Outreach
results
Pavement
Projects
Destination
Proximation
Tier 2 and 3 Projects
Prioritization
Factors
Proximity to Key Destinations
Schools
Parks and Open Space
Cal Poly
Downtown
Retail and Employment Centers
Transit Connections
Senior Services
Pedestrian Project Prioritization
Similar to Tier 2 bikeway prioritization
Additional Pedestrian Specific
Improvements
New Pedestrian
Programs and Goals
Parklets: Provides design guidance on parklets and
establishing a parklet program
Safe Routes to School: Proposes that the City will
create a SRTS Plan for every K-12 School
Supporting Open Street Events Such as Ciclovia
Support Demonstration Projects or Tactical Urbanism
to support residents adding enhancements to their
own neighborhoods
Implementation
Plan will be built over a number of years depending on
funding and staff resources through the 2 -year budget
process
Leveraging Funds: Incorporate improvements as part
of larger roadway resurfacing projects.
Quick-Build: semi-permanent projects that can be
designed and implemented quickly, often with lower -cost
materials
Projects Built as a Condition of Development:
Transportation Impact Fees which collect fair share
funding from development
Performance Measures
Face-to-Face Activities
Neighborhood Pop -ups at:
Lucy’s Coffee Co.
Lincoln Deli
Nautical Bean-Los Osos Valley Road
Vons in Marigold Center
Cal Poly
Downtown Farmers Market
Face-to-Face Activities
Open House Workshop at the SLO Library
Online Activities
Active Transportation Committee
Input: Over 19 Meetings
In person meetings or other input
Cal Poly ASI and Administration
Save Our Downtown
SLO RISE
Downtown Association
SLO U40
HEAL-SLO
SLO Chamber of Commerce
And many others
Concurrence
Active Transportation Committee
(Dec 3, 2020):
Recommended adoption of the Active
Transportation Plan and that staff
consider comments provided by the
ATC for inclusion into the plan where
feasible.
Response to Questions
Bob Jones Trail
•Tier 1 Segment on LOVR
(Froom Ranch to Calle
Joaquin)
•Tier 2 Segment Octagon
Barn –LOVR
•Tier 3 Segment Prado -
Marsh
•Many land owners
•Creek Impacts
•No services on path
•Personal Security Concerns
Neighborhood Greenways
ATC Comment Themes
1.Improve clarity of maps and ability to “zoom in”
2.Add additional language on how the plan fits with
wider city policies
3.Additional explanation of plan concepts including
the project tiers
4.Refinements to how causes of collisions are
described as well as language describing Vision
Zero
5.Comments on ways to improve the organization
of the plan
6.Requests to add or change certain photos to
illustrate key concepts
Public Draft
www.slobikewalk.org
Public Review Period:
11/19/20 –12/31/20
Email Comments to
afukushima@slocity.org
Active Transportation Plan
Schedule
Public
Review Draft
Until Dec
31st
ATC
Dec 3
Council
Study
Session
Dec 8
Planning
Commission
Dec 9
Council
Adoption
Feb 2
Recommendation
1.Receive a presentation on the Draft Active
Transportation Plan
2.Provide comments and direction to staff to
guide the final draft Active Transportation
Plan to be considered for adoption.
Questions for Discussion
Question #1:Does the policy framework of
the Plan provide a suitable roadmap for
reaching mode share targets identified in the
Circulation Element?
Question #2: Is Council satisfied with the
overall organization of the Plan?
Question #3: Does Council have additional
input on the proposed bicycle and pedestrian
network?
Questions for Discussion
Question #4: Would Council like to make
changes to proposed project prioritization,
namely projects in the Tiers 1 -3?
Question #5: Does Council have concerns
with establishing an ambitious target date of
2030 for completing the Tier 1 network?
Question #6: Is Council satisfied with the
proposed Performance Measures and plan
to monitor success?
PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEM #20
•Verbal Public Comment
➢Participants of the webinar:
•Submit a ‘question’that includes their name
and item number (or public comment)for the
item they would like to speak on.
•Once public comment for the item is
called,your microphone will be unmuted and
you will have three minutes to speak.
LIAISON REPORTS AND
COMMUNICATIONS
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
The next Rescheduled Regular Meeting
of the City Council is scheduled for
Tuesday, January 12, 2021 at 6:00 p.m.,
via teleconference.
The Regular Meeting of the
San Luis Obispo
City Council
will resume shortly
*Recess in Progress*