Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/02/1999, C6 - AUTHORIZATION OF APPLICATION FOR GRANT FUNDS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA'S ENVIRONMENTAL ENHANCEMENT AND MITIGATION PROGRAM council M 02-99 j acEnaa RepoRt C6� '` C I T Y O F SAN LU IS O B 1 S P 0 FROM: Ken Hampian,Assistant City Administrative Officer Prepared By: Neil HavWc,Natural Resources Manager.H? SUBJECT: AUTHORIZATION OF APPLICATION FOR GRANT FUNDS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA'S ENVIRONMENTAL ENHANCEMENT AND MITIGATION PROGRAM CAO RECOMMENDATION Adopt a resolution authorizing staff to complete and submit an application for grant monies in amount of$250,000 from the State Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation Program (EENT), which would be used in support of the acquisition of the Ayers property on Ontario Road. DISCUSSION Background The Ayers property, also known as the "Johnson Ranch", is a 242-acre property with frontage on Highways 1 and 101 about 1-%2 miles south of the City limits of San Luis Obispo on the west side of the highway. The property is characterized by rolling hills, which then change abruptly to a rather steep ridge,which is part of the Irish Hills. The property is undeveloped except for one small residence, which is visible from the Highway and is perhaps best recognized for the large billboard advertising the Apple Farm to motorists heading north into San Luis Obispo on the highway. The "Saving Special Places Report" commissioned by the City Council in 1995 and prepared by the Land Conservancy, identified the Ayers property(which was for sale at that time) as one of the highest priorities for a conservation transaction in the area around the City. For a variety of reasons the property has never sold and is currently not being actively marketed. City staff has -had discussions with the representatives of the property owners and while there has not been a commitment on their part to sell the property, there has been an interest in working out the details of such a possibility with City staff. The earlier asking price for the property was in the range of$2 million dollars, however, our recent experience with nearby properties leads us to believe that the fair market value of the property is in the range of $1.2 to $1.4 million. This has been communicated to the landowners and while they have expressed some disagreement with this figure, they have retained an interest in addressing the possibilities of conservation sale to the City of San Luis Obispo. The City did receive an award earlier this year in the-amount of$400,000 from the Regional Water Quality Control Board to support acquisition of this property. This is because a tributary to San Luis Obispo Creek flows through the property and this stream has significant restoration potential that could greatly enhance habitat for Southern Steelhead and other native fish species. C6-1 Council Agenda Report-Authorization of Application for Grant Funds Page 2 Proposed Grant Program and Request The Transportation Blueprint Legislation of 1989 created a funding program known as the Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation Program, or EEMP. This program makes available $10,000,000 statewide (subject to annual appropriation by the Legislature) for environmental enhancement projects over and above those required as mitigation for transportation projects within the State (including land acquisition, highway landscaping and urban forestry, and roadside recreation). Given the many values the Ayers property could contribute to the community as a conservation resource, and the site's high visibility from and proximity to Highway 101, staff believes that it is appropriate to seek State support for the project through this program. Given the size of the program statewide, staff feels it is reasonable to apply for the maximum grant amount of $250,000. If authorized by the Council, this will be the second application of grant support for the Ayers property as part of an anticipated four or five grant sources to assemble the funding necessary to make the project a success. Other possible outside funding sources include the State Wildlife Conservation Board, State Coastal Conservancy, and Packard Foundation. The grant deadline is November 15, 1999. We can expect to hear whether we are successful by April 2000. FISCAL EMPACT The grant, if successful, will.provide outside funding to support City acquisition of the property, thus providing a beneficial fiscal effect. The EEMP does not require matching fads, however the use of matching funds where they exist enhances the competitive value of the proposal. It is anticipated that some budgeted General Fund monies for the Open Space Protection Program would be made available at the appropriate time for this purchase. These funds together with other grant funds would be expected to make up the match, which staff will indicate in the EEMP grant application. There would be future capital costs associated with construction of restoration features, as well as costs of management of the property. The former are anticipated to be available largely from grant fimds, and the latter would be incorporated into the natural growth of the City's current Open Space Ranger Program. ALTERNATIVES The Council could decide not to pursue the grant monies. This is not recommended as simply filing the application does not commit the City to anything; if,however,we choose not to apply we will lose the opportunity entirely. Attachments 1. Resolution 2. Location Map 3. Grant Program Summary NOTE: The grant application document itself is still in preparation and a draft of the application C6-2 Council Agenda Report-Authorization of Application for Grant Funds Page 3 will be available for review in the Council Reading File. C6-J RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR GRANT FUNDS FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL ENHANCEMENT AND MITIGATION PROGRAM UNDER SECTION 164.56 OF THE STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE FOR THE PROJECT KNOWN AS AYERS PROPERTY ACQUISITION WHEREAS, the Legislature of the State of California has enacted AB 147 (Chapter 106 of the Statutes of 1989), which is intended to provide $10 million annually for a period of ten years for grant funds to local, State, and Federal agencies and nonprofit entities for projects to enhance and mitigate the environmental impacts of modified or new public transportation facilities; and WHEREAS, the Resources Agency has established the procedures and criteria for reviewing grant proposals and is required to submit to the California Transportation Commission a list of recommended projects from which the grant recipients will be selected; and WHEREAS, said procedures and criteria established by the Resources Agency require a resolution certifying the approval of application by the applicants governing body before submission of said application to the State; and WHEREAS, the application contains assurances that the applicant must comply with; and WHEREAS, the applicant, if selected, will enter into an agreement with the State of California for acquisition or development of the project; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo hereby. 1. Authorizes the filing of an application for the Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation Program for grant assistance for the above project; and 2.. Certifies that said , applicant will make adequate provision for operation and maintenance of the project; and 3. Appoints the City Administrative Officer as agent of the City to conduct all negotiations, execute and submit all documents, including, but not limited to, applications, agreements, amendments, payment requests and so on, which may be necessary for the completion of the aforementioned project. C6-4 Approved and adopted this 2nd day of November, 1999. On motion of _: seconded by _ __. _ _ _____ __ _ _ _ and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was adopted this day of 11999. Allen K. Settle; Mayor ATTEST: Lee Price, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: J _ en n, . A ey - -- - --- C6-5 ` >,\^rte`' �'`-- , ' d �.if' � ,:•' ; is ,;; ri i 'jN r 'f<,! +J�t _ e, ! f � if r'�•`y- ''`� Y � Rim,. '—C' " -.—� �05 -,_ '-^+�_��, � � , , , �%• +� _��j,.� f _ s-� _ �;� ��ff i tit �.V '�•� �1 tip.__=- .:'? / � L- �•� 'i {d• 1 521 '''�~��z..,+l� `—^ti _� d. �I :� :�"1 .•r' 1�: \ •^,,' � _•,t 1 y ' I S �♦ 1t. �1�'• � ry '1. -- +1 �.�.�„��—� �. � _� —'^r' �' � ✓ J���4tti{�,�= 4, 1 I 1 i,� i.� � Qiy s 1�� = l ._ .•.�.—;�. '�, lam•. '' �- / f � 9 ;_ :�;;' �'.�,"�"�y� ��l� �_._�.�� r� 4s •ti•.�\h, —__�.�-"'� -' 'moi { ,i�• j j-� + L y \J l y _ y71, th --, If • I l I��.r�l _ _ r..r^�� Ole 1 I L ' t.� . f _- '- CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO GREENBELT PROTECTION PROGRAM AYERS PROPERTY scale 1"= 1,200'approx. C6-6 RESOURCES AGENCY 1416 Ninth Street, Suite 1311 State of California Sacramento, CA 95814 916-653-5656 ENVIRONMENTAL ENHANCEMENT AND MITIGATION PROGRAM PROCEDURES AND CRITERIA 2000-2001 Grant Cycle 1. GENERAL INFORMATION 1-1. Purnose and Authority These procedures and criteria guide the evaluation and selection of projects under the Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation (EEM) program. This program provides grants to State, local and federal agencies and non-profit organizations to mitigate the environmental impact of modified or new public transportation facilities. The EEM program was established by the enactment of the Transportation Blueprint Legislation of 1989 (AB 471, Katz). This legislation states that it is the intent of the Legislature to allocate $10 million annually to this program for grant purposes for a 10-year period from Fiscal Year 1991-92 to Fiscal Year 2000-01. The legislation provides the following delegation of responsibilities for the EEM program. The Resources Agency prescribes procedures and criteria to evaluate grant proposals. Based on its evaluation, the Agency prepares and submits a list of proposals recommended for funding to the California Transportation Commission (CTC). The CTC annually awards grants to fund proposals from the Agency's list. 1-2. Eligible Applicants Any State, local or federal agency or 501(c)(3) non-profit entity may apply for and receive grants. The agency or entity is not required to be a transportation or highway related organization, but must be able to demonstrate adequate charter or enabling authority to cant' out the type of project proposed. Two or more entities may participate in a project with one designated as the lead agency. 1-3. Imolementation Timeline Applications for funding in the 2000-01 fiscal year (July 1. 2000 throuah June 30. 2001) must be postmarked no later than Monday. November 15. 1999 or delivered to the Resources Agency by 5 p.m. that day. C607 EEM Program Procedures and Criteria August 1999 Page 2 The Resources Agency will send a list of recommended projects and funding amounts to the California Transportation Commission (CTC) by April 15, 2000. All project applicants will be notified of the status of their application at that time. In July 2000, it is anticipated that the CTC will give preliminary approval to projects to be funded, with funding allocations to be considered at a subsequent Commission meeting upon contract approval. The Department of Transportation (Caltrans) administers contracts for approved grant projects. Environmental clearance documents for Agency recommended projects are required by the CTC, and must be submitted to the CTC in May 2000 for projects to be considered at the July 2000 meeting. Projects without environmental clearance documents will not be considered for funding. Grant funds should be expended as soon as possible after the grant is awarded by the CTC (second funding allocation vote), preferably within the first fiscal year. However, all expenditures must be made within three fiscal years. 1-4. Proiect Magnitude Grants for individual project are generally limited to $250,000. However, the Resources Agency may recommend awards exceeding the $250,000 guideline for acquisition projects only, based on the consideration of unique or unusual factors, including, but not limited to, maximum benefits in a one-time or limited opportunity, acquisition of resource lands of a considerable size, substantial leveraging, and/or projects with high statewide significance. 1-5. North/South Split In accordance with the provisions of Section 187 and 188 of the Streets and Highways Code, an attempt will be made to allocate 40 percent of the total amount recommended to projects in northern counties and 60 percent of the total amount to projects in southern counties. The southern counties are: San Luis Obispo, Kern, Mono, Tulare, Inyo, Santa Barbara, Ventura, Los Angeles, San Bernardino, Orange, Riverside, San Diego, and Imperial. For purposes of this north/south split, all other counties are considered northern counties. C6-8 EEM Program Procedures and Criteria August 1999 Page 3 2. PROJECT GUIDEIJNES 2-1. Eligible Projects The categories of environmental enhancement and mitigation projects eligible for funding are: Highway Landscape and Urban Forestry — Projects designed to offset vehicular emissions of carbon dioxide through the planting of trees and other suitable plants. Projects may be within or outside the right-of-way of a related transportation facility. However. reimbursement for the cost of vegetation planted within the public road right-of-way is limited to trees. Resource Lands — Projects for the acquisition, restoration or enhancement of resource lands to mitigate the loss of, or the detriment to, resource lands lying within or near the right-of-way acquired for proposed transportation improvements. Resource lands include natural areas, wetlands, forests, woodlands, meadows, streams or other areas containing fish or wildlife habitat. Enhancement of resource lands may include the restoration of wildlife corridors. Additionally, resource lands may contain features of archaeological or historical value. Roadside Recreation — Projects which provide for the acquisition and/or development of roadside recreational opportunities, including parks and greenways, roadside rests, scenic overlooks, trails, and sno-parks. 2-2. Related Transportation Facility To be eligible for consideration, each environmental enhancement and mitigation project must be directly or indirectly related to the environmental impact of the modification of an eAsting transportation facility (CA Constitution. Art. XIX. Sec. 1) or construction of new transportation facility. For purposes of this program, a transportation facility is defined as a public street, highway, mass transit guideway or their appurtenant features (e.g. park and ride facilities, high-occupancy vehicle lanes, transit stations, etc.) Additionally, the 'related transportation facility' must be 1) a project where construction began after January 1, 1990; or 2) a project which is not yet under 'C6-9 EEM Program Procedures and Criteria August 1999 Page 4 construction, but is included in an adopted State transportation program or in a locally adopted and certified capital outlay program. If a transportation facility is to be constructed in separate and distinct phases, each phase may be considered a separate project for purposes of this definition, provided that each phase creates an operable transportation improvement. 2-3. Minimum Proiect Requirements Projects which fail to meet these minimum requirements will not be considered further. a. All projects must demonstrate a direct or indirect relationship with the environmental impact of modifying an existing transportation facility or construction of a new transportation facility. b. All projects must provide mitigation or enhancement in addition to the mitigation required as part of the transportation project to which they are related. The EEM oroiect cannot suoulant mitigation reguined of the transportation oroiect. c. The mitigation, if in or near the right-of-way, must be compatible with and not interfere with the operation or safety of the transportation facilities. d. The mitigation must not limit currently planned or anticipated future improvements to the transportation facility. 3. PROJECT EVALUATION CRITERIA All projects will be evaluated by the Resources Agency using the following criteria and assigning values based on a point system within the ranges indicated. A maximum of 100 points may be assigned to any one project. Projects will be evaluated on the General Criteria (up to 55 points) and the appropriate Project Category Criteria (up to 45 points) In summary, the scoring allocation is as follows: C6-10