HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/16/2008, 7 - BUENA VISTA & GARFIELD AT MONTEREY INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS, SPECIFICATION NO. 90676 council M fi"Dw
9/16/2008
acEnaa REpoQt
CITY OF SAN LUI S OBISPO
FROM: Jay Walter, Public Works Director
Prepared By: Jake Hudson, Senior Traffic Engineer
SUBJECT: BUENA VISTA & GARFIELD at MONTEREY INTERSECTION
IMPROVEMENTS, SPECIFICATION NO. 90676
CAO RECOMMENDATION
1. Award a contract to Brough Construction, Inc. of Arroyo Grande, CA in the amount of
$362,463 for traffic safety improvements at Buena Vista& Garfield at Monterey, specification
no. 90676.
2. Approve a transfer of$134,463 from CIP Reserve account to this project account.
DISCUSSION
Background
The City's need for intersection improvements at Buena Vista& Garfield at Monterey were originally
identified in the 2003 Annual Traffic Safety Report and funded by Council at its November 14, 2006
meeting (Attachment 3 —Vicinity Map). From 2006 to 2008 the project went through a lengthy design
process including several public meetings with surrounding property owners and a design consultant.
During the design process two other issues were identified and addressed, a significant deficiency in
pedestrian connectivity in the immediate area and unappealing aesthetics for this City.Gateway. On
April 15, 2008 the Council approved an additional $24,000 for design to include reconstruction of
damaged sidewalk which was outside of the original project scope, $35,000 for contract construction
management, and authorized staff to advertise for construction bids.
The project was first advertised onApril 19, 2008. During this bid period contractors interested in
bidding on the project identified several significant errors and omissions in the design and contract
quantities estimated by the design consultant. Although the project had undergone plan checking from
various departments for conformity with City and Caltrans standards and specifications including
overall constructability,these particular errors and omissions were not identified during the plan
check process because they were material estimates and survey calculation issues which the
consultant was responsible for verifying. Once these errors & omissions were confirmed, staff
cancelled the bid advertisement and returned the plans and specifications to the design consultant for
correction. The project was then re-advertised on July 1, 2008. Six bids were received and opened on
August 5, 2008. The lowest bid of$362,463 was recieved from Brough Construction, Inc. of Arroyo
Grande, California. This amount was 44%or$130,000 above the original Engineer's estimate of
$232,150.
Bid & Project Validation I
Staff conducted a validation review of the lowest bid, concluding that Brough Construction's bid was '
appropriate for the scope of the construction contract and current material costs. Based on staffs
i
Buena Vista &Garfield at Monterey Intersection Improvements,Specification No.90676 Page 2
review there are three discrepancies which account for the significant difference between the
Engineer's estimate and the lowest bid:
1. The original Engineer's estimate of$232,150 was used for the bid advertisement. This amount was
not updated to reflect revised contract quantities provided by the design consultant. Using the revised
quantities the Engineer's estimate for the corrected plans and quantities is $335,797. This is $103,647
over the original Engineer's estimate used to bid the project.
2. According to a July 2008 publication by the Association of General Contractors of America,
asphalt costs have risen more than 40% since last year and 16%-20% since April 2008. This change in
asphalt cost represented an increase of approximately$18,000 in paving costs for this project.
3. A section of street paving was removed from the FY 2007-08 Paving Project and added to this
project,the estimate for that portion of work was$9,000.
Construction Bid Verification
Oringal Engineer's Estimate $232,150
$232,150
Quantity Descrepencies $103,647
Increased Paving Costs $18,000
2007-08 Paving Section $9,000
$130,647
Revised Const. Est. $362,797
Brough Const. Bid. $362,463
Although construction costs are significantly higher than estimated when council authorized bidding
the project, staff continues to believe that the cost is justifiable for the following reason. This location
experienced approximately eight to ten collisions annually and according to the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration the damages associated with these collisions is valued at approximately
$250,000 annually. Therefore, while not directly quantifiable, this one time expenditure has the
potential to mitigate approximately $1,250,000 in damages to the traveling public at this location over
a five year period. These amounts are consistent with those reported to the Council as part of the
Annual Traffic Safety Report each year. This location has also been identified as having a significant
pedestrian access deficiency between hotels, restaurants, and transit stops; this project will provide a
much needed pedestrian crossing and significantly improve access to each of these destinations. This
location is considered the northern gateway to the city and immediately serves the city's largest
concentration of hotels; however the intersection is aesthetically unappealing. This project will
significantly reduce paved area and provide landscaping and public art in its place, this will ultimately
establish a more cohesive and appealing entry to the City.
Buena Vista&Garfield at Monterey Intersection Improvements,Specification No.90.676 Page 3
Project Design
The current project design is the product of several years of development and input from surrounding
property owners,Architectural Review Committee, and the City Council. The project design was
approved by the City Council at its April 15th, 2008 meeting; however staff has attached a vicinity
map (Attachment 3) and a graphical comparison of the existing alignment and the new alignment
(Attachment 1) for the Council's reference.
Public Art Component
At its September 17, 2007 meeting, the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) reviewed the
preliminary project plans, identified this location as a key project to improve the aesthetics of the City
gateway and identified the location as a primary candidate for a public art project. The ARC directed
City staff to remove a portion of the landscape design from the primary roadway plans in order to
have the landscaping and public art designed as a single, cohesive project in which the landscape and
public art elements compliment each other. Both Public Works and Parks & Recreation staff are
working together to deliver two separate contracts; the first for public art which the Council approved
as part of the proposed public art projects for 2007-09, and the second for landscape design which
staff can award as a purchase order under the City's purchasing policy. Each of these contracts will
require that the landscape architect and the artist work directly with each other and with City.staff.
The estimated cost for the public art piece it self will be funded from public art funds and the
additional landscaping to accommodate the public art piece will be funded this project account which
is estimated at$10,000.
FISCAL IMPACT
The City's Fiscal Heath Contingency Plan was recently activated and as a result all CIP. projects are
currently under review for possible deferral or deletion. A report is planned for Council review on
September 30, 2008 that will identify and recommend project deferrals and deletions. However Brough
Construction's bid expires on September 29, 2008 and cannot be held until after Council's review of
recommended CIP deferrals and deletions. Although the analysis of the budget gap funding in FY 2008-
09 and related budget-balancing recommendations are not yet complete, the CIP review committee has
undertaken a detailed evaluation of all general fund CIP projects, and does not recommend this for
deletion or deferral for three key reasons:
1. This project is a high priority public safety improvement.
2. Significant staff, advisory body, and public effort have gone into this project and we should
capitalize on this investment.
3. The bids for this project will expire on September 29 h, 2008 and it will be more expensive to
defer the improvements of this important project.
Funding for this project was originally approved by the Council at its November 14, 2006 meeting in
the amount of $290,000. On April 15, 2008, Council approved additional funding for construction
management services, landscaping, increased construction contingencies and added sidewalk repair
adjacent to the project as additional scope, bringing the total project budget to $349,000. The lowest
� -3
Buena Vista&Garfield at Monterey Intersection Improvements,Specification No.90676 Page 4
bid received for the project was $362,463. There is an overall project shortfall of$143,463. Staff is
recommending the transfer of $134,463 from the CIP Reserve account to fund construction cost
increases and $9,000 from the Street Reconstruction and Resurfacing 2007-08 main account to fund
additional paving work transferred from that project.
Existing Project Budget New Project Budget
Total Project Estimate. $349,000 $492,463
Design Allocation: $48,000 $48,00
Construction Allocation: $241,00 $362,463
Const.Management: $35,00 $35.00
Public Art Landscaping $ $10,00
10%Contingencies: $24,00 $36,00
Project Total: $348,00 $491,463
Miscellaneous $1,00C $1,00
(PGE Permitting,Printing,etc.):
Total Cost: $349,OOC $492,46
Transfer from CIP Reserve(90215) $134,463
Street R&R 2007-08(90729) $9,00
Project Account Budget: $349,00
Total Funds Available: $349,00 $492,4
The CIP Reserve account currently has a balance of$528,022. After the transfer of these funds, the
remaining balance will be $393,559. The Street Reconstruction& Resurfacing 2007-08 main account
currently has a balance of $40,297, after the transfer of these funds the remaining balance will be
$31,297. These funds were already earmarked for a portion of work within the same project area-,
therefore there will be no fiscal impact from shifting that additional work to this project.
ALTERNATIVES
1. The Council could defer construction until a later date. However, with asphalt construction
costs increasing over 40% from last year staff anticipates construction costs will continue to increase
over time. Deferring construction would also release Brough Construction's bid which staff believes
is competitive; the next lowest bid was $45,000 more. In addition with the current temporary
alignment there is a significant pedestrian access deficiency, turning radius constraints, and visual
impacts-which will persist until the project is completed.
2. The Council could award the contract to Brough Construction without the landscaping
element of the project. This alternative will provide a cost savings of approximately $35,000 to the
project and still accomplish the primary goal of mitigating the collision pattern. However staff does
not recommend this alternative because it's not consistent with the direction of the ARC. In addition
landscaping was a key element identified during public meetings with surrounding property owners
and businesses. In addition the Parks and Recreation Department is concurrently proceeding with a
public art project which is contingent on the completion of the landscape elements of this project. If
the landscape element of this project is eliminated or deferred the public art project may have to be
eliminated or deferred as well.
Buena Vista &Garfield at Monterey Intersection Improvements,Specification No.90676 Page 5
3. The Council could not award the contract to Brough Construction, direct staff to reevaluate
the project scale for any possible cost savings measures and to return to council with a new
project design. Other than eliminating landscaping from the project as identified in alternative 2, any
modification of the project would require revised project plans and specifications and a new bid
process. Staff does not recommend this alternative because other than landscaping the project as
presented has been designed with only the essential elements in order to effectively mitigate the
collision pattern & provide pedestrian access. Although certain elements can be substituted (i.e. using
paint instead of curb for the pedestrian refuge island, etc.) these types of modifications would not
likely achieve the desired effect. In addition the plans as presented are the result of several years of
community involvement and advisory body input which has ultimately led to a unanimously accepted
design. Any significant change in the project scale would require further public outreach and would
likely cost more in material cost increases than any potential savings from reducing the project scale.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Comparison of existing alignment and new alignment
2. Contract Agreement, Brough Construction Inc.
3. Vicinity Map
Bid summary is available in the council reading file
G:\Staff-Reports-Agendas-Minutes\_CAR\2008\Transportation\90676 Buena Vista&Garfield\CAR 90676 Award.Doc
�S
ATTACHMENT
\\ i
] I \
/>
-,BUENA R TA
O�
Z
W ------
Z a ��
LV
Q
LL
LOU
slog \ti
,
\l
I
I F.
�B ENA VIST `
Z \� F
\"t
Z w
W
�\ ATTACHMENT
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
CALIFORNIA
AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT,made on this day of 2008,by and between the City of San Luis Obispo,
a municipal corporation and charter city,San Luis Obispo County,California(hereinafter called the Owner)and
BROUGH CONSTRUCTION (hereinafter called the Contractor).
WITNESSETH:
That the Owner and the Contractor for the consideration stated herein agree as follows:
ARTICLE 1, SCOPE OF WORK: The Contractor shall perform everything required to be performed, shall
provide and furnish all of the labor, materials, necessary tools, expendable equipment, and all utility and
transportation services required to complete all the work of construction of
BUENA VISTA&GARFIELD AT MONTEREY,SPEC NO.90676
in strict accordance with the plans and specifications therefor, including any and all Addenda,adopted by the Owner, in
strict compliance with the Contract Documents hereinafter enumerated.
It is agreed that said labor, materials, tools, equipment, and services shall be furnished and said work performed and
completed under the direction and supervision and subject to the approval of the Owner or its authorized representatives.
ARTICLE H, CONTRACT PRICE: The Owner shall pay the Contractor as full consideration for the faithful
performance of this Contract,subject to any additions or deductions as provided in the Contract Documents,the contract
prices as follows:
Item Item Unit of Estimated Item Price Total
No. Measure Quantity (in figures) (in figures)
BASE BID
1 CLEARING &GRUBBING AC 0.50
$18,915.00 $9,457.50
2 BENCH MARK RELOCATION EA 1 $600.00 $600.00
3 REMOVE TREE EA 1 $340.00 $340.00
4 SAWCUT CONCRETE LF 160 $7,71 $1,233.60
5 SAWCUT AC LF 580
$2.84 $1,647.20
6 ROADWAY& PARKING LOT AC/PCC CY 290
BASE SUBGRADE REMOVAL $35.00 $10,150.00
7 ROADWAY & PARKING LOT AC/BASE CY 340
SUBGRADE REMOVAL $33.65 $11,441.00
8 FINE GRADING/ EXPORT SQFT 2,400
$1.77 $4,248.00
9 REMOVE CONCRETE (CURB, GUTTER, SQFT 5,400
SIDEWALK) $1.44 $7,776.00
10 ADJUST WATER METER/VALVE WELL EA 4
FRAME COVERS TO N GRADE $250.00 $1,000.00
1 I INTEGRAL MISSION STYLE SQFT 3,600
SIDEWALK $12.87 $46,332:00
_ 1 _
ATTACHMENT
12 INTEGRAL SIDEWALK SQFT 1,250 $11.30 $14,125.00
13 ABANDON (E) FIRE HYDRANT EA 1 $2,100.00 $2,100.00
14 INSTALL(N) FIRE HYDRANT EA 1 $7,200.00 $7,200.00
15 DRIVEWAY SQFT 2,000 $10.90 $21,800.00
16 CONCRETE CROSS GUTTER& SQFT 1,000 $11.99 $11,990.00
SPANDREL
17 INSTALL(N) PAVING SECTION SQFT 7,750 $7,02 $54,405.00
AC BASE SUBGRADE
18 INSTALL(N) PAVING SECTION SQFT 4,710 $5.40 $25,434.00
AC PCC BASE SUBGRADE
19 ADJUST SEWER CO FRAME/COVERS EA 1 $560.00 $560.00
TO N GRADE
20 REMOVE (E) STRIPING/MARKINGS SQFT 200 $5.87 $1,174.00
21 INSTALL CURB &GUTTER LF 560 $39.95 $22,372.00
22 INSTALL CURB LF 440
$39.85 $17,534.00
23 INSTALL HANDICAP RAMP EA 5 $2,200.00 $11,000.00
24 PAVEMENT MARKINGS SQFT 1,200
$4.74 $5,688.00
25 PAVEMENT STRIPING LF 1,300 $3,14 $4,082.00
26 (N)TRAFFIC SIGNS EA 17 $261.00 $4,437.00
27 LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION SQFT 3,300 $9,04 $29,832.00
28 MONUMENT SIGNAGE, ELECTRICAL LS 1 $18,000.00 $18,000.00
LIGHTING &SERVICE ENCLOSURE
29 TRAFFIC CONTROL LS 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00
30 2"CONDUIT TO LIGHTING & FUTURE LF 205 $14.75 $3,023.75
LOCATION
31 PG&E CONDUIT&TRENCH LF 190 $18.30 1 $3,477.00
TOTAL PROJECT BID: $362,459.05
Payments are to be made to the Contractor in accordance with and subject to the provisions embodied in the documents
made a part of this Contract.
Should any dispute arise respecting the true value of any work omitted, or of any extra work which the Contractor may
be required to do, or respecting the size of any payment to the Contractor, during the performance of this Contract,said
dispute shall be decided by the Owner and its decision shall be final,and conclusive.
ARTICLE III,COMPONENT PARTS OF THIS CONTRACT: The Contract consists of the following documents,
all of which are as fully a part thereof as if herein set out in full,and if not attached,as if hereto attached:
1. Notice to Bidders and information forbidders.
2. Standard Specifications,Engineering Standards and Special Provisions.
2. Accepted Proposal.
4. Public Contract code Section 10285.1 Statement and 10162 Questionnaire.
5. Noncollusion Declaration.
6. Plans.
7. List of Subcontractors.
8. Agreement and Bonds.
9. Insurance Requirements and Forms.
-2-
ATTACHMENT 2
ARTICLE IV. It is further expressly agreed by and between the parties hereto that should there be any conflict between
the terms of this instrument and the bid or proposal of said Contractor, then this instrument shall control and nothing
herein shall be considered as an acceptance of the said terms of said proposal conflicting herewith.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties to these presents have hereunto set their hands this year and date first above
written.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO,
A Municipal Corporation
Ken Hampian,City Administrative Officer
APPROVED AS TO FORM: CONTRACTOR
Jonathan P.Lowell Brough Construction
City Attorney Jeff Brough,President
�� I
ATTACHMENT 3
VICIMTY NW
ir
"ft onbc ;c
gram OL
LA CL13M M
=am mx w=ncm
0161-1 0
J,y
k%
rcD
SWOON
C,
A Lea
opr
e�LIMA HEHOrIZANDUM
Date: September 16, 2008
TO: City Council RECEIVED
SEP 16 2008
VIA: Ken Hampian, City Administrative Office SLO CITY CLERK
FROM: Jake Hudson, Senior Traffic Engineer
SUBJECT: Buena Vista & Garfield at Monterey Collision History
A council member has requested collision information for the Buena Vista & Garfield at
Monterey intersection. The following table is the collision history for three years leading
up to the date the temporary realignment was installed and three years there after.
There has been no traffic collisions reported to Public Works since the temporary
realignment was installed. The project presented to Council makes the temporary safety
improvements permanent with further improvements to pedestrian access, property
access, & aesthetics as directed by the Council.
TOTAL
YEAR COLLISIONS BROAD SIDE REAR-END
2002 7 5 2
2003 10 73
TEMP 2004 9 6 3
IMPROVEMENTS Pre 2/2005 1' 1
INSTALLED FEB 05' Post 2/2005 0 0 0
2006 0 0 0
2007 0 0 0
Collision occurred just prior to installation of temporary improvements
2tOUNCIL F11CDD DIR
RED FILE O'CAO E FIN DIR
Ct' AO 2*PIRE CHIEF
MEETING AGENDA L3 6TTORNEY 20�pw DIR
DATE4 o 8'ITEM #_ �q— ,� CLERKJORIG 21POLICE CHF
❑ DEPT HEADS C' C DIR
�P�B t�lTIL DIR
LTHR DIR
�C6'�AfCfG. .
/GLF D
G:�Staff-Reports-ggendas-Minutes\ CCMemos%20081RED FILE COUNCIL MEMORANDUM BVG.doc
C0UNCIL g_ ZDD DIR
Memorandum Gd,EAO In/FIN DIA
le AO
le
JPW DIR
To: City Council 13 DEPT HEADS m PEC® CHF
EMORIG
cc: Chamber Economic Visioning Committee ❑ .,
From: Andrew CarterHP D�
Date: 09/08/08 aR DIA
Re: Chamber of Commerce Economic Visioning Committee 1'1 a Cou,✓r.�c
✓T2tBUnJ� l
Introduction
As you are aware, Clair Clarke and I are serving on the San Luis Obispo Chamber of Commerce's
Economic Visioning Committee. The Chamber Board of Directors has tasked this committee to
update the Chamber's Economic Vision Statement. The Economic Vision originally dates to 1992
and has been updated twice previously—in 1997 and 2003. It is the Chamber Board's hope that
City Council will officially endorse the new Chamber Vision once it is developed. That is why
the Chamber requested that I be Council's official representative to the Visioning Committee.
The Visioning Committee has had five meetings to date. In addition to wide-ranging committee
discussion we have received presentations from Steve DeVincinzi of SLOCOG, Bruce Gibson of
the County Board of Supervisors, and Bill Durgan of Cal Poly. We have also visited Paso Robles
and met with Paso Robles city staff.
DeVincinzi, Gibson, Durizan Presentations
Steve DeVincinzi's presentation focused on SLOCOG's"Community 2050"planning process
which is designed to foster greater countywide planning and sub-regional planning(North County,
North Coast, South County, greater SLO). It is also designed to link transportation funding with
land use planning.
Bruce Gibson's presentation focused on key trends he sees impacting the county—its businesses,
residents, and government. These trends include climate change, peak oil, the development of a
global economy, infrastructure needs and costs, changes in County agriculture, the need for Cal
Poly to become more of an economic engine, and the need for greater cooperation between the
County and its municipalities particularly as regards land use planning.
Some of the impacts of climate change and peak oil are the increased cost of commuting and thus
the greater need for residents to live and work in the same community or engage in
telecommuting.
With respect to planning, Bruce discussed the need to improve the Transfer of Development
Credit process. He said, "We already have enough legal lots in this county. We don't need to
create more. We do need to rearrange where they are."
Bruce also talked about the need to see agriculture in this county as a collection of small specialty
businesses.
RECEIVE® RED FILE
SEP 112000 [MEETING AGENDA
Report on Economic Visioning Committee DATE`� �`o ITEM #ColK>It�eA�tCcOs Page 1 of 4
SLO CITY CLERK
On the global economic front, Bruce believes there are positives and negatives for the local
economy. Outsourcing to lower wage countries is a negative, but the development of a"wired
world"has many positives. These include the growth of distance telecommuting (local residents
working for companies outside the immediate area) and the ability of local companies and
professionals to build and maintain business relationship with companies and clients outside the
local area.
Steve and Bruce's presentations caused me to think about the jobs/housing imbalance in the City
of San Luis Obispo and past countywide debates about how to split the state's RHNA numbers. I
also thought about how lower fees in the county, lower standards, and poor regional planning have
encouraged sprawl, led to water issues in Cambria and Nipomo and sewer issues in Los Osos, and
have levied high societal costs—air pollution, traffic jams, wasted gasoline used for commuting,
wasted time spent commuting, and inefficient use of infrastructure (e.g. the need to build new
schools in the South County while we're closing schools in San Luis Obispo).
Bill Durgan's presentation focused on Cal Poly's new strategic plan. Some of Cal Poly's goals are
to strengthen its graduate programs, focus even more on technology-based learning and project-
based learning, improve collaboration across disciplines particularly between the liberal arts and
technical education, focus on sustainability, improve student success and retention particularly
among minority populations, and reduce faculty course loads so that faculty can engage in more
research and consulting. Major initiatives will take place in the fields of agriculture waste and
energy recovery, disaster and emergency preparedness, food safety, the urban/wildland interface,
and teacher preparation in math and science.
Paso Robles Visit
The Visioning Committee was interested in visiting Paso Robles because of the great strides Paso
has made over the past decade and the belief among many committee members that"Paso knows
where it's going and how to get there." We wanted to see if there are things we can learn from
Paso Robles' experience.
In Paso, we received a presentation from City Manager Jim App, Assistant City Manager Meg
Williamson, and Community Development Director Ron Wisenhand. They talked about the
development of Paso's"Economic Strategy" which was a joint project of the Paso Robles
Chamber of Commerce and the City of Paso Robles. We also met with Mayor Frank Meecham
and vintner Gary Eberle.
Paso Robles has conscientiously fostered a partnership between the City, the Chamber, the Wine
Country Alliance, the Paso Robles Event Center, the Paso Robles School District, and other
community groups. In fact, the theme of Paso's Economic Strategy is "people, place, positioning,
partnership."
Paso believes its economic vitality starts with tourism which attracts high income business people
to the community, many of whom end up buying homes there and moving their companies there.
The hook for this tourism is wine and the Events Center, particularly the equestrian events which
take place at the Center.
Report on Economic Visioning Committee Page 2 of 4
From a"place"perspective, Paso sees itself as having a key asset in its downtown park which is
the city's "center." Paso is trying to develop other assets. Paso is working on improving the
quality of its "built form"through public and private investment. Paso is also focused on
"develop[ing] the Salinas River as a signature landscape and attraction." Paso is interested in
developing a downtown arts center and establishing conference facilities.
There is a lot of long range planning going on in Paso Robles. Of note is the Downtown Specific
Plan which is in the process of being developed. This plan covers more than just the downtown
proper. The planning area includes 245 city blocks from Vine Street at the west to the Salinas
River at the east, from Route 101 at the north to Niblick Road at the south.
Here are some of the things which struck me during the committee's visit to Paso Robles:
1) Paso's ability to plan big and get things done. The relatively homogenous political
environment there helps. So does the fact that much of Paso Robles was perceived as "run
down" (particularly the Spring Street corridor), thus fear of change to the built form was
less prevalent.
2) The commitment to major long-term infrastructure improvements—a new library, a new
public safety building, a new Niblick Road bridge, major park improvements, etc. The
passage of the local bond measure in Paso several years ago made this possible. Are we as
focused on long-term infrastructure improvement in San Luis Obispo? Do we have the
funds to accomplish it?
3) The commitment to economic vitality. Given our political environment, I'm not sure we
have as strong a commitment to this in San Luis Obispo.
4) Paso Robles' use of wine and the Event Center as "hooks" for economic development.
What are our hooks? Cal Poly and the Downtown? Have we leveraged these hooks
enough?
5) The focus on place. We pride ourselves on that in San Luis Obispo. I didn't realize our
neighbors to the north were also focused on it. One question I have is whether we are
taking good enough care of our jewel, the Downtown.
6) Paso is completing a Downtown Specific Plan. We have a Downtown Concept Plan. Are
the two the same? To what extent is our Downtown Concept Plan driving decision
making? To what extent should it? Does it provide enough focus for future public and
private investment?
Committee Work to Date
At this point, the committee has not yet begun the task of updating the Chamber's Economic
Vision. We've taken the approach of stepping back to square one to think about who we are as a
community and where we want to go.
Report on Economic Visioning Committee Page 3 of 4
One of our initial exercises was to develop a list of five words which each of us individually
thinks best describes San Luis Obispo. My list was "beautiful, friendly, community-minded,
collegetown, entrepreneurial." Words advanced by others included happy, fun, positive, active,
healthy, work/life balance, quality of life, diverse, tolerant, embracing, modest, unpretentious,
perfect climate(weather, geography, people, business), heritage, historical, old fashioned,
authentic, "pure California,"best of California, unique, having a sense of place, progressive,
cosmopolitan, vibrant. Our economic challenge is to build on these strengths.
One of our next steps will be to think about the economic"building blocks"we already have in
San Luis Obispo and how we can build upon them. One key building block is Cal Poly. That's
why there has been so much discussion over time about a Cal Poly research park, a Cal Poly
"business incubator," and even a Cal Poly conference center.
We're also beginning to think about what business "clusters" currently exist in the community—
where is there already a"critical mass"upon which to build and where might a small amount of
effort help develop that critical mass.
One of the thoughts I've had is that San Luis Obispo, at least from a private sector perspective, is
an "artisan economy." Agriculture is moving in that direction—away from ranching and row
crops to wine, olives, organic farming, and the like. To some extent, tourism is moving in that
direction as well—from"mass"to "class." What"industry" we have has always been that way—
small specialty manufacturers and suppliers of specialty goods. Finally, much of our growth,
particularly our entrepreneurial growth, has been in high end"services"—specifically those
services needed in the creative knowledge-based economy. This does not mean that we don't have
low-end agriculture, low-end tourism, and low-end retail with low paying jobs. What it does
mean to me is that we need to focus on high-end "artisan"niches which have the prospect of
higher paying jobs.
Another thought I've had,really a question, is how do we continue to insure the well-rounded
economic vitality of our downtown? One of the worries I have is that the economic center of the
city is continually sprawling out. We have seen this in retail with rapid growth in the Madonna/
LOVR corridor. What concerns me more, however, is the office growth taking place along South
Higuera, Broad Street, and Tank Farm. I worry about downtown becoming almost exclusively a
retail, dining, and entertainment center with the only remaining office focus being city
government, county government, and the courts. A specific problem with multiple economic
centers is that it makes the provision of public transit infinitely more complicated.
This concludes my report on the work of the Chamber's Economic Visioning Committee to date
as well as some general thoughts I've had on local economic development.
Report on Economic Visioning Committee Page 4 of 4
' September 16, 2008
Terry Mohan
2416 Santa Clara
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Ken Hampian
CAO, City of San Luis Obispo
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Ken,
As a candidate for city council two years ago I became familiar with the difficulty
of getting yourself and your view out to the general public. Now that I am
running for mayor I am attempting to not only get exposure for myself but also
for the other candidates who do not have platforms in city government to express
their opinions. When inquiring about using the city council chambers for public
televised forums involving all of the candidate for our city government I was told
that I, as a candidate, could not organize such an event that I would have to find a
non-profit organization to set it up.
I have contacted over a half dozen non-profit organizations and then went on to
the major media outlets in the city. I have not been able to find one organization
that feels it is worth their time to introduce the candidates who are opting to run
this city for the next four years. So it has fallen back onto my lap.
Pursuant to Chapter 1.1.5 of the Council Policies and Procedures the CAO has the
exclusive authority to grant the use city council chamber and set up calendar
dates. In 1.1.5, Part f. it states that providing all candidate are invited the
chamber may be used for a Candidate Forum, without any stipulation of who
needs to organize it.
This is an official request to allow me to set up a meeting with all of the
candidates for city office who would like to participate in such a forum to chose
the date(s) for the forum and choose moderators to compile and ask questions.
I would request that you give us a list of dates at night prior to the election so that
the public and all of the candidates would be available. I would like to request we
be allowed to hold at least one and possibly two forums in the chambers before
election day.
I would also request of the council to forgo any charges to the candidates as this
would be considered a public service and since the chambers already belong to
the citizens the only other charge would be the operation of the video equipment.
I would ask the council to agendise an item to allot the $400 to $600 per forum
for this service as it is pittance compared to the benefits it gives to the voters to
determine the best candidates.
Terry Mo an