HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-21-2015 B1 Strategic Budget Direction and Major City Goal Work ProgramsCity of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda Report, Meeting Date, Item Number
FROM: Katie Lichtig, City Manager
Prepared By: Jason Stilwell, Interim Director of IT & Financial Planning
Joe Lamers, Budget Manager
SUBJECT: STRATEGIC BUDGET DIRECTION AND MAJOR CITY GOAL WORK
PROGRAMS FOR THE 2015-17 FINANCIAL PLAN
RECOMMENDATION
1. Receive an updated Five-Year Fiscal Forecast; and
2. Review proposed Major City Goal and Other Important Objective work programs; and
3. Provide guidance to the City Manager regarding the recommended allocation of one-time
and ongoing budget resources to fund proposed Significant Operating Program Changes
(SOPCs), and the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), Fleet Replacement Fund, Information
Technology (IT) Replacement Fund, and Major Facility Replacement Fund; and
4. Receive an update on key informational items regarding future financial issues, including an
updated Budget and Fiscal Policy related to unfunded liabilities.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF
Strategic Budget Direction is a critical next step in the development of the two-year Financial
Plan for all funds (General, Water, Sewer, Parking and Transit Funds). This report presents an
updated General Fund Five Year Fiscal Forecast, work plans for Major City Goals and other
Important Objectives, proposed Significant Operating Program Changes and CIP projects for all
funds and proposals for the use of one-time General Fund funding. All of this is presented in
order to give the community and Council an early opportunity to provide staff guidance on any
refinements or changes that are needed so that there is the highest probability that the
Preliminary Financial Plan meets the needs and expectations of the City Council. The following
summarizes the major topics that follow.
Five Year Fiscal Forecast and Use of One-Time Funding
Attachment 1 includes the current five year fiscal forecast. Updates from the forecast the City
Council received in December 2014 include refinement of revenue estimates resulting in
decreases of $1.4 million over the five-year forecast period. The forecast continues to show
revenues exceeding ongoing expenditures throughout the five-year forecast period. The 2014-15
unrestricted General Fund balance above the minimum policy level is $3.6 million comprised of
Measure Y Contingency, over realized Measure Y revenue, and General Fund savings (Non-
Measure Y). As discussed later, this amount is proposed to be allocated to paying down
unfunded or underfunded liabilities based on the priorities established by the City Council on
February 17, 2015.
4/21/15
B1
B1-1
2015-17 Financial Plan
Strategic Budget Direction and
Major City Goal Work Programs Page 2
In addition to the projected $3.6 million year end 2014-15 amount in excess of the 20%
minimum reserve, there is $2.6 million of one-time funding projected for fiscal year 2015-16 for
other high priority Capital Improvement Plan projects. This funding becomes available because
on-going programing of this revenue is not sustainable throughout the term of the fiscal forecast
(i.e. other projected ongoing or onetime costs preclude an allocation for new reoccurring costs).
As a result, $6.2 million is recommended for use as one-time expenditures in the 2015-17
Financial Plan.
Major City Goal and Other Important Objective Work Programs
Attachment 2 details work programs and required resources for the Major City Goals and Other
Important Objectives identified by Council during the public workshop on January 24, 2015.
Conceptual approval of the work programs by the Council at this stage is not final approval of
the Major City Goal or Other Important Objective program or its budget. Formal approval of
these work programs will occur when the Council adopts the 2015-17 Financial Plan in June
2015, after additional workshops and public hearings. However, if Council finds that the work
programs do not accurately reflect Council priorities and intentions, then direction to staff is
necessary before the preliminary budget is finalized.
Allocation of Budget Resources Not Directly Related to Major City Goals
The City Manager is seeking direction from the City Council regarding expenditures for projects
and activities in the following categories: Significant Operating Program Changes (Attachment
3), and the Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) (Attachment 4) which includes the
Capital Improvement Fund Projects, Fleet Replacement Fund, Information Technology (IT)
Replacement Fund, and Major Facility Replacement Fund.
Budget Policy Change Proposed
Staff is recommending a policy change to the Fund Balance and Reserves Policy based on City
Council direction of February 17, 2015, to include the following additional language:
To the extent fund balances significantly exceed these minimum requirements and are
available after completing the annual audit, staff will return to the City Council as
part of the mid-year budget to recommend appropriation of these resources to certain
unfunded or underfunded liabilities, and underfunded deferred maintenance
requirements.
DISCUSSION
The City of San Luis Obispo has received national recognition for its use of a two-year budget
process that involves the community in the goal-setting process, emphasizes long-range financial
planning, and supports effective program management. This critical part of this process, referred
to as Strategic Budget Direction, affords the City Council an early opportunity to review the draft
work programs and associated financial resources proposed to accomplish Major City Goals and
Other Important Objectives established by the City Council in January. At this stage of the
process the City Council provides direction on any changes needed to refine these work
programs and resource allocations to better achieve the desired outcomes.
B1-2
2015-17 Financial Plan
Strategic Budget Direction and
Major City Goal Work Programs Page 3
Additionally, staff requests the City Council provide the City Manager with the policy direction
needed to allocate resources in line with Council’s expectations. The proposed allocations to
capital projects, Significant Operating Program Changes, and one-time are presented as part of
this agenda item. This process is helpful so that the developing Preliminary Financial Plan to be
presented to the City Council and community in May mirrors the Council’s expectations as much
as possible.
The City’s financial plan development process involves all City programs. While this report
may seem to focus heavily on the General Fund it is important to acknowledge that it reflects a
review of proposals from the Enterprise Funds as well. The Enterprise Funds, Water, Sewer,
Parking, and Transit, account for about 34% of the City’s financial operations. While the focus
of this report is the General Fund, the Enterprise Funds also participate in this process of
examining program operations and capital improvement projects in order to ensure their financial
sustainability in achieving mission and City-wide efficiency.
Enterprise
Fund
SOPCs Recommended Capital Improvement Projects
Number 2015-16 $ 2016-17 $ Number 2015-17 $
Parking 2 $53,600 $59,000 4 $299,670
Transit 3 $592,800 $592,900 4 $765,500
Utilities 6 $576,557 $502,027 12 $90,159,200
The focus of Strategic Budget Direction is on the proposed work programs. In addition proposed
SOPCs (Attachment 3) and CIPs (Attachment 4) not tied to a Major City Goal or Other
Important Objective work program are also included as part of Strategic Budget Direction to
provide the community and City Council an opportunity to provide input or direction. On June
16, 2015, Council will be considering the water and sewer Enterprise Funds’ rate
recommendations and the financial plans for all four Enterprise Funds.
Overall, this report highlights several positive factors including:
• Steady growth in revenue as a result of the continuing economic recovery
• Reinvestment in the City’s services, infrastructure, and deferred maintenance and
unfunded liabilities
• The City’s ability to achieve the set of Major City Goals and Other Important Objectives,
as outlined in the associated proposed work programs.
The most recent financial projections continue to indicate that City revenues will exceed
expenditures, even as the City makes new, prioritized investments in core community services,
Major City Goals and Other Important Objectives as well as Capital Improvement Plan projects.
While the overall picture is positive, the expenditures proposed are carefully considered in light
of anticipated and uncertain fiscal demands in the future including the following issues:
unfunded or underfunded liabilities and deferred maintenance, future foreseen rate increases
mandated by the California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS), continuing
strength of the economic recovery (particularly related to new development and the effects of a
prolonged drought) and unpredictable increases of the City’s general liability and workers
compensation insurance premiums. Even though all of these factors have been taken into
consideration by staff in terms of the proposals that are presented for your consideration, caution
B1-3
2015-17 Financial Plan
Strategic Budget Direction and
Major City Goal Work Programs Page 4
is warranted in that significant changes could warrant the need for prudent decision making in
the future.
1. Five-Year General Fund Fiscal Forecast
Attachment 1 includes the current five year fiscal forecast. The forecast anticipates a balanced
budget throughout the five-year period. The City’s fiscal outlook remains consistent since the
forecast was last presented to the City Council in December 2014. The forecast shows revenues
exceeding ongoing expenditures throughout the five-year forecast period. The changes are
detailed in this report, and include a revenue forecast that is revised to reflect more modest
growth in a number of revenue categories. Projected costs larger than the December forecast for
insurance premiums (liability and workers compensation) owed to the California Joint Powers
Insurance Authority (CJPIA) additionally reduce the amount of funding available for new
expenditures and are described further below. In addition, resources remain to allow for major
reinvestments in all aspects of the City’s Capital Improvement Plan.
The purpose of this forecast is to assess the General Fund’s ability over the next five years to
achieve five outcomes:
• Deliver current service levels.
• Maintain the City’s existing infrastructure and facilities based on past funding levels and
deferred maintenance liabilities.
• Preserve the City’s long-term fiscal health by aligning operating revenues and
expenditures.
• Maintain fund balance at policy levels.
• Prepay unfunded liabilities and underfunded deferred maintenance liabilities particularly
in areas of CalPERS pension liabilities, Other Post-Employment Benefits liabilities, and
road maintenance, fleet replacement, and information technology replacement.
When the forecast was last formally presented to the City Council in December 2014, it stated
that there is “a clear indication that the City is benefitting from a continuously improving
economic climate…and projects that there will be steady growth in 2014-15 and throughout the
five year forecast period.” This remains the context in the updated fiscal forecast.
City staff has prepared an interim update to the General Fund Five-Year Fiscal Forecast due to
changing conditions and new financial information. The recommendations are informed by the
forecast, and likewise, the forecast includes and has been adjusted for the proposed spending
levels outlined in the Major City Goal and Other Important Objectives Work Programs,
Significant Operating Program Change descriptions, Capital Improvement Plan project
descriptions, and proposed use of one-time funding.
The following summarizes the information included in the updated forecast.
A. Revenue Forecast
i. Current Numbers. In this forecast, the 2014-15 base revenue numbers have been
adjusted to reflect the most recent results and current year forecasts presented at the
Mid-Year Budget review in February. This results in lower projected development
services revenue due to a revised lower 2014-15 base from which the growth is
B1-4
2015-17 Financial Plan
Strategic Budget Direction and
Major City Goal Work Programs Page 5
projected. Overall, most revenues shown in this forecast are growing at rates that are
comparable to those reflected in the last five-year fiscal plan update.
ii. Property Tax. Property tax revenues in 2015-16 reflect a growth rate of 5% based
on information received from the County with future growth rates increasing at
approximately 4% per year in later years.
iii. Ongoing Revenue from New Development. The forecast includes sales tax,
property tax and transient occupancy tax estimates for both the Chinatown (Monterey
Street portion of the project) and Garden Street Terraces projects. The timeline
indicates that revenue generation from these projects is to begin in 2015-16 beginning
with development services revenue and in 2016-17 for ongoing revenue.
iv. Rental Inspection. Rental inspection program revenue is included in this update of
the forecast and is anticipated to ratchet up as described below and in the SOPC. The
City Council is scheduled to consider approval of this program in May. Inclusion in
the forecast is intended to present a comprehensive picture but not to foreshadow a
policy choice by the Council.
v. Close Out of “Triple Flip.” Sales tax revenue jumps in 2015-16 due to a one-time
influx as a result of the close-out of the triple flip. Steady sales tax growth is
otherwise projected.
vi. Gas Tax. Gas tax revenues are projected to decrease by $335,000 in 2015-16. The
California State Board of Equalization approved a 6 cent per gallon reduction in the
variable gas tax rate, bringing the total state gas tax rate down to 30 cents per gallon
effective July 1, 2015. The rate is composed of an 18 cent base rate that is allocated
under Streets and Highways Code Sections 2104-2108 to the state highway system,
cities and counties, and a variable rate, established with the Fuel Tax Swap of 2010
that is intended to replace the Proposition 42 state sales tax on gasoline. This revenue
funds the existing Streets and Sidewalk maintenance program therefore funds priority
street and sidewalk repairs completed by City forces. No reductions in the program
are proposed and General Fund revenue is recommended to backfill the lost revenue
and maintain the level of service.
B. Expenditure Forecast
i. Total SOPC Costs. Both the one-time and recurring costs resulting from the
Significant Operating Program Changes that are being recommended have been
included in this forecast. The on-going total net General Fund cost of the
recommended SOPCs is $1,585,335 beginning in 2015-16, increasing to $2,273,443
in 2016-17.
ii. Savings Assumptions. A savings rate of 2.5% of non-staffing costs and 2.9% for
staffing costs is assumed for Fiscal Year 2015-16 and 2016-17. At the end of each 2-
year cycle, only encumbered monies will be carried over to the next year.
Historically non-staffing and staffing savings has exceeded this amount.
iii. CalPERS Cost Increase. An increase of 12% in the amount of the employer cost for
the California Public Employees Retirement System Program has been assumed in
2015-16 and 9% in 2016-17. These estimates are based on the formula and estimates
provided by CalPERS. The December forecasts had growth estimates of 9% in 2015-
16 and 10% in 2016-17 which have been refined based on updated payroll data and
future year staffing.
B1-5
2015-17 Financial Plan
Strategic Budget Direction and
Major City Goal Work Programs Page 6
iv. Changes to CDBG. The Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) transfer is
increasing primarily as a result of the decrease in funding from the County. This
transfer represents an additional general fund contribution to the housing program in
the amount of $72,000 for 2015-16 and $79,000 for 2016-17.
v. Capital Investment Expenditure. Consistent with the Fiscal Sustainability and
Responsibility Other Important Objective, capital investment has been maintained
over the entire five-year forecast period to a level that funds all high ranking capital
plan projects. Projects are ranked according to the following criteria; a)
implementation of Council Goal or Objective, b) maintenance of existing
infrastructure, equipment or facilities, and c) enhance public safety. In addition,
consideration is given if a proposal completes an existing project, is mandated by the
state or federal government or if there is significant outside funding for the project.
Total General Fund capital investment, including allocation of one-time funding, is
$8,794,700 in 2015-16 and $6,046,800 in 2016-2017.
C. Use of One-Time Funding
As part of the City’s long term financial sustainability strategy, ongoing expenditures are only
recommended when there are ongoing budget resources available to pay for those costs. Funds
that are one-time in nature are available for one-time expenditures. Based on the changes
incorporated into the General Fund Five-Year Fiscal Forecast, there is $6.2 million available for
allocation to one-time expenses in 2015-16: $3.6 million from projected 2014-15 General Fund
balance and $2.6 million in 2015-16 projected revenues above ongoing expenditures.
i. 2014-15 General Fund Balance
On February 17, 2015 Council agreed to the prepayment of certain long-term liabilities and
directed staff to return at Strategic Budget Direction with specific recommendations about
proposed allocations for this purpose. Staff will include a policy statement of prepayment of the
City’s liabilities in the 2015-17 Financial Plan for the Council’s consideration in June based on
this Council direction.
The 2014-15 unrestricted General Fund balance above the minimum policy level is $3.6 million
comprised of Measure Y Contingency ($1.6 million), Measure Y over realized revenue
($600,000), and General Fund savings (Non-Measure Y). These funds are proposed to be
allocated based on direction received from the City Council on February 17, 2015 and consistent
with the proposed policy amendment as follows:
2014-15 above 20% Total
CalPERS pension liability1 $750,000
OPEB liability1 $250,000
Roads $275,000
Fleet Equipment $450,000
IT Equipment $450,000
Rental Inspection Program start-up costs2
(total project cost of $274,764) $232,000
Open Space Acquisition $250,000
B1-6
2015-17 Financial Plan
Strategic Budget Direction and
Major City Goal Work Programs Page 7
2014-15 above 20% Total
Open Space Maintenance (Capital Projects) $285,000
Laguna Lake ADA Trail $250,000
Infrastructure Investment Fund $250,000
LUCE implementation
(total year 1 project cost of $305,000) $133,000
TOTAL $3,575,000 1 Not funded by Measure Y 2 Contingent on program adoption
Additional details on which projects are recommended to be funded by the Measure Y balance
will be included in the Preliminary Financial Plan presented in June. This recommendation will
incorporate review and input from the Citizens’ Revenue Enhancement Oversight Commission.
Staffing costs such as contributions to CalPERS and OPEB liabilities will not be linked to the
Measure Y balance.
ii. 2015-16 Revenues for One-time Expenditures
In addition to the projected year end 2014-15 amount in excess of the 20% minimum reserve,
there is one-time funding projected for fiscal year 2015-16 in the amount of $2.6 million.
Although funding is available in this two year-financial plan it is not available on an ongoing
basis above what is recommended. This recommendation is consistent with the Council adopted
Fiscal and Budget policy that on-going programing costs should be funded with ongoing revenue
and the same is true for one-time costs such as capital expenditures or program implementation.
Consistent with Council direction during the 2015-16 Fiscal Year, one-time funding is proposed
to be used for the following projects or purposes:
2015-16 above 20% Total
Bikes Multimodal $400,000
Laguna Lake Dog Fencing $50,000
Police Station Feasibility Study $45,000
Laguna Lake Conservation
(total project cost of $450,000) $450,000
Fire Department Personal Protective Equipment
Turnouts
$110,000
Open Space Maintenance Year 2 (Capital Projects) $285,000
LUCE implementation
(total project cost of $305,000) $172,000
LUCE Implementation Year 2 $325,000
Wayfinding Signs $175,000
Public Safety video cameras $32,000
Traffic Signal: Monterey/Osos $225,000
Fire Training $46,000
Open Space Acquisition $250,000
Fire Dept. #1 parking lot $22,000
TOTAL $2,587,000
B1-7
2015-17 Financial Plan
Strategic Budget Direction and
Major City Goal Work Programs Page 8
It is worth noting that as a result of these projects being shown as expenditures and the fact that
they are being supported by one-time funding, the resulting Revenues Over/(Under)
Expenditures Amount shown in the Five Year Fiscal Forecast for these years will be shown as a
negative value. This is due to the fact that the planned use of these amounts will draw from one-
time fund balance in excess of the minimum 20% requirement, not from on-going revenues.
Throughout the five-year period covered by this forecast, the General Fund is expected to
maintain a reserve in excess of the minimum 20% requirement.
D. California Public Employees Retirement Program (CalPERS)
The fiscal forecast reflects anticipated increases in the employer costs related to both the rates
associated with the City’s benefit plans and the amortization of the unfunded liability. The new
funding formula approved by the governing board of CalPERS has increased the annual
contributions required to fund the program. This funding formula which takes effect in 2015-16
is designed to fully amortize the remaining unfunded retirement liabilities over 30 years. This
new formula utilizes a strategy that rapidly escalates costs in the five-year period immediately
following a change in actuarial and demographic assumptions. The City’s share of costs for the
retirement program included in the fiscal forecast are based on information provided by
CalPERS in the most recent valuation report for the period ending June 30, 2013.
CalPERS costs in FY 2015-16 are projected to increase by 12% or by $995,000 over the 2014-15
budgeted amount. $12 million is proposed for the two-year Financial Plan to reduce the City’s
CalPERS unfunded liability. By 2019-20 these costs are projected to grow by $4.1 million or
49% over the current budget. The majority of the cost increase represents payments to be made
towards the unfunded liability. Normal cost, which represents the value of the benefits earned by
current employees, is projected to remain flat primarily due to pension reform efforts adopted by
the City and State.
2. Major City Goal and Other Important Objectives Work Programs
Attachment 2 details work programs and required resources for the Major City Goals and Other
Important Objectives identified by Council during the public workshop on January 24, 2015. The
work programs are provided in draft form to offer the City Council and the community an
opportunity to review, comment, and direct changes to the work programs and associated
resources.
Conceptual approval of the work programs by the Council at this stage is not final approval of
the Major City Goal or Other Important Objective program or its budget. Formal approval of
these work programs will occur when the Council adopts the 2015-17 Financial Plan in June
2015, after additional workshops and public hearings.
It is important to note that each goal has been carefully drafted with existing resources in mind.
In consideration of the total amount of limited funding available, staff has identified areas where
augmenting existing resources in an incremental way would improve the City’s ability to
accomplish a goal or objective. In considering the trade-offs necessary to accomplish all of the
goals, the Council may decide to make adjustments or narrow the scope of certain work
B1-8
2015-17 Financial Plan
Strategic Budget Direction and
Major City Goal Work Programs Page 9
programs in order to augment others. Presenting these work programs now allows for
adjustments so that the Preliminary Financial Plan accurately reflects the City Council’s
intentions. Council can either affirm that the work programs and resource allocations accurately
reflect the Council’s priorities and intentions or provide specific direction to staff to revise the
work program and/or funding. Please see Attachment 2 for a complete discussion of all
resources allocated to accomplish these goals.
Major City Goals for 2015-17
Major City Goals –These are the highest priority Council Goals and the attached report includes
the detailed work programs, schedule and new budget augmentations recommended to achieve
each goal. The dollar amounts listed below do not reflect existing budget resources allocated to
achieve the goal and certain SOPCs and CIPs support more than one work program so the dollar
amounts referenced may not be exclusive to one work program.
• Open Space Preservation – Protect and maintain open space.
o SOPCs: $73,686 in 2015-16 and $77,298 in 2016-17
o CIP Projects: $1,337,500 in 2015-16 and $2,885,000 in 2016-17
• Housing – Implement the Housing Element, facilitating workforce, affordable, supportive
and transitional housing options, including support for needed infrastructure within the
City’s fair share.
o SOPCs: $405,151 in 2015-16 and $287,899 in 2016-17
o CIP Projects: $250,000 in 2015-16 and $0 in 2016-17
• Multi-modal Transportation – Prioritize implementation of the Bicycle Master Plan and
improve and maintain bicycle, pedestrian, and transit facilities.
o SOPCs: $754,932 in 2015-16 and $758,182 in 2016-17
o CIP Projects: $3,842,617 in 2015-16 and $10,449,100 in 2016-17
B1-9
2015-17 Financial Plan
Strategic Budget Direction and
Major City Goal Work Programs Page 10
Other Important Objectives for 2015-17
Other Important Objectives – These are important goals to accomplish and resources should be
made available in the 2015-17 Financial Plan if possible. Summary work programs and budgets are
provided. The dollar amounts listed below do not reflect existing budget resources allocated to
achieve the goal and certain SOPCs and CIPs support more than one work program so the dollar
amounts referenced may not be exclusive to one work program.
• Neighborhood Wellness – Improve neighborhood wellness, work with residents, Cuesta,
and Cal Poly; increase public safety, code compliance, and collaborative solutions.
o SOPCs: $256,164 in 2015-16 and $459,312 in 2016-17
o CIP Projects: $953,000 in 2015-16 and $2,621,200 in 2016-17
• Laguna Lake Restoration – Initiate implementation of the Laguna Lake Natural Reserve
Conservation Plan.
o SOPCs: $0 in 2015-16 and $0 in 2016-17
o CIP Projects: $450,000 in 2015-16 and $260,000 in 2016-17
• Downtown – Adopt a Downtown Concept Plan, develop a plan for expansion of Mission
Plaza, and improve safety, infrastructure, and maintenance in the Downtown.
o SOPCs: $185,978 in 2015-16 and $59,000 in 2016-17
o CIP Projects: $130,000 in 2015-16 and $1,017,400 in 2016-17
• Fiscal Sustainability and Responsibility – Implement the City’s Fiscal Responsibility
Philosophy with a focus on the reduction of unfunded liabilities.
o SOPCs: $0 in 2015-16 and $0 in 2016-17
o CIP Projects: $0 in 2015-16 and $0 in 2016-17
o $2.4 million above minimum reserve levels are projected to be allocated in 2015-16
to prepayment of the City’s unfunded liabilities and deferred maintenance (roads,
fleet replacement, and information technology replacement). The 2015-17
Financial Plan allocates $12 million to pay down a portion of the City’s CalPERS
unfunded pension liability.
3. Significant Operating Program Changes (SOPCs)
The City Manager is seeking direction from the City Council regarding expenditures for
Significant Operating Program Changes (SOPC) (Attachment 3). There are 31 SOPCs totaling
$2,808,292 net cost increases in 2015-16 and $3,427,370 in 2016-17 recommended for Council
direction. The term SOPC refers to requests to increase or decrease a program operating budget
by more than $7,500 or involves other significant changes that will benefit from Council and
public review. In addition to the SOPCs identified as necessary to achieve Major City Goals, the
current work program includes several requests to add resources to existing operating programs
to meet statutory requirements, fund cost increases required to maintain or increase an existing
level of service, or address a public safety requirement. Examples of cost increases include:
This is a highlight of significant SOPCs. The entire list of recommended SOPCs not associated
with Major City Goals is included in Attachment 3.
B1-10
2015-17 Financial Plan
Strategic Budget Direction and
Major City Goal Work Programs Page 11
• Development Services staffing and Community Development Department reorganization:
The Community Development Department, Fire Department and Public Works are
requesting to transition six positions from temporary to regular positions, continue the
use of six temporary employees, reorganize the CDD Administration Division, add a Fire
Inspector I and use a short term Human Resources Temp to provide support during
transition. This will cost approximately $1,571,617 in FY 2015-16 and $1,372,490 in FY
2016-17, all of which will be revenue off-set.
• Rental housing inspection program: This SOPC is for the necessary resources to fund the
proposed Rental Housing Inspection Program as a part of the Neighborhood Wellness
Major City Goal as specified by the City Council on December 16, 2014. These resources
will allow the City to create a program to inspect all single family and duplex rental units
every three years including a self-certification program for rentals that pass an initial
inspection. On-going costs are $251,164 in 2015-16 and $449,312 in 2016-17. These
costs will be offset by approximately $146,150 in revenue in 2015-16 and $280,074 in
2016-17. The Community Development Department projects that by 2017-18 costs will
be fully offset by revenues when full program implementation is achieved. City Council
is not anticipated to take action to approve the program until May 5, 2015. Staff will be
able to revise the Preliminary Financial Plan based on whatever action is taken regarding
this program.
• Transit short range plan service change: The City of San Luis Obispo and the San Luis
Obispo Regional Transit Authority are conducting a joint update to each entity’s Short
Range Transit Plan. This document will make recommendations for service changes,
identify opportunities for growth and improved coordination between the two agencies.
This request is a placeholder for those anticipated service change recommendations that
will result as part of the City’s SRTP update. It is anticipated that projected funding
levels may allow up to ongoing service cost increases of $500,000 in 2015-16 and
$500,000 in 2016-17, offset by $25,000 in new farebox revenue beginning in 2015-16 as
a result of ridership increase. The County Auditor-Controller is projecting a significant
decrease in Local Transportation Funds from recent revenue levels due to several factors
that reduce the sales tax base.
• California Joint Powers Insurance Authority rate premium increases: The City of San
Luis Obispo became a member of the CJPIA in 2003 for participation in the workers’
compensation and liability programs. Membership in the CJPIA means sharing risk with
other member agencies. On-going costs for general liability premiums are increasing by
$294,163 in 2015-16 and are projected to increase by $556,942 in 2016-17, based on
actual required contribution amounts provided by CJPIA for 2015-16 and a 15% increase
estimate in 2016-17. For workers’ compensation, on-going cost increases of $388,016 in
2015-16 and $690,956 in 2016-17 are based on actual required contribution amounts
provided by CJPIA for 2015-16 and a 15% increase estimate in 2016-17. Not paying the
premiums would result in having no general liability and workers’ compensation
insurance coverage.
• Utilities Department reorganization: The Utilities Department is reorganizing the
Department’s structure to meet future service demands, adding 4.25 FTE. Two FTE
B1-11
2015-17 Financial Plan
Strategic Budget Direction and
Major City Goal Work Programs Page 12
(Control Systems Administrator and Control Systems Technician) are to support complex
control systems that are integral to all Utilities operational functions. These positions will
show up in the Information Technology Division. One FTE is a Utilities Engineer/Project
Manager focused on capital projects, systems modeling, and development review. A
fourth FTE is a Health and Safety Engineer to ensure safety for citizens and employees
alike. A workload assessment for administrative support indicated that an increase in
staffing is warranted. A 0.75 FTE Administrative Assistant is proposed to become full-
time. The net new ongoing costs of this SOPC is $382,200 beginning in 2015-16 split
equally between the water and wastewater divisions and funded by water and wastewater
rate revenues.
4. Capital Improvement Plan
The City Manager is seeking direction from the City Council regarding expenditures for the
Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) (Attachment 4) which includes the Capital
Improvement Fund Projects, Fleet Replacement Fund, Information Technology (IT)
Replacement Fund, and Major Facility Replacement Fund. The Capital Improvement Plan (CIP)
provides the City with a mechanism to systematically plan, schedule, and finance capital projects
to ensure the maintenance and reliability of the City’s existing infrastructure and equipment in a
cost-effective and reliable manner as well as deliver new facilities. A CIP Project is defined in
the City’s Budget and Fiscal Policies to include construction projects and equipment purchases
which cost $25,000 or more. This report presents descriptions of the projects proposed for
funding during the 2015-17 Financial Plan, and summary information for the projects that make
up the entire five-year plan.
The City Council has consistently expressed a clear preference for reinvestment in the CIP. The
total amount of funding recommended by the City Manager for the 2015-17 General Fund CIP is
$14.8 million. This increased level of investment is possible because of the improving fiscal
outlook and the availability of one-time funding.
Overall, the attached CIP maintains a significant level of reinvestment in capital infrastructure,
fleet, and information technology. The CIP proposed for 2015-17 is within the existing capacity
of staff to manage. As a result, the City Manager is recommending an increase in the CIP during
the 2015-17 Financial Plan, and increasing that level of investment through the 5 year CIP
planning horizon.
A. Fleet Replacement Fund
The City maintains a fund for the replacement of the City’s fleet (including 322 vehicles,
generators and other equipment), such as fire trucks, police motorcycles, heavy construction
equipment and other vehicles that are used to provide service to the community. Maintaining the
systematic replacement schedule allows the City to plan for large expenditures across a longer
period of time than the five-year time horizon of the CIP. The City Manager is recommending
that the Council allocate $1,729,200 to the Fleet Fund to finance the replacement cost for 50
General Fund vehicles in the City’s fleet during the 2015-17 Financial Plan period. The total
General Fund purchase price of these vehicles will be $3,567,000. Twelve Enterprise Fund
vehicles are proposed to be replaced during the two year period of 2015-17, anticipated to cost
B1-12
2015-17 Financial Plan
Strategic Budget Direction and
Major City Goal Work Programs Page 13
$741,600. Two vehicles (a street sweeper and fire engine) are proposed to be lease-purchases
during 2015-17 consistent with past practice to lease purchase vehicles in excess of a $200,000
purchase price. The proposed replacement of fleet vehicles addresses a pent-up demand as
limited funding had been available to replace aging vehicles in the City’s fleet in recent budget
cycles. Descriptions of the proposed fleet replacements are included in the CIP, Attachment 4.
The Fleet Replacement Fund was evaluated relative to the Fiscal Responsibility Philosophy and
Fiscal Sustainability and Responsibility Other Important Objective. Based on the evaluation and
the direction of the City Council on February 17, 2015, the City Manager recommends an
infusion of one-time funding of $450,000 to the Fund. The City Council should be aware that the
proposed reinvestment in the City’s fleet will cause the Fleet Replacement Fund to fall slightly
below the revised contingency reserve policy level of $500,000 by fiscal year 2017-18. It is
important to note that the Fleet Replacement Fund maintains a reserve throughout the five year
planning horizon. With the fleet purchases proposed, the City will be addressing its most urgent
fleet equipment replacement needs and retiring many vehicles that are beyond their useful life.
B. Information Technology (IT) Replacement Fund
In December 2012, the City Council approved an amendment to the City’s budget policies to
establish an IT Replacement Fund beginning with the 2012-13 fiscal year. Similar to fleet, the IT
fund allows for a replacement schedule of critical IT infrastructure to be replaced over time.
Over the past several years, the City has made major investments in IT infrastructure including
broadband, emergency communications equipment, data and storage servers, and software
applications that support efficiency and customer service and meet Federal requirements for
security. The IT Replacement Fund will ensure that the City is in a position to replace this
equipment when it is needed. The City Manager is recommending that the Council allocate a
total of $1,782,500 to fund IT projects during 2015-17. Descriptions of the proposed new IT
projects are also included in CIP, Attachment 4.
The IT Replacement Fund was evaluated relative to the Fiscal Responsibility Philosophy and
Fiscal Sustainability and Responsibility Other Important Objective. Based on the evaluation and
the direction of the City Council on February 17, 2015, the City Manager recommends an
infusion of one-time funding of $450,000 to the Fund. The City Council should be aware that the
IT replacement schedule projects additional funding requirements beyond what is now reflected
in fiscal forecast in 2019-20 as several major replacement projects are anticipated in that fiscal
year. Staff will further evaluate the timing requirements of these replacement projects during the
upcoming fiscal year.
C. Major Facility Replacement Fund
As part of the General Fund Five-Year Fiscal Forecast presented to the City Council in
December, staff identified the need for major equipment replacement funding. Planning for long-
term facility needs is a prudent practice that helps maintain the City’s fiscal well-being.
Accordingly, the forecast included funding for the Major Facility Replacement Fund. The current
forecast maintains investment in the Major Facility Replacement Fund at $457,000 in 2015-16
growing to $791,000 in 2019-20. Projects considered under this fund would replace or remodel
major City facilities such as downtown restroom replacement and remodeling. Project
B1-13
2015-17 Financial Plan
Strategic Budget Direction and
Major City Goal Work Programs Page 14
expenditures are included in the CIP and descriptions of the proposed new major facility projects
are also included in the CIP, Attachment 4.
5. Important Informational Updates
A. Unfunded Liabilities and Reserve Policy
On February 17, 2015, the City Council took action to establish a framework for prepayment of
certain long-term liabilities and directed staff to return at Strategic Budget Direction with
specific recommendations about proposed allocations for this purpose. Staff anticipates including
a policy statement of prepayment of the City’s liabilities in the 2015-17 Financial Plan for the
Council’s consideration in June based on this Council direction.
Council action on February 17, 2015 was to 1) give priority consideration to accelerated
payments to the unfunded pension liability, Other Post Employment Benefit (OPEB) liability,
roads infrastructure, and equipment replacement funds (in that order), 2) direct staff to return at
Strategic Budget Direction with recommendations to allocate portions of available one-time
resources to make prepayment to certain long-term liabilities of the City based on the
prioritization adopted by the City Council, and 3) develop a Budget Policy for incorporation in
the 2015-17 Financial Plan that reflects this policy direction regarding the use of one-time
resources.
Priority Recommend for
additional allocation
Not Recommended at this time
1 CalPERS safety pool CalPERS miscellaneous plan
2 OPEB Facilities
3 Roads Storm Pipes
4 Equipment
As directed on February 17, 2015 the proposed use of one-time funding was previously outlined
in this report. The proposed amendment to the Fund Balance and Reserves Policy based on City
Council direction of February 17, 2015 is as follows (additions indicated with underline text):
Minimum Fund and Working Capital Balances. The City will maintain a
minimum fund balance of at least 20% of operating expenditures in the
General Fund and a minimum working capital balance of 20% of
operating expenditures in the water, sewer and parking Enterprise
funds. This is the minimum necessary to maintain the City’s credit
worthiness and to adequately provide for:
B1-14
2015-17 Financial Plan
Strategic Budget Direction and
Major City Goal Work Programs Page 15
1. Economic uncertainties, local disasters, and other financial
hardships or downturns in the local or national economy.
2. Contingencies for unseen operating or capital needs.
3. Cash flow requirements.
To the extent fund balances significantly exceed these minimum
requirements and are available after completing the annual audit, staff will
return to the City Council as part of the mid-year budget to recommend
appropriation of these resources to certain unfunded or underfunded
liabilities, and underfunded deferred maintenance requirements.
City Council concurrence with this proposed policy addition is requested.
B. California Joint Powers Insurance Authority (CJPIA)
The City is also seeing an increase in costs for its liability and workers compensation insurance
programs. The California Joint Powers Insurance Authority (CJPIA) presented the City with
unanticipated retrospective insurance adjustment costs and the City Council at the mid-year
2014-15 budget established a $2,444,000 General Fund reserve designation for the retrospective
insurance liabilities. From this designated reserve a $1,124,000 payment is anticipated to be
made to CJPIA and this is reflected in the Insurance Benefit Fund, while $1,320,000 remains in
designated reserves for potential cost increases in the future.
In addition to the retrospective adjustments previously approved by Council the annual rate
premiums for annual insurance coverage are significantly increasing in 2015-17. The estimates
provided by CJPIA and included in the December 2014 five year forecast projected a 5%
increase in liability premiums and a 15% increase in workers compensation rate premiums for
fiscal year 2015-16. Recently, the City received notice from the CJPIA that the rate increase for
fiscal year 2015-16 for each will be approximately 20%. The total annual premiums for fiscal
year 2015-16 are now anticipated to be $3.8 million. This size of this series of increases is
unexpected and a disconcerting trend that is prompting further analysis and exploration of next
steps which will be incorporated into the Fiscal Sustainability and Responsibility Other
Important Objective as appropriate.
C. Development Services
The five year fiscal forecast anticipates a continued trend of increasing demand for development
services. This in turn supports a need for stability to bring regular staffing levels up while
maintaining some services using temporary staff and contractor to meet the long term service
demands. This is a balanced and prudent approach with the flexibility that as circumstances
change the City can be agile in matching the dynamic economic conditions. Projected increases
in building valuation are directly related to an increase in permit review and inspection.
The City Manager is recommending that the Community Development Department, Fire
Department, and Public Works transition six positions from temporary to regular positions,
continue to the use of six temporary employees, reorganize the Community Development
Department Administration Division, transitioning recording secretary duties and staffing to the
B1-15
2015-17 Financial Plan
Strategic Budget Direction and
Major City Goal Work Programs Page 16
City Clerk’s Office, add a Fire Inspector I and use a short-term Human Resources temporary
employee to provide support during the transition. This change will cost $1,582,917 in Fiscal
Year 2015-16 and $1,373,990 in Fiscal Year 2016-17 all of which will be revenue off-set.
D. Integrating Local Sales Tax (Measure Y/G)
On November 4, 2014, 70 percent of voters in the City of San Luis Obispo approved Ballot
Measure G (Essential Services Sales and Use Tax) that stated:
To protect and maintain essential services and facilities – such as open space preservation; bike
lanes and sidewalks; public safety; neighborhood street paving and code enforcement; flood
protection; senior programs; and other vital services and capital improvement projects – shall the
City’s Municipal Code be amended to extend the current one-half percent local sales tax for
eight years, with independent annual audits, public goal-setting and budgeting, and a Citizens’
Oversight Commission?
This local half-percent tax is forecasted to generate over $7 million of General Fund revenue
annually, which per the ballot measure language should fund operating and capital investments
that help “protect and maintain essential services and facilities.” The majority of Major City
Goals and Other Important Objectives relate to essential services and facilities, therefore
elements of the following work programs are recommended to be tied to Measure G funding:
• Open Space Preservation
• Multi-Modal Transportation
• Neighborhood Wellness
• Laguna Lake Restoration
• Downtown
Further detail on how Measure G dollars are proposed to be used will be included in the
Preliminary Financial Plan presented in June. In the interim, the Council-established Citizens’
Revenue Enhancement Oversight Commission (REOC) is providing oversight and input on
Measure G recommendations for the Financial Plan. The REOC’s ongoing purpose is to review
the half-percent sales tax revenues and expenditures, report on the City’s stewardship of this
general purpose tax, and provide recommendations directly to the City Council regarding
expenditures of these tax revenues as an integral part of the budget process. The REOC has held
two meetings to date:
1. January 26th Kickoff – elected officers, drafted bylaws, set quarterly meeting
schedule, and received background on financial planning, Measure Y audit, and
Major City Goals.
2. March 16th – discussed measuring Commission effectiveness, tools for tracking local
sales tax revenues and expenditures (Attachment 5, REOC Tracking Spreadsheet),
and provided general direction on operating and capital costs that could potentially be
tied to Measure G.
A third meeting is scheduled in May to craft formal recommendations to Council on a more
detailed list of Measure G revenues and expenditures. Early REOC direction on Measure G
expenditures has been:
B1-16
2015-17 Financial Plan
Strategic Budget Direction and
Major City Goal Work Programs Page 17
1. Strike a balance of capital and operating that leans more towards capital investments
than the historical Measure Y 60/40 split;
2. Tie Measure G funding to those projects and programs with a direct nexus to the
ballot language, Major City Goals, and community input; and
3. Emphasize Measure G investment in bicycles and open space since these are two
Major City Goals and were the top issues supported at the Community Forum.
The REOC has also been busy designing reporting tools that will aid in community education
and outreach about the use and value represented by Measure G. To that end the REOC has
crafted and reviewed a drafting tracking spreadsheet (Attachment 5). This tracking tool will be
refined and recommended uses of the local ½ cent sales tax will be presented in this format as
part of the Preliminary Financial Plan. Additionally, in pursuit of furthering the mission of
educating the public about the ½ cent local sales tax the Commission has asked the Chairperson
to author a Viewpoint in the local paper about the Commission’s goals and objectives.
NEXT STEPS
The purpose of this agenda item is for staff to receive Strategic Budget Direction on the proposed
Major City Goal and Other Important Objective work programs, proposed capital investment and
use of one-time funding, and proposed significant operating program changes. This direction is
valuable in further assuring that the 2015-17 Financial Plan under development meets City
Council’s expectations when it is received in May.
Upcoming 2015-17 Financial Plan Development Steps
Date Item Council Action
April 21 Strategic Budget
Direction
Provide Direction on:
-Major City Goal Work Programs
-Other Important Objective Work Programs
-Capital Improvement Program
-Significant Operating Program Changes
-One-time expenditures
May 26 Preliminary Financial
Plan
City Council receives Preliminary 2015-17
Financial Plan
June 9 Budget Workshop Review and discuss General Fund operating
programs
June 11 Budget Workshop Review and discuss General Fund capital
improvement projects
June 16 Budget Workshop Review and discuss Enterprise Fund programs,
capital improvement projects, and rates
June 23 Budget Adoption Final review and adoption of Fiscal Year 2015-17
Financial Plan
June 30
(if required)
Budget Adoption Final review and adoption of Fiscal Year 2015-17
Financial Plan
B1-17
2015-17 Financial Plan
Strategic Budget Direction and
Major City Goal Work Programs Page 18
FISCAL IMPACT
The direction being sought from the Council will provide the City Manager with the information
needed to complete the Preliminary Financial Plan, which will be distributed on May 26, 2015.
The intent is to give general guidance so that the Preliminary Financial Plan will be consistent
with the City’s budget policies and to maintain fiscal sustainability over the long term. The five
year forecast shows that the City is able to use one time funding for certain expenditures,
accelerate the payment of underfunded liabilities and allocate resources to programs and projects
in the pursuit of Major City Goals and Other Important Objectives while maintaining a
structurally balanced budget. It is important to note that no budget decisions will be made at this
meeting. Therefore there are no fiscal impacts from any actions associated with this report.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Updated Five-Year Fiscal Forecast
2. Major City Goal and Other Important Objectives Work Programs and Related SOPCs and
CIPs
3. Significant Operating Program Changes not related to a Major City Goal or Other
Important Objective
4. Summary of the Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan (2015-20) and Capital
Improvement Plan Project summary descriptions for 2015-17
5. Revenue Enhancement Oversight Committee (REOC) Tracking Spreadsheet
T:\Council Agenda Reports\2015\2015-04-21 (Budget Major City Goals)\Budget Workshop - Major City Goals Wk Prgms (Padilla-
Lamers)\CAR - SBD.docx
B1-18
3/27/15
City of San Luis Obispo - General Fund Five Year Fiscal Forecast
April 2015 Update (Strategic Budget Directon)
$ in 000's Actual Actual Budget
2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20
1 Sales Tax 14,242 15,406 15,233 17,211 16,866 17,598 18,228 18,872
2 Measure Y/G Sales Tax 6,494 6,774 6,902 7,189 7,477 7,738 8,009 8,289
3 Sales Tax Prop 172 328 392 411 420 429 438 447 456
4 Property Taxes 9,177 8,960 9,263 9,726 10,106 10,500 10,909 11,335
5 Property Tax in Lieu of VLF 3,533 3,646 3,849 4,042 4,199 4,363 4,533 4,710
6 Transient Occupancy Tax 5,572 6,063 6,518 6,844 7,170 7,592 7,956 8,302
7 Utility Users Tax 4,916 5,345 5,345 5,506 5,671 5,841 6,016 6,197
8 Franchise Fees 2,552 2,637 2,676 2,523 2,620 2,653 2,687 2,721
9 Business Tax 2,055 2,143 2,185 2,339 2,395 2,455 2,516 2,579
10 Real Property Transfer Tax 256 288 180 184 187 191 238 199
11 Subtotal Taxes 49,126 51,653 52,562 55,984 57,120 59,370 61,541 63,662
12 Transfers In (Gas Tax, TDA, Other)1,375 1,640 1,490 1,405 1,302 1,302 1,302 1,302
13 Other Subventions & Grants 1,355 1,238 719 323 323 323 323 323
14 Development Review Fees 2,595 4,207 4,724 3,811 4,189 4,856 5,569 6,235
15 Rental Inspection Fees 1 146 280 461 472 484
16 Recreation Fees 1,748 1,733 1,635 1,646 1,646 1,679 1,713 1,747
17 Other Service Charges 1,851 1,952 1,746 1,750 1,777 1,803 1,830 1,858
18 Other Revenues 903 604 527 543 543 543 543 543
19 Subtotal Non-Tax Revenues 9,828 11,374 10,840 9,625 10,059 10,966 11,752 12,491
20 Total Resources 58,953 63,027 63,403 65,608 67,179 70,336 73,293 76,152
21 Operating Expenses (excl PERS)2 40,996 42,417 46,548 47,205 48,581 49,943 51,587 53,539
22 PERS Normal Costs 3 3,145 2,921 4,621 3,727 3,912 4,017 4,123 4,229
23 PERS Unfunded Liability 4,443 4,642 3,791 5,680 6,340 6,955 7,610 8,305
24 Subtotal: Operating Expenses 48,583 49,981 54,960 56,612 58,834 60,916 63,320 66,073
25 Debt Service 2,773 3,551 5,382 3,015 3,006 3,015 2,914 2,290
26 Transfer to CDBG 45 52 75 147 154 154 154 154
27 Transfer to Insurance Benefit Fund - - 280 2,124 - - - -
28 CIP - Fleet Replacement 500 411 533 1,074 655 824 824 975
29 CIP - IT Replacement 200 566 967 1,100 683 700 850 900
30 CIP - Major Facility Replacement - 853 551 457 226 582 375 791
31 CIP - All Other 3,496 5,754 2,858 6,164 4,768 3,921 4,349 4,282
32 Subtotal: Operating Transfers 7,014 11,187 10,645 14,081 9,491 9,196 9,465 9,392
33 Total Expenditures 55,597 61,168 65,606 70,693 68,325 70,112 72,785 75,465
34 Resources Over/(Under) Expenses 3,356 1,860 (2,203) (5,085) (1,146) 224 508 687
35 Fund Balance, Beginning of Year 13,684 18,938 20,797 18,594 13,510 12,364 12,588 13,096
36 Funding Adjustment 1,897 - - - - - -
37 Ending Fund Balance 18,938 20,797 18,594 13,510 12,364 12,588 13,096 13,783
38 Reserve @ 20% Operating Costs 10,070 9,996 11,234 10,186 10,499 10,792 11,142 11,554
39 Adj for Debt Svc Reserve (332) (332) (332) (332) (332) (332) (332) (332)
40 Encumbrance & Designated Reserve 4 (1,768) (6,272) (3,440) (1,320) (1,320) (1,320) (1,320) (1,320)
41 Reserve Over/(Under) Policy Level 6,767 4,198 3,588 1,671 213 144 302 578
Notes
1 Rental Inspection Fees dependent upon Council approval. Item being presented at May 5th hearing and as a Financial Plan SOPC.
2 Operating costs include 2015-17 Significant Operating Program Change (SOPC) requests.
3 PERS costs estimated based on CalPERS valuation reports and are broken out to show contribution to normal cost unfunded liability.
4 Designated reserve in 2015-16 and beyond reflects set aside for potential retrospective insurance costs.3/27/2015
Five Year Forecast
15-17 Financial Plan
1
ATTACHMENT 1
B1-19
PROJECTION FACTORS 5 Years 10 Years 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20
DEMOGRAPHICS
Population 0.2%0.2%
Housing Units 0.5%0.6%
Inflation 2.4%2.5%2.5%2.5%2.5%2.5%2.5%2.5%
KEY REVENUES
Sales Tax (excluding Triple Flip Adj)5.4%3.5%1.8%4.2%4.0%3.5%3.5%3.5%
Triple Flip Adjustment (300) 1,072
Chinatown 95 190 190 190
Garden Street Terrace 50 73 88
Measure Y/G Sales Tax 3.9%NA 1.9%4.2%4.0%3.5%3.5%3.5%
Property Tax 0.5%4.1%3.4%5.0%3.9%3.9%3.9%3.9%
Transient Occupancy Tax 5.4%4.6%7.5%5.0%4.8%5.9%4.8%4.3%
Garden Street Terrace 96 135 155
Utility Users Tax 4.4%4.2%0.0%3.0%3.0%3.0%3.0%3.0%
Franchise Fees 1.6%3.0%1.5%-5.7%3.8%1.3%1.3%1.3%
Business Tax 2.6%3.8%1.9%7.1%2.4%2.5%2.5%2.5%
Real Property Transfer Tax 2.0%2.0%2.0%2.0%2.0%
Garden Street Terrace 43
Gas Tax / TDA / Transfers In 15.2%6.7%-9.1%-5.6%-7.4%0.0%0.0%0.0%
Development Review Fees 12.3%-19.3%9.9%15.9%14.7%11.9%
Recreation Fees -5.7%0.7%0.0%2.0%2.0%2.0%
EXPENDITURES
Operating Costs (excluding PERS)2.5%2.5%2.5%
PERS Total Costs 11.8%9.0%7.0%6.9%6.8%
PERS Normal Costs -19.3%5.0%2.7%2.6%2.6%
PERS Unfunded Liability 49.8%11.6%9.7%9.4%9.1%
Estimated Staff savings 2.9%2.9%2.9%2.9%2.9%
Estimated Non-Staff savings 2.5%2.5%2.5%2.5%2.5%
Debt Service (Based on Existing Debt)-44.0%-0.3%0.3%-3.4%-21.4%
CIP (including Fleet, IT, Major Facility, All Other)79.2%-28.0%-4.8%6.1%8.6%
Forecast AssumptionsHistorical Trends (Annual Growth Rates)
2
ATTACHMENT 1
B1-20
MAJOR CITY GOALS
Open Space Preservation
OBJECTIVE
Protect and maintain open space.
DISCUSSION
Existing Situation and Work Completed To Date
The City of San Luis Obispo formalized its open space program in 1994 with the adoption of an updated General Plan
Land Use Element and Open Space Element. In 1995, the allocation of open space acquisition funding first occurred.
The City’s first Ranger was hired in 1995 and the first Natural Resources Manager was hired in early 1996. The City’s
Conservation and Open Space Element was adopted in 2006. Other key policy and regulatory documents include the
Conservation Guidelines for Open Space Lands of the City of San Luis Obispo (2002), adopted property-specific
Conservation Plans, as well as various sections of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. The City’s open space program
is managed by an “Open Space Team” comprised of City Administration Natural Resources Program staff and Parks and
Recreation Ranger Service staff.
At present, the City of San Luis Obispo o wns approximately 3,500 acres of open space lands comprised of 12 major
properties held in open space, natural reserve, or ecological reserve status. City staff also oversees approximately
3,500 acres of land protected under open space or conservation easements. As of 2015 the City has an
established trail network of over 52 miles. City staff undertakes open space maintenance, patrol, site stewardship,
and environmental education through various programs and partnerships.
Open Space Preservation in San Luis Obispo
Now in its 20th year of operation, the City’s open space program has accomplished a proud land conservation legacy and
established world-class outdoor passive recreation opportunities. Over the years, the program has necessarily had a major
focus on land acquisition and trail building in order to establish the fundamental building blocks of a functional open
space system. As the program is now mature it has become of paramount importance for the City to shift towards a more
balanced program that also provides an appropriate level of maintenance and day-to-day operating standards; key open
space infrastructure enhancement to ensure both user safety and neighborhood compatibility; restoration of degraded or
hazardous areas; and, focused interpretive and educational opportunities.
2014 Comprehensive Survey of City Open Space
In 2014, the Natural Resources Program partnered with Cal Poly’s City and Regional Planning Department to conduct a
comprehensive study and survey pertaining to City open space. This project entailed a facilities assessment of trailheads
at every open space property, a survey that was completed by over 400 respondents (99% confidence interval with +/- 6%
margin of error), and deployed an EcoCounterTM device to count open space users accessing various City open space
properties over the course of six months.
With these open space survey results in-hand, together with the Open Space Team’s anecdotal day-to-day observations in
the field, staff can now suggest a data-driven and experienced approach to the goal of open space protection and
maintenance. Major findings of the open space study include:
1. Conditions Could Be Improved. Photos of trailhead facilities and conditions revealed dated, worn out, and
uncoordinated signs, gates, and fences, as well as a proliferation of trash and pet waste.
2. User Demographics. Survey respondents revealed that open space users tend to be white, relatively affluent,
well-educated, and are mostly City or County residents.
3. Most Popular Open Spaces. Johnson Ranch Open Space, Bishop Peak Natural Reserve, Cerro San Luis
Obispo Natural Reserve and the Irish Hills Natural Reserve are the most popular open spaces, receive the most
3
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-21
MAJOR CITY GOALS
Open Space Preservation
use, and are regionally significant. Other open space locations such as Reservoir Canyon Natural Reserve, South
Hills Natural Reserve, Terrace Hill Open Space, and Islay Hill Open Space are much less frequented and tend to
be more oriented to local neighborhood use.
4. Daily Use. The four major open space properties received an average of 300-500 users per day during the
survey period, but also experienced spikes of 1,000 users per day or more during busy holiday weekends with
favorable weather conditions. Although the survey period did not span an entire year, extrapolation of the data
collected suggests that these open space properties may each potentially receive approximately 100,000 to
150,000 users per year.
5. Users Preferences. Open space users indicate that they would like to see improved trailhead signs and
wayfinding opportunities. They also desire something to ameliorate the proliferation of trash and pet waste. At
the same time, there is also a segment of open space survey respondents that indicate that they would like to see
City open space maintained in as natural and pristine a state as possible without the incursion of human-
introduced elements.
Work Program and Strategy – How To Continue to Protect and Maintain City Open Space
The City’s Open Space Preservation goal can be achieved by applying a two part strategy to the protection and
maintenance of the City’s Open Space. In order to achieve significant advancements within the 2015-17 Financial Plan
period staff recommends undertaking key work efforts that will first set the stage for ongoing priorities and initiatives to
protect the City’s open space in a sustainable manner by planning for the future, followed by implementing projects
identified in those plans.
Key planning efforts to address the future of the City’s preservation of its Open Space include the following:
1. Roundtable and Long Term Vision. Staff will establish and undertake the Natural Resources Manager’s
Roundtable: The 20th Anniversary Proceedings of the San Luis Obispo Greenbelt resulting in the preparation of a
long-term vision plan, Saving Special Places III: Towards a Sustainable Greenbelt, with a focus on long-term
strategic open space acquisition priorities, maintenance and enhancement project priorities, future staffing and
equipment, and funding strategies.
2. Open Space Maintenance Plan. Staff will draft and seek Council’s approval of a comprehensive maintenance
plan for the City’s open space that details “nuts & bolts” maintenance practices and protocols, outlines standard
open space facility design specifications, identifies standard trail head amenities, integrates existing Conservation
and Open Space Plan projects (as identified in each adopted conservation plan), identifies ongoing annual
maintenance and stewardship costs by property, and includes recommendations for staffing and equipment needs
to address continued acquisitions of open space by the City.
Key implementation efforts to address the City’s ongoing preservation of open space will include the following:
1. Complete Land Acquisitions. Pursue voluntary land conservation opportunities in the Cuesta Canyon area of
the City’s Greenbelt by working cooperatively with the property owners to acquire and protect portions of The
Miossi Brothers La Cuesta Ranch and the Ahearn Family Ranch.
2. Implement of the Open Space Maintenance Plan. With implementation of the Open Space Maintenance Plan,
staff will both catch up on deferred maintenance and begin to address new maintenance projects. This effort will
focus on enhancement to existing trailheads, maintenance and construction of approved and sustainable trails for
passive recreation purposes only, removal of illicit materials and trails, improved user and natural resource safety,
land restoration and stewardship via mitigation projects and monitoring, education of users via patrols, and
management of the wildland-urban interface areas.
4
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-22
MAJOR CITY GOALS
Open Space Preservation
Proposed Action Plan Tasks
The proposed action plan for the Open Space Preservation Major City Goal entails the following categories:
1. Real Property Acquisition and Conservation Planning
2. Open Space Improvements, Maintenance, User Safety, and Patrol
3. Land Restoration, Stewardship, Monitoring, and Education
4. Wildland-Urban Interface Fuel Reduction
WORK PROGRAM CONSTRAINTS AND LIMITATIONS
Constraints and limitations associated with the Open Space Preservation Major City Goal vary by the two main focus
areas - acquisition and maintenance.
For the land acquisition focus, ongoing discussions and negotiations with the property owners focused on accomplishing
mutually agreeable goals and objectives for both the City and the property owners will be a key ingredient to success with
these endeavors. Achieving land acquisitions of this size and magnitude will also depend on the City leveraging General
Fund dollars by obtaining necessary grant funding from other agencies and organizations. If negotiations and funding are
successful, final acquisition also depends on the City’s satisfactory due diligence inspections of the property interests.
With respect to the focus on open space maintenance, a plan must be drafted, reviewed and revised by all stakeholders and
considered by Council before certain projects can proceed. The success of maintenance efforts is also dependent upon
stable staffing resources and financial resources over time. The City has traditionally relied on volunteer efforts for many
maintenance activities, especially trail construction and repair, and implementation of maintenance objectives will
continue to require outstanding volunteerism from within the community.
STAKEHOLDERS AND PARTNERSHIPS
Open Space Preservation is a topic of considerable interest and concern for a wide array of stakeholders. Among those
affected by successful open space protection and maintenance activities are:
In order to successfully carry out the Open Space Preservation Major City Goal, the Open Space Team will continue to
work through partnerships to achieve mutual objectives, including, but not limited to, the following:
The Land Conservancy of San Luis
Obispo County
Environmental Center of San
Luis Obispo (ECOSLO)
California Conservation
Corps / Americorps
California Native Plant Society
Central Coast Concerned
Mountain Bikers
Central Coast Grown
Cal Poly Growing Grounds Farm &
Nursery
Volunteers
Residents
Neighbors
Property owners
Passive recreation users
Local businesses
Academia
Regional partners, agencies, and
non-governmental organizations
Native plant communities and
wildlife
Future generations
5
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-23
MAJOR CITY GOALS
Open Space Preservation
ACTION PLAN
Task Date
Real Property Acquisition and Conservation Planning:
1. Pursue voluntary land conservation opportunities in the Cuesta Canyon area of the City’s
Greenbelt by working cooperatively with the property owners to acquire and protect portions of
The Miossi Brothers La Cuesta Ranch and the Ahearn Family Ranch. An opportunity also
exists to expand the Irish Hills Natural Reserve by collaborating with non-profit land trust
partners.
Ongoing
2. Facilitate open space dedications anticipated as components of land use entitlements to protect
the Chevron Tank Farm open space and portions of the South Hills, Righetti Hill, and Cerro
San Luis Obispo.
3. Establish and undertake the Natural Resources Manager’s Roundtable: The 20th Anniversary
Proceedings of the San Luis Obispo Greenbelt and pursue any follow up items that arise from
this process.
4. Prepare a long-term vision plan, Saving Special Places III: Towards a Sustainable Greenbelt,
pertaining to long-term strategic open space acquisition priorities, maintenance and
enhancement projects, staffing and equipment, and funding strategies in order to provide for the
long-term protection and stewardship of natural resource conservation values and passive
recreational amenities appurtenant to City open space properties in existence now and that are
planned in the future.
5. Update Conservation Guidelines for Open Space Lands within the City of San Luis Obispo to
address minor inconsistencies with other policy documents
6. Ongoing annual monitoring of all City-owned open space properties, open space easements,
and conservation easements.
Ongoing
January 2017
July 2017
July 2017
Ongoing
Open Space Enhancements, Maintenance, User Safety and Patrol
1. Adopt a Maintenance Plan for the City’s Open Space.
2. Consistent with adopted conservation and open space plans, complete Trailhead Enhancements
at signature open space properties including installation of trash cans, mutt mitt stations, trail
head signage, informational kiosks, trail way finding signage, and where possible improved
parking for cars and bikes, as well as improved public transportation access.
3. Complete priority projects previously identified in conservation and open space plans
including:
4. Bishop Peak emergency vehicle access and trailhead improvements;
5. Johnson Ranch trailhead parking and safety improvements;
6. Reservoir Canyon trailhead parking enhancements, trail signs, and new loop trail;
7. Cerro San Luis trail re-routing and erosion control, and completion of the “M” trail;
Dec 2015
June 2017
June 2017
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
6
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-24
MAJOR CITY GOALS
Open Space Preservation
8. Terrace Hill sign and kiosk improvements, trail closure/erosion control, and new fencing.
9. Continue to construct additional trails at Froom Ranch consistent with the approved Irish Hills
Conservation Plan completing BLM license area, expanding existing network, and working on a
new and improve access point to the trail network.
10. Initiate implementation of the Laguna Lake Natural Reserve Conservation Plan (see Other
Important Council Objective )
11. Continue to address daily maintenance project needs in the City’s Open Space to address wear
and tear, natural events, vandalism and other activities which create repair needs in the open
space.
12. Complete prioritized deferred maintenance projects identified in Open Space Maintenance Plan
13. Continue patrol of the City’s open space areas and creek corridors
14. Continue to coordinate 70 trail work days (4,000 hours) a year utilizing volunteers including
continuing the partnership with the Central Coast Concerned Mountain Bikers on various open
space improvements and maintenance
15. Continue Ranger Led Hikes in the City’s open space on a monthly basis and upon request.
16. Continue Ranger Service environmental education program and Junior Ranger Camp to
increase open space knowledge and user safety
17. Increase staffing resources in the Ranger Service Program to provide increased open space
improvements, maintenance, and patrol
18. Include QR codes for donation links in signage, Develop a marketing and promotion plan for
donations to the Community Foundation City of San Luis Obispo Open Space Fund for
Maintenance.
Land Restoration, Stewardship, Monitoring, and Education:
1. Ongoing community outreach and education in partnership with ECOSLO through the SLO
Stewards newsletter
2. Creek and flood protection within the City’s natural waterways through Zone 9 projects and
coordination and oversight of the Stormwater Management Program
3. Ongoing monitoring, remedial action, and enhancement, as needed, of existing mitigation sites
4. Ongoing invasive species treatment and control
5. Complete wetland meadow and riparian planting / invasive species control at Calle Joaquin
Agricultural Reserve using awarded Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation Program grant
funds
6. Complete project design and specifications for the Fox Hollow reservoir rainwater storage
project to enhance summer stream flow in San Luis Obispo Creek.
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
June 2017
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
August 2015
June 2017
Quarterly
October 2015
and 2016
Ongoing
Ongoing
January 2016
June 2017
7
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-25
MAJOR CITY GOALS
Open Space Preservation
Wildland-Urban Interface Fuel Reduction:
1. Irish Hills Natural Reserve eucalyptus thinning, mowing, oak grove understory management
2. Bowden Ranch Open Space eucalyptus thinning
3. Terrace Hill Open Space mowing and /or grazing
4. Islay Hill Open Space grazing
5. Cerro San Luis Natural Reserve / Lemon Grove eucalyptus thinning and grazing
6. Johnson Ranch Open Space grazing
7. Bishop Peak Natural Reserve grazing, Felsman Loop Fuel Break maintenance, removal of dead
pines near Highland Drive
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT
The City’s Open Space Team is comprised of Administration, The Natural Resources Program, Parks and Recreation,
Ranger Service, and the Fire Department. The Natural Resources Program in City Administration will serve as the lead
responsible department. It is expected that Parks and Recreation will also take a lead role, especially with respect to open
space maintenance functions. The Fire Department will coordinate the grant applications and oversight for the Wildland-
Urban Interface Fuel Reduction Program.
FINANCIAL AND STAFF RESOURCES REQUIRED TO ACHIEVE THE GOAL
Two separate Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) projects, as well as one SOPC, have been prepared in order to facilitate the
Action Plan for the Open Space Preservation Major City Goal in 2015-17. Both open space acquisition and maintenance
are supported by project-specific CIPs. Staff suggests using one time monies from Measure Y reserves to address these
capital improvement projects which are predominately one time in nature. An additional Ranger maintenance worker
position requested via a SOPC is necessary to implement the level of maintenance efforts anticipated to achieve this goal
and preserve the City’s open space in the future. Staff is therefore requesting an addition to the City’s fleet of one full-
sized pickup truck for the Parks and Recreation Department Ranger Service program. The Ranger Service program has
two existing pickup trucks shared by five Ranger staff members covering over 7,000 acres of open space and over 35 City
parks, facilities including the SLO Swim Center, Damon-Garcia Sports Fields, Laguna Lake Golf Course, and all School
District sites in the City which are also patrolled by the Rangers. The current Ranger Service fleet has proven inadequate
as staff continually has limited space to transport necessary equipment, employees and volunteers, and frequently utilize
personal vehicles to complete daily work tasks and projects. Open Space Preservation will continue to rely upon existing
staff resources within the departments listed above and are expected to be sufficient to oversee and coordinate these
various work efforts with the additional Ranger. Achieving the Open Space Preservation goal will require the award of
grant funds.
8
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-26
MAJOR CITY GOALS
Open Space Preservation
Cost Summary
2015-162016-172015-162016-17
Open Space Protection: Land Acquisition 1,000,000 2,600,000
Open Space Protection: Maintenance 285,000285,000
Ranger Service Staffing 73,68677,298
Fleet Expansion Ranger Service 52,500
Total $73,686$77,2981,337,500 2,885,000
Operating Programs Capital Improvement Plan
Funding Sources
2015-162016-172015-162016-17
Grants - Open Space Acquisition 600,0002,000,000
General Fund - Open Space Acquistion CIP prior allocation 150,000350,000
General Fund - Open Space Acquisition CIP 2015-17 250,000250,000
General Fund - Open Space Maintenance CIP 2015-17 285,000285,000
General Fund - Fleet Expansion Ranger Service 2015-16 52,500
General Fund - Ranger Service SOPC 73,68677,298
Total $73,686$77,298$1,337,500$2,885,000
Operating Programs Capital Improvement Plan
GENERAL FUND REVENUE POTENTIAL
There is no direct general fund revenue originating from enterprise or fee income associated with open space. The City
does anticipate receiving grant funds in order to complete the land acquisition projects. A successful open space program
is considered to be fiscally positive due to enhanced property values, user expenditures, and cost avoidance associated
with natural hazards and climate change.
OUTCOME—FINAL WORK PRODUCT
Additional real property interests acquired for conservation and open space purposes to serve all stakeholders, while the
entire open space inventory is managed, maintained, and enhanced in accordance with City policy and best practices for
conservation land stewardship, user safety, and fire safety.
9
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-27
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE –
LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES
RANGER SERVICE STAFFING
Summary of Change: In support of the 2015-17 Major City Goal of Open Space Preservation, The Parks and
Recreation Department is seeking an increase in the staffing levels for the Ranger Service Program with request
for a full-time Ranger Maintenance Worker to continue to develop a sustainable open space maintenance
program.
Fiscal Impact: Ongoing cost of $73,686 in 2015-16 and $77,298 in 2016-17.
Service Level Impact: The added staffing resource will assist the City’s Ranger Service in meeting program
demands and the growing needs of maintenance and enhancement for the City’s open space on a daily basis.
KEY OBJECTIVES
1. Provide added full-time permanent staffing to the Ranger Service Program dedicated solely to open space.
2. Enhance open space user experience, infrastructure amenities, and catch up on long deferred projects.
3. Increase infrastructure maintenance specific to open space, predominately trails.
4. Increase patrol of City open space which reduces maintenance needs in the long term.
5. Address the impacts of illicit activities in the City’s open space and creeks that impact the City’s natural
resources and its compliance with storm water mandates.
6. Assist the Natural Resources program with the management of mitigation areas and resource protection
projects.
7. Assist the Fire Department on reduction of fuels in the urban wild-land interface.
EXISTING SITUATION: FACTORS DRIVING THE NEED FOR CHANGE
Brief History of the Ranger Service Program
The Ranger Service program came into existence in 1995. The program, as was typical of the time, was initially
focused on park patrols to address inappropriate activities in City parks, as well as to educate park users about the
natural environment. With the establishment of the City’s Natural Resources program and significant acquisitions
of open space lands the Ranger Services program expanded its focus to include protecting and maintaining natural
resources.
Primary Activities and Staffing Levels of the Ranger Service Program
The Ranger Service program is in Parks and Recreation. The program is staffed seven days a week during
daylight hours and occasional nighttime. Its existing staff resources consist of: one full time Recreation
Supervisor/Lead Ranger; one full time Ranger Maintenance Worker II; two part time limited benefit temporary
rangers; and hours for a part time temporary City Worker 5. Ranger Service staff enforce the proper use of City
parks and open space. Daily, Ranger Service staff patrol 35 City parks, visit 25 trailheads, inspect 7-8 miles of
creek corridor, and maintain 4,000 acres of open space. Furthermore they protect the City’s natural resources by
completing maintenance, construction, rehabilitation and patrol of parks and open space. Ranger staff also
conduct year round environmental education programs including hikes in the open space.
Presently, the City has 52.5 miles of trails and 4,000 acres of open space that Ranger Service staff and volunteers
maintain, manage, and patrol in addition to its creek corridors. Thanks to a longstanding partnership with Central
10
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-28
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE –
LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES
RANGER SERVICE STAFFING
Coast Concerned Mountain Bikers and Cal Poly interns, volunteers provide over 4,000 hours of trail maintenance
and construction a year to the program including 70 trail work days a year. In recent years, the City has become
increasingly involved in the maintenance and monitoring of riparian creek corridors in response to the endangered
steelhead trout residing in the system and increased storm water regulations. This has also come at a time where
illegal camping and illicit activities in the creeks and open space have increased requiring significant and routine
clean-up by Ranger Service staff of trash, discarded furniture, drug paraphernalia and human and animal waste.
All members of the Ranger Service program team wear many hats each day. Patrolling and maintaining (Rangers
carry tools and fix trail issues along the way when not working in a focused area) the City’s parks and open space
is a daily responsibility, but it is a task often completed by one Ranger. In practice this means only a finite
number of areas are patrolled each day. If an issue arises a Ranger will respond, however when deep into open
space lands it can take 45 minutes or more before a Ranger is able to arrive at the scene of the incident. The
Rangers respond to complaints and change patrol patterns to address ongoing issues many of which create
maintenance issues (i.e. short cut trails, illegal encampments, dogs off leash engaging with native species) but can
only cover limited issues at a time. As the open space areas of the City have expanded the Rangers have more
issues to address and more areas to maintain and patrol on foot, in vehicles, or on bikes. While the program is
admirably supported by volunteers for maintenance there are daily projects which require staff’s attention and
work to prevent health and safety issues to the public as well as the natural resources. Today staff triages its
priorities and there is much deferred maintenance to be addressed.
Staffing Need and Response to 2015-17 Major City Goal Open Space Preservation
In conducting research on best practices regarding maintenance of open space it was found that there is not an
industry standard for the number of Rangers focused on open space maintenance. Using City’s with somewhat
similar programs results in the following comparative data.
City Open Space Staffing
Aurora, Colorado
7,000 acres
21 full-time
9 Ranger Patrol
12 Ranger Maintenance and Operations
Boulder, Colorado
6,555 acres
11 rangers
9 maintenance workers
3 education and outreach
Bend, Oregon
2,500 acres
17 rangers and maintenance workers
26 seasonal staff
San Luis Obispo
4,000 acres
2 Rangers (1 Supervisor, 1 Full Time)
2 LBT Rangers
1 CW 5
Given the City’s present staffing, for San Luis Obispo, it is a reasonable objective to ultimately achieve the ratio
of one full time Ranger per 1000 acres of open space maintained by Ranger Service. This is modest in
comparison with other communities’ staffing levels but acknowledges the program’s LBT positions and
unprecedented use in the industry of volunteers at 4,000 plus hours of assistance a year. The addition of a Ranger
Maintenance Worker would result in coming close to this ratio taking into account current staffing levels (full
time and part time) and volunteers. Furthermore if this position is approved, it is the intent of the Ranger
Supervisor to re-deploy the staffing resources such that the LBTs are focused on Park Patrols (as supported by
11
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-29
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE –
LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES
RANGER SERVICE STAFFING
PD) and the full time Ranger Maintenance Workers are focused on open space matters and not City parks on a
routine basis.
Planning For Future Maintenance and Catching Up on Existing Enhancement Needs
In order to achieve the Major City Goal to Protect and Maintain City Open Space staff has identified the need to
develop a Maintenance Plan for the City’s Open Space. This Plan will identify standards of care for the City
Open Space, develop a plan for existing open space infrastructure enhancements needed (i.e. trash cans, signs,
mutt mitt stations, etc at trail heads), compile in one place a list of all deferred maintenance projects, and identify
future projects consistent with Open Space and Conservation Plans for each Natural Area. In order to implement
this Plan added staff is needed to “catch up” on already identified projects and to continue to maintain the open
space when that “catch up” is complete. At present staff has a list of over 100 projects that are needed to be
completed in the City’s open space and this is before the Master Plan for Maintenance is completed. Of course
none of this takes into account “nature happening” in the City open space which would change priorities - i.e. a
very wet winter, vandalism of a sign, or other daily occurrence which result in maintenance needs.
Proposed Addition of Staff Resources
Final analysis and required documentation will be completed by the Human Resources Department to verify
compensation is commensurate with the duties and responsibilities of the position and it is classified equitably
compared to other positions within the organization. The assumptions at this time include the addition of one full-
time regular Ranger Maintenance Worker managed by the Ranger Service Supervisor. Ranger Service staff
anticipate that this position would assist the Ranger Service Supervisor with maintenance (trail construction,
mitigation projects, mowing and clean-ups associated maintenance) and patrol projects in the City’s open space
only.
Year 1 staffing projected at Step 1 and Year 2 at Step 2
Job Classification Hrs/Wk Salary PERS Ins Medicare Total
Ranger Maint.
Worker
(Year 1 Step 1 )
40 40,612 11,493 15,792 589 68,486
Ranger Maint.
Worker
(Year 2 Step 2)
40 42,770 12,916 15,792 620 72,098
Overtime (Y1) ** 5,000
Overtime (Y2) ** 5,000
** The division has no overtime budget for any employees and this item is recommended given the seasonal nature of maintenance which
can require immediate needs and overtime
Associated Operating Expenditures
It is expected that any addition to the Ranger Service staffing will also result in added costs associated with
education and training (PC 832), uniforms and Department of Justice clearances; resulting in a non-staffing
expenditure increase of $1,000.
GOAL AND POLICY LINKS
1. 2015-17 Major City Goal Open Space Preservation: protect and maintain open space.
2. Measure G ballot language for open space preservation.
12
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-30
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE –
LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES
RANGER SERVICE STAFFING
3. Provide adequate staffing and other resources to maintain and enhance open space quality and amenities for
the community.
STAKEHOLDERS
A wide range of stakeholders are affected by this program, including community members, residents, trail users
(hikers, runners, bikers) and visitors. Internal stakeholders include the Park Rangers, the Natural Resources
program, Fire and Police.
IMPLEMENTATION
Task Date
1. Work with Human Resources on recruitment. July 2015
2. Recruit and Interview Eligible Candidates August 2015
3. Orientation and Safety Training August 2015
PROGRAM MANAGER AND TEAM SUPPORT
Program Manager:
The Ranger Service Supervisor is responsible for ensuring mission critical services necessary to ensure successful
completion of the Open Space Major City Goal and staffing levels associated.
Project Team:
Parks and Recreation – Ranger Service, Administration – Natural Resources, Fire Department.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Contract Employee for a Two Year Term. An alternative could be to add a contract employee at $45,000 a
year for a two year term. This is not recommended as it is an ongoing and existing need and contrary to City
employment policies.
2. Continue the Status Quo. By continuing with the current Ranger Service staffing structure, the program will
continue to fall behind on open space maintenance.
3. Implementation in a Different Way. When, in seldom times, contract resources are available for these
specialized Ranger Service projects, the services are not cost effective.
OPERATING PROGRAM
Ranger Service – 60290
13
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-31
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE –
LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES
RANGER SERVICE STAFFING
COST SUMMARY
The Cost Summary below outlines staffing costs associated with added full-time permanent staff for the Ranger
Service Program.
Line Item Description Account No.2015-16 2016-17
Staffing 73,486 77,098
Regular Salaries 100-60290-7010 40,612 42,770
PERS 100-60290-7040 11,493 12,916
Health Insurance 100-602900-7042 15,792 15,792
Medicare 100-60290-7044 589 620
Overtime 100-60290-7020 5,000 5,000
Other Operating Expenditures 200 200
Contract Services 100-60290-7227 200 200
Total Operating Costs 73,686 77,298
14
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-32
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
OPEN SPACE PROTECTION: ACQUISITION
Project Description
Enhanced funding for high-priority open space acquisition projects in the Greenbelt surrounding the City of San Luis Obispo of $250,000 per year would enable
the City to provide one-third of anticipated open space acquisition costs. It is expected that acquisition funds will be augmented by grant funding of $600,000 in
2016-17, $2,000,000 in 2017-18. The Open Space Acquisition fund balance is approximately $500,000. Open Space Acquisition projects will therefore cost
$250,000 per year of new money starting in 2015-16.
Maintenance/Replacement New projects Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request
Council Goal / Measure G Priority: Open Space Preservation: Protect and Maintain Open Space
Need and Urgency
The City of San Luis Obispo continues to actively pursue fee simple and conservation easement acquisition opportunities to enhance the Greenbelt surrounding the
City, and to provide recreational and habitat connectivity opportunities where appropriate and feasible. The Council has consistently supported such efforts,
particularly when they are leveraged with outside funding. The City has the opportunity to pursue voluntary land conservation opportunities in the Cuesta Canyon
area of the City’s Greenbelt by working cooperatively with the property owners to acquire and protect portions of The Miossi Brothers La Cuesta Ranch and the
Ahearn Family Ranch, as well as pursue possible additions to the Irish Hills Natural Reserve through partnered efforts to protect larger landscapes including
headwaters to several perennial streams and valuable habitat areas.
It is anticipated that rural and agricultural land values will continue to recover with the rest of the economy, making it timely to take advantage of conservation
opportunities in the current real estate market. Further, several long-standing local family properties are seeing transitions between generations, which often-times
represents a pivotal moment and opportunity to endeavor upon a conservation transaction.
Open space acquisition was an important community benefit acknowledged in the successful campaign for Measure G in 2014, and according to the LUCE Survey
remains a priority for residents. At the same time, there is an increasing need to maintain and enhance existing City open space properties through the
implementation of Council-adopted conservation plans. A recent survey and count of open space users indicates that signature open space properties such as
Bishop Peak Natural Reserve, Cerro San Luis Natural Reserve, and Johnson Ranch Open Space, for example, receive as many as 6,000 to 8,000 users per month
during the peak seasons. This level of use demonstrates both the popularity of open space, as well as the potential to disburse use across a larger open space
system.
Open space enhancement projects, as well as day-to-day maintenance items are supported by a separate CIP project, and will also continue to be supported through
Natural Resources Program and Ranger Service operating budgets.
15
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-33
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
OPEN SPACE PROTECTION: ACQUISITION
Readiness to Build
Study complete or n/a
Equipment purchased or n/a
Property owned or property agreement in place (for enhancement projects) n/a
Environmental approval and permits complete or n/a
Specifications or construction documents complete n/a
IT Steering Committee review n/a
Environmental Review and Permits Required
Environmental Review n/a
Building Permit n/a
Waterway Permits (Fish & Game, Water Quality, Army Corps) n/a
Railroad n/a
Other: (Enter the title and agency of any other needed permits) n/a
Operating Program Number and Title:
11250 – Natural Resources Protection
Project Phasing and Funding Sources
Continuing, ongoing or master account project - Specification No. 99837950
Initial Project Costs by Phase
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
Land Acquisition $500,000$1,000,000$2,600,000$250,000$1,000,000$250,000$5,600,000
Total$500,000$1,000,000$2,600,000$250,000$1,000,000$250,000$5,600,000
Ongoing costs associated with Open Space are supported by the Natural Resources Program and Parks and Recreation Department base annual budgets. In terms
of life expectancy, real property interests acquired for conservation and open space purposes are typically expected to be managed and held in perpetuity.
Additional ongoing costs resulting from new acquisitions will vary depending on the project type; for example, a new open space reserve that is owned in fee
simple where new trails, parking, and signs are anticipated will result in substantive new, ongoing costs. An addition or expansion of an existing reserve may only
result in modest additional costs due to existing mobilization efforts and infrastructure, while the acquisition of a conservation easement interest would generate
only minimal ongoing costs.
16
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-34
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
OPEN SPACE PROTECTION: ACQUISITION
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
General Fund - existing CIP $500,000$150,000$350,000$250,000$250,000$250,000$1,750,000
General Fund - 2015-17 CIP $250,000$250,000
Enterprise Fund $0
Grants $600,000$2,000,000 $750,000 $3,350,000
Total$500,000$1,000,000$2,600,000$250,000$1,000,000$250,000$5,600,000
Project Funding by Source
City funds have been matched in the past by funds provided through Army Compatible Use Buffer (ACUB) program monies secured by The Land Conservancy of
SLO County, while grant funding from the State Coastal Conservancy (SCC), California Farmland Conservancy Program (CFCP), and California Wildlife
Conservation Board (WCB), which are major grant sources the City has historically been successful with, can be applied for at any time. With the passage of
California Proposition 1, the Water Quality, Supply, and Infrastructure Improvement Act of 2014 (AB 1471 or “the Water Bond”) SCC and WCB will receive $100.5
million and $200 million, respectively. The renewal of the federal Farm Bill also promises greatly enhanced and streamlined funding through the Farm and
Ranchland Protection Program (FRPP). Lastly, the expanded federal tax incentives associated with qualified conservation contributions (IRC 170(h)) are expected
to be renewed. In sum, it is very reasonable to expect that City acquisition funds will be significantly leveraged to enable high value acquisitions to be successful.
Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives
Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project: possible on a case-by-case basis.
Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: possible on a case-by-case basis.
Project Team
Open Space Acquisition Program Estimated Hours
Project Manager Natural Resources 2500
Project Support Natural Resources 1000
Technical Studies Natural Resources 100
Environmental Clearance Community Development 100
Contract Management Natural Resources 100
Open Space Enhancement Program Estimated Hours
Project Manager Lead Ranger 500
Project Construction Ranger Service Division 1500
Contract Management Ranger Service Division 100
17
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-35
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
OPEN SPACE PROTECTION: MAINTENANCE
Project Description
Address the deferred and ongoing maintenance needs of the City’s Open Space by using as a guide the standards of care identified in an adopted Open Space
Maintenance Plan, completing trailhead enhancement projects, completing prioritized Conservation and Open Space Plan identified projects for the City’s various
Natural Areas. Due to significant deferred maintenance and previously identified Conservation and Open Space Plan needs, projects are expected to cost an
additional $285,000 in 2015-16 and $285,000 in 2016-17.
Maintenance/Replacement New projects Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request
Council Goal / Measure G Priority: FY 2015-17 Major City Goal and Measure G: Open Space Preservation
Need and Urgency
Open space protection is a 2015-17 Major City Goal, an important community objective as acknowledged in the adoption of Measure G in 2014, and according to
the various resident surveys is a top priority and community value for residents. Staff will draft and seek Council’s approval of a comprehensive maintenance plan
for the City’s open space that details “nuts & bolts” maintenance practices and protocols, outlines standard open space facility design specifications, identifies
standard trail head amenities, integrates existing Conservation and Open Space Plan projects (as identified in each adopted conservation plan), identifies ongoing
annual maintenance and stewardship costs by property, and includes recommendations for staffing and equipment needs to address continued acquisitions of open
space by the City. Maintenance of all City Open Space is premised on the protection of natural resources, including plants, animals, geologic and historic features
and the natural areas themselves. Maintenance will continue to be done in accordance with the Conservation and Land Use Element, Conservation Guidelines,
adopted Conservation and Open Space Plans for specific open space areas, and in accordance with the to-be-adopted Open Space Maintenance Plan.
Maintenance includes the following activity areas: enhancement to existing trailheads, maintenance and construction of approved and sustainable trails and open
space facilities for passive recreation purposes only, removal of illicit materials and trails, improved user and natural resource safety, land restoration and
stewardship projects, invasive species treatment and control, erosion control and stabilization, education of users via patrols and community outreach, and
management of the wildland-urban interface areas.
Due to existing levels of use, there is a correspondent increase in the need to maintain and enhance existing City open space properties through the implementation
of Council-adopted conservation plans and the to-be-adopted Open Space Maintenance Plan. A recent survey and count of open space users indicates that
signature open space properties such as Bishop Peak Natural Reserve, Cerro San Luis Natural Reserve, and Johnson Ranch Open Space, receive as many as 6,000
to 8,000 users per month during peak times. Conservation plan implementation items are numerous and property specific, and include such activities as: trailhead,
parking, and emergency access improvements; directional and educational trail signs and kiosks; trail installation, closures, re-routes, and erosion control; invasive
species control, fire protection and native habitat restoration; and, bridge, fence, and open space infrastructure replacement. Such enhancements will result in
substantive user safety or resource protection improvements. Priority projects at this time include:
18
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-36
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
OPEN SPACE PROTECTION: MAINTENANCE
1. Adoption and Implementation of Open Space Maintenance Plan in 2015: With implementation of the Open Space Maintenance Plan, staff will both catch
up on deferred maintenance and begin to address new maintenance projects. This effort will focus on enhancement to existing trailheads, maintenance and
construction of approved and sustainable trails for passive recreation purposes only, removal of illicit materials and trails, improved user and natural
resource safety, land restoration and stewardship via mitigation projects and monitoring, education of users via patrols, and management of the wildland-
urban interface areas.
2. Trailhead enhancements at signature open space properties including installation trash cans, mutt mitt stations, trail head signage, informational kiosks,
trail way finding signage, and where possible improved parking for cars and bicycles as well as improved public transportation access or visibility.
3. Conservation and Open Space Plan previously identified and prioritized projects number over 100 and would include at a minimum these major efforts:
a. Bishop Peak emergency vehicle access and trailhead improvements;
b. Johnson Ranch trailhead parking and safety improvements;
c. Reservoir Canyon trailhead parking enhancements, trail signs, and new loop trail;
d. Cerro San Luis trail re-routing and erosion control, and completion of the “M” trail;
e. Terrace Hill sign and kiosk improvements, trail closure/erosion control, and new fencing.
4. Daily and Ongoing Maintenance includes activities and materials to address wear and tear, natural events (i.e. heavy rain or wind or fire), vandalism, and
seasonal needs that happen on routine basis. Specific activities could range from sign maintenance to fencing repairs to removal of graffiti on geologic
features to a replanting of a mitigation area. Equipment associated with maintenance including funds to rent heavy equipment, bicycles for access, and
hand tools.
5. Wildland-Urban Interface Fuel Reduction including funding for spring and early summer work crews and tools to reduce weeds and hazardous materials.
Readiness to Build
X Study complete or n/a
Equipment purchased or n/a
X Property owned or property agreement in place (for enhancement projects) n/a
X Environmental approval and permits complete or n/a
Specifications or construction documents complete n/a
IT Steering Committee review n/a
19
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-37
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
OPEN SPACE PROTECTION: MAINTENANCE
Environmental Review and Permits Required
Environmental Review n/a
Building Permit n/a
Waterway Permits (Fish & Game, Water Quality, Army Corps) n/a
Railroad n/a
Other: (Enter the title and agency of any other needed permits) n/a
Operating Program Number and Title
60290 – Ranger Service
Project Phasing and Funding Sources
Continuing, ongoing or master account project - Specification No. 99837 (Open Space Protection – Master)
100-60290-99837953-99837100-99837953 (Open Space Maintenance – Ranger Service)
General Projects and Costs
2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20
Trailhead Enhancement $60,000 $60,000 0* 0* 0*
Conservation Plan Projects $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000
Ongoing Open Space Maintenance $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000
Open Space Multi-Modal Access Improvements $150,000 $150,000 0 0 0
Total $285,000 $285,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000
*Dependent on land acquisition.
Ongoing costs associated with Open Space are supported by the Natural Resources Program and Parks and Recreation Department base annual budgets. In terms
of life expectancy, real property interests acquired for conservation and open space purposes are typically expected to be managed and held in perpetuity.
Additional ongoing costs resulting from new acquisitions will vary depending on the project type; for example, a new open space reserve that is owned in fee
simple where new trails, parking, and signs are anticipated will result in substantive new, ongoing costs. Such costs will now be presented to Council upon
acquisition with a plan for implementation, An addition or expansion of an existing reserve may only result in modest additional costs due to existing mobilization
efforts and infrastructure, while the acquisition of a conservation easement interest would generate only minimal ongoing costs.
20
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-38
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
OPEN SPACE PROTECTION: MAINTENANCE
Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives
Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of reduced project is feasible but may not be desired if maintenance is intended by Council to be a
significant component of its Major City Goal to protect open space. It would be possible to do fewer projects and make less progress on catching up on deferred
maintenance and enhancements of the City’s open space.
Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: possible on a project basis.
Project Team
Open Space Protection -
Maintenance
Program Estimated Hours
Project Manager Ranger Supervisor 2000
Project Support Natural Resources 1000
Technical Studies Natural Resources 100
Environmental Clearance Community Development 100
Contract Management Ranger Supervisor 400
Project Construction Ranger Service Division 4000
Administrative Analyst Parks & Recreation 500
2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
General Fund $285,000$285,000$75,000$75,000$75,000$795,000
Total $285,000$285,000$75,000$75,000$75,000$795,000
Project Funding by Source
21
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-39
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-40
MAJOR CITY GOALS
MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION
OBJECTIVE
Prioritize implementation of the Bicycle Transportation Plan and improve & maintain bicycle, pedestrian, &
transit facilities.
DISCUSSION
Multimodal mobility enhances a city’s vitality as it helps define a sense of place and community. Health and
safety, culture and environment, aesthetics, economic vitality, and access all are essential pieces of a well created
and vibrant town. Transportation and mobility tie these elements together and enable access for all.
Active Transportation
Promoting Active Transportation has long been a priority with the City of San Luis Obispo. Active
Transportation, as defined by the Partnership of Active Transportation, “is a means of getting around that is
powered by human energy, primarily walking and bicycling.” Active Transportation is essential to a Multi-modal
system, as it provides alternatives to the automobile. At the January 2015 Community Forum, citizens reaffirmed
their interest in Multi-modal and Active Transportation. In addition, the City has recently updated its Land Use
and Circulation Elements (LUCE), which include some of the most aggressive mode split objectives and policies
in the nation. Prior to that adoption, the City also updated its Bicycle Transportation Plan (BTP). This document
proposes an integrated bicycle network within the City’s fabric that would be equal to the automobile’s road
infrastructure. The two-year Major Council Goal on Multimodal Transportation proposes to begin this major
transition of our city, and prepare a foundation for implementation of the General Plan vision.
Work Program and Strategy – Implementing the Vision
This MCG builds off of these past accomplishments and begins the 20-year implementation of the new plans. The
major council goal proposes an initial 2-year work plan consistent with the level of funding for new initiatives
anticipated in 2015-17. Future Financial Plans will address additional projects and services considered in the
LUCE and the BTP.
Motor Vehicles 66%
Transit 8%
Bicycles 10.9%
Walking, Car Pools
Other 20%
Motor Vehicles 50%
Transit 12%
Bicycles 20%
Walking, Car Pools
Other 18%
Figure 1 - Prior CE Vs. New CE Modal Spilt Objectives
22
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-41
MAJOR CITY GOALS
MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION
Private development will be required to construct the majority of new multimodal infrastructure as projects are
approved through the entitlement process and move forward through construction and occupancy. It is critical that
the initial years of LUCE and BTP implementation focus heavily on establishing the design standards, review
policies, and update of fee programs to ensure that the appropriate requirements are established to ensure that new
development moves forward in a manner that is consistent with the City’s new multimodal vision.
WORK PROGRAM CONSTRAINTS AND LIMITATIONS
There are a few important assumptions that were made in the development of this work program, including:
1. The City will rely heavily on new development to implement new facilities. Examples: Chevron, San Luis
Ranch, OASP and MASP for bikeways, roadway and transit improvements.
2. There will be limited City Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) revenue available due to current reimbursement
commitment for LOVR Interchange. Some new specific plan fees will be forthcoming but are restricted in
use to the specific plan areas where they originate.
3. On February 24, 2015, the California legislature approved a $.06 cut in the Gasoline Excise Tax which will
go into effect on July. It is estimated that this would reduce statewide transportation funding, which funds
local streets & roads, state highways, and mass transportation, by up to $1.1 billion in 2015-16. With these
significant reductions there will be limited grant funding available for new projects. Therefore, while staff
will continue to aggressively pursue grant funding opportunities, no new grant funding in the next two years
can reasonably be assumed.
4. Cooperation and coordination with other agencies including: RTA, SLOCOG, Caltrans, Cal Poly, Area
Agency on Aging and the County will be essential for implementing the projects and programs identified in
the MCG and Circulation Element.
Some of the constraints and limitations of the proposed work program include:
1. A significant proportion of transportation staffing resources for delivering existing regular ongoing functions
is currently classified as temporary. These temporary staffing resources should be converted to regular
classifications to better align with the City’s commitment to implement these plans.
2. In order to accommodate new initiatives additional transportation resources will be necessary. If additional
resources are not approved, implementation of the BTP & CE over the next two years will need to be scaled
back and deferred.
3. Peaks in the number of development review applications will require transportation staff resources that will
compete for resources needed for implementation of this work plan. Flexibility in the use of development
review fees for contract services will be necessary to accommodate these high peak demands.
4. Transportation projects in general can be controversial and heavily scrutinized. It’s difficult to fully anticipate
the level of controversy and/or opposition a particular project will have. Some projects may require a higher
level of consensus building than anticipated which can result in significant delays.
STAKEHOLDERS
Due to the broad nature of this goal stakeholder involvement will need to be equally broad. City residents remain
the primary stakeholders. Generally, outreach will also be targeted to other government agencies associated with
projects and programs, in addition to interested parties, advocacy groups, and neighborhoods in the vicinity of
projects. We anticipate the primary stakeholder to be San Luis Obispo Council of Governments, Caltrans, bike
23
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-42
MAJOR CITY GOALS
MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION
advocacy groups, citizen groups, neighborhood groups, and environmental and business associations. The
involvement of each stakeholder will vary by project and service.
ACTION PLAN
As previously mentioned, over the next several years private development will construct the vast majority of new
multimodal infrastructure. That assumption is consistent with both the LUCE and the BTP. The following action
plan is structured to secure new development standards and fee programs which ensures that implementation of
these plans in both the short and long term.
Tasks Date
CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS
See Associated CIP Requests for Details
1. Continue Transportation Safety & Operations Programs
2. Continue Bicycle Facilities Improvement Activities
3. Complete 2015-17’ BTP Implementation CIP
4. Complete environmental review and design of Prado Rd. Bridge at San Luis
Creek Widening & Grade Separated Bike/Pedestrian crossing.
5. Develop Safe Routes to School & BTP implementation plan for the Foothill:
Pacheco / Bishop Peak Elementary School Area.
6. Complete environmental review and design of Bob Jones Trail Octagon
Connection.
7. Complete environmental review and design of Bob Jones Trail
Prefumo Creek Connection.
8. Complete Marsh & Higuera Lighted Crosswalk Replacement.
9. Complete Highland & Chorro Bike Improvements.
10. Complete 2015-17 Pedestrian & Bicycle Pathway Maintenance.
11. Complete 2015-17 Downtown Tree & Sidewalk Replacements.
12. Complete 2015-17 Mission Plaza Railing Upgrades.
13. Complete 2015-17 Street Reconstruction & Resurfacing.
14. Complete 2015-17 Sidewalk Ramp Construction.
15. Begin Construction on Marsh Street Bridge Replacement.
16. Begin project development work on Prado Rd. Broad to Higuera Class I
Path.
17. Begin project development work on Phillips Lane Bike Bridge.
Ongoing
Ongoing
June 2017
June 2017
June 2017
June 2016
June 2017
June 2017
April 2016
June 2017
June 2017
June 2017
Ongoing
June 2017
June 2016
August 2015
August 2015
24
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-43
MAJOR CITY GOALS
MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION
RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT
The Public Works Department will primarily be responsible for implementing this major council goal. The
Community Development Department will be a close partner in the study and adoption of new impact fee
programs and developing & implementing new development standards. The Police, Fire, and Parks & Recreation
Departments will also be key support departments.
FINANCIAL AND STAFF RESOURCES REQUIRED TO ACHIEVE THE GOAL
The SOPC for LUCE Implementation includes a request for resources to design and cost infrastructure, to
complete traffic modeling and nexus study, and to integrate the resulting information through a public discussion
process into updated facilities financing and impact fee programs. This effort is at the core of the financial
discussion regarding implementing multi-modal transportation.
SERVICES & PLANNING
See Associated CIP & SOPC Requests for Details
18. Develop a detailed BTP prioritization and implementation plan
19. Conduct AB1600 Study & Update Infrastructure Fee Program
a. Develop RFP & Work Program
b. Consultant Selection & Work Effort
c. Public Outreach & Hearings
d. Final Adoption
20. Update Multimodal Development Standards, Policies, & Programs
a. Update Zoning Code & Subdivision Regulations
b. Update Transportation Impact Study Guidelines
c. Develop Access Mgmt. Policy / Program
21. Continue Bicycle Education Activities & Develop and expand active
transportation Education & Advocacy Programs.
22. Implement new Transit Marketing Plan
23. Complete Short Range Transit Plan with RTA
August 2015
March 2016
July 2016
November 2016
December 2016
March 2017
October 2016
July 2015
October 2015
Ongoing
Ongoing
June 2016
25
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-44
MAJOR CITY GOALS
MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION
2015-162016-172015-16 2016-17
Transportation Planner/Engr. SOPC On Going $0 $0
Dev. Services Staffing & CDD Reorg. SOPC*On Going $26,732$29,982
Bicycle Transportation Plan Implementation SOPC On Going $0 $0
Transit Marketing & Advertising Augemntation SOPC On Going $60,000$60,000
Transportation (Transit) Program Assistant SOPC*On Going $57,800$57,800
Short Range Transit Plan SOPC One Time $475,000$475,000
LUCE Implementation and Fee Update SOPC*One Time $150,000$150,000
*A portion of the SOPC supports this work program
Sidewalk Repairs & Tree Replacement CIP*One Time $100,000$100,000
Neighborhood Traffic Management CIP On Going $20,000 $20,000
Traffic Safety Improvements CIP On Going $25,000 $25,000
Marsh & Higuera Lighted X-Walk Replacement CIP One Time $0 $43,500
Mission Plaza Railing Upgrades CIP One Time $30,000 $30,000
Pedestrian & Bicycle Pathway Maintenance CIP On Going $100,000 $60,000
Street Reconstruction & Resurfacing CIP*On Going $1,566,817$1,630,700
Bicycle Facility Improvements CIP One Time $100,000$100,000
Bob Jones Octagon Barn Bike Path CIP ($345k Unsecured Grants)One Time $345,000 $0
RRST - Bike Bridge at Phillips Lane CIP ($1.25m Unsecured Grants)One Time $250,000$1,250,000
Safe Routes to School CIP One Time $45,000 $0
Santa Fe Realignment and Bridge Rehab CIP ($50 TIFF)One Time $50,000 $0
South & Parker Traffic Safety Improvements CIP One Time $30,000 $0
Marsh Street Bridge Replacement CIP ($5.9m Secured Grants)One Time $0$6,640,000
Sidewalk Ramp Construction CIP ($210k Secured Grants)One Time $150,000$105,000
Prado Rd. Bridge Widening CIP ($300k TIFF)One Time $0$300,000
Traffic Operations CIP On Going $30,000 $0
Transportation Monitoring CIP ($48k TIFF)On Going $60,000 $0
Traffic, Bicycle & Pedestrian Markings Replacement (CIP)One Time $20,000 $0
Bob Jones Prefumo Creek Bike Path CIP ($156k Secured Private)One Time $156,000 $0
BTP Implementation CIP One Time $400,000 $0
Monterey & Osos Safety Project CIP One Time $225,000 $0
*A portion of the CIP supports this work program
Total $769,532$772,782$3,702,817$10,304,200
Operating Programs Capital Improvement Plan
Note on funding: Some major capital projects rely on unsecured grant funding, if no grant funding can be
obtained these projects cannot move forward.
OUTCOME—FINAL WORK PRODUCT
By the end of this two-year cycle the City’s new multimodal standards and fee programs will be implemented so
that when private development projects move forward with the construction of new facilities, the new facilities
are consistent with the City’s long range plans, such as the General Plan and Bicycle Transportation Plan. In
addition, the outcome will be the construction of new facilities, such as the Bob Jones Prefumo Creek Bike Path,
and maintenance of existing facilities, such as the replacement of lighted crosswalks, that will further the City’s
multi-modal transportation objectives.
26
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-45
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(TRANSPORTATION)
TRANSPORTATION PLANNER/ENGINEER POSITION: CONTRACT TO REGULAR CONVERSION
SUMMARY OF CHANGE: Converting an ongoing 1.0 full-time equivalent (FTE) benefitted contract position
to a 1.0 FTE regular position in the Transportation Planning and Engineering program.
FISCAL IMPACT: Converting an existing contract benefited staff position to a regular staff position will result
in zero net cost to the General Fund.
SERVICE LEVEL IMPACT: Maintaining this ongoing position is critical to providing core transportation
services such as operations, safety, neighborhood wellness, and fulfilling local, State, and Federal regulatory
requirements.
KEY OBJECTIVES
Maintain existing staff resources necessary for:
1. Continuing the City’s Annual Traffic Safety, Bi-Annual Traffic Operations, and Neighborhood Traffic
Management Programs.
2. Implementing Measure G priority to protect and maintain essential services and facilities such as bike lanes
and sidewalk.
3. Fulfilling regulatory and municipal code requirements
4. Fulfilling State & Federal regulatory requirements for traffic control and operations
EXISTING SITUATION: FACTORS DRIVING THE NEED FOR CHANGE
This position was a 1.0 FTE benefitted permanent position prior to 2009, when it was temporarily converted to a
fulltime benefitted contract position to qualify for grant funding as part of a short term 2009-11 budget reduction
strategy. In December of 2011, the grant funding was exhausted, and the position was returned to being funded
completely from the General Fund. However, the contract engineer position has yet to be converted back to a
permanent position. The regular position was never intended to be eliminated or permanently placed into contract
status as this work has been determined to be ongoing regular work. Rather, the position was intended to be
restored back to the General Fund once the State grant was fully exhausted. Continuing to maintain this on-going
core position as a contract is in conflict with the City’s Temporary Employee Policy. This policy calls for
temporary contract employees to be generally used for six months to two years for medium to short-term special
projects and programs or seasonal work. This is the only position associated with Measure G that is not a regular
full time status.
This position is essential to the City fulfilling its Major City Goal of Multi-Modal Transportation and Other
Important Objective of Neighborhood Wellness, Measure G priority to protect and maintain essential services and
facilities such as bike lanes and sidewalk, and maintaining current service levels, programs, and regulatory
obligations. Over the last twelve years there has been a substantial increase in staffing demand with, among other
things:
1. 15 new traffic signals
2. Approximately 7 new center line miles
3. New traffic operations program
4. Expansion of the traffic safety program
5. Expansion of the neighborhood traffic management (NTM) program
27
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-46
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(TRANSPORTATION)
TRANSPORTATION PLANNER/ENGINEER POSITION: CONTRACT TO REGULAR CONVERSION
6. Augmentation of bicycle and pedestrian programs and projects
7. Travel demand modeling functions in-house
8. Traffic signal operations and design in–house
9. Annexation/development of new residential, commercial, and industrial areas.
10. Spike in development applications
11. 50+ new actionable policies, program, and project adopted as part of the General Plan Update
GOAL AND POLICY LINKS
1. 2015-17 Major City Goal for Multi-Modal Transportation
2. 2015-17 Other Important Objective for Neighborhood Wellness
3. Congestion Relief
4. Circulation Element Objectives 1.6 Thru 1.11
5. Circulation Element Policies & Program Standards 6.1 Thru 9.1
6. City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code Titles 10 & 12
7. California Vehicle Code Section 21400
8. Title 23 U.S. Code, Sections 109(d), 114(a), 217, 315, 402(a)
9. Title 23 Code of Federal Regulations 655.603, Sections 1.48(b)(8), 1.48(b)(33), & 1.48(c)(2)
IMPLEMENTATION
Task Date
1. Establish Regular Fulltime Transportation Planner/Engineer Position July 2015
2. Eliminate temporary contract Engineer II – Trans. position July 2015
3. Submit requisition for the full time regular position & provide in-house
opportunity (EOP)
July 2015
4. Establish eligibility list August 2015
5. Interview candidates and select one for appointment to the position August 2015
6. Begin orientation and training September 2015
PROGRAM MANAGER AND TEAM SUPPORT
Program Manager:
Transportation Operations Manager
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Continue the Status Quo. Renew the current contract, which is currently set to expire on June 30, 2015, and
continue to fill this position as a temporary contract. However, this is a critical core position that has been
ongoing for at least the past twelve years and therefore continuing the position as a temporary contract is in
conflict with the City Temporary Employee Policy.
2. Defer or Re-Phase the Request. Defer the conversion of this position from contract to permanent to a later
date. However, there is no financial or operational benefit derived from this alternative and continuing to
maintain this position as a temporary contract is in conflict with the City Temporary Employee Policy.
28
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-47
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(TRANSPORTATION)
TRANSPORTATION PLANNER/ENGINEER POSITION: CONTRACT TO REGULAR CONVERSION
3. Change the Scope of Request. Other than continuing the status quo or deferring the request there is no
feasible alternative that would involve a different scope of the request.
4. Implementation in a Different Way. Other than continuing the status quo or deferring the request there is no
feasible alternative that would involve implementation in a different way.
5. Existing Program Evaluation. This position is currently being contracted out; however because of the core
service and on-going nature of the position it is not appropriate to maintain this position under contract. If
this position was eliminated and the division was required to operate with fewer employees this would result
in a significant functional deficiency within the Transportation Division and would necessitate the
suspension of many programs such as the City safety, operations, and neighborhood traffic management
programs. Operating with fewer transportation staff would also result in substantial delays in the delivery of
capital project program, private development applications and environmental review, neighborhood services,
and citizen request responses.
OPERATING PROGRAM
Transportation Planning & Engineering (50500)
COST SUMMARY
Line Item Description Account No.2015-162016-17
Staffing 104,800111,200
Regular Salaries 50500-7010 71,80075,600
Retirement Contribution 50500-7040 20,30022,800
Health & Disability Insurance 50500-7042 11,70011,700
Medicare 50500-7044 1,000 1,100
Unemployment Insurance 50500-7046
Total Operating Costs 104,800111,200
Offsetting Costs Savings or Revenues
Contract Salaries 50500-7012 (71,800)(75,600)
Retirement Contribution 50500-7040 (20,300)(22,800)
Health & Disability Insurance 50500-7042 (11,700)(11,700)
Medicare 50500-7044 (1,000)(1,100)
Unemployment Insurance 50500-7046
Net Operating Costs 0 0
29
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-48
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT)
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFFING, CONTRACT SERVICES AND CDD REORGANIZATION
SUMMARY OF CHANGE:
The Community Development Department, Fire Department and Public Works are requesting to transition six
positions from temporary to regular positions, continue the use of six temporary employees, reorganize the CDD
Administration Division, add a Fire Inspector I and use a short term Human Resources Temp to provide support
during transition. In addition, consultant and contract services needed to assist the department in technical
support and timely response to applications. This will cost approximately $1,582,917 in FY 2015-16 and
$1,373,990 in FY 2016-17, all of which will be revenue off-set.
Temporary to Regular Employees
Administration 15-16 16-17
Receptionist/Cashier $58,240 $58,859
Development Review 15-16 16-17
Associate Planner $116,741 $118,214
Long Range Planning 15-16 16-17
Projects Manager $129,923 $131,600
Engineering Development Review 15-16 16-17
Civil Engineer $141,645 $143,493
Engineering Technician - Regular Full Time $87,801 $88,853
Public Works 15-16 16-17
Transportation Planner/Engineer $104,558 $110,579
Total FY Cost: $638,908 $651,598
Continued Temporary Positions
Development Review 15-16 16-17
Planning Tech - Temporary Full Time $77,079 $78,131
Assistant Planner - Temporary Full Time $94,599 $95,927
Engineering Development Review 15-16 16-17
Engineering Technician - Temporary Full Time $75,649 $76,701
Long Range Planning 15-16 16-17
Planning Tech - Temporary Full Time $77,079 $78,131
Building & Safety 15-16 16-17
Permit Technician - Temporary Full Time $72,856 $73,846
Fire 15-16 16-17
Temp Fire Staff $40,000 $40,000
Total FY Cost: $437,263 $442,735
30
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-49
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT)
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFFING, CONTRACT SERVICES AND CDD REORGANIZATION
Administrative Support Services Reorganization
Administration 15-16 16-17
Supervising Admin to CDD Business Manager $30,752 $31,211
Deputy City Clerk $87,801 $88,853
Total FY Cost: $118,553 $120,064
New Positions
Fire 15-16 16-17
Fire Inspector I $99,351 $94,593
Human Resources 15-16 16-17
Human Resources Specialist - Part Time Temporary $3,842 $0
Total FY Cost: $103,193 $94,593
Consultant and Contract Services
Building 15-16 16-17
Contract Services – plan check $100,000 $0
Fire 15-16 16-17
EnerGov Support/Report writing $ 15,000 $ 15,000
City Attorney 15-16 16-17
Contract Services for consultant assistance $50,000 $0
Development Services 15-16 16-17
Contract Services – application processing $50,000 $0
Subdivision Improvement Plan Review $10,000 $0
Surveyor/Map Review $10,000 $0
Airport Land Use Consultant assistance $50,000 $50,000
Total FY Cost: $285,000 $65,000
31
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-50
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT)
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFFING, CONTRACT SERVICES AND CDD REORGANIZATION
Planning and Building Permit activity has increased more than 40% since Fiscal Year 2011-2012 while
regular staffing has increased 12%. Eleven full time temporary positions and $1.1M in Consultant
Services has been relied upon to provide resources to meet the service demands during high permit
activity, however, the influx of permit activity has been consistent for over one year and economic
forecast numbers reflect a five year trend of increased development services supporting the need and
stability to bring regular staffing levels up to meet the long term service demands. Projected increases in
building valuation are directly related to a corresponding increase in permit review and inspections and
hiring regular staff will provide a stable and reliable workforce to address these positive challenges and
also prepare for the natural employee turnover that occurs within organizations.
FISCAL IMPACT:
One time cost of $735,905 in FY 15-16 and $507,735 in FY 16-17. On-going costs of $847,012 in FY
15-16 and $866,255 in FY 16-17. The one-time costs will be offset by FY 2014-15 over realized
revenue that is projected to be approximately $996,000. All on-going cost will be offset by the continued
increase in forecasted development services revenue as outlined below.
Fiscal Year Dev Services Balance
SOPC Cost Savings &
Other Revenue
Offset Remaining
Balance
Staffing Contract
Services On going One-time
15-16 $1,703,052 1 $847,012 $450,905 $285,000 $133,524 $253,659
16-17 $1,238,797 2 $866,255 $442,735 $65,000 $138,428 $3,235
1 75% of 14/15 projected revenue in excess of budget + 75% of 15/16 forecasted revenue in excess of five year fiscal forecast
– cost of Council approved Building FTE. ($996,164+$706,888) 2 Dev Services Remaining Balance + 75% of 15/16 forecasted revenue in excess of five year fiscal forecast – cost of Council
approved Building FTE. ($253,659+$985,138)
32
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-51
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT)
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFFING, CONTRACT SERVICES AND CDD REORGANIZATION
SERVICE LEVEL IMPACT:
The objective of this request is to ensure the City is able to timely process applications through the
development review and plan check process given increased permit activity. While regular and
temporary staff positions have been added, regular positions are needed for recruitment and retention
over the longer term, so that there is a stable and reliable staff that can efficiently and effectively process
permit applications.
In addition, the City will continue to require technical support to participate in the Airport Land Use
Plan update process and support review of projects within the area subject to airport influence. This
participation is critical to the ongoing success of the LUCE and in bringing the two policy/regulatory
guidance documents in closer alignment.
Requested staffing is required to keep up with permit activity that has remained consistently high since
2012-13 and are expected to continue through 2016-17 and beyond. Should these resources not be
available, permit volumes will overwhelm the development review process, impairing the City’s ability
to keep pace with permit volumes and implement Major City Goals and other objectives. Long term
temporary staff has been used to fill these positions since September of 2013. Now that a trend of
elevated permit activity has been established, it’s more effective to use regular staffing to provide
consistent levels of service from dependable regular city employees.
Beyond the impact of providing support for increased development services, CDD’s administrative
support services team has taken on several significant ongoing tasks that require a restructure of the
division to ensure there is administrative capacity to support the department and align positions with
tasks and responsibilities. These tasks include but are not limited to:
Administrative support/management of Affordable Housing Fund and the Human Relations
Commission
Administration and implementation of EnerGov Software program – including management of
E-portal
Cashier functions handled solely by support staff to ensure the appropriate levels of control and
checks and balance.
Administrative support to Engineering Development Review
33
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-52
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT)
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFFING, CONTRACT SERVICES AND CDD REORGANIZATION
The restructure would include replacing the Supervising Administrative Assistant position with a CDD
Business Manager. The CDD Business Manager would be equivalent to a Senior Analyst with
supervision duties and will absorb the fiscal responsibilities of the Supervising Administrative Assistant,
supervise CDD support staff and identify, develop and implement process improvements. The addition
of a Deputy City Clerk will free up the Administrative Assistant III that currently spends 90-100% of
her time coordinating Advisory Body activities so she can absorb the clerical activities of the
Supervising Administrative Assistant and will serve as a customer service lead. The Deputy City Clerk
and the Recording Secretary will be relocated to the Clerk’s Office.
Human Resources request the use of a temporary HR specialist to ensure the timely recruitment and
processing of the requested staffing.
CDD has funding for a part-time temporary Engineering Consultant ($40,430 in 15-16 and $41,022 in
16-17) and a contract Permit Technician ($41,841 in 15-16 and $42,424 in 16-17) that would no longer
be necessary and will offset cost by $82,271 in 2015-16 and $83,446 in 2016-17. Public Works has
funding to cover $26,732 of the Transportation Planner/Engineer in 2015-16 and $29,982 in 2016-17.
KEY OBJECTIVES
1. Match resources available to services being requested
2. Maintain established levels of service
3. Satisfaction of both external and internal customers
EXISTING SITUATION: FACTORS DRIVING THE NEED FOR CHANGE
1. High levels of permit activity – resources needed to meet processing times
2. Large and complex project submissions –require professional staff and consultants to process
permits
3. Transition of Development Review Software to EnerGov
4. Engineering Development Review transitioning from Public Works to CDD
GOAL AND POLICY CRITERIA
1. Major City Goals – This request supports long standing Major City Goals, including Affordable
Housing, the Economic Development Strategic Plan (EDSP) and policy research, development and
implementation. Timely processing of priority affordable housing projects is critical in meeting the
City’s Housing objectives. A major strategy of the EDSP is streamlining the development review
process to removing barriers to creating head-of-household jobs. This request supports current
Major City Goals of Housing and Multi-Modal Transportation as well as other important objectives
of Downtown and Neighborhood Wellness by ensuring that adequate staff is available to achieve
permit processing and support.
34
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-53
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT)
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFFING, CONTRACT SERVICES AND CDD REORGANIZATION
2. Legal Concerns – The State of California Permit Streamlining Act requires timely processing of
development applications. The initial 30-day “completeness” review of all applications demands
adequate staff to meet that deadline.
3. Priority Level of Service – Timely processing of development applications is a priority to a
significant contingent of the community and is fundamental to the City’s ongoing economic
recovery and viability.
4. Revenue Generation and/or Cost Savings – The use of regular employees is more cost effective
than the use of consultants. For example, from February 2014 to September 2014 $286,790 was paid
out to consultants for plans examining and building inspections. It cost $214,482 to use full-time
regular staffing for a Plans Examiner and a Building Inspector for one year. This request will enable
the processing of more applications in house resulting in lower operating cost.
5. Reorganization within or across Departments – This request includes the increased support and
new initiatives the Community Development Department is taking on: Affordable Housing
Fund/Human Relations Commission, EnerGov systems management, Engineering Development
review, Rental Housing Inspection Program, and more complex and financial responsibilities that
have historically been with FIT. The funding of a Deputy City Clerk will centralize and pair the
function of committee and commission support with a division within the City that is functionally
organized around these technical responsibilities. Approval of this SOPC will support reorganization
within and across departments to achieve these objectives.
6. Reallocation of Existing Resources – This request will allow several departments to reallocate
resources to streamline a significant citywide task. Funding a Deputy City Clerk to work under the
direction of the City Clerk and provide support to the advisory bodies will make a more efficient
process and free up CDD resources to provide administrative support for development services.
This will also enable CDD staff to provide liaison and administrative support to the Human
Relations Commission (i.e. grants-in-aid process) while agenda support for Commission meetings
will be provided by the City Clerk’s staff. This will free up Human Resources staff to focus on core
services.
STAKEHOLDERS
Development Services affect the entire community. Development projects have the potential to go
through three departments, five divisions, three advisory bodies and City Council. Minor delays at any
of these levels may cause major impacts. This program will provide the resources to limit delays and the
effect on stakeholders.
IMPLEMENTATION
The continued temporary staffing and consultant services are currently at the proposed level, approved
by Council 6/14/14 as part of the 2014/15 Supplemental budget review and just require approval for
additional funding.
35
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-54
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT)
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFFING, CONTRACT SERVICES AND CDD REORGANIZATION
Task Date
1. Hire Temporary Human Resource Specialist June 2015
2. Meet and confer with SLOCEA for new positions and Admin reorganization July 2015
3. Finalize Details of Admin Reorg July 2015
4. Recruitment for new hires
5. On board new hires
July-Aug 2015
Aug 2015
PROGRAM MANAGER AND TEAM SUPPORT
Program Manager:
The Director of Community Development, Derek Johnson, will be responsible for the management of
this program.
Project Team:
The project team will consist of the Community Development Department’s Fiscal Officer, Deputy
Directors, Chief Building Official, Supervising Civil Engineer, the Fire Chief, City Clerk, Human
Resources and the Transportation Manager.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Continue the Status Quo. If these resources are not available, permit volumes will overwhelm the
development review process, impairing the City’s ability to keep pace with permit volumes and
implement Major City Goals and other objectives.
2. Implementation in a Different Way. The program request is for a fairly balanced use of regular staff,
temporary staff and contract services. A trend has been determined that would suggest a need for full
time regular staffing while still maintaining the flexibility of temporary staffing or the use of
consultants to adjust to the fluctuating nature of permit activity. The request could be filled using all
temporary staffing and/or consultants, however, when using temporary staffing and consultants for
long terms, the operating cost, turnover costs and impact to regular employees exceeds that of the
sustainability of regular staffing.
3. Existing Program Evaluation. The last year and a half has been a live evaluation of the requested program.
Temporary staffing and consultants have been used to meet the demand on resources. Consultant costs far
exceed temporary and regular staffing cost. In some cases we have been unsuccessful in securing temporary
staffing and predict that it will become more difficult as the economy recovers and even more difficult to
retain the temporary staffing we currently have. All requests for staffing have been discussed with Human
Resources (HR) and preliminary SOPC was reviewed by HR prior to submittal.
OPERATING PROGRAM
1. Community Development Department – Development Review
2. Community Development Department – Engineering Development Review
3. Fire Department – Hazard Prevention
4. Public Works - Transportation
36
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-55
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT)
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFFING, CONTRACT SERVICES AND CDD REORGANIZATION
COST SUMMARY
Line Item Description Account No.2015-162016-17
Staffing 1,571,6171,372,490
Administration - Support Services Reorg. 40100-Various 176,793 178,923
Planning - Development Review 40200-Various 288,419 292,272
Planning - Long Range 40400-Various 207,002 209,731
Engineering - Senior Civil Engineer & Techs 40500-Various 305,096 309,046
Building - Permit Tech 40700-Various 72,856 73,846
HR - Temporary staffing 30100-7014 3,842 0
Fire - Fire Inspector I 85300-Various 88,051 93,093
Fire -Temporary Staffing 85300-Various 40,000 40,000
Public Works 50500-various 104,558 110,579
Airport Land Use Consultant Work 40400-7227 50,000 50,000
Contract Services - Building Division 40700-7227 100,000 0
Contract Services - Development Review 40200-7227 50,000 0
Surveyor/Map Review 40500-7227 10,000 0
Subdivision Improvement Plan Review 40500-7227 10,000 0
Additional Support for City Attorney's office 15100-7227 50,000 0
EnerGov Support/Report writing - Fire 85300-7227 15,000 15,000
Other Operating Expenditures 11,300 1,500
Training 85300-7459 1,500 1,500
Office Supplies (work station /computer/etc)85300-7421 9,500
Uniforms and Identification 85300-7913 300
Minor Capital 0 0
Total Operating Costs 1,582,9171,373,990
Offsetting Costs Savings or Revenues
Revenues - Dev Services (706,888)(985,138)
Revenues - Transportation Env Review 100-45830 (24,521)(25,000)
14/15 Development Services Appropriation (996,164)
Public Works - Temporary Salaries 50500-7014 (26,732)(29,982)
Engineering - Temp Engineering Consultant 40500-Various (40,430)(41,022)
Engineering - Contract Permit Tech 40500-Various (41,841)(42,424)
Net Operating Costs (253,659)250,424
*FY 14/15 carryover projected to be approximately $600,000.
37
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-56
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(TRANSPORTATION)
BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
SUMMARY OF CHANGE: Reorganize the Principal Transportation Planner job description to an Active
Transportation Manager and a reclassification of a City Worker 4 to a Transportation Planner/Engineer to enable
the Transportation Division to implement the Bicycle Transportation and General Plans.
FISCAL IMPACT: On-going costs of $16,500 in 2015-16 and $17,500 in 2016-17 from the General Fund,
offset by a reduction in the adopted CIP. On-going costs of $16,500 in 2015-16 & $17,500 in 2016-17 from the
Parking Fund. The remaining annual on-going costs of $71,200 will be offset by existing temporary salaries and
development review revenue. The proposed revenue is from transportation development services surcharges for
such services as traffic impact studies, the amount is separate from that requested by the Community
Development Department for their SOPC.
SERVICE LEVEL IMPACT: This request will provide adequate structure and staffing resources in the
Transportation Planning & Engineering Division for supporting the Major City Goal of Multimodal
Transportation. This prioritizes implementation of the Bicycle Transportation plan and the associated new capital
projects, programs, and services.
KEY OBJECTIVES
Maintain and restructure staff resources necessary for:
1. Beginning long term implementation of the City’s Bicycle Transportation Plan (BTP)
2. Beginning long term implementation of the City’s Circulation Element (CE)
3. Adequate staffing capacity for processing development review applications
EXISTING SITUATION: FACTORS DRIVING THE NEED FOR CHANGE
In November of 2013 the City adopted its Bicycle Transportation Plan and identified implementation of that plan
as a Major City Goal for 2015-17. Elements of the Bicycle Transportation Plan are implemented thru private
development and other larger capital projects. This SOPC proposes to restructure the Transportation Planning and
Engineering program to be better suited for implementing the Major Council Goal, BTP, and CE.
This proposal creates both an Active Transportation Manager, and a Bicycle Coordinator. The LUCE, the BTP,
the proposed capital programs, and the upcoming development obligations create the need for policy
development, project delivery, program implementation, and project review. This workload is best accommodated
by a policy level Active Transportation Manager and a Bike Coordinator to implement capital and development
projects. The Active Transportation Manager utilizes the existing funding and the FTE for the Public Works
Department’s Principal Transportation Planner. The Planner would be eliminated and a new Active
Transportation Manager created. The Bicycle Transportation Coordinator would utilize the following funding
sources:
• Existing funding from the General Fund for .25 Bike Coordinator in the Transit Program
• Development Review funding to facilitate construction of new development bike and pedestrian projects
• Capital funding as this position would implement the capital elements of the BTP
• Parking funds as this position impacts the need for downtown parking
38
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-57
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(TRANSPORTATION)
BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
If the Principal Transportation Planner shift to Active Transportation Manager is approved, the non-active
transportation programs & services of the existing Planner would shift to the existing Transportation Manager,
and the existing Planner/Engineer staff of the unit.
In addition to programs, services, and long range planning; implementation of the Bicycle Transportation Plan
also requires new capital projects, development review, and transportation impact studies. The current Bicycle
Coordinator job classification does not require the level of education, experience, and responsibility necessary for
delivering these things, therefore this SOPC proposes to elevate the Bicycle Coordinator classification to another
Transportation Planner/Engineer. Since approximately half of this position will be responsible for development
review and transportation impact studies, the cost for this position would be 50% offset with development review
fees. The offsetting development review funding may either be established directly from the revenue accounts or
an update to the cost allocation plan.
The graphic attached depicts the two primary transportation functions; delivering capital & public improvement
projects and providing programs & services along with the corresponding staffing levels. (note: the chart also
includes the recommended changes included in the Baseline SOPC for changes to the Transportation Program).
GOAL AND POLICY CRITERIA
1. 2015-17 Major City Goal for Multimodal Transportation
2. Bicycle Transportation Plan
3. Measure Y/G Objective: Traffic Congestion Relief
4. Circulation Element
5. City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code Titles 10 & 12
6. California Vehicle Code Section 21400
7. Title 23 U.S. Code, Sections 109(d), 114(a), 217, 315, 402(a)
8. Title 23 Code of Federal Regulations 655.603, Sections 1.48(b)(8), 1.48(b)(33), & 1.48(c)(2)
STAKEHOLDERS
A wide range of stakeholders are affected by this program, including community members, residents, and visitors.
Internal stakeholders include the Community Development, Utilities, Fire and Police.
IMPLEMENTATION
Task Date
1. Reclassify Principal Transportation Planner and Bicycle Coordinator Positions July 2015
2. Submit Requisition for Trans. Planner/Engr. Position July 2015
3. Establish eligibility list August 2015
4. Interview candidates and select one for appointment to the position August 2015
5. Begin orientation and training September 2015
39
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-58
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(TRANSPORTATION)
BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
PROGRAM MANAGER AND TEAM SUPPORT
Program Manager:
Transportation Operations Manager
Project Team:
The Public Works, Community Development, Parks and Recreation, Police, Fire, and Administration
Departments.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Continue the Status Quo. Currently the City does not have the adequate staffing resources to accommodate
implementation of the BTP. Also, under the status quo, staff resources dedicated to bicycling is part-time
and temporary.
2. Implementation in a Different Way. The City could revise the Principal Transportation Planner job
description to an Active Transportation Manager but not reclassify City Worker 4 to a Transportation
Planner/Engineer. This would secure regular, on-going staffing for bicycles but not provide adequate staffing
for delivering the capital projects programs and services proposed as part of the Major City Goal: Multimodal
Transportation, therefore, the work scope of that goal would need to be reduced significantly.
OPERATING PROGRAM
Transportation Planning & Engineering (50500)
COST SUMMARY
Line Item Description Account No.2015-16 2016-17
Staffing 104,200 110,200
Regular Salaries 50500-7010 68,200 71,800
Retirement Contribution 50500-7040 19,300 21,700
Health & Disability Insurance 50500-7042 15,700 15,700
Medicare 50500-7044 1,000 1,000
Unemployment Insurance 50500-7046
Total Operating Costs 104,200 110,200
Offsetting Costs Savings or Revenues
Temporary Salaries 50500-7014 (18,800)(19,600)
Transportation Sur Charge Revenues 100-45485 (52,400)(55,600)
Parking Enterprise Fund (16,500)(17,500)
Reductions in CIP (16,500)(17,500)
Net Operating Costs 0 0
40
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-59
CU
R
R
E
N
T
BU
D
G
E
T
Re
g
u
l
a
r
FT
E
= 3
Te
m
p
o
r
a
r
y
FT
E
= 2.
2
5
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
BU
D
G
E
T
Re
g
u
l
a
r
FT
E
= 5.
2
5
Te
m
p
o
r
a
r
y
FT
E
= 0
20
1
5
‐17
Tr
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
& En
g
.
Di
v
i
s
i
o
n
SOPCs
Ci
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
El
e
m
e
n
t
& Bi
c
y
c
l
e
Tr
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
Pl
a
n
Im
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
Bo
t
t
o
m
Li
n
e
:
Ad
d
i
n
g
2.
2
5
FT
E
wi
l
l
co
s
t
an
ad
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
$2
9
K
to
th
e
General Fund
Bi
k
e
Co
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
o
r
(E
l
i
s
s
a
M.
)
.2
5
FT
E
PW
Te
m
p
.
.2
5
FT
E
Tr
a
n
s
i
t
Te
m
p
.
Principal Planner (Peggy M.)1 FTE: Reg
50
%
GF
50
%
Tr
a
n
s
i
t
100% GF
Tr
a
n
s
.
Pl
n
.
/
E
n
g
.
(T
B
D
)
1F
T
E
:
Re
g
.
or
Co
n
t
r
a
c
t
35
%
GF
15
%
Pa
r
k
i
n
g
50
%
De
v
.
Rev.
50
%
Tr
a
n
s
i
t
Active Trans. Mgr.(Peggy M.)1 FTE: Reg100% GFSOPCBTPImp.$0MCG SOPC
Tr
a
n
s
.
Pl
n
.
/
E
n
g
.
(B
r
y
a
n
W.
)
1F
T
E
:
Co
n
t
r
a
c
t
.
10
0
%
GF
25
%
GF
75
%
Gr
a
n
t
Tr
a
n
s
.
As
s
i
s
t
.
(J
e
n
R.
)
1F
T
E
:
Co
n
t
r
a
c
t
SOPC Convert
Cont. Trans. Plnr/Eng.
$0
Tr
a
n
s
.
Pl
n
.
/
E
n
g
.
(B
r
y
a
n
W.
)
1F
T
E
:
Re
g
10
0
%
GF
50
%
GF
50
%
De
v
Re
v
75
%
Gr
a
n
t
Tr
a
n
s
.
Pl
n
.
/
E
n
g
.
(T
B
D
)
1F
T
E
:
Re
g
.
SOPC
Dev Serv. Staffing.
$29Kto General Fund
BA
S
E
L
I
N
E
SO
P
C
S
Le
g
e
n
d
Bo
l
d
= Ch
a
n
g
e
in
Fu
n
c
t
i
o
n
Bo
l
d
= Po
s
i
t
i
o
n
Up
g
r
a
d
e
Bo
l
d
= Ch
a
n
g
e
in
Ti
t
l
e
Co
n
t
r
a
c
t
/
Te
m
p
.
Po
s
i
t
i
o
n
Co
n
t
r
a
c
t
/
T
e
m
p
.
Co
n
v
e
r
t
e
d
to
Re
g
u
l
a
r
Po
s
i
t
i
o
n
Bi
k
e
/
T
r
a
n
s
i
t
Co
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
o
r
(T
B
D
)
.2
5
FT
E
:
PW
Re
g
.
.7
5
FT
E
:
Tr
a
n
s
i
t
25
%
GF
75
%
Tr
a
n
s
i
t
Trans. Prog. Assist.
SOPC.
$0
If
MC
G
is
ap
p
r
o
v
e
d
,
th
i
s
SO
P
C
wo
u
l
d
be
re
v
i
s
e
d
fr
o
m
a ¾ FT
E
to
1 FT
E
tr
a
n
s
i
t
po
s
i
t
i
o
n
OR
.2
5
GF
41
ATTACHMENT 2 B1-60
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(TRANSPORTATION)
TRANSIT MARKETING & ADVERTISING AUGMENTATION
SUMMARY OF CHANGE: Increasing the Transit Marketing and Advertising Budget to build ridership and
promote services.
FISCAL IMPACT: Ongoing cost of $60,000 in 2015-16 and $60,000 in 2016-17.
SERVICE LEVEL IMPACT: Historical transit funding, particularly during the “Great Recession”, has severely
limited marketing and advertising for SLO Transit. As a result, marketing and advertising to build ridership and
promote services has been very limited. The recent economic recovery has increased transit funding, particularly
in State Transportation Development Act (TDA) funding. Increasing the marketing and advertising budget by
$60,000 each year will help build choice riders and promote support and use of the transit system.
KEY OBJECTIVES
1. Execute strategic marketing campaigns aimed at promoting the benefits of public transit. Staff will be able to
better engage at-risk and under-engaged populations with more thorough messaging. This will become even
more pertinent as SLO Transit starts to promote the service changes that will come as a result of the adopted
Short Range Transit Plan.
2. Improve public engagement motivate choice-riders to use the improved (SRTP) services SLO Transit offers.
Not having the ability to market the changes, brought about by the SRTP, could nullify their value if staff
cannot promote their use.
3. Educate the public in an attractive manner with a cohesive messaging and regular frequency.
4. Motivate the public to use SLO Transit services by portraying public transit in a positive light, highlighting its
many economic and environmental benefits.
EXISTING SITUATION: FACTORS DRIVING THE NEED FOR CHANGE
The SLO Transit marketing budget is currently $34,000, representing around 1% of the total Transit Operating
budget. This budget is quickly consumed by a few promotions, which frankly have a limited range in public
reach because of their infrequency. To supplement these campaigns, staff does leverages social media, public
events and in-kind contributions. However, a more frequent, cohesive and encompassing message is needed to
keep the public engaged, educated and motivated to benefit from SLO Transit services.
A strong marketing budget is the best way to create excitement for fixed-route service to the general public.
Changes to the transit system will come with many benefits for current riders as well as for the rest of our
community. The increase in marketing budget will give staff plenty opportunity to educate and promote the
benefits of these changes during the next 5-7 years it takes to implement the SRTP.
GOAL AND POLICY CRITERIA
Continue to garner support from transit oriented populations (seniors, disabled, economically disadvantaged,
college-age population, etc.). The second goal is to increase transit ridership among key under-performing
demographics (Commuters, K-12 students, Downtown Employees, etc). And thirdly, to keep the Transit riding
and general public informed about service changes and improvements that come as a result of the Short Range
Plan as they come fruition during the next 5-7 years and in a way to grow ridership and support for transit
services. Other Goals include:
42
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-61
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(TRANSPORTATION)
TRANSIT MARKETING & ADVERTISING AUGMENTATION
1. 2013-15 Major City Goal to address homelessness in our City
2. 2013-15 Major City Goal for Pedestrian & Bicycles
3. 2013-15 other Council objectives to address transportation (Advertising revenue etc)
4. Measure Y Objective: Traffic Congestion Relief
5. Circulation Element Objectives calls for bicycling, transit, and walking as a means to reduce traffic.
6. Vehicle operations, administration and facility and bus stop maintenance
7. 2011-13 Major City Goal for Traffic Congestion Relief
8. Temporary Employee Policy: It is the policy of the City of San Luis Obispo to hire temporary employees to
meet the temporary needs of the City that result from emergencies, special projects of a short-term nature,
seasonal work, un-programmed surges in workload, and to provide substitutes for regular employees.
9. Human Resources Management: Regular employees will be the core workforce and the preferred means of
staffing ongoing, year-round program activities that should be performed by full-time City employees rather
than independent contractors.
Other key issues:
1. SLO Transit is the largest transit agency in the County without designated marketing staff. The County’s
regional provider, RTA, has a full-time management level position fulfilling these duties
2. Two previous transit audits recommended inclusion of a marketing position to promote the benefits of transit
to various populations within the city.
3. Mobility statistics nationwide indicate that younger people are awaiting longer to get a driver’s license and
car ownership percentages are declining among the younger age group. There is an opportunity to capture that
demographic for increased transit ridership
STAKEHOLDERS
The Mass Transit Committee has been a long-time advocate for enhancing the marketing efforts of SLO Transit.
The Short Range Transit Plan provides a thorough analysis of SLO Transit rider demographics. It also provides
insights into travel patterns, trip times & length and their purposes. These insights provide key indicators for
what targeted messaging is likely to be the most affect to garner support.
This increase to the SLO Transit marketing budget will primarily enhance staff’s ability to reach the general
public and educate them about the benefits of fixed-route services. The increased marketing budget also means
the division has more “buying power” for ad placements and could use this to negotiate better bulk rates; in
essence furthering SLO transit marketing leverage. An analysis of marketing mediums/channels will indicate to
staff which methods yield the best results to reach the intend markets.
IMPLEMENTATION
With approval of the proposed budget, staff can commence with crafting key messaging, themes, campaigns and
mediums that will yield the biggest impact at increasing ridership. These marketing messages will be based on
performance indicators about key demographics which have historically translated into ridership (e.g. Seniors,
Disabled, Students, Economically Disadvantaged, etc.)
43
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-62
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(TRANSPORTATION)
TRANSIT MARKETING & ADVERTISING AUGMENTATION
Tasks Date
1. Identify key markets (i.e. identify demographics) August, 2015
2. Identify key messages September, 2015
3. Identify key mediums and channels for reaching these markets October, 2015
4. Develop a spending plan December, 2015
5. Execute marketing plan March, 2016
Specific tasks include:
1. Conducting targeted marketing to key currently under-performing populations relative to transit ridership,
including potential commuters, school age children and their parents
2. Conducting targeted marketing to sustain or increase ridership among key populations, including Cal Poly
students and seniors over 65
3. Increase ridership and fare media sales by implementation of marketing/outreach plan
4. Expand Promotional assistance with Downtown Access Pass Program (DAP) and Transit fare pass media
5. Develop a Speakers’ Bureau program to build awareness of the benefits that San Luis Obispo Transit has to
offer.
6. Increase transit use by providing education and resources on the ‘First Mile-Last Mile’ strategy employed
nationally; essentially, this educates potential riders on mobility choices to address the distance between their
trip origin and their departure bus stop, and their trip destination and their departure bus stop. National studies
show lack of clarity on ‘first-mile/last mile options are a barrier to increased ridership
PROGRAM MANAGER AND TEAM SUPPORT
Program Manager:
The Transit Assistant and Transportation Assistant, at the direction of the Transit Manager, are primarily
responsible for the public engagement, public outreach and marketing of Transit’s services.
Project Team:
It is within the division’s ability to expand its current marketing programs beyond their current state to reflect
broader and more targeted messaging.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Continue the Status Quo.
a. The current SLO Transit marketing budget is largely consumed by 1) reproducing informational print
materials riders use to learn about the bus services, 2) creating rider focused Public Service
Announcements (PSA’s) addressing passenger issues and 3) producing new “Rider Alert” materials
regarding operational issues. All these categories do little to nothing to grow the ridership base from
non-riders, but are necessary to maintaining the operation.
b. A small remaining portion of marketing funds are then used for a limited number of outreach
campaigns. However, the scarcity and infrequency of these outreach campaigns have limited success
in cultivating and fostering NEW transit-riding habits.
c. Not increasing the budget would mean that these few outreach dollars transit does have would be
consumed by legal ad placements as part of implementing the SRTP process. While these are
necessary, to inform the public of service changes, they also do little to nothing to promote the use of
transit to current non-riders.
44
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-63
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(TRANSPORTATION)
TRANSIT MARKETING & ADVERTISING AUGMENTATION
2. Defer or Re-Phase the Request.
a. Similarly, while staff will be able to inform the public of public-participation meetings and the
service changes impending with its limited outreach marketing dollars, the ability to highlight these
benefits in an attractive and outreach way would be deferred to another fiscal year.
b. In that deferral, the time sensitive opportunity to build community support, in the form that translates
into ridership, could be lost and become much more difficult to recover in consequent years.
3. Change the Scope of Request.
a. The increase of $26,000 to the marketing budget, for a total of $60,000, is the bare minimum by
which staff believes it can be affective in both engaging, educating and motivating the public about
the benefit of SLO Transit services.
b. Any amounts above this, would only help in broadening the messaging. Industry wide, 4% of the
operating budget tends to sufficient.
OPERATING PROGRAM
Transit (50700)
COST SUMMARY
Line Item Description Account No.2015-162016-17
Other Operating Expenditures 60,000 60,000
Advertising and Marketing 50700.7203 60,000 60,000
Total Operating Costs 60,000 60,000
Net Operating Costs 60,000 60,000
45
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-64
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(TRANSPORTATION)
TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM ASSISTANT (Transit)
SUMMARY OF CHANGE: Converting a .25 full-time equivalent (FTE) temporary City Worker VIII Bicycle
Programs Coordinator/Transit Assistant position to a regular 1.0 FTE Transportation Assistant position for the
Transit Enterprise Fund will cost $78,000 annually. The existing temporary staffing funding will be converted
with an additional budget augment of $57,800 needed to fully fund this position conversion.
FISCAL IMPACT: Ongoing cost of $57,800 in 2015-16 and 2016-17. Current temporary transit staffing dollars
totaling $20,200 will be converted to help support this staffing request.
SERVICE LEVEL IMPACT: Maintaining this ongoing position is critical to providing core transportation
services such as operations, safety, and fulfilling local, State, and Federal regulatory requirements.
KEY OBJECTIVES
SLO Transit touches the lives of San Luis Obispo citizens over 1.1 million times over the course of a fiscal year,
arguable more than any other division. Yet, transit staff consists of two FTE and one .25 Temporary position.
Bringing the .25 temporary position to a full-time, regular position better enables transit staff to take advantage of
Federal, State and Regional resources, maintain the City’s transit system and further develop these services to
levels consistent with the City’s Goals & Objectives.
Currently, Transit’s two FTE are dedicated to the Financial and Operational mission-critical aspects of
maintaining the SLO Transit system. To a lesser degree, staff along with the .25 temporary position, are actively
pursuing and applying for grants, conducting operational analyses, engaging the public and further developing the
system. An additional .75 time for transit purposes, will create better immediate and long tern opportunities for
serving the public.
One example is the time staff has dedicated to processing public applications for Disabled Identification Cards,
VIP (80+ years old) and Downtown Access passes. Because of time constraints, the public is limited to having
these processed only one day a week and for only a two hour window. With an increased staffing level, transit
will be able to offer the public more front counter hours to process their individual requests at times convenient
for the rider.
EXISTING SITUATION: FACTORS DRIVING THE NEED FOR CHANGE
Transit has commenced its mandated Short Range Transit Plan. This is a comprehensive analysis of the current
state of the transit system with purposes of identifying strengths and opportunities. As a result, service changes
will be recommended and will be implemented over the course of the next 5-7 years. Each of these service
changes will require a considerable amount of public engagement, operational analyses, asset management as well
as post-implementation monitoring. These tasks require work above and beyond maintaining current level of
services. The addition of .75 time, for transit purposes, will help absorb to a considerable degree the impact of the
increased work load, help ensure thorough analyses are performed and help expedite the prescribed system
improvement.
GOAL AND POLICY CRITERIA
There are two key objectives with this request. The first is to increase transit ridership among key under-performing
demographics (commuters, younger students, etc.), and second, to increase the safety of current transit riders. Given
the high ethic of active mobility, the presence of CalPoly and a high number of people who are transit dependent, the
City has a vibrant transit system. Ridership could be increased by targeted outreach to specific groups. Relative to
46
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-65
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(TRANSPORTATION)
TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM ASSISTANT (Transit)
safety, approximately 90% of the passenger/driver issues with safety relate to individuals associated with
homelessness. This could be reduced with targeted outreach to shelters and service providers. Specific tasks include:
1. Enhancing safety on transit routes by providing outreach and education to Homeless shelters
2. Conducting targeted marketing to key currently under-performing populations relative to transit ridership,
including potential commuters, school age children and their parents
3. Conducting targeted marketing to sustain or increase ridership among key populations, including Cal Poly
students and seniors over 65
4. Increase ridership and fare media sales by implementation of marketing/outreach plan
5. Expand Promotional assistance with Downtown Access Pass Program (DAP) and Transit fare pass media
6. Develop a Speakers’ Bureau program to build awareness of the benefits that San Luis Obispo Transit has to offer.
7. Increase transit use by providing education and resources on the ‘First Mile-Last Mile’ strategy employed
nationally; essentially, this educates potential riders on mobility choices to address the distance between their trip
origin and their departure bus stop, and their trip destination and their departure bus stop. National studies show
lack of clarity on ‘first-mile/last mile options are a barrier to increased ridership
As part of the 2007-09 financial plan, a temporary staffing position was approved for two years partially funded by
the division’s contract services budget. A part-time temporary City Worker VIII staffing position was established in
FY 2009-10 for a Bicycle Programs Assistant in the Transportation Planning and Engineering Program to assist with
implementation of the Major City Goal and Measure Y Priority for Traffic Congestion Relief. This position also
serves as the Transportation Program Assistant with Transit (50700) sharing the .25 FTE costs associated with transit
related duties. Other key issues:
1. SLO Transit is the largest transit agency in the County without designated marketing staff. The County’s regional
provider, RTA, has a full-time management level position fulfilling these duties
2. Two previous transit audits recommended inclusion of a marketing position to promote the benefits of transit to
various populations within the city.
3. Mobility statistics nationwide indicate that younger people are waiting longer to get a driver’s license and car
ownership percentages are declining among the younger age group. There is an opportunity to capture that
demographic for increased transit ridership
A full time position dedicated to public engagement/marketing has the potential to increase transit mode share, meet
city goals on congestion relief, economic development and climate change. In addition more pedestrians using transit
to access the downtown results in fewer cars and makes for a friendlier business district. Due to existing citizen
values, the presence of a homeless population and the proximity of Cal Poly we already have a high performing
transit system that has carried over one million riders in each of the last five years and our performance is above
average when compared to similar sized transit systems nationwide. Convenience, reliability, time competitiveness,
accessibility, cost, comfort, safety are just a few of the intangible factors beyond simply providing the vehicles and
operating the service that will ultimately determine how effective our SLO transit system will be. This expanded
position dedicated to public engagement programs and marketing which would allow us to take our system to the next
level of service to our community. Adopted goals or policies include:
1. 2013-14 Major City Goal to address homelessness in our City
2. 2013-14 Major City Goal for Pedestrian & Bicycles
3. 2013-14 other Council objectives to address transportation (Advertising revenue etc.)
4. Measure Y Objective: Traffic Congestion Relief
5. Circulation Element Objectives calls for bicycling, transit, and walking as a means to reduce traffic.
6. Vehicle operations, administration and facility and bus stop maintenance
7. 2011-13 Major City Goal for Traffic Congestion Relief
47
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-66
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(TRANSPORTATION)
TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM ASSISTANT (Transit)
8. Temporary Employee Policy: It is the policy of the City of San Luis Obispo to hire temporary employees to meet
the temporary needs of the City that result from emergencies, special projects of a short-term nature, seasonal
work, un-programmed surges in workload, and to provide substitutes for regular employees.
9. Human Resources Management: Regular employees will be the core workforce and the preferred means of
staffing ongoing, year-round program activities that should be performed by full-time City employees rather than
independent contractors.
STAKEHOLDERS
The increase to a full-time, regular position translates to additional support for Transit services, enabling the
division to offer more services to the general public, improve communicational outreach and expedite the process
by which service enhancements can be implemented.
IMPLEMENTATION
Task Date
1. Advertise position July 2015
2. Hire Transportation Assistant September 2015
PROGRAM MANAGER AND TEAM SUPPORT
Program Manager:
Transit Manager
Project Team:
This request will primarily involve the Transit Division and with some support from the Human Resources
Department.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Continue the Status Quo. SLO Transit outperforms many of its transit peers. However, this robust support
for SLO Transit services also comes accompanied with increased demands and administrative needs. The two
FTE’s and .25 Temporary positions sufficiently maintain current service levels. Any further expansion of
services (e.g. those identified in the SRTP, along with Major City’s Goals and LUCE) will require additional
staffing levels.
2. Defer or Re-Phase the Request. Deferring the increased staffing position until sometime after this fiscal year
means that the already commenced SRTP could take longer to implement.
3. Change the Scope of Request. Having a Transit team, comparable to system peers, will go a long way in
helping to meet local transit service demands and in a quality and expedited fashion. The increased work load
from the SRTP process will hamper staff’s ability to advance transit related interests in the meantime.
4. Implementation in a Different Way. Moving the .25 temporary position to a full-time, regular FTE is the
minimum that is needed so that the city does not violate its own policy, whereby: “temporary resources
should not be used for regular ongoing work.” This position has existed in a “temporary” state for the last
nine years and is continued to be needed indefinitely.
48
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-67
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(TRANSPORTATION)
TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM ASSISTANT (Transit)
OPERATING PROGRAM
Transit (50700)
COST SUMMARY
Fiscal Impact Summary
Costs By Type
Fund
Current
FTE Current
Proposed
FTE Proposed
Change in
FTE Change
Transit Services 530-50700.2520,200$ 1.00 78,000$ 0.75 57,800$
Line Item Description Account No.2015-16 2016-17
Staffing 78,000 78,000
Regular Salaries 50700-7010 49,900 41,800
Retirement Contribution 50700-7040 14,200 9,700
Health & Disability Insurance 50700-7042 13,200 11,300
Medicare 50700-7044 700 500
Total Operating Costs 78,000 78,000
Offsetting Costs Savings or Revenues
Temporary Salaries 50700-7014 (19,900)(19,900)
Medicare 50700-7040 (300)(200)
Net Operating Costs 57,800 57,900
The ongoing financial impact associated with converting this half-time non-benefitted temporary position to a full
time regular benefited position is $78,000 annually.
The staffing costs will be fully funded by the Transit Enterprise Fund. The Transit Enterprise Fund has current
temporary staffing dollars that will be converted to help support this staffing conversion. An additional $57,800
will be needed annually to augment this staffing cost.
49
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-68
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(TRANSPORTATION)
SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN SERVICE CHANGE
SUMMARY OF CHANGE: Increasing Service Levels as a result of recommendations of the Short Range
Transit Plan.
FISCAL IMPACT: Ongoing cost of $500,000 in 2015-16 and $500,000 in 2016-17, offset by $25,000 in new
farebox revenue as a result of ridership increase.
SERVICE LEVEL IMPACT: The City of San Luis Obispo and SLO RTA are conducting a joint update to each
entity’s Short Range Transit Plan. This document will make recommendations for service changes, identify
opportunities for growth and improved coordination between the two agencies. This request is a placeholder for
those anticipated service change recommendations that will result as part of the City’s SRTP update.
KEY OBJECTIVES
1. Increase service levels as identified by the Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP).
2. Fill service gaps and take advantage of opportunities for growth for the SLO Transit system.
3. Add earlier and later operating hours, more frequent headways, increased service levels during summer months
(both later hours and more headways), new east-to-west (and vice versa) routes, new service near the high school
and perhaps even service near the airport.
4. Report implementation of these service changes regional, State and Federal transit regulatory organizations.
EXISTING SITUATION: FACTORS DRIVING THE NEED FOR CHANGE
Ability to demonstrate SLO Transit has support from local stake holders is essential for when staff approaches the
COG for the State and Federal funds that would make up the $500,000 in transit operating budget.
GOAL AND POLICY CRITERIA
The SRTP and Circulation Element are the guiding documents for transit services for the City. This request
anticipates significant recommendations for service changes as a result of the SRTP Update currently underway (in
essence acting as a place holder for recommendations that are anticipated to come forward in FY 2015-16)
Adopted goals or policies include:
1. 2015-17 Major City Goal for Multi-Modal Transportation
2. Newly adopted LUCE forecasts significant increases in the transit mode choice for the City of San Luis
Obispo
3. 2013-15 Major City Goal to address homelessness in our City
4. 2013-15 Major City Goal for Pedestrian & Bicycles
5. 2013-15 other Council objectives to address transportation (Advertising revenue etc)
6. Measure Y (G) Objective: Traffic Congestion Relief
7. Circulation Element Objectives calls for bicycling, transit, and walking as a means to reduce traffic.
8. Vehicle operations, administration and facility and bus stop maintenance
9. 2011-13 Major City Goal for Traffic Congestion Relief
50
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-69
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(TRANSPORTATION)
SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN SERVICE CHANGE
STAKEHOLDERS
The SRTP process has a considerable amount of stake-holder and public participation before becoming adopted.
Based on these comments, the SRTP consultant and staff will have designed system improvements that address
service gaps & deficiencies, as well as further promote fixed-route services.
IMPLEMENTATION
Task Date
1. Adopt SRTP Early 2016
2. Implement SRTP Mid 2016
3. Post implementation Monitoring Late 2016
PROGRAM MANAGER AND TEAM SUPPORT
Program Manager:
The Transit Manager will be responsible for the development and implementation of the Short Range Transit
Plan.
Project Team:
Transit, Transportation Planning & Engineering, San Luis Obispo Council of Governments, Regional
Transportation Agency, Mass Transportation Committee.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Continue the Status Quo. Current operational budget reflects costs associated with operating the services as
they are today. Any increases to the service (e.g. operational hours, increased headways and miles) must be
met with additional funds.
2. Defer or Re-Phase the Request. Deferring the additional funds will severely delay Transit’s ability to
implement service changes
3. Change the Scope of Request. With no changes to the Transit Operating Budget, only status quo service can
be maintained. By increasing the budget, this ensures Transit staff can carry through with the
recommendations brought forth by the SRTP.
OPERATING PROGRAM
Transit (530.50700)
51
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-70
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(TRANSPORTATION)
SHORT RANGE TRANSIT PLAN SERVICE CHANGE
COST SUMMARY
Based upon the project revenue and expenditure over the next two years, Transit fund can absorb in expenditure
costs.
Line Item Description Account No.2015-162016-17
Other Operating Expenditures 500,000 500,000
Purchased Transportation 50700.7338 500,000 500,000
Total Operating Costs 500,000 500,000
Offsetting Costs Savings or Revenues
Increased farebox as a result of ridership increase (25,000)(25,000)
Net Operating Costs 475,000 475,000
52
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-71
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT)
LUCE IMPLEMENTATION AND FEE UPDATE
SUMMARY OF CHANGE: Implementing the update to Land Use and Circulation Elements (LUCE) to ensure
internal consistency of the City’s implementing ordinances and fees will cost approximately $410,00 in FY 2015-
16 and $325,000 in FY 2016-17 for consultant and contract services.
FISCAL IMPACT: One time cost of $410,000 in FY 2015-16 and $325,000 in FY 2016-17.
SERVICE LEVEL IMPACT: The objective of this request is to complete the LUCE update by implementing
key strategies that were developed as part of the update process. This effort is necessary to maintain internal
consistency of the General Plan and its implementing documents. This effort will involve form-based
codes/updated guidelines for the downtown that will provide an updated graphic Downtown Concept Plan (as
called for in the Land Use Element) along with other changes to the Zoning Code; and a nexus study and impact
fee program update to address changed infrastructure needs and evaluate facilities and service needs not
previously captured, in order to update the City’s impact fee program.
KEY OBJECTIVES
1. Leverages initial fiscal analysis conducted as part of the LUCE update.
2. Provides internal consistency between the General Plan and implementing ordinances as required by
Government Code.
3. Develops fee and impact information needed for Economic Development Strategic Plan implementation.
4. Implements recommendations of the Community Development Organizational Assessment where Zoning
Code changes may impact process changes.
5. Conducts the required AB1600 evaluation of the fee program and fair share cost allocation resulting from
changes to public infrastructure and service needs defined in the LUCE update.
6. Complies with State law requirement to complete routine updates to fee programs.
EXISTING SITUATION: FACTORS DRIVING THE NEED FOR CHANGE
Due to an $880,000 grant from the Strategic Growth Council (SGC) the City was able to initiate an update to the
Land Use and Circulation Elements (LUCE) during the 2011-13 Financial Plan period. The Council added
$367,500 to this budget in order to complete the environmental review of the project (which was not covered by
the grant). The draft LUCE was submitted to the Strategic Growth Council by the grant deadline of September
26, 2014 and hearings and review of the Environmental Impact Report proceeded through the fall with final
approval by the Council on December 9, 2014. Subsequent work efforts are now needed to implement the
updated General Plan. Changes to the Zoning Code and other implementing documents are called for as part of
the LUCE update. The updated General Plan will benefit from implementing ordinances and standards that are
more graphical in nature and more easily understood by the public. This request includes a desire to see updated
graphics and re-organization of the Zoning Code and other implementing codes.
Also, infrastructure changes identified and endorsed by the City Council through the LUCE update and associated
EIR require a more detailed evaluation to determine how the infrastructure will be funded and how the current
impact fee programs will need to be adjusted. While the LUCE update process involved a financial analysis, it
did not provide the level of detail required to develop infrastructure costs and distribution through appropriate
mechanisms, such as impact fees. This evaluation (also referred to as an AB 1600 study) must be done to
establish the nexus between the infrastructure desired and the development that will pay the impact fees. AB
1600 sets the legal and procedural parameters for the charging of development impact fees.
53
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-72
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT)
LUCE IMPLEMENTATION AND FEE UPDATE
The City’s traffic impact fee program was originally established in 1995 and last updated in 2006. The purpose of
the fee is to fund the transportation improvements required to accommodate new development in the City. Since
the last update, new transportation improvements have been identified that are not currently included in the traffic
impact fee program and a multi-modal approach has been endorsed. Additionally, the equity of some specific
plan area fees has been questioned. These circumstances are best to be addressed as part of a multi-modal
circulation impact fee update now that the General Plan has been updated. Augmenting contract services for
transportation consultant assistance is essential for providing services to internal City customers such as
the Police & Fire Departments. Other stakeholders, such as Cal Poly, Cal Trans, SLO County, San Luis
Obispo Council of Governments are affected by this resource. Previously traffic impact updates have been
completed by the Finance and IT Department. Given the department’s current resources, staff recommends
consultant services be utilized to accomplish this task.
GOAL AND POLICY CRITERIA
This request meets all of the SOPC criteria as follows:
1. Supports Major City Goals: This request supports Major City Goals, including Housing and Multi-Modal
Transportation as well as supports an other important objective of Downtown. It also continues
implementation of goals from the 2013-15 Financial Plan of Infrastructure and Fiscal Health, Bike and
Pedestrian Paths, and implementing the Economic Development Strategic Plan (EDSP) by updating the fee
program to achieve community objectives of affordable housing and circulation infrastructure.
2. Needed to address health, safety or legal concern: Updating the Zoning Code will provide internal
consistency between the recently-adopted General Plan and implementing ordinances as required by
Government Code. Providing a nexus study and update to the fee program is required to reflect new and
changed infrastructure identified in the LUCE update. This includes conducting the required AB1600
evaluation of the fee program and fair share cost allocation for affordable housing, public art, open space,
parks, and changes to public infrastructure and service needs defined in the LUCE update.
3. Needed to provide a priority level of service: Updating the impact fees to fairly distribute responsibility and
cost of needed infrastructure is a priority for the development community. In addition, updating the Zoning
Code and implementing bike paths and affordable housing projects is a broader community priority.
4. Supports revenue generation and/or cost savings: Both efforts may indirectly result in either revenue
generation or cost savings. Updating the impact fees will more accurately represent the cost of infrastructure
needs in the community and will distribute the costs to pay for those needs. The resulting infrastructure will
support new development which will generate revenue. Updating the Zoning Code will provide more clarity
and reflect a range of uses that were not envisioned in 1994 – the last time the Land Use Element was
significantly updated.
5. Represents reorganization within or across Departments: Implements recommendations of the Community
Development Organizational Assessment where Zoning Code changes may impact process changes.
54
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-73
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT)
LUCE IMPLEMENTATION AND FEE UPDATE
6. Reallocation of Existing Resources: The staff resources previously assigned to the LUCE update will be
available to coordinate this effort, but consultant services will still be required. Updating the Downtown
Concept Plan will leverage the resources allocated for the Mission Plaza CIP project and visioning/outreach
efforts can be coordinated for efficiency. In addition, the Public Art Master Plan effort will be completed by
September 2015 and will inform the Downtown Concept Plan update effort.
STAKEHOLDERS
Implementation of the updated General Plan will engage many of the same community members who were
interested and involved in the LUCE update itself: Residents for Quality Neighborhoods; Home Builders
Association; Chamber of Commerce; Downtown Association; SLO Property and Business Owners’ Association;
city residents, and owners of properties and businesses.
IMPLEMENTATION
Implementation is envisioned as follows:
Task Date
1. Develop RFP for Downtown Concept Plan update Aug 2015
2. Interviews and consultant selection process Sept 2015
3. Visioning, interviews, charrette(s), review of Mission Plaza Assessment
from CIP
Oct-Dec 2015
4. Develop Draft Concept Plan Dec-Jan 2016
5. Advisory Body review (ARC, CHC, PC) and early Council feedback Feb-May 2016
6. Council review and approval July 2016
7. RFP for Infrastructure Fee Update Feb 2016
8. Consultant Selection for Infrastructure fee update March 2016
9. Work effort for Infrastructure update (costs, nexus, financing options, right-
sizing)
April – July 2016
10. Public outreach – infrastructure update Aug-Sept 2016
11. RFP for Zoning Code update August 2016
12. Consultant Selection for Zoning Code update September 2016
13. Commission and Council consideration of Infrastructure options Oct-Nov 2016
14. Consultant work on Zoning Code update Oct –Dec 2016
15. Council adoption of Public Facilities Fee program Dec 2016
16. Draft Zoning Code and CEQA evaluation Jan – Mar 2017
17. Referral of Draft Zoning Code and CEQA to ALUC April 2017
18. Planning Commission and Council review of draft Zoning Code update April – May 2017
19. Council approval of Zoning Code update June 2017
55
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-74
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT)
LUCE IMPLEMENTATION AND FEE UPDATE
PROGRAM MANAGER AND TEAM SUPPORT
Program Manager:
The program manager for the Affordable Housing Nexus study and for LUCE implementation (Zoning
code/Downtown Concept Plan) will be the Community Development Deputy Director. The Public Works Deputy
Director and Transportation Operations Manager will take the lead on circulation element implementation and
traffic impact fee update.
Project Team:
The project team will include a Transportation Planner, Community Development Senior and Associate Planners,
the Finance and Information Technology Director, and support staff. Representatives from City Police, Fire,
Utilities, Public Works, Finance and IT, and Parks and Recreation departments will be involved.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Continue the Status Quo. Once the Land Use and Circulation Elements are adopted, the City will need to
ensure that implementing documents, information and processes are updated as well. Continuing the status
quo implies that no changes will be required in response to the update. Regardless the traffic impact fee
program will need to be updated to comply with State law and add facilities to support LUCE land uses and
policies. If no other changes are needed, staff will recommend any identified funds be returned to the General
Fund. This is an unlikely scenario. Infrastructure improvements and impact fees must be updated if the
community will be able to achieve improvements identified in the updated General Plan. Other changes
identified in the update will need to be implemented otherwise the policies and programs cease to provide
direction for decision-makers and inconsistencies would exist between policies and implementation
mechanisms.
2. Defer or Re-Phase the Request. The request could be phased to address the infrastructure financing or the
implementing zoning code and standards to be changed in response to the update. This approach could result
in the General Plan having no way to implement desired improvements or could result in a General Plan that
has inconsistent standards if funding is not approved in the 2015-17 Financial Plan. Neither of these
outcomes is desirable. The City’s traffic impact fee program needs to be updated whether or not there are
changes to the General Plan.
3. Change the Scope of Request. The request could be re-scoped to include consultant assistance for the nexus
study, traffic impact fee update and infrastructure fee development only. Existing staff would be required to
complete the implementation of other changes resulting from the LUCE Update. Due to existing workload
and resource commitments, this could mean that other work desired by the Council does not occur. Items that
could lose momentum or be deferred include completion of the Housing Element update, implementation of
Climate Action Plan strategies, and other initiatives assigned to the Community Development Department.
4. Implementation in a Different Way. City staff seeks grants to accomplish Council-directed work efforts and
will continue to look for funding opportunities, funding partners, and any funding efficiencies possible to
leverage City resources. Transportation Impact Fund fees (TIF) are not available for this update. There are
limited TIF funds available for AB 1600 work or updates to this source which only covers City-wide
infrastructure (Specific Plans are handled separately). A program amendment would be required to enable
funds to be used for this purpose and would still only address city-wide fees. If grant funds are not available,
56
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-75
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT)
LUCE IMPLEMENTATION AND FEE UPDATE
General Fund support will be required to accomplish this effort unless staff in the Finance and IT Department
complete the consultant services components of this work effort. Given the current staffing resources in that
department, this alternative is not recommended.
5. Existing Program Evaluation. The LUCE update will involve an evaluation of the City’s existing land use
and circulation element policies and programs, their status and on-going fit with community values. This
process will be completed with the adoption of the LUCE update (projected to occur by November 2014).
OPERATING PROGRAM
Long Range Planning
Transportation Planning
COST SUMMARY
Completion of the updated Land Use and Circulation Elements (LUCE) to ensure internal consistency of the
City’s implementing ordinances and fees will cost approximately $735,000 in Financial Plan 2015-17.
Line Item Description Account No.2015-16 2016-17
Staffing 0 0
Contract Services 410,000 325,000
Engineering Firm to design and cost infrastructure 50500-7227 50,000
Traffic modeling and Nexus study 50500-7227 50,000
Financial Firm to develop PFFP 40400-7227 75,000
Financial Firm to update TIF program 50500-7227 50,000
Affordable Housing Nexus Study 40400-7227 35,000
Changes to EnerGov to accommodate updated fees 40400-7227 50,000
Downtown Concept Plan update 40400-7227 100,000
Update of Zoning Code 40400-7227 150,000
CEQA analysis and ALUC referral 40400-7227 75,000
Transportation Consultant 50500-7227 50,000 50,000
Total Operating Costs 410,000 325,000
TIF Funds (70,000)
Affordable Housing Funds (35,000)
Net Operating Costs 305,000 325,000
57
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-76
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
SIDEWALK AND TREE REPLACEMENTS
Project Description
Repairing City sidewalks and replacing trees will cost $100,000 annually.
Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request
Council Goal / Measure G Priority: Multimodal Transportation, Neighborhood Wellness, Fiscal Sustainability & Responsibility, Downtown
Need and Urgency
Areas of the City’s sidewalks are damaged by street tree roots or other influences. Damaged areas are often displaced resulting in an uneven walkway that can
pose difficulties to pedestrians. There are approximately 15,000 damaged locations in the City, with about one-third of these related to trees. Maintenance crews
make temporary repairs to the majority of these, with a combination of maintenance crews and contract services completing reconstruction of about 30 locations a
year. These areas of curb, gutter, and sidewalk are repaired in advance of pavement maintenance work to prevent cutting into new pavement during construction.
This project combines the goals of removing trip hazards, rebuilding tree wells, and regenerating the urban forest. For areas in the downtown, areas of standard
gray sidewalk that have been lifted by tree roots will be replaced with Mission Style Sidewalk.
The City’s Downtown is an area of particular interest for trees and sidewalks due to the important ambiance the trees provide for this area and the high volume of
pedestrians. In 2006 the City completed an assessment of all trees in the Downtown to prioritize trees in need of replacement. Approximately 125 trees in the
Downtown core area are approaching maturity, increasing maintenance needs of the trees and surrounding sidewalk. These trees were all planted at about the
same time and will decline in health at about the same time, leaving the Downtown core area with a radically different character. As part of this sidewalk and tree
program, trees will be selectively removed and replace with new, approved species, increasing the health and diversity of the urban forest, as well as providing
variation in age. This approach conforms to the Downtown Street Tree Maintenance Plan approved by Council in 2007.
As described in the Land Use and Circulation Update, increasing walking as a viable means of transportation is encouraged. Additional funding for sidewalks will
support this goal. The repair program is now incorporated into the Job Order Contract. This streamlines project delivery so that the ability to deliver the work no
longer restricts the amount to be budgeted. Funding for 2014-15 was $25,000 and used within two months of allocation. Each site costs, on average $12,000 and
numerous locations wait funding to be corrected.
There are also opportunities throughout the year for public - private partnerships where small amounts of funding can be leveraged to provide a better sidewalk
repair or replacement, than can be provided by either party. For example, if a property owner must remove a narrow piece of sidewalk to install a utility, the City
can augment that work and expand it somewhat to include an adjacent damaged area or narrow strip of gray sidewalk in the Mission Style district. This project will
provide that leverage funding. These augmentation activities are anticipated to be less than 15% of the total budgeted amount.
58
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-77
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
SIDEWALK AND TREE REPLACEMENTS
Readiness to Build
Study complete or n/a
Equipment purchased or n/a
Property owned or property agreement in place n/a
Environmental approval and permits complete or n/a
Specifications or construction documents complete n/a
IT Steering Committee review n/a
Environmental Review and Permits Required
Environmental Review n/a
Building Permit n/a
Waterway Permits (Fish & Wildlife, Water Quality, Army Corps) n/a
Railroad n/a
Other: (Enter the title and agency of any other needed permits) n/a
Operating Program Number and Title:
50300 Streets and Sidewalk Maintenance
Project Phasing and Funding Sources
Continuing, ongoing or master account project - Specification No. 90849 Sidewalk Repair Master Account
Initial Project Costs by Phase
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
Construction on-going$100,000$100,000$100,000$100,000$100,000$500,000
Total $0$100,000$100,000$100,000$100,000$100,000$500,000
Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs:
These facilities already exist so there will be no additional operating costs. The replacement of damaged sidewalk with new sidewalk will reduce the maintenance
costs because ongoing grinding or patching of raised areas and sunken areas will not be required for a period of years. It also may reduce claims associated with
trip and falls.
59
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-78
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
SIDEWALK AND TREE REPLACEMENTS
Anticipated Facility Life Span:
Sidewalks can last indefinitely; however, sidewalk areas around trees have a shorter life span and may need to be repaired within 10 to 30 years depending upon
the age and variety of the tree. New trees vary in life span, but have been living about 50 years in the urban setting.
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
General Fund on-going$100,000$100,000$100,000$100,000$100,000$500,000
Total $0$100,000$100,000$100,000$100,000$100,000$500,000
Project Funding by Source
Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives
Reduced or expanded project is feasible – Cost for installation of 30 lineal feet of curb, gutter and sidewalk is approximately $6,000 by contract. Project
budget can be adjusted to desired funding level.
Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: Project is submitted as a phased project.
Project Team
Assignment Program Estimated Hours
Project Management CIP Engineering - Design 120 hours per year
Contract Administration CIP Engineering - Administration 90 hours per year
Construction Management CIP Engineering – Construction 200 hours per year
Site List – For multi-year projects
Location
Estimated Year of Construction Pavement Area
(for projects in right-of-way)
Various Locations 2015 Area 8 & 9
Various Locations 2016 Area 1 & 9
Various Locations 2017 Area 2 & 9
Various Locations 2018 Area 3 & 9
Various Locations 2019 Area 4 & 9
60
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-79
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
Project Description
Constructing neighborhood traffic management projects requested by residents and approved by Council will cost $20,000 annually starting in 2015-16 and
increasing to $30,000 annually in 2017-18.
Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request
Council Goal / Measure G Priority: Improve Transportation; Measure Y Priority
Need and Urgency
This project will continue the efforts of the City’s Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan (NTM) to improve traffic conditions in existing neighborhoods. The
Circulation Element of the General Plan specifically identified seven residential areas that would benefit from adoption of NTM plans and construction of
recommended projects. The 1998 Neighborhood Traffic Management Guidelines outline procedures for selecting eligible projects and sharing project financing
between neighborhoods and the City.
Since adoption of the guidelines in June 1998, Public Works has become involved with eleven small-scale and seven large-scale NTM plans. Each year the City
receives requests for solutions to speeding and cut-through traffic problems within neighborhoods. Based upon current workload and resources, typically one to
two of these requests develop into large scale NTM projects. Beginning with the 2003-05 Financial Plan, and then again in the 2005-07 and 2011-13 Financial
Plans, NTM allocations were reduced due to financial limitations and budget constraints. Due to these budget reductions, NTM requests are being taken on a first
come first serve basis.
Readiness to Build
Study complete or n/a
Equipment purchased or n/a
Property owned or property agreement in place n/a
Environmental approval and permits complete or n/a
Specifications or construction documents complete n/a
Environmental Review and Permits Required
Environmental Review n/a
Building Permit n/a
Waterway Permits (Fish & Wildlife, Water Quality, Army Corps) n/a
Railroad n/a
Other: (Enter the title and agency of any other needed permits) n/a
61
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-80
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
Operating Program Number and Title:
50500 Transportation Planning & Engineering
Project Phasing and Funding Sources
Continuing, ongoing or master account project - Specification No. 99501 Neighborhood Traffic Management Master Account
Initial Project Costs by Phase
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
Construction ongoing $20,000$20,000$30,000$30,000$30,000$130,000
Total $0$20,000$20,000$30,000$30,000$30,000$130,000
Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: Work is typically street and sidewalk work, modifying
existing facilities and minimizing increased maintenance costs.
Anticipated Facility Life Span: Life spans will be dependent upon facility constructed.
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
General Fund ongoing $20,000$20,000$30,000$30,000$30,000$130,000
Total $0$20,000$20,000$30,000$30,000$30,000$130,000
Project Funding by Source
Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives
Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project:
Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: Project is submitted as a phased request.
Project Team
Assignment Program Estimated Hours
Project Manager Transportation Engineering 50 Hrs
Environmental Clearance Community Development 120 Hrs
Contract Management Transportation – Administration 100 Hrs
Construction Management CIP Engineering – Construction 80 Hrs
62
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-81
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
TRAFFIC SAFETY IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
Project Description
Constructing traffic safety improvements as identified in the Annual Traffic Safety Report will cost $25,000 annually beginning in 2015-17 and increasing to
$30,000 annually beginning in 2018-19.
Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request
Council Goal / Measure G Priority: Improve Transportation; Measure Y Priority
Need and Urgency
Each year the City analyzes high collision rate locations, ranks and prioritizes those locations, develops mitigation measures, and constructs them. Since 2001
annual traffic collisions within the City have been reduced by over 50% with an annual return of approximately $10 million in reduced economic impacts to the
community (medical expenses, emergency service costs, damages to property, and legal and insurance costs). This award winning program is the City’s primary
mechanism for effectively addressing traffic safety and congestion related collisions. With this project, funding is provided to pursue minor capital improvements
addressing safety issues identified in the Traffic Safety Report. Large scale safety projects, if any, are brought forward with funding recommendations as part of
the annual traffic safety report to Council.
Readiness to Build
Study complete or n/a
Equipment purchased or n/a
Property owned or property agreement in place n/a
Environmental approval and permits complete or n/a
Specifications or construction documents complete n/a
Environmental Review and Permits Required
Environmental Review n/a
Building Permit n/a
Waterway Permits (Fish & Wildlife, Water Quality, Army Corps) n/a
Railroad n/a
Other: (Enter the title and agency of any other needed permits) n/a
63
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-82
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
TRAFFIC SAFETY IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
Operating Program Number and Title:
50500 Transportation Planning and Engineering
Project Phasing and Funding Sources
Continuing, ongoing or master account project - Specification No. 90398 Traffic Safety Implementation Master Account
Initial Project Costs by Phase
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
Construction ongoing $25,000$25,000$25,000$30,000$30,000$135,000
Total $0$25,000$25,000$25,000$30,000$30,000$135,000
Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: Work is typically street and sidewalk work, modifying
existing facilities and minimizing increased maintenance costs.
Anticipated Facility Life Span: Life spans will be dependent upon facility constructed.
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
General Fund ongoing $25,000$25,000$25,000$30,000$30,000$135,000
Total $0$25,000$25,000$25,000$30,000$30,000$135,000
Project Funding by Source
Grants will be explored as a possible replacement for General Funds as the projects are developed.
Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives
Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project:
Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: Project is already submitted as a phased project.
Project Team
Assignment Program Estimated Hours
Project Proponent Transportation Planning & Engineering 200
Project Management Transportation Planning & Engineering 100
Contract Administration CIP Engineering - Administration 100
64
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-83
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
REPLACEMENT OF LIGHTED CROSSWALKS ON MARSH & HIGUERA STREETS
Project Description
Replacing the Marsh Street in-ground light crosswalk will cost $43,500 in 2014-15, and the Higuera Street in-ground crosswalk will cost $43,500 in 2016-17.
Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request
Council Goal / Measure Y Priority: Improve Transportation; Measure Y Priority
Need and Urgency
Marsh In-Ground Lighted Crosswalk
The in-ground lighted crosswalk system on Marsh Street between Chorro and Morro streets was installed in May of 2002. Prior to the installation of this lighted
crosswalk system there were approximately 3 pedestrian collisions per year at this crossing, however since the lighted crosswalk system has been installed, over 10
years ago, there has been only one pedestrian collision. Being over 10 years old this lighted crosswalk system is now beyond its intended service life and is in need
of replacement. Recently this aging system averages three to five major failures a year requiring a significant maintenance commitment from Traffic Signal
Technician staff.
Higuera In-Ground Lighted Crosswalk
The in-ground lighted crosswalk system on Higuera Street between Chorro and Morro streets was installed in November of 2002. Prior to the installation of this
lighted crosswalk system there were also approximately 3 pedestrian collisions per year at this crossing, however since the lighted crosswalk system has been
installed, over 10 years ago, there has been no pedestrian collisions. Also being over 10 years old this lighted crosswalk system is now beyond its intended service
life and is in need of replacement. Recently the aging system averages two to four major failures a year also requiring a significant maintenance commitment from
Traffic Signal Technician staff.
After these lighted crosswalk systems were installed they experienced a major failure once every two to three years and did not pose a significant drain on Traffic
Technician Staff; however, with the passing of their intended service life these systems now require approximately seven times the maintenance commitment
expected. In addition to the deteriorating condition of both crosswalk systems, new federal and state standards for these types of systems have been adopted and
the current system is not in compliance and should be upgraded to comply with those new standards.
Readiness to Build
Study complete or n/a
Equipment purchased or n/a
Property owned or property agreement in place n/a
Environmental approval and permits complete or n/a
Specifications or construction documents complete n/a
65
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-84
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
REPLACEMENT OF LIGHTED CROSSWALKS ON MARSH & HIGUERA STREETS
IT Steering Committee review n/a
Environmental Review and Permits Required
Environmental Review n/a
Building Permit n/a
Waterway Permits (Fish & Game, Water Quality, Army Corps) n/a
Railroad n/a
Other: (Enter the title and agency of any other needed permits) n/a
Operating Program Number and Title:
50500 Transportation Planning & Engineering
Project Phasing and Funding Sources
Initial Project Costs by Phase
Budget to Date 2013-142014-152015-162016-172017-18 Total
Construction $40,000 $40,000 $80,000
Construction Management $3,500 $3,500 $7,000
Total $0 $0$43,500 $0$43,500 $0$87,000
This project replaces existing facilities with lower maintenance & more effective devices therefore no impact on operating costs are expected
Anticipated Facility Life Span: 10 Years
Budget to Date 2013-142014-152015-162016-172017-18 Total
General Fund $43,500 $43,500 $87,000
Total $0 $0$43,500 $0$43,500 $0$87,000
Project Funding by Source
Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives
In lieu of replacing the aging signs they could be removed, the cost for removing both lighted crosswalk system is estimated at $20,000. Staff does not
recommend this as the pedestrian collision pattern will likely resume.
66
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-85
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
REPLACEMENT OF LIGHTED CROSSWALKS ON MARSH & HIGUERA STREETS
The replacement of these signs could be differed to a later date. Staff does not recommend this as the maintenance requirements for this aging system are
significant.
Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: The project is current recommended for a two year phased project.
Project Team
Assignment Program Estimated Hours
Project Manager Transportation - Design 30
Contract Management Transportation – Administration 20
Construction Management CIP Engineering – Construction 10
Site List – For multi-year projects
Location
Estimated
Year of
Construction
Pavement Area
(for projects in right-of-way)
Marsh St. 800 Block 2014-15 N/A – Work on Sidewalk
Higuera St. 800 Block 2015-16 N/A – Work on Sidewalk
67
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-86
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES
MISSION PLAZA RAILING UPGRADE
Project Description
Replacement and modification of Mission Style guard railing in the Mission Plaza will cost $30,000 annually.
Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request
Council Goal / Measure G Priority: Multimodal Transportation, Downtown, Fiscal Sustainability & Responsibility
Need and Urgency
Changes to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Building Codes since the time the railings in the Mission Plaza were installed include the reduction of
spacing between vertical pickets of guard railing in public places. Vertical railing pickets are now required to be spaced apart such that a 4” diameter sphere
cannot pass through the pickets. The majority of guard railing throughout the Mission Plaza area is not compliant with this requirement. While guard railing is in
place where needed, the vertical picket spacing ranges from 5” to almost 9”. This current spacing would not prevent a small child from going through the guard
railing or getting stuck between the pickets.
In a recent review of the Plaza railing, the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority (CJPIA) indicated to the City the areas where the Mission Style railing was
in critical and immediate need for code compliance. As a temporary measure, plastic mesh barrier netting was installed across the picket guard railing at these
designated areas to eliminate the non-compliance of the railing. Currently, these critical areas have been or are in the process of being upgraded.
This project will modify or replace approximately 160 lineal feet of Mission Style railing annually for code compliance. In one area, the pickets are spaced wide
enough such that an intermediate picket can be welded in between the existing pickets without having to replace the entire metal panel. Some areas will require
complete panel replacement as the pickets are too close for insertion of an intermediate picket. Other areas will need complete replacement of railing and posts as
they are made entirely of wood railing that is deteriorated and in non-compliance with ADA. The majority of redwood posts and top railing are in good shape such
that replacement will be minimal.
Readiness to Build
Study complete or n/a
Equipment purchased or n/a
Property owned or property agreement in place n/a
Environmental approval and permits complete or n/a
Specifications or construction documents complete n/a
IT Steering Committee review n/a
68
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-87
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES
MISSION PLAZA RAILING UPGRADE
Environmental Review and Permits Required
Environmental Review n/a
Building Permit n/a
Waterway Permits (Fish & Game, Water Quality, Army Corps) n/a
Railroad n/a
Other: Encroachment Permit – Public Works Department n/a
Operating Program Number and Title:
50200 Landscape and Park Maintenance
Project Phasing and Funding Sources
Continuing, ongoing or master account project - Specification No. 91247
Initial Project Costs by Phase
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
Construction $60,000$30,000$30,000$30,000 $30,000$30,000$210,000
Total$60,000$30,000$30,000$30,000$30,000$30,000$210,000
Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: This facility already exists, so no additional ongoing costs
are anticipated. Replacement with new materials will reduce ongoing maintenance efforts to repair badly deteriorated railings.
Anticipated Facility Life Span: 25 years
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
General Fund $60,000$30,000$30,000$30,000$30,000$30,000$210,000
$0
Total$60,000$30,000$30,000$30,000$30,000$30,000$210,000
Project Funding by Source
Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives
Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project:
69
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-88
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES
MISSION PLAZA RAILING UPGRADE
Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: The amount of railing replace can be adjusted up or down to adjust costs and duration of the work to
completion as shown in Table A. There may be some savings of scale with a larger project.
Table A
Replacement
Duration
Annual Construction
Funding Required
5 $ 80,000
8 $ 50,000
10 $ 40,000
15 $ 30,000
20 $ 20,000
Project Team
Assignment Program Estimated Annual Hours
Project Proponent Administration 8
Project Management Engineering Design 80
Project Inspection Engineering Inspection 16
Project Administration Public Works Administration 100
Project Maintenance Parks Maintenance 16
70
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-89
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES
PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE PATHWAY MAINTENANCE
Project Description
Performing pavement maintenance on pedestrian and bicycle pathways throughout the City will cost $100,000 in 2015-16, and $60,000 annually thereafter.
Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request
Council Goal / Measure G Priority: Multimodal Transportation, Neighborhood Wellness, Fiscal Sustainability & Responsibility
Need and Urgency
The total length of City maintained pathways is approximately 6.5 miles including the following pathways and Class I bikeways:
• Railroad Safety Trail from Jennifer Street Bridge to Orcutt Road (Phase 1 & 2)
• Railroad Safety Trail from Foothill Blvd to Taft Street
• Bob Jones City to Sea Trail at Water Reclamation Facility
• Laguna Lake Park pathways
• Islay Hill Park pathways
• Sinsheimer Park pathways
• Meadow Park pathways
• Poinsettia Creek pathway (eastern portion of pathway is under City jurisdiction)
These pathways are used by bicycles and pedestrians, along with occasional service vehicles. To maintain accessibility to the City’s facilities and reduce the risk of
accidents, regular maintenance of pathways is important.
The City has not established a policy for maintenance of these facilities to date. Staff looked to the City’s Pavement Management Plan (PMP) for guidance. The
current PMP, as revised by the Council in 2009, includes the objective of maintaining at least 70% of Local Streets in good condition and less than 7% in bad
condition. (A pavement surface with a Pavement Condition Index (PCI) of greater than 70 is considered to be in good condition and a one with a PCI less than 30
is considered to be in bad condition.) This criteria has been applied to City-maintained pathways, to develop a basis for a funding request. Approximately 50% of
these pathways are in good condition. The recommended funding level is sufficient to make very modest increases toward increasing the percentage of pathways
in good condition, and begin repair and replacement of damaged pathways.
Readiness to Build
Study complete or n/a
Equipment purchased or n/a
Property owned or property agreement in place n/a
71
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-90
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES
PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE PATHWAY MAINTENANCE
Environmental approval and permits complete or n/a
Specifications or construction documents complete n/a
IT Steering Committee review n/a
Environmental Review and Permits Required
Environmental Review n/a
Building Permit n/a
Waterway Permits (Fish & Wildlife, Water Quality, Army Corps) n/a
Railroad n/a
Other: (Enter the title and agency of any other needed permits) n/a
Operating Program Number and Title:
50200 Landscape and Park Maintenance
Project Phasing and Funding Sources
Continuing, ongoing or master account project - Specification No. – Master Account to be developed for this ongoing annual maintenance program.
Initial Project Costs by Phase
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
Construction ongoing $100,000$60,000$60,000$60,000$60,000$340,000
Total $0$100,000$60,000$60,000$60,000$60,000$340,000
Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: These are existing facilities, so no additional maintenance
costs are anticipated. These repair activities will reduce customer complaints and improve safety for pedestrians and cyclists using these facilities.
Anticipated Facility Life Span: Pathways should receive a seal approximately every 8 years to postpone the need to perform reconstruction.
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
General Fund ongoing $100,000$60,000$60,000$60,000$60,000$340,000
Total $0$100,000$60,000$60,000$60,000$60,000$340,000
Project Funding by Source
72
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-91
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES
PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE PATHWAY MAINTENANCE
Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives
Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project:
Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: Project is submitted as a phased project, based on location. Further phasing is not recommended.
Project Team
Assignment Program Estimated Hours
Project Management CIP Engineering - Design 100 hours
Contract Administration CIP Engineering - Administration 40 hours
Construction Management CIP Engineering – Construction 80 hours
Environmental Review Planning 4
Site List – For multi-year projects
Location
Estimated Year of
Construction
Pavement Area
(for projects in right-of-way)
Railroad Safety Trail – Phase 1 & 2 2016 2
Islay Hill Park Pathways 2017 3
Meadow Park Pathways 2018 4
Poinsettia Creek Walk 2019 4
Bob Jones City to Sea Trail at WRRF 2020 5
73
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-92
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
STREET RECONSTRUCTION AND RESURFACING
Project Description
Performing maintenance on City-owned pavement throughout the City will cost $1,566,817 in 2015-16, $1,630,700 in 2016-17, and an average of $2,025,000 in
years 2017-20 for study, construction, and construction management.
Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request
Council Goal / Measure G Priority - List: Neighborhood Wellness, Multimodal Transportation, Fiscal Sustainability & Responsibility
Need and Urgency
The City’s Pavement Management Plan (PMP) was adopted in 1998. The PMP established eight principal pavement maintenance zones within the City, and a
plan in which each of these areas receives maintenance on an eight-year rotation. The downtown area is a ninth zone for which maintenance activities are
coordinated with other work activities. The PMP also sets forth recommended funding for pavement maintenance projects to be included in the City’s Capital
Improvement Plan.
In 2009, the PMP was re-evaluated by a pavement management consulting firm, at the request of the City Council, who recommended that the PMP be modified to
provide greater priority for arterial streets while maintaining the eight-year rotation for maintenance work on local streets. The City Council approved this
modification on October 6, 2009.
The revised PMP objectives adopted by the Council are shown below in the priority listed and take the place of the prior stated goal of the PMP to achieve an
average Pavement Condition Index (PCI) of 80 for the City’s network as a whole:
1. 90% of Arterial Streets in good condition and 0% in bad condition.
2. 80% of Downtown Streets in good condition and 0% in bad condition.
3. 80% of Collector Streets in good condition less than 5% in bad condition.
4. 70% of Local Streets in good condition and less than 7% in bad condition.
* Note: A street with a PCI of greater than 70 is considered to be in good condition and a PCI less than 30 is considered to be in bad condition. PCI continues
to be used in internal computerized pavement management activities.
Pavement maintenance is an ongoing need. Preventive maintenance has been found to provide the best long-term solution in providing smooth pavement surfaces
at the lowest overall cost. Deferring pavement maintenance funding will result in the deterioration of the pavement and higher pavement maintenance costs in the
future.
74
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-93
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
STREET RECONSTRUCTION AND RESURFACING
The request is prepared to alternate Arterial paving and neighborhood paving. This alternating year approach was recently tried, when the annual budget allowed
only for Arterial street work. The following year, two pavement areas were sealed. The larger volume of sealing work resulted in lower than anticipated bids. This
approach also provides that only one pavement project per year is released, rather than two, reducing project overhead. Table A summarizes the recommended
construction funding only. The City’s overall roadway conditions have gone down in recent years and this request recommends a gradual increase in funding to
better maintain the system.
Table A
Proposed Construction Funding
Street Type Current Status 2015-16 2016-17 Achieves Adopted Goal
Arterial 54% Good / 1% Bad $1,436,817 $0 61% Good / 1% Bad 90% Good / 0% Bad
Downtown 59% Good / 5% Bad $0 $0 59% Good / 5% Bad 80% Good / 0% Bad
Collector 53% Good / 3% Bad $0 $240,000 65% Good / 1% Bad 80% Good / 5% Bad
Local 66% Good / 5% Bad $0 $1,270,700 74% Good / 2% Bad 70% Good / 7% Bad
Totals: $1,436,817 $1,510,700
Pavement Deflection Testing
Pavement Rehabilitation generally consists of the placement of a thin (1 to 2 inch) layer of asphalt over the existing surface, or if needed, the complete
reconstruction of the street. Once a street has been identified as requiring pavement rehabilitation, the pavement surface is tested in order to determine the existing
strength of the pavement, the remaining design life, and the required treatment in order to restore it to a “like new” condition. California Standard Test 356 utilizes
measured pavement deflection under a specific loading condition in order to measure the strength of the pavement and determine the recommended overlay
thickness. This testing is done for City paving projects every two years with the next planned inspection work to be performed during the 2015-16 fiscal year.
This work is budgeted at an amount of $60,000. There is no alternative proposed for this work as it is a required step in designing a paving project.
Pavement Inspection
In order to maintain accurate and up-to-date pavement condition information for management activities, the pavement surfaces require periodic evaluation and
updating of the PCI. Staff has found the method of automated data collection by a team of pavement consulting engineers utilizing a specialized vehicle for
pavement condition analysis to be the safest, most efficient, and most cost effective approach in updating the City’ pavement database.
Pavement Inspection is conducted every two years with the next planned inspection work to be performed during the 2016-17 fiscal year. This work is budgeted at
an amount of $50,000. There is no alternative proposed for this inspection as it is a required step in planning future paving projects.
Readiness to Build
Study complete or n/a
Equipment purchased or n/a
Property owned or property agreement in place n/a
75
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-94
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
STREET RECONSTRUCTION AND RESURFACING
Environmental approval and permits complete or n/a
Specifications or construction documents complete n/a
Environmental Review and Permits Required
Environmental Review: Pavement Maintenance projects typically receive Notice of Exemptions
Building Permit n/a
Waterway Permits (Fish & Wildlife, Water Quality, Army Corps) n/a
Railroad n/a
Other: (Enter the title and agency of any other needed permits) n/a
Operating Program Number and Title:
50300 Streets and Sidewalk Maintenance
Project Phasing and Funding Sources
Continuing, ongoing or master account project - Specification No. 90346 Street Reconstruction & Resurfacing Master Account
Initial Project Costs by Phase
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
Study on-going $60,000$50,000$60,000$50,000$60,000$280,000
Design*on-going $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Construction on-going $1,436,817$1,510,700$1,808,000$1,949,957$1,939,000$8,644,474
Construction Management on-going $70,000$70,000$70,000$70,000$70,000$350,000
Total $1,566,817$1,630,700$1,938,000$2,069,957$2,069,000$9,274,474
Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information:
There are no additional operating costs associated with this project. However, reducing the budget will result in an increased capital maintenance cost in the future,
higher levels of complaints, and a greater need for pavement repairs (i.e. pothole repairs) to be performed by City staff.
Anticipated Facility Life Span: Reconstruction and Resurfacing projects are designed for a service life of 20 years. Preventative Maintenance (i.e. slurry seal)
provides an extended service life of approximately 6 years.
76
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-95
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
STREET RECONSTRUCTION AND RESURFACING
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
General Fund on-going $1,566,817$1,630,700$1,938,000$2,069,957$2,069,000$9,274,474
Total $0$1,566,817$1,630,700$1,938,000$2,069,957$2,069,000$9,274,474
Project Funding by Source
As proposed in the 2015-17 Significant Operating Program Change to augment CIP Engineering resources
Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives
Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project:
The project can either be increased or decreased. Increased funding will allow more maintenance to occur, improving the condition of more of the roadways and
making progress towards the Council’s pavement goals. A reduced project will result in additional deterioration of the pavement condition requiring higher future
investment. The construction investment needed to meet the pavement management goals is outlined below in Table.
Table B
Construction Funding Only
Street Type Current Status 2015-16 2016-17 Achieves / Goal
Arterial 54% Good $3,673,000 $3,673,000 90% Good
Downtown 59% Good $213,000 $213,000 80% Good
Collector 53% Good $274,000 $274,000 80% Good
Local 66% Good $650,000 $650,000 70% Good
Totals: $4,810,000 $4,810,000
Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: Project is an ongoing, phased maintenance project.
Project Team
Assignment Program Estimated Hours
Pavement Management Program CIP Engineering – Design 100 hours per year
Project Management CIP Engineering – Design 400 hours per year
Environmental Community Development 8 hours per year
Contract Administration CIP Engineering - Admin 60 hours per year
Construction Management CIP Engineering - Construction 400 hours per year
77
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-96
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
STREET RECONSTRUCTION AND RESURFACING
Site List – For multi-year projects
Location
Estimated
Year of
Construction
Pavement Area
(for projects in right-of-way)
Arterial Streets 2015 Citywide
Area 8 and 1 Local and Collector Streets 2016 8 and 1
Arterial Streets 2017 Citywide
Area 2 and 3 Local and Collector Streets 2018 2 and 3
Arterial Streets 2019 Citywide
78
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-97
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
STREET RECONSTRUCTION AND RESURFACING
Map of City Pavement Areas
79
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-98
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
BICYCLE FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS
Project Description
Designing and constructing small-scale, miscellaneous bicycle facility improvements identified in the City’s Bicycle Transportation Plan will cost $100,000
annually.
Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request
Council Goal / Measure G Priority: FY 15-16 Major City Goal: Multimodal Transportation/Expand Bicycle and Pedestrian paths
Need and Urgency
Relief of traffic congestion and the development of bikeways were two high priority concerns received from public comments as part of the goal setting process of
the 2011-13 and 2013-15 Financial Plans. This funding allows the City to complete small-scale bicycle facility improvements in a cost efficient manner by
incorporating them into larger projects such as the City’s annual pavement maintenance project. Past projects include removal of storm drain grates that impact
bike lanes, bike lane signing and striping, and shared lane markings in conjunction with City paving projects, and striping for new on-street bike parking
downtown. The 2009-11 American Community Survey estimates that 3% of County residents commute by bike to work in comparison to 6.7% of City residents.
Improving bikeways encourages bicycle riding as an alternative travel mode, supporting congestion relief and greenhouse gas emission reduction.
Readiness to Build
Study complete or n/a
Equipment purchased or n/a
Property owned or property agreement in place n/a
Environmental approval and permits complete or n/a
Specifications or construction documents complete n/a
IT Steering Committee review n/a
Environmental Review and Permits Required
Environmental Review n/a
Building Permit n/a
Waterway Permits (Fish & Wildlife, Water Quality, Army Corps) n/a
Railroad n/a
Other: City Encroachment Permit
80
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-99
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
BICYCLE FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS
Operating Program Number and Title:
50500 - Transportation Planning and Engineering
Project Phasing and Funding Sources
Continuing, ongoing or master account project - Specification No. 90572 Bicycle Facility Improvements Master Account
Initial Project Costs by Phase
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
Construction on-going $100,000$100,000$100,000$100,000$100,000$500,000
Total $0$100,000$100,000$100,000$100,000$100,000$500,000
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-18 2018-192019-20 Total
Traffic Impact Fees*
General Fund $100,000$100,000$100,000$100,000$100,000$500,000
Total $0$100,000$100,000$100,000$100,000$100,000$500,000
Project Funding by Source
* Project was funded in prior years by TIF funds however, the Los Osos Valley Road Interchange Bond Indebtedness payments are likely to absorb
most of the annual TIF received by the City for the foreseeable future.
Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives
Reduced project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of reduced project: $10,000 annually would provide a minimal level of funding to complete some
work.
Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: Project is submitted as a phased project
Project Team
Assignment Program Estimated Hours
Project Management CIP Engineering - Design 40
Construction Management CIP Engineering - Construction 50
Project Administration CIP Engineering - Administration 16
Project Proponent Transportation Planning & Eng. 10
81
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-100
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
BICYCLE FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS
Site List – For multi-year projects
Location
Estimated Year of
Construction
Pavement Area
(for projects in right-of-way)
Various Locations 2015 Area 8
Various Locations 2016 Area 1
Various Locations 2017 Area 2
Various Locations 2018 Area 3
Various Locations 2019 Area 4
82
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-101
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
BOB JONES TRAIL OCTAGON BARN CONNECTION
Project Description
Completing the planning effort, environmental and permitting work, and land acquisition for the extension of the Bob Jones City-to-Sea trail between the Octagon
Barn and Los Osos Valley Road will cost $395,000 for construction in 2015-16.
Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request
Council Goal / Measure Y Priority: FY 2015-17 Major City Goal: Multi-Modal Transportation
Need and Urgency
Currently the County’s conceptual plan for the Bob Jones City-to-Sea Trail terminates at the Octagon Barn and the City’s plan begins at Los Osos Valley Road
(LOVR). Planning for this section between the Octagon Barn and LOVR is needed to ensure a continuous trail is developed. A joint City/County grant
application is proposed to fund the planning effort.
Readiness to Build
Study complete or n/a
Equipment purchased or n/a
Property owned or property agreement in place n/a
Environmental approval and permits complete or n/a
Specifications or construction documents complete n/a
IT Steering Committee review n/a
Environmental Review and Permits Required
Environmental Review n/a
Building Permit n/a
Waterway Permits (Fish & Wildlife, Water Quality, Army Corps) n/a
Railroad n/a
Other: Land acquisitions or easements will be required. n/a
Operating Program Number and Title:
50500 Transportation Planning/Engineering
83
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-102
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
BOB JONES TRAIL OCTAGON BARN CONNECTION
Project Phasing and Funding Sources
Continuing, ongoing or master account project - Specification No. 91169
Initial Project Costs by Phase
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
Study $84,751 $0 $84,751
Environmental / Permit $25,000 $0 $25,000
Land Acquisition $10,000 $0 $10,000
Design $40,000 $0 $40,000
Construction $0$350,000 $350,000
Construction Management $0$45,000 $45,000
Total$159,751$395,000 $0 $0 $0 $0$554,751
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
Contract Services $0$2,500$2,500$2,500$2,500$2,500$12,500
Total $0$2,500$2,500$2,500$2,500$2,500$12,500
Ongoing Costs by Type
Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: The path extension will require ongoing maintenance of the
asphalt surface (long term) and landscaping (ongoing shown in table.) General Fund would assume ongoing maintenance costs through the pathway maintenance
program at a cost of approximately $10,000 every 10 years.
Anticipated Facility Life Span: Asphalt pathway life is anticipated to be 9 years, with lifespan extension through a regular sealing program.
Project Funding by Source
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
Grant- Existing $76,230 $76,230
Grant- Future $345,000 $345,000
TDA- local match $50,000 $50,000
Total$76,230$395,000 $0 $0 $0 $0$471,230
The City received a $76,230 Transportation Planning grant for the planning phase of this project. The project is dependent on the City/County receiving a future
grant to pay for the initial study, environmental review, and land acquisition (if needed). Future grants would also be sought to pay for the design and
construction. Projects such as this one, which close a gap in a bike path system, are typically strong candidates to receive grants.
84
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-103
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
BOB JONES TRAIL OCTAGON BARN CONNECTION
Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives
Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project:
Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: Project is presented as a phased project.
Project Team
Assignment Program Estimated Hours
Project Management Transportation - Design 160
Environmental Review Planning Development Review 40
Project Proponent Transportation Planning & Eng. 40
Contract Administration Transportation - Administration 100
Construction Management CIP Engineering - Construction 80
85
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-104
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
BOB JONES TRAIL OCTAGON BARN CONNECTION
86
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-105
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
BIKE BRIDGE AT PHILLIPS LANE
Project Description
Extending the Railroad Trail from the intersection of California Blvd and Phillips Lane to the intersection of Phillips Lane and Pepper Street will cost $250,000 in
2015-16 to complete design and land acquisition, and $1,250,000 in 2016-17 for construction and construction management.
Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request
Council Goal / Measure G Priority: FY 2015-17 Major City Goal: Multi-Modal Transportation/Expand Bicycle and Pedestrian paths
Need and Urgency
In November 2000, the Council adopted the preliminary alignment plan for the Railroad Safety Trail. Since that time grants have been applied for and work
continues with Union Pacific Railroad to receive approval for specific segments, using a phased approach. In 2013 the bike path and fencing was extended
southward along California Boulevard to Taft Street. An additional phase is planned for construction during the Spring of 2015, extending the pathway on the
westerly side of California Boulevard, to the intersection of California Boulevard and Phillips Lane, as the first phase of the previously approved “Taft to Pepper”
project.
This request completes the connection to Pepper Street. This bridge connection over the railroad will allow cyclists traveling north, to avoid crossing California
Blvd to get onto the Trail, either at Phillips Lane or farther north at Taft Street. Cyclists will be able to ride north on Pepper Street, cross the bridge to Phillips
Lane, and join the Trail at California Boulevard, without crossing the street. Future phases will be pursed to extend the trail southward to connect to the existing
southern portion starting at the Railroad Station.
Readiness to Build
Study complete or n/a
Equipment purchased or n/a
Property owned or property agreement in place n/a
Environmental approval and permits complete or n/a
Specifications or construction documents complete n/a
IT Steering Committee review n/a
Environmental Review and Permits Required
Environmental Review n/a
Building Permit n/a
Waterway Permits (Fish & Wildlife, Water Quality, Army Corps) n/a
87
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-106
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
BIKE BRIDGE AT PHILLIPS LANE
Railroad n/a
Other: (California Public Utilities Commission for the railroad crossing. ARC approval of the new bridge may be needed) n/a
Operating Program Number and Title:
50500 Transportation Planning and Engineering
Project Phasing and Funding Sources
Continuing, ongoing or master account project -
Initial Project Costs by Phase
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
Land Acquisition $0
Design $250,000 $250,000
Construction $1,200,000 $1,200,000
Construction Management $50,000 $50,000
Total $0$250,000$1,250,000 $0 $0 $0$1,500,000
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
Contract Services $2,200$2,200$2,200$6,600
Total $0 $0 $0$2,200$2,200$2,200$6,600
Ongoing Costs by Type
Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information:
The path extension will require ongoing maintenance of the asphalt surface (long term) and landscaping (ongoing shown in table.) General Fund would assume
ongoing maintenance costs.
Anticipated Facility Life Span: Asphalt pathway and bridge design life is anticipated to be 50 years.
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
TIF $0$250,000 $0 $0 $250,000
General Fund*$0 $0$1,250,000 $0 $1,250,000
Total $0$250,000$1,250,000 $0 $0 $0$1,500,000
Project Funding by Source
* Future grant will be pursued. If grant is obtained, general fund budget will be reduced dependent on the amount of grant funding.
88
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-107
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
BIKE BRIDGE AT PHILLIPS LANE
Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives
Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project:
Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing:
Project Team
Assignment Program Estimated Hours
Project Management CIP Engineering - Design 400
Environmental Review Planning Development Review 40
Project Proponent Transportation Planning & Eng. 120
Construction Management CIP Engineering – Construction 240
Contract Administration CIP Engineering – Administration 100
Environmental Review Planning 40
Location Map
PROJECT
LOCATION
89
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-108
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
SAFE ROUTE TO SCHOOL IMPROVEMENTS – PACHECO AND BISHOP PEAK ELEMENTARY
Project Description
Constructing safe route to school improvements for Pacheco and Bishop Peak schools on Foothill Road at Ferrini will cost $45,000 in 2015-16.
Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request
Council Goal / Measure G Priority - FY 2015-17 Major City Goal: Multi-Modal Transportation
Need and Urgency
Note: this project was referred to staff by Council for consideration in the FY 2015-17 Financial Plan process.
This project will improve access to and from Pacheco and Bishop Peak schools as part of a safe route to school improvement project. Currently bicyclists
communing to the schools from the south must ride contra-flow on the north side of Foothill to access the signals at Broad or Chorro Street or cross Foothill at
Ferrini across four lanes of traffic.
These movements have been identified as problematic by the parent teacher associations, residents in the area, the bicycling community and the BAC. Staff is
currently assessing the requests for improvements and anticipates the need for funding to improve access and traffic warning/control at the intersection. The
location is identified in the Bicycle Plan as a location needing attention to improve access for school children and safe route to school purposes.
These improvements are not TIF eligible.
Readiness to Build
Study complete or n/a
Equipment purchased or n/a
Property owned or property agreement in place n/a
Environmental approval and permits complete or n/a
Specifications or construction documents complete n/a
IT Steering Committee review n/a
90
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-109
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
SAFE ROUTE TO SCHOOL IMPROVEMENTS – PACHECO AND BISHOP PEAK ELEMENTARY
Environmental Review and Permits Required
Environmental Review n/a
Building Permit n/a
Waterway Permits (Fish & Game, Water Quality, Army Corps) n/a
Railroad n/a
Other: (PUC) n/a
Operating Program Number and Title:
50500 – Transportation Engineering and Planning
Project Phasing and Funding Sources
Continuing, ongoing or master account project - Specification No.
Initial Project Costs by Phase
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
Study $0 $0
Environmental / Permit $0
Land Acquisition $0
Site Preparation $0
Design $0
Construction $45,000 $45,000
Construction Management $0
Equipment Acquisition $0
Total $0$45,000 $0 $0 $0 $0$45,000
91
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-110
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
SAFE ROUTE TO SCHOOL IMPROVEMENTS – PACHECO AND BISHOP PEAK ELEMENTARY
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
Fleet Maintenance (50340)
Utilities $0
Maintenance materials $0
Property rental/lease $0
Staff $0
Contract Services $0
Ongoing Costs by Type
Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information:
Anticipated Facility Life Span: N/A
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
General Fund $45,000 $45,000
Enterprise Fund $0
Grant $0
TIF
Debt Financing $0
Developer Contribution $0
Total $0$45,000 $0 $0 $0 $0$45,000
Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives
Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project:
Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing:
Project Team
Assignment Program Estimated Hours
Project Proponent Traffic Engineering 40
Project Manager CIP Engineering – Design
Technical Studies Natural Resources
92
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-111
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
SAFE ROUTE TO SCHOOL IMPROVEMENTS – PACHECO AND BISHOP PEAK ELEMENTARY
Assignment Program Estimated Hours
Environmental Clearance Community Development 3
Contract Management CIP Engineering – Administration
Construction Management CIP Engineering – Construction
Location Map
Bicycle Plan Excerpt
93
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-112
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
SANTA FE ROAD REALIGNMENT AND BRIDGE REHABILITATION
Project Description
Preliminary environmental and design work for relocating Santa Fe Road Bridge over Acacia Creek and relocate Santa Fe at Tank Farm Road to improve traffic
Safety will cost $50,000 in 2015-16.
Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request
Council Goal / Measure G Priority - List:
Need and Urgency
This project will prepare a project study report for the bridge rehabilitation and eventual realignment of Santa Fe Road south of Tank Farm Road in order to
determine if federal HBRR (Highway Bridge replacement & Rehabilitation funds) can be used to fund the improvements at an 88/12 match.
The intersection of Santa Fe at Tank Farm Road as well as the existing Santa Fe Bridge south of Tank Farm Road are problematic and need to be
replaced/relocated. These projects are included in the AASP public facility funding program and essential to improve traffic safety in the area.
The Santa Fe Bridge (which was annexed into the City from the County) is currently structural and design deficient. (see pictures below)
The Chevron development project is currently moving forward and ultimately may be construction these improvements. However, the current phasing of the
Chevron development map calls for these improvements in the 5th phase of the development (15+ years out) and the rehabilitation of the bridge needs to take place
sooner than that timeframe.
In addition, relocation of the intersection of Santa Fe at tank Farm Road and realignment of the bridge will cause relocation of business access points in the area
and this work needs to be done as soon as possible to help with redevelopment activities if they occur. Part of the study will create a working group of property
owners in the vicinity to discuss short-medium and long term circulation, access and safety issues to help coordinate projects, minimize conflicts and reduce costs
for all.
The City has collected AASP impact fee for these purposes that will be used to fund the study.
The project is detailed in the Airport Area Specific Plan (AASP) and is an essential capital improvement necessary to provide safety improvements
As part of the AASP revisions the City committed to moving forward with the property owners in resolving access and safety issues in this area. In addition, the
HBRR program is currently funded and if the project is eligible, should seek funding as soon as possible since this program is not always fully funded by the
federal government.
94
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-113
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
SANTA FE ROAD REALIGNMENT AND BRIDGE REHABILITATION
Readiness to Build
Study complete or n/a
Equipment purchased or n/a
Property owned or property agreement in place n/a
Environmental approval and permits complete or n/a
Specifications or construction documents complete n/a
IT Steering Committee review n/a
Environmental Review and Permits Required
Environmental Review n/a
Building Permit n/a
Waterway Permits (Fish & Game, Water Quality, Army Corps) n/a
Railroad n/a
Other: (Enter the title and agency of any other needed permits) n/a
Operating Program Number and Title:
50500 – Transportation Engineering and Planning
Project Phasing and Funding Sources
Continuing, ongoing or master account project - Specification No.
Initial Project Costs by Phase
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
Study $50,000 $50,000
Environmental / Permit $0
Land Acquisition $0
Site Preparation $0
Design $0
Construction $0
Construction Management $0
Equipment Acquisition $0
Total $0$50,000 $0 $0 $0 $0$50,000
95
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-114
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
SANTA FE ROAD REALIGNMENT AND BRIDGE REHABILITATION
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
Fleet Maintenance (50340)
Utilities $0
Maintenance materials $0
Property rental/lease $0
Staff $0
Contract Services $0
Ongoing Costs by Type
Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information:
Anticipated Facility Life Span: 50 Years
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
General Fund $0
Enterprise Fund $0
Grant $0
Debt Financing $0
AASP Impact Fees $50,000 $50,000
Developer Contribution $0
Total $0$50,000 $0 $0 $0 $0$50,000
96
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-115
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
SANTA FE ROAD REALIGNMENT AND BRIDGE REHABILITATION
Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives
Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project:
Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing:
Project Team
Assignment Program Estimated Hours
Project Proponent Traffic Engineering 200
Project Manager CIP Engineering – Design 100
Technical Studies Natural Resources 10
Environmental Clearance Community Development 20
Contract Management CIP Engineering – Administration
Construction Management CIP Engineering – Construction
97
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-116
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
SANTA FE ROAD REALIGNMENT AND BRIDGE REHABILITATION
Location Map
Vicinity Map
Santa Fe Road
Bridge Location
98
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-117
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
SANTA FE ROAD REALIGNMENT AND BRIDGE REHABILITATION
Vicinity Map 2
Santa Fe Road
Bridge Location High Collision
Rate
Location/Skew
99
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-118
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
SANTA FE ROAD REALIGNMENT AND BRIDGE REHABILITATION
Airport Specific Plan Realignment of SFR
Relocation and realignment
of Santa Fe Road for Safety
purposes as part of Airport
Area Specific Plan
100
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-119
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
SANTA FE ROAD REALIGNMENT AND BRIDGE REHABILITATION
Schematic of Realignment and relocated bridge
Relocation and realignment
of Santa Fe Road for Safety
purposes as part of Airport
Area Specific Plan
101
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-120
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
SANTA FE ROAD REALIGNMENT AND BRIDGE REHABILITATION
Bridge Condition #1
102
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-121
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
SANTA FE ROAD REALIGNMENT AND BRIDGE REHABILITATION
Bridge Condition #2
103
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-122
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
SANTA FE ROAD REALIGNMENT AND BRIDGE REHABILITATION
Bridge Condition #3
104
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-123
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - FUNCTION
SOUTH & PARKER TRAFFIC SAFETY PROJECT: MEDIAN
Project Description
Replacing temporary safety measure with permanent measures will cost $30,000 in 2015-16 for construction.
Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request
Council Goal / Measure G Priority – FY 2015-17 Major City Goal: Multi-Modal Transportation
Need and Urgency
As part of the City’s annual traffic safety program the intersection of South & Parker was identified as a high priority safety issue. At the beginning of 2014 staff
installed temporary plastic curbing and cones to test the restriction left turn movements as a corrective measure. The left turn restriction has been 100% successful
in mitigating the collision pattern, therefore staff is requesting funds to install replace the temporary curbing and cones with a more permanent concrete median.
Readiness to Build
Study complete or n/a
Equipment purchased or n/a
Property owned or property agreement in place n/a
Environmental approval and permits complete or n/a
Specifications or construction documents complete n/a
IT Steering Committee review n/a
Environmental Review and Permits Required
Environmental Review n/a
Building Permit n/a
Waterway Permits (Fish & Game, Water Quality, Army Corps) n/a Dependent on bridge location.
Railroad n/a Dependent on bridge location
Other: (Enter the title and agency of any other needed permits) n/a
Operating Program Number and Title:
50500 Transportation Planning & Engineering
105
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-124
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - FUNCTION
SOUTH & PARKER TRAFFIC SAFETY PROJECT: MEDIAN
Project Phasing and Funding Sources
Continuing, ongoing or master account project - Specification No.
Initial Project Costs by Phase
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
Design $0 $0
Construction $30,000 $0$30,000
Construction Management $0 $0
Total $0$30,000 $0 $0 $0 $0$30,000
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
Fleet Maintenance (50340)
Utilities $0
Maintenance materials $0
Property rental/lease $0
Staff $0
Contract Services $0
Total $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Ongoing Costs by Type
Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: These maintenance projects will prolong the lives of the
bridges and defer costly replacement projects.
Anticipated Facility Life Span: The life of a permanent median is expected to exceed 30 years. If this project is not improved the expect life of the temporary
devices currently in place is approximately 2 years.
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
General Fund $30,000 $30,000
Grant $0
Total $0$30,000 $0 $0 $0 $0$30,000
Project Funding by Source
106
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-125
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - FUNCTION
SOUTH & PARKER TRAFFIC SAFETY PROJECT: MEDIAN
Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives
Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project:
Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing:
Project Team
Assignment Program Estimated Hours
Project Manager Transportation 40
107
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-126
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
MARSH STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT
Project Description
Marsh Street Bridge and sewer siphon replacement will cost $6,640,000 for construction and construction management in 2016-17.
Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request
Council Goal / Measure G Priority: Downtown, Fiscal Sustainability & Responsibility
Need and Urgency
The Marsh Street Bridge, near the intersection of Marsh and Santa Rosa Streets, was built in 1909 and over the years has received occasional minor repair work by
City maintenance staff. More intense maintenance was scheduled as part of the 2007-09 Financial Plan to replace heavily damaged bridge rails, and to patch and
seal the deck. As a condition to use federal bridge funding for the work, a structural review was completed. The review indicated the bridge deterioration was too
significant to be ameliorated only by maintenance and that more intensive rehabilitation work and possibly replacement would be required. A maintenance
inspection conducted by the State of California Department of Transportation in 2008 supported this finding with the overall bridge efficiency rating dropping
nearly 30 points since 2004, to a rating of 64 out of 100, indicating an accelerating decline.
In June 2011, the City contracted with Dokken Engineering, one of the City’s pre-qualified on-call civil engineering consultants, to complete a structural
assessment of the bridge, leading to the preparation of an Alternatives Study Report of the Marsh Street Bridge to discuss rehabilitation alternatives and compare
those alternatives to complete replacement. The report recommends replacing the existing bridge to provide a long term solution for City’s investment and
minimize future disruption to this busy corridor. This alternative was approved by the City Council on January 22, 2013. With the adoption of the project as a
complete replacement, a new cost estimate has been completed and additional funds are needed.
Replacement of the sewer siphon that runs under the Marsh Street Bridge and San Luis Obispo Creek will be coordinated with this project. This siphon is a critical
facility conveying wastewater from a large portion of the City. Replaced in 1971, after it was exposed by flooding, the siphon no longer meets the City’s criteria
for siphon design and construction and requires bi-monthly intensive maintenance. Funding for this replacement will come entirely from the sewer fund as a
distinctly separate funding source for this component of the project.
Readiness to Build
Study complete or n/a
Equipment purchased or n/a
Property owned or property agreement in place n/a
Environmental approval and permits complete or n/a
Specifications or construction documents complete n/a
IT Steering Committee review n/a
108
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-127
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
MARSH STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT
Environmental Review and Permits Required
Environmental Review n/a – CEQA, NEPA, RWQCB, SHPO
Building Permit n/a
Waterway Permits (Fish & Wildlife, Water Quality, Army Corps) n/a
Railroad n/a
Other: Encroachment Permit (Public Works Department) n/a
Operating Program Number and Title:
50320 Creek and Flood Control
Project Phasing and Funding Sources
Continuing project - Specification No. 90480 Marsh Street Bridge
Initial Project Costs by Phase
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
Environmental / Permit $275,000 $275,000
Property Acquisition $175,000 $175,000
Design $307,900 $307,900
Construction $6,340,000 $6,340,000
Construction Management $300,000 $300,000
Total$757,900 $0$6,640,000 $0 $0 $0$7,397,900
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
Utilities $90 $90 $90 $270
Total $0 $0 $0 $90 $90 $90 $270
Ongoing Costs by Type
Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: There are no new anticipated ongoing costs for the structure,
as the new structure will require less maintenance. There will be ongoing maintenance and electrical costs associated with installation of new pedestrian level
lighting on the structure, anticipated as part of restoration of the original design of the structure. Electrical ($1.80 per month per light) and relamping costs ($200
every 15-20 years per light). Globes should be cleaned every 2 years (1/2 hour per lamp) to maximize light output.
109
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-128
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
MARSH STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT
Anticipated Facility Life Span: Bridges have a design life of 100 years.
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
General Fund $82,343 $734,000 $816,343
Grant - HBRR $635,557 $5,666,000 $6,301,557
Sewer Fund $40,000 $240,000 $280,000
Total$757,900 $0$6,640,000 $0 $0 $0$7,397,900
Project Funding by Source
Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives
Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project:
Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing:
Project Team
Assignment Program Estimated Hours
Project Management CIP Engineering - Design 400
Construction CIP Engineering - Construction 520
Contract Administration CIP Engineering - Administration 100
Environmental Review Planning 40
Location Map
110
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-129
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
SIDEWALK RAMP CONSTRUCTION
Project Description
Constructing curb ramps for accessibility in conjunction with street reconstruction and microsurfacing projects, and as requested by the public will cost $150,000
in 2015-16 for design and construction, $105,000 in 2016-17 for design and construction, and an average of $135,000 in years 2017-20 for design and
construction.
Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request
Council Goal / Measure G Priority: Multi-Modal Transportation
Need and Urgency
The City has an established system of streets with curbs, gutters, and sidewalks. This system works well for most people but can be challenging to negotiate for
those with physical disabilities. One of the impediments to travel is the difference in elevation between the street grade and the sidewalk grade at points of
transition. While it would be difficult to furnish continuous access between the street and the sidewalk, it is feasible to provide access at corners where people
using the sidewalk most often cross the street. The method of access that works best is a ramp with a safe transition.
The City has identified 1,846 points at intersections where pedestrians cross the street. More than 40 percent of these crossing points already have some sort of
transition ramp provided; however, many of these were built some years ago and do not conform to current standards that allow ready use by wheelchairs. The
remaining 60 percent of crossing points continue to have a step between the street and sidewalk.
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requires that any alteration to a street include construction of an accessible ramp where none exist, and to make
compliant any ramps that existed previously. Some ADA compliance problems have arisen from differing interpretations of the term "alteration;" however, the
courts have made a determination on this issue and any overlay and microsurfacing work requires ramp construction / upgrade. Any ramps required in order to
meet legal obligations relative to paving and microsurfacing, that are not funded from this program, will be funded from the paving program, reducing funding
available for street work. Slurry Sealing does not require ramp work.
In addition to building ramps in conjunction with street reconstruction and microsurfacing projects, staff includes a small number of ramps that are requested by
members of the public to address access issues on commonly used routes of travel. Increasing needs for ramp work as it relates to resurfacing projects has driven a
need for increased funding for this program.
Readiness to Build
Study complete or n/a
Equipment purchased or n/a
Property owned or property agreement in place n/a
111
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-130
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
SIDEWALK RAMP CONSTRUCTION
Environmental approval and permits complete or n/a
Specifications or construction documents complete n/a
Environmental Review and Permits Required
Environmental Review - Notice of Exemption & NEPA Clearance for CDBG Funding
Building Permit n/a
Waterway Permits (Fish & Wildlife, Water Quality, Army Corps) n/a
Railroad n/a
Other: n/a
Operating Program Number and Title:
50300 Streets and Sidewalk Maintenance
Project Phasing and Funding Sources
Continuing, ongoing or master account project - Specification No. 99868 Sidewalk Ramps Master Account
Initial Project Costs by Phase
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
Design ongoing $5,000$5,000$5,000$5,000$5,000$25,000
Construction ongoing $145,000$100,000$145,000$145,000$100,000$635,000
Total $0$150,000$105,000$150,000$150,000$105,000$660,000
Budget to Date 2013-142014-152015-162016-172017-18 Total
Maintenance materials $500 $500 $500 $500 $500$2,500
Total $0 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500$2,500
Ongoing Costs by Type
Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information:
There will be minor additional costs associated with maintenance of ramps versus maintenance of sidewalk due to the need to maintain the truncated dome surface
(yellow tactile pad); however the addition of the truncated dome surface is required.
Anticipated Facility Life Span:
112
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-131
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
SIDEWALK RAMP CONSTRUCTION
The concrete ramp will last indefinitely; however, accessibility requirements may change and require replacements. The dome surfacing life span also varies and is
shown as an ongoing cost in the table above. It is anticipated to have a 5 to 10-year life.
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
CDBG $105,000$105,000$105,000$105,000$105,000$525,000
General Fund $45,000 $45,000$45,000 $135,000
Total $0$150,000$105,000$150,000$150,000$105,000$660,000
Project Funding by Source
If CDBG funding is not authorized, general fund backfill will be required to meet this need.
Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives
Reduced project is feasible – Estimated cost for each curb ramp is $7,000. Project budget can be reduced in $7,000 increments to desired funding level.
Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: Project as submitted is a phased project, coordinating with the street resurfacing program.
Project Team
Assignment Program Estimated Hours
Project Management CIP Engineering - Design 120 hours per year
Environmental Community Development 40 hours per year
Contract Administration CIP Engineering - Administration 40 hours per year
Construction Management CIP Engineering - Construction 450 hours per year
113
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-132
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
PRADO ROAD BRIDGE & ROAD WIDENING
Project Description
Preliminary environmental and design work for widening Prado Road Bridge over San Luis Creek to relief traffic congestion and improve traffic circulation with
Environmental permitting, land acquisition, and design will cost $300,000 in 2015-16 and $540,000 in 2016-17.
Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request
Council Goal / Measure G Priority: Improve Transportation
Need and Urgency
Prado Road between Higuera & Highway 101 is currently widened to accommodate four lanes with the exception of the San Luis Creek Bridge and a 500’ section
along the frontage of the water treatment facility which limits Prado to two lanes along this segment. This section of Prado is identified for widening to four lanes
as part of the City’s Circulation Element and incorporated into the Transportation Impact Fee Program. Also this widening is assumed as a funded and completed
project in Environmental Impacts Reports (EIR) for projects within the vicinity, in particular recent developments within the Margarita Area, Airport Area, and the
Chevron remediation and development project. Widening of this bridge is a prerequisite for the mitigation measures and traffic improvements associated with
those projects to actually achieve the intended mitigation outcome. One example of the situation is that EIR’s in the vicinity call for the installation of a dual
northbound left turn lane at Prado & Higuera, without the bridge being widened the second left turn lane would have no place go and therefore could not be
provided to actually achieve the mitigation.
Funding to begin this project was originally requested as part of the 2001-03 Financial Plan but because of limited development activity in the Margarita and
Airport Areas at that time the project was differed. Now that the City is receiving development applications and development projects are underway it is critical
that the Environmental, Right of Way, and Design work on this project begin now. If this project is differed and not completed before projects in these areas are
ready to begin occupying, the mitigation conditions of those projects will not be achievable and may result in delays in approving occupancy. Also if this project is
not completed it is expected that traffic operations and safety at the intersection of Prado and Higuera will degrade to beyond acceptable levels as established in the
City’s Circulation Element as well as congestion impacts at the Los Osos Valley Road and Madonna Road, Highway 101 interchanges.
Readiness to Build
Study complete or n/a
Equipment purchased or n/a
Property owned or property agreement in place n/a
Environmental approval and permits complete or n/a
Specifications or construction documents complete n/a
IT Steering Committee review n/a
114
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-133
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
PRADO ROAD BRIDGE & ROAD WIDENING
Environmental Review and Permits Required
Environmental Review n/a
Building Permit n/a
Waterway Permits (Fish & Game, Water Quality, Army Corps) n/a
Railroad n/a
Other: (Enter the title and agency of any other needed permits) n/a
Operating Program Number and Title:
50500 Transportation
Project Phasing and Funding Sources
Continuing, ongoing or master account project - Specification No.
The preliminary phases for environmental and design work is recommended to be funded directly from the Transportation Impact Fee Fund. It is anticipated that
construction funding in 2017-18 will require debt financing with repayment from the Transportation Impact Fee Fund or funded thru the Federal Local Highway
Bridge grant program (HBP).
Initial Project Costs by Phase
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
Project Study Report $40,000 $40,000
Environmental / Permit $0 $120,000 $120,000
Land Acquisition $25,000 $25,000
Design $390,000 $300,000$395,000 $1,085,000
Total Construction $5,000,000 $5,000,000
Total$430,000 $0$300,000$540,000$5,000,000 $0$6,270,000
Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information:
Minimal additional operating costs are anticipated with the widening.
Anticipated Facility Life Span: Anticipated service life the new bridge is 30+ years, depending on the approved construction alternative.
115
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-134
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
PRADO ROAD BRIDGE & ROAD WIDENING
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
Transportation Impact Fund $430,000 $0$300,000 $0 $0 $300,000
Unsecured Grant*$540,000$5,000,000 $5,540,000
$0
Total$430,000 $0$300,000$540,000$5,000,000 $0$6,270,000
Project Funding by Source
*If grant funding is not secured or only partially secured other funding sources will be considered such as debt financing.
Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives
Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project:
Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: 5-6 Years
Widening of the Prado Road Bridge is already being recommended as a phased project.
Project Team – Environmental & Design Phases Only
Assignment Program Estimated Hours
Project Manager Transportation – Design 200 Hrs. Per Year
Environmental Clearance Community Development 40 Hrs. Per Year
Technical Studies Natural Resources 100 Hrs. Per Year
Contract Management Transportation – Administration 90 Hrs Per Year
116
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-135
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
TRAFFIC OPERATION IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
Project Description
Constructing traffic operations improvements as identified in the Annual Traffic Operations Report will cost $30,000 every other year starting in 2015-16.
Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request
Council Goal / Measure G Priority: Improve Transportation
Need and Urgency
Each year the City analyzes high congestion locations, ranks and prioritizes those locations, develops mitigation measures for construction. This program is a
highly effective program built on the same principles as the City’s award winning Traffic Safety Program, whereby all primary intersections and corridors within
the City are evaluated. The locations are ranked based on the degree of travel time delay and projects are identified and implemented accordingly. This is the
City’s primary mechanism for effectively addressing traffic congestion relief and allows pursuit of minor capital improvements to address congestion issues
identified in the Traffic Operations Report.
Readiness to Build
Study complete or n/a
Equipment purchased or n/a
Property owned or property agreement in place n/a
Environmental approval and permits complete or n/a
Specifications or construction documents complete n/a
Environmental Review and Permits Required
Environmental Review n/a
Building Permit n/a
Waterway Permits (Fish & Wildlife, Water Quality, Army Corps) n/a
Railroad n/a
Other: (Enter the title and agency of any other needed permits) n/a
Operating Program Number and Title:
50500 Transportation Planning and Engineering
117
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-136
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
TRAFFIC OPERATION IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
Project Phasing and Funding Sources
Continuing, ongoing or master account project - Specification No. 90884 Traffic Operations Report Implementation Master Account
Initial Project Costs by Phase
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
Construction $30,000 $0$30,000 $0$30,000$90,000
Total $0$30,000 $0$30,000 $0$30,000$90,000
Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: Work is typically street and sidewalk work, modifying
existing facilities and minimizing increased maintenance costs.
Anticipated Facility Life Span: Life spans will be dependent upon facility constructed.
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
General Fund $30,000 $0$30,000 $30,000$90,000
Total $0$30,000 $0$30,000 $0$30,000$90,000
Project Funding by Source
Note: Grant funding will be pursued as available to offset General Fund.
Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives
Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project:
Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: Project is submitted as a phased project.
Project Team
Assignment Program Estimated Hours
Project Proponent Transportation Planning & Eng. 200 Hrs
Project Management Transportation Planning & Eng. 100 Hrs
Contract Administration CIP Engineering - Administration 100 Hrs
118
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-137
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
TRANSPORTATION MONITORING
Project Description
Conducting citywide bi-annual traffic counts to identify and monitor levels-of-service (LOS) on streets resulting from development and travel changes will cost
$60,000 every other year starting in 2015-16.
Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request
Council Goal / Measure G Priority: Improve Transportation
Need and Urgency
As required under the General Plan Circulation Element policy 7.7 the City conducts bi-annual traffic volume counts citywide. Traffic counts are a prerequisite for
the traffic studies necessary to respond to citizen requests, program traffic signal timing, identify and implement roadway improvements, forecast future traffic
demands and facilitate the City’s Traffic Safety, Operations, and Neighborhood Traffic Management Programs. These counts are also required to complete
environmental review of City and private development projects. This funding will provide resources for contract services to count vehicles, bicycles, and
pedestrians at approximately 110 intersections and 200 segments. There are various counting methods (road tubes, counting board, video recording, etc.) that
maybe used to conduct the counts depending on the consultant selected and the site conditions each specific count location.
The cost of this study will increase from $48,000 per year to $60,000 per year due to the augmented multimodal monitoring prescribed in the City General Plan
Update. Part of these funds will come from Transportation Impact Fees that are eligible to be used for this purpose.
Readiness to Build
Study complete or n/a
Equipment purchased or n/a
Property owned or property agreement in place n/a
Environmental approval and permits complete or n/a
Specifications or construction documents complete n/a
Environmental Review and Permits Required
Environmental Review n/a
Building Permit n/a
Waterway Permits (Fish & Wildlife, Water Quality, Army Corps) n/a
Railroad n/a
Other: (Enter the title and agency of any other needed permits) n/a
119
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-138
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
TRANSPORTATION MONITORING
Operating Program Number and Title:
50500 Transportation Planning and Engineering
Project Phasing and Funding Sources
Continuing, ongoing or master account project - Specification No. 90653 Traffic Volume Counts Master Account
Initial Project Costs by Phase
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
Study ongoing $60,000 $0$60,000 $0 $120,000
Total $0$60,000 $0$60,000 $0 $0$120,000
No additional operating costs are anticipated from this work.
Anticipated Facility Life Span: n/a
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
Traffic Impact Fee $48,000 $0$48,000 $96,000
General Fund $12,000 $0$12,000 $24,000
Total $0$60,000 $0$60,000 $0 $0$120,000
Project Funding by Source
Project work will only be undertaken if adequate TIF funds are available.
Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives
Reduced project is feasible – Cost of reduced project:
Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing:
Project Team
Assignment Program Estimated Hours
Project Management Transportation Planning & Eng. 80 Hrs
Contract Admin CIP Engineering - Administration 20 Hrs
120
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-139
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
TRAFFIC, BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN MARKING REPLACEMENT
Project Description
Replacing thermoplastic striping, pavement markings, and raised pavement markers will cost $20,000 in 2015-16, $22,000 in 2017-18, $22,000 in 2018-19.
Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request
Council Goal / Measure G Priority - List: Multi-Modal Transportation
Need and Urgency
The City is responsible for maintaining 133 miles of streets, 2400 sidewalk ramp crossings, 70 signalized intersections, 241 miles of sidewalks and 60 miles of
bike lanes and paths. Legible legends and markings are essential to enabling safe travel by the public. Specifically, lane lines, stop bars, marked crosswalks and
other visible indicators enable motorists, cyclists and pedestrians to safely navigate the City’s transportation network.. Thermoplastic markings last longer than the
old method of painting, and should be replaced approximately every eight (8) years. .
Currently the City replaces existing legends and markings once every 8 years on neighborhood streets. This replacement occurs with the ongoing Annual Paving
program whereby each of the City’s 8 Pavement Areas are sealed or microsurfaced once over an 8 year period. Markings and Legends on arterials are completed
whenever that corridor is scheduled for repaving. In addition, the City proactively ensures the legends and markings in school zones are visible. Remarking
arterials are completed when that particular arterial is scheduled for repaving. Currently the city’s funding allows for one section of arterial to be completed every
other year. Some sections of arterials, such as Los Osos Valley Road, Madonna Ave, etc; are lengthy and will require several million dollars for a complete
repaving job. The high cost means arterials will be repaved beyond the typical life-span of the legends and markings. In addition, arterials more vehicle, bicycle
and pedestrian traffic, experience more wear and tear, and impact a greater number of users. The requested funding would enable the city to replace approximately
30 crosswalks or other markings on an annual basis.
Brighter markings and legends can enhance safer circulation and mobility for drivers, transit, cyclists and pedestrians. Crosswalks, stop bars, lane lines and other
markings enable drivers, cyclists and walkers to safely navigate the public right of way. Those markings are as significant to a transportation network as are speed
limit signs, traffic signals and stop signs – as they provide the user with information on how best to share public transportation space
Readiness to Build
Study complete or n/a
Equipment purchased or n/a
Property owned or property agreement in place n/a
Environmental approval and permits complete or n/a
Specifications or construction documents complete n/a
IT Steering Committee review n/a
121
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-140
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
TRAFFIC, BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN MARKING REPLACEMENT
Environmental Review and Permits Required
Environmental Review n/a
Building Permit n/a
Waterway Permits (Fish & Game, Water Quality, Army Corps) x n/a
Railroad n/a
Other: (Enter the title and agency of any other needed permits) n/a
Operating Program Number and Title:
50300 Street and Sidewalk Maintenance
Project Phasing and Funding Sources
Continuing, ongoing or master account project - Specification No.
Initial Project Costs by Phase
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
Construction $20,000 $0$22,000$22,000 $0$64,000
Total $0$20,000 $0$22,000$22,000 $0$64,000
Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information:
Social benefits are increased public safety, environmental result from potential increased walking and cycling due to enhanced markings, and economic could be
attained through fewer collisions associated with better driver/walker decision-making as a result of brighter markings and legends. Public benefit is strictly related
to safer mobility and circulation.
Anticipated Facility Life Span: Themoplastic striping typically requires replacement approximately every eight years.
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
General Fund $20,000 $0$22,000$22,000 $0$64,000
Total $0$20,000 $0$22,000$22,000 $0$64,000
Project Funding by Source
122
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-141
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
TRAFFIC, BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN MARKING REPLACEMENT
Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives
Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project: This project could be scaled to a lower number
Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing:
Project Team
Assignment Program Estimated Hours
Project Proponent Public Works - Admin 10
Project Manager CIP Engineering – Design 100
Environmental Clearance Community Development 10
Contract Management CIP Engineering – Administration 60
Construction Management CIP Engineering – Construction 50
Existing Conditions:
123
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-142
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
BOB JONES TRAIL – PREFUMO CREEK CONNECTION TO OCEANAIRE
Project Description
Constructing a class I bicycle connection from Calle Joaquin to Oceanaire will cost $156,000 for design and environmental in 2015-16 and $1,060,000 for
construction in FY 2018-19.
Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request
Council Goal / Measure G Priority – FY 2015-17 Major City Goal: Multi-Modal Transportation/Expand Bicycle and Pedestrian paths
Need and Urgency
This project will construct the connection of the Bob Jones Trail Facility for Calle Joaquin to Oceanaire Avenue past the Target shopping center. As part of the
development of the Target Center (Prefumo Creek Commons) the developer contributed $249,507 in air quality mitigation fees to the City for use in constructing
the path. This money was received in 2010 and needs to be used. The City was unsuccessful in using this sum as a source for local match in the recent Statewide
Active Transportation Grant process. By activating the funds to complete design and permitting it is hoped that the better state of “readiness” will help the grant
compete more favorably in the upcoming next cycle.
The City is hoping to use a previously acquired bridge to reduced costs for the project and the trail has been planned as part of the Bob Jones Trail planning
process and has been included in the Calle Joaquin Agriculture Master Plan. The path was included in the environmental determination for the masterplan but will
likely need additional environmental review as part of project development.
It is anticipated that the project will compete favorably for outside grant funding however, the remaining part of developer contribution, Measure G, TIF or general
fund will be needed as local match or necessary if a grant is not realized.
Funding may need to be moved forward depending upon successful competition and award of grant funding.
Readiness to Build
Study complete or n/a
Equipment purchased or n/a
Property owned or property agreement in place n/a
Environmental approval and permits complete or n/a
Specifications or construction documents complete n/a
IT Steering Committee review n/a
124
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-143
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
BOB JONES TRAIL – PREFUMO CREEK CONNECTION TO OCEANAIRE
Environmental Review and Permits Required
Environmental Review n/a
Building Permit n/a
Waterway Permits (Fish & Game, Water Quality, Army Corps) n/a
Railroad n/a
Other: (Enter the title and agency of any other needed permits) n/a
Operating Program Number and Title:
50500 Transportation Planning and Engineering
Project Phasing and Funding Sources
Initial Project Costs by Phase
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
Study $35,000 $35,000
Environmental / Permit $0
Land Acquisition $0
Site Preparation $0
Design $121,000 $121,000
Construction $1,000,000 $1,000,000
Construction Management $60,000 $60,000
Equipment Acquisition $0
Total $0$156,000 $0 $0$1,060,000 $0$1,216,000
Ongoing Costs by Type
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
Utilities
Maintenance/replacement 1000 1000 2000
Property rental/lease
Staff
Contract Services
Total 1000 1000 2000
125
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-144
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
BOB JONES TRAIL – PREFUMO CREEK CONNECTION TO OCEANAIRE
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
Fleet Maintenance (50340)
Utilities $0
Maintenance materials $1,000$1,000$2,000
Property rental/lease $0
Staff $0
Contract Services $0
Ongoing Costs by Type
Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information:
Once constructed, the facility will need annual maintenance from the Streets Division of Public Works. Additional funding for cleaning, paving and miscellaneous
work on the facility is expected to be a minimum of $1,000 annually beginning in 2018-19.
Anticipated Facility Life Span: 20 Years
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
General Fund (Measure G)$216,493 $216,493
Enterprise Fund $0
Grant $750,000 $750,000
Debt Financing $0
Developer Contribution $156,000 $93,507 $249,507
Total $0$156,000 $0 $0$1,060,000 $0$1,216,000
Project Funding by Source
The project will seek grant assistance for construction purposes and will need local matching funds.
Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives
Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project:
Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing:
126
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-145
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
BOB JONES TRAIL – PREFUMO CREEK CONNECTION TO OCEANAIRE
Project Team
Assignment Program Estimated Hours
Project Proponent Transportation Engineering - Design 600
Project Manager CIP Engineering – Design 200
Technical Studies Natural Resources 60
Environmental Clearance Community Development 40
Contract Management CIP Engineering – Administration
Construction Management CIP Engineering – Construction 480
127
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-146
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
BOB JONES TRAIL – PREFUMO CREEK CONNECTION TO OCEANAIRE
128
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-147
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
Project Description
Implementation of various Bicycle Transportation Plan projects and programs will cost $400,000 in 2015-16.
Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request
Council Goal / Measure G Priority: FY 2015-17 Major City Goal: Multi-Modal Transportation/Measure G: Bike Lanes and Sidewalks
Need and Urgency
Background
In November of 2013 the City Adopted the Bicycle Transportation Plan and identified implementation of that plan as a Major City Goal for 2015-17. Elements of
the Bicycle Transportation Plan are implemented through private development and other larger capital projects. This Capital Project encompasses implementation
of various projects and programs which are not under the umbrella of other larger projects, either private or public.
Two line items of this capital project include plan & program development in 2015-16. The implementation section of the bicycle transportation plan calls for a
prioritization and refinement of projects and alternatives. This task will be primarily conducted by staff along with an additional $5,000 in 2015-16 for consultant
services support and outreach activities. Development of an active transportation education & advocacy plan will refine future campaigns for concepts like
pedestrian rodeos, & car free days, and other Active Transportation events. This task will also be primarily conducted by staff and supplemented by an additional
$10,000 in 2015-16 for consultant services support & outreach materials.
Five line items of this capital project include study, design, and construction activities related to priority capital projects identified in the Bicycle Transportation
Plan. They are noted as follows, 1) Modification of the Highland & Chorro intersection to improve bicycle connectivity ($20k in 15-16). 2), Project development
on the Boysen & Santa Rosa grade separated bike & pedestrian crossing to position the City for potential future grant funding opportunities ($50k in 15-16). 3),
Project development and right of way activities for making a Class I connection along the future Prado Road alignment connecting Higuera & Broad Street ($50k
in 15-16 and $50k in 16-17). 4) Installing a bike box at Chorro & Foothill ($10k in 15-16). 5) Connecting the Railroad Safety Trail to the Laurel & Orcutt
connection (this is in advance of the construction of the trail to the south, an obligation of the Orcutt Area development currently in the review. ($30k in 15-16
and $120k in 16-17). The totals below match the request for $400,000 in 2015-16.
129
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-148
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
2015-16*
BTP Prioritization & Implementation Plan 5,000
Active Transportation Education & Advocacy Program 10,000
Highland & Chorro Bicycle Improvements 20,000
Boysen & Santa Rosa Crossing Project Study Report 50,000
Prado Rd. Class I Connection - Project Development 100,000
Chorro & Foothill Bike Box 10,000
RRST Class I Connection Laurel & Orcutt 150,000
Bicycle & Pedestrian Grants Support 55,000
Subtotal $400,000
*Due to one-time available monies, funding for the projects will be allocated in 2015-16
though completion of the projects isn’t expected until 2016-17. Any unspent funding in
2015-16 will be rolled over to 2016-17 as part of the supplemental budget.
The Transportation Planning & Engineering program does not have currently have the staffing capacity to accommodate this capital project, an associated BTP
implementation SOPC is proposed in order to support this Capital Project and the Major Council Goal as a whole. This request and the corresponding SOPC
represent a complete and inter-dependent service delivery package.
Readiness to Build
Study complete or n/a
Equipment purchased or n/a Staff is working with sign fabricator on first phase of signs
Property owned or property agreement in place n/a
Environmental approval and permits complete or n/a Project should be categorically exempt from CEQA
Specifications or construction documents complete n/a Staff is currently working on the plans and specifications for the first phase of sign installation.
IT Steering Committee review n/a
Environmental Review and Permits Required
Environmental Review n/a Project should be Categorically Exempt from CEQA
Building Permit n/a
Waterway Permits (Fish & Game, Water Quality, Army Corps) n/a
Railroad n/a
Other: Caltrans permits will be required for any signs placed in State right-of-way n/a
130
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-149
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
Operating Program Number and Title:
50500 Transportation Planning/Engineering
Project Phasing and Funding Sources
This Capital Project would essentially be an ongoing master account for the life of the Bicycle Transportation Plan.
This request assumes that all SOPC’s for maintaining and augmenting transportation staff resources are approved.
Initial Project Costs by Phase
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
Planing / Study $165,000 $165,000
Design $30,000 $30,000
Construction $205,000 $205,000
Total $0$400,000 $0 $0 $0 $0$400,000
Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: There could be ongoing replacement and maintenance costs
associated with replacement of damaged or vandalized signs.
Anticipated Facility Life Span: 10 years
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
General Fund $400,000 $400,000
Total $0$400,000 $0 $0 $0 $0$400,000
Project Funding by Source
Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives
Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project: Any number and combination of line items can be differed from this capital
request.
Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: Project as shown is the initial phase in implementation of the BTP
131
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-150
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
Project Team
Assignment Program Estimated Hours
Trans. Planning & Eng. Project Management CIP Engineering 3,000
CIP Construction Management CIP Engineering 100
CIP Administration CIP Engineering 50
CDD-Planning/Design Review Community Development 20
132
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-151
TRANSPORTATION
MONTEREY & OSOS TRAFFIC SIGNAL SAFETY UPGRADE
Project Description
Reconstructing the traffic signal at Monterey and Osos to address a recurring collision pattern and improve intersection safety will cost $250,000 in 2015-16 for
construction and construction management.
Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request
Council Goal / Measure G Priority - List: Sustain Essential Services & Fiscal Health, Improve Transportation & Enhance maintenance of City infrastructure
Need and Urgency
As part of the 2013 Annual Traffic Safety Report the City Council approved this project to be brought back as part of the 2015-17 financial plan as a high priority
capital request.
The intersection of Monterey and Osos streets has been identified as a top ranking collision location as part of the City Annual Traffic Safety Program. Over the
course of the last ten years this intersection has experienced approximately 50 traffic collisions primarily attributed to red light violations. The collisions over this
period of time have resulted in approximately three quarters of a million dollars in damages that represent an overall economic impact to the community (medical
expenses, emergency service costs, damages to property, and legal and insurance costs).
The traffic signal was originally constructed in 1962 well before contemporary design standards were established. At the time the signal was designed and
constructed the volume of pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular traffic and surrounding structures on the south side of the intersection were very different; an open
parking lot existed on the south west corner where the Court Street Building exists today and Nash Automotive Repair existed on the South East corner where
Mo’s BBQ exists today. As land uses and design standards have changed over the years a collision pattern developed which is attributed the number of visible
signal indications for each approach and overall intersection visibility. Staff is recommending that the signal be reconstructed to contemporary standards in order
to improve visibility and reduce the collision rate.
Similarly the City experienced and corrected this type of collision pattern thru the same means at other downtown intersections such as Marsh and Osos streets,
which was reconstructed in 2008, and Marsh and Santa Rosa streets, which was reconstructed in 2009.
Readiness to Build
Study complete or n/a
Equipment purchased or n/a
Property owned or property agreement in place n/a
Environmental approval and permits complete or n/a
Specifications or construction documents complete n/a
133
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-152
TRANSPORTATION
MONTEREY & OSOS TRAFFIC SIGNAL SAFETY UPGRADE
IT Steering Committee review n/a
Environmental Review and Permits Required
Environmental Review n/a
Building Permit n/a
Waterway Permits (Fish & Game, Water Quality, Army Corps) n/a
Railroad n/a
Other: (Enter the title and agency of any other needed permits) n/a
Operating Program Number and Title:
50500 Transportation
Project Phasing and Funding Sources
Continuing, ongoing or master account project - Specification No.
Initial Project Costs by Phase
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
Design $0
Construction $225,000 $225,000
Construction Management $0 $0
Total $0 $0 $0$225,000 $0 $0$225,000
Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information:
Because this project replaces aging equipment it is anticipated that the signal will require less maintenance and lower utility costs, and therefore have not impact
on ongoing costs.
Anticipated Facility Life Span: Improvements are expected to provide adequate capacity for at least 30 years.
134
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-153
TRANSPORTATION
MONTEREY & OSOS TRAFFIC SIGNAL SAFETY UPGRADE
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
General Fund $225,000 $225,000
$0
Total $0 $0 $0$225,000 $0 $0$225,000
Project Funding by Source
Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives
Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project:
Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing:
Project Team
Assignment Program Estimated Hours
Project Manager Transportation – Design 120
Environmental Clearance Community Development 1
Contract Management Transportation – Administration 40
Construction Management CIP Engineering – Construction 60
135
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-154
MAJOR CITY GOALS
HOUSING
OBJECTIVE
Implement the Housing Element, facilitating workforce, affordable, supportive and transitional housing options,
including support for needed infrastructure within the City’s fair share.
DISCUSSION
Proposed Scope of Work
The proposed work program includes three key objectives;
1) Continue to implement ongoing Housing Element programs,
2) Support affordable housing and homeless services provision, and
3) Implement new key Housing Element programs.
The proposed work program is based on the background information and analysis included in Appendix A and
will build on ongoing efforts to include monitoring of the Inclusionary Housing stock for compliance with
affordable housing program requirements; implementing the City’s BEGIN first-time homebuyer program;
inventorying City-owned property suitable for partnerships in housing projects; collaborating with Cal Poly on
their Master Plan update process to address the link between enrollment and the expansion of campus housing that
advances neighborhood wellness goals; updating the City’s affordable housing documents consistent with
industry standard best practices and state law; working with non-profit and for-profit development groups to
facilitate construction of affordable housing; leveraging the City’s affordable housing funds and proactively
looking for new ways to use these funds to increase affordable housing production; continuing support for the
development of a new homeless services center; apply for grants; and updating the City’s infrastructure financing
and impact fee program.
General Plan Housing and Land Use Elements
The proposed work program includes implementation of the following key Housing Element and related Land
Use Element programs:
HE 2.16 – Affordability. Evaluate and consider including a workforce level of affordability to increase
housing options for those making between 121-160% of the Area Median Income.
HE 6.12, 6.13 & 6.27 & LUE 4.0.28 – Housing Production. Continue to develop incentives to encourage
additional housing in the Downtown Core (C-D Zone), including alternatives to calculating residential
density, to encourage the development of smaller efficiency units.
HE 6.30 – Housing Production. Evaluate and consider adopting Subdivision and Zoning Regulation changes
to support small lot subdivision, ownership bungalow court development. Eliminate the one acre minimum lot
area for PD overlay zoning, and other incentives to conventional subdivision design.
HE 6.31 – Housing Production. Consider scaling development impact fees for residential development based
on size, number of bedrooms, and room counts.
HE 8.13 – Special Housing Needs. Continue to support, jointly with other agencies, housing programs, such
as Housing First and Rapid Rehousing, for the homeless.
HE 9.12 & LUE 3.5.7.1 – Sustainable Housing, Site, and Neighborhood Design. Consider incentivizing
dwelling units to a minimum size of 150 square feet, consistent with the California Building Code, by reduced
impact fees and property development standards.
HE 10.5 – Local Preference. Work with Cal Poly to address the link between enrollment and the expansion of
campus housing to reduce pressure on the City’s housing supply.
136
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-155
MAJOR CITY GOALS
HOUSING
Subsidized Housing
There are several affordable housing programs in the City that provide subsidized housing. Subsidized housing is
government sponsored economic assistance aimed towards alleviating housing costs and expenses for qualifying
households. Forms of subsidies can include direct housing subsidies, non-profit housing, public housing and rent
supplements. Subsidized housing accounts for approximately 5% of the City’s housing stock. Appendix A
includes charts that indicate the number of affordable housing units in the City by income level and program. The
proposed work program includes increased coordination and representation of City interest in discussions with the
County, non-profit organizations and developers to increase the production of subsidized housing.
Inclusionary Housing
The City Inclusionary Housing Program has generated over 227 deed restricted or otherwise secured affordable
dwellings, and approximately $8 Million in affordable housing funds. The Affordable Housing Fund (AHF) has
provided approximately $6 Million in direct assistance and leveraged other grant and tax credit financing to
various affordable housing projects throughout the City. Appendix A includes additional background information
and a graphic that indicates the City’s Inclusionary Housing units by affordability level and tenure.
The periodic monitoring of Inclusionary Housing is essential to an effective program. This effort is very time
consuming and includes the preparation of surveys, property research, outreach and meetings, and corrective
actions for those properties found to be out of compliance. In 2012, this effort took approximately six months to
complete. This is an important component as auditing ensures that affordable housing projects meet all of the
requirements and that the public investment of these projects is lasting and meeting its intended purpose. The
proposed work program includes monitoring of the Inclusionary Housing stock, ongoing support to implement the
Inclusionary Housing program and continued administration of the AHF to increase housing opportunities and
leverage other funds to create affordable housing.
Affordable Housing Funding Sources and Incentives
The City uses a combination of regulatory and financial incentives to facilitate affordable housing development.
These include development review fee waivers, grants and loans, density bonuses, permit streamlining, flexible
property development standards and other incentives. Appendix A includes a graphic that shows the income
ranges for each housing affordability category along with an overview of available funding sources and
incentives. The proposed work program includes the development of additional incentives for workforce housing,
small efficiency units and mixed-use development in the Downtown Core to support and encourage the
development of a variety of housing types and affordability levels.
Community Development Block Grant Program
Grant funding for the City’s Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program is awarded by the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and provides annual funding for eligible affordable
housing projects and support for the homeless shelter. Over the past five years the Program has provided over
$1,250,000 towards affordable housing and approximately $500,000 towards homeless services. The proposed
work program includes continuing to prioritize the use of CDBG funds for these purposes.
Grants-In-Aid Program
The City’s Grants-In -Aid (GIA) program provides financial support to non-profit organizations that promote the
economic and social well-being of the City’s citizens. In fiscal year 2014-2015 the City allocated $133,900 to the
GIA program. The total funding requested during the application process was $267,055, which amounts to
approximately 100% more than available funding. During the 2013-15 Financial Plan GIA funding levels
increased incrementally based on Consumer Price Index (CPI). Staff recommends continuing this practice in the
2015-17 Financial Plan to provide added resources to meet Council’s priorities.
137
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-156
MAJOR CITY GOALS
HOUSING
San Luis Obispo County Housing Trust Fund
The San Luis Obispo County Housing Trust Fund (HTF) is a Community Development Financial Institution
(CDFI) that provides financing, technical assistance and advocacy to increase the supply of affordable housing in
the City. Since 2005, the HTF has provided over $2.3 million for affordable housing projects in the City,
contributing to the creation or preservation of 112 affordable dwelling units. The Affordable Housing Fund
(AHF) has been used to help support the operating costs of the HTF over the past 11 years, for a total of
$300,000. The proposed work program includes continued use of the AHF to support the HTF’s operating
expenses to provide below-market financing and technical assistance to affordable housing developers.
Affordable Housing Advocacy
The City’s Housing Programs Manager (HPM) implements the Housing Element, which contains policies and
programs that support housing and service agencies whose mission it is to develop and provide housing for the
community. The HPM promotes collaborative efforts and opportunities to address housing needs of the
community and is a Board member of the Workforce Housing Coalition, San Luis Obispo County Housing Trust
Fund commission member and City liaison to the HSOC and Friends of Prado Day Center. The HPM provides
leadership in implementing the 10-Year Plan by working with CAPSLO and other housing and service providers
including considering ways to encourage transitional housing and “housing first” options. The City should
continue to expand partnerships with the County, other cities, non-profit entities and developers to provide
housing that meet the needs of the community as outlined in the Housing Element. The proposed work program
includes continuing and increasing these efforts.
Homeless Services Center
On January 20, 2015, Council approved a grant award of $250,000 to CAPSLO for the design and construction of
the new Homeless Services Center at 40 Prado Road. The grant specifies that no more than $50,000 may be used
for design and engineering expenses. The remaining $200,000 is to be used for direct construction costs and will
be available only after certification that CAPSLO has raised $250,000 from other sources. In addition, both the
City and County have awarded CAPSLO CDBG funds for design and engineering costs in the amount of
$125,000 and $100,000, respectively, for a total of $225,000.
CAPSLO is developing construction documents for City review with the goal to have a building permit by August
1, 2015. Construction is anticipated to begin in fall 2015. The proposed work program includes ongoing support
for the development of the HSC and development of a funding agreement with CAPSLO for facility operations.
Maxine Lewis Memorial Shelter
Maxine Lewis provides nightly year-round services for up to 50 people. CAPSLO manages the shelter and
partners with faith-based organizations to provide nightly overflow services for up to an additional 40 people on a
rotating monthly basis. In fiscal year 2013-14, daily overnight stays at the shelter were 29,440 and daily breakfast
and dinner meals served were 64,887. CAPSLO estimates these numbers will be similar for fiscal year 2015-16.
In fiscal year 2014-2015 the City provided a total of $120,767 ($74,767 from CDBG and $46,000 from General
Fund) and the County provided a total of $169,899 ($74,898 from CDBG, $44,307 from Emergency Shelter
Grants (ESG) and $50,694 from General Fund) in funding support to the shelter). CAPSLO has requested
$127,081 in funding support from the City in fiscal year 2015-16. CDBG funding for the shelter is anticipated to
be $69,916 for 2015-16 and $66,420 for 2016-17 (maximum allocation allowed). Due to on-going CDBG grant
funding reductions, staff recommends increasing General Fund support based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI)
for Maxine Lewis by $1,000 for 2015-16 and an additional $1,000 for 2016-17.
Countywide 50Now Program
In 2013, the County’s Homeless Services Oversight Council (HSOC) voted to make Housing First its top priority
for 2014, and voted to join the 100,000 Homes Campaign. This program uses the Housing First approach to assist
138
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-157
MAJOR CITY GOALS
HOUSING
the most vulnerable, chronically homeless persons who are at risk of dying on the streets. In response to HSOC’s
action, HASLO offered to make available 50 Housing Choice Vouchers to house the most vulnerable homeless
persons. On August 26, 2014, the County BOS awarded a $1.86 million contract over a three year period to
Transitions Mental Health Association (TMHA), in conjunction with partnership agencies, to implement the
50Now program.
TMHA has placed 17 individuals in housing as of December 31, 2014, with the majority being placed in the City.
All individuals are participating in independent living support skill groups as well as meeting with their assigned
case manager on a weekly basis. TMHA has exceeded the first milestone for success in the 50Now contract with
the County. The individuals in the program are being provided housing and supportive services, including food
resources, medical treatment, mental health support and assistance with entitlement benefits. The proposed work
program includes continued support, jointly with other agencies, for housing programs, such Housing First and
Rapid Rehousing, for the homeless.
Support for needed infrastructure within the City’s fair share (LUCE Implementation)
With completion of the LUCE and the focus on residential development and multi-modal circulation, the City is
well-positioned to consider its infrastructure needs, impact fees, and distribution of responsibility for
infrastructure to support residential development. The SOPC for LUCE Implementation includes a request for
resources to design and cost infrastructure, to complete traffic modeling and nexus study, to conduct an affordable
housing nexus study, and to integrate the resulting information through a public discussion process into updated
facilities financing and impact fee programs. This effort is at the core of the financial discussion regarding
housing objectives for workforce, affordable, supportive and transitional housing options.
WORK PROGRAM CONSTRAINTS AND LIMITATIONS
1. Declining federal and state funds for affordable housing and more competitive grants require the City to be
creative in its efforts to find funding sources.
2. Allocation of resources to address housing issues given other competing priorities.
3. The City does not own, manage or build affordable housing itself and therefore must rely on non-profits and
for-profit developers to come forward with proposals.
4. The City’s limited ability to control the decisions and funding of outside agencies and housing providers. The
provision of housing and implementation of the Housing Element requires a variety of City Departments,
outside agencies and housing providers to commit to, and accomplish, their related work programs.
5. Required land use entitlements for housing projects (use permit, architectural review, environmental review,
etc.).
6. Vast number and divergent objectives of stakeholders or decision makers including the County, housing
agencies, non-profit organizations, business and property owners, residents and neighborhood groups (see
“Stakeholders” below).
STAKEHOLDERS
1. Residents
2. Homeless individuals and families
3. Homeless advocates
4. Business/Property Owners
5. Chamber of Commerce
6. Economic Vitality Corporation (EVC)
7. Social service agencies
139
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-158
MAJOR CITY GOALS
HOUSING
8. Community Action Partnership of San Luis
Obispo County, Inc. (CAPSLO)
9. Workforce Housing Coalition (WHC)
10. San Luis Obispo County Housing Trust Fund
(HTF)
11. Affordable housing and market rate developers
12. Inclusionary Housing owners and renters
13. People’s Self Help Housing Corporation
14. Non-profit organizations
15. Habitat for Humanity
16. Transitions Mental Health Association
17. Women’s Shelter Program of SLO County
18. AIDS Support Network
19. Tri-Counties Housing Corporation
20. Housing Authority of San Luis Obispo
(HASLO)
21. Homeless Services Oversight Council (HSOC)
22. City Departments (Administration, City
Attorney, Finance, Fire, Police, Public Works,
Parks and Recreation)
23. County Departments
ACTION PLAN
Task Date
Objective: Implement the Housing Element
New
1. Monitor the City’s Inclusionary Housing stock for compliance with affordable housing
agreements and standards.
Ongoing
2. Continue to implement Housing Element programs and housing production goals.
3. Continue the City’s participation with the Workforce Housing Coalition, San Luis Obispo
County Housing Trust Fund and HSOC to identify, evaluate, and implement strategies to
increase the production of housing.
4. Increase coordination and representation of City interests in discussions with the County,
non-profit organizations and developers to increase the production of housing. City staff
will continue to coordinate and support the City’s advocacy efforts consistent with the
adopted legislative platform, Major City Goal, and Housing Element.
5. Continue, and increase where feasible, financial support for Housing Programs.
6. Continue to implement the Inclusionary Housing Program.
Objective: Facilitate workforce and affordable housing options
New
7. Implement the City’s BEGIN first-time homebuyer program by providing down payment
assistance loans to qualifying households.
8. Update the City’s long-term affordable housing agreement, deed and note templates
consistent with industry standard best practices.
6/17
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
6/16
6/16
140
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-159
MAJOR CITY GOALS
HOUSING
Task Date
9. Work with Cal Poly to address the link between enrollment and the expansion of campus
housing to reduce pressure on the City’s housing supply (HE Program 10.5).
10. Work with the Housing Authority to develop affordable housing in the Margarita Area
Specific Plan.
11. Inventory City owned properties suitable for housing and present a proposal to Council on
possible opportunities to pursue, if any.
12. Council consideration of City owned properties and direction as to whether to partner with
an affordable housing developer.
13. Develop a workforce level of affordability, including incentives, to increase housing
options for those making between 121-160% of the Area Median Income (HE Program
2.16).
14. Consider scaling development impact fees for residential development based on size,
number of bedrooms and room counts (HE Program 6.31).
15. Consider incentivizing dwelling units to a minimum size of 150 square feet, consistent
with the California Building Code, by reduced impact fees and property development
standards (HE Program 9.12 & LUCE 3.5.7.1).
16. Evaluate and consider adopting subdivision and ordinance changes to support small lot
subdivisions and ownership bungalow court development (HE Program 6.30).
17. Eliminate or adjust the one acre minimum lot area for PD overlay zoning (HE Program
6.30).
18. Continue to develop incentives to encourage additional housing in the Downtown Core (C-
D Zone), including alternatives to calculating residential density, to encourage the
development of smaller efficiency units (HE Programs 6.12, 6.13 & 6.27 & LUCE 4.0.28).
19. Support employer/employee and employer/developer financing programs and partnerships
to increase housing opportunities specifically targeted towards the local workforce.
Ongoing
20. Continue to prioritize the use of CDBG funds for affordable housing and homeless
services.
21. Continue to use the AHF to support the HTF’s operating expenses to provide below-
market financing and technical assistance to affordable housing developers.
22. Work with developers to include affordable housing units in projects and to complete
housing projects in process.
23. Continue to look for new opportunities to use Affordable Housing Fund and grant monies
Ongoing
Ongoing
6/16
10/16
6/17
12/16
6/17
6/16
6/16
6/17
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
141
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-160
MAJOR CITY GOALS
HOUSING
Task Date
to leverage other funds for affordable housing projects.
24. Continue to research and apply for Federal, State and private foundation housing loans and
grants.
Objective: Facilitate supportive and transitional housing options
New
25. Provide expedited building permit application review for the HSC.
26. Provide timely building inspections and ongoing support throughout the HSC’s
construction process.
27. Develop a funding agreement between the City and CAPSLO for the HSC that outlines
funding amounts, services and expectations for ongoing facility operations.
28. Continue to support, jointly with other agencies, housing programs, such Housing First and
Rapid Rehousing, for the homeless (HE Program 8.13).
Objective: Support for needed infrastructure within the City’s fair share (LUCE
Implementation)
New
29. Fund and use the Infrastructure Investment Fund to facilitate housing projects that are in
alignment with the General Plan and City goals.
30. Develop a Request for Proposals for the Infrastructure Fee Update work plan.
31. Select a consultant for the Infrastructure/Impact Fee Update
32. Complete the work effort for the Infrastructure Fee Update (costs, nexus, financing
options, right-sizing).
33. Conduct public outreach for Infrastructure Fee Update.
34. Advisory body and Council consideration of infrastructure options.
35. Council adoption of Public Facilities Fee Program.
Ongoing
8/15
Ongoing
3/17
Ongoing
Ongoing
2/16
3/16
4/16 - 7/16
8/16 – 9/16
10/16/-11/16
12/16
KEY WORK PROGRAM ASSUMPTIONS
1. The City will commit sufficient staff and resources to complete the work plan.
2. The City cannot solve all housing issues in the Community, due to resource constraints and inability to
control housing and financing market factors.
142
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-161
MAJOR CITY GOALS
HOUSING
RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT
The Community Development Department will take the lead on this Major City Goal with assistance from
Administration, City Attorney, Finance, Fire, Police, Public Works, Utilities and Parks and Recreation. The City’s
Administration, Public Works, Finance and Utilities Departments will assist with the infrastructure component of
the goal. The City Attorney’s office will assist with new ordinance language for consistency with State law and
review affordable housing loans, contracts and agreements. The Housing Programs Manager (HPM) is tasked
with Housing Element implementation and facilitating provision of affordable housing. The HPM represents the
City on the San Luis Obispo County Housing Trust Fund Commission, Workforce Housing Coalition and Friends
of Prado Day Center Board, while a City Council member serves on the Homeless Services Oversight Council
(HSOC) to implement the 10-Year Plan.
FINANCIAL AND STAFF RESOURCES REQUIRED TO ACHIEVE THE GOAL
Accomplishing this goal will require leadership commitment and ensuring appropriate staff and financial
resources are available to work on and fund these efforts. The City’s Housing Programs are fully subscribed and
there is no more capacity to take on efforts outlined in the work plan without adding 1.2 Full Time Equivalent
(FTE) staff in additional resources (see Staff Resource analysis in Appendix A). These additional resources
include one full time temporary planning technician, 10% of the Project Manager’s time for homeless services
and 10% of the Business Manager’s time for Housing Programs administration. These staff resources are pending
2015-17 Financial Plan Development Services staffing and Contract Services SOPC approval.
Cost Summary
2015-162016-172015-162016-17
Grants-In-Aid (Housing Bdgt)1,6003,000
AH Agreement Consultant Support 10,000
SLO County HTF 30,00030,000
Maxine Lewis Memorial Shelter (Housing Bdgt)1,0001,000
Development Srvcs Staffing & CDD Reorg (SOPC)*102,551103,899
LUCE Implementation and Fee Update (SOPC)*260,000
Zoning Regulations Update (LUCE SOPC phase 2)*150,000
Infrastructure Investment CIP 250,000
Total $405,151$287,899$250,000 $0
Operating Programs Capital Improvement Plan
Funding Sources
2015-162016-172015-162016-17
General Fund 330,151257,899
Affordable Housing Fund 75,00030,000
Infrastructure Investment Fund 250,000
Total $405,151$287,899$250,000 $0
Operating Programs Capital Improvement Plan
GENERAL FUND REVENUE POTENTIAL
This is not a revenue-generating work plan. However, a portion of the Housing Programs cost will continue to be
offset by CDBG and the AHF. Staff will continue to seek grant opportunities and partnerships to offset work plan
costs to the General Fund.
143
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-162
MAJOR CITY GOALS
HOUSING
OUTCOME—FINAL WORK PRODUCT
The Action Plan outlined above will increase the amount of housing and affordable units available to the
community enabling more citizens who work in the community to live in the community and meet General Plan
goals for residential development.
144
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-163
MAJOR CITY GOALS
HOUSING
APPENDIX A
This appendix includes background information and analysis that is the basis for the proposed Major City Goal
work program for Housing. It includes an overview of the City’s demographics, employment trends, household
income, housing inventory, housing affordability, Regional Housing Needs Allocation, residential development
capacity, subsidized housing, affordable housing funding sources and incentives, staff resources analysis,
Inclusionary Housing, Safe Parking and Prado Warming Station.
Demographics
To understand the City’s housing needs, a demographic
profile of the community is essential. As part of the Housing
Element, social, economic and housing characteristics were
analyzed to determine how these factors affect housing needs,
costs and availability. The City is the largest of the seven
cities in the County, as having approximately 17 percent of the
County residents. The graphics show the City’s population
growth from 2000-2013 and population projections over the
next 15 years.
The City’s largest population segment is in the 18-24 year
old category due to the proximity of the two colleges, Cal
Poly and Cuesta. This demographic affects our housing
market in profound ways, including housing supply and
demand, type and tenure, and affordability. However,
planned expansion of student and faculty housing at Cal
Poly will likely reduce pressure on the rental housing market and help stabilize rental costs in the near term. In
the longer term, President Armstrong’s announcement to increase Cal Poly enrollment by 4,000 to 5,000 students
in the future will require ongoing collaboration with Cal Poly to address impacts to the City through the Master
Plan process.
Other demographic changes include a smaller household size.
The County has also experienced this trend toward smaller
household sizes. What this means is that while additional
houses have been constructed, fewer people are living in each
housing unit leading to a smaller population growth and
greater housing demand than might otherwise be anticipated.
This trend is expected to continue, but eventually stabilize.
Employment Trends
The City’s work force in not immune from State and
National economic forces. Due to the recent economic
recession, the unemployment rate in the City reached 11
percent in 2010. Since this time, the City has seen a steady
decrease in annual unemployment rates with unemployment
falling to six percent in 2014.
The City’s economy is relatively stable due to the large
number of public sector employers, and private sector
employers that receive government funds, including the
County of San Luis Obispo, California Polytechnic State University, Cuesta College, California State Department
145
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-164
MAJOR CITY GOALS
HOUSING
of Forestry, California Department of Transportation, California Army National Guard, San Luis Coastal Unified
School District and the City of San Luis Obispo. Large private sector employers include P.G.&E., Cal Poly
Foundation, Sierra Vista Regional Medical Center and French Hospital.
Household Income
Household type, demographics, and employment trends all
impact household income. The City’s median household
income is approximately 75 percent of the County’s. The
City’s household median income is impacted by the large
student population and the larger share of the regions service
sector employees.
Housing Inventory
In 2013, the State Department of Finance estimated the City’s
housing stock at 20,697 units. The graphics below show the
City’s housing stock by type and bedroom count.
Type Bedroom
Housing Affordability
Standard metrics indicate that housing is affordable if a household can secure the appropriate size living quarters
for approximately 30 percent of the household income. Many people who live in the City overpay for housing,
and many who work here cannot
afford to live here. This issue has
become more problematic from 2002
to 2014 as the income required to buy
housing outpaced median family
income increases, effectively widening
the affordability gap. While this trend
began to slightly reverse or stabilize
from 2007 to 2010 with the economic
recession and subsequent drop in
housing prices, prices have since
stabilized and incrementally
rebounded.
Median rents have not changed
substantially despite market
conditions. As a result, the median income renter was spending 48 percent of their income on housing. The mid
146
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-165
MAJOR CITY GOALS
HOUSING
2000’s saw extremely low vacancy rates which impacted rental prices. Since 2005, the City has seen a steady
increase in vacancy rates with a rate of 5.5 percent in 2010. While vacancy rates are higher than in the recent
past, they are still in a range of what is generally considered a low vacancy rate. A balanced vacancy rate for an
area is typically around five percent. Vacancy rates lower than five percent favor landlords while rates higher than
five percent can signal landlords are having trouble finding tenants.
Regional Housing Needs Allocation
The Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) produced by the State Department of Housing and Community
Development (HCD) identifies the projected housing needs in the region as part of the periodic updating of local
housing elements of the General Plan. The San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) is responsible
for working with the state-mandated RHNA and distributing the allocation between the cities and the
unincorporated County areas. For the current housing element cycle, the City was assigned 1,144 units (28% of
4,090 for the County as a whole) for the current planning period. The City is not required to construct housing,
but to demonstrate that it can accommodate this requirement through a variety of programs as well as having
appropriate land use and zoning capacity.
The City currently has the land use and zoning capacity to accommodate this allocation without the need to
rezone property. The graphics below shows the RHNA distribution for each jurisdiction on the left, and the City’s
RHNA by income category on the right for new housing construction for January 1, 2014 through June 30, 2019.
Residential Development Capacity
As part of the Housing Element update process, the City documented its residential land capacity to show how our
assigned RHNA can be met. This analysis shows that under the 1994 General Plan in place, the City had
approximately 754 acres of vacant, underutilized or deteriorated property that could accommodate approximately
3,721 dwelling units. A substantial portion of this residential development capacity is located in the Margarita and
Orcutt Area Specific Plans. The Land Use Element adopted in December 2014 increases the capacity for new
dwelling units to a total of 4,904 units. The City’s residential capacity exceeds the 1,144 unit RHNA, and
therefore, a property rezoning program was not required with the Housing Element update.
Total = 1,144
147
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-166
MAJOR CITY GOALS
HOUSING
Subsidized Housing
Subsidized housing accounts for approximately 5% of the City’s housing stock. The charts below indicate the
number of affordable housing units in the City by income level on the left and program on the right.
Affordable Housing Funding Sources and Incentives
The graphic below shows the income ranges for each housing affordability category along with an overview of
available funding sources and incentives.
148
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-167
MAJOR CITY GOALS
HOUSING
Staff Resource Analysis
HOUSING PROGRAMS
FTE1
(Ongoing
Work Load)
FTE1
(MCG Work
Plan)2
FTE1
(FY 2015-17
Projected Work
Load)
Housing Programs Manager (1 FTE)
1 CDBG program administration 0.15 -0.02 0.13
2 Housing Element implementation 0.15 0.10 0.25
3 Inclusionary Housing program 0.15 -0.02 0.13
4 AHF management & award program 0.02 0.02
5 Grant research & applications 0.03 0.01 0.04
6 Homebuyer & rental services 0.10 0.10
7 Development Review project referrals 0.05 0.05
8 Homeless Services & 10-Year Plan 0.15 -0.10 0.05
9 WHC, HTF, HSOC & FPDC meetings & Support 0.05 0.05
10 Advisory Body & Council meetings & support 0.07 -0.02 0.05
11 Regional Coordination 0.02 0.02
12 Department training & meetings 0.05 0.05
13 HRC liaison 0.03 0.03
14 BEGIN First-Time Homebuyer program 0.01 0.01 0.02
15 Update of long-term affordability agreements 0.01 0.01
Subtotal 1.00 0.00 1.00
Full Time Temporary Planning Technician (1 FTE) 4
16 CDBG program administration 0.05 0.05
17 Inclusionary Housing program 0.20 0.20 0.40
18 Housing Element implementation 0.19 0.18 0.37
19 AHF management & award program 0.02 0.02
20 BEGIN First-Time Homebuyer program 0.01 0.03 0.04
21 Advisory Body & Council meetings & support 0.04 0.04
22 Grant research & applications 0.02 0.05 0.07
23 Homeless Services & 10-Year Plan 0.01 0.01
Subtotal 0.50 0.50 1.00
Project Manager (.1 FTE) 3,4
24 Homeless Services & 10-Year Plan 0.10 0.10
Subtotal 0.10 0.10
Administration Support (.1 FTE) 4,5
25 Inclusionary, CDBG, AHF, GIA, BEGIN Support 0.10 0.10
Subtotal 0.10 0.10
Total Subscribed 1.50 0.70 2.20
Actual Staff Resources 1 0.20 1.20
Temporary Staff 0.5 0.5 1.00
Available for New Projects 0.00 0.00 0.00
1 Full Time Equivalent (FTE) = 1,703 productive staff hours annually.
2 Includes additional and expanded work tasks in the MCG work plan (underlined items).
3 10% of Project Manager time allocated to homeless services and 10-Year Plan.
4 Pending 2015-17 Financial Plan SOPC approval.
5 10% of Business Manager time allocated to Housing Programs administration
149
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-168
MAJOR CITY GOALS
HOUSING
Inclusionary Housing
Adopted in 1999, the Inclusionary Housing Program implemented two core housing programs of the General Plan
– that of providing affordable housing for extremely-low, very-low, low and moderate income households, and
establishing a housing trust fund. The Program
requires that most new development projects help meet
affordable housing needs by: 1) building affordable
dwellings as part of a development project, 2)
dedicating real property, improved or not, for
development of affordable housing by the City’s
Housing Authority or by a non-profit housing provider,
3) paying an in-lieu fee which is used to fund
affordable housing throughout the City, or 4) Use a
combination of the above methods, to the approval of
the City Council.
To qualify as affordable, dwellings must have guarantees that they remain affordable for a specified time period.
The City has two different approaches to maintaining affordability: 1) the property owner agrees to maintain the
designated dwelling unit as affordable for at least 30 years; or 2) the property owner agrees to participate in a
shared equity purchase program.
Since adoption, the Program has generated over 227 enforceable-restricted affordable dwellings, and
approximately $8 Million in affordable housing funds. The Affordable Housing Fund (AHF) has provided
approximately $6 Million in direct assistance and leveraged other grant and tax credit financing to various
affordable housing projects throughout the City. The graphic above shows the City’s Inclusionary Housing units
by affordability level and tenure. The Land Use Element adopted in December 2014 doubled the potential for
creating by policy the number of enforceable restricted dwelling units.
Safe Parking
On March 20, 2012, the City Council authorized CAPSLO to operate a safe parking pilot program for up to five
vehicles on a portion of the property located at 43 Prado Road adjacent to the Prado Day Center. The program
provides homeless persons with vehicles a safe place to temporarily park with the goal of eventually transitioning
them into permanent housing. On October 22, 2014, the Planning Commission approved a use permit to allow for
a permanent program and increased the vehicle allowance from five spaces to seven.
The cost to operate the safe parking program in fiscal year 2013-14 was $24,118. Both the City and County
contributed $10,000 each to support operation of the program with CAPSLO absorbing the remaining costs. A
significant portion of this cost is associated with case management, which is a requirement of the program. The
Housing Programs operating budget includes ongoing funding support for the safe parking program in the amount
of $10,000 for 2015-16 and $10,000 for 2016-17.
Warming Station
In 2010, the City amended the use permit for the Prado Day Center to be used at night for a warming station
during the winter months. The warming station was active for the first time in the winter of 2010 and allowed
those living outdoors during inclement weather to stay at the center with access to sleeping bags, food and the
center’s amenities. The warming station is activated based on Red Cross’ forecast of weather emergencies. It
keeps the center open after regular hours and is operated with one Prado staff member and volunteers attending
the people seeking shelter. The warming station serves an average of 200 individuals monthly during the winter
months.
Total = 227
150
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-169
MAJOR CITY GOALS
HOUSING
Funding for the warming station is not included in the operations budget for the Prado Day Center. There is no
fixed budget to run the station and CAPSLO does not have funding to support this function. The warming station
was open 11 days in fiscal year 2013-14 at a cost of $9,613. This was the least number of days the warming
station was activated and resulted in the lowest annual operating cost. As a result, operating costs were fully
covered by the County ($7,500) and donations ($2,113). Although the City budgeted $5,000 towards the warming
station in fiscal year 2013-14, these funds were not utilized. The Housing Programs operating budget includes
ongoing funding support for the warming station in the amount of $5,000 for 2015-16 and $5,000 for 2016-17.
151
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-170
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Project Description
The Infrastructure Investment Capital Improvement Project (IICIP) provides resources for important infrastructure investments, consistent with the City’s
Infrastructure Investment Fund Policy. The IICIP, together with the policy, provides a framework to allow the City Council and the community to evaluate any
proposed infrastructure investment in relation to current Major City Goals, the economic environment, and various other factors at the time of the decision. This
concept is similar to the current Open Space Acquisition Capital Improvement Project and fund, which provide the City with the resources needed to expand the
greenbelt by being prepared when opportunities to acquire new open space arise. This project was reviewed and approved by Council on March 17, 2015.
Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request
Council Goal / Measure G Priority - List: This project is an ongoing implementation of the 2013-15 Economic Development Major City Goal, the 2015-17
Housing Major City Goal, and the Economic Development Strategic Plan strategy for removing barriers to job creation. Infrastructure was also identified on the
Measure G ballot as a potential use of local sales tax revenue.
Need and Urgency
In early 2014, the City Council concluded a series of study sessions regarding infrastructure financing alternatives. These study sessions were part of the
implementation of the Economic Development Strategic Plan (EDSP), which identified the lack of infrastructure in certain areas of the City as a barrier to the
creation of new head-of-household jobs. Following the study sessions, Council directed staff to develop prioritized list of infrastructure projects for the City to
invest in from an Economic Development and Quality of Life perspective.
City staff carried out a portion of this work effort internally, and one of the outcomes was awareness that many factors complicate the usefulness and effectiveness
of a single list of priority projects. These factors include timing, the state of the larger economy, overall City budget goals, and project benefits (e.g. job vs.
housing vs. traffic congestion relief, etc.). As a result, staff proposed creating an Infrastructure Investment Capital Fund (IICF) and Infrastructure Investment
Capital Improvement Project (IICIP) that would regulate expenditures from the IICF. The ability to be prepared to make investments in infrastructure at the
appropriate time to help the community realize projects with significant public benefits is considered a critical success factor for accomplishing the EDSP goals.
Readiness to Build
Study complete or n/a
Equipment purchased or n/a
Property owned or property agreement in place n/a
Environmental approval and permits complete or n/a
Specifications or construction documents complete n/a
IT Steering Committee review n/a
152
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-171
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Environmental Review and Permits Required
Environmental Review n/a
Building Permit n/a
Waterway Permits (Fish & Game, Water Quality, Army Corps) n/a
Railroad n/a
Other: (Enter the title and agency of any other needed permits) n/a
Operating Program Number and Title:
11200 Economic Development
Project Phasing and Funding Sources: Not applicable
Continuing, ongoing or master account project - Specification No.
Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: Ongoing costs of managing the program will be
covered by the Economic Development Program. Specific projects will be evaluated by the Council based on a variety of criteria, including; Head of Household
Job Creation, Housing Creation, Circulation/Connectivity Improvements and Net General Fund impact, and other public benefits realized through the project.
Anticipated Facility Life Span: Dependent on the specific project.
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
General Fund $60,000$250,000 $0$250,000 $0 $0$560,000
Grant TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD $0
Developer Contribution TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD $0
Total$60,000$250,000 $0$250,000 $0 $0$560,000
Project Funding by Source
Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives
Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project: Amount of funding is based on public input and Council direction.
Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: Funding could be restructured from year to year as resources are available.
Project Team: Project team needs would be determined on a project by project basis and costs would be covered by the proposed project applicant, if applicable.
153
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-172
OTHER IMPORTANT COUNCIL OBJECTIVES
NEIGHBORHOOD WELLNESS
OBJECTIVE
Improve neighborhood wellness, work with residents, Cuesta, and Cal Poly; increase public safety, code
compliance, and collaborative solutions.
OUTCOME—FINAL WORK PRODUCT
Improve quality of life for residents in the neighborhoods through infrastructure improvements, code enforcement
and collaboration.
ACTION PLAN
Work with residents and educational institutions and students
The FY 2013-15 Major City Goal identified an effort to enlist students to “adopt a neighborhood.” This effort
would task students living in residential neighborhoods to help maintain neighborhood wellness by regularly
monitoring the neighborhood for trash (and picking it up)actively seeking out residents to establish relationships
and build mutual respect and provide positive contributions to neighborhood wellness. The bi-monthly
neighborhood wellness meeting takes place to engage residents and share information and content of those
meetings will be carefully selected to encourage dialogue and problem identification and solving.
The Police and Fire Departments participate in orientation and ongoing programs (such as the annual Housing
Fair) at Cal Poly to increase awareness about neighborhood wellness, healthy decision making regarding drugs
and alcohol, reducing fire hazards including our zero-tolerance for couch burning, and reducing overcrowding by
talking with students and parents about safe living and relevant fire code issues.
Public safety
Monthly meetings between SLO Fire and the University Police Department to discuss public safety impacts of
upcoming on-campus events will continue and SLOPD will continue to support the efforts of the Cal Poly and
Cuesta Dean of Students Offices who are addressing off-campus behaviors through their respective Codes of
Conduct. A “Communication Committee” as a recommendation of the Neighborhood Wellness/Community
Civility Effort will be established to enable SLOPD and community and university/community college partners to
maximize outreach efforts and make neighborhood wellness messaging consistent. Neighborhood Officer and
code enforcement “Walk and Talks” will take place consistently in the neighborhoods to educate and encourage
voluntary compliance. The Police Department will also seek out social media monitoring software to assist with
the detection of information on potential large social gatherings for prevention purposes. Neighborhood Outreach
shall do focused promotion of the SLO Solutions program to inform residents of the existing resource and
encourage those experiencing challenges to seek conflict resolution coaching or mediation. This will be done
using existing resources.
Collaborative Solutions
Utilize Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort recommendations to address neighborhood challenges
as well as further develop existing partnerships with Cal Poly, Cuesta and neighborhood groups to strengthen
neighborhoods. Recommendations include the SLOPD/UPD MOU, Communication Committee creation, and
utilizing the Student Community Liaison Committee to become the coordinating body tasked with
implementation of approved recommendations.
154
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-173
OTHER IMPORTANT COUNCIL OBJECTIVES
NEIGHBORHOOD WELLNESS
This task will also explore the neighborhood match grant program to provide small grants to volunteers who wish
to undertake a neighborhood project. This task will also include the implementation of key initiatives in
collaboration with Cuesta and Cal Poly that are recommended by the Neighborhood Wellness/Community
Civility Effort.
Code Compliance
Neighborhood wellness is a continuing Council priority and the Community Development Department is the lead
for ensuring property code compliance is accomplished. This includes existing efforts to achieve pro-active
neighborhood wellness and zoning code compliance as well as new efforts to implement a Rental Housing
Inspection Program.
Administrative Order Process
Review current administrative order process, confirm that it complies with the current state of the law governing
such processes, and consider an implementation process and training.
Maintenance
Regular infrastructure maintenance for street paving, sidewalks, and drainage facilities will continue in
neighborhoods. Street surfacing work for neighborhoods will occur in the second year of the Capital Improvement
Plan, with Arterial repairs occurring during the first year.
Task Date
1. Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort Recommendations Ongoing
2. Neighborhood Match Grant Program initiation October 2015
3. Establish Civility Communication Committee
4. Begin Implementation of key measures from Community Civility Committee
Dec 2015
July 2015
5. “Adopt a Block Pilot” Program – SCLC
6. Consider Administrative Order process
7. Public Safety MOU – Cal Poly University Police and SLOPD
8. Code Compliance Performance Measures
March 2016
December 2015
September 2015
Ongoing
9. Hire staff to implement rental housing inspection (contingent on program adoption) Feb 2016
10. Begin inspections - prioritize properties with code enforcement violations Spring 2016
11. On-going inspections and follow up for rental housing violations Ongoing after April
2016
12. Neighborhood pro-active enforcement Ongoing
13. Continue Sidewalk Repairs Ongoing
14. Continue Stormdrain Cleaning, Silt Removal & Stormdrain Replacements Ongoing
15. Complete Neighborhood Street Repair & Sealing October 2016
155
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-174
OTHER IMPORTANT COUNCIL OBJECTIVES
NEIGHBORHOOD WELLNESS
RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT
The Police Department will be the lead on this objective with close assistance from the Community Development
Department. Support will also be given from the City Attorney, Administration, Public Works, Fire, and Utilities.
FINANCIAL AND STAFF RESOURCES REQUIRED TO ACHIEVE THE OBJECTIVE
Cost Summary
2015-16 2016-17 2015-162016-17
Rental Housing Inspection SOPC**251,164449,312
Neighborhood Match program SOPC 5,00010,000
Sidewalk Repair CIP*100,000100,000
Stormdrain Replacements CIP 578,000595,600
Silt Removal CIP 275,000150,000
Neighborhood Street Repairs CIP*1,775,600
$256,164$459,312$953,000$2,621,200
*A portion of this CIP supports the Neighborhood Wellness Other Important Objective work program
**Contingent on program adoption
Funding Sources
2015-162016-172015-162016-17
General Fund (Year 1 costs)110,01410,000
General Fund (Year 2 costs designated reserve)169,238
Program revenue 146,150280,074
Total $425,402$290,074 $0 $0
Operating Programs Capital Improvement Plan
156
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-175
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT)
RENTAL HOUSING INSPECTION PROGRAM
SUMMARY OF CHANGE: Per City Council direction, implement a Rental Housing Inspection Program from
for single family and duplex rentals in the City. Implementation contingent on program adoption by the City
Council.
FISCAL IMPACT: On-going costs of $251,164 in 2015-16 and $449,312 in 2016-17. These costs will
be offset by approximately $146,150 in revenue in 2015-16 and $280,074 in 2016-17. The development
of an effective Rental Housing Inspection Program for the City will require a substantial investment of
time and resources. Given the City’s budgetary limitations and need for fiscal prudency, the program
will be designed to be fee supported and minimize any significant financial impacts on the General
Fund. One time and ongoing costs will be partially offset by annual revenue during the first two years
and fully offset in future years when full program participation is received.
SERVICE LEVEL IMPACT: This SOPC is for the necessary resources to fund the proposed Rental
Housing Inspection Program as a part of the Neighborhood Wellness Major City Goal as specified by
the City Council on December 16, 2014. These resources will allow the City to create a program to
inspect all single family and duplex rental units every three years including a self-certification program
for rentals that pass an initial inspection.
KEY OBJECTIVES
This change will accomplish implementation of an action item from the 2013-15 Neighborhood Wellness Major
City Goal to establish a Rental Housing Inspection Program (RHIP) in the City. A RHIP is intended to help
stabilize and preserve neighborhoods by addressing blight and substandard conditions related to rentals as the
City’s percentage of rental properties increases. The ultimate goals of such a program would be the elimination of
unsafe rental housing conditions, and the preservation and improvement of safe, livable, and attractive
neighborhoods.
1. Help stabilize and preserve neighborhoods
A significant portion of the housing units in the City of San Luis Obispo are rentals. Based on the 2010 Census,
the City had 20,553 dwelling units and 61.8%, or approximately 12,700 of them were rentals. In comparison, the
statewide rental rate is about 43%. There are estimated to be 8,541 multifamily rental units and 4,059 single-
family and/or duplex rental units. Given the current growth rate of rental units (.4% per year), the percentage of
the housing stock that could be rentals in 2015 is 63-64%. In addition, approximately 79% of code enforcement
violations identified in residential zones in 2013 are attributable to rental units. Of particular note, rental units in
R1 and R2 zoning districts have a far greater violation occurrence rate than in multifamily zones (i.e. 139 cases
per thousand units as compared to 20 cases per thousand units).
2. Addressing blight and substandard conditions related to rentals
A RHIP would allow inspectors to enter a property to enforce the minimum standards for the maintenance of
residential occupancies as defined by State Housing Law and derived from the Uniform Housing Code. The
program would also enforce the property maintenance standards contained in SLOMC 17.17.
Staff has had numerous discussions with students and nonstudent tenants who relate that they are reluctant to
report code violations because of concerns of retaliation and difficulty in finding alternate housing. Some students
have reported living in housing that is in significant disrepair, yet are unwilling to file a complaint. It is also not
157
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-176
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT)
RENTAL HOUSING INSPECTION PROGRAM
uncommon to receive complaints from parents regarding the substandard nature of their student’s rental units. In
addition, neighborhood associations have told staff that they believe many violations are not reported by tenants,
and that illegal rental conversions are much more common than reported as was evidenced with the recent case of
the Slack and Grand homes purchased by Cal Poly.
EXISTING SITUATION
As a part of the 2013-15 Neighborhood Wellness Major City Goal work plan, the City Council directed staff to
develop a RHIP to address concerns related to rental units in the City. The current percentage of the housing stock
that could be rentals is 63-64% compared to a statewide average of 43%. In addition, approximately 79% of code
enforcement violations identified in residential zones in 2013 are attributable to rental units.
GOAL AND POLICY CRITERIA
Neighborhood Wellness has been consistently identified as a top community priority through the previous and
current financial planning process. As evidenced from similar communities, a RHIP is one of the key elements to
enhancing neighborhood wellness in a community with a significant number of rental units. As a part of the 2013-
2015 Neighborhood Wellness Major City Goal, the City Council held a study session on RHIP options in
December 2014. At that time, the City Council directed staff to draft an ordinance to create a program for single-
family and duplex rental units. Staff will be returning to the City Council with an ordinance on May 5, 2015.
STAKEHOLDERS
Over the past year, staff has been engaged in a public outreach effort with various stakeholders including
business, neighborhood and student groups and individuals to receive input and concerns about a RHIP.
Presentations were made to the San Luis Obispo Association of Realtors (SLOAOR), Chamber of Commerce,
Property Managers Association, Residents for Quality Neighborhoods, Monterey Heights Neighborhood
Association, Alta Vista Neighborhood Association, the Student-Community Liaison Committee, the
Neighborhood Civility Working Group, Cal Poly Transitional Housing Program Committee, and Cal Poly
Associated Students (ASI). Staff is currently following up with these groups on the key elements of the proposed
RHIP.
IMPLEMENTATION
Task Date
1. Rental Housing Inspection Program Ordinance Public Hearing May 5, 2015
2. Hire Code Enforcement Supervisor and Administrative Assistant July 2015
3. Develop inspector job descriptions, inspection checklist, standard operating procedures,
notification and billing system.
Aug.-Dec.
2015
4. Begin notification and billing process
5. Hire 1st inspector
6. Begin inspections
7. Hire 2nd inspector
Jan. 2016
Feb. 2016
Apr. 2016
July 2016
PROGRAM MANAGER AND TEAM SUPPORT
Program Manager: Chief Building Official
158
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-177
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT)
RENTAL HOUSING INSPECTION PROGRAM
Project Team: Chief Building Official, Community Development Director, Building and Safety Supervisor,
Code Enforcement Supervisor
The City Attorney, and Finance & Information Technology, Fire and Police Departments concur with the
recommended actions and limited ongoing coordination will be required of these departments during
implementation.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Continue the Status Quo. Maintain status quo by continuing mandated complaint-based code enforcement
for housing violations and the Fire Department’s Multi-family Inspection Program unchanged. This would not
be consistent with City Council direction.
2. Implementation in a Different Way. As a part of the implementation process, staff will explore options for
contracting parts of the RHIP including billing and notification, but the inspections are intended to be
performed by City staff.
OPERATING PROGRAM
1. Community Development Department – Building Division
COST SUMMARY
Line Item Description Account No.2015-162016-17
Staffing 212,414 398,112
1 supervisor, 1 admin and .5 inspector (2015-16)
1 supervisor, 1 admin, 2 inspectors (2016-17)40700212,414 398,112
Contract Services 0 0
Will be explored as a part of implementation
40700
Other Operating Expenditures 38,750 51,200
Vehicle maintenance, fuel, training, supplies,
contingency, etc.
40700 38,750 51,200
Minor Capital 0 0
169,750 (2015-16)
34,000 (2016-17)
Address file scanning, office construction, furniture,
computer equipment, vehicles
(submitted separate CIP request)
Total Operating Costs 251,164 449,312
Offsetting Costs Savings or Revenues
30% cost recovery (2015-16)
60% cost recovery (2016-17)(146,150)(280,074)
Net Operating Costs 105,014 169,238
159
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-178
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT)
NEIGHBORHOOD MATCH GRANTS
SUMMARY OF CHANGE: Implementing Neighborhood Match Grants as one of the tools to address
Neighborhood Wellness will cost approximately $5,000 in FY 2015-16 and $10,000 in FY 2016-17 for grant
funds.
FISCAL IMPACT: On-going costs of $5,000 in FY 2015-16 and $10,000 in FY 2016-17.
SERVICE LEVEL IMPACT: The objective of this request is to provide grant funds to neighborhood-sponsored
projects. The intended outcome of this program is to support a pilot grant program that will provide city
resources to “match” neighborhood resouces (which may include volunteer labor or professional services,
donations, or other resources) to accomplish smaller neighborhood wellness, enhancement or beautification
projects. This effort was identified as part of the FY 2013-15 Neighborhood Wellness Major City Goal.
KEY OBJECTIVES
1. Implements neighborhood wellness Major City Goal from the FY 2013-15 Financial Plan.
2. Enhances a sense of place within neighborhoods supporting Land Use Element policy 2.11.
3. Implements Land Use Element policy 2.12 Neighborhood Wellness Action Plans to engage the neighborhood
and provide support to accomplish neighborhood goals and address neighborhood needs.
EXISTING SITUATION: FACTORS DRIVING THE NEED FOR CHANGE
Support of neighborhood led initiatives is one of five distinct work programs designated in the FY 2013-2015
Neighborhood Wellness Major City Goal. A task toward implementation of neighborhood initiatives included
obtaining Council direction for guidelines and process for “Neighborhood Match” grants for neighborhood
improvement projects. In consideration of the Land Use and Circulation Element Update effort, the work
program timing was adjusted as part of the last Major City Goal status report to seek Council direction in March
of 2015. The updated LUCE policies and programs are now available to inform development of the neighborhood
match grant program and City staff has received initial Council direction regarding grant program considerations.
Staff will now conduct more extensive outreach with neighborhood groups to help address program development
considerations such as goals of the program, eligibility criteria, amount of awards and types of projects supported,
ranking, and review process.
GOAL AND POLICY CRITERIA
This request meets all of the SOPC criteria as follows:
1. Supports Other Important Objective: This request supports the Neighborhood Wellness Other Important
Objective identified by the City Council for FY 2015-17. It implements a part of the collaborative solutions
effort to engage residents in efforts that will strengthen neighborhood cohesion and accomplish neighborhood
objectives.
2. Needed to address health, safety or legal concern: Providing neighborhood match grants has the potential to
increase neighborhood health. While program guidelines are still under development, there is a potential that
projects to address safety concerns could be funded under the match grant program.
3. Needed to provide a priority level of service: Providing funds to match neighborhood volunteer hours or
donations will address priorities defined by the neighborhood itself.
160
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-179
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT)
NEIGHBORHOOD MATCH GRANTS
4. Supports revenue generation and/or cost savings: Required match of volunteer hours, or donations of
professional services or materials leverage city funds and will ultimately result in cost savings to accomplish
the neighborhood project.
5. Reallocation of Existing Resources: The program is still under development and procedures and advisory
body review have yet to be identified, however, the intent is to work within existing advisory body resources
for review of grant applications.
STAKEHOLDERS
Implementation of the Neighborhood Match Grant will engage neighborhood groups and their residents (i.e.
Residents for Quality Neighborhoods; Alta Vista, Monterey Heights, Neighbors North of Foothill, San Luis
Drive, Laguna, Old Town, College Highlands, Anhold Mt. Pleasant neighborhood groups; Home Owners’
Associations; and residents within Parking Districts).
IMPLEMENTATION
Implementation is envisioned as follows:
Task Date
1. Study Session with City Council March 2015
2. Public outreach – neighborhood group interviews and meetings April – June 2015
3. Program guideline recommendations for Council August 2015
4. Application period for first year grants Oct - Dec 2015
5. Advisory Body Review and recommendation Jan-Feb 2016
6. Award of grants and work begins March 2016
PROGRAM MANAGER AND TEAM SUPPORT
Program Manager:
The manager for the Neighborhood Match Grant program would be identified as either the Tourism Manager or
Long Range Planning staff, dependent upon the advisory body that is identified as the appropriate review body for
the match grant program.
Project Team:
The project team will include staff from Public Works, Utilities, Fire, Community Development (including
Building staff), and Parks and Recreation, depending on the type of project proposed.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Continue the Status Quo. There is no current neighborhood match grant program, therefore continuing the
status quo would mean that staff would not implement this effort identified as part of the FY 2013-15
Financial Plan Major City Goal of Neighborhood Wellness. Neighborhoods would not have this identified
source of funding to assist them in achieving neighborhood objectives.
161
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-180
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT)
NEIGHBORHOOD MATCH GRANTS
2. Defer or Re-Phase the Request. The program could be phased to initiate in FY the 2016-17 fiscal year
instead of FY 2015-16. Staff anticipates that delaying implementation until FY 2016-17 will avoid the $5,000
cost associated earlier implementation, however it will not provide significant savings to the City’s overall
budget and will defer implementation of an identified Major City Goal work effort.
3. Change the Scope of Request. The request could be re-scoped however the funding requested is already
quite small and the effort is intended to start off as a pilot program. The funding could be identified for year
2015-16 only and Council could request staff to return and report on the success of the program prior to
authorizing funding for the subsequent year. This is not recommended. Staff anticipates the minor amount of
funding identified is necessary for program initiation.
4. Implementation in a Different Way. The Council could assign a portion of the Community
Event/Beautification grants-in-aid budget to this effort. This would reduce the amount of grant funds
available to support community events or beautification projects. Given the small amount of funding
available for the grants-in-aid awards, this alternative is not recommended.
5. Existing Program Evaluation. The neighborhood match grant program is a new effort. Staff is currently
working to develop program guidelines after consulting with neighborhood groups and receiving more input.
OPERATING PROGRAM
Long Range Planning
COST SUMMARY
The neighborhood match grant program will cost approximately $15,000 in Financial Plan 2015-17.
Line Item Description Account No.2015-16 2016-17
Staffing 0 0
Other 5,000 10,000
Grant funds for neighborhood match projects 40400-7287 5,000 10,000
Total Operating Costs 5,000 10,000
Net Operating Costs 5,000 10,000
162
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-181
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
SILT REMOVAL
Project Description
Removing areas of silt build-up within the City’s open channel drainage system will cost $275,000 in 2015-16 for construction, $50,000 in 2016-17 for permitting,
and $100,000 in 2016-17 for design, and $405,000 in 2018-19 for construction.
Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request
Council Goal / Measure G Priority - List: Neighborhood Wellness
Need and Urgency
Silt carried by storm water settles at points in the creek where the storm water’s velocity decreases. This reduction in velocity allows solids suspended in the water
to settle out. As these deposits build up, the capacity of the creek decreases and risk of flooding of the surrounding areas increases. The regular removal of built
up silt increases channel capacity and removes the conditions conducive for channel vegetation to grow and block flow.
Readiness to Build
Study complete or n/a
Equipment purchased or n/a
Property owned or property agreement in place n/a
Environmental approval and permits complete or n/a – Varies by project
Specifications or construction documents complete n/a
IT Steering Committee review n/a
Environmental Review and Permits Required
Environmental Review n/a
Building Permit n/a
Waterway Permits (Fish & Wildlife, Water Quality, Army Corps) n/a
Railroad n/a
Other: Grading Permit n/a
Operating Program Number and Title:
50320 Flood Control
163
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-182
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
SILT REMOVAL
Project Phasing and Funding Sources
Master account project - Specification No. 90581 Silt Removal.
Initial Project Costs by Phase
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
Environmental / Permit $50,000 $50,000
Design $100,000 $100,000
Construction $275,000 $405,000 $680,000
Total $0$275,000$150,000 $0$405,000 $0$830,000
Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs: No additional operating costs are anticipated from this work.
The potential need for emergency response during storm events should be reduced.
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
Zone 9 $275,000$150,000 $405,000 $830,000
Total $0$275,000$150,000 $0$405,000 $0$830,000
Project Funding by Source
Staff will request Zone 9 funds for these projects but does not currently have an allocation for all project work proposed. If funding is not allocated for this work,
staff will put forward a request for General Fund support at a future date.
Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives
Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project: If only one site was completed the cost would be between $5,000 and $100,000
for removal depending upon the project site. Permitting costs will be incurred with each individual project if the proposed year of construction changed from that
authorized under the permit.
Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: Project is submitted as a phased project using a cycle time representative of the normal period for silt
to build up.
Project Team
Assignment Program Estimated Hours per Project
Project Management CIP Engineering - Design 400 hours
Environmental Community Development 40 hours
164
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-183
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
SILT REMOVAL
Assignment Program Estimated Hours per Project
Technical Studies Natural Resources 200 hours
Contract Administration CIP Engineering - Administration 80 hours
Construction Management CIP Engineering - Construction 200 hours
Site List – For multi-year projects
Location Estimated Year
of Construction
San Luis Obispo Creek at Marsh Street Bridge / 101 freeway 2015 & 2018
San Luis Obispo Creek Bypass Channel - Near Water Reclamation Facility
northwest side of creek
2015 & 2018
San Luis Obispo Creek Bypass Channel - East side of Prefumo Creek
confluence
2018
San Luis Obispo Creek at LOVR - Bridge Barrel Sediment Removal 2018
Prefumo Creek downstream of Madonna Road 2015 & 2018
Prefumo Creek Arm - Between LOVR and Laguna Lake 2015 & 2018
Tank Farm Road at Hollyhock Culvert 2015 & 2018
San Luis Obispo Creek – downstream from LOVR 2015
Sydney Creek at Railroad Safety Trail - East side of bike path 2015 & 2018
Culvert – Larkspur at Goldenrod 2015 & 2018
Murray Culverts at Broad – Old Garden Creek 2018
Prefumo Creek 700 feet downstream of South Madonna Road 2018
165
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-184
OTHER IMPORTANT COUNCIL OBJECTIVES
LAGUNA LAKE RESTORATION
OBJECTIVE
Initiate implementation of the Laguna Lake Natural Reserve Conservation Plan.
BACKGROUND
The 344-acre Laguna Lake Natural Reserve is a place of exceptional beauty, blending a rich ecosystem with
spectacular views and recreational opportunities. The City has adopted the Laguna Lake Natural Reserve
Conservation Plan (“LLNRCP”) to guide future management of the Reserve by offering a framework for
conservation, restoration, recovery, and scenic recreational use.
Laguna Lake is primarily a naturally occurring lake, although it has also been substantially altered and
manipulated resulting in sedimentation rates into the lake that have been significant over time. Recent
bathymetric surveys indicate dramatic changes in lake depth and morphology resulting in decreased water quality
and aquatic habitat functions, as well as diminished aesthetic and recreational values associated with the lake.
Accordingly, one of the primary recommendations of the LLNRCP is to implement dredging and sediment
management strategies: “The option of dredging portions of the lake is also accommodated by the framework laid
out in this plan, when coupled with erosion and sedimentation strategies… in order to make such a project both
more feasible from a regulatory standpoint and more sustainable over the long-term” (p. 5).
OUTCOME—FINAL WORK PRODUCT
The work products for the Laguna Lake Restoration project during the 2015-17 Financial Plan period will address
the key beginning steps contemplated by the LLNRCP. The Implementation section of the LLNRCP (p. 34)
describes four main project components for years 1-3. An additional task pursuant to the Fiscal Statement section
of the LLNRCP (p.34-35) is a detailed evaluation, feasibility tests, and the initiation of a Community Facilities
District or similar financing mechanism(s).
Given that the 2015-17 Financial Plan period is two years and that the initial implementation phase of the
LLNRCP is three years, it is expected that the first two components (trail signs and accessible paths) will be
completed within the Financial Plan period, while also beginning to set aside funding for project implementation.
The second two components (sediment basins and begin dredging) will have all of the necessary conditions
precedent to beginning the physical stages of these projects completed so that they are “shovel ready” at the
beginning of year three during the 2017-19 Financial Plan period.
The preliminary tasks to be completed during the upcoming two-year period include updated soil samples and
water quality studies, project design and engineering, project specifications, disposal site land tenure, regulatory
agency permits, and an updated project-specific environmental document. Following the 2015-17 Financial Plan
period, a second phase that initiates the physical dredging project and installation of sediment basins, as well as an
additional, final phase, are anticipated in subsequent CIP cycles. These projects will complete the Laguna Lake
Restoration project over a total of 10 years.
LLNRCP Implementation Components (3 years) Final Work Product at End of Financial Plan (2 years)
1. Install new, updated signage at trailheads
and along trails
Completed
2. Install accessible paths Completed
3. Install sediment basins “Shovel Ready”
4. Begin a dredging project “Shovel Ready”
5. Initiate financing mechanism(s) “Shovel Ready”
166
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-185
OTHER IMPORTANT COUNCIL OBJECTIVES
LAGUNA LAKE RESTORATION
ACTION PLAN
Install new, updated signage at trailheads and along trails Date
1. Complete site-specific design
2. Complete requisition signs and attendant materials
3. Installation of updated signs at trailheads and along trails
June 2016
Sept 2016
Dec 2016
Install accessible paths Date
1. Complete Site-specific design and project specifications
2. Issue Request for Proposals (RFP) and Contractor selection
3. Installation of accessible path along lake front
Dec 2016
Feb 2017
June 2017
Install sediment basins Date
1. Issue Request for Proposals (RFP) for Design / Engineering consultant
2. Complete Site-specific designs and project specifications
3. Complete Project permitting and environmental document
July 2015
March 2016
June 2017
167
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-186
OTHER IMPORTANT COUNCIL OBJECTIVES
LAGUNA LAKE RESTORATION
Begin a dredging project Date
1. Issue Request for Proposals (RFP) for Design / Engineering consultant
2. Site-specific designs and project specifications completed
3. Soil samples and water quality tests
4. Evaluate disposal site options and secure land tenure agreements, if necessary
5. Final project design selection with City Council
6. Project permitting and environmental document completed
July 2015
March 2016
March 2016
May 2016
June 2016
June 2017
Evaluate Project Financing Options and Mechanisms Date
1. Issue Request for Proposals (RFP) for economic / municipal finance and public opinion research
consultant(s)
2. Evaluate financing options and feasibility
3. Conduct study session with City Council on financing options and feasibility
4. Conduct focused public workshops and community outreach
5. Final selection of preferred financing option(s) by City Council and resolution of intention as
appropriate and legally required.
6. Public Hearing with City Council to create financing mechanism and adopt resolution of formation as
appropriate and legally required.
7. Conduct registered voter election consolidated with general election.
8. If step 7 is successful, proceed with any and all action necessary to fund sediment basin and dredging
project implementation in 2017-19.
July 2015
January 2016
Feb 2016
April 2016
May 2016
July 2016
Nov 2016
Feb 2017
168
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-187
OTHER IMPORTANT COUNCIL OBJECTIVES
LAGUNA LAKE RESTORATION
RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT
The Natural Resources Program in City Administration will serve as the lead responsible department with the
support from Public Works, Parks and Recreation, Finance and IT, and the City Attorney’s Office.
FINANCIAL AND STAFF RESOURCES REQUIRED TO ACHIEVE THE OBJECTIVE
Three separate Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) projects have been prepared in order to facilitate the Action Plan
for the Laguna Lake Restoration objective in 2015-17. The trailhead signs for Laguna Lake Natural Reserve are
supported by a portion of the Open Space Enhancement and Maintenance CIP, while the ADA paths and
Dredging and Sediment Management components are both supported by project-specific CIPs. Overall, the
Laguna Lake Restoration objective in 2015-17 is largely consultant driven, and existing staff resources within the
departments listed above are expected to be sufficient to oversee and coordinate these various work efforts.
Cost Summary
2015-16 2016-17 2015-162016-17
Open Space Enhancement and Maintenance CIP*10,000
Laguna Lake ADA Paths CIP 250,000
Laguna Lake Dredging and Sediment Mgt CIP 450,000
Total $0 $0$450,000$260,000
*A portion of the CIP supports this work program
169
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-188
LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES
LAGUNA LAKE PARK & NATURAL RESERVE ADA ACCESSIBLE TRAIL
Project Description
Construction of an Americans with Disabilities Act compliant and accessible trail in the Laguna Lake Natural Reserve will cost $250,000 for design and
construction in 2016-17.
Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request
Council Goal / Measure G Priority: FY 2015-17 Major City Goal and Measure G: Open Space Preservation
Need and Urgency
Today, despite over 7,000 acres of open space in natural reserves around the City, and 52 miles of multi-use trails where community members enjoy a wide variety
of open space experiences, the City does not have an Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant open space trail. In order to uphold the City’s tradition of
inclusivity, alongside its cutting edge natural resource protection, an ADA trail is an important addition to the City’s trail network. At present, and primarily due
to the topography of our area, most of the City’s open space trails have significant slopes where it would be impractical and unsafe to construct an accessible trail.
For years, however, staff has identified a portion of Laguna Lake Natural Reserve as offering ample area and conditions to develop a trail to meet accessibility
standards, and this concept was included in the City Council’s adoption of the Laguna Lake Natural Reserve Conservation Plan in July 2014. An existing 780
yard/0.44 mile portion of trail, which starts near the boat launch and heads west into the natural reserve lands parallel to Laguna Lake, could be designed and
reconstructed to meet appropriate grades for ADA compliance with little to no impact on existing natural resources. When planning and designing the proposed
trail, basic spatial dimensions would accommodate a wide range of users including patrons who use wheelchairs or mobility aids. As a leisure path, the trail would
also include bulb out stopping points and environmental education kiosks. The proposed ADA accessible trail would feature views of the lake and surrounding
wetland areas, as well as off-site views of the Irish Hills, Bishop Peak, and Cerro San Luis. The proposed project represents the first phase (years 1-3) of trail
circulation and accessibility enhancements contemplated by the Laguna Lake Natural Reserve Conservation Plan, with the peninsula boardwalk component
planned as a subsequent phase (years 7-10).
The ever expanding open space trail network lends itself to ongoing opportunities to enhance the open space experience for all. One way to address evolving
community needs is with the creation of an accessible trail which follows the standards of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
Readiness to Build
Study complete or n/a
Equipment purchased or n/a
Property owned or property agreement in place n/a
Environmental approval and permits complete or n/a
Specifications or construction documents complete n/a
IT Steering Committee review n/a
170
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-189
LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES
LAGUNA LAKE PARK & NATURAL RESERVE ADA ACCESSIBLE TRAIL
Environmental Review and Permits Required
Environmental Review n/a
Building Permit n/a
Waterway Permits (Fish & Game, Water Quality, Army Corps) n/a
Railroad n/a
Other: Encroachment Permit – Public Works Department n/a
Operating Program Number and Title:
60290 – Ranger Service
Project Phasing and Funding Sources
Continuing, ongoing or master account project - Specification No.
Initial Project Costs by Phase
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
Study $0
Design $50,000 $50,000
Construction $175,000 $175,000
Construction Management $25,000 $25,000
Total $0 $0$250,000 $0 $0 $0$250,000
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
Utilities $0
Maintenance materials*$1,000$1,000$1,000$3,000
Property rental/lease $0
Staff $0
Contract Services $0
Total $0 $0 $0$1,000$1,000$1,000$3,000
Ongoing Costs by Type
Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information:
*Ongoing costs are requested as part of the Parks and Recreation Ranger Service program operating budget for annual and ongoing trail maintenance and repairs.
171
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-190
LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES
LAGUNA LAKE PARK & NATURAL RESERVE ADA ACCESSIBLE TRAIL
Anticipated Facility Life Span: 50+ years
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
General Fund $250,000 $250,000
$0
Total $0 $0$250,000 $0 $0 $0$250,000
Project Funding by Source
Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives
Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project:
The existing trail could remain as-is and another trail location identified for ADA upgrades. Cost of trail reconstruction if identified at a different location, is not
likely to yield cost savings.
Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing:
Project could be designed in year 5 and constructed in year 6.
Project Team
Assignment Program Estimated Hours
Project Proponent Parks & Recreation 160
Project Management Engineering Design 100
Project Inspection Engineering Inspection 80
Project Inspection Building Department 10
Project Administration Public Works Administration 40
Project Maintenance Park ?s Maintenance 10
172
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-191
LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES
LAGUNA LAKE PARK & NATURAL RESERVE ADA ACCESSIBLE TRAIL
Location Map
173
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-192
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
LAGUNA LAKE DREDGING AND SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT
Project Description
The Laguna Lake Dredging and Sediment Management project will provide one of the key implementation steps contemplated by the City Council adopted
Laguna Lake Natural Reserve Conservation Plan. The first phase of this project will cost $450,000 in years 1-2 and will provide the necessary conditions
precedent to the project, to include updated studies, project designs and engineering, project specifications, disposal site land tenure, regulatory agency permits,
and an updated project-specific environmental document, as well as detailed evaluation, feasibility tests, and initiation of a Community Facilities District or similar
financing mechanism. The first phase also begins to set aside funding for implementation once all of the conditions precedent to beginning a physical dredging
project are in place, as described above. The second phase initiates the physical dredging project and installation of a sediment basin in year 3 with the expectation
that the efforts undertaken during this Financial Plan period will result in a “shovel ready” project by that time. An additional, final phase is anticipated in a
subsequent CIP cycle to complete the project over a total of 10 years.
Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request
Council Goal / Measure G Priority - List: The project is currently an adopted Other Important Council Objective and is an identified Measure G priority (Open
Space Preservation and vital capital improvement project).
Need and Urgency
Laguna Lake is primarily a naturally occurring lake located in the easterly end of Los Osos Valley. All lakes eventually fill in over the course of geologic time.
But, Laguna Lake has also been substantially altered and manipulated to include the re-routing of Prefumo Creek into the lake and the excavation of the Southeast
Arm of the lake during the 1960’s. These activities created a wonderful recreational lake amenity for the community to enjoy in a manner reflective of our values
at that time, but they also created a long-term management challenge. Sedimentation rates into the lake have been significant, and recent bathymetric surveys
indicate dramatic changes in lake depth and morphology resulting in decreased water quality and aquatic habitat functions, as well as diminished aesthetic and
recreational values associated with the lake.
The prospect of initiating a maintenance dredging project for Laguna Lake has been discussed at various times going back to the late 1970’s, and was evaluated in
detail in the years leading up 2009. At that time, however, questions remained as to whether the project is an overall community priority, how to pay for the
project, and how the project might fit in with a larger natural resource conservation plan. These questions have been addressed through the City Council’s
adoption of the Laguna Lake Natural Reserve Conservation Plan (“LLNRCP”) and the associated public participation process leading up to it. The LLNRCP was
well supported by the community and neighbors, to include their indication of support for pursuing a Community Facilities District to assist the City in financing
the project, while also detailing the important natural resources found in and around the lake and describing protective strategies for them. The completion of the
LLNRCP combined with drought-induced dry conditions in the lake have galvanized the community around Laguna Lake, leading to strong support and a unique
and timely opportunity to initiate this project.
Readiness to Build
174
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-193
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
LAGUNA LAKE DREDGING AND SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT
Study complete, but additional studies necessary
Equipment purchased or n/a
Property owned or property agreement in place, but land tenure for a disposal site is not in place
Environmental approval and permits complete or n/a
Specifications or construction documents complete n/a
IT Steering Committee review n/a
Environmental Review and Permits Required
Environmental Review
Building Permit n/a
Waterway Permits (Fish & Wildlife, Water Quality, Army Corps) n/a
Railroad n/a
Other: NOAA Fisheries and USFWS Biological Opinion n/a
Operating Program Number and Title:
11250 – Natural Resources
Project Phasing and Funding Sources
Initial Project Costs by Phase
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
Study $25,000 $25,000
Environmental / Permit $50,000 $50,000
Land Acquisition $25,000 $25,000
Site Preparation $0
Design / Specifications $100,000 $100,000
Construction $250,000 $250,000
Construction Management
Equipment Acquisition $0
Total $0$450,000 $0 $0 $0 $0$450,000
175
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-194
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
LAGUNA LAKE DREDGING AND SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT
Detail of initial costs:
Initial costs during phase I consist of contract services for engineering, environmental review and permits, and economic advisors. These consultant services costs
are preferred compared to “staffing up” to handle these tasks with City staff. It is expected that detailed cost estimates for phase II of the project will be among the
products of phase I.
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
Utilities $0
Maintenance materials $0
Property rental/lease $0
Staff $0
Contract Services
Total $0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A $0
Ongoing Costs by Type
Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information:
Ongoing costs during phase I consist of minor staff time supported through existing operating program budgets to prepare and oversee consultant contracts. Once
the project is complete, it is expected that ongoing costs will consist of periodic studies to monitor results and changes, but there will be no ongoing operational
costs associated with the project.
Anticipated Facility Life Span:
It is anticipated that the dredging project will be long-lasting (20-30 years), especially when combined with the sediment management strategies contemplated by
this CIP and the LLNRCP. Decadal bathymetric surveys will be completed to assess ongoing rates of sedimentation and to inform the need for ongoing
maintenance needs and frequency.
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
General Fund $450,000
Enterprise Fund
Grant
CFD Debt Financing
Developer Contribution $0
Total $0$450,000 $0 N/A N/A N/A $450,000
Project Funding by Source
176
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-195
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
LAGUNA LAKE DREDGING AND SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT
Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives
Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project:
Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: The project is anticipated to be phased over the course of 10 years.
Project Team
Assignment Program Estimated Hours
Project Proponent Natural Resources 1000
Project Manager CIP Engineering – Design 1200
Technical Studies Natural Resources 100
Environmental Clearance Community Development 100
Contract Management CIP Engineering – Administration 100
Construction Management CIP Engineering – Construction 200
177
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-196
OTHER IMPORTANT COUNCIL OBJECTIVES
FISCAL SUSTAINABILITY AND RESPONSIBILITY
OBJECTIVE
Implement the City’s Fiscal Responsibility Philosophy with a focus on the reduction of unfunded liabilities.
BACKGROUND
The City has a history of being fiscally responsible and the activities described in this work plan build on the
progress made as part of implementing the 2013-15 Major City Goal to “Sustain essential services, infrastructure,
and fiscal health.”
In particular, during the 2013-15 period, the City was able to (1) maintain resident satisfaction through the
ongoing provision of essential services, as evidenced through the results of the Citizen Satisfaction Survey; (2)
secure a diverse revenue stream through the approval of an eight-year extension to the City’s half-cent local sales
tax (Measure G); (3) implement contingency planning that has resulted in the availability of an additional $1.7
million in available one-time funding following the approval of Measure G; (4) pay down $1.4 Million of the
City’s unfunded liabilities related to insurance, (5) develop an analysis of opportunities to control pension costs
and additional unfunded liabilities, including deferred maintenance and retrospective insurance costs; and (6)
implemented a compensation study, consistent with the Compensation Philosophy, to inform future contract
negotiations with City labor groups.
One of the most important accomplishments of the 2013-15 work program was the adoption of a new Fiscal
Responsibility Philosophy. On July 1, 2014, the City Council adopted Resolution 10546 (2014), which commits
the City to a core set of actions as part of an overall Fiscal Responsibility Philosophy. These action items include:
1. Informed decision making
2. Shared responsibility
3. Increased transparency
4. Aligned investments
5. Diversified and aligned revenue sources
6. Addressing long-term unfunded liabilities
7. Continued efficiency and effectiveness
In addition, the City will continue its investment in aging infrastructure through the 2015-17 Financial Plan as an
important way to address unfunded liabilities. The proposed Capital Improvement Plan invests approximately $9
million in 2015-16 and $15 million in 2016-17 in existing infrastructure. Departments will continue
implementation of efficiencies in their operations, which have historically resulted in operational savings at the
end of each fiscal year. This provides opportunities to maintain an appropriate reserve and invest all or a portion
of the General Fund reserve that exceeds the 20% minimum in the City’s highest priorities.
The following work program identifies the outcomes expected from implementation of the Fiscal Responsibility
Philosophy over the next two year period, and the action plan to achieve those outcomes.
OUTCOME—FINAL WORK PRODUCT
Increased transparency and reporting of the City’s fiscal activities and short and long term costs to facilitate
management of the City’s fiscal condition. The final work product would include:
• Increased use of performance management and reporting, including new public dashboards
178
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-197
OTHER IMPORTANT COUNCIL OBJECTIVES
FISCAL SUSTAINABILITY AND RESPONSIBILITY
o Refinement and increased use of performance management and reporting, including new public
dashboards to provide the public with access to important information about the City’s
performance and progress towards achieving stated goals;
• Long term unfunded liabilities
o Development and implementation of a budget policy related to accelerated payment of unfunded
liabilities;
o Analysis of insurance costs to establish a goal that contains or reduces liability and workers
compensation costs through education and focus on prevention of claims;
o Pursuit of Council’s adopted labor relations objectives that address fiscal responsibility,
including shared responsibility through continued progress in the area of long-term systemic
pension cost containment and balanced cost sharing;
o Reinvestment in the City’s Capital Improvement Plan to address deferred maintenance.
• Diversified and Aligned Revenue Sources
ACTION PLAN
Increased use of performance management and reporting, including new public dashboards
Date
1. Establish a performance management and reporting team to identify a set of performance
criteria for public reporting based on information the public wants to know and available
information already being maintained and reported internally.
July 2015
2. Gather public opinion to establish a baseline for City performance and to determine what
information the public is interested in seeing in a new set of online dashboards.
May 2016
3. Implement a system for ongoing tracking, management, and reporting of performance and
service metrics.
4. Work with the Citizen’s Revenue Enhancement Oversight Commission to accomplish enhanced
reporting on the use of Measure G revenue.
January 2017
Ongoing
5. Continue to implement and track operational efficiencies including alternative service delivery,
best management practices, and cost containment measures that preserve the effectiveness of
City services and operations.
6. Identify and include updated performance measures in the 2017-2019 Financial Plan.
May 2017
June 2017
Long term unfunded liabilities Date
1. Addressing the City’s long term costs: Develop a budget policy for incorporation in the 2015-
17 Financial Plan that reflects policy direction regarding the use of one-time resources.
June 2015
2. Work with CJPIA to establish an objective to contain or reduce liability and/or workers
compensation claims and communicate goal to departments.
December
2015
3. Accelerated payment to a long-term cost item from year-end fund balance as adopted by the
City Council in the annual budget 2015-16.
June 2016
4. Review progress regarding liability and/or workers compensation claim reduction February 2017
5. Continue investment in infrastructure maintenance Ongoing
179
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-198
OTHER IMPORTANT COUNCIL OBJECTIVES
FISCAL SUSTAINABILITY AND RESPONSIBILITY
6. Continue developing, implementing and reporting on operational efficiencies Ongoing
Diversified and Aligned Revenue Sources Date
1. Complete a comprehensive analysis of City costs and fees every five years
August 2015
2. Adjust existing fees per Council policy and in accordance with User Cost Recovery Goals Annually
3. Review and adjust enterprise fees and rate structures as required to ensure they remain
appropriate and equitable
4. Monitor receipts of local revenues (such as business licenses, utility user taxes, franchise fees)
and initiate effective collection strategies to ensure that revenues and taxes are paid by those
who are obligated to pay them.
5. Implement a business license compliance program using outside consultants to identify
unlicensed businesses within the community.
Ongoing
Ongoing
May 2016
RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT
Finance and Information Technology will take the lead on this objective with support from Public Works, Human
Resources, Administration and Utilities.
FINANCIAL AND STAFF RESOURCES REQUIRED TO ACHIEVE THE OBJECTIVE
Financial and staffing resources are anticipated to be required for all three aspects of this work plan.
First, as projected in the Financial Forecast and based on Council direction of February 17, 2015 and anticipated
Council direction, year end fund balance of $2.4 million above minimum reserve levels are projected to be
allocated to prepayment of the City’s unfunded liabilities and deferred maintenance. The 2015-17 Financial Plan
allocates $12,020,000 from the General Fund to pay down a portion of the City’s CalPERS unfunded pension
liability.
Second, staff resources will be used to (1) establish a performance management and reporting team, (2) gather
public opinion to determine what performance information is most important for the public to know, and (3) to
work with the REOC to accomplish enhanced Measure G reporting. This staff work will be completed by a cross-
departmental team led by the Assistant City Manager, Special Projects Manager, and Principal Administrative
Analyst.
Overall, staff lead for this objective will be Finance and Information Technology with Public Works, Human
Resources, Administration and Utilities serving as supporting departments. Existing staff resources of the
supporting departments will be utilized for 1) Providing updated financial estimates of the City’s underfunded
deferred maintenance program. 2) Providing user business need perspectives on performance management. 3)
Serving as some level of core component for the performance management review team, 4) Establishing the
adequacy of Enterprise Fund fees, 5) Assisting with and guiding the outreach regarding the business license
compliance program.
180
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-199
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(GENERAL GOVERNMENT)
REQUEST FOR BUSINESS LICENSE COMPLIANCE SERVICES
SUMMARY OF CHANGE: Contract with outside firm for business license compliance services.
FISCAL IMPACT: One time cost of $ 32,000 in 2015-16 and $30,000 in 2016-17.
SERVICE LEVEL IMPACT: This request is to obtain professional services from an experienced company that
is capable of detecting unlicensed businesses within the community and bringing them into compliance with the
city’s business license ordinance. The number of unlicensed businesses operating within the community is not
known at this time. This not only represents a loss of revenue for the city but also a source of frustration for the
business community that regularly pays their taxes while competing against those that do not. It has been
approximately 4 years since the last enforcement effort was carried out.
Using the resources of a company having the ability to compare existing business license information against
other databases to search for unlicensed businesses will identify those home-based, rental property and other
business types that have escaped detection previously. City staff will observe and learn from this process to begin
identifying these businesses sooner and hopefully avoid having them go undetected in the future. The result will
be more revenue for the city which will exceed the cost of the service by a 2-1 margin.
Adequate outreach will be conducted to make the business community aware of the enforcement efforts and
possible contact that may be made by members of the consulting firm. Ahead of this, an assessment of the
existing ordinance along with current and past practices in interpreting the ordinance will be made to ensure that
the enforcement effort is consistent with past practice.
KEY OBJECTIVES
1. Increase the number of licensed businesses operating within the city while also leveling the playing field for
those businesses that have maintained their business license while competing against those who have not.
2. Increased revenue to the city while offsetting costs on a 2-1 ratio. This represents an increase in one-time
revenue as delinquent amounts are paid and on-going revenue from future license renewals.
3. Improve the city’s ability to identify and reach out to new businesses that might otherwise go undetected
EXISTING SITUATION: FACTORS DRIVING THE NEED FOR CHANGE
It has been more than 3 years since the city conducted a business license enforcement effort. While regular
enforcement efforts are optimal, periodic ‘sweeps’ still yield significant results in the form of additional one-time
and on-going revenues as well as leaving an impression in the community afterward that reminds people that the
city does check for compliance. It is now time to initiate another enforcement effort and staff is recommending
the use of outside experts to carry out a much more comprehensive effort using a variety of databases that will be
compared to the current business license listing to detect a multitude of business types including home-based,
rental property, vacation rental and storefront locations. The city does not have access to these databases nor does
it have the staff resources needed to devote time to this endeavor. As much as 2/3rds of the city housing stock is
established as rental properties but staff is not able to confirm how many of the rental properties are actually
licensed. Through this comprehensive effort, staff should be able to identify all rental properties, and working
with the consultant, bring those that are unlicensed into compliance.
Through this effort the city will see an increase in one-time revenues from the collection of delinquent taxes and
penalties while also increasing future revenues from license renewals.
181
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-200
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(GENERAL GOVERNMENT)
REQUEST FOR BUSINESS LICENSE COMPLIANCE SERVICES
GOAL AND POLICY CRITERIA
1. This request supports the Major City Goal of Fiscal Sustainability and Responsibility by presenting a plan to
identify unlicensed businesses and collect delinquent business license taxes and initiate future payments from
business license renewals. As a result, revenues from an existing source will be enhanced.
2. This request is expected to generate upwards of $100,000 per year in on-going revenue and a minimum of
$50,000 per year from the collection of delinquent taxes and fees although the last enforcement effort by the
City generated more than $100,000 in delinquent revenues. (the fee estimate is based on 32% of delinquencies
captured the first year and 30% of delinquencies captured in the second year of a two-year enforcement effort
with $100,000 in delinquencies captured each year. If revenue recovery is less, the fee is less)
STAKEHOLDERS
While staff from the Finance & I.T. Department will be involved in the planning, implementation and execution
of the compliance program, the business community will be affected in a number of ways. As such it is
imperative to have a meaningful and effective outreach effort as this program is being developed and
implemented. Next, those businesses that are operating and which currently have a business license will be made
aware that the city is taking license compliance seriously and is trying to level the playing field with respect to
having all business obtain a license. Next, those businesses that are operating without a license will be contacted
and asked to apply for a license through letter and phone contact. A series of mailings will be sent out via utility
bill inserts and direct mailings letting the business community, Chamber of Commerce and the Business
Improvement District know that this enforcement effort is underway using an outside service provider and how
they can assist. Staff at the city will be available to answer questions and assist with the license registration
process. The launch date will be planned for a time when the Finance Department will not have competing
obligations and can devote the time needed to this effort.
IMPLEMENTATION
Task Date
1. Program design and outreach to appropriate stakeholders; release RFP after Council
review
August 2015
2. Award contract by City Council
3. Design communications, review municipal code requirements and past practices for
implementing business license requirements
October 2015
January 2016
4. Prepare mailings and notifications April 2016
5. Release mailings and notifications and launch enforcement program May 2016
PROGRAM MANAGER AND TEAM SUPPORT
Program Manager:
The Finance Director, working with the Financial Operations Manager and the Supervising Accounting Assistant
will oversee the collection effort and ensure its success.
182
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-201
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(GENERAL GOVERNMENT)
REQUEST FOR BUSINESS LICENSE COMPLIANCE SERVICES
Project Team:
The staff at the Community Development Department (CDD) will be involved as they will be reviewing new
applications as they are generated from businesses that were operating without a license. The Director for CDD
has reviewed this request and finds that his staff is able to absorb this workload.
ALTERNATIVES:
What are the reasonable alternatives to your request? Examples may include:
1. Continue the Status Quo. The Finance Department can compare the list of licensed businesses against the
sales tax permit database provided by HdL and a listing of utility accounts by address where the property
owner’s address is not the same as the utility location. Locations found that are not in the business license
listing will be flagged as possible unlicensed businesses and will be sent a letter to confirm the location’s
status. This can be done on a batch basis with groups of letters going out periodically as time permits.
2. Defer or Re-Phase the Request. This request can be deferred, however this simply delays the recognition of
revenues that are owed to the city. Given that this request will generate more revenue than it costs to conduct,
this does not seem like a prudent choice.
3. Change the Scope of Request. The scope of work can be scaled up or down and the cost vs. revenue ratio
will not change significantly.
OPERATING PROGRAM
This request will be the responsibility of the Finance Department’s Revenue Division.
COST SUMMARY
Line Item Description Account No.2015-162016-17
Contract Services 32,000 30,000
25120-7227 32,000 30,000
Total Operating Costs 32,000 30,000
Offsetting Costs Savings or Revenues (100,000)(100,000)
Net Operating Costs (68,000)(70,000)
183
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-202
OTHER IMPORTANT COUNCIL OBJECTIVES
DOWNTOWN
OBJECTIVE
Adopt a Downtown Concept Plan, develop a plan for expansion of Mission Plaza, and improve safety,
infrastructure, and maintenance in the Downtown.
OUTCOME—FINAL WORK PRODUCT
Complete an updated vision for the Downtown and Mission Plaza, and maintain and improve safety and
infrastructure to continue to improve downtown vibrancy.
ACTION PLAN
This other important objective for the downtown includes three key elements: vision, safety, and maintenance.
Work completed in this action plan will update the City’s vision for the Downtown and Mission Plaza, and
provide some safety and maintenance enhancements. The Action Plan continues services traditionally provided
for maintenance, as well as the expanded police services implemented as part of the 2013-15 Financial Plan.
Vision
Visioning for the Downtown is impacted by several efforts: on-going discussions related to the current capital
improvement project for Mission Plaza assessment and infrastructure prioritization; progress on the Downtown
Pedestrian Plan, and finally, updates to the Downtown Concept Plan. These three priorities will need to be
closely coordinated to leverage resources and ensure community outreach and visioning process outcomes are
integrated into the final work products. The LUCE Implementation SOPC contains the budget request support for
updating the Downtown Concept Plan in FY 2015-16.
Safety
The Police Department continues to provide a police presence in the downtown area with the use of a daytime
downtown bicycle officer. This officer has enhanced connectivity with the downtown merchants, citizens, and
tourists in acting as a vital educational and enforcement resource. The Department has collaborated with the
Downtown Association in participating in safety training and awareness. Their efforts include the Donation
Station “Make Change Count” program that provides citizens with an opportunity to donate funds toward local
social service efforts. In addition to providing a benefit to direct service providers, this program also discourages
the giving of funds to panhandlers who commonly engage in adverse behaviors that negatively impact the
downtown core. The Department also initiated focused and directed enforcement efforts in order to target criminal
behavior to include plain clothes surveillance, alcohol stings and foot patrols.
The Police Department’s CAT (Community Action Team) Program continues to serve the downtown by
contacting frequent offenders and working with mental health professionals, social service providers and the
courts to provide focused case management and alternatives to simply enforcement. The Police Department is
pursuing the further use of cameras in the downtown for improved public safety. With these additional cameras
the Police Department could have instant access to view problems in the downtown and also have the ability to
record criminal incidents for prosecution of offenders.
Infrastructure & Maintenance
The Capital Improvement Plan and Public Works operating programs will continue infrastructure replacements
and maintenance in the downtown, including sidewalk repair and ongoing cleaning. Community Development
will continue with the Newsrack Program that was successfully implemented during the last budget cycle. The
department will work with the Downtown Association and their Ambassador’s on a collaborative enforcement
184
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-203
OTHER IMPORTANT COUNCIL OBJECTIVES
DOWNTOWN
effort for the inspection, reporting, notification, and follow-up related to any permit violations including rack
maintenance and aesthetic standards.
Task Date
1. Vision & Economic Vitality
1.1 Develop RFP for Downtown Concept Plan update in coordination with the update of the City’s
zoning ordinance.
Aug 2015
1.2 Interview and select consultants Sept 2015
1.3 Complete community visioning, interviews, charrette(s), review of Mission Plaza Assessment
project
Oct-Dec 2015
1.4 Present draft concepts and study findings to City committees and commissions for input Mar -May 2016
1.5 Present draft concepts and study findings to Council review and approval June 2016
1.6 Present final Concept Plan and final Mission Plaza Study to Council July 2016
1.7 Coordinate with the Downtown Association to develop a building inventory and occupancy
reporting methodology
Ongoing
1.8 Collaborate with the Downtown to develop options for downtown residential parking October 2017
1.9 Complete Design for Downtown Renewal (Construction proposed for 2017-18) June 2017
1.10 Facilitate completion of Chinatown and Garden Street Terraces private developments Ongoing
2. Safety
2.1 Provide one police officer for the downtown and additional personnel as available Ongoing
2.2 Provide Community Action Team (CAT) to combine enforcement, intervention & education Ongoing
2.3 Coordinate with outreach groups for the homeless Ongoing
2.4 Coordinate with other law enforcement agencies Ongoing
2.5 Expand use of safety cameras June 2016
3. Infrastructure & Maintenance
3.1 Complete Sidewalk Repairs & Tree Replacements – Yr 1 June 2016
3.2 Complete Sidewalk Repairs & Tree Replacements – Yr 2 June 2017
3.3 Replace Marsh & Higuera Lighted Crosswalk June 2017
3.4 Upgrade Mission Plaza Railing– Yr. 1 June 2016
3.5 Upgrade Mission Plaza Railing– Yr. 2 June 2017
3.6 Start Construction of Marsh Street Bridge June 2016
185
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-204
OTHER IMPORTANT COUNCIL OBJECTIVES
DOWNTOWN
Task Date
3.7 Complete Design for Mission Plaza Restroom – (Construction proposed for 2017-18) June 2017
3.8 Implement Parking Program organizational change January 2016
3.9 Initiate Environmental Study for the Palm / Nipomo Parking Structure January 2017
3.10 Develop and implement annual report outlined in the Public Works Strategic plan, to report
annually on Downtown Support
June 2016
3.11 Continue Downtown Street Sweeping Ongoing
3.12 Continue Downtown Sidewalk & Bubblegum Alley Steam Cleaning Ongoing
3.13 Continue Downtown Trash Pickup & Graffiti Removal Ongoing
3.14 Continue Newsrack Enforcement & Permitting Program Ongoing
RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT
The Public Works Department will be the lead department in accomplishing this goal. Key support departments
include the Community Development Department and Police Department.
FINANCIAL AND STAFF RESOURCES REQUIRED TO ACHIEVE THE OBJECTIVE
The Police Department intends to deploy both daytime downtown police officers provided adequate staffing
levels are reached in the Patrol Division. At a minimum, the Police Department will continue to assign one
officer downtown whenever possible with the objective of adding the second at the earliest opportunity. The
Police Department will also direct available resources to this area to conduct surveillance, enhance enforcement,
and increase foot patrols to continue our connectivity to this important area in our community. The Department
will continue to leverage technologies such as the public safety camera system to deter and react to criminal
behavior. The Department will also continue to work with the Downtown Association and other stakeholders to
address issues, provide educational opportunities and embark on other forms of outreach focusing on the
reduction of crime and enhancing the feeling of safety for citizens.
Cost Summary
Assistant Parking Services Manager (SOPC)*53,00058,400
Downtown Concept Plan (LUCE SOPC)* 100,000
Video Cameras (SOPC)32,378
Lighted Crosswalk Replacement 43,500
Sidewalk Repairs & Tree Replacements 100,000100,000
Mission Plaza Railing Upgrade 30,00030,000
Mission Plaza Restroom Replacement 80,000
Marsh Bridge Replacement 757,900
Total $185,378$58,400$130,000$1,017,400
*A portion of the SOPC supports this work program
186
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-205
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(TRANSPORTATION)
ASSISTANT PARKING SERVICES MANAGER
SUMMARY OF CHANGE: Add a full-time permanent Assistant Parking Services Manager position that will
focus on the day-to-day operations of Parking Services.
FISCAL IMPACT: On-going costs of $112,600 in 2015-16 and $118,000 in 2016-17, offset by $59,600 in
salary savings from a vacant .5 FTE planner position.
SERVICE LEVEL IMPACT: The additional staff position will support the Parking Services Manager with the
day-to-day operation and oversight of the parking system including: operation and maintenance of the City’s on-
street and off-street parking supply, parking enforcement, and temporary staff levels. This position would allow
the Parking Services Manager to focus on policy, outreach, future planning efforts and technology advancements.
KEY OBJECTIVES
1. Will implement one of the major recommendations included in the 2014 Parking Services Organizational
Assessment.
2. To provide additional administrative and supervision support for the Parking Services Division and general
public.
3. Will allow the Parking Services Manager to delegate some daily line functions to the Assistant and regain
time to devote to greater effort in strategic planning that addresses current and future parking issues.
EXISTING SITUATION: FACTORS DRIVING THE NEED FOR CHANGE
The Parking Services Organizational Assessment (2014 Walker Parking Consultants) identified the need to
provide additional support for the Parking Manager to allow greater effort to be spent in strategic planning and
administration. Currently the Parking Manager must split time between planning and operations which results in
reduced time spent on long term planning and other missed opportunities for service changes.
From the Organizational Study:
“The Parking Manager in San Luis Obispo is without the support of an assistant to oversee the day-to-
day responsibilities of the operation, a position that the equivalent of the parking manager position in
similar municipal parking organizations have assisting them. Further, our observations suggest that
planning-related demands in other cities appear to be less than what we see and currently and project for
the future in San Luis Obispo. While the input from stakeholders indicates a high level of satisfaction with
the Manager’s effort in planning, stakeholders also said that more input would ultimately be needed from
the Parking Manager for the City’s future growth, and the resulting parking issues, to be properly
accommodated.”
Creating the position of Assistant Parking Manager will address this stakeholder concern and provide additional
resources for the Parking Manager as identified in the study.
GOAL AND POLICY CRITERIA
As part of the 2013-15 Financial Plan, the City approved the allocation of funds for an organizational assessment
of the Parking Services Division. One of the key objectives for the organizational assessment was to determine
the adequacy of existing staff resources and opportunities for reorganization. In April 2014 the Parking Services
contracted Walker Parking Consultants (Walker Parking) to perform the organizational assessment.
187
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-206
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(TRANSPORTATION)
ASSISTANT PARKING SERVICES MANAGER
Walker Parking conducted interviews with internal and external stakeholders, performed a detailed evaluation of
the future parking demand in the downtown area, and reviewed similar parking organizations and their
organizational structures. The result was a list of recommendations (near-term and longer-term) for change to the
Parking Services Division that will allow the Division to continue to provide a high-level of service to residents
and visitors of the City.
One of the near-term recommendations put forth by the organizational assessment is to create an Assistant
Parking Services Manager position. The purpose of the Assistant Parking Services Manager position is to manage
the day-to-day parking operations thereby allowing the Parking Services Manager to devote greater effort to
strategic planning, policy development, and community outreach.
Walker Parking recommends funding the Assistant Parking Services Manager position using revenue generated
by extending parking meter hours of operation and enforcement from 6 PM to 9 PM Monday through Saturday.
Walker Parking estimates extended operation and enforcement will generate over $434,000 net income annually.
The estimated revenue generation is well above the recommended compensation for the Assistant Parking
Services Manager position. If the hours of operation and enforcement are not extended, the Parking Enterprise
Fund can support the cost of the new position and still be fiscally solvent.
The cost summary below outlines the staffing costs associated with the addition of a full-time permanent staff
position to the Parking Services Division beginning in 2015-16.
STAKEHOLDERS
This recommendation will benefit many stakeholders including: members of the general public accessing parking
services of the City, Resident for Quality Neighborhoods (RQN), the Downtown Association, Chamber of
Commerce, Cal Poly, internal City departments relying on Parking for budget and planning assistance, and other
neighborhood groups that interrelate with Parking Services.
IMPLEMENTATION
Task Date
1. Develop Assistant Parking Manager Job Classification August 2015
2. Advertise for Position September 2015
3. Hire new Assistant Parking Manager December 2015
PROGRAM MANAGER AND TEAM SUPPORT
Program Manager:
Parking Services Manager
Project Team:
The Human resources Department will assist in developing the job description for the new position and the hiring
process.
188
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-207
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(TRANSPORTATION)
ASSISTANT PARKING SERVICES MANAGER
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Continue the Status Quo. Denial of the request will continue the current pattern of the Parking Services
Manager being split between operations and planning with limited time for strategic planning. In addition, the
status quo reduces the City’s ability to provide succession planning and backup of administration and
management staff.
2. Implementation in a Different Way. Contracting out for this service is not recommended since the cost
would likely be higher and would not provide the same benefits to the City – i.e. succession planning – that
would result from the recommendation.
OPERATING PROGRAM
Parking Services (50600)
COST SUMMARY
Line Item Description Account No.2015-162016-17
Staffing 112,600 118,000
Regular Salaries 50600 - 7010 74,10077,100
PERS 50600 - 7040 21,00023,300
PARS 50600 - 7041 700 800
Health Insurance 50600 - 7042 15,70015,700
Medicare 50600 - 7043 1,100 1,100
Total Operating Costs 112,600118,000
Offsetting Cost Savings
Savings from .5 FTE Planner position (59,600)(59,600)
Net Operating Costs 53,000 58,400
San Luis Obispo Parking Services Organizational Structure – Future and Current
Future Current
Source: Walker Parking Consultants
189
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-208
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(PUBLIC SAFETY)
PUBLIC SAFETY VIDEO CAMERAS
SUMMARY OF CHANGE: Purchase four additional video cameras to further enhance safety in the downtown.
FISCAL IMPACT: One time cost of $32,378 in FY 2015-16.
SERVICE LEVEL IMPACT: Purchasing four additional video cameras to be placed around the downtown will
enable the Police Department to improve service levels to the community.
KEY OBJECTIVES
1. Enhance security levels and safety in the downtown.
2. Provide additional tools to deter crime.
EXISTING SITUATION: FACTORS DRIVING THE NEED FOR CHANGE
In FY 2013-14, as part of the Downtown Renewal Major City Goal, City Council directed the San Luis Obispo
Police Department to establish a pilot video surveillance camera program for known problem areas in downtown
San Luis Obispo.
Surveillance cameras provide multiple tools when placed in known problem locations. The first and greatest
impact is the presence of a camera. Individuals who frequent know problem locations will be unwilling to
continue in negative activity knowing there is a surveillance camera in the area. These cameras are visible to the
public and each location is clearly posted with signs that advise citizens the area is under video surveillance.
Secondly, these cameras give officers the ability to remotely monitor the problem locations with a desktop
computer, handheld mobile device or a cellular phone. Having this ability allows officers to be more proactive
than reactive when addressing crimes in these areas. Finally, if a crime does occur where a camera is present the
video can be retained and used to help identify suspects, investigate crimes that have occurred and be saved as
evidence to use during prosecution.
The department purchased three camera pod systems, each system being equipped with four cameras. Two of
these cameras were strategically placed in the downtown area and the third is currently being used to monitor the
skate park while it is under construction. With the placement of these cameras the police department has seen a
noticeable reduction in the crimes and problems that occurred in these areas. Department staff has also received
numerous calls from business owners, and citizens, expressing their appreciation in the addition of these cameras
downtown.
Based on the positive impacts seen with the placement of the three camera systems, the police department would
like to purchase 4 additional cameras to further address known problem areas. Three of the cameras would be
placed in the downtown area and the fourth would be located near the intersection of Hathway and Bond.
Three Downtown locations include:
Parking Lot 2 – this location is to the rear of several bars downtown and would allow coverage of both
Bubblegum and Garden alley. This area experiences frequent problems during both the daytime and
evening hours.
Intersections of Higuera and Garden & Marsh and Broad Streets – placement at these intersections would
capture a large portion of the downtown area that frequently experience transient related problems and
problems associated with large groups and individuals who frequent our downtown bars.
190
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-209
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(PUBLIC SAFETY)
PUBLIC SAFETY VIDEO CAMERAS
Hathway and Bond location: The intersection of Hathway and Bond is primarily residential with a heavy
concentration of college-aged residents living in this area. Problems associated with this location are
large unruly gatherings, abandon couch burnings and assaults.
GOAL AND POLICY CRITERIA
1. Installing additional cameras will support Council’s Other Important Objective for the Downtown – Adopt a
Downtown Concept Plan, develop a plan for expansion of Mission Plaza, and improve safety, infrastructure,
and maintenance in the Downtown.
2. Enhance safety and quality of life in the downtown.
STAKEHOLDERS
Police Department
Downtown Business Community
Residents and Visitors in the downtown area
Residents in the vicinity of Hathway & Bond
IMPLEMENTATION
Task Date
1. Obtain at least three bids from vendors July, 2015
2. Complete and submit City Manager Report July, 2015
3. Purchase Video Cameras August, 2015
4. PD staff to work with IT and PW departments to install cameras September,
2015
PROGRAM MANAGER AND TEAM SUPPORT
Program Manager:
Jeff Smith, Police Lieutenant
Project Team:
Finance & Information Technology – Network Administrators
Public Works
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Continue the Status Quo. Council could choose to continue status quo and not purchase additional cameras.
Staff does not recommend this alternative. Due to the high frequency of problems during both day and night
hours, there is a great need for additional cameras in specified areas of the downtown. In some cases, the
cameras themselves will act as a deterrent for some crimes.
2. Change the Scope of Request. Staff could be directed to purchase fewer cameras, however the impact would
not be as significant. Staff does not recommend this alternative.
191
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-210
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(PUBLIC SAFETY)
PUBLIC SAFETY VIDEO CAMERAS
OPERATING PROGRAM
80200 – Police Patrol
COST SUMMARY
Line Item Description Account No.2015-162016-17
Other Operating Expenditures 32,378 0
Operating Materials & Supplies 100-80200-7843 32,378
Total Operating Costs 32,378 0
192
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-211
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
DOWNTOWN RENEWAL
Project Description
Continuing downtown renewal efforts will cost $6,000 in 2016-17 for design update, $160,000 for construction and $30,000 for construction management in 2017-
18 to complete sidewalk replacement at 858 Higuera; and. $500,000 in 2018-20 to complete design and construction of another block of Higuera Street.
Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request
Council Goal / Measure G Priority: Downtown Other Important Objective and Measure G Priority vital capital improvement projects.
Need and Urgency
During Goal Setting workshop on January 26, 2013, the City Council expressed a desire to continue to renew the downtown through sidewalk and amenity
upgrades. While this upgrade work is not typically essential to the function of the sidewalks, the renewal of the downtown is essential to keeping it a vibrant
attraction for the community. Pedestrian lighting has improved visibility on sidewalks, and improved tree grates have reduced tripping hazards around large trees.
Higuera – Morro to Chorro
One exception to the essential nature of sidewalk replacement is the sidewalk in front of 858 Higuera Street. This portion of sidewalk is deteriorating and needs to
be replaced. The sidewalk doubles as the roof of the basement for 858 Higuera Street. Sections of concrete have spalled exposing the rebar, which in turn, is
deteriorating. While immediate collapse is not anticipate, leaving this condition will eventually result in failure of the sidewalk and require sidewalk closure. This
portion of sidewalk was left unfinished during the renewal project of 2012, due to insufficient funds and incomplete design work.
Design work is now complete, with the exception of minor updates due to new building codes, and the project is ready to move forward.
Higuera – Osos to Morro
A significant portion of this block of Higuera Street has Mission Style Sidewalks so City investment can be leveraged with privately funded work already
complete, to finish another block of renewed infrastructure in the downtown. This continues emphasis of improvements in the core area of the Downtown. Future
projects can include Monterey Street and cross streets in the area. With each project, the conversion from high level street lights to pedestrian level lighting will be
pursued, along with conduits to support Downtown Association activities. Conversations will continue with the Downtown Association as to the viability of
creating a sponsorship program for the street lights to assist in funding installations.
Readiness to Build
Study complete or n/a
Equipment purchased or n/a
Property owned or property agreement in place n/a
Environmental approval and permits complete or n/a – Varies by project.
193
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-212
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
DOWNTOWN RENEWAL
Specifications or construction documents complete n/a – Varies by project
IT Steering Committee review n/a
Environmental Review and Permits Required
Environmental Review n/a
Building Permit n/a
Waterway Permits (Fish & Game, Water Quality, Army Corps) n/a
Railroad n/a
Other: (Enter the title and agency of any other needed permits) n/a
Operating Program Number and Title:
50300 Street and Sidewalk Maintenance
Project Phasing and Funding Sources
Initial Project Costs by Phase
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
Design $6,000 $60,000 $66,000
Construction $160,000 $370,000$530,000
Construction Management $30,000 $70,000$100,000
Total $0 $0$6,000$190,000$60,000$440,000$696,000
Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: none
Anticipated Facility Life Span: 50 years
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
General Fund $6,000$190,000$60,000$440,000$696,000
Total $0 $0$6,000$190,000$60,000$440,000$696,000
Project Funding by Source
194
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-213
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION
DOWNTOWN RENEWAL
Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives
Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project: The City can pursue an alternative site to the one presented in the request,
including portions of Monterey, Marsh, Higuera, and all the cross streets. Cost to complete a block of sidewalk will cost between $500,000 and $1,000,000
depending upon the amount of Mission Sidewalk already existing. Portions of street where basements extend under the sidewalk will add significant costs beyond
those noted above.
Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: Project is submitted as a phased project. Project could be further phased by breaking down the work
by type or by area to do it in smaller increments.
Project Team
Assignment Program Estimated Hours per project
Project Management CIP Engineering 80 hours
Construction Management CIP Engineering 500 hours
Contract Management CIP Engineering 40 hours
Site List – For multi-year projects
Location
Estimated Year of
Construction
Pavement Area
(for projects in right-of-way)
Higuera – Morro to Chorro 2017-18 9
Higuera – Osos to Morro 2019-20 9
Monterey, Chorro, Morro, Osos, Broad, Nipomo, Marsh Future 9
Location Map
195
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-214
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES
RESTROOM REPLACEMENT & REMODELING
Project Description
• Replacing the Golf Course restroom will cost $400,000 for construction and construction management in 2015-16.
• Mission Plaza restroom will cost $80,000 for design in 2016-17 and $430,000 for construction and construction management in 2017-18.
• Johnson Park restroom will cost $50,000 for design and $380,000 for construction and construction management in the future.
Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request
Council Goal / Measure G Priority: Fiscal Sustainability & Responsibility
Need and Urgency
Access to government facilities by people with disabilities is a fundamental goal of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). To ensure that this goal is met,
Title II of the ADA requires State and local governments to make their programs and services accessible to persons with disabilities. In 2004 the City and the
Department of Justice (DOJ) entered into an agreement to upgrade several restroom facilities to meet ADA requirements. The Laguna Lake Golf Course restrooms
require compliance under this DOJ agreement.
The Laguna Lake Golf Course restroom does not comply with existing ADA requirements for restroom facilities. The overall bathroom structure has been
evaluated and found to be in poor condition. Given the significant investment that will be required to remodel the existing structure, complete replacement of this
restroom facility is recommended.
The Mission Plaza restroom was built in 1969 and remodeled in 1995. The existing facility does not meet the needs of its users and the Plaza is host to numerous
events throughout the year in addition to being a focal point for tourists. The toilets commonly backup and the number of fixtures is inadequate for the events that
take place at the Mission Plaza. Staff receives complaints on a regular basis about restroom odor even immediately after they have been cleaned. This site was
remodeled in 1995 but will be reevaluated for ADA compliance as part of the design work. A final determination on upgrading versus replacement will be made
during the initial stages of design work. The work will be coordinated with the Mission Plaza Assessment underway.
The Johnson Park restroom does not comply with existing ADA requirements for restroom facilities. The restroom is a 47 year old concrete block structure with
two toilets for women and one toilet and one urinal for men. The park and facility serve large group events, including ongoing youth programs for the YMCA, and
therefore reduction of fixtures to meet ADA requirements is not recommended. Bringing this restroom into compliance without a reduction in toilet fixtures will
require either a complete replacement of the restroom or a substantial remodel.
Readiness to Build
Design work on the Laguna Lake Golf Course Restrooms began in 2014 with an anticipated design completion of June 2015 when it will be ready to advertise for
bids. No work has been completed on the other restroom projects.
196
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-215
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES
RESTROOM REPLACEMENT & REMODELING
Study complete or n/a
Equipment purchased or n/a
Property owned or property agreement in place n/a
Environmental approval and permits complete or n/a
Specifications or construction documents complete n/a
IT Steering Committee review n/a
Environmental Review and Permits Required
Environmental Review n/a
Building Permit n/a
Waterway Permits (Fish & Wildlife, Water Quality, Army Corps) n/a
Railroad n/a
Other: (Enter the title and agency of any other needed permits) n/a
Operating Program Number and Title:
50200 – Landscape and Park Maintenance (Mission Plaza, Johnson Park)
60900 – Golf Course Operations & Maintenance (Laguna Lake Golf Course)
Project Phasing and Funding Sources
Continuing, ongoing or master account project - Specification No. 91327 Golf Course Restroom Replacement, new accounts for Mission Plaza and
Johnson restrooms.
Initial Project Costs by Phase
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
Design $50,000 $80,000 $130,000
Construction $350,000 $350,000 $700,000
Construction Management $50,000 $80,000 $130,000
Total$50,000$400,000$80,000$430,000 $0 $0$960,000
Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information:
No increase of on-going costs for utilities and maintenance are anticipated as these are remodels or replacements of existing restroom facilities. There are
reductions in staff time anticipated as a result of having improved facilities both from a customer perspective (fewer complaints) and for reduced maintenance.
197
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-216
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES
RESTROOM REPLACEMENT & REMODELING
Anticipated Facility Life Span: 30-50 years
Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total
General Fund $50,000$400,000$80,000$430,000 $0 $0$960,000
Total$50,000$400,000$80,000$430,000 $0 $0$960,000
Project Funding by Source
Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives
Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project: The Golf Course Restroom building currently contains an electrical charging
station for the golf carts on the outside of the building. The architect working on the design has recommended that the new building contain a weather cover or
enclosure for the purposes of being able to store and charge the golf carts in a weather-protected area. This addition would involve additional construction and
would also trigger the need for the entire building to be furnished with fire protection sprinklers. The cost of this optional feature would require an additional
$50,000 to be budgeted for Construction in 2015-16.
Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: Projects are already shown phased. Johnson and Mission Plaza restrooms could be phased further
by shifting design and construction out by one year.
Project Team
Assignment Program Estimated Hours
Project Management CIP Engineering - Design 250 hours/year
Permits & Environmental Review Community Development 40 hours/year
Construction Management CIP Engineering - Construction 200 hours /year
Maintenance- plan review Building, Golf & Park Maintenance 10 hours/year
Project Proponent- Project scoping, Parks and Recreation 10 hours/year
Project Administration CIP Engineering - Administration 80 hours/year
Site List
Location Estimated Year of Construction
Golf Course 2015-16
Mission Plaza 2017-18
Johnson Park Future
198
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-217
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES
RESTROOM REPLACEMENT & REMODELING
Location Map
199
ATTACHMENT 2
B1-218
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGES
SUMMARY OF INCREASES BY FUNCTION
2015-16 2016-17
Public Safety
Police Administration Animal Control Services Contract 11,610$ 20,871$
Police Patrol Services Public Safety Video Cameras 32,378$
Police Support Services Communications Technician 96,228$ 101,712$
Fire Emergency Response Emergency Responders Personal Protective Equipment 110,464$
Fire Apparatus & Public Works Vehicle & Equipment Maintenance Services 46,000$ 46,000$
Fire Training Services Rescue Training for Fire Emergency Responders 59,776$
Fire Technical Services Slurry Seal at Fire Station 1 22,000$
Public Utilities
Utilities Administration Administration and Engineering Contract Services $ 75,000 $ 15,000
Staffing Due to Department Reorganization $ 273,400 $ 273,900
Water Distribution/Wastewater
Collection Control Systems Staffing $ 96,600 $ 94,900
Wastewater & Stormwater Wastewater Collection Minor Capital $ 46,400 $ 20,000
Water Quality Laboratory National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Permit-Analysis $ 17,000 $ 17,000
Water Quality Laboratory Analyst $ 77,157 $ 81,227
Transportation
p g
Engineering Conversion of Contract Planner/Engineer to Regular $ - $ -
Bicycle Transportation Plan Implementation $ - $ -
Parking Administrative Hearing Officer $ - $ -
Assistant Parking Services Manager $ 53,000 $ 58,400
Transit Transit Marketing & Advertising Augmentation $ 60,000 $ 60,000
Short Range Transit Plan Service Change $ 475,000 $ 475,000
Transportation Program Assistant $ 57,800 $ 57,900
Fiscal Year (Net Cost)
200
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-219
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGES
SUMMARY OF INCREASES BY FUNCTION
2015-16 2016-17
Fiscal Year (Net Cost)
Leisure, Cultural, and Social Services
Ranger Services Staffing 73,686$ 77,298$
Laguna Lake Golf Course Parks & Recreation Reorganization -$ -$
Community Development
Community Development/Fire/Public
Works Development Services Staffing Reorganization -$ 250,424$
Long Range Planning LUCE Implementation and Fee Update 305,000$ 325,000$
Neighborhood Match Grants 5,000$ 10,000$
Building & Safety Rental Housing Inspection Program 105,014$ 169,238$
CIP Project Engineering Capital Improvement Program Engineer -$ -$
Project Management Software Ongoing Support 27,000$ 25,200$
General Government
Revenue Management Business License Compliance Services -$ -$
Risk Management Increase in Liability Insurance 294,163$ 556,942$
Increase in Workers Compensation Contribution 388,016$ 690,758$
TOTAL 2,807,692$ 3,426,770$
Summary By Fund 2015-16 2016-17
General Fund 1,585,335$ 2,273,443$
Utilities 576,557$ 502,027$
Parking Fund 53,000$ 58,400$
Transit Fund 592,800$ 592,900$
TOTAL 2,807,692$ 3,426,770$
201
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-220
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(PUBLIC SAFETY)
ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES CONTRACT
SUMMARY OF CHANGE: Contract increase for Animal Control Services with the County of San Luis
Obispo.
FISCAL IMPACT: On-going costs of $11,610 in FY 2015-16 and an estimated $20,871 in FY 2016-17.
SERVICE LEVEL IMPACT: The City contracts with the County of San Luis Obispo Animal Services Division
to provide animal care and control functions to the City of San Luis Obispo. Costs associated with services
provided by the County have increased.
KEY OBJECTIVES
Continue contracting with the County of San Luis Obispo for animal care and control services.
EXISTING SITUATION: FACTORS DRIVING THE NEED FOR CHANGE
The City is currently under a three year term contract with the County which is set to expire on June 30th, 2016.
The City has contracted with the County of San Luis Obispo for Animal Care and Control Services for many
years. Services provided include: emergency and non-emergency response of Animal Services Officers for
injured and stray animals; investigative services for animal bites, abuse, and neglect; sheltering and quarantine
services; dog licensing; animal adoption and other services as required either by State law or City Municipal
Code. The Police Department administers the contract on behalf of the City.
Contract Cost Methodology
In 2009 the City was notified by the County that contract costs would be substantially increasing mostly due to
the fact that the County was not obtaining full cost recovery from all the cities they contracted with. In light of
this, all seven contract cities in the County formed a committee to further analyze the services and costs
associated with animal care and control; included in this committee were representatives from County
Administration and Health Agency, County Animal Services Manager, Police Chiefs from San Luis Obispo and
Arroyo Grande, and the City of San Luis Obispo’s Finance Director.
The committee discovered that a new cost methodology was greatly needed. Prior to 2009, the County allocated
costs to contract cities by assigning a “service factor”. This measured certain services to determine if a city was
using more or less services in proportion to that city’s population. According to the committee’s findings, this
method was deficient in accurately allocating costs and revenue based on services used by each city.
The committee compared two other types of cost allocation methods that were being used by other counties in the
state. These methodologies were:
1. Per Capita – Costs and revenue are allocated to cities and County based only on the percentage of resident
population in each jurisdiction. This method, although easy to administer, assumes each city and the County
are using about the same level of service proportional to their population. Unfortunately, residents in
different cities are not all generating the same amount of revenue or using the same amount of services – so
this method does not work with our county. Some cities use services at a higher rate or generate greater
revenue than others; therefore, using this method would cause cities using fewer services and/or generate
more revenue having to subsidize other cities that use a disproportionately higher share of services. For the
City of San Luis Obispo, analysis showed (at that time) that our City utilized a lower proportion of services
compared to other cities in the county.
202
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-221
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(PUBLIC SAFETY)
ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES CONTRACT
2. Service-based – Costs and revenues are based on each city’s actual use of services and revenue generated.
Actual use is based on the following: actual field calls, animal impounds, and licenses issued. This method
provides a more direct relationship between actual amount of service being provided, and actual revenue
generated by the city. Cities that have a lower rate of service and/or generate more off-setting revenue pay
lower contractual fees than cities with higher usage rates.
After the committee reviewed what the County was already using for cost allocation, and reviewing the other two
alternate methods, it was agreed that the service-based model was the fairest and most accurate way to allocate
costs and revenue. This new cost allocation method began in 2010.
The following are the four facets of service the “service-based” methodology is based on:
1. Field service
2. Licensing
3. Shelter operations
4. Education services
Per the contract, the determination of cost of service will be calculated by determining the average percentage of
service allocated to the City over the preceding three (3) years for each of the services described above and
multiplying the percentage against the Animal Services operational cost for each facet. The average annual
revenue generated from fees/fines from the preceding three (3) years will be applied against the city’s total service
cost.
Notification of Costs for FY 2015-16
On January 21st, 2015, the County held a meeting with all agencies and announced costs for FY 2015-16. Per the
County, some agencies are realizing increases in costs due to the following factors:
operational cost increases with the most considerable impact related to a 2.3% COLA coupled with
increase in worker’s compensation rates for the County
services and supply expenses increased for shelter operations and cities with more utilization of shelter
services resulted in a more significant rise in service costs
Specifically for the City of San Luis Obispo, increases were attributed to:
increase in shelter services used, and a small increase in the revenue projected associated with that usage
o shelter services increased in these categories (which affected the overall 3 year average):
strays, confiscations, owner requested euthanasia
o overall costs associated with shelter services for the County have increased due to COLA and
supply costs – which, in turn, affects the City’s costs for those services
field service usage remained flat in the 3 year average, though a drop in revenue in the 3 year average
(1.5%) is affecting the net cost to the City
decreased or unchanged rates for other cities, affect the overall percentage distributed among the cities
203
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-222
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(PUBLIC SAFETY)
ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES CONTRACT
GOAL AND POLICY CRITERIA
1. Needed to address a health & safety concern: By continuing the City’s contractual obligation through June
2016 and beyond; the County will continue to provide animal shelter services and field services for the City
of San Luis Obispo and enforce local ordinances.
2. Needed to provide a level of service that is a priority for a significant contingent in the community: The
community has been receiving these services for numerous years; the Department does not have the resources
to provide these services directly to the public.
STAKEHOLDERS
Police Department
County of San Luis Obispo Animal Services Division
Community
IMPLEMENTATION
The City’s current contract with the County does not expire until June 30, 2016, so implementation would begin
immediately. Staff from the Police and Finance Departments will be involved in reviewing the County’s cost
methodology for the next contract period (FY 2016 – 19).
PROGRAM MANAGER AND TEAM SUPPORT
Program Manager:
Police and Finance & Information Technology
ALTERNATIVE:
Deny the request or Change Amount of Request. If the department’s budget is not increased to reflect new costs
for the Animal Control agreement, the City will be unable to continue to receive services from the County related
to animal services. Currently there is no other alternative; the department does not have adequate resources to
provide this scope of service to the community.
OPERATING PROGRAM
80100 – Police Administration
COST SUMMARY
Line Item Description Account No.2015-162016-17
Contract Services 11,610 20,871
Animal Control Agreement 100-80100-7211 11,610 20,871
Total Operating Costs 11,610 20,871
204
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-223
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(PUBLIC SAFETY)
COMMUNICATIONS TECHNICIAN
SUMMARY OF CHANGE: Hire an additional Communications Technician position to provide adequate
staffing levels in the Emergency Communications Center.
FISCAL IMPACT: On-going costs of $96,228 in FY 2015-16 and $101,712 in 2016-17.
SERVICE LEVEL IMPACT: Hiring an additional Communications Technician is essential to meeting industry
standards related to Emergency Communication Center staffing levels. The position will enhance service to the
community, address current staff mental and physical fatigue, and enable the center to establish a minimum
staffing level of three dispatchers at all times.
KEY OBJECTIVES
1. Enhance efficiency for processing calls and dispatching.
2. Reduce liability by providing proper staffing levels.
3. Provide better service to our citizens and emergency responders.
EXISTING SITUATION: FACTORS DRIVING THE NEED FOR CHANGE
The essential duties of personnel in the Emergency Communication Center are to provide efficient emergency and
non-emergency service to the public, Public Safety responders, and internal City customers. To provide safe
efficient quality service it requires an adequate number of qualified personnel be on duty to respond to the
demanding and increasing workload. With numerous changes in technology, emergency medical dispatching and
workload expectations these and other factors have created an environment where the mental and physical
demands on the modern day dispatcher are challenging. Future introductions of technology into the dispatch
center to include Next Generation text and video dispatching, Quickest Route and other applications will continue
to tax this workgroup.
As early as 1984 total staffing included eight communication technicians and one working supervisor. Minimum
staffing was two dispatchers on duty. Proper coverage was still needed and to supplement the staffing there were
two fully trained Field Service Technicians that assisted with coverage, and on occasion officers would cover
shifts when needed.
By 1997 full staff included eleven communication technicians and one manager who was not assigned to work in
dispatch. In October 2000 through grant funding the City Council approved an additional communication
technician bringing the total to twelve.
Because of the growing work expectations of the dispatch center, liability and need to provide oversight in 2002
two supervisor positions were created. These were not additional bodies but were removed from line personnel
and were considered promotions. Supervisors work 10-hour shifts four days a week. However, to meet staffing
needs these positions have been pulled from their supervisory responsibilities frequently in order to cover shifts
and meet minimum call taking staffing demands.
In 2004 one temporary part-time dispatch position was created. Due to the length and depth of training, limited
hours, and union complications this part-time position was eliminated.
205
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-224
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(PUBLIC SAFETY)
COMMUNICATIONS TECHNICIAN
During the 2009-11 Financial Plan, with Measure Y funding, the department gained one communications
technician position. Staffing levels were at eleven dispatchers and two supervisors, for a total of thirteen.
However, due to budget reductions in FY 2011-12, the newly added position was eliminated. Although personnel
was decreased the workload and demand for services continues to increase.
Ultimately, the short and long term effects on communications center personnel has led to staffing issues being
exasperated, to include increased overtime, increased sick leave use and the frequent shifting of personnel to meet
safe staffing standards. A manager and supervisors have filled shifts frequently to meet staffing demands. This
has caused an already understaffed Emergency Communications Center to fall into a crisis experiencing both
mental and physical fatigue.
Today this job has become incredibly technical and complex that only trained and certified Communication
Technicians are able to staff a position.
INDUSTRY STANDARDS
Researching several industry standards the Communications Center has been working in an understaffed capacity
for several years. A variety of nationally recognized staffing formulas have shown that for an agency with our call
volume and size there should be three to five communications technicians on duty during any given shift. By
requesting one additional communications technician we will begin the process of adding needed personnel to an
already overtaxed and understaffed center.
Listed below are several industry studies that analyze staffing levels utilizing a variety of metrics. Some studies
address the proper number of call takers by analyzing phone statistics. Other studies address staffing levels by
tasks assigned and some studies use shifts and leave time as a staffing indicator. To provide an overall guideline
for proper and safe staffing levels for an agency with our size and workload the results are listed below.
By Task Formula – Source: www.911dispatch.com/shifts/index.html
This formula recommends that an agency our size with similar task work would require 15 dispatchers.
Minimum Call-Taker Staffing Formula – Source: www.911dispatch.com
This formula recommends our agency would need five dispatchers per shift. We currently operate with two
minimum with three on selected busier shifts.
APCO Communication Center Staffing Formula – Source: www.911dispatch.com/shifts/apco_staffing.html
This formula takes into account the hours worked, breaks, and leave time to staff a center. For our center this
formula would require a minimum of 14.44 dispatchers.
Survey – Source: 2013 Public Safety PSAP Survey Results, Stratus Technologies.
Stratus Technologies surveyed 919 PSAP employees throughout North America. Reviewing both staffing by
population and staffing by call volume it shows that staffing of three to five dispatchers is what is needed versus
our practice of two.
Using the above standards and survey for determining proper staffing we are significantly understaffed in every
study.
206
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-225
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(PUBLIC SAFETY)
COMMUNICATIONS TECHNICIAN
Caller Hold and Talk Times:
The focus for many communications centers are to rapidly process calls and disconnect in the quickest time
possible. Our City’s focus is on excellent customer service and meeting our citizen’s needs. This can take time,
however, hold times are ranked and we have an excessive number of calls placed on hold for an unacceptable
length of time. This is due to inadequate staffing levels. Communication Technicians are rated on answer times
and under normal circumstances they are to answer all incoming lines immediately and business lines within three
rings.
In addition to basic staffing concerns there has been a significant increase in technology which causes further
demands on the already taxed communication technician. These technologies improve many things and allow for
better reporting statistics but it’s the communication technician that must manage these technologies.
Examples of Technology in the Communication Center: Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) Software, CAD
mapping, CAD to CAD (sending calls to and from other agencies), Mobile Digital Computers, Instant Messaging,
3SI Alarm Tracking (internal alarms and tracking software), USDD Fire Alerting, Cal Fire Alerting and
Frequency unmute, G2 Manual and daily testing of alert system, Security Cameras, Electronic controlled gates
and doors for both Police and Fire stations, CJIS Portal, CLETS, Photo Link, LS System for County Warrants,
Computer Phone System and monthly TTY testing, and all City network software that is used for regular business
like email, time cards, etc.
New audio recording equipment, text and video to 9-1-1, and Quickest Route are the known new technologies
being considered and will be implemented into our communications center. Additions of these and other
applications will continue to tax this workgroup.
Supervisors as line employees:
Research shows that it is not in the best interest of a Communications Center to use supervisors as line employees.
This causes conflict with their roles and responsibilities. Supervisors have oversight of the Center, assist when
call load requires, and fulfill many administrative duties to include evaluations, training (new and existing
employees) and keeping the Center current in meeting mandates and industry standards. Using supervisors to
meet minimum staffing on a regular basis takes them away from needed supervisory duties.
Goal and Policy
An increase in staffing by one communication technician will help the center move toward the goal of
establishing a minimum of three communication technicians on duty during any given shift. This will allow for
one police dispatcher, one call taker, and one fire dispatcher. All current training teaches that there is a limit to
multi-tasking and the ability to transition back and forth between tasks effectively. In the critical field of
Emergency Dispatching it is imperative to staff the center with a dedicated call taker, a dedicated police radio
dispatcher, and a dedicated fire radio dispatcher. This significantly improves and addresses “enhanced public
service in addressing health and safety concerns” dedicating personnel to attend to medical emergency 9-1-1 calls
and Emergency Medical Dispatching (EMD) services.
STAKEHOLDERS
• The community and citizens visiting the City of San Luis Obispo
• Communications Personnel
• Human Resources
• Police and Fire
207
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-226
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(PUBLIC SAFETY)
COMMUNICATIONS TECHNICIAN
IMPLEMENTATION
Task Date
1. Begin the Hiring Process July 2015
2. Conduct interviews and background investigations August 2015
3. Hire and Training begins October 2015
4. Assign trained Communication Technician to a shift April 2016
PROGRAM MANAGER AND TEAM SUPPORT
Program Manager:
Kerri Rosenblum, Communications & Records Manager
Project Team:
• Human Resources
• Police Department
o Training Sergeant
o Communications Supervisors
• Fire Department
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Continue the Status Quo. Remain at current staffing levels. This is not recommended and by doing nothing
it will continue to exasperate an already over taxed situation and potentially lead to unwanted liability with
delays and mistakes.
2. Defer or Re-Phase the Request. The current demographics in the Communications Center are such that a
few could retire at any time. We cannot afford to mandate more overtime and without relief those nearing
retirement may choose to leave sooner than later.
3. Change the Scope of Request. An acceptable change to the request would be to hire multiple FTE positions
to bring staffing levels up to the desired state of one call-taker, one police dispatcher, and one fire dispatcher.
4. Existing Program Evaluation. Human Resource personnel have been involved in meetings to discuss our
staffing needs. They have also been involved in confidential workers compensation and personnel
investigations that exemplify the need to increase and stabilize staffing in the communications center.
Contracting out services is not an option. Our Communications Center staff undergo POST and EMD
training and certifications and have ongoing training requirements. The job also requires many perishable
skills that require longevity to attain proficiency.
OPERATING PROGRAM
80400 – Police Support Services
208
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-227
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(PUBLIC SAFETY)
COMMUNICATIONS TECHNICIAN
COST SUMMARY
Line Item Description Account No.2015-162016-17
Staffing 96,228 101,712
Communication Technician - Step 3 yr. 1; Step 4 yr. 2
Regular Salaries 100-80400-7010 60,060 63,232
Holiday 100-80400-7016 3,003 3,162
Retirement Contributions 100-80400-7040 15,955 18,059
Health Ins 100-80400-7042 16,296 16,296
Medicare 100-80400-7044 914 963
Total Operating Costs 96,228 101,712
209
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-228
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(PUBLIC SAFETY)
EMERGENCY RESPONDERS PERSONAL PROTECTIVE STRUCTURAL FIRE FIGHTING EQUIPMENT
SUMMARY OF CHANGE: Replace personal protective structural firefighting equipment (turnouts) for
emergency responders.
FISCAL IMPACT: One time cost of $110,464 in FY 2015-16.
SERVICE LEVEL IMPACT: Increased safety for emergency responders with replacement of protective
structural firefighting equipment that will meet National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) standards.
KEY OBJECTIVES
1. Increase safety of emergency responders.
2. Provide emergency responders with firefighting equipment that meets National Fire Protection Association
(NFPA) standards. Currently 37 set of turnouts are outdated (more than ten years old).
EXISTING SITUATION: FACTORS DRIVING THE NEED FOR CHANGE
The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) is the definitive source of standards for firefighting safety. Per
the 2014 Edition of Standard 1851 “Standard on Selection, Care, and Maintenance of Protective Ensembles for
Structural Fire Fighting and Proximity Fire Fighting,” all structural firefighting protective ensembles (henceforth
referred to as “turnouts”) must be retired from service ten years after date of manufacture due to degradation in
the turnouts’ ability to protect firefighters from the extreme environments of a structure fire. Despite a robust and
proactive inspection, cleaning, and maintenance program, 37 sets of San Luis Obispo City Firefighters’ turnouts
must be replaced due to age and condition. These sets of turnouts no longer provide the minimum level of safety
required to perform our mission in the community and surrounding areas. The structural components of these
turnout garments have deteriorated due to age and use; more specifically occupational wear and tear is
deteriorating both the outer shells as well as the liners. The garments’ shells have sustained considerable damage
over the years, which includes blown-out knees, tearing of crotch areas, ripped and torn pockets, broken zippers,
unreliable Velcro closures, and ripped D rings. The garments’ liners are beyond their service life and have begun
delamination where the thermal barrier and moisture barrier are beginning to separate. Based on a number of
current regulations and standards, such as NFPA, Cal-OSHA, manufacturer’s recommendations and industry
standards, these thirty seven sets of structural firefighting turnouts are out of-date, ineffective, and unacceptable
due to damage that has incurred. They pose a considerable safety risk to the Department line suppression
personnel. The Fire Department has worked diligently to secure the necessary funding for this vital need.
Each Fire Emergency Response personnel maintain two sets of turnouts. Two sets are necessary as turnouts must
be thoroughly inspected and decontaminated after every fire. The Fire Department maintains a special washing
machine at Fire Station 1 for the purpose of cleaning contaminated turnouts. Inspecting, cleaning, and drying
turnouts is a process that can take 24 hours or more. Failure to maintain a second set of turnouts could result in
all 14 on-duty personnel being unable to respond to a fire while their structural firefighting protective ensembles
is being cleaned and dried. Operationally, the Department would need to replace all on-duty personnel with off-
duty personnel in order to maintain our ability to respond. This is not a feasible option. In years past, the Fire
Department permitted the second set of turnouts to be older than the standard set by NFPA 1981 and thus provide
less than the recommended safety to firefighters. This too is not a feasible or responsible option. It should be
acknowledged that the fire doesn’t care if a firefighter is in his/her primary or backup set of structural firefighting
protective ensemble.
210
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-229
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(PUBLIC SAFETY)
EMERGENCY RESPONDERS PERSONAL PROTECTIVE STRUCTURAL FIRE FIGHTING EQUIPMENT
GOAL AND POLICY CRITERIA
The following criteria have been established as requirements for 2015-17 SOPC’s. Briefly explain how the
proposed change meets one or more of the following criteria.
1. Needed to address a health & safety concern: The City of San Luis Obispo Fire Department suppression
personnel responded to over 5,400 calls in 2014. Protective clothing, such as structural firefighting protective
ensembles, is the most important life safety equipment for a Firefighter. It is the first line of defense between
a dangerous environment and their body. Failure to follow the NFPA Standard in providing this safety
garment to emergency responders could result in significant injury to firefighters and poses a significant
liability issue for the City.
2. Needed to provide a level of service that is a priority for a significant contingent in the community:
Firefighting turnouts are used daily by all members of Fire Emergency Response for all types of fires
including structure fire and wildland fires, as well as specialty rescue calls including vehicle extrication and
high-angle rescues.
3. Supports revenue generation and/or cost savings: The requested firefighting turnouts are used when
responding to State and Federal wildland fires. Our participation in the system generates mutual aid revenue
for the City.
STAKEHOLDERS
Emergency Responders and the community they serve.
IMPLEMENTATION
Task Date
1. Prepare and release request for proposals 8/2015
2. Select proposal 9/2015
3. Measure personnel and order turnouts 10/2015
4. Receive and in-service turnouts 12/2015
PROGRAM MANAGER AND TEAM SUPPORT
Program Manager:
Ray Hais, Battalion Chief
Project Team:
Ray Hais, Battalion Chief, PPE Committee (Emergency Responders) and Julie Cox, Administrative Analyst
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Continue the Status Quo. This will put the outdated turnouts further out of date and create potential liability
issues for the city.
211
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-230
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(PUBLIC SAFETY)
EMERGENCY RESPONDERS PERSONAL PROTECTIVE STRUCTURAL FIRE FIGHTING EQUIPMENT
2. Defer or Re-Phase the Request. Providing funding for part of the request will enable the most outdated
turnouts to be replaced.
OPERATING PROGRAM
85200 Emergency Response
COST SUMMARY
Line Item Description Account No.2015-162016-17
Staffing 0 0
Contract Services 0 0
Other Operating Expenditures 110,464 0
Protective clothing 100-85200-7861 110,464
Minor Capital 0 0
Total Operating Costs 110,464 0
Net Operating Costs 110,464 0
212
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-231
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(PUBLIC SAFETY & GENERAL GOVERNMENT)
FIRE APPARATUS AND PUBLIC WORKS VEHICLE & EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE SERVICES
SUMMARY OF CHANGE: Increase non-staffing operating costs to support Fire Apparatus and Public Works
Vehicle & Equipment Maintenance Services.
FISCAL IMPACT: On-going costs of $46,000 in 2015-16 and $46,000 in 2016-17.
SERVICE LEVEL IMPACT: The Fire Department’s Fire Apparatus and the Public Works Department’s
Vehicle & Equipment Maintenance operating material and supply costs require an increase in funding to
effectively service the City’s fleet of vehicles and equipment. While efforts have been made to reduce costs and
transfer funds from other programs to assist with the increase in operating costs, there is still a need for additional
funds.
KEY OBJECTIVES
1. Assure availability of funding for the purchase of equipment parts and ongoing equipment repair and
maintenance costs. This work is absolutely essential in maintaining the City’s fleet in good working order and
ensuring the safety of drivers and the surrounding community.
2. Align the City’s fleet budget with actual expenditures.
EXISTING SITUATION: FACTORS DRIVING THE NEED FOR CHANGE
1. Increasing equipment and repair costs to keep up with increasing repair demands. Vehicles and equipment
must be outsourced to keep fleet safe and operational.
2. Eliminate the need to “backfill” program budget expenditures derived in fleet services with savings in other
Fire and Public Works Department programs and accurately reflect expenditures/savings in the originating
programs.
GOAL AND POLICY CRITERIA
Over the past several years, the Fire Department Fire Apparatus services and the Public Work’s Vehicle and
Equipment Maintenance operating program budget for fleet operations have been underfunded; more specifically
in the overhaul & major repairs, equipment replacement parts and tires & batteries accounts. While repair costs
can fluctuate annually depending on the need, the three year average has shown these budget accounts in Public
Works over-expended by an annual average amount of $100,700. In the past, funding to offset these budget
overages has come from miscellaneous savings in other Public Works Department programs and were one-time in
nature. For the past two years, the Fire Department has made a midyear budget request for an additional $26,000
to cover the deficit in the Fire Apparatus program. This trend is expected to continue due to the increase in
replacement parts and equipment.
To partially offset future costs in the equipment replacement parts account, various programs in Public Works
have permanently transferred $23,000 from their non-staffing budgets to the fleet budget. Because these funds are
spread amongst nine general fund program budgets, the service level impact is expected to be minimal. In
addition, the Fleet Manager is currently working diligently to contain costs without negatively impacting the
operation and maintenance of the City’s fleet. That work, along with the request for $20,000 and transfer of
$23,000 is expected to address the Public Work’s Vehicle and Equipment Maintenance operating program budget.
Additional funding from other Fire Department programs has not been available to transfer to Fire Apparatus
services. While it was acknowledged during the FY 2013-14 midyear process that this funding gap is an ongoing
issue for the Fire Department, funding was not extended beyond FY 2013-14. This provided the opportunity for
213
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-232
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(PUBLIC SAFETY & GENERAL GOVERNMENT)
FIRE APPARATUS AND PUBLIC WORKS VEHICLE & EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE SERVICES
collaboration between the Fire Department and Public Works Department to assess the capacity for Public Works
to transfer funds to the Fire Department to cover the ongoing funding gap. Upon completion of the FY 2013-14
budget, Public Works conducted an extensive analysis of that department’s capacity to support Fire’s budget
need, resulting in the internal funding listed in the previous paragraph. The result of this analysis was the
conclusion that Public Works does not have the capacity to transfer funding to the Fire Department.
This requested adjustment in the Fire Apparatus and Vehicle and Equipment Maintenance program operating
budget will assure availability of funding for the purchase of equipment parts and ongoing equipment repair and
maintenance costs. This work is absolutely essential in maintaining the City’s fleet in good working order and
ensuring the safety of drivers and the surrounding community. This request will more accurately align the Vehicle
and Equipment Maintenance operating program budget and the Fire Apparatus operating budget program with
actual expenditures. Though this request will address some of the budget shortfalls experienced over the past
several years, it may not resolve any future, unanticipated cost increases to the fleet operation. The goal with this
request is to help avoid future midyear budget requests from the Departments for additional operating budget
funding for the Fire Apparatus and Vehicle & Equipment Maintenance programs.
In addition, funding for Fire Apparatus and Vehicle and Equipment Maintenance operations is partially support
by Enterprise Funds through the Cost Allocation process. A portion of this repair work/equipment as it relates
directly to Enterprise Funds will be supported through the Cost Allocation Plan.
STAKEHOLDERS
The general public of San Luis Obispo and those that share the roads in this community. The City employees that
operate City fleet or equipment and rely on safe, dependable vehicles and equipment in their daily course of work.
IMPLEMENTATION
Task Date
1. Allocate funding for overhaul/major repairs, equipment replacement parts, tires and
batteries budget accounts
July 1, 2015
PROGRAM MANAGER AND TEAM SUPPORT
Program Manager:
Fire Vehicle Mechanic, Fleet Maintenance Supervisor
Project Team:
Fire & Public Works Administrative Analysts
ALTERNATIVES:
What are the reasonable alternatives to your request? Examples may include:
1. Continue the Status Quo. Continuing without a budget augmentation will cause the Fire Apparatus and
Vehicle and Equipment Maintenance program budgets to be annually over-expended. Continuing the status
quo may result in increased labor hours and vehicle downtime.
214
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-233
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(PUBLIC SAFETY & GENERAL GOVERNMENT)
FIRE APPARATUS AND PUBLIC WORKS VEHICLE & EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE SERVICES
2. Change the Scope of Request. Program budgets could be augmented in an amount less than the annual
average as shown above. However, staff still anticipates the two program budgets will be over-expended at
year’s end.
OPERATING PROGRAM
Fire Apparatus (85210)
Vehicle & Equipment Maintenance (50340)
COST SUMMARY
Line Item Description Account No.2015-162016-17
Other Operating Expenditures 69,000 69,000
Fire - Equipment Replacement Parts 85210-7795 21,000 21,000
Fire - Tires, Batteries & Accessories 85210-7907 5,000 5,000
PW - Equipment Replacement Parts 50340-7795 23,000 23,000
PW - Tires, Batteries & Accessories 50340-7907 20,000 20,000
Minor Capital 0 0
Total Operating Costs 69,000 69,000
Offsetting Costs Savings
PW-Admin.50100-7227 (1,000)(1,000)
PW - Streets 50300-7227 (1,600)(1,600)
50300-7621 (6,000)(6,000)
50300-7835 (1,000)(1,000)
50300-7845 (2,100)(2,100)
50300-7875 (500)(500)
PW - Traffic & Signals 50330-7229 (700)(700)
50330-7233 (2,000)(2,000)
50330-7791 (1,000)(1,000)
50330-7843 (200)(200)
PW - Park Maint.50200-7227 (200)(200)
50200-7229 (200)(200)
50200-7531 (600)(600)
50200-7821 (400)(400)
50200-7843 (500)(500)
50200-7845 (2,000)(2,000)
50200-7875 (500)(500)
50200-7911 (500)(500)
PW-Building Maint.50230-7605 (1,000)(1,000)
PW-CIP Project Engineering 50410-7459 (1,000)(1,000)
Net Operating Costs 46,000 46,000
215
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-234
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(PUBLIC SAFETY)
RESCUE TRAINING FOR FIRE EMERGENCY RESPONDERS
SUMMARY OF CHANGE: Increase training budget for Fire emergency responders and Fire administrative
personnel.
FISCAL IMPACT: One time cost of $59,776 in FY 2015-16.
SERVICE LEVEL IMPACT: Additional emergency responders will receive Rescue Systems-II certification
training, required Hazardous Materials Technician training, and Chief Officer professional development training.
KEY OBJECTIVES
1. Increase safety of emergency responders.
2. Provide mandated training opportunities to emergency responders.
EXISTING SITUATION: FACTORS DRIVING THE NEED FOR CHANGE
There are three components to this request: Rescue Systems-II certification training, Hazardous Materials
Technician certification training, and Chief Officer professional development training.
The first portion of this SOPC, Rescue Systems-II training, will directly address the risks identified in our
community by past and current Local Hazard Mitigation Plans (LHMP) and will provide significantly enhanced
search and rescue capabilities in the City by increasing number of emergency responders to be proficient in using
rescue equipment. This completes an operational goal that was eliminated during the Great Recession; however,
the need for this capability remains.
The potential for human loss and injury is compounded by the fact that approximately two-thirds of City of San
Luis Obispo Firefighters are inadequately trained and certified to safely rescue trapped victims in building
collapses. With the occurrence of a high-magnitude earthquake, all agencies within the County will be
overwhelmed with their own mitigation efforts in their own communities. We will be forced to rely on our own
personnel, equipment, and training.
The California Office of the State Fire Marshal certified Rescue Systems-II class (Advanced Heavy Rescue) is a
40 hour hands-on instructor led class which teaches the advanced skills and techniques necessary to safely
conduct effective search and rescue operations at structure collapse incidents in reinforced and unreinforced
masonry (URM), concrete tilt-up, and heavy timber buildings. This level is also capable of conducting high angle
rope rescue, confined space rescue (no permit required), and trench/excavation rescue. Students utilize a wide
variety of specialized tools and heavy equipment in breaching walls and floors, and in the creation of shoring and
stabilization systems, which allows for safe victim search and extrication. This class requires a specialized
training facility with elaborate props used to simulate collapsed buildings and structures. This course can only be
delivered at a State Fire Training approved site, located in Southern California and Northern California. There are
24 San Luis Obispo Firefighters that need to complete this class to achieve Type II Operational Level Capability
of US & R response as specified by ICS-US&R-120-1. San Luis Obispo City Fire Department is requesting
funding to enhance response capability and operational safety for an additional eight emergency responders. The
best way to ensure the safety of responding Firefighters is to provide the necessary training and equipment. The
Fire Department had established this course as a minimum required for all responders, but the ability to train all
personnel was eliminated with the significant training budget reductions during the Great Recession. Previous
attempts to reinstate this required minimum have failed. The ability to safely perform rescues from collapsed
buildings is currently limited to a small number of adequately trained personnel (14 of 42) due to a lack of
funding. Only one third of the Department is currently trained to the Rescue Systems-II level. The Fire
216
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-235
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(PUBLIC SAFETY)
RESCUE TRAINING FOR FIRE EMERGENCY RESPONDERS
Department has attempted to secure the required funding numerous times through federal grants but has been
unsuccessful.
The Rescue Systems II requested budget will train eight firefighters in FY 2015-16. The budget includes:
Personnel: $35,768 (92.5 hours of overtime per person, $4471.), Fringe Benefits: $520 ($65. per person), Course
fees $5,200 ($650. per person), Travel $7,088 includes: Transportation (fuel and parking) $1,544. Average round
trip mileage is 550 miles, two people per vehicle to reduce cost, 2013 IRS mileage rate .565. Total cost for
mileage is $1,244 ($311 per car with two people). Parking cost is $15.00/day for 5 days is $75.00. Estimated 4
trips to training sites to train 8 individuals. Total cost for parking is $300 and lodging totals $2,784. FY 2014
General Services Administration (GSA) rate used to determine lodging cost, double occupancy will be used to
reduce cost for the five day training. Food is estimated to be $2,760 and based on the FY 2014 GSA rate for 8
firefighters during the 5 day training.
Rescue Systems II
Line Item Description Account No. 8 persons
Overtime 85400-7020 35,768
Medicare 85400-7044 520
Course fee 85400-7459 5,200
Travel 85400-7459 7,088
TOTAL 48,576
Mileage 1,244
Parking 300
Lodging 2,784
Food 2,760
Total travel 7,088
The second part of this SOPC is a result of new requirements for the six shift-based City of San Luis Obispo
emergency responders that are on the San Luis Obispo County Regional Hazardous Materials Response Team.
The annual continuing education requirements for team members have increased from 24 hours to 60, effective
April 3, 2014, per the SLO County Regional Haz Mat Standard Operating Guidelines. It is estimated that the
addition cost per team member for training will be $1,000 per person for a total of $6,000 annually. This
additional expense is an ongoing request for $6,000 for training for the Hazardous Material Team members on the
county-wide Hazardous Materials Team.
Haz Mat Training
Line Item Description Account No. Annual Amount
Education and training 85400-7459 6,000
The third portion of this SOPC is to provide professional development opportunities related to administrative staff
performance goals set in the evaluation process. Conference registration and travel cost for 4 conferences is
estimated at $1,000 - $1,500 per conference. The existing budget is insufficient to support this need. The travel,
meeting, dues budget was reduced from $5,500 in FY 2007-08. While the cost of participating in educational
217
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-236
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(PUBLIC SAFETY)
RESCUE TRAINING FOR FIRE EMERGENCY RESPONDERS
conferences has increased substantially in the past 7 years and there was no Deputy Chief in 2007, the Fire
Department is requesting $300 less than the FY 2007-08 authorized budget for this purpose. The position of
Deputy Chief was added to the Administrative Division in FY 2012-13.
Professional conferences or educational
opportunities
Line Item Description Account No. Annual Amount
Professional conferences 85100-7529 5,200
GOAL AND POLICY CRITERIA
The following criteria have been established as requirements for 2015-17 SOPC’s. Briefly explain how the
proposed change meets one or more of the following criteria.
1. Needed to address a health & safety concern: The training requested in this grant would directly address
the risks identified in our community by past and current Local Hazard Mitigation Plans (LHMP). One of
the Hazard Mitigation goals is to “Reduce the severity of damage and losses due to natural and human-
caused hazards.” An objective under this goal is to provide Rescue Systems-II class to all City of San
Luis Obispo firefighters. Funding this SOPC will assist in accomplishing this objective. It will provide a
greater safety margin for the firefighters who will be tasked with providing rescue services to victims in
collapsed buildings and compromised structures due to vehicle versus occupied building, earthquake or
other natural event, new construction or industrial accident, train derailment, or farm or industrial
machinery entrapment. The City of San Luis Obispo also operates 12 large (30-700 acres) open space
lands that are available for recreation which includes Bishops Peak, 1546 ft. three-pointed peak that is a
popular technical rock climbing area. The City additionally operates numerous smaller areas. This class
will enhance our ability to rescue ill or injured hikers or climbers using low and high angle rope rescue
systems.
2. Needed to provide a level of service that is a priority for a significant contingent in the community: Since
this training enhances our ability to rescue persons trapped in residences, businesses, permit required
confined spaces, open spaces, and a myriad of other locations and activities, it would be of value to all
citizen and visitors if/when a large or small scale rescue emergency exists. Training and education
enhances the administrative staff’s ability to develop and implement best practices and be responsive to
new methods and techniques for services delivered to for the community.
STAKEHOLDERS
Emergency Responders and the community they serve.
IMPLEMENTATION
Task Date
1. Register emergency responders for training 8/2015
2. Participate in training 10/15- 5/16
218
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-237
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(PUBLIC SAFETY)
RESCUE TRAINING FOR FIRE EMERGENCY RESPONDERS
PROGRAM MANAGER AND TEAM SUPPORT
Program Manager:
Jeff Gater, Deputy Chief
Project Team:
Jeff Gater, Deputy Chief
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Defer or Re-Phase the Request. Providing funding for part of the request.
OPERATING PROGRAM
85400 Training Services
COST SUMMARY
Line Item Description Account No.2015-162016-17
Staffing 36,288 0
Overtime 100-85400-7020 35,768
Medicare 100-85400-7044 520
Contract Services 0 0
Other Operating Expenditures 23,488 0
Professional Conferences 100-85100-7529 5,200 0
Education and training 100-85400-7459 18,288
Minor Capital 0 0
Total Operating Costs 59,776 0
Net Operating Costs 59,776 0
219
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-238
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(PUBLIC SAFETY)
SLURRY SEAL AT FIRE STATION 1
SUMMARY OF CHANGE: Slurry seal asphalt driving surfaces at Fire Station 1.
FISCAL IMPACT: One time cost of $22,000 in FY 2015-16
SERVICE LEVEL IMPACT: The slurry seal project will provide needed maintenance and safety at Fire Station
1.
KEY OBJECTIVES
1. Provide funding for maintenance of asphalt at the Fire Station 1 to maintain condition of this heavy use
surface before further and more costly deterioration.
EXISTING SITUATION: FACTORS DRIVING THE NEED FOR CHANGE
Slurry seal asphalt surfaces at Fire Station 1: A new asphalt layer was added to the entire Dispatch
Center Facility during construction in 2010. The asphalt surface has since weathered and is in need of a
slurry seal application. Existing budget for city-wide asphalt maintenance can’t financially support this
need; although City staff has endorsed the need to perform this maintenance work to preserve the
integrity of the costly subsurface and to avoid significant repair needs in the near future. The asphalt
surfaces at Fire Station 1 provide multiple benefits to the Fire Department’s operations. The public and
employees use both front and rear lots. The large rear lot is used by heavy fire vehicles for training,
maintenance, and also for large public outreach events such as Fire Prevention Open House. The rear
lot has a thick layer of asphalt designed to handle the constant loading from heavy vehicles and is a
significant investment. Keeping the asphalt layer sealed will reduce erosion of the sand ingredient that
is currently clogging up the site’s drainage system and will prolong the life of the surface. Slurry seal
coating is a standard maintenance procedure for asphalt surfaces.
GOAL AND POLICY CRITERIA
1. Needed to address a health & safety concern: The slurry seal will prevent the existing erosion of
sand that is clogging the site’s underground drainage system and has filled the runoff clarifier to
approximately 50% of its capacity. Servicing the clogged pipes and pumping out the clarifier will be
expensive and difficult and should be avoided as long as possible.
2. Needed to provide a level of service that is a priority for a significant contingent in the community:.
A functional asphalt surface is critical to the emergency, training, and vehicle maintenance activities
that occur at Fire Station 1.
STAKEHOLDERS
Emergency Responders and the community they serve.
220
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-239
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(PUBLIC SAFETY)
SLURRY SEAL AT FIRE STATION 1
IMPLEMENTATION
Task Date
1. Coordinate with public works on slurry seal project 8/2015
2. Obtain at least three quotes for slurry seal 7/2015
3. Bid awarded by Finance for slurry seal 8/2015
4. Vendor provides slurry seal 9/2015
PROGRAM MANAGER AND TEAM SUPPORT
Program Manager:
Bob Bisson,
Project Team:
Bob Bisson Battalion Chief - SLOFD, Daniel Van Beveren – Public Works (asphalt/slurry advisor), and Julie
Cox, Administrative Analyst - SLOFD
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Defer or Re-Phase the Request. Defer the request.
OPERATING PROGRAM
85500 Technical Services
COST SUMMARY
Line Item Description Account No.2015-162016-17
Staffing 0 0
Contract Services 22,000 0
contract services - Slurry seal contract 100-85500-7227 22,000
Total Operating Costs 22,000 0
Net Operating Costs 22,000 0
221
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-240
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(PUBLIC UTILITIES)
WATER AND SEWER ADMINISTRATION & ENGINEERING CONTRACT SERVICES
SUMMARY OF CHANGE: Additional funding required for contract services to support Water and Sewer
hydraulic models, recycled water study, and update to water and sewer development impact fees.
FISCAL IMPACT: One time cost of $60,000 in 2015-16. On-going cost of $15,000 in 2015-16 and 2016-17.
SERVICE LEVEL IMPACT: These contract services will allow the City to maintain the water, recycled water
and sewer collection system hydraulic models annually in addition to conducting a recycled water rate study and
reviewing water and sewer development impact fees in 2015-16.
KEY OBJECTIVES
1. Develop and maintain hydraulic models that allow for estimating impacts of development projects.
2. Maximize operational efficiency and future capital planning.
EXISTING SITUATION: FACTORS DRIVING THE NEED FOR CHANGE
During the 2013-15 Financial Plan, the Utilities Department utilized consultant services to develop calibrated
hydraulic models of the water distribution system, recycled water distribution system and wastewater collection
system as a tool for estimating impacts of development projects, maximizing operational efficiency, and assisting
with future capital planning. These hydraulic models will require annual maintenance updates as the City
develops, new capital projects are brought on-line, and new pipelines are installed in the City. They will also need
to be recalibrated as additional flow data is available. Maintenance of the water, recycled water, and wastewater
collection system models are estimated to cost $5,000 each per year for a total of $15,000. Contracting for
consultant services to maintain the models is cost effective as the models require specialized software, training,
and expertise to run and maintain.
Recycled Water Rate Study. Upon completion of the Recycled Water Master Plan (tentatively scheduled for
August 2015), a rate study is needed to revisit the current rate structure and consider other elements in the plan
such as an off-peak seasonal rate.
Impact Fees. The City updated its water and sewer development impact fees in August 2013. At that time the
Utilities Department indicated it would consider capacity and connection fees (as opposed to development impact
fees) in its next fee update. Using the 2015 Water Master Plan, the 2015 Wastewater Collection System
Infrastructure Renewal Strategy, and the 2014 Land Use Element, the impact fee study will coordinate with the
citywide impact fee update and infrastructure financing plan. This request will fund the study of a fee structure
that will include necessary capacity improvements to serve new development and the City’s capital investment in
its water distribution pipeline, reservoir infrastructure, and wastewater collection system; all critical infrastructure
elements which have historically not been included in the City’s calculation of water and sewer development
impact fees.
GOAL AND POLICY CRITERIA
1. City of San Luis Obispo, General Plan, Water and Wastewater Management Element, policy A5.2.5 (water)
and B2.2.3 (wastewater).
2. City of San Luis Obispo, General Plan, Land Use Element, policy 1.12.1.
3. Consistency with the 2013-15 Major City Goal: Essential Services, Infrastructure & Fiscal Health
4. City of San Luis Obispo Utilities Department Strategic Plan, Goal 2 – Infrastructure; Goal 4 – Stewardship
222
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-241
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(PUBLIC UTILITIES)
WATER AND SEWER ADMINISTRATION & ENGINEERING CONTRACT SERVICES
STAKEHOLDERS
Community Development Department, Utilities Department staff, as well as the City’s Economic Development
Manager, will work together to ensure stakeholders such as developers, builders, and ratepayers are informed.
The City’s water and sewer ratepayers, as well as developers, will benefit from capacity and connection fees that
most accurately reflect the costs incurred to provide service to new development.
IMPLEMENTATION
Task Date
1. Execute contract with consultants (hydraulic model maintenance, recycled water rate
study, capacity and connection fee study).
July 2015
2. Present recycled water rate study and capacity and connection fee study
recommendations to Council.
June 2016
PROGRAM MANAGER AND TEAM SUPPORT
Program Manager:
Utilities Projects Manager
Project Team:
Deputy Directors from Water and Wastewater, Utilities Business Manager, Utilities Services Manager, Utilities
Analyst, Deputy Director of Community Development, Chief Building Official, and the Economic Development
Manager.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Defer or Re-Phase. While the on-going hydraulic model maintenance could be deferred to a later Financial
Plan, this alternative should only be chosen if the Council desires to reduce the update cycle for the hydraulic
model data. For a relatively low investment, the maintenance of the hydraulic models will provide the ability
to accurately analyze the potable and recycled water distribution systems with the most up-to-date
information and ensure adequate capacity is available in the collection system to avoid potential sanitary
sewer overflows.
2. Use in-house resources to conduct water rate study and capacity and connection fee study. There is in-
house expertise to complete these studies without the use of consultant services although doing so would
require changes to the proposed work program. As the project is currently planned, staff will be significantly
engaged with the work in order to keep consultant costs to a minimum; partnering with the consultants to
maximize the strengths of each party.
OPERATING PROGRAM
55100 – Water Administration/Engineering
55300 – Wastewater Administration/Engineering
223
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-242
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(PUBLIC UTILITIES)
WATER AND SEWER ADMINISTRATION & ENGINEERING CONTRACT SERVICES
COST SUMMARY
Line Item Description Account No.2015-162016-17
Contract Services 75,000 15,000
Water Admin/Engineering - Recycled Water 55100.7227 20,000
Water Admin/Engineering - Hydraulic Model 55100.7227 10,000 10,000
Water Admin/Engineering - Impact Fee 55100.7227 20,000
Sewer Admin/Engineering - Hydraulic Model 55300.7227 5,000 5,000
Sewer Admin/Engineering - Impact Fee 55300.7227 20,000
Total Operating Costs 75,000 15,000
224
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-243
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(PUBLIC UTILITIES)
STAFFING DUE TO UTILITIES DEPARTMENT REORGANIZATION
SUMMARY OF CHANGE: Hiring a Utilities Engineer/Project Manager dedicated to capital projects and development
review, a Health and Safety Engineer to ensure safety for citizens and employees alike, and increasing the three-quarter
time Administrative Assistant to full-time are the next steps toward the future Utilities Department structure.
FISCAL IMPACT: On-going costs of $273,400 in 2015-16 and $273,900 in 2016-17 split equally between the water
and wastewater division.
SERVICE LEVEL IMPACT: To implement the new master plans for Water and Wastewater services requires
engineering support from a dedicated staff member familiar with the Utilities infrastructure. Providing public and
employee safety is essential to the department and its constituency and requires dedicated staff. A workload assessment
for administrative support indicated that an increase in staffing is warranted.
KEY OBJECTIVES
1. Efficient capital improvement plan delivery and development review services.
2. Constant review and implementation of complex and changing safety requirements for strict adherence with OSHA
regulations.
3. Provide proficient and efficient administrative support for a department with 65 employees.
EXISTING SITUATION: FACTORS DRIVING THE NEED FOR CHANGE
Utilities Engineer/Project Manager
Providing safe water and wastewater services to San Luis Obispo citizens requires a vast infrastructure of treatment
plants, pipelines, pump and lift stations. With new master plans being finalized, the Department is embarking on an
ambitious capital projects program that requires dedicated management to be completed to ratepayer expectations. Having
a staff member familiar with the Utilities infrastructure and concentrated on the Utilities CIP program is imperative in
order to provide efficient CIP delivery and development review services.
Health and Safety Engineer
Providing public and employee safety is essential to the Utilities Department and its constituency. OSHA regulations
require strict adherence. Assessment and audit of health and safety risks associated with infrastructure and operational
practices must be routinely conducted and focused training provided on an ongoing basis to ensure compliance and
maximum safety to all involved. Having a dedicated health and safety professional ensuring that complex and changing
safety requirements are met, including in-depth training and administrative requirements, is an important part of the
Utilities’ operation.
Administrative Assistant – ¼ time
The workload assessment for administrative support for the Utilities Department and its 65 Utilities employees indicates
that a minimum of two full-time employees are needed to provide timely public reception and office management, human
resources (including timecards) administration, and various complex and routine administrative tasks.
GOAL AND POLICY CRITERIA
Approval of the positions and hiring the new employees will allow the department to:
- continue to address health and safety concerns for both citizens and employees;
- deliver water and sewer services with the infrastructure required and expected by the ratepayer;
- build the foundation for the next step in aligning the department with the organizational structure required to
deliver water and wastewater services in the 21st century.
225
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-244
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(PUBLIC UTILITIES)
STAFFING DUE TO UTILITIES DEPARTMENT REORGANIZATION
STAKEHOLDERS
- Rate payers expecting safe water treatment and delivery and sewer collection and treatment.
- Water and Wastewater division programs with capital improvement projects and crews working on utilities
infrastructure.
- The Utilities department’s workforce relying on proper and time-efficient administration and office/workspace
management.
IMPLEMENTATION
Task Date
1. Begin hiring process for Utilities Engineer and Health and Safety Engineer July 2015
2. Increase Administrative Assistant time from ¾ to full-time July 1, 2015
3. Finalize selection process and hire positions October 2015
PROGRAM MANAGER AND TEAM SUPPORT
Program Manager:
Director of Utilities
Project Team:
Human Resources, Deputy Directors Water and Wastewater.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Continue the Status Quo. By disallowing the hire of the Utilities Engineer, the capital improvement program would
be greatly hindered and unable to move forward as required by the new master plan. At this point, the department
does not have any safety related oversight and violations of OSHA regulations remain unchecked. Provided the
ambitious work program, additional administrative assistance is imperative for proper operation and administration.
2. Defer or Re-Phase the Request. The hiring of the positions could be staggered. Within the request, the Utilities
Engineer has the highest priority, followed by the Health and Safety Engineer, and Administrative Assistant.
OPERATING PROGRAM
55100 – Water Administration/Engineering
55300 – Wastewater Administration/Engineering
COST SUMMARY
Line Item Description Account No.2015-162016-17Staffing269,400 273,900
Salaries 55100.7010 94,775 95,075
Salaries 55300.7010 94,775 95,075
Benefits 55100.7040-50 39,925 41,875
Benefits 55300.7040-50 39,925 41,875
Other Operating Expenditures 4,000 0
Computer Supplies 55100.7413 2,000
Computer Supplies 55300.7413 2,000
Total Operating Costs 273,400 273,900
226
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-245
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(PUBLIC UTILITIES)
CONTROL SYSTEMS STAFFING
KEY OBJECTIVES
1. Implementation and maintenance of the Utilities Department’s Control Systems infrastructure.
2. Ensuring proper and effective operation of the complex infrastructure and processes associated with water
resource management.
3. Ensuring the community’s health and safety standards through proper operation and alarm systems control.
EXISTING SITUATION: FACTORS DRIVING THE NEED FOR CHANGE
The Utilities Department’s computer-based process control systems program (including programmable logic
controllers, telemetry devices, measuring and monitoring equipment, SCADA) is managed by the City’s IT
division. Effectively operating the complex infrastructure and processes associated with managing the City’s
water and wastewater resources requires heavy reliance on these control systems. Currently IT manages a contract
for control systems support that provides emergency and on-call services. This model does not provide the scope
and level of support needed to enhance these systems. Dedicated staff is required to manage and maintain the
multi-million dollar investments associated with these control systems located throughout the City and County
(Whale Rock Reservoir, Salinas Reservoir, Nacimiento water project and Cal Poly). A $1.5 million capital project
to install SCADA across the water distribution system and Whale Rock Reservoir is at 95 percent design and the
updated Water Resources Recovery Facility and upgrade and needed improvements for the Water Treatment
Plant’s SCADA will require higher levels of technical service. In retrospect, project approval should have
included a staffing component to implement this project; unfortunately it did not. After analyzing the option of
contracting out this work it is clear the overall need for the in-house skills these positions bring is crucial to
operations. The positions would be housed in IT as the interconnectivity of all network systems and association
with the IT team is the most effective and efficient way to deliver this service.
GOAL AND POLICY CRITERIA
1. Assisting in addressing water and wastewater related health & safety concerns.
2. Needed to provide a level of service that is a priority for a significant contingent in the community.
3. City of San Luis Obispo Utilities Department Strategic Plan Goal 2 – Infrastructure; Goal 4 - Stewardship
SUMMARY OF CHANGE: Hiring two new positions (Control Systems Administrator and Control Systems
Technician) to plan, design, develop, implement, modify and maintain the Utilities Department computer-based
process control systems and all components associated with those control systems is crucial for the successful
construction and implementation of the water division’s Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) and
the ongoing safe and proper function of the Utilities infrastructure and service delivery to rate payers.
FISCAL IMPACT: On-going costs of $237,500 in 2015-16 and $235,800 in 2016-17 plus annual staffing
related increases thereafter paid for by the Water and Sewer Enterprise funds. This cost is offset by a reduction in
the annual cost allocation charges for IT/Telemetry of $140,900 that would no longer apply.
SERVICE LEVEL IMPACT: Allow the construction of the $1.5 million control systems capital project and
ensure proper and ongoing maintenance of the entire water and wastewater control systems infrastructure.
227
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-246
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(PUBLIC UTILITIES)
CONTROL SYSTEMS STAFFING
STAKEHOLDERS
Staffing for the control system infrastructure and SCADA are critical to the health and safety of the City and the
compliant and efficient operations of all wastewater and water facilities.
IMPLEMENTATION
Task Date
1. Begin hiring process July 2015
2. Hire employees Mid-September 2015
PROGRAM MANAGER AND TEAM SUPPORT
Program Manager:
Director of Utilities
Project Team:
Interim Director of Information Technology, members of Information Technology and Water and Wastewater
Divisions
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Continue the Status Quo. The status quo would require the hiring of contract services and alternate
approaches to getting the SCADA project moving forward through construction. Investing $1.5 million in an
infrastructure that cannot be properly maintained and kept up, would not be a prudent fiscal investment. It
would require significant staff time to manage the contract services during a complex construction project.
The status quo would not address the serious gap in services Utilities requires to maintain its control systems
infrastructure that exists today and will be installed in the future.
2. Defer or Re-Phase the Request. The request is to fund both positions for the entire year. The Control
Systems Administrator could be hired first after which time the Control Systems Technician (who would
report to the Control Systems Administrator) hiring process could being. This would reduce funding needed
for year one.
3. Implementation in a Different Way. Staff has investigated contracting for these services. The difficulty is
finding contractors locally that do not have to travel here from either down south or up north. Travel time,
overhead cost, and time lag would make this alternative exponentially more expensive and time prohibitive.
OPERATING PROGRAM
55160 – Water Distribution
55310 – Wastewater Collection
55500 – Reservoir Operation
228
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-247
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(PUBLIC UTILITIES)
CONTROL SYSTEMS STAFFING
COST SUMMARY
Line Item Description Account No.2015-162016-17
Staffing 233,000 235,800
Staffing 55160.7010 69,900 69,900
Staffing 55310.7010 77,600 77,600
Staffing 55500.7010 7,700 7,700
Benefits 55160.7040-50 35,000 36,300
Benefits 55310.7040-50 38,900 40,300
Benefits 55500.7040-50 3,900 4,000
Other Operating Expenditures 4,500 0
Computer Supplies 55160.7413 2,000
Computer Supplies 55310.7413 2,250
Computer Supplies 55500.7413 250
Total Operating Costs 237,500 235,800
Offsetting Costs Savings or Revenues
Cost Allocation for Telemetry Services / IT 2013-14 CAP (140,900)(140,900)
Net Operating Costs 96,600 94,900
229
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-248
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(PUBLIC UTILITIES)
WASTEWATER COLLECTION MINOR CAPITAL
SUMMARY OF CHANGE: Implement minor capital funding for the wastewater collection system to ensure
optimal operation and maintenance of the sanitary sewer and stormwater collection systems.
FISCAL IMPACT: One time cost of $26,400 in 2015-16 and ongoing cost of $20,000 in 2015-16 and 2016-17.
SERVICE LEVEL IMPACT: Adequate minor capital funding for responsive maintenance of sanitary sewer
manholes is essential to avoid costly emergency repairs and fines from system overflows. One-time funding for
computer modules and a pipe inspection camera will provide the tools for proper maintenance and operation of
the City’s wastewater collection and stormwater systems.
KEY OBJECTIVES
1. Reduce risk, avoid costly emergency repairs, and failure within the collection system.
2. Enable data configuration and the production of reports necessary for proper maintenance of the City’s
wastewater collection and stormwater systems.
3. Efficiently determine the structural integrity of the sanitary sewer and stormwater systems.
EXISTING SITUATION: FACTORS DRIVING THE NEED FOR CHANGE
Deteriorating Manholes. Manhole replacement and rehabilitation is typically associated with sewerline CIP
projects which is the preferred approach to managing the collection system. However, providing a level of
funding for the rapid rehabilitation of manholes found to be deteriorating to the point of catastrophic failure is
necessary and prudent. Attending these repairs before catastrophic failure can be managed by wastewater staff and
reduces the risk and costs associated with sanitary sewer overflows. Manhole rehabilitation has been a common
activity for Wastewater Collection to oversee and was previously funded in its operating budget.
GIS Select and Analysis Module. Purchasing this module provides the ability to filter and query closed circuit
television (CCTV) data and information to pre-configured reports. This module allows data to be configured so
reports can be produced to enhance the maintenance, operation, and asset management data of the wastewater
collection and stormwater systems. It supports the Wastewater Collection System Infrastructure Renewal Strategy
and other software such as Cityworks Infrastructure Optimization (I/O) asset management software.
Replacement of Pipe Camera. The current portable pipe camera is outdated and operating beyond its useful life.
This tool is critical in determining the structural integrity of infrastructure and has resulted in responsive
maintenance activities and effective data gathering providing improved customer service. Funding will be split
between Utilities and Public Works (50 percent from Sewer and 50 percent from General Fund - Stormwater).
GOAL AND POLICY CRITERIA
1. Comply with the State Water Resources Control Board Order No. 2006-003-DWQ.
2. Maintain compliance with San Luis Obispo’s 2014 Sewer System Management Plan (SSMP).
3. Maintain compliance with San Luis Obispo’s Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP).
4. City of San Luis Obispo Utilities Department Strategic Plan; Goal 2 – Infrastructure, Goal 3 – Regulatory,
Goal 4 - Stewardship
230
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-249
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(PUBLIC UTILITIES)
WASTEWATER COLLECTION MINOR CAPITAL
STAKEHOLDERS
- Wastewater Collection and Stormwater programs.
- Water Quality regulatory agencies.
IMPLEMENTATION
Task Date
1. Hire outside contractor to rehabilitate and coat existing collection system manholes. July 2015
2. Purchase GIS Select and Analysis Module, sole source from IT Pipes. July 2015
3. Purchase pipe camera. July 2015
4. Hire outside contractor to rehabilitate and coat collection system manholes. July 2016
PROGRAM MANAGER AND TEAM SUPPORT
Program Manager:
Wastewater Collection Supervisor
Project Team:
Wastewater Collection and Stormwater program employees.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Continue the Status Quo. The request intends to replace infrastructure at the end of its useful life. Continue
to use the current assets will increase the risk of failure and liability to the City.
2. Change the Scope of Request. The request for minor capital funding to replace deteriorating manholes could
be increase to address more location within one year. However, staff believes that the requested amount will
allow for improvement and continued maintenance of the manhole infrastructure on a responsive annual basis.
OPERATING PROGRAM
55310 – Wastewater Collection
50230 - Stormwater
COST SUMMARY
Line Item Description Account No.2015-162016-17
Minor Capital 46,40020,000
Coat Deteriorated Manholes 55310.7957 20,00020,000
Purchase GIS Select and Analysis Module 55310.7957 8,400
Purchase Pipe Camera (Utilities)55310.7957 9,000
(Public Works) 50320.7957 9,000
Total Operating Costs 46,40020,000
231
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-250
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(PUBLIC UTILITIES)
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM PERMIT – STUDIES AND ANALYSIS
SUMMARY OF CHANGE: Additional operating funds are needed at the Water Quality Lab to support testing,
analysis, and special studies associated with the City’s new National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permit for the Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF).
FISCAL IMPACT: On-going costs of $17,000 annually.
SERVICE LEVEL IMPACT: This funding will support mandated studies, testing, and analysis needed for the
City WRRF’s newly issued NPDES permit.
KEY OBJECTIVES
1. Conduct additional studies, testing, and analysis as required by the City WRRF’s new NPDES permit
including material, supplies, and equipment not currently available in the Water Quality Lab operating
budget.
2. Fulfill the terms of water quality testing as mandated by federal and state requirements under the new NPDES
permit.
EXISTING SITUATION: FACTORS DRIVING THE NEED FOR CHANGE
NPDES Permit. The WRRF’s revised NPDES permit requires additional sampling, analysis and reporting. The
additional requirements are mandatory water quality regulations and discharge requirements that allow the
compliant operation of the WRRF and discharge into San Luis Obispo Creek.
GOAL AND POLICY CRITERIA
1. Protecting the health and safety of the community.
2. City of San Luis Obispo General Plan, Water and Wastewater Management Element.
3. City of San Luis Obispo Utilities Department Strategic Plan Goal 3 – Regulatory; Goal 4 - Stewardship.
4. Compliance with Federal and State mandated regulations.
STAKEHOLDERS
Water Quality Lab and WRRF staff
Federal and State water quality agencies
IMPLEMENTATION
Task Date
1. Ongoing sampling and analysis July 1, 2015
PROGRAM MANAGER AND TEAM SUPPORT
Program Manager:
The Water Quality Lab Manager is responsible for program execution and the timely submittal of permit required
data and reporting.
232
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-251
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(PUBLIC UTILITIES)
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM PERMIT – STUDIES AND ANALYSIS
Project Team:
The Water Quality Lab Manager is supported by Water Quality Lab Analysts and the Water Resource Recovery
Facility staff.
ALTERNATIVE:
This is a regulatory mandate. Alternatives to meeting this mandate would put the City at risk to become out of
compliance with its NPDES permit requirements.
OPERATING PROGRAM
55350 – Water Quality Lab
COST SUMMARY
Line Item Description Account No.2015-162016-17
Contract Services 17,000 17,000
WRRF Mandated Analysis 55350-7255 17,000 17,000
Total Operating Costs 17,000 17,000
233
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-252
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(PUBLIC UTILITIES)
WATER QUALITY LABORATORY ANALYST
SUMMARY OF CHANGE: Addition of one FTE Water Quality Laboratory Analyst.
FISCAL IMPACT: On-going costs of $77,157 in 2015-16 and $81,227 in 2016-17.
SERVICE LEVEL IMPACT: This position will provide needed staffing to meet the increased workload for ongoing
studies related to the City’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit to comply with State and
Federal water quality regulations.
KEY OBJECTIVES
1. Comply with State and Federal Water Quality regulations mandated by the City’s new NPDES permit.
2. Ensure that all requirements of the NPDES permit are considered, properly administered, and reported.
EXISTING SITUATION: FACTORS DRIVING THE NEED FOR CHANGE
Ongoing operational requirements at the Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF). The required sampling and
analysis to meet the requirements of the recently revised NPDES permit and ongoing process control sampling have
critically exceeded the Water Quality Laboratory’s ability to accomplish them on a regular work schedule.
The lab has utilized part- and full-time temporary employees to meet the time sensitive demands of sampling, analysis,
reporting, and other lab duties, in addition to shift coverage for its seven-day-a-week operation. This has not proven to be
a sustainable solution given the complicated workload and requirements for shift coverage. This request is a cost effective
and time efficient answer to meet the required workload given that the cost of outsourcing the analysis would exceed the
cost of hiring staff. This position was not filled when vacant in 2009 and was subsequently deleted from Water Quality
Laboratory’s budget in 2009 as a cost saving measure.
GOAL AND POLICY CRITERIA
1. State and Federal Mandates: With the new NPDES permit came new and more stringent discharge requirements. In
order to ensure the mandated discharge levels are achieved, increased testing is necessary.
2. The sampling and analysis addresses the community’s health and safety concerns by safekeeping the creek and
recycled water quality.
3. This request conforms to the City’s Temporary Employee policy, as much of the increased workload has been
accomplished with temporary aid.
STAKEHOLDERS
Water Quality Lab and WRRF staff
Federal and State agencies governing the new NPDES permit
IMPLEMENTATION
The hiring process would begin with the new fiscal year. The position is expected to be filled by mid-September.
Task Date
1. Open Recruitment July 1, 2015
2. Hire Laboratory Analyst Mid-September 2015
234
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-253
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(PUBLIC UTILITIES)
WATER QUALITY LABORATORY ANALYST
PROGRAM MANAGER AND TEAM SUPPORT
Program Manager:
The Water Quality Lab Manager will work with the Human Resources department through the hiring and selection
process.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Continue the Status Quo. This request is based on the demands and requirements of the new NPDES permit which is
a State and Federal mandate. Leaving regular staffing levels at status quo would require additional temporary staffing
to be hired. This work is permanent and ongoing as directly tied to the new NPDES permit. Filling the need with
temporary staffing is inconsistent with the City’s temporary employee policy.
2. Existing Program Evaluation. The Water Quality Lab already contracts for services that cannot be efficiently
accomplished in-house due to the special equipment needed for the analysis of specific tests. Contract services are
currently invoiced at a cost of $88,900. Contracting out additional analysis still requires staff to sample, process and
manage analytical samples including the analytical results.
OPERATING PROGRAM
55350 - Water Quality Lab
COST SUMMARY
Line Item Description Account No.2015-162016-17
Staffing 77,157 81,227
Laboratory Analyst (SBP)55350.7010 60,138 63,310
Retirement Contribution 55350.7040 17,019 17,917
Health & Disability Insurance 55350.7042 15,712 16,000
Medicare 55350.7044 872 918
Other Operating Expenditures 0 0
Total Operating Costs 77,157 81,227
Offsetting Costs Savings or Revenues (Enter as a negative
number. If there are none, delete this row in the table.)
Net Operating Costs 77,157 81,227
235
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-254
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(TRANSPORTATION)
PARKING SERVICES STAFFING – ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING OFFICER
SUMMARY OF CHANGE: Add a temporary part time Administrative Hearing Officer position in Parking
Services.
FISCAL IMPACT: Funding for this request will come from Parking Services existing temporary staffing
budget so the request is cost neutral.
SERVICE LEVEL IMPACT: An Administrative Hearing Officer position is essential to the proper functioning
of the City’s parking enforcement process.
KEY OBJECTIVES
1. Continues the high level of service to the community in reviewing citation appeals
2. Retains well trained individuals as administrative appellate reviewers and minimizes costs associated with
training and re-training individuals due to turnover of volunteers
EXISTING SITUATION: FACTORS DRIVING THE NEED FOR CHANGE
The parking citation contestation hearing process is an integral and necessary part of parking enforcement.
Beginning in 1996 California Vehicle Code (CVC) requires any agency that issues parking citations to offer free
administrative hearings as part of the parking citation appeal process.
In the past the Administrative Hearing Officer function was provided by volunteers. Because the time
commitment has increased significantly over the past few years due to the addition of Sunday enforcement and
new residential parking districts, the City has begun to pay a temporary part-time staff member to conduct the
administrative hearings. Additionally, the State requires Hearing officers to complete 20 hours of training that can
be costly and time consuming if turn over occurs.
CVC section 40215 (a)(4)(A) states that the officer/examiner must be separate and independent from the
citation collection or processing function. As such, this position needs to be separate from other temporary
positions in Parking Services. Staff recommends a paid position at a flat hourly rate of $20-$25. Five California
cities were contacted regarding their Administrative Hearing Officer positions. Of the five cities contacted, four
provided compensation to either contracted-out or in-house staff. The compensation method (case-by-case, flat
rate, etc.) varied from city to city. Case-by-case compensation can range from $30 to $35 per case.
Currently, the staff person handling administrative hearings conducts hearings every other Friday for about five
hours; for a total of 120 hours annually. At $25 per hour this position would cost roughly $3,000 annually. This
position is budgeted at $3,500 annually to ensure all reasonably unforeseen additional costs are covered.
GOAL AND POLICY CRITERIA
City policy allows for hiring of temporary workers if available budget exists. This SOPC requests simply
formalizes the existing compensation being paid to the City’s citation reviewer.
STAKEHOLDERS
236
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-255
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(TRANSPORTATION)
PARKING SERVICES STAFFING – ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING OFFICER
Primary stakeholders involved in this recommendation are members of the public that are seeking administrative
review of their parking citations. A well trained and knowledgeable review officer will be providing higher levels
of service and consistency for these stakeholders as their reviews are processed.
IMPLEMENTATION
Because the position is currently filled the implementation of this SOPC will begin on the first day of the next
fiscal year.
PROGRAM MANAGER AND TEAM SUPPORT
Program Manager:
Parking Manager
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Continue the Status Quo. The current citation appeals officer is being compensated and this request will not
change that.
2. Defer or Re-Phase the Request. The City could deny the request and instead contract out for this process or
rely on volunteers. Contracting for this service will be more costly based upon comparisons with other
agencies. Relying on a volunteer group may save salary but will require time and costs of other staff to hire,
train and monitor the volunteer force. Substantial saving is not anticipated under this scenario and if high
turnover should occur, will likely be more costly to the City.
OPERATING PROGRAM
Parking Services: 50600
COST SUMMARY
Line Item Description Account No.2015-162016-17
Staffing 3,551 3,640
Temporary Salaries*50600-7014 3,500 3,588
Medicare 50600-7044 51 52
Total Operating Costs 3,551 3,640
Offsetting Costs Savings
Temporary Salaries 50600-7014 (3,500)(3,588)
Medicare 50600-7044 (51)(52)
Net Operating Costs 0 0 *Existing temporary salary savings have been used to fund this position in the past. This proposal would identify
and budget those funds specifically for the use of the temporary parking administrative officer position.
237
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-256
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES)
PARKS & RECREATION REORGANIZATION TO ENHANCE GOLF AND SENIOR PROGRAMS
SUMMARY OF CHANGE: Reorganize the operations of the Laguna Lake Golf Course Program within the
Parks and Recreation Department (due to a retirement and the identification of an enhanced operational structure).
Existing program budget resources are sufficient to accomplish a reorganization focused on maintenance and
programming and are proposed to be used to add one additional Recreation Coordinator in Parks and Recreation
to address program needs for both Golfers and Seniors.
FISCAL IMPACT: None. Existing program budget is sufficient.
SERVICE LEVEL IMPACT: Increase the Golf Program’s full time regular staff at the Laguna Lake Golf
Course by one net new full time position. It is proposed upon the retirement on May 4th of the Recreation
Supervisor Golf that the program be reorganized into maintenance and programming. The maintenance functions
with management support coming from the Recreation Supervisor for Aquatics and Facilities would consist of a
Golf Crew Coordinator and two Maintenance Workers II/III as well as a part time city worker seasonal position.
The programming functions would be supported by a new position of Recreation Coordinator Golf/Seniors with
the 2015-16 budget adoption to coordinate programmatic activites at the Golf Course and Senior Center as well as
coordinate part time Proshop workers and volunteers. This position would be supported by the Recreation
Supervisor Sports.
The addition of a Recreation Coordinator Golf/Seniors to the Parks and Recreation Department would allow for
all programs in the Department to work together in a coordinated effort to improve services at the Laguna Lake
Golf Course and the Senior Center. This operational enhancement responds to Measure G by enhancing Senior
Programming. By having one position focused on senior activities (which take place at two separate facilities) the
hope is to better coordinate activities for Seniors throughout the City. The position would also assist in the
transition in anticipated staff retirements at the Course in 2015, including the hiring, scheduling, and training of
all Proshop staff and Course volunteers. The position would be in charge of operating the Golf Course Proshop,
implementing software upgrades at the Course to enhance user efficiencies, managing financial and general office
administrative tasks, and marketing the Course. This position in coordination with the Recreation Coordinator,
Sports would manage the programming at the Golf Course and where possible add new recreational opportunities
to the course. This position would be a complement to the Golf Course Maintenance Crew Coordinator whose
position is intended to coordinate all maintenance activities at the Golf Course including supervising two
maintenance workers and one seasonal worker and is supervised by the Recreation Supervisor Aquatics/Facilities.
KEY OBJECTIVES
1. Increase Golf Staffing within Existing Resources. Provide added staffing to the Golf Course with a
specific focus on programming, customer service, and fiscal management to all golfers.
2. Enhance Senior Programming. Enhance two programs at the Golf Course and Senior Center to improve
services to the community. Provide operational innovations at the Golf Course and Senior Center in support
of senior programming, responding to Measure G.
3. Add New Activities and Enhance User Experience. Enhance Programming at the Course by easier to use
reservation software, new events such as Concerts on the Green, exploring the addition of Foot Golf and or
Pickleball along with broadened programs at the Course including cards at the Clubhouse.
4. Work in Partnership with Maintenance. Provide a compliment and enhance maintenance staff structure at
the Golf Course consisting of a Golf Maintenance Crew Coordinator, two Parks Maintenance Workers and
one seasonal part time worker arising from a reorganization.
238
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-257
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES)
PARKS & RECREATION REORGANIZATION TO ENHANCE GOLF AND SENIOR PROGRAMS
5. Allow for Maintenance Staff to Focus on Maintenance Enhancements. Provide the Maintenance Staff
time to increase conservation efforts at the Course including modernizing irrigation and site specific weather
systems, evaluating and where appropriate installing new grasses and other opportunities focused on turf
reduction.
EXISTING SITUATION: FACTORS DRIVING THE NEED FOR CHANGE
Retirement of Long Time Supervisor
The long time supervisor of the Golf Course will retire on May 4, 2015, and it is anticipated that many of the pro
shop workers who have worked under him (many of whom have retired from multiple careers already) will also
choose to retire this year. The long time retiree has 30 years of experience at the course and invaluable
institutational knowledge. For years he has worked as an active supervisor and has physically performed
maintenance duties himself daily. His time has been split with greater emphasis on maintenance than
programming. He has worked on average many more hours than a 40 hour work week. As this structure is not
sustainable, this has resulted in a proposed reorganization of the Golf Course Program staff to better address the
operational and programmatic needs of the facility in the long term and to set it up for continued success.
All Hands Approach
In analyzing the best way to staff the Course into the future, and to best address the Council and public’s recent
feedback on operations, Parks and Recreation proposes taking an all hands on deck approach to managing and
enhancing Laguna Lake Golf Course in the future and better integrating the Course into the Department and with
the Senior population that does not golf. To accomplish this staff is proposing a reorganization of the Golf
Program into two divisions of the Department with one maintenance focused and the other programming (similar
to the overall structure that the department uses already). The proposed reorganization of the Golf Program
suggests taking the duties of the Golf Course Supervisor position and splitting it into the two new divisons. Staff
is recommending a change in job duties so that those engaged in maintenance can focus solely on that activity and
the same for programming. Of course both divisions will be partners but would report to different supervisors in
the Department to better integrate the Course into the Department’s offerings to the community and to better use
Recreation Supervisors with expertise in maintenance and programming respectively. The proposed
organizational structure would look like this:
Mechanics of Reorganization and Staffing Addition
Recreation
Supervisor
Aquatics/Facilities
Golf Crew
Coordinator
Golf Maintenance
Worker II/III
Golf Maintenance
Worker II/III
Part Time
Seasonal
Recreation
Supervisor Sports
NEW Recreation
Coordinator
Golf/Seniors
Part Time Proshop
Golf Volunteers
Senior Volunteers
239
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-258
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES)
PARKS & RECREATION REORGANIZATION TO ENHANCE GOLF AND SENIOR PROGRAMS
To facilitate the reorganization of the golf program into two divisions the Golf Course Supervisor position, upon the
incumbent’s retirement, would be reclassified to Golf Course Crew Coordinator. There would be salary savings
from that reclassification that is proposed to be reallocated by Council upon adoption of the 2015-17 Financial Plan
and used to fund in part the Recreation Coordiantor Golf/Seniors. The Golf Crew Coordinator would be focused on
maintenance activities and would be a lead role at the Course. It is similar to the Streets Crew Coordinator and
Parks Maintenance Crew Coordinator positions which exist already at the City. SLOCEA has been met with on this
topic and approves of this restructuring in the area of maintenance. Staff would meet and confer with SLOCEA on
the topic of the Recreation Coordinator position following Council’s approval of it with budget adoption.
The new position of Recreation Coordinator Golf Course/Seniors would plan, organize and coordinate recreation
programs at the Golf Course and the Senior Center, including activities and special events. This position would
also assist with activities associated with operating the Course Proshop which includes staffing it about 12 hours a
day seven days a week with temporary staffing and volunteers (including hiring, training, scheduling, time card
management of Proshop personnel), management of operational software and assisting with programmatic
activities ranging from promotions of the Course to implementing new recreational efforts at the course and some
general office administrative tasks and supervision and volunteer program management.
Operational Model Is Intended to Provide a Foundation for Continued Success at the Golf Course
As Council is familiar the users of Laguna Lake Golf Course are passionate about its level of maintenance and
operations. Staff believes that this operational model as proposed will allow for the transition of a key staff member
to retirement while allowing for new staff to have the foundation for continued success. Under this reorganization
and enhancement the Golf Course staff in 2015-17 would be able to focus on new program initiatives, staff training,
and increased sustainable practices in ongoing maintenance.
With this reorganization, it is intended that all of the City’s Recreation Programs will take a more active part in
the development of new initiatives at the Course. For instance, Sports could identify facility enhancements (a
future CIP) to offer Pickleball at the Course as well develop new activities for active adults. Ranger Service staff
could become involved in developing a walking trail and nature walks around areas of the golf course.
Community Services would continue to actively enhance senior programming and with increased coordination of
all Senior activities offered both at the Course and the Senior Center would serve more members of the growing
senior community in San Luis Obispo. The Recreation Coordinator at the Golf Course would assist in Senior
activities at both facilities. Staff believes that a diversified supervision structure will result in better integration
within the department of this key facility as will staff being focused on either maintenance or programming but
not both. This is the model used at both the SLO Swim Center and Damon Garcia Sports fields to great success.
In response to Council consensus, staff will continue to develop best practices for the golf course and these
enhancements and innovations will encourage use beyond golf, as well as preserve the natural setting of the
course. The enhancements of the reorganization proposed is intended to increase programming to the Golf
Course and the Senior Center and improve coordination across programs. This added operational enhancement
responds to Measure G by enhancing Senior Programming. In addition, the Pro-Shop operations, customer
service and fiscal management will be the center of activity for the programming side of operations for the course
and will be best utilized as a separate function from the maintenance.
240
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-259
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES)
PARKS & RECREATION REORGANIZATION TO ENHANCE GOLF AND SENIOR PROGRAMS
GOAL AND POLICY CRITERIA
1. Measure G ballot language for enhancing senior programs.
2. Additional recreation opportunities continue to expand upon all users in the community from seniors to youth,
requiring additional staffing for the site and patron safety.
3. Upgrade to the online reservation system will deliver daily functionality and future vision to the community
and LLGC staff.
4. Expansion and promotion of new programming, (such as FootGolf, Pickle Ball, Events and Non-County
Resident fee) that will generate new revenue sources.
STAKEHOLDERS
A wide range of stakeholders are affected by this program, including seniors, golfers, community members,
residents and visitors. Internal stakeholders include Recreation Supervisors for Aquatics/Facilties, Adult and
Youth Sports, Community Services and the Senior Center.
IMPLEMENTATION
Task Date
1. Meet and Confer with SLOCEA
2. Work with Human Resources on Recruitment
July 2015
August 2015
3. Recruit and Interview Eligible Candidates Sept. 2015
4. Orientation and Training Fall 2015
5. New Programs for Golf and Seniors Ongoing
PROGRAM MANAGER AND TEAM SUPPORT
Program Manager:
The Recreation Supervisors Aquatics/Facilities and Sports are responsible for ensuring critical services necessary
to ensure success of Laguna Lake Golf Course.
Project Team:
Golf Course Staff, Parks and Recreation Analyst and all Divisions of Parks and Recreation.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Continue the Status Quo. By continuing with the current Golf Course staffing structure, the program will
rely on the newly hired Golf Maintenance Crew Coordinator to maintain operations of the Golf Course
maintenance and the Pro Shop. With impending retirements of valued staff and volunteers this will become a
strain on the Course and staff and does not set the Golf Course up for success.
OPERATING PROGRAM
Laguna Lake Golf Course – 60900
COST SUMMARY
241
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-260
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES)
PARKS & RECREATION REORGANIZATION TO ENHANCE GOLF AND SENIOR PROGRAMS
Line Item Description Account No.2015-162016-17
Staffing 85,82686,851
Golf/Seniors Recreation Coordinator 100-60900-7010 53,976 53,976
PERS 100-60900-7040 15,275 16,300
Medicare 100-60900-7044 783 783
Insurance 100-60900-7042 15,792 15,792
Total Operating Costs 85,82686,851
Revenue offset Cost
Salary Savings Reorganization 100-60900-7010 (55,482)(55,482)
Part Time Temporary Golf 100-60900-7014 (30,344)(31,369)
Net Operating Costs 0 0
242
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-261
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT)
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ENGINEER
SUMMARY OF CHANGE: Augment CIP Engineering resources to reduce capital project
implementation costs.
FISCAL IMPACT: On-going operating cost of $136,500 in 2015-16 and $145,200 in 2016-17, offset by
reductions in the design service with the adopted CIP.
SERVICE LEVEL IMPACT: The primary objective of the CIP Engineering Program is to deliver quality
Capital projects in a cost effective manner.
KEY OBJECTIVES
1. Reduce design costs for CIP projects
2. Increase consistency of design
EXISTING SITUATION: FACTORS DRIVING THE NEED FOR CHANGE
Upon passage of the original ½ cent sales tax (Measure Y), the CIP Engineering program made a conscious
decision to hold staffing levels and absorb the increased workload through increased consultant services. This
decision was based on the sunset clause of the measure and the reality that new staff have a “start-up” time before
they become fully productive. Engineering management worked with on-call service consultants to streamline
their integration with staff to produce as seamless an operation as possible. Consultants were provided access to
records to complete their own research with the City’s historical construction documents and provided high levels
of feedback on their initial projects. The result was less than hoped for in terms of creating highly integrated
consultant staff. The projects selected for consultants changed from specialized to more routine projects in the
hopes of improving integration and reducing the amount of time staff devoted to plan review. The result was
again less than hoped for. As part of the 2011-13 Financial Plan adoption, the use of a contract employee was
proposed as a substitute for consultant services. This request was approved and a contract employee began work
in 2012.
An analysis has been completed of a group of projects where both staff and consultants have produced similar
projects in order to compare costs as much “apples to apples” as possible. The analysis shows that the average
cost of design for paving and sealing projects, as a percentage of the construction cost, is 3% for City staff as
compared to 11.5% for a consultant. The staff cost is based on actual hours, multiplied by full compensation rates
for an Engineer III. The actual costs were lower as the work was accomplished in part with a contract Engineer I
and student intern, both unbenefited. Sampling of curb ramp projects showed a similar trend with staff cost at
25.7% on average and consultant average cost at 109.5%. The sample size is not very large; however, the
significant difference and consistency of results across all design activities supports the finding that staff is able to
more cost effectively produce Capital projects. Office space and computing equipment are currently available to
support the additional position with no additional investment. Transportation is available, on an as needed basis,
through the existing pool cars.
GOAL AND POLICY CRITERIA
1. The Council has indicated clear support for continued Capital Improvements, possibly increasing funding
levels over those of previous years, in the 2015-17 Financial Plan.
243
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-262
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT)
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ENGINEER
2. The City’s Financial Management Manual (Section 210) identifies Public Works Engineering as the
centralized purchasing authority for construction projects and related services, making Engineering the
appropriate location for identified increased resource needs to deliver construction projects.
3. A change in project delivery approach for certain projects, from consultant services to internal staff is
anticipated to result in a net cost savings to the City estimated at $250,000 (based on anticipated delivery
capacity for an additional engineer and design budgets proposed in the Capital program) for a mix of General
Fund and Enterprise projects.
STAKEHOLDERS
All internal clients of the CIP Engineering program of Public Works will potentially be affected by this change.
Historically, internal design staff is more accessible and more familiar with City operations and needs, and so able
to provide a higher level of service to clients than contract services. Regardless of delivery method, clients are
involved in scoping, reviewing, and final construction of their projects through the Engineering staff designing or
managing consultant design. Preliminary analysis of the projected 2015-17 Financial Plan, indicates there will be
cost savings for the overall CIP in excess of the cost of this staff addition. The Community, as the ultimate
stakeholders in City operations, will benefit through reduced costs of design delivery.
IMPLEMENTATION
The Utilities Department will participate with Public Works in implementing design work in-house with this
additional resource. As savings on design are realized, the funds will be reprogramed into the CIP to meet other
pressing needs.
Task Date
1. Advertise position July 2015
2. Hire engineer Sept 2015
3. Reallocate savings (Financial Plan Supplement) June 2016
PROGRAM MANAGER AND TEAM SUPPORT
Program Manager:
CIP Engineering Program - Supervising Civil Engineer
Project Team:
Utilities will be a partner in implementing internal design and participated in a discussion of this delivery model.
There will be some minor impacts to Administrative services in Public Works and Finance and Information
Technology to handle employee related activities.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Continue the Status Quo. Continuing Status Quo of using a contract employee for an extended period for
ongoing regular work is not compliant with the City’s Personnel Rules & Regulations.
244
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-263
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT)
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ENGINEER
2. Implementation in a Different Way. The alternative to the proposed staff augmentation and continuation of
the status quo, is to end the contract currently in effect and resume higher levels of consultant design services.
Analysis indicates this is more costly than providing these services in-house.
3. Existing Program Evaluation. As discussed above, under the Existing Situation, analysis indicates this is a
cost effective delivery model.
OPERATING PROGRAM
CIP Engineering (50410)
COST SUMMARY
Initial reductions in the CIP to offset program costs will come from the Street Reconstruction and Stormdrain
Replacement design budgets (pending final Council CIP adoption and approval of this SOPC.) As the new
employee becomes more productive and additional savings in the CIP are realized, the released funds will be
reallocated to other needs.
Line Item Description Account No.2015-162016-17
Staffing 113,800 121,600
Salary 100.50410 75,600 79,400
PERS 100.50410 21,400 25,300
Insurance 100.50410 15,700 15,700
Unemployment 100.50410
Medicare 100.50410 1,100 1,200
Other Operating Expenditures 22,700 23,600
20% Reserve Fund Balance 22,700 23,600
Total Operating Costs 136,500 145,200
Initial Reductions in CIP Project Design Funding:
- Street Reconstruction & Resurfacing*(120,000)(123,900)
- Stormdrain Replacements*(16,500)(21,300)
Net costs across Operating and Capital programs 0 0
*Note that funding for these CIPs will be adjusted as noted in each of the CIP write-ups if this SOPC is approved.
245
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-264
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT)
PROJECT MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE ONGOING SUPPORT
SUMMARY OF CHANGE: Provide funding for ongoing maintenance and hosting of Project Management
software approved for implementation in the 2013-15 Financial Plan.
FISCAL IMPACT: On-going net costs of $27,000 in 2015-16 and $25,200 in 2016-17.
SERVICE LEVEL IMPACT: Project Management Software allows for consolidated scheduling, tracking and
reporting of all City projects. These activities are currently accomplished in CIP Engineering using a combination
of an unreliable FoxPro application, Microsoft Project, and Excel. These programs are not consistently used
across the organization, with each department using whatever tools are available to them. Maintaining the
program will provide for a centralized, uniform, and streamlined approach to project management.
KEY OBJECTIVES
1. Provide funding for ongoing maintenance, licensing, and hosting for the City’s CIP Project Management
program software and data.
EXISTING SITUATION: FACTORS DRIVING THE NEED FOR CHANGE
The purchase and deployment of new project management software was approved as part of the 2013-15
Financial Plan. Once implemented, the software has ongoing support, maintenance, and hosting costs to allow it
to be used.
1. The Council has indicated clear support for continued Capital Improvements, possibly increasing funding
levels over those of previous years, in the 2015-17 Financial Plan.
2. The City’s Financial Management Manual (Section 210) identifies Public Works Engineering as the
centralized purchasing authority for construction projects and related services, making Engineering the
appropriate location for identified increased resource needs to deliver construction projects.
STAKEHOLDERS
Project Management software will allow for a consistent tool for anyone completing a project or tracking project
status. This information is often of interest to the community, the Council, City management, and project
proponents. Standardized software for tracking will provide more accessible and comprehensive information on
project status.
GOAL AND POLICY CRITERIA
1. Council Goals include project implementation directly related to Project Management needs.
2. Operating Program Goals for CIP Engineering include the oversight and management of construction
projects, directly related to Project Management needs.
3. Cost Allocation Plan development requires detailed tracking for assignment of operating program costs. CIP
Engineering works under multiple funds and Project Management software provides the mechanism to readily
track project hours for allocation
246
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-265
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT)
PROJECT MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE ONGOING SUPPORT
IMPLEMENTATION
Task Date
1. Award Contract for Software Deployment December, 2014
2. Complete Installation December, 2015
3. Make 1st Year Payment December, 2015
PROGRAM MANAGER AND TEAM SUPPORT
Program Manager:
CIP Engineering Supervising Civil Engineer
Project Team:
The project team for ongoing costs is minimal and involves generally, only bill processing. There may be possible
impacts to having the software hosted that have not been foreseen at this time. Any issues will be addressed in
cooperation with Information Technology staff.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Deny the Request. If the request is denied, the investment in the software will be lost as the product will be
unusable.
OPERATING PROGRAM
CIP Project Engineering (50410)
COST SUMMARY
Line Item Description Account No.2015-162016-17
Contract Services 27,000 27,000
Data Processing Services 100.50410.7229 27,000 27,000
Total Operating Costs 27,000 27,000
Offsetting Costs Savings or Revenues
Microsoft Project Subscription (1,800)
Net Operating Costs 27,000 25,200
247
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-266
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(GENERAL GOVERNMENT)
INCREASE IN LIABILITY INSURANCE
SUMMARY OF CHANGE: Increase in general liability premiums
FISCAL IMPACT: On-going costs of $294,163 in 2015-16 and $556,942 in 2016-17.
SERVICE LEVEL IMPACT: On-going costs of $294,163 in 2015-16 and $556,942 in 2016-17 are based on
actual required contribution amounts provided by CJPIA for 2015-16 and a 15% increase estimate in 2016-17.
Not paying premiums would result in having no liability insurance coverage.
KEY OBJECTIVES
1. Comply with contractual obligation with CJPIA to fund Liability Insurance annual contributions.
EXISTING SITUATION: FACTORS DRIVING THE NEED FOR CHANGE
The City of San Luis Obispo became a member of the CJPIA in 2003 for participation in the liability program.
Membership in the CJPIA means sharing risk with other member agencies. However, the risk is shared among a
large number of agencies, who share common goals of risk avoidance, claims control and transfer of risk in order
to eliminate or reduce exposure. By following proven practices of risk management, member agencies assist each
other in keeping the cost of claims down. By sharing risk, the cost to an agency for a year with significant claims
experience is somewhat mitigated and spread out over a number of years.
The CJPIA Executive Committee approved a prospective funding model (beginning with claim year 2013-14) that
aimed at funding coverage periods sufficiently, providing budgetary predictability for members by requiring one
annual contribution and eliminating the retrospective adjustments, and rewarding effective loss control and risk
management efforts with lower rates. Coverage years under the prospective formula will not be adjusted
retrospectively on an annual basis. However, if net asset levels become insufficient, an assessment may be
needed in the future. The new funding model is intended to provide overall financial strength and security for the
pool, and rate stability and fairness for the members. Coverage years under the old funding model (prior to 2013-
14) will continue to have retrospective adjustments until all claims are closed for those years.
GOAL AND POLICY CRITERIA
Other Important Objective: Fiscal Sustainability and Responsibility
STAKEHOLDERS
All City Departments
IMPLEMENTATION
Task Date
1. Receive annual contribution information from CJPIA April 2015
2. Liability Insurance annual contribution due to CJPIA July 2015
248
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-267
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(GENERAL GOVERNMENT)
INCREASE IN LIABILITY INSURANCE
PROGRAM MANAGER AND TEAM SUPPORT
Program Manager:
Greg Zocher, Human Resources Manager
Project Team:
Monica Irons, Human Resources Director
Wayne Padilla, Finance and Information Technology Director
Jason Stilwell, Interim Information Technology and Financial Planning Director
Joe Lamers, Budget Manager
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Continue the Status Quo. Failure to pay insurance premiums would be a breach of contract with CJPIA.
2. Defer or Re-Phase the Request. Paying the additional insurance premium at a later time would result in
assessment of late penalties.
OPERATING PROGRAM
30200 – Risk Management
COST SUMMARY
Increase In Liability Insurance
Fiscal
Year Total
Annual
Increases
In 2015-17
Cumulative
Increase Over
2014-15 (SOPC)
FY 14-15 1,457,697
FY 15-16 1,751,860 294,163 294,163
FY 16-17 2,014,639 262,779 556,942
Line Item Description Account No.2015-162016-17
Staffing 0 0
Regular Salaries
PERS
PARS
Health Insurance
Medicare
Unemployment Insurance
Total Operating Costs 100.30200.7725 294,163 556,942
Net Operating Costs 294,163 556,942
249
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-268
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(GENERAL GOVERNMENT)
INCREASE IN WORKERS’ COMPENSATION INSURANCE
SUMMARY OF CHANGE: Increase in Workers’ Compensation premiums
FISCAL IMPACT: On-going costs of $388,016 in 2015-16 and $690,956 in 2016-17.
SERVICE LEVEL IMPACT: On-going costs of $388,016 in 2015-16 and $690,956 in 2016-17 are based
on actual required contribution amounts provided by CJPIA for 2015-16 and a 15% increase estimate in 2016-17.
Not paying the premiums would result in having no workers’ compensation insurance coverage.
KEY OBJECTIVES
1. Comply with contractual obligation with CJPIA to fund Workers’ Compensation annual contributions.
EXISTING SITUATION: FACTORS DRIVING THE NEED FOR CHANGE
The City of San Luis Obispo became a member of the CJPIA in 2004 for participation in the workers’
compensation program. Membership in the CJPIA means sharing risk with other member agencies. However, the
risk is shared among a large number of agencies, who share common goals of risk avoidance, claims control and
transfer of risk in order to eliminate or reduce exposure. By following proven practices of risk management, member
agencies assist each other in keeping the cost of claims down. By sharing risk, the cost to an agency for a year with
significant claims experience is somewhat mitigated and spread out over a number of years.
The CJPIA Executive Committee approved a prospective funding model (beginning with the claim year 2013-14)
that aimed at funding coverage periods sufficiently, providing budgetary predictability for members by requiring
one annual contribution and eliminating the retrospective adjustments, and rewarding effective loss control and
risk management efforts with lower rates. Coverage years under the prospective formula will not be adjusted
retrospectively on an annual basis. However, if net asset levels become insufficient, an assessment may be
needed in the future. The new funding model is intended to provide overall financial strength and security for the
pool, and rate stability and fairness for the members. Coverage years under the old funding model (prior to 2013-
14) will continue to have retrospective adjustments until all claims are closed for those years.
GOAL AND POLICY CRITERIA
Other Important Objective: Fiscal Sustainability and Responsibility
STAKEHOLDERS
All City Departments
IMPLEMENTATION
Task Date
1. Receive annual contribution information from CJPIA April 2015
2. Workers’ Compensation annual contribution due to CJPIA July 2015
250
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-269
SIGNIFICANT OPERATING PROGRAM CHANGE
(GENERAL GOVERNMENT)
INCREASE IN WORKERS’ COMPENSATION INSURANCE
PROGRAM MANAGER AND TEAM SUPPORT
Program Manager:
Greg Zocher, Human Resources Manager
Project Team:
Monica Irons, Human Resources Director
Wayne Padilla, Finance and Information Technology Director
Jason Stilwell, Interim Information Technology and Financial Planning Director
Joe Lamers, Budget Manager
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Continue the Status Quo. Failure to pay insurance premiums would be a breach of contract with CJPIA.
2. Defer or Re-Phase the Request. Paying the additional insurance premium at a later time would result in
assessment of late penalties.
OPERATING PROGRAM
30200 – Risk Management
COST SUMMARY
Increase In Workers' Compensation Insurance
Fiscal Year Total Cost
Annual
Increases
2015-17
Cumulative
Increase Over
2014-15 (SOPC)
FY14-15 1,631,585
FY15-16 2,019,601 388,016 388,016
FY16-17 2,322,541 302,940 690,956
Line Item Description Account No.2015-162016-17
Staffing 0 0
Regular Salaries
PERS
PARS
Health Insurance
Medicare
Unemployment Insurance
Total Operating Costs 100.30200.7726 388,016 690,956
Net Operating Costs 388,016 690,956
251
ATTACHMENT 3
B1-270
2015-17 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS – PUBLIC SAFETY
2015-16 2016-17
POLICE PROTECTION
Police Scheduling Program
Replacing the Police department’s current personnel scheduling program 37,000
Body Worn Cameras and Video Storage
Purchasing body worn cameras for police field personnel and additional video storage. 69,000
Police Facility Site Assessment
Conduct a facility site assessment for the Police Department 45,000
FIRE AND ENVIRONMENT SAFETY
Fire Station 2 Restroom and Dorms Privacy Modifications
Remodel of dorms and bathroom to become ADA compliant and address privacy
issues. 160,000
Fire Station 1 Carpet, Painting and Wiring Replacement
Fire Station No. 1 carpet replacement upstairs and downstairs, upgrade IT wiring and
install additional data ports in EOC command room, and re-paint walls and ceilings
upstairs, and in training and fitness rooms. 88,600
Fire Station 2 Exterior Driveway Slab Replacement
Replacing the exterior concrete driveway at Fire Station #2 10,000
Fire Department Electronic Patient Care Reporting (ePCR) Records
Management
Implementing electronic patient records management for the Fire Department. 53,800 25,700
Total, Public Safety 295,800 193,300
252
ATTACHMENT 4
B1-271
2015-17 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS – TRANSPORTATION
2015-16 2016-17
STREETS
Downtown Renewal
Design update to continue downtown renewal efforts. 6,000
Sidewalk Repairs and Tree Replacements
Repairing City sidewalks and replacing trees. 100,000 100,000
Street Reconstruction and Resurfacing
Maintenance on City-owned pavement throughout the City 1,566,817 1,630,700
Sidewalk Ramp Construction
Constructing curb ramps for accessibility in conjunction with street reconstruction and
microsurfacing projects. 150,000 105,000
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING AND ENGINEERING
Neighborhood Traffic Improvements
Construction of neighborhood traffic management projects requested by residents and
approved by Council. 20,000 20,000
Traffic Safety Improvement Projects
Construction of traffic safety improvements as identified in the Annual Traffic Safety
Report. 25,000 25,000
Safe Route to School Improvements-Pacheco and Bishop Peak Elementary
Construction of safe route to school improvements for Pacheco and Bishop Peak
schools on Foothill Road at Ferrini. 45,000
Santa Fe Road Realignment and Bridge Rehabilitation
Preliminary environmental and design work for relocating Santa Fe Road Bridge over
Acacia Creek and relocate Santa Fe at Tank Farm Road to improve traffic Safety . 50,000
South and Parker Traffic Safety Project: Median
Replacing temporary safety measures with permanent measures. 30,000
Prado Road Bridge and Road Widening
Preliminary environmental and design work for widening Prado Road Bridge over San
Luis Creek to relief traffic congestion and improve traffic circulation with
Environmental permitting, land acquisition, and design. 300,000
Traffic Operation Improvement Projects
Constructing traffic operations improvements as identified in the Annual Traffic
Operations Report. 30,000
Transportation Monitoring
Conducting citywide bi-annual traffic counts to identify and monitor levels-of-service
(LOS) on streets resulting from development and travel changes. 60,000
Monterey and Osos Traffic Signal Safety Upgrade
Reconstructing the traffic signal at Monterey and Osos to address a recurring collision
pattern and improve intersection safety. 225,000
City Wayfinding Signs
Continuing implementation of the City Wayfinding Program. 175,000
PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE PATHS
Replacement of Lighted Crosswalks on Marsh and Higuera Streets
Replacement of the in-ground light crosswalks on Marsh and Higuera Streets. 43,500
Pedestrian and Bicycle Pathway Maintenance
Performing pavement maintenance on pedestrian and bicycle pathways throughout the
City. 100,000 60,000
253
ATTACHMENT 4
B1-272
2015-17 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS – TRANSPORTATION
Bicycle Facility Improvements
Designing and constructing small-scale, miscellaneous bicycle facility improvements
identified in the City’s Bicycle Transportation Plan. 100,000 100,000
Bob Jones Trail Octagon Barn Connection
Completing the planning effort, environmental and permitting work, and land
acquisition for the extension of the Bob Jones City-to-Sea trail between the Octagon
Barn and Los Osos Valley Road. 395,000
Bike Bridge at Phillips Lane
Extension of the Railroad Trail from the intersection of California Blvd and Phillips
Lane to the intersection of Phillips Lane and Pepper Street with design and land
acquisition in 2015-16, and construction and construction management in 2016-17. 250,000 1,250,000
Repainting and Replacement of Traffic, Bicycle and Pedestrian Markings
Replacing thermoplastic striping, pavement markings, and raised pavement markers. 20,000
Bob Jones Trail – Prefumo Creek Connection to Oceanaire
Constructing a class I bicycle connection from Calle Joaquin to Oceanaire. 156,000
Bicycle Transportation Plan Implementation
Implementation of various Bicycle Transportation Plan projects and programs. 400,000
CREEK AND FLOOD PROTECTION
Broad Street Bank Reinforcement
The Broad Street Bank Reinforcement project will cost $80,000 for construction in
2015-16. 80,000
Silt Removal
Removing areas of silt build-up within the City’s open channel drainage system. 275,000 150,000
Storm Drain System Replacement
Replacing failing drainage infrastructure throughout the City. 561,500 574,300
Toro Street Bank Stabilization
Stabilizing a section of San Luis Obispo Creek bank near Toro Street Bridge that has
failed. 50,000
Marsh Street Bridge Replacement
Marsh Street Bridge and sewer siphon replacement. 6,640,000
PARKING
Parking Structure Assessment and Rehabilitation Study
Preparing an assessment and rehabilitation study of the City’s three parking structures
including determination of causes for the water intrusion at 919 Palm. 50,000
Marsh Street Parking Garage Circulation Improvements
Correcting circulation design deficiencies in the Marsh Street parking structure
needed for safety and efficiency. 78,000
Vehicle License Plate Recognition
Incorporating license plate recognition and digital permitting technologies into
parking services practices. 135,000 10,000
919 Palm Garage Building Assessment
An assessment of the 919 Palm Garage structure to determine causes for the water
intrusion. 25,000 10,000
TRANSIT
Bus Stop Equipment Projects Including Electronic Signage and Cameras
Install electronic signs, shelters, kiosks, benches and other passenger amenities at City
owned bus stops as grant funding becomes available. 31,300 31,300
254
ATTACHMENT 4
B1-273
2015-17 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS – TRANSPORTATION
Bus Stop Shelter Replacement
Study, design, construction, construction management and equipment acquisition for
new bus stop shelters. 92,000 92,000
Transit Facility Remodel
Remodeling and expansion of the SLO Transit Facility located 29 Prado Road. 180,000
Total, Transportation 5,455,617 4,507,800
255
ATTACHMENT 4
B1-274
2015-17 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS – LEISURE, CULTURAL AND SOCIAL SERVICES
2015-16 2016-17
PARKS & RECREATION
Public Art Fund
Funding of the City’s public art fund at policy level (1% of eligible capital project
construction costs) Estimates included. (Final amounts TBD) 30,000 30,000
Laguna Lake Golf Course Pro-Shop Building Assessment
A building assessment of the Laguna Lake Golf Course Pro-Shop will cost $37,000 to study in
2015-16. 37,000
PARKS AND LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE
Mission Plaza Railing Upgrade
Replacement and modification of Mission Style guard railing in the Mission Plaza. 30,000 30,000
Park Facilities Major Maintenance
Repairing and replacing major components of parks and landscape area facilities. 86,000 220,000
Restroom Replacement and Remodeling
Replace the Golf Course restroom in 2015-16 and design work for Mission Plaza
restroom in 2016-17. 400,000 80,000
Dog Off-Leash Area Roadway Safety Fending
Fencing around the restrooms at the Laguna Lake Park Dog Off-Leash Area and along
the parking and roadway edge. 50,000
RANGER PROGRAM
Fleet Expansion – Ranger Service Program Pickup Truck
Adding one (1) Full-Sized ¾ ton four-wheel drive Pickup Truck for the Parks and
Recreation Department Ranger Service Program. 52,500
Open Space Protection-Maintenance
Address the deferred and ongoing maintenance needs of the City’s Open Space by
using as a guide the standards of care identified in an adopted Open Space
Maintenance Plan, completing trailhead enhancement projects, completing prioritized
Conservation and Open Space Plan identified projects for the City’s various Natural
Areas 285,000 285,000
Laguna Lake Park & Natural Reserve ADA Accessible Trail
Construction of an Americans with Disabilities Act compliant and accessible trail in
the Laguna Lake Natural Reserve 250,000
SWIM CENTER MAINTENANCE
Olympic Pool Replastering
Replastering, underwater lighting renovation and Virginia Graeme Baker Pool and
Spa Safety Act (VGBA) upgrades to the Olympic Pool at the Swim Center. 290,000
Total, Leisure, Cultural & Social Services 1,510,500 645,000
256
ATTACHMENT 4
B1-275
2015-17 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS – COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
2015-16 2016-17
NATURAL RESOURCES PROTECTION
Open Space Protection – Acquisition
Enhanced funding for high-priority open space acquisition projects in the Greenbelt
surrounding the City of San Luis Obispo. 850,000 2,850,000
Laguna Lake Dredging and Sediment Management
The Laguna Lake Dredging and Sediment Management project will provide one of the
key implementation steps contemplated by the City Council adopted Laguna Lake
Natural Reserve Conservation Plan. 450,000
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Infrastructure Investment Capital Improvement Project
The Infrastructure Investment Capital Improvement Project (IICIP) provides resources
for important infrastructure investments, consistent with the City’s Infrastructure
Investment Fund Policy. The IICIP, together with the policy, provides a framework to
allow the City Council and the community to evaluate any proposed infrastructure
investment in relation to current Major City Goals, the economic environment, and
various other factors at the time of the decision. This concept is similar to the current
Open Space Acquisition Capital Improvement Project and fund, which provide the
City with the resources needed to expand the greenbelt by being prepared when
opportunities to acquire new open space arise. This project was reviewed and
approved by Council on March 17, 2015. 250,000
Total, Community Development 1,550,000 2,850,000
257
ATTACHMENT 4
B1-276
2015-17 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS – GENERAL GOVERNMENT
2015-16 2016-17
BUILDING AND SAFETY
Office Remodel and Equipment for Rental Housing Inspection Program
Allocate $203,750 in 2015-2017 to scan contents and convert file storage area to five
office spaces; purchase three fleet vehicles; and provide equipment to support the
proposed Rental Housing Inspection Program. 203,750
BUILDING MAINTENANCE
Facilities Maintenance
Completing ongoing regular maintenance of City facilities to maximize lifespan and
minimize significant capital maintenance and facility replacement. 57,000 146,000
Total, General Government 260,750 146,000
258
ATTACHMENT 4
B1-277
2015-17 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS – PUBLIC UTILITIES
2015-16 2016-17
WATER
Reservoir Replacement
This replacement project is planned for Reservoir #2. 250,000 5,300,000
Water Treatment Plant – Major Facility Maintenance
Performing routine maintenance of facilities at the City’s Water Treatment Plant, in order to
ensure proper operation and prolong the useful life of equipment and other facilities. 160,000 170,000
Distribution System Improvements
Replacement of water distribution pipes, mainlines, water meters, fire
hydrants, and related infrastructure is an ongoing program for appropriate
water distribution and fire protection. The City has identified opportunities to
consolidate water distribution zones to simplify operations, reduce pumping
needs, and eliminate pump stations that would otherwise require replacement. 2,200,000 1,845,000
Water Storage Reservoirs-Maintenance and Tank Replacement
• Dive inspections of the Islay, Slack, Terrace Hill and Edna Saddle Tanks
• Maintenance, repairs, and interior and exterior coating of the Wash Water
Tank #2 at the Water Treatment Plant
• Maintenance repairs and coating for Terrace Hill Tank
• Design services for safety improvements and coating of Edna Saddle Tank 77,500 700,000
SEWER
Water Resource Recovery Facility Upgrade
Upgrading the City’s Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) to meet new regulatory
requirements and addressing capacity and infrastructure deficiencies. 4,924,000 75,332,000
Water Resource Recovery Facility Major Maintenance
This project includes maintenance or replacement of key components at the Water Resource
Recovery Facility WRRF in order to ensure proper operation and prolong the useful life of
equipment and other facilities. 430,000 155,000
Lift Station Replacements
The project includes the replacement of four Smith and Loveless dry well/wet
well design lift stations and force mains that were installed between 1962 and
1971. The design of the Margarita and Foothill lift station replacements was
approved in 2013. 1,000,000 1,375,000
Wastewater Collection System Improvements
Replacement of sewer infrastructure (including pipes, manholes, and
equipment) is an ongoing program. Projects have been selected and prioritized
for replacement due to existing structural deficiencies and the potential for
near-term failure. 1,526,000 875,000
Wastewater Collection Telemetry System Improvements
This project will upgrade six sewer lift station and the Cal-Poly flow meter
telemetry radio communications (including repeater) and relocate them from
Cuesta Peak to the South Hill radio location. Project includes a radio survey,
radio and SCADA/HMI programing, Data Concentrator de-commissioning,
and the purchase of seven Ethernet radios; including new controllers. 100,000
WHALE ROCK
Pump Station Isolation Valve Replacement
Replacing pump isolation valves at the Whale Rock Reservoir, Pump Station B. 61,000
Total, Public Utilities 10,667,500 85,813,000
259
ATTACHMENT 4
B1-278
2015-17 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS – INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT
911 Phone System Replacement
The City’s 911 emergency reporting system is scheduled for replacement in January
of 2016.
500,000
Police CAD Hardware (Servers and Storage)
The City uses Spillman system software to dispatch both Police and Fire. This
equipment replacement request includes two Computer Aided Dispatch/Records
Management System (CAD/RMS) servers at the Police Department as well as the
associated needed storage.
250,000
Emergency Communication Center UPS Batteries (All Funds)
The ECC has two backup UPS systems. The systems can easily maintain the center
during a commercial power outage until the emergency generator (onsite) can turn on
and stabilize. Once the Generator is fully online the UPS switch back to a
maintenance mode.
51,000
Enterprise Storage Growth
To keep up with the City’s data storage needs, staff periodically has to increase
the size of the data storage system. This project adds additional racks and
storage disks to the network.
50,000
Microsoft Outlook Email Servers
City email servers have a lifespan of 5-7 years, after that point they begin to
experience problems causing users to experience system failures.
35,000
VMware Infrastructure Upgrade
The City’s VMware infrastructure consists of 15 hosts running VMware virtualization
software. These hosts are strategically located across the City to provide redundancy
of the City mission critical systems such as Exchange email, finance system, Energov
and Cityworks. It is vital that this virtual server infrastructure be maintained.
242,000
Server Operating System Software
This is the Microsoft Operation System software that is installed on all server
hardware. The updating of this software is critical to remain compatible with
applications and to prevent security vulnerabilities.
50,000
Wastewater Telemetry Radios
As a separate component of the Water Distribution SCADA and Telemetry
Upgrade project, this project replaces all existing wastewater telemetry radio
links, purchases new radios and equipment and relocates the telemetry radio
repeater from Cuesta Peak to the City’s South Hill radio site.
150,000
Total, Information Technology Replacement 801,000 527,000
260
ATTACHMENT 4
B1-279
2015-17 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS – FLEET REPLACEMENT
Department staff has evaluated the condition of the proposed replacements for conformance with Fleet
Management Policies, maintenance records, mileage logs, condition assessment and operational needs, and has
consulted with the Fleet Manager to research pricing, options and replacement dates. The following table
prioritizes the proposed replacements based upon these criteria over the next 5-years. The estimated Fleet
Replacement expenditure projection, as identified in the 2013-15 Financial Plan, is also provided per fiscal year.
The vehicles highlighted are recommended to be purchased using the City’s debt financing process.
Department Program Description
Proposed
Replacement
Year
Projected
Replacement
Cost
GENERAL FUND
Police Patrol SUV 2015-16 53,000
Public Works Swim Center 3/4 Ton Truck w/Utility
Box
2015-16 37,100
Comm. Dev. Building Sedan 2015-16 38,000
Public Works Flood Control 1/2 Ton Pickup Truck 2015-16 28,500
Public Works CIP Engineering 1/2 Ton Pickup Truck 2015-16 31,500
Public Works Building Maint. 3/4 Ton Truck w/Utility
Box
2015-16 39,000
Public Works Fleet 5K Fork Lift 2015-16 34,400
Public Works Fleet Sedan (Pool Car -
Yellow)
2015-16 33,400
Police Traffic Safety Motorcycle 2015-16 31,700
Police Support Services 1/2 Ton Pickup Truck 2015-16 31,400
Comm. Dev. Building Sedan 2015-16 38,000
Police Investigations Sedan (Purchased Used) 2015-16 33,300
Public Works Parks. Maint 5 Yard Dump Truck 2015-16 105,000
Police Investigations Sedan 2015-16 33,300
Police Patrol Sedan 2015-16 44,200
Police Patrol Sedan (Unmarked) 2015-16 39,300
Public Works Parks. Maint Groundsmaster Mower 2015-16 65,000
Parks & Rec. Ranger 1/2 Ton 4x4 Pickup
Truck
2015-16 51,500
Fire Emergency
Response
E-350 Van with
Ambulance Package
(Squad)
2015-16 180,000
Fire Fire Prevention SUV 2015-16 45,500
261
ATTACHMENT 4
B1-280
2015-17 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS – FLEET REPLACEMENT
Department Program Description
Proposed
Replacement
Year
Projected
Replacement
Cost
Fire Fire Prevention SUV 2015-16 45,500
Fire Emergency
Response
Fork Lift (Used at FS1) 2015-16 50,000
Police Traffic Safety Motorcycle 2015-16 31,700
Police Police
Administration
Sedan (Unmarked) 2015-16 38,500
Finance & I.T. Network Service Econoline Van 2015-16 29,900
Public Works Transportation Radar Trailer 2015-16 15,000
Total, General Fund 2015-16 $1,203,700
Public Works Streets Maint. Backhoe 2016-17 128,000
Public Works Fleet Sedan (Pool Car - purple) 2016-17 34,100
Public Works Fleet Sedan (Pool Car - Brown) 2016-17 34,100
Police Patrol Sedan 2016-17 45,200
Public Works Streets Maint. HD Truck w Tymco 600
Sweeper Unit
2016-17 266,600
Public Works Streets Maint. 3/4 Ton Pickup Truck 2016-17 34,500
Public Works Streets Maint. 3/4 Ton Pickup Truck 2016-17 34,500
Fire Emergency
Response
Pumper (Eng 2 # F110) 2016-17 900,000
Fire Emergency
Response
SUV-Deputy Chief
Vehicle
2016-17 99,400
Police Patrol Sedan 2016-17 45,200
Parks & Rec. Golf Riding Reel-Mower 2016-17 35,300
Public Works Signals&
Lights
Medium Duty Truck w/
Altec Lift
2016-17 91,000
Police Patrol Sedan (Unmarked) 2016-17 39,300
Police Traffic Safety Motorcycle 2016-17 34,200
Parks & Rec. Golf Compact Pickup Truck 2016-17 28,500
Public Works Urban Forest Brush Chipper 2016-17 42,000
Public Works Urban Forest Heavy Duty Truck
w/Altec Boom Lift
2016-17 185,000
262
ATTACHMENT 4
B1-281
2015-17 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS – FLEET REPLACEMENT
Department Program Description
Proposed
Replacement
Year
Projected
Replacement
Cost
Public Works Urban Forest Medium Duty Truck w/
Chipper Box
2016-17 70,200
Comm. Dev. Building SUV 2016-17 27,000
Comm. Dev. Building SUV 2016-17 27,000
Public Works Streets Maint. Asphalt grinder & Trailer
Mount
2016-17 89,100
Public Works Parks. Maint Meter Matic Topdress 2016-17 9,500
Finance & I.T. 2530 4x4 SUV 2016-17 31,800
Finance & I.T. 2530 SUV 2016-17 31,800
Total, General Fund 2016-17
WATER FUND
Utilities Water Dist. 1/2 Ton Pickup Truck 2015-16 34,500
Utilities Water Treatment
Plant Service Body Truck 2015-16 59,100
Utilities Water Dist. Portable Vacuum Pump 2015-16 112,000
Total, Water Fund 2015-16 $205,600
Utilities Utility Services Compact Pickup Truck 2016-17 25,200
Total, Water Fund 2016-17 $25,200
SEWER FUND
Utilities WasterWater
Collections
3/4 Ton Van (Specialty
Box Truck Sewer Cam) 2015-16 169,100
Utilities WRRF Sedan 2015-16 33,000
Total, Sewer Fund 2015-16 $202,100
Utilities WasterWater
Collections
Medium Duty Truck
w/Utility Box & Crane 2016-17 72,000
Utilities WasterWater
Collections
Medium Duty Truck
w/Utility Box & Crane 2016-17 72,000
Utilities WasterWater
Collections Portable Sewage Pump 2016-17 36,900
Total, Sewer Fund 2016-17 $180,900
WHALE ROCK
Utilities Whale Rock 4x4 Pickup Truck 2015-16 30,500
Utilities Whale Rock 4x4 3/4 Ton Truck
w/Utility Box & Crane 2015-16 65,800
Total, Whale Rock 2015-16 $96,300
Utilities Whale Rock 4x4 SUV 2016-17 31,500
Total, Whale Rock 2016-17 $31,500
263
ATTACHMENT 4
B1-282
2015-17 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS – FLEET REPLACEMENT
PARKING
Public Works Parking SUV 2016-17 27,100
Total, Parking $27,100
TOTAL 2015-17 PROPOSED CIP BUDGET BY FUND
Law Enforcement Grant Fund 69,000
Major Facility Replacement Fund 1,077,750
Open Space Fund 4,520,000
IT Replacement Fund 1,122,216
CDBG 210,000
Traffic Impact Fees 648,000
Fund 401 Grants 2,216,000
Transit Fund 433,234
Parking Fund 339,446
Fleet Fund 1,358,200
Water Fund 10,780,978
Sewer Fund 86,444,220
Whale Rock 191,606
General CIP (Net Cost) 7,785,017
Total $117,195,667
Grant Funded $4,167,234
Debt Funded $72,166,000
264
ATTACHMENT 4
B1-283
2015-17 General Fund CIP Projects
Includes General CIP & Major Facility Replacement Projects
CIP Description
MCG
OIO Funding Total General Fund Total General Fund Total General Fund Total General Fund Total General Fund
Fire Station 2 Remodel of Dorms & Bathroom
General 160,000 160,000 - - - - - - - -
Downtown Renewal D General - - 6,000 6,000 190,000 190,000 60,000 60,000 440,000 440,000
Sidewalk Repairs and Tree Replacement N,D,MT General 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000
Broad St Bank Reinforcement
General,
Grant 80,000 40,000 - - - - - - - -
Silt Removal N General 275,000 - 150,000 - - - 405,000 - - -
Storm Drain System Replacement N General 561,500 561,500 574,300 574,300 279,175 279,175 652,117 652,117 651,545 651,545
Toro Street Bank Stabilization General 50,000 50,000 - - - - - - - -
Neighborhood Traffic N,MT General 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000
Traffic Safety Improvement Projects MT General 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000
Replacement of lighted crosswalks on Marsh
& Higuera D, MT General - - 43,500 43,500 - - - - - -
Mission Plaza Railing Upgrade D, MT General 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000
Pedestrian and Bicycle Pathway Maint MT General 100,000 100,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000
Olympic Pool Replastering General 290,000 290,000 - - - - - - - -
Public Art Fund - $ TBD General 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000
Open Space Acquisition OS
General,
Grant 850,000 250,000 2,850,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 850,000 250,000 250,000 250,000
Facility Maintenance General 57,000 57,000 146,000 146,000 152,000 152,000 374,750 374,750 791,100 791,100
Street Reconstruction & Resurfacing MT General 1,566,817 1,566,817 1,630,700 1,630,700 1,935,494 1,935,494 2,064,289 2,064,289 2,060,090 2,060,090
Bicycle Facility Improvement MT General 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000
Bob Jones Trail Octagon Barn Connection MT Grant, General 395,000 50,000 - - - - - - - -
Bike Bridge at Phillips Lane MT General, TIF 250,000 - 1,250,000 250,000 - - - - - -
Office Remodel & Fleet for Rental Inspection
Program General 203,750 203,750 - - - - - - - -
Safe Route to School Improvements -
Pacheco and Bishop Peak Elementary MT General 45,000 45,000 - - - - - - - -
Santa Fe Realignment and Bridge Rehab MT Impact Fee 50,000 - - - - - - - - -
South & Parker Traffic Safety Project MT General 30,000 30,000 - - - - - - - -
Park Facilities Major Maintenance General 86,000 86,000 220,000 220,000 155,000 155,000 415,000 415,000 398,900 398,900
Fleet Expansion - Ranger Services Program
Pickup Truck Fleet 52,500 52,500 - - - - - - - -
Fire Station 1 Carpet, Painting and Wiring
Replacement General - 88,600 88,600 - - -
FS 2 Ext Driveway Slab Replacement General - - 10,000 10,000 33,000 33,000 - - - -
Fire Dept. EPCR (New IT Request)General 53,800 53,800 25,700 25,700 25,700 25,700 25,800 25,800 26,000 26,000
Police Scheduling System General 37,000 37,000 - - - -
2018-192015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2019-20
265
ATTACHMENT 4
B1-284
2015-17 General Fund CIP Projects
Includes General CIP & Major Facility Replacement Projects
CIP Description
MCG
OIO Funding Total General Fund Total General Fund Total General Fund Total General Fund Total General Fund
2018-192015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2019-20
Body Worn Cameras General/
Grant - 69,000 - - - -
Restroom Replacement & Remodeling D General 400,000 400,000 80,000 80,000 430,000 430,000 - - - -
Marsh Street Bridge Replacement D,MT
General,
Grant, Sewer - - 6,640,000 734,000 - - - - - -
Sidewalk Ramp Construction MT
General,
CDBG 150,000 45,000 105,000 150,000 45,000 150,000 45,000 105,000
Prado Road Bridge Widening MT
TIF, Debt,
Grant - - 300,000 540,000 - 500,000 - -
Traffic Operations Improvement Project MT General 30,000 30,000 - 30,000 30,000 - - -
Transportation Monitoring (Traffic Counts)MT TIF, General 60,000 12,000 - 60,000 12,000 - - -
Road Stripes MT General 20,000 20,000 - 22,000 22,000 22,000 22,000 -
Golf Course Pro Shop Building Assessment General 37,000 37,000 - - - - - -
Palm Garage Building Assessment
General,
Parking 25,000 8,333 10,000 - - - - -
Bob Jones Trail - Perfumo Creek Connection MT
General,
Grant, Private 156,000 - - - - 1,060,000 216,493 -
Traffic Sign Maintenance General - - 40,000 40,000 143,000 143,000 -
Tree Removals and Replanting General - - 68,800 68,800 - -
Facilities Master Plan General - - 145,000 145,000 - -
Monterey & Osos Traffic Signal Safety
Upgrade MT,D General 225,000 225,000 - - - - -
Infrastructure Investment 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000
Open Space Maintenance OS General 285,000 285,000 285,000 285,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000
Bicycle Transportation Plan Implementation
(Bikes / Multimodal)MT General 400,000 400,000
Wayfinding Signs 175,000 175,000
Police Facility Site Assessment 45,000 45,000
Laguna Lake Conservation LL 450,000 450,000
Laguna Lake ADA Trail LL 250,000 250,000
Laguna Lake Dog Park Fencing LL 50,000 50,000
Sinsheimer Tennis Court Lighting
Parkland
Development - - - - - - 25,000 - 175,000 -
New Park Amenity Initiatives Parkland Devel - - - - - - 60,000 - - -
Total General CIP / Major Facility / Open Space 8,506,367 6,620,700 14,848,800 4,708,800 5,196,169 4,503,169 7,261,956 4,723,449 5,352,635 5,072,635
Legend - Major City Goal/Other Important Objective OS =Open Space Preservation LL =Laguna Lake Restoration
MT =Multimodal Transportation D =Downtown
N =Neighborhood Wellness
266
ATTACHMENT 4
B1-285
Parking & Transit 2015-17 CIP
CIP Description Funding
Transit
Grants Parking Total
Transit
Grants Parking Total
Transit
Grants Parking Total
Transit
Grants Parking Total
Transit
Grants Parking Total
Parking Structure Assessment Parking 50,000 50,000 - - -
Marsh St Parking Garage Circulation Improvements Parking 78,000 78,000 - - -
Vehicle License Plate Recognition Parking 135,000 135,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000
919 Palm Garage Building Assessment Parking 16,667 16,667 10,000 10,000
Total Parking 279,667 279,667 20,000 20,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000
Bus Stop Equipment Projects Transit 31,300 31,300 31,300 31,300 31,300 31,300 31,300 31,300 31,300 31,300
Bus Stop Shelter Replacement Transit 92,000 92,000 92,000 92,000 92,000 92,000 92,000 92,000 92,000 92,000
Transit Facility Remodel Transit 180,000 180,000 - - - -
Total Transit 303,300 - 303,300 123,300 - 123,300 123,300 - 123,300 123,300 - 123,300 123,300 - 123,300
2019-202018-192017-182015-16 2016-17
267
ATTACHMENT 4
B1-286
Utilities 2015-17 CIP
CIP Description Funding Source Water Sewer Whale Rock Total Financing Water Sewer Whale Rock Total Water Sewer Whale Rock Total Water Sewer Whale Rock Total Water Sewer Total
Water Distribution System Improvements Water, Sewer 2,117,500 82,500 2,200,000 1,762,500 82,500 1,845,000 1,868,000 85,000 1,953,000 2,987,500 87,500 3,075,000 2,894,000 90,000 2,984,000
Water Storage Reservoirs - Maint & Tank Repl Water 77,500 77,500 700,000 700,000 75,000 75,000 745,000 745,000 -
Lift Station Replacements Sewer 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,375,000 1,375,000 1,650,000 1,650,000 1,550,000 1,550,000 - -
Pump Station Isolation Valve Replacement Whale Rock - 61,000 61,000 - - -
Reservoir Replacement Water 250,000 250,000 5,300,000 5,300,000 - - -
WTP-Major Facility Maintenance Water 160,000 160,000 170,000 170,000 290,000 290,000 160,000 160,000 160,000 160,000
WRRF Upgrade Sewer 4,924,000 4,924,000 71,000,000 4,332,000 75,332,000 - - -
Wastewater Collection System Improvements Sewer 1,526,000 1,526,000 875,000 875,000 1,385,000 1,385,000 825,000 825,000 1,540,000 1,540,000
Wastewater Collection Telemetry System Improveme Sewer 100,000 100,000 - - - -
WRRF Facility Major Maintenance Sewer 430,000 430,000 155,000 155,000 - - -
Pipeline Assessment Whale Rock - - 500,000 500,000 - -
Totals, Utilities 2,605,000 8,062,500 - 10,667,500 71,000,000 7,932,500 6,819,500 61,000 85,813,000 2,233,000 3,120,000 500,000 5,853,000 3,892,500 2,462,500 - 6,355,000 3,054,000 1,630,000 4,684,000
2018-19 2019-202015-16 2016-17 2017-18
268
ATTACHMENT 4
B1-287
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
New Facility
or Existing
Assets
Leverage
New staff or
maintaining previous
staff
Ongoing costs
(Low, Med, High)
Ongoing or short
term project Leverage
Listed example of
service
Current Major City
Goal Dot exercise results
Other essential
service
Current Other
Important Objective
Other: Previous
adopted goal, GP
goal, other
Laguna Lake
dredging: CEQA and
Permits
$300,000 parks Major city goal High capital maintenance no NA Medium NA NA First step in multi-year program
New neighborhood
services $100,000 neighborhood code
enforcement
Other important
objective Low operations NA NA New staff posistion Medium ongoing no Expansion of program
Storm Drain
replacement $500,000 flood protection Other important
objective Medium capital maintenance no NA High NA NA Part of on-going city wide upgrades
Cuesta grade open
space acquisition $500,000 open space
preservation major city goal High capital new Yes: $3.0 M
total value NA Low NA NA
contingent on grants; wil llikely
require increased O&M costs in
future
Fire Marshal $125,000 public safety Past major city goal
(?)operations NA NA
Maintaining existing
service/existing staff
position
Medium Ongoing no Continuation of position funded
through local sales tax since 2008
NOTE: THE ITEMS BELOW ARE MADE-UP AND ARE FOR ILLUSTRATION ONLY OF HOW THE CRITERIA COULD BE USED TO FURTHER SORT PROPOSED EXPENDITURES
Other Comments
Capital Operations
Project Title Proposed
Expenditure
Nexus to
Measure G
Relation to City
Goals
Public workshop
input (Low,
Med, High)
Capital or
Operations
Attachment 5REOC Draft Measure G Expenditure Tracking Sheet
Triple Bottom Line:
efficiency, ecology,
funding ratio
B1-288
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Strategic Budget Direction
City Council
2015-17 Financial Plan
April 21, 2015
Presentation Overview
2015-17 Strategic Budget Direction
1.Purpose and Goals
2.Updated 5-year Forecast
3.Use of One-Time Funding
4.Major City Goals and Other Important Objectives
a.Work Programs
5.Significant Operating Program Changes
6.5-year Capital Improvement Plan
7.Other Important Information
a.Budget policy revision
b.California JPIA
c.Development Services
d.Measure Y/G
8.Next Steps
2
Purpose of Strategic Budget Direction
2015-17 Strategic Budget Direction
1.Critical Step in development of 2-year Financial Plan
2.An early opportunity for City Council to provide staff
guidance
3.Goal is to have the preliminary budget in May meet the
needs and expectations of the City Council
3
Process for Tonight
2015-17 Strategic Budget Direction
1.Presentation by staff
2.Council questions of staff
3.Comments/Input from the community
4.Council Deliberations
Guidance on the use of one-time funding (if any)
Guidance on Major City Goal and Other Important Objective work
programs
Guidance on Significant Operating Program Changes
Guidance on Capital Improvement Projects
Conceptual approval of draft Unfunded Liabilities and Reserve Policy
4
Tonight’s Recommendation
2015-17 Strategic Budget Direction
1.Receive an updated Five-Year Fiscal Forecast; and
2.Review proposed Major City Goal and Other Important Objective work
programs; and
3.Provide guidance to the City Manager regarding the recommended
allocation of one-time and ongoing budget resources to fund proposed
Significant Operating Program Changes (SOPCs), and the Capital
Improvement Plan (CIP), Fleet Replacement Fund, Information Technology
(IT) Replacement Fund, and Major Facility Replacement Fund; and
4.Receive an update on key informational items regarding future financial
issues, including an updated Budget and Fiscal Policy related to unfunded
liabilities.
5
Five-year Fiscal Forecast: Summary
2015-17 Strategic Budget Direction
1.Balanced budget throughout the five-year period
2.A clear indication that the City is benefitting from a continuously improving
economic climate
3.Consistent with the forecast the City Council received in December
4.The forecast includes the proposed spending levels presented today
6
Agenda Page B1-19
Five-year Fiscal Forecast: Revenues
2015-17 Strategic Budget Direction
1.Revenue estimates have been refined since the December forecast and
since the Mid-Year budget review.
1.Major revenues:
1.Property tax: 5% growth rate in 2015-16; 4% thereafter
2.Sales tax: 4.2% growth rate in 2015-16 slowing to 3.5%
3.Transient Occupancy Tax: 5% avg. annual growth next 5 years
2.Notable Refinements:
1.Development services: same projected growth rate but from a
lower starting point
2.Revenue from projected new development
3.Lower gas tax backfilled with General Fund
7
Agenda Page B1-19
Five-year Fiscal Forecast: Expenditures
2015-17 Strategic Budget Direction
1.Significant Operating Program Changes:
1.Net General Fund cost of $1.6M in 2015-16
2.Net General Fund cost of $2.3M in 2016-17
2.Savings assumptions
1.2.5% non-staffing savings
2.2.9% salary savings
3.CalPERS published rates
1.12% increase in 2015-16
2.9% in 2016-17
4.Capital expenditures
1.$8.8M in 2015-16 for the General Fund
2.$6M in 2016-17 for the General Fund
8
Agenda Page B1-19
Use of One-Time Funding
2015-17 Strategic Budget Direction 9
Council prioritization from
February 2015
Priority Recommend for
additional allocation
1 CalPERS safety pool
2 OPEB
3 Roads
4 Equipment
CalPERS
OPEB
Roads
Fleet IT Equipment
Rental
Inspection
Open Space
Acquisition
Open Space
Maintenance
Laguna Lake
ADA Trail
Infrastructure
Investment
Fund
LUCE
2014-15 Fund Balance
Agenda Page B1-6
Use of One-Time Funding
2015-17 Strategic Budget Direction 10
2014-15 above 20% Total
CalPERS pension liability $750,000
OPEB liability $250,000
Roads $275,000
Fleet Equipment $450,000
IT Equipment $450,000
Rental Inspection Program start-up costs
(total project cost of $274,764)
$232,000
Open Space Acquisition $250,000
Open Space Maintenance (Capital Projects) $285,000
Laguna Lake ADA Trail $250,000
Infrastructure Investment Fund $250,000
LUCE implementation
(total year 1 project cost of $305,000)
$133,000
TOTAL $3,575,000
CalPERS
OPEB
Roads
Fleet IT Equipment
Rental
Inspection
Open Space
Acquisition
Open Space
Maintenance
Laguna Lake
ADA Trail
Infrastructure
Investment
Fund
LUCE
2014-15 Fund Balance
Agenda Page B1-6
Use of One-Time Funding
2015-17 Strategic Budget Direction 11
2015-16 above 20% Total
Bikes Multimodal $400,000
Laguna Lake Dog Fencing $50,000
Police Station Feasibility Study $45,000
Laguna Lake Conservation $450,000
Fire Department Turnouts $110,000
Open Space Maintenance Year 2 $285,000
LUCE implementation Year 1 $172,000
LUCE Implementation Year 2 $325,000
Wayfinding Signs $175,000
Public Safety video cameras $32,000
Traffic Signal: Monterey/Osos $225,000
Fire Training $46,000
Open Space Acquisition $250,000
Fire Dept. #1 parking lot $22,000
TOTAL $2,587,000
Bikes
Multimodal
Laguna Lake
Dog Fencing
Police Station
Feasibility
Laguna Lake
Conservation
Fire
Department
Turnouts
Open Space
Maintenance
Year 2
LUCE
Year 1
LUCE Year 2
Wayfinding
Signs
Public Safety
video cameras
Traffic Signal:
Monterey/Osos
Fire Training Open Space
Acquisition
Fire Dept. #1
parking lot
2015-16 One-Time
Agenda Page B1-7
Major City Goals & Other Important Objectives
2015-17 Strategic Budget Direction 12
Major City Goal: Open Space Preservation
2015-17 Strategic Budget Direction
Protect and Maintain Open Space.
Work Program:
1.Real Property Acquisition and Conservation Planning
2.Open Space Enhancements, Maintenance, User Safety and Patrol
3.Land Restoration, Stewardship, Monitoring, and Education
4.Wildland-Urban Interface Fuel Reduction
Related CIP Projects:
1.Open Space Acquisition (existing)
2.Open Space Acquisition (new)
3.Open Space Maintenance
4.Ranger Fleet Vehicle
Related SOPCs:
1.Open Space Ranger (1 FTE)
13
Agenda Page B1-21
Major City Goal: Multi-Modal Transportation
2015-17 Strategic Budget Direction
Prioritize implementation of the Bicycle Master Plan and improve and
maintain bicycle, pedestrian, and transit facilities.
Work Program:
1.New or Expanded Programs
a.Examples: Bike Plan implementation, Active Transportation Manager, sidewalk
& bike path maintenance, markings & legends, Short-Range Transit Plan
2.Continued Programs
a.Examples: Bicycle facilities, Bob Jones and Railroad Safety trails, Mission
Plaza railing, Safe Routes to School, traffic safety, street maintenance
Related SOPCs:
1.Bicycle Plan Implementation
2.Transportation Planner/Engineer and
Transportation Program Assistant
3.Dev. Services Staffing & CDD Reorg
4.Short Range Transit Plan and Transit
Marketing
5. LUCE Implementation & Fee Update
14
Agenda Page B1-41
Major City Goal: Multi-Modal Transportation
2015-17 Strategic Budget Direction
Prioritize implementation of the Bicycle Master Plan and improve and
maintain bicycle, pedestrian, and transit facilities.
Related CIPs: Bikes, Peds, All Modes
1.Traffic, Bicycle & Pedestrian Markings
2.Bob Jones Prefumo Creek Bike Path
3.BTP Implementation
4.Bicycle Facility Improvements
5.Bob Jones Octagon Barn Bike Path
6.Safe Routes to School
7.Neighborhood Traffic Management
8.Traffic Safety Improvements
9.Marsh & Higuera Lighted Crosswalk
10.Mission Plaza Railing Upgrades
11.Pedestrian & Bicycle Pathway Maintenance
12.Sidewalk Ramp Construction
13.Sidewalk Repairs & Tree Replacement
14.Street Reconstruction & Resurfacing
15.Santa Fe Realignment & Bridge Rehab
16.South & Parker Traffic Safety
17.Prado Road Bridge Widening
18.Traffic Operations
19.Transportation Monitoring
20.Monterey & Osos Safety Project
15
Agenda Page B1-41
Major City Goal: Housing
2015-17 Strategic Budget Direction
Implement the Housing Element, facilitating workforce, affordable, supportive
and transitional housing options, including support for needed infrastructure
within the City’s fair share.
Work Program:
1.Implement the Housing Element
2.Facilitate workforce and affordable housing options
3.Facilitate supportive and transitional housing options
4.Support for needed infrastructure within the City’s fair share (LUCE)
Related CIP Projects:
1.Infrastructure Investment Fund
Related SOPCs:
1.Dev. Services Staffing & CDD Reorg
2.LUCE Implementation & Fee Update
3.Zoning Regulations Update
16
Agenda Page B1-155
Other Important Objective: Neighborhood Wellness
2015-17 Strategic Budget Direction
Improve neighborhood wellness, work with residents, Cuesta, and Cal Poly;
increase public safety, code compliance, and collaborative solutions.
Work Program:
1.Work with residents and educational institutions and students
2.Public safety
3.Collaborative Solutions
4.Code Compliance
5.Administrative Order Process
6.Maintenance
Related CIP Projects:
1.Sidewalk Repair
2.Stormdrain Replacements
3.Silt Removal
4.Neighborhood Street Repairs
Related SOPCs:
1.Rental Housing Inspection
2.Neighborhood Match Program
17
Agenda Page B1-173
Other Important Objective: Laguna Lake Restoration
2015-17 Strategic Budget Direction
Initiate implementation of the Laguna Lake Natural Reserve
Conservation Plan.
Work Program:
1.Install new, updated signage at trailheads and along trails
2.Install accessible paths
3.Install sediment basins
4.Begin a dredging project
5.Evaluate project financing options and mechanisms
Related CIP Projects:
1.Open Space Maintenance
2.Laguna Lake ADA Paths
3.Laguna Lake Dredging and Sediment
Related SOPCs:
1.n/a
18
Agenda Page B1-185
Other Important Objective: Fiscal Sustainability and
Responsibility
2015-17 Strategic Budget Direction
Implement the City’s Fiscal Responsibility Philosophy with a focus on the
reduction of unfunded liabilities.
Work Program:
1.Increased use of performance management and reporting, including new
public dashboards
2.Long term unfunded liabilities
3.Diversified and aligned revenue sources
4.Explore options and opportunities to control costs re: CJPIA
Related CIP Projects:
1.n/a
Related SOPCs:
1.Request for Business License Compliance
Services
19
Agenda Page B1-197
Other Important Objective: Downtown
2015-17 Strategic Budget Direction
Adopt a Downtown Concept Plan, develop a plan for expansion of Mission
Plaza, and improve safety, infrastructure, and maintenance in the Downtown.
Work Program:
1.Vision and Economic Vitality
2.Safety
3.Infrastructure and Maintenance
Related CIP Projects:
1.Lighted Crosswalk Replacement
2.Sidewalk Repairs & Tree Replacement
3.Mission Plaza Railing Upgrade
4.Mission Plaza Restroom Replacement
5.Marsh Bridge Replacement
Related SOPCs:
1.Assistant Parking Services Manager
2.Downtown Concept Plan (LUCE)
3.Video Cameras
20
Agenda Page B1-203
Additional Items for Direction
21
Significant Operating Program Changes (SOPC)
Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP)
2015-17 Strategic Budget Direction
Significant Operating Program Changes
2015-17 Strategic Budget Direction 22
Public Safety,
$378K, 13%
Public
Utilities,
$585K, 21%
Transportation
$646K, 23% Leisure,
Cultural, and
Social
Services,
$74K, 3%
Community
Development,
$442K, 16%
General
Government,
$682K, 24%
2015-16
Summary increases by function
($2.8M) Public Safety,
$168K, 5%
Public Utilities,
$502K, 15%
Transportation,
$651K, 19%
Leisure,
Cultural, and
Social
Services,
$77K, 2%
Community
Development,
$780K, 23%
General
Government,
$1.2M, 36%
2016-17
Summary increases by function ($3.4M)
Agenda Page B1-219
5-year Capital Improvement Plan
2015-17 Strategic Budget Direction 23
Agenda Page B1-271
Public Safety,
$296K, 2%
Transportation,
$5.5M, 31%
Leisure, Cultural
& Social
Services,
$1.5M, 9%
Community
Development,
$1.5M, 9% General
Government,
$261K, 1%
Public Utilities,
$5.7M, 33%
IT
Replacement,
$801K, 5%
Fleet
Replacement
$1.7M, 10%
2015-16
Capital Improvement Plan
$22.2M
Public Safety,
$193K, 1%
Transportation,
$4.5M, 20% Leisure,
Cultural &
Social Services,
$645K, 3%
Community
Development,
$2.9M, 13%
General
Government,
$146K, 1%
Public Utilities,
$10.5M, 48%
IT
Replacement,
$527K, 2%
Fleet
Replacement,
$2.6M, 12%
2016-17
Capital Improvement Plan
$97.3M
Charts exclude
WRRF costs
2015-16 $4.9M
2016-17 $75.3M
General Fund CIP Overview ($16.2M)
2015-17 Strategic Budget Direction 24
$13.M or
80%
$3.2M or
20%
Maintain or Replace
Existing Assets
New Assets
Agenda Page B1-271
CIP to Maintain or Replace Assets ($13M)
2015-17 Strategic Budget Direction 25
$4.6M or
36%
$1.7M or
13%
$515K or 4%
$1.2M or
10%
$3.5M or
27%
$1.3M or
10%
Transportation
Public Spaces
Public Safety
Stormwater Mgmt &
Flood Control
City Fleet
Information Technology
Agenda Page B1-271
Investments in New Assets ($3.2M)
2015-17 Strategic Budget Direction 26
$1.5M or
48%
$950K or
30%
$710K or
22% Major City Goals
Other Important
Objectives
Other
Agenda Page B1-271
Investments in New Assets ($3.2M)
2015-17 Strategic Budget Direction 27
$1M or 31%
$552K or 17% $700K or 22%
$250K or 8%
$470K or 15%
$241K
or 7%
MCG - MultiModal
MCG - Open Space
OIO - Laguna Lake
OIO - Housing
Public Safety
Public Spaces
Agenda Page B1-271
Other Important Information
2015-17 Strategic Budget Direction
1.Budget policy revision language
1.Revision based on Council direction of February 17, 2015
2.California JPIA
1.Increases for retrospective adjustments discussed at mid-year
2.Annual rate premiums also significantly increasing
3.Continue to explore options and opportunities to control costs
3.Development Services
1.Reorganization to meet standard for service
4.Measure Y/G – Revenue Enhancement Oversight Committee
1.Balance capital and operating that leans more towards capital investments;
2.Tie Measure G funding to those projects and programs with a direct nexus to
the ballot language, Major City Goals, and community input; and
3.Emphasize Measure G investment in bicycles and open space since these are
two Major City Goals and were the top issues supported at the Community
Forum.
28
Next Steps
2015-17 Strategic Budget Direction 30
Upcoming 2015-17 Financial Plan Development Steps
Date Item Council Action
April 21 Strategic Budget Direction Provide Direction on:
-Major City Goal Work Programs
-Other Important Objective Work Programs
-Capital Improvement Program
-Significant Operating Program Changes
-One-time expenditures
May 26 Preliminary Financial Plan City Council receives Preliminary 2015-17 Financial Plan
June 9 Budget Workshop Review and discuss General Fund operating programs
June 11 Budget Workshop Review and discuss General Fund capital improvement
projects
June 16 Budget Workshop Review and discuss Enterprise Fund programs, capital
improvement projects, and rates
June 23 Budget Adoption Final review and adoption of Fiscal Year 2015-17 Financial
Plan
June 30
(if required)
Budget Adoption Final review and adoption of Fiscal Year 2015-17 Financial
Plan
Council Deliberation
2015-17 Strategic Budget Direction
1.Guidance on the use of one-time funding (if any)
2.Guidance on Major City Goal and Other Important Objective work
programs
3.Guidance on Significant Operating Program Changes
4.Guidance on Capital Improvement Projects
5.Conceptual approval of draft Unfunded Liabilities and Reserve Policy
31
Tonight’s Recommendation
2015-17 Strategic Budget Direction
1.Receive an updated Five-Year Fiscal Forecast; and
2.Review proposed Major City Goal and Other Important Objective work
programs; and
3.Provide guidance to the City Manager regarding the recommended
allocation of one-time and ongoing budget resources to fund proposed
Significant Operating Program Changes (SOPCs), and the Capital
Improvement Plan (CIP), Fleet Replacement Fund, Information Technology
(IT) Replacement Fund, and Major Facility Replacement Fund; and
4.Receive an update on key informational items regarding future financial
issues, including an updated Budget and Fiscal Policy related to unfunded
liabilities.
32