Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Preliminary 2015-17 Financial Plan - Capital Improvement Plan
Financial Plan Capital Improvement Plan 2015-17 Preliminary 2015-17 Financial Plan JAN HOWELL MARX, MAYOR JOHN ASHBAUGH, VICE MAYOR CARLYN CHRISTIANSON, COUNCIL MEMBER DAN CARPENTER, COUNCIL MEMBER DAN RIVOIRE, COUNCIL MEMBER Katie Lichtig, City Manager Prepared by the Department of Finance & Information Technology Wayne Padilla, Director of Finance & Information Technology Jason Stilwell, Interim Director of Financial Planning and Information Technology Michelle Bulow, Administrative Assistant Capital Improvement Plan CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1 INTRODUCTION Purpose and Scope of the Capital Improvement Plan 1-1 Project Evaluation and Selection 1-2 Role of Measure G Revenues 1-3 Budget and Fiscal Polices 1-5 Financial Reporting and Funding 1-7 Section 2 CIP SUMMARY Overview: CIP Expenditure Summaries 2-1 Summary of Expenditures by Function 2-2 Summary of Expenditures by Fund and Funding Sources 2-4 Project Expenditures by Function Public Safety 2-7 Public Utilities 2-9 Transportation 2-13 Leisure, Cultural & Social Services 2-18 Community Development 2-19 General Government 2-20 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS Project Expenditure by Fund General Purpose Capital Outlay Fund and Fleet Replacement Fund 2-22 Local Revenue Measure Sub-Fund 2-24 Fleet Replacement Fund 2-27 Information Technology Replacement Fund 2-29 Parkland Development Fee Fund 2-30 Law Enforcement Grant Fund 2-30 Major Facility Replacement Fund 2-31 Public Art Fund 2-31 Infrastructure Investment Capital Fund 2-31 CDBG Fund 2-32 Transportation Impact Fees Fund 2-32 Airport Area Impact Fees 2-32 Open Space Protection Fund 2-32 Water Fund 2-33 Sewer Fund 2-34 Parking Fund 2-36 Transit Fund 2-37 Whale Rock Fund 2-38 Section 3 PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS Organization 3-1 List of capital projects 2015-20 3-2 Project Descriptions 3-7 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Section 1 INTRODUCTION INTRODUCTION Public Safety 2% Public Utilities 78% Transportation 14% Leisure, Cultural & Social Services 2% Community Development 3% General Government 1% 2015-17 CIP by Function PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Through the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), the City systematically plans, schedules, and finances capital projects to ensure cost effectiveness and conformance with established policies and longer-term plans. The City’s thorough budget process guides the priorities through community input, Council goal setting, Measure G priorities, and the Major City Goal work programs as defined by the City Council. The City’s CIP encompasses the work programs for all infrastructure projects and equipment purchases over the next five years. The plan represents a phased approach to funding the projects needed to maintain the City’s infrastructure and major building facility assets over the entire five-year period. The plan also identifies equipment replacement needs in the area of fleet and information technology infrastructure. All of the City's construction projects and equipment purchases costing $25,000 or more are included in the Capital Improvement Plan. Minor capital outlays costing less than $25,000 are included with the Financial Plan operating program budgets. Based on the Council determined goals, and balanced with the City’s financial circumstances, the recommended capital improvement projects total $127 million for the 2015-17 Financial Plan and $203 million over the five-year plan. Shown below is a breakout of proposed city-wide projects by function as well as a graphical representation of the funding sources used to pay for these projects. General Fund 2% Enterprise Funds 25% Grants 9% Impact Fees 1% Debt Financing 63% 2015-17 CIP by Funding Source 1-1 INTRODUCTION The project breakout for improvements to be funded from non-general fund sources is shown below. ProposedProposedProposed 2015-162016-17 2017-182018-192019-20 General Purpose CIP 1,053,0006,816,0003,497,4699,801,4063,501,635 Fleet Replacement Fund 521,8001,694,4001,573,400471,1001,108,700 Information Technology Replacement Fund 334,706329,5121,138,1161,236,5513,024,924 Major Facility Replacement Fund 145,750234,600915,000789,7501,190,000 Open Space Protection Fund 600,0002,000,00075,000825,00075,000 Infrastructure Investment Capital Fund 250,000 250,000 Local Revenue Measure Sub-Fund 7,072,850 5,113,100 - - - 9,978,10616,187,6127,448,98513,123,8078,900,259 2015-17 Financial Plan ProposedProposedProposed 2015-162016-17 2017-182018-192019-20 Parkland Development Fee Fund 85,000175,000 Law Enforcement Grant Fund 69,000 Public Art Fund 36,40039,90034,90038,70040,400 Community Development Block Grant Fund 105,000105,000105,000105,000105,000 Transportation Impact Fees 298,000300,00048,00050,000 Airport Area Impact Fees 50,000 Water Enterprise Fund 2,812,4857,968,4932,277,6423,980,8673,436,145 Sewer Enterprise Fund 8,268,945 79,765,275 3,236,349 2,745,305 2,526,788 Parking Enterprise Fund 280,31350,79823,625,57283,485120,998 Transit Enterprise Fund 304,301129,033176,8461,300,8641,600,473 Whale Rock Commission 146,717114,889523,07564,4924,972 12,302,16188,542,38830,027,3848,453,7138,009,776 2015-17 Financial Plan 1-2 INTRODUCTION PROJECT EVALUATION AND SELECTION To assist the City Manager in developing the recommended CIP for 2015-20, a designated CIP Review Committee evaluated all departmental requests. Review team members included: Daryl Grigsby, Director of Public Works Michael Codron, Assistant City Manager Jason Stilwell, Interim Director of Financial Planning and Information Technology Garret Olson, Fire Chief Derek Johnson, Director of Community Development Carrie Mattingly, Director of Utilities Shelly Stanwyck, Director of Parks & Recreation In preparing the CIP recommendations, the review team considered the following evaluation factors in setting priorities: 1. Is it mandated by the state or federal government? 2. Is there significant outside funding for the project? 3. Is it necessary to address an immediate public health or safety concern that cannot be deferred? 4. Is it necessary to adequately maintain existing facilities, infrastructure or equipment? 5. Does it implement a high priority Council goal for 2015-17? 6. Will it result in significant operating savings in the future that makes a compelling case for making this investment solely on a financial basis? KEY ROLE OF MEASURE G REVENUES Measure G, also known as the San Luis Obispo Essential Services Measure, is a ½ percent general purpose sales tax that was approved by voters in November 2014 as an extension of the former Measure Y ½ percent general sales tax. It is projected to generate about $7.1 million in 2015-16 and $7.4 million 2016-17 in added revenues for the City. All Measure G spending is reported in the Local Revenue Measure Sub-Fund, which is a sub-fund of the General fund. Measure G provides a local revenue source to ensure that even during challenging financial times the City is able to provide its residents with a high level of service. This fact was proven during the Great Recession when the City used cost containment measures and the available Measure Y revenues to sustain existing essential service levels and make new investments to achieve Council goals. Measure G revenues will continue to be allocated to many of the community priorities that surfaced before and during the Measure G campaign and provides the City with the financial ability to address new priorities as they emerge. 1-3 INTRODUCTION Linkage to Major City Goals The proposed uses of Measure G revenues in 2015-17 are closely aligned with the top goals and objectives adopted by the City Council, and are summarized as follows: • Preservation of Essential Services: Public Safety; Infrastructure maintenance services (Streets & Sidewalks, Parks, Creek & Flood Protection and CIP Project Management) • Neighborhood Wellness • Infrastructure Maintenance (Downtown Renewal, Facility Maintenance, Pedestrian and Bicycle Pathway Maintenance, Parks and Tree Maintenance) • Traffic Congestion Relief • Open Space Preservation • Pedestrian and Bicycle Pathway Construction Accountability for the Use of Measure G Revenues The ordinance approved by the voters as part of Measure G provides the City with revenues for general purposes. By definition, a general purpose revenue, such as Measure G, is not restricted to any particular use. In practice, the City focuses its Measure G revenues on funding essential services such as public safety, streets, flood protection, code enforcement and open space preservation. Measure G includes significant accountability provisions, many of which are continued practices from its predecessor, Measure Y. For example, Measure G revenues and expenditures will continue to be audited and reported on annually as part of the City’s Comprehensive Annual Financial Report; the Local Revenue Measure Community Forum will continue to be held each year in order to allow the City Council and staff to hear from residents about their priorities for the City; decisions on Measure G expenditures must be made through the City’s budget process and include recommendations made by the recently formed Revenue Enhancement Oversight Committee (REOC); the REOC will review the annual report on Measure G expenditures and a written report detailing Measure G’s uses will be sent to each household in the community. Measure G has an eight-year sunset clause, as did the former Measure Y and will expire in March 2023 if it is not renewed during the 2022 general election. 1-4 INTRODUCTION In approving Measure G, the voters recognized that challenges and priorities change over time; and that the Council would need flexibility in using Measure G revenues to respond to emergent issues. For this reason, one of the key accountability features in Measure G is using the City’s budget and goal-setting process as the primary way of determining the use of these general purpose General Fund revenues. As provided in Section 3.15.040 (D) of the Essential Services and Use Tax Ordinance: Integration of the Use of Funds into the City's Budget and Goal-Setting Process. The estimated revenue and proposed use of funds generated by this measure shall be an integral part of the City's budget and goal setting process, and significant opportunities will be provided for meaningful participation by citizens in determining priority uses of these funds. In short, the proposed use of Measure G revenues in 2015-17 is based on the results of the City Council’s goal-setting process and input from the REOC, which included a focus on Measure G and thus reflects the community’s current priorities. BUDGET AND FISCAL POLICIES FOR THE CIP Formally articulated budget and fiscal policies provide the fundamental framework and foundation for preparing and implementing the City’s Financial Plan and the Capital Improvement Plan. For ease of reference, policies pertaining to Capital Improvement Plan Project Management are listed here. A comprehensive list of all budget and fiscal policies can be found in the 2015-17 Financial Plan. Capital Improvement Plan Project Management Policies A. CIP Project: $25,000 or more. Construction projects and equipment purchases that cost $25,000 or more will be included in the CIP. Minor capital outlays of less than $25,000 will be included with the operating program budgets. B. CIP Purpose: The purpose of the CIP is to systematically plan, schedule, and finance capital projects to ensure cost-effectiveness in conformance with established policies. The CIP is a five-year plan organized into the same functional groupings used for the operating programs. The CIP reflects a balance between capital replacement projects that repair, replace or enhance existing facilities, equipment or infrastructure; and capital facility projects that significantly expand or add to the City’s existing fixed assets. Public Works 63% Parks & Recreation 14% Community Development 8% Police 9% Fire 6% Local Revenue Measure Sub-Fund Uses 2015-17 1-5 INTRODUCTION C. Project Manager. Every CIP project will have a project manager who will prepare the project proposal, ensure that required phases are completed on schedule, authorize all project expenditures, ensure that all regulations and laws are observed, and periodically report project status. D. CIP Review Committee. Headed by the City Manager or his/her designee (currently the Public Works Director), this Committee will review project proposals, determine project phasing, recommend project managers, review and evaluate the draft CIP budget document, and report CIP project progress on an ongoing basis. E. CIP Phases. Each CIP proposal emphasizes project planning, with projects progressing through one or more of the following phases depending on the project type and scope: * Construction Management (CM) F. CIP Appropriation. The City’s annual CIP appropriation for study, design, acquisition and/or construction is based on the projects designated by the Council through adoption of the Financial Plan. Adoption of the Financial Plan CIP appropriation does not automatically authorize spending for specific projects. This spending approval generally occurs only after the preceding project phase has been completed and approved by the Council. Accordingly, expenditure approvals are generally made when the City authorizes the release of the project specifications for bidding. In that action the Council authorizes a contract to be entered into if the project costs are within the budgeted amount as spelled out in the Council action. If project costs at the time of bid award are less than the budgeted amount, the balance will be un-appropriated and returned to fund balance or allocated to another project. If project costs at the time of bid award are greater than budget amounts, five options are available: 1. Eliminate the project. 2. Defer the project for consideration to the next Financial Plan period. 3. Re-scope or change the phasing of the project to meet the existing budget. 4. Transfer funding from another specified, lower priority project. 5. Appropriate additional resources as necessary from fund balance. G. CIP Budget Carryover. Appropriations for CIP projects lapse three years after budget adoption if spending approval has not been obtained (see CIP Appropriation). Project accounts, which have received spending approval, will not lapse until completion of the approved project phase. H. Public Art. CIP projects will be evaluated during the budget process and prior to each phase for conformance with the City's Public Art policy, which generally requires that 1% of eligible project construction costs be set aside for public art. Excluded from this requirement are underground projects and utility infrastructure projects. It is generally preferred that public art be incorporated directly into the project, but this is not practical or desirable Fund Appropriation Project Study Design Environmental Review Property Acquisition Site Preparation Equipment Acquisition Construction & CM* 1-6 INTRODUCTION for all projects; in this case, an in-lieu contribution to public art will be made. To ensure that funds are adequately budgeted for this purpose regardless of whether public art will be directly incorporated into the project, funds for public art will be identified separately in the CIP. I. Program Objectives. Project phases will be listed as objectives in the program narratives of the programs, which manage the projects. J. General Plan Consistency Review. The Planning Commission will review the Preliminary CIP for consistency with the General Plan and provide its findings to the Council prior to plan adoption. CIP FINANCIAL REPORTING AND FUNDING The following summarizes key policies related to CIP financial reporting and funding. CIP Budget and Financial Reporting It is the City’s policy to prepare financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). The City prepares its budget for each fund in accordance with its respective basis of accounting. This includes the CIP. CIP Revenues It is the City’s policy to discourage earmarking general-purpose revenues, whether in the General Fund or Enterprise Funds. For this reason, there are no “dedicated” revenues for CIP purposes, except in limited circumstances where revenues are legally restricted for capital projects. This includes: 1. Development Impact Fees. It is the City’s policy that new development should pay its fair share of the cost of constructing the community facilities needed to serve it. For this reason, the City has established development impact fees for water, sewer, and transportation improvements under the stringent requirements set by the State under Assembly Bill 1600 (California Government Code Section 66000 et. seq.) 2. In-Lieu Fees. The City has adopted parking, parkland dedication, and “inclusionary moderate and low income housing” requirements. In some cases, developers may pay in-lieu fees instead of providing that asset (parking, parkland, or affordable housing). 3. Grants. Projects may be funded from grant programs where the use is restricted for CIP purposes by an outside agency. In preparing the CIP, the City reflects grant funding from the various sources that are available to fund eligible projects. While the CIP program includes these grant-funded projects, none are appropriated until the grant award is confirmed by city staff. 4. Donations. Very rarely the City may receive donations; but in these cases, they are generally earmarked by the donor for a specific project. All other CIP project funding competes with resources for delivery of day-to-day services and other new initiatives, within the overall resource capacity of the General Fund and applicable Enterprise Funds. This is appropriate, given that this is the fundamental purpose of the City’s budget process: balancing limited resources between basic services, new program initiatives, infrastructure maintenance, and new facilities. It also means that the CIP is directly tied to the City’s overall fiscal health and financial outlook. 1-7 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Section 2 CIP EXPENDITURE SUMMARIES CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN CIP EXPENDITURE SUMMARIES This section includes summary information for the 2015-20 Capital Improvement Plan using the four categories described below. 1. Summary of CIP expenditures by function by fiscal year: Departments included: a. Public Safety: Police, Fire b. Public Utilities: Water, Sewer, Whale Rock c. Transportation : Transportation Management, Streets, Creek & Flood Protection, Parking, Transit d. Leisure, Cultural and Social Services: Parks & Recreation, Cultural Services, Social Services e. Community Development: Planning, Construction Development, Natural Resources, Economic Health f. General Government: Legislative and Policy, General Administration, Legal Services, City Clerks, Human Resources, Finance & Information Technology, Building, Fleet 2. Summary of CIP expenditures by fund and funding source by fiscal year: a. Governmental Funds i. General Capital Outlay Fund ii. Information Technology Replacement Fund iii. Major Facility Replacement Fund iv. Fleet Replacement Fund v. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Fund vi. Transportation Impact Fee Fund vii. Open Space Protection Fund viii. Infrastructure Investment Capital Fund ix. Local Revenue Measure Sub-Fund x. Parkland Development Fee Fund xi. Law Enforcement Grant Fund xii. Public Art Fund xiii. Airport Area Impact Fee Fund b. Enterprise and Agency Funds i. Water ii. Sewer iii. Parking iv. Transit v. Whale Rock Commission 3. Project description by function, by fiscal year 4. Project description by fund, by fiscal year 2-1 Section 2 SUMMARY OF CIP EXPENDITURES BY FUNCTION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - SUMMARY BY FUNCTION Proposed Proposed Proposed 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 PUBLIC SAFETY Police Protection 1,168,400 232,900 288,800 750,600 1,171,000 Fire & Environmental Safety 559,800 1,123,700 124,300 25,800 649,500 Total Public Safety 1,728,200 1,356,600 413,100 776,400 1,820,500 PUBLIC UTILITIES Water Services 2,812,485 7,968,493 2,277,642 3,980,867 3,436,145 Wastewater Services 8,268,945 79,525,275 3,236,349 2,745,305 2,526,788 Whale Rock Reservoir 146,717 114,889 523,075 64,492 4,972 Total Public Utilities 11,228,147 87,608,657 6,037,066 6,790,664 5,967,905 TRANSPORTATION Streets 1,566,817 2,280,400 3,202,194 2,336,789 2,725,590 Pedestrian & Bicycle Paths 1,841,000 1,598,500 372,000 1,482,000 305,000 Creek & Flood Protection 995,000 7,364,300 279,175 1,057,117 651,545 Parking 288,646 50,798 23,625,572 83,485 120,998 Transit 304,301 129,033 176,846 1,300,864 1,600,473 Transportation Management 405,000 345,000 675,000 5,060,000 60,000 Total Transportation 5,400,764 11,768,031 28,330,787 11,320,255 5,463,606 LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES Parks & Recreation 1,875,500 1,085,400 1,074,900 874,600 794,800 Total Leisure, Cultural & Social Services 1,875,500 1,085,400 1,074,900 874,600 794,800 2015-17 Financial Plan 2-2 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - SUMMARY BY FUNCTION Proposed Proposed Proposed 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Building & Safety 229,750 54,000 Natural Resource Protection 1,300,000 2,250,000 250,000 1,000,000 250,000 Construction Regulation 31,500 35,100 Economic Development 250,000 250,000 Total Community Development 1,811,250 2,304,000 500,000 1,035,100 250,000 GENERAL GOVERNMENT Information Technology 72,606 393,112 1,032,416 655,751 1,980,924 Buildings 96,000 146,000 338,100 374,750 882,300 Fleet Management 67,800 68,200 Total General Government 236,406 607,312 1,370,516 1,030,501 2,863,224 TOTAL $22,280,267 $104,730,000 $37,726,369 $21,827,520 $17,160,035 2015-17 Financial Plan 2-3 Section 2 SUMMARY OF CIP EXPENDITURES BY FUND & FUNDING SOURCE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN- SUMMARY BY FUND & FUNDING SOURCE Proposed Proposed Proposed 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 GENERAL PURPOSE CIP Reserve Balance 54,806 General Fund Contribution 237,000 2,957,469 3,591,600 3,501,635 Developer Contribution 156,000 State and Federal Grants 660,000 6,816,000 540,000 6,155,000 Total General Purpose CIP 1,053,000 6,816,000 3,497,469 9,801,406 3,501,635 LOCAL REVENUE MEASURE SUB-FUND Measure G Revenue 7,072,850 5,113,100 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT FUND Reserve Balance 412,316 360,751 State Grant 255,000 General Fund Contribution 79,706 329,512 725,800 875,800 524,924 Debt Financing 2,500,000 Total IT Replacement Fund 334,706 329,512 1,138,116 1,236,551 3,024,924 MAJOR FACILITY REPLACEMENT FUND General Fund Contribution 145,750 234,600 915,000 789,750 1,190,000 FLEET REPLACEMENT FUND Reserve Balance 98,700 511,800 361,386 General Fund Contribution 407,100 604,414 471,100 485,200 16,000 16,000 16,000 Debt Financing 1,166,600 591,600 623,500 Total Fleet Replacement Fund 521,800 1,694,400 1,573,400 471,100 1,108,700 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) FUND Federal Grants 105,000 105,000 105,000 105,000 105,000 2015-17 Financial Plan Interest income 2-4 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN- SUMMARY BY FUND & FUNDING SOURCE Proposed Proposed Proposed 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2015-17 Financial Plan TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE FUND Transportation Impact Fees 298,000 300,000 48,000 50,000 Debt Financing Federal & State Grants Total Transportation Impact Fee Fund 298,000 300,000 48,000 50,000 OPEN SPACE PROTECTION FUND General Fund 325,000 325,000 325,000 Grants 600,000 2,000,000 750,000 Total Open Space Protection Fund 600,000 2,000,000 325,000 1,075,000 325,000 WATER ENTERPRISE FUND User fees 2,812,485 7,968,493 2,277,642 3,980,867 3,436,145 SEWER ENTERPRISE FUND Reserve Balance User fees 8,268,945 7,765,275 3,236,349 2,745,305 2,526,788 Debt Financing 72,000,000 Total Sewer Enterprise Fund 8,268,945 79,765,275 3,236,349 2,745,305 2,526,788 PARKING ENTERPRISE FUND Service Charges 280,313 50,798 23,625,572 83,485 120,998 Debt Financing Total Parking Enterprise Fund 280,313 50,798 23,625,572 83,485 120,998 TRANSIT ENTERPRISE FUND Transportation Development Act (TDA) Funds 304,301 129,033 176,846 1,300,864 1,600,473 Grants Total Transit Enterprise Fund 304,301 129,033 176,846 1,300,864 1,600,473 2-5 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN- SUMMARY BY FUND & FUNDING SOURCE Proposed Proposed Proposed 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2015-17 Financial Plan WHALE ROCK COMMISSION FUND Member Assessments 146,717 114,889 523,075 64,492 4,972 PARKLAND DEVELOPMENT FUND Park In-lieu Fees 85,000 175,000 AIRPORT AREA IMPACT FEE FUND Impact Fees 50,000 PUBLIC ART FUND General Fund Contribution 36,400 39,900 34,900 38,700 40,400 LAW ENFORCEMENT GRANT FUND Federal Grant 69,000 INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT CAPITAL FUND General Fund 250,000 250,000 TOTAL $22,280,267 $104,730,000 $37,726,369 $21,827,520 $17,160,035 2-6 Section 2 CIP PROJECTS BY FUNCTION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - PROJECT EXPENDITURES BY FUNCTION Proposed Proposed Proposed 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 PROJECT DETAIL - PUBLIC SAFETY POLICE PROTECTION Police Facility Site Assessment 45,000 Police Scheduling Program 37,000 Police Body Worn Cameras & Video Storage 69,000 Fleet Replacement Police Administration Sedan 38,500 Police Marked Patrol Sedans 83,500 129,700 90,400 Police Patrol SUV 53,000 45,200 94,400 153,100 Police Patrol Van (Jail Transport Van)38,400 Police Investigations Sedans 66,600 31,200 Police Investigations Van (Evidence/CSI)105,000 Police Investigations SUV 49,900 Police Support Services Pickup 31,400 Police Traffic Safety Motorcycles 63,400 34,200 34,800 IT Replacement 911 Phone System 500,000 Police CAD Hardware 250,000 250,000 Police SAN Controllers 80,000 Police CAD/RMS Study 50,000 ECC Blade Computers 150,000 ECC Equipment Replacement & UPS 70,000 Public Safety Mobile Data Computer Replacement 693,000 ECC Audio Visual System 275,000 Total Police Protection 1,168,400 232,900 288,800 750,600 1,171,000 2015-17 Financial Plan 2-7 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - PROJECT EXPENDITURES BY FUNCTION Proposed Proposed Proposed 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2015-17 Financial Plan PROJECT DETAIL - PUBLIC SAFETY FIRE & ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY Fire Station 1/City EOC Rewiring, Carpet and Paint Maintenance 88,600 Fire Station 2 Restroom and Dorms Privacy Modifications 160,000 Fire Station 2 Exterior Driveway Concrete Ramp Replacement 10,000 33,000 Fire Department Electronic Patient Care Reporting (ePCR)53,800 25,700 25,700 25,800 26,000 Fleet Replacement Fire Prevention SUV (2)91,000 Fire Emergency Response SUV 99,400 Fire Emergency Response Van with Ambulance Package 180,000 Fire Emergency Response Pumper 900,000 623,500 Fire Emergency Response Forklift 50,000 Fire Training Services Pickup (Open Space Rescue)65,600 IT Replacement Computer Aided Dispatch 25,000 Total Fire & Environmental Safety 559,800 1,123,700 124,300 25,800 649,500 TOTAL PUBLIC SAFETY $1,728,200 $1,356,600 $413,100 $776,400 $1,820,500 2-8 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - PROJECT EXPENDITURES BY FUNCTION Proposed Proposed Proposed 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2015-17 Financial Plan PROJECT DETAIL - PUBLIC UTILITIES WATER SERVICES Water Treatment Plant-Major Facility Maintenance 160,000 170,000 290,000 160,000 160,000 Water Distribution System Improvements 2,117,500 1,762,500 1,868,000 2,987,500 2,894,000 Reservoir #2 Replacement 250,000 5,300,000 Water Storage Reservoirs-Maintenance and Tank Replacement 77,500 700,000 75,000 745,000 Fleet Replacement Water Administration Sedan 33,700 Utilities Services Pickup Truck 25,200 Water Distribution Pickup Truck 34,500 28,500 57,000 Water Treatment Plant Service Body Truck 59,100 Water Distribution Portable Vacuum Pump 112,000 Water Distribution Backhoe w/Attachments 136,000 IT Replacements Microsoft Office share 16,773 UPS Battery Replace 1,885 1,885 VM Infrastructure 8,945 8,945 Server Operating System 1,848 VoIP 20,360 Radio Handhelds 24,282 Tait Radio System 24,282 Firewall Replacement 15,259 Virtual Private Network Replacement 9,028 Network Switch Replacement 14,140 Finance System Replace 125,000 Total Water Services 2,812,485 7,968,493 2,277,642 3,980,867 3,436,145 2-9 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - PROJECT EXPENDITURES BY FUNCTION Proposed Proposed Proposed 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2015-17 Financial Plan PROJECT DETAIL - PUBLIC UTILITIES WASTEWATER SERVICES Water Distribution System Improvements 82,500 82,500 85,000 87,500 90,000 Wastewater Collection System Improvements 1,526,000 875,000 1,385,000 825,000 1,540,000 Lift Station replacements 1,000,000 1,375,000 1,650,000 1,550,000 Wastewater Collection Telemetry System Improvements 100,000 Water Resource Recovery Facility Upgrade 4,924,000 76,832,000 Water Resource Recovery Facility Major Maintenance 430,000 155,000 Fleet Replacement Environmental Compliance Sedan 39,000 Wastewater Administration Sedan 38,500 Wastewater Collections Trucks w/Utility Box & Crane 144,000 Wastewater Collections Video Inspection Van 169,100 Wastewater Collections Truck w/Vac-Con Hydrocleaner 375,000 Wastewater Collections Portable Sewage Pump 36,900 Wastewater Collections Mini Excavator (Pooled)78,000 Water Resource Recovery Facility Utility ATV's 57,600 Water Resource Recovery Facility Truck w/Flatbed & Crane 71,500 Water Resource Recovery Facility Sedan 33,000 Water Resource Recovery Facility Decanter Trailer 8,500 IT Replacements Microsoft Office share 11,045 UPS Battery Replace 4,345 4,345 VM Infrastructure 20,615 20,615 Server Operating System 4,260 VoIP 15,789 2-10 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - PROJECT EXPENDITURES BY FUNCTION Proposed Proposed Proposed 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2015-17 Financial Plan PROJECT DETAIL - PUBLIC UTILITIES WASTEWATER SERVICES, continued Radio Handhelds 42,960 Tait Radio System 42,960 Firewall Replacement 8,918 Virtual Private Network Replacement 18,958 Network Switch Replacement 27,252 Finance System Replace 125,000 MP2 Mtce Software System 30,000 SCADA iFIX System Controls 250,000 Hach Wins 30,000 Total Wastewater Services 8,268,945 79,525,275 3,236,349 2,745,305 2,526,788 WHALE ROCK RESERVOIR Whale Rock Residence Retrofit/Demo 50,000 Whale Rock Reservoir-Pipeline Reliability Assessment 510,000 Whale Rock Pump Station Isolation Valve Replacement 61,000 Whale Rock Weather Station Replacements 20,000 Whale Rock Cla Valve Replacement 36,000 Fleet Replacement Whale Rock Reservoir 4x4 Pickup Truck 30,500 Whale Rock Reservoir 4x4 Truck w/Utility Box & Crane 65,800 Whale Rock 4x4 SUV 31,500 Whale Rock Reservoir Boat (Used)15,000 IT Replacements Microsoft Office 1,636 UPS Battery Replacement 417 417 2-11 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - PROJECT EXPENDITURES BY FUNCTION Proposed Proposed Proposed 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2015-17 Financial Plan PROJECT DETAIL - PUBLIC UTILITIES WHALE ROCK RESERVOIR, continued VM Infrastructure 1,980 1,980 Server Operating System 409 VoIP Phone System Radio Handhelds 13,075 Tait Radio System 13,075 Firewall Replacement 1,356 Total Whale Rock Reservoir 146,717 114,889 523,075 64,492 4,972 TOTAL PUBLIC UTILITIES $11,228,147 $87,608,657 $6,037,066 $6,790,664 $5,967,905 2-12 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - PROJECT EXPENDITURES BY FUNCTION Proposed Proposed Proposed 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2015-17 Financial Plan PROJECT DETAIL - TRANSPORTATION STREETS Street Reconstruction & Resurfacing 1,566,817 1,630,700 1,935,494 2,064,289 2,060,090 Traffic Sign Maintenance 40,000 143,000 Downtown Renewal 6,000 190,000 60,000 440,000 Fleet Replacement Streets Maintenance Trucks 69,000 28,500 69,500 175,500 Streets Maintenance HD Truck Sweeper Unit 266,600 266,600 Streets Maintenance HD Dump Truck w/Slide In 325,000 Streets Maintenance Backhoe 128,000 126,900 Streets Maintenance Asphalt Grinder & Trailer Mount 89,100 Streets Maintenance Skip Loader 128,000 Streets Maintenance Wheeled Loader 161,700 Signals and Lighting Maintenance Lift Truck 91,000 IT Replacement Signal & Light Management 50,000 Total Streets 1,566,817 2,280,400 3,202,194 2,336,789 2,725,590 PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE PATHS Sidewalk and Tree Replacements 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 Sidewalk Ramp Construction 150,000 105,000 150,000 150,000 105,000 Traffic, Bicycle & Pedestrian Marking Replacement 20,000 22,000 22,000 Replacement of Lighted Crosswalk on Higuera Street 43,500 Bicycle Transportation Plan Implementation 400,000 Bicycle Facility Improvements 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 Bob Jones Trail Octagon Barn Connection 395,000 2-13 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - PROJECT EXPENDITURES BY FUNCTION Proposed Proposed Proposed 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2015-17 Financial Plan PROJECT DETAIL - TRANSPORTATION PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE PATHS, continued Bob Jones Trail-Prefumo Creek Connection to Oceanaire 156,000 1,060,000 Bike Bridge at Phillips Lane 250,000 1,250,000 Bicycle/Pedestrian Safety Improvement-Penny Lane Bridge at UPRR 50,000 Safe Route to School Improvements-Pacheco and Bishop Peak Schools 45,000 Monterey & Osos Traffic Signal Safety Upgrade 225,000 Total Pedestrian and Bicycle Paths 1,841,000 1,598,500 372,000 1,482,000 305,000 CREEK AND FLOOD PROTECTION Storm Drain System Replacement 561,500 574,300 279,175 652,117 651,545 Silt Removal 275,000 150,000 405,000 Marsh Street Bridge Replacement 6,640,000 Broad Street Bank Reinforcement 80,000 Toro Street Bank Stabilization 50,000 Fleet Replacement Flood Control Pickup Truck 28,500 Total Creek and Flood Protection 995,000 7,364,300 279,175 1,057,117 651,545 2-14 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - PROJECT EXPENDITURES BY FUNCTION Proposed Proposed Proposed 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2015-17 Financial Plan PROJECT DETAIL - TRANSPORTATION PARKING Parking Structures Assessment and Rehabiliation Study 75,000 10,000 Marsh Street Parking Garage Circulation Improvements 78,000 Vehicle License Plate Recognition 135,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 Fleet Expansion-Parking Enforcement Utility Scooter 34,000 Palm/Nipomo Parking Garage 23,600,000 Fleet Replacement Parking SUV 27,100 Parking Pickup Trucks 29,500 31,500 IT Replacements Microsoft Office share 4,909 UPS Battery Replace 646 646 VM Infrastructure 3,065 3,065 Server Operating System 633 VoIP 6,233 Radio Handhelds 9,339 Tait Radio System 9,339 Firewall Replacement 4,069 Network Switch Replacement 4,955 Finance System Replace 62,500 Total Parking 288,646 50,798 23,625,572 83,485 120,998 2-15 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - PROJECT EXPENDITURES BY FUNCTION Proposed Proposed Proposed 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2015-17 Financial Plan PROJECT DETAIL - TRANSPORTATION TRANSIT Bus Stop Shelters and Bench Improvements 92,000 92,000 92,000 92,000 92,000 Bus Stop Equipment Projects Including Signage and Cameras 31,300 31,300 31,300 31,300 31,300 Transit Facility Remodel 180,000 Fleet Replacement SLO Transit Buses 1,124,264 1,158,000 SLO Transit Trolley 240,000 IT Replacements Microsoft Office 2,455 UPS Battery Replacement 1,001 1,001 VM Infrastructure 4,751 4,751 Server Operating System 982 VoIP Phone System 1,247 Radio Handhelds 52,299 Tait Radio System 52,299 Firewall Replacement 2,035 Network Switch Replacement 7,432 Finance System Replace. 62,500 Total Transit 304,301 129,033 176,846 1,300,864 1,600,473 2-16 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - PROJECT EXPENDITURES BY FUNCTION Proposed Proposed Proposed 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2015-17 Financial Plan PROJECT DETAIL - TRANSPORTATION TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT City Wayfinding Signs 175,000 Neighborhood Traffic Improvements 20,000 20,000 20,000 30,000 30,000 Prado Road Bridge & Road Widening 300,000 540,000 5,000,000 Traffic Operation Improvement Projects 30,000 30,000 Transportation Monitoring 60,000 60,000 Traffic Safety Improvement Projects 25,000 25,000 25,000 30,000 30,000 Santa Fe Road Realignment and Bridge Rehabilitation 50,000 South & Parker Traffic Safety Project: Median 30,000 Fleet Replacement Transportation Radar Trailer 15,000 Total Transportation Management 405,000 345,000 675,000 5,060,000 60,000 TOTAL TRANSPORTATION $5,400,764 $11,768,031 $28,330,787 $11,320,255 $5,463,606 2-17 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - PROJECT EXPENDITURES BY FUNCTION Proposed Proposed Proposed 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2015-17 Financial Plan PROJECT DETAIL - LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES PARKS & RECREATION Park Major Maintenance and Repairs 86,000 220,000 155,000 415,000 398,900 Mission Plaza Railing Upgrade 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 Olympic Pool Replastering 290,000 Pedestrian and Bicycle Pathway Maintenance 100,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 Tree Major Maintenance, Removal & Replanting 68,800 Dog Off-Leash Area Roadway Safety Fencing 50,000 Sinsheimer Park Tennis Court Lighting 25,000 175,000 New Park Amenity Initiatives 60,000 Open Space Protection: Maintenance 285,000 285,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 Laguna Lake Park & Natural Reserve ADA Accessible Trail 250,000 Restroom Replacement & Remodeling 400,000 80,000 430,000 Laguna Lake Golf Course Pro-Shop Building Assessment 37,000 Public Art Fund 36,400 39,900 34,900 38,700 40,400 Fleet Expansion - Ranger Service Program Pickup Truck 52,500 Fleet Replacement Parks & Recreation Administration Minivan 33,500 Farmer's Market Portable Restroom Replacement 66,400 Parks Maintenance Equipment 65,000 9,500 106,200 15,500 Parks Maintenance 5 Yd Dump Truck 105,000 Parks Maintenance Utility Cart 17,600 Ranger Program Pickup Truck 51,500 Swim Center Service Body Truck 37,100 Tree Maintenance Heavy Duty Truck with Boom Lift 185,000 Tree Maintenance Equipment 112,200 Golf Course Pickup Trucks 28,500 Gold Course Utility Cart 30,000 Golf Course Mowers 35,300 18,600 84,800 IT Replacement Irrigation Controllers 35,000 TOTAL LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES 1,875,500 1,085,400 1,074,900 874,600 794,800 2-18 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - PROJECT EXPENDITURES BY FUNCTION Proposed Proposed Proposed 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2015-17 Financial Plan PROJECT DETAIL - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NATURAL RESOURCES PROTECTION Open Space Acquisition 850,000 2,250,000 250,000 1,000,000 250,000 Laguna Lake Dredging and Sediment Management 450,000 Total Natural Resources Protection 1,300,000 2,250,000 250,000 1,000,000 250,000 BUILDING AND SAFETY Office Remodel and Vehicles for Rental Housing Inspection Program 153,750 Fleet Replacement Building & Safety Sedans 76,000 Building & Safety SUV's 54,000 Total Building and Safety 229,750 54,000 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Infrastructure Investment Capital Improvement Project 250,000 250,000 Total Economic Development 250,000 250,000 CONSTRUCTION REGULATION Fleet Replacement Capital Engineering Pickup Trucks 31,500 35,100 Total Construction Regulation 31,500 35,100 TOTAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT $1,811,250 $2,304,000 $500,000 $1,035,100 $250,000 2-19 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - PROJECT EXPENDITURES BY FUNCTION Proposed Proposed Proposed 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2015-17 Financial Plan PROJECT DETAIL - GENERAL GOVERNMENT INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY Fleet Replacement Finance & Information Technology Van 29,900 Finance & Information Technology SUV's 63,600 IT Replacement UPS Battery Backup 42,706 42,706 Enterprise Growth Stroage 50,000 50,000 Email System 35,000 VM Infrastructure 202,644 202,644 Server Operating System Software 41,868 Document Scanners 18,000 VoIP Phone System 256,371 Radio Handhelds 508,045 Storage Capacity Upgrade & Replacement 250,000 SAN Controllers-Non Public Safety 80,000 Tait Radio System Upgrade 508,045 AutoCAD Engineering Software 25,000 Microsoft Office Upgrade 188,182 Firewall Replacement 154,863 Network Security Upgrade 125,000 Virtual Private Network Replacement 102,014 Network Switching Infrastructure Equipment 496,221 Laserfiche 65,000 Access Control (automatic gate card system)125,000 Finance System Replacement 375,000 Signs Management 65,000 Fleet Maintenance 32,000 Total Information Technology 72,606 393,112 1,032,416 655,751 1,980,924 2-20 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - PROJECT EXPENDITURES BY FUNCTION Proposed Proposed Proposed 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2015-17 Financial Plan PROJECT DETAIL - GENERAL GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS Facilities Master Plan 145,000 Facilities Maintenance 57,000 146,000 152,000 374,750 791,100 Fleet Replacement Building Maintenance Service Body Trucks 39,000 41,100 91,200 Total Buildings 96,000 146,000 338,100 374,750 882,300 FLEET MANAGEMENT Fleet Replacement Fleet Services Forklift 34,400 City Pool Cars 33,400 68,200 Total Fleet Management 67,800 68,200 TOTAL GENERAL GOVERNMENT $236,406 $607,312 $1,370,516 $1,030,501 $2,863,224 TOTAL ALL FUNCTIONS 22,280,267 104,730,000 37,726,369 21,827,520 17,160,035 2-21 Section 2 CIP PROJECTS BY FUND * Project funded by more than one source D: Item is being financed G: Item is grant funded C: Developer Contribution CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - CIP EXPENDITURES BY FUND Proposed Proposed Proposed 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 GENERAL PURPOSE CIP Transportation Management City Wayfinding Signs 175,000 Neighborhood Traffic Improvements 20,000 30,000 30,000 Traffic Operation Improvement Projects 30,000 *Transportation Monitoring 12,000 12,000 Traffic Safety Improvement Projects 25,000 30,000 30,000 Streets Street Reconstruction & Resurfacing 1,935,494 2,064,289 2,060,090 Traffic Sign Maintenance 40,000 143,000 Downtown Renewal 190,000 60,000 440,000 Pedestrian and Bicycle Paths Sidewalk and Tree Replacements 100,000 100,000 100,000 *Sidewalk Ramp Construction 45,000 45,000 Traffic, Bicycle & Pedestrian Marking Replacement 22,000 22,000 Bicycle Facility Improvements 100,000 100,000 100,000 G Bob Jones Trail Octagon Barn Connection 345,000 *Bob Jones Trail-Prefumo Creek Connection to Oceanaire 216,493 G Bob Jones Trail-Prefumo Creek Connection to Oceanaire 750,000 C Bob Jones Trail-Prefumo Creek Connection to Oceanaire 156,000 93,507 G Bike Bridge at Phillips Lane 1,000,000 Safe Route to School Improvements-Pacheco and Bishop Peak Creek and Flood Protection Storm Drain System Replacement 279,175 652,117 651,545 G Silt Removal 275,000 150,000 405,000 G Prado Road Bridge Widening 540,000 5,000,000 G Marsh Street Bridge Replacement 5,666,000 G Broad Street Bank Reinforcement 40,000 2015-17 Financial Plan 2-22 * Project funded by more than one source D: Item is being financed G: Item is grant funded C: Developer Contribution CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - CIP EXPENDITURES BY FUND Proposed Proposed Proposed 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2015-17 Financial Plan GENERAL PURPOSE CIP, continued Parks and Recreation Mission Plaza Railing Upgrade 30,000 30,000 30,000 Pedestrian and Bicycle Pathway Maintenance 60,000 60,000 60,000 Tree Major Maintenance, Removal & Replanting 68,800 Dog Off-Leash Area Roadway Safety Fencing 50,000 Total General Purpose CIP 1,053,000 6,816,000 3,497,469 9,801,406 3,501,635 2-23 * Project funded by more than one source D: Item is being financed G: Item is grant funded C: Developer Contribution CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - CIP EXPENDITURES BY FUND Proposed Proposed Proposed 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2015-17 Financial Plan LOCAL REVENUE MEASURE SUB-FUND - Transportation Management Neighborhood Traffic Improvements 20,000 20,000 Traffic Operation Improvement Projects 30,000 Traffic Safety Improvement Projects 25,000 25,000 South & Parker Traffic Safety Project: Median 30,000 Transportation Radar Trailer 15,000 *Parking Structures Assessment and Rehabilitation Study 8,333 Streets Street Reconstruction & Resurfacing 1,566,817 1,630,700 Downtown Renewal 6,000 Streets Maintenance Trucks 69,000 Streets Maintenance Backhoe 128,000 Streets Maintenance Asphalt Grinder & Trailer Mount 89,100 Monterey & Osos Traffic Signal Safety Upgrade 225,000 Signals and Lighting Maintenance Lift Truck 91,000 Pedestrian and Bicycle Paths Sidewalk and Tree Replacements 100,000 100,000 *Sidewalk Ramp Construction 45,000 Replacement of Lighted Crosswalk on Higuera Street 43,500 Traffic, Bicycle & Pedestrian Marking Replacement 20,000 Bicycle Transportation Plan Implementation 400,000 Bicycle Facility Improvements 100,000 100,000 Bob Jones Trail Octagon Barn Connection 50,000 *Bike Bridge at Phillips Lane 250,000 Safe Route to School Improvements-Pacheco and Bishop Peak 45,000 Creek and Flood Protection Storm Drain System Replacement 561,500 574,300 Marsh Street Bridge Replacement 734,000 Broad Street Bank Reinforcement 40,000 Toro Street Bank Stabilization 50,000 Flood Control Pickup Truck 28,500 2-24 * Project funded by more than one source D: Item is being financed G: Item is grant funded C: Developer Contribution CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - CIP EXPENDITURES BY FUND Proposed Proposed Proposed 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2015-17 Financial Plan LOCAL REVENUE MEASURE SUB-FUND, continued Parks and Recreation Mission Plaza Railing Upgrade 30,000 30,000 Olympic Pool Replastering 290,000 Pedestrian and Bicycle Pathway Maintenance 100,000 60,000 Laguna Lake Park & Natural Reserve ADA Accessible Trail 250,000 Ranger Program Pickup Truck (2)104,000 Golf Course Pickup Truck 28,500 Park Major Maintenance & Repairs 86,000 220,000 Open Space Maintenance 285,000 285,000 Community Development Laguna Lake Dredging and Sediment Management 450,000 Open Space Acquisition 250,000 250,000 Capital Engineering Pickup Trucks 31,500 Police Protection Police Administration Sedan 38,500 Police Marked Patrol Sedans 83,500 129,700 Police Patrol SUV 53,000 Police Investigations Sedans 66,600 Police Support Services Pickup 31,400 Police Traffic Safety Motorcycles 63,400 34,200 Computer-Aided Dispatch 25,000 911 Phone System 245,000 Police CAD hardware 250,000 Policy Facility Site Assessment 45,000 Fire & Environmental Safety Fire Prevention SUV (2)91,000 Fire Emergency Response SUV 99,400 Fire Emergency Response Van with Ambulance Package 180,000 Fire Emergency Response Forklift 50,000 Fire Electronic Patient Care Reporting System 53,800 25,700 2-25 * Project funded by more than one source D: Item is being financed G: Item is grant funded C: Developer Contribution CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - CIP EXPENDITURES BY FUND Proposed Proposed Proposed 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2015-17 Financial Plan LOCAL REVENUE MEASURE SUB-FUND, continued Fire Station 2 Restroom and Dorms Privacy Modifications 160,000 Fire Station 2 Exterior Driveway Ramp Replacement 10,000 Buildings Restroom Replacement and Remodeling 400,000 80,000 Total Local Revenue Measure Fund 7,072,850 5,113,100 - - - 2-26 * Project funded by more than one source D: Item is being financed G: Item is grant funded C: Developer Contribution CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - CIP EXPENDITURES BY FUND Proposed Proposed Proposed 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2015-17 Financial Plan FLEET REPLACEMENT FUND Police Protection Police Marked Patrol Sedans 90,400 Police Patrol SUV 45,200 94,400 153,100 Police Patrol Van (Jail Transport Van)38,400 Police Investigations Sedans 31,200 Police Investigations Van (Evidence/CSI)105,000 Police Investigations SUV 49,900 Police Traffic Safety Motorcycles 34,800 Fire & Environmental Safety D Fire Emergency Response Pumper 900,000 623,500 Fire Training Services Pickup (Open Space Rescue)65,600 Streets Streets Maintenance Trucks 28,500 69,500 175,500 D Streets Maintenance HD Truck Sweeper Unit 266,600 266,600 D Streets Maintenance HD Dump Truck w/Slide In 325,000 Streets Maintenance Backhoe 126,900 Streets Maintenance Skip Loader 128,000 Streets Maintenance Wheeled Loader 161,700 Construction Regulation Capital Engineering Pickup Trucks 35,100 Rental Inspection Program Vehicles 102,000 Parks and Recreation Parks & Recreation Administration Minivan 33,500 Farmer's Market Portable Restroom Replacement 66,400 Parks Maintenance Equipment 65,000 9,500 65,000 15,500 Parks Maintenance 5 Yd Dump Truck 105,000 Parks Maintenance Utility Cart 17,600 Parks Maintenance Mower 41,200 2-27 * Project funded by more than one source D: Item is being financed G: Item is grant funded C: Developer Contribution CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - CIP EXPENDITURES BY FUND Proposed Proposed Proposed 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2015-17 Financial Plan FLEET REPLACEMENT FUND, continued Swim Center Service Body Truck 37,100 Tree Maintenance Heavy Duty Truck with Boom Lift 185,000 Tree Maintenance Equipment 112,200 Golf Course Utility Cart 30,000 Golf Course Mowers 35,300 18,600 84,800 Information Technology Finance & Information Technology Van 29,900 63,600 Buildings Building & Safety Sedans 76,000 Building & Safety SUV's 54,000 Building Maintenance Service Body Trucks 39,000 41,100 91,200 Fleet Management Fleet Services Forklift 34,400 City Pool Cars 33,400 68,200 Total Fleet Replacement Fund 521,800 1,694,400 1,573,400 471,100 1,108,700 Finance & Information Technology SUV (2) 2-28 * Project funded by more than one source D: Item is being financed G: Item is grant funded C: Developer Contribution CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - CIP EXPENDITURES BY FUND Proposed Proposed Proposed 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2015-17 Financial Plan INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT FUND Replacements G 911 Phone System 255,000 Police CAD hardware 250,000 *UPS Battery Backup 42,706 42,706 Enterprise Storage Growth 50,000 D Enterprise Storage Growth 50,000 E-Mail System 35,000 *VM Infrastructure 202,644 *D VM Infrastructure 202,644 *Server Operating System Software 41,868 Police SAN Controllers 80,000 Document Scanners 18,000 *VoIP Phone System 256,371 *Radio Handhelds 508,045 Storage Capacity Upgrade & Replacement 250,000 Police CAD/RMS Study 50,000 ECC Blade Computers 150,000 ECC Equipment Replacement & UPS 70,000 SAN Controllers - non public safety 80,000 *Tait Radio System Upgrade 508,045 Irrigation Controllers 35,000 Auto CAD-Engineering Software 25,000 *Microsoft Office Upgrade 188,182 *D Firewall Replacement 154,863 Network Security Upgrade 125,000 D Virtual Private Network Replacement 102,014 D Public Safety Mobile Data Computer Replacement 693,000 *D Network Switching Infrastructure Equipment 496,221 Laserfiche 65,000 2-29 * Project funded by more than one source D: Item is being financed G: Item is grant funded C: Developer Contribution CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - CIP EXPENDITURES BY FUND Proposed Proposed Proposed 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2015-17 Financial Plan INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT FUND, continued D Access Control (automatic gate card system)125,000 D ECC Audio Visual System 275,000 Signal & Light Management 50,000 Signs Management 65,000 *D Finance System Replacement 375,000 D Fleet Maintenance 32,000 Additions Police Scheduling Program 37,000 Fire Electronic Patient Care Reporting System 25,700 25,800 26,000 Total Information Technology Replacement Fund 334,706 329,512 1,138,116 1,236,551 3,024,924 PARKLAND DEVELOPMENT FEE FUND Sinsheimer Park Tennis Court Lighting 25,000 175,000 New Park Amenity Initiatives 60,000 Total Parkland Development Fee Fund - - - 85,000 175,000 LAW ENFORCEMENT GRANT FUND G Police Body Worn Cameras 69,000 Total Law Enforcement Grant Fund - 69,000 - - - 2-30 * Project funded by more than one source D: Item is being financed G: Item is grant funded C: Developer Contribution CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - CIP EXPENDITURES BY FUND Proposed Proposed Proposed 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2015-17 Financial Plan MAJOR FACILITY REPLACEMENT FUND Police Protection Policy Facility Site Assessment Fire & Environmental Safety Fire Station 1/City EOC Carpet and Painting - 88,600 - - - Fire Station 2 Restroom and Dorms Privacy Modifications Fire Station 2 Exterior Driveway Ramp Replacement 33,000 Parks and Recreation Park Major Maintenance & Repairs 155,000 415,000 398,900 Laguna Lake Golf Course Pro Shop Building Assessment 37,000 Buildings Facilities Master Plan 145,000 Facilities Maintenance 57,000 146,000 152,000 374,750 791,100 Office Remodel for Rental Housing Inspection Program 51,750 Restroom Replacement and Remodeling 430,000 Total Major Facility Replacement Fund 145,750 234,600 915,000 789,750 1,190,000 PUBLIC ART FUND Public Art 36,400 39,900 34,900 38,700 40,400 Total Public Art Fund 36,400 39,900 34,900 38,700 40,400 INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT CAPITAL FUND Infrastructure Investment Capital Improvement Project 250,000 250,000 Total Infrastructure Investment Capital Improvement Fund 250,000 - 250,000 - - 2-31 * Project funded by more than one source D: Item is being financed G: Item is grant funded C: Developer Contribution CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - CIP EXPENDITURES BY FUND Proposed Proposed Proposed 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2015-17 Financial Plan COMMUNITY BLOCK GRANT FUND G Sidewalk Ramp Construction 105,000 105,000 105,000 105,000 105,000 Total Community Development Block Grant Fund 105,000 105,000 105,000 105,000 105,000 TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES *Bike Bridge at Phillips Lane 250,000 Bicycle/Pedestrian Safety Improvement-Penny Lane Bridge at UPRR 50,000 *48,000 48,000 *Prado Road Bridge Widening 300,000 Total Transportation Impact Fee Fund 298,000 300,000 48,000 50,000 - AIRPORT AREA IMPACT FEES Santa Fe Road Realignment and Bridge Rehabilitation 50,000 Total Airport Area Impact Fee Fund 50,000 - - - - OPEN SPACE PROTECTION FUND Open Space Acquisition 250,000 250,000 250,000 G Open Space Acquisition 600,000 2,000,000 750,000 Open Space Maintenance 75,000 75,000 75,000 Total Open Space Protection Fund 600,000 2,000,000 325,000 1,075,000 325,000 Total Governmental Funds 10,467,506 16,701,512 7,886,885 13,652,507 9,470,659 Transportation Monitoring 2-32 * Project funded by more than one source D: Item is being financed G: Item is grant funded C: Developer Contribution CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - CIP EXPENDITURES BY FUND Proposed Proposed Proposed 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2015-17 Financial Plan ENTERPRISE AND AGENCY FUNDS WATER FUND Water Treatment Plant-Major Facility Maintenance 160,000 170,000 290,000 160,000 160,000 *Water Distribution System Improvements 2,117,500 1,762,500 1,868,000 2,987,500 2,894,000 Water Storage Reservoirs-Maintenance and Tank Replacement 77,500 700,000 75,000 745,000 Reservoir #2 Replacement 250,000 5,300,000 Fleet Replacement Water Administration Sedan 33,700 Utilities Services Pickup Truck 25,200 Water Distribution Pickup Truck 34,500 28,500 57,000 Water Treatment Plant Service Body Truck 59,100 Water Distribution Portable Vacuum Pump 112,000 Water Distribution Backhoe w/Attachments 136,000 IT Replacements *Microsoft Office share 16,773 *UPS Battery Replace 1,885 1,885 *VM Infrastructure 8,945 8,945 *Server Operating System 1,848 *VoIP 20,360 *Radio Handhelds 24,282 *Tait Radio System 24,282 *Firewall Replacement 15,259 *Virtual Private Network Replacement 9,028 *Network Switch Replacement 14,140 *Finance System Replace. 125,000 TOTAL WATER FUND 2,812,485 7,968,493 2,277,642 3,980,867 3,436,145 2-33 * Project funded by more than one source D: Item is being financed G: Item is grant funded C: Developer Contribution CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - CIP EXPENDITURES BY FUND Proposed Proposed Proposed 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2015-17 Financial Plan SEWER FUND *Water Distribution System Improvements 82,500 82,500 85,000 87,500 90,000 Wastewater Collection System Improvements 1,526,000 875,000 1,385,000 825,000 1,540,000 Lift Station replacements 1,000,000 1,375,000 1,650,000 1,550,000 Wastewater Collection Telemetry System Improvements 100,000 Water Resource Recovery Facility Upgrade 4,924,000 2,832,000 D Water Resource Recovery Facility Upgrade 74,000,000 Water Resource Recovery Facility Major Maintenance 430,000 155,000 *Marsh Street Bridge Replacement 240,000 Fleet Replacement Environmental Compliance Sedan 39,000 Wastewater Administration Sedan 38,500 Wastewater Collections Trucks w/Utility Box & Crane 144,000 Wastewater Collections Video Inspection Van 169,100 Wastewater Collections Truck w/Vac-Con Hydrocleaner 375,000 Wastewater Collections Portable Sewage Pump 36,900 Wastewater Collections Mini Excavator (Pooled)78,000 Water Resource Recovery Facility Utility ATV's 57,600 Water Resource Recovery Facility Truck w/Flatbed & Crane 71,500 Water Resource Recovery Facility Sedan 33,000 Water Resource Recovery Facility Decanter Trailer 8,500 IT Replacements *Microsoft Office share 11,045 *UPS Battery Replace 4,345 4,345 *VM Infrastructure 20,615 20,615 *Server Operating System 4,260 *VoIP 15,789 *Radio Handhelds 42,960 2-34 * Project funded by more than one source D: Item is being financed G: Item is grant funded C: Developer Contribution CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - CIP EXPENDITURES BY FUND Proposed Proposed Proposed 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2015-17 Financial Plan SEWER FUND, continued *Tait Radio System 42,960 *Firewall Replacement 8,918 *Virtual Private Network Replacement 18,958 *Network Switch Replacement 27,252 *Finance System Replace. 125,000 MP2 Mtce Software System 30,000 SCADA iFIX System Controls 250,000 Hach Wins 30,000 8,268,945 79,765,275 3,236,349 2,745,305 2,526,788 TOTAL SEWER FUND 2-35 * Project funded by more than one source D: Item is being financed G: Item is grant funded C: Developer Contribution CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - CIP EXPENDITURES BY FUND Proposed Proposed Proposed 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2015-17 Financial Plan PARKING FUND *Parking Structures Assessment and Rehabilitation Study 66,667 10,000 Marsh Street Parking Garage Circulation Improvements 78,000 Vehicle License Plate Recognition 135,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 D Palm/Nipomo Parking Garage 23,600,000 Fleet Replacement Parking SUV 27,100 Parking Pickup Trucks 29,500 31,500 Scooter 34,000 IT Replacements *Microsoft Office share 4,909 *UPS Battery Replace 646 646 *VM Infrastructure 3,065 3,065 *Server Operating System 633 *VoIP 6,233 *Radio Handhelds 9,339 *Tait Radio System 9,339 *Firewall Replacement 4,069 *Network Switch Replacement 4,955 *Finance System Replace 62,500 Total Parking Fund 280,313 50,798 23,625,572 83,485 120,998 2-36 * Project funded by more than one source D: Item is being financed G: Item is grant funded C: Developer Contribution CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - CIP EXPENDITURES BY FUND Proposed Proposed Proposed 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2015-17 Financial Plan TRANSIT FUND G Bus Stop Shelters and Bench Improvements 92,000 92,000 92,000 92,000 92,000 G Bus Stop Equipment Projects Including Signage and Cameras 31,300 31,300 31,300 31,300 31,300 G Transit Facility Remodel 180,000 G Fleet Replacement G SLO Transit Buses 1,124,264 1,158,000 G SLO Transit Trolley 240,000 G IT Replacements G *Microsoft Office 2,455 G *UPS Battery Replacement 1,001 1,001 G *VM Infrastructure 4,751 4,751 G *Server Operating System 982 G *VoIP Phone System 1,247 G *Radio Handhelds 52,299 G *Tait Radio System 52,299 G *Firewall Replacement 2,035 G *Network Switch Replacement 7,432 G *Finance System Replace 62,500 TOTAL TRANSIT FUND 304,301 129,033 176,846 1,300,864 1,600,473 2-37 * Project funded by more than one source D: Item is being financed G: Item is grant funded C: Developer Contribution CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - CIP EXPENDITURES BY FUND Proposed Proposed Proposed 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2015-17 Financial Plan WHALE ROCK FUND Whale Rock Reservoir-Pipeline Reliability Assessment 510,000 Whale Rock Pump Station Isolation Valve Replacement 61,000 Whale Rock Residence Retrofit/Demo 50,000 Whale Rock Cla Valve Replacement 36,000 Whale Rock Weather Station Replacements 20,000 Fleet Replacement Whale Rock Reservoir 4x4 Pickup Truck 30,500 Whale Rock Reservoir 4x4 Truck w/Utility Box & Crane 65,800 Whale Rock 4x4 SUV 31,500 Whale Rock Reservoir Boat (Used)15,000 IT Replacements *Microsoft Office 1,636 *UPS Battery Replacement 417 417 *VM Infrastructure 1,980 1,980 *Server Operating System 409 *VoIP Phone System *Radio Handhelds 13,075 *Tait Radio System 13,075 *Firewall Replacement 1,356 TOTAL WHALE ROCK FUND 146,717 114,889 523,075 64,492 4,972 TOTAL ENTERPRISE & AGENCY FUNDS 11,812,761 88,028,488 29,839,484 8,175,013 7,689,376 TOTAL ALL FUNDS 22,280,267 104,730,000 37,726,369 21,827,520 17,160,035 2-38 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Section 3 PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS ORGANIZATION The table of contents immediately follows this page and provides the following summary for the Capital Improvement Plan: Function(described below) Page Number (where the full description will be found) CIP Description (brief description of project) Following the table of contents is the full description of the project, which is listed in function order. This section provides detailed documentation for each recommended CIP project proposed during 2015-20. The individual CIP project requests are sorted by the City’s Functional Areas: Function Programs included within each function Public Safety (PS) Police, Fire Public Utilities (PU) Water, Sewer, Whale Rock Transportation (TP) Transportation Management, Streets, Creek & Flood Protection, Parking, and Transit Leisure, Cultural & Social Services (LCS) Parks & Recreation, Cultural Services, Social Services Community Development (CD) Planning, Construction Development, Natural Resources, Economic Health General Government (GG) Legislative and Policy, General Administration, Legal Services, City Clerk, Organizational Support Services (HR, Finance & IT), Building, and Fleet. Each individual write-up includes the following information: a. Function h. Operating Program Number and Title b. Request Title i. Project Phasing and Funding Sources c. Project Description j. Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives d. Link to Council Goals and/or Measure Y k. Project Team e. Need and Urgency l. Site List f. Readiness to Build m. Location map g. Environmental review and permits required 3-1 5 Year Capital Improvement Plan 2015-2020 Function Page CIP Name 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 PS 3-7 Police Facility Site Assessment 45,000 PS 3-12 Police Scheduling Program 37,000 PS 3-15 Police Body Worn Cameras & Video Storage 69,000 PS 3-19 Fire Station 1/City EOC Rewiring, Carpet and Paint Maintenance 88,600 PS 3-27 Fire Station 2 Restroom and Dorms Privacy Modifications 160,000 PS 3-31 Fire Station 2 Exterior Driveway Concrete Ramp Replacement 10,000 33,000 PS 3-34 Fire Department Electronic Patient Care Reporting (ePCR)53,800 25,700 25,700 25,800 26,000 PU 3-39 Water Treatment Plant-Major Facility Maintenance 160,000 170,000 290,000 160,000 160,000 PU 3-42 Water Distribution System Improvements 2,200,000 1,845,000 1,953,000 3,075,000 2,984,000 PU 3-50 Water Storage Reservoirs-Maintenance and Tank Replacement 77,500 700,000 75,000 745,000 PU 3-54 Reservoir #2 Replacement 250,000 5,300,000 PU 3-57 Wastewater Collection System Improvements 1,526,000 875,000 1,385,000 825,000 1,540,000 PU 3-65 Lift Station Replacements 1,000,000 1,375,000 1,650,000 1,550,000 PU 3-69 Wastewater Collection Telemetry System Improvements 100,000 PU 3-72 Water Resource Recovery Facility Upgrade 4,924,000 76,832,000 PU 3-76 Water Resource Recovery Facility Major Maintenance 430,000 155,000 PU 3-79 Whale Rock Residence Retrofit/Demo 50,000 PU 3-82 Whale Rock Reservoir-Pipeline Reliability Assessment 510,000 3-2 5 Year Capital Improvement Plan 2015-2020 Function Page CIP Name 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 PU 3-85 Whale Rock Pump Station Isolation Valve Replacement 61,000 PU 3-88 Whale Rock Reservoir Weather Station Replacements 20,000 PU 3-91 Whale Rock Reservoir-Cla Valve Replacement 36,000 TP 3-94 Street Reconstruction & Resurfacing 1,566,817 1,630,700 1,935,494 2,064,289 2,060,090 TP 3-100 Traffic Sign Maintenance 40,000 143,000 TP 3-103 Downtown Renewal 6,000 190,000 60,000 440,000 TP 3-106 Sidewalk and Tree Replacements 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 TP 3-109 Sidewalk Ramp Construction 150,000 105,000 150,000 150,000 105,000 TP 3-112 Traffic, Bicycle & Pedestrian Marking Replacement 20,000 22,000 22,000 TP 3-115 Replacement of Lighted Crosswalk on Higuera Street 43,500 TP 3-118 Bicycle Transportation Plan Implementation 400,000 TP 3-122 Bicycle Facility Improvements 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 TP 3-125 Bob Jones Trail Octagon Barn Connection 395,000 TP 3-129 Bob Jones Trail-Prefumo Creek Connection to Oceanaire 156,000 1,060,000 TP 3-133 Bike Bridge at Phillips Lane 250,000 1,250,000 TP 3-136 Bicycle/Pedestrian Safety Improvement-Penny Lane Bridge at UPRR 50,000 TP 3-142 Safe Route to School Improvements-Pacheco and Bishop Peak Schools 45,000 TP 3-146 Monterey & Osos Traffic Signal Safety Upgrade 225,000 3-3 5 Year Capital Improvement Plan 2015-2020 Function Page CIP Name 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 TP 3-149 Storm Drain System Replacement 561,500 574,300 279,175 652,117 651,545 TP 3-152 Silt Removal 275,000 150,000 405,000 TP 3-155 Marsh Street Bridge Replacement 6,640,000 TP 3-158 Broad Street Bank Reinforcement 80,000 TP 3-161 Toro Street Bank Stabilization 50,000 TP 3-164 City Wayfinding Signs 175,000 TP 3-167 Neighborhood Traffic Improvements 20,000 20,000 20,000 30,000 30,000 TP 3-169 Prado Road Bridge & Road Widening 300,000 540,000 5,000,000 TP 3-172 Traffic Operation Improvement Projects 30,000 30,000 TP 3-174 Transportation Monitoring 60,000 60,000 TP 3-176 Traffic Safety Improvement Projects 25,000 25,000 25,000 30,000 30,000 TP 3-178 Santa Fe Road Realignment and Bridge Rehabilitation 50,000 TP 3-189 South & Parker Traffic Safety Project: Median 30,000 TP 3-192 Parking Structures Assessment and Rehabiliation Study 75,000 10,000 TP 3-195 Marsh Street Parking Garage Circulation Improvements 78,000 TP 3-201 Vehicle License Plate Recognition 135,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 TP 3-204 Palm/Nipomo Parking Garage 23,600,000 TP 3-208 Fleet Expansion-Parking Enforcement Utility Scooter 34,000 3-4 5 Year Capital Improvement Plan 2015-2020 Function Page CIP Name 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 TP 3-212 Bus Stop Shelters and Bench Improvements 92,000 92,000 92,000 92,000 92,000 TP 3-215 Bus Stop Equipment Projects Including Signage and Cameras 31,300 31,300 31,300 31,300 31,300 TP 3-218 Transit Facility Remodel 180,000 LCS 3-221 Park Major Maintenance and Repairs 86,000 220,000 155,000 415,000 398,900 LCS 3-229 Mission Plaza Railing Upgrade 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 LCS 3-232 Olympic Pool Replastering 290,000 LCS 3-235 Pedestrian and Bicycle Pathway Maintenance 100,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 LCS 3-238 Tree Major Maintenance, Removal & Replanting 68,800 LCS 3-243 Dog Off-Leash Area Roadway Safety Fencing 50,000 LCS 3-247 Sinsheimer Park Tennis Court Lighting 25,000 175,000 LCS 3-251 New Park Amenity Initiatives 60,000 LCS 3-256 Open Space Protection: Maintenance 285,000 285,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 LCS 3-260 Laguna Lake Park & Natural Reserve ADA Accessible Trail 250,000 LCS 3-264 Restroom Replacement & Remodeling 400,000 80,000 430,000 LCS 3-268 Laguna Lake Golf Course Pro-Shop Building Assessment 37,000 LCS 3-272 Public Art 36,400 39,900 34,900 38,700 40,400 LCS 3-277 Fleet Expansion - Ranger Service Program Pickup Truck 52,500 CD 3-280 Open Space Acquisition 850,000 2,250,000 250,000 1,000,000 250,000 3-5 5 Year Capital Improvement Plan 2015-2020 Function Page CIP Name 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 CD 3-283 Laguna Lake Dredging and Sediment Management 450,000 CD 3-287 Infrastructure Investment Capital Improvement Project 250,000 250,000 CD 3-289 Office Remodel and Vehicles for Rental Housing Inspection Program 153,750 GG 3-293 Facilities Master Plan 145,000 GG 3-298 Facilities Maintenance 57,000 146,000 152,000 374,750 791,100 ALL 3-307 IT Replacement 826,000 377,000 1,298,000 1,361,000 3,873,500 3-311 Fleet Replacement-General Fund 1,203,700 2,363,300 1,573,400 471,100 1,108,700 TP 3-321 Fleet Replacement-Parking Fund 27,100 29,500 31,500 TP 3-323 Fleet Replacement-Transit Fund 1,124,264 1,398,000 PU 3-327 Fleet Replacement-Water Fund 205,600 25,200 62,200 193,000 PU 3-330 Fleet Replacement-Sewer Fund 202,100 180,900 57,600 235,500 375,000 PU 3-333 Fleet Replacement-Whale Rock Fund 96,300 31,500 15,000 3-6 PUBLIC SAFETY POLICE FACILITY SITE ASSESSMENT Project Description Conducting a facility site assessment for the Police Department will cost $45,000 in FY 2015-16. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure G Priority - List: Other Important Council Objectives – Infrastructure Maintenance Need and Urgency A Police Facilities Master Plan was completed in 2003 for the San Luis Obispo Police Department. The report reflected a twenty-five year planning period, and included the following components: Service Demand and Staffing Projections, Existing Facilities and Parking Requirements and Existing Facilities Conditions, Facility and Site Planning Options, and Communication Center Relocation. In 2003, as a result of the completed Master Plan, the recommendation to build a new police department was added to the City’s Long Term Capital Improvement Plan. The plan now includes land acquisition and construction costs, estimated at $42 million. Background The original police building was built in 1969 and provided approximately 8,000 – 9,000 net square feet. In 1982 a two-story addition was added on the southern end of the original building; which increased the net square feet to 12,800. In the 1990’s, the department acquired a small residence (1016 Walnut) which is adjacent to the property and provides an additional 788 square feet. Currently, the department’s Traffic Enforcement Team utilizes this building for office space and the team’s motorcycles are stored in the small detached garage located in the rear of the property. In 2002 a women’s locker room was added which included shower facilities, storage lockers and restrooms. In 2010 the department’s Communication Center moved from the Police Department to a newly constructed building located near Fire Station 1. Prior to that time, the dispatchers were located in the lower level of the Police Department. Facilities Master Plan In the Police Facilities Master Plan1 report, the following master planning options were identified: 1. Expansion on the Existing Site – this includes the existing building and parking lot at 1042 Walnut, and the building at 1016 Walnut. a. Advantages: easy access to Highway 101 as well as to east/west connector streets. b. Disadvantages: limitation of existing site size; the purchase of the building/worksite on the southern end of the site. A parking structure will be required (subterranean or multi-leveled); site will be developed to the maximum potential. 1 Attachment 1, Police Facilities Master Plan – Section 3, page 26 3-7 PUBLIC SAFETY POLICE FACILITY SITE ASSESSMENT 2. Acquisition of Adjacent Facilities – acquiring the existing two-story building directly across the street on Santa Rosa. a. Advantages: ability to meet immediate expansion needs and have additional parking. Home/office building at South end of police site would not need to be purchased. b. Disadvantages: department’s operations will be decentralized and fragmented. 3. Construction on a New Site – locating and purchasing land to construct an entire new facility. a. Advantages: construction of a new building on another site is the best long-term option; allows for the department to build facility with technological infrastructure needs for modern law enforcement operations; would provide adequate parking for staff and visitors; it would meet all code regulations for an essential services building. b. Disadvantages: locating a suitable site with appropriate acreage; allocating funding toward project. It’s important to note that although these finding were made in 2003; the concerns still exists and the lack of space and efficiency has increased over the years. Below are some other growing areas of concern: 1. Inadequate power supply - The “power grid” or electrical capabilities are at maximum capacity. On occasion, staff experiences equipment failures (printers losing power, etc.) when other devices are plugged in. 2. Lack of parking – the department’s lower parking lot is not large enough to accommodate all working employees (with the exception of Mondays or Fridays when seemingly fewer staff are working). Employees try to find parking on the street, and compete for spaces with others who live or work in the area. Parking challenges also affect visitors; there is no designated parking lot for visitors that need to conduct business at the department. Hosting meetings with outside agencies is often cumbersome due to lack of available parking. 3. Work Space Inefficiencies – a. The police department currently has five (5) volunteers that work in the office weekly. Efficient work space for volunteers is lacking; volunteers need to work alternating days/hours in order to share work space in the office. The department is currently working to create a more robust volunteer program, and the need to increase office space specifically for the volunteers is much needed. SNAP employees also use this area as office space which further impacts the functionality of the office. b. Currently five (5) field supervisors share one small office. In addition to field duties these supervisors are in charge of evaluations and other administrative duties that require the use of this officer space to use the computers, store equipment, counsel employees or write reports. This area is not functional for their expected duties. c. Livescan Machine – the department utilizes a Livescan machine to take finger prints for bookings and applicants (job applicants within the City). Due to safety reasons the machine was moved to the small area in front of the Record’s lobby counter to be more visible. Unfortunately, there is not adequate room to maneuver around the machine and the space is inefficient for the long term; privacy for the person getting their fingerprints taken is minimal due to other people that may be in line or sitting in the lobby. d. The department’s Traffic Safety Team is located in the small building (1016 Walnut) next to the parking lot; in order to create a more cohesive working environment, the ultimate goal would be to locate these officers in the same building as other police department employees. e. The building only has one (1) actual conference room; however, the Training Room is often utilized as a meeting location as well. Other than the small interview rooms located in the Lobby (used by officers interviewing subjects), there are no smaller conference rooms to accommodate fewer people. 3-8 PUBLIC SAFETY POLICE FACILITY SITE ASSESSMENT 4. Storage Needs – a. Field personnel utilize storage cubbies for their work related safety equipment. The cubbies are small and are not capable of housing the increased need for equipment that personnel require and need while working in the field. This equipment must be moved from storage to their patrol car for use and returned at the completion of their shift. Currently the demand for individual cubby space has exceeded field personnel capacity. As we develop our volunteer program for additional field activity an even greater demand for storage space will be realized. b. Bulky evidence items are stored in an outside metal building and larger area that is covered by a metal roof. These structures have been in place for over 25 years. The area is rat infested and both structures have deteriorated over time. Both structures leak during the rainy season. 5. Men’s locker room and restroom facilities – the men’s locker room and restrooms are in poor condition. This area is not compliant with today’s American with Disabilities Act or California Building Code standards. The size of the facility is no longer adequate for employees; the showers are cramped and the size of the lockers is too small. These facilities were built in 1969 and with the exception of some small cosmetic improvements to include carpet and paint (approximately 10- years ago), plumbing and water fixtures have deteriorated over time and electrical access for radios, cameras, flashlights, cell phones and other modern electronic equipment needs to be improved. Facility Assessment Expectations In order to gain more knowledge into the process of creating a site assessment, Department staff contacted a consulting firm that specializes in planning and design of sustainable architecture for public safety facilities. Staff discussed the background and purpose of the site assessment and received feedback on how best to accomplish the project. The following are suggested key components for the assessment: Step 1. Perform a “macro” space needs assessment to determine a rough estimate of building square footage and corresponding parking counts. This would not be considered a detailed space needs assessment (which would eventually need to be done in the future to enable an architect to commence a design effort). Step 2. Determine how much of the existing site may be used for redevelopment. A preliminary assessment of potential impacts of any changed site utilization standards enacted since the present building was constructed (i.e. the consultant would perform a preliminary review of local zoning codes to determine setbacks, on-site water retention, minimum public / staff parking requirements, and municipal landscaping minimums and maximum lot coverage). Step 3. Prepare one “test-fit” sketch to confirm and illustrate how the site may accommodate a new building and accompanying parking structure. Step 4. Prepare an initial preliminary project budget. Some variables to consider: Variable #1: Instead of conducting a macro study and deferring the space needs assessment to a later date; conduct a detailed space needs assessment. Doing this first would likely add about $15,000 to the project. 3-9 PUBLIC SAFETY POLICE FACILITY SITE ASSESSMENT Variable #2: If the existing site is deemed unacceptable (cost is too high to rebuild, etc.), then the next option should be to explore alternative sites. Lastly, it’s important to note that the consultant suggested a more realistic project budget of $65,000. Readiness to Build & Environmental Review and Permits Required Not applicable as this project is not a construction project. Operating Program Number and Title: 80100 Police Administration 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 $45,000 $45,000 Total $0$45,000 $0 $0 $0 $0$45,000 Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total 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: N/A Anticipated Facility Life Span: N/A 3-10 PUBLIC SAFETY POLICE FACILITY SITE ASSESSMENT Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total General Fund $45,000 $45,000 Total $0$45,000 $0 $0 $0 $0$45,000 Project Funding by Source Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: The project is not recommended for phasing. Phasing the assessment will only prolong the project and make it more difficult to identify outcomes and recommendations. Project Team Assignment Program Estimated Hours Project Proponent Police Department 100 Project Manager Police Department 120 3-11 PUBLIC SAFETY POLICE SCHEDULING PROGRAM Project Description Replacing the Police department’s current personnel scheduling program will cost $37,000 in FY 2015-16. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure G Priority - List: Need and Urgency The Police department has been utilizing SpeedShift as the department’s scheduling software since 2004. SpeedShift has become dated technology (the software is sixteen years old); it is client based, there are a limited number of licenses, and it does not incorporate any “rules” based coding into the software. Often times, due to limited licenses, users cannot log onto the system and must wait for another user to log out. The ability to create and run reports is limited as well. With the changes in technology, there are opportunities to enhance the scheduling process, provide improved access to users, and also allow for a new integrated approach for overtime and leave requests. Many software vendors offer other “modules” as well to their scheduling programs that manage processes such as asset tracking and court and subpoena procedures. These processes can be cumbersome and tracking typically is not maintained in one system. There are other factors that will need to be considered when selecting a vendor, such as Network Services involvement and management of the system. Some vendors offer “cloud based” deployment, whereas physical servers are not required to host the software. In these instances, maintenance becomes less of a burden for IT staff; however, it may have drawbacks as well, such as cost or lack of direct access to the server. In the end, the typical lifespan of scheduling software is usually well over 5 years. In 2010, the Council approved a request to replace all FoxPro applications and included in the request was a replacement for Speedshift as well. Project staff selected a vendor to replace both Speedshift and the scheduling program that Fire was using as well (a FoxPro system). The selected vendor was Telestaff, and unfortunately, due to complex rules based scheduling for police personnel, the program was not well suited for the police department. The fire department did proceed with the change of scheduling systems; however, police staff chose to continue using SpeedShift at that time. End of Life Support Due to the software’s outdated architecture, the vendor for SpeedShift no longer offered support after June 2013. Staff conferred with Network Services, and although customer support concluded last year, the decision was made to continue to use the software. This was mainly due to the fact that the department has not had to rely heavily on support from the vendor in the past. However, utilizing software without support poses several downfalls; as an example, department computers are scheduled to be upgraded to Windows 7, and there are known compatibility issues which will require additional Network Services resources. Due to the unknown outcome of these issues, staff does not recommend deferring much longer than FY 2015-16. 3-12 PUBLIC SAFETY POLICE SCHEDULING PROGRAM 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: 80100 – Police Administration 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 Equipment Acquisition $37,000 $37,000 Total $0$37,000 $0 $0 $0 $0$37,000 Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Contract Services $4,900$4,900$4,900$4,900$4,900$24,500 Total $0$4,900$4,900$4,900$4,900$4,900$24,500 Ongoing Costs by Type 3-13 PUBLIC SAFETY POLICE SCHEDULING PROGRAM Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: Staff is estimating annual ongoing maintenance based on quotes from various vendors. The police department budget currently has funding earmarked for annual maintenance in the amount of $4,900. However, savings may be incurred if the scheduling program offered a system in which upgrades and support were included in the upfront costs. Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total General Fund $37,000 $37,000 Total $0$37,000 $0 $0 $0 $0$37,000 Project Funding by Source Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project: The police department could continue to use existing scheduling software; however, due to the fact that the vendor no longer supports the system this would not guarantee continued reliability. Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: Project Team Assignment Program Estimated Hours Project Management Police 300 Project Research Police 100 Project Implementation Network Services & Police & Finance 80 3-14 PUBLIC SAFETY POLICE BODY WORN CAMERAS & VIDEO STORAGE Project Description Purchasing body worn cameras for police field personnel and additional video storage will cost $69,000 in FY 2016-17. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure G Priority - List: Need and Urgency Many citizens have the ability to capture photographs or video images immediately. Often these images are transferred to others or viewed through a social media provider for others to see. Frequently enough images have been captured showing police officers and their encounters with citizens. Although most interactions police have with their communities are professional and non-confrontational at times images have shown officers engaged in acts of violence or perceived questionable circumstances. Although officer(s) were acting appropriately and within department policies, none the less, these images can be concerning and even disturbing depending on the perspective. Police Departments across the nation have either implemented or are looking into implementing body worn camera programs for their field personnel. Scrutiny of an officer(s) and their actions in the field are often called into question. Frequently enough accusations are made against police personnel ranging from excessive force to unprofessional behavior. In many instances these interactions may not be captured on audio or video and there is difficulty in assessing a true understanding of the situation. Sometimes these contacts may be captured by a video device but they only offer a single perspective of a much larger incident. Sometimes these images are from a distance, grainy or unfocused creating even greater obstacles as viewers assess or try to fill in the blanks of a given encounter. By providing field personnel with body worn cameras a visual and audio perspective is documented from the officer’s point of view. The body worn camera is just a single tool in the assessment of an incident, however, coupled with police radio traffic, phone calls, in-car video, statements and other evidence it is obvious video footage is an important piece of the overall puzzle. Allowing officers the ability to provide this video perspective from most places where they are allowed to be and perform their duty is critical as citizens look to departments to enhance accountability and transparency. In 2010 the City of Rialto PD (twice the size of San Luis Obispo PD) conducted a study involving the deployment of body worn cameras with police personnel. Over the course of a year there was a reduction of officer use of force incidents by 60% and a reduction of complaints against the police by 88%. Similar numbers were posted in the second year of the study. Rialto Police Chief Farrar oversaw the study and at the conclusion stated, “Whether the reduced number of complaints was because of the officers behaving better or the citizens behaving better-well, it was probably a little bit of both.” Many agencies that have gone to the use of body worn cameras have experienced similar results. Police supervisors and managers expend a great deal of time trying to examine use of force incidents and resolve citizen complaints. Many agencies allow complainants of officer conduct to view recorded footage. After viewing the footage the complaints are dropped and the need to continue with an involved 3-15 PUBLIC SAFETY POLICE BODY WORN CAMERAS & VIDEO STORAGE investigation is negated. Some complaints have been determined to be founded and provide managers with important evidence to move forward with the appropriate discipline or training depending on the circumstances. The same can be said for use of force incidents. Pilot Program In preparation of deploying body worn cameras to field personnel the department has been approved by the City Manager to utilize carry over funds from FY 13- 14 in the amount $15,000 to implement a pilot program to test, evaluate, prepare policy and purchase a limited number of cameras for long term testing. The pilot program will be implemented in four phases: Phase One: The first phase will include stakeholder outreach (i.e. the police unions, management, the Chief’s roundtable, Finance and IT) for policy/procedure development. Phase Two: The second phase will include research, testing and evaluation of available body worn technology and products. Phases one and two have been initiated and are expected to last approximately four months from January 2015 through April of 2015. Phase Three: Based upon the results of outreach and testing the department will use carry over funds to purchase 10-15 body worn cameras. With an estimated start date of July 1, 2015 these cameras will be assigned to selected field personnel for a one year trial period. This evaluation period will allow the department to analyze effectiveness, modify policy as needed, evaluate storage needs, and examine retention policies. Phase three will allow the department to transition into phase four with a broader understanding of the overall expectations and impacts of deploying body worn cameras for all field personnel. Phase Four: Phase four includes the completion and submission of this CIP request for fiscal year 2016-17 to purchase additional body worn cameras for the remaining field personnel in the department to further develop a more robust body worn camera program. Network Services is looking into storage solutions as the video storage needs of the department will increase. It is estimated that the department will need approximately 60 Terabytes of storage to store the 30 months of video as mandated by the City Video Policy. Staff is requesting to purchase 45 body worn cameras for an estimated amount of $45,000; additionally, the storage (as described above) will cost an estimated $24,000. 3-16 PUBLIC SAFETY POLICE BODY WORN CAMERAS & VIDEO STORAGE 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 reviewed the Body Worn Camera proposal 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: 80100 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 Equipment Acquisition $69,000 $69,000 Total $0 $0$69,000 $0 $0 $0$69,000 Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Maintenance materials $1,500$1,500$1,500$4,500 Total $0 $0 $0$1,500$1,500$1,500$4,500 Ongoing Costs by Type 3-17 PUBLIC SAFETY POLICE BODY WORN CAMERAS & VIDEO STORAGE Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: There have been discussions at the Federal level to provide grant opportunities to communities to initiate body worn camera programs, however, at this time funds have not been devoted for this purpose. Additionally, locally some funds may be available to assist with the purchase of cameras through County Realignment funds, however, discussions will need to take place amongst the various SLO County and City agency representatives to determine how and when these funds are expended. The Department will monitor options at the federal, state and local level to determine alternative methods of funding should they arise. Network Services determined the annual ongoing costs based on what staff expects to expend on drives annually. Anticipated Facility Life Span: 3 – 5 years Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total General Fund $69,000 $69,000 Total $0 $0$69,000 $0 $0 $0$69,000 Project Funding by Source Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project: The department could purchase fewer cameras to reduce equipment costs and storage needs; however, not all field personnel would have the ability to capture important video information. Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: Project Team Assignment Program Estimated Hours Project Proponent Police Department 20 Project Manager Police Department 40 Project Integration & Support Network Services 80 3-18 PUBLIC SAFETY FIRE STATION 1 / CITY EOC NETWORK WIRING REPLACEMENT, CARPET AND PAINT MAINTENANCE Project Description 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 will cost $ 88,600 in 2016-2017. Maintenance/Replacement New project Council Goal / Measure G Priority - List: Measure G Public Safety Need and Urgency- Fire Station No. 1 was completed and occupied in 1996. It has not been repainted or re-carpeted in the last 18 years. It receives heavy use as it serves as the fire department’s administrative headquarters, and is home to the department’s fire prevention bureau/staff. It is also the maintenance and training facility for the four fire station service delivery system. It is also historically the busiest firehouse of the four station system in terms of call load/responses for service, and it houses the largest number of firefighters (5) and emergency response apparatus (8) plus staff vehicles. It is an around the clock essential service facility. The interior finishes are original and reflect that fact. The carpet is worn, torn, and heavily (and irreversibly) stained in several high traffic areas. The carpet has wrinkles that create a tripping hazard. With the need to upgrade cabling to Cat 6 capability throughout the office work spaces and into the EOC there is an opportune timeframe to also incorporate/phase the painting and carpet replacement. Redundant and repetitive moving of furniture/equipment/work stations would be minimized. The re-painting and carpet replacement is several years overdue. 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 3-19 PUBLIC SAFETY FIRE STATION 1 / CITY EOC NETWORK WIRING REPLACEMENT, CARPET AND PAINT MAINTENANCE Operating Program Number and Title: 85500 Technical Services 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 Environmental / Permit $0 Land Acquisition $0 Site Preparation $0 Design $0 Construction - paint, carpet, etc.$88,600 $88,600 Construction Management $0 Equipment Acquisition $0 Total $0 $0$88,600 $0 $88,600 Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: This is an existing facility, so no additional on-going expenses are anticipated. Maintenance contract will include carpet cleaning annually. Anticipated Life Span: 10 years for carpet and painting Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total General Fund $88,600 $88,600 Grant Debt Financing Developer Contribution Total $88,600 $88,600 3-20 PUBLIC SAFETY FIRE STATION 1 / CITY EOC NETWORK WIRING REPLACEMENT, CARPET AND PAINT MAINTENANCE Cost breakdown: • Furniture disassembly/removal/replacement/reassembly: $ 7,047.00 • Carpet removal/installation: $44,029.00 • Painting $15,880.00 • IT -Cat 6 cable installation $21,644.00 Total $88,600.00 Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project: Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: Phasing of the project is a more expensive alternative as it will require that the modular workstations, furniture, and IT infrastructure be moved and reconstructed twice as opposed to once. Project Team Assignment Program Estimated Hours Project Proponent Fire/IT 20 Project Manager Fire/IT 160 Technical Studies IT 40 IT Equipment Removal/Replacement IT 100 Contract Management Fire/IT 120 3-21 PUBLIC SAFETY FIRE STATION 1 / CITY EOC NETWORK WIRING REPLACEMENT, CARPET AND PAINT MAINTENANCE 3-22 PUBLIC SAFETY FIRE STATION 1 / CITY EOC NETWORK WIRING REPLACEMENT, CARPET AND PAINT MAINTENANCE 3-23 PUBLIC SAFETY FIRE STATION 1 / CITY EOC NETWORK WIRING REPLACEMENT, CARPET AND PAINT MAINTENANCE 3-24 PUBLIC SAFETY FIRE STATION 1 / CITY EOC NETWORK WIRING REPLACEMENT, CARPET AND PAINT MAINTENANCE 3-25 PUBLIC SAFETY FIRE STATION 1 / CITY EOC NETWORK WIRING REPLACEMENT, CARPET AND PAINT MAINTENANCE 3-26 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - PUBLIC SAFETY FIRE STATION 2 RESTROOM AND DORMS PRIVACY MODIFICATIONS Project Description Remodel of Fire Station 2 dorms and bathroom will cost $160,000 in 2015-16 for construction. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure G Priority: Measure G Priority Need and Urgency Fire Station 2 at 136 N. Chorro was built in 1953, has 2,900 square feet under roof, and is the oldest facility in the four station system. Per the January 16, 2009 Fire Department Master Plan for the City of San Luis Obispo conducted by Citygate Associates, LLC (“the Citygate Report”), Fire Station 2 has exceeded its functional lifespan. Prior requests to replace or renovate the facility were not successful, which has led to a delay in remediating the working condition and capabilities of this facility. The fire station only has one bathroom that is non-ADA compliant and does not accommodate the potential for a female firefighter or visitor, including female City employees or contract workers who have business at the fire station. Most of the fixtures in the bathroom are original and do not conserve water. The toilet stalls are open (no doors) and offer no privacy. One person cannot shower while another uses the toilet with any expectation of modesty or seclusion. Even for the current all-male crews at this fire station, the level of privacy is inadequate and creates uncomfortable situations. This fire station is the only one in the City that does not offer a separate female bathroom facility or stall. A remodel of the bathroom can eliminate this disparity/deficiency. The dorm accommodations at Fire Station 2 are similarly deficient. Prior attempts to solve this issue included the conversion of a closet into a combination dorm room and office for the supervisor and the installation of a partial wall to separate employee dorm areas. The latter solution is still inappropriate for the privacy needs of employees. It is very common for would-be firefighter candidates to visit fire stations in an attempt to learn more about the fire department, our employees, and our values. Would-be female candidates visiting this fire station would observe a facility that was constructed decades before women entered the fire service and has had little work done to change their accommodations. This situation is contrary to the City and Fire Department’s espoused goals for recruitment and working conditions. Prior attempts to remedy the problems with the bathroom and dorm areas have been underfunded; hence the solutions have left much to be desired. The fire station has historically been used as a County polling place for the surrounding voter precinct. Its inadequacies are well-known and remediation of the issues has been repeatedly deferred in the hopes that the Station would have been demolished and/or replaced by now, as was advocated in the Citygate Report: While the City has been able to invest in a new central station and headquarters, the other three stations are [35-60] years old, and when built were not constructed to be 50-100 year old facilities. They have been given some upgrades, but more will be necessary. In other cities today, the more common size for a single fire company neighborhood station with space for reserve apparatus, separate gender areas and on-site outdoor activity space is approximately 5,000 square foot and larger building on at least 1+ acre site. The City will soon be facing significant repair and upgrade needs at the three neighborhood fire stations (p. 61). 3-27 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - PUBLIC SAFETY FIRE STATION 2 RESTROOM AND DORMS PRIVACY MODIFICATIONS This proposed remodel seeks to make necessary improvements as inexpensively as possible while achieving the stated goals of being able to accommodate separate genders and provide livability, privacy and modesty to its occupants and visitors for the remaining lifespan of the facility, but this “solution” does not fully accomplish the goal of ADA accessibility nor does it address the aged condition of the facility. It does however provide an intermediate step for the staff and visitors to this fire station. The proposed remodel can be accomplished economically by remodeling 58 square feet of floor space. This includes adding a non-bearing partition wall to the main dorm, moving (reusing) an existing pocket door, adding a second pocket door, and moving/adding a light fixture, venting, and a radio speaker. The bathroom can likewise be remodeled within the existing wall configuration to provide two separate/private bathroom stalls, which would allow more than one person to use the bathroom at a time (currently not the case). This proposed remodel will not make the existing/non-conforming facility fully ADA compliant. To achieve complete ADA compliance a much more expensive remodel (estimated at $450,000) would be necessary and has been proposed in the reduced/enhanced section of this proposal. 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: Public Works Encroachment Permit n/a Operating Program Number and Title: 85500 Fire-Technical Services Project Phasing and Funding Sources Continuing, ongoing or master account project - Specification No. 91258 3-28 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - PUBLIC SAFETY FIRE STATION 2 RESTROOM AND DORMS PRIVACY MODIFICATIONS Initial Project Costs by Phase Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Study $0 Environmental / Permit $0 Land Acquisition $0 Site Preparation $0 Design $24,500 $24,500 Construction $6,000$160,000 $166,000 Construction Management $0 Contingency $0 Total$30,500$160,000 $0 $0 $0 $0$190,500 Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: On-going utility costs should go down with replacement of old/original bathroom fixtures with modern, low flow units, instantaneous tankless water heater and installation of energy-efficient lighting. Anticipated Facility Life Span: 10 more years at the most Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total General Fund $30,500$160,000 $190,500 Enterprise Fund $0 Grant $0 Debt Financing $0 Developer Contribution $0 Total$30,500$160,000 $0 $0 $0 $0$190,500 Project Funding by Source Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – 1. Cost of an ADA compliant alternative project: $450,000 - a more complete remodel (of 750 square feet of the entire rear portion of the station) has been proposed in the past and involved a complete reworking/reconfiguration of the existing main dorm, locker room, bathroom, and “Captain’s dorm”. This alternative/proposed remodel would be far more appropriate were the station planned for a longer life span and ADA compliance a priority. 2. Implement the recommendations from the Citygate Report: If the scope of the Citygate Report is adequate to conclude that this facility needs to be replaced without further structural and design considerations outsourced for assessment, the Fire Department would suggest replacement schedule to begin with design in 2015-16 and construction in 2016-17. This option would eliminate other proposed CIP expenses for this aged facility, including the replacement of the concrete apparatus bay floor. 3-29 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - PUBLIC SAFETY FIRE STATION 2 RESTROOM AND DORMS PRIVACY MODIFICATIONS Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: Phasing is a poor option for the proposed remodel, as it only further delays an unacceptable set of conditions, and produces no cost savings. Project Team Assignment Program Estimated Hours Project Proponent Fire 20 Project Manager CIP Engineering - Design 120 Contract Management CIP Engineering – Administration 100 Construction Management CIP Engineering - Construction 160 Project Inspection Building 24 3-30 PUBLIC SAFETY FIRE STATION 2 EXTERIOR DRIVEWAY CONCRETE RAMP REPLACEMENT Project Description Replacing the exterior concrete driveway at Fire Station 2 will cost $10,000 in 2016-17 for design, and $33,000 for construction in 2017-18. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure G Priority - List: Measure G Public Safety Sustain Essential Services, Infrastructure, and Fiscal Health & Enhance Maintenance of City infrastructure Need and Urgency The exterior concrete driveway at Fire Station 2 has been settling and moving under the weight of the fire engines ( Note: this does not include the existing concrete sidewalk and gutter, only the 4 slabs that make up the driveway in front of the station). The slabs have settled over an inch below the existing threshold at the primary rollup door and shifts under the weight of fire equipment. The settling of the slabs indicates insufficient soil compaction and possible structural problems with the slabs themselves. Slab settling is most likely the result of the additional weight of the newer fire trucks being used now, as compared to those in use at the time it was built. A similar situation was recently corrected at Station 3 through interior and exterior slab replacement. When there is water under the slabs during rainy periods, water can be seen to visibly pump out of the expansion joints between the slabs as a fire engine drives out of the station. Additionally, when small amounts of water run across the slabs and expansion joints, the water disappears into the joints the way a French drain would perform. Continued settling will likely result in cracking of the slab at the borders of the 4 slabs and worsen the drop coming out of the apparatus bay. The existing trip hazard will only worsen over time. This CIP request is made with the belief that the current concrete degradation will need to be repaired prior to any facility replacement that may occur. Replacement of the slab is not a complicated task and onsite logistics and mitigation can be performed by Fire Department management personnel. Standard inspections by Public Works and the Building Departments during construction will suffice for oversight of the technical requirements of the engineered slabs. As such, no Construction Management costs have been forecasted for this CIP. 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 3-31 PUBLIC SAFETY FIRE STATION 2 EXTERIOR DRIVEWAY CONCRETE RAMP REPLACEMENT 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: Encroachment Permit (Public Works Department) n/a Operating Program Number and Title: 85100 Fire Administration 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 $10,000 $10,000 Construction $33,000 $33,000 Total $0 $0$10,000$33,000 $43,000 Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: This is an existing facility, so no additional ongoing expenses are anticipated. The project has the potential to eliminate injury and damage through the improved surfacing. Anticipated Facility Life Span: The slab will have an estimated life of 30 Years, assuming similar fire apparatus for the future. The Fire Station has a life span less than the 30 years estimated for the concrete slabs. Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total General Fund $10,000$33,000 $43,000 Total $0 $0$10,000$33,000 $43,000 Project Funding by Source Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives Alternate project is not feasible or advantageous. Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: N/A 3-32 PUBLIC SAFETY FIRE STATION 2 EXTERIOR DRIVEWAY CONCRETE RAMP REPLACEMENT Project Team Assignment Program Estimated Hours Project Management CIP Engineering - Design 100 Project Inspection CIP Engineering - Construction 120 Project Administration CIP Engineering - Administration 100 Project Proponent Fire Department Administration 8 Environmental Review Planning 8 3-33 PUBLIC SAFETY FIRE DEPARTMENT ELECTRONIC PATIENT CARE REPORTING (ePCR) RECORDS MANAGEMENT Project Description Implementing electronic patient records management for the Fire Department will cost $53,800 in FY 2015-16 and $25,700 in FY 2016-17 and ongoing cost of $21,200 for hosting/software and $4,500 for equipment replacement. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure G Priority - List: Measure G Public Safety Need and Urgency Background Due to budgetary constraints, the Fire Department discontinued its electronic pen-based computer reporting (ePCR) in 2011. The Fire Department once again utilizes pen-and-paper-based documentation for all emergency medical service patient records. Approximately 4,000 three-sheet, carbonless copy forms are hand written at emergency scenes every year by Fire Department paramedic-firefighters. When a medical patient is transported to an emergency room, one hard copy of the report is provided to the ambulance company and another hard copy is provided to the emergency room. The readability of these medical documents is adversely affected by weather, writing surface, hand-writing legibility, contact with hard or pointed surfaces, and a variety of uncontrollable factors found on emergency scenes. The original top-sheet returns to the fire station with the Fire Department paramedic-firefighter where several data fields are manually entered into Spillman software. Typically less than 10% of the information on the paper report is entered into the Spillman system. The report is then placed in a folder until the next day when it is accessed and reviewed by the paramedic-firefighter on the next shift for quality assurance (QA) purposes. If there is any question about the completeness of the form or the accuracy of the care provided, the paramedic-firefighter providing QA review writes his/her observations on a Post-It note and affixes it to the report. The paramedic-firefighter who created the report reviews the comments of the QA paramedic-firefighter at his/her next shift, which can be up to six days after the form has been reviewed. This process continues until the form is complete and accurate. The report is then delivered via interoffice mail to Fire Administration where a Battalion Chief reconciles in Spillman that a report was generated for each medical patient encountered. The hard- copy report is then filed at Fire Administration by a Fire Department volunteer. Currently the Department spends approximately $2,400 annually on printing 3- part no carbon required PCR forms. If this program is not implemented, this annual cost will continue to occur. Emergency medical responses account for approximately 60% of the Fire Department’s 9-1-1 responses. Developing, safeguarding, and utilizing medical records and public health trends are critical factors to this primary business function of the Fire Department, and the current system does not provide for any of these functions. While our paramedic-level care is top-notch, our documentation is substandard and creates potential liability issues related to HIPAA compliance and records retention. The City of San Luis Obispo is the only community in the County that provides paramedic level care with hand written medical documentation. Not implementing the Electronic Patient Care Reporting project is actually counterproductive. Currently under the hand-written patient care documentation program the Fire Department needlessly spends countless personnel hours physically routing reports, reviewing reports, filing reports for storage, and searching for data - that in present hand-written form- takes precious staff time. Having the ability to retrieve information and statistics in a customizable report format is simply not possible under the Fire Department’s current system. 3-34 PUBLIC SAFETY FIRE DEPARTMENT ELECTRONIC PATIENT CARE REPORTING (ePCR) RECORDS MANAGEMENT Problems Identified The ePCR program discontinued due to budgetary constraints in 2011 was successful, and the value of this program has been fully realized over the past three years as the Fire Department operated without this tool. The current paper-based system has significant shortcomings including: • Security: hard-copy patient care reports are much less secure than electronic versions that include advanced security measures. The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 addresses the security and privacy of medical records. This law is a primary driving force in transitioning medical care providers to electronic documentation and records retention. • Timeliness: as previously stated, takes several days to greater than a week to fully process and record our patient care reports. Until then, citizens requesting copies of their medical report, as is common particularly for vehicle collision patients, receive a significant delay in service from agencies using hard-copy care reports versus those that use electronic reports. • Quality Assurance (QA): the current Post-It note system of feedback preserves the integrity of the written patient care report; however it provides no tracking of the QA process or individual accountability. Electronic systems allow for significantly great QA, including the ability to QA and close a report from remote locations. For example, if a paramedic-firefighter creates an electronic patient care report while on-duty at fire station 1, the same staff member can log into the system and QA that report from any other station. This is particularly helpful as the Fire Department’s daily staffing is incredibly dynamic. • Legibility and physical integrity: Hand written patient care reports are subject to penmanship issues as well as physical damage and contamination. These forms can become wet and rendered useless. Paper forms can also absorb biohazards if, for example, they come in contact with the patient’s vomitus, blood or other fluid. This is not an uncommon occurrence in emergency medical incidents. When a paper form comes in contact with a biohazard, the form must be disposed of properly and a new form is generated. Electronic systems designed for medical patient care reporting includes robust hardware that can be decontaminated if exposed to biohazard waste. The electronic data is not jeopardized. • Redundancy: portions of the hard-copy patient care report are entered into our electronic records reporting system (Spillman). This is a redundant act that creates the opportunity for miss-entry due to human error. • Records management and trend analysis shortcomings: greater than 90% of all the medical information cannot be queried since it exists only in hand- written narrative form. This significantly limits the City’s ability to query information and analyze trends. Fully electronic records systems permit data queries and analysis that facilitate pattern and trend identification. These trends can be used to develop public education programs based on specific community needs. Additionally, queried electronic data can be used to report department performance measures related to patient care and medical interventions. • Transparency and open government reporting: very little information is currently captured electronically regarding the Fire Department’s emergency medical services. As the City moves toward greater access to public information, the Fire Department is ill-situated to support that effort. Agencies with ePCR are capable of providing vast statistics on medical emergencies including types of emergencies (such as number of chest pain incidents or average age of an injured bicyclist), the average time-to-intervention/treatment (such as how long it takes to obtain a 12-lead cardiac assessment for patients with chest pain), and paramedic performance (such as the percent of IVs successfully established on the first attempt by individual fire- paramedics). All of these statistics have real value, but are uncaptured based on the current lack of technology. 3-35 PUBLIC SAFETY FIRE DEPARTMENT ELECTRONIC PATIENT CARE REPORTING (ePCR) RECORDS MANAGEMENT Electronic patient care reporting improves the quality, consistency, and accuracy of the Fire Department’s patient care reporting, medical records management, quality assurance, data gathering and analysis, public education, and performance measures. As such, ePCR has a positive influence on patient outcomes and medical liabilities. 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: 85100 Fire Administration Project Phasing and Funding Sources Continuing, ongoing or master account project - Specification No. 3-36 PUBLIC SAFETY FIRE DEPARTMENT ELECTRONIC PATIENT CARE REPORTING (ePCR) RECORDS MANAGEMENT Initial Project Costs by Phase Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Training $4,500 $4,500 Software/Hosting $33,700 $33,700 Equipment Acquisition $15,600 $15,600 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total $0$53,800 $0 $0 $0 $0$53,800 Annual savings in Emergency Response Contracts account (85200-7227) of $2,400 for printing of EPCR reports. Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Annual hosting/software $21,200$21,200$21,300$21,500$85,200 Equipment replacement $4,500$4,500$4,500$4,500$18,000 $0 $0 $0 Total $0 $0$25,700$25,700$25,800$26,000$103,200 Ongoing Costs by Type Ongoing cost: annual hosting/software fees and equipment replacement Anticipated Life Span: 5 years Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total General Fund $53,800$25,700$25,700$25,800$26,000$157,000 Enterprise Fund $0 Grant $0 Debt Financing $0 Developer Contribution $0 Total $0$53,800$25,700$25,700$25,800$26,000$157,000 Project Funding by Source 3-37 PUBLIC SAFETY FIRE DEPARTMENT ELECTRONIC PATIENT CARE REPORTING (ePCR) RECORDS MANAGEMENT Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives: This project will result in a reduction in printing costs of approximately $2,400 for carbonless, multi-sheet care reports. Project Team Assignment Program Estimated Hours Project Management Fire and Network Services 200 Equipment Acquisition Fire and Network Services 20 Equipment Configuration and Testing Network Services 20 Installation Management/Coordination Fire Vehicle Mechanic staff 40 3-38 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – PUBLIC UTILITIES WATER TREATMENT PLANT – MAJOR FACILITY MAINTENANCE Project Description 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, will cost $160,000 in 2015-16, $170,000 in 2016-17, and $610,000 in 2017-20 for the ongoing maintenance and upkeep of the plant’s equipment listed in this request. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure G Priority - List: Infrastructure Maintenance Need and Urgency The City’s Water Treatment Plant was originally constructed in 1961. In 1995, a significant upgrade to the plant was completed to meet changing water quality requirements. In April of 2008, another major upgrade project was completed that replaced older equipment, added additional treated water storage, and enhanced treatment processes. The ongoing maintenance of the facilities and equipment at the Water Treatment Plant is necessary in order to prolong the useful life of the facilities and ensure staff’s ability to operate the plant and treat water to State and Federal 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 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 3-39 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – PUBLIC UTILITIES WATER TREATMENT PLANT – MAJOR FACILITY MAINTENANCE Operating Program Number and Title: 55150 – Water Treatment Project Phasing and Funding Sources Continuing, ongoing or master account project Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Maintenance materials $160,000$170,000$290,000$160,000$160,000$940,000 Total $0$160,000$170,000$290,000$160,000$160,000$940,000 Ongoing Costs by Type Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: Anticipated Facility Life Span: Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Water Fund ongoing $160,000$170,000$290,000$160,000$160,000$940,000 Total $0$160,000$170,000$290,000$160,000$160,000$940,000 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: Deferring the projects included in this request is not recommended, since these projects have been identified and selected to enhance operations and prolong the service life of facilities and equipment that are critical to Water Treatment Plant operations. Project Team Assignment Program Estimated Hours Project Proponent Project Manager CIP Engineering – Design Technical Studies Natural Resources Environmental Clearance Community Development 3-40 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – PUBLIC UTILITIES WATER TREATMENT PLANT – MAJOR FACILITY MAINTENANCE Assignment Program Estimated Hours Contract Management CIP Engineering – Administration Construction Management CIP Engineering – Construction Projects List 2015-16 PROJECT LIST Cost Estimate Ozone System Maintenance $108,000 Chemical System Maintenance Air Compressor & Dryer Maintenance $27,000 $25,000 2016-17 PROJECT LIST Cost Estimate Ozone System Maintenance $108,000 Chemical System Maintenance Air Compressor & Dryer Maintenance $27,000 $25,000 Replace Air Compressor-Design $10,000 2017-18 PROJECT LIST Cost Estimate Replace Compressor $130,000 Ozone System Maintenance $108,000 Chemical System Maintenance Air Compressor & Dryer Maintenance $27,000 $25,000 2018-19 PROJECT LIST Cost Estimate Ozone System Maintenance $108,000 Chemical System Maintenance Air Compressor & Dryer Maintenance $27,000 $25,000 2019-20 PROJECT LIST Cost Estimate Ozone System Maintenance $108,000 Chemical System Maintenance Air Compressor & Dryer Maintenance $27,000 $25,000 3-41 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PUBLIC UTILITIES DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS Project Description 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. Related construction projects will cost $2,200,000 in 2015-16, $1,845,000 in 2016-17 and $8,012,000 for years three through five combined including the cost of design and construction management services. Maintenance and replacement projects for water meter and fire hydrant infrastructure are done throughout the year and are an ongoing effort. Funding for the replacement of water meters, water meter boxes, and fire hydrants will cost $190,000 in years 2015-16 and 2016-17, and $610,000 for years three through five. The Sewer Enterprise Fund will contribute $82,000 per year toward the cost of the replacement water meters. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal List: Infrastructure Maintenance Need and Urgency The City operates a complex water distribution system that is comprised of sixteen distribution zones, ten potable water storage tanks, two reservoirs, five hydro‐ pneumatic tanks, eight pump stations, 21 pressure reducing valves (PRVs) and 184 miles of pipe with diameters ranging in size from four inches to 30 inches. Some City water distribution lines are undersized and deteriorating due to age. The expected useful life of a water pipeline is approximately 50 years, which corresponds with a replacement schedule of approximately two percent of the distribution system each year. Listed projects include replacing undersized mains in areas requiring increased fire flows, replacing aging mains that have experienced multiple failures requiring expensive emergency repairs, and projects to improve distribution system operations. Projects were selected and prioritized to have the greatest impact in reducing disruptions to water service and improving fire flows. Trench repairs and raising valve covers are routine activities associated with street paving. These projects occur on an as-needed basis, routinely several times per year. Water meters and fire hydrants are a vital component of the City’s water distribution and fire safety system. Their upkeep is an ongoing effort with a portion of the inventory of almost 15,000 meters and 1,867 hydrants being replaced annually. Readiness to Build Study complete or n/a Equipment purchased or n/a Property owned or property agreement in place n/a 3-42 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PUBLIC UTILITIES DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS 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: 55160 Water Distribution Water Fund Project Phasing and Funding Sources Continuing, ongoing or master account project Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: Replacing aging infrastructure will potentially reduce ongoing maintenance as well as emergency repair costs. Anticipated Facility Life Span: 50 years Initial Project Costs by Phase Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Design $150,000$125,000$225,000$235,000$127,000$862,000 Construction on-going $1,710,000$1,405,000$1,408,000$2,400,000$2,420,000$9,343,000 Construction Management $150,000$125,000$125,000$235,000$227,000$862,000 Meter /Hydrant Replacement $190,000$190,000$195,000$205,000$210,000$990,000 Total$0$2,200,000$1,845,000$1,953,000$3,075,000$2,984,000$12,057,000 3-43 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PUBLIC UTILITIES DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Water Fund $2,117,500$1,762,500$1,868,000$2,987,500$2,894,000$11,629,500 Sewer Fund $82,500$82,500$85,000$87,500$90,000$427,500 Total $0$2,200,000$1,845,000$1,953,000$3,075,000$2,984,000$12,057,000 Project Funding by Source 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 15-16 16-17 17-18 18-19 19-20 Project Management Public Works, Engineering 800 800 800 800 800 Project Support Utilities, Water, Water Distribution Supervisor and Staff Public Works, Administration 100 100 100 100 100 Construction Management Public Works, Inspection 200 200 200 200 200 Environmental Review Community Development 8 8 8 8 8 Project Proponent Utilities, Water, Water Division Manager 80 80 80 80 80 3-44 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PUBLIC UTILITIES DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS Site List Based on the information currently available, projects have been prioritized and are listed in priority order. As additional information becomes available, projects in future years may be re-prioritized. In some cases, unanticipated use of contract design and inspection services may be required due to various reasons, which could increase project costs. This may result in the need to shift projects to future budget years to work within established funding levels and maintain priority order. 2015-2016 Project List: Location Pavement Area Length (feet) Cost 2015-2016 Water Distribution System Improvements Design (contract services) $150,000 Casa - Murray to Deseret (increase to 12”) Stenner (Murray to end) Chorro (intersection of Chorro/Meinecke and Chorro/Murray) Murray - Santa Rosa to Hathway Pacific – Nipomo to Higuera (increase from 10” to 12”) Boysen - Santa Rosa Street to N. Chorro Street 8 900 $1,560,000 8 580 8 100 8 1,350 4 2,100 1,200 Total: 6,230 Construction Management (contract services) $150,000 Trench Repair N/A N/A $125,000 Raise Valve Covers on Paving Projects N/A N/A $25,000 Water Meters and Water Meter Boxes N/A N/A $165,000 Fire Hydrants and Parts N/A N/A $25,000 Total $2,200,000 3-45 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PUBLIC UTILITIES DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS 2016-2017 Project List: Location Pavement Area Length (feet) Cost 2016-2017 Water Distribution System Improvements Design (contract services) $125,000 Mountain View - Hill Street to Broad Street (increase from 6” to 8”) Hill Street - Lincoln Street to 525 Hill Street (increase from 4” to 8”) West Street – Chorro Street to Lincoln Street (increase from 6” to 8”) Lincoln - Chorro to West (increase from 4” to 8”) 212 San Miguel to Santa Ynez San Miguel - Santa Ynez to Buena Vista Buena Vista - McCollum to 392 Buena Vista (increase from 4” to 8”) Higuera – Toro to Johnson 7 360 $1,255,000 7 220 7 730 7 1,520 8 640 8 620 8 450 4 480 Total: 5,020 Construction Management (contract services) $125,000 Trench Repair N/A N/A $125,000 Raise Valve Covers on Paving Projects N/A N/A $25,000 Water Meters and Water Meter Boxes N/A N/A $165,000 Fire Hydrants and Parts N/A N/A $25,000 Total $1,845,000 3-46 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PUBLIC UTILITIES DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS 2017-2018 Project List: Location Pavement Area Length (feet) Cost 2017-2018 Water Distribution System Improvements Design (contract services) $125,000 Chorro Street – Broad Street to Upham Street El Paseo – Flora to El Cerrito (increase from 8” to 10”) El Cerrito – El Paseo to end Wilding - Iris - Sierra - Boulevard Del Campo - 4 1,000 $1,258,000 1 290 1 670 1 600 1 320 2 1,500 2 650 Total: 5,030 Construction Management (contract services) $125,000 Serrano Zone Consolidation (Study and Design Phase) $100,000 Trench Repair N/A N/A $125,000 Raise Valve Covers on Paving Projects N/A N/A $25,000 Water Meters and Water Meter Boxes N/A N/A $170,000 Fire Hydrants and Parts N/A N/A $25,000 Total $1,953,000 3-47 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PUBLIC UTILITIES DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS 2018-2019 Project List: Location Pavement Area Length (feet) Cost 2018-2019 Water Distribution System Improvements Design (contract services) $135,000 Craig (increase from 6” to 12”) Craig – Patricia to Jeffrey (increase from 4” to 8”) Christina – Warren to Craig (increase from 4” to 8”) Jaycee (8”) Westmont – Jeffrey to Stanford La Canada – Tolosa to Cerro Romauldo (inc. from 4” and 6” to 8”) Cerro Romauldo – Patricia to Los Cerros 7 260 $1,350,000 7 750 7 600 7 1,350 8 500 7 850 7 1,080 Total: 5,390 Construction Management (contract services) $135,000 Serrano Zone Consolidation (Construction, Phase 1) Construction Management (contract services) 7 3,800 $1,000,000 $100,000 Trench Repair N/A N/A $125,000 Raise Valve Covers on Paving Projects N/A N/A $25,000 Water Meters and Water Meter Boxes N/A N/A $175,000 Fire Hydrants and Parts N/A N/A $30,000 Total $3,075,000 3-48 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PUBLIC UTILITIES DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS 2019-2020 Project List: Location Pavement Area Length (feet) Cost 2019-2020 Water Distribution System Improvements Design (contract services) $127,000 Patricia – Cerro Romauldo to Highland 7 1,130 Patricia – Highland to Fel Mar 7 270 Highland – Fel Mar to 113 Highland 8 280 La Entrada – Hermosa to San Jose 7 880 La Entrada – San Jose to Foothill 7 1,420 La Entrada – Catalina to Foothill 7 1,100 Total: 5,080 1,270,000 Construction Management (contract services) $127,000 Serrano Zone Consolidation (Construction, Phase 2) Construction Management (contract services) 7 3,800 $1,000,000 $100,000 Trench Repair N/A N/A 125,000 Raise Valve Covers on Paving Projects N/A N/A $25,000 Water Meters and Water Meter Boxes N/A N/A $180,000 Fire Hydrants and Parts N/A N/A $30,000 Total $2,984,000 3-49 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - PUBLIC UTILITIES WATER STORAGE RESERVOIRS - MAINTENANCE AND TANK REPLACEMENT Project Description • Dive inspections of the Islay, Slack, Terrace Hill and Edna Saddle Tanks will cost $20,000 in 2015-16. • Maintenance, repairs, and interior and exterior coating of the Wash Water Tank #2 at the Water Treatment Plant will cost $15,000 for design in 2015-16 and $170,000 for construction in 2016-17. • Maintenance repairs and coating for Terrace Hill Tank will cost $42,500 for design in 2015-16 and $530,000 for construction and construction management in 2016-17. • Design services for safety improvements and coating of Edna Saddle Tank will cost $75,000 in 2017-18 and $745,000 for construction in 2018-19. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure G Priority: Maintenance of City Infrastructure Need and Urgency The City hired Advantage Technical Services in 2009 to inspect the interior (using sanitary diving procedures) and exterior of seven of the City’s water storage reservoirs and prepare a written assessment report for each tank with the observations, recommendations, and preliminary cost estimates. Following the inspection of each of the reservoirs, staff worked with the consultant to assign a priority ranking to each capital project. The condition of the tanks that remain to be addressed are summarized here: • Terrace Hill Tank is experiencing corrosion on 50 percent of the internal roof area. In order to prevent the tank structure from deteriorating and ensure that full tank lifespan is realized, the report recommends interior and exterior coating (may include removal of lead based coat), safety improvements such as improvements to the roof surface, the addition of a designated tie-off point, as well as a seismic retrofit. • Interior and exterior coating of Edna Saddle Tank is recommended in 2019 as the interior roof plate and structure has corrosion. Safety improvements are also recommended. The City hired Advantage Technical Services in 2012 to inspect Wash Water Tank #2 at the Water Treatment Plant and prepare a condition assessment. The findings included the following: • The bottom extension (chime) is in poor condition with significant corrosion and metal loss present. There is no caulking between the bottom extension and concrete and moisture is present in the inaccessible area. • The coating on the bottom plate and welds, as well as the coatings on the interior shell plate, were in fair to poor condition. • Significant corrosion is present on the vent to roof joint on the tank interior. Some corrosion is starting on the bracket hardware which connects the cover to the vent riser. The coating on the interior of the vent hood is failing and loose. 3-50 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - PUBLIC UTILITIES WATER STORAGE RESERVOIRS - MAINTENANCE AND TANK REPLACEMENT ATS recommends the City re-coat all tank surfaces within five years to prevent significant material loss and relatively expensive repairs. 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: 55160 - Water Distribution 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 (Dive inspections)$20,000 $20,000 Design $57,500 $75,000 $132,500 Construction $650,000 $675,000 $1,325,000 Construction Management $50,000 $70,000 $120,000 Total $0$77,500$700,000$75,000$745,000 $0$1,597,500 3-51 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - PUBLIC UTILITIES WATER STORAGE RESERVOIRS - MAINTENANCE AND TANK REPLACEMENT Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: Each of the tank maintenance projects will help extend the useful life of the tanks by approximately 25 years. Replacement of Slack Tank is more cost effective than maintenance due to extensive corrosion. Anticipated Facility Life Span: The remaining life span at the City’s water storage reservoirs vary. Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Water Fund $0$77,500$700,000$75,000$745,000 $0$1,597,500 Total $0$77,500$700,000$75,000$745,000 $0$1,597,500 Project Funding by Source 3-52 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - PUBLIC UTILITIES WATER STORAGE RESERVOIRS - MAINTENANCE AND TANK REPLACEMENT 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 Note: Slack Water Tank replacement scheduled for design in 2014-15 and construction in 2015-16 is a full replacement therefore more labor-intensive Assignment Program Estimated Hours 15-16 16-17 17-18 18-19 19-20 Project Management Public Works, Engineering, Design 100 200 100 100 100 Project Support Utilities, Water, Water Distribution Supervisor and Staff Public Works, Administration Public Works, Engineering 100 20 100 150 40 150 200 30 200 100 20 100 100 20 100 Environmental Review Community Development 4 40 4 4 4 Construction Management Public Works, Inspection 200 200 400 200 200 Project Proponent Utilities, Water, Water Division Manager 20 40 40 20 20 Site List – For multi-year projects Location Estimated Year of Design Estimated Year of Construction WTP, Wash Water Tank #2 2015-16 2016-17 Terrace Hill Water Tank Recoating 2015-16 2016-17 Edna Saddle Water Tank Recoating 2017-18 2018-19 3-53 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PUBLIC UTILITIES RESERVOIR REPLACEMENT Project Description This replacement project is planned for Reservoir #2. The study phase and design phase of the Reservoir #2 Replacement will cost $250,000 in 2015-16. Construction of project, including costs associated with construction management, will cost $5,300,000 in 2016-17. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal List: Infrastructure Maintenance Need and Urgency The City currently operates two reservoirs that are estimated to be 50 to 60 years old. The expected useful life of a reservoir is approximately 25 years. Reservoir #2 is a 7.44 MG reservoir equipped with floating covers that had previously been identified to be replaced in 2015-16. Because the reservoir is a single entity, the entire storage volume must be taken out‐of‐service for reservoir maintenance. With the completion of the water distribution system hydraulic modeling, the City identified opportunities to consolidate water distribution zones to improve operations, reduce pumping needs, eliminate tanks and pump stations that would otherwise require replacement, improve fire flow, and improve available fire storage. Replacement of Reservoir #2 will include construction of two new 2.5 MG above ground tanks at the existing reservoir site. This will provide desired redundancy and allow for tank maintenance without interruption. The study phase will research constructability and identify project components such as whether electrical upgrades are necessary to the transfer pump station to ensure system reliability during construction. 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 3-54 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PUBLIC UTILITIES RESERVOIR REPLACEMENT Operating Program Number and Title: 55160 - Water Distribution Project Phasing and Funding Sources Continuing, ongoing or master account project Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: Replacing aging infrastructure will potentially reduce ongoing maintenance as well as emergency repair costs. Anticipated Facility Life Span: 50 years Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Water Fund $250,000$5,300,000 $5,550,000 Total $0$250,000$5,300,000 $0 $0 $0$5,550,000 Project Funding by Source Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives Reduced project is feasible – Cost of reduced project: Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: Initial Project Costs by Phase Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Study $50,000 $50,000 Design $200,000 $200,000 Construction $5,000,000 $5,000,000 Construction Management $300,000 $300,000 Total $0$250,000$5,300,000 $0 $0 $0$5,550,000 3-55 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PUBLIC UTILITIES RESERVOIR REPLACEMENT Project Team Assignment Program Estimated Hours 15-16 16-17 17-18 18-19 19-20 Project Management Public Works, Engineering 400 100 0 0 0 Project Support Utilities, Water, Water Distribution Supervisor and Staff Utilities, Water, Water Treatment Supervisor Public Works, Administration 100 100 40 100 100 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 Construction Management Public Works, Inspection 0 200 0 0 0 Environmental Review Community Development 8 0 0 0 0 Project Proponent Utilities, Water, Water Division Manager 80 80 0 0 0 3-56 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PUBLIC UTILITIES WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS Project Description 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 and will cost $1,526,000 in 2015-16, $875,000 in 2016-17, and $3,750,000 for years three through five combined. The cost includes design and construction management services. Funding includes $25,000 annually for raising manholes as necessitated by City paving projects. Addressing inflow and infiltration (I/I) into the wastewater collection system is a long-term effort involving investigation and correction. Flow studies and field investigations have been successful in identifying sources of I/I in both City and privately owned sewer infrastructure. Funding will be required to monitor, correct and reduce I/I sources. Program goal will cost $100,000 for 2015/16 and $100,000 for 2016/2017 and $300,000 for years three through five. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal List: Infrastructure Maintenance Need and Urgency The City’s wastewater collection system includes approximately 135 miles of sewer lines and operational equipment. Some pipes are over 100 years old and are undersized. Maintenance requirements increase dramatically as pipeline and equipment approach the end of their useful life. Pipeline and operational equipment requires ongoing maintenance and condition assessment to prioritize periodic replacement and ensure proper function as well as prolong service life. With an expected service life of fifty years, approximately two percent of the wastewater collection system is scheduled for replacement or rehabilitation per year. 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 3-57 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PUBLIC UTILITIES WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS Railroad n/a Other: (Enter the title and agency of any other needed permits) n/a Operating Program Number and Title: 55310 - Wastewater Collection Project Phasing and Funding Sources Continuing, ongoing or master account project Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: Project replaces existing pipelines and has an estimated 50-year life cycle. Other operational equipment, including controllers, radios, etc., become obsolete with advances in technology and therefore have a shorter life cycle (approximately 10 years). Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Sewer Fund $1,526,000$875,000$1,385,000$825,000$1,540,000$6,151,000 Total $0$1,526,000$875,000$1,385,000$825,000$1,540,000$6,151,000 Project Funding by Source Initial Project Costs by Phase Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Design $35,000$60,000$80,000$50,000$100,000$325,000 Construction on-going $1,456,000$755,000$1,225,000$725,000$1,340,000$5,501,000 Construction Management $35,000$60,000$80,000$50,000$100,000$325,000 Total $0$1,526,000$875,000$1,385,000$825,000$1,540,000$6,151,000 3-58 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PUBLIC UTILITIES WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives Reduced project is feasible – Cost of reduced project: n/a Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: n/a Project Team Assignment Program Estimated Hours 15-16 16-17 17-18 18-19 19-20 Project Management Public Works, Engineering 800 800 800 800 800 Project Support Utilities, Wastewater, Wastewater Collection Supervisor and Staff Public Works, Administration 100 100 100 100 100 Construction Management Public Works, Inspection 200 200 200 200 200 Environmental Review Community Development 8 8 8 8 8 Project Proponent Utilities, Wastewater, Wastewater Division Manager 40 40 40 40 40 Site List Based on the information currently available, projects are listed in priority order. As additional information becomes available, projects in future years may be re- prioritized. In some cases, unanticipated use of contract design and inspection services may be required due to various reasons, which could increase project costs. This may result in the need to shift projects to future budget years to work within established funding levels and maintain priority order. 3-59 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PUBLIC UTILITIES WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS 2015-2016 Project List: Location Pavement Area Length (feet) Cost Reroute Sewerline - Marsh, Higuera, California Street to Marsh-Monterey Marsh– Marsh Easement (Above California) to RR Crossing Grove - Monterey to Higuera Higuera-RR crossing to Higuera End (Above Grove) California – Marsh to Monterey 1 3,357 $960,000 Sewer Lining (Group Project) Design (contract services) Phillips – Hwy 101 (RR Crossing and easement) Phillips (at Hwy. 101) - Toro Street to 101 on-ramp Howard - Phillips to Hwy 101 Johnson - Phillips to RR easement Benton and Chorro easement - Meinecke to Murray Broad (2 segments) - Center to Murray Mission - end to Broad Broad and Benton easement- Murray to Meinecke Murray Easement - Santa Rosa to Chorro Construction Management (contract services) 1 7 Total: 6,048 2,425 3,623 $35,000 $425,000 $35,000 Inflow/Infiltration Reduction $100,000 Raise manholes after paving N/A N/A $25,000 2015-2016 TOTAL : $1,526,000 3-60 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PUBLIC UTILITIES WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS 2016-2017 Project List: Location Pavement Area Length (feet) Cost Sewerline Replacement (Trench and Pipe Bursting) Design (contract services) Santa Barbara - Morro to Osos/Leff Osos – Leff to Buchon (trench) Osos – Leff to Railroad Church Street - Railroad to Osos Jennifer Street - one segment above Church to Leff Leff - Osos to end Construction Management (contract services) 4 TOTAL: 2,520 $60,000 $630,000 $60,000 Inflow/Infiltration Reduction $100,000 Raise manholes after paving N/A N/A $25,000 2016-2017 TOTAL : $875,000 3-61 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PUBLIC UTILITIES WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS 2017-2018 Project List: Location Pavement Area Length (feet) Cost Sewerline Replacement (Trench and Pipe Bursting) Design (contract services) Walnut - Santa Rosa to Morro Morro - Palm to Peach Jeffery- Westmont to Cerro Romauldo Westmont - Jeffrey to Patricia Westmont Easement- End to Westmont Cerro Romauldo – Jeffrey to Jeffrey Construction Management (contract services) 4 7 and 8 TOTAL: 4,373 1,331 3,042 $80,000 $1,100000 $80,000 Inflow/Infiltration Reduction $100,000 Raise manholes after paving N/A N/A $25,000 2017-2018 TOTAL : $1,385,000 3-62 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PUBLIC UTILITIES WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS 2018-2019 Project List: Location Pavement Area Length (feet) Cost Sewer Lining (Group Project) Design (contract services) Serrano Heights- End to Serrano Serrano - Serrano Heights to Broad Bressi- end to Serrano Palomar –one segment north of Serrano to Serrano Penman–End to Serrano Penman easement- End to Penman Luneta - Tassajara to Verde Verde - Luneta to Ramona Lizzie - Johnson to Wilding Wilding - Lizzie to end Woodland - Wilding to end Skylark – End to Woodland Santa Rosa-Palm to Monterey Mill-Santa Rosa to Morro Rachel / Swazey Easement Chorro- Pismo to Pacific Construction Management (contract services) 7 7 1 4 Easement 9 Total: 7,940 2,934 1,075 2,923 1,115 181 300 $50,000 $600,000 $50,000 Inflow/Infiltration Reduction $100,000 Raise manholes after paving N/A N/A $25,000 2018-2019 TOTAL : $825,000 2019-2020 Project List: 3-63 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PUBLIC UTILITIES WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS Location Pavement Area Length (feet) Cost 2019-20 Sewerline Replacement (Trench and Pipe Bursting) Design (contract services) Johnson - Halfway between San Luis Dr. and RR bridge to Buchon Buchon- Johnson to Santa Rosa Santa Rosa- Islay to Pismo Buchon- Santa Rosa to Morro Morro- Buchon to Pacific Pacific- Morro to Chorro Chorro- Pacific to Marsh Construction Management (contract services) 1 1 1 1 1 9 9 Total: 4,417 $100,000 $1,215,000 $100,000 Inflow/Infiltration Reduction $100,000 Raise manholes after paving N/A N/A $25,000 2019-2020 TOTAL : $1,540,000 3-64 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PUBLIC UTILITIES LIFT STATION REPLACEMENTS Project Description 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. Construction of the Margarita lift station will cost $950,000 in 2015-16 including costs associated with easement acquisition and construction management services. Construction of the Foothill lift station will cost $1,275,000 in 2016- 17 including costs associated with easement acquisition and construction management services. The study phase for the Airport lift station replacements will cost $50,000 in 2015-16 and the design phase will cost $100,000 in 2016-17. Construction of the Airport lift station and force main replacement, including costs associated with easement acquisition and construction management will cost $1,550,000 in 2017- 18. The design phase of the Silver City lift station and force main replacement will cost $100,000 in 2017-18. Construction of the Silver City lift station and force main replacement, including costs associated with easement acquisition and construction management will cost $1,550,000 in 2018-19 including easement acquisition and construction management services. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal List: Infrastructure Maintenance Need and Urgency The Margarita Lift Station was put into service in 1971. This station is 41 years old and is operating beyond its life expectancy of 20 years. This station is a Smith and Loveless dry/wet well design. In 1995, the floor of the sump pump was leaking and repairs were made. Cathodic protection was added in 1996 to extend the life of the lift station structure. In 2010, leaks were repaired on the floor and walls. A report provided by ATS confirmed signs of accelerated deterioration causing the dry well to be structurally unsound. The inspection report noted a high risk of failure at the station as both the wet and dry well walls were deteriorating, causing leaks and structural issues. Because of its age and condition, replacement of the lift station has been prioritized with the other necessary system components that include the wet well and force main. The force main is approximately 225 feet in length and is cast iron pipe. Based on a pipe condition assessment, the pipeline is operating beyond its useful life expectancy. These replacements will ensure that all components function effectively as a system. The replacement lift station will accommodate a portion of the future development anticipated in the Margarita Area Specific Plan. The Foothill Lift Station is the oldest in the City’s wastewater collection system and is in a location with minimal access. This station is over 50 years old and is operating beyond its life expectancy. This station is a Smith and Loveless dry/wet well design. The equipment was originally installed in 1962 to serve the Broad Street and Orcutt area, but was removed and warehoused, then reconfigured and installed in its present location in 1986. Due to external corrosion the sump pump floor was repaired in 1995. Although cathodic protection was installed in 1996 to extend the life of the station, it is experiencing exterior corrosion and leaking 3-65 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PUBLIC UTILITIES LIFT STATION REPLACEMENTS ground water through internal welds in the structure. The existing force main is approximately 325 feet in length and is cast iron pipe. In 2013 the force main failed due to corrosion and pipe age. A pipeline condition assessment has shown it is operating beyond its useful life expectancy. Because of its age and condition, replacement of the lift station has been prioritized with the other necessary system components. It is recommended that the station be relocated approximately 500 feet west of its current location to serve future development. Relocating the station would require an addition of 500 feet of gravity and force main and property and easement acquisition. The Airport Lift Station is located on Broad Street near the intersection of Fiero Lane. This station is a Smith and Loveless dry/wet well design. It operates with two-240 gpm, 5 horse power pumps and 840 feet of existing eight-inch force main and was originally constructed by San Luis Obispo County. The City took over its operation and maintenance in 2000. Due to age and poor structural condition and exterior corrosion the station is operating beyond its life expectancy. The replacement lift station will be sited in order to accommodate future development of the Airport Area Specific Plan which will include additional gravity sewers and a longer force main. It is recommended that the station be relocated approximately 775 feet west of its current location at the end of Fiero Lane. Relocating the station would require an addition of 500 feet of gravity main and 900 feet of additional force main and property acquisition. The Silver City lift station is a Smith and Loveless dry/wet well design, and was put in to service in 1971. The existing six-inch asbestos concrete force main pumps under San Luis Obispo Creek (it is encased under the creek) approximately 765 feet to a manhole upstream of the Laguna Lift Station. The Silver City lift station operates with two 450 gpm, 18.5 horse power pumps. Due to the age of the station the structural integrity is in poor condition and the force main has experienced several breaks and sanitary sewer leaks. The station replacement will be located in the same current location proximity. An additional property acquisition and easements will be required to relocate both the new lift station and force main. In addition to the force main replacement it will require the pipe to be encased in the San Luis creek crossing. The replacement lift station will accommodate a portion of the future development anticipated in the Margarita Area Specific Plan. 3-66 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PUBLIC UTILITIES LIFT STATION 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 & 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: 55310 - Wastewater Collection Project Phasing and Funding Sources Initial Project Costs by Phase Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Study $50,000 $50,000 Design $200,000 $100,000$100,000 $400,000 Construction $800,000$1,100,000$1,350,000$1,350,000 $4,600,000 Construction Management $100,000$125,000$150,000$150,000 $525,000 Easement Acquisition $50,000$50,000$50,000$50,000 $200,000 Total$200,000$1,000,000$1,375,000$1,650,000$1,550,000 $0$5,775,000 Project costs that are attributable to new development will be recovered through the collection of impact fees. Impact fees for Foothill and Airport Lift Stations are being developed and will be brought to Council for approval. 3-67 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PUBLIC UTILITIES LIFT STATION REPLACEMENTS Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: Project replaces four existing lift stations and associated force mains. Please see the information provided above. Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Sewer Fund $200,000$1,000,000$1,375,000$1,550,000$1,550,000 $5,675,000 Total$200,000$1,000,000$1,375,000$1,650,000$1,550,000 $0$5,775,000 Project Funding by Source 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 15-16 16-17 17-18 18-19 19-20 Project Management Utilities, Utilities Project Manager 400 200 200 200 200 Project Support Utilities, Wastewater, Wastewater Collection Supervisor and Staff Public Works, Administration Public Works, Engineering 600 400 400 400 400 Construction Management Public Works, Inspection 200 200 200 200 200 Environmental Review Community Development 8 8 8 8 8 Project Proponent Utilities, Wastewater, Wastewater Division Manager 75 75 75 75 75 3-68 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PUBLIC UTILITIES WASTEWATER COLLECTION TELEMETRY SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS Project Description 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. Project costs will be $100,000 in 2015-16 Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal List: Infrastructure Maintenance Need and Urgency The current controllers and radio system are unreliable. Maintenance and operational cost will continue to increase as various equipment and components become obsolete. By staying current and relevant in hardware and equipment, staff time will be used efficiently with minimal impact on the IT department. The Cuesta Peak location is isolated with limited accessibility for maintenance and repairs. The relocation to the South Hill location will provide easier access for maintenance and repair. 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 3-69 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PUBLIC UTILITIES WASTEWATER COLLECTION TELEMETRY SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS Operating Program Number and Title: 55310 - Wastewater Collections Project Phasing and Funding Sources Continuing, ongoing or master account project Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: Project replaces and relocates existing Radios/Controllers. Controllers and radios become obsolete with advances in technology and therefore have a shortened life cycle (approximately 10 years). Utilities/ Sewer fund is funding the project; this is just a continuation of an existing work program moved to a new site which is expected to assist IT in operating it more efficiently. Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Sewer Fund $50,000$100,000 Total$50,000$100,000 $0 $0 $0 $0$150,000 Project Funding by Source Project Team Assignment Program Estimated Hours 15-16 16-17 17-18 18-19 19-20 Project Management IT Department 80 4 Project Support Utilities, Wastewater, Wastewater Collection Supervisor and Staff 80 4 Project Proponent Utilities, Wastewater, Wastewater Division Manager 10 Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Relocate and Upgrade Radio/Controllers $50,000 $100,000 $150,000 Total $50,000$100,000$0$0$0$0$150,000 3-70 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN PUBLIC UTILITIES WASTEWATER COLLECTION TELEMETRY SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS Project Timeline Project Timeline RFP March 2016 Radio Survey June 2016 Ethernet Radio purchase and programming September 2016 SCADA/ HMI programming November 2016 Ethernet Radio and controller installation November 2016 Data Concentrator de-commission January 2017 3-71 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - PUBLIC UTILITIES WATER RESOURCE RECOVERY FACILITY UPGRADE Project Description Upgrading the City’s Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) to meet new regulatory requirements and addressing capacity and infrastructure deficiencies will cost $1,824,000 in program management, $600,000 in environmental permitting and $2,500,000 for design in 2015-16. $76,832,000 will be needed in 2016-17 for program management, design, construction, contingencies and construction management. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure G Priority - List: Need and Urgency The City’s Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) has to be upgraded to comply with stricter discharge limits required by the Central Coast Water Board (CCWB), to increase capacity to serve the City’s population at General Plan build out, and to replace existing aged facilities that have reached the end of their service life. The draft 2015 WRRF Facilities Plan identifies the related upgrades and associated costs. Study of these improvements began in 2014-15, with design and environmental permitting beginning in 2015-16 and construction in 2016-17. Stricter discharge limits will require new treatment processes as well as changes to current processes at the WRRF to remove nutrients and disinfection by- products before discharging to San Luis Obispo Creek. These limits are required to meet the CCWB’s Basin Plan for inland waterbodies. Recently the Regional Water Quality Control Board adopted a revised National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit with stricter discharge requirements that went into effect December 1, 2014 and requires the City to meet these new standards by November 2019. The WRRF’s capacity will be increased from its current 5.1 million gallons per day (MGD) to approximately 5.4 MGD to meet the projected growth for the next 20 years while several aged or obsolete processes will require upgrades or removal. This project will also maximize recycled water production and include much needed upgrades to buildings and communication infrastructure to assist in the optimal operation and maintenance of the facility. All aspects of the upgrade will consider a triple bottom line approach to ensure the facility becomes a valuable community asset. 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 3-72 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - PUBLIC UTILITIES WATER RESOURCE RECOVERY FACILITY 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: Air Pollution Control District Operating Program Number and Title: 55330 - Water Resource Recovery Facilities Project Phasing and Funding Sources Initial Project Costs by Phase Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Program Management $2,326,000$1,824,000$1,500,000 $5,650,000 Environmental / Permit $50,000$600,000 $650,000 Design $3,500,000$2,500,000$1,300,000 $7,300,000 Construction Flood Control $1,500,000 $1,500,000 Nutrient Removal $19,214,400 $19,214,400 Infrastructure $20,156,800 $20,156,800 Disinfection $13,860,800 $13,860,800 Contingency $13,300,000 $13,300,000 Construction Management $6,000,000 $6,000,000 Total$5,876,000$4,924,000$76,832,000 $0 $0 $0$87,632,000 Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: The project will include new equipment and processes and ongoing costs will be explored through the project’s design phase to ensure energy efficiency, regulatory compliance, and efficient use of staff resources. Anticipated Facility Life Span: 15 to 50 years; changing regulatory requirements can require upgrades prior to plant and equipment reaching their useful life. 3-73 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - PUBLIC UTILITIES WATER RESOURCE RECOVERY FACILITY UPGRADE Project Funding by Source Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Sewer Fund 5,876,000$ 4,924,000$ 2,832,000$ 13,632,000$ Debt Financing 74,000,000$ 74,000,000$ Total$5,876,000$4,924,000$76,832,000 $0 $0 $0$87,632,000 Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives The draft facility plan evaluated a variety of alternatives to determine the most effective and efficient project. Value engineering, on-going efforts to optimize processes and alternative evaluations will continue to be utilized to enhance the project through design and into construction. Project costs will become more defined as the project moves through environmental permitting, design, additional value engineering and construction. Project Team Assignment Program Estimated Hours 15-16 16-17 17-18 2018-19 2019-20 Project Management Consultant Services 400 500 500 200 200 Environmental review Utilities Community Development 0 0 0 0 0 Construction Management Contract Services (with assistance from Public Works and Utilities) 0 1,000 1,000 1,000 500 Project Support WRRF Supervisor and WRRF Staff Public Works Engineering 400 700 700 600 400 Project Proponent Utilities, Wastewater Admin, Deputy Director 300 300 300 300 300 3-74 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - PUBLIC UTILITIES WATER RESOURCE RECOVERY FACILITY UPGRADE Location Map : City of San Luis Obispo Water Resource Recovery Facility at 35 Prado Road. 3-75 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - PUBLIC UTILITIES WATER RESOURCE RECOVERY FACILITY MAJOR MAINTENANCE Project Description 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. Cost of projects will be $430,000 in 2015-16, and $155,000 in 2016-17. As the WRRF will begin its upgrade project in 2016-17, the outer years have not been assessed. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure G Priority: Maintenance of City Infrastructure Need and Urgency The structures and equipment at the Water Resource Recovery Facility (WRRF) range in age from five to over 75 years. As part of the continued operation of the WRRF, existing processes and equipment require maintenance and periodic replacement to ensure proper function, prolong service life, and maintain high quality treatment processes. Preventive maintenance is a key component to reducing equipment failure and reducing risk associated with regulatory discharge limit violations. Construction and equipment replacement must occur in such a way as to not interfere with the City’s ability to continue to provide wastewater treatment within a strict regulatory setting. Replacement of equipment and maintenance activities will be coordinated with the upcoming WRRF upgrade project. Readiness to Build Study complete or n/a Equipment purchased or n/a Property owned or property agreement in place Environmental approval and permits complete or n/a Specifications or construction documents complete Environmental Review and Permits Required Environmental Review Building Permit Waterway Permits (Fish & Game, Water Quality, Army Corps) Railroad Other: 3-76 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - PUBLIC UTILITIES WATER RESOURCE RECOVERY FACILITY MAJOR MAINTENANCE Operating Program Number and Title: 55330 - Water Resource Recovery Facility Project Phasing and Funding Sources Initial Project Costs by Phase Budget to Date 2015-16 2016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Study Design Construction on-going $130,000 $130,000 Equipment Acquisition $300,000$155,000 $455,000 Total $0$430,000$155,000$0$0$0$585,000 Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: Staff time associated with repair and maintenance of these facilities will be reduced but not eliminated. Anticipated Facility Life Span: Equipment proposed for replacement (cooling towers, influent pumps, aeration blower replacements, telemetry upgrade,) is at or beyond its life cycle or is being replaced to achieve greater process or staffing efficiency (valve actuators, supernatant access). Budget to Date 2015-16 2016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Sewer Fund on-going $430,000$155,000$0$0$0$585,000 Total $0$430,000$155,000$0$0$0$585,000 Project Funding by Source 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 15-16 16-17 Project Management Public Works, Engineering Design 3-77 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - PUBLIC UTILITIES WATER RESOURCE RECOVERY FACILITY MAJOR MAINTENANCE Environmental Review Community Development Construction Management Public Works, Inspection (Management of Contract Services) Project Support Public Works, Administration Finance and Information Tech. staff Utilities, Wastewater, WRRF staff Project Proponent Utilities, Wastewater, WRRF Supervisor Site List Based on the best information currently available, projects have been prioritized and are listed in priority order. As additional information becomes available, projects in future years may be re-prioritized. In some cases, unanticipated use of contract design and inspection services may be required due to various reasons, which could increase project costs. This may result in the need to shift projects to future budget years to work within established funding levels and maintain priority order. 2015-2016 Project List: Project Estimated Cost 3W Pump Bowl Assemblies $100,000 Unit 3 Plant Drain Pump $30,000 Valve Actuators (Equipment) $180,000 Telemetry Upgrade (Equipment) $120,000 Total $430,000 2016-2017 Project List: Project Estimated Cost Telemetry Upgrade (Equipment) $75,000 Cooling Tower Effluent Modulating Valves $50,000 Drain Grates $30,000 Total $155,000 2017-2020 Project List: Project Estimated Cost WRRF Upgrade Project underway 3-78 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - FUNCTION WHALE ROCK RESERVOIR – DAM KEEPER RESIDENCE REMODEL Project Description Remodeling the Whale Rock residence to provide a dam keeper residence will cost $50,000 in 2015-2016. Remodel will include interior and exterior work, but is not anticipated to be structural. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure G Priority - List: Need and Urgency The Whale Rock dam keeper’s residence historically housed the Whale Rock Supervisor allowing for after-hours caretaker duties and dam condition monitoring. When housed onsite, the dam keeper was the first contact in the event of an earthquake or other emergencies. Since the home has been vacant for over 20 years, it needs repairs to maintain the structure and return it to a habitable state. Currently, Whale Rock Reservoir staff provides ongoing upkeep even though the house is empty. The Division of Safety of Dams, the permitting agency for Whale Rock Reservoir, supports housing staff onsite due to the ability to monitor the condition of the dam, safeguard the surrounding residents, and provide an emergency contact. The rehabilitation of the property would allow the eventual housing of a dam keeper at Whale Rock should the commissioners elect to do so. 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 3-79 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - FUNCTION WHALE ROCK RESERVOIR – DAM KEEPER RESIDENCE REMODEL Operating Program Number and Title: 55500 Whale Rock Reservoir Initial Project Costs by Phase Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Study $0 Environmental / Permit $0 Land Acquisition $0 Site Preparation $0 Design $0 Construction $50,000 $50,000 Construction Management $0 Equipment Acquisition $0 $0 $0 $0 Total $0$50,000 $0 $0 $0 $0$50,000 Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Fleet Maintenance (50340) Utilities $0 Maintenance materials $500 $500 $500 $500$2,000 Property rental/lease $0 Staff $0 Contract Services $0 Total $0 $0 $500 $500 $500 $500$2,000 Ongoing Costs by Type Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: After the remodel is complete the structure will require periodic maintenance anticipated to be $500 yearly. If the property were rented through a mutual-benefit agreement, the rent amount would offset the maintenance cost of the property. Anticipated Facility Life Span: 30 years with continued upkeep. 3-80 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - FUNCTION WHALE ROCK RESERVOIR – DAM KEEPER RESIDENCE REMODEL Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Whale Rock Fund $0$50,000 $0 $0 $50,000 Grant $0 Debt Financing $0 Developer Contribution $0 Total $0$50,000 $0 $0 $0 $0$50,000 Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project: Alternatives will be discussed by the Whale Rock Commission and include demolishing the structure or leaving the structure as is. Cost of demolishing the property has not been assessed. Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: NO Project Team Assignment Program Estimated Hours Project Proponent-Whale Rock Reservoir 55500 200 Project Manager-Noah Evans 0 Site List – For multi-year projects Location Estimated Year of Construction Pavement Area (for projects in right-of-way) Whale Rock Reservoir 2015-16 None 3-81 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – PUBLIC UTILITIES WHALE ROCK RESERVOIR – PIPELINE RELIABILITY ASSESSMENT Project Description A condition assessment of the 17.6 miles of the 30-inch pipe line that transports water from the Whale Rock Reservoir (WRR) to the City of San Luis Obispo will cost $510,000 in 2017-18. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure G Priority - List: Need and Urgency The 17.6 miles of pipeline conduit that transport water from the WRR to the City are 50 years old and an assessment of the pipeline’s condition is needed to properly schedule repair and replacement projects. Without a condition assessment staff won’t be able to prioritize repairs and prevent emergency pipeline failure which are disruptive, costly and waste hundreds of thousands of gallons of water. 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: 55500 - Reservoir Operations 3-82 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – PUBLIC UTILITIES WHALE ROCK RESERVOIR – PIPELINE RELIABILITY ASSESSMENT 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 $510,000 $0 $510,000 Total $0 $0 $0$510,000 $0 $0$510,000 Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: The initial budget for this project is for the pipeline condition assessment only. The condition assessment will allow for targeted CIP development to insure future reliability of the WRR raw water pipeline providing maximum utility to the Whale Rock Commission members. The cost of full pipeline replacement is prohibitive and completing a condition assessment will allow for future CIP projects to be implemented based on assessed asset condition in order to provide the maximum utility of the existing pipeline infrastructure. Anticipated Facility Life Span: Pipeline is 50 years old and anticipated lifespan is currently unknown. Similar pipelines have an expected lifespan of 50-70 years. There is not a planned pipeline replacement project at this time. Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Whale Rock Fund $510,000 $510,000 Total $0 $0 $0$510,000 $0 $0$510,000 Project Funding by Source The Whale Rock Reservoir is funded by three partner agencies; the City of San Luis Obispo, Cal Poly University, and the California Men’s Colony (CMC). The cost will be split according to the ownership percentage of each agency which is: San Luis Obispo: 55.05% Cal Poly: 33.72% CMC: 11.24% Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project: Schedule the reliability assessment in future years. No change in cost is anticipated if project is delayed. Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: Project will likely be phased over multiple years due to anticipated cost and logistics of assessment process. Number of years/phases is unknown at this time. 3-83 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – PUBLIC UTILITIES WHALE ROCK RESERVOIR – PIPELINE RELIABILITY ASSESSMENT Project Team Assignment Program Estimated Hours Project Proponent Utilities, Water Division 40 Project Manager Utilities CIP Engineering 80 3-84 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - FUNCTION WHALE ROCK PUMP STATION ISOLATION VALVE REPLACEMENT Project Description Replacing pump isolation valves at the Whale Rock Reservoir, Pump Station B will cost $61,000 in 2016-17. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure G Priority - List: Need and Urgency Currently two of the ten, 50-year old valves are broken and the remaining eight do not provide pump isolation. The lack of functioning valves is impeding proper maintenance to the pumps and requires a complete shutdown of the station, to complete repairs, interrupting water service to the City, Cal Poly and the California Men’s Colony (CMC). Replacement of the valves will allow for proper maintenance and insure reliable water delivery without interruptions. Readiness to Build Study complete or n/a Equipment purchased or Property owned or property agreement in place n/a Environmental approval and permits complete or n/a Specifications or construction documents complete. 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: 55500 - Reservoir Operations 3-85 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - FUNCTION WHALE ROCK PUMP STATION ISOLATION VALVE REPLACEMENT Project Phasing and Funding Sources Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: There is no ongoing cost associated with this project. This is a lifecycle replacement of infrastructure that has served its full utility and no longer functions. Valves require little ongoing maintenance besides painting and exercising which will be performed by Whale Rock Reservoir staff. Replacement of the pump isolation valves will allow for maintenance on individual pumps insuring the reliability of water deliveries to SLO, CMC, and Cal Poly. Currently two of the valves are broken and the remaining 8 do not provide pump isolation. The lack of functioning valves means that the whole pump station must be taken offline to repair pumps. Whale Rock reservoir is a key component of the City of San Luis Obispo, CMC, and Cal Poly’s water supply and must be able to reliably deliver water. Anticipated Facility Life Span: Anticipated lifespan is 50 years. There is currently no plan in place to renew the pump station. Ongoing maintenance is critical for the facility to function for the next 50 years. Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Whale Rock Fund $61,000 $61,000 Total $0 $0$61,000 $0 $0 $0$61,000 Project Funding by Source The Whale Rock Reservoir is funded by three partner agencies; the City of San Luis Obispo, Cal Poly University, and the California Men’s Colony (CMC). The cost will be split according to the ownership percentage of each agency which is: San Luis Obispo: 55.05% Cal Poly: 33.72% CMC: 11.24% Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project: None Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: Not feasible. Initial Project Costs by Phase Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Construction $25,000 $25,000 Equipment Acquisition $36,000 $36,000 Total $0 $0$61,000 $0 $0 $0$61,000 3-86 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - FUNCTION WHALE ROCK PUMP STATION ISOLATION VALVE REPLACEMENT Project Team Assignment Program Estimated Hours Project Management Utilities CIP Engineering - Design 120 Contract Administration Utilities 20 Construction Management Utilities 60 3-87 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - FUNCTION WHALE ROCK RESERVOIR – WEATHER STATION REPLACEMENTS Project Description Replacing the two aging weather stations at Whale Rock Reservoir will cost $20,000 in 2016-17. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Need and Urgency The existing weather stations are in need of replacing due to age. The new stations will be equipped with more sensitive devices that will log weather data more precisely and over a multiple-day period. This will help in accounting for each Whale Rock owner’s share of stored water more accurately and facilitate use forecasting. 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 Operating Program Number and Title: 55500 Whale Rock Reservoir Project Phasing and Funding Sources Continuing, ongoing or master account project - Specification No. No phasing required 3-88 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - FUNCTION WHALE ROCK RESERVOIR – WEATHER STATION REPLACEMENTS Initial Project Costs by Phase Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Study $0 Environmental / Permit $0 Land Acquisition $0 Site Preparation $0 Design $0 Construction $0 Construction Management $0 Equipment Acquisition $20,000 $0 $20,000 Total $0 $0$20,000 $0 $0 $0$20,000 Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Fleet Maintenance (50340) Utilities $0 Maintenance materials $50 $50 $50 $150 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: The w eather stations will require periodic maintenance that will be performed by WRR staff. Anticipated Facility Life Span: 10-20 years 3-89 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - FUNCTION WHALE ROCK RESERVOIR – WEATHER STATION REPLACEMENTS Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total General Fund $0 Whale Rock Fund $20,000 $0 $20,000 Grant $0 Debt Financing $0 Developer Contribution $0 Total $0 $0$20,000 $0 $0 $0$20,000 Project Funding by Source Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project: Not applicable Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: Not applicable Project Team Assignment Program Estimated Hours Project Proponent-Whale Rock Reservoir 55500 40 Project Manager-Noah Evans Site List – For multi-year projects Location Estimated Year of Construction Pavement Area (for projects in right-of-way) Whale Rock Dam and Cottontail Creek 2016-17 None 3-90 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - FUNCTION WHALE ROCK RESERVOIR – CLA VALVE REPLACEMENT Project Description Replacing six Cla valves at the two Whale Rock Reservoir pumping stations will cost $36,000 in 2018-19. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure G Priority - List: Need and Urgency Cla valves are an integral part of the Whale Rock Reservoir pump stations and actively protect the Whale Rock pipeline from damage due to pressure fluctuation. The current Cla valves were installed in 1960 and are at the end of their useful life. 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 Operating Program Number and Title: 55500 Whale Rock Reservoir Project Phasing and Funding Sources Continuing, ongoing or master account project - Specification No.- No phasing required. 3-91 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - FUNCTION WHALE ROCK RESERVOIR – CLA VALVE REPLACEMENT Initial Project Costs by Phase Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Study $0 Environmental / Permit $0 Land Acquisition $0 Site Preparation $0 Design $0 Construction $0 Construction Management $0 Equipment Acquisition $36,000 $36,000 Total $0 $0 $0 $0$36,000 $0$36,000 Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: Valves will require periodic maintenance that will cost several hundred dollars per valve which will be paid through the Whale Rock operating budget. Staff anticipates a five-year maintenance cycle. Anticipated Facility Life Span: 30-50 years Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total General Fund $0 Whale Rock Fund $36,000 $36,000 Grant $0 Debt Financing $0 Developer Contribution $0 Total $0 $0 $0 $0$36,000 $0$36,000 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: 3-92 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - FUNCTION WHALE ROCK RESERVOIR – CLA VALVE REPLACEMENT Project Team Assignment Program Estimated Hours Project Proponent-Whale Rock Reservoir 55500 40 Project Manager-Noah Evans Site List – For multi-year projects Location Estimated Year of Construction Pavement Area (for projects in right-of-way) Pump Station A & Pump Station B 2018-19 None 3-93 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 $2,002,000 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. 3-94 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 3-95 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 Construction on-going $1,436,817$1,510,700$1,805,494$1,944,289$1,930,090$8,627,390 Construction Management on-going $70,000$70,000$70,000$70,000$70,000$350,000 Total $1,566,817$1,630,700$1,935,494$2,064,289$2,060,090$9,257,390 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. 3-96 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$1,935,494$2,064,289$2,069,090$9,257,390 Total $0$1,566,817$1,630,700$1,935,494$2,064,289$2,069,090$9,257,390 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 B. 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 3-97 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 3-98 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION STREET RECONSTRUCTION AND RESURFACING Map of City Pavement Areas 3-99 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION TRAFFIC SIGN MAINTENANCE Project Description Replacing roadway signs to meet minimum Federal Highway Administration’s retroreflectivity standards will cost $40,000 in 2017-18 and $143,000 in 2018-19. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure G Priority: Fiscal Sustainability & Responsibility Need and Urgency Retroreflectivity is a measure of how well a traffic sign bounces light from a vehicle’s headlights back towards the driver making the sign appear brighter and easier to see and read at night. As road signs age they lose their retroreflectivity and become increasing difficult to see. Low retroreflectivity can contribute to traffic collisions if drivers are unable to perceive and react to roadway controls such as stop signs. National highway statistics show that nighttime fatal crash rates are approximately three times that of the daytime crash rate. In response to this collision trend on January 22nd, 2008 the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) required public agencies to maintain minimum retro-reflectivity for street signs. FHWA originally mandated that by January of 2012 all agencies implement a continuous assessment or management method that is designed to identify traffic signs no longer meet the established minimum levels. FHWA also mandated that all regulatory, warning and ground-mounted guide (except street name) signs meet minimum requirements by January 2015 and that street name signs and overhead guide signs meet the minimum requirement by January 2018. This ruling created a significant financial impact on public agencies requiring them to replace a large volume of signs in a short period of time. Recognizing this financial impact the Federal Highway Administration enacted a new ruling on May 14th, 2012, eliminating the compliance deadlines and allowing agencies to replace signs with a schedule based on the City’s resources. The elimination of the compliance date does not eliminate the regulatory requirement to comply with the minimum sign retroreflectivity standard; it does however allow the City to extend the replacement schedule in order to reduce annual replacement costs. Based on this new ruling staff is proposing to extend the replacement schedule and reduce the previously approved annual budget from $60,000 to $40,000, reducing the annual sign replacements from approximately 400 to 250 signs. This proposed level of reduction is consistent with the intent of the new FHWA ruling and is a reasonable approach to improving night time traffic safety within the City. If the FHWA determines that the City has failed to comply with Federal Regulations it may withhold any state and federal funding the City currently receives until compliance has been accomplished. In addition the City may be held liable for any damages incurred related to signs not meeting the new minimum retro- reflectivity requirements. On a path to compliance with these requirements, the City is currently systematically replacing signs that do not meet these requirements. Additional funding is needed to continue the progress toward meeting the regulations. 3-100 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION TRAFFIC SIGN MAINTENANCE 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: 50300 Streets and Sidewalk Maintenance Project Phasing and Funding Sources Continuing, ongoing or master account project - Specification No. 90943 (91319) Initial Project Costs by Phase Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Software $0 Construction on-going $0 $0$40,000$143,000 $183,000 Total $0 $0 $0$40,000$143,000 $0$183,000 Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: These signs already exist and are being replaced, so no additional costs are anticipated as a result of this work. Anticipated Facility Life Span: Signs have an anticipated life span of 5 to 10 years depending on the orientation of the sign and specific sign conditions. 3-101 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION TRAFFIC SIGN MAINTENANCE Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total General Fund ongoing $0 $0$40,000$143,000 $0$183,000 Total $0 $0 $0$40,000$143,000 $0$183,000 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: The project is submitted as a phased project. Further phasing could be completed, but is not recommended in order to provide improved safety through increased reflectivity. Project Team Assignment Program Estimated Hours Project Management Transportation 50 Contract Administration Transportation 10 Construction Management CIP Engineering - Construction 10 3-102 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 the 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 anticipated, 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. 3-103 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 3-104 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 3-105 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. 3-106 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. 3-107 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 3-108 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 or upgrade of ramps to new standards. 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 3-109 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. 3-110 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION SIDEWALK RAMP CONSTRUCTION Anticipated Facility Life Span: 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 3-111 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 3-112 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 3-113 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: 3-114 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION REPLACEMENT OF LIGHTED CROSSWALK ON HIGUERA STREET Project Description Replacing 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 G Priority: To protect and maintain essential services and facilities, and the Major City Goal: Multimodal Transportation Need and Urgency 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 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 3-115 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION REPLACEMENT OF LIGHTED CROSSWALK ON HIGUERA STREET 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 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Construction $40,000 $40,000 Construction Management $3,500 $3,500 Total $0 $0$43,500 $0 $0 $0$43,500 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 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total General Fund $43,500 $43,500 Total $0 $0$43,500 $0 $0 $0$43,500 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. 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. 3-116 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION REPLACEMENT OF LIGHTED CROSSWALK ON HIGUERA STREET 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) Higuera St. 800 Block 2015-16 N/A – Work on Sidewalk 3-117 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 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. 3-118 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 3-119 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 3-120 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION Project Alternative Should Council decide to accelerate work on the Broad Street Bike Boulevard, enclosed is a matrix of how that project would be funded; showing modifications to the projects in the above chart. It should also be noted that this chart includes the addition of the Octagon Barn item discussed at Council on April 21, 2015. The projects below total $400,000. 1. BTP Prioritization Education & Advocacy Program ............................................ $5,000 2. Active Transportation Education & Advocacy Program ..................................... $10,000 3. Highland & Chorro Bicycle Improvements 4. Boysen & Santa Rosa Crossing Project Study Report 5. Prado Rd. Class I Connection Project Development & Right of way ............... $100,000 6. Chorro & Foothill Bike Box ................................................................................ $10,000 7. RRST Class I Connection Laurel & Orcutt ....................................................... $150,000 8. Bicycle & Pedestrian Grants Support .................................................................. $10,000 9. Broad Street Bike Boulevard Plan Development ............................................ $90,000 10. Octagon Barn Contribution ............................................................................ $25,000 Total ...................................................................................................................... $400,000 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 3-121 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 3-122 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 3-123 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 3-124 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 environmental, land acquisition and permitting 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 3-125 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 $0$135,000 $135,000 Land Acquisition $0$260,000 $260,000 Design $0 $0 $0 Construction $0 $0 $0 Construction Management $0 $0 $0 Total$84,751$395,000 $0 $0 $0 $0$479,751 Budgets for design and construction will be added as grants are available or in a future Financial Plan, as costs are refined. Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Contract Services $0 $0 $0 $0$2,500$2,500$5,000 Total $0 $0 $0 $0$2,500$2,500$5,000 Ongoing Costs by Type Appraisals for the property acquisition and final estimates for permit have yet to be finalized. A council session to receive final recommendations from the Phase I study is anticipated for summer 2015. Land Acquisition costs may be significantly different based upon fair market appraisals. 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. 3-126 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION BOB JONES TRAIL OCTAGON BARN CONNECTION Project Funding by Source Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Grant- Existing $76,230 $76,230 TDA Article III $8,521$50,000 $58,521 Grant- Future $345,000 $345,000 TIF/Developer Contribution $0 General Fund $0 Total$84,751$395,000 $0 $0 $0 $0$479,751 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. 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 3-127 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION BOB JONES TRAIL OCTAGON BARN CONNECTION 3-128 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 and $1,000 for maintenance, both 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 3-129 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 $1,000$1,000$2,000 Property rental/lease Staff Contract Services Total $1,000$1,000$2,000 3-130 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION BOB JONES TRAIL – PREFUMO CREEK CONNECTION TO OCEANAIRE 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)$217,493 $217,493 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$1,061,000 $0$1,217,000 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 has not been identified Project is already a phase and is part of the larger Bob Jones bike project 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 3-131 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION BOB JONES TRAIL – PREFUMO CREEK CONNECTION TO OCEANAIRE 3-132 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 3-133 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 $250,000 Grant Funding*$0 $0$1,000,000 $0 $1,000,000 Total $0$250,000$1,250,000 $0 $0 $0$1,500,000 * Future grant will be pursued. 3-134 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 3-135 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION BICYCLE/PEDESTRIAN SAFETY IMPROVEMENT – PENNY LANE BRIDGE AT UPRR Project Description Preparing a project study report for the construction of a pedestrian and bicycle bridge over the Union Pacific Railroad at Penny Lane will cost $50,000 in 2018- 19. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure G Priority: Multi-Modal Transportation Need and Urgency This project will conduct a project study report into the feasibility of installing a bridge at the Penny Street crossing of the Union Pacific Railroad as part of bicycle and pedestrian improvements. The project is currently in the adopted Bicycle Plan as well as identified in the Railroad Safety Trail Plan. Currently pedestrians and bicyclists traveling between the Johnson Avenue residential areas and Downtown cross the railroad at two locations. First is the narrow Johnson Road undercrossing where the grades of the street can make it difficult to ride bicycles up and down the street grade. A second location is the illegal crossing at Penny Lane where the old Penny Lane bridge used to exist. This bridge was previously removed in exchange for getting the Johnson Street underpass built by the railroad. Because of traffic volumes along Johnson Avenue pedestrians often use the bridge x-ing at Johnson as well as the slopes at Penny Lane to cross the tracks and then access Johnson Avenue at the traffic Signal at Lizzie. French hospital is currently under construction of the new medical office building on their properties. As part of that project a new class I bike path will be constructed from their parking lot dawn the slope to Fairview and Breck. This access sets the stage for the final completion of a class I facility from Johnson Avenue down to Fairview, across a new Penny Lane Bridge and then into Downtown. The project study report will analyze the issues associated with pursuing completion of the Penny Lane Bridge including: permitting requirements from UPRR as well as the PUC, engineering study of the bridge design and structural needs, any easement requirements, adjacent property issues and construction cost estimates. The project is TIF eligible but may ultimately compete well for construction grant funding at the regional and state level. Readiness to Build Study complete or n/a Equipment purchased or n/a Property owned or property agreement in place n/a 3-136 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION BICYCLE/PEDESTRIAN SAFETY IMPROVEMENT – PENNY LANE BRIDGE AT UPRR Environmental approval and permits complete or n/a Specifications or construction documents complete n/a The Bicycle Plan and the Railroad Safety Plan identify the Penny Lane Bridge project. 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: (PUC) Environmental review, railroad coordination and PUC approval of the project will ultimately be necessary however they will not be require to complete the project study phase of the project. 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 $0 $0 $0$50,000 $0$50,000 3-137 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION BICYCLE/PEDESTRIAN SAFETY IMPROVEMENT – PENNY LANE BRIDGE AT UPRR 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 $50,000 $50,000 Total $0 $0 $0 $0$50,000 $0$50,000 Ongoing Costs by Type Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: Depending upon the final project, there will likely be ongoing replacement and maintenance costs of the improvements. These costs are not know as of yet but may be studied as part of the project study report. Anticipated Facility Life Span: N/A Study only Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total General Fund $0 Enterprise Fund $0 Grant $0 TIF $50,000 Debt Financing $0 Developer Contribution $0 $0 Total $0 $0 $0 $0$50,000 $0$50,000 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: 3-138 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION BICYCLE/PEDESTRIAN SAFETY IMPROVEMENT – PENNY LANE BRIDGE AT UPRR Project Team Assignment Program Estimated Hours Project Proponent Traffic Engineering 40 Project Manager CIP Engineering – Design Technical Studies Natural Resources Environmental Clearance Community Development 3 Contract Management CIP Engineering – Administration Construction Management CIP Engineering – Construction 3-139 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION BICYCLE/PEDESTRIAN SAFETY IMPROVEMENT – PENNY LANE BRIDGE AT UPRR Location Map Bicycle Plan Excerpt 3-140 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION BICYCLE/PEDESTRIAN SAFETY IMPROVEMENT – PENNY LANE BRIDGE AT UPRR Penny Lane Bridge Class I connection being built by French Hospital Access across Johnson at Lizzie Sginal 3-141 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 3-142 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 3-143 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 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 Proponent Traffic Engineering 40 Project Manager CIP Engineering – Design Technical Studies Natural Resources 3-144 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 3-145 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 $225,000 in 2015-16 for construction and construction management. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure G Priority: Sustain Essential Services & Facilities and Multi-Modal Transportation 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 IT Steering Committee review n/a 3-146 TRANSPORTATION MONTEREY & OSOS TRAFFIC SIGNAL SAFETY 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: (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 $0 $225,000 Construction Management $0 $0 Total $0$225,000 $0 $0 $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. Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total General Fund $225,000 $225,000 $0 Total $0$225,000 $0 $0 $0 $0$225,000 Project Funding by Source 3-147 TRANSPORTATION MONTEREY & OSOS TRAFFIC SIGNAL SAFETY UPGRADE 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 3-148 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION STORM DRAIN SYSTEM REPLACEMENT Project Description Replacing failing drainage infrastructure throughout the City will cost for design, construction and construction management, $561,500 in 2015-16, $574,300 in 2016-17, $279,175 in 2017-18, $652,117 in 2018-19, and $651,545 in 2019-2020. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure G Priority: Neighborhood Wellness, Fiscal Sustainability & Responsibility Need and Urgency In 2001 the entire storm drain system (manholes, inlets, and pipes) was inspected and evaluated to establish overall condition. About 25 percent of the pipes surveyed were Corrugated Metal Pipe (CMP), a material that no longer conforms to City standards and should be replaced based on known performance problems. Over time, the bottom of the pipe, where water collects, rusts through. Water then erodes the ground below the pipe, pulls surrounding soil into the pipe, and then carries the soil downstream. The surface above the pipe then settles. As this deterioration progresses and becomes more severe, the pipe deforms and often collapses taking the surrounding improvements with it. When Public Works presented the Storm Sewer Management Plan to the Council in early 2005, addressing CMP exclusively was one of the options for system maintenance. A second option was to replace all substandard pipes, regardless of material, including non-CMP pipe with inadequate capacity. Because of the prohibitive costs associated with this second option, CMP replacement has consistently been requested and funded in subsequent budgets to address the most fragile portion of the infrastructure as the priority. This effort has been consistently funded by the ½ cent sales tax measure and approximately 4,500 feet of pipe have been installed to replace failed drain systems since funding became available, equating to about 20% of the CMP. Some system capacity and flow efficiencies are gained through improved pipe materials and updated inlets. 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 3-149 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION STORM DRAIN SYSTEM REPLACEMENT Environmental Review and Permits Required Environmental Review n/a Building Permit n/a Waterway Permits (Fish & Wildlife, Water Quality, Army Corps) n/a – Permits may be needed for some, but not all installations. Railroad n/a Other: Caltrans Encroachment Permit – Permit may be needed for some, but not all installations. Operating Program Number and Title: 50320 Creek and Flood Control Project Phasing and Funding Sources Continuing, ongoing or master account project - Specification No. 90742 CMP Replacement Master Account Initial Project Costs by Phase Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Design ongoing $33,500$28,700$28,000$28,000$28,000$146,200 Construction ongoing $428,000$475,000$226,500$525,000$525,000$2,179,500 Construction Management ongoing $100,000$70,600$24,675$99,117$98,545$392,937 Total $0$561,500$574,300$279,175$652,117$651,545$2,718,637 Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs: These facilities already exist so there will be no additional operating costs. Timely replacement will prevent expensive roadway repairs resulting from sink holes. Anticipated Facility Life Span: Lifespan of improvements is estimated at 50 to 100 years depending on type of installation. Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-172019-18 Total General Fund ongoing $561,500$574,300$279,175$652,117$651,545$2,718,637 Total $0$561,500$574,300$279,175$652,117$651,545$2,718,637 Project Funding by Source 3-150 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION STORM DRAIN SYSTEM REPLACEMENT Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project: Pipeline infrastructure is typically funded on a 50 year replacement cycle. The CMP portion of the infrastructure had only a 30 year life, but is already over 50 years old, and until passage of the sales tax measure, received minimal funding. Based on the 2005 Storm Sewer Management Plan, the replacement cost for the entire storm drain system is $75,000,000. To date, the City has funded approximately $2,100,000. The annual construction funding needed to replace the system every 50 years is $1,500,000. In order to reduce storm drain replacement funding levels to a manageable amount, replacement of CMP pipes only has been funded under the ½ cent sales tax since 2007. Table A shows alternative funding levels needed based on replacement cycle. Table A Replacement Cycle Annual Construction Funding Required 8 Years $1,687,500 10 Years $1,350,000 20 Years $675,000 25 Years $540,000 50 Years $270,000 This request funds storm drain replacements at an approximately 25 year replacement cycle starting in 2015-16, with funding increasing to a 20 year cycle at the end of the Plan, and extending until such time as all the failed pipe has been removed from the system. Once the failed portions of the system have been replaced, the City can reassess the desired replacement cycle and system improvements to fund. More rapid replacement is preferred due to the poor conditions; however, the system needs must be balanced against other City needs. Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: Project is presented as a phased project, but funding amounts can be varied. Project Team Assignment Program Estimated Hours Project Management CIP Engineering - Design 200 hours per year Environmental Community Development 40 hours per year Technical Studies Natural Resources 100 hours per year Contract Administration CIP Engineering - Administration 90 hours per year Construction Management CIP Engineering - Construction 300 hours per year 3-151 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; in 2016-17 $50,000 will be spent on permitting, and $100,000 on design; $405,000 will be spent on construction in 2018-19. 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 3-152 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. 3-153 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION SILT REMOVAL Project Team Assignment Program Estimated Hours per Project Project Management CIP Engineering - Design 400 hours Environmental Community Development 40 hours 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 3-154 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 3-155 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. Anticipated Facility Life Span: Bridges have a design life of 100 years. 3-156 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION MARSH STREET BRIDGE REPLACEMENT 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 3-157 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION BROAD STREET BANK REINFORCEMENT Project Description The Broad Street Bank Reinforcement project will cost $80,000 for construction in 2015-16. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure G Priority: Neighborhood Wellness, Fiscal Sustainability & Responsibility Need and Urgency In 1964 the City installed three 72 inch diameter reinforced concrete pipes to pass the flow of Old Garden Creek from the west side of Broad Street to the east side of Broad Street between Meinecke and Murray streets. Just upstream of the culvert entrance the creek bank is stabilized with wire mesh boxes which contain rocks, otherwise known as gabions. Upstream of the gabion structures, Old Garden Creek is beginning to cut into the creek bank and work its way behind the gabions. As Old Garden Creek cuts into the creek bank, the creek will eventually dislodge the gabions and cause some blockage of the downstream culverts. Above this area of the bank is an assisted living facility, including its backflow device and phone service enclosure. Without improved revetment, there is a high level of risk the bank will erode below these facilities. Some improvements at the location of the gabion structure are needed. Downstream of the existing concrete pipes is an area of sediment accumulation. Removing this sediment requires permits from the Army Corps of Engineers, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Because the bank stabilization work will also require regulatory permits from these agencies, the removal of this sediment is included in the project scope in an attempt to streamline the overall permitting process. In 2012, the City began the process of obtaining regulatory permits and completing the design of the project. This effort is ongoing and a completed design and receipt of all regulatory permits is anticipated to be completed in time to schedule construction for the summer of 2015. The estimated cost of construction has been increased due to a more refined design, and in particular, the need for a confined space entry plan necessary for the removal of sediment from one of the 72 inch diameter culverts. 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 3-158 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION BROAD STREET BANK REINFORCEMENT 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: 50320 Creek and Flood Control Project Phasing and Funding Sources Continuing, ongoing or master account project - Specification No. 91165 Broad Street Bank Stabilization Initial Project Costs by Phase Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Environmental / Permit $20,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0$20,000 Design $15,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0$15,000 Construction $0$80,000 $0 $0 $0$80,000 Total$35,000$80,000 $0 $0 $0 $0$115,000 Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs: No increase in operating costs is anticipated from the work and may prevent the need for emergency response work that would be required if the bank failed and the culvert plugged. Anticipated Facility Life Span: It is anticipated that the service life of the project will be approximately 25 years. Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total General Fund *$35,000$40,000 $75,000 Zone 9 $40,000 $40,000 Total$35,000$80,000 $0 $0 $0 $0$115,000 Project Funding by Source * Additional Zone 9 Funding will be requested and substituted if approved. 3-159 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION BROAD STREET BANK REINFORCEMENT 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 50 hours remaining Contracts Administration CIP Engineering - Administration 100 hours Environmental Community Development 40 hours Technical Studies Natural Resources 20 hours Construction Management CIP Engineering – Construction 300 hours 3-160 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION TORO STREET BANK STABILIZATION Project Description Stabilizing a section of San Luis Obispo Creek bank near Toro Street Bridge that has failed will cost $50,000 in 2015-16. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure G Priority - List: Fiscal Sustainability & Responsibility Need and Urgency Toro Street between Marsh and Pacific streets runs along the top of the bank of San Luis Creek for about two thirds of the block. Much of the creek is actually in the original street right of way with the street built in a later acquired addition. A portion of the creek bank is armored with concrete sack revetment to protect it against erosion as the creek makes a curve to move along behind the buildings fronting Marsh Street. A section of the revetment is severely undermined. Toro Street sits at the top of the bank. While Toro is not a major street it does serve as the loading access for the adjacent commercial development where the Supermarket is located. A similar problem exists at the base of the bank along the Dallidet Adobe. Some build up of silt has also occurred near the bridge on Toro and would be appropriately dealt with at the same time. If the bank failed it would result in road failure and the need to close Toro Street. In 2014, staff completed the project design and received all necessary regulatory permits from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineer, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and the California Regional Water Quality Control Board. The final construction estimate, accounting for all regulatory requirements is higher than the original estimate and additional funding is need to allow the project to go forward to construction in summer 2015. The project is ready to be advertised for construction. Readiness to Build Study complete or n/a Equipment purchased or n/a Property owned or property agreement in place Environmental approval and permits complete or n/a Specifications or construction documents complete 3-161 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION TORO STREET BANK STABILIZATION Environmental Review and Permits Required Environmental Review Building Permit Waterway Permits (Fish & Game, Water Quality, Army Corps) Railroad Other: Operating Program Number and Title: 50320 Flood Control Project Phasing and Funding Sources Continuing, ongoing or master account project - Specification No. 90646 Initial Project Costs by Phase Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Environmental / Permit $20,000 $20,000 Design $28,350 $28,350 Construction $36,650$50,000 $86,650 Total$85,000$50,000$0$0$0$0$135,000 Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs: No increase in operating costs is anticipated from the work and may prevent the need for emergency response work that would be required in the event of a road failure. Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total General Fund $85,000$50,000 $135,000 Total$85,000$50,000$0$0$0$0$135,000 Project Funding by Source Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives Reduced project is feasible – Cost of reduced project: Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: 3-162 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION TORO STREET BANK STABILIZATION Project Team Assignment Program Estimated Hours Project Management CIP Engineering – Design 40 hours remaining Contracts / Insurance PW Administration 100 hours Environmental Community Development 40 hours Technical Studies Natural Resources 100 hours Construction Management CIP Engineering – Inspection 300 hours 3-163 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION CITY WAYFINDING SIGNS Project Description Continuing implementation of the City Wayfinding Program will cost $175,000 for design and construction in 2015-16. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure G Priority: Need and Urgency Background The Promotional Coordinating Committee (PCC) has championed this project and recommended funding allocations through the Community Promotions program. The purpose of the program is to bring uniformity and cohesiveness to a variety of City wide features used to “brand” the City’s image, guide tourists to destinations, and identify City facilities. This gives consistency of design to a wide range of signs, markers, plaques, and City branding features to prevent the inadvertent “morphing” of City branding features that tend to occur over time. Two separate Capital Improvement Program (CIP) projects - the City Gateways Project and the Downtown Comprehensive Directional Sign Project – were brought forward and adopted as part of the 2007-09 and the 2009-11 Financial Plans. The Directional Sign project was also identified as part of the 2007-09 Downtown Beautification and Maintenance goal. Rather than the two projects spinning off in potentially two different directions, staff combined and coordinated the conceptual design phases of the projects through development of a City-wide wayfinding program. In April 2010, the City hired the team of RRM Design Group and Rademaker Design to develop sign and monument designs and assist staff with development of the City Wayfinding Program. Council approved the City Wayfinding Program at its October 18, 2011 based on the recommendation from the PCC and directed staff to implement the program. The Program consists of three components - a master sign list of all sign types in the program, conceptual designs of the signs as they are designed and adopted, and an implementation plan which provides action items and guidance for full development of the plan. The adopted program can be viewed in more detail at: Resolution 10311. Conceptual designs were approved as part of the adopted program for two sizes of gateway monuments and various vehicular and pedestrian wayfinding signs. The implementation plan directs staff to further develop design concepts for the remaining sign types in the master list as well as to secure funding for fabrication and installation of the various signs and monuments. In May of 2014, nine prototype signs were fabricated and installed in downtown. The prototypes were well received and staff is currently working on installation of an estimated additional 21-25 vehicular wayfinding signs. This work will occur during the summer of 2015. Work has begun on the design of the “you–are- here” orientation maps and a new kiosk/information center to replace the current information center at the entrance to City Hall. 3-164 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION CITY WAYFINDING SIGNS Proposed Work This request allows for continued implementation of the City Wayfinding Program by installing an additional 11 vehicular wayfinding signs, 8-10 pedestrian wayfinding signs and preparation of construction documents and installation of a new City Hall kiosk and orientation maps. No additional funding for vehicular and pedestrian wayfinding sign installation is recommended at this time, as it will be important to have feedback from these initial installations to better gage how the signs are received and whether more are needed before proceeding with additional investment in the program. 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 Operating Program Number and Title: 50500 Transportation Planning/Engineering Project Phasing and Funding Sources Continuing, ongoing or master account project - Specification No. 90740 Initial Project Costs by Phase Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Design $40,000$20,000 $60,000 Construction $135,000$155,000 $290,000 Construction Management $0 Total$175,000$175,000 $0 $0 $0 $0$350,000 3-165 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION CITY WAYFINDING SIGNS Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Maintenance materials $750 $750 $750 $750 $750$3,750 Staff $0 Total $0 $750 $750 $750 $750 $750$3,750 Ongoing Costs by Type 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 $175,000$175,000 $350,000 Enterprise Fund (Parking)$0 Total$175,000$175,000 $0 $0 $0 $0$350,000 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 as shown is phased. Project costs can be reduced by installing less signs or not installing the City Hall kiosk or some of the orientation maps. Project Team Assignment Program Estimated Hours CIP Project Management CIP Engineering 400 per year CIP Construction Management CIP Engineering 100 per project CIP Administration CIP Engineering 40 per year Traffic Traffic 40 per project CDD-Planning/Design Review Community Development 20 per project 3-166 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 starting 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 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 3-167 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$20,000$30,000$30,000$120,000 Total $0$20,000$20,000$20,000$30,000$30,000$120,000 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$20,000$30,000$30,000$120,000 Total $0$20,000$20,000$20,000$30,000$30,000$120,000 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 3-168 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 2016-17 and $540,000 in 2016-17. The City will pursue grants and/or debt financing to cover the future construction costs which are estimated to be $5.0 million in 2018-19. 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 3-169 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. 3-170 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 3-171 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 through 2017-18. 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 3-172 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 $60,000 Total $0$30,000 $0$30,000 $0 $0$60,000 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 $0$60,000 Total $0$30,000 $0$30,000 $0 $0$60,000 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 3-173 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 3-174 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 3-175 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 3-176 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 3-177 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. 3-178 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 3-179 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 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: 3-180 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION SANTA FE ROAD REALIGNMENT AND BRIDGE REHABILITATION 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 3-181 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION SANTA FE ROAD REALIGNMENT AND BRIDGE REHABILITATION Location Map Vicinity Map Santa Fe Road Bridge Location 3-182 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION SANTA FE ROAD REALIGNMENT AND BRIDGE REHABILITATION Vicinity Map 2 Santa Fe Road Bridge Location High Collision Rate Location/Skew 3-183 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 3-184 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 3-185 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION SANTA FE ROAD REALIGNMENT AND BRIDGE REHABILITATION Bridge Condition #1 3-186 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION SANTA FE ROAD REALIGNMENT AND BRIDGE REHABILITATION Bridge Condition #2 3-187 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION SANTA FE ROAD REALIGNMENT AND BRIDGE REHABILITATION Bridge Condition #3 3-188 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 3-189 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 3-190 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 3-191 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION PARKING STRUCTURES ASSESSMENT AND REHABILITATION STUDY Project Description Preparing an assessment and rehabilitation study of the City’s three parking structures including determination of causes for the water intrusion at 919 Palm will cost $75,000 in 2015-16 for the study and $10,000 in 2016-17 for design for 919 Palm (as necessary). Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure G Priority Need and Urgency The City of San Luis Obispo owns and operated three parking structures in the Downtown area. Maintenance of these structures has historically been on an ad hoc basis such that general maintenance activities are usually funded when problems occur or equipment becomes obsolete. As parking structures age, it is important to have a regular maintenance and inspection program to find distress as it occurs, and address it promptly. Most distress that typically occurs in a parking structure gets increasingly worse over time, so delaying maintenance often leads to exponentially more expensive repairs. Although they are classified and constructed as buildings, parking structures are unique because they are loaded primarily by moving vehicles and are exposed directly to the elements. In our climate, the structures are often exposed to water intrusion and sometimes ice that can be corrosive to concrete and rebar if exposed. The open air nature of our structures means they experience greater volume changes (temperature, shrinkage and creep) than enclosed structures. We are beginning to see deterioration in structure conditions most notably in Palm I (1988) and the original Marsh Street structure (1990) which are over 25 years old. We are also seeing water intrusion in the 919 Palm structure which was constructed in 2005. The parking structures are anticipated to have a minimum 50 year useful life but this depends upon conditions, maintenance and major rehabilitations that must occur when necessary. Palm I has also begun to have concrete chipping occur in the deck structures such that iron rebar is being exposed to moisture. Individual repairs are completed when necessary but it may be more economical to perform deck sealing than spot repairs. Staff does not have the expertise to assess this or other structural issues that may exist in the facilities. Additionally, 919 Palm (2005) is showing signs of rust and surface delamination near window casings and expansion joints. During the summer 2014 while repairing delaminated brick veneer tiles on the west side of the building, it was noticed that the underlying metal expansion joint material was rusty. Upon closer inspection of the building, rust was found at other expansion joints around the perimeter of the building, as well as some delamination of the acrylic stucco coating. An assessment is needed to determine the source of the water intrusion and identify damaged areas of the building. After the assessment is complete, construction documents will be prepared to make necessary modifications and repairs. The outcome of the assessment will determine the final budget required for the design phase. 3-192 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION PARKING STRUCTURES ASSESSMENT AND REHABILITATION STUDY This project would hire in a specialized expert in parking structure assessments (structural, operational and cosmetic) to assess the conditions of the facilities and prepare a master plan for use in programing maintenance and major expenditures. The plan would assess issues such as: surface durability, deterioration of expansion/construction joints, corrosion detection, moisture testing, and other structural assessments. 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: 50600 – Parking Services 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 $75,000 $75,000 Design $10,000 $10,000 Total $0$75,000$10,000 $0 $0 $0$85,000 3-193 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION PARKING STRUCTURES ASSESSMENT AND REHABILITATION STUDY Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: Assessment of the existing condition of the parking structures will help generate a master rehabilitation and maintenance plan which will reduce future maintenance costs as well as reduce unforeseen expenditures. Anticipated Facility Life Span: 20 years Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total General Fund $8,333 $8,333 Parking Fund $66,667$10,000 $76,667 Total $0$75,000$10,000 $0 $0 $0$85,000 Project Funding by Source Note: Repair and maintenance of 919 Palm is shared responsibility between the General Fund (Office space) and the Parking Fund. Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project: Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: The assessment and rehabilitation study will occur in 2015-16 which will determine the final budget and schedule for the design phase in 2016-17. Design phase might extend beyond 2016-17 depending on the outcome of the study. Project Team Assignment Program Estimated Hours Project Proponent Parking Manager 40 Project Manager Parking Manager 200 CIP Engineering – Design 80 Project Assistance CIP Engineering – Design 50 Environmental Clearance Community Development 1 Contract Management CIP Engineering – Administration 20 Construction Management CIP Engineering – Construction 20 3-194 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION MARSH STREET PARKING GARAGE CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENTS Project Description Correcting circulation design deficiencies in the Marsh Street parking structure needed for safety and efficiency will cost $78,000 in construction and construction management services in 2015-16. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure G Priority Need and Urgency Minor accidents and property damage have been taking place in the Marsh Street parking structure due to the tight radius of the garage ramps, glare from the garage floor surface, old pavement markings and minimal directional signage. An evaluation of the structure’s operational features conducted in 2013 concluded that minor changes to the location of garage curbs, railings, striping and signage are needed to improve vehicular circulation and reduce the frequency of repairs. for. 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: 50600 Parking Enterprise Fund 3-195 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION MARSH STREET PARKING GARAGE CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENTS 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 Environmental / Permit $0 Land Acquisition $0 Site Preparation $0 Design $9,990 $9,990 Construction $58,000 $58,000 Construction Management $20,000 $20,000 Equipment Acquisition $0 Total$9,990$78,000 $0 $0 $0 $0$87,990 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: Project will correct circulation deficiencies which will extend the life of the facility and reduce the on-going costs currently needed to repair property damage. Anticipated Facility Life Span: n/a 3-196 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION MARSH STREET PARKING GARAGE CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENTS Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total General Fund $0 Parking Fund $9,990$78,000 $87,990 Grant $0 Debt Financing $0 Developer Contribution $0 Total$9,990$78,000 $0 $0 $0 $0$87,990 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 Proponent Parking 40 Project Manager Transportation Engineering 30 Contract Management Transportation Engineering 30 Construction Management CIP Engineering – Construction 20 3-197 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION MARSH STREET PARKING GARAGE CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENTS 3-198 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION MARSH STREET PARKING GARAGE CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENTS 3-199 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION MARSH STREET PARKING GARAGE CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENTS 3-200 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION VEHICLE LICENSE PLATE RECOGNITION Project Description Incorporating license plate recognition and digital permitting technologies into parking services practices will cost $135,000 in 2015-16 and $10,000 annually. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure G Priority Need and Urgency In 2014, the Parking Services Organizational Assessment identified the use of vehicle license plate recognition and digital permitting technologies for increased efficiencies. Implementing these systems will greatly reduce the time currently spent enforcing time zones and permit parking thus yielding more productivity at current staffing levels. Additionally the digital permitting system would support on line purchasing and management of residential parking program permits significantly reducing staff time spent administering the program. 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: 50600 Parking Enterprise Fund 3-201 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION VEHICLE LICENSE PLATE RECOGNITION 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 Environmental / Permit $0 Land Acquisition $0 Site Preparation $0 Design $0 Construction $0 Construction Management $0 Equipment Acquisition $125,000 $125,000 Total $0$125,000 $0 $0 $0 $0$125,000 Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Fleet Maintenance (50340) Utilities $0 Maintenance materials $0 Annual system subscription $10,000$10,000$10,000$10,000$10,000$50,000 Staff $0 Contract Services $0 Ongoing Costs by Type Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: The vehicle license plate recognition program requires the payment of an annual subscription fee that can be used for all types of parking enforcement and permit management and would be ideal for implementing a downtown residential parking program in the future. From a cost/benefit standpoint, utilizing such a system for the sole use of residential parking districts would cost approximately $4,500 per year more than the City spends today. Given the time efficiencies and multiple uses of the program, a significant cost savings is expected. Anticipated Facility Life Span: A 10-year life is assumed for the equipment. 3-202 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION VEHICLE LICENSE PLATE RECOGNITION Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total General Fund $0 Parking Fund $135,000$10,000$10,000$10,000$10,000$175,000 Grant $0 Debt Financing $0 Developer Contribution $0 Total $0$135,000$10,000$10,000$10,000$10,000$175,000 Project Funding by Source Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project: The project could be reduced by $45,000 with the elimination of the digital permitting system. Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: The project could be phased by purchasing the digital permitting system at a later date. Project Team Assignment Program Estimated Hours Project Proponent Parking 40 Project Manager Parking 40 3-203 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION PALM – NIPOMO PARKING STRUCTURE Project Description Building the Palm Nipomo parking structure will cost $22,000,000 in construction and $1,600,000 in construction management in 2017-18. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure G Priority Need and Urgency The City’s fourth parking structure needs to be constructed to adequately handle the downtown parking demand in the next 5 to 7 years. If there is not enough available parking it could deter access and decrease commercial and cultural activities in the downtown. As the economy improves it will increase parking demand as people have more money to spend. As the economy improves, smaller redevelopments like the Art Museum, Marsh Street Commons, and Monterey Place (Leitcher House property) will be completed and attract more people downtown. Larger projects like Chinatown and Garden Street Terraces will eliminate about 220 parking spaces and also attract more people downtown. Conservatively the City will need to replace the lost 220 parking spaces and build an estimated 200 new parking spaces needed for the redevelopments. Although some of the parking demand will be distributed to the remaining downtown streets, parking lots, and parking structures, the City will have to construct more parking. The Downtown Concept Plan calls for that parking to be in the form of a parking structure. The City owns all the land needed for the project and a consultant has been hired to develop the design, conduct environmental review and take the project through the public hearing process. Through this process a potential significant impact to historic resources has been identified. In January 2012 the City Council directed staff to prepare and advertise a Request for Proposals to prepare a focused environmental impact report (EIR). Due to staff resources and other City priorities, this work effort has been delayed. For construction to begin in later parts of 2017, adoption of the EIR and project approvals should be completed by December 2016. Large major capital projects like a parking structure will take approximately two years to construct. Waiting until there is insufficient downtown parking to move forward with the construction will be detrimental to the downtown economy. In the past, identified “triggers” for adding new public parking were considered by City Council and rejected during consideration of the Parking & Downtown Access Plan (PDAP). This is because it is difficult to anticipate private redevelopment and transportation changes in the future. However, when the City eliminates the 220 parking spaces for the Chinatown and Garden Street Terraces projects it will be time to move forward with the Palm Nipomo parking structure. The cost estimate used for this request will need to be reevaluated once the final design and environmental review is completed. Readiness to Build Study complete or n/a Equipment purchased or n/a 3-204 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION PALM – NIPOMO PARKING STRUCTURE 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: 50600 – Parking Enterprise Fund 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 Environmental / Permit $300,000 $300,000 Land Acquisition $2,328,200 $2,328,200 Site Preparation $0 Design $1,350,000 $1,350,000 Construction $22,000,000 $22,000,000 Construction Management $1,600,000 $1,600,000 Equipment Acquisition $0 Total $3,978,200 $0 $0$23,600,000 $27,578,200 Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: Ongoing costs cannot be estimated until a final design is developed. 3-205 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION PALM – NIPOMO PARKING STRUCTURE Anticipated Facility Life Span: 50 years Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total General Fund $0 Enterprise Fund $3,978,200 $23,600,000 $27,578,200 Grant $0 Debt Financing $0 Developer Contribution $0 Total$3,978,200 $0 $0$23,600,000 $27,578,200 Project Funding by Source Note: The project will use a combination of debt financing and pay as you go funds from the Fund Reserve in an as yet to be determined ratio. 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 Public Works – Parking Services 200 hours per year Project Manager* CIP Engineering – Design 500 hours per year Contract Management CIP Engineering – Administration 40 hours per year Construction Management** CIP Engineering – Construction 500 hours per year * During Construction Document preparation. ** During Construction 3-206 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION PALM – NIPOMO PARKING STRUCTURE Location Map 3-207 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION NEW FLEET REQUEST – PARKING ENFORCEMENT UTILITY SCOOTER Project Description Purchasing one (1) Parking Enforcement Utility Scooter for the Parking Services Enterprise Fund will cost $34,000 in 2018-19 Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure G Priority - List: Need and Urgency The City currently has two (2) Go-4 Parking Enforcement utility scooters that are used on a daily basis. The vehicles are used in the downtown area and neighborhoods throughout the City to enforce and gain compliance with parking regulations. The Go-4 utility scooters are highly specialized vehicles made with parking enforcement and similar functions in mind. Sliding doors on both sides of the vehicles allow Parking Enforcement Officers the ability to perform necessary duties on narrow streets. The Go-4 utility scooters also feature a minimal turning radius due in part to the three wheel design and a roll-cage for added safety. As the area for parking enforcement expands with the formation of new residential districts and time zones so does the need for additional enforcement vehicles. In the last several years there has been a significant expansion of parking enforcement responsibilities throughout the City including: parking enforcement on Sundays, enforcement of new time zones on Slack Street near Cal Poly, establishment of the Mission Orchard Residential Parking Permit District, and the parking agreements established for the Damon-Garcia Sports Fields. The expansion of parking enforcement beyond the downtown area results in an increase in use of existing vehicles. Having reliable and high functioning vehicles are necessary for Parking Enforcement Officers’ efficiency and high-level of service to the community. Electric powered enforcement scooters were considered as an alternative. The cost was approximately the same as a gasoline powered vehicle however the electric scooters have just been introduced to the market. Reliability and access to replacement parts is a concern for staff. Additionally, the cost to replace the battery cells is approximately $10,000 which exceeds the total cost of gasoline during the life of the vehicle. Battery cells have an expected service life of 5 years. Nonetheless, the proposed gas-powered Go-4 vehicle uses a 3-cylinder 69 horsepower engine capable of over 45 miles per gallon. The decision to purchase this vehicle is based on the following factors: 1. Expansion of parking enforcement areas, particularly those outside of the downtown area 2. The Go-4 Parking Enforcement utility scooters are uniquely equipped for parking enforcement duties 3. There is no back-up vehicle for the existing Go-4 Parking Enforcement utility scooters 3-208 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION NEW FLEET REQUEST – PARKING ENFORCEMENT UTILITY SCOOTER 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: 50600 – Parking Enterprise Fund Project Phasing and Funding Source s Continuing, ongoing or master account project - Specification No. Initial Project Costs by Phase Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Equipment Acquisition $34,000 $34,000 Total $0 $0 $0 $0$34,000 $0$34,000 3-209 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION NEW FLEET REQUEST – PARKING ENFORCEMENT UTILITY SCOOTER Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Fleet Maintenance (50340) Utilities $0 Maintenance materials $0 Staff $0 Contract Services $0 Ongoing Costs by Type Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: Ongoing costs are those associated with typical preventative maintenance. Typical annual costs for preventative maintenance such as oil/filter changes, inspections, plus as-needed replacement of wear parts such as tires, batteries, brakes, filters and fuses. Budget for these repairs/routine maintenance are supported through the Fleet Services operating budget for routine maintenance and repairs. Parking Enterprise Fund supports fleet operating services indirectly through the City’s Cost Allocation Plan. Anticipated Facility Life Span: 6 years / 30,000 miles Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Parking Enterprise Fund $34,000 $34,000 Total $0 $0 $0 $0$34,000 $0$34,000 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 Vehicle Specifications Parking Services, Fleet Services 8 Vehicle Procurement Fleet Services 8 Equipment Installation/Ready for Service Fleet Mechanics 8 3-210 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION NEW FLEET REQUEST – PARKING ENFORCEMENT UTILITY SCOOTER Description of Fleet Expansion Units Fiscal Year 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 Vehicle Type Utility Scooter Make GO-4 Model Interceptor IV Cost Base Unit 28,028 Accessories & Other Costs 974 Delivery Included in Cost Sales Tax 2,320 Total Cost $0 $0 $0 $31,322 $0 3-211 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION BUS STOP SHELTERS AND BENCH IMPROVEMENTS Project Description Study, design, construction, construction management and equipment acquisition for new bus stop shelters will cost $92,000 annually from 2015-16 through 2019- 20. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure G Priority: Maintenance of City Infrastructure Need and Urgency The SLO Transit system has exceeded over one million passengers in each of the last five fiscal years, reaching a system high of 1,147,748 passengers in FY 13/14. Under the performance guidelines of the 2009 adopted Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP), shelters should be provided at bus stops that have a minimum twenty-five daily passenger boarding’s. The SLO Transit system has approximately forty-nine (49) bus shelters and over 235 bus stops and many of the existing shelters using a concrete pad are older models with glass panels that are past their useful life and are subject to graffiti and vandalism. With the older models glass replacement is an ongoing expense and approximately $1,000 has been expended in 2012-13 FY due to vandalism. This project will replace old dilapidated shelters and benches as well as install new shelters in high boarding locations. Project costs are expected to include replacement or expanded concrete pads if a larger replacement shelter is installed or the existing pad is damaged or worn. 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: Encroachment Permit (Public Works Department) n/a 3-212 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION BUS STOP SHELTERS AND BENCH IMPROVEMENTS Operating Program Number and Title: 50700 Transit 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 Environmental / Permit $0 Land Acquisition $0 Site Preparation $0 Design $5,000$5,000$5,000$5,000$5,000$25,000 Construction $29,200$15,000$15,000$15,000$15,000$15,000$104,200 Construction Management $4,000$4,000$4,000$4,000$4,000$20,000 Equipment Acquisition $68,000$68,000$68,000$68,000$68,000$340,000 Total$29,200$92,000$92,000$92,000$92,000$92,000$489,200 Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: Minor amount of on-going costs anticipated in connection with new shelters for cleaning and repairs however these expenses exist regardless if they are replaced or not and therefore accounted for in the Transit budget. Anticipated Facility Life Span: 15 years Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Prop 1B $0 TDA $29,200$62,000$62,000$92,000$92,000$92,000$429,200 FTA 5307 $30,000$30,000 $60,000 $0 Total$29,200$92,000$92,000$92,000$92,000$92,000$489,200 Project Funding by Source The City will seek capital grant assistance for the project. 3-213 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION BUS STOP SHELTERS AND BENCH IMPROVEMENTS Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives Project can be phased – Depending on available funding. Project Team Assignment Program Estimated Hours Project Management CIP Engineering 80 Project Inspection Engineering Inspection 120 Project Inspection Building Department 40 Project Administration Public Works Administration 100 Project Proponent Transit Administration 160 3-214 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION BUS STOP EQUIPMENT PROJECTS INCLUDING ELECTRONIC SIGNAGE AND CAMERAS Project Description Install electronic signs, shelters, kiosks, benches and other passenger amenities at City owned bus stops at a cost of $ $31,300 annually from 2015-16 to 2019-20 as grant funding becomes available. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure G Priority Need and Urgency The SLO Transit system has approximately forty-nine (49) bus shelters and over 235 bus stops. Equipment at some bus stops are past their useful life. Bus stop improvements projects are recommended in the 2009 adopted Short Range Transit Plan for stop amenities and have been the highest rated items requested in passenger surveys. Since this project will utilize Safety and Security funding it proposes to install solar lighting, additional sign kiosks, or electronic Real-Time Information signs inside at selected stops. The city is expected to receive Prop 1B and California Emergency Management (CAL EMA) funding on an annual basis through FY 2017-18. Annual projects will include the installation of electronic bus arrival signage, shelters, benches and other passenger amenities as funding becomes available. 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 3-215 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION BUS STOP EQUIPMENT PROJECTS INCLUDING ELECTRONIC SIGNAGE AND CAMERAS Operating Program Number and Title: 50700 Transit Project Phasing and Funding Sources Continuing, ongoing or master account project - Specification No. Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Study $1,000$1,000$1,000$1,000$1,000$6,000 Environmental / Permit $0 Land Acquisition $0 Site Preparation $0 Design $0 Construction Management $2,300$2,300$2,300$2,300$2,300$13,800 Construction $28,000$28,000$28,000$28,000$28,000$159,900 Equipment Acquisition $0 Total $0$31,300$31,300$31,300$31,300$31,300$179,700 Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: Minor amount of on-going costs anticipated in connection with electronic signage, however these cost exist and are already accounted for with current equipment. New shelters and benches and other equipment are graffiti and vandalism resistant by design. Anticipated Facility Life Span: 15 years Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Prop 1B $25,689$25,689$25,689$25,689$25,689$146,034 CAL-EMA $4,561$4,561$4,561$4,561$4,561$27,366 TDA $1,050$1,050$1,050$1,050$1,050$6,300 $0 Total $0$31,300$31,300$31,300$31,300$31,300$179,700 Project Funding by Source 3-216 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION BUS STOP EQUIPMENT PROJECTS INCLUDING ELECTRONIC SIGNAGE AND CAMERAS Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives Project can be phased – Depending on availability of funding. Project Team Assignment Program Estimated Hours Transit Manager 530-50700 80 Project Integration & Support Information Technology 200 Project Management CIP Engineering 20 3-217 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION TRANSIT FACILITY REMODEL Project Description Remodeling and expansion of the SLO Transit Facility located 29 Prado Road will cost $45,000 for design in 2015-16 and $135,000 for construction, construction management and equipment acquisition in 2015-16. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure G Priority Need and Urgency SLO Transit owns property and a facility located at 29 Prado Road. The facility is used for the purpose of housing SLO Transit’s contractor, First Transit, who are responsible for the daily operations of the transit system and the maintenance of vehicles associated with the operation. This facility was originally built in 1976 and is now nearly 40 years old. Little has been done since its original construction to keep the facility up to par with current demands. Specifically and due to lack of space availability, the contractor has had to create a make-shift classroom for the education and instruction of new-hires within the maintenance bay. This is a problem because there is a considerable amount of distraction during safety sensitive lessons when, simultaneously; maintenance of vehicles is also being performed. It should also be noted that the maintenance bay is not insulated nor conditioned to maintain comfortable conditions. Immediately adjacent to the offices, just beyond the restrooms on the west end of the building, is a parts room. This room has been identified as the best candidate to be remodeled into a suitable training classroom. Transit Staff have worked with a Public Works Engineer, Building Plans Inspector and on-call Architectural Consultant to appraise the feasibility of the remodel and to develop a preliminary scope-of-work associated in converting the parts-room into a functional classroom. Currently this room is only accessible from the maintenance bay. The remodel would preserve the access from the maintenance bay, as an additional entry/exit, but would also create a new entry/exit from within the office portion of the building. This eliminates the need for non-maintenance staff to enter the garage in order to have access to the new proposed classroom. Additionally, this room would be insulated, fitted with electrical outlets, finished with sheet rock, paint, acoustic ceilings, flooring and windows as to function as a proper classroom. The parts and tools, currently located in this room, would then be relocated into the maintenance bay where the current make-shift classroom currently sits. 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 3-218 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION TRANSIT FACILITY REMODEL 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: Encroachment Permit – Public Works Department n/a Operating Program Number and Title: 50700 - Transit Enterprise Fund 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 $8,100$45,000 $0 $53,100 Construction $120,000 $0 $120,000 Construction Management $15,000 $0 $15,000 Total$8,100$180,000 $0 $0 $0 $0$188,100 Budget to Date 2013-142014-152015-162016-172017-18 Total 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: Utility costs and general tenant improvement repairs are covered by existing contractor operations and maintenance agreement (First Transit Inc.). Ongoing cost for major repairs such as plumbing, roof, HVAC, etc. will be the responsibility of SLO Transit. Currently, this facility is not maintained by the City’s Facility Maintenance staff and is not incorporated into the City’s Cost 3-219 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION TRANSIT FACILITY REMODEL Allocation Plan. Once the facility is remodeled, it will be added to the existing purchased transportation contract. Additional costs for maintenance and utilities resulting from the remodel are the responsibility of the SLO Transit contractor and will be added to the existing agreement for contractor operations and maintenance. Anticipated Facility Life Span: 40 years Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total TDA $8,100$180,000 $0 $188,100 FTA CMAQ Total$8,100$180,000 $0 $0 $0 $0$188,100 Project Funding by Source Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives Alternate project is feasible or advantageous-Install a permanent construction style trailer alongside the maintenance building. Challenges include building requirements such as a wheelchair ramp, sprinkler system and trailer access in front of two maintenance bay doors. Also, it would take away valuable space currently used for bus maintenance. Project Team Assignment Program Estimated Hours Project Management CIP Engineering – Design 120 hours Project Proponent Transit Manager 40 hours Building Permits Community Development 8 hours Construction Management CIP Engineering – Construction 160 hours Contract Administration CIP Engineering – Administration 100 hours Computer Network Information Technology 40 hours 3-220 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES PARK MAJOR MAINTENANCE & REPAIRS Project Description Repairing and replacing major components of parks and landscape area facilities will cost $86,000 in 2015-16, $220,000 in 2016-17, and an average of $325,000 in years 2017-20 to address aging park facilities. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure G Priority - List: Neighborhood Wellness, Fiscal Sustainability & Responsibility Need and Urgency 1. Pedestrian Bridges There is one pedestrian bridge in Meadow Park linking the parking lot to the community building and playground, and a second bridge in the connected Exposition Park crossing the creek at about the mid-point of the joined park. While both bridges are in need of replacement, the bridge closest to the parking lot is of higher priority as it is the route to the building and play area for people with access issues. The existing wood structure was substantially repaired a few years ago, but the main structural elements are rotting and the entire structure will need to be replaced. Given the age of the structure, the project assumes that new foundations will be required to meet current building codes. If the bridge is removed, the building will no longer be available for use due to the lack of access. The bridge in the middle of the park near King Street has deteriorated to the point where it can no longer be repaired and will need to be closed or removed in the near future. Justification for inclusion in Years 1-2 Design is recommended for funding in the second year for the Meadow Park bridge, due to the high level of deterioration and the importance of the bridge near the building, for accessibility. The pedestrian bridge in Mission Plaza between the Art Center and Novo Restaurant has severely worn surface planking. The decking is uneven and the spaces between the planks are increasing as the decking wears, making it more challenging to traverse, and less accessible for anyone with mobility issues. The project will replace the decking. 2. Sports Courts A. Surfaces Five of the City’s sport courts have failed coatings. The coatings have areas missing, and as water gets under them, it accelerates the delamination as well as trapping moisture against the surface. Constant moisture can cause deterioration within the slab. The Hockey court at Santa Rosa Park is the highest priority, due to the higher speeds of the players, and the fact that they are less stable on skates than in sport shoes. The failing surface is causing the skaters to slip and the deterioration of the edge felt can catch a hockey stick. 3-221 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES PARK MAJOR MAINTENANCE & REPAIRS The tennis courts and basketball courts at Islay Park and French Park are also failing. These are the original surfaces constructed with the parks and are now about 20 years old. The missing areas leave a rough edge, and the underlying slab can be slippery when wet. Prompt attention and recoating, can result in a less costly project, because the existing coating does not have to be entirely removed. Justification for inclusion in Years 1-2 The surfaces provide both a safety surface to the users and a coating which serves to protect the underlying surface. As this surface deteriorates, edges in the surface are created which can catch on shoes and skates, and the underlying exposed slab is more slippery. To provide the safest surface possible, it is important to replace the surfacing before it breaks down further. B. Hardscape The concrete pad in front of the Tennis Courts at Sinsheimer Park has been damaged by tree roots presenting an uneven surface for users entering the courts. The area receives temporary patching, but the surface will remain uneven until it is replaced. 3. Sports Fields A. Bleachers The bleachers located at the Meadow Park and Santa Rosa Park ball fields do not comply with current Consumer Product Safety (CPSC) Guidelines for bleachers. Older bleachers tend to have minimal rails to keep users from falling from or through the bleachers on to the surface below. Falls can occur when guardrails are missing from the backs or open sides of the bleachers or when openings between the seats or guardrails are large enough for a person to pass through. According to the CPSC, most injuries/falls occur to children under the age of 15. Per California Building Code, when spectator seating for viewing of events is provided for the general public, such as bleachers provided at a community ball field, they must provide equivalent spaces for wheelchair bound spectators. In addition, an accessible path of travel must also be provided to the spectator seating. Currently, neither ball field provides wheelchair spaces. At the Meadow Park ball field there is no solid path (only turf) that connects the bleachers to the nearby walkway. At Santa Rosa Park ball field the existing asphalt surfacing provided around the bleachers and backstop is too steep and bumpy from roots to be considered a compliant path of travel. This project will provide accessible seating integrated with, or adjacent to, the new bleachers and correct path of travel issues to the new bleachers at both ball fields. Depending on use, a non-compliant drinking fountain at Meadow Park ball field will either be replaced with an ADA compliant drinking fountain or will be removed. Justification for inclusion in Years 1-2 The bleacher risk at Meadow and Santa Rosa Park ball fields is identified in a 2008 Risk Management Evaluation conducted for the City by the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority (CJPIA) with a recommendation for replacement. 3-222 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES PARK MAJOR MAINTENANCE & REPAIRS B. Fencing The backstop at Sinsheimer Park at the Stadium is believed to be the original from the Stadium construction in the 1970’s. It is regularly coated on the outside to prevent rusting; however, there is clear evidence that the backstop is rusting from the inside and is in need of replacement or rehabilitation. C. Lighting The large sport lighting at Damon Garcia Sports Fields and El Chorro Park are due for relamping. The Damon Garcia fixtures were installed with the park, and are now 10 years old. El Chorro lights were installed shortly after by the City in this County park, as part of a use agreement. Lighting allows night time play, extending the available hours of facility use. This is particularly important to adult players, many of whom work during daylight hours. The lights need regular replacement and due to the height of the fixtures, is most cost effectively performed by the manufacturer. As part of the relamping, the manufacturer also cleans the lenses and reflectors, and disposes of the old fixtures. Justification for inclusion in Years 1-2 The lights at El Chorro have already reached their maximum hours for usage. Three of the bulbs are “out” and in need of replacement. D. Equipment Storage and Workshop The storage area for Sinsheimer Park houses materials and equipment for the regular maintenance of the Stadium, and provides a work area for maintenance staff. The storage/workshop is a Seatrain container on railroad ties, which leaks through the roof and walls, and has rotting floors. The unit houses the equipment, small tools, and materials dedicated to Stadium maintenance. Without this storage area, all equipment and material needed for maintenance would need to be hauled to the site each day, resulting in lost productivity of approximately 2 hours per day, or about $20,000 per year. The proposal is for construction of a small concrete block maintenance building suitable for equipment and material storage, and repair work performed on site. The alternative would be to replace the existing Seatrain with another Seatrain at a cost of approximately $6,000. E. Drainage The Stadium field at Sinsheimer Park has an underground drainage system to pull excess water from the field. At this time only about 50% of the drainage system is working. The result is that play must be delayed, as right field remains flooded for several days after rainy weather. Some revenue is lost to refunds for unusable conditions. This work will replace the sub-surface drainage system and should be coordinated with the irrigation system replacement as the field will have to be dug up for both projects to complete the work. 4. Irrigation Systems The irrigation systems in the parks are generally the same age as the parks, which are of various ages. Of the larger parks, Santa Rosa Park dates from the mid- 1950s, Laguna Lake Park from the mid-1960s, Meadow Park, Mission Plaza and Sinsheimer Park from the 1970s to early 1980s. Even more recent additions, such as French Park, are over 25 years old. The irrigation Central Control system was replaced as part of the 2013-15 Financial Plan and provides for sophisticated operation of the system to minimize irrigation and make sure watering is occurring when the plant material needs it, not on fixed schedules. The irrigation distribution infrastructure is now the weak link in the delivery system. In the long term, the parks will benefit from complete irrigation system replacements to improve coverage and efficiency, and reduce repairs. 3-223 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES PARK MAJOR MAINTENANCE & REPAIRS Of all the systems currently in place, the system at Sinsheimer Stadium is in the most pressing need for replacement. The original design provided for 360 degree spray, resulting in the dugouts, backstop, fencing, and infield all being watered, in addition to the turf. The backstop is rusting and needs to be replaced, and portions of the fence are replaced every year at a cost of about $3,000 annually. The wetting of the infield delays infield preparation and the turf cannot be efficiently watered as a balance as to be struck between getting the turf adequately wetted, and not overwetting non-turf areas. A new irrigation system can be designed to efficiently distribute water onto the turf with minimal overspray, which in addition to reducing damage to the facility, will save water. Two additional valve replacement projects are proposed to address high levels of valve failures at Meadow Park and Mission Plaza. Conversion of an above ground system installed along Calle Joaquin Parkway to underground is proposed for a future year to address high levels of damage and deterioration of the parkway irrigation. Full irrigation system replacements at all major parks are contemplated for future years of the plan to systematically remove outdated and deteriorated systems. 5. Specialty Items A. Fencing Several years ago San Luis Creek undermined the bank at Elsford Park located on San Luis Drive, northeast of California Blvd. The location is popular with students and neighbors from the area, for sitting under shade trees. The undermining created a steeper than 1:1 slope, meaning the top of bank is unsupported, about 20’ above the creek. Fencing is need to clearly demarcate the usable area, and the benches at the park need to be relocated closer to the street on new concrete pads to further discourage use of the area near the top of bank. Justification for inclusion in Years 1-2 The current top of bank could collapse without notice. It is important to move existing facilities and provide additional barriers to users as soon as possible. The fencing along the Railroad Trail between Orcutt Road and Jennifer Street is a multi-wire fence installed with the trail in 1988. Some of the posts have rotted at the ground and failed. The wire has been cut so many times, that the fence has no integrity. The fence not only needs to be replaced because of the rotting posts but also to improve the integrity by installing something other than wire between the posts, to prevent it from being cut. The alternative would be to install the high iron fence, such as that installed along the California Blvd section of the Trail. This option provides better control of access onto Railroad right-of-way, and based on past bidding, such a large quantity may not be significantly more expensive than post and rail type fencing. B. Sewer Lateral The sewer lateral serving the restrooms at Mission Plaza has severe root intrusion. This requires ongoing treatment and can lead to backups. Regular treatment of the line is occurring; however, the lateral line needs to be replaced. The Plaza hosts numerous events throughout the year, as well as being one of the few restrooms open until midnight to serve the downtown area. It is important to the Downtown and the Community as a whole, for it to have reliable restroom services. C. Arbor The arbor at Mission Plaza near the flag court is rotted in several places. The structure is original to the plaza construction and provides some shading and architectural detailing to this portion of the plaza. The members are of significant size, so repair is not suited to an in-house repair effort. The work will include replacement of rotted members and refinishing of salvageable members. 3-224 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES PARK MAJOR MAINTENANCE & REPAIRS D. Lake Shore & Docks The shoreline of Laguna Lake is regularly acted upon by the wave action in the lake resulting in bank erosion. While much of the shoreline has vegetation growth which assists in protecting the bank, there are areas that are not shielded in this way and have noticeable erosion. In Laguna Lake Park, one such area exists at the end of the main drive aisle down to the lake where it meets the road along the edge of the lake. This area has continued to erode to the point where additional erosion will require closure of the lake road to vehicle traffic. Stabilizing the bank to restore the lake edge will prevent this closure and improve the safety at this intersection. This stabilization is also part of the stormwater management program as it will prevent the introduction of asphalt paving into the lake as the roadway is undermined. This road is the only access road to the boat dock, gazebo picnic area, and other lakeside amenities. There are two docks for Laguna Lake, a large one existing at the north end of the active park which is suitable for larger boats, including the City’s pontoon maintenance boat, and a smaller dock, suitable for small vessels or wind surfers. The bank erosion around the lake has undermined the boat ramp and the approach slab at the smaller docks. The smaller dock approach is now supported on only a small portion of the footprint. This approach and dock are recommended to be permanently removed to reduce long term maintenance. The main dock can serve for all activities. The boat ramp needs repair due to undermining, but appears to be salvageable. Some repairs are needed for the dock to replace panels that have deteriorated in the sun. E. Fitness Equipment The par course at Meadow Park has significantly deteriorated and some of the pieces have been removed. The course provides specific exercise elements along a walking or running route to improve overall fitness of the users. The fitness equipment at Emerson Park was donated several years ago and parts are no longer available to fix it. Equipment will be removed as it fails. 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 – Varies by project Building Permit n/a – Varies by project Waterway Permits (Fish & Game, Water Quality, Army Corps) n/a – Varies by project Railroad n/a Other: (Enter the title and agency of any other needed permits) n/a 3-225 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES PARK MAJOR MAINTENANCE & REPAIRS Operating Program Number and Title: 50200 Landscape and Parks Maintenance Project Phasing and Funding Sources Continuing, ongoing or master account project - Specification No. – Master Account to be developed for this ongoing annual park maintenance program. Initial Project Costs by Phase Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Design $25,000$20,000$35,000$40,000$45,000$165,000 Construction $61,000$180,000$120,000$365,000$328,900$1,054,900 Construction Management $20,000 $0$10,000$25,000$55,000 Total $0$86,000$220,000$155,000$415,000$398,900$1,274,900 Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total 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: Regular maintenance is known to extend the life of infrastructure. Extending full replacement through maintenance reduces long term facility costs. Regular maintenance reduces reactive maintenance and increases time available for preventive maintenance. Anticipated Facility Life Span: The life span of the facilities varies depending upon the type of facilities. Pedestrian bridges can have a life span of 30 to 50 years. Shoreline stabilization is estimated to last closer to 15 years, depending upon weather. Park facilities have significant social benefits, as several studies have shown the calming effect of such facilities, as well as the potential to provide healthy recreational opportunities. Well maintained facilities reduce the risk of injury to the public and of environmental damage such as erosion from irrigation system ruptures, or eroding banks on the Lake. The City’s parks are also used for special events which provide economic benefits. 3-226 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES PARK MAJOR MAINTENANCE & REPAIRS Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total General Fund $86,000$220,000$155,000$415,000$398,900$1,274,900 Total $0$86,000$220,000$155,000$415,000$398,900$1,274,900 Project Funding by Source Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project: Project work is presented in a phased approach to spread expenses across multiple years. The individual project elements could occur on an accelerated schedule to reduce the deferred maintenance, decrease the number of facilities which are not usable, and reduce demand for reactive maintenance. Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: Project is submitted as a phased ongoing program. As work is completed on the five year plan, additional items will be added to address the highest priority needs for park and landscaped areas. Project Team Assignment Program Estimated Hours – Yrs 1 & 2 Project Proponent Park Maintenance Supervisor 100 Project Manager CIP Engineering – Design 1000 Technical Studies Natural Resources 40 Environmental Clearance Community Development 120 Contract Management CIP Engineering – Administration 120 Construction Management CIP Engineering – Construction 1000 Site List – For multi-year projects Estimated Cost Implementation Years Location Design Construction Design Construction Priority Santa Rosa Park Hockey Court Surface $18,000 2015-16 1 El Chorro Sport Lights $10,000 2015-16 2 Meadow & Santa Rosa Park Bleachers $25,000 $200,000 2015-16 2016-17 3 Elsford Park Preclusion Fence $15,000 2015-16 4 Islay & French Park Tennis Court Surfaces $9,000 2015-16 5 3-227 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES PARK MAJOR MAINTENANCE & REPAIRS Location Design Construction Design Construction Priority Islay & French Park Basketball Surfaces $9,000 2015-16 6 Meadow Park Building Access Bridge $20,000 $80,000 2016-17 2017-18 7 Sinsheimer Stadium Backstop $10,000 $50,000 2017-18 2018-19 8 Mission Plaza Bridge decking $40,000 2017-18 9 Mission Plaza Arbor $10,000 $60,000 2017-18 2018-19 10 Meadow Park King Street Bridge $15,000 $90,000 2017-18 2018-19 11 Sinsheimer Irrigation $10,000 $60,000 2018-19 2019-20 12 Sinsheimer Stadium Drainage $10,000 $60,000 2018-19 2019-20 13 Sinsheimer Court Entrance Hardscape $25,000 2018-19 14 Sinsheimer Equipment Storage $20,000 $95,000 2018-19 2019-20 15 Damon Garcia Sport Lights $30,000 2018-19 16 Meadow Park Irrigation Valves $90,000 2018-19 17 Mission Plaza Irrigation Valves $30,000 2018-19 18 Mission Plaza Sewer Lateral $25,000 2019-20 19 Railroad Bike path fencing - Partial $83,900 2019-20 20 Laguna Lake Docks & Ramp $30,000 2019-20 21 Laguna Lake Shoreline $15,000 $150,000 2019-20 Future 22 Calle Joaquin Irrigation $10,000 $25,000 2019-20 Future 23 Meadow Park Par Course $10,000 $30,000 2019-20 Future 24 Emerson Park Fitness Equipment $10,000 $50,000 2019-20 Future 25 Railroad Bike path fencing - Partial $220,000 Future 26 3-228 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 3-229 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 3-230 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES MISSION PLAZA RAILING UPGRADE Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project: 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 3-231 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES OLYMPIC POOL REPLASTERING Project Description Replastering, underwater lighting renovation and Virginia Graeme Baker Pool and Spa Safety Act (VGBA) upgrades to the Olympic Pool at the Swim Center will cost an additional $290,000 for construction, construction management in 2015-2016. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure G Priority: Fiscal Sustainability & Responsibility Need and Urgency The pool was last re-plastered in 1998, and has deteriorated. This deterioration was first noticed before the conversion from use of Bromine to Chlorine in 2003. The early degradation is attributed to failure of the re-plaster contractor to immediately fill the pool with water after applying the plaster, to allow for proper curing. In the intervening time since the condition was first identified, the deterioration has been slowed by diligent and highly exact chemical analyses and adjustment. The plaster is becoming heavily pockmarked with a roughened surface that can compromise structural integrity and create health and safety concerns in the forms of sharp edges and areas where algae and mold can become established. The re-plaster component will eliminate the potential for sharp edges on the expansion joint that runs the entire width of the pool, negate losses of water through inevitable leaks in the flexible seal of the expansion joint, and facilitate cleaning by removing the roughened pool surface. In 2015 the existing shell plaster will be 17 years old. Under normal conditions a re-plastered shell is expected to last for 10 to 15 years. This project has been on the list for funding since 2005. An added component of this project is the underwater lighting; the lighting hardware is original to pool construction, and while staff has diligently repaired and retrofit the illuminators, 33-years underwater has caused significant corrosion to the housing fixtures. Without the underwater lighting component, the designer estimates the cost of the project would be reduced by $20,000 to $25,000. The impact of the elimination would be the continued deterioration of the lighting system to the point it could no longer be repaired. This would lead to the pool being much darker at night, presenting a safety issue. Upgrades to the existing drain system are also necessary to meet the VGBA which went into effect on December 19, 2008 and requires that all public pools are equipped with anti-entrapment drain covers. Without the necessary upgrades to the existing drain system the County of San Luis Obispo Public Health Department will not issue the appropriate permits to complete this project. This project was originally funded in the 2013-15 Financial Plan. Since that time, the design for the project has been started and is currently at 75% complete. A detailed cost estimate has now been generated and an additional $290,000 is needed to fund construction. During the 2013-15 Financial Plan Staff generated a preliminary estimate of construction, however as the design progressed and a more thorough and detailed analysis was done which included additional work originally not identified. 3-232 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES OLYMPIC POOL REPLASTERING 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: (Facility alteration by County of San Luis Obispo Environmental Health) n/a Operating Program Number and Title: 50210 Swim Center Maintenance Project Phasing and Funding Sources Initial Project Costs by Phase Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Design $25,000 $25,000 Construction $255,000$266,000 $521,000 Construction Management $55,000$24,000 $79,000 Total$335,000$290,000 $0 $0 $0 $0$625,000 Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: Replastering will not result in any increased ongoing costs and will reduce risk for the City for injuries resulting from irregular plaster edges. This project will result in a reduction in staff time needed to clean and repair the pool shell, and a reduction in staff time and material costs repairing the 33-year old lighting system. Anticipated Facility Life Span: Excluding catastrophe or codification requiring replacement, given proper resources are applied to maintenance and renovation, this facility could easily serve the community for the next 50 years. The pool will need to be replastered again in 10 to 15 years. 3-233 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES OLYMPIC POOL REPLASTERING Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total General Fund $335,000$290,000 $625,000 Total$335,000$290,000 $0 $0 $0 $0$625,000 Project Funding by Source Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project: If the underwater lighting component is eliminated, construction funding could be reduced by $20,000 to $25,000, this is not recommended due to safety reasons for night visibility. Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: Phasing is not feasible. Project Team Assignment Program Estimated Hours Project Manager CIP Engineering – Design 160 Project Proponent PW/Build Maint 160 Public Outreach & Coordination Parks and Recreation 160 Contract Administration CIP Engineering - Administration 60 Construction CIP Engineering – Construction 280 Environmental Review Planning 4 3-234 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 3-235 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 3-236 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 3-237 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES TREE MAJOR MAINTENANCE, REMOVAL & REPLANTING Project Description Addressing large scale pruning, removal, replanting, and establishing of the City’s Urban Forest in various areas of the City will cost $68,800 in 2017-18, and an average of $260,000 annually in a future Financial Plan, to address the aging urban forest. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure G Priority - List: Neighborhood Wellness Need and Urgency Johnson Park Trees 139 Large Blue Gum Eucalyptus Trees along the creek dividing Johnson and Sinsheimer parks, and Sinsheimer Elementary School need much more frequent care than provided under the current maintenance rotation. This is due to their enormous size and proximity to school children, scheduled users of the playground equipment coming from YMCA programs, and the frequent users of the park who play amongst the trees. The frequency of this risk reduction work should be every two to three years because of the high use of the area and the nature of large blue gum eucalyptus trees. California Street Palm Trees Seven large Canary Island Date Palms on California Street were identified for removal by the City’s service contractor during a scheduled pruning. This was confirmed during an aerial inspection by City Forestry staff in June of 2014. Having reached a near critical decay threshold, two of the palms were in imminent danger of failure and were removed. Over the past 20 years several other palms have been removed without replacement. The remaining five palms identified need to be removed soon to avoid failures, and a replanting plan implemented to restore the palms, ensuring this iconic gateway to Cal Poly is preserved. So. Higuera Monterey Cypress Street Trees South Higuera is recognizable by the 132 Cypress trees that line the easterly side between Los Osos Valley Road and Prado Road. The trees have experienced increasing levels of decline and failure. In the spring of 2011 a significant work effort was completed with the pruning of 103 trees and the removal of 19 dead and dying trees. A recent site review revealed an additional 20 large cypress trees in need of removal due to internal decay and dieback. The level of removal is now significant enough where a large replanting effort of 50 replacements is needed and warranted. This project will complete dying tree and stump removals, and replant trees to restore the urban forest on this gateway stretch of arterial roadway. Los Osos Valley Road Palm Trees The 25 Canary Island Palm Trees that line the road along Los Osos Valley Road (LOVR), across the street from Home Depot in front of the Oceanaire neighborhood have been in decline and several have been removed. The maintenance of these trees was added when the City annexed this section of road, previously under the County’s jurisdiction. Since the annexation the trees have been pruned twice are in need again. There are 15 empty locations previously occupied. Replanting is needed for the 15 missing palms, and maintenance for the remaining palms. 3-238 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES TREE MAJOR MAINTENANCE, REMOVAL & REPLANTING Neighborhood Street Trees The 198 Modesto Ash trees in the South Johnson Pavement Maintenance Area 2, 114 Ash in the North Foothill Pavement Maintenance Areas 7 and 8, and 238 Ash in the Oceanaire neighborhoods Pavement Maintenance Areas 5 and 6 are severely declining in health as a result of poor structure from initial nursery practices, annual infestations of aphids causing heavy sap drip, Anthracnose disease, and age. The Modesto Ash trees were planted at the time the areas developed and they are reaching the end of their useful urban lifespan. This species is prone to specific diseases and are particularly prone to damaging hardscape; combined with their age, this creates a need to start a replacement program. A tree replacement project was completed some years ago in the South Oceanaire neighborhood with the Liquidambar species. This project will also remove some of the remaining 121 Liquidambar trees in the South Oceanaire neighborhood due primarily to hardscape issues with driveway approaches curbs and repeated sidewalk replacements causing a potential for them to fail due to root pruning needed to regrade hardscape. The 50 large American elm trees on Branch Street are approaching the end of their useful life after over 65 years of service. City staff has removed and replaced some of the worst specimens due to decay and to reduce liabilities. Additional trees have been lost to unforeseen natural occurrences related to weather through the years. Between PG&E’s heavy top pruning on the south side of the street for power line clearance and sidewalk, and curb gutter and driveway repairs affecting the root system, there are 10 trees that should be replaced soon with a variety line of smaller Dutch Elm Disease resistant hybrids along the south side and a resistant larger hybrid on the north side. Currently there are 17 empty locations to be replanted in addition to the replanting needed for the 10 trees to be removed. This project will require coordination with the Tree Committee and significant outreach to the neighborhoods, as some residents are particularly attached to the trees around their home. As in past projects, residents who would like to retain their tree for a while longer will be offered that option if the tree is not an immediate hazard. This method allows for a smoother staggered transition for the neighborhood. 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 3-239 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES TREE MAJOR MAINTENANCE, REMOVAL & REPLANTING Operating Program Number and Title: 50220 Tree 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 $68,800 $68,800 Total $0 $0 $0$68,800 $0 $0$68,800 Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total 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: Each contract involving contract planting is anticipated to include the first three years of watering and small tree care to prevent the need to augment program maintenance budgets. Upon completion of the maintenance period, the trees will enter the regular inventory and result in ongoing care expenses. Under current contract, smaller tree pruning cost is $30 per tree, with pruning anticipated to occur approximately once every 8 years. Ongoing costs are already accounted for in the program budget, with initial establishment and maintenance of the new trees to be covered under the project budget. Laguna Lake Park will be the exception as the staff will perform replanting and maintenance efforts for this site. Trees provide social, environmental, and economic benefits through their documented influence on calming people, creating cleaner air and stormwater, and encouraging spending. Anticipated Facility Life Span: 40 years on average 3-240 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES TREE MAJOR MAINTENANCE, REMOVAL & REPLANTING Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total General Fund $68,800 $68,800 $0 Total $0 $0 $0$68,800 $0 $0$68,800 Project Funding by Source Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project: The trees could be removed without replacement, saving the replacement cost and maintenance of $36,000. Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: The project should be accelerated to get to more of the needed work sooner. Project Team Assignment Program Estimated Hours per year Project Proponent City Arborist 25 Project Manager CIP Engineering – Design 200 Environmental Clearance Community Development 10 Contract Management CIP Engineering – Administration 60 Construction Management CIP Engineering – Construction 200 Site List – For multi-year projects Location Estimated Year of Construction Pavement Area (for projects in right-of-way) Johnson Park 2017-18 n/a California Blvd Future 8 South Higuera Future 5 Los Osos Valley Future 5 Branch Street Future 4 South Johnson Neighborhood Future 2 & 3 Oceanaire Neighborhood Future 5 & 6 3-241 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES TREE MAJOR MAINTENANCE, REMOVAL & REPLANTING Location Estimated Year of Construction Pavement Area (for projects in right-of-way) North Foothill Neighborhood Future 7 & 8 Work is scheduled to occur in advance of street work, as sidewalk removal and repairs are anticipated with some of the tree removals. 3-242 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES DOG OFF-LEASH AREA ROADWAY SAFETY FENCING Project Description Fencing around the restrooms at the Laguna Lake Park Dog Off-Leash Area and along the parking and roadway edge will cost $50,000 in 2015-16. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Request is a combination of replacement and new Council Goal / Measure G Priority Need and Urgency The Dog Off-Leash Area at Laguna Lake Park began many years ago as a pilot program and quickly evolved into a popular and consistently utilized recreation opportunity. Taking note of this community need, the Parks and Recreation Commission and City Council formally adopted the area into the Park Master Plan in 2005. It is the only area of the City’s facilities and parks in which owners may allow their canines to be off-leash, running freely, and interacting with other dogs. Overall, the users are happy with the area’s maintenance and do not wish to completely enclose it; however there is interest in addressing safety concerns related to the dogs roaming off-leash adjacent to the roadway and in close proximity to the parking lot to safely avoid incoming vehicle traffic. Additionally when the restrooms at this portion of the park were reconstructed in 2009, no fencing was placed around the restrooms. The volume and frequency of dog marking (aka urinating) on the cinderblock restrooms was not contemplated at the time of their construction. This project includes funds to create a barrier, either fencing or coating, to minimize the impacts to the building from dog marking. If something is not done soon, the marking will significantly shorten the lifespan of the restrooms, as seen by premature rusting of metal components. In approximately 2008, Ranger Service staff installed panels of temporary fencing (chain link panels) along the parking lot area to improve animal safety. The panels are not embedded in the ground and have feet that stick out each way to stabilize them, which can interfere with pedestrian movement. This project would replace these temporary fence panels and extend fencing approximately 250 feet to the limits of the Dog Off-Leash Area for a total of approximately 600 feet of new fence. Gates will be installed at appropriate locations with the entire off-leash area remaining partially fenced. Visible markers, such as landscape boulders, would also be placed at the outer limits of the Dog Off-Leash Area into the park to serve as boundary lines for users, as the entire park is not available for off-leash use. 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 3-243 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES DOG OFF-LEASH AREA ROADWAY SAFETY FENCING 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: 50200 Landscape and Park Maintenance Project Phasing and Funding Sources Continuing, ongoing or master account project - Specification No. Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total 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: *Fencing will need routine maintenance, estimated to be $2,000 every three years; however, premature aging of the restroom facility will result in increased maintenance costs. Anticipated Facility Life Span: 20 years Initial Project Costs by Phase Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Construction $50,000 $50,000 $0 Total $0$50,000 $0 $0 $0 $0$50,000 3-244 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES DOG OFF-LEASH AREA ROADWAY SAFETY FENCING Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total General Fund $50,000 $50,000 $0 Total $0$50,000 $0 $0 $0 $0$50,000 Project Funding by Source Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project: The project could be limited to the area currently fenced with temporary fencing, about 250 feet. This length would allow the parking lot area to be fenced. The full project is recommended as parking occurs along the access road in addition to the parking lot. Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: Full fencing can be phased over one or more additional years. Project Team Assignment Program Estimated Hours Project Proponent Parks and Recreation 20 Project Management CIP Engineering 100* Construction Management CIP Engineering 60* Project Administration CIP Engineering 40 Environmental Document Community Development 4 * Assumes in-house design and inspection. 3-245 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES DOG OFF-LEASH AREA ROADWAY SAFETY FENCING Location Map Proposed Fencing and Area Boulders. Map not to Scale. Conceptual locations of Landscape Boulders. Proposed Fencing Conceptual Location of Area Boulders 3-246 LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES SINSHEIMER PARK TENNIS COURT LIGHTING Project Description Design and construction of court lighting for the Sinsheimer Park Tennis Courts will cost $25,000 in 2018-19 for design and $175,000 in 2019-20 for construction and construction management services. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure Y Priority - List: Need and Urgency At this time there are no lit tennis courts in the City of San Luis Obispo maintained and operated by the City. For many years tennis court advocates have sought to light the Sinsheimer Park Tennis Courts. There are six tennis courts at Sinsheimer Park and they receive a tremendous amount of play. Interestingly there are peak uses throughout the day at tennis courts – morning (8:00a.m. to 1:00 p.m. being the first wave and then after 3:00p.m. representing the start of the second). There is an active Women’s Tennis League which has competitive matches three days a week during the daytime hours. There are a large number of adult users who play in the morning as an informal group some having played together weekly for over 30 years. Youth play occurs predominately after school hours and in the summer with several options for recreational lessons offered by Parks and Recreation. Consistent with the Joint Use Agreement with the San Luis Obispo Coastal Unified School District four of the courts are used by Junior Varsity girls in the Fall and boys in the Spring or for a fee by Mission College Preparatory if the San Luis Obispo High School Coaches have all athletes play together at the high school courts. Unfortunately, due to the lack of lighting at the Sinshiemer Park Tennis Courts there is an underserved population – working adults and their children. The courts at San Luis Obispo High School do have lights but they are antiquated, don’t always work, and are not under the City’s maintenance and control. During athletic seasons, and particularly in the Fall, student athletes take priority at Sinsheimer. During the summer months players are able to eek out play until about 8:00pm. Once daylight savings begins play ends at 5:00pm. There is an active group of users who are advocating for the City to meet this unmet need. They are willing to assist in the cost associated with this project in a limited capacity. As they have pointed out all other sports from soccer to rugby to softball to baseball to swimming to sand volleyball to hockey to skating have lit facilities. It seems unreasonable to continue to limit the use of this life sport to only daytime hours. Design Review of this project would result in significant community outreach to existing residents near to the Sinshiemer Park Tennis Courts as some have been at times opposed to such a use as others have been in favor. Readiness to Build Study complete or n/a Equipment purchased or n/a Property owned or property agreement in place n/a 3-247 LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES SINSHEIMER PARK TENNIS COURT LIGHTING 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: 60230 – Parks and Recreation Facilities 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 $25,000 $25,000 Construction $145,000$145,000 Construction Management $30,000$30,000 Total $0 $0 $0 $0$25,000$175,000$200,000 Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Utilities $4,000$4,000 Maintenance materials $0 Staff $0 Contract Services $0 Total $0 $0 $0 $0 $0$4,000$4,000 Ongoing Costs by Type 3-248 LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES SINSHEIMER PARK TENNIS COURT LIGHTING Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: Ongoing electric utilities costs are estimated at $4,000 annually. Public Works Parks Maintenance staff would maintain the court lighting on an annual basis. Anticipated Facility Life Span: 25 years Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total General Fund $0 Grant $0 Parkland Dev Fund*$116,703 $25,000$175,000$316,703 Developer Contribution $0 Total$116,703 $0 $0 $0$25,000$175,000$316,703 Project Funding by Source **The Parkland Development Fund has insufficient funds for the two CIP requests. If Tennis Court Lighting is designed and approved in Year 3 as identified funds are predicted to be sufficient for this request in Year 4. The Parkland Development Fund In-Lieu fees are imposed on residential development and collected for the purpose of acquisition and development of new community parks and existing park facilities intended for access and use by the entire city. The purpose of the Parkland In-Lieu fee is to assure open space and community park facilities are available and adequate to meet the needs created by such development while maintaining current and proposed park and recreation standards pursuant to the City’s General Plan and Parks and Recreation Element. Fees are collected as residential development occurs and remains as an aggregated fund balance until allocated to new park projects as approved by City Council. Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project: A more expensive alternative would be to build new tennis courts somewhere in the community with lighting. This would cost hundreds of thousands of dollars more but would not have the neighborhood issues, potentially. Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: Project Team Assignment Program Estimated Hours Project Proponent & Manager Parks and Recreation 120* Project Manager Parks and Recreation, CIP Engineering, Public Works Parks Maintenance 120 Construction Management CIP Engineering – Construction 100 *Includes extensive public outreach to neighborhood and design review and consideration is required prior to proceeding to construction. 3-249 LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES SINSHEIMER PARK TENNIS COURT LIGHTING Location Map 3-250 LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES NEW PARK AMENITY INITIATIVES Project Description Enhancing existing City parks with new recreational initiatives will cost $60,000 in 2018-19. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure G Priority - List: Need and Urgency The Parks and Recreation Department is dedicated to enhancing the quality of life and promoting a sense of community within San Luis Obispo. In partnership with our citizens, we provide quality comprehensive park and recreation programs, facilities and services, which respond to the changing needs within our communities. We strive to preserve, enhance and protect our open spaces and natural resources to enrich the quality of life for the present and future generations in a safe and secure environment. Funding of $60,000 in 2018-19 for new park initiatives would allow the City to address pent up demands for park amenities and better respond to the changing recreational needs of the community. As the community demographics change, the desire for new recreational opportunities arises. Over the past several years, the community has expressed desires for skating facilities, pickleball, bicycle pump tracks, soccer golf and many more. A Parks and Recreation Master Plan is being requested as part of the 2015-17 Financial Plan. This master planning document will better define future park amenity needs and necessary funding levels for the next twenty years. The City currently maintains over 30 community, neighborhood and mini parks, a sports field complex, community center, aquatic center, Senior Center, Historic Jack House, a 10-hole municipal golf course, community gardens and over 50 miles of open space trails in the 7,000 acres of open space it controls. New park amenity initiatives would identity existing park or facility locations that could be enhanced to include new recreational opportunities as identified by the community. Several potential recreational initiatives have been identified below to provide an insight into possible park amenity enhancements: Pickle-ball Pickleball is a fun game for all ages. Played with a paddle on a court or in the yard, Pickle-ball is a cross between badminton, tennis, and ping-pong. A potential location has been identified at Santa Rosa Park adjacent to the Jessie Garcia Horseshoe pits. 3-251 LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES NEW PARK AMENITY INITIATIVES Bicycle Pump Track The concepts of bike parks and pump tracks are still new in the biking world but is quickly becoming a trend gaining momentum over the past five years. A pump track is a continuous loop of dirt berms and “rollers” (smooth dirt mounds) that bicyclists can ride without pedaling. Various City parks have been identified which could accommodate a bicycle park pump track. FootGolf Combining two of your favorite sports! FootGolf is a combination of the popular sports of soccer and golf. The game is played with a regulation #5 soccer ball on shortened holes with 21-inch diameter cups. The rules largely correspond to the rules of golf. 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 3-252 LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES NEW PARK AMENITY INITIATIVES Operating Program Number and Title: 60100 – Parks and Recreation Administration 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 Environmental / Permit $0 Land Acquisition $0 Site Preparation $0 Design $10,000 $10,000 Construction $50,000 $50,000 Construction Management $0 Equipment Acquisition $0 Total $0 $0 $0 $0$60,000 $0$60,000 Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Fleet Maintenance (50340) Utilities $0 Maintenance materials $1,000$1,000 Property rental/lease $0 Staff $0 Contract Services $1,000$1,000 Total $0 $0 $0 $0 $0$2,000$2,000 Ongoing Costs by Type Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: Various: Ongoing maintenance costs would be determined upon the new recreational initiative implemented. Parks and Recreation and Public Works Departments would work together in the maintenance of City parks and facilities. Costs of materials for annual maintenance are anticipated to be minor and could be absorbed within existing operating budgets. 3-253 LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES NEW PARK AMENITY INITIATIVES Anticipated Facility Life Span: varies, 10-20 years Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total General Fund $0 Enterprise Fund $0 Grant $0 Debt Financing $0 Parkland Development Fund*$116,703 $60,000 Developer Contribution $0 Total$116,703 $0 $0 $0$60,000 $0$176,703 Project Funding by Source **The Parkland Development Fund has insufficient funds for the two CIP requests. If Tennis Court Lighting is designed and approved in Year 3, funds are insufficient to cover Park Amenity Initiatives. The Parkland Development Fund In-Lieu fees are imposed on residential development and collected for the purpose of acquisition and development of new community parks and existing park facilities intended for access and use by the entire city. The purpose of the Parkland In-Lieu fee is to assure open space and community park facilities are available and adequate to meet the needs created by such development while maintaining current and proposed park and recreation standards pursuant to the City’s General Plan and Parks and Recreation Element. Fees are collected as residential development occurs and remains as an aggregated fund balance until allocated to new park projects as approved by City Council. Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project: The alternative would be to not fund minor new park initiatives and have the City’s park in lieu funds aggregate in anticipation of the need to assist in the funding of new park construction with ongoing residential expansion. Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: New park initiatives will be a phased in project as funding allows. Project Team Assignment Program Estimated Hours Project Proponent Parks and Recreation Administration 80 Project Team Parks and Recreation, Public Works Parks Maintenance 80 Contract Management Parks and Recreation – Administration 80 Design, Construction and Construction CIP Engineering 120 3-254 LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES NEW PARK AMENITY INITIATIVES Assignment Program Estimated Hours Management Site List – For multi-year projects Location Estimated Year of Construction Park AmenityInitiatives Santa Rosa Park 2018-19 Pickleball Various City Parks or Facilities 2019-20 Pump track Various City Parks or Facilities 2020-21 FootGolf 3-255 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: 3-256 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 3-257 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. 3-258 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 3-259 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 2015-16. 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 3-260 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$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. 3-261 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$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 3-262 LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES LAGUNA LAKE PARK & NATURAL RESERVE ADA ACCESSIBLE TRAIL Location Map 3-263 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. 3-264 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. 3-265 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 3-266 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES RESTROOM REPLACEMENT & REMODELING Location Map 3-267 LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES LAGUNA LAKE GOLF COURSE PRO-SHOP BUILDING ASSESSMENT Project Description A building assessment of the Laguna Lake Golf Course Pro-Shop will cost $37,000 to study in 2015-16. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure G Priority - List: Infrastructure Maintenance; Measure G Senior Programming Need and Urgency The Laguna Lake Golf Course Pro-Shop is the hub of the 10-hole course. In addition to the Pro-Shop, the building hosts the 11th Hole Grille a restaurant presently operated by Achievement House, office space for the Golf Course Supervisor and staff and public restrooms In the 2013-15 Financial Plan, the Laguna Lake Golf Course restroom project (design, construction, and construction management) was identified as a significant need as the outdated restrooms are noncompliant with the American’s with Disabilities Act. As such, Council approved the design and reconstruction of the Laguna Lake Golf Course restrooms during the five-year CIP plan (2013-2018). The design for upgraded restrooms is currently underway and construction is anticipated to begin in 2015-16 (assuming funding continues to be allocated in support of this project). Given the significant investment that will be required to remodel the existing restroom structure, it is imperative that a building assessment of the Golf Course Pro- Shop be performed to assess the impact the restroom upgrade will have on the aging and declining Pro-Shop. Staff is specifically requesting this building assessment as the Pro Shop’s exterior siding is original to the building, from its construction in the early 1970s, and has not been painted in 25 years. As a result it is in serious need of repair and rehabilitation. The timing for an assessment is therefore now – so that appropriate maintenance activities can be coordinated. 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 3-268 LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES LAGUNA LAKE GOLF COURSE PRO-SHOP BUILDING ASSESSMENT Railroad n/a Other: Encroachment Permit – Public Works Department n/a Operating Program Number and Title: 60900 – Golf Course 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 37,000 $37,000 Design $0 Construction $0 Construction Management Total $0$37,000 $0 $0 $0 $0$37,000 Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Utilities Maintenance materials Property rental/lease Staff Contract Services 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: This is an existing facility and ongoing costs are not anticipated to increase. There may be some small savings through energy efficiency measures. However, with constant use of the diminishing Pro-Shop building, unexpected issues and major repairs have the possibility of arising routinely. Anticipated Facility Life Span: 50+ years 3-269 LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES LAGUNA LAKE GOLF COURSE PRO-SHOP BUILDING ASSESSMENT Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total General Fund $37,000 $37,000 $0 Total $0$37,000 $0 $0 $0 $0$37,000 Project Funding by Source Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project: Continue to make minor/temporary repairs, restoration and ADA noncompliance work to eliminate unsafe conditions over a longer span of time. Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: Project Team Assignment Program Estimated Hours Project Proponent Parks & Recreation 40 Project Management Engineering Design 100 Project Inspection Engineering Inspection Project Inspection Building Department Project Administration Public Works Administration 40 Project Maintenance Facilities Maintenance 3-270 LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES LAGUNA LAKE GOLF COURSE PRO-SHOP BUILDING ASSESSMENT Location Map 3-271 LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES PUBLIC ART FUND Project Description Funding of the City’s public art fund at policy level (1% of eligible capital project construction costs) will cost $36,400 in 2015-16, $39,900 in 2016-17, $34,900 in 2017-18, $38,700 in 2018-19 and $40,400 in 2019-20. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure Y Priority - List: Need and Urgency The City’s Public Art program receives funding by a combination of the City’s general capital program and development revenues. This funding is used to support various public art projects throughout the City. Capital Improvement Project Contribution to Public Art Fund. Under the City's public art policy, 1% of the construction component of eligible City capital improvement plan (CIP) projects shall be allocated for public art. Capital projects that are excluded from this 1% requirement are: 1. Underground projects (Storm drain replacements, etc.) 2. Utility infrastructure projects (Water and Sewer) 3. Projects funded from outside agencies (Grant funded projects) 4. Costs other than construction (such as study, environmental review, land acquisition, design, site preparation, construction management or equipment acquisition) 5. Public Art projects themselves Projects with eligible construction funding components have been identified in the five year CIP funding table located at the end of this budget request. In accordance with the approved funding policy level of 1% of eligible capital project construction costs, staff has identified funding allocations totaling $190,280 over the five-year CIP program; $36,386 in 2015-16, $39,854 in 2016-17, $34,928 in 2017-18, $38,712 in 2018-19 and $40,400 in 2019-20. Development In-Lieu Fee Contribution to Public Art Fund. Non-residential, private sector improvement projects are also required to include a public art component defined as the Public Art Development In-Lieu Fee. While there are some exceptions and the “in-lieu fee” can vary depending on the size of the project, non-residential private sector projects are generally required to include a public art component with a value that is at least 0.5% of construction costs. In these circumstances, a Development “in-lieu” fee would be assessed and that funding contribution would be made to the public art fund to be used in support of public art in conjunction with other projects or locations where it can have a greater public benefit than if it was arbitrarily installed with a project to which public art was not well-suited. Development in-lieu fees for public art can fluctuate 3-272 LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES PUBLIC ART FUND greatly from year to year as this funding is dependent upon the strength of the economy and our community’s development activity. The average in-lieu fees collected over the past five years is approximately $40,000. Allocation of Public Art Funds After the Financial Plan is adopted, the CIP Review Committee will review approved funding, potential projects, and make recommendations to the Council regarding the allocation of public art funds to specific public art projects. This review should be completed by September 2015. Following Council approval, briefings will be held with affected project managers on the most effective process for incorporating public art into their project. This process ensures that funds are adequately budgeted for public art regardless of whether public art will be directly incorporated into the project (through development in-lieu fees) or if funding for this purpose is identified separately in the City’s 5-year CIP program. 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 Building Permits will be required per individual public art project. 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 Will be evaluated on case-by-case basis, but the need for significant environmental review of public art projects is unlikely. Operating Program Number and Title: 60100 – Parks and Recreation Administration Project Phasing and Funding Sources Continuing, ongoing or master account project - Specification No. 3-273 LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES PUBLIC ART FUND Initial Project Costs by Phase Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Study $0 Environmental / Permit $0 Land Acquisition $0 Site Preparation $0 Design $0 Construction $0 Construction Management $0 Equipment Acquisition $0 Public Art*$36,400$39,900$34,900$38,700$40,400$190,300 Total $0$36,400$39,900$34,900$38,700$40,400$190,300 *Public Art Projects include design and construction costs that are borne by the selected Artist. Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Utilities $0 Maintenance materials*$15,000$15,000$15,000$15,000$15,000$75,000 Property rental/lease $0 Staff $0 Contract Services*$0 Total $0$15,000$15,000$15,000$15,000$15,000$75,000 Ongoing Costs by Type Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs: *Ongoing maintenance costs of public art pieces are an annual ongoing activity needed to maintain the 68 works of public art (both permanent and temporary installations) in the City’s collection. Proposed maintenance funding through the Parks and Recreation Administration operation budget shall be requested in the Fall (following adoption of the City’s Financial Plan) and shall be subject to City Council approval. Anticipated Facility Life Span: Annual Funding for various Public Art projects. 3-274 LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES PUBLIC ART FUND Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total General Fund - CIP allocation for Public Art $36,400$39,900$34,900$38,700$40,400$190,300 Enterprise Fund $0 Grant $0 Debt Financing $0 Developer In-Lieu Fee*$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total $0$36,400$39,900$34,900$38,700$40,400$190,300 Project Funding by Source *Public Art in-lieu fee projections based on average Development in-lieu fees collected from 2009 to 2014. Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project: Cost of reduced project: Funding at less than 1% policy level has been done in the past in response to budgetary constraints and is a feasible alternative. Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: Public art projects are phased-in over the five-year capital improvement program. Project Team Assignment Program Estimated Hours Public Art Coordination Parks and Recreation Administration 300* Public Works Various (Engineering and Facilities) 300* *Total hours based upon construction of public art projects. 3-275 LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES PUBLIC ART FUND Projects with eligible construction components: ProposedProposedProposed Eligible Capital Improvement Project Title 2015-162016-17 2017-182018-192019-20 1 Rental Housing Inspection Remodel 450$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 2 Dog Off Lease Fencing 500$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 3 Mission Plaza Railing 300$ 300$ 300$ 300$ 300$ 4 Parks Major Maintenance 610$ 1,800$ 1,200$ 3,650$ 3,289$ 5 Pedestrian & Bicycle Pathway Maintenance 1,000$ 600$ 600$ 600$ 600$ 6 Olympic Pool Replastering 2,660$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 7 Tree Maintenance & Removal -$ -$ 688$ -$ -$ 8 Facility Maintenance 570$ 1,460$ 1,460$ 2,747$ 7,771$ 9 Restroom Replacement & Remodeling 3,500$ -$ 3,500$ -$ -$ 10 Downtown Renewal -$ -$ 1,600$ -$ 3,700$ 11 Traffic, Bicycle & Pedestrian Marking Replacement 200$ -$ 220$ 220$ -$ 12 Sidewalk Ramp Construction 450$ -$ 450$ 450$ -$ 13 Sidewalk Repairs 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 14 Traffic Sign Maintenance -$ -$ 400$ 1,430$ -$ 15 Street Resurfacing & Reconstruction 14,566$ 15,356$ 18,330$ 19,750$ 19,640$ 16 Broad Street Bank Reinforcement 400$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 17 Silt Removal -$ -$ -$ 4,050$ -$ 18 Bicycle Facility Improvements 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 1,000$ 19 Bike Bridge at Phillips Lane -$ 12,000$ -$ -$ -$ 20 Bob Jones Prefumo Creek Connection -$ -$ -$ 2,165$ -$ 21 Lighted Cross Walk Replacement on Marsh & Higuera Streets -$ 400$ -$ -$ -$ 22 Monterey & Osos Traffic Signal Safety Upgrade -$ -$ 2,250$ -$ -$ 23 Neighborhood traffic Improvements 200$ 200$ 300$ 300$ 300$ 24 South & Parker Median 300$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 25 Traffic Operations 300$ -$ 300$ -$ -$ 26 Traffic Safety 250$ 250$ 250$ 300$ 300$ 27 Wayfinding Signs 1,050$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 28 CIP Bicycle Transportation Plan (BTP) Implementation 2,050$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 29 Marsh Street Garage Circulation Improvements 580$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 30 Laguna Lake Park & Natural Reserve ADA Accessible Trail -$ 1,750$ -$ -$ 1,750$ 31 Open Space Protection: Maintenance 2,850$ 2,850$ 750$ 750$ 750$ 32 Fire Station 2 Exterior Driveway Concrete Ramp Replacement -$ -$ 330$ -$ -$ 33 Fire Station 1 & OEC Network Remodel -$ 888$ -$ -$ -$ 34 Fire Station 2 Restroom & Dorm Remodel 1,600$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 36,386$ 39,854$ 34,928$ 38,712$ 40,400$ 2015-17 Financial Plan 3-276 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES FLEET EXPANSION – RANGER SERVICE PROGRAM PICKUP TRUCK Project Description Adding one (1) Full-Sized ¾ ton four-wheel drive Pickup Truck for the Parks and Recreation Department Ranger Service program will cost $52,500 in 2015-16. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request 2013-15 Council Goal / Measure G Priority - List: Open Space Acquisition and Maintenance Need and Urgency With the 2013-15 Financial Plan, Council adopted a Major City Goal to commit funding to expand open space and provide adequate staffing, planning, and other resources to maintain and enhance open space quality and amenities. As a result, the hiring of a full-time permanent Ranger with the focus on maintenance and patrol was budgeted. In effort to achieve this Major City Goal staff has continued to patrol and maintain City open space areas and creek corridors on a daily basis. With 65 trail work days a year and daily duties (7 days a week), an ever expanding open space area and trail network, and with the Ranger Supervisor driving his personal vehicle on a daily basis in order to supervise and manage staff, the Parks and Recreation Department has identified the need for an additional Ranger Service vehicle immediately. Furthermore, of the two Ranger trucks in the City’s fleet, one is being recommended for accelerated replacement due to its excessive mileage accumulation which far exceeds average use given these Ranger vehicles are driven every day of the week, including weekends. 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 have limited space to transport necessary equipment, employees and volunteers, and frequently utilize personal vehicles to complete daily work tasks and projects. Park Rangers are required to perform a variety of assignments at various sites throughout the City and it is common for the five Ranger staff members to be stationed at a minimum of three properties at one time. The expansion of the Open Space network and Ranger Service programming and staff requires this fleet expansion to better accommodate program objectives including ongoing trail construction, trail/open space maintenance, mitigation projects, patrol and tool/material transport, as well as Department-wide hauling needs. Due to the nature of the Ranger Service program’s daily operations and programming, staff is requesting a ¾ ton four-wheel drive long bed. Similar to the style of the Ranger Service fleet replacement scheduled for 2014-15, the Ranger program would require a 4-wheel drive, long bed, quad cab truck to fully meet the existing needs of the program, transport staff and accomplish significant maintenance projects. This size vehicle with a quad cab (4 door) is recommended for the daily transport of employees, volunteers and equipment, and for the towing of equipment trailers to and from various locations, City-wide. The quad cab truck would include a lumber rack, tool box(es) and a winch. A winch is valuable asset for Ranger Service vehicles and is needed to extricate other vehicles from rugged terrain, safely remove trees from roads and pull debris from creeks. This fleet addition would also provide compatibility to tow the three existing trailers (designated to the Parks and Recreation Department) which are extensively used for clean-up and hauling related to trail and creek maintenance. 3-277 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES FLEET EXPANSION – RANGER SERVICE PROGRAM PICKUP TRUCK The fleet addition is critical in meeting the City’s Major City Goal for maintenance of open space and in providing essential resources so that the Ranger Service may effectively accomplish these program goals and objectives. With the submittal and approval of this request, staff asks that Asset 0219 Chevy Silverado Pickup Truck (2000), which is scheduled for replacement in 2014-15, remain as an active gray-fleet vehicle for the Ranger program until the new fleet addition pickup truck is delivered and made available for Ranger Service use. Operating Program Number and Title: 60290 – Ranger Service Project Phasing and Funding Sources Continuing, ongoing or master account project - Specification No. Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Fleet Maintenance (50340)52,500$ Total $0$52,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Ongoing Costs by Type Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: Ongoing costs are those associated with typical preventative maintenance. Typical annual costs for preventative maintenance include: oil/filter changes, inspections, plus as-needed replacement of wear parts such as tires, batteries, brakes, filters and fuses. Budget for these repairs/routine maintenance are supported through the Fleet Services operating budget for routine maintenance and repairs. The addition of a full-sized truck for Ranger Services is anticipated to have a minimal impact to ongoing vehicle maintenance costs. Anticipated Vehicle Life Span: 12 years / 90,000 miles Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Fleet Replacement Fund $52,500 $52,500 Total $0$52,500 $0 $0 $0 $0$52,500 Project Funding by Source Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives Alternative: Allow the Ranger Truck referred to as Asset 0219 Chevy Silverado Pickup Truck (2000) being replaced in the 2014-15 fiscal year to remain as an active “grey-fleet” vehicle under the Ranger Services program until new fleet resources can be funded and made available for Ranger Service use. As 3-278 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – LEISURE, CULTURAL & SOCIAL SERVICES FLEET EXPANSION – RANGER SERVICE PROGRAM PICKUP TRUCK Asset 0219 is still in reasonably good condition, has had regular maintenance, and is not known to have looming problems, this vehicle could bridge the gap and help to meet the Department’s needs for several years if funding is not made available in 2015-16 for the requested new fleet. This alternative would require an exception to the “grey fleet” policy which currently only allows up to six months of “grey fleet” vehicle use. Should the new fleet addition request be deferred beyond the requested 2015-16 year, Asset 0219 would require “grey fleet” status approval beyond the six months. Leasing Alternative: Leasing Alternative: Although leasing may be beneficial in some instances, such as specialty construction equipment or lower mileage vehicles, it is not always viable for all vehicles. If the life of a vehicle can be extended due to favorable condition assessments, a lease may not allow for vehicle replacement “deferment”. A comprehensive cost analysis for fleet leasing would need to be conducted in order to fully evaluate the cost benefits of this alternative. Description of Fleet Expansion Units Fiscal Year 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 Vehicle Type Ford F250 Quad Cab, 4-Wheel Drive Cost Long Bed Base Unit 46,570 Accessories & Other Costs 1,580 Delivery 500 Sales Tax 3,850 Total Cost $52,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 3-279 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 2015-16, $2,000,000 in 2016-17. In addition, the Open Space Acquisition Fund has $325,000 in unspent and previously appropriated monies available for land acquisition. This request is to provide $250,000 in each of the five years for Open Space Acquisition projects. In 2015-16, $25,000 of this total may be provided to the Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo in support of Bob Jones City-to-Sea Trail trailhead amenities to be constructed at the Octagon Barn. 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. In 2015-16, $25,000 of funding allocated to this project may be provided to the Land Conservancy to support the development of trailhead amenities at the Octagon Barn. 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. 3-280 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 $75,000$1,000,000$2,425,000$250,000$1,000,000$250,000$5,000,000 Total$75,000$1,000,000$2,425,000$250,000$1,000,000$250,000$5,000,000 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. 3-281 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT OPEN SPACE PROTECTION: ACQUISITION Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total General Fund - existing CIP $75,000$150,000$175,000 $400,000 General Fund - 2015-17 CIP $250,000$250,000$250,000$250,000$250,000$1,250,000 Enterprise Fund $0 Grants $600,000$2,000,000 $750,000 $3,350,000 Total$75,000$1,000,000$2,425,000$250,000$1,000,000$250,000$5,000,000 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 3-282 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. 3-283 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT LAGUNA LAKE DREDGING AND SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT Readiness to Build 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 3-284 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 3-285 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 3-286 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 3-287 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. 3-288 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - FUNCTION OFFICE REMODEL AND VEHICLE ACQUISITION FOR THE RENTAL HOUSING INSPECTION PROGRAM Project Description Allocate $153,750 in 2015-2017 to purchase three fleet vehicles and remodel existing office space to support the proposed Rental Housing Inspection Program. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal 2013-2015: Goal 2: Continue and Enhance Neighborhood Wellness Initiatives – Pursue a Rental Housing Inspection Program Need and Urgency As part of the 2013-15 budget process the City Council identified pursuing a Rental Housing Inspection Program as part of the Neighborhood Wellness Major City Goal to address concerns associated with the growing number of rental housing units in the City and consequent impacts on neighborhood wellness and stability. The Council conducted a workshop to review best practices and receive stakeholder input as part of providing direction to develop an ordinance and implementation plan. Implementation is dependent upon staff resources to develop and initiate the inspection program which requires modifications to 919 Palm to accommodate potentially five additional staff (three inspectors, one supervising inspector, one administrative assistant) and associated equipment. Modification to 919 Palm Street building includes framing and creating a wall, providing a new data drop to accommodate communications equipment (computers and phone), and constructing five office spaces. Design for tenant improvements will be done by building staff. Work will be contracted out. 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 3-289 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - FUNCTION OFFICE REMODEL AND VEHICLE ACQUISITION FOR THE RENTAL HOUSING INSPECTION PROGRAM Operating Program Number and Title: 40700 Building and Safety Project Phasing and Funding Sources Continuing, ongoing or master account project - Specification No. Note that the costs for scanning address files and acquiring equipment are reflected as minor capital items within the program’s operating budget. This request focuses on the acquisition of vehicles and the remodel of existing office space at 919 Palm. Initial Project Costs by Phase Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total $0 Construction - 5 office spaces $45,000 $45,000 3 Vehicles $102,000 $102,000 Contingency (15% of construction)$6,750 $6,750 $0 Total $0$153,750 $0 $0 $0 $0$153,750 Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Fleet Maintenance (50340) Staff (SOPC) to be determined through Council direction $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: This new program will require additional staff to implement. With over 12,000 rental housing units in the City, any form of effective inspection program cannot be implemented with existing staff. Remodel of 919 Palm Street facility is more cost effective than moving GIS division to City Hall and remodeling the vacated space to accommodate new staff. Program staff need to be in close proximity to Building Division, Code Enforcement, and Neighborhood Specialist staff in order to coordinate responses and leverage existing resources. Anticipated Facility Life Span: Thirty years 3-290 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - FUNCTION OFFICE REMODEL AND VEHICLE ACQUISITION FOR THE RENTAL HOUSING INSPECTION PROGRAM Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total General Fund $0$153,750 $153,750 Enterprise Fund $0 Grant $0 Debt Financing $0 Developer Contribution $0 Total $0$153,750 $0 $0 $0 $0$153,750 Project Funding by Source Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project: Alternative project would entail relocating GIS staff to the first floor of City Hall (990 Palm) in the FIT offices and converting the vacated offices at 919 Palm Street to accommodate five additional staff. This would include greater cost due to reconfiguration needs of two buildings as well as disruption of existing staff. Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: Project can be phased at Council discretion however, no additional staff may be added until space is created to accommodate them. Initiation of Rental Housing Inspection Program is dependent on expanding office space and hiring program staff. Project Team Assignment Program Estimated Hours Project Proponent Community Development Project Manager Community Dev - Building 20 IT Network/Hardware/Software FIT 40 Environmental Clearance Community Development – Dev. Rev 1 Contract Management Public Works – Facilities Maintenance 10 Construction Management Public Works – Facilities Maintenance 40 Site List – For multi-year projects Location Estimated Year of Construction Pavement Area (for projects in right-of-way) 919 Palm Street 2015 3-291 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - FUNCTION OFFICE REMODEL AND VEHICLE ACQUISITION FOR THE RENTAL HOUSING INSPECTION PROGRAM Location Map Description of Fleet Expansion Units Fiscal Year 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 Rav 4 or equivalent (3 vehicles) Cost 102,000 Base Unit Accessories & Other Costs Delivery Sales Tax Total Cost $102,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 3-292 CAPITOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – GENERAL GOVERNMENT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN Project Description Preparing an updated facilities master plan to guide the improvement, maintenance and replacement of city facilities will cost $145,000 in 2017-18. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure G Priority - List: Fiscal Sustainability & Responsibility Need and Urgency The City of San Luis Obispo owns and is responsible for 221,000 square feet of buildings. This inventory consists of all types of facilities, including, fire stations, golf courses, City Hall, and other structures. At some point in time each of these spaces will need to be evaluated to determine if the physical spaces have outlived their original purpose. There may be additional or modified space needs. . The building may no longer meet current codes, or the heating systems and roofs are outdated. Maintenance costs of old systems may no longer be fiscally responsible. New regulations, increasing energy costs and changes in the way business is done may make what was once a perfectly usable space into a place that is inefficient and costly to maintain. Change is constant. In order to keep up with change, an organization needs to constantly re-invent itself and its spaces. This is where Master Planning and Facility Evaluations can make a difference to the organization. A good Master Plan will review organizational goals and make sure the municipal facilities help to meet those goals, while saving money and improving conditions for employees and customers. There’s a difference between planning and a Master Plan. Everyone makes action plans that help meet their goals. A Master Plan goes a bit farther by using professional evaluation and assessment tools to derive a series of options that are then studied to determine the best way forward. The Master Plan process typically asks two questions: what are the needs and what is the best response to those needs at the most economical cost. The answers are best obtained through the services of architects, engineers, and programing specialists experienced with large facilities and complex organizations that know the local area’s tradesmen and costs. To determine the need, the professional starts by conducting an analysis of the buildings and sites to understand the current space use, the status of existing mechanical and electrical systems, the condition of the building envelope, and whether the facility still serves the organization’s needs and goals. The physical needs of the facility are summarized in a facilities analysis, which contains descriptions of potential issues, offers solutions and establishes costs. The space needs of the organization are determined by an in depth study of operations and goals, and a determination of the ability of the physical space to suit those operations. These two investigations start to define the need. Using this information, the specialist will start developing conceptual solutions for building renovation, growth or consolidation, and will develop a plan to manage the physical needs of the facility over a 5, 10, or 20 year period. Initial planning identifies regulatory issues, and costs that would apply to any improvements. It also provides a time line for funding. It may be that the planning process identifies a need to relocate, or a need for a new facility. The relatively low cost to have a professional Master Plan formulated will pay itself back many times over in cost savings from well thought out improvements. 3-293 CAPITOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – GENERAL GOVERNMENT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN A good Master Plan establishes a series of goals for the facility for the next 5, 10, or 20 years. It turns complex change into a straightforward activity. Just as the needs of an organization can change and grow the Master Plan changes too. The Plan should be reviewed and updated every 5 years. Having a Master Plan keeps buildings aligned with business plans, can save money, and help the organization grow and succeed. The last general facilities master plan was completed in 1988 and covered expected facility related issues to 2010. While several of the space issues identified in the plan have been addressed (replace Fire Station #1, replace Parks and Recreation administration, add storage and covered equipment area at Corporation Yard), many areas of need remain. • Corp Yard storage needs were identified in 1988 as 18,000 square feet of enclosed storage space. This was predicted to expand to 25,000 to 30,000 square feet by 2010. The Corp Yard warehouse constructed in 2002 includes 6,000 square feet of enclosed storage space. The Admin building was also identified for expansion of staff. The building office spaces are currently fully occupied. • The police department admin building was assessed in 1988 as having: limited flexibility, poor acoustical privacy, undersized employee lounge, inadequate locker rooms, and inefficient clerical space. The site was evaluated again in 2003 as insufficiently sized to meet present needs; employee and public parking is in very short supply, with some interior areas inefficiently utilized. The main electrical panel was evaluated in 2004 and found to have; limited availability of replacement breakers for this age panel, combined with the multiple modifications endure and proximity to existing water pipes make it a candidate for replacement to: correct existing electrical code violations, remove field modifications and abandoned equipment, provide U.L. listing to the main electrical service equipment, improve system reliability and parts availability. • In 1988 Fire station #2 was found to have; engine bays too small to accommodate large equipment with an outdate engine bay design requiring returning vehicles to back into the bays, storage space, office space, and bunk spaces are inadequate and no facilities exist for female firefighters. The building was evaluated as well maintained and should remain in use for another 20-years until 2008. • In 1988 Fire station #4 was found to have infiltration problems at opening in masonry walls, deficiencies including circulation through bunk areas, lack of entry area, inadequate bunk and lounge spaces, small apparatus bay area, and lack of facilities for female fire fighters. The 1988 facilities master plan goes on to identify an additional 18,000 to 20,000 square feet of needed office space by 2010. With the addition of 919 Palm housing Public Works and Community Development, the renovation of 879 Morro to house Utilities administration, and the elimination of 955 Morro, the net office space gain is approximately 15,000 square feet. The space needs at the time of course did not take into account the creation of the Information Technology division, with a GIS component, or the significant growth in code enforcement staffing. The facilities master plan goes on to identify needs at recreation facilities, libraries, and leased spaces such as the art center. While many tenant improvements have been made and several buildings replaced to ease the space/programing issues, a significant number of items remain unaddressed from the 1988 study, or have arisen in the past 26-years. An updated facilities master plan will capture today’s needs to plan for tomorrows projects that renovate or replace City facilities with the additional resources needed to operate and maintain existing and new infrastructure. The facilities master plan is intended to evaluate the general condition of buildings and gauge the condition against the current and future programing needs to create a broad-view of long- term facility projects. 3-294 CAPITOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – GENERAL GOVERNMENT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 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: 50100 Public Works Admin 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 $145,000 $145,000 Total $0 $0 $0$145,000 $0 $0$145,000 3-295 CAPITOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – GENERAL GOVERNMENT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Utilities $0 Maintenance materials $0 Property rental/lease $0 Staff $0 Contract Services $145,000 $145,000 Total $0 $0 $0$145,000 $0 $0$145,000 Ongoing Costs by Type Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: The Triple Bottom Line analysis method will be a component of the study; this will use a multi-criteria assessment approach for evaluating alternatives or options based on the economic, environmental, and social impacts of the alternatives or options. In practical terms, triple bottom line accounting means expanding the reporting framework to take into account environmental and social performance in addition to financial performance. The first step in the sustainable options evaluation process is the development of a master list of potential sustainable options for rehabilitation projects. These sustainable options for rehabilitation projects are then correlated to the Triple Bottom Line Evaluation Criteria. Using a master list, a list of viable sustainable options is then developed for each of the buildings. Sustainable options included those that yield resource consumption reductions (gas, electricity, and water) and others that provide social benefits such as improved indoor environmental quality, health, and human performance. The building-specific sustainable options for resource consumption reductions are then developed and tested as a complete package for each building. The goal for each building is to yield maximum practical reduction in gas, electricity, and water use. To evaluate upgrades individually would not provide the complete picture of the intended effect. In addition, other environmental and social benefits provided by the options are noted. The sustainable options evaluations are then shown in a table for evaluations that were conducted at each of the buildings. In general, additional capital costs will be incurred to implement the sustainable options for each building. Assuming the City can maintain its current energy and water prices, the options do not generally pay for themselves in terms of the resultant annualized life cycle cost (includes consideration for reduced energy and water use). However, increases in energy costs or water costs over the life of the option could result in a reduction of the annualized costs that could result in cost savings for the City. In addition, implementation of the sustainable options for rehabilitation projects contributes to the following Triple Bottom Line Criteria: Environmental Reduced energy use Minimized carbon footprint Minimized resource use 3-296 CAPITOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – GENERAL GOVERNMENT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN Social Improved quality of life Improved infrastructure Improved indoor environmental quality, health, and human performance Anticipated Facility Life Span: Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total General Fund $145,000 $145,000 Total $0 $0 $0$145,000 $0 $0$145,000 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 Proponent PW- Admin / Build Maint 50 Project Manager CIP Engineering – Design 120 Contract Management CIP Engineering/Admin 40 3-297 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - GENERAL GOVERNMENT FACILITY MAINTENANCE Project Description Completing ongoing regular maintenance of City facilities to maximize lifespan and minimize significant capital maintenance and facility replacement will cost $57,000 in 2015-16, $146,000 in 2016-17, $152,000 in 2017-18, $374,750 in 2018-19, and $791,100 in 2019-20. Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure G Priority: List: Fiscal Sustainability & Responsibility Need and Urgency 1. Program Organization and General Needs: The Building and Swim Center programs are jointly staffed by five technical maintenance staff and one, half time temporary employee, operating under the supervision of the Facilities Maintenance Supervisor. Four of the staff focus on general building maintenance and repair, and the remaining one and one-half staff focus on Swim Center maintenance. Best practices indicate that properly staffed maintenance programs should be achieving a mix of 20% reactive maintenance and 80% preventative maintenance. Given the square footage and level of resources assigned to the program, the program operates at approximately 75% reactive, and 25% preventative maintenance work. In the long term, the additional resources for regular maintenance of facilities will reduce capital improvements costs for major maintenance by providing planned equipment replacement and more frequent preventive maintenance to the building shells. The addition of resources to the combined programs will improve the ability of the City to properly maintain its facilities over the long term. The industry standard recommends one maintenance FTE for every 40,000 to 50,000 square feet of occupied space. When all types of sites are included, the current program has one maintenance FTE for every 114,000 square feet, further indicating the importance of making regular and ongoing investment in major and minor maintenance activities to allow the City to keep staffing resources to the minimum. The tax payers, as the owners of city properties, benefit from proper infrastructure maintenance which reduces overall lifecycle cost by controlling the cost of major repairs that result from deferred maintenance. 2. Specialty Needs: A. Rehabilitate Motor Control Panel. The existing motor control panel on the Olympic pool at the S.L.O. Swim Center is original to construction in 1979. It has been through many equipment and system change outs over the past 35-years including: solar panels, air-compressors, ozone generators, oxygen concentrators, circulation booster pumps, soda ash and diatomaceous earth tanks with agitation and delivery systems, and the installation of a micro- turbine co-generation plant. These many years of reconfiguring of the plant systems have left the main motor control panel in need of significant clean-up of old components that have been abandoned in place that make trouble-shooting very difficult. Professional evaluation by an electrical engineer recommended removal and replacement of the equipment panel to maximize space use and modernize equipment. Staff believes the older components within the panel can be addressed while leaving the cabinet shell in place to minimize cost, with space use in the mechanical room not being a key issue at this time. However, the system is 480-volts, and any changes made should be done by a qualified electrician. B. Replace Thermal Blankets. Thermal pool blankets minimize water evaporation which reduces water, gas, and electricity use and costs by as much as 75%. If employed regularly, the blankets also assist in keeping the pool temperature consistent for swimmers. Thermal blankets are deployed and recovered each 3-298 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - GENERAL GOVERNMENT FACILITY MAINTENANCE day of operation at the S.L.O. Swim Center on both of the pools to achieve the goals listed.. These blankets have a life-span of approximately 4 to 5-years. With training in use and regular repair these units have been lasting as long as 5-6 years. The last set thermal blankets was replaced in 2010, this request is anticipating the need to replace the blankets 2016-17. C. Replace Co-Generation Plant. The co-generation plant at the S.L.O. Swim Center was installed in 2005 and brought on-line in 2006. The unit burns natural gas in a micro-turbine to generate up to 60-kW of electricity. The waste heat from the gas burn is then diverted to a heat exchanger to supply an additional 500,000 BTUs of heat to the pool water. Due to the complexity and cost of repairs to this equipment, it must be kept under a comprehensive service warranty with all maintenance and repairs performed by a factory qualified micro-turbine service company. On 3/5/2014, the existing service warranty expired, and a new warranty was established. The manufacturer (Capstone), as of this writing, has agreed to provide another service warranty extension on the existing equipment of 5-years at a 5-10% cost increase over the current service agreement cost. This cost is covered in the swim center operating program. The next 5-year service agreement will cover the equipment from 3/5/14 through 3/5/19, after which the equipment will have reached the end of its projected lifespan. The manufacturer has informed staff that further warranty coverage of the equipment may not be an option, and that the equipment may have to be replaced. This request plans for the eventual replacement of the co-gen unit by addressing a time-line for design and construction of replacement if the manufacturer is unable to further extend warranty service of the existing equipment. D. Re-plaster Therapy Pool. The warm water therapy pool at the S.L.O. Swim Center was built in 2006 and has never been re-plastered. While original plaster in a traditional pool can have a life expectancy of 20-years, several factors are influencing the life-span of the therapy pool plaster. The high heat level (90- deg) year-round, the level of chemicals needed to keep warm water, with a high level of bather load, sanitary, and the direct and extended contact with the plaster that in-water exercise creates have all contributed to a degrading of the plaster in an accelerated manner. While deterioration is slowed by diligent and highly exact chemical analyses and adjustment, the plaster is becoming heavily pockmarked with a roughened surface that can compromise structural integrity and create health and safety concerns in the forms of sharp edges and algae/mold growth. The re-plaster component will eliminate the potential for these hazards by rehabilitating the pool’s inner shell. E. Install P.D. IT-Room Cooling. Information Technology has grown significantly in its role within the Life & Safety realm. Two major changes are driving this specialty request. At the Police Admin building (1042 Walnut), a former closet has become the de facto “IT-room.” Windows were removed, the ceiling redone, additional electrical was run, and IT equipment racks installed. No cooling equipment was installed. This created a heat load problem and the IT equipment started to fail. An interim solution was to install two stand-alone cooling units. These units are a temporary fix, not a permanent solution. This request seeks funding to install a commercial grade cooling system in this room. F. Replace DataAire at Emergency Communication Center. In 2010 the Emergency Communications Center was completed. The center controls all aspects of Life & Safety dispatch for the City of S.L.O. The site houses an approximately 1000 square foot data center with cooling provided by a 28-ton capacity DataAire cooling unit. The unit has experienced several catastrophic failures and has cost $40,000 in repairs in just the past 4-years. The device is a complex and highly electronic controlled unit that requires a great deal of maintenance and repair. Through four years of assessment and repair by the designer, the manufacturer, the manufacturer’s rep, city staff, and independent contractor, the system was found to be faulty in both manufacture of the unit, and design of the room. A three component conceptual plan to correct the situation has been arrived at. 1.) Replacement of the single cooling unit to a series of three standard “off the shelf” direct expansion cooling units to create ease of maintenance and redundancy. 2.) Installation of an outside air intake 3-299 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - GENERAL GOVERNMENT FACILITY MAINTENANCE to use cool outside air to cool the room with nothing more than a supply fan running (instead of 24/7 compressor run-time) to maximize efficiency and minimize electrical use. 3.) An exhaust system to remove heat and fan generated positive pressure and to serve as another redundancy in cooling. The goals are to minimize failure rate, maximize efficiency, and create a system with redundancy of operation to ensure the continued functioning of the large amount of information technology equipment that must be kept at a cool temperature to ensure the Emergency Communications Center can continue operation. G. Replace Fire Station #1 Fire Alarm. This system is original to the building construction of 1997. The system is outdated and is not the City standard alarm panel. The type of panel installed is no longer available nor are parts. The system has experienced many failures that have resulted in sub panels being installed to interface and interact with the many system components such as pull stations, heat and smoke detectors that are installed throughout the facility and must be able to communicate with the main controller. This request is for design and construction to replace the main Centralized Warning Panel and all ancillary components. H. Fire Station #3 Sewer Lateral. Recent sewer back-ups at the site and the resulting root balls removed from the sewer lateral motivated staff to hire a contractor to camera the line. The pipe sections of the line are still intact. Unfortunately each seam down the length of the pipe showed signs of significant root intrusion. The request seeks funding to replace the sewer lateral, and, given the elevation of the building in relation to the sewer main on Augusta St, install an anti-back water valve to prevent main sewer line blockage from backing up into the building. I. Jack House and Ludwick Center Facility Assessment. These two key recreation and/or historically significant sites are in need of professional assessment for needed repairs and accessibility components with accompanying construction cost estimates, and proper maintenance resource allocation. In both cases, siding has begun to deteriorate and some structural issues are beginning to appear. The Jack House is a historical site and sees significant use as a tour and wedding/event site. Staff is requesting a building assessment to outline the growing maintenance needs for these two sites of significant age. The Jack House, built in 1880, is a unique piece of California's elegant and colorful past which will transport visitors back to the Victorian era. The Jack family holds history with some of the most prominent players in the drama of Central California development. Active in ranching, politics, travel, banking and land development, the Jacks were also friends and associates with the likes of railroad magnates Charles Crocker and C.P. Huntington, acclaimed statesman and pianist, Ignace Paderewski, and humorist Will Rogers. The Ludwick Center is a pre WWII building that has undergone many renovations over the decades. The Ludwick Center is a key public meeting facility the fills many needs in the community including the public council goal setting meetings. The location is ideal for special occasions, meetings or get-togethers. Staff recommends a comprehensive physical assessment of the structures to efficiently address siding, hazardous materials and structural concerns, rather than parsing out issues, a building assessment would be more efficient and in the best financial interest of the City. J. Corp Yard Fuel Island Siding Replacement. Protecting the fuel islands and the wash bay from the elements is a requirement of the City’s Hazardous Materials Business Plan and Stormwater Management Plan. The metal siding of the fuel island at the Corporation Yard has suffered from severe long-term corrosion. Several repairs have been made over the years, but due to constantly wet conditions, rust has progressed and begun to destroy the previously repaired areas. This structure has excessive exposure to moisture due to proximity to the wash rack and windy conditions inherent to the LOVR/Prado area. The current design allows moisture to collect, keeping the structural metal framing and siding wet, causing rust. All elements of the structure are metal which allows unchecked rust to place the paneling and framing at risk of corrosion. Although this corrosion is a relatively slow process, left 3-300 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - GENERAL GOVERNMENT FACILITY MAINTENANCE unattended this condition will eventually compromise the structural steel framing and supports. The building manufacturer is no longer in business and replacement components are not available. The design phase will determine how best to repair existing damage and mitigate the inherent wet conditions of the adjacent wash rack through a modified design. This project will repair the siding, and modify the corrosion situation to prolong the life of the structure. K. City Hall F&IT Entry Door. With recent revisions to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), it has been determined that the door entrances to City Hall are non-compliant. The minimum pressure required to continually push or pull the doors open for accessibility is exceeded by the existing doors. The existing hardware is incapable of being adjusted to meet current standards. In order to provide compliant accessibility, the existing doors will need power assistance. The rear doors to the main level of City Hall have been modified and had a power-assisted door-opening system installed. The lower level, which houses the Finance Department, has the lower level doors at Palm Street as the main entrance to the Department for the public. Many City residents pay their utility bills, purchase bus passes, pay for business licenses and parking tickets in-person at the Finance Department front counter from this entrance. It is imperative to accessibility regulation compliance that this entry be modified for the public to access City facilities. For security purposes the door-opening system would be identical to the system already installed at the rear doors of the main level. This will provide synchronization for locking and unlocking all doors into City Hall. 3. Exterior Painting: Of the sites overseen by Building Maintenance, only 4 have been repainted on the exterior in the last 10 years: the Police Department Annex, the Utilities Administration Building, the Parks and Recreation building and the Jack House. Best practices in the building maintenance industry recommend repainting building exteriors every 10 years. With over 30 different sites maintained by the Building Maintenance division, the entire inventory should have been repainted in the last 10 years. Regular painting seals buildings against damage to prolong building life and prevent more costly repairs created by water intrusion. Funding will be used yearly to repaint various sizes of buildings. Larger budget requests in a given year reflect painting of larger buildings such as City Hall, the Police Dept, or the Ludwick Center. Smaller budget requests in a given year reflect painting of smaller size facilities (4000 to 7000- square feet). All painting projects will be completed through a painting contractor. Each year City buildings will be evaluated for need and painting of the highest priority sites completed. 4. HVAC: In 2013 the Building Maintenance division completed 306 HVAC repair work orders totaling more than 700-hours of labor and $20,000 in parts. The City owns literally hundreds of pieces of HVAC equipment, much of it far beyond its expected service life. This request continues funding to replace these ageing pieces of smaller sized equipment in a proactive lifecycle costing process. The standard industry approach is to replace equipment in a planned, funded, and organized fashion as it nears the end of its anticipated lifespan to reduced maintenance costs and provide quality environments for building occupants. This funding allocation will replace aging equipment to minimize downtime and maintenance needs, while increasing staff time available to support other maintenance needs. 3-301 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - GENERAL GOVERNMENT FACILITY MAINTENANCE 6. Rollup Doors: Some of the current roll-up doors are approaching 30-years of service and are becoming severely worn and are requiring multiple repairs using extraordinary measures to keep them working. Maintenance efforts and dollars spent on these doors have increased (2011= 20 work orders, with 50 staff hours, $2,600 on parts, and $886 in contracted repairs. 2012 = 25 work orders, with 76 staff hours, $3,424 on parts, and $4,391 in contracted repairs. 2013 = 19 work orders, with 53 staff hours, and $2,030 in contracted repairs) with the corresponding staff time and financial impacts. The repair cost trending is clear. As these doors approach the end of their usable lifecycle, the resources needed to keep them working will increase until catastrophic failure occurs which will result in an unplanned and unbudgeted replacement project. This funding continues a regular equipment replacement program to enable a proactive equipment change-out type of approach to facility needs. 7. Roof Replacements: Along with exterior painting, an intact roof system is the frontline defense in stopping moisture related damage to the building and maintaining healthy in-door air quality. The roofs on several City buildings are past their expected service life and are in need of replacement. Replacing failing roof systems is a best practice to avoid more costly interior repairs related to moisture damage and health concerns. In some cases, pending interior repairs of components such as ceilings, wall paint, and carpet replacement cannot be executed until the roof leaks are eliminated. This funding continues a regular equipment replacement program to enable a proactive equipment change out type of approach to facility needs. 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 – Varies by project Building Permit n/a – Varies by project 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: 50230 - Building Maintenance 3-302 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - GENERAL GOVERNMENT FACILITY MAINTENANCE Project Phasing and Funding Sources Continuing, ongoing or master account project - Specification No. 91250 New Fund (413) has been developed for this ongoing annual building/structure maintenance program. Initial Project Costs by Phase Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total Design ongoing $6,000$100,050$14,000$120,050 Construction ongoing $57,000$146,000$146,000$274,700$777,100$1,400,800 Total $0$57,000$146,000$152,000$374,750$791,100$1,520,850 Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20Total 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: Regular investment in infrastructure maintenance will reduce efforts and direct costs for reactive maintenance. Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total General Fund ongoing $57,000$146,000$152,000$374,750$791,100$1,520,850 $0 Total $0$57,000$146,000$152,000$374,750$791,100$1,520,850 Project Funding by Source 3-303 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - GENERAL GOVERNMENT FACILITY MAINTENANCE Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project: Deferred repairs will increase in cost, and work order response time will remain unusually long. Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: Project is submitted as phased. Project Team Many of these projects are of minor size and will be managed by the Facilities Maintenance Team. Those projects detailed as having “Spec’s” or a “Design “ phase, Engineering will be asked to partner with Facilities to create project documents and act as Project Manager and/or Inspector. Site List – For Multi-Year Projects Currently Anticipated Location Work Type Estimated Cost Implementation Years Priority Design Construction Design Construction Police Admin Install IT-Room Cooling Specialized $11,000 $55,000 2018-19 2019-20 1 Olympic Pool Thermal Blankets Specialized Spec’s $32,000 N/A 2016-17 2 City Hall F&IT Entry Door Specialized N/A $22,000 N/A 2016-17 3 Corp Yard Fuel Island Siding Specialized $11,250 $75,000 2018-19 2019-20 4 Ludwick and Senior Center Exterior Paint Spec’s $68,500 N/A 2017-18 5 Fire Station 2 Exterior Paint N/A $17,500 N/A 2017-18 6 Fire Station 1 Masonry Seal Exterior Paint Spec’s $30,000 N/A 2017-18 7 Fire Station 3 Exterior Paint N/A $17,500 N/A 2018-19 8 Police Department Exterior Paint Spec’s $51,000 N/A 2018-19 9 Fire Station 4 Exterior Paint N/A 18,500 N/A 2019-20 10 Corp Yard Bldgs A and B Exterior Spec’s $25,500 N/A 2015-16 11 3-304 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - GENERAL GOVERNMENT FACILITY MAINTENANCE Currently Anticipated Location Work Type Estimated Cost Implementation Years Priority Paint City Hall Exterior Paint Spec’s $55,000 N/A 2016-17 12 Emergency Dispatch Center Replace DataAire Specialized $9,000 $110,000 2018-19 2019-20 13 Swim Center Re-plaster Therapy Pool Specialized $16,000 $50,000 2018-19 2019-20 14 Jack House and Ludwick Center Facility Assessment Specialized Spec’s $65,000 N/A 2018-19 15 Fire Station #3 Replace Sewer Lateral Specialized N/A $18,000 N/A 2018-19 16 Swim Center Co-Generation Plant Specialized N/A $85,000 N/A 2018-19 17 Corp Yard HVAC N/A $10,000 N/A 2015-16 18 Fire Stations HVAC N/A $15,000 N/A 2016-17 19 City/County Library HVAC $6,000 $38,200 2017-18 2018-19 20 Parks & Recreation HVAC N/A $15,000 N/A 2017-18 21 Utilities Administration HVAC N/A $15,000 N/A 2017-18 22 Rosa Butrone Adobe Exterior Paint $12,500 $30,000 2017-18 2018-19 23 Corp Yard A Rollup Door N/A $9,500 N/A 2015-16 24 Fire Stations Rollup Door N/A $9,500 N/A 2016-17 25 Fire Station #1 Admin Bldg Roof $11,500 $90,000 2018-19 2019-20 26 Swim Center Bath House Ceiling Specialized Spec’s $25,000 N/A 2020-21 27 Jack House Roof $6,500 $82,000 2018-19 2019-20 28 Swim Center Bath House Roof $7,500 $62,000 2018-19 2019-20 29 Fire Station #1 Fleet Maint Bldg Roof $4,000 $25,000 2018-19 2019-20 30 Police Boiler HVAC N/A $27,000 N/A 2019-20 31 Police Evidence Storage Bldg Roof $4,000 $25,000 2018-19 2019-20 32 Fire Station #1 Replace Fire alarm Specialized $14,000 $95,000 2019-20 2020-21 33 3-305 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - GENERAL GOVERNMENT FACILITY MAINTENANCE Currently Anticipated Location Work Type Estimated Cost Implementation Years Priority Ludwick Center Roof $7,900 $78,900 2018-19 2019-20 34 Police Records Ducting HVAC $7,500 $40,500 2018-19 2019-20 35 Swim Center Motor Control panel Specialized N/A $12,000 N/A 2015-16 36 Police Firearms Range Roof $3,900 $38,200 2018-19 2019-20 37 3-306 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – GENERAL FUND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENTS Project Description Adhering to an appropriate replacement schedule for the city’s information technology assets will require the following annual investments shown below: 1) $826,000 in 2015-16 2) $377,000 in 2016-17 3) $1,298,000 in 2017-18 4) $1,361,000 in 2018-19 5) $2,873,500 in 2019-20 Maintenance/Replacement New project IT Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure G Priority - List: Need and Urgency Staff is requesting replacement the replacement of various pieces of hardware and software that serve all of the city’s departments. The decision to replace these items is based on: 1) Projected reliable service life of the asset or software and the actual age of the item compared to its projected service life. 2) The current performance trends indicating the item’s reliability and cost of repairs 3) The availability of warranty service and replacement parts in the event of a failure. 4) Manufacturer’s scheduled end of life/end of support for the item. 5) The expectation that the network will be capable of meeting the uptime standard of 99.9% by continuing to utilize the item. Operating Program Number, Title and Project Phasing: Staff’s process for evaluating items for replacement during this 5 year period included determining which items projects could be phased for implementation, which were the most critically in need of replacement and which were the most critical to the organization. The availability of grant funds was also considered in reaching conclusions about the scheduled replacements. As each replacement is programmed into the financial system, it will be provided with as unique identifier establishing the appropriation and will be assigned to the appropriate department in order to assure that future reports reflect the costs in accordance with the function that they serve. 3-307 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – GENERAL FUND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENTS Description Projected Replacement Cost 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 PUBLIC SAFETY Thinkstream CAD (Connection to County 911 & Sheriff's Office) 25,000 25,000 911 Phone System 500,000 500,000 Police CAD Hardware - Servers & Storage 250,000 250,000 250,000 PD SAN Controllers (Storage Area Network) 80,000 80,000 Police CAD/RMS Study 1,000,000 50,000 ECC Blade Computers 150,000 150,000 ECC Equipment Replacement & UPSs 70,000 70,000 Public Safety MDC's (Total Project Cost $693,000) 97,731 693,000 ECC Audio Visual System 275,000 275,000 TRANSPORTATION Fleet Maintenance (Cartegraph) 32,000 32,000 Signal & Light Management (Cartegraph) 50,000 50,000 Signs Management (Cartegraph) 65,000 65,000 LEISURE, CULTURAL AND SOCIAL SERVICES Irrigation (Rainmaster/Rainbird) 35,000 CITY-WIDE APPLICATIONS General Fund Share Microsoft Office (Total Project $225,000) 188,182 225,000 UPS Battery Backup System (Total Project ($51,000) 42,706 51,000 51,000 Enterprise Storage Growth 50,000 50,000 E-mail System 35,000 35,000 VM Infrastructure (Total Project $242,000) 202,644 242,000 242,000 Server Operating System Software (Total Project $50,000) 41,868 50,000 Document Scanners 18,000 18,000 VoIP (Total Project $300,000) 256,371 300,000 Radio Handhelds & Mobile Radios (Total Project $650,000) 508,045 650,000 Storage Capacity Upgrade & Replacement 250,000 250,000 SAN Controllers - City 80,000 80,000 3-308 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – GENERAL FUND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENTS Description Projected Replacement Cost 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 Tait Radio System Upgrade Backend (Total Project $650,000) 508,045 650,000 AutoCAD-Eng Software 25,000 25,000 Firewall Replacement (Total Project $186,500) 154,863 186,500 Network Security Upgrade 125,000 125,000 Virtual Private Network Replace- (VPN (Total cost $130,000) 102,014 130,000 Network Switching Infrastructure Equipment (Total Project $550,000) 496,221 550,000 Laserfiche 65,000 65,000 Access Control (Automatic Gate Card System) 125,000 125,000 Finance System Replacement (Total Project $750,000) Upgraded 2013 375,000 750,000 Annual Totals: 826,000 377,000 1,298,000 1,361,000 3,563,500 SEWER UTILITY FUND MP2 Maintenance Software System 30,000 30,000 iFix SCADA System -Controls wastewater alarms 250,000 250,000 Hach Wims (prev. OPS32) 30,000 30,000 Annual Totals: 310,000 TOTAL ALL FUNDS 826,000 377,000 1,298,000 1,361,000 3,873,500 The items shown in 2019-20 are recommended to be lease-purchased. Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project: NA Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: Staff has incorporated the spreading of replacement dates for these items in an attempt to smooth replacement costs and alleviate financial burden on the IT Replacement Fund. Leasing Alternative: Staff evaluated the use of lease purchase financing throughout the 5 year period shown. It was found that the cost of carrying the debt became too great as the cost of leased assets grew over time so this alternative was removed from consideration except for the last year in the five year period. Here, the number and value of replacement items is twice that of any prior period and some form of financing must be considered if all assets listed are to be 3-309 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – GENERAL FUND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENTS replaced. While the current information reflects that leasing these assets may be necessary, staff will continue to evaluate the situation to determine whether one or more of these items’ scheduled replacement period can be deferred to a later time. Project Team These purchases will be will be managed by the IT Manager with assistance from the IT Supervisor and the affected department supervisors to ensure coordinated and timely purchases and implementations. 3-310 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – GENERAL FUND FLEET REPLACEMENTS Project Description Replacing 92 vehicles/equipment will cost: 1) $1,203,700 in 2015-16 2) $2,363,300 in 2016-17 3) $1,573,400 in 2017-18 4) $471,100 in 2018-19 5) $1,108,700 in 2019-20 Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure G Priority - List: Need and Urgency Staff is requesting replacement of vehicles and equipment for the following General Fund Departments: 1) Fire 2) Police 3) Public Works 4) Parks & Recreation 5) Community Development 6) Administration The decision to replace these vehicles is based on the following factors: 1) Projected miles of vehicles at time of replacement will meet or exceed replacement miles recommended in the Fleet policy. 2) Actual years of operation compared to expected years in the Fleet policy. 3) Review of mechanical condition and history by Fleet Supervisor and operating Department staff. 4) Evaluation of maintenance costs by Fleet Supervisor. 5) Spreading vehicle replacement costs over multiple years for program users. Operating Program Number, Title and Project Phasing: 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 3-311 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – GENERAL FUND FLEET REPLACEMENTS 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 Asset # Year Make Model Description Proposed Replacement Year Age @ Replacement Current Year/ Mileage Replacement Policy Year/Mileage Projected Replacement Cost 2015-16 Police Patrol 1105 2011 Chevrolet Tahoe SUV 2015-16 5 4/106,000 80,000 53,000 Public Works Swim Center 0332 2002 Dodge D250 3/4 Ton Truck w/Utility Box 2015-16 14 12/90,000 12/100,000 37,100 Comm. Dev. Building 0229 2002 Ford Taurus Sedan 2015-16 14 12/109,000 11/90,000 38,000 Public Works Flood Control 0815 2008 Ford F150 1/2 Ton Pickup Truck 2015-16 8 6/106,000 11/90,000 28,500 Public Works CIP Engineering 9906 1998 Ford F150 1/2 Ton Pickup Truck 2015-16 18 16/92,000 11/90,000 31,500 Public Works Building Maint. 0314 2002 Dodge D250 3/4 Ton Truck w/Utility Box 2015-16 14 12/84,000 12/100,000 39,000 Public Works Fleet 8426 1984 Caterpillar V50C 5K Fork Lift 2015-16 32 30/4,400 12/5000 34,400 Public Works Fleet 0231 2002 Ford Taurus Sedan (Pool Car - Yellow) 2015-16 14 12/88,000 11/90,000 33,400 Police Traffic Safety 0710 2005 Honda ST1300 Motorcycle 2015-16 11 9/31,000 35,000 31,700 Police Support Services 0220 2002 Chevrolet Silverado 1/2 Ton Pickup Truck 2015-16 14 12/75,000 80,000 31,400 Comm. Dev. Building 0230 2002 Ford Taurus Sedan 2015-16 14 12/88,000 11/90,000 38,000 Police Investigations 0807 2007 Chevrolet Impala Sedan (Purchased Used) 2015-16 9 7/75,000 8/90,000 33,300 Public Works Parks. Maint 9104 1991 GMC Top Kick 5 Yard Dump Truck 2015-16 25 23/18,500 12/60,000 105,000 Police Investigations 0605 2005 Chevrolet Impala Sedan 2015-16 11 8/80,000 8/90,000 33,300 Police Patrol 0714 2007 Ford Crown Victoria Sedan 2015-16 9 7/88,000 80,000 44,200 3-312 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – GENERAL FUND FLEET REPLACEMENTS Police Patrol 0839 2008 Dodge Charger Sedan (Unmarked) 2015-16 8 6/75,000 8/90,000 39,300 Public Works Parks. Maint 0601 2005 Toro 3500D Groundsmaster Mower 2015-16 11 9/4300 7/5000 65,000 Parks & Rec. Ranger 0822 2008 Ford F150 1/2 Ton 4x4 Pickup Truck 2015-16 8 6/91,000 11/90,000 51,500 Fire Emergency Response 0317 1998 Ford E350 E-350 Van with Ambulance Package (Squad) 2015-16 18 151,000 80,000 180,000 Fire Fire Prevention 0237 2000 Ford Explorer SUV 2015-16 16 14/83,000 11/90000 45,500 Fire Fire Prevention 0238 2000 Ford Explorer SUV 2015-16 16 14/86,000 11/90000 45,500 Fire Emergency Response 0423 n/a Fork Lift (Used at FS1) 2015-16 5,000 Hrs 50,000 Police Traffic Safety 0708 2005 Honda ST1300 Motorcycle 2015-16 11 22,609 35,000 31,700 Police Police Administration 0618 2006 Ford Crown Victoria Sedan (Unmarked) 2015-16 10 8/43,000 8/90,000 38,500 Finace & I.T. Network Service 9903 1998 Ford E150 Econoline Van 2015-16 18 16/56,000 11/90,000 29,900 Public Works Transportation 0125 2001 Terex ODLSE25 Radar Trailer 2015-16 15 13 Years 7 Years 15,000 TOTAL $1,203,700 3-313 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – GENERAL FUND FLEET REPLACEMENTS Department Program Asset # Year Make Model Description Proposed Replacement Year Age @ Replacement Current Year/ Mileage Replacement Policy Year/Mileage Projected Replacement Cost 2016-17 Public Works Streets Maint. 0213 2001 Caterpillar 420 Backhoe 2016-17 15 13/3700 12/5000 128,000 Public Works Fleet 0228 2002 Ford Taurus Sedan (Pool Car - purple) 2016-17 15 12/88,000 11/90,000 34,100 Public Works Fleet 0227 2002 Ford Taurus Sedan (Pool Car - Brown) 2016-17 15 12/86,000 11/90,000 34,100 Police Patrol 1203 2011 Chevrolet Caprice Sedan 2016-17 6 4/51,000 80,000 45,200 Public Works Streets Maint. 0817 2008 International Durastar HD Truck w Tymco 600 Sweeper Unit 2016-17 9 6/38,000 8/60,000 266,600 Public Works Streets Maint. 0723 2007 Ford F250 3/4 Ton Pickup Truck 2016-17 10 7/80,000 11/90,000 34,500 Public Works Streets Maint. 0821 2008 Ford F250 3/4 Ton Pickup Truck 2016-17 9 6/75,000 11/90,000 34,500 Fire Emergency Response 0029 2000 Pierce Lance Pumper (Eng 2 # F110) 2016-17 17 14/88,000 16 Years/4 Reserve 900,000 Fire Emergency Response 0021 2000 Chevrolet Tahoe SUV-Deputy Chief Vehicle 2016-17 17 14/76,000 11/90,000 99,400 Police Patrol 0713 2007 Ford Crown Victoria Sedan 2016-17 10 7/78,000 8/90,000 45,200 Parks & Rec. Golf 1008 2009 Toro 3100D Riding Reel- Mower 2016-17 8 5/2,000 7/5,000 35,300 Public Works Signals&Lights 0122 2001 Ford F450 Medium Duty Truck w/ Altec Lift 2016-17 16 13/30,000 12/60,000 91,000 Police Patrol 0838 2008 Dodge Charger Sedan (Unmarked) 2016-17 9 6/56000 8/90,000 39,300 Police Traffic Safety 0706 2005 Honda ST1300 Motorcycle 2016-17 12 26000 35,000 34,200 Parks & Rec. Golf 0316 2003 Ford Ranger Compact Pickup Truck 2016-17 14 12/33,000 11/90,000 28,500 3-314 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – GENERAL FUND FLEET REPLACEMENTS Public Works Urban Forest 0212 2001 Bandit 250XP Brush Chipper 2016-17 16 13 Years 15 Years 42,000 Public Works Urban Forest 0421 2003 International 4300 Heavy Duty Truck w/Altec Boom Lift 2016-17 14 11/29,000 12/60,000 185,000 Public Works Urban Forest 0510 2004 Ford F550 Medium Duty Truck w/ Chipper Box 2016-17 13 10/30,000 12/60,000 70,200 Comm. Dev. Building 0127 2001 Toyota RAV 4 SUV 2016-17 16 13/70,000 11/90,000 27,000 Comm. Dev. Building 0128 2001 Toyota RAV 4 SUV 2016-17 16 13/70,000 11/90,000 27,000 Public Works Streets Maint. 0615 2005 Zip BT0006 Asphalt grinder & Trailer Mount 2016-17 12 9/1,213 89,100 Public Works Parks. Maint 0239 n/a Meter Matic Topdress 2016-17 9,500 Finace & I.T. 2530 0403 2003 Ford Explorer 4x4 SUV 2016-17 14 11/44,000 11/90,000 31,800 Finace & I.T. 2530 0404 2003 Ford Explorer SUV 2016-17 14 11/31,000 11/90,000 31,800 TOTAL $2,363,300 3-315 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – GENERAL FUND FLEET REPLACEMENTS Department Program Asset # Year Make Model Description Proposed Replacement Year Age @ Replacement Current Year/ Mileage Replacement Policy Year/Mileage Projected Replacement Cost 2017-18 Public Works Streets Maint. 0909 2009 International Durastar HD Truck w Tymco 600 Sweeper Unit 2017-18 8 5/41,000 8/60,000 266,600 Police Patrol 1305 2013 Ford Intercept or Sedan 2017-18 4 2/45,000 80,000 45,200 Police Patrol 1306 2013 Ford Intercept or Sedan 2017-18 4 2/39,000 80,000 45,200 Police Patrol 1307 2012 Ford Intercept or Utility 2017-18 5 2/43,000 80,000 45,200 Public Works Streets Maint. 0614 Case 480F LL Skip Loader 2017-18 ???/4850 12/5000 128,000 Public Works Streets Maint. 9713 1994 Freightliner n/a HD Dump Truck w/Slide In 2017-18 24 20/549,00 0 12/60,000 325,000 Public Works Building Maint. 0612 2005 Dodge D250 3/4 Ton Truck w/Utility Box 2017-18 13 9/37,000 12/100,000 41,100 Parks & Rec. Golf 0624 2006 Cushman Turf Truckster Utility Cart 2017-18 12 8 Years 15,000 Parks & Rec. Golf 0862 2008 Toro Gm 1000 Greens Mower ( 22" Walk Behind) 2017-18 10 6 Years 7/5,000 9,300 Parks & Rec. Golf 0863 2008 Toro Gm 1000 Greens Mower ( 22" Walk Behind) 2017-18 10 6 Years 7/5,000 9,300 Parks & Rec. Golf 0844 2008 Cushman Turf Truckster Utility Cart 2017-18 10 6 Years/1,0 00 15,000 Public Works Parks. Maint 1007 2010 Toro 4000D Riding Mower 2017-18 8 4/2,100 7/5,000 41,200 3-316 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – GENERAL FUND FLEET REPLACEMENTS Police Traffic Safety 0705 2005 Honda ST1300 Motorcycle 2017-18 13 12,000 35,000 34,800 Fire Training Services 0301 2002 Ford F150 Pickup Truck (Open Space Rescue) 2017-18 16 12/55,000 12/100,000 65,600 Public Works Streets Maint. 0223 2002 Dodge Dakota Compact Pickup Truck 2017-18 16 12/36,000 11/90,000 28,500 Public Works Streets Maint. 0329 2002 Caterpillar 924 Wheeled Loader 2017-18 16 12/2,400 12/5,000 161,700 Public Works Parks. Maint 0333 2002 NC n/a Portable Restroom (Trailer) 2017-18 16 12 Years 15 Years 33,200 Public Works Parks. Maint 0334 2002 NC n/a Portable Restroom (Trailer) 2017-18 16 12 Years 15 Years 33,200 Public Works Parks. Maint 0131 2001 John Deere JD4500 Tractor/Mower/A ttachments 2017-18 17 13/2,400 12/5,000 65,000 Public Works Streets Maint. 0413 2003 Caterpillar 420 Backhoe 2017-18 15 12/2,400 12/5,000 126,900 Police Patrol 0222 2002 Dodge B2500 Van (Jail Transport Van) 2017-18 16 12/14,000 11/90,000 38,400 TOTAL $1,573,400 3-317 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – GENERAL FUND FLEET REPLACEMENTS Department Program Asset # Year Make Model Description Proposed Replacement Year Age @ Replacement Current Year/ Mileage Replacement Policy Year/Mileage Projected Replacement Cost 2018-19 Police Patrol 1308 2013 Ford Interceptor Utility 2018-19 5 2/40,000 80,000 47,200 Police Patrol 1309 2014 Ford Interceptor Utility 2018-19 4 1/17,000 80,000 47,200 Public Works Streets Maint. 0234 2002 Ford F550 Medium Duty Truck w/Hook-Lift Bed 2018-19 17 12/31,000 12/60,000 69,500 Parks & Rec. Rec. Admin. 0802 2007 Dodge Caravan Minivan 2018-19 12 7/57,000 11/90,000 33,500 Public Works Parks. Maint 0608 2005 Club Car Carry-All Utility Cart (Golf Truck W/ Dump Bed) 2018-19 14 9/2,237 17,600 Parks & Rec. Golf 1201 2011 John Deere 8800 All-Terrain Cut Mower 2018-19 8 3/1,300 7/5,000 75,000 Parks & Rec. Golf 9001 2009 Toro Gm 1000 Greens Mower ( 22" Walk Behind) 2018-19 10 5 Years 7/5,000 9,800 Police Investigations 1016 2009 Chevrolet Impala Sedan (Detective Vehicle) 2018-19 10 5/33,000 8/90,000 31,200 Police Investigations 0118 2001 Ford E250 3/4 Ton Van (Evidence/CSI) 2018-19 18 13/12,000 11/90,000 105,000 Public Works CIP Engineering 0722 2007 Chevrolet Colorado Compact Pickup Truck 2018-19 12 7/27,000 11/90,000 35,100 TOTAL $471,100 3-318 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – GENERAL FUND FLEET REPLACEMENTS Department Program Asset # Year Make Model Description Proposed Replacement Year Age @ Replacement Current Year/ Mileage Replacement Policy Year/Mileage Projected Replacement Cost 2019-20 Fire Emergency Response 0331 2003 Pierce Lance Pumper (eng 3 #F112) 2019-20 17 11/78000 16 Years/4 Reserve 623,500 Police Patrol 1506 2015 Ford Interceptor Utility 2019-20 5 0/500 80,000 49,200 Police Patrol 1507 2015 Ford Interceptor Utility 2019-20 5 0/500 80,000 49,200 Public Works Streets Maint. 0842 2008 Ford F550 Medium Duty Truck w/Utility Box & Crane 2019-20 12 6/33,000 12/60,000 71,500 Public Works Streets Maint. 0843 2008 Ford F550 Medium Duty Truck w/Hook-Lift Bed 2019-20 12 6/26,000 12/60,000 71,500 Public Works Building Maint. 0829 2008 Ford F250 3/4 Ton Truck w/Utility Box 2019-20 12 6/45,000 12/100,000 45,600 Public Works Building Maint. 0831 2008 Ford F250 3/4 Ton Truck w/Utility Box 2019-20 12 6/35,000 12/100,000 45,600 Police Investigations 0818 2008 Ford Escape SUV, Hybrid 2019-20 12 6/24,000 11/90,000 49,900 Police Patrol 0823 2008 Chevrolet Suburban SUV (Swat) 2019-20 12 6/11,000 11/90,000 54,700 Public Works Parks. Maint 0505 2005 John Deere 1200A Field Prep Machine 2019-20 15 9/1,400 15,500 Public Works Streets Maint. 0853 2008 Ford Ranger Compact Pickup Truck 2019-20 12 6/15,000 11/90,000 32,500 TOTAL $1,108,700 The vehicles highlighted in grey are recommended to be purchased using the City’s debt financing process. 3-319 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – GENERAL FUND FLEET REPLACEMENTS Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project: NA Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: Staff has incorporated the spreading of replacement dates for these vehicles in attempts to smooth replacement costs and alleviate financial burden on the Fleet Replacement Funds. Leasing Alternative: Although leasing may be beneficial in some instances, such as specialty construction equipment or lower mileage vehicles, it is not always viable for all vehicles and equipment. If the life of a vehicle can be extended due to favorable condition assessments, a lease may not allow for vehicle replacement “deferment”. A comprehensive cost analysis for fleet leasing would need to be conducted in order to fully evaluate the cost benefits of this alternative. Project Team These purchases will be will be managed by the Fleet Program with minimum assistance by the Program Manager to ensure coordinated and timely purchases. 3-320 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – PARKING FUND FLEET REPLACEMENTS Project Description Replacing 3 vehicles will cost: 1) None in 2015-16 2) $27,100 in 2016-17 3) None in 2017-18 4) $29,500 in 2018-19 5) $31,500 in 2019-20 Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure G Priority - List: Need and Urgency Staff is requesting replacement of vehicles and equipment for the following Parking Services Fund Department: 1) Public Works The decision to replace these vehicles is based on the following factors: 1) Projected miles of vehicles at time of replacement will meet or exceed replacement miles recommended in the Fleet policy. 2) Actual years of operation compared to expected years in the Fleet policy. 3) Review of mechanical condition and history by Fleet Supervisor and operating Department staff. 4) Evaluation of maintenance costs by Fleet Supervisor. 5) Spreading vehicle replacement costs over multiple years for program users. Operating Program Number, Title and Project Phasing: 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. 3-321 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – PARKING FUND FLEET REPLACEMENTS Department Program Asset # Year Make Model Description Proposed Replacement Year Current Year/ Mileage Replacement Policy Year/Mileage Projected Replacement Cost 2016-17 PUBLIC WORKS Parking 0409 2003 Toyota RAV4 SUV 2016-17 11/60,000 11/90,000 27,100 TOTAL $27,100 2018-19 PUBLIC WORKS Parking 0854 2008 Ford Ranger Pickup Truck 2018-19 6/20,000 11/90,000 29,500 TOTAL $29,500 2019-20 PUBLIC WORKS Parking 0813 2008 Ford F150 Pickup Truck 2019-20 6/49,000 11/90,000 31,500 TOTAL $31,500 Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project: NA Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: Staff has incorporated the spreading of replacement dates for these vehicles in attempts to smooth replacement costs and alleviate financial burden on the Fleet Replacement Funds. Leasing Alternative: Although leasing may be beneficial in some instances, such as specialty construction equipment or lower mileage vehicles, it is not always viable for all vehicles and equipment. If the life of a vehicle can be extended due to favorable condition assessments, a lease may not allow for vehicle replacement “deferment”. A comprehensive cost analysis for fleet leasing would need to be conducted in order to fully evaluate the cost benefits of this alternative. Project Team These purchases will be will be managed by the Fleet Program with minimum assistance by the Program Manager to ensure coordinated and timely purchases. 3-322 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION FLEET REPLACEMENT – SLO TRANSIT VEHICLES Project Description Replacing transit vehicles for the SLO Transit System will cost: 1) Two (2) 30-40 foot Bus (Asset# 0861, 0824) will cost $1,124,264 in 2018-19 2) Two (2) 40 foot Bus (Asset# 0912, 0913) will cost $1,158,000 in 2019-20 3) One (1) Trolley (Asset# 0911) will cost $240,000 in 2019-20 Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure Y Priority - List: Need and Urgency Transit vehicles have very specific useful life criteria established by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). Over the road coaches have an established useful life of twelve (12) years. Due to California Air Resources Board (CARB) emissions reduction requirement in the mid 2000’s, SLO Transit had to replace the majority of our transit fleet in years 2007 and 2008 to comply with clean diesel emission standards. As such, the 12 year useful life criteria will cause SLO transit to strategically begin to replace or rehabilitate eight (8) buses and one trolley starting in 2018-19. This CIP request proposes to begin that replacement cycle with two buses per year starting in 2018-19 and the trolley in FY 2019-20. Rehabilitation funding may be necessary for the remaining vehicles to extend their useful life until adequate funding is available. Because these replacements are occurring in the “out” years of the financial plan, available grant funding is difficult to predict due to issues such as Federal appropriations limits, availability of Grant sources such as FTA 5307 funding, Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ), and state TDA funds. The number of vehicles that would be replaced or rehabilitated per year is highly dependent upon these funding levels and this CIP will need adjustments as future funding levels are known. In accordance with the City’s Fleet Policy, buses have a target replacement schedule of 12 years. Staff has reviewed maintenance records, mileage logs and a condition assessment and recommends these vehicle replacement dates. The decision to replace these vehicles is based on the following factors: 1. FTA guidelines for recommended year of bus replacement 2. Review of mechanical condition and history by Fleet Supervisor and Department staff. 3. Evaluation of maintenance costs by Fleet Supervisor and Transit Manager. 4. Spreading vehicle replacement costs over multiple years for program users. 5. Projected FTA capital grant revenues 3-323 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION FLEET REPLACEMENT – SLO TRANSIT VEHICLES The City is currently underway with the Short Range Transit Plan update which will help forecast out major capital replacement needs and funding scenarios. Operating Program Number and Title: 50700 – Transit Enterprise Fund Project Phasing and Funding Sources Replacement Fiscal Year 2018-19 2018-19 2019-20 2019-20 2019-20 City Fleet Number 0861 0824 0911 0912 0913 Vehicle Type 30' Diesal Bus 30' Diesal Bus Trolley 40' Diesal Bus 40' Diesal Bus Make Gillig Gillig Double K Gillig Gillig Model Low Floor Low Floor Low Floor Low Floor Model Year 2007 2007 2008 2008 2008 Date Entered City Service 2007 2007 2008 2008 2008 Odometer Reading at 06-2014 183,187 194,640 46,493 225,160 194,234 Replacement Guidelines Target: Years or Mileage 12/500,000 12/500,000 12/500,000 12/500,000 Proposed: Years or Mileage 12/265,750 12/304,015 12/74,825 12/473,068 12/432,300 Replacement Cost Base Unit Accessories & Other Costs Delivery Sales Tax Total Replacement Costs 562,132 562,132 240,000 579,000 579,000 Year Totals:1,124,264 1,398,000 Note: Final vehicles that will be replace in future year will be determined based upon future replacement and rehabilitation cost analysis of each vehicle needing to be replaced. 3-324 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION FLEET REPLACEMENT – SLO TRANSIT VEHICLES Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information: No on-going costs as vehicle maintenance and training (except major engine repairs) is contractor responsibility under current contract. Deny, or defer the request. Deferring replacement of these buses could lead to higher costs for maintenance and operation and impact the purchased transportation contract with the contractor. Additional funds will be needed for increased repairs should replacements be deferred. Anticipated Vehicle Life Span: 12 years Budget to Date 2015-162016-172017-182018-192019-20 Total FTA/CMAQ/Prop 1 B Grants $0 $0 $0$899,411$1,118,400$2,017,811 TDA $224,853$279,600$504,453 Other $0 Total $0 $0 $0 $0$1,124,264$1,398,000$2,522,264 Project Funding by Source *Final funding sources will be determined based upon available grant funding from Federal, state and local sources. Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Possible major bus rehab project to replace engine, transmission and other components estimated @ $225,000 per vehicle. Downside is that alternate fuel or clean diesel technology engines not available due to older design restrictions in engine compartment. Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: Bus replacements already spreading over five year Financial Plan to help absorb the impact of vehicle replacements. The buses meet or exceed target age for replacement as recommended by the FTA. Deferring replacements could lead to increased repairs above routine preventative maintenance. The buses could be retrofit to extend their useful life. Purchase of replacement buses has been cost effective for the City rather than major vehicular rehabilitations. Final determination of purchase versus rehabilitation will be made dependent upon amount of grant funding received by the City. Leasing Alternative: Leasing can be beneficial in some instances for specialty construction equipment or low usage vehicles, although it is not always viable for all vehicles. A comprehensive cost analysis for fleet leasing for transit buses would need to be conducted in order to fully evaluate the cost benefits of this alternative. 3-325 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN - TRANSPORTATION FLEET REPLACEMENT – SLO TRANSIT VEHICLES Project Team Assignment Program Estimated Hours Vehicle Specifications Fleet Maintenance Supervisor & Transit Manager 80 Vehicle Procurement Transit Manager 40 Iinstallation of Equipment & Ready for Service Transit contractor 2 3-326 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – WATER FUND FLEET REPLACEMENTS Project Description Replacing 10 vehicles/equipment will cost: 1) $205,600 in 2015-16 2) $25,200 in 2016-17 3) None in 2017-18 4) $62,200 in 2018-19 5) $193,000 in 2019-20 Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure G Priority - List: Need and Urgency Staff is requesting replacement of vehicles and equipment for the following Water Fund Department: 1) Utilities The decision to replace these vehicles is based on the following factors: 1) Projected miles of vehicles at time of replacement will meet or exceed replacement miles recommended in the Fleet policy. 2) Actual years of operation compared to expected years in the Fleet policy. 3) Review of mechanical condition and history by Fleet Supervisor and operating Department staff. 4) Evaluation of maintenance costs by Fleet Supervisor. 5) Spreading vehicle replacement costs over multiple years for program users. Operating Program Number, Title and Project Phasing: 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. 3-327 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – WATER FUND FLEET REPLACEMENTS Department Program Asset # Year Make Model Description Proposed Replacement Year Current Year/Mileage Replacement Policy Year/Mileage Projected Replacement Cost 2015-16 UTILITIES Water Dist. 1010 2010 Ford F150 1/2 Ton Pickup Truck 2015-16 4/90,000 11/90,000 34,500 UTILITIES Water Treatment Plant 9702 1996 GMC Service Body Truck 2015-16 18/37,000 12/60,000 59,100 UTILITIES Water Dist. 0111 2000 BT Portable Vacuum Pump 2015-16 14/1,500 15 Years 112,000 TOTAL $205,600 2016-17 UTILITIES Utilities Services 0402 2003 Chevrolet S10 Compact Pickup Truck 2016-17 11/45,000 11/90,000 25,200 TOTAL $25,200 2018-19 UTILITIES Water Dist. 0621 2006 Ford Ranger Compact Pickup Truck 2018-19 8/70,000 11/90,000 28,500 UTILITIES Water Admin. 0805 2007 Toyota Prius Sedan 2018-19 7/70,000 11/90,000 33,700 TOTAL $62,200 2019-20 UTILITIES Water Dist. 0704 2007 Chevrolet Colorado Compact Pickup Truck 2019-20 7/64,000 11/90,000 28,500 UTILITIES Water Dist. 0703 2007 Chevrolet Colorado Compact Pickup Truck 2019-20 7/60,000 11/90,000 28,500 UTILITIES Water Dist. 0720 2007 Caterpillar 420E Backhoe w/Attachments 2019-20 7/2100 12/5000 136,000 TOTAL $193,000 Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project: NA Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: Staff has incorporated the spreading of replacement dates for these vehicles in attempts to smooth replacement costs and alleviate financial burden on the Fleet Replacement Funds. Leasing Alternative: Although leasing may be beneficial in some instances, such as specialty construction equipment or lower mileage vehicles, it is not always viable for all vehicles and equipment. If the life of a vehicle can be extended due to favorable condition assessments, a lease may not allow for vehicle replacement “deferment”. A comprehensive cost analysis for fleet leasing would need to be conducted in order to fully evaluate the cost benefits of this alternative. 3-328 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – WATER FUND FLEET REPLACEMENTS Project Team These purchases will be will be managed by the Fleet Program with minimum assistance by the Program Manager to ensure coordinated and timely purchases. 3-329 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – SEWER FUND FLEET REPLACEMENTS Project Description Replacing 13 vehicles/equipment will cost: 1) $202,100 in 2015-16 2) $180,900 in 2016-17 3) $57,600 in 2017-18 4) $235,500 in 2018-19 5) $375,000 in 2019-20 Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure G Priority - List: Need and Urgency Staff is requesting replacement of vehicles and equipment for the following Sewer Fund Departments: 1) Utilities The decision to replace these vehicles is based on the following factors: 1) Projected miles of vehicles at time of replacement will meet or exceed replacement miles recommended in the Fleet policy. 2) Actual years of operation compared to expected years in the Fleet policy. 3) Review of mechanical condition and history by Fleet Supervisor and operating Department staff. 4) Evaluation of maintenance costs by Fleet Supervisor. 5) Spreading vehicle replacement costs over multiple years for program users. Operating Program Number, Title and Project Phasing: 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. 3-330 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – SEWER FUND FLEET REPLACEMENTS Department Program Asset # Year Make Model Description Proposed Replacement Year Current Year/Mileage Replacement Policy Year/Mileage Projected Replacement Cost 2015-16 UTILITIES Wasterwater Collections 0509 2000 GMC 2500 3/4 Ton Van (Specialty Box Truck Sewer Cam) 2015-16 10/27,000 12/100,000 169,100 UTILITIES WRRF 0412 2003 Ford Taurus Sedan 2015-16 11/51,000 11/90,000 33,000 TOTAL $202,100 2016-17 UTILITIES Wasterwater Collections 0507 2004 Ford F550 Medium Duty Truck w/Utility Box & Crane 2016-17 10/33,000 12/60,000 72,000 UTILITIES Wasterwater Collections 0508 2004 Ford F550 Medium Duty Truck w/Utility Box & Crane 2016-17 10/23,000 12/60,000 72,000 UTILITIES Wasterwater Collections 0133 2001 Gorman- Rupp Portable Sewage Pump 2016-17 13/1500 15 Years 36,900 TOTAL $180,900 2017-18 UTILITIES WRRF 0855 2008 Club Car Utility ATV 2017-18 6/400 10/500 19,200 UTILITIES WRRF 0856 2008 Club Car Utility ATV 2017-18 6/450 10/500 19,200 UTILITIES WRRF 0857 2008 Club Car Utility ATV 2017-18 6/400 10/500 19,200 TOTAL $57,600 2018-19 UTILITIES Wastewater Admin. 0804 2007 Toyota Prius Sedan 2018-19 7/52,000 11/90,000 38,500 UTILITIES WRRF 0611 2008 Ford F550 Medium Duty Truck w/Flatbed & Crane 2018-19 8/10,000 12/60,000 71,500 UTILITIES Wasterwater Collections 0626 2006 Caterpillar 304C Mini Excavator (Pooled) 2018-19 8/400 12/5000 78,000 UTILITIES Environmental Comp. 0806 2007 Toyota Prius Sedan 2018-19 7/31,000 11/90,000 39,000 UTILITIES WRRF 0132 2001 Decanter Trailer 2018-19 13 Years 18 Years 8,500 TOTAL $235,500 2019-20 UTILITIES Wasterwater Collections 0718 2007 Sterling Heavy Duty Truck w/Vac-Con Hydrocleaner 2019-20 8/20,000 12/60,000 375,000 TOTAL $375,000 3-331 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – SEWER FUND FLEET REPLACEMENTS Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project: NA Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: Staff has incorporated the spreading of replacement dates for these vehicles in attempts to smooth replacement costs and alleviate financial burden on the Fleet Replacement Funds. Leasing Alternative: Although leasing may be beneficial in some instances, such as specialty construction equipment or lower mileage vehicles, it is not always viable for all vehicles and equipment. If the life of a vehicle can be extended due to favorable condition assessments, a lease may not allow for vehicle replacement “deferment”. A comprehensive cost analysis for fleet leasing would need to be conducted in order to fully evaluate the cost benefits of this alternative. Project Team These purchases will be will be managed by the Fleet Program with minimum assistance by the Program Manager to ensure coordinated and timely purchases. 3-332 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – WHALE ROCK FUND FLEET REPLACEMENTS Project Description Replacing 4 vehicles/equipment will cost: 1) $96,300 in 2015-16 2) $31,500 in 2016-17 3) None in 2017-18 4) $15,000 in 2018-19 5) None in 2019-20 Maintenance/Replacement New project Fleet Replacement New Fleet Request Council Goal / Measure G Priority - List: Need and Urgency Staff is requesting replacement of vehicles and equipment for the following Whale Rock Fund Department: 1) Utilities The decision to replace these vehicles is based on the following factors: 1) Projected miles of vehicles at time of replacement will meet or exceed replacement miles recommended in the Fleet policy. 2) Actual years of operation compared to expected years in the Fleet policy. 3) Review of mechanical condition and history by Fleet Supervisor and operating Department staff. 4) Evaluation of maintenance costs by Fleet Supervisor. 5) Spreading vehicle replacement costs over multiple years for program users. Operating Program Number, Title and Project Phasing: 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. 3-333 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – WHALE ROCK FUND FLEET REPLACEMENTS Department Program Asset # Year Make Model Description Proposed Replacement Year Year/Mileage Replacement Policy Year/Mileage Projected Replacement Cost 2015-16 Utilities Whale Rock 0902 2009 Ford F150 4x4 Pickup Truck 2015-16 5/100,000 11/90,000 30,500 Utilities Whale Rock 0224 2002 Dodge D250 4x4 3/4 Ton Truck w/Utility Box & Crane 2015-16 12/70,000 12/100,000 65,800 TOTAL $96,300 2016-17 Utilities Whale Rock 0123 2004 Jeep Cherokee 4x4 SUV 2016-17 13/78,000 11/90,000 31,500 TOTAL $31,500 2018-19 Utilities Whale Rock 9714 Boston Whaler 17 FT Boat (Purchased Used) 2018-19 17 Years 21 Years 15,000 TOTAL $15,000 Reduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives Alternate project is feasible or advantageous – Cost of alternative project: NA Project can be phased – Number of years for phasing: Staff has incorporated the spreading of replacement dates for these vehicles in attempts to smooth replacement costs and alleviate financial burden on the Fleet Replacement Funds. Leasing Alternative: Although leasing may be beneficial in some instances, such as specialty construction equipment or lower mileage vehicles, it is not always viable for all vehicles and equipment. If the life of a vehicle can be extended due to favorable condition assessments, a lease may not allow for vehicle replacement “deferment”. A comprehensive cost analysis for fleet leasing would need to be conducted in order to fully evaluate the cost benefits of this alternative. 3-334 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN – WHALE ROCK FUND FLEET REPLACEMENTS Project Team These purchases will be will be managed by the Fleet Program with minimum assistance by the Program Manager to ensure coordinated and timely purchases. 3-335 SL O C i t y . o r g © 2 0 1 4 C i t y o f S a n L u i s O b i s p o