The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About12-06-2011 Agenda Packetcounc11 Agcn6A C I T Y OF S A N L U I S O B I S P O CITY HALL, 990 PALM STREET Tuesday, December 6, 2011 7:00 p.m. REGULAR MEETING Council Chamber 990 Palm Street CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Jan Marx ROLL CALL: Council Members Dan Carpenter, Andrew Carter and Kathy Smith, Vice Mayor John Ashbaugh and Mayor Jan Marx PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE PRESENTATIONS SLOCOG DOWNTOWN TRANSIT CENTER STUDY. (30 MINUTES) APPOINTMENT Al. VICE MAYOR APPOINTMENT FOR 2012. (CODRON /CANO — 15 MINUTES) RECOMMENDATION: Appoint a Vice Mayor to serve a one -year term commencing upon appointment. ® City Council regular meetings are televised live on Charter Channel 20. The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to including the disabled in all of its services, programs, and activities. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (805) 781 -7410. Please speak to the City Clerk prior to the meeting if you require a hearing amplification device. For more agenda information, call 781 -7100. Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection in the City Clerk's office located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, during normal business hours. Council Agenda Tuesday, uecember 6, 2011 PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA (not to exceed 15 minutes total) The Council welcomes your input. You may address the Council by completing a speaker slip and giving it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. At this time, you may address the Council on items that are not on the agenda. Time limit is three minutes. State law does not allow the Council to discuss or take action on issues not on the agenda, except that members of the Council or staff may briefly respond to statements made or questions posed by persons exercising their public testimony rights (Gov. Code Sec. 54954.2). Staff may be asked to follow up on such items. Staff reports and other written documentation relating to each item referred to on this agenda are on file in the City Clerk's Office in Room 4 of City Hall. CONSENT AGENDA The Consent Agenda is approved on one motion. Council Members may pull consent items to be considered after Business items. The public may comment on any item on the Consent Calendar. C1. MINUTES. (CODRON /CANO) RECOMMENDATION: Waive oral reading and approve as presented. C2. REDUCTION IN MANAGEMENT COMPENSATION. (IRONS) RECOMMENDATION: 1) Adopt a resolution reducing compensation for appointed officials, department heads, and management employees resulting in an estimated $807,000 annually in savings during the term of the resolution, January 1, 2012, through December 31, 2013; 2) Accept the City Manager's waiver of car allowance; 3) Adopt a resolution ceasing to pay and report the value of the employer paid member contribution (EPMC) to California Public Employees Retirement System (CaIPERS); and 4) Authorize the Mayor to execute amended contracts of employment with the City Manager and the City Attorney reducing their compensation as specified in this report. C3. CITY COMMUNICATIONS INFRASTRUCTURE EASEMENT. (CODRON) RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the Mayor to accept an easement from the owners of the Damon - Garcia Ranch for communications infrastructure, and in exchange grant a fee waiver for Subdivision Services valued at $2,949. C4. TRENCH REPAIR, JOB ORDER CONTRACT, SPECIFICATION NO. 91092. (WALTER /HORN) RECOMMENDATION: 1) Approve plans and specifications for the Trench Repair, Job Order Contract, Specification No. 91092; and 2) Authorize staff to advertise for bids and authorize the City Manager to award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder. 2 Council Agenda Tuesday, uecember 6, 2011 PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. REVIEW OF AMENDMENTS TO MUNICIPAL CODE TITLE 17: ZONING REGULATIONS AND REVIEW OF AMENDMENTS TO THE ACCESS AND PARKING MANAGEMENT PLAN (CONTINUED FROM THE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 15, 2011). (MURRY /DUNSMORE /LEVEILLE/ MANDEVILLE — 45 MINUTES) RECOMMENDATION: As recommended by the Planning Commission: 1) Introduce by title only, an ordinance to adopt the proposed amendments to Title 17 (Zoning Regulations) of the Municipal Code; and 2) Approve a resolution amending the Access and Parking Management Plan to support downtown residential parking. STUDY SESSION 2. 2011 -12 CITYWIDE WINTER WEATHER PREPARATION. ( WALTER /CODRON /LYNCH /HAVLIK/NANCE /HANNULA — 30 MINUTES) RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file a report on the City's 2011 -12 winter weather preparations. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS (not to exceed 15 minutes) Council Members report on conferences or other City activities. Time limit -3 minutes. COMMUNICATIONS (not to exceed 15 minutes) At this time, any Council Member or the City Manager may ask a question for clarification, make an announcement, or report briefly on his or her activities. In addition, subject to Council Policies and Procedures, they may provide a reference to staff or other resources for factual information, request staff to report back to the Council at a subsequent meeting concerning any matter, or take action to direct staff to place a matter of business on a future agenda. (Gov. Code Sec. 54954.2) ADJOURN. 3 council a en a nEpo C I T Y OF S A N L U I S O B I S P O FROM: Michael Codron, Assistant City Manager Prepared By: Elaina Cano, City Clerk SUBJECT: VICE MAYOR APPOINTMENT FOR 2012 RECOMMENDATION: Meeting Dam Item Number /q/ Appoint a Vice Mayor to serve a one -year term commencing upon appointment. DISCUSSION Section 408 of the City's Charter states: The Council shall elect one of its members to be Vice Mayor. During the temporary absence or disability of the Mayor, the Vice Mayor shall act as Mayor Pro Tempore. In case of the temporary absence or disability of both the Mayor and Vice Mayor, the Council shall elect one of its members to be Mayor Pro Tempore. In case of vacancy in the office of Mayor, the Vice mayor shall act as Mayor until such vacancy can be filled as provided by this Charter. Section 3.2 of the Council Policies and Procedures provides that the appointment of the Vice Mayor shall be for a one -year term, that the appointment shall be made on a rotational basis, and that-the appointment shall go to the next senior member. Following current Council policy of rotating the Vice Mayor position, the prior six years have been as follows: Council Member Settle - 2006 Council Member Mulholland — 2007 Council Member Brown — 2008 Council Member Settle — 2009 Council Member Carter — 2010 Council Member Ashbaugh - 2011 T: \Council Agenda Reports \City Clerk CAR \Vice Mayor Appointment 2012.doc AM ,1EETING AGENDA DATE / r1 ITEM # MINUTES REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 1, 2011 - 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBER, 990 PALM STREET SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA ROLL CALL: Council Members Present: Council Members Dan Carpenter, Andrew Carter and Kathy Smith, Vice Mayor John Ashbaugh, and Mayor Jan Marx City Staff Present: Katie Lichtig, City Manager, Christine Dietrick, City Attorney, Michael Codron, Assistant City Manager, and Elaina Cano, City Clerk, were present at Roll Call. Other staff members presented reports or responded to questions as indicated in the minutes. PRESENTATION Mayor Marx presented a proclamation to 2012 Poet Laureate, Bonnie Young. PUBLIC COMMENT Gary Fowler, San Luis Obispo, spoke in opposition to a 5:00 p.m. Council meeting start time and the Palm - Nipomo parking garage. Jody Frey, San Luis Obispo, spoke about Mayor Marx's participation with the "No on Measure X campaign. Mayor Marx stated that she participated in the "No on Measure X campaign due to her First Amendment right. Donald E. Hedrick, San Luis Obispo, spoke about his concerns regarding the Occupy SLO movement in front of the County Courthouse and the lack of public restrooms. Becky Jorgeson, Santa Margarita, spoke about the need for tent cities for the homeless. Bobby Jackson, agreed with the previous speaker and recommended that the City help find a solution for the homeless. C1 -1 DRAFT City Council Meeting Tuesday, November 1, 2011 CONSENT AGENDA C1. MINUTES. Page 2 ACTION: Moved by Smith /Carter to waive oral reading and approve as presented; motion carried 5:0. C2. ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 13.08 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO INDUSTRIAL DISCHARGERS. ACTION: Moved by Smith /Carter to adopt Ordinance No. 1570 (2011 Series) which amends the Sewer Use Ordinance and Industrial Discharge Limits; motion carried 5:0. C3. SIGNAL AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS. ACTION: Moved by Smith /Carter to: 1) Approve the Request for Proposals for Signal and Lighting Maintenance services; and 2) Authorize staff to advertise for proposals; and 3) Authorize the City Manager to award a contract for on -call services; motion carried 5:0. C4. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC PLAN REQUEST_ FOR PROPOSALS. ACTION: Moved by Smith /Carter to: 1) Approve the Request for Proposals (RFP) for consultant services for a five -year Economic Strategic Plan; and 2) Authorize the City Manager to award the contract if within the project budget of $50,000; motion carried 5:0. PUBLIC HEARINGS FINAL DESIGN REVIEW OF THE REVISED GARDEN STREET TERRACES MIXED -USE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT IN THE C -D AND C -D -H ZONE (ARC 124 -06. 1119 GARDEN STREET AND ADJACENT PARCELS). Deputy Community Development Director Davidson introduced this item, following which Senior Planner Ricci presented the agenda report and responded to Council questions. Carol Florence, Garden Street SLO Partners, LP, spoke in support of the staffs recommendation and responded to Council questions and concerns. George Garcia, Garcia Architecutre & Design, spoke in support of the staffs recommendation and responded to Council questions. Mayor Marx opened the public hearing. C1-2 DRAFT City Council Meeting Tuesday, November 1, 2011 Page 3 The following speakers spoke about their concerns regarding the design and /or aesthetics of the project: Ivan Cliff, San Luis Obispo Dixie Cliff, San Luis Obispo Donald E. Hedrick, San Luis Obispo David Brodie, San Luis Obispo Allan Cooper, San Luis Obispo Save Our Downtown recommended continuing the project to review further. Elizabeth Thyne, San Luis Obispo Diane Duenow, San Luis Obispo Susan Pyburn, San Luis Obispo Ginger Kamp, San Luis Obispo Sara McEri San Luis Obispo Save Our Downtown Sandra Lakeman San Luis Obispo Pete Evans, San Luis Obispo Linda Groover, San Luis Obispo, spoke about her concerns regarding the model and recommended the Council defer the project until there is a colored model. Elisabeth Abrahams, San Luis Obispo Joseph Abrahams, San Luis Obispo Jim Duenow, San Luis Obispo Jody Frey, San Luis Obispo Deborah Cash Executive Director of the San Luis Obispo Downtown Association, spoke in support of staffs recommendation. Vicente Del Rio, San Luis Obispo, spoke in support of the overall project but did have some concerns with the design. C1 -3 DRAFT City Council Meeting Page 4 Tuesday, November 1, 2011 Richard Stephens, San Luis Obispo Downtown Business Owner, spoke in support of the project but stated that there should also be improvements to Garden Alley included. Tom Swem, San Luis Obispo spoke in support of the project. Council recessed at 9:15 p.m. and reconvened at 9:30 p.m. with all members present. Mr. Blomfield, San Luis Obispo, spoke in support of the project. Jon Seitz, Grover Beach, spoke in support of the project with conditions and referred to a statement he submitted to the Council at the meeting and on file with the original agenda report. Mike McNamara, San Luis Obispo, spoke in support of the project, stated his concerns regarding the loss of parking and requested his business (742 Marsh Street) be exempt from parking in lieu fees. Mr. McNamara responded to Council questions. Anthony Palazzo, Architectural Review Commissioner, spoke in support of staffs recommendation. Marianne Orme, Owner of Linnea's Cafe, spoke in support of staffs recommendation and also suggested improvements to Garden Alley. Jacob Brandt, did not speak. Gary Fowler, San Luis Obispo, did not speak. Russ Brown, San Luis Obispo, spoke in support of the project but did have some concerns with the colors of the buildings. Paul Neel, San Luis Obispo, spoke in support of the project. Thomas Fowler, San Luis Obispo, spoke in support of the project. Courtney Kienow. San Luis Obispo Chamber of Commerce, spoke in support of the concept of the project as it relates to the Chamber's Economic Vision document. However, Ms. Kienow stated that they do not take a position regarding architecture. Erik Justesen, San Luis Obispo, spoke in support of staff's recommendation. Hamish Marshall, Garden Street Terraces, LP, spoke about the process and in support of staffs recommendation. Mayor Marx closed the public hearing. CI-4 DRAFT City Council Meeting Tuesday, November 1, 2011 Page 5 Council discussion ensued during which they suggested revisions to Conditions 1, 16, 18, and 28. Council Member Smith spoke about her concerns regarding the loss of parking spaces, the design and aesthetics of the project, the future cost for purchasing the condominiums, and the compatibility of the uses to the surrounding businesses. Ms. Smith expressed her approval of Garden Street Terraces, LP and their open communication with Save Our Downtown. ACTION: Moved by Carter /Ashbaugh, as recommended by the Cultural Heritage Committee (CHC) and Architectural Review Commission (ARC), to adopt Resolution No. 10312 (2011 Series) granting final approval of the revised project design, based on findings, including a finding acknowledging the review and acceptance of the Addendum to the Final EIR, with revisions to Condition 1, 16, 18 and 28; motion carried 4:1, (Smith opposed). 2. MASTER FEE SCHEDULE UPDA' Interim Director of Finance & Information Technology Bradley introduced this item, following which Chief Building Official Girvin presented the agenda report and responded to Council questions. Mayor Marx opened the public hearing. Kevin Rice. San Luis Obispo, spoke in opposition to higher fees. Mayor Marx closed the public hearing. ACTION: Moved by Carter /Ashbaugh to adopt Resolution No. 10313 (2011 Series) as amended, to include rain water harvesting on the reduced permit fee list; (4:1, Carpenter opposed). COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS Vice Mayor Ashbaugh referenced his Council Liaison Report he submitted prior to the meeting. COMMUNICATIONS City Clerk Cano provided Council with an update regarding the upcoming Special Election. Mayor Marx announced current Advisory Body vacancies. C1 -5 DRAFT City Council Meeting Tuesday, November 1, 2011 Page 6 There being no further business to come before the City Council, Mayor Marx adjourned the meeting on November 2, 2011, at 12:09 a.m. Elaina Cano, CMC City Clerk APPROVED BY COUNCIL: xx/xx/11 C1 -6 DRAFT MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO MONDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 2011 —1:30 P.M. COMMUNITY FOUNDATION, 550 DANA STREET SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA ROLL CALL: Council Members Present: Council Members Dan Carpenter, Andrew Carter and Kathy Smith, Vice Mayor John Ashbaugh, and Mayor Jan Marx City Staff Present: Katie Lichtig, City Manager, Christine Dietrick, City Attorney, and Michael Codron, Assistant City Manager, were present at Roll Call. There was no public comment PUBLIC COMMENT TRAINING A training session was provided for Council and staff by Mary Egan and John Shannon. Topics included governing body performance, expectations, the appointed officials evaluation process and Council policies and procedures. There being no further business to come before the City Council, Mayor Marx adjourned the meeting at 4:30 p.m. Elaina Cano, CMC City Clerk APPROVED BY COUNCIL: xx/xx/11 C1 -7 DRAFT MINUTES MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 15, 2011 990 PALM STREET SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA 6:00 P.M. — SPECIAL MEETING — COUNCIL HEARING ROOM ROLL CALL: Council Members Present: Council Members Dan Carpenter, Andrew Carter and Kathy Smith and Mayor Jan Marx Vice Mayor John Ashbaugh was present for the CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS and CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — Existing Litigation. Mr Ashbaugh was not present during the CONFERENCE REGARDING PROPERTY NEGOTIATIONS due to a conflict of interest. City Staff Present: Katie Lichtig, City Manager, Christine Dietrick, City Attorney, Michael Codron, Assistant City Manager, and Elaina Cano, City Clerk, were present at Roll Call. Other staff members presented reports or responded to questions as indicated in the minutes. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION TOPICS City Attorney Dietrick announced the following Closed Session topics. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS Pursuant to Government Code § 54957.6 Agency Negotiators: Monica Irons, Katie Lichtig, Michael Codron, J. Christine Dietrick, Andrea S. Visveshwara Employee Organizations: San Luis Obispo City Employees' Association (SLOCEA), San Luis Obispo Police Officers' Association (POA), Police Staff Officers' Association (SLOPSOA), Fire Battalion Chiefs' Association and San Luis Obispo City Firefighters, Local 3523 Unrepresented Employees: Confidential Employees, Unrepresented Management Employees CONFERENCE REGARDING PROPERTY NEGOTIATIONS Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.8 Property: APN's 002 - 416 -034 and 002 -416 -029 Negotiating Parties: C1 -8 DRAFT City Council Meeting Tuesday, November 15, 2011 City of San Luis Obispo: San Luis Obispo Court Street, LLC (aka San Luis Obispo Chinatown, LLC) Negotiations: Page 2 Katie Lichtig, Michael Codron, J. Christine Dietrick Tom Copeland, Suzanne Fryer, Mark Rawson Direction as to terms of payment on Option to Purchase Real Property Agreement CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — Existing Litigation Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.9 San Luis Obispo Police Officers Association v. City of San Luis Obispo Public Employment Relations Board, Tracking No. 393818221J137 PUBLIC COMMENT ON CLOSED SESSION ITEMS Mayor Marx called for public comments. None were forthcoming and the meeting adjourned to the Closed Session. CLOSED SESSION REPORT City Attorney Dietrick reported on the Closed Session at the commencement of the 7:00 p.m. Regular Meeting. The Closed Session adjourned at 7:05 p.m. 7:00 P.M. — REGULAR MEETING — COUNCIL CHAMBER Mayor Marx called the Regular Meeting to order at 7:07 p.m. All Council Members were present. CLOSED SESSION REPORT City Attorney Dietrick reported that Council met in Closed Session to discuss Labor Negotiations, Property Negotiations, and Existing Litigation as indicated above. No further reportable action was taken. INTRODUCTIONS City Manager Lichtig introduced the new Finance and Information Technology Director, Charles Bourbeau, and the new Community Development Director, Derek Johnson. C1 -9 DRAFT City Council Meeting Tuesday, November 15, 2011 PRESENTATION Page 3 Chief of Police Linden and Sergeant Amoroso gave a presentation on City employee " Movember" efforts. APPOINTMENT Al. APPOINTMENT TO THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION. ACTION: Moved by Carpenter /Ashbaugh to appoint Susan Updegrove to the Parks and Recreation Commission to fill an unscheduled vacancy with a term ending March 31, 2013; motion carried 5:0. Moved by Carter /Smith to move Public Hearing Item 1 to the December 6, 2011, Council meeting. PUBLIC COMMENT Becky Jorgeson, San Luis Obispo, spoke about creating a "Dignity Village" in the City of San Luis Obispo and her concerns with the homeless population. Cory Wilson, concurred with the prior speaker. Steve Barasch, San Luis Obispo, spoke about his concerns regarding the Master Fee Schedule. Gary Fowler, San Luis Obispo, commended Council for appointing Mr. Bourbeau and stated his concern regarding a sewer line under Nacimiento Lake. By consensus, Council directed staff to create a follow -up memo regarding Mr. Fowler's concerns. Donald E. Hedrick, San Luis Obispo, spoke about his concerns regarding homelessness. Jody Frey, San Luis Obispo, spoke about her concerns regarding the outdoor smoking ban. Will Powers. San Luis Obispo, spoke about his concerns regarding evaluations for City staff. Lee Ferrero, Los Osos, spoke about National Alzheimer's Month. Austin Perlak, spoke about his concerns regarding the maintenance in the downtown area. C1 -10 DRAFT City Council Meeting Tuesday, November 15, 2011 Page 4 Ivan Cliff, San Luis Obispo, stated his concern regarding the cost for downtown maintenance. Council Member Smith explained that although HSOC have discussed safe parking lots, there have been no recent discussions regarding "Dignity Cities." CONSENT AGENDA Public Comment: Paul Allen, San Luis Obispo, spoke in opposition to Item C2 staffs recommendation. Jody Frey, San Luis Obispo, spoke about her concerns regarding Items C2, C3 and C5. Council discussion ensued regarding Item C3. Parks and Recreation Director Sta responded to Council's questions and concerns. Council Member Carter clarified the Council compensation waiver requests. C1. MINUTES. ACTION: Moved by Ashbaugh /Carter to waive oral reading and approve as presented; motion carried 5:0. C2. MID HIGUERA REHABILITATION. SPECIFICATION NO. 90073. ACTION: Moved by Ashbaugh /Carter to: 1) Approve plans and specifications for the Mid Higuera Rehabilitation Project, Specification No. 90073; 2) Approve the transfer of $27,500 from various Utilities Master accounts to the Mid Higuera Rehabilitation project account: $16,500 from the Water Distribution System Improvements Master account and $11,000 from the Collection System Improvements Master account; and 3) Authorize staff to advertise for bids and authorize the City Manager to award the contract if the lowest responsible bid is within the Engineer's Estimate of $565,000; motion carried 5:0. C3. APPROVAL OF PUBLIC ART FOR THE MEADOW PARK COMMUNITY GARDENS_ ACTION: Moved by Ashbaugh /Carter to: 1) As recommended by the Public Art Jury and the Architectural Review Commission (ARC), approve the public art piece entitled Roots of Community for the community gardens in Meadow Park; and 2) Authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with the artist for $65,000 for completion of the project; motion carried 5:0. C4. REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR CREDIT CARD CAPABLE PARKING METERS AND SERVICE CONTRACT, PROPOSAL NO. 91137. C1 -11 DRAFT City Council Meeting Page 5 Tuesday, November 15, 2011 ACTION: Moved by Ashbaugh /Carter to authorize staff to advertise Request for Proposals (RFP) for purchase and on -going service of 400 credit card capable parking meters, and authorize the City Manager to award the contract if the lowest responsible bid is within the 2011 -12 budgeted amounts; motion carried 5:0. C5. CITY COUNCIL COMPENSATION WAIVER REQUESTS. ACTION: Moved by Ashbaugh /Carter to adopt Resolution No. 10314 (2011 Series): 1) Endorsing waivers by the Mayor and all Council Members receiving the benefit of the 8% employer paid member contribution (EPMC) paid by the City on behalf of the Mayor and participating Council Members to the Public Employees Retirement System (PERS); and 2) Endorsing monthly salary waiver requests by Council Members Ashbaugh, Carter and Smith, resulting in a reduction in monthly compensation from $1,000 per month to $949 per month, effective the first full payroll period in January 2012, through the remainder of the terms of office of each Council Member; motion carried 5:0. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. REVIEW OF AMENDMENTS TO MUNICIPAL CODE TITLE 17: ZONING REGULATIONS AND REVIEW OF AMENDMENTS TO THE ACCESS AND PARKING MANAGEMENT PLAN. ACTION: Moved by Carter /Smith to move item Public Hearing Item 1 REVIEW OF AMENDMENTS TO MUNICIPAL CODE TITLE 17: ZONING REGULATIONS AND REVIEW OF AMENDMENTS TO THE ACCESS AND PARKING MANAGEMENT PLAN to the December 6, 2011, Council meeting. BUSINESS ITEMS 2. DOWNTOWN MAINTENANCE AND BEAUTIFICATION , _SPECIFICATION NO. 90979A. Deputy Director of Public Works Lynch introduced this item, following which Senior Civil Engineer Fraser presented the agenda report and responded to Council questions. Public Comments David Brodie, San Luis Obispo, spoke in support of staff's recommendation. Jody Frey, San Luis Obispo, spoke about her concerns regarding the cost of the project. Deborah Cash, SLO Downtown Association Executive Director, spoke in support of staff's recommendation and responded to Council questions. C1 -12 DRAFT City Council Meeting Page 6 Tuesday, November 15, 2011 Courtney Kienow, SLO Chamber Commerce, spoke in support of staffs recommendation. Donna Lewis, San Luis Obispo, spoke in support of staffs recommendation. Paul Rys, San Luis Obispo, spoke about his concerns regarding the lack of lighting in the downtown area. Donald E. Hedrick, San Luis Obispo, spoke about his concerns regarding the mission style sidewalks and the lack of lighting. Will Powers, San Luis Obispo, spoke about his concerns regarding the Public Works Department staff. - - -end of public comments - -- Council recessed at 9:10 p.m. and reconvened at 9:20 p.m. with all members present. Council discussion ensued during which they discussed the importance of additional lighting in the downtown, increased costs for the project, comparison of daytime /nighttime construction, and future funding for additional blocks. Moved by Smith to cancel the project and reject all bids. Motion failed due to lack of a second. Moved by Carter to reject bids and down -scale the project as stated in Alternative 1. Motion failed due to a lack of a second. Moved by Ashbaugh /Marx to: 1) Award a contract to John Madonna Construction Co. of San Luis Obispo for the Base Bid in the amount of $666,446.80 for construction of the Downtown Maintenance and Beautification Project, Specification No. 90979A; 2) Approve transfers in the amount of $34,913 from the CIP Reserves account and $19,000 from the CIP Completed Projects account to the project's construction account to support construction costs; and 3) Appropriate $121,000 from the unreserved balance of the General Fund to the project's construction account to support construction costs; motion failed 2:3 (Carpenter /Carter /Smith opposed). ACTION: Moved by Carpenter /Marx to accept bid, except liaison and attempt to backfill shortfall from downscaling /elimination of other approved CIP projects (3:2 Carter /Smith opposed). 3. UPDATE ON ALCOHOL OUTLET PUBLIC SAFETY STRATEGIES. Chief of Police Linden and Community Development Deputy Director Davidson presented the agenda report and responded to Council questions. C1 -13 DRAFT City Council Meeting Tuesday, November 15, 2011 Public Comments Page 7 Steve Tolley, Arroyo Grande Safe Night Life Association Coordinator, spoke in support of staff's recommendation and encouraged continued partnership with the City. Barbara Lawrence, Morro Bay, stated that she would like to participate in the task force and mentioned other resources that may be available. Deborah Cash SLO Downtown Association, spoke about the importance of lighting in the downtown and spoke in support of staffs recommendation. Mike Linn, SLO Safe Ride, spoke in support of staff's recommendation and of his concerns regarding the safety and security of the bar patrons and neighborhoods. Hamish Marshall, WestPac, spoke in support of staffs recommendation. Sandra Rowley, Residents for Quality Neighborhoods, spoke in support of the staffs recommendation with a stipulation that RQN is included as stakeholders and recommended Council not include the link to the Neighborhood Wellness Major City Goal. Courtney Kienow, SLO Chamber of Commerce, spoke in support of staffs recommendation. - - -end of public comments - -- ACTION: Moved by Ashbaugh /Smith to endorse an action plan and regulatory approach to reduce public safety problems associated with alcohol outlets. (5:0). Council expressed consensus to focus Neighborhood Services Specialists to neighborhood enhancement ordinance enforcement. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS AND COMMUNICA Council Member Smith reported on her attendance at the Community Academy Graduation. Council discussion ensued regarding the mock City Council meeting of the Community Academy attendees where discussed the closure of the "Broad Street dog- leg" project. By consensus, Council requested that staff provide them with a memo of the history of the project. Vice Mayor Ashbaugh announced that May 2012 will be the 60th celebration of City Hall. Mayor Marx reported that she will be participating in the Police Chief interviews. Ms. Marx announced that there is a City of San Luis Obispo Open Space fund at the Community Foundation. C1 -14 DRAFT City Council Meeting Tuesday, November 15, 2011 Page 8 There being no further business to come before the City Council, Mayor Marx adjourned the meeting on November 16, 2011, at 12:07 a.m. Elaina Cano, CMC City Clerk APPROVED BY COUNCIL: xx/xx/11 C1 -15 DRAFT council j acen&A uEpont C I T Y OF S A N L U I S O B I S P O FROM: Monica Irons, Director of Human Resources SUBJECT: REDUCTION IN MANAGEMENT COMPENSATION RECOMMENDATION ASee finq C7xt. itsm Itivmlrrr 1. Adopt a resolution reducing compensation for appointed officials, department heads, and management employees resulting in an estimated $807,000 annually in savings during the tenn of the resolution, January 1, 2012 through December 31, 2013. 2. Accept the City Manager's waiver of car allowance. 3. Adopt a resolution ceasing to pay and report the value of the employer paid member contribution (EPMC) to California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS). 4. Authorize the Mayor to execute amended contracts of employment with the City Manager and the City Attorney reducing their compensation as specified in this report. DISCUSSION Background The City's management group includes 73 employees: 11 department heads (including two appointed officials); and 62 other management or exempt level employees. Compensation and benefits for this group of employees is set by resolution that expires December 31, 2011. Since these employees are unrepresented, there are no negotiations, as there are for other regular employees. Instead, the group provides the City Manager with a recommendation after discussing the issues among its members. This group's discussions were grounded in the City's fiscal reality and Council's labor relations objectives. The group discussed the adoption of a series of budget balancing strategies during the 2011 -13 Financial Plan process including reducing the cost of personnel via negotiated concessions. The management group's recommendations were guided by the following labor relations objectives provided by Council: 1. Implement sustainable actions to reduce total employee compensation costs by 6.8% or a total of $3.1 million annually for all funds ($2.6 million in the General Fund only) as set forth in the 2011 -13 Financial Plan; and, 2. Achieve "significant progress" in the area of long -tenn systemic pension cost containment and reduction, including: o a shift to employees paying the full member contribution required by Ca1PERS (eight percent for Miscellaneous employees and nine percent for Safety G: \Counci1\Agenda reports \2011\Management Comp Reso - December 6th\REP0RT_MgtComp2012- 13MI.doe C2 -1 Page 2 employees); thus moving away from EPMC for current and future employees; and, • implementation of a second tier retirement benefit, or, • other actions that meet this objective. The management group deterinined the following recommendations most closely achieved Council's labor relations objectives: 1. Effective the first full payroll period in January 2012 the unrepresented management group will pay the full member contributions to Ca1PERS (eight percent for Miscellaneous and nine percent for Safety employees). 2. A resolution tern of two years (January 1, 2012 through December 31, 2013) with no across the board (e.g. cost of living) salary increases and no changes to the City contribution to health insurance. 3. The group recognizes the necessity of implementing a second tier retirement benefit. The City currently pays the member contribution to Ca1PERS for the management, confidential, San Luis Obispo City Employees Association (SLOCEA), and the International Association of Firefighters, Local 3523 (Fire Union). Several years ago, the San Luis Obispo Police Officers Association (POA), the San Luis Obispo Police Staff Officers Association (SLOPSOA), and the Battalion Chiefs agreed to pay the member contribution to Ca1PERS and received equivalent salary increases. The management group will not receive any offsetting or across the board salary increases during the terin of this agreement. Further, the City currently reports the value of the member contribution to CalPERS as additional compensation. By adopting the two proposed resolutions, this practice will cease and the member contribution will no longer be reported to Ca1PERS as additional compensation. In addition to the management recommendations outlined above, the department heads also recommended to the City Manager the elimination of the department heads' ability to cash out unused administrative leave at year end. This option had been suspended in the 2011 Management Compensation Resolution. The elimination of this benefit saves approximately $40,000 annually that is a budgeted expense based on past experience. The City Manager is committed to taking a continued leadership role in the area of sustainability and therefore, waives her monthly car allowance in addition to the above actions. Both the City Manager's and City Attorney's contracts preclude reductions during the term of their contracts, but both appointed officials have agreed to the reductions outlined. Thus, staff recommends that Council authorize the Mayor to execute the necessary amendments to the appointed officials' contracts to implement the reductions approved by the attached resolutions. These reductions in compensation are significant, especially when taken in combination with average Ca1PERS health plan premiums increases of three percent and an almost three percent increase in the consumer price index during the past twelve months. However, the City's managers remain committed to leading by example, continuing to provide excellent community service, and advancing Council priorities. The managers recognize the G:\ Council \Agenda repoits\2011\Management Comp Reso - December 6th \REPORT_MgtComp2012- 13 MI. doe C2-2 e3 need for sustainable financial solutions, including pension cost reductions and containment. Thus, while the group is concerned about the City's ability to attract well qualified employees with a reduced pension benefit, they understand the trend is to implement second tier pension formulas for new hires and they intend to continue to support efforts toward achieving the City's long term fiscal sustainability. In reviewing the Management Compensation Resolution (Attachment 1, Exhibit A) minor clarifications to be consistent with the City's past practice have been included in Section I and J. Section I states that approval of vacation requests can be considered in light of the operational needs of the City. When an employee reaches the maximum vacation accrual amount, an extension can be granted by a department head or the City Manager to allow the employee to use the accrued vacation instead of losing it. In the past exceptions have been occasionally granted to provide up to a six -month period to use the accrued vacation. If the vacation is not used during the approved period no further extension is granted and it is lost. Further, a modification in Section J clarifies that administrative leave is not paid out upon tennination of employment. Neither modification has any fiscal impact. FISCAL IMPACT These reductions in compensation of $807,000 exceed the financial target of $759,000 for the group by approximately $48,000 per year and result in an ongoing 7.2% reduction in total compensation costs for this employee group. ALTERNATIVES Do not approve the resolutions and contract amendments. This alternative is not recommended, as the resolutions and contract amendments are consistent with the Council's labor relations objectives and the City's employer- employee relations policies. ATTACHMENTS 1. Management compensation resolution. 2. Resolution ceasing to pay and report the value of EPMC to CAPERS for the unrepresented management group. 3. Amended City Manager Contract of Employment. 4. Amended City Attorney Contract of Employment. GACoundhAgenda reports\201Management Comp Reso - December 6th \REPORT MgtComp2012- 13Ml.doe C2 -3 ATTACHMENT 1 RESOLUTION NO. (2011 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO REGARDING MANAGEMENT COMPENSATION FOR APPOINTED OFFICIALS, DEPARTMENT HEADS, AND MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEES AND SUPERSEDING PREVIOUS RESOLUTIONS IN CONFLICT WHEREAS, the unrepresented management employees (Appointed Officials, Department Heads, and Management employees) of the City of San Luis Obispo met multiple times during the months of September and October to identify sustainable reductions in total compensation costs to achieve Council's labor relations objectives to reduce total compensation costs and implement sustainable pension cost contain>nent and reductions; and WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo strives to provide excellent service to the community at all times, and supports this standard by promoting organizational values including customer service, productivity, accountability, innovation, initiative, stewardship, and ethics; and WHEREAS, to achieve its service standards the City must attract and retain well qualified employees who exemplify its organizational values, and WHEREAS, the unrepresented management employees acknowledge the fiscal challenges facing the City of San Luis Obispo and are committed to working with the City to help achieve long -term sustainable solutions; and WHEREAS, the unrepresented management employees have demonstrated sensitivity to the fiscal challenges facing the City for several years by agreeing to no across the board salary increases (e.g. "cost of living" increases) since January 2009; and WHEREAS, the unrepresented management employees have also agreed to no increases in the City's contribution to health care for the past two calendar years, while medical premiums have increased in that same timeframe and will increase again in 2012; and WHEREAS, the unrepresented management employees remain committed to providing high quality service to the citizens of San Luis Obispo in an efficient and effective manner; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo hereby revises management compensation as follows: SECTION 1. Unrepresented management employees will begin paying the full Member Contribution to Ca1PERS (e.g. eight percent of salary for Miscellaneous employees and nine percent of salary for Safety employees) and the City will no longer report to Ca1PERS the Member Contribution as additional compensation, effective the first full payroll period in January 2012. SECTION 2. There will be no across the board salary increases (e.g. "cost of living" increases). GACouncil\Agenda reports\201 I\Management Comp Reso - December 6th\ATTACHMENT 1- Management Resolution 2012.doc C2-4 ATTACHMENT 1 Page 2 of 3 increases). SECTION 3. There will be no increase to the City's health contribution. SECTION 4. Cash out of administrative leave is eliminated. SECTION 5. City Manager's car allowance as set forth in Resolution 9440 (2003 Series) is eliminated. SECTION 7. The City shall continue to provide employees certain fringe benefits as set forth in Exhibit "A ", fully incorporated by reference. SECTION 8. Unrepresented management employees acknowledge the City's need to achieve long term financial sustainability and pension cost reductions through the establishment of a second tier retirement formula for new employees. If the City amends the Ca1PERS Miscellaneous contract to provide a second tier retirement formula, management employees will participate as required by Ca1PERS. SECTION 9. All prior resolutions relating to management and appointed official compensation and benefits are hereby superseded to the extent inconsistent with this resolution. SECTION 10. This resolution shall be in effect from January 1, 2012 through December 31, 2013. SECTION 11. The Director of Finance and Information Technology shall reduce the appropriate accounts to reflect the compensation changes. Upon motion of and on the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was adopted this 6th day of December, 2011. Mayor Jan Marx ATTEST: Elaina Cano City Clerk seconded by GACounciRAgenda reports\201 INanagement Comp Reso - December 6th\ATTACHMENT 1- Management Resolution 2012.doc C2 -5 ATTACHMENT 1 Page 3 of 3 APPROVED AS TO FORM: Richard C. Bolanos Partner, Liebert Cassidy Whitmore GACouncil \Agenda repoits\201 IWanagement Comp Reso - December 6th\ATTACHMENT 1- Management Resolution 2012.doc C2 -6 EXHIBIT "A" Page 1 of 6 MANAGEMENT FRINGE BENEFITS 2012 Section A Medical, Dental, Vision The City shall establish and maintain medical, dental and vision insurance plans for department head and management employees and their dependents. The City reserves the right to choose the method of insuring and plans to be offered. The City has elected to participate in the PERS Health Benefit Program pursuant to the Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act (PEMHCA) with the "unequal contribution option" at the PERS minimum contribution rates, $112.00 per month for active employees and $106.40 for retirees as of January 1, 2012. The City's contribution toward retirees shall be increased by 5% per year of the City's contribution for the active employees until such time as contributions for employees and retirees are equal. Employees with proof of medical insurance elsewhere are not required to participate in the medical insurance plan and may receive the unused portion of the City's contribution (after dental and vision insurance is deducted) in cash in accordance with the City's cafeteria plan. Those employees will be assessed $16.00 per month to be placed in the Retiree Health Insurance Account. This account will be used to fund the City's contribution toward retiree premiums and the City's costs for the Public Employees' Contingency Reserve Fund and Administrative Costs. However, there is no requirement that these funds be used exclusively for this purpose, nor any guarantee that they will be sufficient to fund retiree health costs, although they will be used for employee benefits. Employees will be required to participate in the City's dental and vision plans at the employee - only rate. Should they elect to cover dependents in the City's dental and vision plans, they may do so, even if they do not have dependent coverage for medical insurance. Employees shall participate in term life insurance of $4,000 through payroll deduction as a part of the cafeteria plan. Section B Cafeteria Plan Contribution The City's contribution to the Cafeteria Plan for regular, full -time employees will remain the same as the 2010 amounts. Employee Only $469 monthly Employee + 1 $938 monthly Employee + Family $1254 monthly Employees with proof of medical insurance elsewhere may elect to opt out of the City's medical plan and receive a $200 cafeteria contribution. Employees who opted out of the City's medical insurance coverage and were hired prior to August 31, 2008 were "grandfathered" in at the $790 per month contribution level, until that time when they elected to be covered under the tiered contribution structure. An employee elects to be covered under the tiered contribution structure G: \CounciMgenda reports\201 I\Management Comp Reso - December 6th \EXHIBITA - Management Fringe Benefits 2012.doc ►�/ C2-7 Resolution No. (2012 Series) EXHIBIT "A" Management Fringe Benefits 2012 Page 2 of 6 when he or she enrolls as an employee only or with dependents (employee plus one or family). At that time the employee would no longer be grandfathered in at the $790 per month contribution, but would receive the tiered contribution amount. Employees hired prior to August 31, 2008 that had employee only medical insurance coverage were "grandfathered" in at the $790 per month contribution level, until such time when they added dependents or opted out. At that time the employee would no longer be grandfathered in at the $790 per month contribution, but would receive the tiered contribution amount. Less than full -time employees shall receive a prorated share of the City's contribution. The City agrees to continue its contribution to the cafeteria plan for two (2) pay periods in the event that an employee has exhausted all paid time off due to an employee's catastrophic illness. Section C Life and Disability Insurance The City shall provide the following special insurance benefits in recognition of management responsibilities: to Long -term disability insurance providing 66 2/3% of gross salary (maximum benefit $5,500 per month) to age 65 for any sickness or accident, subject to the exclusions in the long -term disability policy, after a 30 -day waiting period. 2. In addition to $4,000 term life insurance purchased by the employee through the cafeteria plan a $100,000 term life insurance for department heads and $50,000 term life insurance for management employees, including accidental death and dismemberment. Section D Retirement The City shall provide the California Public Employees' Retirement System's (CaIPERS) 2.7% at 55 plan to all eligible employees including the amendments permitting conversion of unused sick leave to additional retirement credit, the 1959 survivor's benefit (Level Four), one year final compensation, and pre- retirement Option 2 death benefit. The Police and Fire Chiefs shall receive the same retirement formula as sworn personnel in their departments. The employee is responsible for paying the employee's contribution to CaIPERS (8% for miscellaneous, 9% for safety) effective the first full pay period in January 2012. The City shall no longer report as salary all Employer -Paid Member Contributions (EPMC) to Ca1PERS for the purposes of retirement credit in accordance with Government Code Section 20636 (c) (4) effective the first full pay period in January 2012. GACounciMgenda reports\2011\Management Comp Reso - December 6th \EXHIBITA - Management Fringe Benefits 2012.doc C2 -8 Resolution No. (2012 Series) EXHIBIT "A" Management Fringe Benefits 2012 Page 3 of 6 Section E Supplemental Retirement The City shall contribute I% of salary for management employees and 2% of salary for department heads to a defined contribution supplemental retirement plan established in accordance with sections 401 (a) and 501 (a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and California Government Code sections 53215 - 53224. Section G Retiree Medical Benefit Trust Management employees participate in the San Luis Obispo Employees Retiree Medical Trust. This trust aims to provide for health insurance and other medical expense reimbursements to San Luis Obispo City Employees Association ( SLOCEA) and management employees after retirement. The Trust is administered separately by SLOCEA and a Board of Trustees. The City is not involved with the establishment or administration of the Trust. Included in the funding for the Trust will be amounts designated by SLOCEA to be deducted from each employees' paycheck. The City's sole responsibility is to forward the designated amounts to the Trust. The employee contribution is currently $100 per month and $6.50 per month to SLOCEA for administration of the Trust. Appointed officials and public safety chiefs have opted not to participate in the Retiree Medical Trust. Section H Pay for Performance In 1996 the City Council established the Management Pay for Perfor>ance System for management employees. The system is designed to recognize and reward excellent performance by managers and to provide an incentive for continuous improvement and sustained high performance. Instead of step increases, the management employee moves through his/her salary range solely according to accomplishment of objectives and job - related behavior. Further inforination about the Management Pay for Performance System can be found in the Management Pay for Perfonnance System Guide. Section I Vacation Vacation leave is governed by section 2.36.440 of the Municipal Code, except that it may be taken after the completion of the sixth calendar month of service since the benefit date. Vacation leave shall be accrued as earned each payroll period provided that not more than twice the annual rate may be carried over to a new calendar year. However, if the City Manager determines that a department head has been unable to take vacation due to the press of City business, the City Manager may approve up to a six -month extension of maximum vacation accrual. The City Manager may, within two years of appointing a department head, increase the rate of vacation accrual to a maximum of 120 hours per year. G: \Counci1\Agenda repotts\2011 \Management Comp Reso - December 6th\EXHIBITA- Management Fringe Benefits 2012.doc C2 -9 Resolution No. (2012 Series) EXHIBIT "A" Management Fringe Benefits 2012 Page 4 of 6 Vacation schedules for management employees shall be based upon the needs of the City and then, insofar as possible, upon the wishes of the employee. A department head may not deny a management employee's vacation request if such denial will result in the loss of vacation accrual by the employee, except that, a department head may approve up to a six -month extension of maximum vacation accrual. However, in no event shall more than one such extension be granted in any calendar year. Department Head and management employees are eligible, once annually in December, to request payment for up to 40 hours of unused vacation leave provided that an employee's overall performance and attendance practices are satisfactory. Section J Administrative Leave Department heads and appointed officials shall be granted 80 hours of administrative leave per calendar year. Management employees shall be granted 48 hours of administrative leave per calendar year. Administrative leave hours shall be pro -rated when a department head or management employee is appointed or leaves employment during the calendar year. The employee's final check will be adjusted to reflect the pro -rated hours, however there is no provision to receive cash payment for unused administrative hours. Department Heads and Managers are considered exempt from the overtime provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and not eligible for overtime payment. In general, management employees are expected to work the hours necessary to successfully carry out their duties and frequently must return to work or attend meetings and events outside their normal working hours. However, when specifically authorized by the department head due to extraordinary circumstances, a management employee may receive overtime payment of time and one -half for hours worked above and beyond what would be considered norinal work requirements during an emergency event lasting at least eight (8) hours. Section K Holidays Department heads and management employees shall receive 11 fixed plus 2 floating holidays per year. The floating holidays shall be accrued on a semi - monthly basis and added to the vacation accrual. Section L Sick Leave Sick leave is governed by section 2.36.420 of the Municipal Code. An employee may take up to 16 hours per year of sick leave if required to be away from the job to personally care for a member of his /her immediate family as defined in Section 2.36.420. This may be extended to 40 hours per year if the family member is part of the employee's household and to 56 hours if a household family member is hospitalized and the employee submits written verification of such hospitalization. If the family member is a child, parent, domestic partner or spouse, an employee GACounciRAgenda reports\20t Management Comp Reso - December Rh\ExHIBITA- Management Fringe Benefits 2012.doc C2 -10 Resolution No. (2012 Series) EXHIBIT "A" Management Fringe Benefits 2012 Page 5 of 6 may use up to 48 hours annually to attend to the illness of the child, parent or spouse, instead of the lesser maximums above, in accordance with Labor Code Section 233. In conjunction with existing leave benefits, department head and management employees with one year of City service who have worked at least 1,280 hours in the previous year may be eligible for up to 12 weeks of Family /Medical Leave in accordance with the federal Family and Medical Leave Act and the California Family Rights Act. Sick leave may be used to be absent from duty due to the death of a member of the employee's immediate family as defined in Section 2.36.420, provided such leave shall not exceed forty working hours for each incident. The employee may be required to submit proof of relative's death before being granted sick leave pay. False inforination concerning the death or relationship shall be cause for discharge. Upon termination of employment by death or retirement, a percentage of the dollar value of the employee's accumulated sick leave will be paid to the employee, or the designated beneficiary or beneficiaries according to the following schedule: (A) Death — 25% (B) Retirement and actual commencement of Ca1PERS benefits: (1) After ten years of continuous employment — 10% (2) After twenty years of continuous employment — 15% Section M Workers' Compensation Leave An employee who is absent from duty because of on-the-job injury in accordance with State workers' compensation law and is not eligible for disability payments under Labor Code Section 4850 shall be paid the difference between his /her base salary and the amount provided by workers' compensation law during the first ninety (90) business days of such temporary disability absence. Eligibility for workers' compensation leave requires an open workers' compensation claim. Section N Vehicle Assignment For those department heads requiring the use of an automobile on a regular 24 -hour basis to perform their normal duties, the City will, at City option, provide a City vehicle or an appropriate allowance for the employee's use of a personal automobile. Department heads who are not provided a City vehicle shall receive a car allowance of $236 per month. The use of a personal automobile for City business will be eligible for mileage reimbursement in accordance with standard City policy. Section O Uniform Allowance GACouncil\Agenda reports\2011\Management Comp Reso - December 6th \EXHIBITA - Management Fringe Benefits 2012.doe C2 -11 11 Resolution No. (2012 Senes) EXHIBIT "A" Management Fringe Benefits 2012 Page 6 of 6 For employees required to wear a uniform, including the Fire Chief, Fire Marshall and Police Chief, shall receive the same uniform allowance as those they directly supervise. Section P Appointed Officials The fringe benefits outlined in this exhibit for department heads apply to appointed officials, except where they have been modified by council resolution. GACouncilWgenda reports\201 IWauagement Comp Reso - December 6th\EXHIBITA- Management Fringe Benefits 2012.doc C2 -12 ATTACHMENT 2 RESOLUTION NO. (2011 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO CEASING TO PAY AND REPORT THE VALUE OF EMPLOYER PAID MEMBER CONTRIBUTIONS FOR APPOINTED OFFICIALS AND MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEES AND SUPERSEDING PREVIOUS RESOLUTIONS IN CONFLICT WHEREAS, the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo has the authority to implement Govenunent Code Section 20636(c) (4) pursuant to Section 20691; and WHEREAS, the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo has a resolution which no longer provides for the normal member contributions to be paid by the employer and reported as additional compensation for appointed officials and management employees; and WHEREAS, one of the steps in the procedures to implement Section 20691 is the adoption by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo of a Resolution to no longer pay and report the value of said Employer Paid Member Contributions (EPMC); and WHEREAS, the governing body of the City of San Luis Obispo has identified the following conditions for the purpose of its election to no longer pay EPMC; • This benefit shall no longer apply to all employees of the Appointed Officials, Department Heads, and Management classifications. • Zero percent of the nonnal contributions will be paid as EPMC, and the same zero percent (value) of compensation earnable {excluding Govenunent Code Section 20636(c)(4)) will be reported as additional compensation. • The effective date of this Resolution shall be January 26, 2012; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo hereby: SECTION 1. Elects to no longer pay or report the value of EPMC, as set forth above. SECTION 2. Directs that prior resolutions relating to management and appointed official compensation and benefits are hereby superseded to the extent inconsistent with this resolution. Upon motion of , seconded by and on the following vote: AYES: NOES: : "C'r3 till (_;d"Agelld ;i "Ma1w-t�gllirl�'.'i ='. C2 -13 ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was adopted this 6th day of December, 2011. Mayor Jan Marx ATTEST: Elaina Cano City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Richard C. Bolanos Partner, Liebert Cassidy Whitmore ATTACHMENT 2 Page 2 of 2 GACouncil\Agenda reports\201 INanagement Comp Reso - December 6th\ATTACHMENT 2- Management Resolution 2012 #2MI.doc C2 -14 ATTACHMENT 3 CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT WITH KATIE E. LICHTIG CITY MANAGER THIS CONTRACT is entered- ;„+ ^amended as of this 6th day of December, 2009 2011 by and between the CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, State of California (hereinafter referred to as "CITY "), and KATIE E. LICHTIG, a contract employee (hereinafter referred to as " KATIE LICHTIG "); 1►JI1101!I *'19:k9:P WHEREAS, Charter Section 703 provides that the SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY COUNCIL (hereinafter referred to as "COUNCIL ") is responsible for the appointment and removal of the CITY MANAGER, and WHEREAS, the COUNCIL, on behalf of the CITY acknowledges and accepts the responsibility for supervision of the CITY MANAGER; and WHEREAS, the COUNCIL is desirous of appointing a CITY MANAGER and wishes to set the terms and conditions of said employment; and WHEREAS, KATIE LICHTIG desires to accept the position of CITY MANAGER consistent with certain terms and conditions of said employment, as set forth in this CONTRACT. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties do mutually agree as follows: Section 1. Effective Date. A. The appointment of KATIE LICHTIG is effective January 19, 2010. B. Nothing in this Contract shall prevent, limit or otherwise interfere with the right of the COUNCIL to terminate the services of KATIE LICHTIG at any time, subject only to San Luis Obispo CITY Charter Section 709 and the provisions set forth in Section 13 of this Contract. C. Nothing in this Contract shall prevent, limit or otherwise interfere with the right of KATIE LICHTIG to resign at any time from her position with the CITY, subject only to the provision set forth in Section 14 of this Contract. Section 2. Duties and Salary. A. CITY agrees to employ KATIE LICHTIG as full -time City Manager of the City to perform the functions and duties specified in the Charter and G: \Council\Agenda reports\201 I \Management Comp Reso - December 6th\ATTACHMENT 3- CityMgrKLi chtigContractAmended. doc C2 -15 ATTACHMENT 3 Municipal Code and to perform such other legally permissible and proper duties and functions as the COUNCIL may from time to time assign. B. It is recognized KATIE LICHTIG is an exempt employee but is expected to engage in those hours of work that are necessary to fulfill the obligations of the City Manager's position. The parties acknowledge KATIE LICHTIG will not regularly participate in a formal 9 -80 work schedule as is provided to department heads and certain other City employees as part of the City's Trip Reduction Incentive Program. However, KATIE LICHTIG is authorized, with appropriate notification to Council, to from time to time modify her regular work schedule in order to take time off with pay while ensuring appropriate coverage of her duties as City Manager. Leave pursuant to this provision shall not be used in lieu of vacation or administrative leave. C. COUNCIL agrees to pay KATIE LICHTIG, for her services rendered pursuant hereto, a starting annual base salary of $221,500 payable in installments at the same time as the other management employees of the CITY are paid. In addition, COUNCIL agrees to increase said base salary by the cost - of- living adjustment approved by the COUNCIL for all CITY management employees under the Management Pay- for - Performance System (Resolution No. 10036 (2008 Series) and any successors. Section 3. Benefits. In addition to the salary set forth in Section 2 of this CONTRACT, KATIE LICHTIG shall be entitled to the same benefits as those offered by the CITY to the CITY MANAGER, in accordance with Resolution No. 4003 (2008 Series), Resolution 9440 (2003 Serio4 Resolution 8661 (1997 series) and successors. Notwithstanding the above, KATIE LICHTIG shall be entitled to the following leave benefits: An initial balance of 40 hours of sick leave and 40 hours of vacation leave; and a vacation leave accrual rate of 160 hours per year in light of her past public sector service. Section 4. Performance Evaluation. A. By April 30, 2010, COUNCIL and KATIE LICHTIG shall establish mutually agreeable written goals, performance objectives, and priorities for the performance period ending March 30, 2011. Further, Council shall conduct an "interim" evaluation by October 29, 2010. An annual formal Council evaluation will be conducted in March of 2011 in accordance with the City's Appointed Official Evaluation Process. Consistent with the schedule outlined above, based on the Appointed Officials Evaluation Process, and subject to performance as assessed by the COUNCIL, the CITY MANAGER compensation shall be reviewed by COUNCIL in April 2011 consistent with the Management Pay -for- Performance System in place at that time. GACounciKAgenda reports\2011\Management Comp Reso - December 6thWTTACHMENT 3- CityM grKLichtigContractAmended. doe C2 -16 ATTACHMENT 3 B. Each calendar year thereafter, COUNCIL shall review and evaluate the performance and compensation of KATIE LICHTIG in accordance with the adopted Appointed Officials Evaluation Process and adopted Management Pay - for- Performance System, or any successor systems. Section 5. Outside Activities, Conduct and Behavior. A. KATIE LICHTIG shall not engage in teaching, consulting or other non - CITY connected business without the prior approval of COUNCIL. B. KATIE LICHTIG shall comply with all local and state requirements regarding conflicts -of- interest. Section 6. Dues and Subscriptions. COUNCIL agrees to budget for and to pay for professional dues and subscriptions of KATIE LICHTIG necessary for her continuation and full participation in national, regional, state, and local associations, and organizations necessary and desirable for her continued professional participation, growth, and advancement, and for the good of the CITY. Section 7. Professional Develooment. A. COUNCIL hereby agrees to budget for and to pay for travel and subsistence expenses of KATIE LICHTIG for professional and official travel, meetings, and occasions adequate to continue the professional development of KATIE LICHTIG and to adequately pursue necessary official functions for the CITY, including but not limited to the League of California Cities Annual Conference, International City /County Managers' Association and such other national, regional, state, and local governmental organizations, groups and /or committees. B. COUNCIL also agrees to budget for and to pay for travel and subsistence expenses of KATIE LICHTIG for short courses, institutes, and seminars that are necessary for her professional development and for the good of the CITY. C. Other professional development may be agreed upon from time to time between the COUNCIL and KATIE LICHTIG. Section 8. General Expenses. COUNCIL recognizes that certain expenses of a non - personal and job - affiliated nature are incurred by the CITY MANAGER, and hereby agrees to authorize the Finance Director to reimburse or to pay said general and reasonable expenses, consistent with CITY policies, upon receipt of duly G: \Council\Agenda reports\201 1\Management Comp Reso - December 6th\ATTACHMENT 3 CityMgrKLich tigContractAmended.doc C2 -17 ATTACHMENT 3 executed expense or petty cash vouchers, receipts, statements or personal affidavits. Section 9. Relocation Assistance A. The CITY shall pay or reimburse KATIE LICHTIG all reasonable relocation expenses incurred in moving her residence and family from Los Angeles County to the City of San Luis Obispo. These expenses shall be limited to the cost of packing, moving, and temporary storage of household furnishings and up to two house - hunting trips. B. The CITY shall reimburse KATIE LICHTIG a monthly temporary housing rental expense not to exceed $2,500 per month to assist her while relocating her personal residence to a new principal residence in San Luis Obispo. This allowance shall be made available only through July 31, 2010. C. The CITY shall make available a loan to KATIE LICHTIG, to assist with the purchase of a principal residence within the corporate limits of the City of San Luis Obispo CITY and KATIE LICHTIG shall execute such notes, deeds of trust, escrow instructions, agreements and other documents as the City Attorney may determine are reasonably necessary to effectuate this second mortgage assistance in a form mutually determined by the City Attorney and KATIE LICHTIG and executed by the Mayor on behalf of CITY. The maximum amount of such a loan shall not exceed $125,000. The interest rate shall be variable, adjusted annually, and tied to the City's Local Agency Investment Fund rate. The term of the loan shall be for ten years. Payments shall be amortized over 30 years. The loan shall be structured to allow for interest -only payments with a balloon payment at the end of ten years. Rollover of existing equity in another residence shall not be required. Section 10. Indemnification. In addition to that required under state and local law, CITY shall defend, save harmless, and indemnify KATIE LICHTIG against any claims, demands, causes of actions, losses, damages, expenses (including but not limited to attorney's fees as may be authorized against public entities or officers consistent with state law) or liability of any kind whether stated in or arising from tort, professional liability or any other legal action or equitable theory, whether groundless or otherwise arising out of an alleged act or omission occurring in the performance of KATIE LICHTIG'S duties as CITY MANAGER to the fullest extent permitted by law. CITY may compromise and settle any such claim or suit, and shall pay the amount of any settlement or judgment rendered thereon. GACounciiAgenda reports\2011\Management Comp Reso - December 6thA77ACHMENT 3- CityMgrKLichtigContractAmended. doc C2 -18 ATTACHMENT 3 Section 11. Other Terms and Conditions of Employment. The COUNCIL, in consultation with KATIE LICHTIG, shall fix any such other terms and conditions of employment, as it may determine from time to time, relating to the performance of KATIE LICHTIG, provided such terms and conditions are not inconsistent with or in conflict with the provisions of this CONTRACT, the CITY Charter or any other law. Section 12. No Reduction of Pav and /or Benefits. COUNCIL shall not at any time during the term of this CONTRACT, reduce the salary, compensation or other financial benefits of KATIE LICHTIG, except to the degree of such a reduction across - the -board for all employees of the CITY. Section 13. Termination and Severance Pay. A. In the event KATIE LICHTIG'S employment is terminated by the COUNCIL, or she resigns at the request of a majority of the COUNCIL during such time that she is otherwise willing and able to perform the duties of CITY MANAGER, the COUNCIL agrees to pay her a lump sum cash payment equal to nine (9) months compensation (salary and all appointed officials fringe benefits). Additionally, CITY shall extend to KATIE LICHTIG the right to continue and purchase at her expense health insurance pursuant to the terms and condition of the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1986 (COBRA) or any successor legal requirement. KATIE LICHTIG is the City Manager for the purposes of the benefits under the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority of which the CITY is a member. Any associated severance benefit as a result of termination shall be in accordance with the terms and conditions of the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority's Memorandum of Liability Coverage in effect at the time of termination. B. In the event that KATIE LICHTIG is terminated for "good cause" the COUNCIL shall have no obligation to pay the lump sum severance payment mentioned above. For the purpose of this CONTRACT, "good cause" shall mean any of the following: (1) Malfeasance, dishonesty for personal gain, willful violation of law, corrupt misconduct, or conviction of any felony. (2) Conviction of a misdemeanor arising directly out of KATIE LICHTIG's duties pursuant to this Agreement. (3) Willful abandonment of duties outlined in this Agreement. "Good cause" shall not mean a mere loss of support or confidence by a majority of the COUNCIL. GACounciMgenda reports\201 l \Management Comp Reso - December 6th\ATTACHMENT 3- CityMgrK LichtigCoutrac tAmended. doe C2 -19 ATTACHMENT 3 C. Any termination of employment shall be done consistent with limitations established in the City Charter Section 709. Additionally, the CITY shall provide a minimum of 30 days prior written notice to KATIE LICHTIG of the intent to terminate this Agreement. Section 14. Resignation. In the event KATIE LICHTIG voluntarily resigns her position with the CITY, she shall give the COUNCIL at least two (2) months advance written notice. Section 15. General Provisions. A. The text herein shall constitute the entire CONTRACT between the parties. B. This CONTRACT shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs at law and executors of the parties. C. It is the intent of the COUNCIL that this CONTRACT and the appointment of KATIE LICHTIG as CITY MANAGER are in accordance with the requirements and provisions of the Charter. Wherever possible, the provisions of this CONTRACT shall be construed in a manner consistent with the Charter. If any provision of this CONTRACT conflicts with the Charter, the Charter shall control. D. If any provision, or any portion thereof, contained in this CONTRACT is held unconstitutional, invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this CONTRACT, or portion thereof, shall be deemed severable, shall not be affected, and shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, CITY and EMPLOYEE have executed this Contract on the day and year first set forth above. KATIE E. LICHTIG JAN MARX, MAYOR DATE DATE GACounciMgenda repoits\201 l \Management Comp Reso - December 6th\ATTACHMENT 3- CityMgrKLichtigContractAmended .doc C2 -20 ATTACHMENT 3 ATTEST: ELAINA CANO CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: RICHARD C. BOLANOS PARTNER, LIEBERT CASSIDY WHITMORE I Ljj:4 GACouncil\Agenda reports\2011\Management Comp Reso - December 6th\ATTACHMENT 3- CityMgrKLichtigContractAmended .doe C2 -21 ATTACHMENT 4 CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT WITH J. CHRISTINE DIETRICK CITY ATTORNEY THIS CONTRACT is o„+^red ; „+ ^amended this t15th 6th day of December, 2099 2011 by and between the CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, State of California (hereinafter referred to as "CITY "), and J. CHRISTINE DIETRICK, a contract employee (hereinafter referred to as " CHRISTINE DIETRICK "); WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Charter Section 703 provides that the SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY COUNCIL (hereinafter referred to as "COUNCIL ") is responsible for the appointment and removal of the CITY ATTORNEY, and WHEREAS, the COUNCIL, on behalf of the CITY acknowledges and accepts the responsibility for supervision of the CITY ATTORNEY; and WHEREAS, the COUNCIL is desirous of appointing a CITY ATTORNEY and wishes to set the terms and conditions of said employment; and WHEREAS, CHRISTINE DIETRICK desires to accept the position of CITY ATTORNEY consistent with certain terms and conditions of said employment, as set forth in this CONTRACT. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties do mutually agree as follows: Section 1. Effective Date. A. The appointment of CHRISTINE DIETRICK is effective January 1, P41611l B. Nothing in this Contract shall prevent, limit or otherwise interfere with the right of the COUNCIL to terminate the services of CHRISTINE DIETRICK at any time, subject only to San Luis Obispo CITY Charter Section 709 and the provisions set forth in Section 12 of this Contract. C. Nothing in this Contract shall prevent, limit or otherwise interfere with the right of CHRISTINE DIETRICK to resign at any time from her position with the CITY, subject only to the provision set forth in Section 13 of this Contract. Section 2. Duties and Salary. A. CITY agrees to employ CHRISTINE DIETRICK as full -time CITY ATTORNEY of the City to perform the functions and duties specified in the GACouncilWgenda repoits\201 Management Comp Reso - December 6th\ATTACHMENT 4- CityAttorneyDietri ckContractAinended. docx C2 -22 Charter and Municipal Code and to perform such other legally permissible and proper duties and functions as the COUNCIL may from time to time assign. B. COUNCIL agrees to pay CHRISTINE DIETRICK, for her services rendered pursuant hereto, a starting annual base salary of $155,000 payable in installments at the same time as the other management employees of the CITY are paid. In addition, COUNCIL agrees to increase said base salary by the cost - of- living adjustment approved by the COUNCIL for all CITY management employees under the Management Pay- for - Performance System (Resolution No. 10036 (2008 Series) and any successors. Section 3. Benefits. In addition to the salary set forth in Section 2 of this CONTRACT, CHRISTINE DIETRICK shall be entitled to a car allowance of $250 per month, a City contribution of 3.5% of salary to a 401(a) supplemental retirement plan and the same benefits as those offered by the CITY to the CITY ATTORNEY, in accordance with Resolution No. 40036 (2008 Series) and successors. Section 4. Performance Evaluation, A. By April 30, 2010, COUNCIL and CHRISTINE DIETRICK shall establish mutually agreeable written goals, performance objectives, and priorities for the performance period ending March 30, 2011. Further, Council shall conduct an "interim" evaluation by October 29, 2010. An annual formal Council evaluation will be conducted in March of 2011 in accordance with the City's Appointed Official Evaluation Process. Consistent with the schedule outlined above, based on the Appointed Officials Evaluation Process, and subject to performance as assessed by the COUNCIL, the CITY ATTORNEY compensation shall be reviewed by COUNCIL in April 2011 consistent with the Management Pay- for - Performance System in place at that time. B. Each calendar year thereafter, COUNCIL shall review and evaluate the performance and compensation of CHRISTINE DIETRICK in accordance with the adopted Appointed Officials Evaluation Process and adopted Management Pay- for - Performance System, or any successor systems. Section 5. Outside Activities, Conduct and Behavior. A. CHRISTINE DIETRICK shall not engage in teaching, consulting or other non -CITY connected business without the prior approval of COUNCIL. B. CHRISTINE DIETRICK shall comply with all local and state requirements regarding conflicts -of- interest. GACounciKAgenda reports\201INanagement Comp Reso - December 6th\ATTACHMENT 4- 2 CityAttomeyDietri ckContractAmended. docx C2 -23 ATTACHMENT 4 Section 6. Dues and Subscriptions. COUNCIL agrees to budget for and to pay for professional dues and subscriptions of CHRISTINE DIETRICK necessary for her continuation and full participation in national, regional, state, and local associations, and organizations necessary and desirable for her continued professional participation, growth, and advancement, and for the good of the CITY. Section 7. Professional Development. A. COUNCIL hereby agrees to budget for and to pay for travel and subsistence expenses of CHRISTINE DIETRICK for professional and official travel, meetings, and occasions adequate to continue the professional development of CHRISTINE DIETRICK and to adequately pursue necessary official functions for the CITY, including but not limited to the League of California Cities Annual Conference, League of California Cities City Attorneys Department Conference, and such other national, regional, state, and local governmental organizations, groups and /or committees. B. COUNCIL also agrees to budget for and to pay for travel and subsistence expenses of CHRISTINE DIETRICK for short courses, institutes, and seminars that are necessary for her professional development and for the good of the CITY. C. Other professional development may be agreed upon from time to time between the COUNCIL and CHRISTINE DIETRICK. Section 8. General Expenses. COUNCIL recognizes that certain expenses of a non - personal and job - affiliated nature are incurred by the CITY ATTORNEY, and hereby agrees to authorize the Finance Director to reimburse or to pay said general and reasonable expenses, consistent with CITY policies, upon receipt of duly executed expense or petty cash vouchers, receipts, statements or personal affidavits. Section 9. Indemnification. In addition to that required under state and local law, CITY shall defend, save harmless, and indemnify CHRISTINE DIETRICK against any claims, demands, causes of actions, losses, damages, expenses (including but not limited to attorney's fees as may be authorized against public entities or officers consistent with state law) or liability of any kind whether stated in or arising from tort, professional liability or any other legal action or equitable theory, whether groundless or otherwise arising out of an alleged act or omission occurring in the GACounciRAgenda reports\201 lWanagement Comp Reso - December 6thWTTACHMENT 4- 3 CityAttorneyDietiickContrac tAmended.docx C2 -24 ATTACHMENT 4 performance of CHRISTINE DIETRICK'S duties as CITY ATTORNEY to the fullest extent permitted by law. CITY may compromise and settle any such claim or suit, and shall pay the amount of any settlement or judgment rendered thereon. Section 10. Other Terms and Conditions of Employment. The COUNCIL, in consultation with CHRISTINE DIETRICK, shall fix any such other terms and conditions of employment, as it may determine from time to time, relating to the performance of CHRISTINE DIETRICK, provided such terms and conditions are not inconsistent with or in conflict with the provisions of this CONTRACT, the CITY Charter or any other law. Section 11. No Reduction of Pay and /or Benefits. COUNCIL shall not at any time during the term of this CONTRACT, reduce the salary, compensation or other financial benefits of CHRISTINE DIETRICK, except to the degree of such a reduction across - the -board for all employees of the CITY. Section 12. Termination and Severance Pay. A. In the event CHRISTINE DIETRICK'S employment is terminated by the COUNCIL, or she resigns at the request of a majority of the COUNCIL during such time that she is otherwise willing and able to perform the duties of CITY ATTORNEY, the COUNCIL agrees to pay her a lump sum cash payment equal to nine (9) months compensation (salary and all appointed officials fringe benefits). Additionally, CITY shall extend to CHRISTINE DIETRICK the right to continue and purchase at her expense health insurance pursuant to the terms and condition of the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1986 (COBRA) or any successor legal requirement. CHRISTINE DIETRICK is the CITY ATTORNEY for the purposes of the benefits under the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority of which the CITY is a member. Any associated severance benefit as a result of termination shall be in accordance with the terms and conditions of the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority's Memorandum of Liability Coverage in effect at the time of termination. B. In the event that CHRISTINE DIETRICK is terminated for "good cause" the COUNCIL shall have no obligation to pay the lump sum severance payment mentioned above. For the purpose of this CONTRACT, "good cause" shall mean any of the following: (1) Malfeasance, dishonesty for personal gain, willful violation of law, corrupt misconduct, or conviction of any felony. (2) Conviction of a misdemeanor arising directly out of CHRISTINE DIETRICK's duties pursuant to this Agreement. GACouucikAgenda repotls\201 lWanagement Comp Reso - December 6tb\ATTACHMENT 4- 4 CityAttorneyDieti ickContractAmended. docx C2 -25 ATTACHMENT 4 (3) Willful abandonment of duties outlined in this Agreement. "Good cause" shall not mean a mere loss of support or confidence by a majority of the COUNCIL. C. Any termination of employment shall be done consistent with limitations established in the City Charter Section 709. Additionally, the CITY shall provide a minimum of 30 days prior written notice to CHRISTINE DIETRICK of the intent to terminate this Agreement. Section 13. Resignation. In the event CHRISTINE DIETRICK voluntarily resigns her position with the CITY, she shall give the COUNCIL at least two (2) months advance written notice. Section 14. General Provisions. A. The text herein shall constitute the entire CONTRACT between the parties. B. This CONTRACT shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs at law and executors of the parties. C. It is the intent of the COUNCIL that this CONTRACT and the appointment of CHRISTINE DIETRICK as CITY ATTORNEY are in accordance with the requirements and provisions of the Charter. Wherever possible, the provisions of this CONTRACT shall be construed in a manner consistent with the Charter. If any provision of this CONTRACT conflicts with the Charter, the Charter shall control. D. If any provision, or any portion thereof, contained in this CONTRACT is held unconstitutional, invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this CONTRACT, or portion thereof, shall be deemed severable, shall not be affected, and shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, CITY and EMPLOYEE have executed this Contract on the da and year first set forth above. i� ov '!1 J. CHRISTINE DIETRICK DATff GACouncihAgenda reports\2011\Management Comp Reso - December 6thWTTACHMENT 4- CityAttornrneyDi etri c kContractAmended. docx C2 -26 JAN MARX, MAYOR DATE ATTEST: ELAINA CANO CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: RICHARD C. BOLANOS PARTNER, LIEBERT CASSIDY WHITMORE DATE ATTACHMENT 4 G: \Council\Agenda reports\201 IWanagement Comp Reso - December 6th\ATTACHMENT 4- 6 CityAttomeyDietrickContractAmended .docx C2 -27 l� FROM: council. Ac cn 0A REpop't C I T Y OF S A N L U I S O B I S P O Michael Codron, Assistant City Manager Meeting Date 9-20-2011 hem N-1- f')� SUBJECT: CITY COMMUNICATIONS INFRASTRUCTURE EASEMENT RECOMMENDATION Authorize the Mayor to accept an easement from the owners of the Damon - Garcia Ranch for communications infrastructure, and in exchange grant a fee waiver for Subdivision Services valued at $2,949. DISCUSSION Background On September 20, 2011, the City Council approved an agreement with Digital West Networks, Inc. to allow access to City -owned conduit for the purpose of completing a private fiber -optic network in the City. In exchange for access to the City's conduit, Digital West agreed to provide the City with certain services, such as data storage, that represent ongoing value to the City. The City's communications conduit runs between the Corporation Yard and Broad Street, and traverses the Damon - Garcia Ranch, as shown in the attached vicinity map (Attachment 1). The conduit was installed at the same time as a recycled water line was installed, which serves the Damon Garcia Sports Fields and is a major trunk line for recycled water service to this part of the City. At the time, it was standard City practice to install communications conduit whenever the City was trenching for other purposes. Digital West has now installed the fiber optic lines in the existing conduit. These fiber "runs" include connections for both the City's fiber optic network and for the Digital West network. During the installation process, it was discovered that the existing water line easement was exclusive to the water line use. As a result, the City worked with the Damon Garcia Ranch owners to permit the installation of the line pending approval of a new easement. New Easement Proposed The proposed communications easement is necessary for the City to move forward with long standing plans to create a fiber optic ring around the City, to improve the speed and reliability of both emergency communications and standard City communications functions. In addition, the easement is necessary for the City to be able to honor its agreement with Digital West, which has contracted with the City for access to the conduit. The new easement follows the exact same path as the existing water line easement (Attachment 2). As a result, staff has utilized the legal description from the waterline easement and modified the waterline easement documents for the proposed communications easement. Given that staff was able to model the proposed communications easement so closely after the waterline easement, staff did not utilize title or escrow services as a cost saving measure. CM City Communications Conduit Agreement Page 2 Fee Waiver Requested Payment for the easement is proposed to be in the form of an exchange of services. Consistent with the City's agreement with Digital West, the City worked with the Damon Garcia Ranch owners to define an exchange of services, in -lieu of a cash payment, to allow use of the communications conduit. In exchange for the new easement, the Damon Garcia Ranch owners have requested a fee waiver for subdivision services, consisting of a lot line adjustment and certificate of compliance for a portion of their property zoned medium - density residential (R2 -SP). This portion of the ranch is located on the corner of Broad Street and Rockview Place (Attachment 3). Granting of the fee waiver does not guarantee approval of the application. The owners of the ranch must still complete a Planning Application for the requested service and staff will follow all of the normal procedures for review of the application. Lot Line Adjustment Procedure In general, lot line adjustments and certificates of compliance are considered ministerial actions that do not involve exercise of discretion on the part of the City. No new lots can be created through this process. The procedures for review and approval of both processes are outlined in Chapter 16 of the Municipal Code. The proposed lot line adjustment has been evaluated on a preliminary basis by staff and it appears consistent with the City's Subdivision Regulations and the Margarita Area Specific Plan. CONCURRENCES Community Development and Finance and Information Technology departments concur with this recommendation. FISCAL IMPACT The requested fee waiver will result in the City rendering services, with a cost of approximately $3,000, without collecting the fees necessary to offset that cost. This is considered a minor fiscal impact considering the value of the communications infrastructure to be installed. ALTERNATIVES 1. Do not approve the Easement. This is not recommended because the cost of the easement is considered minor and the easement is necessary for the City to move forward with long standing plans to create a fiber optic ring around the City to improve the speed and reliability of both emergency communications and standard City communications functions. In addition, the easement is necessary for the City to be able to honor its agreement with Digital West, which has contracted with the City for access to the conduit. 2. Continue consideration of the request. The Council could continue consideration of this request if more information is needed to make a final decision. C3 -2 City Communications Conduit Agreement ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity Map 2. Proposed Easement 3. Map of 3615 Broad Street Page C3 -3 nrrA ftair , ' C3-4 MOMENT 2 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO; Finance Department City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 APNs 076 - 391 -005 & 076 - 391 -007 THIS SPACE RESERVED FOR RECORDER ONLY (Gov. Code . 27361.6) EASEMENT DEED FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, DOUGLAS G. DAMON and EILEEN M. DAMON, Trustees of the Damon Family trust under Agreement dated August 11, 1994; ROY A. GARCIA and DOLLY H. GARCIA, Co- Trustees of the Roy A Garcia Family Revocable Trust dated April 2, 1992; and Dolly H. Garcia, a married woman; hereby GRANT to: CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, a Chartered Municipal Corporation ITEM 1. a permanent communications facilities easement with rights of ingress thereto and egress therefrom, to construct, maintain, operate, reconstruct, repair, remove, replace, increase and /or change the number and/or size of the pipes,conduits, fibers, cables, appurtenances and incidentals thereto for communications facilities under, within, through and upon certain property in the County of San Luis Obispo, State of California, as particularly described and depicted on attached EXHIBITS "Al" AND `BI" which are incorporated into this Easement Deed. This easement and the communications facilities located within it may be relocated at a future date to an alternative route through Grantor's property, by Grantor at Grantor's sole cost and expense, subject to City's pre- approval of an acceptable comparable alternative easement location, City's review and pre - approval of construction plans and specifications, and City's acceptance of replacement facilities constructed per such plans and specifications. In order to pursue any such future relocation, once Grantor's communications facilities easement relocation proposal is approved by City, Grantor shall execute an easement deed to City conveying an easement over the alternative communications facilities route and may then pursue construction of the replacement communications facilities within said new easement in accordance with the relocation conditions of approval specified by City in conjunction with their approval of Grantor's easement and communications facilities relocation plan. Once construction of replacement communications facilities is completed to City's satisfaction within the relocated easement and such facilities are accepted by City, City agrees to quitclaim this original easement. In the event that no easement relocation occurs per the provisions specified herein, this easement shall remain valid and effective in perpetuity. Page 1 of 3 C3 -5 ATTACHMENT ITEM 2 City hereby agrees to provide a minimum of seventy -two (72) hours' notice to Grantor prior to accessing, utilizing or otherwise exercising any right as provided for in this Easement Deed, except in an emergency situation as deemed in the sole discretion of the City. Notice shall be via first class mail, facsimile, overnight mail, email, telephone or any other electronic communication. The terms and conditions of easement deed shall run with the land and be binding upon the heirs and successors in interest to the parties hereto. Dated State of County of [T.1 before me, DOUGLAS G. DAMON and EILEEN M. DAMON, Trustees of the Damon Family trust under Agreement dated August 11, 1994 Eileen M. Damon, Trustee personally appeared , personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is /are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he /she /they executed the same in his /her /their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his /her /their signatures(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal Signature (Seal) Signatures continued on next page... ROY A. GARCIA and DOLLY H. GARCIA, Co- Trustees of the Roy A Garcia Family Revocable Trust dated April 2, 1992 Roy A. Garcia, Trustee Dolly H. Garcia, Trustee Dolly H. Garcia, an individual Page 2 of 3 C3 -6 ATfAGIMENT2 Roy A. Garcia, an individual (This signature is provided for the purposes of releasing any community property interests Roy Garcia may hold as spouse to Dolly Garcia) State of County of On before me, personally appeared - personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is /are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he /she /they executed the same in his /her /their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his /her /their signatures(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal Signature (Seal) Page 3 of 3 C3 -7 ATiACHMENT2 EXHIBIT Al Permanent Easement LEGAL DESCRIPTION utility casement, 10.00 feet wide, over portions of the San Luis Obispo Suburban 'Tract in the Cite of San Luis Obispo and the southeast' /, section of Section 2, T31S, RUE, M.D. B. & M., in the county of San Luis Obispo, State of California. The centerline of said easement being parallel and equidistant 15.00 feet southerly to the centerline of the 20.00 feet wide easement described in Book- 3592, page 345, Official Records, in the County Recorder's office, as document No. 68772, conveyed to the City of San Luis Obispo and more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point located on the northwesterly property line of the 23.5 acre parcel of land conveyed to the City of San Luis Obispo and recorded in official records of the office of the County Recorder of the County of San Luis Obispo per Document No. 1999 - 056626, said point being located a distance of 426.31 feet, N 46° 43' 01" E, along said northwesterly property line from its intersection with the westerly section line of Section 1, said point being the true point of beginning; Thence N 86° 32'00" W, 114.03 feet; Thencc N 63° 23'45" W, 317.43 feet; Thence N 34° 24' 29" W, 415.93 feet; Thence N 52° 41' 11" W, 542.50 feet; Thence N 56° 07' 59" W, 576.69 feet; Thence N 54° 57' 11" W, 597.13 feet Thence N 86° 52' 16" W, 97.11 feet, more or less, to the easterly right-of- -way line of that certain easement conveyed to the City of San Luis Obispo per Document Number 35626, recorded in book 1920, page 684, official records in the office of the county recorder of San Luis Obispo County, State of California. The sidelines of said easement being prolonged or foreshortened so as to terminate at their points of intersection. Easement area is 0.61 acres, more or less. HIJI *" N0. 5139* r � � (:: \D) umcnts and Scttin{ s \slr)uscr \Desktop \Garcia C-�smcnt \Pcrmanant Fascmcm Leal Description Kcv I (030503).drx C3 -8 ATTACHMENT EXISTING 3--' EASEMENT EXHIBIT `B1' PER DOC. NO, 35626, PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT BOCiI< 1 _) 'C?, C 684;0.R. _, TO THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA EASEMENT AREA = t0.61 ACRES N86 °52'1 6 "W 97.11' - / �1 N54 °57'11 "W 597.13' CENTERLINE, EXISTING 20' WIDE EASEMENT PER BOOK 3592, PG. 345 O.R. N56 °07'59 "W 576.69' SE 1/4 OF SEC. 2 T31S., R12E., M.D.B. & M. 1 �� --15' OFFSET N52 °41'11 "W 542.50' CENTERLINE, 10' WIDE PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT TO CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO�^ N34 °24'29 "W 415.93' LOT 87 S.L.O, SUBURBAN TRACT N63 °23'45 "W 317.43' N86 °32'00 "W 114.03' TPOB PROPERTY '` LINE N46 °43'01' �,��, 426.31' ,�. CITY OF SAN LUIS OBIS 0 ` 23.5 ACRES f ,� �\DOC. NO. 1999- 056626 O.R."`j � / f y C3 -9 ATTACHMENT PARCEL NO.: 076 - 391 - 005,007 (San Luis Obispo County) PROJECT: City of San Luis Obispo - Digital West RIGHT OF WAY AGREEMENT (WITH ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS) THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between Roy A. Garcia and Dolly H. Garcia, co- trustees of the Roy A. Garcia Family Revocable Trust dated April 2, 1992; Dolly H. Garcia, a married woman; and Douglas G. Damon and Eileen M. Damon, Trustees of the Damon Family Trust under agreement dated August 11, 1994, all hereinafter collectively called "Grantor," and The City of San Luis Obispo, a Chartered Municipal Corporation, hereinafter called "City." An Easement Deed covering the property rights particularly described therein, has been executed concurrently with this Agreement and delivered to City representatives. In consideration of which, and other considerations hereinafter set forth, it is mutually agreed as follows: 1. The parties have herein set forth the whole of their agreement. The performance of this Agreement constitutes the entire consideration for said Easement. 2. The City shall: A. PAYMENT - waive Planning Application Fees for a future Lot Line Adjustment request with Certificates of Compliance to separate certain R -2 residential land on the Damon - Garcia Ranch (Parcel I.D. 053- 431 -003) from the remaining portion of the Property., which shall occur when title to said real property interests has vested in City free and clear of all liens, encumbrances, assessments, easements and leases, recorded or unrecorded, except for recorded public utility easements and public rights of way. B. MISCELLANEOUS COSTS - Pay all recording fees incurred in this transaction. C. PROPERTY RESTORATION - Generally restore the surface of the easement areas described in the referenced Easement Deed to the condition that existed prior to City's Project construction, to the extent reasonably practical, except in areas where surface appurtenances such as markers, manholes, and access vaults may be located. D. INDEMNIFICATION - Indemnify, and hold harmless Grantor from any and all claims, damages, costs, judgments, or liability caused by City or its officers, employees or agents arising from City's Project construction and restoration work on Grantor's property or as a result of the operation of City facilities on Grantor's property. C3 -10 ATTACHMENT E. RECORDATION OF INSTRUMENT_ - Accept the Easement Deed herein referenced and cause the same to be recorded in the office of the San Luis Obispo County Recorder at such time as when clear title can be conveyed to the City. 3. The Grantor: A. LEASE INDEMNIFICATION - Warrants there are no oral or written leases on all or any portion of the easement areas described in the referenced Easement Deed, or if there are any such leases, Grantor agrees to hold the City harmless and reimburse City for any and all of its losses and expenses occasioned by reason of any lease of said property held by tenant of Grantor. B. PERMISSION TO ENTER - Hereby grants to the City, its agents and contractors, permission to enter upon the easement areas described in the referenced Easement Deed, subject to all applicable terms and conditions contained in this Agreement and the associated Easement Deed prior to the recordation of the Easement Deed. C. GRANTOR'S ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS WARRAN'T'Y - To the best of Grantor's knowledge and belief, Grantor represents and warrants that throughout the period of ownership of the Property by Grantor, there have been no notices, directives, violation reports or actions by any local, state or federal department or agency concerning environmental laws or regulations. Further Grantor warrants that Grantor has no knowledge of any spill, discharge, release, cleanup or contamination of or by any hazardous or toxic waste or substance on the easement areas described in the herein referenced easement deed, during the term of Grantor's ownership of the Property. 4. The Parties agree: A. TAXES - Any taxes which have been paid by Grantor, prior to recording of the Easement Deed, shall not be prorated between City and Grantor, but Grantor shall have the sole right after recordation, to apply to the County Tax Collector of said County for any refund of such taxes which may be due Grantor for the period after the communications facilities easement conveyance is completed. B. TRANSFER OF EASEMENT City hereby agrees to provide at least thirty (30) calendar days' notice to Grantor prior to transfer of Easement. City hereby further agrees that City shall not transfer the Easement without the approval of Grantor. Grantor hereby agrees to give its approval, which shall not be unreasonably withheld, and shall provide notice of either its approval or reasonable disapproval of the transfer of the Easement to City within five (5) business days of receiving the City's notice of the transfer of the Easement. Grantor's failure to provide notice within five (5) business days shall constitute approval of the transfer of the Easement. 2 C3 -11 ATTACHMENT C. ARTICLE HEADINGS, - Article headings in this Agreement are for convenience only and are not intended to be used in interpreting or construing the terms, covenants and conditions of this Agreement. D. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS - This Agreement shall apply to and bind the heirs, executors, administrators, assigns and successors of the parties hereto E. COUNTERPARTS - This agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which so executed shall irrespective of the date of its execution and delivery be deemed an original, and all such counterparts together shall constitute one and the same instrument. F. COMPLETE UNDERSTANDING - This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, superseding all negotiations, prior discussions, and preliminary agreements or understandings, written or oral. This Agreement may not be amended except in writing by the parties hereto or their successors or assigns. G. CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL - This Agreement is subject to and conditioned upon approval and ratification by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo. This Agreement is not binding upon the City until executed by the appropriate City official(s) acting in their authorized capacity. No Obligation Other Than Those Set Forth Herein Will Be Recognized. Signatures appear on following page C3 -12 ATTACHMENT 2 Continued from Page 4 SIGNATURES— RIGHT OF WAY AGREEMENT (WITH ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS): Date: GRANTOR: ROY A. GARCIA AND DOLLY H. GARCIA, CO- TRUSTEES OF THE ROY A. GARCIA FAMILY REVOCABLE TRUST DATED APRIL 2, 1992 Roy A. Garcia, CoTrustee Date: Dolly H. Garcia, CoTrustee Date: DOUGLAS G. DAMON AND EILEEN M. DAMON, TRUSTEES OF THE DAMON FAMILY TRUST UNDER AGREEMENT DATED AUGUST 11, 1994 Eileen M. Damon, Trustee MAILING ADDRESS OF GRANTOR: C/O Dolly and Roy Garcia 547 Prado Road San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 CITY: CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO Date: By: MAILING ADDRESS OF CITY: City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 al C3 -13 3615 BROAD C /OS-40 -SP 053 - 431 -003 ATACHMENT 3 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO he information contained in this database is intended for informational use only. This information is provided for the convenience of users, but GEODATA SERVICES oes not necessarily constitute precise property ownership or legal descriptions of any property, and should not be relied upon as an official roperty record. The City of San Luis Obispo makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of this data; however, the accuracy of this material is 955 MORRO STREET of guaranteed and users assume responsibility for independent verification of any and all information contained herein prior to use or reliance SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401 pon such information for any official purpose. The City San Luis Obispo disclaims any responsibility or liability for any direct or indirect (805) 781 -7167 amages resulting from the use of this data. C3 11/28/2011 11:09 -14 c o u n c i l Mrniing Date 12/6/11 j Ac cn OA REp0Rt c C I T Y OF S A N L U IS O B I S P O FROM: Jay D. Walter, Director of Public Works JDW Prepared By: Matt Horn, Supervising Civil Engineer SUBJECT: TRENCH REPAIR, JOB ORDER CONTRACT, SPECIFICATION NO. 91092 RECOMMENDATION 1. Approve plans and specifications for the Trench Repair, Job Order Contract, Specification No. 91092. 2. Authorize staff to advertise for bids and authorize the City Manager to award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder. DISCUSSION Background Throughout the course of the year, small street repairs need to be completed. Repairs are usually needed because an excavation has occurred to repair an underground pipeline, or an area of the street has settled significantly. When a water or sewer pipe is repaired, Utility Department staff completes the work to the pipeline and then temporarily patches the roadway. Engineering Division staff then collects the location information and periodically issues a construction contract to replace the temporary patch with a stronger and more permanent asphalt patch. This is currently occurring approximately every 12 months. In order to streamline this activity and allow these permanent repairs to be completed more rapidly, while still retaining the benefits of low bids, staff is proposing re- establishing a Job Order Contract (JOC) for trench repair work. JOC is an alternative bidding procedure that was approved by the voters and added to the City's Charter on November 5, 2002. (See Attachment 1). Simply put, it is an on -call service contract. The JOC provisions allow the City to perform maintenance related construction projects for repair, remodeling or other repetitive work under a unit price contract. The City first implemented a JOC program shortly after the Charter amendment was approved by the voters. The Gordian Group was retained to develop the JOC program in which 160,000 pre - priced construction tasks were developed and the contractors bid a percentage mark -up. The Gordian Group developed the specifications and a contract was awarded in August 2003. The City used this contract for about 2 years. Multiple projects were completed using the JOC and the success of the program evaluated. The 160,000 pre -priced construction tasks covered every imaginable type of work and broke work down into very small elements, such as traffic control where the City paid per cone costs. This minute breakdown required staff to spend a great deal of time unraveling a cost proposal to see if C4 -1 Trench Repair, Job Order Contract, Specification No. 91095 Page 2 it made sense for the work proposed to be completed or if there were unnecessary elements in the proposal. The additional staff time needed for review made controlling City costs more challenging. Engineering staff has revisited the JOC concept and believes that it can be used to create contracts at low cost to the City in a more rapid timeframe, but will be better as a "focused program ". Instead of bidding a JOC program which covers every imaginable type of work and essentially pays the contractor for each worker and each piece of equipment that is used to complete the work, staff has developed a program that bids the finished product. This Trench Repair Job Order Contract has been developed to pay the contractor for each square foot of roadway repaired regardless of number of pieces of equipment or the number of staff the contractor plans to use. This methodology is consistent with other types of projects the City completes and should make it simpler for the contractors to prepare and submit proposals. How the contract would work The City has a need for these types of repairs, the most common being roadway repairs resulting from utility line work or a base failure on a busy street. Engineering staff will be notified of the specific sites needing repair by maintenance staff in both the Utilities and Public Works departments. Every few months, Engineering staff and the selected contractor will complete site visits and quantify the square footage of the accumulated repairs. With this information the contractor will calculate the cost of the repairs based on the contract prices established through the Trench Repair contract. Once staff has verified the contractor's calculation is correct, a purchase order will be issued for the work, authorized by the City Engineer for projects of $25,000 or less, and by the City Manager for all other projects within approved budget. Only those work orders in excess of approved budget will return to Council for approval. These authorization limits have been set by the Council in Resolution 9444 as part of the JOC program. (See Attachment 2). Once the work is authorized at the appropriate level and budget transfer completed, a work order would be issued to complete the repair and work can commence. Payment and close out of the individual work orders will generally follow existing practices. Staff will be monitoring the effectiveness of this type of focused JOC, and if the program works well, staff anticipates releasing other focused JOC projects to handle the more routine project work. Staff has considered completing this type of work on a regular basis with maintenance forces in the Public Works department in the past. Such an approach can work and staff does respond regularly to immediate needs such as the waterline break on California. However, this will reduce the volume of preparation work street maintenance staff can complete in advance of the microsurfacing project. That will cause those paving projects to increase in price and cost more in overhead for contract preparation and inspection. By operating this streamlined Trench Repair project, the staff remains focused on delivering Measure Y priority paving work, while still providing an increased responsiveness for utility trench repairs. Contract preparation costs are kept to a minimum as well, by using this on -call service concept. C4 -2 Trench Repair, Job Order Contract, Specification No. 91095 CONCURRENCES Paae 3 This project is exempt from environmental review since it is a maintenance and replacement project and a Notice of Exemption has been filed through the Community Development Department. FISCAL IMPACT This contract does not obligate any funds for construction. Once the contract has been executed, staff will begin scoping work and issuing work orders. Funding will be transferred into this project account from previously approved and funded Capital Improvement Plan projects, not -to- exceed the funding authorized by Council or authorization limits as approved by Council Resolution Number 9444 (2003 Series). Transfers of existing appropriations between projects will be completed in accordance with Council adopted financial policies. The funding sources for this work would be the Street Reconstruction and Resurfacing (R &R) Master Account, Water Distribution System Improvement Master Account and the Collection System Improvement Master Account. ALTERNATIVE Deny authorization to advertise. The City Council could choose not to authorize the advertisement of the project. This is not recommended because the JOC program is believed to be a cost - effective way in which to get necessary maintenance work complete in a shorter timeframe. ATTACHMENTS 1. Council Agenda Report, Authorizing JOC 2. Resolution 9444 (2003 Series) AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW IN THE COUNCIL OFFICE Trench Repair JOC — Specifications \ \chstore4 \Team \Counci1 Agenda Reports \Public Works CAR \2011 \CIP \91092 Trench Repair \91092 CAR Advertise.doc C4 -3 Attachment 1 ' 1 council 6MeefincDala 4 -15 -03 AQen VA Re ORt ricn, Number C I T Y OF S A N L U I S O B I S P O FROM: Michael D. McCluskey, Public Wor s Director Bill Statler, Director of Finance Jay D. Walter, City Engineer SUBJECT: JOB ORDER CONTRACTING AND ALTERNATIVE BIDDING PROCEDURES CAO RECOMMENDATION Introduce an ordinance amending Chapter 3.24 of the Municipal Code to provide for the use of Job Order Contracting and Alternative Bidding Procedures for construction projects. DISCUSSION Background The City's Mission Statement and the Council's budget and fiscal policies both strongly encourage enhancements in productivity, including changing cumbersome procedures. In December 2001, the Director of Public Works authorized staff to research additional methods to accomplish construction projects. After a review of the existing Public Contract Code and inquiring of several cities and counties, we found two alternative methods that are in broad use throughout the state: Job Order Contracts (JOC) and the Uniform Public Construction Cost Accounting Act (Alternative Bidding Procedures), which offer added methods for cities to accomplish construction projects. They are particularly beneficial when focusing on smaller, repetitive -type projects that can be accomplished quickly without the need for the same formal plans and specifications that larger, more complex projects require. Based on the experience of other agencies (including Cal Poly and the County), these added methods could significantly enhance the Engineering Division's ability to deliver construction projects for the City faster and at a lower cost. Charter Amendments. On May 7, 2002, the Council. conceptually implementing the two alternative methods for construction project contracting; and on June 18, 2002, formally authorized placing a measure on the November 5, 2002 ballot to amend the City Charter to allow their use. The voters overwhelmingly approved Measure L -02 by 77 %. Current Policies and Procedures. The City's current purchasing policies and procedures governing construction projects are set forth in a number of documents, including the California Public Contract Code, City Charter, Municipal Code, Purchasing Resolution and Financial Management Manual. In addition to amending the Charter, the City now needs to amend the Municipal Code regarding formal bidding procedures (Article III of Chapter 3.24) in order to implement JOC and alternative bidding procedures. The City's Purchasing Resolution will also need to be amended and this is the subject of a companion agenda item. (PH -1 Attachment 1 Job Order Contracting and Alternative Bidding Procedures Page 2 Municipal Code Amendments Only Article III of the City's purchasing ordinance (Chapter 3.24 of the Municipal Code), which addresses the City's formal bidding procedures, needs to be amended to implement JOC and alternative bidding procedures: all other provisions of the City's purchasing ordinance remain the same. The proposed revisions to Article III are highlighted in Exhibit A of the attached ordinance (the new text is shaded and the deleted text is struelt tbfeugh). The following summarizes the changes. Job Order Contracting. As previously discussed with the Council, JOC allows the use of a fixed unit -price contract for indefinite quantity contracts for maintenance -type construction contracts. In preparing the specifications for this master contract, a detailed and comprehensive "Construction Task Catalog" with general specifications and a "baseline" cost is prepared for each specific task that is allowed to be performed under the master contract. The City then invites formal bids from general contractors, who will bid using a percentage adjustment factor (up or down) to be applied against the "baseline" unit prices in the bid document. The JOC award is then made to the contractor with the lowest adjustment factor. Work is subsequently performed under the JOC by the use of individual Task Orders, which are specific proposals agreed to by the City and the contractor on a project -by- project basis using the fixed unit - prices specified in the master contract. The authority to approve Task Orders is set forth in the City's Purchasing Resolution. As discussed in the companion agenda item, we recommend that the City Engineer be authorized to approve JOC Task Orders up to $25,000; and that CAO approval be required for all Task Orders in excess of this amount. Regardless of the amount, all Task Orders will be subject to the requirement that the amount be equal to or less than the budget amount specifically approved by the Council for each project. This will be verified through the rigorous "CAO Report" and purchase order process already in place for all purchases. On December 17, 2002, the Council approved contracting with The Gordian Group to develop the extensive catalog and specifications needed to implement the JOC system. We plan to return to the Council for approval of these documents in June 2003. Once these are approved by the Council, with the addition of Section 3.24.145 in the attached Municipal Code amendment, we will be then be able to implement the JOC program in accordance with Charter requirements. Alternative Bidding Procedures. Until the Charter amendment approved by the voters in November 2002, all City construction contracts were governed by a Charter provision adopted in 1955, which in turn referenced a State Public Contract Code dating to the 1930's. The affect of this was to limit the ability for City employees to do minor construction work ($5,000 or less, including staff time, materials and equipment use), and to require formal bids for all construction work in excess of $5,000. While these dollar limits made sense seventy years ago, they don't any longer. The framers of the 1955 Charter tried to account for the passage of time by linking dollar limits to a specific section of the State Public Contract Code, rather than specifying a dollar amount in the Charter itself, under the reasonable assumption that over time, the State would amend the dollar amounts in the referenced code section. Unfortunately, the State never has. Instead, in 1985 it adopted "alternative bidding procedures" in a separate section of the Public Contract Code than the 64-,Z_ Attachment 1 Job Order Contracting and Alternative Bidding Procedures Page 3 one specified in the Charter. These "alternative bidding procedures" created the updated limits envisioned by the 1955 Charter framers by: 1. Allowing the use of "force account" (City staff and materials) for projects of $25,000 or less. 2. "Open market" soliciting of bids by phone, fax or letter for projects of $25,000 or less. 3. Direct solicitation of formal bids from qualified contactors (with notice to construction trade journals) for projects of $25,000 to $100,000. In exchange for easing the requirements for lower -value projects, the alterative procedures increase them for projects costing more than $100,000: published notice 14 days before bids are due is required (versus the current 10 -day requirement); and mailed notice to trade journals 30 days before the bids are due is required (which isn't currently required at all). With approval of the Charter amendment, the City can now use these "alternative bidding procedures." The changes and additions to Sections 3.24.150, 180, 185 and 187 of the proposed amendment are to implement the alternative procedures in accordance with Charter requirements. Proposed Purchasing Guidelines Update A companion staff report titled "Purchasing Guidelines Update" gives an overview of the City's current purchasing system and outlines the proposed resolution changes also needed to implement JOC and the alternative bidding procedures, and integrate these changes into the City's overall purchasing system. CONCURRENCES In addition to the Council's action to authorize a ballot measure to amend the Charter, the SLO County Builders Exchange supported the City's adoption of both alternative methods. FISCAL IMPACT There are no direct fiscal impacts in adopting the proposed update to the City's Municipal Code. However, there will be indirect cost savings through improved organizational effectiveness and productivity by implementing these procedures. ALTERNATIVES Take No Action. Without these changes to the Municipal Code, the City cannot take advantage of the productivity improvements now envisioned in the City Charter. ATTACHMENT Ordinance amending Article III of Chapter 3.24 of the Municipal Code. G: Finance /Manuals/Financial Management Manual /200- Purchasing/Proposed Updates#Council Agenda Report- JOC/ABP 619'-5 Attachmen4 - ORDINANCE NO. (2003 Series) AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AMENDING CHAPTER 3.24, ARTICLE III OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO PROVIDE FOR THE USE OF JOB ORDER CONTRACTING AND ALTERNATIVE BIDDING PROCEDURES FOR PUBLIC CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS WHEREAS, the citizens of San Luis Obispo approved Measure L -02 on November 5, 2002, which amended the City Charter to authorize the use of job order contracting for maintenance - related projects as provided under Section 20128.5 of the Public Contract Code and alternative bidding procedures as provided under Section 22000 of the Public Contract Code ( "Uniform Public Construction Cost Accounting Act") for public construction projects; and WHEREAS, Section 901 (E) and (F) of the City Charter states that the Council shall establish by ordinance guidelines for the use of such contracts and procedures. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Article III of Chapter 3.24 of the Municipal Code of the City of San Luis Obispo is hereby amended as set forth in Exhibit A. SECTION 2. A summary of this ordinance, approved by the City Attorney, together with the names of the Council members voting for and against it, shall be published at least five days prior to its final passage, in The Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated in this City. This ordinance will go into on effect at the expiration of thirty (30) days after its final passage. INTRODUCED on April 15, 2003 AND FINALLY ADOPTED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo on , 2003 on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: Lee Price, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Gilbert A. Ti o, Inte City Attorney David F. Romero, Mayor _,_ (al-4 Attachment 1 GA Exhibit A AMENDMENT TO FORMAL CONTRACT PROCEDURES Chapter 3.24 of the Municipal Code ARTICLE III. FORMAL CONTRACT PROCEDURE 3.24.140 Requirements for purchase. Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, purchases and contracts for supplies, services, equipment and construction projects public- :3 epks not eantfel ed by the Gh ft r _ -__.Y _ _, which are equal to or in excess of the bid requirement amount specified by council resolution, shall be by written contract with the lowest responsible bidder pursuant to the procedures prescribed in this article. 3.24.145 Job order cfttr`acjjLiL. A. Such contracts. wo secured on a om etitive i in accordance with the r ores set forth in.this Article: B. No new construction will be performed under:such- contracts-, C. The specifications -for such contracts provide f0 vuruL-price terms'for all work that will typically be performed under individual Tagk Orders-, amounts of Ta k der o be issued under.the contract.. E. The council will specify limits on the, authontX_to_a prove irtd vidual Task .0 de s by resolution. 3.24.150 Bids - Notice of invitation and submission. A. Notices inviting bids shall include, but not be limited to, the following: 1. A general description of the item(s) or service(s) to be purchased, or the public work to be constructed or improved; 2. The location where bid blanks and specifications may be secured; 3. The time and place assigned for the opening of sealed bids; 4. The type and character of bidder's security required, if any; and 5. The location and deadline for submission of bids. B. Notices inviting bids shall be published made.a afollows: 1. For su plies services nd•e ui ment notices invitin bids shall be ubl shed at least once in the official newspaper of the city, with the first publication occurring at least ten calendar days before the date of opening the bids. -2- 6A Attachment 1 Exhibit A AMENDMENT TO FORMAL CONTRACT PROCEDURES categories of work, at least .ten calendar days before the bids are due The City Engineer is responsible for developing and maintaining this list -based on the criteria determined by Clip bids are -due to all construction trade,- outrrfal"s as required !& the Comrrussign, if the g tyIdoes not have a list of qualified contractors for theme particular typevf work to be performed, notices inviting bids will only be sent to the construction trade as required. by. the Commission. contractors. 3. For cons vction pLojects-above an :amoutit specified by council resolution the date of oven the bids. Notices invitin bids distinctly describin ttio, ro "ect shall Osa: be mailed at least thirtY-calendar days before.:the date of oneninv hid.q tc all rrynsfn,e^rlhin frnriA 4. The ci1y a1g al o give.,such other notice as it deems a prouriatc. C. Sealed bids shall be identified as bids on the envelopes and shall be submitted to the purchasing authority. 3.24.160 Bids - Security requirement. Bidder's security may be required when deemed necessary by the purchasing authority. Bidders shall he entitled to return of bid security. However, a successful bidder shall forfeit his bid security upon refusal or failure to execute a contract within fifteen days after notice of award of that contract, unless the city is responsible for the delay. The contract may be awarded to the next lowest responsible bidder upon the refusal or failure of the successful bidder to execute the contract within the time herein prescribed. 3.24.170 Bids - Opening and retention. Sealed bids shall be opened in public at the time and place stated in the notice inviting bids. A tabulation of all bids received shall be made available for public inspection until the award of a contract. All bids shall be retained on file for a period of not less than two years. 3.24.180 Bids - Rejection. The purchasing authority may reject: A. Any bid that fails to meet the bidding requirements in any respect; or B. All bids, for any reason whatsoever, and may readvertise for new bids or abandon the purchase. -3- Attachment 1 Exhibit A AMENDMENT TO FORMAL CONTRACT PROCEDURES C. In the a case of construcko projeem, construe the couacd:ma, by assa a of a resoli d6n by four - fifths vote, declare that the project can be performed;rtiore economically_ by empl3o ees of the city and mU have the project done by force account, 3.24.185 Bids — None received. If no bids_ are received, the purchase myy be made.through; negotiated contract or,afher process Apgrroved by the purchasing authority. including in the case. of construction prriiects, performing the workb ernployees.of the city by force account. for construction nrolecta —. allowed sander Section 2204f) of Public Contract bode, and bids were invited pursuant to the 3.24.190 Contract award. Subject to the prior approval of the city administrative officer, contracts shall be awarded by the purchasing authority to the lowest responsible bidder, except as follows: A. If, at the time of bid opening, two or more bids received are for the same total amount or unit price, quality and service being equal, and if in the discretion of the purchasing authority the public interest will not permit the delay of readvertising for bids, then the purchasing authority may accept the one she or he chooses or the lowest bid obtained through subsequent negotiation with the tie bidders. B. Sellers, vendors, suppliers and contractors who maintain places of business located within the limit of the city shall be given preference if quality, price, service and all other factors are equal. 3.24.200 Requiring bond of successful bidder. The purchasing authority may require as a condition to executing a contract on behalf of the city, a performance bond or a labor and material bond, or both, in such amounts as the purchasing authority shall determine appropriate to protect the best interests of the city. The form and amounts of such bond(s) shall be described in the notice inviting bids. 3.24.210 Determination of lowest responsible bidder. In addition to the bid or quotation price, criteria for determining the lowest responsible bid or quotation, for the purposes of the Charter and this chapter, shall include, but not be limited to, the following: A. The character, integrity, reputation, judgment, experience and efficiency of the bidder (this may include an analysis of previous work performed for the city); -4- ��'% Attachment 1 Exhibit A AMENDMENT TO FORMAL CONTRACT PROCEDURES B. The ability of the bidder to perform the contract, or provide the supplies, equipment or services required, within the time specified, without delay or interference; C. The ability of the bidder to provide future maintenance, repair parts and replacement of purchased equipment or supplies; D. Compliance by the bidder with federal acts, executive orders and state statutes governing nondiscrimination in employment; and E. The results of any evaluation relating performance and price, such as testing, life -cycle costing, and analysis of service, maintenance and technical data. -5- • • Attachment 2 RESOLUTION NO. 9444 (2003 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO UPDATING PURCHASING GUIDELINES WHEREAS, in the course of conducting City operations it is necessary to purchase a broad range of goods and services; and WHEREAS, the Council has adopted purchasing policies and procedures as set forth in Chapter 3.24 of the Municipal Code that require the Council to specify by resolution the dollar amount of purchases and contracts requiring the use of either open market or formal bidding procedures, and the level of authority required to authorize invitations for bids (or requests for proposals), award contracts or approve Job Order Contract Task Orders; and WHEREAS, the Council desires to update existing guidelines to reflect current conditions and implement improved procedures, including electing to become subject to the uniform construction cost accounting procedures set forth in the Public Contract Code, commencing with Section 22010, as required by the State in order to use the alternative bidding procedures for construction projects set forth in Section 22032 of the Public Contract Code. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo that: SECTION 1. Resolution No. 8239 (1993 Series) is hereby rescinded and the updated purchasing guidelines set forth in Exhibit A are hereby adopted. SECTION 2. The construction change order policy set forth in Exhibit B is hereby amended. SECTION 3. The City hereby elects to become subject to the uniform construction cost accounting procedures set forth in the Public Contract Code. On motion of Council Member Settle, seconded by Council Member Ewan, and on the following roll call vote: AYES: Council Members Ewan, Settle and Schwartz, Vice Mayor Mulholland, and Mayor Romero NOES: None ABSENT: None the foregoing resolution was adopted on April 15, 2003. Mayor David F. Romero ATTES Lee Price, C.M.C. City Clerk OVE TO FORM: Gilbert A. Trujillo, Acting City Attorney R 9444 C4 -12 • • Attachment 2 Exhibit A Resolution No., 9444 In accordance with the policy framework set forth in Chapter 3.24 of the municipal code, City purchases and contracts (including those for rentals and leases, but excluding those for real property) will be made pursuant to these guidelines. Applicable competitive bidding categories, authorization limits or contract award procedures will be based on unit cost, total purchase cost for consolidated bid items or fiscal year aggregates in the case of blanket purchase orders or similar ongoing purchasing arrangements. Staging of purchases in order to avoid these competitive bidding procedures or authorization limits is prohibited. GENERAL PURCHASES Purchases and contracts for supplies, equipment, operating and maintenance services, and construction projects will be made pursuant to the following guidelines. A. Over - the - Counter. Purchases of less than $5,000 may be authorized by the Department Head. Although no specific purchasing requirements are established for this level of purchase, competitive bidding should be used whenever practical. B. Open Market. Purchases between $5,000 and 25000 $45,009 may be authorized by the Director of Finance (or designee) pursuant to the open market bidding procedures established in Chapter 3.24 (Article U) of the municipal code. C. Formal Bids or Proposals. Purchases in excess of • $25,000 $15,000 will be made pursuant to the formal bidding requirements established in Chapter 3.24 (Article III) of the municipal code. Authority to approve specifications, invite bids or request proposals and award contracts will be as follows: 1. For purchases with an approved budget and a cost estimate of $400,1000 $50,000 or less, the City Administrative Officer is authorized to invite bids or request proposals, approve specifications and award the contract. 2. For purchases in excess of 10Q=000 $50,000, Council approval of the specifications and authorization to invite bids or request proposals is required. The Council may authorize the City Administrative Officer to award the contract if the selected bid or proposal is less than or equal to the Council- approved cost estimate and there are no substantive changes to the specifications. Otherwise, Council award of the contract is required. D. Jots Order Contract.,,: _Construction Praiects._ Under the Job Order Contact-provisions of Chapter 124 (,Article ]II) of the municipal codi for nrarritelrrt7ce related construction protects,_ individual_ Task_ Orden up to $25,000 'inav be <e ? roved by the City_Engincer. Individual Task Orders in excess_ of $25,000 Irequire approval i,v_tfrtr c jity 1�imiiristrative Officer. - CONSULTANT SERVICES Contracts for consultant services will be awarded pursuant to the following guidelines. -1- C4 -13 • • Attachment 2 Exhibit A Resolution No.. 9444 (2003 Series) PURCHASING GUIDELINES A. Contracts for consultant services estimated to cost less than $5,000 may be awarded by the Department Head. Although no specific purchasing requirements are established for this level of contract, proposals should be solicited whenever practical. B. Contracts for consulting services estimated to cost between $5,000 and RM $999 may be awarded by the City Administrative Officer. Proposals from at least three firms should be solicited whenever practical. C. Contracts for consultant services estimated to cost more than tj 14 $15;999 will generally be awarded pursuant to the following guidelines; however, it is recognized that the City's need for consultant services will vary from situation to situation, and accordingly, flexibility will be provided in determining the appropriate evaluation and selection process to be used in each specific circumstance. 1. The Council should generally approve request for proposal (RFP) documents before they are issued. The Council may authorize the City Administrative Officer to award the contract if it is less than or equal to the Council- approved cost estimate and there are no substantive changes to the approved workscope. Otherwise, Council award of the contract is required. 2. In the event that the timely evaluation and selection of a consultant precludes Council approval of the RFP before it is issued, the RFP may be approved and distributed by the City Administrative Officer; however, award of the contract will be made by the Council. 3. Cost will not be the sole criterion in selecting the successful bidder. Consultant proposals will be evaluated based on a combination of factors that result in the best value to the City, including but not limited to: a. Understanding of the work required by the City b. Quality and responsiveness of the proposal c. Demonstrated competence and professional qualifications necessary for satisfactory performance of the work required by the City d. Recent experience in successfully performing similar services e. Proposed methodology for completing the work f. References g. Background and related experience of the specific individuals to be assigned to the project h. Proposed compensation 4. If it is determined that it is in the best interest of the City for services to be provided by a specific consultant —with contract terms, workscope and compensation to be determined based on direct negotiations--contract award will be made by the Council. -2- C4 -14 • • Attachment 2 Exhibit B Resolution No. 9444 L2003 $erles CONSTRUCTION • ORDERS OVERVIEW When the City awards a construction contract, the need for contract change orders (CCO's) is not unusual. CCO's are required whenever the scope of work changes from that in the original contract or an unknown condition of the site requires a change in the scope of work. Usually a contingency amount is established when the project budget is finalized upon contract award to accommodate limited CCO's. The purpose of this policy is to establish limits of authority for approving construction project CCO's. GOALS 1. Ensure appropriate authority and accountability in the approval of change orders. 2. Minimize the time needed to approve a CCO in order to avoid project delays. 3. Establish a system under which the organizational level at which approval is given is commensurate with the size of CCO and size of project. 4. Eliminate the potential for approval of a CCO when contingency funds are insufficient. POLICIES Conditions for Approval of CCO's by Staff 1. Sufficient contingency funds are budgeted and available in order for the Public Works Director or City Administrative Officer (or CAO- approved designees) to approve a CCO. 2. The nature of work in the CCO is not significantly different from that in the contract. 3. Authorization limits are based on an individual CCO amount, not the aggregate amount of all CCO's. 4. Authorization limits apply to CCO's for increases in contract amounts only. 5. When the aggregate amount of CCO's reaches 75% of the contingency, the awarding authority shall be informed of the status of the project and the sufficiency of funding to complete the project. 6. Work will not be broken up into multiple CCO's in order to circumvent this policy. 7. All CCO's must be in writing and approved by the appropriate contract parties consistent with the authorized limits established in this policy. C4 -15 0 • Attachment 2 Exhibit B Resolution No. 9444 2003 Series CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT ORDERS 8. A copy of each approved CCO will be transmitted promptly to the Finance Department. 9. The CAO may grant approval of CCO's in excess of ''$ 'O flpq $50,000 under the following circumstances (all three factors must be present): a. Immediate approval of the CCO is necessary to avoid delay. b. The CCO is an integral and mandatory component of the project. c. The costs associated with delay of the project would be excessive. The Project Manager is responsible for carrying out this policy. 10. The CAO is also authorized to. approve CCO .s in excess of : 100,000 related to Job Order Contract Task Orders. Authorization Limits 1. Public Works Director /Approved Designee Not to exceed $25,000 2. City Administrative Officer Not to exceed =1:M" id $50;000 3. City Council Greater than contract or :166,6OC)* $50,009 * See circumstances above where the CAO may approve CCO's in excess of $100,000. Originally Approved by the Council on August 3, 1993, Revised by the Council on April 15, 2003 -2- 0 I 1J c o u n c i l M eiing Dzec A cj cnOA P-E ORt R.:u,s. PH CITY O F SAN LUIS O B I S P O FROM: Kim Murry: Acting Community Development Director Prepared By: Phil Dunsmore, Senior Planner Brian Leveille, Associate Planner Peggy Mandeville, Principal Transportation Planner SUBJECT: REVIEW OF AMENDMENTS TO MUNICIPAL CODE TITLE 17: ZONING REGULATIONS AND REVIEW OF AMENDMENTS TO THE ACCESS AND PARKING MANAGEMENT PLAN. RECOMMENDATION As recommended by the Planning Commission: 1. Introduce by title only an ordinance to adopt the proposed amendments to Title 17 (Zoning Regulations) of the Municipal Code. 2. Approve a resolution amending the Access and Parking Management Plan to support downtown residential parking. DISCUSSION Background Consistent with on -going efforts to update and improve various development regulations, the Community Development Department has prepared a draft update to the City's Zoning Regulations. Periodic review of City documents is necessary to ensure that regulations are clear, consistent, effectively implement the goals and policies of the General Plan, and remain current with respect to relevant state regulations. The last update to the Zoning Regulations was completed one year ago in September 2010. Planning staff is committed to periodically updating the Zoning Regulations to reflect current best practices and minimize the number of interpretations necessary for their implementation. Based on direction from the Planning Commission and City Council over the past year, and staff's experience working daily with the document, several corrections, updates, and modifications are recommended (Attachment 1). Staff is also recommending more substantive revisions which are discussed below. Proposed new language in the Zoning Regulations is underlined, and proposed deleted language is shown in strikethfo g>, Changes to Table 6 (Parking Requirements by Use), are shown italicized and shaded. See Attachment 1, Text amendments in legislative draft format. Planning Commission Hearings and Recommendations Zoning Code and Access and Parking Management Plan amendments recommended for adoption include recommendations from the Planning Commission. The Commission held three separate meetings to review amendments to Downtown Residential Parking (GPI 83 -07) in 2011, on May 25th, July 27th and August 24th. The Planning Commission also reviewed staff recommended amendments which include follow up actions from last year's Council adopted Zoning Code updates, and other corrections and updates which are part of staff's periodic updates (GPI 8 -11); PH1 -1 Council Agenda Report — GPI 8 -11 & GPI 83 -07 —November- 4-5,2041, Page 2 which the Commission reviewed in 2011, on June 22 °d, July 13th, and August 24t ". Previous Planning Commission reports and minutes from all previous meetings will be available for review in the Council Reading file. Staff has included all of the Planning Commission recommended amendments from both applications (GPI 83 -07 & GPI 8 -11) for discussion in this report and all recommended amendments are included in the attached legislative draft (Attachment 1), draft ordinance (Attachment 4), and draft resolution (Attachment 5). The discussion below follows the order of amendments in the legislative draft. Main Areas of Discussion Chapter 17.08.110 (Homeless Shelters) This modification is recommended in response to Council direction from last year's review of Zoning Code amendments which need to be modified for consistency with Housing Element Policy 8.19. Housing Element Policy 8.19 calls for establishing Zoning Regulations that allow for homeless shelters "by right" in at least one zoning district as required by state law (a project allowed by right is not subject to discretionary review). In last year's review of proposed amendments to allow for homeless shelters by right in the Public Facilities (PF) zone, Council was not supportive of eliminating existing language that requires "adequate buffering" when homeless shelters are proposed near R -1 and R -2 neighborhoods. Staff recommends provisions for architectural review when homeless shelters are proposed adjacent to residential neighborhoods. The requirements of this section only apply to homeless shelters in the PF zone which may be established by right without use permit approval. Homeless shelters proposed in other zones require Planning Commission use permit review. Chapter 17.16.040. (Table 5.5: Maximum Height by Zone) Staff recommends adding the table to allow a more quick reference of height requirements for each zone. No changes to height requirements by zone are proposed. Chapter 17.16.050. Fences, Walls, and Hedges Arbors Current regulations place arbors in the same category as fences which is not practical since the maximum fence height allowed at the street yard property line is three feet. An arbor would have to be located 20 feet from the property line in most cases. Planning Commission recommended amendments would allow light- weight pedestrian scale arbors (6 -8 feet wide, max 8 -9 feet tall) along street yard property lines. Fences on retaining walls PH1 -2 Council Agenda Report — GPI 8 -11 & GPI 83 -07 wxeuib 1 G ••� ice/ % /11 1 Page 3 ( Recommended amendments are intended to reduce the number of unnecessary fence height exception applications. There are many properties in the City where there are existing retaining walls between properties due to natural grade changes. In these cases, when a new or replacement six foot fence is proposed to provide necessary privacy, fence height exception applications are required since the overall height of the fence is measured from the low side of the combined fence /wall and the maximum allowed height in "other yards" is six feet. Recommended revisions would allow fences of a maximum six feet from the uphill side and an overall height of nine feet (from lower grade side) without the need for fence height exception approval. The revised regulations do not apply if there is evidence that a modification to the grade has occurred from the original subdivision/design approvals. In cases where the grade has been modified, proposals to exceed six feet of overall height will require approval of a fence height exception consistent with existing regulations. Downtown Residential Parking Amendments The City's General Plan contains policies and programs to encourage housing development in the downtown core, including several that address residential parking. Specifically, Land Use Element (LUE) 4.22 and Housing Element (HE) program 6.9 and 6.10 (Attachment 2) direct the City to consider more flexible parking regulations for downtown housing development. Over the past year, the Public Works Department and Planning Division have been working together to formulate options that would effectively implement these policies and programs. Staff attended four separate meetings with the parking sub - committee of the Downtown Association over the past year to review proposed amendments. The committee recommended modifications to the Municipal Code and to the Access and Parking Management Plan to implement the policy direction. The proposed amendments were reviewed by the Planning Commission at three hearings (May 25, July 27 and August 24, 2011). The Commission's recommendation included two code amendments designed to increase flexibility for residential units in the C -D zone. One amendment increases the distance allowed to off -site parking up to 1,250 feet (current limit is 500 feet); and the other amendment allows for discretionary parking reductions to be granted by the Community Development Director (up to 10 %) or the Planning Commission (greater than 10 %) for residential projects that provide a trip reduction plan or other justification that the reduction is warranted. Additionally, the amendment includes relocating the code text that discusses parking for the C -D zone from MC 17.42 into the general parking section, MC 17.16.060, to allow all of the parking requirements to be within one chapter, increasing readability. The Commission's recommendation also included amendments to the Access and Parking Management Plan to implement the General Plan policies for more flexible parking regulations by adding a section on parking for downtown residents. Specifically, the Commission's recommendation includes the following changes to the City's Access and Parking Management Plan: PHI -3 Council Agenda Report — GPI 8 -11 & GPI 83 -07 Pate 4 1. Revise the Table of Contents to include a section on Downtown Residential Parking. 2. Expand the Parking Management Goals to support downtown residential parking. 3. Revise the definition of "Parking Structures" to include residential users. 4. Expand the General Use of Parking policies to allow the long term parking for residential uses in City owned parking facilities. 5. Add a section on the Use of Parking for Downtown Residents that includes policies and actions. The recommended changes are detailed in Exhibit A of Attachment 5. Chapter 17.16.060. (Table 6 — Parking Requirements by L se) This modification corrects an error from previous Zoning Code updates where Multi - family parking requirements should have been modified to be consistent with changes to parking requirements for the Multi- family development and the R -1 zone. No changes to parking requirements for Multi- family parking are recommended. Neighborhood Preservation (Chapter 17.17.075) Planning Commission recommended amendments would modify screening requirements of trash, recycling, and green waste receptacles, which were added by the City Council in last year's Zoning Code update on September 7, 2010. At the September 7th, 2010, Council meeting, a provision was added which required trash, green waste, and recycling receptacles to be completely screened from public view. The provision was an addition to Planning Commission recommended amendments that the receptacles be completely removed from the "front yard" area unless placed out for pickup in accordance with Municipal Code requirements. The "front yard" is defined as: The area of a residential lot that lies between the street property line and the walls of any residences that face the street (Ord. 1277, 1995). The Municipal Code states that the containers shall not be placed adjacent to the street for pickup more than 24 hours before pickup time, and must be removed within the twelve -hour period following pickup. Although the screening requirement is in the context of "front yards ", it did not specify clearly that screening applies to "front yards" only, and refers to screening the receptacles from public view. There are many properties in the city where receptacles have been stored in rear yard areas along alley ways, or are partially screened but open on one side. Also, on a corner lot with two street frontages, long- standing storage of trash receptacles in the side yard is a violation of the ordinance if visible from public view. This has created public confusion and enforcement issues for staff since the ordinance can be interpreted to mean that if receptacles are visible from anywhere on the public right -of -way that the property is in violation. The recommended amendments are intended to clarify the screening requirements apply to the "front yard" area. The recommended amendments also clarify how the regulations apply to multi - family developments. Front Yard Parking On September 7, 2010, The City Council considered Zoning Regulations Amendments forwarded from the Planning Commission. The Council adopted the Zoning Regulation PH1-4 Council Agenda Report — GPI 8 -11 & GPI 83 -07 Nuvernber 1 /v-1(v/l Page 5 amendments and directed staff to return to Council with revised regulations on front yard parking which are clear and enforceable. Council's direction on front yard parking regulations was based on public comment on the negative impact of vehicle parking in front yard areas outside of driveways and approved parking spaces. In many areas of the City, makeshift parking has expanded in front yard areas beyond driveways leading to garages or other approved parking spaces. Landscaped areas of front yards have been eliminated and additional parking spaces have been forced into front yard areas that were not designed to be parking areas and do not align with the curb openings to the street. On April 19, 2011, Council directed staff to create a more robust enforcement program utilizing additional resources in the form of Neighborhood Services Specialists. The work program currently includes neighborhood parking and front yard parking violations as one of the work program issues as a focus of Neighborhood Services Specialists. On April 27, 2011, the Planning Commission held a study session to discuss potential amendments to the Zoning Code including front yard parking and fence height regulations. The Commission raised numerous points including how to address previously approved parking which may be non - conforming under the new regulations and enforcement strategies including a strategy for roll out and how to achieve the most effective enforcement methods. The Commission discussed whether property owners could be held responsible for repeated violations of tenants. The Commission also discussed the need for outreach to students and property owners on the issue prior to beginning stepped up enforcement efforts. Staff anticipates returning to the Council in early 2012 with amendments to front yard parking regulations following outreach efforts, Planning Commission review, and full consideration of legal and enforcement constraints. Business Park (Chapter 17.49) & Growth Management ( Chapter 17.88) The Business Park Zoning (BP) chapter reflects already adopted regulations in the Airport Area and Margarita Area Specific Plans and no changes are proposed. The Business Park Regulations are being added to the Zoning Code for reference only. Amendments for the Growth Management Regulations reflect recently adopted amendments approved by Council and no changes are recommended. Environmental Review On September 7, 2010, the City Council adopted a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for Zoning Code amendments (ER 3 -10). The recommended Zoning Code amendments are a follow up to amendments previously reviewed by the Council, and there are no additional modifications which would have the potential for significant impacts to the environment. An Initial Study of Environmental Impact (GPI/ER 83 -07) was prepared for Downtown Residential Parking amendments and did not identify any impacts that were considered significant and unavoidable (Attachment 2). The Negative Declaration of environmental impact was recommended by the Planning Commission on July 27, 2011. Final adoption of the Negative Declaration requires City Council approval. PH1 -5 Council Agenda Report — GPI 8 -11 & GPI 83 -07 1 Nee 6 I FISCAL IMPACT When the General Plan was prepared, it was accompanied by a fiscal impact analysis, which found that overall the General Plan was fiscally balanced. Accordingly, since the proposed amendments are consistent with the General Plan, it has a neutral fiscal impact. ALTERNATIVES 1. The Council could approve the proposed amendments to the Zoning Regulations and Parking and Access Plan with additional modifications. 2. The Council could determine that the proposed modifications would be inconsistent with the General Plan and /or other policy documents, and therefore not approve the amendments. 3. The Council could continue review of the proposed Zoning Regulations and Parking and Access Plan amendments, and provide direction to staff for research and revisions. ATTACHMENTS 1. Zoning Regulations Text Amendments (legislative draft) 2. Land Use Element and Housing Element General Plan Policies 3. Initial Study of Environmental Impact (GPI 83 -07) 4. Draft ordinance introducing the text amendments 5. Draft resolution amending the Access and Parking Management Plan COUNCIL READING FILE 1. Planning Commission Minutes (May 25, June 22, July 13, July 27, and August 24, 2011) 2. Planning Commission Resolutions (May 25, June 22, July 13, July 27, and August 24, 2011) 3. Planning Commission staff reports (May 25, June 22, July 13, July 27, and August 24, 2011) G: \CD- PLAN\BLeveill\Zoning code update 2011 \Council Docs \11,15,01 CC Meeting Does \l 1- 15,2011, Zoning Regs Update Council Agenda Report.doc PHI -6 Attachment 1 city of sm Luis oBispo zontnc, 12�yu aCsvns c G EMBF -12 2010 b. Day care centers with more than 12 adults or more than 14 children must provide two spaces per facility and one space for each 12 day care clients (based on the facility's license), rounded to the nearest whole number, in addition to any spaces required for the residential use. See Section 17.16.060 of this Title. (Ord. 1365 (2000 Series)(part)) D. Day care as an accessory use. When day care facilities are accessory to another use requiring a permit, only one permit application need be filed and acted on. As accessory uses to schools and churches, and where an employer provides on -site child care to 14 or fewer children for the exclusive use of employees, day care is allowed by right, providing the primary use meets City parking standards. (Ord. 1365 (2000 Series)(part)) E. Exceptions. Nothing in this section shall prohibit applicants from requesting exceptions or variances from the strict interpretation of the Zoning Regulations to the extent allowed by said regulations. The Director may authorize minor exceptions to performance standards upon finding that: The modification is in accordance with the intent and purpose of the Zoning Regulations, and consistent with City day care policy. F. Nonconforming status. All day care facilities licensed by the State at the time of ordinance adoption (1992) shall be considered legal nonconforming uses, consistent with Chapter 17.10 of these regulations, except that nonconforming day care facilities may not be changed to another nonconforming use. (Ord. 1225, 1992) 17.08.110 Homeless Shelters. The below requirements are for homeless shelters within the PF zone which may be established without use permit review. Homeless shelters in other zones, which require use permit review, may be subject to conditions of approval with requirements that vary from these standards. A. The shelter shall be operated by a responsible agency or organization, with experience in managing or providing social services. B. The shelter shall provide at least one qualified on -site supervisors at all times, plus one attendant for each 50 occupants. C. A homeless shelter shall not be approved when another homeless shelter exists within 300 feet of the proposed site. This requirement may be modified by use permit. D. Nearby R-I and R 2 neighborhends sh 11 be adequately buffered from poteRtial RipaGts of the proposed 6helter Homeless shelters proposed adjacent to residential neighborhoods shall require architectural review to ensure the shelter design provides for adequate orivacv between uses and minimizes potential impacts of the roposed shelter to adjacent residences. E. Parking shall be supplied at a ratio of one vehicle space per 10 beds, and one secured bicycle parking area designed to accommodate up to one bicycle per 10 beds. pacE is PH1 -7 Attachment 1 city Of SAn LUIS OBISPO c >sCCMBCR 2010 zonmG izcqutAtions 17. Affordable Housing Incentives, Chapter 17.90; 18. On -Shore Support Facilities, Chapter 17.92; 19. Development Agreements, Chapter 17.94 B. Where provisions of this chapter conflict with provisions of other applicable laws, the more restrictive provision shall prevail. (Ord. 1006 - 1 (part), 1984: prior code - 9202.5(A)) 17.16.010 Density. A. Determination of Allowed Development. 1. "Density" is the number of dwellings per net acre, measured in density units. In the AG, C /OS, and R -1, and R 2 zones, each single - family dwelling counts as one density unit. In the other zones, different size dwellings have density unit values as follows: (Ord. 1365 (2000 Series)(part)) a. Studio apartment, 0.50 unit; b. One - bedroom dwelling, 0.66 unit; c. Two- bedroom dwelling, 1.00 unit; d. Three - bedroom dwelling, 1.50 units; e. Dwelling with four or more bedrooms, 2.00 units. 2. The following procedure shall be used to determine the maximum development allowed on a given lot or land area: a. Determine the Average Cross -slope of the Site. "Average cross - slope" is the ratio, expressed as a percentage of the difference in elevation to the horizontal distance between two points on the perimeter of the area for which slope is being determined. The line along which the slope is measured shall run essentially perpendicular to the contours. L Where a site does not slope uniformly, average cross -slope is to be determined by proportional weighting of the cross - slopes of uniformly sloping sub - areas, as determined by the Community Development Director. ii. Cross -slope determinations shall be based on the existing topography of the net site area after subtracting the area for any future on -site grading necessary to accommodate proposed right -of -way improvements and other on -site improvements. iii. Cross -slope shall be calculated only for the net area as defined in Sub- section A2b below. iv. When the calculation of cross slope results in a fractional number, it shall be rounded to the next highest whole number if the fraction is one -half or more; otherwise it shall be rounded down to the next lowest whole number. v. No slope -rated density reduction is required in the C /OS, C -R, C -C or PF zones. vi. The maximum development allowed for each average cross -slope category is as follows: pACIC 27 PH1 -8 OCCCMBC12 2010 ttpo city of s ent 1 zonmG uEGulations Figure 1 b. Uncovered balconies, uncovered porches, or decks may extend into the required yard not more than four feet or one -half the required yard distance, whichever is less. Fire escapes, exit stairs or other required exits may be required to meet greater setbacks to comply with Building Code requirements. c. Decks, planters and similar features less than 30 inches above grade may be located within the required yards. 6. Trash Enclosures. Trash enclosures which have been approved by the Architectural Review Commission may be located within a required yard, provided no part of the enclosure is less than three feet from any right -of -way or adopted setback line. 7. Unenclosed Parking Spaces in Other Yards. Unenclosed parking spaces and parking aisles may be located within other yards. 8. Unenclosed. Tandem Parking Spaces. For single dwellings required parking may be approved by the Director to be in tandem where safe and compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. 9. Enclosed and Unenclosed Parking Spaces in Street Yard Prohibited. In no case may an enclosed parking space or required parking space from which vehicles exit directly onto the street be located less than 20 feet from the street right -of -way or setback line except as provided in 17.16.020E.2 below. E. Exception To Yard Requirements. These regulations provide two general types of exceptions to the yard requirements: first, those which the property is entitled to because of physical circumstances, and second, those which the City may approve upon request and subject to certain discretionary criteria. 1. Exceptions Property May Be Entitled To. a. Street Yards on Corner Lots Recorded Before April 1, 1965. On corner lots in the R -1 and R -2 zones, recorded before April 1, 1965, the street yard along the lot frontage having the longer dimension shall be not less than 10 feet, as in Figure 4 3. t0� 2a'•� Figure 3 b. Street Yards on Corner Lots Where Each Corner Lot has Its Longer Frontage Along the Cross Street. In the R -1 and R -2 zones, when each corner lot on a PAGE 33 PH1 -9 city of san tuts oslspo Attachment 1 zonmc, PecjutAtions ECCMBE:R 2010 cross street has its longer frontage along the cross street, as in Figure 4 31# the street yard along the longest frontage shall be not less than 10 feet. 2 J -. PL I I � L Figure 3 c. Street Yard Averaging (developed areas). Where these regulations require street yards and where buildings have been erected on at least one -half of the lots in a block as of the effective date of the regulations codified in this section, the minimum required street yard shall be the average of the street yards of the developed lots, but in no case less than 10 feet nor more than would otherwise be required. d. Reduced Street Yard for New Structure Providing Additional Creek Setback. Where a new structure provides a creek setback larger than required by this title, the required street yard shall be reduced one foot for each one foot of additional creek setback, so long as the street yard is at least one -half that required by Table 2. 2. Discretionary Exceptions. a. Reduced Street Yards. Upon approval of a use permit, or in conjunction with tandem parking approval, the director may allow street yards to be reduced to zero for unenclosed parking spaces. Street yards may be reduced to 10 -feet for structures including carports. Reductions may be approved for garages when the driveway is long enough to accommodate a parked car that doesn't overhang the sidewalk (18.5 feet min.). b. Variable Street Yards in Subdivisions. In new residential subdivisions, the entity approving the subdivision may approve variable street yards, to be noted on the approved map, provided the average of the yards on a block is at least 15 feet and no yard is less than 10 feet. c. Variable Other Yards In Subdivisions. In new residential subdivisions, the entity approving the subdivision map may approve exceptions to the other yard standards, with the exceptions to be noted on the map, provided a separation of at least 10 feet between buildings on adjacent lots will be maintained and an acceptable level of solar exposure will be guaranteed by alternative yard requirements or private easements. d. Other Yard Variations in Previously Subdivided Areas. Upon approval of a use permit, the Director may allow other yards to be reduced to zero under either of the following circumstances: i. When there exists adequate recorded agreement running with the land to maintain at least 10 feet of separation between buildings on adjacent parcels; or ii. When the reduction is for either a minor addition to an existing legal structure which is non - conforming with regard to yard requirements or for PAGE 34 PH1 -10 tachment City of SAn IS OBISPO &CCIMMIZ 2010 equtations a detached single -story accessory structure provided that the Director makes the following findings: (Ord. 1365 (2000 Series)(part)) • in the case of a minor addition, that the minor addition is a logical extension of the existing non - conforming structure; (Ord. 1365 (2000 Series)(part)) • in the case of a detached single -story accessory structure, that the accessory structure is consistent with the traditional development pattern of the neighborhood and will have a greater street yard setback than the main structure; (Ord. 1365 (2000 Series)(part)) • that adjacent affected properties will not be deprived of reasonable solar exposure; (Ord. 1365 (2000 Series)(part)) • that no useful purpose would be realized by requiring the full yard; • that no significant fire protection, emergency access, privacy or security impacts are likely from the addition; and • that it is impractical to obtain a 10 -foot separation easement pursuant to subsection "i" above. All such minor additions and new accessory structures shall comply with applicable provisions of Title 15, Building and Construction Regulations, of this code (see also Chapter 17.14, Non - conforming structures). (Ord. 1365 (2000 Series)(part)) e. Other Yard Building Height Exceptions. Upon approval of a use permit, the Director may allow exceptions to the standards provided in Tables 3, 4, and 5 of subsection C2 of this section. Such exceptions may be granted in any of the following and similar circumstances, but in no case shall exceptions be granted for less than the minimum yard required: (Ord. 1365 (2000 Series)(part)) i. When the property that will be shaded by the excepted development will not be developed or will not be deprived of reasonable solar exposure, considering its topography and zoning; ii. When the exception is of a minor nature, involving an insignificant portion of total available solar exposure; iii. When the properties at issue are within an area where use of solar energy is generally infeasible because of landform shading; iv. When adequate recorded agreement running with the land exists to protect established solar collectors and probable collector locations; v. When the property to be shaded is a street. vi. Where no significant fire protection, emergency access, privacy or security impacts are likely to result from the exception. (Ord. 1365 (2000 Series)(part)) Intersection Visibility. At the intersections not controlled by a stop sign or traffic signal, no plant, structure or other solid object over three feet high which would obstruct visibility may be located within the area indicated in Figure 5 4. At controlled intersections, the City Engineer may determine visibility requirements for proper sight distance. (Note: Yard requirements may also be modified by variance, Chapter 17.60; planned development, Chapter 17.62; specific plan, Chapter 17.52; or special consideration zone, Chapter 17.56.) (Ord. 1102 - Ex. A(7), (8), 1987; Ord. 1085 - 1 Ex. A (part), 1987; Ord. 1009 - 1, 1984; Ord. 1006 - 1 (part), 1984; Ord. 941 - 1 (part), 1982: prior code - 9202.5(C)) pacE 35 PHI -11 city of san lids o>ilspo Attachment 1 zonlnc, P-equLAtions 6CCCMB6R 2010 Table 6 5.5: Maximum Height by Zone Zone Maximum Height R -1 25 ft. (up to 35 feet with approval of an administrative use permit) R -2 35 feet R -3 35 feet R -4 35 feet C /OS 35 feet AG 35 feet O 25 feet (up to 35 feet with approval of an administrative use permit) PF 35 feet C -N 35 feet C -R 45 feet C -C 35 feet C -D 50 feet additional height up to 75 feet may be approved, section 17.42.020.0. C -T 45 feet C -S 35 feet M 35 feet BP Varies by specific plan area (see section 17.49) See also Section 17.16.020 for relationship of yards and building height. Components of solar energy systems, chimneys, elevator towers, screening for mechanical equipment that is not integral with building parapets, vents, antennae and steeples shall extend not more than 10 feet above the maximum building height. Commercial and governmental agency antennae may exceed the height limits for the zone in which they are located if such an exception is approved by the Director. Any other exception to the height limits requires approval of a variance as provided in Chapter 17.60. For height limits of signs, see Chapter 15.40. Sign Regulations. (Ord. 1085 - 1 Ex. A (part), 1987; Ord. 1006 - 1 (part), 1984; Ord. 941 - 1 (part), 1982: prior code - 9202.5(E)) 17.16.050 Fences, walls and hedges. A. Purpose and Application. 1. The purpose of these regulations is to achieve a balance between concerns for privacy and public concerns for enhancement of the community appearance, visual image of the streetscape, overall character of neighborhoods, and to ensure the provision of adequate light, air, and public safety. 2. These regulations apply to any type of visible or tangible obstruction which has the effect of forming a physical or visual barrier between properties or between property lines and the public right -of -way, including but not limited to: any type of artificially constructed barriers of wood, metal, or concrete posts connected by boards, rails, panels, wire or mesh and any type of natural growth such as hedges, and screen plantings. jJdCIE 44 PHI -12 -� Attac ent 1 city of san luis outs 6CCEmBER 2010 zoninci izequlations B. Fences, walls or hedges may be placed within required yards, provided: Mwdmum fence height withln street yard l y 6 NO FENCE HEDGE T THAN TH Figure 8 1. The maximum height in any street yard shall be as shown in Figure 8; 2. The maximum height in any other yard shall be six feet; 3. Arbors, trellises, and other t+ghtweigh ornamental IandrGape elemeRts features are allowed within a required yard, subject to the same height limits that apply to fences and hedges except as provided below ; 4. Arbors. Up to one such feature per street frontage may be allowed with a maximum height of 9 feet and an area of not more than 40 square feet as measured by the perimeter formed by the vertical projection to the ground of the outermost elements of the feature, and no horizontal dimension shall exceed eight feet in length. Any portion of such a feature wider than 18 inches and that exceeds the usual fence height requirements of this section shall be of an open design such that a person standing on the adjacent public right-of-way can see completely through at least 50 percent of the structure to the depth of the required street yard (Figure 9, below) Such features within required yards shall not be connected-to a building and shall comply with intersection visibility reguirements of section 17.16.O2O.E.2. 50% Open if Wider than 18" Fence Height Limit Figure 9 May be Solid pac,E 45 PH1 -13 MY of san Luis oalspo Attac hment 1 zonmCa Pcc4utAtions OEcEMBCR 2010 5. Decorative pilasters, statuary, flower pots and similar ornamental elements attached to or incorporated into the design of conforming fences or walls mgy exceed the-required heiclht limit up to 18 inches provided that the decorative element is not wider than 18 inches and that such elements are used to define a gateway or other entryway or are otherwise at least four feet apart. C. Fences or walls may be placed outside required yards, provided: 1. The maximum height is eight feet. 2. Where the wall is connected to and a part of the house, it may be any height allowed in the underlying zone. D. Fence height is measured from the adjacent grade along the lower side of the wall or fence, directly at the base of the wall or fence. E. Measurement of height where fences or walls are located on retaining walls. 1. Where fences or walls are located on retaining walls, the height of the retaining wall shall be considered as part of the overall height of the fence or wall. Walls or fences must have a minimum spacing of five feet to be considered separate structures for purposes of measuring overall height. 2. Where fences are located on a berm or mound the height of fence shall include the berm or mound directly beneath the fence and above natural grade in the overall height measurement. 3. Where fences are located on retaining walls within other yards, fences not to exceed six feet as measured from the uphill side may be erected or replaced on top, of the retaining wails and the combined fence and retaining wall height shall not exceed nine feet from the lower side, provided no modification of grade has occurred from the original subdivision improvements and/or design approvals. A building permit is required for the combined fence and retaining wall height to exceed six feet and if there is evidence that a modification to the grade has occurred from the original subdivision /design approvals the height must be authorized through a fence height exception. F. The Director may grant exceptions to these standards subject to a finding that no public purpose would be served by strict compliance with these standards. G. A public notice shall be posted at the site of each proposed fence height exception. If anyone informs the Community Development Department of a reasonable objection concerning the proposed fence height exception within five days of the posting, the Director shall schedule a hearing for the application as provided for administrative use permits. If no questions or objections are received by the Community Development Department within five days after posting, the Director may issue a letter of approval upon submission of all required information and without further notice or public hearing. (Ord. 1006 - 1 (part), 1984; Ord. 941 - 1 (part), 1982: prior code - 9202.5(F)) 17.16.060 Parking space requirements. A. Intent. This section is intended to ensure provision of adequate off - street parking, considering the demands likely to result from various uses, combinations of uses, and settings. It is the City's intent, where possible, to consolidate parking and to minimize pdCIE 46 PHI-14 city of san furs oafspo Attachment 1 zoninG izeculAtions OCCCMBCR 2010 G. Downtown Core: Within the Downtown - Commercial (C -D) zone the following parking standards and incentives shall apply: 1. Parking space reductions noted in items B through E above shall not be applicable in the C -D zone as the reduced parking rates established herein are intended to provide flexibility in meeting-parking re uirements and rely on the consolidation of parking. 2. Restaurants, sandwich shops, take -out food, bars, taverns, night clubs, other food service or entertainment establishments, theaters, auditoriums, convention halls, and churches: One -half that required in Table 6 Section 17-.16.060; provided, however, that in no case the requirement shall exceed one space per three hundred fifty square feet gross floor area. 3. Dwellings, motels, hotels and bed and breakfast inns: One -half that required in S9GtiGR 17.16.060 Table 6. In order to support and encourage residential uses in the C -D zone, additional options for meeting parking requirements for residential uses are available as listed in subsection 7 below. 4. All other uses: One space per five hundred square feet gross floor area. 5. In determining the total number of required spaces, all fractions shall be rounded to the nearest whole number. Fractions of one -half or greater shall be rounded to one; fractions less than one -half shall be rounded to zero. 6. For existing buildings, only the parking needed for additions thereto or for changes in occupancy which increase parking requirement relative to prior uses shall be required. 7. The parking space requirement may be met by: a. Providing the required spaces on the site occupied by the use; b. , but Within five develepeF of the pmpesed use; The director may, by approving an administrative use permit, allow some or all of the parking to be located _on_a site different from the use. Such off -site parking shall not be within a residential zone. It shall be within reasonable walking distance and no greater than 1250 feet of the use and shall not be separated from the use by any feature that would make pedestrian access inconvenient or hazardous. The site on which the parking is located shall be owned, leased or otherwise controlled by the party controlling the use. c. Participating in a commonly held and maintained off -site parking lot where other businesses maintain their required spaces; PAGE 48 PHI -15 Attachment I city of San Luis OBISpo dCCCMBCP 2010 zornnc, Peculations d. Participating in a parking district that provides parking spaces through a fee or assessment program. e. Participating in an in -lieu fee program as may be established by the city council. Any parking agreement approved prior to adoption of the parking standards contained in subsections {k4)(1) through (3) of this section may be adjusted to conform with those standards, subject to approval by the community development director and city attorney; ■ .• ■ STM .• .. G H. Requirements by Type of Use. Except as otherwise provided in these regulations, for every structure erected or enlarged and for any land or structure devoted to a new use requiring more spaces according to the schedule set out in this subsection, the indicated minimum number of off - street parking spaces located on the site of the use shall be provided. The right to occupy and use any premises shall be contingent on preserving the required parking and maintaining its availability to the intended users, including residents, staff, and /or customers. In no case may required parking spaces for a use be rented or leased to off -site uses or used for other purposes. Parking, in addition to these requirements, may be required as a condition of use permit approval. 9 I. Uses Not Listed. The Director shall determine the parking requirement for uses which are not listed. His /her determination shall be based on similarity to listed uses, and may be appealed to the Planning Commission. J--J. Parking calculations. 1. The parking requirement is based on the gross floor area of the entire use, unless stated otherwise. 2. When the calculation of required parking results in a fractional number, it shall be rounded to the next highest whole number if the fraction is one -half or more; otherwise it shall be rounded down to the next lowest whole number. 3. Where there has been a reduction in required parking, all resulting spaces must be available for common use and not exclusively assigned to any individual use. pacC 49 PHI -16 city of san lulls os>ISpo Attachment 1 zoninc, Rec,u Lions 06C6MBCR 2010 In mixed use projects, required residential parking may be reserved, but commercial parking must be made available for guests or overflow from residences. 4 K. Tandem parking. For residential uses, when parking spaces are identified for the exclusive use of occupants of a designated dwelling, required spaces may be arranged in tandem (that is, one space behind the other) subject to approval of the Community Development Director. Tandem parking is intended to allow for needed flexibility on constrained lots or where tandem parking is consistent with the existing neighborhood pattern. Tandem parking shall not be used to provide for the conversion of garage spaces. 2. Hotel and Restaurant Projects (New and Existing). Tandem parking may be used for hotel and restaurant development in the Downtown Commercial (C -D) zone where parking service is provided, subject to the approval of a Parking Management Plan by the Public Works and Community Development Directors. A Parking Management Plan is a document that outlines how site parking will be regulated and includes provisions to reduce parking demand, including but not limited to, availability of transit in close proximity, access to a car share program and access to information regarding alternative transportation programs. 3. Tandem parking may be considered in office development if all of the following requirements are satisfied: a. With review of the location and design by the Architectural Review Commission, where adequate maneuverability and access arrangements are provided; and b. When the tandem spaces are set aside for the exclusive use of on -site employees; and c. Where the total number of tandem spaces does not exceed 30% of the total parking provided for projects that require 10 vehicle parking spaces or less, and 15% of the total parking provided for projects that require 11 or more vehicle parking spaces; and d. With the approval of a Parking Management Plan by the Public Works and Community Development Directors to insure that proper management and oversight of the use of the proposed tandem spaces will occur. 4. For existing office development where there is a desire to upgrade or modify the parking layout to increase efficiency or better meet standards, and review by the Architectural Review Commission would not be required, the approval of new tandem parking spaces would require the approval of an administrative use permit, where adequate maneuverability and access arrangements are provided. Pace 50 PHI -17 juLy 2010 ment 1 Gl j/ Ott te #�lll$ OBIS PO zonmc uec,uLAtions TABLE 6 - PARKING REQUIREMENTS BY USE Type of Use Number of Off - Street Parking Spaces Required RESIDENTIAL USES Boarding /rooming house, dormitory One space per 1.5 occupants or 1.5 spaces per bedroom, whichever is greater Caretaker quarters Two spaces per dwelling Convents and monasteries One space per five occupants Fraternity, sorority One space per 1 5 occupants or 1.5 spaces per bedroom, whichever is greater The parking requirement shall be greater of: 1. The number of space required for dwellings. or 2. One High occupancy residential use off- street parking space per adult occupant, less one. Home occupation See Section 17.06.090 2 spaces per unit Same as 8049 family dwgllIA ultRamily dwellings ^Y4 1.5 spaces per unit: 1 space to be with unit Live /work units Mixed -use project Mobile home park 1 per studio apartment: 1 -1/2 for first bedroom plus 1/2 for each additional bedroom in a unit, plus 1 Multi- family dwellings for each five units in developments of more than five units Also see parking reduction paragraphs under 17.16.060. Residential care facilities - 6 or fewer residents Same as Rest home Same as Rest home Same as Rest home One space per four beds (adult): one space per five juvenille occupants Residential care facilities - 7 or more residents Residentail hospice facility Rest home Single- family dwellings 2 spaces per dwelling In the R -1 and C /OS zones, one space must be covered. 2 spaces per unit Work/live units PACfe49 PHI -18 OecemBCP 2010 Attachment 1 city of san lugs OB>ISPO zornnq aEGutations of any of the following items on private property must be screened from any public right - of -way, except as provided in section € D, below. Objects and activities will be considered "screened" when they are either 1) not visible from a public right -of -way or 2) behind a solid six - foot -high fence, wall, or hedge where such fence, wall, or hedge is otherwise permitted by zoning and building codes. A. Furniture and other equipment. Furniture or other equipment, including but not limited to stuffed couches and chairs, household appliances, sinks, heaters, boilers, tanks, machinery, other household or commercial equipment, or any parts thereof. B. Materials. Building materials, including but not limited to packing boxes, lumber, dirt piles, wood, landscape materials, or debris. C. Recreational vehicles and related devices. 1. Any airplane or other aircraft, or any parts thereof, 2. Special mobile equipment or parts thereof, such as tar wagons, water trailers, and similar devices as defined in section 575 of the Vehicle Code, 3. Boats, trailers, camper shells, recreational vehicles, jet skis or similar devices, or parts from any of these items, unless exempted in section D7 below. D. Exceptions. The following may be allowed in front yards under the noted circumstances: 1. Waste haulers and recycling containers may be placed for pickup in accordance with Chapter 8.04 & 17.17.075 of this code. 2. Portable on demand storage containers (PODS) used for the temporary storage of personal property owned or rented by the occupants may be allowed for a period not to exceed one week. 3. Building materials, vehicles, equipment, or construction tools may be placed in yards during construction with a valid building permit. 4. Personal property owned or rented by the occupants may be repaired, washed, cleaned, and serviced, subject to any other relevant regulations, provided that vehicles are parked in a driveway and that all work is completed within 72 hours. 5. Storage, repair, and maintenance of vehicles or other equipment may be allowed in commercial or agricultural areas visible from a public right -of -way, where these activities are an integral part of the commercial business and are conducted in accordance with all other limitations on that business. 6. Barbecues and furniture that is designed and intended for outdoor use may remain on a porch or in a walled front patio, where the walls are designed in accordance with fence height regulations. 7. Recreational vehicles and trailers with current licenses may be parked in driveways. 17.17.050 Front yard paving. No more than 50% of any residential front yard (see definition of "front yard "), not to exceed 26 feet in width, may be covered by concrete or any other impervious material, including driveways, patio areas, walkways, and other landscape features. Exceptions to this standard can be granted through the Administrative Use Permit process, should the proposed paving be compatible with the neighborhood. (Ord. 1412 — 2002 Series). Pace 65 PHI -19 Attachment 1 city of san lufs oafspo zonlnq QecutAtions 06CCMBCP 2010 17.17.060 Roofs. A. No furniture or equipment, including chairs, mattresses, couches, recreational furniture, or other materials may be placed on any roof, patio cover, carport, shed top, or similar structure, except for the following: 1. Roof -top equipment, including antennas, satellite dishes, masts, poles, heating, ventilation, air conditioning equipment and similar devices that are designed for roof -top installation, and were lawfully installed, may remain on the roof as long as they are properly maintained. 2. Furniture or other equipment may be placed on a roof deck or other similar place that was lawfully designed and created for such use. 17.17.070 Fences. All fencing that is visible from a public right -of -way shall be maintained so that fencing materials and support are structurally sound, with no missing material. 17.17.075 Neighborhood preservation. It shall be unlawful and a public nuisance for any person, firm or corporation, owning, leasing, occupying, or having possession of any private property in the City to maintain such property in such a manner that any of the following conditions are found to exist thereon: Refuse, green waste, and recycling receptacles shall not be within in the front yard area except as provided in Municipal Code section 8.04 which states: Refuse and garbage containers shall not be placed adjacent to the street for pickup more than twenty -four hours before pickup time, and such containers shall be removed within the twelve -hour period following pickup, except in the Business Improvement Area (as defined in Chapter 12.36). In the Business Improvement Area, refuse and garbage containers shall not be placed adjacent to the street for pickup before 5:00 p.m. or the close of business on the day preceding pickup, whichever is later. Such containers shall be removed before 10:00 a.m. following pickup. The "front yard" area is defined as: The area of a residential lot that lies between the street property line and the walls of any residences that face the street. (Ord. 1277, 1995). Trash, green waste, and recycling receptacles shall be completely screened from public view from the public right -of -way that abuts the front yard by a fence, landscaping, or wall, or fenGe that is otherwise permitted by Zoning and Building Codes. Multi - family developments, condominium projects, and other common interest residential units which are approved for individual waste wheelers shall remove waste wheelers from the common area visible from the public right -of -way in accordance with this section. Multi-family projects with shared bin service shall utilize approved enclosure locations consistent with project approvals. 2. Buildings which are abandoned, partially destroyed or damaged or left in an unreasonable state of partial construction, whose owners have been notified by the City that the property has been determined to be in violation of this section. An abandoned building means any building or structure which is not occupied, used or secured for a period of one (1) year or more. A partially destroyed or damaged building means any building or structure in which 25% or more of the structure has been destroyed or damaged and not repaired or replaced for a period of one (1) year or more. An unreasonable state of partial construction is defined as any unfinished building or structure that has been in the course of construction for two (2) years or more, and the condition of said unfinished building or structure or accumulation of paGE 66 PHI -20 July 2010 TABLE 9 - USES ALLOWED BY ZONE - Continued Attachment 1 MY Of san Luis OBISPO zoning Peculations Land Use Permit Requirement by Zoning District Specific use Regulations AG C /OS R1 R2 R3 R4 PF O (1) C -N C -C C -D C -R C -T C -S M BP SERVICES - BUSINESS, FINANCIAL & PROFESSIONAL ATMs Banks and financial services Business support services Medical service - Clinic, laboratory, urgent care Medical service - Doctor office PC PC PC D A A A A A A A A A D PC PC PC PC PC A A A A A D(4) D(4) A A A A Day care - Day care center (child /adult) A A A/D A D(9) A A A A A/D A D(9) D(9) D(9) D 17 08.100 17.08.100 D D A A D(11) A D(11) A A A A A A A A/D A/D A D(11) D(11) Medical service - Extended care _ PC PC D PC PC D D _Medical service - Hospital _ D D PC PC Maintenance service, client site services Convalescent hospital PC PC PC Mortuary, funeral home Office - Accessory D A A A A A A A A A Office - Business and service A A A A A A A A/D A Personal services - Restricted D (4) D(4) D Office - Government Office - Processing Office - Production and administrative D PC D A A Public safety facilities ?P� PC D D D D(4) D(4) A PC A A/D A/D A A D(4) D(4) A Repair service - Equipment, large appliances, etc. Office - Professional A A/D A/D A A A D D Residential Support Services Office - Temporary See Section 17,08.010.0 Photographer, photographic studio Al A/D A PC A SERVICES - GENERAL Catering service Cemetery, mausoleum, columbarium Copying and Quick Printer Service PC PC PC D D A I D I A A PC PC PC PC PC PC PC A A A A A A A A Day care - Day care center (child /adult) D(9) D(9) D(9) D(9) D(9) A A A A/D A D(9) D(9) D(9) D 17 08.100 17.08.100 Day care - Family day care home (small/large) A A A A A A A A A A A A Equipment rental Food bank/packaged food distribution center _ A A D D D Maintenance service, client site services A A PC Mortuary, funeral home D D A D Personal services A A A A D A D Personal services - Restricted D D Public safety facilities PC PC Public utility facilities PC A A 17.08,080 Repair service - Equipment, large appliances, etc. A A D Residential Support Services A A A A Social service organization D A A A A D Vehicle services - Repair and maintenance - Major A A D Vehicle services - Repair and maintenance - Minor PC D A A D Vehicle services - Carwash D D PC D D Veterinary clinic/hospital, boarding, large animal PC PC D D Veterinary clinicthospital, boarding, small animal, indoor D D A A/D A A Veterinary clinicihospital, boarding, small animal, outdoor D Key: A= Allowed D = Directors Use Permit approval required PC = Planning Commission Use Permit approval required A/D = Director's approval on ground floor, allowed on second floor or above Note: Footnotes affecting specific land uses follow the table PAC/C 82 PHI -21 city o f san Luis OBIS PO Attachment 1 zonlnc PecjuLAtions 6CCCMBCQ 2010 Building Code Analysis: A building code analysis specifying the building's allowable area, occupancy class, occupancy load, and construction type. D. Maximum coverage: 100 %. E. Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR): 1. 3.0 - maximum allowed for buildings up to 50 feet tall; 2. 3.75 - maximum allowed for buildings approved above 50 feet tall; 3. 4.0 - maximum allowed for approved buildings over 50 feet tall with transfer of development credits for open space protection or historic preservation; or if a density bonus for affordable housing is granted. F. Standard Lot Dimensions: Minimum lot area: 3,000 square feet Minimum lot width: 25 feet Minimum lot depth: 50 feet Minimum street frontage: 15 feet G. Vehicle Access: Although residential uses are encouraged in the C -D Zone, it is not the intent of the City to ensure that parking is provided on -site for residential uses. Therefore, there is no guarantee of parking availability, either on -site or off -site, for downtown residential projects. On -site parking may be considered inappropriate at certain downtown locations where the pedestrian experience would be harmed by vehicle ingress and egress across the sidewalk. In order to maintain pedestrian orientation and the continuity of sidewalks within the C -D Zone, an Administrative Use Permit must be approved to permit the installation of new driveway approaches proposed after the effective date of this ordinance. When new driveway approaches are proposed in conjunction with an application for Architectural Review, a separate Planning Application shall not be required. In order to approve the new driveway approach, the approving body must make at least one of the following findings: 1. The proposed driveway approach will not harm the general health, safety and welfare of people living or working in the vicinity of the project site because the number of vehicles expected to use the driveway is limited (less than 10 spaces) and there are no other alternatives, such as service alleys, to provide vehicle access to the site. 2. The proposed driveway approach is located along a non - arterial street and will not significantly alter the character of the street or pedestrian circulation in the area in consideration of the characteristics of pedestrian flow to and from the project site and surrounding uses. 3. The proposed driveway approach is a shared facility and provides efficient access to more than a single project in a way that eliminates the need for additional driveways. 4. The proposed driveway approach provides access to public parking. H. Parking. See Section 17.16.060. , the pace 114 PHI -22 1 city o suhwnt deCCIMBER 2010 zoninG ReGulat�ons I. Maximum Building Size: No retail establishment (commercial building) shall exceed 60,000 square feet of gross floor area, unless excepted by subsection H and Section 17.16.035. J. A retail establishment may be allowed up to 140,000 square feet of gross floor area, if the Planning Commission determines that it meets the following standards: 1. The proposed use will serve the community, in whole or in significant part, and the nature of the use requires a larger size in order to function. PAGE 115 PHI -23 Attachment 1 city of sAn Luis OBISpo OCCEMBCIZ 2010 zoninc, Peciul.ations Chapter 17.49: BUSINESS PARK (BP) ZONE Sections: 17.49.010 Purpose and application. 17.49.020 __Property development standards. 17.49.010 Purpose and application. The BP zone is intended to provide for research and development, lb hl manufacturing, and business services that are compatible with each other and with airport -operations, The BP zone implements and is consistent with the Business Park land use category of the General Plan. 17,49.020 Property development standards. BP zoning is found only within the Airport Area and Marclarita Area Specific Plan boundaries. The following is a summary of some of the property development standards that apply to each specific plan area. These standards are included in the Zoning Regulations for reference only. See the appropriate specific elan for more detailed roperty development information. Airport Area Specific Plan A. Yards. Setback distance between: 1. Buildings and property lines along streets, 16 feet; 2. Parking lots and property lines along streets, 10 feet; 3. Buildings and property lines between adjacent parcels, zero; 4. Parking lots and property lines between adiacent parcels, 5 feet. B. Maximum height: 1. Occupied buildings, 45 feet (not to exceed three stories); 2. Non - occupied architectural features, 52 feet. C. Coverage: 1. Maximum coverage by buildings, driveways, and parking shall not exceed 80 %. 2. Minimum landscape area (planning areas, water features, and hard surfaces used mainly by pedestrians) shall be at least 20% of site area. D. Maximum floor area ratio: 1. Warehousing, storage, or automated manufacturing uses shall not exceed 1.0; 2. All other uses shall not exceed 0.6. E. Standard Lot Dimensions: paGE 121 PHI -24 city of san Luis ol3fspo Attachment 1 zoninc, 12EGU Mons OCCCMBCIZ 2010 1. Minimum lot area: 0.5 acre 2. Minimum lot width: 100 feet 3. Minimum lot depth: 100 feet 4. Maximum lot depth to width ratio shall be 3:1 5. Minimum street frontage: 50 feet Margarita Area Specific Plan (Low -rise Office) F. Yards. Setback distance between: 1. Buildings and property lines along streets, 15 feet; 2. Parking lots and property lines along streets, 15 feet; 3. Buildings and property lines between adjacent parcels, 5 feet; 4. Parking lots and property lines between adjacent residential parcels, 3 feet: 5. Parking lots and property lines between adjacent „non- residential parcels, zero. G. Maximum height: 1. Occupied buildings 25 feet; 2. Sin le -sta mason area one occupied level not to exceed 36 feet. H. Covers e: Minimum landscape area (Planning areas water features and hard surfaces used mainly by pedestrians) shall be at least 20% of site area. 1. Maximum floor area ratio: The ratio of roes building floor area to site area shalt not exceed 0.29. J. Standard Lot Dimensions: Same as Office zone. Margarita Area Specific Plan (General Business Park) Yards. Setback distance between: 1. Buildinas and property lines along streets, 20 feet; 2. Parking lots and property lines along streets, 20 feet; 3. Buildings and property lines between adjacent parcels, zero; 4. Parking lots and property lines between adjacent residential parcels, NIA: 5. Parking lots and propeyXiines between adjacent non - residential parcels, zero. L. Maximum height: 1. Occupied buildings, 36 feet; 2. Non - occupied architectural features such as towers may extend to 45 feet. PAGE 122 PH1 -25 OCCEm13CP 2010 4�hToent Cfty o sa 1 zonmc, Peculations M, Coverage: Minimum landscape area (planning areas, water features, and hard surfaces used mainly by pedestrians) shall be at least 15% of site area. N. Maximum floor area ratio: The ratio of gross building floor area to site area shall not exceed 0.44. O. Minimum land parcel size: One acre. P. Parking: The parking requirements in the Low -rise Office and General Business Park areas are as follows: 1. For all uses. paring will be provided at a rate of not less than one space per 500 square feet of gross floor area, nor more than one space per 300 square feet of gross floor area. Exceptions: a. Medical_ offices may, but are not required to, provide parking at a ratio of one space per 200 square feet. b. For warehousing. parWing will be provided at a rate of not less than ones ace per 1,500 square feet of gross floor area nor more than one space per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. PACaE 123 PHI -26 06CEmsCa 2010 Attachment 1 MY Of san tuts OBISPO zonmc, RequLations Chapter 17.88: Residential Growth Management Regulations Sections: 17.88.010 Purpose and justification. 17.88.020 Allocations. 17.88.030 Admustments to alIGGations requested by propedy owners. 17.88.040 Periodic city council review and consideration of revisions. 17.88.010 Purpose and justification. A. The regulations codified in this chapter are intended to assure that the rate of population growth will not exceed the city's ability to assimilate new residents and to provide municipal services, consistent with the maximum growth rates established in the general plan. Also, these regulations are to assure that those projects which best meet the city's objectives for affordable housing, infill development, open space protection, and provision of public facilities will be allowed to proceed with minimum delay. B. San Luis Obispo is a charter city, empowered to make and enforce all laws concerning municipal affairs, subject only to the limitations of the city charter and the constitution and laws of the state. Regulation of the rate of residential development is a reasonable extension of municipal authority to plan overall development, in furtherance of the public health, safety and general welfare. C. According to the general plan land use element, the city should achieve a maximum annual average population growth rate of one percent. The reserve of developable land within the city and the capacity of proposed annexations could sustain growth rates which would exceed the objectives of the general plan. Orel p�ap►lieies -grad- the aaake► a-si sckaetIQrd b#ese regulatiORS eeIie li kelike�4 -t#t- a-pa capeyt #i- t#j -ic#at lie- depi�re e f raasonabl "avelepn;ent-eatlements#hreury a eper�tien�f- t#aes��eg�ataoras D.The growth rate policies of the general plan reflect the city's responsibility to accommodate a reasonable share of expected state and regional growth. E. F--. To avoid further imbalance between the availability of jobs and of housing within the city, the general plan also manages expansion of growth- inducing activities. The burdens of growth management are not being placed solely on the residential sector, since it largely responds to demands caused by other sectors. F.G-.Considering the likely levels of housing demand and construction throughout the housing market area, nearly coinciding with San Luis Obispo County, these regulations are not expected to affect the overall balance between housing supply and demand in the market area. These regulations will not impede and may help meet the needs of very low -, low- and moderate - income households. (Ord. 1459 § 3 (part), 2004: Ord. 1359 § 3 (part), 1999) pAC,C 187 PHI -27 Attachment 1 city of san Luis OBISPO zontnq RequIations OCCCMBCQ 2010 17.88.020 Allocations. A. Each Specific Plan The Gity GewRGil 6hall, by reselution, shall adopt a phasing schedule that allocates timing of potential residential construction, including phasing of required improvements, ameRq aRRGXAtiGR areas, consistent with the general plan and with these regulations. B. The limitations on residential development established by these regulations apply to new residential construction within certain areas that have been annexed to the city or that will be annexed to the city. Development in such areas is subject to development plans or specific plans, which shall contain provisions consistent with these regulations and with the phasing sGhedule. C. ," Aallocations shall be implemented by the timing of issuance of building permits. l TkEesa-- ragL- 0ations- shall -n rt_4in4AA- h &- is&ua- nGe -4 bcifs{iF g e its- for -lo 14ons -WNGh D €. Dwellings affordable and enforceably restricted to residents with extremely low, very low, low or moderate incomes, as defined in the city's general plan housing element, and new dwellings in the downtown core (C -D zone as shown in the most official zoning map) shall be exempt from these regulations. Enforceably restricted shall mean dwellings that are subject to deed restrictions, development agreements, or other legal mechanisms acceptable to the city to ensure long -term affordability, consistent with city affordable housing standards. In expansion areas, the overall number of units built must conform to the city- approved phasing plan. EF. It shall not be necessary to have dwellings allocated for a particular time interval or location to process and approve applications for general plan amendment, zone change or other zoning approval, subdivision, or architectural review. (Ord. 1459 § 3 (part), 2004: Ord. 1359 § 3 (part), 1999) �e�+ €ice -wit# asla- gvgoer- fnr -wl�► erne- �i�iw�o#- �capsrty- develep�eef w.3,elsli- ire --a€ aGtGdn�',�.,�; a pFGpesec�-- sh,arge-- (e+t#er ktaeteee�- C�r-sf raf�y p pFb��}i i t— �irQCwtYIC n'+t 4 st the a ll8ia'atkw-n��Tf rhn ellings ,shGwn n4# 9-p a�s+r}g-Ghe,cWs}, so -4onq as t o total r rn,nom her e clwall {rte farafl expa rfee areast#iara irrtewal t�aes- raet- sfaega— T#ae- siireGtsr s#aa41veiestaptae determining that there would- be Re Subst-ARti-al diff9FeRG9 in provisiop of -affordable 17.88.03040 Periodic city council review and consideration of revisions. A. The community development department shall provide status updates to the city council concerning implementation of these regulations, coordinated with the annual report on the general plan. The status update will describe actual construction levels and _suggest if revisions are necessary to maintain the Cty`s one percent growth rate. pace lss PHI-28 Attachment 1 city of san Luis OBISpo dECEmBER 2010 zonmc, Recutations ##fig 1. Change the tot-al Rl-lFR-hE)F Of dWelliRg6 that may be permitted within -an intep-gal- .— cmf�ts #hrr��morl fr rlc�mninn- �nr�rr infilm,I�rl��pyry� `A. e areas; sly alloGated to n certain expanGinn area ;A.ghA-.n there AG not ve-rified written approval by eaGh ;-;ffR-r-,tA-d- 4. Shift the years Govered by iRtewals. f Q. 9r6 NetiGee# the heaFiRg shall be provid-e-d- -;;t le-ast tep but not Mare thaR thh4y day6 prier to the h yy { �ii- t-�Ciit'Y-d{Qer n$ nr.�arpptn }ill�r n # #nntesri Sit. N H a ht; oht;;ept;d from thA oDou.n.ty pmpeAy assessment rell, or from other spurner, w the flnmmr i y eveEe egi r Ow detern es� vu ie ec r p a# f €l t r t duly adepted dwellings- exceeds-these- ac #eakly- per -.:n ra, n �v�es e�i -t e e Plait e€ ran annexa#+ees: neighborhoeds e e a a4owe�ide growth rate to be exGeeded, and lwi4he Q s approval of (QFd. • 004Ord. • •• pace 189 PH1 -29 OCCCMBE12 2010 city o a 1 t�5 C7til5 11 zonmc, izEGutations cameras and photographic supplies orthopedic supplies clothing and accessories collectibles (cards, coins, comics, stamps, etc.) department stores drug and discount stores dry goods religious goods small wares specialty shops sporting goods and equipment stationery toys and games fabrics and sewing supplies variety store Golf Course. Golf courses, and accessory facilities and uses including: clubhouses with bar and restaurant, locker and shower facilities; driving ranges; "pro shops" for on -site sales of golfing equipment; and golf cart storage and sales facilities. Grazing. "Grazing" means the keeping of hoofed animals where food grown on the premises is the principal food of the livestock. (Ord. 941 - 1 (part), 1982: prior code - 9204.11 (part)) Gross floor area. "Gross floor area" means the total area enclosed within a building, including closets, stairways, and utility and mechanical rooms, measured from the interior face of the walls. (Ord. 941 - 1 (part), 1982: prior code - 9204.11 (part)) Guest House. A separate "accessory structure ", that is designed, occupied, or intended for occupancy as sleeping and bathing quarters only, that does not contain a kitchen, and is intended to be used in conjunction with a primary residence that contains a kitchen. A guest house shall be no larger than 450 square feet. H. Definitions, "H." Hedge. A barrier or boundary formed by a dense row of shrubs or low trees. Heliport. A designated, marked area on the ground or the top of a structure where helicopters may land at anytime. High Occupancy Residential Use. A "High Occupancy Residential Use" is any dwelling other than a residential care facility as defined in section 17.04.340 of this code, in the R -1 or R -2 zones when the occupancy of the dwelling consists of six or more adults. (Ord. 1154 - 1 Ex. A (part), 1989) Home Occupation. The conduct of a business within a dwelling unit or residential site, employing only the occupants of the dwelling, with the business activity being subordinate to the residential use of the property. Homeless Shelter. A church, public building, or quasi - public facility that provides emergency or temporary shelter for more than thirty (30) days in any one year period to homeless individuals and /or groups. These accommodations may include temporary lodging, meals, laundry facilities, bathing, counseling, and other basic support services. pac,E 239 PHI -30 Attachme-nt 2 Land Use Element Policy 4.22 Parking for Downtown Residents The City should revise the Access and Parking Management Plan (2002) to include a downtown access program for residents in the downtown core area. The revision should evaluate various strategies and long -term parking solutions and include implementation recommendations. Strategies and solutions that may be considered include, but are not limited to, components of Housing Element Programs 6.3.2, 6.3.3 and 6.3.4, in addition to: 1. A fee based program to allow limited residential parking in downtown parking structures owned and operated by the City. 2. Criteria for on -site parking (requirements and prohibitions) based on project size, project location, site access criteria, housing type, and feasible alternative transportation options. 3. Determination if any downtown core streets should have driveway access restricted. 4. Vehicle parking and storage areas located outside the downtown core area, such as Park and Ride style lots, that can be used by downtown core residents. 5. The development of additional transit programs to increase options for downtown residents. 6. Credit towards parking requirements for projects that implement shared vehicle programs. Housing Element Policies and Programs Policy 6.2 New commercial developments in the Downtown Core (C -D Zone) shall include housing, unless the City makes one of the following findings: A) Housing is likely to jeopardize the health, safety or welfare of residents or employees; or B) The property's shape, size, topography or other physical factor makes construction of new dwellings infeasible. Program 6.9 Amend the Zoning Regulations and Parking Access and Management Plan to allow flexible parking regulations for housing development, especially in the Downtown Core (C -D Zone), including the possibilities of flexible use of city parking facilities by Downtown residents, where appropriate, and reduced or no parking requirements where appropriate guarantees limit occupancies to persons without motor vehicles or who provide proof of reserved, off -site parking. Such developments may be subject to requirements for parking use fees, use limitations and enforcement provisions. Program 6.10 Provide incentives to encourage additional housing in the Downtown Core (C -D Zone), particularly in mixed -use developments. Incentives may include flexible density, use, height, or parking provisions, fee reductions, and streamlined development review and permit processing. PHI-31 Attachment city of san Luis ogIspo INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM For GPI 83 -07 Zoning Code Amendment 1. Project Title: Downtown Parking Zoning Code Amendment 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of San Luis Obispo 919 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Phil Dunsmore (805) 781 -7522, e-mail: Pdunsmore @slocity.org 4 Project Location: Downtown Commercial (C -D) Zone �f T WIN �v .m 8 C -D Zone Affected by proposed Zoning Regulation Revisions CITY OF SAN LUIS ClEmpo I INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2010 PHI -32 3 Attachment 3 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: City of San Luis Obispo 919 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 6. General Plan Designation: General Retail 7, Zoning: C -D (Downtown - Commercial) 8. Description of the Project: The project involves revisions to the City's Zoning Ordinance regulations Chapter 17.42 and chapter 17.16.060 to revise and relocate the specific parking standards for the Downtown - Commercial (C -D) Zone. Specifically, language is added to the downtown parking standards to support alternatives for residential developments. The C -D zone parking requirements will also be moved from chapter 17.42 to chapter 17.16.060 to incorporate the C -D zone requirements with the general parking requirements discussion. The Access and Parking Management Plan (July 2002) will be amended to include a provision for downtown residential parking. Revisions include allowing residential developments in the C -D zone to utilize spaces in public parking facilities once a parking program is established; amendments to the Municipal Code to extend the distance allowed for off -site parking, and amendments to the Municipal Code to allow parking space reductions for parking/trip reduction programs that may be approved with an administrative use permit. The proposed revisions implement Land Use Element policy 4.22 and Housing Element programs 3.12.2 through 3.12.4 which encourage housing development in the Downtown Core by providing flexible parking regulations, incentives and use of the City parking facilities. A legislative draft of the proposed amendments has been included as Attachment 2. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Settings: The Downtown Commercial (CD) zone is located in the heart of San Luis Obispo, situated along three primary streets, Monterey Street, Higuera Street and Marsh Street. The northeast /southwest boundaries of the CD zone are Santa Rosa Street and Beach Street, respectively. The CD zone is bordered by office, public, residential and retail uses. Adjacent zones include Retail Commercial (CR), Office (0), Public Facility (PF), High Density Residential (R -4) and Medium High Density Residential (R -3). The CR zone has similar standards as the CD zone, except for a greater parking requirement, including on -site parking requirements, resulting in less -int6m development. The Downtown Historic District and the Chinatown Historic District overlay portions of the CD zone. The Downtown Historic District is a large district bounded by Osos Street and Nipomo Street and extending down Dana Street. The Chinatown Historic District is a small portion of this area located along Palm Street between Morro and Chorro Streets. There are many valuable historic resources within these districts, including the Mission, the Ah Louis Store, the Andrews Building, the Sinsheimer Brother's Store and the Warden Block building. CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 2 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2010 PHI -33 Attachment The Downtown Area is generally flat south of the creek. North of the creek, the topography includes a slope up to the Palm Street ridge, which is most evident on Chorro Street and Morro Street between Monterey and Palm Streets. 10. Project Entitlements Requested: Municipal Code Text Amendment, Access and Parking Management Plan amendment, Environmental Review. 11. Other public agencies whose approval is required: None. 12. Attachments: Attachment 1: Vicinity Map (LUE Figure 4) Attachment 2: Legislative draft of proposed amendments �i CITY OF SAN Luis OBISPO 3 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2010 3 PHI -34 Attachment 3 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. FISH AND GAME FEES There is no evidence before the Department that the project will have any potential adverse effects on fish X and wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. As such, the project qualifies for a de minimis waiver with regards to the filing of Fish and Game Fees. The project has potential to impact fish and wildlife resources and shall be subject to the payment of Fish and Game fees pursuant to Section 711.4 of the California Fish and Game Code. This initial study has been circulated to the California Department of Fish and Game for review and comment. STATE CLEARINGHOUSE This environmental document must be submitted to the State Clearinghouse for review by one or more State agencies (e.g. Cal Trans, California Department of Fish and Game, Department of Housing and Community Development). The public review period shall not be less than 30 days (CEQA Guidelines y 15073 (a)). CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2010 PH1 -35 Aesthetics Greenhouse Gas Emissions Noise Agriculture & Forestry Resources Hazards & Hazardous Materials Population / Housing Air Quality Hydrology / Water Quality Public Services Biological Resources Land Use / Planning Recreation Cultural Resources Mandatory Findings of Significance Transportation / Traffic Geology / Soils Mineral Resources Utilities / Service Systems FISH AND GAME FEES There is no evidence before the Department that the project will have any potential adverse effects on fish X and wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. As such, the project qualifies for a de minimis waiver with regards to the filing of Fish and Game Fees. The project has potential to impact fish and wildlife resources and shall be subject to the payment of Fish and Game fees pursuant to Section 711.4 of the California Fish and Game Code. This initial study has been circulated to the California Department of Fish and Game for review and comment. STATE CLEARINGHOUSE This environmental document must be submitted to the State Clearinghouse for review by one or more State agencies (e.g. Cal Trans, California Department of Fish and Game, Department of Housing and Community Development). The public review period shall not be less than 30 days (CEQA Guidelines y 15073 (a)). CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2010 PH1 -35 Attachment 3 DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and X a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made, or the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet(s) have been added and agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant" impact(s) or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact(s) on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR of NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. J%M t 1iW/W gnature Kim Murry, Deputy Director of Community_ Development Printed Name CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO Date For: Done Davidson. Interim Community Development Director INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2010 PHI -36 Attachment 3 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the analysis in each section. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project - specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project - specific screening analysis). 2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on -site, cumulative as well as project - level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact' is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4. "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" "applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section 17, "Earlier Analysis," may be cross - referenced). 5. Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063 (c) (3) (D) In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they addressed site - specific conditions for the project. 6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. & This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. The explanation of each issue should identify: a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 6 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2010 PH1 -37 Issues, Discussion and Supporting , formation Sources Sources Potem,_ Toter sf i��n E tjd b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited Significant Signi rant f�iiflYC3tit ' tlkiFr?t E R # 83 -07 to, trees, rock outcroppings, open space, and historic buildings Issues Unless Impact Downtown Residential Parking Revisions within a local or state scenic highway? Mitigation Incorporated 1. AESTHETICS. Would the ro'ect: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 3 X b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited X to, trees, rock outcroppings, open space, and historic buildings within a local or state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality. of X the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would X adverseiX affect day or ni httftne views in the area? Evaluation a) Scenic Vistas and Views - Figure 11 of the Conservation and Open Space Element (COSE) is the City's Scenic Roadways Map, which shows the scenic vistas that are located in the City. None of these vistas are physically located in the downtown core area and the proposed project will have no direct effect on these vistas. Appendix `B" of the Circulation Element includes the Scenic Roadway Survey Methodology and the City's evaluation of roads with scenic value. The study shows that roadway locations within the downtown core area scored too low in the visual quality evaluation to be designated as scenic roadways. However, many of the visual resources identified in Figure 11 are visible from downtown. Views from downtown out towards the hillsides include the following visual resources in their order of prominence: Cerro San Luis, Cuesta Grade, Santa Lucia Range, Bishop's Peak, Laguna Lake Ridge, Terrace Hill, Irish Hills, and South Street Hills. To the extent that the proposed project would increase the number of buildings downtown that are developed or redeveloped, existing views of surrounding visual resources will be lost at the sidewalk level. Recent projects approved and developed in the downtown core area, including the Marsh Street Parking Garage Expansion, the Garden Street Terraces project and the Court Street project, illustrate this fact. These projects obscured sidewalk -level views of Cerro San Luis. However, these recent projects show that the impact occurs under existing conditions and are proceeding regardless of these proposed changes to the parking regulations. Therefore the effect of the proposed project, which would provide different ways of satisfying parking demand for the residential portion of developments, is considered minor with respect to its effect on scenic vistas. b) Other Scenic Resources - Highway 101 along the western edge of downtown San Luis Obispo is designated as a roadway of moderate scenic value in Figure 11 of the COSE. No views from the scenic highway would be impacted by this change because the visual resources available from the highway are to the west and north of the downtown core. c) Visual Character and Quality - The visual quality of the downtown core area is defined by a combination of features. The character defining features can be broadly categorized as pedestrian orientation and historic character. Pedestrian- oriented features include: • continuous building storefronts • recessed building entries with 12' to 16' first floor heights • mid -block pedestrian connections • generally low -scale street walls with one to three -story facades • sidewalk -level access to sun and shade • public open space areas that are separated from vehicles with access to views • landscape features such as benches, planters, large canopy street trees and lighting • a proliferation of awnings and projecting signs that are designed for and oriented to pedestrians on the sidewalk The visual quality is also defined by historic character. This character is created by the historic buildings within the downtown core area and the traditional development pattern that is prevalent within the Downtown Historic District, which covers most of the project area. This traditional development pattern is associated with the numerous historic buildings in the downtown core and their components, such as traditional building materials, decorated parapets and cornices, and a combination of land uses including residential apartments or offices above retail storefronts. Potential impacts to historic CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 7 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2010 PHI -38 Issues, Discussion and Supportin, .riformation Sources sources Pot � PonN tc Significant :Si g ni i an i E R # 83 -07 Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Zoning Ordinance Amendment for Parking in the C -D Zone Incorporated character are evaluated in the Cultural Resources section of this Initial Study. The proposed project would not have an adverse impact on the visual character or quality of the downtown core area because future residential developments will have options for addressing their parking needs that include off -site options, fewer individually- assigned spaces, and unbundling of parking from dwelling unit sales. The potential to address parking demand in ways other than providing individual spaces on -site will enhance the ability to create or maintain the pedestrian features listed above since parking areas and associated access on -site may be reduced or eliminated thus preserving the continuous storefronts in the Downtown Core. d) Light and Glare - The project will not create a new source of substantial light or glare. Conclusion: Less Than Significant Impact. 2. AGRICULTURE & FOREST RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state's inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the nroiect: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of 1,2,10 X Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non - agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a X Williamson Act contract? c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104 (g))? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non - forest use? e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to X their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non - agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non - forest use? Evaluation a) The Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency identifies the project site as urban land, therefore no farmland conversion will result from the project. b) No Williamson Act contract or agricultural zoning exists with the project boundaries. c) The proposed project would not change the environment in a way that could result in conversion of farmland to non- agricultural uses. Conclusion: No Impact. CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPo INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2010 3 PH1 -39 Issues, Discussion and Supportin Aforma>ion Sources Sources Poter y Potenti s n Significant Significant Signi scant Impact E R # 83 -07 Issues Unless Impact Zoning Ordinance Amendment for Parking in the C -D Zone b) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air Mitigation X Incorporates Evaluation a), b) San Luis Obispo County is a non - attainment area for the State and PM 10 (fine particulate matter 10 microns or smaller in diameter) and ozone air quality standards. State law requires that emissions of non - attainment pollutants and their precursors be reduced by at least 5% per year until the standards are attained. The proposed project does not directly involve development related activities. When future projects are proposed under the revised policies, those projects will be reviewed by the Air Pollution Control District (APCD) for compliance with the local Clean Air Plan and CEQA Air Quality Handbook, published by the APCD. The recommendations of the APCD for mitigating air impacts during the construction and operational phases of projects are routinely implemented by the City through discretionary review processes, such as Architectural Review. b) The project is intended to allow for additional ways to meet parking requirements associated with residential portions of development in the downtown core, CD zone. To the extent that the project also results in increased vehicle trips, air quality impacts may occur. When new projects are proposed they are routinely evaluated for their impacts to air quality, and where necessary, trip reduction requirements are required to reduce the number of vehicle trips that are likely to be generated by the project, consistent with existing Circulation Element policies. The location of the proposed project, the downtown core area, is proximate to services, public transportation and bicycle routes, which increases the potential effectiveness of vehicle trip reduction measures. Furthermore, allowing residential tenants to park in City facilities is likely to reduce the amount of driving time that may be required to locate an on- street parking space outside of the downtown zone. c) The downtown area is occupied by retail businesses, offices, public uses and residential uses that do not create substantial pollutant concentrations. Residential uses are considered sensitive receptors, however, the proposed project will not increase exposure of residents to substantial pollutant concentrations. f) The project is not expected to result in the creation of objectionable odors. Occasionally businesses in the downtown engage in activities that have the potential to create strong odors. In mixed -use developments, these types of activities are controlled through existing ordinance requirements (SLOMC 17.08.072.A.1). Other uses are evaluated for consistency with adjacent uses through the Architectural Review or use permit approval processes. Odor complaints are investigated and enforced by the Air Pollution Control District, as well as City Code Enforcement. a), b), c), e) According to the APCD's "CEQA Air Quality Handbook," land uses that cause the generation of 10 or more pounds per day (PPD) of reactive organic gases, oxides or nitrogen, sulfur dioxide, or fine particulate matter (PM 10), or 50 lbs /per day or more of carbon monoxide (CO) have the potential to affect air quality significantly. Table 1 -1 of this document states that it takes approximately 50 apartment units to generate over 10 pounds of these pollutants. Assuming the downtown core is developed with mixed use projects, future developments would be of sizes that are well below APCD's air quality significance thresholds due to the smaller sizes of underlying lots and the inherent development potential of the C -D area. =2 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 9 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2010 C, PHI -40 3. AIR QUALITY. Would the project: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an 11, 12 X existing or projected air quality violation? b) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air X quality plan? c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant X concentrations? d) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of X people? e) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria X pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed qualitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? Evaluation a), b) San Luis Obispo County is a non - attainment area for the State and PM 10 (fine particulate matter 10 microns or smaller in diameter) and ozone air quality standards. State law requires that emissions of non - attainment pollutants and their precursors be reduced by at least 5% per year until the standards are attained. The proposed project does not directly involve development related activities. When future projects are proposed under the revised policies, those projects will be reviewed by the Air Pollution Control District (APCD) for compliance with the local Clean Air Plan and CEQA Air Quality Handbook, published by the APCD. The recommendations of the APCD for mitigating air impacts during the construction and operational phases of projects are routinely implemented by the City through discretionary review processes, such as Architectural Review. b) The project is intended to allow for additional ways to meet parking requirements associated with residential portions of development in the downtown core, CD zone. To the extent that the project also results in increased vehicle trips, air quality impacts may occur. When new projects are proposed they are routinely evaluated for their impacts to air quality, and where necessary, trip reduction requirements are required to reduce the number of vehicle trips that are likely to be generated by the project, consistent with existing Circulation Element policies. The location of the proposed project, the downtown core area, is proximate to services, public transportation and bicycle routes, which increases the potential effectiveness of vehicle trip reduction measures. Furthermore, allowing residential tenants to park in City facilities is likely to reduce the amount of driving time that may be required to locate an on- street parking space outside of the downtown zone. c) The downtown area is occupied by retail businesses, offices, public uses and residential uses that do not create substantial pollutant concentrations. Residential uses are considered sensitive receptors, however, the proposed project will not increase exposure of residents to substantial pollutant concentrations. f) The project is not expected to result in the creation of objectionable odors. Occasionally businesses in the downtown engage in activities that have the potential to create strong odors. In mixed -use developments, these types of activities are controlled through existing ordinance requirements (SLOMC 17.08.072.A.1). Other uses are evaluated for consistency with adjacent uses through the Architectural Review or use permit approval processes. Odor complaints are investigated and enforced by the Air Pollution Control District, as well as City Code Enforcement. a), b), c), e) According to the APCD's "CEQA Air Quality Handbook," land uses that cause the generation of 10 or more pounds per day (PPD) of reactive organic gases, oxides or nitrogen, sulfur dioxide, or fine particulate matter (PM 10), or 50 lbs /per day or more of carbon monoxide (CO) have the potential to affect air quality significantly. Table 1 -1 of this document states that it takes approximately 50 apartment units to generate over 10 pounds of these pollutants. Assuming the downtown core is developed with mixed use projects, future developments would be of sizes that are well below APCD's air quality significance thresholds due to the smaller sizes of underlying lots and the inherent development potential of the C -D area. =2 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 9 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2010 C, PHI -40 Issues, Discussion and Suppordhi , Aormation Sources Sources Potent_ ,� Potcn a s " a X through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a Significant Significant Sigbnficant Impact E R # 83 -07 Issues Unless Impact Zoning Ordinance Amendment for Parking in the C -D Zone Mitigation of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Incorporated Therefore, the proposed changes to parking options for residential development will not generate significant operational air quality impacts. Conclusion The proposed project will facilitate the development of housing in a location that is proximate to services, public transit and bicycle routes and is therefore consistent with APCD recommendations and therefore potentially reducing potential air quality impacts. Individual projects that are proposed in the future are subject to the requirements of the San Luis Obispo Clean Air Plan. During the operational phase of new development projects, the City implements alternative transportation and demand management programs as recommended by APCD and encouraged by the City's Circulation Element. The proposed project will have a less than significant immact on air quality. I d_ R1(11.O9--1('AT. R'F.Q lrTR('FC Wmd,] +h. --+- —! a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or indirectly or 6 X through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect, on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional X plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance (e.g. Heritage Trees)? X d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native X resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved X local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? f) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined in Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but X not limited to, marshes, vernal pools, etc.) through direct removal, filling, h drolo ical interru tion, or other means? Evaluation a), b), c), d), e), f) The proposed project would establish ordinance standards to enable different options to address parking requirements associated with existing and future residential developments in the downtown core area of San Luis Obispo. This is an area that is completely urbanized and intensely developed with buildings and infrastructure. San Luis Obispo Creek also runs through the center of the downtown core area. Further encroachment on the creek's riparian area is prohibited by the City's Creek Setback Ordinance. Future proposals to develop buildings adjacent to the creek will have to comply with the requirements of the ordinance. d) The C -D zone is completely within a core of urban development and the proposed project will not interfere with the movement of any wildlife species or migratory wildlife corridor. No specific development project is proposed. e) The proposed project will not conflict with any local policy protecting biological resources nor any adopted habitat conservation plan, or Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan since this proposal accommodates a parking regulation change and no specific development project is proposed. The project will have no adverse effect on CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO wetlands_ 10 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2010 3 PHI -41 Issues, Discussion and Supporting, ..4Mormation Sources E R # 83 -07 Zoning Ordinance Amendment for Parking in the C -D Zone Conclusion: No Impact. j 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Sources Potem- .J Potenti y t Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historic resource? (See CEQA Guidelines 15064.5) 16 -19 25 X b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an 25 X archaeological resource? (See CEQA Guidelines 15064.5) c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? X d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? X Setting San Luis Obispo has a rich cultural heritage spanning the prehistoric, Spanish, Mexican, and American periods. The City is located within the area historically occupied by the Obispeno Chumash, the northernmost of the Chumash people of California. The Obispeno occupied land from the Pacific coast east to the coast range and from the Santa Maria River north to approximately Point Estero. The era of Chumash contact with Europeans began with the initial Spanish exploration of California in 1542. Mission San Luis Obispo de Tolosa was founded in 1772, the first Spanish establishment in Chumash territory. In 1822 California became a Mexican Territory, and the mission lands gradually became private ranchos via the new Mexican land grants. After California entered the Union in 1850, the ranchos continued to raise cattle until 1863 -1864, when a severe drought depleted the cattle. By 1869, dairying had become an important part of the local economy, headed primarily by Swiss and Swiss - Italian farmers. Chinese, Portuguese, and other ethnic groups also played important roles in local history, particularly in the downtown core area. From its inception as a mission settlement in 1772, the commercial and civic life of San Luis Obispo evolved along the streets adjacent to the Old Mission. Today, the principal business district covers roughly the same area it did in the late 19th century, occupying both sides of Monterey, Higuera, and Marsh Streets between Santa Rosa and Nipomo Streets. This is essentially the project boundary, covering the current Downtown Commercial (CD) zone. Here is located the City's largest concentration of historic, multi- storied commercial, residential and public buildings, offering visible proof of the significance and central role of Downtown over time. The evolution of the current streetscape began in 1873, when the County built its Greek Revival style courthouse to replace the 1850 adobe original. With the connection of Higuera Street between 1889 -1892, the streetscape surrounding the project area began to mature. As the pattern of transportation and land use changed in the early 1900s, commercial buildings began to outnumber private residences in the study area. Civic and commercial buildings housing retail establishments, restaurants, professional offices, and residential units on upper floors, today dominate the built environment. Architectural styles are eclectic, and include Mission Revival, Tudor Revival, California Craftsmen, Richardsonian Romanesque, early 20`I' century commercial, Spanish Colonial Revival, Streamline Modeme, and Contemporary. Due to the high concentration of cultural resources — including both archaeological sites and historic buildings — Downtown San Luis Obispo has been designated as a Historical District. Archaeolo .Qical Resources The archaeology of San Luis Obispo reflects the City's rich, multi - cultural heritage. Archaeological excavations and construction projects have unearthed an unusually rich collection of pre- historic and historic artifacts and features considered as significant under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 15064.5. Although limited in geographic area, past excavations suggest that the probability of encountering additional artifacts and archaeological features due to future development projects is high. Records pertaining to prehistoric sites within the city are very limited. Chert flakes, fire- affected rock, and shell have been documented at CA -SLO -1424 and CA -SLO -835. CA- SLO -30, at Mill and Osos streets, reportedly contained four burials. However, the site, discovered in 1948, was poorly documented. Prehistoric materials also were reportedly discovered in CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I 1 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2010 PHI -42 Issues, Discussion and Supportih .,)formation Sources Sources Posen. y Po y Wiff Significant Si ul E R # 83 -07 Issues Unless Impact Zoning Ordinance Amendment for Parking in the C -D Zone Mitigation Incorporated 1YZ50 during construction of the Palm Street parking structure, but there is no report of these discoveries. Many of the prior studies document historical research and excavations in the vicinity of Mission San Luis Obispo de Tolosa. The Palm Street Historic Site, CA- SLO- 1419H, was discovered in 1986 during construction of the Palm Street parking structure. The site contains extensive remains from the Mission period to the present. Recent investigation of this site at the city-owned Kozak parking lot property on the corner of Palm and Morro Streets revealed an extensive Mission - era Chumash midden as well as late 19th century refuse deposits (SLO- 1419H, Heritage Discoveries 1995). Historical Resources Proposed projects within the Downtown Historic District would be near or next to several of the City's most historically and architecturally significant buildings. These include: Mission San Luis Obispo de Tolosa, Murray Adobe, Carnegie Library, Ali Louis Store, Muzio's Store, Sauer /Adams Adobe, Sauer Bakery, Universal Auto Parts Building, J.P. Andrews Building, Fremont Theatre, Sperry-Laird Building, and the Anderson Hotel. Several of the listed structures have been determined to be eligible or "potentially eligible" for the National Register of Historic Places. Evaluation a) The project site area is predominantly located within the Downtown Historic District, which has a significant inventory of historical resources. This inventory is included in the City's Historical Resource Preservation. New buildings can have an impact on existing historical resources in two ways, directly, by altering or demolishing existing buildings to make way for new ones, or indirectly, by changing the overall character of the historic district. However, this project does not involve the construction of new buildings, nor does it allow for new development projects without further review. The proposed alternatives to satisfy parking requirements for residential developments in the downtown core area could make it financially attractive for property owners and developers to try to remove historic buildings and completely redevelop existing sites. Conversely, providing other alternatives to parking than requiring it be provided on -site might encourage adaptive re -use and preservation of existing historic resources. Therefore, at this time, it can be assumed that the text change will result in less than significant impacts to cultural resources. b), c), d) The City's Archaeological Resource Preservation Guidelines include procedures for mitigating potentially significant impacts to archaeological resources and paleontological resources due to construction projects. Prior projects in the downtown core area including the Court Street Project and the Palm Street Garage involved significant mitigation requirements for archeological resources. Public Works projects within the downtown core area that involve installation and/or replacement of utilities infrastructure are also evaluated for their potential to disturb archeological resources. According to the Guidelines, the downtown core area is a sensitive site because of proximity to San Luis Creek and known archeological resources, including human burials. Therefore, planning applications submitted for new buildings downtown must include Phase I Archeological Resource Inventories. In most cases, depending on the scope of the project, the Phase I report will recommend further work, including a Phase II Subsurface Archeological Resource Evaluation. The Phase II report would include recommendations for avoidance, excavation, recovery, and curation as determined to be necessary by a qualified archeologist and the Community Development Director. The recommendations are based on the scope of the project, the significance of the resources, and the value of curation and public education vs. the preferred practice of avoidance and/or leaving the resource in place. With the Guidelines in effect, the impacts of new development projects on archeological resources, paleontological resources and potential burials are adequately addressed. Conclusion The downtown core area is located within an historic district and among many known archeological sites, including human burials. The project area also includes many important buildings that are included on the City's Inventory of Historical Resources. Therefore, new development projects must be evaluated for their potential to impact historic resources, either directly through alterations or demolitions or indirectly by changing the overall character of the district. CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 12 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2010 PH 1 -43 Issues, Discussion and Supportih�,_Aformation Sources Sources Poten- _,y Significant Yvter7t' Sgni ca t NP E R # 83 -07 X Issues tl niess c Zoning Ordinance Amendment for Parking in the C -D Zone X Mitigation Incorporated There is also very high probability that pre- historic or archeological materials will be found when new development projects are constructed in the downtown core area. As a result, the Archeological Resource Preservation Guidelines requires that new projects submit Phase I studies with recommendations on how to proceed. The Guidelines include adopted City standards for how to proceed in the event that archeological resources are determined to be present. Adherence to these standards insures the impacts to archeological resources are less than significant. The City's Cultural Heritage Committee reviews all new development projects and building alterations in the Downtown Historic District, and makes recommendations to City decision makers regarding potential impacts on historical resources and archeological resources, consistent with General Plan policies and other City guidelines. CEQA also plays a role because impacts to historical and archeological resources are considered an impact on the environment. This results in significant discretionary review requirements for projects that involve alterations to historical resources, and a requirement to prepare an EIR if an historical resource is proposed for demolition. The proposed project is expected to have a less than significant impact on Cultural Resources because existing policies that promote historic preservation are in place and adherence to the City's Community Design Guidelines is required prior to project approvals and this proposal does not directly result in downtown development projects. Future projects that involve significant, unavoidable impacts to these resources may require the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report. 6. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the pr o °ect: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? b) Use non - renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient 6,7 X b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? X manner? c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource X that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State? Evaluation a), b) The project will not conflict with adopted energy conservation plans or promote the use of non - renewable resources in an inefficient manner. Future site development must comply with the policies contained in the Energy chapter of the General Plan's Conservation and Open Space Element (COSE). The City implements energy conservation goals through enforcement of the California Energy Code, which establishes energy conservation standards for residential and nonresidential construction. Future development of this site must meet those standards. The City also implements energy conservation goals through Architectural Review. Project designers are asked to show how a project makes maximum use of passive means of reducing conventional energy demand, as opposed to designing a particular image and relying on mechanical systems to maintain comfort. c) There are no known mineral resources on the project site that would be of value to the region or to the residents of the State. Conclusion: No impact. 1 7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? X b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? X Evaluation a)b)c) The purpose of the downtown parking amendment is to attract additional residents to the downtown area as an effort to CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 13 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2010 3 PH1 -44 A 'LL A- _ J Issues, Discussion and Supportir;..Aformation Sources Sources Potell, F Poten L z effects, including risk of loss, injury or death involving: 24 Significant Signi ca �y p E R # 83 -07 Issues Unless Impact Zoning Ordinance Amendment for Parking in the C -D Zone Mitigation Incorporated support higher density, mixed use development within existing and future downtown buildings. Such high density or mixed - use residential development typically results in significant reductions of greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) because people are closer to places of employment and services and will be able to utilize existing transit or shorter vehicular commutes. In order to assess the potential changes in GHG from the ordinance amendment we can look to guidance from the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association ( CAPCOA) in their CEQA and Climate Change white paper (January 2008). The CAPCOA document provides the technological methodologies to assess GHG emissions. The information provided in this section is based on recently established California goals for reducing GHG emissions as well as a project - specific emissions inventory developed for the Specific Plan. The City of San Luis Obispo, as the lead agency, has no duty to establish a significance threshold for GHG emissions. Therefore, the analysis of the proposed parking ordinance change does not establish thresholds for the City or set precedence for the type of analysis in a climate change analysis. Since this amendment does not result in a specific development project, no specific quantity of GHG can be assumed. Conclusion: Less than significant. I R. GF.01,0GV AND CnTi.C_ Wnn1d fhP nrniPrf• -� a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse 5, 21, effects, including risk of loss, injury or death involving: 24 1. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated in the X most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area, or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? I1. Strong seismic ground shaking? X III. Seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction? X IV. Landslides or mudflows? X b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? X c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that X would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on or off site landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as determined in accordance with X ASTM D4829 per California Building Code (CBC), creating substantial risks to life or roc ? Evaluation a) There are no known fault lines on site or in the immediate vicinity. However, the City of San Luis Obispo is in Seismic Zone 4, a seismically active region of California and strong ground shaking should be expected at any time during the life of proposed structures. Structures must be designed in compliance with seismic design criteria established in the Uniform Building Code. Since this is a code requirement that is monitored through the review of plans during the Building Division's plan check process, no further mitigation is necessary. b) The project area is within the City's urbanized downtown core and the project does not directly result in a new development and therefore will not result in substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil. c) The site lies in an area identified by the Safety Element of the General Plan as being in an area of High Liquefaction Potential. As defined in the Safety Element, liquefaction is "the sudden loss of the soil's supporting strength due to groundwater filling and lubricating the spaces between soil particles as a result of ground shaking." In extreme cases of liquefaction, structures can tilt, break apart, or sink into the ground. The likelihood of liquefaction increases with the strength and duration of an earthquake. The risk of settlement for new construction can be reduced to an acceptable level through careful site preparation and proper foundation design. Recommendations for proper site preparation and foundation design are included in project soils reports and soils engineering reports. These documents are required by code to be submitted to the Building Division as part of the construction permit process therefore, no further mitigation is necessary. CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 14 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2010 3 PHI -45 l� !1 Issues, Discussion and Supportin; .formation Sources Sources Potetj E'ot s X through the routine use, transport or disposal of hazardous Significant Sigra� is r urk E R # 83-07 Issues Unless Impact Zoning Ordinance Amendment for Parking in the C -D Zone Mitigation Incorporated through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions d) Expansive soils are common in San Luis Obispo and occur in the downtown core area. Recommendations included in soils reports and soils engineering reports, which are required as part of the building permit application process, are sufficient to mitigate potential hazards from building on expansive soils. In general, the presence of expansive soils requires additional base for roadways and flat work and deeper footings for building foundations. e) Septic tanks are not permitted with new construction in the City. The project will be served by the City's sewer system. Conclusion The proposed project involves less than significant impacts with respect to geology and soils. 9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the Dr o'ect: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment 5, 7, X through the routine use, transport or disposal of hazardous 23 materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment X through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter X mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Expose people or structures to existing sources of hazardous X emissions or hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste? e) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous X materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, it would create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? f) For a project located within an airport land use plan, or within X two miles of a public airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for the people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of, or physically interfere with, the X adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of lose, injury, X or death, involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residents are intermixed with wildlands? Evaluation a),b),c),d) Development in the downtown core area normally includes retail, restaurant, office and automobile parking uses that are not likely to create health hazards. The City's Zoning Regulations insure that uses involving hazardous substances are separated from densely populated urban areas. Where generators or other fuel tanks are required, permits issued by the City's Fire Department ensure compliance with applicable public safety standards. The project site area is not subject to reasonably foreseeable upset or accident conditions because the downtown core area does not include major transportation routes such as the railroad or Highway 101, which are located outside of the downtown core area. e), f) The project site is not within the Airport Land Use Plan area and is located greater than two miles from the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport. CITY OF SAN Luis OBISPO 15 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2010 PH1 -46 A ► ► _1 Issues, Discussion and Supportir,;, .i' formation Sources Sources PoteT4 .y Pot a Ulu X requirements? FbViolate 22 Significant Si i t E R # 83 -07 Issues Unless Impact X Zoning Ordinance Amendment for Parking in the C -D Zone Mitigation Incorporated g) The proposed project will not interfere with an adopted emergency response plan. Projects proposed in the downtown core area are reviewed by the Fire Marshall to insure compliance with access requirements for firefighters and paramedics. h) The project site is an urbanized area that is not adjacent to wildland fire areas. Conclusion The proposed project will create no impacts with respect to hazards or hazardous materials. 1 10. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the {project: I any water quality standards or waste discharge 6, 15, X requirements? FbViolate 22 Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere X substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g. The production rate of pre - existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses for which permits have been granted)? X c) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide additional sources of runoff into surface waters (including, but not limited to, wetlands, riparian areas, ponds, springs, creeks, streams, rivers, lakes, estuaries, tidal areas, bays, ocean, etc.)? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or X area in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation onsite or offsite? e) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or X area in a manner which would result in substantial flooding onsite or offsite? f) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on X a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? g) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which X would impede or redirect flood flows? h) Will the project introduce typical storm water pollutants into X ground or surface waters? i) Will the project alter ground water or surface water quality, X temperature, dissolved ox en, or turbidity? Evaluation a) Allowing different options for meeting parking requirements in the downtown core area will not violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements because it does not entitle new development and new development projects are subject to the City's Waterways Management Plan and requirements established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. The City's standards and the standards applied by the Regional Board insure that new development projects meet all water quality and waste discharge requirements. b) The project area does not make use of groundwater and development in the downtown core area will have no effect on the local groundwater table level. c), d), e), f) Development in the downtown core area does not have the potential to substantially alter the existing drainage pattern because the area is already completely urbanized. All area drainage from new development projects is directed into the storm drain system or overland into one of the City's waterways. In the downtown core area, stormwater flows are CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPo 16 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2010 K, PH1 -47 Issues, Discussion and Supportirt,_ , iformation Sources Sources Poten. , Po 1 lj s X purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? Significant Si i t h wA E R # 83 -07 Issues Unless Impact X Zoning Ordinance Amendment for Parking in the C -D Zone Mitigation Incorporated X directed into San Luis Creek. New development is required to be consistent with the requirements of the Waterways Management Plan, which prohibits increases in the rate and volume of post development stormwater runoff. Proof of compliance with the Waterways Management Plan is required to be submitted to the City at the Planning Application stage, and this information is verified before construction permits are issued. Development in the downtown core area is not expected to have a negative effect on water quality. g) A significant portion of the downtown core area lies within the 100 -year flood plain of San Luis Obispo Creek. Over the years, shallow sheet flooding has been observed. The Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) indicates that portions of the project area are within the AO Zone with a maximum floodwater depth of 2 feet. The AO Zone is described as areas of 100 -year shallow flooding where depths are between 1 and 3 feet. The potential impacts of flooding in San Luis Obispo are addressed by ordinance requirements contained in the Flood Damage Prevention Guidelines. For projects in the AO Zone, the ordinance requires the lowest finished floor of buildings to be raised to a minimum of one foot above the 100 -year peak flood elevation. Flood - proofmg of downtown commercial buildings using flood -gates and the use of building materials that are less likely to be damaged by water are identified as acceptable alternatives in the ordinance to raising the finished floor elevation. Compliance with standards contained in the Flood Damage Prevention Guidelines and the Waterways Management Plan is considered adequate to mitigate potentially significant impacts to people and property from flooding hazards. Conclusion The project site area is completely urbanized and future development will not negatively effect water quality, runoff patterns or flood levels,_ and will not subject property to significant flooding hazards, because compliance with existing standards will require that flood protection measures are installed where necessary and that existing runoff conditions are not exacerbated with the development of new buildings and other improvements. Furthermore, the ordinance changes do not entitle new development projects. Less than significant impacts are likely to occur to hydrology and water quality. 111 _ LAND TTSF. AND PT,ANNTNG Wnnld fha nrniarf- a) Conflict with applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project adopted for the 1 X purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? b) Physically divide an established community? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural communi conservation plans? X X Evaluation a) The project will not conflict with any land use plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. The City's General Plan currently allows residential density up to 36 units per acre in the downtown core area. However, most development in the downtown core area is less intense than current policies envision. The proposed project would allow for additional ways to satisfy parking requirements in an effort to facilitate residential development, among other goals, but would not conflict with existing plans or policies. b) The proposed project will allow for further infill and intensification of the City's downtown core area and will not physically divide an established community. d) There are currently no habitat conservation plans or natural community conservation plans in effect within the project area. Conclusion CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 17 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2010 PHI -48 Issues, Discussion and Supportinb ., formaton Sources sources Poten.. 4- PoteA117 levels as defined by the San Luis Obispo General Plan Noise 23 Significant SIP AT it � E R # 83 -07 Issues Unless Impact Zoning Ordinance Amendment for Parking in the C -D Zone Mitigation Incorporated X The proposed project will have no impacts on land use and planning. 12. NOISE. Would the project result in: a) Exposure of people to or generation of "unacceptable" noise 4, 14, X levels as defined by the San Luis Obispo General Plan Noise 23 Element, or general noise levels in excess of standards established in the Noise Ordinance? b) A substantial temporary, periodic, or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing X without the project? c) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundbome X vibration or groundborne noise levels? d) For a project located within an airport land use plan, or within X two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Evaluation a) The proposed project is located in the City's downtown core area. The Noise Element of the General Plan includes the City's goals, policies and programs regarding noise exposure. Residential uses are considered noise sensitive uses and the Noise Element includes standards for interior and exterior noise exposure limits for these types of uses. The Noise Element also projects noise levels at General Plan build -out. According to the Noise Element, Figure 5b, the project site area will be subject to transportation generated noise levels in excess of 60dB. 60dB LDN (24 -hour, day and night average) is the maximum level of exterior noise exposure permitted in residential open space areas, such as private yards and decks, without requiring some form of mitigation. Mitigation of excessive noise levels is generally possible for up to l OdB of noise (Noise Element, Figure 1). The noise in the project area is generated primarily by vehicle traffic on Highway 101, but also includes noise from vehicle traffic on area streets. Maximum interior noise exposure is established at 45dB LDN. Interior noise exposure limits are easier to accomplish because standard construction techniques will reduce noise exposure levels by 15dB and additional noise attenuation measures can reduce interior noise exposure by an additional 15dB, resulting in a total interior noise level reduction of 30dB. Areas within 342 feet of the centerline of Highway 101 would be subject to noise in excess of 70dB. In these locations it is more difficult to provide outdoor use areas that comply with acceptable noise exposure limits. However, the project site is completely outside of the area that is subject to projected noise levels of over 70dB. Therefore, the proposed project will not expose people to excessive exterior noise levels. As individual projects come forward for review by the City, noise studies will be required, per Figure 2 of the Noise Element. Noise study recommendations are routinely incorporated into project conditions of approval and mitigation measures, to insure that projects are consistent with the General Plan for both interior and exterior noise exposure limits. b) The project site is the City's urban downtown core and is not an area that has ground - mounted machinery that would cause vibration. c), d) Proposed projects in the downtown core area may include features, such as parking garages, that would increase ambient noise levels above current levels. Temporary increases in ambient noise levels can occur during construction. The City of San Luis Obispo has a Noise Ordinance that includes standards for maximum noise levels across property lines. The Noise Ordinance also includes standards for construction related noise. Compliance with Noise Ordinance requirements is required and sufficient to mitigate any potential impacts to less than significant levels. CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 18 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2010 3 Issues, Discussion and Supportins ..formation Sources Sources Poteri, ., �a t. 11 s (for example by proposing new homes or businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other Significant r lit E R # 83 -07 Issues Unless Impact Zoning Ordinance Amendment for Parking in the C -D Zone Mitigation Incorporated X The Police Department has indicated that it deals with a large number of noise complaints due to existing nightclubs and bars in the downtown core area. The impacts are generated by sound systems within nightclubs and by patrons of these downtown businesses. With the development of new buildings in the downtown core area, and the associated addition of residential dwellings, conflicts between patrons of nightclubs and bars and downtown residents may increase. Nightclubs and bars in the downtown area require Administrative Use Permit approval. Use permits typically limit hours of operation and require crowd control plans. The Noise Ordinance also gives the Police Department the ability to act on noise complaints. Establishments that continually violate noise standards and are the subject of neighborhood complaints may have their use permits revoked. If noise complaints rise as more residents are added to the downtown core area, the City may need to revise its noise ordinance standards accordingly. e),f) The project area is outside of the boundaries covered by the Airport Land Use Plan for the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport. Conclusion The proposed project will result in less than significant noise impacts. Future projects proposed in the downtown core area may be required to prepare Noise studies to insure compliance with the criteria in the General Plan Noise Element and the City's Noise Ordinance. 1 111 PnPTTT.ATT(lN ANn TT(nTTQTN(_ Wmild *ha nvniar *• I a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly 1 X (for example by proposing new homes or businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing or people X necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Evaluation a) The proposed project would increase the potential for residential development in the downtown core area by allowing for alternative ways to satisfy parking requirements associated with residential development. This population growth would be located in an existing urban area that is designed to accommodate development of the proposed intensity. Existing City policy encourages infill and intensification in areas already committed to urban development (LUE Goal 12). Existing policy also states that the downtown core area should be the most intensely developed location in the City (LUE Policy 4.15). Therefore, the increased population that may result from the proposed policy and ordinance changes would be consistent with existing City policies for population and housing and would not exceed the currently allowed 36 dwelling units /acre. The project would help implement Housing Element Policy 6.2.2, which says that new commercial developments in the downtown core area shall include housing. b) The project will not displace existing housing and is intended to encourage the development of additional housing, among other objectives. c) The project will not displace substantial numbers of people. Conclusion The proposed project will have less than significant impacts in the area of population and housing. 14. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision, or need, of new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other �1 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 19 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2010 t] PHI -50 r�t Ll Issues, Discussion and Suppordht, Aormation Sources Sources PoteK .y Pot 1 s° c Significant Si fi f E R # 83-07 Issues Unless Impact Zoning Ordinance Amendment for Parking in the C -D Zone X Mitigation Incorporated performance Ojectives for any of the public services: a) Fire protection'? b) Police protection? c) Schools? d) Parks? e) Roads and other transportation irifrastructure? Other ublic facilities? 7 X X X X X X Evaluation a) The San Luis Obispo Fire Department ( SLOFD) provides emergency and non - emergency fire protection services in the City. Emergency services include fire response, emergency medical response, hazardous materials response, and public assistance. Non - emergency services include fire and life safety inspections, building inspections, fire code investigations, and public education. SLOFD currently operates four stations and maintains a response time goal of four minutes. Station #1 (2160 Santa Barbara Avenue) and Station #2 (136 N. Chorro Street) are located less than 1 mile from the project area, to the south and north, respectively. The proposed project would enable alternative ways to satisfy parking requirements for residential developments within the downtown core area. Mixed use buildings are developed to have the commercial development on the ground floor and residential development either behind the commercial development or located on upper floors. With recent changes to the allowed building height in the downtown core, buildings up to 75' tall are allowed under certain circumstances. As part of the planning process, the design of proposed buildings is evaluated by the City's Fire Marshall. When emergency access issues are identified, the Fire Marshall can require design modifications to insure that the project meets the Fire Code and that SLOFD can provide adequate fire fighting and life safety response services to the project. With respect to tall buildings, advance planning for fire fighting and emergency response is even more important and as a result, designers of proposed buildings in the downtown core area take these issues into account early on in the design development process. Planning applications submitted for new buildings between 50 and 75 feet tall within the downtown core area include a fire and life safety access plan, which shows how access to upper floors will be provided, consistent with the Uniform Fire Code and the requirements of SLOFD. Applicants are encouraged to review proposed emergency access plans with the City's Fire Marshal prior to finalizing their building design and submitting their planning applications. Therefore, encouraging residential development by allowing alternate methods for addressing parking requirements will not have an adverse impact on fire protection. b) Police protection is provided by the City of San Luis Obispo Police Department ( SLOPD). Police services for the area are based at the station located at the intersection of Walnut and Santa Rosa, just outside of the downtown core area. SLOPD also operates an un- staffed storefront office on 840 Marsh Street, within the downtown core area. The Police Department indicated that the design of the stairwells and elevators in terms of the safety and security of users should be considered during design of taller buildings. SLOPD reviews plans for new development projects in the downtown core area for these considerations. Therefore, encouraging residential development by allowing alternate methods for addressing parking requirements will not have an adverse impact on police protection. c) Proposed changes to parking requirements in the downtown core area will have no impact on area schools. New development projects are required to pay school fees, which are used to offset increased demand for school facilities caused by new development. d) The proposed project may increase the number of residents that live in the downtown core area. The Parks and Recreation Element of the General Plan includes a standard for parkland of 10 acres per 1000 residents. The development of new buildings in the downtown core area will contribute to the City's ability to achieve this policy standard through the payment of in -lieu fees. Fees are set at an amount that is intended to offset the impact of each new dwelling unit. Therefore, the effect of the proposed project on parks is expected to be less than significant. CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 20 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2010 R, PH1 -51 Issues, Discussion and Supportin;, .6formation Sources Sources Potefil -.y Pct v 1 V �s t other recreational facilities such that substantial physical Significant Significant �igni scant mpact E R # 83 -07 Issues Unless Impact agency for designated roads and highways? Zoning Ordinance Amendment for Parking in the C -D Zone Mitigation Incorporated X b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or e) No other public facilities have been identified that could be impacted by the proposed project. Conclusion The proposed zoning code amendments would provide additional options for residential developments in the downtown core area to meet their associated parking requirements. This could result in more residential units being built due to the increased flexibility in ways to meet parking demand, however, current requirements for Fire and Police review of proposed development plans address public safety concerns. Impacts to public services from the proposed project are considered less than significant. 15. RECREATION. Would the project: a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood or regional parks or 3, 13, 23 X other recreational facilities such that substantial physical X standard established by the county congestion management deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? agency for designated roads and highways? X b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse X c) Substantially increase hazards due to design features (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. physical effect on the environment? farm equipment)? Evaluation a) The proposed project may increase the number of residents that live in the downtown core area. The Parks and Recreation Element of the General Plan includes a standard for parkland of 10 acres per 1000 residents. The development of new buildings in the downtown core area will contribute to the City's ability to achieve this policy standard by paying Parkland in- lieu fees. Fees are set at an amount that is intended to offset the impact of each new dwelling units. Therefore, the effect of the proposed project on parks is expected to be less than significant. There is limited ability in the downtown core area to develop new recreation facilities, but the existing parks, including Mitchell Park and Emerson Park are centrally located and provide good recreational opportunities for existing and future residents. The downtown core area is also located adjacent to open space resources, such as trails on Cerro San Luis and the Railroad Safety Bicycle Trail, that provide exceptional recreational opportunities for City residents, including downtown residents. The proposed project, which would allow for alternative ways to satisfy residential parking requirements for residential developments in the downtown core is expected to have a less than significant impact on these recreational facilities. b) The proposed project does not involve or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that would have and adverse physical effect on the environment. Conclusion The proposed project will have less than significant impacts on recreation facilities. 16. TRANSPORTATION /TRAFFIC. Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service 3, 13, 23 X X standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads and highways? X c) Substantially increase hazards due to design features (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 21 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2010 _r PHI -52 A/%I, �"A ^ +IA Issues, Discussion and Supportirib .Mormation Sources sources Ponds y pot" Significant 5igni scant Ogm teat mPact E R # 83 -07 Issues Unless Impact Zoning Ordinance Amendment for Parking in the C -D Zone Mitigation Incorporated d) Result in inadequate emergency access? e) Result in inadequate parking capacity onsite or offsite? f) Conflict with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? g) Conflict with the with San.. Luis Obispo County Airport Land Use Plant resulting in substantial safety risks from hazards, noise, or a chance in air tragic patterns? Evaluation a), b) The City's Circulation Element of the General Plan classifies streets as arterial, collector and local, based on their design characteristics and capacity. Key downtown streets that provide access to and through the downtown core include Santa Rosa, Osos, Chorro and Broad on the east -west axis and Higuera, Marsh, and Monterey on the north -south axis. A grid network of local streets provides access to and from the core area to surrounding neighborhoods. Highway 101 is located to the north and west of the downtown core area and primary access to the Highway is provided at Marsh, Broad (southbound only), Osos (northbound only), and Santa Rosa. As new buildings are developed within the downtown core, traffic travel patterns will change and generate additional vehicle trips. These additional demands will likely impact the operation of signalized and un- signalized intersections and may degrade the level of service (LOS) at some intersections. The Circulation Element (CI) of the City's General Plan provides a management strategy for addressing increased traffic congestion based on the buildout potential in the downtown. Because the encrouragement of additional residential in the downtown is consistent with the maximum buildout and maximum densities allowed within the downtown, the Circulation Element policies adequately address the increases to area traffic. Cl Policy 8.0.1 provides actions that the City will pursue as LOS decreases, including "institute programs that require the use of alternative forms of transportation: and establish policies and programs .that act as disincentives to the use of vehicles." Depending on the specific distribution of traffic generated by new development, and whether or not on -site parking is provided, future projects may significantly impact intersection operations. When intersections are potentially impacted by new development, the City routinely requires project applicants to submit a traffic study. An analysis of LOS impacts at intersections is a basic traffic study component and is required by the City's Transportation Impact Study Guidelines. The traffics impacts of downtown development, including the construction of additional parking garages, were evaluated in the draft Final Environmental Impact Report for the Parking and Downtown Access Plan (Parsons Transportation Group, 1999). This report concluded that traffic impacts to area intersections and street segments would not exceed thresholds of significance (e.g. LOS E) established by the City's Circulation Element, and that specific mitigation may not be required. While this report provides important background data and is an appropriate reference document, the specific impacts of proposed projects will need to be separately evaluated. Applications for new development projects that have the potential to exceed thresholds of significance for traffic are required to include traffic studies, per the City's Traffic Impact Study guidelines. The impacts of the proposed project with respect to traffic increases is considered less than significant because the change allows different ways to meet parking requirements which may redirect parking space location or negate the need for some parking associated with residential development in the downtown core. The downtown core area is already planned to accommodate significant retail floor area and residential density and should not be impacted by the change in parking space location or the ability to provide units without associated parking if the resident agrees to not bring a car. c) If the changes to the parking standards result in an increase in residential units, there will most likely be an increase in pedestrian demand that is not addressed by the City's current sidewalk system or signal system. This is an important consideration at intersections, where conflicts between pedestrians and turning vehicles are most likely to occur. Recent improvements at intersections associated with the Court Street Project include improved pedestrian controls, such as countdown walk signs, and wider sidewalks in some locations. In the case of the Court Street Project, wider sidewalks were provided by eliminating on- street parking along the project's street frontage. d) The downtown core area is located on a grid street network that provides adequate emergency response access. The first responder to incidents in the downtown core is the SLO City Fire Department. Two stations, Station #1 (2160 Santa Barbara) and Station #2 (136 North Chorro) are located outside of the downtown core, but within the City's response time goal of four CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 22 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2010 PH1 -53 Issues, Discussion and Supporting .iformation Sources E R # 83 -07 Zoning Ordinance Amendment for Parking in the C -D Zone Sources Poteif :y P t iI Significant Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated minutes. e) In -lieu fees that are collected through the program go to the City's Parking Fund, which supports parking operations and the construction and maintenance of new parking facilities in the downtown core. There are currently three parking garages in the project area, including two on Palm Street and the Marsh Street Garage. In total these garages include 917 parking spaces. In addition to on -street parking, surface level parking, and private parking in the downtown core there are a total of 3,218 parking spaces. New development in the downtown core is required to pay in -lieu fees and in some circumstances may provide on -site parking. Over time, implementation of the City's Parking and Downtown Access Plan will insure adequate parking for new development by constructing new public parking garages. A parking garage at the corner of Nipomo Street and Monterey Street is currently being planned. The garage would include between 400 and 600 new parking spaces. Existing and planned parking provided for commercial uses is sufficient to meet parking demand, however, a potentially significant impact has been identified with respect to residential parking. The City's current ordinance does not require on- site parking for residential uses in the downtown core area and overnight parking is not currently permitted in the City's parking garages. Current proposals that include residential units but that do not include parking are the Ali Louis Building (800 Pahn, 1 rental unit) and the redevelopment of the old Bladerunner building (956 Monterey, 2 rental units). In general, it can be expected that the larger condominium projects will provide on -site parking to attract a wider pool of potential buyers, whereas developers of projects with a smaller number of condominium or rental units may not provide on -site parking because it would be cost prohibitive to build parking for such a small number of units. There are a range of considerations with respect to residential parking in the City's urban core. Parking for residential units in the core should not be pushed into surrounding neighborhoods. Parking for downtown core residents could be provided in the City's parking garages on a fee basis. Parking can be required on -site for larger residential projects, however, this would result in fewer residential units ,and larger buildings to make room for the parking. On -site parking also creates problems with sidewalk continuity and vehicle access to garages, which should be minimized to maintain the pedestrian focus of the downtown core area. g) The proposed project will not conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs for alternative transportation. The proposed project may result in slightly increased residential development in the downtown core area, which would facilitate alternative forms of transportation such as walking, bicycling and transit because it will bring City residents closer to commercial services and existing public transportation resources. Conclusion The proposed project would not result in significant impacts to pedestrian or vehicular circulation in the downtown core. Instead the project is designed to implement General Plan policy and work within the density standards already assumed in the Downtown district. 117- IITTT,TTTFS AND CFRVTCF. CVCTF.MC_ Wnrnlrl tha nrniart• I a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable 7,20 X Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction or expansion of new water X treatment, wastewater treatment, water quality control, or storm drainage facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project X from existing entitlements and resources, or are new and expanded water resources needed? d) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, F-T X which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 23 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2010 PHI -54 Issues, Discussion and Supportih., Mormation Sources sources Poten_ ..y Potential Ie Significant Significant stf,I1cazt ,��,, /+ mpaCt E R # 83 -07 Issues Unless Impact Zoning Ordinance Amendment for Parking in the C -D Zone Mitigation Incorporated capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitment? e) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? f) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Evaluation a) The City of San Luis Obispo Utilities Department has indicated that the proposed project would not impact the City's ability to meet applicable wastewater treatment requirements. Comments note that individual projects proposed downtown are subject to wastewater impact fees, which ensure that new development projects pay a fair share of the total cost of constructing the wastewater treatment and collection facilities that are needed to serve development citywide. b) Individual development projects proposed in the downtown core area are evaluated by the Utilities Department on a case by case basis to insure that City standards and the requirements of other applicable codes, such as the Plumbing Code, can be met. In the case of mixed use buildings, which may involve significant residential density, office, restaurant, retail and transient uses, the Utilities Department has two primary concerns. These include adequate water pressure to deliver potable water and fire flows to the upper floors of tall buildings and adequate capacity in the wastewater collection system. Resolution of these issues is required by existing code, prior to issuance of construction permits. To the extent that allowing different methods to meet the residential parking demand, residential projects in the downtown may experience a less than significant increase. c) Individual projects proposed in the future are required to comply with the drainage requirements of the City's Waterways Management Plan. This plan was ,adopted for the purpose of insuring water quality and proper drainage within the City's watershed. The Waterways Management Plan requires that site development be designed so that post - development site drainage does not exceed. pre - development run -off. This can be achieved through a combination of detention and use of pervious surfaces to increase water absorption on -site. In most cases downtown, additional development will not create additional run -off because most project sites are either currently developed or paved with surface level parking. d) The Water & Wastewater Management Element and the Land Use Element of the General Plan projects the City water needs at its ultimate build -out. Development of the downtown core area with additional residential uses has long been considered under the General Plan. Residential density limits in the CD zone have been set at 36 units per acre since the 1994 Land Use Element was adopted. No change to the residential density standard is proposed with the project. The proposed project may facilitate development of additional residential density in the downtown core area, but this growth is included in the anticipated General Plan build -out. The 2006 Water Resources Status Report indicates that there is currently 256 acre - feet of water available to allocate to in -fill development and intensification projects (development within the 1994 City Limits). Another 256 acre -feet is available to serve the City's expansion areas, for a total of 512 acre feet of water available to allocate to development. The City has also initiated multiple water supply projects including the water reuse project, the Nacimiento Pipeline Project, additional water conservation programs and the Salinas Dam transfer. Development of these water supply resources will provide more than enough water to meet the City's projected water demand in the build -out scenario of the City's current General Plan. e) According to the City's Utilities Department, the City's Water Reclamation Facility (WRF) has adequate capacity to serve future development downtown. The Wastewater Facilities Master Plan anticipates build -out under the General Plan and includes a program for upgrades to the collection system and the Water Reclamation Facility based on regulatory requirements and projected demand. The City's impact fee program for wastewater is used to fund these anticipated improvements. 0, g) Background research for the Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB939) shows that Californians dispose of roughly 2,500 pounds of waste per month. Over 90% of this waste goes to landfills, posing a threat to groundwater, air quality, and public health. Cold Canyon landfill is projected to reach its capacity by 2018. To help reduce the waste stream generated by new development projects, consistent with the City's Source Reduction and Recycling Element, recycling M CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 24 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2010 PH1 -55 Issues, Discussion and Supportih, ;iformation Sources Sources Potcn, .y Pot s s environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife Significant Si fi 1 t' a t ER # 83 -07 Issues Unless Impact Zoning Ordinance Amendment for Parking in the C -D Zone Mitigation Incorporated facilities must be planned for, and a solid waste reduction plan for recycling discarded construction materials must be submitted with new building permit applications. New development projects are already required by ordinance to include facilities for recycling to reduce the potential waste stream, therefore, no mitigation is required. Conclusion The proposed project will have a less than significant impacts on Utilities and Service Systems in the Downtown. 1 18. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCR I a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the X environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self - sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California hist2a or rehisto ? impacts are less than significant since the project site is already developed, is in an urbanized area and potentially significant 1 Impacts to historic resources Cats he mitivated to ieGC than ciunificant levalc fcer (i„Ifiirnl RPennrcae rtiecnee,nn nln. l 1 b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but X cumulatively considerable? ( "Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of the past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future ro'ecfs) I 1 ne ImDaCIS Wentltled In this 7mtin I atndv are cner.itic to this nrniect and wnnlrl not ha I c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause X substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? No potentially significant Impacts to human beings have been identified in this initial study that would occur either directly or 19. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIlt or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration. Section 15063 (c) (3) (D). In this case a discussion should identify the following items: _ y Identify y and state where the are a Earlier analysis used. Identi earlier analyses y re available for review: N/A b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. N/A c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site - specific conditions of the project. N /A. Mitigation measures are required to reduce potential impacts to cultural resources, however these measures are not a result of prior environmental studies prepared pursuant to CEt2IA. 20. SOURCE REFERENCES. 1. City of SLO General Plan Land Use Element, Au ust 1994 2. City of SLO General Plan Housing Element, March 2004 3. City of SLO General Plan Circulation Element, November 1994 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 25 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2010 3 PH1 -56 Issues, Discussion and Supporth, ..iformabon Sources Sources Toter y Pot e t 1 . s a o 7. City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code Significant Sig t 1 l t USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Soil Survey of San Luis Obispo Coun ER # 83-07 Website of the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency: http://www.consrv.ca.gpv/dIM/FMMP/ Issues Unless Impact CE QA Air uali Handbook, Air Pollution Control District, 2003 Zoning Ordinance Amendment for Parking in the C -D Zone Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation Manual, 7h Edition, on file in the Community Development Department 140 Mitigation Incorporated 15. City of SLO Waterways Mana ement Plan 4. City of SLO General Plan Noise Element, May 1996 5. City of SLO General Plan Safety Element, July 2000 6. City of SLO General Plan Conservation and Open Space Element, April 2006 7. City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code 8. City of San Luis Obispo, Land Use Inventory Database 9. USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Soil Survey of San Luis Obispo Coun 10. Website of the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency: http://www.consrv.ca.gpv/dIM/FMMP/ IL Clean Air Plan for San Luis Obis po Cop , Air Pollution Control District, 2001 12. CE QA Air uali Handbook, Air Pollution Control District, 2003 13. Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation Manual, 7h Edition, on file in the Community Development Department 140 City of San Luis Obispo Noise Guidebook, May 1996 15. City of SLO Waterways Mana ement Plan 16. City of San Luis Obispo, Historic Resource Preservation Guidelines, on file in the Community Development Department 17. City of San Luis Obispo, Archaeological Resource Preservation Guidelines, on file in the Community Development Department 18. City of San Luis Obispo, Historic Site Ma 19. City of San Luis Obispo Burial Sensitivity Ma 20. City of SLO Source Reduction and Recycling Element, on file in the Utilities De. partrnerat 21. San Luis Obispo Quadrangle Map, prepared by the State Geologist in compliance with the Alquist -Priolo Earthquake Fault Zonin g Act, effective January 1, 1990 22. Flood Insurance Rate Ma (Community Panel 0603100005 C) dated July 7, 1981 23, San Luis Obispo County Airport Land Use Plan 24. 2007 California Building Code 25. Attachments: 1. Vicinity Map 2. Legislative Draft of Proposed Amendments to Zoning Regulations and Access & Parking Management Plan CITY OF SAN Luis OBISPO 26 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 2010 3 PHI -57 Attachment 4 ORDINANCE NO. # # ## (2011 Series) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AMENDING TITLE 17 (ZONING REGULATIONS) OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE (GPI 8 -11) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on June 22, 2011, July 13, 2011, and August 24, 2011, and recommended approval of amendments to Title 17 (Zoning Regulations) of the Municipal Code; and Whereas, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on May 25, 2011, July 27, 2011, and August 24, 2011, and recommended approval of amendments to Downtown Residential Parking Regulations, Title 17 (Zoning Regulations) of the Municipal Code WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on November 15, 2011, for the purpose of considering amendments to Title 17 of the Municipal Code (GPI 8 -11); and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposed text amendments are consistent with the General Plan, the purposes of the Zoning Regulations, and other applicable City ordinances; and WHEREAS, notices of said public hearings were made at the time and in the manner required by law; and BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Environmental Determination. The City Council finds and determines that previous environmental review adequately evaluates all of the potential impacts of the project and the Negative Declaration adopted by the City Council on September 7, 2010, and correctly determines that the project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment. A Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact (GPI/ER 83 -07) was prepared for Downtown Residential Parking amendments and was recommended for adoption by the Planning Commission on July 27, 2011. The City Council finds and determines that the project's Negative Declaration adequately addresses the potential significant environmental impacts of the proposed project, and reflects the independent judgment of the City Council. The Council hereby adopts said Negative Declaration. SECTION 2. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the Council makes the following findings: 1. The proposed amendments will not significantly alter the character of the City or cause significant health, safety or welfare concerns, since the amendments are PH1 -58 Ordinance No. # # ## (201; GPI 8-11 Attachment 4 consistent with the General Plan and directly implement City goals and policies. 2. Periodic amendments, updates, and corrections of the Zoning Code are consistent with General Plan Policy to maintain regulations which are effective in implementing policies consistent with the General Plan. SECTION 3. Chapter 17.08.110.D. of the City of San Luis Obispo's Municipal Code is repealed and replaced to read as follows: Homeless shelters proposed adjacent to residential neighborhoods shall require architectural review to ensure the shelter design provides for adequate privacy between uses and minimizes potential impacts of the proposed shelter to adjacent residences. SECTION 4. Chapter 17.16.010.A.1. of the City of San Luis Obispo's Municipal Code is repealed and replaced to read as follows: "Density" is the number of dwellings per net acre, measured in density units. In the AG, C /OS, and R -1 zones, each single - family dwelling counts as one density unit. In the other zones, different size dwellings have density unit values as follows: (Ord. 1365 (2000 Series)(part)) a. Studio apartment, 0.50 unit; b. One - bedroom dwelling, 0.66 unit; c. Two - bedroom dwelling, 1.00 unit; d. Three - bedroom dwelling, 1.50 units; e. Dwelling with four or more bedrooms, 2.00 units. SECTION 5. Chapter 17.16.020.E.1.a. of the City of San Luis Obispo's Municipal Code is replaced and amended to read as follows: Street Yards on Corner Lots Recorded Before April 1, 1965. On corner lots in the R -1 and R -2 zones, recorded before April 1, 1965, the street yard along the lot frontage having the longer dimension shall be not less than 10 feet, as in Figure 2. PL 10'x' 20'= Figure 2 SECTION 6. Chapter 17.16.010.E.1.b. of the City of San Luis Obispo's Municipal Code is repealed and replaced to read as follows: Street Yards on Corner Lots Where Each Corner Lot has Its Longer Frontage Along the Cross Street. In the R -1 and R -2 zones, when each corner lot on a cross street has its longer frontage along the cross street, as in Figure 3, the street yard along the longest frontage shall be not less than 10 feet. PH1 -59 Ordinance No. # # ## (2011 vies) GPI 8 -11 {a •:,r '+fir -Y';. ;* },. Figure 3 Attachment 4 SECTION 7. Chapter 17.16.010.E.2.f of the City of San Luis Obispo's Municipal Code is replaced and amended to read as follows: Intersection Visibility. At the intersections not controlled by a stop sign or traffic signal, no plant, structure or other solid object over three feet high which would obstruct visibility may be located within the area indicated in Figure 4. At controlled intersections, the City Engineer may determine visibility requirements for proper sight distance. (Note: Yard requirements may also be modified by variance, Chapter 17.60; planned development, Chapter 17.62; specific plan, Chapter 17.52; or special consideration zone, Chapter 17.56.) (Ord. 1102 - Ex. A(7), (8), 1987; Ord. 1085 - 1 Ex. A (part), 1987; Ord. 1009 - 1, 1984; Ord. 1006 - 1 (part), 1984; Ord. 941 - 1 (part), 1982: prior code - 9202.5(C)) Barrier Height at Street Corners No barriers over 3' high I FFFEr Effli in this area 30' IProperty Line 30'— 1 Curb Figure 4 SECTION 8. Chapter 17.16.040. of the City of San Luis Obispo's Municipal Code is repealed and replaced to read as follows: The height of a building is the vertical distance from the average level of the ground under the building to the topmost point of the roof, including parapets. The average level of the ground is determined by adding the elevation of the lowest point of the part of the lot covered by the building to the elevation of the highest point of the part of the lot covered by the building, and dividing by two. (See Figure 7.) Height measurements shall be based on existing topography of the site, before grading for proposed on -site improvements. (Ord. 1365 (2000 Series)(part)) PH1 -60 Ordinance No. # # ## (2011 Fries) GPI 8-11 Attachment 4 CH I MNEYS, 50LAR SY5TEM5� ETL. cANmoT CE MORE THAN ID' ABWE � w _ ( MAY.IMUM BUILDIA& HE16HT MAXIMUM HEIGHT ALLOWED HIGHEST POINT + UNDER THE BUILDING 7tLOWEST"FOINT AVERAGE ELEVATION UNDER BLD6. UNDER BUILDING Figure 7 Table 5.5: Maximum Height by Zone Zone Maximum Height R -1 25 ft. (up to 35 feet with approval of an administrative use permit) R -2 35 feet R -3 35 feet R -4 35 feet C /OS 35 feet AG 35 feet 0 25 feet (up to 35 feet with approval of an administrative use permit) PF 35 feet C -N 35 feet C -R 45 feet C -C 35 feet C -D 50 feet (additional height up to 75 feet may be approved, section 17.42.020.C.) C -T 45 feet C -S 35 feet M 35 feet BP Varies by specific plan area (see section 17.49) See also Section 17.16.020 for relationship of yards and building height. Components of solar energy systems, chimneys, elevator towers, screening for mechanical equipment that is not integral with building parapets, vents, antennae and steeples shall extend not more than 10 feet above the maximum building height. Commercial and governmental agency antennae may exceed the height limits for the zone in which they are located if such an exception is approved by the Director. Any other exception to the height limits requires approval of a variance as provided in Chapter 17.60. For height limits of signs, see Chapter 15.40. Sign Regulations. (Ord. 1085 - 1 Ex. A (part), 1987; Ord. 1006 - 1 (part), 1984; Ord. 941 - 1 (part), 1982: prior code - 9202.5(E)) PHI -61 Ordinance No. # # ## (2011 ries) GPI 8-11 Attachment 4 SECTION 9. Chapter 17.16.050.B.3. of the City of San Luis Obispo's Municipal Code is repealed and replaced to read as follows: 3. Arbors, trellises, and other ornamental features are allowed within a required yard, subject to the same height limits that apply to fences and hedges except as provided below; SECTION 10. Chapter 17.16.050.B.4. of the City of San Luis Obispo's Municipal Code is added to read as follows: Arbors. Up to one such feature per street frontage may be allowed with a maximum height of 9 feet, and an area of not more than 40 square feet as measured by the perimeter formed by the vertical projection to the ground of the outermost elements of the feature, and no horizontal dimension shall exceed eight feet in length. Any portion of such a feature wider than 18 inches and that exceeds the usual fence height requirements of this section shall be of an open design such that a person standing on the adjacent public right -of -way can see completely through at least 50 percent of the structure to the depth of the required street yard (Figure 9, below) Such features within required yards shall not be connected to a building and shall comply with intersection visibility requirements of section 17.16.020.E.2. 50% Open if Wider than 18" Fence Height Limit + 8' Max. Width Figure 9 Max. Height V May be Solid SECTION 11. Chapter 17.16.050.B.5. of the City of San Luis Obispo's Municipal Code is hereby adopted to read as follows: Decorative pilasters, statuary, flower pots and similar ornamental elements attached to or incorporated into the design of conforming fences or walls may exceed the required height limit up to 18 inches provided that the decorative element is not wider than 18 inches and that such elements are used to define a gateway or other entryway or are otherwise at least four feet apart. SECTION 12. Chapter 17.16.050.E. of the City of San Luis Obispo's Municipal Code is replaced and amended to read as follows: E. Measurement of height where fences or walls are located on retaining walls. PH1 -62 Ordinance No. # # ## (2011 ries) GPI 8-11 Attachment 4 1. Where fences or walls are located on retaining walls, the height of the retaining wall shall be considered as part of the overall height of the fence or wall. Walls or fences must have a minimum spacing of five feet to be considered separate structures for purposes of measuring overall height. 2. Where fences are located on a berm or mound the height of fence shall include the berm or mound directly beneath the fence and above natural grade in the overall height measurement. Where fences are located on retaining walls within other yards, fences not to exceed six feet as measured from the uphill side may be erected or replaced on top of the retaining walls and the combined fence and retaining wall height shall not exceed nine feet from the lower side, provided no modification of grade has occurred from the original subdivision improvements and /or design approvals. A building permit is required for the combined fence and retaining wall height to exceed six feet and if there is evidence that a modification to the grade has occurred from the original subdivision /design approvals the height must be authorized through a fence height exception. SECTION 13. Chapter 17.16.060.G. of the City of San Luis Obispo's Municipal Code is hereby adopted to read as follows: G. Downtown Core: Within the Downtown - Commercial (C -D) zone the following parking standards and incentives shall apply: 1. Parking space reductions noted in items B through E above shall not be applicable in the C -D zone, as the reduced parking rates established herein are intended to provide flexibility in meeting parking requirements and rely on the consolidation of parking. 2. Restaurants, sandwich shops, take -out food, bars, taverns, night clubs, other food service or entertainment establishments, theaters, auditoriums, convention halls, and churches: One -half that required in Table 6; provided, however, that in no case the requirement shall exceed one space per three hundred fifty square feet gross floor area. 3. Dwellings, motels, hotels and bed and breakfast inns: One -half that required in Table 6. In order to support and encourage residential uses in the C -D zone, additional options for meeting parking requirements for residential uses are available as listed in subsection 7 below. 4. All other uses: One space per five hundred square feet gross floor area. In determining the total number of required spaces, all fractions shall be rounded to the nearest whole number. Fractions of one -half or greater shall be rounded to one; fractions less than one -half shall be rounded to zero. 6. For existing buildings, only the parking needed for additions thereto or for changes in occupancy which increase parking requirement relative to prior uses shall be required. 7. The parking space requirement may be met by: a. Providing the required spaces on the site occupied by the use; b. The director may, by approving an administrative use permit, allow some or all of the parking to be located on a site different from the use. Such off -site parking shall not be within a residential zone. It shall be PH1 -63 Ordinance No. # # ## (2011 lies) GPI 8 -11 Attachment 4 within reasonable walking distance and no greater than 1250 feet of the. use and shall not be separated from the use by any feature that would make pedestrian access inconvenient or hazardous. The site on which the parking is located shall be owned, leased or otherwise controlled by the party controlling the use. c. Participating in a commonly held and maintained off -site parking lot where other businesses maintain their required spaces; d. Participating in a parking district that provides parking spaces through a fee or assessment program. e. Participating in an in -lieu fee program as may be established by the city council. Any parking agreement approved prior to adoption of the parking standards contained in subsections (1) through (3) of this section may be adjusted to conform with those standards, subject to approval by the community development director and city attorney; SECTION 14. Table 6 — Parking Requirements by Use, Chapter 17.16.060. of the City of San Luis Obispo's Municipal Code is repealed and replaced to read as follows: PH1 -64 Ordinance No. # # ## (201' tries) GPI 8 -11 56PtEa11L3FR 2011 TABLE 6 - PARKING REQUIREMENTS BY USE Attachment 4 city of sin Lids owspo Z011lllCY VC.CiL1L\ ims Type of Use Number of Off- Street Parking Spaces Required AGRICULTURE Crop production and gmang jNo requirement Greenhouse, commercial No requirement Livestock feed lot As provided in approved use permit INDUSTRY, MANUFACTURING 8 PROCESSING, WHOLESALING Bakery, wholesale ;Same as Manufacturing - Light Furniture and Fixtures manufacturing, cabinet shop Same as Manufacturing - Light One space per 300 square feet office or laboratory area, plus one space per 500 square feet indoor Industrial research and development assembly or fabrication area, plus one space per 1,500 square feet outdoor work area or indoor warehouse area Laboratory - Medical, analytical, research, testing One space per 300 square feet gross floor area Laundry, dry leaning plant One space per 500 square feet gross floor area Manufacturing - Heavy One space per 500 square feel gross too, area One space per 300 square feet accessory office area plus one space per 300 square feet to 500 f0anufacluring - Light square feet manufacturing floor area, to be determined by director according to employment characteristics of each use, plus one per 1,500 square feet outdoor manufacturing area Petroleum product storage and distribution One space per 360 square feet office areas plus one space per 500 square feet indoor storage area ;plus one space per 2,000 square feet outdoor storage area Photo and ffm processing lab One space per 300 square feet gross ffoos area Printing and publishing One space per 300 square feet gross floor area Recycling facilities - Coteclan and processing facility One space per 500 square feet of gross floor area plus one space per 10,000 square feet outdoor ;storage area, but in no case less than d spaces Recycling facilities -Scrap and disnaaniling yard One space per 500 square feet of gross floor area plus one space per 10,000 square feet outdoor storage area, but in no case less than d spares Recycling facilities - Small coilecl'ron facrfily As provided in approved use permit Storage - Personal storage facility One space per 300 square feel office area and common indoor €acilBies and one space for every five storage units [hat do not have direct drive -up vehicle access Storage yard One space per 2,000 square feel gross floor area Warehousing, indoor storage One space per 300 square feet office area Pius one space per 1,506 square feet indoor storage area Whoiesating and distribution Orin space per 300 square feet office area plus one space per 1,000 square feet indoor sales.15wage area, plus one space per 2.006 square feet outdoor sales area LODGING Bed and breakfast inn One per room of group of rooms to be occupied as a suite, plus two for resident managers quarters Hostel One space per five beds, Plus one for manager. oilmen the hostel is part of a residence: one space Per five beds, in addition to two spaces for the residence. Hotel. motel One per room or group of rooms to be occupied as a suite, plus one for resident manager's quarters, plus eatinglassembly area requirements Recreational vehicle (RV) park accessory to hotel, motet As provided in approved use permit PAGt. >1 PH1 -65 Ordinance No. # # ## (201 ] ',ries) GPI 8 -11 CISY Or SAn LUIS O13,IS })O Z011111Cj rcc,ulAV011S TABLE 6 - PARKING REQUIREMENTS BY USE Attachment 4 Septclmlel2 2011 Type of Use Number of Off- Street Parking Spaces Required RECREATION, EDUCATION, & PUBLIC ASSEMBLY USES Barltavern 'One space per 60 square feet of customer use plus one space per 100 square feet of food (preparation area Club, lodge, private meeting half One space per 300 square feet office area plus one space per four fixed seats or one space per 40 square feet seating area without fixed seats, in the largest assembly rooms Commercial recreation faeilit:j - Indoor Bowling alleys One space per 300 square feet gross floor area Two spaces per lane plus one space per four seats spectatorfeating area Commercial recreation facility - Outdoor One space per 500 square feet outdoor use area Educational conferences As provided in approved use permit ;=ilness,'health facility One space per 300 square feet gross floor area Library, museums One space per 500 square feet storageldisplay area plus government office and meeting room requirements Library, branch facility As provided in approved use permit Night club One space per 60 square feet floor or outdoor ground area for customer use, including seating and dancing areas, plus one space per 100 square feet focal preparation area Off -site vine fasting room One space per 200 square feet gross floor area Park, playground One space per 500 square feet Public assembly facility One space per four fixed seats or one space per 40 square feet of assembly area without fixed seats Religious facility One space per four fixed seats (one space per 40 square feet seating area without fixed seats) in largest assembly mom School - Boarding school; elementary, middle, secondary As provided in approved use permit School - College, university - Campus As provided in approved use perinit School - College, uni Ordinance No. # # ## (2011 Mies) GPI 8 -11 SO})tEl11Uf.12 20I1 TABLE 6 - PARKING REQUIREMENTS BY USE Attachment 4 CAA Or SAn LUIS OBISPO zoi-I 1C} Pecjtl Atiotis Type of Use Number of Off - Street Parking Spaces Required RESIDENTIAL. USES Boardingirooming house, dormitory One space per 1 5 occupants or 1.5 spaces per bedroom, whichever is greater Caretaker quarters Two spaces per dwelling Convents and monasteries One space per five occupants Fraternity, sorority One space per 1.5 occupants or 15 spaces per bedroom, whichever is greater High occupancy n3sidential use The parking requirement shall be greater of: 1. The number of space required for dwellings. or 2 One off- street parking space per adult occupant, less one - Home occupation See Section 17.08.090 Livelwork units 2 spaces per unit Mixed -use project Same as Mult4amily dwellings h1obile home park LS spaces per unit: 1 space to be with unit Multi - family dwellings 1 per studio apartment: 1 -112 for first bedroom plus If2 for each additional bedroom in a Link, plus I for each five units in developments of more than fire units Also see parking reduction paragraphs under 17.16.060. Residential care facilifies - 6 or fewer residents Same as Rest home Residential care fac €lilies - 7 or more residents Same as Rest home Residentail hospice facility :Same as Rest home Rest home One space per four beds jadultj= one space per five juvenille occupants Single- family dwellings 2 spaces per dwelling In the R -1 and C1OS zones, one space must be covered. Work,live units 2 spaces per unit P'xCie 53 PH1 -67 Ordinance No. # # ## (2011, ies) GPI 8-11 Attachment 4 CAY Or S \n LUIS OBISPO Z01111 1Q RCQjLJ . tl0l1S TABLE 6 - PARKING REQUIREMENTS BY USE I SCPtCl11B6V 20tt Type of Use Number of Off- Street Parking Spaces Required RETAIL SALES Auto and vehicle sales and rental One space per 300 square feet office area plus one space per 500 square feet parts sales service area, plus one space per 2,000 square feet outdoor sales area Auto parts sales, with installation One space per 500 square feet gross floor area Auto parts sales, without installation One space per 500 square feet gross floor area Bakery, retail One space per 200 square feet gross floor area Building and landscape materials sales, indoor One space per 300 square feet office area plus one space per 500 square feet indoorsales area plus one space per 2,000 square feet warehouse area Building and landscape materials sales, outdoor One space per 300 square feet office area plus one space per 500 square feet indoor sales area plus one space per 2,000 square feet warehouse or outdoor sales area Construction and heavy equipment sales and rental One space per 300 squaree feet office area plus one space per 500 square feet parts sales service area, plus one space per 2,000 square feet outdoor sales area Convenience store Two spaces for employee parking, plus one space per 500 square feet of gross floor area and a minimum of five bicycle parking spaces shall be provided per business Extended hour retail Same as speck type of retail Farm supply and feed store One per 500 square feet indoor saleslstorage area plus one space per2,000 square feet outdoor sales/storage area Fuel dealer (propane., etc;) One per 500 square feet indoorsalesfstorage area plus one space per 2,4300 square feet outdoor salesistorage, area. Furniture, furnishings, and appliance stores 'One space per 500 square feet gross floor area General retail - 2,000 sf or less One space per 300 square feet gross floor area General retail - More than 2,000 at, up to 15,000 sf One space per 300 square feet gross floor area General retail - More than 15,000 sf, up to 45,000 sf One space per 300 square feet gross floor area General retail - More than 45,000 sf, up to 60,000 s€ A maximum of one space per 200 square feet gross floor area, with the exception for more spaces 0 structured multi -level parking is used General retail - More than 60,000 sf, up to 140.000 sf A maximum of one space per 200 square feet gross noor area, with the exception for more spaces if structured multi -lever parking is used Florists and Photofinishing (retail) One space per 500 square feel floor area Retail sales and repair of bicycles One space per .500 square feet floor area Groceries, liquor, specialty foods One space per 200 square feet gross floor area Motile home, RV, and boat sales One space per 300 square feet office area plus one space per 500 square feet parts sales service ,area, plus one space per 2,000 square feet outdoor sales area Office-supporting retail, 2.000 sf or less One space per 300 square feet gross floor area Office - supporting retail, more than 2,000, up to 5,000 sf 'One space per 300 square feet gross floor area Outdoor temporary andlor seasonal sales See Section 17 08.020 Produce stand One space per 300 square feet gross floor area One space per 60 sq. h customer use area, including waiting seating, counter service areas, and Restaurant dancing areas, plus one space per 100 sq. f< food preparation, including counter space, pantry storage, and dishwashing areas. Wills, halls, reslrooms, and dead storage areas do not count as either customer use or food preparation floor area Service station (see also `vehicle services ") one space for attendant booth plus two per service bay plus one space per four fuel pumps Varehouse stores - 45.000 sf or less gfa Minimum one space per 300 square feet grass floor area Warehouse stores - more than 45,000 sf gfa A maximum of one space per 200 square feet gross floor area, with the exception for more spaces 0 struclured multilevel parking is used PJC {E 54 PH1 -68 Ordinance No. # # ## (2011 , les) GPI 8 -11 SC,PtC..11)bCl2 3011 TABLE 6 - PARKING REQUIREMENTS BY USE Attachment 4 CAV Of SAn Wis C ?mspo Z0111I)Cx Izegy(jL\tIOI)S Type of Use Number of Off - Street Parking Spaces Required SERVICES - BUSINESS, FINANCIAL & PROFESSIONAL ATMs No requirement Banks and financial services One space per 300 square feet gross floor area Business support services -One space per 300 square feet dross floor area Convalescent hospital Same as Medical service - Extended care Medical service - Clinic, laboratory, urgent care IMedical, dental, and other health services: one per 200 square feet gross floor area Medical service - Doctor office (Medical, dental, and other health services: one per 200 square feet gross Floor area. Medical service - Extended care One space per four beds (adult): one space per five juvenile occupants thedical service - Hospital One space per bed Office - Accessory As required for principle use Office - Business and service One space per 300 square feet gross floor area Office - Government Post offices Offices: one per 300 square feet gross floor area, Meeting rooms: one per four fixed seats or one per 40 square feet of sealing area without fixed seats. One space per 300 square feet office, sorting, customer service area plus one space per 500 square feet bulk handling Office - Processing One space per 200 square feet gross floor area Office - Production and administrative One space per 300 square feet gross floor area Office - Professional Medical dental and other health services: one per 200 square feet gross floor area All others: one space per 300 square feet gross floor area. Office- Temporary See Section 17.08.010 C Photographer, photographic studio 10ne space per 200 square feet gross floor area ?\i#ES7 PHI -69 Ordinance No. # # ## (2011 ; :es) GPI 8 -11 Clt�' Of SAn tuts Ciwspo ZC)11111Ci 12EitUL.Ntioiis TABLE 6 - PARKING REQUIREMENTS BY USE Attachment 4 SC.PtC)116tt,12 2011 Type of Use Number of Off - Street Parking Spaces Required SERVICES - GENERAL Catering service One space per 100 square feet food preparation area Cemetery, mausoleum, columbarium 'One space per 500 square feet of building area Dav care - day care center fchildfadult) Two spaces plus one per 14 clients Day care - Family day care home (smalWarge) Small faramily day care- same as for "Dwellings "_ Large family day care - One space plus required residential parking. Equipment rental One per 300 square feel office area plus 1 per 500 square feet indoor displayfstorage plus 1 per 1,000 square feet outdoor display /storage Food banklpackaged food distribution center One space per 300 square feet of office plus one space per 1,500 square feet of indoor storage Homeless shelter Two spaces for the facility plus one space for each six occupants at maximum allowed occupancy Maintenance service, client site services One space per 300 square feet gross floor area Mortuary, funeral home 1 per four fixed seats or 1 per 40 square feet assembly area, whichever is greater Personal services One space per 200 square feet gross floor area Repair services - Small appliances; shoes, etc. One space per 300 square feet Self service laundry/dry cleaner 'One Space per each four washers or dryers Public safety facilities One space per 500 square feet gross floor area Public utility facilities ,One space per 300 square feet office area Pius one space per 1,500 square feet warehouselservice area plus space for fleet vehicles Repair service - Equipment, large appliances, etc One space per 500 square feet gross floor area Social service organization One space per 300 square feet gross floor area Vehicle services - Repair and maintenance - Major One space per 500 square feel gross floor area Vehicle services - Repair and maintenance - Minor One space per 500 square feet gross floor area Service stations One space forattendant booth plus two per service bay Plus one space per four fuel pumps Vehicle services - Carwash Two spaces plus sufficient wailing line(s) or Two spaces plus washing area(s) Veterinary clinicihospital„ ;warding, large animal One space per 500 square feet gross floor area Veterinary r_liniclhospital, boarding, small animal, indoor One space per 300 square feet gross floor area Velerinary clinic/hospital, boarding, small animal, outdoor -One space per 300 square feet gross floor area TRANSPORTATION & COMMUNICATIONS Airport To be determined when use permit is approved Ambulance, taxi, andior limousine dispatch facility One space per 300 square feet office area plus one space per 1,000 square feet garagelwirehouse area Ambulance services Three spaces per emergency vehicle Broadcast studio One space per 300 square feet gross floor area Hekport As provided in approved use permit Railroad facilities One space per 300 square feet office or waiting room Transit station or terminal One space per 300 square feet officelwaiting area plus one space per 1,000 square feet housei are a area Truck or freight terminal One space per 300 square feet office plus one space per 1,000 square feet garegelvearehouse area Water and wastewater treatment plants and services One space per 300 square feetoffice plus one space per 1,000 square feet warehouseiservice area Water and wastewater treatment plants I As provided in approved use permit PH1 -70 Ordinance No. # # ## (2011 )ries) GPI 8 -11 Attachment 4 SECTION 15. Chapter 17.17.040.D.1 of the City of San Luis Obispo's Municipal Code is repealed and replaced to read as follows: Waste haulers and recycling containers may be placed for pickup in accordance with Chapter 8.04 & 17.17.075 of this code. SECTION 16. Chaper 17.17.075.1. of the City of San Luis Obispo's Municipal Code is repealed and replaced to read as follows: Refuse, green waste, and recycling receptacles shall not be within the front yard area except as provided in Municipal Code section 8.04 which states: Refuse and garbage containers shall not be placed adjacent to the street for pickup more than twenty -four hours before pickup time, and such containers shall be removed within the twelve - hour period following pickup, except in the Business Improvement Area (as defined in Chapter 12.36). In the Business Improvement Area, refuse and garbage containers shall not be placed adjacent to the street for pickup before 5:00 p.m. or the close of business on the day preceding pickup, whichever is later. Such containers shall be removed before 10:00 a.m. following pickup. The "front yard" area is defined as: The area of a residential lot that lies between the street property line and the walls of any residences that face the street. (Ord. 1277, 1995). Trash, green waste, and recycling receptacles shall be completely screened from public view from the public right -of -way that abuts the front yard by a fence, landscaping, or wall, or fence that is otherwise permitted by Zoning and Building Codes. Multi- family developments, condominium projects, and other common interest residential units which are approved for individual waste wheelers shall remove waste wheelers from the common area visible from the public right -of -way in accordance with this section. Multi- family projects with shared bin service shall utilize approved enclosure locations consistent with project approvals. SECTION 17. Table 9 — Uses Allowed by Zone, Chapter 17.22: Use Regulation, of the City of San Luis Obispo's Municipal Code is replaced and amended to read as follows: PH1 -71 Ordinance No. # # ## (2011" 'ties) GPI 8 -11 GItY Or SAIL LUIS OBISI)O Zo11II1cr f:eg1Llid,tloiis TABLE 9 - USES ALLOWED BY ZONE Attachment 4 SC,PtCI11B0Q 2011 Land Use Permit Requirement by Zoning District Specific use Regulations AG CIOS R1 R2 R3 R4 PF O (1) C -N C -C C -D C -R C -T C -S' M BP AGRICULTURE Crop production and grazing A A A A D D Greenhouse, commercial PC PC Livestock feed lot PC PC INDUSTRY. MANUFACTURING & PROCESSING. WHOLESALING Bakery, wholesale D PC PC A A A A A I PC urnnute an r ores manu actunng, ra uie shop PC PC A PC PC PC PC PC PC D A 17.08 110 Industrial research and development PC PC A A A PC D D Laboratory - Medical, analytical, research, testing PC A A A A A A Laundn /, dry clan -sng plant PC A A Vacation Rental I Manufacludn - Heavy 17 22 -G PC PC Manufacturing - Light D A A Petroleum product storage and distribution D Photo and film processing lab A A Printing and publishing— - A A A Recycling facilities - Collection and processing facitrty D Recycling facilities - Scrap and dismantlino yard D Recyclin facilities - Small collection facility- D D D A Storage - Personal storage facility A A Storage yard D A Warehousing, indoor storage A A PC Wholesaling and distribution A A PC LODGING Bed and breakfast inn D PC PC A A A Homeless sheher PC PC A PC PC PC PC PC PC PC PC 17.08 110 Hostel PC PC A A A Hotel, motel A A A PC Recreational vehicle (RU) park accessory to holel, motel PC Vacation Rental I 17 22 -G Key: A = Allowed D = Directors Use Permit approval required PC = Planning Commission Use Permit approval required AfD = Directors approval on ground boor, allowed on second floor or above Note: Footrtotes affecting specific land uses follow the table,. pc4e '-'3 PH1 -72 Ordinance No. # # ## (2011 Ries) GPI 8 -11 SC.pte,1116CI: 2011 TABLE 9 - USES ALLOWED BY ZONE - Continued Attachment 4 CItV Or SAn Luis OIt spo zoni1nCr kP.cluL1t ons Land Use Pemtit Requirement by Zoning District Specific use Regulottons I AG CJ0S R1 I R2 I R3 I R4 I PF 1 o (1I C -N I C -C I C -D I C -R I C -7 I C -S I M I BP RECREATION, EDUCATION, & PUBLIC ASSEMBLY USES Barltavern PC D D D D D D D Chapter 97.20 Club, lodge. privale meeting_ hall A A A A D D A A A D AID D D D A D Commercial recreation facifity - Indoor PC A A PC D D D D D(12) PC D 17.0&060 Commercial recreation facility - Outdoor PC PC PC PC Educational conferences D D D D D D 17.08.010.0.6 Fitnessfheafth facility H H H H H H 0 H A D D PC A A D 17 08 040 Goff Course PC A A A A A 170-3, 120 Libra •, museum _ PC A 0 D D D I A PC PC 1708072 Library. branch facility A A A A A A A D D D D Night club 4 A A A D D D D 0 0 Chapter 17 95 Off -sde ovine tasting room A A A A D A A A A A A Park, playground D D A A A A D D A A A D Public assennblyfacili A A A A A PC D D D ❑ D PC Religious facility PC D D D D A 0 D I D A I D(7) D(7) OI7) School - Boarding school, elementary„ middle, secondary A A A PC PC 0 Arl3 AID D School - Golly e. university campus A A A(2i A A A PC A D ❑ School - College, university - Satellite classroom facility A A A A A Chapter 97.21 School - Elementary. middle, secondary PC PC D D PC: D D D 17.08.120 School - Specialized educafionhralnin PC AJD AID A A A Special event D 0 D D D D D D D 17.08 010 Sports and active recreation facility PC PC PC PC Scoris and entertainment assembly facility PC PC Studio - Art, dance, martial arts. music, efc D D AID AID A PC A Theater I:PC(8j D D D D Chapter 17.95 Theater - Drive -in PC PC RESIDENTIAL USES Boardii 11foomniq house. dormitory PC D D D Chapter 97.20 Caretaker quarters A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A D Convents and monasteries PC A A D Fraternity, sorority PC PC High occupancy residential use D D Home occupation H H H H H H H H H H H H H H 17 08 040 Livehvork units _ A A A A A 170-3, 120 Mixed -use project A A A A A I A PC PC 1708072 Mobile home as temporary residence at building site A A A A A A A A Mobile hone park 4 A A A Muiti�family dwellings A A A A D D Residential care facilities -6 orfewer residents A A A A A A AID A!D AID D Residential care facilities - 7 or more residents A A A A A D AID A/D D Residenlial hospice facility PC PC D PC PC D Rest home A A A A A 0 Arl3 AID D Single- famitvdwellings A A A(2i A A A A D ❑ Secondary dweAng units A A A A A Chapter 97.21 WorkAive units D D 17.08.120 Key: A = Allowed D = Directors Use Pemtit approval required PC= Planning Commission Use Permit approval required IUD =Directors approval on ground floor, allowed on second floor or above H = Home Occupato,n Permit required Note: Footnotes affecting specific land uses follow the table PACIIC R4 PH1 -73 Ordinance No. # # ## (2011 'ries) GPI 8 -11 Cltj' or Sall ILIIS OBISPO Z011lllicii, RECrL(L1 ono TABLE 9 - USES ALLOWED BY ZONE - Continued Attachment 4 S ep ct -11w elz. 2011 Land Use Permit Requirement by Zoning District Speelflc use Regulations AG Clod R1 I R2 R3 1. R4 I PF 1 0 1j C-M I C -C I C -D C -R C -T CS M I Bp RETAIL SALES Auto and vehicle sales and rental D A PC Auto pans sales, with installation D(51 A A Auto parts sales, without installation A D A A A Bakery, retail A A A A A D D Building and landscape materials sales, indoor A A A A A Building and landscape materials sales, out" D D _ A A A Construction and heavy equipment sales and rental D D Convenience store D D D A A A A A D D D 17.08.095 Extended hourretad D D D D D D D D Farm supply and feed store PC A A Fuel dealer (pro ane, etc) D A Furniture, fumishin s, and appliance stores A A A A General retail - 2 000 sf or less A(3) A A A A General retail - re than 2,000 sf, up to IS. 000sf D13) D A A General retail - More than 15,000 sf, up to 45.000 sf D A A D General retail - 1&77774-97611373, up to 60.000 sf D A A General retail - More than 0,000 s , tip to 140,000 s€ PC PC PC Grocenes, liquor, speriat€+j foods A(10) A A A PC Mobile home. RV, and boat sales A PC Office sup rtan , retail, 2,000 sf or less A A A A A D Office- supporting retail, More than 2,000, up to 5.000 sf D D A A I D Outdoor ternporarvandfor seasonal sales See Section 17.O8 020 17.Q8.O20 Produce stand D D A A A I _ Restaurant A A A A A D D Outdoor BBQ,'Gdi[, accessory to restaurant D D D D D D D Service station (see also "vehicle services ") D D D D A 17.08.030 Vending machine See Section 17 08.020 1708-020 Warehouse stores_- 45,000 sf or less gfa D D D Warehouse stores - more than 45,000 sf gfa PC PC PC Key; A = Allowed D = Directors Use Perm t approval required PC = Planning Commission Use Permit approval required XD = Director's approval on ground floor, allowed on second floor or above Note: Footnotes affecting specific land uses follow the table PH1 -74 Ordinance No. # # ## (2011 ' "ries) GPI 8-11 Attachment 4 SCPtell"106P 2011 TABLE 9 - USES ALLOWED BY ZONE - Continued city of san LUIS OBISPO Z011lllCi RCQIUL1t1o11S Permit Requirement by Zoning District Specific use Land Use I AG I CIOS R1 I R2 R3 I R4 I PF 1 O (t) C -N I C -C I C -D I C -R I C -T I C -S I M I BP Regulations SERVICES - BUSINESS, FINANCIAL & PROFESSIONAL ATMs I A A A A A A A A A Banks and financial services PC PC PC PC PC PC A A A A PC D(4) D(4) D Business support services A A A AID A A A A Medical service- Clinic, laboratory. urgent care DO) DI9) D(9) D(91 D(9) D A D D A D(11) D(9) D(l1) 1708.100 Medical service - Doctor office A A A A A A A A AID AID A _aa A D(I IX D {11) 17.08 100 Medical service - E)tendedcare PC PC D PC PC D A A D Medical service - Hospital PC PC D D Convalescent hospital PC PC A A PC Office - Accessory D A A A A A A A A O(5ca- Business and service A A A AID A D D (4) D(4) D Offce - Covemment D PC A A D PC Office - Processinq PC D D D D(4) Df4) A Office - Production and administrative PC: A A1D AD A D(4) D(4) A 17.0 OHO Office - Professional A AID AfD A A A D Office - Temporary See Section I7 W010 -C Photographer, phot ra hic studio A I AID A PC A SERVICES - GENERAL Catering serfice I I D D A D A A Cemeter, :, mausoleum, columbarium PC PC PC PC PC PC PC PC PC PC. Copying and Quick Printer Service A A A A A A A A Day care - Day care center chibfaduft) DO) DI9) D(9) D(91 D(9) A A A AID A Df9) D(9) D 1708.100 Day care - Family day care home (small/large) A A A A A A A A A A A _aa A 17.08 100 Equipment rental A A D Food banktpackaged food distribution cenler D D Maintenance service, clieett site services A A PC Mortuarv, funeral home -- - D D A D Personal services A A A A D A D Personal services - Restricted D D Public safety facilities PC PC PLlbkc utilrh: facilities PC: A A 17.0 OHO epairsersice - quipntent, large appliances, °etc- A A D Residential Support Services A A A A Social service organization D A A A A D Vehicle services - Repair and maintenance - Major A A D Vehicle services- Repair and maintenance • Minor _ - PC D A A D Vehicle services - Carwnsh D D PC D D Veterinary clirticlhospilal- boardir br e animal PC PC D D veterutary clrnir_Snosprtal, boarding, sera animal; indoor D D A AID A A elennary c intc 4rospfta, boarding. sma animal; outdoor - i - Key: A = Allowed D = Dkctors Use Permit approval required PC = Plamiing Commission Use Permit approval iequi ed AiD = Directors approval on ground floor, allowed on second floor or above Note: Footnotes affecting specific land uses folbw the table. PHI -75 Ordinance No. # # ## (2011 ' )ries) GPI 8 -11 CA\, OV S n Luis ot;ispo Zorllny PCOULktions TABLE 9 - USES ALLOWED BY ZONE - Continued Attachment 4 SE:Pt4FA1WC -,l` 2011 Land Use Permit Requirement by Zoning District Spedfic rase Regulatll>ns I AG C70S R1 I R2 I R3 I R4 PF O (1 )C -N C -C C -D C -R C -T C -S M I BP TMAN'tl3MOTATIOM R r nmmi [Mir. ATIr1NC Airport PC PC PC D Ambulance, taxi, andlor limousine dispatch facility A D D Antennas and teecommunications facilities D D D D D D D D D D D 17- 16.120 Media Production - Broadcast studio A A0 A A A A Media Production - Backlotslouldoor faci&ties and soundstages D D D Heliport PC PC PC Parking facility PC(6) PC(61 PC(6) D(6) D(6) D(6) Parking facil ty - Multimlevel PC(6) PC(a PC(6) Pq6) PC(6) PC(6) Parking facility - Temporary PC D D D D D D D D 17.08010 Railroad facilities O A Transit station or terminal PC PC PC D A Transit stop A A I A A A A A A Track orfreghtterminal A A D kVater and wastewater treatment plants and services PC PC Key: A = Allowed D = Director's Use Permit approval required PC = Planning Commission Use Permit approval required A+D = Directors approval on ground floor, allowed on second floor of above Note: Footnotes affecting specific land uses follow the table SECTION 18. Chapter 17.42.H. of the City of San Luis Obispo's Municipal Code is repealed and replaced to read as follows: Parking. See Section 17.16.060. SECTION 19. Chapter 17.49 of the City of San Luis Obispo's Municipal Code is hereby added to read as follows: PHI -76 Ordinance No. # # ## (2011 Fries) GPI 8 -11 Attachment Chapter 17.49: BUSINESS PARK (BP) ZONE Sections: 17.49.010 Purpose and application. 17.49.020 Property development standards. 17.49.010 Purpose and application. The BP zone is intended to provide for research and development, light manufacturing, and business services that are compatible with each other and with airport operations. The BP zone implements and is consistent with the Business Park land use category of the General Plan. 17.49.020 Property development standards. BP zoning is found only within the Airport Area and Margarita Area Specific Plan boundaries. The following is a summary of some of the property development standards that apply to each specific plan area. These standards are included in the Zoning Regulations for reference only. See the appropriate specific plan for more detailed property development information. Airport Area Specific Plan A. Yards. Setback distance between: 1. Buildings and property lines along streets, 16 feet; 2. Parking lots and property lines along streets, 10 feet; 3. Buildings and property lines between adjacent parcels, zero; 4. Parking lots and property lines between adjacent parcels, 5 feet. B. Maximum height: 1. Occupied buildings, 45 feet (not to exceed three stories); 2. Non - occupied architectural features, 52 feet. C. Coverage: 1. Maximum coverage by buildings, driveways, and parking shall not exceed 80 %. 2. Minimum landscape area (planning areas, water features, and hard surfaces used mainly by pedestrians) shall be at least 20% of site area. D. Maximum floor area ratio: 1. Warehousing, storage, or automated manufacturing uses shall not exceed 1.0; 2. All other uses shall not exceed 0.6. E. Standard Lot Dimensions: 1. Minimum lot area: 0.5 acre 2. Minimum lot width: 100 feet 3. Minimum lot depth: 100 feet 4. Maximum lot depth to width ratio shall be 3:1 PHI -77 Ordinance No. # # ## (2011 'ries) GPI 8-11 Attachment 4 5. Minimum street frontage: 50 feet Margarita Area Specific Plan (Low -rise Office) F. Yards. Setback distance between: 1. Buildings and property lines along streets, 15 feet; 2. Parking lots and property lines along streets, 15 feet; 3. Buildings and property lines between adjacent parcels, 5 feet; 4. Parking lots and property lines between adjacent residential parcels, 3 feet; 5. Parking lots and property lines between adjacent non - residential parcels, zero. G. Maximum height: 1. Occupied buildings, 25 feet; 2. Single -story masonry area, one occupied level, not to exceed 36 feet. H. Coverage: Minimum landscape area (planning areas, water features, and hard surfaces used mainly by pedestrians) shall be at least 20% of site area. I. Maximum floor area ratio: The ratio of gross building floor area to site area shall not exceed 0.29. J. Standard Lot Dimensions: Same as Office zone. Margarita Area Specific Plan (General Business Park) K. Yards. Setback distance between: 1. Buildings and property lines along streets, 20 feet; 2. Parking lots and property lines along streets, 20 feet; 3. Buildings and property lines between adjacent parcels, zero; 4. Parking lots and property lines between adjacent residential parcels, N /A; 5. Parking lots and property lines between adjacent non - residential parcels, zero. L. Maximum height: 1. Occupied buildings, 36 feet; 2. Non - occupied architectural features such as towers may extend to 45 feet. M. Coverage: Minimum landscape area (planning areas, water features, and hard surfaces used mainly by pedestrians) shall be at least 15% of site area. N. Maximum floor area ratio: The ratio of gross building floor area to site area shall not exceed 0.44. O. Minimum land parcel size: One acre. P. Parking: The parking requirements in the Low -rise Office and General Business Park areas are as follows: 1. For all uses, paring will be provided at a rate of not less than one space per 500 square feet of gross floor area, nor more than one space per 300 square feet of gross floor area. PH1 -78 Ordinance No. # # ## (2011 ties) GPI 8 -11 Attachment 4 Exceptions: a. Medical offices may, but are not required to, provide parking at a ratio of one space per 200 square feet. b. For warehousing, parking will be provided at a rate of not less than one space per 1,500 square feet of gross floor area, nor more than one space per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. SECTION 20. Chapter 17.88 of the City of San Luis Obispo's Municipal Code is replaced and amended to read as follows: Chapter 17.88: Residential Growth Management Regulations Sections: 17.88.010 Purpose and justification. 17.88.020 Allocations. 17.88.030 Periodic city council review and consideration of revisions. 17.88.010 Purpose and justification. A. The regulations codified in this chapter are intended to assure that the rate of population growth will not exceed the city's ability to assimilate new residents and to provide municipal services, consistent with the maximum growth rates established in the general plan. Also, these regulations are to assure that those projects which best meet the city's objectives for affordable housing, infill development, open space protection, and provision of public facilities will be allowed to proceed with minimum delay. B. San Luis Obispo is a charter city, empowered to make and enforce all laws concerning municipal affairs, subject only to the limitations of the city charter and the constitution and laws of the state. Regulation of the rate of residential development is a reasonable extension of municipal authority to plan overall development, in furtherance of the public health, safety and general welfare. C. According to the general plan land use element, the city should achieve a maximum annual average population growth rate of one percent. The reserve of developable land within the city and the capacity of proposed annexations could sustain growth rates which would exceed the objectives of the general plan. D. The growth rate policies of the general plan reflect the city's responsibility to accommodate a reasonable share of expected state and regional growth. E. To avoid further imbalance between the availability of jobs and of housing within the city, the general plan also manages expansion of growth- inducing activities. The burdens of growth management are not being placed solely on the residential sector, since it largely responds to demands caused by other sectors. F. Considering the likely levels of housing demand and construction throughout the housing market area, nearly coinciding with San Luis Obispo County, these regulations are not expected to affect the overall balance between housing supply PH1 -79 Ordinance No. # # ## (2011 fries) GPI 8 -11 and demand in the market area. These regulations will not impede and may help meet the needs of very low -, low- and moderate - income households. (Ord. 1459 § 3 (part), 2004: Ord. 1359 § 3 (part), 1999) 17.88.020 Allocations. A. Each Specific Plan, shall adopt a phasing schedule that allocates timing of potential residential construction, including phasing of required improvements, consistent with the general plan and with these regulations. B. The limitations on residential development established by these regulations apply to new residential construction within certain areas that have been annexed to the city or that will be annexed to the city. Development in such areas is subject to development plans or specific plans, which shall contain provisions consistent with these regulations. C. Allocations shall be implemented by the timing of issuance of building permits. D. Dwellings affordable and enforceably restricted to residents with extremely low, very low, low or moderate incomes, as defined in the city's general plan housing element, and new dwellings in the downtown core (C -D zone as shown in the most official zoning map) shall be exempt from these regulations. Enforceably restricted shall mean dwellings that are subject to deed restrictions, development agreements, or other'legal mechanisms acceptable to the city to ensure long -term affordability, consistent with city affordable housing standards. In expansion areas, the overall number of units built must conform to the city- approved phasing plan. E. It shall not be necessary to have dwellings allocated for a particular time interval or location to process and approve applications for general plan amendment, zone change or other zoning approval, subdivision, or architectural review. (Ord. 1459 § 3 (part), 2004: Ord. 1359 § 3 (part), 1999) 17.88.030 Periodic city council review and consideration of revisions. A. The community development department shall provide status updates to the city council concerning implementation of these regulations, coordinated with the annual report on the general plan. The status update will describe actual construction levels and suggest if revisions are necessary to maintain the City's one percent growth rate. Attachment 4 SECTION 21. Definition of "Homeless Shelter ", Chapter 17.100.H. of the City of San Luis Obispo's Municipal Code is replaced and amended to read as follows: Homeless Shelter. A church, public building, or quasi - public facility that provides emergency or temporary shelter for more than thirty (30) days in any one year period to homeless individuals and /or groups. These accommodations may include temporary lodging, meals, laundry facilities, bathing, counseling, and other basic support services. SECTION 22. S_everability. If any subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase of this ordinance is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unenforceable by a court PH1 -80 Ordinance No. # # ## (201' 'tries) GPI 8 -11 Attachment 4 of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect the validity or enforcement of the remaining portions of this ordinance, or any other provisions of the City's rules and regulations. It is the City's express intent that each remaining portion would have been adopted irrespective of the fact that any one or more subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses, or phrases be declared invalid or unenforceable. SECTION 23. A summary of this ordinance, together with the names of Council members voting for and against, shall be published at least five (5) days prior to its final passage, in The Tribune, a newspaper published and circulated in this City. This ordinance shall go into effect at the expiration of thirty (30) days after its final passage. INTRODUCED on the day of , 2011, AND FINALLY ADOPTED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo on the day of , 2011, on the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Jan Howell Marx, Mayor ATTEST: Elaina Cano, City Clerk APP VED TO FO Christine Dietrick, City Attorney G:\CD- PLANTLeveill\Zoning code update 2011 \Council Docs \11,15,01 CC Meeting Docs \GPA 8 -11, Zonign Regs Update, CC Ordinance (11,15,2011).doc PHI -81 Attachment 5 RESOLUTION NO. (2011 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AMENDING THE ACCESS & PARKING MANAGEMENT PLAN WHEREAS, the City adopted its first Parking Management Plan in 1987 and revised the Plan in 1990 and 1995 and revised and retitled the Plan in 2002; and WHEREAS, the City's General Plan contains policies and programs to encourage housing development in the downtown core, including allowing more flexible parking regulations for housing developments through amendments to the Zoning Regulations and Access and Parking Management Plan; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted public hearings on May 25, 2011, July 27, 2011, and August 24, 2011, and recommended approval of amendments to Access and Parking Management Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on November 15, 2011 to consider amendments to the Access and Parking Management Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the Negative Declaration of environmental impact as prepared by staff and reviewed by the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Findings. The Council makes the following findings: 1. The proposed amendments will not significantly alter the character of the City or cause significant health, safety or welfare concerns. 2. The proposed amendments further the goals and policies of the General Plan in support of downtown residential development. SECTION 2. Environmental Determination. The City Council finds and determines that the project's Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact (GPI/ER 83 -07) prepared for the Access and Parking Management Plan and Zoning Regulations amendments adequately addresses the potential environmental impacts of the proposed project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and the City's Environmental Guidelines, and reflects the independent judgment of the Council. The Council hereby adopts the Negative Declaration. SECTION 3. Access and Parking Management Plan Amendment Approval. The City Council finds and approves the Access and Parking Management Plan Amendment attached as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference. PH1 -82 Upon motion AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Attachment 5 Of seconded by and on the following vote: The foregoing resolution was adopted this day of _ , 2011. Mayor Jan Marx ATTEST: Elaina Cano City Clerk APFROV D TO FORM(: 'r1rL� J. Christine Dietrick City Attorney PH1 -83 DRAFT hmenl �„ ,� city of san lUIS OBISPO ACCESS AND PARKING MANAGEMENT PLAN Amended November, 2011 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, PARKING SECTION 1260 Chorro Street, Suite B, San Luis Obispo, California 93401 DRAFT PHI -84 EXHIBIT CITY TRANSPORTATION PLANS Attachment 5 The City of San Luis Obispo adopts and maintains plans that help direct the implementation of the General Plan Circulation Element. These plans include: Title of Document Status Access & Parking Management Plan (this document) Amended November, 2011 Bicycle Transportation Plan Updated May, 2007 Short Range Transit Plan Updated May, 2009 Pavement Management Plan Updated October, 2009 For more information about City transportation plans, projects and programs, contact the San Luis Obispo Public Works Department, Transportation Division at (805) 781 -7210. PHI -85 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXHIBIT A- Attachment 5 Topic Page Introduction.................................................................................................... ..............................4 Relationship to Other Plans and Policies ........................................................ ..............................5 Scopeof Plan .............................................................................. ............................... 5 ParkingManagement Goals ........................................................................... ..............................5 Definitions.......................................................»...,...».....,...,...,....................... .................,....,.,.,..., .6 GeneralUse of Parking ..........................,.,,............................,...............,......, .........,....................6 EmployeeUse of Parking ..... ............................... ...........,,..,...................... ..............................8 JurorUse of Parking ................................................ ............................... .... .....................,........9 Use of Parking for Downtown Residents. _ lI} Expansionof Parking ..................................................................................... .............................11 Enforcement....................................................... .................. ........................................... ,............. 12 Financing of Commercial Core Parking ................................... ......... »..................... ................13 ResidentialParking ...............................................,.,....................................... .............................14 Program Administration and Promotion ......... ............................................................................. 15 APPENDIX A.1 Map of Downtown Parking and Business Improvement Area Showing Existing Parking.... 16 A.2 Approved Parking Management and Demand Reduction Programs .......... .............................17 A.3 Map of Existing Residential Parking Districts ........................................... .............................18 A.4 City Council Resolution # 9350 (2002 Series) revising this plan ............. .............................19 PHI -86 EXHIBIT Attachment 5 INTRODUCTION Between 1977 and 1987, a number of studies were conducted to assess the vehicle parking situation in downtown San Luis Obispo. As a result of this work, the City built two parking structures that house 669 vehicles. The first parking structure located at the corner of Palm and Morro Streets was completed in 1988. The second garage at the corner of Chorro and Marsh Streets was completed in 1990. An expansion of the Marsh Street garage that added 342 spaces (net increase of 245 spaces) will be completed in September 2002. These three projects resulted in a total of 1,007 garage spaces. In addition, the City manages over 1,600 spaces located in surface lots and along downtown streets. Another result of these early parking studies was the City's adoption of its first Parking Management Plan in 1987. The management plan was updated in 1990 and again in 1995 to reflect the completion of some of the major parking projects and to better define management policies. In February 1993, a group of local architects and designers completed a Conceptual Physical Plan for the City's Center (commonly known as the Downtown Concept Plan). The City Council has adopted, in concept, the Plan and feels that it should be considered when making planning decisions that affect the City's center. The Plan was revised in 1997 to reflect changes to the Court Street Parking Lot area. The Concept Plan suggests that a number of new parking structures be built and that the pedestrian character of the commercial core be improved. In November 1994, the City adopted a new General Plan Circulation Element. The adopted Circulation Element directs the City to conduct studies of downtown parking needs and to consider ways of reducing traffic congestion by promoting the use of other types of transportation. The Circulation Element also directs the reevaluation of the use of curb space in the commercial core with the aim of creating more short -term parking spaces. This plan has been revised to address a number of events and decisions that have occurred since 1995, including the following: In 1997, a Downtown Parking and Access Plan was completed by Meyer - Mohaddes and Associates. While never adopted by the City Council, this draft plan estimated future parking demand, identified candidate parking garage locations, as well as a variety of actions that the City could take to better manage its current parking supply and reduce employee demand for downtown parking. As a way of incrementally implementing the draft Downtown Parking and Access Plan, the City Council authorized the implementation of a variety of measures to encourage employees to use means other than their private vehicles to access the downtown. In July 2001 a "Gold Pass" program was initiated that provides subsidized monthly transit passes to downtown employees. Parking stalls for car pools have also been reserved in existing parking structures. Other parking management activities have also been pursued. Appendix A.2 identifies these approved activities. On 05/01/2001 the City Council amended Section 6.1 of the Parking Management Plan to provide clarity on the use of Parking Fund revenues. PH1 -87 EXIMT Attachment 5 The City Council approved a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with private property owners that, among other things, calls for the construction of a new office /parking structure on the southeast corner of Palm and Morro Streets that will house 243 vehicles. This project is designed to satisfy parking demand created by the retirement of the Court Street parking lot and the development of a retail commercial project on that site (the "Copelands Project "). The City Council authorized its staff to solicit proposals from consultants to prepare schematic plans for a transit- parking -mixed use facility east of Santa Rosa Street. Entitled the "North Area Regional Facility (NARF)," this design work will investigate opportunities for constructing new parking garages to serve the downtown core and the expanded County Administrative Complex. The San Luis Obispo Downtown Association participated in the review of the 1995 Parking Management Plan. This updated plan will be used as a management tool to help direct how vehicle parking should be provided and used throughout San Luis Obispo and how the demand for downtown parking will be managed. RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER PLANS AND POLICIES The City's General Plan Land Use Element establishes the pattern of land uses throughout San Luis Obispo. The General Plan Circulation Element identifies how transportation services will be provided to land uses envisioned by the Land Use Element. One of these transportation services is vehicle parking. This plan provides specific direction for the management of vehicle parking in a way that supports the Circulation Element's overall transportation strategy. This plan focuses on the management of vehicle parking in the community's commercial core. Parking of bicycles is addressed by the Bicycle Transportation Plan (2002) but is an issue that is relevant to the use of City parking structures and surface lots. SCOPE OF THIS PLAN `['his plan establishes vehicle parking policies and programs that apply throughout San Luis Obispo. However, its primary focus is the management of parking in the commercial core. This plan also identifies, in Appendix A.2, approved management techniques for putting to better use existing parking spaces, and for reducing the employee demand for parking spaces in the commercial core. This plan may be revised from time to time to address parking needs in areas beyond and within the commercial core. For more information about City parking programs, contact the Parking Section of the Public Works Department at (805) 781 - 7230. �� EXHIBrr A Attachment 5 PARKING MANAGEMENT GOALS Support the commercial core as a viable economic and cultural center and preserve its historic character. Q�_ Support the goals of the Conceptual Physical Plan for the City's Center. [�Fl Provide enough parking in the commercial core for visitors and employees. Reduce the demand for employee parking through various programs such as carpooling, vanpools, transit subsidies, and bicycle and pedestrian systems development. Qk_ Support the transportation strategy presented in the General Plan Circulation Element. � Support the residential component of infixed use development Land Use &_ Carry out actions described in this plan within budget constraints and consistent with Financial Plan goals and policies that are updated every two years. DEFINITIONS The following words and phrases used throughout this plan have the following meanings: Commercial Core is the central business district in San Luis Obispo. Its boundaries are the same as the Downtown Association Area (see Appendix A.1). Commercial Deliveries are made to businesses in the commercial core using trucks that are commercially licensed. Downtown Association (DA) Advisory Board is an 11- member group established pursuant to Municipal Code Chapter 12.36 by the City Council to promote the economic health of the commercial core. The DA (and its advisory committees) participates in the development of City programs that affect the downtown and provide advice to City staff and the City Council. Long -Term Parking spaces may be free or metered, are located along streets, in monthly permit lots or parking structures, and typically allow parking for 10 hours or more. Parking Structures are multi -level buildings that are managed by the City and provide parking for the general public, residential component of „mixed,- use_de.velopment, commercial core employees, and jurors at the Palm Street parking structure. Short -Term Parking spaces may be free or metered and typically have a two -hour or less time PH1 -89 limit. rm-mr, .-A - Attachment 5 Qff, Support the transportation strategy presented in the General Plan Circulation Element. � Carry out actions described in this plan within budget constraints and consistent with Financial Plan goals and policies that are updated every two years. Triiiii GENERAL USE OF PARKING POLICIES 1.1 The City should maximize the use of all parking structures and surface lots. 1.2 The City should encourage any development of surface parking lots in the commercial core to conform, to the degree possible, to the "Conceptual Physical Plan for the City's Center." 1.3 Curb parking spaces are intended for short-term parking. People parking for longer periods should use monthly permit lots and long -term metered spaces and parking structures. 1.4 The City may install parking meters or post parking time limits where at least 7511/0 of a block's frontage is developed with commercial uses. The City will consider requests by a majority of residential and commercial property owners along a block to install parking controls. 1.5 Thirty- minute parking spaces shall be placed at the ends of blocks in the commercial core where short-term parking is needed. The City will consider requests by property owners to locate 30- minute spaces at other locations. 1.6 Parking for commercial deliveries in the commercial core should be managed so that: � Illegal double parking or excessive circulation by delivery vehicles is discouraged. Deliveries are discouraged during peak traffic periods and during retail business hours. Merchants may consider lockbox systems that allow for unassisted nighttime access for deliveries. Oversized vehicles do not attempt deliveries. ACTIONS 1.7 The City will: Publicize the availability of parking spaces in underused lots and will offer incentives to increase their use. Take actions that better direct people to parking structures and underused parking lots PH1 -90 /T T and long -term metered curb parking areas. Attachment 5 1�1!' Continue to offer permits for 10 -hour metered parking spaces. Maintain long -term metered spaces on Pacific Street and along side streets near the Marsh Street parking structure for overflow parking, but periodically evaluate their use. 1.8 The City will consider: '�V_ Allowing the mixture of daily and monthly parking in underused permit lots. Managing employee use of the Marsh Street parking structure so that (A) more spaces can be reserved for shoppers, and (B) more employees are encouraged to use the Palm Street structure, which has more vacant spaces. Allowing the use of lop term_ _ ar kin 1vr downtown residential uses in City owned arkin facilities. 1.9 City staff will periodically evaluate and revise as appropriate: cz�r The placement of 15- and 30- minute parking meters. The layout of existing parking lots or structures when they are resurfaced or re- striped with the aim o£ (a) maximizing their use, (b) improving circulation and complying with requirements to provide parking for the disabled. The use of curb space in the downtown (including no parking and loading zones) to identify opportunities for creating more short-term spaces. The optimum mixture of long- and short-term metered spaces and the expansion of metered curb areas. 1.10 If congestion levels in the commercial core exceed standards set by the Circulation Element, the City will adopt an ordinance that limits times for commercial deliveries. PH1 -91 EMPLOYEE USE OF PARKING POLICIES 4 -�• i s �`'� �� y� I 1 Attachment 5 2.1 Employee parking programs will be consistent with the goals and objectives of the Circulation Element. 2.2 The City and County should develop programs that reduce the number of their employees that are driving alone to work. 2.3 Commercial core employers should establish programs that encourage employees to: Use Palm Street Parking Structure, monthly permit lots, and long -term metered spaces. Use other types of transportation to get to work or to carpool. A listing of approved programs is included as Appendix A.2. ACTIONS 2.4 The City will establish a program in the commercial core that fosters carpooling by employees and visitors. 2.5 The Downtown Association (DA) and Chamber of Commerce should sponsor on -going education programs that discourage employees from using curb parking and promote alternate transportation. 2.6 The City should discourage long -term employee use of curb parking in the commercial core by: Expanding areas with two -hour parking limits when needed to maintain convenient customer parking opportunities. 8 PH1 -92 Attachment 5 — Monitoring the use of 15- and 30- minutes curb spaces; Consider increasing the fines for overtime violations; As requested, consider establishing resident parking districts in areas adjoining the commercial core and office districts. 2.7 The City will institute a trip reduction program for its employees in compliance with goals established by the Circulation Element. 2.8 The City should develop a bulk discount rate for its transit passes without negatively affecting transit funding. Employers should purchase passes and make them available to employees who substitute riding the bus for driving to work. 2.9 The City will install bicycle lockers at convenient locations in the commercial core and will promote their use by commercial core employees on a space - available basis. 2.10 The City will work to consider park- and -ride lots that serve the commute needs of commercial core employees. The City will evaluate outlying parking lots for their use by commercial core employees with a shuttle connecting these lots with the core. JUROR USE OF PARKING POLICIES 3.1 The City will provide free parking for jurors in the Palm Street parking structure or in metered spaces when the Palm Street parking structure is full or when a juror drives an oversized vehicle as per the agreement with the County for limited use. ACTIONS 3.2 City staff will work with the Jury Commissioner to inform prospective jurors of the City's parking policies. Staff will monitor the amount of jury parking and inform the Jury Commissioner if overflow parking becomes a problem. PHI -93 ' x xT - A - Attachment 5 S' USE OF PARKING FOR DOWNTOWN RESIDENTS POLICIES 4.1 Asa ilot ro ram the Citv will Drovide a limited number of parking s aces to accommodate residential tenants within the Downtown- Convnercial C -D zone consistent with General Plan Land Use Element policy 4.22 and Housing Element Policy 3,12.4. Theses aces may be pLovided in structures or other locations that are suitable for overnight parking programs. 4.2 Monthly fees for such parking spaces shall be as adopted by City Council Resolution to financially contribute to the cost of the new program. 4.3 Parking sl2aces shall be in locations suitable for overnight use and shall be in locations that do not sigLaificantly interfere with necessary parking for downtown customers and em to ees or encroach into adiacent_residential neidiborhoods. ACTIONS 4.4 The City shall establish a pilot program to allow residents within the downtown core to utilize 12ublic arkin and to monitor the amount of residential paddng required. 4.5 The City Council shall adopt a resolution that establishes a fee program use limitations and enforcement options for regulating use of parking for downtown residents. 4.6 The Municipal Code shall be amended to include ap rkineopfiions for downtown residences. 4.7 The City will assist owners of downtown residences to inform prospective tenants of the Cit `s Darking policies and transportation choices. The Parking Services web page is one element that could be used as a component of this information source. EXPANSION OF PARKING POLICIES fj.41 Parking should be provided in the commercial core for shoppers, tourists, employees and patrons of government and private offices. C X*2 Building parking structures is the best way of providing more parking facilities while minimizing the use of valuable commercial land. City -owned land earmarked for parking structures may be used as temporary surface parking lots. PHI-94 Attachment 5 GJ,4.3 Existing City -owned surface parking lots purchased by the Parking Fund which are not earmarked for parking structure locations may be sold to finance expansion of parking in permanent structures when and after new parking structures have been built to take their place. 9,4.4 Parking structures and surface lots should be located along the periphery of the commercial core as a means of eliminating traffic congestion and enhancing pedestrian activities. ACTIONS 5 .14 5 Develop a program to encourage use of underutilized parking lots, which would benefit the commercial core. ENFORCEMENT POLICIES k.,<I Parking laws will be strictly enforced to: Discourage overtime parking; Discourage habitual parking violations -- people with six or more violations; Encourage meter payments; and Direct people parking for long periods to use long -term parking spaces. ACTIONS {o jSr.2 City enforcement officers will strictly enforce all parking laws, especially overtime violations and the misuse of loading zones. (o The City in cooperation with the BIA will develop a plan to discourage habitual violators. FINANCING OF COMMERCIAL CORE PARKING POLICIES 7 .-61 The City's Parking Program will be self - supporting. The principal purpose of Parking Fund revenues will be used to: a) Maintain and expand parking operations and supply, including effective parking demand reduction programs, and b) Repay bonds that financed the construction of the parking structures. 10 PH1 -95 Attachment 5 Pilot or "test case" parking demand reduction activities may also be funded, provided that they are well defined and monitored for a defined period of time and a measurement of effectiveness is predetermined. 7 X..2 Commercial core merchants, business owners, and property owners should help finance the parking program. ACTIONS 7,+U The City will deposit all revenues from parking fines into the Parking Fund. 7 0.4 The City will: Review parking meter and citation rates every two years and make adjustments as needed Continue to charge variable rates for different types of parking. Continue to collect in -lieu fees from development projects in the commercial core. Consider new fee programs applicable to commercial core merchants, business owners, and property owners. '7,e5 The City, upon Council direction, will evaluate the elimination of parking meters in the commercial core and the creation of a comprehensive financing plan to finance the Parking Program. RESIDENTIAL PARKING POLICIES 1 Parking along streets in residential areas should be used by residents and their guests. However, no individual household has the exclusive right to use a particular section of curb parking and curb parking is not guaranteed in front of each household. $ X.2 The City may prohibit or limit curb parking in residential areas to ensure safe traffic flow, pedestrian crossing conditions or to install motor vehicle or bicycle lanes consistent with the Circulation Element or the Bicycle Transportation Plan. 4*3 The City will create residential parking districts when needed to manage parking and maintain the quality of life in residential areas. 6 X4 All residential parking districts must comply with provisions of Section 10.36.170 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. 11 PH1 -96 Attachment 5 ACTIONS 8'l5 Upon receiving a petition from a 60% majority of affected residents living within a proposed parking district, the City Council may create a district consistent with provisions of the municipal code. (For the location of existing Residential Parking Districts, see Appendix A.3) PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION AND PROMOTION POLICIES 1 The City's Parking Manager is responsible for interpreting and implementing the provisions of ` .� this plan. q X..2 As the need arises, the City will evaluate the potential for hiring a private company to manage its parking structures. 9 X.3 The Parking Manager will continue to work with the Downtown Association (DA), Chamber of Commerce, and County government to cooperatively implement this plan. X.4 The Parking Manager will undertake a wide range of actions to make the public aware of the provisions of this plan. 19.5 Applications for amending the Access and Parking Management Plan shall be filed with the City's Parking Manager. Applications will receive and extensive review process and will be acted on no more frequently than annually by the City Council. 12 PH1 -97 APPENDIX � i N 9 v V T, Attachment 5 A.1 Map of Downtown Parking and Business Improvement Area Showing Existing Parking A.2 Approved Parking Management and Demand Reduction Programs A.3 Map of Existing Residential Parking Districts A.4 City Council Resolution # (2011 Series) amending this plan PH1 -98 APPENDIX A -1 A- Aftachment � � W A TII CO �a OU C� O E-* O C� O LA PHI -99 APPENDIX A.2 Approved Parking Management and Demand Reduction Programs Attachment 5 # _j „_ Description Status Pa king Demand Reduction Programs 1 Increase the maximum charge for garage parking Approved/Completed 2 Transit pass subsidies for downtown employees A roved /Com leted 3 Reduce monthly arkin ass costs for hi h -occu anc vehicles A roved /Com leted 4 Improve bicycle access to the downtown Approved/Ongoing 5 Establish an advertising program for downtown parking demand reduction (PDR) pro rams Approved /Ongoing 6 Encourage the county to establish a trip reduction program similar to the City's program Approved /Ongoing Pa king Management Pro rams 1 Reduce free parkina in garages from 90 minutes to 60 minutes Ap roved/Completed 2 Increase the in -lieu parking fee charged to new development to better reflect the cost of downtown parking Approved /Completed 3 Increase 2 -hour parking in the commercial core and limit long-term parking Approved /Completed Respond to citizen proposals to establish residential parking districts in neighborhoods adjoining the downtown. Approved /Ongoing 4 Increase long-term ark in at the periphery of the downtown A roved /On oin 5 Work with the Downtown Association to establish a program for discoura h habitual violators Approved /Ongoing 15 PHI -100 I t � k I f 1 � I � Attachment 5 APPENDIX A —926l r T \ O E � v n L l vo !1 N v L � ,v o v �o F°- N 1 E-♦ E-1 cn H A w. E-# A t� r tJ� , PHI -101 McB11� council I2 -6 -11 j accnc�a nEpo�t �emN..95 C I T Y OF S AN L U IS O B I S P O FROM: Jay D. Walter, Director of Public Works Michael Codron, Assistant City Manager PREPARED BY: , Barbara Lynch, City Engineer, Neil Havlik, Natural Resource Manager, Bud Nance, Wastewater Collections Supervisor, Hal Hannula, Supervising Civil Engineer SUBJECT: 2011 -12 CITYWIDE WINTER WEATHER PREPARATION RECOMMENDATION Receive and file a report on the City's 2011 -12 winter weather preparations. DISCUSSION Background Each year City staff completes a variety of activities to prepare the City creeks and storm drains for winter and to reduce the risk of flooding in the community. The work is carried out by City Administration's Natural Resources Program, the California Conservation Corps, and Public Works and Utilities department staff, assisted by the occasional herd of goats. Throughout the year staff thins vegetation, removes blockages, monitors various locations, completes CIP projects for flood protection and, through Measure Y funding augmentation, cleans storm drain systems. It is important to note that even with all of the preparation work that is done each year, there are some fundamental creek capacity issues in the City. Due to these issues, flooding cannot be prevented in the event of a major storm. San Luis Obispo Creek as it approaches the Downtown has the approximate capacity to convey a 17 -year storm event. Capacity downstream is even less, and through the Mid - Higuera reach, it is closer to a 10 -year storm event. This illustrates that storm events, and their associated rainfall amounts, may result in flooding, even though City staff has undertaken winter preparation activities and completed CIP projects in advance. 2011 -12 Drainage System Winterization 1. Rock Guards Throughout the City there are about 15 rock guards. These "pipe grate" structures are typically placed near the entrance of a culvert that accepts drainage from the steeply sloped hills around town. Their purpose is to prevent large material and debris (rocks, branches, etc.) from entering the culvert, becoming lodged in place, and creating a storm water back -up that cannot be easily removed. The Street Maintenance staff checked and cleared all rock guards at the end of summer. SS2 -1 2011 -12 Winter Weather Preparation Page 2 hid Rock Guard The Street Maintenance staff has also checked all historically troublesome drain inlets and culverts to make sure they are clear of debris. Street Maintenance staff has worked closely with staff from the City's Natural Resource program and the California Conservation Corps (CCC) in providing drop boxes for creek debris as it is removed from the channels. 2. Creek Work The creek winterization program focuses on (1) the "usual suspects ", areas that are known to be problematic every year or almost every year; primarily the lower reaches of San Luis Obispo Creek inside the City limits, and Prefumo Creek between Los Osos Valley Road and the confluence with San Luis Obispo Creek near Highway 101; and (2) problems identified by City staff or called in by citizens in the summer and early fall months. This year staff contracted with the CCC and several private contractors to undertake this effort. This included the usual clearance of the flood bypass on lower San Luis Obispo Creek between Prado Road and Los Osos Valley Road, and several other problem locations such as the Elks Lodge and Hayward Lumber properties. It also included a number of clearing projects on the tributary creeks including Old Garden Creek at Broad Street, Stenner Creek at Murray and Broad, Islay Creek in the Edna -Islay area, and Laurel and Acacia Creeks near Orcutt Road (this is the site of some recent correspondence between residents at the Laurel Creek development, City staff, and Council members). It is important to note that the City's winterization efforts include the cleanup and removal of significant amounts of garbage and litter left at transient campsites. The rule of thumb in the City's stormwater management work along the creeks is to maintain shade over the water to protect and preserve habitat, and use floodways whenever possible. Hence the strong efforts at the major floodway at the Water Reclamation Facility, which only carries water during storm events and allows the City to keep clearing activities in San Luis Obispo Creek at that location to a minimum. Staff carefully considers the effect of pruning and SS2 -2 2011 -12 Winter Weather Preparation Page 3 removal along the active waterways with an eye toward keeping as much shade over the creek as possible while maintaining flow capacity. It is a constant balancing act. 3. Multi- Agency, Multi- Department Efforts to Minimize the Impacts of Homeless Encampments on the Creeks City departments, including Administration, Parks and Recreation, and Police have been collaborating with other agencies at the County and State level, as well as private landowners, to address the issue of homeless camps in creek areas and the problems resulting from such camps. These problems include, but are not limited to, accumulations of garbage and litter, damage to riparian vegetation, and lack of sanitation. Several areas have been cleared of camps and were cleaned up, but as the Council is aware, this issue does not simply go away; instead it is transferred to other sites either in town or just outside of it. Nevertheless, staff continues to attempt to remove the camps where possible: this year the Laurel Creek and Acacia Creek areas and areas along San Luis Obispo Creek have been the focus of such efforts. The hope is that, once areas have been properly restored, local property owners will take over the effort and keep their properties free from new encampments. 4. Stormdrain Cleaning. As part of the City's enhanced Storm Water program, scheduled maintenance cleaning of the storm drain system is routinely done. This work ensures the drainage inlets are open to water flow to reduce flooding potential and at the same time prevents debris from entering into the creeks and storm drain infrastructure system. Wastewater Collection staff has developed a comprehensive maintenance program utilizing the Hansen Infrastructure Management System (IMS) data base. Staff has continued to work with the Geographical Information System (GIS) division to develop and update the storm drain maps. The Hansen data base integrates with the GIS system to assist staff in the field to electronically locate and manage storm drain assets and IMS information. For efficiency and historical information staff accesses maintenance records and GIS information via a mobile wireless laptop computer to create and complete work order information. Stormdrain Cleaning Truck The storm drain system is divided into nine area maintenance basins that coincide with the Pavement Management Plan Areas including the Downtown basin. Throughout the system, storm inlets, sumps, and catch Basins are cleaned annually. The Downtown basin is scheduled and cleaned starting in September of every year and prior to the rainy season. Storm pipes are also identified to be cleaned and inspected on a three -year cycle. In preparing for 2011 -12 winter weather, staff has cleaned 1,609 storm inlets, inspected 529 segments of storm pipe and removed 180 tons of debris. SS2 -3 2011 -12 Winter Weather Preparation Page 4 5. Flood Protection By means of the Downtown Association newsletter, staff reminds businesses annually of the need to prepare for winter weather. Specifically they are reminded to clear roof gutters and to locate flood gates so they are ready and accessible. Much of the Downtown core is in the 100 - year flood plain and as such, major remodeling and new construction is required to raise the floor elevation or protect the property with flood gates. Flood gates typically consist of boards of some sort which are fixed in front of the doors to reduce flood water intrusion. In the event of high water, the businesses or property owners are responsible to install these gates to protect their property. For liability reasons, the City does not tell businesses when they need to do this; however, during severe weather, the City does release ongoing updates on the potential for rising waters. City staff monitors weather reports, County stream gauges at certain creek locations, and has observers in the field that report on the situation to the Department Operations Center at the City Corp Yard. Property owners in high risk flood zones carry flood insurance through a federal insurance program. The rates are variable depending upon a number of considerations relating to reduced flood risk. This year the City improved its Community Rating System rating for this insurance. This translates to an additional 5% discount on flood insurance premiums, for up to a total 15 % reduction for property owners in special flood zones. This higher rating was the result of additional efforts by staff to improve our flood prevention program. These efforts included a flood warning program (a visual observation at key spots) and improved documentation of flood response activities by the City. More credits are available now than in prior years for open space / flood zone beneficial uses. The City's GIS Division, Natural Resource Manager, and City Biologist assisted with mapping and descriptions of beneficial use areas for this effort which assisted in gaining the higher rating. Adoption of new building codes by the Building Division significantly improved the City's Building Code Effectiveness Grading System which also added points. The accumulation of all these efforts allowed the City to increase its score, resulting in a higher rating for the program. This effort translates into direct savings for property owners. Capital Improvement Projects During the last year silt removal was completed at Los Osos Valley Road at San Luis Creek and Tank Farm at Hollyhock. These projects remove excess material from underneath the bridges to increase the volume of water that can flow through. Silt Removal — Los Osos Valley Road - Before After The deck of a large culvert on Higuera Street at Exposition Creek, near the cemeteries, was replaced. SS2-4 2011 -12 Winter Weather Preparation Page 5 One of the larger projects was the replacement of an existing creek bypass structure on Andrews Creek near San Luis High School. Andrews Bypass and Rock Guard Structure As part of the corrugated metal pipe (CMP) replacement effort, 340 feet of CMP was replaced in Monterey Street, 85 feet of failed CMP was replaced in Higuera Street and reconnected to San Luis Creek. 1000 feet of new or rehabilitated storm drain pipe has been installed in Highland and Cuesta drive to bypass a failed CMP system. Currently active in design are plans to remove and replace perforated CMP at the intersection of Walnut and Osos with an anticipated construction date of February 2012. This will alleviate a perpetually wet condition that creates potholes near the cross gutter. Additionally there are two larger CMP replacement projects currently in the design phase with anticipated construction dates of summer 2012 and 2013 that will remove CMP in poor condition and install a more robust type of pipe. Design work for repair of a culvert at Broad and Leff Street is about to start with an anticipated construction timeframe of summer 2013. Bank rehabilitation design work has just begun on San Luis Creek near Toro Street with an anticipated construction start of summer 2013. A culvert replacement project on Bullock Lane is currently under design with an anticipated construction start of summer 2013. Regulatory permitting is underway for silt removal projects in the Prefumo Creek Arm of Laguna Lake, in Prefumo Creek below Laguna Lake, and San Luis Obispo Creek adjacent to the Water Reclamation Facility. Actual removal is anticipated to occur in the summer of 2012. Council may recall in July 2011, staff requested authorization to advertise these projects citing all permits had been received excluding the Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) authorization. The City advertised these projects for construction and at the same time solicited help from Congresswoman Lois Capps office for help to expedite ACOE approval process. While Congresswoman Capps office did lend support to this effort, the ACOE permit still has not been obtained. Staff continues to pursue these necessary regulatory permits in order to complete this work in 2012. SS2 -5 2011 -12 Winter Weather Preparation Page 6 Through an effort of the Zone 9 Flood Control and Water Conservation District, technical studies for environmental work are complete for the Mid - Higuera creek widening. The City is now starting preparation of preliminary engineering that will be used in conjunction with the technical studies for development of the project's environmental report. The project currently being studied is one that involves widening or overflow channels only on those properties owned by the City. Project work has been funded by Zone 9 to this point. Miscellaneous Preparations Sand has been delivered to the Corporation Yard, Laguna Lake Golf Course, Sinsheimer Park and Santa Rosa Park and is available to the public in the event they experience localized flooding. Community Service workers have been used to fill and palletized sandbags for emergency response and all chainsaws have been checked and repaired. Although the Winter Weather web page is available all year, staff places a reminder about the web site and the need to prepare for the upcoming wet season on Channel 20. Radios have been delivered to response crews in the event cell phone service is lost. The Winter Weather preparedness web site covers a variety of topics including information on safe travel during storms, reporting of downed power lines, protection of homes from flooding, and flood insurance. City staff also hosts a booth at Farmer's Market during December, distributing winter weather information and answering questions from visitors. FISCAL IMPACT The County Board of Supervisors has authorized approximately $180,000 of funding, through the Zone 9 Flood Control and Water Conservation District, for natural channel clearing, public outreach, and preliminary engineering for the Mid - Higuera project. While this funding has been available to the City for this type of work for a long time, it is discretionary on the part of the County Board of Supervisors. With the exception of silt removal projects, the remainder of the storm related Capital Improvement projects are funded with General Fund. The General Fund projects for the next two years include the Toro Street Bank Stabilization — near Marsh Street, stormdrain pipe and inlet replacements — Citywide, and the Broad Street Culvert Repair — near Leff. Current and Future Measure Y funds dedicated for winter weather preparation Activity Type 2011 -12 2012 -13 Total Wastewater Collection Operators O eratin $184,086 $184,086 $368,172 Storm Drain Replacement CIP $350,000 $350,000 $700,000 Culvert Repair CIP $35,000 $35,000 Toro Street Creek Bank CIP $35,000 $30,000 $65,000 Broad Street Bank CIP $35,000 $35,000 Total $35,000 $634,086 1 $1,203,172 Completed CIP Proiects for winter weather orenaration Project Cost Tank Farm & Los Osos Valley - Silt Removal $14,500 Hi era Culvert $185,800 SS2 -6 2011 -12 Winter Weather Preparation Project Cost Andrews B ass $329,300 Monterey CMP Replacement $302,200 Higuera CMP Replacement $65,100 Highland CMP Replacement $346,000 Walnut at Osos CMP (project bidding) $62,500 Total $1,305,400 ATTACHMENT Location Map t\council agenda reports4puUlc works cah2011\rw admin1201 t winlerpreplrpf 11 winlerprep.docx Page 7 SS2 -7 FUTURE SILT REMOVAL STORM DRAIN - REPLACEMENT FUTURE SILT REMOVAL tii ■r z s �Av�4 STORM DRAIN REPLACEMENT CULVERT REPAIR 0 0.5 1 2 Miles I—I— -1 STORM DRAIN REPLACEMENT FUTURE SILT SILT SILT 0 ROCK GUARD ATTACHMENT STORM DRAIN REPLACEMENT CREEK BYPASS Nl