HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-18-2015 Item 17 Downtown Concept Plan Update
Meeting Date: 8/18/2015
FROM: Derek Johnson, Community Development Director
Prepared By: Kim Murry, Deputy Director, Long Range Planning
SUBJECT: STRATEGY TO UPDATE THE DOWNTOWN CONCEPT PLAN AND
REQUEST FOR CONSULTANT ASSISTANCE
RECOMMENDATION
1. Approve the Scope of Work and Request for Proposal for consultant services associated
with updating the Downtown Concept Plan Specification No. 91364 and authorize staff
to advertise for proposals; and
2. Authorize the Community Development Director to execute the agreement with the
selected consultant if costs are within the approved budget; and
3. Adopt a Resolution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo, California, creating the Creative Vision Team for the Downtown Concept Plan
Update and defining its term and charge.”
DISCUSSION
Background
In late 1990, the City Council authorized the preparation of a Downtown Plan and authorized the
City Manager to establish a committee of community design professionals who would be willing
to do the work on a voluntary basis. Chuck Crotser, Rodney Levin, Andrew Merriam, Pierre
Rademaker, and Kenneth Schwartz volunteered to be the design team for the effort to develop a
Conceptual Physical Plan for the City’s Center (Downtown Concept Plan or Plan). A broad
cross-section of community members also participated to provide feedback as the plan was being
developed. Key City staff participated in providing information and project evaluation. A local
consulting firm, Crawford, Multari, and Starr, provided assistance, assembled data and
established the basic map and graphic formatting. The Downtown Plan was reviewed by the
Parks and Recreation Commission, the Cultural Heritage Committee, and the Architectural
Review Commission prior to review by Planning Commission and City Council. The City
Council approved the plan by resolution on May 4, 1993 (Attachment 3).
The Plan was formatted as a 26” by 39” poster with graphic illustrations of the longer term
vision on the front side (plan view of buildings, streets, and pedestrian ways, complemented by
three-dimensional sketches of possible design solutions for selected parts of the Plan). The
reverse side of the poster contains narrative descriptions of the plan, and its goals and objectives
organized by block(s) of the area covered by the Plan.
17
Packet Pg. 231
The Plan has been referred to over the years as guidance for development projects and for
acquisition of public space. The Resolution adopted by Council in 1993 indicated the intent that
the Plan remain a flexible and responsive guide that should be revisited every five years or so.
Other than a minor adjustment the Plan has remained unchanged, and has served as a compelling
vision for the Downtown.
The recent update to the Land Use Element included a program1 to update the Downtown
Concept Plan by 2016. As part of the 2015-2017 Financial Plan, the City Council included
funding for this update effort.
Strategy to Update Plan
Development of the Downtown Concept Plan in the early 1990’s involved a consultant to lead
the process, community members to participate as part of a task force team, City staff, and a core
of five designers/architects who worked with the team to integrate community input into
drawings, policies and a graphic poster that captured the future vision for this important area of
the City. The process was time-intensive and involved walking tours, homework for the
participants, and many brainstorming sessions with the design team to provide a visual
interpretation of community desires. The Plan took approximately three years to complete.
In approaching the update to the Plan, staff considered the previous process along with input
from the four remaining members of the original design team (Mr. Levin has since passed away).
The overall sentiment expressed by these community members is that the effort does not entail a
wholesale overhaul of the Plan but rather represents an opportunity to update the plan to reflect
successes achieved in the existing plan, and identify future opportunities for success.
Design Team Participation
In defining the strategy moving forward, staff is seeking Council input on the scope of work and
the composition of the community team working on the effort. Misters Crotser, Merriam,
Rademaker, and Schwartz have committed to be actively engaged and involved with the update
process and to provide design vision and input. They have acknowledged that they are not in a
position to organize and lead the update process, but very much wish to be members of a team
that will work with the community, staff, and the consultant leading the update effort. The
original design team members provide not only context from the Downtown Concept Plan
creation effort, but also strong design and visioning skills within the context of community
values.
Process and Community Engagement
Updating the Plan will require engaging the community in a transparent, inclusive and positive
way, and carefully considering how the plan area interacts with adjacent neighborhoods (i.e. Old
Town and Mission Orchard) and planning areas (i.e. Mid-Higuera and Upper Monterey). In
addition, the plan involves design and layout within the historic context of Downtown. For these
reasons, staff is suggesting a process that starts with identification of the areas within the plan
1 4.24. Updating Downtown Concept Plan : The City shall update the Downtown Concept Plan by 2016 and shall
regularly update the plan as required to address significant changes in or affecting the Downtown area including the
opportunity for meaningful public input.
17
Packet Pg. 232
that need an updated vision (both geographic and topic-based areas), followed by engagement of
interested parties and focus groups to work with the visioning team, staff, and the consultant to
provide input for the “big ideas” to be generated b y the creative vision team and explored by the
community. This process would be iterative. The graphic provided in Attachment 1 is a
simplified visual that shows the iterative process of visioning to guide the updates to the Plan.
Updating the Downtown Concept Plan will also interact with the efforts to create a Mission
Plaza Master Plan. The visioning process of the Master Plan will be coordinated with the
Downtown Concept Plan so that the community and creative vision team may be actively
engaged at both the project-specific and contextual levels. This coordination will also allow the
Plaza concepts to be incorporated into the Downtown Concept Plan. The RFP reflects the
required coordination between the two planning efforts.
Roles
Staff has been working with the original authors of the Downtown Concept Plan to more fully
explore and define the roles of staff, consultant, and visioning team in the update process. The
authors of the Plan have strong vision and design skills and a sense of ownership of the plan.
These attributes ensure continuity and cohesion of updated concepts with the existing plan. Staff
recommends, and the authors support, introduction of three additional community residents with
graphic or design skills to the Creative Vision Team as a succession planning tool and as a way
to ensure the visioning process is more accessible. The creation of the Downtown Concept Plan
was made possible by volunteers with a strong commitment committed to both the community at
large and to the Downtown as a vital part of what makes our community special. Staff
recommends seeking volunteers that have this same level of commitment.
Staff recommends the original authors of the plan provide recommendations in selection of both
the consultant and the additional Creative Vision Team participants. For the latter, staff suggests
an application process that can run concurrently with the consultant proposal review and
selection process. Selection of the three additional team members could be made by a sub-
committee comprised of two Council members with consideration of the recommendation of the
original authors of the Plan. The Resolution shown as Attachment 5 documents creation of the
Creative Vision Team.
CONCURRENCES
Public Works and Administration (Economic Development, Natural Resources) staff have
reviewed and provided input for the RFP and will be active participants in the process.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The request for proposal is not a project under CEQA. The resulting plan will require evaluation
for potential impacts.
FISCAL IMPACT
The Council included $100,000 in the 2015-2017 Financial Plan for this effort.
17
Packet Pg. 233
ALTERNATIVES
1. Council may direct that the contract for consultant assistance be reduced. This is not
recommended because staff resources are limited and would not be available to lead the
update process in a way that responds to community expectations.
2. Council may direct changes to the proposed Request for Proposals for consultant
assistance. Specific direction to staff should be provided.
3. Council may direct changes to the proposed Resolution creating the Creative Vision
Team. Specific direction to staff should be provided.
Attachments:
1 - Process Diagram
2 - Downtown Concept Plan RFP
3 - 1993 Resolution adopting DTC Plan
4 - Overview of Previous Process
5 - Resolution for CVT
17
Packet Pg. 234
Id
e
n
t
i
f
y
Fo
c
u
s
A
r
e
a
s
Ge
o
g
r
a
p
h
i
c
To
p
i
c
Cr
e
a
t
i
v
e
V
i
s
i
o
n
T
e
a
m
Co
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
St
a
f
f
Cr
e
a
t
i
v
e
V
i
s
i
o
n
Te
a
m
Focus Groups Stakeholders
Bi
g
I
d
e
a
s
Gr
a
p
h
i
c
s
,
Di
a
g
r
a
m
s
,
Te
c
h
n
i
c
a
l
D
a
t
a
Co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
En
g
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
Up
d
a
t
e
d
Pl
a
n
Co
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
St
a
f
f
Co
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
St
a
f
f
Cr
e
a
t
i
v
e
V
i
s
i
o
n
Te
a
m
Focus Areas
Packet Pg. 235
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
1
-
P
r
o
c
e
s
s
D
i
a
g
r
a
m
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to including disabled persons in all of our services, programs and activities.
Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (805) 781-7410.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Notice Requesting Proposals for Consultant Services
DOWNTOWN CONCEPT PLAN UPDATE
Specification No. 91364
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City of San Luis Obispo is requesting sealed proposals for
services associated with updating The Conceptual Physical Plan for the City’s Center
(Downtown Concept Plan or Plan) pursuant to Specification No. 91364. All proposals must
be received by the Community Development Department by 3:00 p.m. on September 25, 2015
when they will be opened publicly in the Main Conference Room, 919 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo, CA 93401.
Proposals received after said time will not be considered. To guard against premature opening,
each proposal shall be submitted to the Finance Division in a sealed envelope plainly marked
with the proposal title, specification number, proposer name, and time and date of the proposal
opening. Proposals shall be submitted using the forms provided in the specification package.
General Work Description:
In general, primary objectives for this project are to assess and update the present
development, vison, and policies related to the existing Downtown Concept Plan to provide a
roadmap for future public projects and guidance for private development in the Downtown and
surrounding areas.
A pre-proposal conference will be held to answer any questions that the prospective proposers
may have regarding the City's request for proposals.
Council Hearing Room
990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo
Thursday, September 3, 2015 at 1:30 p.m.
Specification packages and additional information may be obtained by contacting the
Community Development Department at 805-781-7170 or downloaded from the City’s website
at:
http://www.slocity.org/doing-business/doing-business-with-the-city/bids-and-proposals
Questions should be directed to Rebecca Gershow at (805) 781-7011 or via email at
rgershow@slocity.org.
Packet Pg. 236
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
-
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
R
F
P
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
City of San Luis Obispo
Specification No. 91364
-2-
Specification No. 91364
TABLE OF CONTENTS
A. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................3
B. SCOPE OF WORK ..................................................................................................................5
C. PROJECT SCHEDULE ...........................................................................................................8
D. PROJECT BUDGET ..............................................................................................................10
E. AVAILABLE RESOURCES ...................................................................................................10
F. GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS ............................................................................14
G. SPECIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS ..............................................................................19
H. FORM OF AGREEMENT......................................................................................................23
I. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS ...........................................................................................25
J. PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL FORMS ......................................................................................27
K. END NOTES ...........................................................................................................................30
Packet Pg. 237
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
-
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
R
F
P
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
City of San Luis Obispo
Specification No. 91364
-3-
A. INTRODUCTION
The City of San Luis Obispo is seeking proposals from qualified consulting firms to prepare an
update to The Conceptual Physical Plan for the City’s Center (Downtown Concept Plan or Plan).
The qualified individual or firm (Consultant Team) should have strong urban design and
visioning skills to lead the process to update the Downtown Concept Plan through a robust
public engagement process.
The City will not accept a proposal as responsive if it covers only a portion of the Scope of Work
requested. A summary of the required deliverables includes (more complete description is
included in sections below):
Updated Downtown Concept Plan (including policy direction)
Identification of regulatory changes necessary to implement plan
Optional deliverable: Update existing SketchUp model of Downtown
1. GENERAL PLAN BACKGROUND
San Luis Obispo is situated in the Central Coast Region of California, midway between San
Francisco and Los Angeles. The City is nestled among the hills and lined with creeks and offers
a mild climate. California Polytechnic State University is located just on the north end of town
and the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport is located to the south of the city. San Luis
Obispo was recognized as one of the top 12 Distinctive Destination Cities in the U.S. by the
National Trust for Historic Preservation, and recently received State recognition for its “Creek
Day” clean-up program. The City received recognition as one of the “happiest” towns in Dan
Buettner’s book Thrive and is recognized as a Bicycle Friendly Community (silver award) by the
League of American Bicyclists
The City traces its roots back to the Native American cultures and subsequent colonization
period associated with establishment of the Mission by Fr. Serra in 1772. It has grown into a
12.8 square mile charter city of approximately 44,948 people. San Luis Obispo has a special
feeling due to its historic downtown and surrounding morros that define the vistas from many
places in the City. It serves as the regional center for many government services as well as
cultural, business and recreational opportunities. It is known as a well-managed city that values
quality services, infrastructure, and a high level of community engagement.
The City’s first General Plan was adopted in 1961. The Land Use and Circulation Elements saw
major revisions in 1972, 1977, 1994, and most recently in 2014. The General Plan reflects the
desire for a compact urban form with a surrounding greenbelt area and includes multi-modal
level of service standards. The General Plan, in addition to related implementing documents
such as design guidelines, zoning ordinance, historic context statement, historic preservation
ordinance, are all used consistently by the City’s staff, advisory bodies and Council to guide
decisions regarding development and capital expenditures. A diagram showing the framework
of land use-related policy documents may be found here:
http://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=6769.
To view the General Plan, please see the city website for more information: www.slocity.org.
Packet Pg. 238
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
-
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
R
F
P
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
City of San Luis Obispo
Specification No. 91364
-4-
2. DOWNTOWN CONCEPT PLAN BACKGROUND
In late 1990, the City Council authorized the preparation of a Downtown Concept Plan and
authorized the City Manager to establish a committee of community design professionals who
would be willing to do the work on a voluntary basis. Chuck Crotser, Rodney Levin, Andrew
Merriam, Pierre Rademaker, and Kenneth Schwartz volunteered to be the design team for the
effort. A broad cross-section of community members also participated to provide feedback as
the plan was being developed. Key City staff participated in providing information and project
evaluation. A local consulting firm, Crawford, Multari, and Starr, provided assistance,
assembled data and established the basic map and graphic formatting. The Downtown Concept
Plan was reviewed by the Parks and Recreation Commission, the Cultural Heritage Committee,
and the Architectural Review Commission prior to review by Planning Commission and City
Council. The City Council approved the Plan by resolution on May 4, 1993.
The Plan was formatted as a 26” by 39” poster with graphic illustrations of the longer term vision
on the front side (plan view of buildings, streets, and pedestrian ways, complemented by three-
dimensional sketches of possible design solutions for selected parts of the Plan). The reverse
side of the poster contains a narrative description of the Downtown Concept Plan, including the
vision, goals and key concepts, and descriptions of recommendations organized by area.
The Downtown Concept Plan has been referred to over the years as guidance for development
projects and for acquisition of public space. It has served as a compelling vision for the
Downtown.
3. PROJECT AREA
The Downtown Concept Plan covers primarily the commercial area bounded by Hwy 101 and
the western end of Marsh, Higuera, and Pacific Streets on the west, to Johnson Avenue at
Monterey, Higuera, and Marsh on the east. Palm Street forms the northern boundary of the
project area and Pacific Street forms the southern boundary. Linkages between the project area
and other planning areas such as Upper Monterey and Mid-Higuera as well as interactions with
adjoining residential neighborhoods are recognized as important though not part of the project
area.
4. POLICY DIRECTION
Policy direction to guide the update to the Downtown Concept Plan includes the following
(references are provided at the end of the document on page 30):
Expansion of Mission Plaza. The Land Use Element1 directs consideration of full or partial
closure and redesign of Broad Street between Palm and Monterey Streets, and Monterey
between the two connections with Broad Street. A separate but related planning effort is
underway to develop an assessment and infrastructure plan for Mission Plaza, including
evaluation of plaza events and physical expansion.
Role of Downtown. The Downtown is the community’s heart2 and serves as the cultural, social,
entertainment, and political center of the City, as well as a neighborhood. Policy subsets support
a mix of residential types, affordability levels, and tenancies on upper floors above the
commercial uses at street level3.
Packet Pg. 239
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
-
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
R
F
P
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
City of San Luis Obispo
Specification No. 91364
-5-
Walking Environment. Several Land Use Element policies4 address the desire/need to see
Downtown as a safe and interesting place for walking, sitting, and gathering. Development of a
Downtown Pedestrian Plan will be informed by the update to the Downtown Concept Plan.
Open Places and Views. Land Use Element policies5 seek to enhance views of the surrounding
hills from the Downtown where possible and to increase areas for green space and parks to
serve the growing Downtown residential population.
Character. The historic buildings in the district contribute to the ambiance and feel of the
Downtown. Street trees also contribute to the character and pedestrian comfort of the area. The
City’s Community Design Guidelines and Historic Preservation Program Guidelines address (in
part) design review and compatibility issues of development in the Downtown.
B. SCOPE OF WORK
1. FORMAT
The update of the Downtown Concept Plan shall consider effective visual communication of the
physical aspects of policy direction to be of utmost importance. The document shall include a
minimum amount of explanatory text and be highly graphic in nature. The Downtown Concept
Plan currently provides direction applicable to single and multiple block areas. Each area
contains direction for Public Projects and Standards and/or Guidelines to shape future
development. Short-, medium- and long-term improvements and acquisition needs are
identified.
Proposers should review the format of the current plan and provide recommendations for the
updated format to ensure it continues to meet the needs of the community. The Plan is
expected to be user-friendly, concise and written in a manner easily understood by the public,
oriented towards graphical representations of the future form of the Downtown. There shall be
an emphasis on providing information visually through the use of photographs, drawings and
maps. The City is seeking an innovative approach in creating a document/map(s), including the
creation of a print and electronic version. The simplicity of the concept plan has been one of the
hallmarks of its utility and general acceptance and use.
2. PUBLIC REALM
In addition to updating the vision contained in the Plan, direction for the public realm shall be
provided in a way that could be used to develop updates to the City’s zoning ordinance,
including the possibility of developing a form-based code for the Downtown. A description of the
public infrastructure and facilities needed for Plan implementation shall be included.
3. CONTEXT
The work of the consultant shall include review of entitled projects and projects currently in
process, community design guidelines, historic preservation program guidelines, the Bicycle
Transportation Plan, GIS data, and existing General Plan policy direction for the downtown and
surrounding residential neighborhoods to ensure familiarity with the physical setting and the
overarching values shaping the area.
Packet Pg. 240
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
-
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
R
F
P
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
City of San Luis Obispo
Specification No. 91364
-6-
4. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
San Luis Obispo has very informed and engaged residents and community stakeholders. As
such, the public participation aspect of this process is especially critical. The City is seeking an
innovative community engagement process that is inclusive and validating for participants.
Proposals should include a Community Engagement Plan that includes the following:
A key component of the community engagement process will be the Creative Vision Team
(CVT) comprised of four of the five original authors of the Plan and three new members. In
addition to providing valuable background and context regarding the original Downtown Concept
Plan, the CVT will assist the consultant with public meetings, visioning exercises, and
collaboration with a variety of stakeholders who may have a particular interest in one or more of
the identified downtown focus areas (geographic or topical). The CVT will actively participate in
generating drawings to visualize concepts and respond to ideas from outreach activities and will
work with the consultant and staff in developing the plan. City staff will be responsible for
meeting coordination, facilitation assistance, set-up and noticing.
The City anticipates the community engagement process will include a walking tour and
charrette(s) to gather and flesh out concepts as well as interviews and focus groups with
key stakeholders. On-line tools may be included to augment but not replace face-to-face
opportunities for interaction. The consultant should allow for attendance at an adequate number
of meetings with staff, and up to eight potential public meetings/hearings (e.g.,
workshops/charrettes, Planning Commission and City Council meetings). Additional pre-
approved meetings will be reimbursed on a time and materials basis.
Interested parties and stakeholder groups include but are not limited to the SLO Chamber of
Commerce, Downtown Association, History Center of San Luis Obispo County, ARTS Obispo,
Residents for Quality Neighborhoods (RQN), San Luis Obispo Business and Property Owners
Association (SLOBPOA), Neighborhood Groups (Old Town, Mission Orchard, etc.), County
Government, San Luis Obispo Museum of Art, Save Our Downtown (SOD), Northern Chumash
Tribal Council, Bike SLO County, Old Mission Church representatives, SLO Little Theater, SLO
Children’s Museum, and others.
In addition, outreach activities and visioning exercises will be cooperative endeavors between
the Downtown Concept Plan and the Mission Plaza Master Plan projects, which will be running
concurrently. See the link to the Mission Plaza Master Plan RFP in Section E, Available
Resources.
Proposals should also include (but not be limited to) outreach activities such as:
Newsletter—Preparation of community outreach newsletter for City distribution
E-updates—Preparation of materials for City staff to send to an email list to maintain
interest and generate participation
Media Outreach—Preparation of news releases on the process and key elements of
the update
Farmers’ Markets—Preparation of materials for staff to use at an information booth
City web site/on-line community forum/interactive virtual town hall – Preparation of
materials for staff to use
Packet Pg. 241
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
-
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
R
F
P
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
City of San Luis Obispo
Specification No. 91364
-7-
5. ISSUES TO ADDRESS IN UPDATED PLAN- DELIVERABLES
Evaluate the appropriateness of the existing boundary of the Downtown Concept
Plan given new General Plan policies and programs for downtown and adjacent
neighborhoods.
Reflect development/redevelopment that has occurred or been approved since
inception of the Downtown Concept Plan.
Understand what portions of the existing Downtown Concept Plan were not
implemented and why.
Incorporate the Palm-Nipomo Parking Structure and other public projects including
circulation and transit.
Identify potential locations for new or expanded public space(s) for gathering and
socializing
Address implementation of new General Plan policies including multi-modal level of
service standards and downtown modal priorities
Address implementation of Bicycle Transportation Plan policies and projects
proposed in the downtown
Address pedestrian needs in the downtown including sidewalk widths and uses,
walking, seating, gathering areas and crossings/mid-block connections
Provide connectivity across and to San Luis Creek where appropriate
Address the goal of activating and revitalizing public areas such as streets, sidewalks
and plazas at all times of day while being considerate of adjoining neighborhoods
Create connections and design cohesion between public and cultural spaces
Identify public art location opportunities
Resolve whether Fremont/County Government Plaza concept is still desirable
Incorporate ideas from the Mission Plaza Master Plan
Activate Monterey Street east of Santa Rosa to draw visitors from hospitality facilities
further east
Identify places where taller buildings may be appropriate
Identify appropriate places to provide public views of surrounding hills/environment
Include tools for evaluating future projects
Include descriptions of public infrastructure and facilities needed for Plan
implementation
Identify regulatory changes needed as part of subsequent Zoning code update
6. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The consultant team will be responsible for completing an Initial Study for the draft update.
Further work on environmental review, including preparation of a Negative Declaration,
Mitigated Negative Declaration, or Environmental Impact report for the project will be completed
by staff or completed prior to final adoption of the updated plan as part of the larger Zoning
Code update project.
Packet Pg. 242
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
-
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
R
F
P
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
City of San Luis Obispo
Specification No. 91364
-8-
C. PROJECT SCHEDULE
The project schedule listed below is a draft. The successful consultant team will work with staff
to finalize the individual project tasks within the overall timeframe.
Activities/Milestones
Responsible
Parties
Timeframe
DOWNTOWN CONCEPT PLAN UPDATE
TASK 1.
PROGRAM INITIATION
1.1 Request for Proposals
(RFP) Authorized by City
Council.
1.2 Post and Distribute RFP
1.3 Solicit volunteers for CVT
1.4 RFP Responses Due
1.5 Evaluate RFP responses
and select consultant(s) for
interview.
1.6 Select 3 additional
volunteers for CVT
1.7 Interview consultant(s).
1.8 Consultant selection and
contracting
1.9 Initial meeting(s) with City
staff and Creative Vision
Team (CVT). Coordinate
with Mission Plaza Master
Plan consultant team.
Finalize proposed schedule
and work plan.
City Staff
City Staff
City Staff
Consultant
City Staff
Subcommittee
of Council and
original CVT
City Staff, 2
CVT reps
City Staff
City Staff,
CVT, and
Consultant
August 18, 2015
August 21, 2015 - September 25, 2015
August 21, 2015 - September 25, 2015
September 25, 2015 3 pm
September 25, 2015 - October 9, 2015
September 25, 2015 - October 9, 2015
October 12, 2105 - October 16, 2015
October 16- 30, 2015
November 2 – 13, 2015
TASK 2.
VISIONING
2.1 Tour of downtown
and focus area brainstorming
session
Consultant,
City Staff,
CVT
November 16, 2015 - November 20, 2015
Packet Pg. 243
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
-
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
R
F
P
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
City of San Luis Obispo
Specification No. 91364
-9-
Activities/Milestones
Responsible
Parties
Timeframe
2.2 Stakeholder focus groups
2.3 Discuss information
collected to date, including:
Mission Plaza Master Plan,
CVT experiences,
development projects,
guidance documents, and
previous Council input
2.4 Community-Wide Meeting
#1: Design Charrette
(includes visioning for
Mission Plaza MP): big ideas
Consultant,
City Staff,
CVT
Consultant,
City Staff,
CVT
Consultant,
City Staff, and
CVT
November 20, 2015 - December 11, 2015
December 11, 2015 – December 18, 2015
January 8, 2016- January 14, 2016
TASK 3.
SYNTHESIS
3.1 Evaluate Charrette
responses and work with
CVT to further develop
concepts, graphics and
policies
3.2 Outreach and work with
focus groups to refine work
3.3 Finalize draft concepts
and policy work
3.4 Community-Wide Meeting
#2: Review Draft concepts
and policy work
Consultant,
City Staff, and
CVT
City Staff and
CVT
Consultant,
City Staff, and
CVT
Consultant,
City Staff, and
CVT
January 15, 2016 - February 12, 2016
February 12, 2016 – March 11, 2016
March 14, 2016 – May 6, 2016
May 2, 2016 – May 6, 2016
TASK 4.
HEARINGS/REVIEW
4.1 MTC/BAC/CHC Hearings
4.2 PRC Hearing
4.3 ARC Hearing
City Staff and
CVT
City Staff and
CVT
City Staff and
CVT
May - June 2016
June 2016
June – July 2016
Packet Pg. 244
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
-
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
R
F
P
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
City of San Luis Obispo
Specification No. 91364
-10-
Activities/Milestones
Responsible
Parties
Timeframe
4.4 Planning Commission
Hearings
4.5 Address input received at
advisory body meetings
4.6 City Council Hearing –
review all input from advisory
bodies. Initiate Initial Study.
City Staff,
Consultant
CVT
Consultant
City Staff and
CVT and
Consultant
July – August 2016
August 2016
September 2016
Task 5.
FINAL CONCEPT PLAN
5.1 Work with CVT to finalize
update, including graphics
and policies in response to
advisory body and Council
input. Complete Initial Study.
5.2 City Council
Endorsement to include DTC
with Zoning Code review.
Consultant,
City Staff and
CVT
City Staff and
CVT
September – October 2016
November 2016
D. PROJECT BUDGET
A budget of $100,000 is earmarked for consultant services, materials, Initial Study and
contingency for this project.
E. AVAILABLE RESOURCES
Document Location
General Plan of San Luis Obispo City
(Land Use, Circulation, Noise, Safety,
Water and Wastewater, Conservation
and Open Space, Housing, and Parks
and Recreation Elements)
http://38.106.4.251/home/showdocument?id=6703
Mid-Higuera Enhancement Plan http://www.slocity.org/Home/ShowDocument?id=4300
Downtown Concept Plan http://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=4951
Stormwater Management Plan –
Urban Sustainability Area
http://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=5184
http://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=5186
Packet Pg. 245
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
-
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
R
F
P
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
City of San Luis Obispo
Specification No. 91364
-11-
Bicycle Transportation Plan http://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=3785
Historic Preservation Program
Guidelines http://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=4144
Zoning Regulations http://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=5861
Subdivision Regulations (to be
updated in 2015-16) http://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=4308
Community Design Guidelines http://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=2104
City of San Luis Obispo Municipal
code http://www.codepublishing.com/ca/sanluisobispo/
Land Use Element Diagram http://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=5857
San Luis Obispo Chamber of
Commerce Strategic Plan https://slochamber.org/your-chamber/strategic-plan/
San Luis Obispo Downtown
Association Strategic Plan
http://downtownslo.com/wp-
content/uploads/2013/05/SLO-Downtown-Association-
Strategic-Plan-2013.pdf?cfa587
Multimodal Transportation Impact
Study Guidelines http://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=6029
Projects approved and in process
http://slocity.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapTour/index.htm
l?appid=27749c92741d46b0a89974c199f4f9b2&webm
ap=12e601e04ce6466495b5f89f46384175
Mission Plaza Master Plan RFP
http://www.slocity.org/Home/Components/RFP/RFP/34
/1382
Other City Resources
Traffic Model
SketchUp Model
GIS Resources
Boundaries
Airport Safety Zones
Annexations
Block Numbers
City limit
Commercial Fire Zone
Downtown Planning Area
Fire response
Flood zones
General plan land use
General Plan Special Design Areas
Greenbelt
Historic Districts
Historic Resources
Mission Sidewalk Style
Packet Pg. 246
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
-
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
R
F
P
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
City of San Luis Obispo
Specification No. 91364
-12-
Open space
Open space easements
Parking Districts
Parks
Pavement Management
PAZ Zones -Diablo
Planning Area
Sales tax areas
School Districts
Specific plan areas
Urban reserve line
USGS quads
Utility fee areas
Waste Collection Days
Water Pressure Zones
Watersheds
Zoning
Built Features
Address labels
Address points
Airport runways
Block Number Labels
Bridges
Cal Poly bldg. labels
CalTrans Hwy Points
City Art
Creek Walkway
Electric meters
Fire Stations
Handicap ramps
Hwy 101 Center Lines
Hwy 101 Pave Out
Indoor Meeting Facilities
Laguna Lake Roads
Mines
Mission Bells
Power lines
Public Toilets
Railroad row
Railroad Tracks
Railroad Underpasses
Recreation fields
Sidewalk centerline
Special Setbacks
Streets
Traffic signals
Trail points
Trails
Unreinforced masonry bldgs.
Packet Pg. 247
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
-
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
R
F
P
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
City of San Luis Obispo
Specification No. 91364
-13-
Natural Features
Contours -2 meter
Creek Buffers
Creeks
Heritage trees
Impervious Areas
Laguna Lake
Rare Endangered Species
Vegetation
Parcels
City Facilities
City owned properties
Easements
Government Owned Properties
Hospitals
Parcels
School parcels
Tracts
Vicinity Parcels Barclay
Transportation
Bicycle Transportation Existing
Bicycle Transportation Proposed
Bike Racks
Bus Routes
Bus Routes Stops
Sub-areas
Meter Zones
Transport Hubs
Truck Routes
Packet Pg. 248
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
-
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
R
F
P
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
City of San Luis Obispo
Specification No. 91364
-14-
SECTION F
GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS
PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS
1. Requirement to Meet All Provisions. Each individual or firm submitting a proposal
(proposer) shall meet all of the terms, and conditions of the Request for Proposals (RFP)
specifications package. By virtue of its proposal submittal, the proposer acknowledges
agreement with and acceptance of all provisions of the RFP specifications.
2. Proposal Submittal. Each proposal must be submitted on the form(s) provided in the
specifications and accompanied by any other required submittals or supplemental
materials. Proposal documents shall be enclosed in an envelope that shall be sealed
and addressed to the Department of Finance, City of San Luis Obispo, 990 Palm Street,
San Luis Obispo, CA, 93401. In order to guard against premature opening, the proposal
should be clearly labeled with the proposal title, specification number, name of proposer,
and date and time of proposal opening. No FAX submittals will be accepted.
3. Insurance Certificate. Each proposal must include a certificate of insurance showing:
a. The insurance carrier and its A.M. Best rating.
b. Scope of coverage and limits.
c. Deductibles and self-insured retention.
The purpose of this submittal is to generally assess the adequacy of the proposer’s
insurance coverage during proposal evaluation; as discussed under paragraph 12
below, endorsements are not required until contract award. The City’s insurance
requirements are detailed in Section E.
4. Proposal Quotes and Unit Price Extensions. The extensions of unit prices for the
quantities indicated and the lump sum prices quoted by the proposer must be entered in
figures in the spaces provided on the Proposal Submittal Form(s). Any lump sum bid
shall be stated in figures. The Proposal Submittal Form(s) must be totally completed. If
the unit price and the total amount stated by any proposer for any item are not in
agreement, the unit price alone will be considered as representing the proposer's
intention and the proposal total will be corrected to conform to the specified unit price.
5. Proposal Withdrawal and Opening. A proposer may withdraw its proposal, without
prejudice prior to the time specified for the proposal opening, by submitting a written
request to the Director of Finance for its withdrawal, in which event the proposal will be
returned to the proposer unopened. No proposal received after the time specified or at
any place other than that stated in the "Notice Inviting Bids/Requesting Proposals" will
be considered. All proposals will be opened and declared publicly. Proposers or their
representatives are invited to be present at the opening of the proposals.
6. Submittal of One Proposal Only. No individual or business entity of any kind shall be
allowed to make or file, or to be interested in more than one proposal, except an
alternative proposal when specifically requested; however, an individual or business
entity that has submitted a sub-proposal to a proposer submitting a proposal, or who has
Packet Pg. 249
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
-
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
R
F
P
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
City of San Luis Obispo
Specification No. 91364
-15-
quoted prices on materials to such proposer, is not thereby disqualified from submitting a
sub-proposal or from quoting prices to other proposers submitting proposals.
7. Cooperative Purchasing. During the term of the contract, the successful proposer will
extend all terms and conditions to any other local governmental agencies upon their
request. These agencies will issue their own purchase orders, will directly receive goods
or services at their place of business and will be directly billed by the successful
proposer.
8. Communications. All timely requests for information submitted in writing will receive a
written response from the City. Telephone communications with City staff are not
encouraged, but will be permitted. However, any such oral communication shall not be
binding on the City.
CONTRACT AWARD AND EXECUTION
9. Proposal Retention and Award. The City reserves the right to retain all proposals for a
period of 60 days for examination and comparison. The City also reserves the right to
waive non-substantial irregularities in any proposal, to reject any or all proposals, to
reject or delete one part of a proposal and accept the other, except to the extent that
proposals are qualified by specific limitations. See the "special terms and conditions" in
Section C of these specifications for proposal evaluation and contract award criteria.
10. Competency and Responsibility of Proposer. The City reserves full discretion to
determine the competence and responsibility, professionally and/or financially, of
proposers. Proposers will provide, in a timely manner, all information that the City
deems necessary to make such a decision.
11. Contract Requirement. The proposer to whom award is made (Contractor) shall
execute a written contract with the City within ten (10) calendar days after notice of the
award has been sent by mail to it at the address given in its proposal. The contract shall
be made in the form adopted by the City and incorporated in these specifications.
12. Insurance Requirements. The Contractor shall provide proof of insurance in the form,
coverages and amounts specified in Section E of these specifications within 10 (ten)
calendar days after notice of contract award as a precondition to contract execution.
13. Business License & Tax. The Contractor must have a valid City of San Luis Obispo
business license and tax certificate before execution of the contract. Additional
information regarding the City's business license and tax program may be obtained by
calling (805) 781-7134.
CONTRACT PERFORMANCE
14. Ability to Perform. The Contractor warrants that it possesses, or has arranged through
subcontracts, all capital and other equipment, labor, materials, and licenses necessary
to carry out and complete the work hereunder in compliance with any and all federal,
state, county, city, and special district laws, ordinances, and regulations.
15. Laws to be Observed. The Contractor shall keep itself fully informed of and shall
observe and comply with all applicable state and federal laws and county and City of
Packet Pg. 250
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
-
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
R
F
P
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
City of San Luis Obispo
Specification No. 91364
-16-
San Luis Obispo ordinances, regulations and adopted codes during its performance of
the work.
16. Payment of Taxes. The contract prices shall include full compensation for all taxes that
the Contractor is required to pay.
17. Permits and Licenses. The Contractor shall procure all permits and licenses, pay all
charges and fees, and give all notices necessary.
18. Safety Provisions. The Contractor shall conform to the rules and regulations pertaining
to safety established by OSHA and the California Division of Industrial Safety.
19. Public and Employee Safety. Whenever the Contractor's operations create a condition
hazardous to the public or City employees, it shall, at its expense and without cost to the
City, furnish, erect and maintain such fences, temporary railings, barricades, lights, signs
and other devices and take such other protective measures as are necessary to prevent
accidents or damage or injury to the public and employees.
20. Preservation of City Property. The Contractor shall provide and install suitable
safeguards, approved by the City, to protect City property from injury or damage. If City
property is injured or damaged resulting from the Contractor's operations, it shall be
replaced or restored at the Contractor's expense. The facilities shall be replaced or
restored to a condition as good as when the Contractor began work.
21. Immigration Act of 1986. The Contractor warrants on behalf of itself and all
subcontractors engaged for the performance of this work that only persons authorized to
work in the United States pursuant to the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986
and other applicable laws shall be employed in the performance of the work hereunder.
22. Contractor Non-Discrimination. In the performance of this work, the Contractor
agrees that it will not engage in, nor permit such subcontractors as it may employ, to
engage in discrimination in employment of persons because of age, race, color, sex,
national origin or ancestry, sexual orientation, or religion of such persons.
23. Work Delays. Should the Contractor be obstructed or delayed in the work required to
be done hereunder by changes in the work or by any default, act, or omission of the City,
or by strikes, fire, earthquake, or any other Act of God, or by the inability to obtain
materials, equipment, or labor due to federal government restrictions arising out of
defense or war programs, then the time of completion may, at the City's sole option, be
extended for such periods as may be agreed upon by the City and the Contractor. In the
event that there is insufficient time to grant such extensions prior to the completion date
of the contract, the City may, at the time of acceptance of the work, waive liquidated
damages that may have accrued for failure to complete on time, due to any of the above,
after hearing evidence as to the reasons for such delay, and making a finding as to the
causes of same.
24. Payment Terms. The City's payment terms are 30 days from the receipt of an original
invoice and acceptance by the City of the materials, supplies, equipment or services
provided by the Contractor (Net 30). All expenditures must be itemized. For each
expenditure of $500 or more, copies of supporting documentation (time sheets, payroll
stubs, receipts, etc.) must be submitted with the invoice.
Packet Pg. 251
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
-
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
R
F
P
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
City of San Luis Obispo
Specification No. 91364
-17-
25. Inspection. The Contractor shall furnish City with every reasonable opportunity for City
to ascertain that the services of the Contractor are being performed in accordance with
the requirements and intentions of this contract. All work done and all materials
furnished, if any, shall be subject to the City's inspection and approval. The inspection of
such work shall not relieve Contractor of any of its obligations to fulfill its contract
requirements.
26. Audit. The City shall have the option of inspecting and/or auditing all records and other
written materials used by Contractor in preparing its invoices to City as a condition
precedent to any payment to Contractor.
27. Interests of Contractor. The Contractor covenants that it presently has no interest, and
shall not acquire any interest—direct, indirect or otherwise—that would conflict in any
manner or degree with the performance of the work hereunder. The Contractor further
covenants that, in the performance of this work, no subcontractor or person having such
an interest shall be employed. The Contractor certifies that no one who has or will have
any financial interest in performing this work is an officer or employee of the City. It is
hereby expressly agreed that, in the performance of the work hereunder, the Contractor
shall at all times be deemed an independent contractor and not an agent or employee of
the City.
28. Indemnification for Professional Liability. To the fullest extent permitted by law,
the Consultant shall indemnify, protect, defend and hold harmless the City and
any and all of its officials, employees and agents (“Indemnified Parties”) from and
against any and all losses, liabilities, damages, costs and expenses, including
attorney’s fees and cost which arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence,
recklessness, or willful misconduct of the Consultant.
29. Contract Assignment. The Contractor shall not assign, transfer, convey or otherwise
dispose of the contract, or its right, title or interest, or its power to execute such a
contract to any individual or business entity of any kind without the previous written
consent of the City.
30. Termination. If, during the term of the contract, the City determines that the Contractor
is not faithfully abiding by any term or condition contained herein, the City may notify the
Contractor in writing of such defect or failure to perform. This notice must give the
Contractor a 10 (ten) calendar day notice of time thereafter in which to perform said work
or cure the deficiency.
If the Contractor has not performed the work or cured the deficiency within the ten days
specified in the notice, such shall constitute a breach of the contract and the City may
terminate the contract immediately by written notice to the Contractor to said effect.
Thereafter, neither party shall have any further duties, obligations, responsibilities, or
rights under the contract except, however, any and all obligations of the Contractor's
surety shall remain in full force and effect, and shall not be extinguished, reduced, or in
any manner waived by the termination thereof.
In said event, the Contractor shall be entitled to the reasonable value of its services
performed from the beginning date in which the breach occurs up to the day it received
the City's Notice of Termination, minus any offset from such payment representing the
Packet Pg. 252
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
-
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
R
F
P
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
City of San Luis Obispo
Specification No. 91364
-18-
City's damages from such breach. "Reasonable value" includes fees or charges for
goods or services as of the last milestone or task satisfactorily delivered or completed by
the Contractor as may be set forth in the Agreement payment schedule; compensation
for any other work, services or goods performed or provided by the Contractor shall be
based solely on the City's assessment of the value of the work-in-progress in completing
the overall work scope.
The City reserves the right to delay any such payment until completion or confirmed
abandonment of the project, as may be determined in the City's sole discretion, so as to
permit a full and complete accounting of costs. In no event, however, shall the
Contractor be entitled to receive in excess of the compensation quoted in its proposal.
The City also may terminate this contract at any time by giving the Contractor written
notice of such termination. Immediately upon receipt of notice of termination,
Contractor shall discontinue work on the project and incur no further obligations or
expenses. Contractor shall be paid the percentage of the total cost that corresponds to
the percentage of the document(s) that are satisfactorily completed prior to the
Contractor’s receipt of said termination.
Packet Pg. 253
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
-
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
R
F
P
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
City of San Luis Obispo
Specification No. 91364
-19-
SECTION G
SPECIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS
ENGINEERING, ARCHITECTURAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
1. Proposal Content. Your proposal must include the following information:
Submittal Forms
a. Proposal submittal summary.
b. Certificate of insurance.
c. References from at least three firms for whom you have provided similar
services.
Qualifications
d. Experience of your firm and those of sub-consultants in performing similar
services.
e. Resumes of the individuals who would be assigned to this project, including any
sub-consultants.
f. Standard hourly billing rates for the assigned staff, including any sub-consultants.
g. Statement and explanation of any instances where your firm or sub-consultant
has been removed from a project or disqualified from proposing on a project.
Work Program
h. Description of your approach to completing the work.
i. Tentative schedule by phase and task for completing the work.
j. Estimated hours for your staff in performing each major phase of the work,
including sub-consultants.
k. Services or data to be provided by the City.
l. Any other information that would assist us in making this contract award decision.
m. Description of assumptions critical to development of the response which may
impact cost or scope.
Proposal Length and Copies
n. Proposal length is not limited to a number of pages, however should only be as
long as required to be responsive to the RFP, including attachments and
supplemental materials.
o. Four copies of the proposal must be submitted along with a CD.
p. Two-sided printing is required.
2. Proposal Evaluation and Consultant Selection. Proposals will be evaluated by a
review committee and contract award process as follows:
Packet Pg. 254
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
-
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
R
F
P
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
City of San Luis Obispo
Specification No. 91364
-20-
Phase 1 – Written Proposal Review/Finalist Candidate Selection
The proposals will be evaluated based on the following criteria as evidenced in their
written proposals:
a. Understanding of the work required by the City.
b. Quality, clarity and responsiveness of the proposal.
c. Demonstrated competence and professional qualifications necessary for
successfully performing the work required by the City.
d. Recent team experience in successfully performing similar services.
e. Proposed approach in completing the work.
f. References.
g. Background and experience of the specific individuals to be assigned to this
project.
h. Effective use of City General funds.
Phase 2 – Oral Presentations/Interviews and Consultant Selection (at City’s
option)
At the City’s discretion, a group of finalist candidates may be asked to provide an oral
presentation to the review committee and answer questions about their proposal. The
purpose of this second phase is two-fold: to clarify and resolve any outstanding
questions or issues about the proposal; and to evaluate the proposer’s ability to clearly
and concisely present information orally. After evaluating the proposals and discussing
them further with the finalists or the tentatively selected contractor, the City reserves the
right to further negotiate the proposed work scope and/or method and amount of
compensation.
Contract award will be based on a combination of factors that represent the best overall
value for completing the work scope as determined by the City, including: the written
proposal criteria described above; results of background and reference checks; results
from the interviews and presentations phase; and proposed compensation.
3. Proposal Review and Award Schedule. The following is an outline of the anticipated
schedule for proposal review and contract award:
a. Issue RFP 8/21/15
b. Receive proposals 9/25/15
c. Complete proposal evaluation 10/2/15
d. Conduct finalist interviews 10/12/15- 10/16/15
e. Finalize staff recommendation 10/16/15
f. Execute contract 10/30/15
g. Start work 11/2/15
OWNERSHIP, DELIVERY AND PRESENTATION OF
WRITTEN OR GRAPHIC PRODUCTS
Packet Pg. 255
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
-
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
R
F
P
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
City of San Luis Obispo
Specification No. 91364
-21-
4. Ownership of Materials. All original drawings, plan documents and other materials
prepared by or in possession of the Contractor as part of the work or services under
these specifications shall become the permanent property of the City, and shall be
delivered to the City upon demand.
5. Release of Reports and Information. Any reports, information, data, or other material
given to, prepared by or assembled by the Contractor as part of the work or services
under these specifications shall be the property of City and shall not be made available
to any individual or organization by the Contractor without the prior written approval of
the City.
6. Copies of Reports and Information. If the City requests additional copies of reports,
drawings, specifications, or any other material in addition to what the Contractor is
required to furnish in limited quantities as part of the work or services under these
specifications, the Contractor shall provide such additional copies as are requested, and
City shall compensate the Contractor for the costs of duplicating of such copies at the
Contractor's direct expense.
7. Required Deliverable Products. The Contractor will be required to provide:
a. Five copies of deliverables addressing all elements of the work scope. City staff
will review any documents or materials provided by the Contractor and, where
necessary, the Contractor will be required to respond to staff comments and
make such changes as deemed appropriate.
b. One camera-ready original, unbound, each page printed on only one side,
including any original graphics in place and scaled to size, ready for
reproduction.
c. When computers have been used to produce materials submitted to the City as a
part of the work scope, the Contractor must provide the corresponding computer
files to the City, compatible with the following programs whenever possible
unless otherwise directed by the project manager:
Word Processing Word 2010
Spreadsheets Excel 2010
Desktop Publishing InDesign
Virtual Models Sketch Up
Digital Maps Geodatabase shape files in
State Plan Coordinate System as
specified by City GIS staff
Computer files must be on CD-ROM. Each diskette must be clearly labeled and
have a printed copy of the directory.
8. Attendance at Meetings and Hearings. As part of the work scope and included in the
contract price is attendance by the Contractor at up to six public meetings to present and
discuss its findings and recommendations. Contractor shall arrange as many "working"
meetings/conference calls with staff as necessary in performing work scope tasks.
Packet Pg. 256
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
-
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
R
F
P
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
City of San Luis Obispo
Specification No. 91364
-22-
ALTERNATIVE PROPOSALS
9. Alternative Proposals. The proposer may submit an alternative proposal (or
proposals) that it believes will also meet the City's project objectives but in a different
way. In this case, the proposer must provide an analysis of the advantages and
disadvantages of each of the alternatives, and discuss under what circumstances the
City would prefer one alternative to the other(s). If an alternative proposal is submitted,
the maximum length of the proposal may be expanded proportionately by the number of
alternatives submitted.
BID SPECIFICATION LIMITS
10. Accuracy of Specifications. The specifications for this project are believed by the City
to be accurate and to contain no affirmative misrepresentation or any concealment of
fact. Proposers are cautioned to undertake an independent analysis of any test results
in the specifications, as City does not guaranty the accuracy of its interpretation of test
results contained in the specifications package. In preparing its proposal, the proposer
and all subcontractors named in its proposal shall bear sole responsibility for proposal
preparation errors resulting from any misstatements or omissions in the plans and
specifications that could easily have been ascertained by examining either the project
site or accurate test data in the City's possession. Although the effect of ambiguities or
defects in the plans and specifications will be as determined by law, any patent
ambiguity or defect shall give rise to a duty of proposer to inquire prior to proposal
submittal. Failure to so inquire shall cause any such ambiguity or defect to be construed
against the proposer. An ambiguity or defect shall be considered patent if it is of such a
nature that the proposer, assuming reasonable skill, ability and diligence on its part,
knew or should have known of the existence of the ambiguity or defect. Furthermore,
failure of the proposer or subcontractors to notify City in writing of specification or plan
defects or ambiguities prior to proposal submittal shall waive any right to assert said
defects or ambiguities subsequent to submittal of the proposal.
To the extent that these specifications constitute performance specifications, the City
shall not be liable for costs incurred by the successful proposer to achieve the project’s
objective or standard beyond the amounts provided there for in the proposal.
In the event that, after awarding the contract, any dispute arises as a result of any actual
or alleged ambiguity or defect in the plans and/or specifications, or any other matter
whatsoever, Contractor shall immediately notify the City in writing, and the Contractor
and all subcontractors shall continue to perform, irrespective of whether or not the
ambiguity or defect is major, material, minor or trivial, and irrespective of whether or not
a change order, time extension, or additional compensation has been granted by City.
Failure to provide the hereinbefore described written notice within one (1) working day of
contractor's becoming aware of the facts giving rise to the dispute shall constitute a
waiver of the right to assert the causative role of the defect or ambiguity in the plans or
specifications concerning the dispute.
Packet Pg. 257
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
-
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
R
F
P
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
City of San Luis Obispo
Specification No. 91364
-23-
SECTION H
FORM OF AGREEMENT
AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into in the City of San Luis Obispo on [day, date, year]
by and between the CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as City,
and [CONSULTANT’S NAME IN CAPITAL LETTERS], hereinafter referred to as Contractor.
W I T N E S S E T H:
WHEREAS, on [date], City requested proposals for an update to the Land Use and Circulation
Elements, Environmental Impact Report, and Fiscal Analysis per Specification No. 91364 (project); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to said request, Contractor submitted a proposal that was accepted by City
for said project;
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual promises, obligations and covenants
hereinafter contained, the parties hereto agree as follows:
1. TERM. The term of this Agreement shall be from the date this Agreement is made and
entered, as first written above, until acceptance or completion of said project.
2. INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE. City Specification No. 91364 and Consultant’s
proposal dated [date], are hereby incorporated in and made a part of this Agreement.
3. CITY'S OBLIGATIONS. For providing the services as specified in this Agreement, City
will pay and Contractor shall receive therefore compensation in a total sum not to exceed [$
100,000.00. Consultant shall be eligible for compensation installments after completion of milestone
Tasks 1-5 as shown in the attached scope of work and payment schedule.
4. CONSULTANT’S OBLIGATIONS. For and in consideration of the payments and
agreements hereinbefore mentioned to be made and performed by City, Contractor agrees with City to do
everything required by this Agreement and the said specification as described in Exhibit A (RFP) attached
hereto and incorporated into this Agreement and to comply with the terms set forth in Exhibits F, G, and I
attached hereto and incorporated into this Agreement.
Packet Pg. 258
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
-
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
R
F
P
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
City of San Luis Obispo
Specification No. 91364
-24-
5. AMENDMENTS. Any amendment, modification or variation from the terms of this
Agreement shall be in writing and shall be effective only upon approval by the Community Development
Director of the City.
6. COMPLETE AGREEMENT. This written Agreement, including all writings specifically
incorporated herein by reference, shall constitute the complete agreement between the parties hereto.
No oral agreement, understanding or representation not reduced to writing and specifically incorporated
herein shall be of any force or effect, nor shall any such oral agreement, understanding or representation
be binding upon the parties hereto.
7. NOTICE. All written notices to the parties hereto shall be sent by United States mail,
postage prepaid by registered or certified mail addressed as follows:
City Derek Johnson
City of San Luis Obispo
919 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Consultant Name
Address
8. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT. Both City and Contractor do covenant that
each individual executing this agreement on behalf of each party is a person duly authorized and
empowered to execute Agreements for such party.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this instrument to be executed the day
and year first above written.
ATTEST: CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
________________________________ By:_____________________________________
City Clerk Community Development Director
APPROVED AS TO FORM: CONSULTANT
________________________________ By: _____________________________________
City Attorney Name of CAO / President
Its: CAO / President
Packet Pg. 259
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
-
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
R
F
P
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
City of San Luis Obispo
Specification No. 91364
-25-
SECTION I
INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS:
Consultant Services
The Contractor shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for
injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of
the work hereunder by the Contractor, its agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors.
Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as:
1. Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence form CG 0001).
2. Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile Liability, code
1 (any auto).
3. Workers' Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability
Insurance.
4. Errors and Omissions Liability insurance as appropriate to the consultant's profession.
Minimum Limits of Insurance. Contractor shall maintain limits no less than:
1. General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property
damage. If Commercial General Liability or other form with a general aggregate limit is used,
either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general
aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit.
2. Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage.
3. Employer's Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease.
4. Errors and Omissions Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence.
Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared
to and approved by the City. At the option of the City, either: the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such
deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers;
or the Contractor shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim
administration and defense expenses.
Other Insurance Provisions. The general liability and automobile liability policies are to contain, or be
endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
1. The City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers are to be covered as insureds as
respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Contractor; products
and completed operations of the Contractor; premises owned, occupied or used by the Contractor;
or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Contractor. The coverage shall contain
no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, official,
employees, agents or volunteers.
2. For any claims related to this project, the Contractor's insurance coverage shall be primary
insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers. Any
Packet Pg. 260
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
-
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
R
F
P
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
City of San Luis Obispo
Specification No. 91364
-26-
insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents or
volunteers shall be excess of the Contractor's insurance and shall not contribute with it.
3. The Contractor's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or
suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability.
4. Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be
suspended, voided, canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty
(30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the
City.
Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating of no
less than A:VII.
Verification of Coverage. Contractor shall furnish the City with a certificate of insurance showing
maintenance of the required insurance coverage. Original endorsements effecting general liability and
automobile liability coverage required by this clause must also be provided. The endorsements are to be
signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. All endorsements are to be
received and approved by the City before work commences.
Packet Pg. 261
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
-
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
R
F
P
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
City of San Luis Obispo
Specification No. 91364
-27-
SECTION J
Proposal Submittal Forms:
Consultants
The undersigned declares that she or he has carefully examined Specification No. 91364,
including the description of the Grant work program which is hereby made a part of this
proposal; is thoroughly familiar with its contents; is authorized to represent the proposing firm;
and agrees to perform the specified work for the following cost quoted in full:
Description 2015-16 2016-17
Task 1
Task 2
Task 3
Task 4
Task 5
Task 6
Task 7
Task 8
Other Costs (please specify)
TOTAL $ $
Certificate of insurance attached; insurance company’s A.M. Best rating:
__________________.
Firm Name and Address
Contact Phone
Signature of Authorized Representative
Date
Packet Pg. 262
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
-
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
R
F
P
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
City of San Luis Obispo
Specification No. 91138
-28-
REFERENCES
Number of years engaged in providing the services included within the scope of the
specifications under the present business name: .
Describe fully the last three contracts performed by your firm that demonstrate your ability to
provide the services included with the scope of the specifications. Attach additional pages if
required. The City reserves the right to contact each of the references listed for additional
information regarding your firm's qualifications.
Reference No. 1
Customer Name
Contact Individual
Telephone & FAX number
Street Address
City, State, Zip Code
Description of services provided
including contract amount, when
provided and project outcome
Reference No. 2
Customer Name
Contact Individual
Telephone & FAX number
Street Address
City, State, Zip Code
Description of services provided
including contract amount, when
provided and project outcome
Reference No. 3
Customer Name
Contact Individual
Telephone & FAX number
Street Address
City, State, Zip Code
Description of services provided
including contract amount, when
provided and project outcome
Packet Pg. 263
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
-
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
R
F
P
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
City of San Luis Obispo
Specification No. 91138
-29-
STATEMENT OF PAST CONTRACT DISQUALIFICATIONS
The proposer shall state whether it or any of its officers or employees who have a proprietary
interest in it, has ever been disqualified, removed, or otherwise prevented from bidding on, or
completing a federal, state, or local government project because of the violation of law, a safety
regulation, or for any other reason, including but not limited to financial difficulties, project
delays, or disputes regarding work or product quality, and if so to explain the circumstances.
Do you have any disqualification as described in the above paragraph to declare?
Yes No
If yes, explain the circumstances.
Executed on at _______________________________________
under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of California, that the foregoing is true and
correct.
______________________________________
Signature of Authorized Proposer Representative
Packet Pg. 264
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
-
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
R
F
P
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
City of San Luis Obispo
Specification No. 91138
-30-
SECTION K END NOTES
1 LUE 4.27 Expansion of Downtown Plaza: The City shall explore the full or partial closure and re-
design of the following street segments to effectively extend, either permanently or for special events,
Mission Plaza on:
A. Broad Street between Palm and Monterey Streets, and
B. Monterey Street between the two connections with Broad Street.
2 LUE 4.1: Downtown is the community’s urban center serving as the cultural, social, entertainment, and
political center of the City for its residents, as well as home for those who live in its historic
neighborhoods.
3 LUE 4.2 Downtown Residential: Downtown is not only a commercial district, but also a neighborhood.
Its residential uses contribute to the character of the area, allow a 24-hour presence which enhances
security and help the balance between jobs and housing in the community.
LUE 4.2.1 Existing and New Dwellings: The City shall use the following when evaluating development
in the Downtown area:
A. Existing residential uses within and around the commercial core should be protected, and new
ones should be developed.
B. Dwellings should be provided for a variety of households.
C. Dwellings should be interspersed with commercial uses.
D. All new, large commercial projects should include residential uses.
E. Commercial core properties may serve as receiver sites for transfer of development credits,
thereby having higher residential densities than otherwise allowed (see Policies 6.4.5 and 6.4.6).
LUE 4.20.2 Upper Floor Dwellings: Existing residential uses shall be preserved and new ones
encouraged above the street level. This new housing will include a range of options and affordability
levels.
4 LUE 4.4 Public Gatherings: Downtown should have spaces to accommodate public meetings,
seminars, classes, socialization and similar activities in conjunction with other uses. Downtown should
provide a setting which is festive and comfortable for public gatherings.
LUE 4.5 Walking Environment
The City shall plan and manage Downtown to include safe, interesting places for walking and pleasant
places for sitting. To this end:
A. Mid-block walkways, courtyards, and interior malls should be well lit and integrated with new
and remodeled buildings, while preserving continuous building faces on most blocks.
B. Downtown streets should provide adequate space for pedestrians.
C. There should be a nearly continuous tree canopy along sidewalks, and planters should provide
additional foliage and flowers near public gathering areas.
D. Public Art should be placed along pedestrian paths.
E. Traffic calming and pedestrian safety should be enhanced, where appropriate, through such
features as road tables, pavement changes, bulb outs and scramble intersection signals.
F. Landscaping should mitigate harsh micro-climates.
5 LUE 4.10 Open Places and Views: The City shall enhance the Downtown to include carefully located
open places where people can rest and enjoy views of the surrounding hills; and outdoor spaces where
people are completely separated from vehicle traffic, in addition to Mission Plaza. Opportunities include
extensions of Mission Plaza, a few new plazas, and selected street closures.
LUE 4.11 Downtown Green Space: The City shall increase Downtown green space and public parks,
including pocket parks and parklets, as the number of people living Downtown increases.
Packet Pg. 265
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
2
-
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
R
F
P
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
O'°'uuiI IIIIII uI`NUIIIUIII "J f La„ P
M "
ITEM
O41.3
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT'
From: Arnold Jonas, Community Development Director °
Prepared by: Whitney McIlvaine, Associate Planner
Subject:. Adoption of a downtown design plan.
CAO RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution (1) adopting A Conceptual Physical Plan for the City's Center as along
range plan for thephysical development of thedowntown, and (2) approving a mitigated
negative declaration of environmental impact.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF
Staff recommends that the proposed downtown design plan be adopted by the City Council
as design guidelines for both private and public developmentprojects in thedowntown. In
response to commentsmade bythe public and advisory bodies, somechanges to the plan
text and graphics are recommended, primarily for clarification. A list of changes is attached
to the draft resolution for adoption. To implement theplan, staff proposes:
Incorporation of appropriate policies, guidelines, andstandards of A Conceptual
Physical Plan for the City's Center into all relevant City documents affecting future
downtown development, including general plan elements, zoning regulations, ARC
guidelines, the parking management and bicycle facilities plans, and engineering
standards.
s Budget consideration of City projects and relatedproperty acquisitionsspecified in
the downtown plan as part of the City's capital improvement program,beginning with
the 1993-94 budget.
Separate environmental review of site specific development projects at the time of
their proposal.
PlanningCommissionreview and a status report to the CityCouncil every two years
to keep the plan current.
DISCUSSION
Plan History
Discussions during the General Planupdate bythe downtown area citizens' committee
1
Packet Pg. 266
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
3
-
1
9
9
3
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
a
d
o
p
t
i
n
g
D
T
C
P
l
a
n
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
city of san Luis oBispo
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
concluded that some type of plan document was needed to weld together all of the
individual studies that have been focused on parts of the downtown, but not on the
downtown as a whole. In late 1990, the City Council authorized the preparation of a
Downtown Plan and directed the City Administrator to establish a committee of community
design professionals who would be willing to do the work on a voluntary basis. The
administrator appointed Charles Crotser, Rodney Levine, Andrew Merriam, Pierre
Rademaker, and Kenneth Schwartz to be the design team. To assist the design team,
representatives were invited from a broad spectrum of the community to meet periodically
to presentrepresentative viewpoints, offer adviceand critique the plan as it developed idea .
by idea. (A list of participants is attached.) Key staff from both the City and the County
participated from time to time in providing information and project evaluation. A local
consulting firm,Crawford, Multari, and Starr,provided staff assistance, assembling data and
establishingbasicmap and graphic formatting. Copies of theposter exhibit,A Conceptual
Physical Plan for the City's Center,are available at the Community Development Department
in City Hall.
Previous Review
The completed design plan was presented to a joint meeting of the Planning Commission
and City Council in the spring of 1992. TheCouncil then referred thedesign plan to the
PlanningCommission and staff for more detailed analysis and public review prior to
bringing the plan back to the Council for final action. ThePlanning Commissionconducted
a series of study sessions during the summer and early fall of 1992 with members of the
downtown design committee. OnOctober 28, 1992, at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission, staff presented a summary evaluation of the plan concepts. The Commission's
review concluded with direction to staff to solicit specific comments from the Architectural
Review Commission (ARC), the Cultural Heritage Committee (CHC), the Parks and
Recreation Commission (PRC), and the City Traffic Engineer. A summary of submitted
comments is attached to this report.
Plan Format
The downtown design plan has beendeveloped in partto provide property owners,
developers, and interested citizens (as well as staff and decision makers) with a single
document which graphically illustrates a long range vision for the downtown and provides
guidelines for public and private investment. The plan proposal is presented in its entirety
on a 26" x 39" poster. The face side illustrates a planview of buildings, streets, and
pedestrian ways, complemented by three-dimensional sketches of possibledesign solutions
for selected parts of the plan. The reverse side is devoted primarily to a verbaldescription
of the plan, its goals and objectives. The design committee approach toplanformat was
specifically intended to promote display of the plan in the hope that it would be more
2
g
Packet Pg. 267
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
3
-
1
9
9
3
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
a
d
o
p
t
i
n
g
D
T
C
P
l
a
n
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
City Of San Leis OBISPO
NUNN COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
frequently referenced.
It may be desirable toslightly alter some of the future printings so that the poster can be
folded into an 8.5" X 11" size. Staff recommends development of a separate 8.5" X 11"
handout, which_ cross references plan concepts with the specific sections of implementing
documents, such as the General Plan and the zoning ordinance.
Implementation Time
To betterclarify the timeline associated with the plan, the design team is recommending the
following language beadded to the text of the plan:
The plan is a long-term blueprint meant to be "time neutral" That is, it does not
propose a specificdate by which the plan or plan components would be accomplished
The plan has been designed as aguideline so that both private and public investment
in the downtown couldwork to be mutually reinforcing. The only reference to time is
contained in the chart which identifies key properties that the City should acquire. These
times are not meant to be rigid
Use of the Plan in Project Evaluation
While the plan view andperspective graphics of A Conceptual Physical Plan for the City's
Center enablean inspiring "big picture" look at howthe design,guidelines might translate
into a three-dimensional environment, the site specific detail alsotends to convey a degree
of precision and a sense of finality that,withoutfurther clarification,may prematurely freeze
design solutions or preclude consideration of alternatives.
Comments made so far, as part of the review process, suggest that the plan would best serve
the community if implementation strongly encouraged individual development projects to
be consistent with thevision and goals described by the plan, but did not confine design
solutions to only those land uses andsite development configurations depicted by the plan
graphics. This approach would be consistent with the intent of the design team. They have
recommended additional language to be included in the plan for clarification:
The plan is meant to be conceptuag yet the design team felt that the delineation of the
plant should carry a note of realism. Hence building footprints have been illustrated to
convey that realism. These building footprints are offered as suggestions and are not
meant to be fired More important are the connectingpedestrian linkages created by the
suggested building outlines.
3
0?
Packet Pg. 268
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
3
-
1
9
9
3
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
a
d
o
p
t
i
n
g
D
T
C
P
l
a
n
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
mxoiliixlp city of san lues oBispo
0i;% COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Environmental Review
Because the conceptual design plan (1) is nottime specific and likely to take decades to
implement, (2) is intended to be primarily advisory and conceptual in nature, and (3) will
not in itself effect any changes to the physical environment, the attached initial study
concludes that the plan will not.have a significant negative environmental impact. Individual
implementing projects will be subject toenvironmental review at the time they are proposed.
Recommended Changes to Plan Text andGraRhics
Minor changes to the plan's text and graphics are recommended, primarily to clarify the
plan's intent and correct misprints in the original document. Changes, as recommended by
the Planning Commission with concurrence from the design team, are attached to the draft
resolution.
Changes to the plan's text address the plan's intended timeline; the issue of literal versus
conceptual interpretation;preservation of historic structures; San Luis Creek as a biological
resource as well as a recreational resource; parking; and alternative-transportation.
Changes to plan graphics would clarify traffic direction onMarsh and Higuera streets;
correct the reference to perspective drawings #7 and #8 on the color-illustrated side of the
poster; more accurately reflect the footprints of existing buildings in the proposed Heritage
Park area; and show access for vehicleson Morro Street between Higuera and Monterey
streets.
The Council may want to suggest other changes to plan-view and/or perspectivegraphics
1.Council members agree that changes should be made to any of the plan's
design concepts, such as Heritage Park; or
2.Council members would be uncomfortable approving projects as rendered in
plan view or in the perspective sketches.
Fiscal Impacts / Public Investment
Theplan advocates a number of City projects and related property acquisitions, which are
divided into three categories according to their implementation priority over time: short
term, midterm, and long range projects. Because of current budgetconstraints, the City
Finance Director has recommended against establishing a separate capital improvement
fund.for public projects and property acquisition atthis time, unless a funding source other
thanthe City's general fund is identified.
4
Packet Pg. 269
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
3
-
1
9
9
3
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
a
d
o
p
t
i
n
g
D
T
C
P
l
a
n
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
1111111$11011111 CTCy of san L„A1S OBISPO
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
However, comments submitted to the PlanningCommission have emphasized the need to
demonstrate tangiblesupport for thedowntown plan by identifyingCity projects which can
be accomplished in the short term given current fiscal constraints. One potential
demonstration project might be a redesign of Garden Street for one-way traffic and
installation of related pedestrian and bicycle improvements. (Listed as item 6 under short
term City projects in the text of the plan.) This projectwould be financially feasible if the
City could secure a sufficient grant allocation throughfederal transportation programs to
cover project costs.
The PlanningCommission supports improvements to Garden Street as an initial
implementing publicproject, with concurrence from the downtown design team, Garden
Streetmerchants, and the Business Improvement Association.
ALTERNATIVES
As an alternative to the CAO recommendation, the Council may:
1. Continue the item for further discussion, with specific directiontostaffto provide
additionalinformation.
2. Adopt a modified version of the resolution and/or recommended changes to plan
text and graphics.
Attachments
draft resolution for adoption
list of recommended modificationsto the plan
summary of advisory comments
minutes of the 3/24/93 pc meeting (forthcoming)
initial environmental study
In the Council packets:
8.5" x 11" copy of plan text
wmL-cc\downtown
r
5
a -5Packet Pg. 270
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
3
-
1
9
9
3
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
a
d
o
p
t
i
n
g
D
T
C
P
l
a
n
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
i
DRAFT RESOLUTION FOR PLANADOPTION
j
a-bPacket Pg. 271
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
3
-
1
9
9
3
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
a
d
o
p
t
i
n
g
D
T
C
P
l
a
n
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
Resolution No. 1993 Series)
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CTTY OF SAN ItUIS OBISPO
ADOPTING A CONCEP'T'UAL PHYSICAL PLAN FOR THE CITY'S CENTER
AS A LONG RANGE VISION FOR THE DOWNTOWN AND
A GUIDE FOR PUBLIC AND PRIVATE INVESTMENT IN THE DOWNTOWN
WHEREAS,A Conceptual Physical Plan for the City's Center, hereinafter referred to
as the "Downtown Plan", has been prepared and presentedby the Council appointed
Downtown Plan Committee; and
WHEREAS, the design decisions incorporated within the Downtown Plan are the
product of ideasgenerated both by the Committee and by a representative panel of citizens
who interacted with the Committee during the 15 monthplan development process; and
WHEREAS, the Downtown Plan has subsequentlybeen reviewed and evaluated by
staff, .the Planning Commission, the Architectural Review Commission, the Parks and
Recreation Commission, the Cultural Heritage Committee, the City Traffic Engineer, and
the public, and
WHEREAS, the City Council has received comments and recommendations, which
will be considered at eachstep of implementation, from those who have reviewed and
evaluated the Downtown Plan;
THEREFORE, the City Council resolves as follows:
SECTION 1. Environmental Determination. The Council hereby approves a
Negative Declaration for the DowntownPlan, finding that the plan will not have a negative
impact on the environment, and noting that individual public and private projects in the
downtown shall be subject to CEQA requirements for environmental reviewat the time of
proposal.
SECTION 2. Plan Adoption. The Council hereby adopts A Conceptual Plan for the
City's Center, including approved modifications as recorded in the minutes of this meeting
and attached as the "Summary of Recommended Modifications to the Downtown Plan."
SECTION 3. Implementation. The City Council directs appropriate staff and
commissions to incorporate relevant components of A Conceptual.Physical Plan for the City's
Center into all City documents affecting future downtown development, specifically:
1.Design concepts proposed in the Downtown Plan will be included in theupdate of
the Architectural Review Guidelines.
Packet Pg. 272
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
3
-
1
9
9
3
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
a
d
o
p
t
i
n
g
D
T
C
P
l
a
n
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
2. Appropriate parts of the Downtown Plan shall be incorporated into theupdate of the
Land Use, Housing, Circulation, Open Space, and Parksand Recreation elements of
the General Plan.
3. The Zoning Ordinance shall be updated consistent with downtowndevelopment
policies as amended into the General Plan.
4. The Parking Management Plan and the BicycleFacilities Plan will be updatedto
address key transportation concepts presented in the Downtown Plan.
5. The City projects and related property acquisitionsspecified in the Downtown Plan
will be considered as part of the City's capitalimprovement program.
6. Individual public and private projects in the downtown will be subject to CEQA
requirements for environmental review at the time of proposal.
7. To ensure the plan remains current, the Planning Commission will review the
Downtown Plan every two years and submit a report to the City Council on the status
of the plan, including any recommendedtext or graphicsrevisions to keep the plan
current with changes in economics, transportation technology, retailing, community
tastes, and any other variables which may affect the vision of the downtown over
time.
On motion of seconded by
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this day of 1993.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
a-Packet Pg. 273
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
3
-
1
9
9
3
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
a
d
o
p
t
i
n
g
D
T
C
P
l
a
n
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
APPROVED:
City trative Officer
orn
Packet Pg. 274
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
3
-
1
9
9
3
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
a
d
o
p
t
i
n
g
D
T
C
P
l
a
n
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
LIST OF RECOMMENDEDMODIFICATIONS TO THE PLAN
07-
Ar)Packet Pg. 275
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
3
-
1
9
9
3
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
a
d
o
p
t
i
n
g
D
T
C
P
l
a
n
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO PLAN TEXT
Heritage Park
The implementation suggested in the plan to achieve a mid-block promenade, reads:
As a condition of newdevelopment, the rear 25 feet of all lots should be offered to the
City for dedication as a public right-of-way.
As described, the implementation is notreflective of requirements needed to achieve the
mid-block walkwaydepicted on the plan because (1) the rear lot lines are staggered and (2)
an additional dedicationprovision would benecessary to create the circular park at the
terminus of the walkway. (Area 10 on the face of the poster.) To enable configuration of
the walkway and terminus as shown on the plan, staff recommendsthe following alternative
language:
As a condition of new development, propertydedication should be required for all lots
in the block bound by Nipomo, Marsh, Carmel, and Higuera streets, in order to create
a mid-block pedestrian right-of-way and a terminus park as illustrated.
Alternative Transportation
A number of advisorycomments stress the importance of alternativetransportation modes
as one of the best ways to improve the pedestrian experience. Staff recommends the text
of the plan be modified, as suggested below, in acknowledgement of these comments, and
to better reinforce the desirability of accommodating alternative transportation as a way of
relieving traffic congestion and improving access to downtown.
replace key concepts "a" and "c" under "transportation" with:
Minimize vehicle congestion in the downtown core by locating parking facilities at the
core's pen'pheryalong key streets that enter the city and by encouraging use of alternative
modes of transportation.
Parking Structures
Comments have questioned the need for locating ten new parking structures as shown on
the plan. Additional structureswere deemed necessary by the plan designers to offset the
loss of existing surface parking and to minimize vehicle congestion in the downtown core.
The planidentifies key sites alongthe most commonly travelled streets into the downtown
which the designers felt were best suited to accommodate peripheral parking. Because the
number of structures will ultimately be based on future parking demand, the"P"designations
on the plan should be described as 'potential parking structure sites," which would not.
preclude alternative site development should the demand for parking be less than the plan
anticipates.
Packet Pg. 276
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
3
-
1
9
9
3
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
a
d
o
p
t
i
n
g
D
T
C
P
l
a
n
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
Surface Parking
During Planning Commissionreview of the design plan, it was suggested that elimination
of surface parkingmight not be the best solution in all cases; that retaining or allowing
small surface lots may be appropriate in some cases. Therefore, the following alternative
language is suggested:
under primary goal No. 6:
EUmbume-.Encvurqa oggo t l surface parking within the core area to allow infill of
commercial and mixed use functions.
under standards for Area 2:
trrage.tn,lt f tr aCegarTrrn wi#retu servtc r,parfc a ctrrd use'.
Mission Plaza Extension
Concerns have beenraised regarding the relocation ordemolition of historic structures in .
the Mission Plaza extension area to makeway for new cultural facilities as suggestedby
both the plan's text and perspective drawing No. 2 (Area 3). Plan designers stress that the
plan is a very long range vision, perhaps 50 years or more into the future. Given such a
timeline, it is reasonable to think that the neighborhood characteralong Monterey Street
will change significantly in response to community needs and desires for expanded cultural
facilities. In the near term, conserving historic structures in place is the bestway to ensure
their continuing contribution to community heritage:
For consistency with existing City policy related to historic preservation, the following
language should be incorporated into the "standards" for Area 3:
Existinghistoric structures along Monterey Street, identified in the Historic Resource
Program, should be maintained and readapted toaccommodate new culturalfacilities
where feasible and desirable. Relocation or demolition should be considered only when
it can be demonstratedto the satisfaction of the City Council that adaptive reuse of
existingstructures is not economical, nor functional; nor consistent with the goals of the
Mission Plaza extension.
San Luis Creek
In order to better acknowlege San Luis Creek as a biological resource in addition to its
aesthetic and recreational value, the text of the plan should be amended as follows:
under primary goal No. 9 - as written:
a-aPacket Pg. 277
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
3
-
1
9
9
3
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
a
d
o
p
t
i
n
g
D
T
C
P
l
a
n
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
Enhance San Luis Creek as avisual resource.extend its accessibility within a compatible
setting. J
alternative language:
Enhance San Luis Creek as a visualaraic`rt resourcearr ertoerrt
under key concepts "pedestrian access and environment, d' - additional language is
highlighted:
access along San Luis CreekExtendpedestrianaccng trttnttt{terfe ptt+2 tv<xarrur
under key concepts "community character in a park,a"-additional language is highlighted:
Open up the creeks to more visual and physical access 'rpvrde ctzerts along the creek
fai-puff access,and ache ecr atranz anrl`tes ezcx ether mus ttr tsrxat acc sx:only
Gateway Arch
At an earlier Planning Commission meeting, the following modification was suggested:
under key concepts "gateways to the downtown, a":
Provide an entry arch ORNMON"N on lowerMarsh Street or near the freeway
off ramp. (A similar change would benecessary under"public projects" for Area 14.)
Miscellaneous Changes to Plan Text
The following revisions to the text of the plan are recommended to clarify or reinforce plan
concepts consistent with commentsreceived and recommended implementation.
to clarify "anchor" under primary goal 10, add:
Anchors may consist of a single department store or a complex of small stores.
under primary goal 15, include language recommended by the ARC:
Encourage clear transitions (zone boundaries) at mid-block rather than at the street.
to clarify the City role in funding projects, add under"implementation: public investment":
The adjacent table recommends priorities for cityacquisitions and public projectset
o avarlabt7rty rf,nds
x_ 12
Packet Pg. 278
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
3
-
1
9
9
3
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
a
d
o
p
t
i
n
g
D
T
C
P
l
a
n
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
consistent with staffs recommendation to retain theposter format of the plan and publish
a separate cross-reference toimplementing documents, revise textunder "implementation:
adoption of standardsand guidelines" as follows:
paragraph l -
Standards should be incorporated into the General Planand then referenced in the zoning
ordinance and € ersl¢rnerirt g:.da: nbx:;;J awsw.w:Nxa:....:'w>%^w:v;:.i:"•+.::.::o:i.::a:::o:::.as i:2v:a:
paragraph 2 -
Guidelines should also be included in the General Plan,
and be considered by staff, advisorycommissions and the City Council when reviewing private
and public projects.
A separate handout, which crossreferences plan concepts with specific sections of implementing
documents, shall also be available for property owners and other interested parties.
l
ij
Packet Pg. 279
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
3
-
1
9
9
3
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
a
d
o
p
t
i
n
g
D
T
C
P
l
a
n
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
RECOMMENDED CHANGES TOPLAN GRAPHICS
Changes in plan graphicsare recommended to:
1.Clarify traffic direction onMarsh and Higuera streets.
2.Correct the reference to perspective drawings#7 and #8 on the color-illustrated side
of theposter.
3.More accurately reflect the footprints of existing buildings in the proposed Heritage
Park area, which could be retained, consistent with development concept for.Area
10.
4.Show access for vehicleson Morro Street between Higuera and Monterey streets.
a -Packet Pg. 280
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
3
-
1
9
9
3
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
a
d
o
p
t
i
n
g
D
T
C
P
l
a
n
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
I1
SUMMARY OF COMMENTS
i
Packet Pg. 281
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
3
-
1
9
9
3
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
a
d
o
p
t
i
n
g
D
T
C
P
l
a
n
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
SUMMARY OF COMMENTS RECEIVED REGARDING THE DOWNTOWN PLAN
Overall, the commentsreceived from advisorybodies, other agencies, and individuals are
very thoughtful and reflect a strong and shareddesire to ensure the continued vitality of the
city's downtown. Comments range from the very specific to the broadlyconceptual. Taken
together, they highlight the magnitude of the conceptual plan's vision. A summary of
comments are grouped below by source. Meeting minutes and comments as submitted are
available in the Community Development Department for further reference.
Architectural Review Commission (ARC)
ARC members agree that the plan will be, and already has been, best used as an "idea tool."
Commissioners explicitly requested that their support and praise for the downtown plan, and
the work that has gone into creating it,be clearly relayed to the Planning Commission. The
ARC reviewed the downtown plan attwo separate meetings. After much discussion, the
ARC formulated the following list of recommendations:
1. . Emphasize Higuera Street as the "Main Street" and pedestrian center of downtown.
Vehicles should not beaccommodated atthe expense of pedestrian amenities.
Pedestrianamenities such as bulb-outs and street furniture should have a high
priority amongthe capital improvements proposed by the conceptual design plan.
Improvements along Higuera Street are themost logicalstarting pointfor physical
implementation of the plan. Accommodating increased pedestrian traffic along the
streetfrontage is more desirable and more feasible thanchannelling it into mid-block
pedestrian ways.
2.Encourage paseos only where they (1) serve a function, such as a logical short cut,
delivery access, and as access to upper level housing; or (2) where theyoccur
naturally, such as along the creek. Emphasize development of creek walkways and
viewingpoints, over the creation of new paseos.
3.Emphasize variety and hierarchy among streetscapes and open space areas to .
enhance place recognition andway finding. Encourage each street, paseo, plaza, and
pocket park to develop its own unique character. Garden Street provides a good
example of this suggestion.
4.Utilize parks as the primary gateway expression.
5.Encourage clear transitions (zone boundaries) betweenthe downtown and
surrounding residential neighborhoods at midblock rather than at the street.
6.Intersperse lodging andhousing throughout the downtown, but especiallyaround
open space amenities such as creeks, parks, and plazas. Because of its proximity to
the Mission Plaza, theBlackstone Hotel should be designated for residential use.
61 -17Packet Pg. 282
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
3
-
1
9
9
3
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
a
d
o
p
t
i
n
g
D
T
C
P
l
a
n
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
7.Relieve the pressure on Mission Plaza as the only large outdoor gathering place by
creating a public plaza on the Court Street site. Court. Street Plaza could be
designed as a more urban space - mostly hardscape andseating punctuated by shade
trees -in contrast to the more serene, park-like setting of Mission Plaza. The Court
Street Plaza could work in conjunction with theproposed resurfacing of Monterey
Street near the CountyGovernment Center for large scale events, or just on its own
as a gathering placeand for small scale events. Improvements to the plaza could be
organized as a voluntary community work program..
8. Emphasize a more natural riparian setting for the creek area extension of Mission
Plaza. Considerloosening up the underlying street grid if Broad and Monterey
streets areclosed to create a more park-like setting. At least in the near term, retain
theexisting residential structures along Monterey Street.
9. Due to current constraintson public spending, physical implementation should focus
on aspects of the plan which can be (1) "tested" - such as, trying one-way traffic on
Garden Street and selectively expanding the sidewalk area along Higuera Street - or
2) accomplished with the help of community volunteers -such as, designand phased
installation of Court Street Plaza.
Cultural Heritage Committee (CHC)
The CHC focused primarily onthe Heritage Park concept and other aspects of the plan
related to historical preservation. TheCommittee supportstheexpansion of the Historical
Museum. The Committee also supportstheconcept of a receiver site for historic structures
thatmight otherwise be demolished. However, individual committee members expressed
reservations about the ultimate success of the Heritage Park concept as described bythe
plan. The major concerns focused on (1) thedanger of Heritage Park becoming an excuse
to move historic structures rather then conserve them in place; (2) the difficulty of providing
architectural continuity and asense of authenticity and (3) the feasibility and fiscal impact
of achievingthe right-of-way necessary to create the mid-block pedestrian way. Additional
suggestions were made to:
Consider an alternative location outsidethe downtown to function as a
receiver site for historic structures.
Conserve historic structuresalong Monterey Street in place rather than
transplant them to a heritage park.
Incorporate historic markers for self-guided walking tours into any system of
pedestrian directory signs.
Provide a strong transportation link_ between CalPoly cultural facilities and
the downtown.
Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC)
The PRCreviewconcentrated onthe "City in a Park" concept. TheCommission endorses .
1) preservation and enhancement of San Luis Creek; (2) the extension of Mission Plaza,
APacket Pg. 283
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
3
-
1
9
9
3
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
a
d
o
p
t
i
n
g
D
T
C
P
l
a
n
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
which the PRC suggests be given the highest priority; and (3) landscaping of major streets
and pedestrian ways as a vital component of the city's urban forest. The PRC is specifically _.
recommending that: J
Public restrooms be provided throughout the downtown.
Active play areas for children outside of the creek area be provided.
Protected areas for wildlife habitat along thecreek be provided.
The open space and parking at Higuera and Nipomo streets be retained,
rather than replaced by commercial development as shown on the plan.
The proposed mid-block paseos be reconsidered, in favor of more emphasis
on improvements to existing sidewalk areas.
Thetransit terminal at Santa Rosa Street be reconsidered.
Commissioner Kourakis also submitted individual comments, recommending, in addition to .
ideas reiterated in other comments:
Diversifying the species of street trees.
Identifying stages of the plan to be completed in contiguousgeographic
sections. .
Providing a stronger link betweenthe governmetn center, Court Street, and
Mission Plaza.
Traffic Engineer
TheCity Traffic Engineer recommends that the downtownplan be adopted as a conceptual
guideline as it relates to traffic and circulation. Implementation of proposed public works
projects, such as street closures and realignments, street surfacing, median installations, and
bulb-outs, should beaccomplished as part of the. CapitalImprovement Program (CIP).
Detailed studies of safetyand circulation impacts should be done at the time individual
projects are proposed for CIP funding. As one of the first work items, the engineer is
recommendingreview and, if necessary, modifications to City standards for bulb-outs,
sidewalk and street surfacing, and street furniture, including benches, lighting, public
directional signs, treewells,fountains and trash receptacles. The Engineer's comments also
point out specific safetyand traffic concerns related to traffic flow, pedestrian activity, street
closures and realignments, and medians.
Other Comments Received
The Air Pollution Control District has commented that, in general, the downtown plan
appears consistent with the District's Clean Air Plan, which includes the goals of:
planning for compact communities
M zoning to incorporate mixed-use_development
M improving the jobs/housingbalance
improving circulation for all modes of travel
a -.9Packet Pg. 284
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
3
-
1
9
9
3
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
a
d
o
p
t
i
n
g
D
T
C
P
l
a
n
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
I
The District expressed concernover the number of parking structures depicted on the plan,
and hopes that the City will balance the needs for additionalparking with support for
alternative transportation modes.
The Sierra Club and Eco-Slo have also submitted written comments on the downtown design
plan. In summary, their comments are:
e endorseincreased downtown housing.
recommend provision of child careand senior services sites.
support the creation of a Court Street Plaza as a community work
project.
favor siting a multi-modal transit centernear the train station.
favor de-emphasizing relianceon the automobile and promotion of
alternative transportation modes.
e recommend an alternative approach to the Heritage Park concept.
a ;o
Packet Pg. 285
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
3
-
1
9
9
3
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
a
d
o
p
t
i
n
g
D
T
C
P
l
a
n
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
MINUTES OF THE 3/24/93
PLANNINGCOMMISSION MEETING
will be forthcoming)
Packet Pg. 286
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
3
-
1
9
9
3
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
a
d
o
p
t
i
n
g
D
T
C
P
l
a
n
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
Packet Pg. 287
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
3
-
1
9
9
3
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
a
d
o
p
t
i
n
g
D
T
C
P
l
a
n
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
city of san lues oBispo
lill,j ;®ii!i INITIAL STUDY OF ENVIRONMENTALIMPACT
SITE LOCATION
DOwntOWn San Luis Obispo APPLICATION NO.
ER 57-93
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Adoption of A Conceptual Physical Plan for the City,'s Center
as design guidelines for the downtown.
APPLICANT City Of San Luis Obispo
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
X
NEGATIVE DECLARATION X MITIGATIONINCLUDED
EXPANDED INITIAL STUDY REQUIRED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTREQUIRED
PREPARED BY Whitney Mcllvaine, Associate Planner DATE
2 / 22 / 93
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S ACTION: DATE 4115
1
11:23
SUMMARY OF INITIAL STUDY FINDINGS
I.DESCRIPTION Of PROJECT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
11.POTENTIAL IMPACT REVIEW POSSIBLE ADVERSE EFFECTS
NONE
A. COMMUNITY PLANSAND GOALS ..................................................
NONE
S. POPULATION DISTRIBUTION AND GROWTH..........................................
NONE
C. LAND USE ................................................................. .......
MAYBE*
D. TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION ...............................................
NONE
E PUBLIC SERVICES ........................_.........._...........................
NONE
F. UTWTIES...........................................................................
NONE*
G. NOISE LEVELS ......_.........................,.....................................
NONE
H. GEOLOGIC&SEISMIC HAZARDS&TOPOGRAPHICMODIFICATIONS ....................
NONE
I. AIRQUALITY AND WIND CONDITIONS................................................
NONE
J. SURFACE WATER FLOW AND QUALITY ...............................................
NONE
KPLANT LIFE................_......................................................
L ANIMAL LIFE.....................................................................
NONE
M. ARCHAEOLOGICALIHISTORICAL ...................................................
MAYBE*
N. AESTHETIC .......................................................................
MAYBE*
O. ENERGYIRESOURCEUSE ...........................................................
NONE
P. OTHER ..........................................................................
NONE
III.STAFF RECOMMENDATION
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
SEE ATTACHED REPORT 71
Packet Pg. 288
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
3
-
1
9
9
3
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
a
d
o
p
t
i
n
g
D
T
C
P
l
a
n
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
1
AREA MA
PfArM S7
a
a a
f
7 .
s4 a Cy`
R a
r
a•
lI
f
10 15
4
i
r
I r
oo oLDPI
o
r
I-
9 Fi1. Zppfr-
Packet Pg. 289
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
3
-
1
9
9
3
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
a
d
o
p
t
i
n
g
D
T
C
P
l
a
n
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: DOWNTOWN DESIGN GUIDELINES
The project involvesendorsement of physical design guidelines for the central business
district of San Luis Obispo, entitled A Conceptual Physical Plan for the. City's Center. The
plan has been developed to serve as a graphic representation of the City's land use policies
and architectural design criteria as they relatespecifically to the downtown area. The extent
of the area affected is shown on theattachedarea map. The document is in poster format
with text on one side and a plan-view illustration of the downtown area on the other.
Perspective sketches on both sides help toillustrate designconcepts. The plan's horizon is
roughly fifteen years. Staff is recommending review every two years to consider any changes
necessary to keep the plan current.
Amendments and updates to City documents which currently guide downtown development,
such as the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and Architectural Review Guidelines, would
implement the plan. Public works projects and property acquisitions suggested by the plan
would be considered as part of the City's capital improvement program.
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
For a description of the city's environmental setting, please referto the environmental
impact report for the Land Use Element/Circulation Element updates, prepared by Fugro-
McClelland (West) Inc.,and datedJanuary 1993 (hereinafterreferred to as the draft E.I.R.).
POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
The conceptual design plan will not in itself effect any immediate changes to thephysical
environment. However, its policies, standards, and guidelines will be consideredwhen the
City evaluates new construction and remodelprojects in the downtown. Each new project
will be subject to separate environmental review at the time it is proposed.
Most of the proposals in the downtown design plan are alreadyapproved or consistent with
policies and programsproposed as part of the general plan update, and with current zoning
regulations. This initial environmental study focuses on those components of the design plan
which are new or different, or which go beyond the level of detail addressed bythe draft
E.I.R. Specifically addressed below aredesign concepts relatedto traffic circulation, noise,
historic preservation, and aesthetics.
D. Transportation and Circulation
Buildout under the proposed general plan update would generate approximately 42 percent
more daily in-citytrips (including cars, transit, bicycling, and walling) than currently occur.
The draft E.I.R. for the 1992 land use and circulation element updates notes that with road
widening and extensions proposed by thesedocuments, significant peak hour congestion
would occur only along Broad Street toward the airport and on Santa Rosa Street near
Foothill Boulevard. Both locations are outside the downtown area. The draft E.I.R.
Packet Pg. 290
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
3
-
1
9
9
3
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
a
d
o
p
t
i
n
g
D
T
C
P
l
a
n
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
Environmental Initial Study
JDowntown Plan
Page 2
concludes that the downtown area would experience peak hour congestion similar to what
currently exists. However, because downtown is a pedestrian-oriented area, slow moving
traffic is considered acceptable and less than a significant impact.
Since the design plan does not call for a land use pattern or buildout capacity that is
significantly different from that of the land use and circulation element updates,it is unlikely
the plan would encourage an increase in traffic beyond what is projected by those
documents. If the design plan is successful in encouraging additional downtown housing, the
need for certaindaily trips (such as, home to work to home) could be reduced.
The design plan does propose some changes to the downtown circulation pattern which have
not been included as capital projects in the circulation element update. These include:
Narrowing Morro Street between Higuera Street and Monterey Street to enhance
pedestrianamenities.
Closing Morro Street between Monterey Street and Palm Street as part of a mixed-
use redevelopment.
QosMg the entire segment of Broad Street between Palm Streetand Higuera Street, .
and closing Monterey Streetbetween the Mission and Nipomo Street as part of the
Mission Plaza extension.
Realigning Pacific, Archer, and Walker streets near their intersection with Higuera
Street for improved traffic safety.
Realigning the right-of-way at the intersection of Higuera and Toro streets in
conjunction with construction of a transit center and infill development east of Santa
RosaStreet.
Converting Garden Street to a one-way street rather than closing it as suggested in
the circulation and open space elements.
Street closures would divert traffic toother downtown streets, increase queuing at affected
intersections, and reduce available curbside parking. Narrowed or one-way streets would
have similar impacts. Prior to any permanent changes to the downtown circulation pattern,
the City should test out the concept, using temporarybarriers to divert traffic. In this way
peak hour impacts could be evaluated and mitigations could be developed and tried.
As an alternativeto realigning Pacific,Archer, and Walkerstreets, the City could try closing
Archer between Pacific and Marsh streets, and closing Walker between Pismo and Pacific
streets. This alternative has the advantage of reducing traffic at problematic intersections
a -a7Packet Pg. 291
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
3
-
1
9
9
3
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
a
d
o
p
t
i
n
g
D
T
C
P
l
a
n
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
Environmental Initial Study
Downtown Plan
Page 3
without requiring realignment through privately owned property.
The design plan suggests creating a traffic circleon Higuera Streetnear Toro Street to mark
the edge of the downtown core area .This would involve closing a portion of Higuera and
Toro streets to through traffic. Traffic has traditionally beenvery light on this segment of
Hignera Street east of Santa Rosa Street. Traffic countsdone by the City noted 6,000
average daily trips in 1986 and 3,000 in 1992. Because of the low volume of traffic, the
impact of diverted traffic onto nearby streets and intersections is not expected to be
significant.* Nonetheless, if the City Council decides to pursue this proposal, further study
will beneeded to determine the following:
L. Impactson the turning movements and queuing for intersectionsalong Marsh at
Toro, Johnson, and Santa Rosa streets.
2. Impacts on the turning movements and queuing for intersections along Santa Rosa
Street at Monterey and Higuera streets.
3.Volume and pattern of diverted traffic as a result of eliminating through traffic on
Higuera and Toro streets.
Pedestrian improvements suggested by the planto improve street crossings, such as comer
and mid-block bulb-outs, were previouslystudied by the City during development of the
Downtown Improvement Manual. The City Engineer and Fire Marshal concluded that
comer bulb-outs were not safe or practical due tothenarrow width of many streets and the
wide turning radii of emergency and delivery vehicles. However, under certain
circumstances comer bulb-outsmay be appropriate, such as:
1. At intersections, such as Chorro and Higuera streets, where it may be desirableto
restrict turning movements.
2. In conjunction with street closures or one-way streets, with a modified bulb-out
design.
The City Traffic Engineer recommends against unsignalized mid-block cross walks because
of the increased likelihood of pedestrian/vehicle accidents. New mid-block bulb-outs and
crosswalks will have to be carefully designed to minim»e confusion over right-of-way and
resulting traffic accidents.
Conclusion: Some of theproposed changes to the downtown street network may negatively
impact circulation. However, since theproposed changes would be implemented
incrementally over a long period of time, and sincesomechanges may prove to be infeasible
giventhe need to significantly reconfigure right-of-way and private properties,it is not useful
aaPacket Pg. 292
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
3
-
1
9
9
3
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
a
d
o
p
t
i
n
g
D
T
C
P
l
a
n
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
Environmental Initial Study
Downtown Plan
Page 4
to assess the potential impacts of the combined changes on existing traffic levels and
circulation patterns. Therefore, each individual project will need to be evaluated for
environmental impactsat the time it is proposed to be included in the City's budget as a
capitalimprovementprogram, or in conjunction with private development.
Recommended Mitigation:
Traffic impact mitigation for additional trips generated should be tailored to specific
development proposals.
Prior to any permanent changes to the downtown circulationpattern, the City should
test out proposals,using temporarybarriers to divert traffic,wheredeemed necessary
by the Traffic Engineer. In this way peak hour impactscan be evaluated and
mitigations developed and tried.
Corner bulb-outs should be installedonly where they will not interferewith
reasonableemergency vehicle and delivery access to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer and Fire Marshal.
Mid-blockbulb-outs should bedesigned to minimise confusion over vehicle and
pedestrian right-of-way to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director
and the City Traffic Engineer.
G. Noise
One of the primary goals of the conceptual design plan is the encouragement of residential
uses on upper stories of commercialbuildings in the downtown core. Housing is currently
allowed throughout the area affected by theconceptual design plan.
Mixing residential and commercial uses in close proximity raises the issue of noiseexposure.
The City's Noise Element establishes thresholds for interior and exterior noise exposure.
No distinction is made for housing in a predominantly residential area versus housing in a
mixed-use setting. While construction techniques can insulate interior spaces from
unacceptable noise exposure, exterior exposure is more difficult to mitigate.
There are two main sources of exterior noise - traffic and noise from a stationary source.
For residential outdoor activity areas-balconies,patios,yards-the recommended allowable
average noise exposure is60 decibels from transportation noise sources, and ranges from
45 to 70 decibels from stationary sources. While this may be a reasonable standard for
housing in a residentialneighborhood, it is not practical for housing in a commercial setting
where ambient noise levels regularly exceed 65 decibels.
aeg$Packet Pg. 293
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
3
-
1
9
9
3
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
a
d
o
p
t
i
n
g
D
T
C
P
l
a
n
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
Environmental Initial Study
Downtown Plan
Page 5
Arguably, the emphasis on downtown housing only recalls a more traditional land use
pattern. Housing has always been a vital part of the mix of uses in the downtown.
However, in more recent years new development and remodelling in the downtown core
area have been primarily commercial. There are currently about 950 housing units in the
area affected by the conceptual design plan. At buildout the plan would accommodate
roughly 300 - 350 more housing units, consistent with the Land Use Element update.
Ultimately people choosing to live downtown will have to weigh thebenefits of proximity
to jobs, services, and cultural events against any inconveniences such as increased noise
exposure.
Conclusion: Current standards for noiseexposure as describedby the Noise Element could
pose obstacles toconstruction of new downtown housing.
Recommendation:
In order topromote additional downtown housing consistent with City policy
regarding noiseexposure, the Noise Element should be reviewed and revised to
remove obstacles to theconstruction of new downtown housing.
M. Archaeological/Historical: Historic Preservation
In thearea affected by thedowntown design plan there are approximately 60 structures
which are included on the master list of historic resources and roughly 80 additional
contributing"properties. The master list identifies structures which have significanthistoric
orarchitectural value. Thesestructures may be listed on the National Register of Historic
Places, oreligible for the National Register, or may be significant in terms of local history.
Contributing"properties are buildings in older neighborhoods that contribute to the historic
character of the neighborhood.
The plan indicates that 6 contributing structures would be removed and replaced with new
cultural facilities along Monterey Street just to the southwest of.Mission Plaza. Although
it is possible that some of these structures could be moved to another location in town, there
is noguarantee they would be preserved. While relocating historic structures to make way
for new development is preferable to demolition, conserving historic structures in place
through adaptive reuse and rehabilitation is the best way to ensure their continuing
contribution to community heritage.
Conclusion: Theplan is, in part, a long range master plan for downtowndevelopment that
is likely to take decades to implement. In the long term it is reasonable to expect the
architectural and.aestheticcharacter of this historic neighborhood will change in response
to community needs and desires for new development, consistent with the draft Land Use
Element policies encouraging the expansion of cultural facilities along this stretch of
Packet Pg. 294
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
3
-
1
9
9
3
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
a
d
o
p
t
i
n
g
D
T
C
P
l
a
n
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
Environmental Initial Study
Downtown Plan
Page 6
Monterey Street. In the nearterm, conserving historic structures in place is the best way
to ensure their continuing contribution to community heritage.
Recommendation:
The public projects, standards, and guidelines for Area 3 in the-conceptual downtown
plan should be revised to allow, wherefeasible anddesireable, historic structures to
beconserved in place, and to provide for adaptive reuse of those structures to
accommodate future cultural facilities. . Relocation or demolition should be
considered only when itis clearly demonstrated to the satisfaction of the City Council
that adaptive reuse is not economical, structurally feasible, or consistent with City
goals for the Mission Plaza Extension.
N. Aesthetics: Scale and Views
One of the community goals stated in the Land Use Element update is protection of public
views of the surrounding hills and mountains, which contribute strongly to a sense of place
in the downtown area. The update alsostates that new downtowndevelopment should
respect views of the Bills, framingrather than obscuringthem. The design.of new infill
buildings and remodels to existing buildings will have to balance view preservation with
other goals of compact development and a pattern of storefronts that encourages walking
in the downtown (LUE policies 4.14 and 4.16). Accommodating future growth while
maintaining a compact commercial core implies more vertical development. Currently the
scale of downtown buildings reinforces"sense of place" because it relates well to the overall
size of the community. The oneand twostory buildings also allow for plenty of sunlight
along the sidewalks.
With a few exceptions, buildings in the downtown are predominantly oneand two stories
in height, although current zoningregulations allow a maximumheight of 50 feet, which
would accommodate three and four story buildings. The conceptual downtown design plan
calls for some new "landmark" buildingswhich could be as high as 75 feet, consistent with
building height policies in the Land Use Element update.
Conclusion: Structures permitted to be over fifty feet (50') in height will have to be
carefully sited anddesigned to avoid excessive shading and obstruction of key views, and to
ensure compatibility with the existing scale of development.
Recommendation:
a To help ensure their protection, a map identifying key views should be included in
the Land Use Element update. Location specific (corner, mid-block, creekside, etc.)
design strategies should be described in the update of the Architectural Review
Packet Pg. 295
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
3
-
1
9
9
3
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
a
d
o
p
t
i
n
g
D
T
C
P
l
a
n
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
i I•
Environmental Initial Study
l\
Downtown Plan
Page7
Guidelines, which:
1.Prevent/minimize obstruction of views of the surrounding hills and mountains.
2. Avoid excessive shading of mid-block pedestrian ways and sidewalks.
3.Ensure compatibility with adjacent development and with the overall pattern
and scale of downtown development.
7. 1
Packet Pg. 296
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
3
-
1
9
9
3
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
a
d
o
p
t
i
n
g
D
T
C
P
l
a
n
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
Environmental Initial Study
Downtown Plan
Page 8
SUMMARY OF STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
Grant a negative declaration of environmental impact with the following mitigations:
Traffic impact mitigation for additionaltrips generated should be tailored to specific
development proposals.
Nor to any permanent changes to the downtown circulation pattern, the City should
test out proposals,using temporary barriers todivert traffic,where deemed necessary
by the Traffic Engineer. In this way peak hour impacts can beevaluated and
mitigations developed and tried.
Comer bulb-outs should be installed only wherethey will not interfere with
reasonableemergency vehicle and delivery access to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer and Fire Marshal.
Mid-block bulb-outs should be designed to minimize confusion overvehicle and
pedestrian right-of-way to the satisfaction of the CommunityDevelopment Director
and the City Traffic Engineer.
In order to promoteadditional downtown housing consistent with. City policy
regarding noise exposure, theNoise Element should be reviewed andrevised to
remove obstacles to the construction of new downtown housing.
The public projects,standards, and guidelines for Area 3 in the conceptual downtown
plan should berevised to allow, where feasible and desireable, historic structures to
be conserved in place, and to provide for adaptive-reuse of those structures to
accommodate future cultural facilities. Relocation or demolition should be
considered only when it is clearly demonstrated to the satisfaction of the City Council
that adaptive reuse is not economical, structurally feasible, or consistent with City
goals for the Mission Plaza Extension.
To help ensure their protection, a map identifying:key views should be included in
the Land Use Element update. Location specific (comer, mid-block, creekside, etc.)
designstrategies should be described in the update of the Architectural Review
Guidelines, which:
1. Prevent/mffii'm7e obstruction of views of the surrounding hills and mountains.
2. Avoid excessive shading of mid-block pedestrian ways and sidewalks.
3. Ensure compatibility with adjacent development and with the overall pattern
and scale of downtown development.
Packet Pg. 297
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
3
-
1
9
9
3
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
a
d
o
p
t
i
n
g
D
T
C
P
l
a
n
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
May 2;. 1.993
COPIES 7n.
r MEETING AGENDA
Zr ol cn plR DATE a ITEM
CEtiO F[M.DiR
Mayor Peg Pinard
WFy DMembersoftheCouncilMTK/0R?r n FGLICECFL990PalmSt.
UL
MCM7:T=s,•I o .X-San Luis Obispo, CA 9340
DearDIR
UT;'.DIzZj n
Dear Mayor Pinard.and Members of the Council ,
This letter is in regard to Item #2 - rDowntown Design Plan. Specifically,
the design plans for the 600 block of Monterey St. My husband and I resiAe at
Monterey St. This has been my family's 'and my home for the past. 40 years.
We own an apartment house at 667 Monterey St. on the same block.
As residents and owners of a business on this block we have grave .concerns
about the volunteer architects plans. for our block. The plan for this block
has no consideration for the residents (in fact they are all eliminated) .
The plan fails to see the beauty and recognize the uniqueness of this small
peaceful block which used to :be a part of the mission gardens and we consider
to be a jewel of the community.
The Committee's plan calls for the destruction of the majority of the
existing houses and the erection of a massive multi-level parking garage
next to our one story house.
Before you adopt this plan, I beg you to take five minutes and walk
down our block from the mission to the corner. of Monterey andNipomo
Street. Please take one last look. Notice theimmaculately kept up houses,
flowers and gardens. Please stop at the. site of the existing city parking
lot and notice how discreetly it blends into the neighborhood. Notice the
view of San Luis Moutain and the tranquility of the area. Now imagine the
multi-level parking structure proposed by the Committee that':woul-d cover
the site of the. next two houses and well as several houses around the corner
and on the other side of the block. .
Please ".find another::site for the parking garage in a neighborhood where
the parking garagewould be a benefit to the neighbors rather than their
destruction. The creation of an artificial "Herritage Park" is not a substi-
tution for the quality of life that would be lost by the destruction and
redevelopment of our block.
Thank you for taking the time to listen to our side of this controversy.
Sincerely,
RECIFIVE0
3eP',MAY - A 1993
CITY CLERK Kathy and Ron Vargas
SAN LUIS OBISPO,CA 642 Monterey St.
C.' San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
543-4656
G -c. A
Packet Pg. 298
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
3
-
1
9
9
3
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
a
d
o
p
t
i
n
g
D
T
C
P
l
a
n
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
M' 'NG AGENDA
DA1 E ITEM #.
SIERRA CLUB SANTA LUCIA CHAPTER
V0VNG[O IM 1892
3 May 1993 COPIMTO: i
Ds:otes Acion FYI
Mayor Peg Pinard DDIR.
Councilmember Penny Rappa O FIN.NR.
Councilmember Bill Roalman Cho F:REOMF
C_3 TT.WEY FW DiR.Councilmember Dave Romero I+d'CL{K O?I i-] pc,LI(t.
Councilmember Allen Settle MCMT.*rlk_x.1 C1 RECDLa
I ED LTnL D11
1
Dear City Council ,
Regarding the downtown concept plan to be discussed at your
May 4 meeting, the Alternative Transportation Task Force of the
Sierra Club (ATTF) offers the following suggestions:
1 . Include specif: langus: z on the integration of
bicycles with the rest o ' owntown /traffic , e .g.
To encourage and e:. snce the use of bicycles:
Bicycle lanes should be provided on downtown streets
where bicyclists cannot easily .integrate with the flow
of traffic
Parking facilities should be provided for bicycles is
locations that allow for convenient access to preferred .
destinations .
2 . Consider locating the proposed multi-modal center
somewhere other than downtown. Locating the center near the
train station would make it more truly multi-modal , as it would
integrate better with trains and with the future bike path along
the railroad tracks . Regional busses could easily access the
center via South Street. Property in this area should be
considerably less expensive than that downtown too.
We hope that you will take these suggestions into
consideration during your discussion of the downtown concept
plan.
Mintrel sr. .BVI.y.---
MAY 3 1993
is Boche CITY COUNCIL
1570 Hansen Lane SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
San Luis Obispo, CA 93041
546-0518
To explore, enior. and protect Me notion's srenic resources . . .Packet Pg. 299
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
3
-
1
9
9
3
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
a
d
o
p
t
i
n
g
D
T
C
P
l
a
n
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
L 5 Action
cdCDOG
9
AGENDA ZODIR. MEL.iCo'FIM DATE tTEM#
1I AQ%O FIRF CHIEF
Draft P.C. Minutes Y/°=Ix Tr t 0 FWDIR.
March 24, 1993 U clFmK/cf''r'. n roucEcH.
1._Clvrr.-as l.:] r c.DtR.
Page 1 cF FELE n ?r1I Dtr..
4. Downtown Physical Design Plan: A request to consider theDowntown Physical
Design Plan; City of San Luis Obispo, applicant.
Whitney Mcllvaine, Associate Planner, presentedthe staff report, recommendedthat the
Commission review the recommendations for modifications to the plan and specify and
changes to the text or graphics whichthe Commission feels are appropriate; recommend
that the City Council adopt theattached draftresolution endorsing A Conceptual Physical
Plan for the City's Center, together with any modifications; identify and recommend to City
Councilone or more public improvement projectswhich should be given a high priority
for achievement during the 1993-95 financial planning period; concur with the initial
environmental study which concludesthat (1)the proposed plan will not have a significant
effecton theenvironment, and (b) individual projects suggested by the plan will be
subject to environmental review at the timethey are proposed.
Whitney Mcllvaine introduced Downtown Design team members, Pierre Rademaker, Ken
Schwartz; and Chuck Crotser.
Pierre Rademakerreviewed highlights of the plan for the Commission. He felt that having
the Council identify and recommend one or more publicimprovementprojects for the 93-
95 financial planning period may be premature until the plan is adopted. He noted that
as a group, theteam was opposed to creating an open plaza on Court Street, feeling that
this area should be maintained as retail. He noted that theteam supported a "closeable"
area in front of the Courthouse on Monterey Street in response to the needs ofthe
downtown business community and not "closing" Monterey Street.
Chuck Crotser reviewed proposals for the Heritage Park area and Mission Plaza. He
noted the observationsof the Architectural Review Commission and the CulturalHeritage
Committee regarding Heritage Park, which should bea lower-density, lower-intensity,
smaller-scale transition area between C-C and C-T uses in the area. He indicated that
some guidelines would have to be developedfor the Heritage Park area for determining
where to site buildings and what buildingswould not be appropriate for the site.
Ken Schwartz reminisced about thecreationofthe Mission Plaza area. He noted that like
the Mission Plaza project, the Downtown Plan isa concept plan and not a specific plan,
noting thatwhat is shown in the plan is not an absolute footprint for the downtown, but
a suggested footprintto give theidea. He urgedtheCommission to recommendthat the
City Council adopt the plan as presented. He felt that the plan should receive a negative
declaration of environmental impact but each projectthat develops will receive an
independent CEQA review. He felt that specific issues relating to right-of-ways, setbacks;
Heritage Park, etc., can be addressed during the implementation phase of the plan..
Packet Pg. 300
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
3
-
1
9
9
3
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
a
d
o
p
t
i
n
g
D
T
C
P
l
a
n
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
Draft P.C. Minutes
March 24, 1993
Page 2
WhitneyMcllvaine asked the Commission to review the minor text changes proposed in
the plan, especially clarifyingthe timeframe for the plan and its conceptual nature.
Mike Underwood, ARC Chairman, noted that the ARC felt that the Court Streetarea would
be an excellent starting point for the plan, once it was adopted.
Commr. Cross envisionedthe Court Street area as a open area with some minor
hardscaped areas, with the harder-scaped areas located acrossthe street from the
Courthouse.
Commr. Williams supported the plan concept proposed for the Court Street area and the
idea of opening upthe creek, with some commercial uses, in order to provide some
continuity for a central-commercial core. She felt that the space needed to be utilized to
its greatest potential.
WhitneyMcllvaine recommended amending the condition on page 5 of the staff report
relating to the Heritage Park project by deleting the reference to the 50-foot dimension for
the mid-block pedestrianright-of-way in orderto make the plan more conceptual in
nature.
Commr. Williams indicated she supported the creating a separate 81/2 by 11 copy ofthe
plan, the time neutral language, highlighting that the plan is conceptual, the changenoted
byWhitneyMcllvaine to the condition on page 5, providing alternative transportation
noted on the bottom of page 5, and the changesnoted on page 7. She agreedwith the
text clarification that anchors could consist of a single department store or a complex.
She was notconcerned with any changes to the plan's graphics because this was a
concept plan and would change over time. She felt that references to the multi-modal
transit facility. remain in the plan for now since a grant has been received for the first
phasefeasibility study.
Ken Schwartz noted for Commr. Senn that the one ofthe biggest issues the design team
dealt with was defining the downtown.
Commr. Senn suggested adding a statement to the beginning of the plan that the
downtown master plan can only be accomplishedby good faith effort and interaction and
cooperativeundertakings ofgovernment and private sector architects, and property
owners and that cooperation, assistance or reasonable flexibility should be utilized to
accomplish thegoals consistent with its overall intent. He felt thiswould help years down
theroad when aspects of the plan were being developed.
The commission concurred with this addition.
Packet Pg. 301
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
3
-
1
9
9
3
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
a
d
o
p
t
i
n
g
D
T
C
P
l
a
n
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
Draft P.C. Minutes
March 24, 1993
Page3
Commr. Whittlesey supported the plan and hoped that the Council would approve. She
concurred with Commr. Williams comments. She asked that the direction of traffic flow
be noted on Higuera Street near Toro in the graphics. She hoped that theCouncil would
direct staffto identify tasks that the community can support. She felt therewere
proposed projects that weredoablenow and should not be held back waiting for other
documents to be adopted.
Whitney Mcllvainereiterated theCommission's consensus for changing the text as
recommended with theadditionof language proposed by Commr. Senn andthe deletion
of specific dimensions for Heritage Park, support for the Heritage Park concept, and
clarifying the graphics, e.g. to show the Toro Street traffic patterns.
The Commission indicated they were not ready to make specific recommendations at this
time, but felt that improvements to Garden Street could be one ofthe first C.I.P projects
undertaken because it would berelatively inexpensive to implement.
Commr. Hoffman left the meeting.
Pierre Rademaker, WhitneyMclvaine, and the Commission reviewed minor wording
changes to the proposed language ofthedraftcouncilresolution for plan adoption.
Commr. Whittleseymoved to recommendthat the Council adopt the plan as amended,
including the negative declaration of environmental impact.
Commr. Williams seconded the motion.
On a voicevote, theCommissionrecommended that theCouncil approve adoption of the
resolution on a 6-0-1 vote (Commr. Hoffman absent).
Commr. Cross indicated that while he supported 95 percent of the plan, he had some
reservations with partsofthe plan which needed to bereviewed by the Council.
Commr. Whittlesey reiterated that the Commission felt this was a concept plan and
recognized that there may be some flaws withthe plan. This flawscan be dealt with later.
The Commission urgedthe Council to act on the plan, and focus on gettingmore
speck, during actual project implementation.
Packet Pg. 302
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
3
-
1
9
9
3
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
a
d
o
p
t
i
n
g
D
T
C
P
l
a
n
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
Packet Pg. 303
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
4
-
O
v
e
r
v
i
e
w
o
f
P
r
e
v
i
o
u
s
P
r
o
c
e
s
s
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
Packet Pg. 304
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
4
-
O
v
e
r
v
i
e
w
o
f
P
r
e
v
i
o
u
s
P
r
o
c
e
s
s
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
Packet Pg. 305
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
4
-
O
v
e
r
v
i
e
w
o
f
P
r
e
v
i
o
u
s
P
r
o
c
e
s
s
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
RESOLUTION NO. (2015 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, CREATING THE CREATIVE VISION TEAM
FOR THE DOWNTOWN CONCEPT PLAN UPDATE AND DEFINING
ITS TERM AND CHARGE
WHEREAS, the City Council designated funding to update the Downtown Concept Plan
during the 2015-2016 Fiscal Year, following update of the Land Use Element; and
WHEREAS, the community benefited greatly from the generous volunteer efforts of five
community members with strong design skills during the creation of the Downtown Concept
Plan during the early 1990’s; and
WHEREAS, four members of the original group of volunteers (Physical Plan Design
Committee) have offered to be actively involved in the update of the Downtown Concept Plan ;
and
WHEREAS, public participation has been a long tradition in land use issues in the City
of San Luis Obispo and public involvement is essential in updating the 1993 Downtown Concept
Plan; and
WHEREAS, the public participation strategy calls for a Creative Vision Team (CVT) to
assist with the visioning process and work with the community and affected stakeholders to
provide recommendations for Council consideration; and
WHEREAS, the composition of the CVT should include the four remaining members of
the Physical Plan Design Committee, plus three additional resident volunteers and one alternate
with design and graphic skills who are willing to commit time to the update effort and represent
the future needs of the community; and
WHEREAS, establishing CVT Ground Rules and Terms of Engagement will provide a
framework for collaborative communication among stakeholders and decision-makers; 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 that a Creative Vision Team is hereby created with a composition, term, charge, ground
rules and staff support as follows:
SECTION 1. CVT. The Creative Vision Team shall be comprised of representatives to
be appointed by the Council. The CVT shall be comprised of an odd number of participants.
Packet Pg. 306
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
5
-
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
C
V
T
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
Council Resolution No. XXXX (2015 Series)
Page 2
SECTION 2. ACTION
1. Appoint volunteers Chuck Crotser, Andrew Merriam, Pierre Rademaker, and Kenneth
Schwartz to serve on the CVT.
2. Direct Staff to provide notice and solicit applications and resumes to serve on the CVT
to be submitted to the City Clerk by September 30, 2015.
3. Appoint a sub-committee of Council members to review applications and resumes and,
based on recommendations of the original four CVT members named above, select an
additional three members and one alternate who shall serve at the pleasure of the City
Council and may, by a majority Council vote, be appointed, dismissed, or replaced.
4. The CVT is hereby established until December 31, 2016, at which point it will no
longer be a standing committee with the possible extension of this term to be
considered by the City Council prior to that time.
5. The purpose of the CVT is to advise the City in developing recommendations to
update the Downtown Concept Plan.
6. The City will provide staff support to the CVT, with the Community Development
Director to be primarily responsible for providing this support, to include preparation
of agendas and minutes, compilation of material for discussion at CVT meetings, and
assistance with public outreach efforts.
7. The CVT Guidelines as shown in Exhibit A, and as may be amended by the City
Council, shall apply to the CVT upon formation by the City Council, including
compliance with the Ralph M. Brown Act governing open meetings for local
government bodies.
Upon motion of _______________________, seconded by _______________________,
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was adopted this _____ day of _____________________ 2015.
____________________________________
Mayor Jan Marx
ATTEST:
Packet Pg. 307
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
5
-
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
C
V
T
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
Council Resolution No. XXXX (2015 Series)
Page 3
____________________________________
Anthony Mejia
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________________
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City
of San Luis Obispo, California, this ______ day of ______________, _________.
______________________________
Anthony J. Mejia
City Clerk
Packet Pg. 308
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
5
-
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
C
V
T
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
EXHIBIT A
CVT GUIDELINES
Guidelines for the Creative Vision Team (CVT)
City of San Luis Obispo
Community Development Department
1. Introduction
The purpose of these Guidelines is twofold:
1) To clarify the respective roles of the each participant in the citizen advisory
committee process; and
2) To outline the roles, responsibilities and relationship of CVT and Staff to
clarify expectations and understanding of the overall process, so that CVT
and Staff contribute to moving toward accomplishing the committee’s specific
goals within an appropriate schedule and budget.
The advisory committee process is a collaborative one involving an often diverse array
of individuals, stakeholders, and viewpoints, levels of expertise and matters of concern.
The public, CVT appointees, and respective Community Development Department staff
(CDD staff), and staff from other agencies and offices all benefit in having a clear
understanding of their respective roles and responsibilities in the committees’ conduct of
their official business.
An effort has been made to cover all essential aspects of the committee operations,
such as how appointments are made, how long each member’s term is, the
responsibilities of different participants, conflict of interest issues, and meeting
procedures. Nonetheless, these Guidelines are not exhaustive, they do not incorporate
statutes and regulations which may apply to CVT operations, e.g. State open meetings
law (Brown Act). The Guidelines strive to make adequate reference to other rules, as
appropriate.
2. Applicability
These Guidelines apply to the Council-appointed Creative Vision Team (CVT) whose
primary mission involves products and activities of the update to the Downtown Concept
Plan.
Packet Pg. 309
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
5
-
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
C
V
T
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
Council Resolution No. XXXX (2015 Series)
Page 5
3. Establishment of CVT
The CVT is being established to advise the City on matters related to the update of the
Downtown Concept Plan. The advice provided by the CVT is communicated to City staff
which is tasked with providing recommendations to Advisory Bodies and City Council.
This CVT is appointed by a City Council sub-committee; its establishment is not
specifically required by any State laws or regulations. Therefore, the City Council has
discretion to create, modify, and terminate the CVT, its membership, mission statement,
schedule, etc. at any time. The CVT is an agent of the City of San Luis Obispo and
members should be cognizant that their actions as individuals or as a whole can have
consequences to the City.
4. Team Authority
The CVT is advisory in nature and has no authority to approve, deny, or require
modification to any policy under the CVT’s consideration. The team’s advice shall be
conveyed to Advisory Bodies, Planning Commission and City Council in all staff reports.
City staff will acknowledge CVT input in formulation of recommendations for action by
Advisory bodies and City Council and will note where a differing recommendation is
being made and the reasons for the difference. When recording votes in meeting
minutes, members voting for and against items will be noted. Staff is assigned
responsibility for the timely completion of Council-approved Downtown Concept Plan
update work program as reflected in the Request for Proposal.
5. Appointment Process and Membership Term
A) Size
The size of a CVT shall be established by the City Council upon creation of the team.
The team shall have an odd number of members; this eliminates ambiguity as to what
constitutes a quorum, and minimizes the possibility of tie votes.
B) Composition
The composition of a CVT shall be determined at the time of its creation, to ensure that
members with strong design and visioning skills who are committed to community
service are represented in the membership. All members must be residents of the City
of San Luis Obispo. Paid advocates will not be considered to serve on the CVT. The
CVT will be created by Council resolution.
Packet Pg. 310
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
5
-
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
C
V
T
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
Council Resolution No. XXXX (2015 Series)
Page 6
C) Vacancies and Application Process
A vacancy or vacancies on a CVT shall exist:
1) When the committee is created
2) When a member or members is/are formally removed by the City Council, or
3) When the Council receives and acknowledges a letter of resignation from an
incumbent.
Vacancies on the CVT shall be advertised by the City Clerk in the same manner as the
original appointments by the Council. Applications for CVT membership shall be
submitted on forms provided by the City Clerk, and shall be accepted by the Clerk. The
temporary absence of members to fill vacancies as described in this section shall not
affect a recommendation by staff and/or the CVT to Advisory Bodies or to the Council.
D) Selection Process
Upon the close of an application period, a copy of each application submitted will be
given to the Council sub-committee for review. Appointment(s) shall be made by the
sub-committee appointed by the full Council. When considering members, a goal of
service to the entire community rather than special interests will be weighed. All
members must be residents of the City of San Luis Obispo. Paid advocates will not be
considered to serve on the CVT.
E) Term of Office
The term of office for the CVT and its members is established by the City Council when
it creates the committee. The CVT shall serve at the discretion of the Council for the
term of appointment outlined in a resolution.
6. Team Operations
A) Team Mission and Responsibilities
The specific mission for the CVT and its term of service shall be to:
1) Advise the City in the development of recommendations during the process of
discussing issues, opportunities and vision; reviewing alternatives; and
developing policy as part of the Downtown Concept Plan update.
2) Review and comment upon other matters related to the CVT’s function as
part of the Downtown Concept Plan update, upon specific direction by the
City Council.
B) Officers and Rules of Conduct
Packet Pg. 311
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
5
-
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
C
V
T
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
Council Resolution No. XXXX (2015 Series)
Page 7
The responsibilities of the CVT also include an election of officers, consisting of at least
a Chair, Vice-Chair, and Recording Secretary. The Chair shall lead all meetings, be the
primary spokesperson for the CVT, and be the primary committee liaison to City staff
and the public. Staff in consultation with the Chairperson shall develop the agenda for
each CVT meeting. The Vice-Chair shall fulfill the duties of Chair in the latter’s absence.
The Recording Secretary will be the Community Development Director or his/her
designee, who will take action minutes of motions. At a minimum, these minutes shall
clearly convey actions and motions taken by the CVT. These minutes are to be
considered, amended as needed and approved by the full task force at the earliest
possible time, and signed by the Chairperson. In addition, the task force may adopt
specific rules of conduct and procedure, as long as such rules are consistent with
applicable laws and regulations (including these Guidelines).
C) Meeting Procedure
The CVT is subject to the Brown Act, which set standards for public notice as to
meeting time, date and location as well as items to be discussed. Significant
implications are as follows:
1) Noticing of all CVT meetings, including time, location and an agenda, must be
posted in a public place within the applicable area. Efforts should be made to
provide adequate public notice beyond minimum Brown Act requirements of
seventy-two (72) hours.
2) All CVT meetings must be open and public. Meetings are to be held in a
facility which makes adequate provision for attendance by all interested
members of the public.
3) Members of the public are to be given an opportunity to speak to the CVT on
any regular agenda item at the time it is being discussed. Members of the
public will also be given an opportunity to speak to any relevant non-agenda
item. All public speakers are subject to reasonable time constraints
established by the CVT Chairperson and any adopted procedures. All public
speakers are to identify their names and relevant business and/or personal
interests they are representing for the record.
4) The CVT will attempt to establish a consistent regular meeting time and
location in their rules of conduct.
5) Minutes of CVT meetings will be kept on file by the Community Development
Department. These minutes shall be available for any interested person to
examine.
6) The CVT will elect officers no later than its second meeting and until such
time, the Community Development Director or his/her designee shall serve as
the Chair Pro-Tem.
7) Meetings shall run in a parliamentary style. Substantive issues will have
higher priority than matters of procedural detail. The Chair has discretion in
guiding discussion of items among CVT members while allowing for
appropriate public input.
8) Staff may address the CVT at any time, with timely recognition by the Chair.
Packet Pg. 312
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
5
-
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
C
V
T
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
Council Resolution No. XXXX (2015 Series)
Page 8
9) Quorum: A majority of the members of the CVT constitute a quorum.
Decisions are made by a majority of the members present and voting. No
business may be transacted if fewer than a quorum is present. Formal votes
by a committee are to have a motion and second, prior to allowing further
discussion and a vote.
10) Members of the CVT shall not vote on issues which involve a legal or ethical
conflict of interest or duty (See section 7)
11) Subcommittees: The CVT may select subcommittees to focus on issues or
subjects meriting more detailed work outside of the team. Subcommittees are
made up of CVT members only, and must number fewer than a quorum of the
full CVT. Subcommittee meeting arrangements may be set by either the staff
or the CVT. Such meetings are not legally required to be noticed or posted,
but every effort should be made by a subcommittee officer or member to
notice and/or post the meetings, as they are open to any interested member
of the public. Information about their time and location is to be made available
through the overall CVT secretary and through CDD staff. Subcommittees
shall choose a Chair and a Vice-Chair, and may choose a Recording
Secretary for preparing informal minutes. A report from any subcommittee
meeting shall be made at the next full CVT meeting. Staff support for
subcommittee meetings may be provided, but is not required.
D) Attendance
CVT members shall make every effort to attend regular meetings. Any member who is
unable to attend any meeting shall contact the CVT Chair or Community Development
Department staff at least seventy-two (72) hours prior to the meeting. Three (3)
consecutive unannounced absences or five (5) consecutive absences by a member
shall be grounds for dismissal from the CVT, subject to the discretion of the Council.
E) Appearance on CVT’s behalf
The Chair, Vice-Chair, or other duly authorized CVT member shall speak for the task
force at any applicable non-CVT public hearing or other meeting as authorized by the
CVT. Individual members of CVT not so designated, who do testify at a public hearing
or other meeting, shall clearly identify themselves as speaking individually as a member
of CVT, and shall clearly indicate that they are not authorized to speak for the full
committee.
F) Timely adjournment of evening meetings
To encourage public participation, evening meetings of CVTs will be organized,
agendized, and run so as to finish at a reasonable hour. If a particular CVT finds its
evening meetings habitually running past 9:30 PM, staff and the Chair will work together
to shorten the agendas and, if necessary, to expedite discussion and action on items.
Packet Pg. 313
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
5
-
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
C
V
T
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
Council Resolution No. XXXX (2015 Series)
Page 9
7. Conflicts of Interest
CVT members are not considered to be “public officials” as defined in § 82048 of the
California Government Code, and therefore are not subject to the State Political Reform
Act and its disclosure provisions (Government Code §§ 81000 et seq.). Nevertheless,
CVT members shall remove themselves from all discussions and votes on matters in
which they have any direct personal financial interest, or where the member’s
professional allegiance and/or personal bias cannot be set aside to allow the member’s
fair consideration of the issue(s) at hand.
In gauging such extra-legal conflicts of interest and/or duty, each member shall exercise
careful judgment and introspection in giving priority to the interests of fairness and
objectivity; if there is any reasonable doubt that the member has a conflict, the member
shall refrain from participation in the team’s deliberations and vote(s). Should a member
not refrain voluntarily, and should the member’s participation spe cifically be challenged
by another CVT member, staff, or the public, the member’s participation on any item of
official CVT business may be prevented by a two-thirds majority vote of the full CVT
(i.e., at least two-thirds of the total incumbent membership, including the member in
question). Pervasive or recurring conflicts of interest and/or duty should lead a member
to resign voluntarily from a CVT, and may be grounds for a dismissal by the Council.
8. CVT Member and Staff Responsibilities
A) CVT Member Responsibilities
The responsibilities of the individual CVT members include:
1) Punctually and fully attend all regular and special meetings of the CVT and all
relevant subcommittee meetings, to the maximum possible extent;
2) Come to all meetings fully prepared, having reviewed the agenda and all
related written/graphic material available before the meeting;
3) Conscientiously follow high ethical standards in putting the broad public
interest ahead of any personal interest and/or bias, and to abstain from all
discussions and votes where this is not possible;
4) Promote full and open discussion of all matters of official CVT business;
5) Support the CVT Chair, Vice-Chair, and staff in maintaining order, keeping
discussions relevant to the business at hand, and following proper
procedures, while giving primary attention to matters of substance.
6) Be cognizant of the project time frame and constraints and strive to comment
on products/concepts presented in a productive and expeditious manner.
B) CDD Staff Responsibilities
Packet Pg. 314
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
5
-
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
C
V
T
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
Council Resolution No. XXXX (2015 Series)
Page 10
Staff responsibilities in supporting the CVT include:
1) Timely completion of deliverables within budget.
2) Schedule all CVT meetings pertaining to Downtown Concept Plan update
issues, make arrangements for all facilities, distribute written/graphic
materials, notices, agendas, etc. For such meetings, coordinate necessary
staff participation and guest speakers;
3) For CVT meetings as appropriate, prepare recommendations and other
material for CVT review and comment. Advise the CVT on matters of both
substance and procedure;
4) Assist the CVT Chair in promoting full and open participation by all CVT
members and other people in attendance at any meeting, keeping discussion
pertinent to the business at hand;
5) Handle information requests for material and general information related to
the official business of the CVT;
6) Report the CVT’s activities, recommendations and comments to Advisory
Bodies or other decision-makers and officials within the framework of the
overall presentation of staff recommendations on a team product-goal (i.e.
draft concepts, policies, or portion thereof);
7) Coordinate with the Chair and Secretary on CVT meeting schedules.
C) City Attorney
Staff support to the CVT will not be provided by the City Attorney. Specific legal issues
are to be directed through CDD to the City Attorney for response.
Packet Pg. 315
At
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
:
5
-
R
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
C
V
T
(
1
0
5
7
:
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
P
l
a
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y
a
n
d
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
f
o
r
C
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
)
Page intentionally left
blank.
Downtown Concept Plan Update
Recommendation
1.Approve the Scope of Work and authorize staff to
advertise for consultant services; and
2.Authorize the Community Development Director to
execute the agreement with the selected consultant
if costs are within approved budget; and
3.Adopt a Resolution establishing the Creative Vision
Team and defining its term and charge
2
Downtown Concept Plan Update
Key Info:
Council provided funding for update in 2015-16
Coordinating with update of Mission Plaza Master Plan
Outcome will inform future
efforts: Zoning Code update,
Infrastructure Fee update
in 2016-2017
Community is fortunate to have
participation by original authors
3
A Conceptual Physical Plan for the City’s Center:
Authorized in 1990 by City Council
The vision shaping the plan – “to preserve, protect
and enhance downtown San Luis Obispo”
Approved in 1993; minor update in 1995
Used as guidance for development projects and for
acquisition of public space
Downtown Concept Plan Update
4
Who Was Involved:
Physical Plan Design Committee:
Chuck Crotser, Rodney Levin, Andrew Merriam,
Pierre Rademaker, and Kenneth Schwartz
Review Committee:
16 representatives from advisory bodies,
organizations, and private businesses
Local consulting firm: Crawford, Multari and Starr
Key city staff
Downtown Concept Plan Update
5
Updating the Vision:
Not a static document
Concept of how downtown should look and
function in the future from today’s vantage
Should be revisited and kept current
Should be guided by General Plan policies
Downtown Concept Plan Update
6
Updating The Vision:
RFP – Scope of Work & Team approach
Highly graphic final product
Innovative approach
Print and electronic communication
Downtown Concept Plan Update
7
Downtown Concept Plan Update
Who will be involved:
Consultant
Creative Vision Team
Staff Team
Stakeholders
General Public
Mission Plaza Master Plan Team
City Committees, Commissions, Council
8
Creative Vision Team:
Resolution appoints 4 original members +
3 new members
3 New members to be appointed by
Council subcommittee
Active leaders; highly engaged; major time
commitment
Work with consultant, staff and community
Downtown Concept Plan Update
9
Downtown Concept Plan Update
Community Engagement Plan:
Walking tour(s)
Small stakeholder/neighborhood focus groups
Community-wide charrettes
Variety of other outreach activities
Collaboration is key … early and often
10
Setting the Stage for the Future:
Mission Plaza Master Plan
Downtown Pedestrian Plan
Inform update to Zoning Ordinance
(potentially a form-based code for Downtown)
Infrastructure Fee Study
Downtown Concept Plan Update
11
Downtown Concept Plan Update
Most of all, the Physical Concept Plan is
intended to show what our downtown can
be, and to set in motion the means to
make this vision a reality.
12
Recommendation
1.Approve the Scope of Work and authorize staff to
advertise for consultant services; and
2.Authorize the Community Development Director to
execute the agreement with the selected consultant
if costs are within approved budget; and
3.Adopt a Resolution establishing the Creative Vision
Team and defining its term and charge – appoint a
Council sub-committee to select the additional CVT
members
13
THENewspaper of the Central Coast
MBUNE
AIJ(11 > . �'!) 's
3825 South Higuera • Post Office Box 112 • San Luis Obispo, California 93406 -0112 • (805) 781 -7800
In The Superior Court of The State of California
In and for the County of San Luis Obispo
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
AD # 1897295
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
ss.
County of San Luis Obispo
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the
County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen and not
interested in the above entitled matter; I am now, and at
all times embraced in the publication herein mentioned
was, the principal clerk of the printers and publishers of
THE TRIBUNE, a newspaper of general Circulation,
printed and published daily at the City of San Luis
Obispo in the above named county and state; that notice
at which the annexed clippings is a true copy, was
published in the above -named newspaper and not in any
supplement thereof — on the following dates to wit;
AUGUST 15, 2015 that said newspaper was duly and
regularly ascertained and established a newspaper of
general circulation by Decree entered in the Superior
Court of San Luis Obispo County, State of California, on
June 9, 1952, Case #19139 under the Government Code
of the State of California.
I certify (or declare) under the penalty of perjury that the
foregoing iis^ true
e and correct.
(Signat L e of Principal Clerk)
DATED: AUGUST 15, 2015
AD COST: $149.60
�OF
)«OMSM
SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY COUNCIL
NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING
The San Luis Obispo City Council rnvil
all interested persons to attend a put
meeting on Tuesday, August 18, 2015,
6;00 p.m. in the City Halt Council Cha
ber, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Oblel
California, to consider the scope of w�
and process to update the DOWNTOV
CONCEPT PLAN:
is Council will consider:
1. Approve the Scope of Work and F
iesl for Proposal for consultant saute
,soclated with updating the Downto,
oncept Plan Specification No. 9136.4 a
ilhorize staff to advertise for proposals.
2. Authorize the Community Dave
mart Director to execute the agreer
with the selected consultant If costs
within the approved budget.
3. Adopt a Resolution entitled "A Ras
tion of the City Council of the 01ty of
Luis Obispo, California, creating the C
tive Vision Team for the Downtown (
cept Plan Update and defining Its term
charge."
For more Information, you are invited to
contact Km Murry of the city's Community
Development Depariment at (805) 781-
7274 or by email at lcnttlrry 9-5096--on
The City Council may also discuss other
hearings or business Items before or after
the items listed above. Reports for this
meeting will be available for review in the
City Clerk's Office and online at www.slo
ctty..org on Wednesday. August 12, 2015,
Please call the City Clerk's Office at (805)
781 -7100 for more Information, The City
Council mooting will be televised live on
Charter Cable Channel 20 and live stream-
ing on www.slocltv.org.
ony J. Mejia
Clerk
of San Luis Obispo
sl 15, 2015