Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-15-2016 Item 01 Update for Orcutt Area Specific Plan Public Facilities Financing Plan Meeting Date: 11/15/2016 FROM: Michael Codron, Community Development Director Tim Bochum, Deputy Public Works Director Prepared By: David Watson, AICP, Contract Planner SUBJECT: UPDATE FOR THE ORCUTT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN (OASP) PUBLIC FACILITIES FINANCING PLAN (PFFP) RECOMMENDATION Adopt a Resolution (Attachment A) to approve an update the Public Facilities Financing Plan for the Orcutt Area Specific Plan. REPORT-IN-BRIEF In May 2010, Council approved the Orcutt Area Specific Plan (OASP). Chapter 8 of that document included a Public Facilities Financing Plan (PFFP) that supports the delivery of needed infrastructure to serve future development in the area. The PFFP includes a detailed breakdown of the estimated costs of these improvements, and identifies the OASP’s share of the cost of these projects, including roads, bridges, pedestrian and bicycle paths, utilities, and public parks, all needed to support development of the specific plan area. The fees that are established for OASP development are based on an analysis of the relative benefits of the planned development projects, and spreads these costs across future development of the area accordingly. This approach is anticipated to implement a “pay-as-you-go” policy that provides for the completion of phased infrastructure to meet the needs of a growing area of the community. Some of the cost estimates currently in the fee program date back to as early as 2007. Estimated project costs have changed since 2007, and additional projects have been identified as part of the review of detailed subdivision plans for the area. As a result, the PFFP needs to be updated to ensure the provision of appropriate fee amounts for all OASP projects. Attachment B is the proposed amended OASP PFFP that recommends these changes. The proposed PFFP reflects more accurate project costs, addresses two new projects that are recommended to be shared by area property owners, and updates costs for projects that have been completed. DISCUSSION The PFFP included four key types of public infrastructure specific to the needs of buildout of the Orcutt Planning Area. These include: 1. Street Improvements (general roadway improvements to perimeter roads such as Tank Farm and Orcutt Roads) 2. Bridges (internal collector roads of the OASP that connect the OASP together) 3. Pedestrian & Bicycle Paths (that interconnect the OASP to citywide pathways) 1 Packet Pg. 9 4. Public Parks & Recreation (new public parks and recreation within the OASP Area) Table 2 of Attachment B lists the improvement projects included in each of these cat egories, the gross cost estimate of each project along with the OASP fair share of these costs and finally, the final net costs to be allocated by fee to OASP development. Since 2010, the City has been increasing the PFFP Fee structure annually with Cons umer Price Index (CPI) updates to keep up with inflation. In 2010, the final OASP and Public Facilities Financing chapter projected about $12.2 million in gross costs for required infrastructure. This amount does not include Parkland Acquisition fees attributable to some, but not all, of the OASP properties because some properties dedicate parkland and some need to pay fees to reimburse for property not dedicated. After fair share calculations were applied to these projects the final “net” PFFP program l ooked to share the costs of approximately $10.5 million improvements between the property owners. In 2016 that figure has risen to $11.5 million based on CPI adjustments. In comparison, the revised PFFP anticipates about $22 million in gross project costs and $17.15 million needed in “net” costs now required for OASP shared infrastructure purposes. Table 1 compares the changes in the net project costs for the OASP PFFP between the 2010 approval and the recommended revisions to the 2016 PFFP. Overall there is approximately a 31% increase in the PFFP resulting from the new project estimates. Attachment B has a summary of changes in project costs and percentages as shown below for each of the major category areas. Table 1 – NET PFFP Project Category Costs Infrastructure 2010 OASP- PFFP 2016 Current PFFP (CPI-Escalated) 2016 PFFP Update Difference from Current 2016 PFFP % Diff Transportation (Roads) Streets $2,627,034 $2,877,367 $4,230,000 $1,352,633 47% Bridges $1,610,000 $1,763,419 $4,080,000 $2,316,581 131% Roundabouts N/A N/A $650,000 $650,000 N/A Roads SubTotals:$4,237,034 $6,265,151 $8,960,000 $2,694,849 43% Pedestrian & Bicycle $1,775,755 $1,944,968 $2,147,000 $202,032 10% Parks & Recreation $4,448,000 $4,871,854 $6,045,700 $1,173,846 24% Totals $10,460,789 $13,081,974 $17,152,700 $4,070,726 31% In addition to the changes in project costs OASP residential units are projected to be slightly above the 2010 forecast. There will be slightly less single family units but substantially more multi-family. Table 2 shows these changes. These units help to spread the increased costs slightly when applied to the development units of the OASP. 1 Packet Pg. 10 Table 2 – OASP Residential Units Residential Type 2010 OASP 2016 Current ) Single Family 523 497 Multiple Family 414 566 Totals 937 1063 As detailed in Attachment A, these developable units and project costs are used to calculate specific plan fees for the OASP area. Table 7 of the PFFP calculate the new fees for the area. Figure 1 – Table 7 from OASP PFFP (Attachment B) While the increased project costs result in an increase in OASP Fees, other City-wide fees have been reduced since the creation of the OASP in 2010. Substantial reductions in the Water and Wastewater impact fees help create a result that overall impact fee obligations in the OASP are lower now than in 2010, even with the proposed OASP fee increase. Residential Type 2010 OASP- Fee 2016 OASP Fee 2010 Citywide & Other Fees 2016 Citywide & Other Fees 2010 Total Impact Fees1 2016 Total Impact Fees Change Single Family $12,755 $19,301 $26,822 $19,361 $39,577 $38,662 ($915) Multiple Family $9,154 $13,594 $21,426 $13,996 $30,580 $27,590 ($2,990) 1) Amounts are slightly different than shown in Draft PFFP due to removal of the OASP Park Land In -Lieu Fee as an impact fee in the above table. Finally, it is important to note that even as the OASP PFFP makes assumption s for project costs, over time, fee amounts may change due to factors such as: 1) the actual construction costs of the facilities, 2) more refined cost estimates at building time, 3) the Citywide AB 1600 study currently underway, and 4) outside funding sources such as grants if acquired by the city or others. 1 Packet Pg. 11 Summary of PFFP Changes 1. Cost Changes – Street Improvements The 2016 Updated PFFP (Attachment B) presents cost changes for most of the projects in this category. Primary increases for this category are largely reflected in two projects. Project T-8, which includes the relocation or changes in grade for Orcutt Road at Hanson Road, would involve a significant potential increase if major improvements are necessary at this location. This issue, as contemplated in the Final EIR Circulation analysis, called for either: (a) the relocation and reorientation of Hanson Road (within the County) to align with a more traditional “T” intersection, and/or (b) constructing needed changes in the grade of Orcutt Road in order to improve visibility and safety in the vicinity of Hanson Road. This roadway is now under City jurisdiction and these safety issues may need to be completed at this location. While potential project cost increased significantly, the OASP fair share has been reduced to 20% to reflect fair share or provide a local match amount for the City to pursue grant funding sources for the improvements. Another project that showed increases is the relocation and improvement to Bullock Lane (project T-7). Project estimates in 2010 did not include replacement of the culvert. More recent engineering review of the roadway has resulted in the need to replace the culvert and improve the roadway for sidewalk and bike lanes. 2. Cost Changes - Bridges The increase in the cost of bridges for at least two of the crossings (Bridges B & C) is some of the highest cost increases in the 2016 update. The estimates have been updated to reflect current design underway by the Tract 3063 developers (Righetti Ranch, Ambient C ommunities). Over $2 million in added costs are attributable to these two bridge crossings. This increase is resulting from higher level of construction drawing detail from the planning level forecasts in 2010. While the OASP recommendation include these potential cost increases, the final amount for these items will be the actual construction costs once completed. It is hoped that actual construction costs will be lower and a savings will be realized. 3. Cost Changes - Roundabouts The 2016 PFFP recommends the inclusion of two new projects for traffic control increases for safety purposes. The Orcutt Road at “A” Street roundabout (Tract 3083, West Creek, Robbins Reed) and the Tank Farm Road at “D” Street roundabout (Tract 3063) were not originally contemplated under the 2010 OASP and PFFP programs. Since adoption of the OASP, the City’s Circulation Element has been updated that provides clear policy direction to utilize roundabouts as the preferred form of new multi-street intersections. These two roundabouts add $1,300,000 in estimated costs above and beyond those from the 2010 OASP but the cost are 1 Packet Pg. 12 being split 50/50 between the overall OASP and directly abutting new developments. . 4. No Major Cost Changes – Pedestrian and Bicycle Paths The scope of planned pedestrian and bicycle paths throughout the OASP have not changed since the adoption of the Specific Plan. The proposed grade separation bridge at Industrial way continues to use the 2010 Dokken Engineering estimate with a simple adjustment for construction cost index. The bridge across Tank Farm road has increase but the OASP percentage has been reduced from 50% down to 25% to reflect a more accurate fair share percentage. Funds collected from the OASP for this project will likely be used to leverag e grant sources in the future. 5. Cost Changes – Parks and Recreation Improvements During review of the Righetti Ranch Tract 3063 project, the primary Central Neighborhood Park was analyzed in detail, along with various other parks called for in the OASP. During the processing of this tract, the Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC) has reviewed detailed design plans that reflect park improvements, parking and staging areas, public restrooms, park furnishings and furniture, and many other park amenities that were ultimately included in the approvals for Tract 3063. The developers of Tract 3063 (Ambient Communities) provided their own cost estimates for the various improvements embodied by the PRC and Council approvals of the tract. These cost estimates were peer reviewed by Wallace and found to be appropriate for the current designs. The original cost estimates for the Parks and Recreation PFFP Fee were $4,448,000. Based on outreach efforts by staff with the developers and property owners in the OASP over the past several weeks, a lowering of these park improvement costs is recommended as detailed below. The updated construction and contingency costs reflected in the Updated PFFP also include a 15% “soft costs” budget. This includes costs associated with conceptual design, construction documents and construction administration. This number is lower than the Ambient-RRM presentation, but staff believes this is an appropriate budget limit to adequately complete these park projects. Two further changes have occurred during this update process. First, the recently proposed “active” park improvements (i.e. a pump track and retaining walls supporting the track) have been removed from the Trail Junction Park area as this land is outside of the Urban Res erve Line and the OASP contemplated this as a more “passive” park and trailhead. Second, the budget for the 0.9-acre expansion into the Garay property for the Central Neighborhood Park has been eliminated. The Garay family has expressed no interest in development. Future development would include a responsibility to provide appropriate parkland within the project site consistent with the OASP land use plan, but because the Garay property can be self-contained with respect to the provision of parkland, this portion of the project does not need to be included in the area- wide fee program. 1 Packet Pg. 13 6. Minor Costs – Parkland Acquisition Fees Part and parcel of the OASP PFFP was a plan to charge a “Parklands Acquisition Fee” to property owners that were not participating in providing public parklands on their sites. The logic to this was that the Acquisition Fees would be treated as an “in-lieu” fee, used to provide partial reimbursement to the property owners that were accepting a disproportionate amount of public parklands on their property. This fee is not collected under the Quimby Act and is solely for the purposes of reimbursing property owners for parks for the OASP built on their property. This Parklands Acquisition Fee, which was originally $4,448,000 under th e 2010 OASP-PFFP, and is now $4,871,852 under the 2016 CPI-adjusted fee, is being recommended to be changed as part of the 2016 PFFP Update process. This change would involve the deletion of the $500,000 Garay improvement for their parklands, as staff has recommended the removal of the funding for a public park expansion on Garay from the area-wide fee program. 7. Minor Cost Changes – Specific Plan and EIR Reimbursements to City The costs of this 2016 PFFP Update, and a companion update to the OASP anticipated in 2017 to codify these and recent amendments to the OASP documents, will be paid for by increasing the OASP Specific Plan and EIR Reimbursement fee by $94 per residential unit. This fee increase is reflected in the 2016 PFFP Update document. Potential for Additional Sub-Area Participation Needs The OASP PFFP shares project costs for improvement projects that are of benefit to all property owners in the OASP areas and are needed to support development. As individual development project come forward, there will likely need to be additional improvements installed that are of benefit to other property owners in the area and even outside of the specific plan. Under Municipal Code provisions, developers that install infrastructure that is oversized or accommodate other development project needs can request that the City enter into a reimbursement agreement to help with the costs of this infrastructure. It is likely that reimbursement agreement requests will be forthcoming for projects in the OASP area. Th ese will be handled on an individual basis pursuant to Municipal Code and any applicable statutory requirements. CONCURRENCES The recommended updates to the PFFP have been developed in a collaborative manner with City Administration and all City Departments, and are supported by all Departments. Staff has provided a copy of the OASP PFFP update to all Orcutt Area property owners to inform them of the potential changes to the OASP fees, and to solicit their input on the proposed revisions. A property owners meeting was held on October 31st, where most property owners were represented. This provided the property owners with an opportunity to have their questions answered directly, and for staff to receive additional input before finalizing its recommendation. 1 Packet Pg. 14 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The adoption of an updated fee structure for development impacts in the Orcutt Planning Area is covered by the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a potential effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. The updating of a fee program does not have any potential to cause significant effects on the environment and the general rule CEQA 15061 (b) (3) exemption applies because all projects included within the fee program have been subject to prior CEQA review in conjunction with plan adoption and/or specific project approvals and there are no changes to previously studied projects proposed to be funded through the fee program. Even if this was a project under CEQA it would be Categorically Exempt under 15273 (a) (4) (Rates, Tolls, Fares, and Charges). Obtaining funds for capital projects, necessary to maintain service within existing services areas are exempt from CEQA. FISCAL IMPACT Adopting the revised OASP has limited impact on the General Fund of the City. The projects included in the OASP PFFP are largely development driven and are the responsibility of the OASP and other development projects. If the OASP is not updated and the project costs not allocated to development the City would need to finance the project s over time, via General Fund or grant sources beyond that assumed in the PFFP. There is no cost to the City for preparing and processing this 2016 Update, as the costs of the update are rolled into the OASP Specific Plan and EIR Reimbursement fee. Finally, the City is currently conducting a citywide review of many development impact fees (the AB 1600 update). As part of this process, the OASP PFFP and other specific plan area fees will likely change based upon a more comprehensive systemic approach to impact fee assessments. ALTERNATIVES City Council may consider alternative actions including: 1. Direct staff to reevaluate one or more of the specific recommendations contained within the 2016 PFFP Update, and return to Council with an updated document for consideration. Elect not to update the OASP PFFP impact fee program. This is not recommended because the PFFP needs to be updated to reflect the approved projects in the OASP and the cost estimates for necessary infrastructure. 1 Packet Pg. 15 Attachments: a - OASP PFFP City Council Resolultion for 11-15-2016 v2 b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) c - OASP PFFP - Projects Vicinity Map 1 Packet Pg. 16 RESOLUTION NO. _______ (2016 SERIES) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN UPDATE TO THE ORCUTT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN – PUBLIC FACILITIES FINANCING PLAN WHEREAS, in May, 2010 the City Council adopted the Orcutt Area Specific Plan (OASP) to govern development of the Orcutt Planning Area; and WHEREAS, the OASP included a Chapter 8 addressing “Public Facilities Financing;” and WHEREAS, the framework for Chapter 8 of the OASP was a September 23, 2009 “OASP Public Facilities Financing Plan” (PFFP) prepared by Goodwin Consulting Group for the City; and WHEREAS, said PFFP evaluated the needed infrastructure to support development of the Orcutt Planning Area, and established a phasing plan and fee structure to support the development of needed infrastructure on a “pay-as-you-go” basis, essentially securing fees from developing properties and concurrently completing infrastructure to support those developing properties; and WHEREAS, the 2010 OASP and 2009 PFFP each anticipated the need to periodically update and revise the scope of needed infrastructure and the costs associated with those projects to insure an adequate fee structure is in place. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Findings. Based on the evidence submitted and considered at its November 15, 2016 meeting, the City Council makes the following findings: 1. The Orcutt Area Specific Plan (OASP) and the OASP Public Facilities Financing Plan (PFFP) were duly approved in March 2, 2010, at which time a PFFP Fee Structure was established that was intended to collect funds from developing properties in the Planning Area to be used to complete needed public infrastructure to support the planned growth in the OASP. 2. The 2010 OASP and PFFP anticipated the need to periodically review and update the PFFP Fee Structure as a means to insure development was paying its fair share of new infrastructure needed to serve the developing Planning Area. 3. Since its adoption in 2010, no updates to the PFFP have been completed, making some of the estimates of costs used therein as old as the 2007 to 2010 timeframe. 4. Since May, 2010, a total of 684 residential units have been approved for development in the OASP, constituting almost 2/3rds of the total units expected in the Planning Area. 5. It is timely to provide this comprehensive update to the PFFP, and update the PFFP Fee 1.a Packet Pg. 17 Attachment: a - OASP PFFP City Council Resolultion for 11-15-2016 v2 [Revision 2] (1494 : OASP PFFP) Resolution No. _____ (2016 Series) Page 2 R ______ Structure to insure new development fully pays its way in meeting public infrastructure demands they create, in a timely and orderly manner. SECTION 2. Environmental Review. The adoption of an updated fee structure for development impacts in the Orcutt Planning Area is covered by the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a potential effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. The updating of a fee program does not have any potential to cause significant effects on the environment and the general rule CEQA 15061 (b) (3) exemption applies because all projects included within the fee program have been subject to prior CEQA review in conjunction with plan adoption and/or specific project approvals and there are no changes to previously studied projects proposed to be funded through the fee program. Even if this was a project under CEQA it would be Categorically Exempt under 15273 (a) (4) (Rates, Tolls, Fares, and Charges). Obtaining funds for capital projects, necessary to maintain service within existing services areas are exempt from CEQA. SECTION 3. Action – Adoption of Resolution. Based on the evidence and findings noted above, the City Council hereby approves the 2016 Orcutt Area Specific Plan, Public Facilities Financing Plan Update, which is attached hereto as Attachment 1. Upon motion of _______________________, seconded by _______________________, and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was adopted this _____ day of _____________________ 2016. ____________________________________ Mayor Jan Marx ATTEST: ____________________________________ Carrie Gallagher City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________________________ 1.a Packet Pg. 18 Attachment: a - OASP PFFP City Council Resolultion for 11-15-2016 v2 [Revision 2] (1494 : OASP PFFP) Resolution No. _____ (2016 Series) Page 3 R ______ 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 ______________, _________. ____________________________________ Carrie Gallagher City Clerk 1.a Packet Pg. 19 Attachment: a - OASP PFFP City Council Resolultion for 11-15-2016 v2 [Revision 2] (1494 : OASP PFFP) ORCUTT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN PUBLIC FACILITIES FINANCING PLAN Prepared for City of San Luis Obispo, California Originally Prepared by Goodwin Consulting Group, Inc. - September 23, 2009 Updated by Watson Planning Consultants, Inc. Wallace Group, Inc. City Council Draft November 15, 2016 1.b Packet Pg. 20 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) (1494 : OASP PFFP) OASP Public Facilities Financing Plan Update 2 City Council Draft November 15, 2016 Orcutt Area Specific Plan San Luis Obispo, California Public Facilities Financing Plan Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................ 3 1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................... 6 2. FACILITY NEEDS AND COST ESTIMATES ............................................. 8 3. OASP FEE PROGRAM AND OTHER FEES ........................................... 10 4. FACILITY PHASING AND PROJECT CASH FLOW ................................ 13 5. IMPLEMENTATION PLAN ................................................................... 14 APPENDIX A: PUBLIC FACILITIES FINANCING PLAN TABLES APPENDIX B: OASP FACILITY COST ESTIMATES 1.b Packet Pg. 21 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) (1494 : OASP PFFP) OASP Public Facilities Financing Plan Update 3 City Council Draft November 15, 2016 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ________________________________________________ A. Project Description and Purpose of Report The Orcutt Area Specific Plan ("OASP" or "Project") is a primarily residential development project that is located in a currently unincorporated area of San Luis Obispo County, immediately southeast of the City of San Luis Obispo city limits. Approximately 892 to 979 housing units, and 16,500 square feet of non - residential land uses, are anticipated to be developed within the OASP by build -out of the Project. This Public Facilities Financing Plan (PFFP) describes the public facilities required to serve future development in the OASP area and identifies the total one-time burdens (impact fees) to be collected from each land use to fund these facilities on a pay-as-you go basis. Furthermore, estimated annual impact fee revenues are compared with estimated annual facility costs to determine if possible gaps in funding exist. Implementation procedures that must be enacted by the City are also described in this PFFP. The OASP PFFP was completed in September 2009, and adopted as part of the OASP approval by City Council in May, 2010. As noted in the PFFP and OASP, future updates to the Financing Program were anticipated as construction costs change and facilities proje cts were studied closer and came into clearer focus. This 2016 PFFP constitutes a comprehensive update to the Financing Program, including the addition, modification and updates to various construction projects and impact fees to support development in the Project area. B. Summary of Impact Fees Various transportation, pedestrian and bicycle path, and park improvements are required. These Project - specific improvements were designed and sized to serve the residential development in the OASP. The total cost for these improvements is estimated to be $12.2 million. In addition to paying impact fees for Project-specific costs, future development in the OASP is also expected to participate in the existing City - wide development impact fee programs for transp ortation, water, and sewer facilities. Lastly, the OASP will be subject to other impact fees for parkland mitigation and Specific Plan and EIR preparation costs, as calculated in this analysis. Table ES-I at the end of the executive summary shows the Project-specific, City-wide, and other fees for each residential land use within the OASP. Total impact fees per unit are summarized below: Total Impact Fees Single Family $41,700 $38,392 Multi-Family $32,000 $27,590 These figures do not include parkland in-lieu fees. OASP property owners have the option of paying a parkland in-lieu fee, providing parkland on their property, or combining the two for purposes of mitigating their parkland obligation. The fees for each property owner, assuming no pa rkland dedication, have been calculated by the City and are provided separately in Table 9 of Appendix A. 1.b Packet Pg. 22 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) (1494 : OASP PFFP) OASP Public Facilities Financing Plan Update 4 City Council Draft November 15, 2016 It is also important to note that the one-time burdens for the OASP are in addition to in-tract improvements that are expected to be privately funded by the OASP developers; in-tract improvements are not addressed in this report. C. Project Cash Flow An estimated absorption schedule for the Project was created based on information from the City and the Specific Plan. Based on this schedule and facility phasing information also provided by the City, the Project's cash flow shows that impact fee revenue, generated on a pay-as-you-go basis, will be sufficient to fund each item of Project-specific infrastructure as it is needed. It is estimated that there will be positive cash flows in some years and negative cash flows in others for individual improvement categories; however, there will be an overall total cumulative surplus in each year. except for two, in which the revenues and costs will break even. Table 15 of Appendix A provides details on annual and cumulative revenue and expenditure projections. 1.b Packet Pg. 23 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) (1494 : OASP PFFP) Project-Specific Impact Fees City-Wide Impact Fees Other Impact Fees Land Use Trans- portation Pedes- trian & Bicycle Paths Parks & Recrea- tion Parkland Acquisition Total Project- Specific Impact Fees Transpor- tation Impact Fee Water Impact Fee Waste- water Impact Fee Total City- Wide Fees Specific Plan & EIR Fee Total Other Fees Total Gross Fees per Unit Total Gross Fees per Net Acre Single Family $5,217 $2,186 $5,352 $4,426 $17,181 $3,220 $15,919 $6,946 $26,085 $737 $737 $44,003 $263,313 Multi-Family $3,644 $1,527 $3,983 $3,294 $12,448 $2,858 $12,735 $5,557 $21,150 $276 $276 $33,874 $541,461 1 OASP property owners have the option of paying this fee, providing parkland on their property, or combining the two for purposes of mitigating their parkland obligation. The parkland in-lieu fees for each property owner have been calculated by the City and provided in Table 9 of Appendix A. Sources: Orcutt Area Specific Plan (Final, May 2010); City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department; OASP Public Facilities Financing Plan - Goodwin Consulting Group, Inc. (2009) Project-Specific Impact Fees City-Wide Impact Fees Land Use Trans- portation Pedes- trian & Bicycle Paths Parks & Recrea- tion Parkland Acquisition Total Project- Specific Impact Fees Transpor- tation Impact Fee Water Impact Fee Waste- water Impact Fee Total City- Wide Fees Specific Plan & EIR Fee Total Other Fees Total Gross Fees per Unit Total Gross Fees per Net Acre 2 Single Family $10,040 $2,406 $6,585 1 $19,031 $3,622 $11,023 $3,815 $18,460 $901 $901 $38,392 $218,316 Multi-Family $7,014 $1,681 $4,899 1 $13,594 $3,214 $7,716 $2,670 $13,600 $396 $396 $27,590 $602,932 1 OASP property owners have the option of paying this fee, providing parkland on their property, or combining the two for purposes of mitigating their parkland obligation. The parkland in-lieu fees for each property owner have been calculated by the City and provided in Table 9 of Appendix A. 2 Net Single-Family acreage = 87.4 acres. Net Multi-Family acreage = 25.9 acres. Sources: Orcutt Area Specific Plan (Final, May 2010); City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department; OASP Public Facilities Financing Plan - Goodwin Consulting Group, Inc. (2009) Updated: Watson Planning Consultants, Inc.November 3, 2016 TABLE ES-1 TOTAL PROJECT-SPECIFIC INFRASTRUCTURE PLUS CITY-WIDE AND OTHER FEES TABLE ES-1 TOTAL PROJECT-SPECIFIC INFRASTRUCTURE PLUS CITY-WIDE AND OTHER FEES DRAFT PFFP Table ES-1 - PFFP 2009-2016 comparison Current as of: 11/3/2016 1.b Packet Pg. 24 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) OASP Public Facilities Financing Plan Update 6 City Council Draft November 15, 2016 Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION _____________________________________________________ A. Objective This report analyzes the public facilities burden that must be carried by the land uses proposed in the Orcutt Area Specific Plan ("OASP" or "Project") and presents a financing strategy to fund that burden. The burden consists of infrastructure and related costs necessary to serve the Project plus development impact fees that would be imposed on the Project for other City-wide capital improvements. The burden does not include in-tract improvements for the OASP; it is expected that these costs will be privately funded by the OASP developers. In summary, this Public Facilities Financing Plan (PFFP) does the following: • Summarizes the implementation measures that must be enacted by the City • Projects annual cash flows comparing revenues (impact fees) against expenses (public facilities) • Outlines the phasing of public facilities needed to keep pace with projected development • Identifies the total one-time burdens (impact fees) to be collected within the Project area to fund facilities on a pay-as-you-go basis • Presents the costs of required public facilities and allocates the costs to the proposed land uses • Describes public facilities required to serve future development in the OASP area • Summarizes the proposed land uses in the OASP B. Project Description The Orcutt Area Specific plan encompasses approximately 231 acres and is situated in the County of San Luis Obispo immediately southeast of the City of San Luis Obispo city limits. The Specific Plan area is bounded by Tank Farm Road to the south, Orcutt Road to the east and north, and the Union Pacific Railroad to the west. Righetti Hill, one of the City's natural landmarks, is situated in the southern portion of the area. There are currently 13 property owners within the OASP and a total of 21 parcels, one of which has all of which have already been annexed into the City. A location map from the Specific Plan dated June 2006 May 2010 is shown on the following page. At build-out, the OASP is expected to develop between 892 and 979 up to 1063 residential units, which will produce approximately 2,000 residents, and 16,500 square feet of non -residential land uses on a total of 114 acres. The Project is predominantly residential and will include low density residential (R -1), medium density residential (R-2), medium high density residential (R-3), and high density residential (R- 4) units. For purposes of this analysis, low and medium density units are categorized as single family residential, and medium high and high density units are categorized as multi-family residential. Regarding 1.b Packet Pg. 25 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) (1494 : OASP PFFP) OASP Public Facilities Financing Plan Update 7 City Council Draft November 15, 2016 non-residential land uses, approximately half an acre is designated for a pedestrian -oriented shopping area that will provide a range of retail sales, personal service establishments, and selective office uses. An additional 103 acres of parks, open space, and detention ponds, as well as 14 acres of arterial, collector, and major local roads, are anticipated in the Project. Table 1 of Appendix A summarizes the OASP land uses that are factored into the analysis presented in this PFFP. The infrastructure required to serve the Project, as described in this report, was sized based on the maximum amount of housing units. However, for purposes of calculating the facilities burden, this report uses the approximate mid-point of 937 units to account for the fact that residential properties may not be developed at their maximum densities. 1.b Packet Pg. 26 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) (1494 : OASP PFFP) OASP Public Facilities Financing Plan Update 8 City Council Draft November 15, 2016 Chapter 2 FACILITY NEEDS AND COST ESTIMATES The Orcutt Area Specific Plan describes in detail the water, wastewater, storm drainage, roads, parks, and miscellaneous improvements proposed to meet the needs of the community. The City currently has a development impact fee program in place that will fund the water and wastewater improvements and some of the road improvements for the Project Thes e City-wide fees will be discussed in more detail in Chapter 3 of this report, where the Project-specific fee program and other fees are covered. For storm drainage, individual land owners are anticipated to utilize individual onsite detention basins, whi ch are considered in-tract improvements, or participate in a combined detention basin with other owners. Owners requesting participation in a combined basin will enter into a separate cost sharing agreement with the other participating owners. The remaining Project-specific costs for roads, bridges, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and parks and recreation that are not covered by existing development impact fees or other funding mechanisms are the focus of this study and are presented in Appendix B of this r eport. The total cost for these improvements required for the OASP is estimated to be $17.15 million. Table 2 of Appendix A summarizes the cost information for each facility category. Certain infrastructure items within the transportation and pedestrian and bicycle path categories are regional in nature and will serve other future development areas outside the OASP. Both the gross costs and net costs allocated to the OASP arc shown. A summary of the net infrastructure costs to serve the OASP development is presented in the following table. TABLE A INFRASTRUCTURE COST ESTIMATES Improvement Total Cost Transportation $5,050,000 $8,959,995 Pedestrian and Bicycle Paths $2,656,000 $2,147,000 Parks and Recreation $4,448,000 $6,045,714 Total $12,154,000$17,152,709 A. Transportation Improvements and Pedestrian and Bicycle Paths The circulation plan for the Project provides direct connections between the existing arterials (Orcutt Road and Tank Farm Road) and the new roads within the OASP. Bicycle and pedestrian circulation routes will provide access throughout the interior of the Project and will connect to the existing pedestrian and bicycle network outside the Orcutt area. The following is a list of circulation system projects required to serve the OASP: • T-1 Orcutt Road / Tank Farm Road improvements • T-2 Broad Street / South Street - Santa Barbara Road improvements • T-3 Broad Street / Tank Farm Road second southbound left turn lane and a second northbound left turn lane • T-4 Orcutt Road / Johnson Avenue improvements • T-5 Broad Street / Prado Road extension and second northbound left turn lane • T-6 Orcutt Road widening - Broad to Laurel • T-7 Bullock Lane realignment 1.b Packet Pg. 27 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) (1494 : OASP PFFP) OASP Public Facilities Financing Plan Update 9 City Council Draft November 15, 2016 • T-8 Relocation of Hanson Road or reducing the grade on Orcutt at Hanson Road • T-9 Transit stops (5) • T-10 Tank Farm Road Roundabout (at Righetti Ranch Road) • T-11 Orcutt Road Roundabout (at “A” Street) • T-12, T-13, T-14 Orcutt expansion area bridges - A, B and C • B-1 Pedestrian and bicycle paths • B-2 Pedestrian / bike overpass • B-3 Bike path extension over Tank Farm Road The total cost for street and bridge improvements is estimated to be approximately $6.6 $12.0 million and the Project's fair share of these improvements is estimated to be $5.1 $8.9 million. An additional $2.7 $2.1 million is anticipated for the OASP's fair share of pedestrian and bicycle paths, which are estimated to cost a total of $2.9 $3.9 million. Costs include engineering and architectural design, construction contingencies, site preparation, earthwork, hardscape, traffic markings, and miscellaneous improvements. B. Parks and Recreation Improvements The Orcutt Area Specific Plan provides for approximately 14.3 16.5 acres of parkland. A proposed neighborhood park located at the center of the Project will serve as a community gathering place for casual recreation and sporting events by providing a variety of active recreation facilities. In addition, a linear park is proposed that will serve a dual purpose as both an area wide detention basin and a recreation area, and a smaller pocket park is planned within the low and medium density residential neighborhoods. The following list summarizes the parks and recreation projects planned to serve the Project: • Central Neighborhood Park - 12.6 Acres • Pocket Park - 0.5 Acres • Linear Park System - 1.2 Acres • Trail Junction Park – 2.2 Acres The total cost of park and recreation improvements to be funded by the Project is estimated to be approximately $4.4 $6.0 million. This amount does not include costs for land; it is anticipated that acreage for the parks will be acquired through dedications to the City, charging in -lieu fees, or most likely, a combination of both. Table 9 of Appendix A presents parkland in-lieu fees by property owner, as calculated by the City, assuming no parkland is dedicated. 1.b Packet Pg. 28 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) (1494 : OASP PFFP) OASP Public Facilities Financing Plan Update 10 City Council Draft November 15, 2016 Chapter 3 OASP FEE PROGRAM AND OTHER FEES Assembly Bill 1600 (herein "AB 1600”), which was enacted by the State of California in 1987, created Section 66000 et seq. of the Government Code. In order to establish, increase, or impose a fee as a condition of approval of a development project, AB 160 0 (also known as the Mitigation Fee Act) requires a public agency to specifically identify the public facilities funded by the impact fees, and determine how there is a reasonable relationship, or "nexus," between the type of development project and the ne ed for the facilities, the cost of the facilities, and the need to impose a fee. Development impact fees are monetary exactions (as opposed to taxes or special assessments) that are charged by local agencies in conjunction with approval of a development project. The fees are paid by builders or developers, typically at the time a building permit is issued. Impact fees are levied for the purpose of defraying all or a portion of the costs of a public facility, improvement, or amenity that benefits the project. The collection of impact fees does not require formation of a special district; an impact fee program is implemented by a public agency's adoption of a resolution or ordinance. Impact fees will be an important component of this PFFP. Once the Proje ct area is completely annexed into the City, a fee ordinance must be adopted by the City and the City's existing public facilities fee program must be updated prior to development of the Orcutt Area Specific Plan; the fee program may also be updated and revised as part of future development phases. This comprehensive update constitutes the first such update since adoption of the original OASP in May 2010. A. Proposed Orcutt Area Specific Plan Fee Program The primary source of funding for Project-specific improvements will be the proposed Orcutt Area Specific Plan Fee Program. In order to fairly allocate facility costs funded by the fee program among land uses within the OASP, it is necessary to use factors that relate the amount of benefit a land use will derive from a given capital facility relative to that of other land uses. Table 3 of Appendix A outlines the appropriate benefit unit classification used for each facility, along with the individual fact ors associated with the different land uses. The individual factors for transportation and pedestrian and bicycle path improvements are consistent with those documented in the OASP draft transportation impact analysis. Park and recreation improvements are allocated to the residential land uses based on the number of residents served. As previously mentioned, the public facilities identified in this analysis were designed and sized to serve the residential development in the OASP since the proposed comme rcial uses arc such a minor part of the total Project, representing less than one-half of 1% of the net developable acreage. Although a very small amount of non-residential development is also anticipated, the cost of public facilities is not allocated to these commercial land uses since they may be developed only as a result of the demand created by the residential development. Tables 4 through 6 of Appendix A show the cost allocation process for each infrastructure category. For example, Table 4 shows the cost allocation process for transportation improvements. The benefit unit, expressed as daily trips, is multiplied by the number of residential dwelling units for each residential category, producing the total number of trips per land use. The perce ntage of trips for each land use relative to the total is calculated and used to allocate the total facility cost among the land uses. For example, single family residential development accounts for 64.4% 55.7% of the total trips. This percentage is mult iplied 1.b Packet Pg. 29 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) (1494 : OASP PFFP) OASP Public Facilities Financing Plan Update 11 City Council Draft November 15, 2016 by the total cost of $5.1 $8.9 million for transportation improvements in the OASP to produce a total burden of $3.3 $4.99 million for single family residential. Dividing this total burden by the quantity of land use (523 497 units) produces a cost of $6,218 $10,040 per dwelling unit for single family residential development, and the amount per unit for multi-family residential development is also shown in Table 4. Similar calculations are shown for pedestrian and bicycle paths, and parks and recre ation costs are shown in Tables 5 and 6. A summary of the Project-specific costs calculated in Tables 4 through 6 is provided in Table 7. Table 7 shows the total facility cost for the OASP along with the burden allocated to each land use. The table bel ow summarizes the gross Project-specific fees per single family and multifamily unit. TABLE B P ROJECT-SPECIFIC COST SUMMARY Land Use Gross Project-Specific Fee Residential (per unit) Single Family $14,800 $19,031 Multi-Family $10,600 $13,594 B. Existing Development Impact Fee Programs Development in the OASP is expected to participate in the existing City -wide development impact fee programs for transportation, water, and sewer facilities. These fees are in addition to the gross Project - specific fees discussed above and will fund the Project's fair share of City -wide public facility costs. Note that there is no transportation infrastructure incorporated into the Project -specific fees that is duplicated in the City-wide fees. The City-wide development impact fees for each land use category are shown in Table 8 of Appendix A. A summary of the City-wide fees applied to a single family unit is provided below: TABLE C CITY-WIDE FEES PER SINGLE FAMILY UNIT Facility Type Fee per Single Family Unit Transportation $3,200 $3,622 Water $15,900 $11,023 Wastewater $6,900 $3,815 Total City Fees $26,000 $18,460 The wastewater facility fee shown in Table C includes two components: (i ) the City-wide wastewater fee; plus (ii) an area-specific add-on fee related to wastewater infrastructure designed specifically to serve the OASP. 1.b Packet Pg. 30 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) (1494 : OASP PFFP) OASP Public Facilities Financing Plan Update 12 City Council Draft November 15, 2016 C. Parkland In-Lieu Fee As previously mentioned, OASP property owners have the option of paying a parkl and in-lieu fee, providing parkland on their property, or combining the two for purposes of mitigating their obligation to the City. The full parkland in-lieu fees for each property owner have been calculated by the City and are provided in Table 9 of Appendix A. Supporting documentation for the individual fees is provided in Appendix B. D. Specific Plan and EIR Fee New development in the Orcutt Area Specific Plan will also be subject to a fee that will be used to reimburse the City and certain land owners for Specific Plan and EJR preparation costs. The total cost through adoption of the 2010 OASP of $500,000 is spread equally to the residential land uses on a per -acre basis, resulting in a fee of $4,413 per acre. This amount is translated into a fe e per residential unit based on the density assumptions shown in Table 1 of Appendix A. The Specific Plan and EIR fees for each land use designation are shown in Table 8 of Appendix A. The cost for this 2016 comprehensive update to the PFFP has been added to this fee in the amount of $50,000 (PFFP document update). Additionally, various modifications to the OASP are needed to reflect the PFFP fee and related text updates, as well as various modifications approved over the last 6 years. Assume a combined added $100,000 cost for these updates, making the reimbursement to the City of $600,000. This equates to an increase of the per-unit-fee of 1,063 units = $94.07/unit fee, for a total of $901 per single-family unit and $396 per multi-family unit. E. Summary of Impact Fees The Project-specific, City-wide, and other fees are presented in Table 10 of Appendix A and are added together to show the total gross burden by land use on a per-unit and per-acre basis. A portion of the OASP has the potential to develop as a school instead of residential. The fees for residential are shown both per unit and per acre to (i) ensure that the amount of expected fee revenue will be maintained and (ii] to document the school's infrastructure obligation, or burden, so that i t can be considered in a possible land sale transaction between the school district and the land owner. The table below summarizes the total gross burden by land use for the OASP. TABLE D TOTAL GROSS FEES PER UNIT OR NET ACRE Land Use Gross Fees Per Unit Gross Fees Per Net Acre Residential (per unit) Single Family $41,700 $38,392 $249,400$218,316 Multi-Family $32,000 $27,590 $511,700$602,932 Table D Notes: Single Family units = 497; Multi-Family units = 566; Total 1,063 units. Net Acreage for SFR = 87.4 acres; Net Acreage for MFR = 25.9 acres. 1.b Packet Pg. 31 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) (1494 : OASP PFFP) OASP Public Facilities Financing Plan Update 13 City Council Draft November 15, 2016 Chapter 4 FACILITY PHASING AND PROJECT CASH FLOW A. Absorption Assumptions Development in the OASP is anticipated to occur in three phases. Based on information provided in the Specific Plan and input from the City, an estimated absorption schedule that is also consistent with the City's Growth Management Phasing Schedule for the Orcutt area was created. P hase I of the Project is assumed to have a five -year absorption horizon, and both Phases 2 and 3 are assumed to develop over the subsequent three-year time periods. While actual absorption rates will vary, these projections provide a useful schedule to estimate the timing of fee revenue and facility phasing. The annual and cumulative absorption assumptions are presented in Tables 11 and 12 of Appendix A. B. Facility Phasing Facilities will be required at various stages of Project development. The majority of the facility phasing is linked to residential development; for example, the Orcutt Road/Tank Farm Road transportation improvements are required to be co mpleted prior to the development of the 371st unit. A limited number of facilities will need to be installed during the first years of development, including construction of the Orcutt expansion area Bridge A, and two transit stops. Other facilities, such as the Broad Street/Prado Road extension, will be constructed as impact fee revenues become available, which is not expected to occur until the last few years of Project development. A conscious effort was made during the design of these phasing assump tions to ensure funding would be available for these improvements on a pay-as-you-go basis. As noted in the cash flow section below, no significant cumulative funding gaps are projected as a result of these phasing assumptions; therefore, lump - sum financing with bonds or other mechanisms can be avoided. Table 13 of Appendix A delineates the phasing assumptions for the OASP facility costs and Table 14 presents the annual costs based on those assumptions. C. Project Cash Flow Table 15 of Appendix A compares the phasing of facility costs to the timing of fee revenues for each cost category and in total. Based on the absorption and phasing assumptions discussed above, there will be positive cash flows in some years and negative cash flows in others; howev er, it is estimated that there will be an overall total cumulative surplus in each year. except for two, in which the revenues and costs will break even. In the last three years of development, fee revenues will be available for the Broad Street/Prado Road extension, the pedestrian and bicycle paths, and for reimbursements to Orcutt Associates, LLC for the Orcutt Road widening project, without causing a cumulative net deficit to occur. 1.b Packet Pg. 32 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) (1494 : OASP PFFP) OASP Public Facilities Financing Plan Update 14 City Council Draft November 15, 2016 Chapter 5 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN The Orcutt Area Specific Plan identifies a program for significant residential growth, and limited non - residential growth, within the City of San Luis Obispo and will be subject to updates and revisions in future years as development applications are submitted and processed. This comprehensive update constitutes the first such update since adoption of the original OASP in May 2010. The Specific Plan and the PFFP are based on assumptions of land use, facility demands, facility standards and design, and cost estimates. Each of these assumptions may be subject to change in future years; therefore, the PFFP may also be revised to reflect these changes. The ongoing implementation of the PFFP will be parallel to the continued monitoring of the Specific Plan; and will require the same degr ee of time and effort to keep it current and useful. In this manner, the PFFP will guide the overall funding of community infrastructure required to serve the Specific Plan. Following is a summary of many of the tasks associated with implementation of the PFFP. A. Updates and Revisions As noted above, changes are likely to occur in facility plans, land use plans, or cost estimates. When these items are revised, there will be a corresponding change in the fair share cost allocation to each land use in the OASP. Land use and facility changes will result in revisions to the benefit analysis and corresponding cost allocation to each land use. To the extent some projects in the OASP will have been developed and will have paid their fair share as defined at the time they were built, revisions will apply only to future new development. If facility costs are determined to be higher than estimated in the PFFP, the City will need to increase fees in future years and, if applicable, call on developers to fund th e extra expenses through the provisions of an acquisition agreement. As the City will adopt new ordinances or update existing ordinances on an ongoing basis, fees will be adjusted based on actual costs realized after construction bids have been received for public facilities. If actual costs are higher than expected, again, the City will have to increase fees and/or rely on the terms of an acquisition agreement to avoid a financing deficit in future years. B. Action Items Prior to commencement of development in the Specific Plan, the City will need to adopt a fee ordinance or resolution implementing a Specific Plan fee program for each type of capital facility. The initial ordinance will reflect fees based on information available at that time. Fees will be adjusted annually or on a more frequent basis to reflect actual costs and current cost estimates. Pursuant to Section 66006 of the Government Code, the City will establish a separate Specific Plan capital facility account and a unique fund for each type of public facility for which fees are collected. Establishment of this account will prevent commingling of the Specific Plan fees with other City revenues and funds. Interest income earned by fee revenues in this account will be deposited in the account and applied to facility construction costs. Within one hundred eighty (180) days of the close of ea ch fiscal year, 1.b Packet Pg. 33 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) (1494 : OASP PFFP) OASP Public Facilities Financing Plan Update 15 City Council Draft November 15, 2016 the City will make information pertaining to the account [as required by Section 66006(b)(1)] available to the public and will review this information at a regularly scheduled public hearing. In order to maximize the efficiency of the cap ital improvements program, the City may borrow money from one fund within the Specific Plan account to pay for facilities financed by another fund within the account. This borrowing will occur when one type of facility is needed immediately, while another type is not needed for a number of years. The City will monitor such borrowing on an ongoing basis and will repay funds from which fee revenues were borrowed in a timely manner and in an amount equal to the original amount borrowed plus the interest that would have accrued had the money not been borrowed from the fund. 1.b Packet Pg. 34 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) (1494 : OASP PFFP) OASP Public Facilities Financing Plan Update 16 City Council Draft November 15, 2016 APPENDIX A PUBLIC FACILITIES FINANCING PLAN TABLES 1.b Packet Pg. 35 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) (1494 : OASP PFFP) Table 1 City of San Luis Obispo Orcutt Area Specific Plan Public Facilities Financing Plan Land Use and Demographic Assumptions Net Units Total Persons/Total Land Use Acres (1)per Acre Units (2)Household (3)Population Single Family 87.4 6 497 2.46 1,223 Multi-Family 25.9 16 22 566 1.83 1,036 Total 113.3 1063 2,258 (1) Net acres excludes the acreage of arterial, collector, and major roads. The net acreage includes mixed-use residential. (2) The projected number of units for the OASP is between 892 and 979 units. The mid-point of this range is used in this analysis. (2) Based on project applications approved through May, 2016, the pattern and numbers of land use types has changed, with a higher percentage of multi-family units being achieved than anticipated in 2010. This Table reflects updated projections for unit types, and a baseline target number of total units at 1,063. (3) The population per household assumptions in the Specific Plan have been adjusted to reflect a weighted average of 2.18, which is consistent with the CA Department of Finance's estimate for the City of San Luis Obispo as of January 2007. 2015 US Census reports 2.48 persons per unit overall, without a breakdown by unit type. Sources: Orcutt Area Specific Plan (Draft, June 2006); City of San Luis Obispo; CA Department of Finance; Goodwin Consulting Group, Inc.9/23/2009 Sources:Orcutt Area Specific Plan (Final, May 2010); City of San Luis Obispo; CA Department of Finance; OASP Public Facilities Financing Plan - Goodwin Consulting Group, Inc. (2009) Updated:Watson Planning Consultants, Inc.6/10/2016DRAFT PFFP Table 1 - 1063 du update Current as of: 10/12/2016 1.b Packet Pg. 36 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) Table 2 City of San Luis Obispo Orcutt Area Specific Plan Public Facilities Financing Plan Summary of Project-Specific Infrastructure Costs Gross OASP Fair Share Net Ref.Item Total Cost Percentage Total Cost Transportation Street Improvements T1 Orcutt Road/Tank Farm Road 1,111,000$ 100.0%1,111,000$ T2 Broad Street/South St-Santa Barbara Road 707,100$ 1 25.4%179,603$ T3 Broad Street/Tank Farm Rd 599,000$ 50.0%299,500$ T4 Orcutt Road/Johnson Ave 359,300$ 2 100.0%359,300$ T5 Broad Street/Prado Road Extension 528,000$ 100.0%528,000$ Second Northbound Left Turn Lane T6 Orcutt Road Widening 383,400$ 3 89.9%344,592$ T7 Bullock Lane Realignment 1,418,000$ 70.0%992,600$ T8 Relocating Hanson Road 1,452,000$ 4 20.0%290,400$ or Reducing the Grade on Orcutt at Hanson Rd T9 Transit Stops (5 at $25,000 each)125,000$ 100.0%125,000$ T10 Tank Farm Roundabout (at Righetti Ranch Road)650,000$ 5 50.0%325,000$ T11 Orcutt Road Roundabout (at "A" Street)650,000$ 6 50.0%325,000$ Subtotal Street Improvements 7,982,800$ 4,879,995$ Orcutt Expansion Area Bridges T12 Bridge A 680,000$ 100.0%680,000$ T13 Bridge B 1,800,000$ 100.0%1,800,000$ T14 Bridge C 1,600,000$ 100.0%1,600,000$ Subtotal Orcutt Expansion Area Bridges 4,080,000$ 4,080,000$ Total Street and Bridges Improvements 12,062,800$ 8,959,995$ Pedestrian and Bicycle Paths B1 Pedestrian and Bicycle Paths 841,000$ 100.0%841,000$ B2 Pedestrian/Bike Overpass at Industrial Way 2,108,000$ 7 50.0%1,054,000$ B3 Bike Path Extension Over Tank Farm Rd 1,008,000$ 8 25.0%252,000$ Total Pedestrian and Bicycle Paths 3,957,000$ 2,147,000$ Total Transportation Improvements 16,019,800$ 11,106,995$ Parks & Recreation P1 Central Neighborhood Park - Main Portion South of Creeks (Righetti)4,800,341$ 9 100.0%4,800,341$ P2 Central Neighborhood Park - Phase 2 (Garay)-$ 10 100.0%-$ P3 Pocket Park 339,849$ 100.0%339,849$ P4 Linear Park System 813,527$ 100.0%813,527$ P5 Trail Junction Park 91,997$ 11 91,997$ Total Parks & Recreation 6,045,714$ 6,045,714$ Total Project-Specific Infrastructure Costs 22,065,514$ 17,152,709$ Parkland Acquisition Fee (11.80 acres x's $300,000/acre)3,540,000$ 12 100.0%3,540,000$ Totals 25,605,514$ 20,692,709$ 1 Project Cost has been adjusted to reflect actual cost minus SHA Grant on project; adjusted for CPI ($645,557). Funds to reimburse City TIF advance to OASP. 2 2010 project estimate = $300,000, adjusted for ENR Changes (March 2010 to August 2016). 3 Total project cost set by Council in 2011 at $357,057, adjusted by CPI to 2016 = $383,400. OASP participation set at 89.88% for reimbursement to Orcutt Assoc. 4 OASP participation cost reduced to 20% to reflect potential local match for HSIP program, or for independent work at intersection. 5 Tank Farm Roundabout (T10) is split 50% to Tract 3063 (Righetti Ranch) and 50% divided between all OASP properties. 6 Orcutt Road Roundabout (T11) is split 50% to Tract 3083 (West Creek) and 50% divided between all OASP properties. 7 By previous action of City Council, the full contribution to the Industrial Way bike/pedestrian overcrossing by the OASP is 50%. 8 OASP participation amount adjusted to 25% to reflect future local match of Grant Request. 9 Parks construction and contingency estimates updated; "soft" costs limited to 15% of estimated projects. 10 0.9 acre expansion of Neighborhood Park into Garay omitted from fee schedule. 11 Includes passive park improvements only. Active improvements deleted from the estimate. 12 Acquisition Fee corrected to reflect approved Neighborhood Park design and revised acreage. Sources: The Wallace Group, City of San Luis Obispo, Goodwin Consulting Group, Inc (2009) Updated: City of San Luis Obispo, The Wallace Group, Watson Planning Consultants, Inc. November 3, 2016 DRAFT PFFP Table 2-4-5-6-7 with Parks Changes - Table2 Applic's 2016 projection Current as of: 11/3/2016 1.b Packet Pg. 37 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) (1494 : OASP PFFP) Table 3 City of San Luis Obispo Orcutt Area Specific Plan Public Facilities Financing Plan Capital Facility Benefit Units Capital Pedestrian and Parks & Facility:Transportation 1 Bicycle Paths Recreation Benefit Daily Daily Residents Unit:Trip Rate Trip Rate Served Single Family 9.09 per unit 9.09 per unit 2.46 per unit Multi-Family 6.35 per unit 6.35 per unit 1.83 per unit Total 1 Includes street improvements and bridges. Sources: Draft Transportation Impact Analysis (Fehr & Peers, June 2007) Goodwin Consulting Group, Inc.9/23/2009 Orcutt Area Specific Plan (Final, May 2010); City of San Luis Obispo; OASP Public Facilities Financing Plan - Goodwin Consulting Group, Inc. (2009) Updated:Watson Planning Consultants, Inc.7/27/2016 DRAFT PFFP Table 3 - Table 3 Current as of: 10/12/2016 1.b Packet Pg. 38 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) Table 4 City of San Luis Obispo Orcutt Area Specific Plan Public Facilities Financing Plan Cost Allocation Table Transportation Net Daily Total Percent Total Cost per Land Use Units Acres Trip Rate Trips Allocation Costs Unit Cost $8,959,995 per Unit Single Family 497 87.4 9.09 4,518 55.69%$4,990,100 $10,040 Multi-Family 566 25.9 6.35 3,594 44.31%$3,969,896 $7,014 Total 1063 113.3 8,112 100%$8,959,995 Sources: Orcutt Area Specific Plan (Draft, June 2006); City of San Luis Obispo; CA Department of Finance; Goodwin Consulting Group, Inc.9/23/2009 Sources:Orcutt Area Specific Plan (Final, May 2010); City of San Luis Obispo; CA Department of Finance; OASP Public Facilities Financing Plan - Goodwin Consulting Group, Inc. (2009) Updated:Watson Planning Consultants, Inc.October 28, 2016 DRAFT PFFP Table 2-4-5-6-7 without Parks Changes - Table 4 Current as of: 11/2/2016 1.b Packet Pg. 39 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) Table 5 City of San Luis Obispo Orcutt Area Specific Plan Public Facilities Financing Plan Cost Allocation Table Pedestrian and Bicycle Paths Net Daily Total Percent Total Cost per Land Use Units Acres Trip Rate Trips Allocation Costs Unit Cost $2,147,000 per Unit Single Family 497 87.4 9.09 4,518 55.69%$1,195,731 $2,406 Multi-Family 566 25.9 6.35 3,594 44.31%$951,269 $1,681 Total 1063 113.3 8,112 100%$2,147,000 Sources: Orcutt Area Specific Plan (Draft, June 2006); City of San Luis Obispo; CA Department of Finance; Goodwin Consulting Group, Inc.9/23/2009 Sources:Orcutt Area Specific Plan (Final, May 2010); City of San Luis Obispo; CA Department of Finance; OASP Public Facilities Financing Plan - Goodwin Consulting Group, Inc. (2009) Updated:Watson Planning Consultants, Inc.October 28, 2016 DRAFT PFFP Table 2-4-5-6-7 without Parks Changes - Table 5 Current as of: 11/2/2016 1.b Packet Pg. 40 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) Table 6 City of San Luis Obispo Orcutt Area Specific Plan Public Facilities Financing Plan Cost Allocation Table Parks & Recreation Total Net Residents Residents Percent Total Cost per Land Use Units Acres Served Served Allocation Costs Unit Cost $6,045,714 per Unit Single Family 497 87.4 2.46 1,223 54.14%$3,272,941 $6,585 Multi-Family 566 25.9 1.83 1,036 45.86%$2,772,773 $4,899 Total 1063 113.3 2,258 100%$6,045,714 Sources: Orcutt Area Specific Plan (Draft, June 2006); City of San Luis Obispo; CA Department of Finance; Goodwin Consulting Group, Inc.9/23/2009 Sources:Orcutt Area Specific Plan (Final, May 2010); City of San Luis Obispo; CA Department of Finance; OASP Public Facilities Financing Plan - Goodwin Consulting Group, Inc. (2009) Updated:Watson Planning Consultants, Inc.November 3, 2016 DRAFT PFFP Table 2-4-5-6-7 with Parks Changes - Table 6 Current as of: 11/3/2016 1.b Packet Pg. 41 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) Table 7 City of San Luis Obispo Orcutt Area Specific Plan Public Facilities Financing Plan Project-Specific Infrastructure Cost Allocation Summary Capital Pedestrian and Parks &Total Cost Total Facility:Transportation Bicycle Paths Recreation Allocation Facility Costs Benefit Daily Daily Residents Unit:Trip Rate Trip Rate Served Capital Costs:$8,959,995 $2,147,000 $6,045,714 $17,152,709 per Unit Single Family $10,040 $2,406 $6,585 $19,032 $9,458,772 Multi-Family $7,014 $1,681 $4,899 $13,594 $7,693,937 Total $17,152,709 Sources: Orcutt Area Specific Plan (Draft, June 2006); City of San Luis Obispo; CA Department of Finance; Goodwin Consulting Group, Inc.9/23/2009 Sources:Orcutt Area Specific Plan (Final, May 2010); City of San Luis Obispo; OASP Public Facilities Financing Plan - Goodwin Consulting Group, Inc. (2009) Updated:Watson Planning Consultants, Inc.November 3, 2016 Cost per Unit DRAFT PFFP Table 2-4-5-6-7 with Parks Changes - Table 7 Current as of: 11/3/2016 1.b Packet Pg. 42 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) Table 8 City of San Luis Obispo Orcutt Area Specific Plan Public Facilities Financing Plan City-Wide and Other Fees Land Use Single Family $3,622 per unit $11,023 per unit $3,815 per unit (4)per unit $901 per unit $19,361 per unit Multi-Family $3,214 per unit $7,716 per unit $2,670 per unit (4)per unit $396 per unit $13,996 per unit (1)The transportation impact fee includes the project's fair share of the grade separated crossing on Orcutt. (2)The wastewater impact fee includes a City-wide component plus an area-specific add-on fee for the OASP. (3)Specific Plan and EIR preparation costs of $500,000 are spread equally on a per acre basis. Costs per residential unit are calculated based on the density assumptions shown in Table 1. (4)OASP property owners have the option of paying this fee, providing parkland on their property, or combining the two for purposes of mitigating their parkland obligation. The parkland in-lieu fees for each property owner have been calculated by the City and provided in Table 9 of Appendix A. Sources: Orcutt Area Specific Plan (Final, May 2010); City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department; OASP Public Facilities Financing Plan - Goodwin Consulting Group, Inc. (2009) Updated: Watson Planning Consultants, Inc.10/17/2016 Total City-Wide and Other Fees Other Impact FeesCity-Wide Impact Fees Transportation Impact Fee (1) Water Impact Fee Wastewater Impact Fee (2) Parkland In-lieu Fee Specific Plan & EIR Fee DRAFT PFFP Table 8 - 2016 update Current as of: 10/17/2016 1.b Packet Pg. 43 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) Table 9 City of San Luis Obispo Orcutt Area Specific Plan Public Facilities Financing Plan Parkland In-Lieu Fee (1) Total Property Total In-Lieu Property Owner (2010 reference)(2016 reference)In-Lieu Fee Acreage Fee per Acre Pratt (2)Pratt 529,021$ 10.96 48,268$ Muick Taylor-Wingate 578,255$ 11.98 48,268$ Midstate Robbins Reed - West Creek 567,153$ 11.75 48,268$ Maddalena Robbins Reed - West Creek 321,467$ 6.66 48,268$ Anderson Anderson 258,236$ 5.35 48,268$ Evans Evans 271,268$ 5.62 48,268$ Farrior Farrior 36,684$ 0.76 48,268$ Fiala Fiala 45,855$ 0.95 48,268$ Hall Hall 54,543$ 1.13 48,268$ Imel Ambient Communities-Righetti Ranch 316,158$ 6.55 48,268$ Jones (2)Ambient Communities-Jones Ranch 561,361$ 11.63 48,268$ 3,540,000$ 73.34 (1) Refer to Appendix B in the report for supporting documentation (2) Jones and Pratt reimbursements at $400,000/acre due to off-site storm runoff and drainage benefit; All properties at $300,000/acre Source: City of San Luis Obispo; Orcutt Area Specific Plan Table A-2 (Final, May 2010 ); Goodwin Consulting group, Inc. Updated: City of San Luis Obispo; Watson Planning Consultants, Inc. November 3, 2016 DRAFT PFFP Table 9 - Applic's 2016 projection Current as of: 11/3/2016 1.b Packet Pg. 44 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) Table 10 City of San Luis Obispo Orcutt Area Specific Plan Public Facilities Financing Plan Total Project-Specific Infrastructure plus City-Wide and Other Fees Land Use Project- Specific City-Wide Other Fees (1) Total Gross Fees per Unit Total Gross Fees per Net Acre Total Costs and Fees Single Family $19,032 $18,460 $901 $38,393 $218,322 $19,081,321 Multi-Family $13,594 $13,600 $396 $27,590 $602,932 $15,615,940 $34,697,261 (1)These fees include the Specific Plan and EIR preparation costs. These do not include the parkland in-lieu fees as shown in Table 9. Sources: OASP Public Facilities Financing Plan - Goodwin Consulting Group, Inc. (2009) Updated: Watson Planning Consultants, Inc.November 3, 2016 Cost per Unit DRAFT PFFP Table 10 - 2016 update Current as of: 11/3/2016 1.b Packet Pg. 45 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) Table 11 City of San Luis Obispo Orcutt Area Specific Plan Public Facilities Financing Plan Phasing Assumptions - 2010 & 2016 Comparison Annual Absorption Assumptions Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Land Use Total 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Single Family 523 55 55 41 42 42 77 53 51 37 36 34 Multi-Family 414 30 30 25 25 25 52 64 63 63 37 0 Total 937 85 85 66 67 67 129 117 114 100 73 34 Sources: Orcutt Area Specific Plan (Draft, June 2006); City of San Luis Obispo Growth Management Phasing Schedule (General Plan Annual Report, 2006); Goodwin Consulting Group, Inc.9/23/2009 Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Land Use Total 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Single Family 497 83 94 93 91 39 39 16 20 7 7 8 Multi-Family 566 86 71 51 51 35 35 35 99 35 34 34 Total 1063 169 165 144 142 74 74 51 119 42 41 42 Sources: Orcutt Area Specific Plan (Final, May 2010); City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department; OASP Public Facilities Financing Plan - Goodwin Consulting Group, Inc. (2009) Updated: Watson Planning Consultants, Inc.9/24/2016DRAFT PFFP Table 11 v3 - PFFP 2009-2016 comparison Current as of: 10/12/2016 1.b Packet Pg. 46 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) Table 12 City of San Luis Obispo Orcutt Area Specific Plan Public Facilities Financing Plan Approval-Based 2016 Phasing Assumptions - APPLICANT PHASING Cumulative Absorption Assumptions assumes each phase over 2-years Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Land Use Total 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Single Family 497 83 177 270 361 400 439 455 475 482 489 497 Multi-Family 566 86 157 208 259 294 329 364 463 498 532 566 Total 1063 169 334 478 620 694 768 819 938 980 1021 1063 Sources: Orcutt Area Specific Plan (Final, May 2010); City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department; Approved projects through May, 2016; OASP Public Facilities Financing Plan - Goodwin Consulting Group, Inc. (2009) Updated: Watson Planning Consultants, Inc. Approved Projects through May, 2016: 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 VTM#3044 (Taylor-Wingate)142 total units = 78 SFR + 64 MFR Approved over 7 Phases SFR 12 7 7 15 16 9 12 78 MFR 64 64 VTM#3060 (Righetti Ranch)304 total units = 272 SFR + 32 MFR Phase 1 = 151 SFR Phase 2 = 87 SFR + 34 MFR Phase 3 = 32 SFR SFR 76 75 45 44 16 16 272 MFR 16 16 32 VTM#3066 (Jones Ranch)66 total units = 14 SFR + 52 MFR Phase 1 = 14 SFR + 52 MFR SFR 7 7 14 MFR 26 26 52 VTM# 3083 (West Creek)172 total units = 67 SFR + 105 MFR Phase 1 = 105 MFR Phase 2 = 67 SFR SFR 34 33 67 MFR 60 45 105 Balance of OASP Properties 379 total units = 66 SFR + 313 MFR SFR 7 7 8 7 7 8 7 7 8 66 MFR 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 34 34 313 TOTALS SFR 83 94 93 91 39 39 16 20 7 7 8 497 MFR 86 71 51 51 35 35 35 99 35 34 34 566 169 165 144 142 74 74 51 119 42 41 42 1063 10/17/2012DRAFT PFFP Table 12 v4 - Alter v4 Phasing 10-17-16 Current as of: 10/17/2016 1.b Packet Pg. 47 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) Table 13 City of San Luis Obispo Orcutt Area Specific Plan Public Facilities Financing Plan Phasing Assumptions for Facility Costs Cost Category Cost Phasing Assumptions Transportation T1 Orcutt Road/Tank Farm Road Prior to 371 Units T2 Broad St/South Street-Santa Barbara Road Prior to 304 Units T3 Broad Street/Tank Farm Rd Prior to 304 Units T4 Orcutt Road/Johnson Ave Prior to 617 Units T5 Broad Street/Prado Rd Extension As Fee Revenue Becomes Available (1) T6 Orcutt Road Widening As Fee Revenue Becomes Available (Reimburse to Orcutt Associates, LLC) (1) T7 Bullock Lane Realignment Prior to 500 Units T8 Relocating Hanson Rd Prior to 731 Units T9 Transit Stops One Stop Per Year, Beginning in Year One T10 Tank Farm Roundabout Year Two with Righetti Ranch Tract 3063 T11 Orcutt Road Roundabout Year Two with West Creek Tract 3083 T12 Bridge A 100% in Year Two T13 Bridge B 100% in Year Six T14 Bridge C 100% in Year Three Pedestrian and Bicycle Paths B1 Pedestrian and Bicycle Paths As Fee Revenue Becomes Available (1) B2 Pedestrian/Bike Overpass Prior to 831 Units B3 Bike Path Extension Over Tank Farm Rd Prior to 500 Units P1-5 Parks & Recreation 75% Spread Evenly Over Five Years, Beginning in Year Three; 25% Spread Evenly Over Two Years, Beginning in Year Eight (1) These infrastructure items and reimbursements are anticipated to occur in three years of Phase 3 (see Table 14), in which the costs do not cause a cumulative net deficit to occur (see Table 15). Sources: Orcutt Area Specific Plan (Final, May 2010); OASP Public Facilities Financing Plan - Goodwin Consulting Group, Inc. (2009) Updated: Watson Planning Consultants, Inc.10/12/2016 DRAFT PFFP Table 13 v2 Table 13 only Current as of: 10/12/2016 1.b Packet Pg. 48 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) Table 14 City of San Luis Obispo Orcutt Area Specific Plan Public Facilities Financing Plan Projects Completed based on 2009 PFFP - 2010 OASP Timing and To-Date Tract Approvals Annual Facility Cost Phasing except "new" projects T10, T11, P5 Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Ref.#Item Total 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Transportation T1 Orcutt Road/Tank Farm Road 1,111,000$ 1,111,000$ T2 Broad Street/South St-Santa Barbara Road 179,603$ 179,603$ T3 Broad Street/Tank Farm Rd 299,500$ 299,500$ T4 Orcutt Road/Johnson Ave 359,300$ 359,300$ T5 Broad Street/Prado Road Extension-2nd Northbound Left Turn Lane 528,000$ 528,000$ T6 Orcutt Road Widening 344,592$ 144,729$ 199,863$ T7 Bullock Lane Realignment 992,600$ 992,600$ T8 Relocating Hanson Road-or Reducing the Grade on Orcutt at Hanson Rd 290,400$ 290,400$ T9 Transit Stops 125,000$ 25,000$ 25,000$ 25,000$ 25,000$ 25,000$ T10 Tank Farm Roundabout (at Righetti Ranch Road)325,000$ 325,000$ T11 Orcutt Road Roundabout (at "A" Street)325,000$ 325,000$ T12 Bridge A ("A" Street - West Creek)680,000$ 680,000$ T13 Bridge B ("Tiburon Road" - Jones and Righetti Ranch)1,800,000$ 1,800,000$ T14 Bridge C ("Righetti Ranch Road" - Righetti Ranch)1,600,000$ 1,600,000$ Subtotal Transportation Improvements 8,959,995$ 25,000$ 5,234,103$ 1,136,000$ 1,376,900$ 25,000$ 290,400$ -$ -$ 144,729$ 727,863$ -$ Pedestrian and Bicycle Paths B1 Pedestrian and Bicycle Paths 841,000$ 841,000$ B2 Pedestrian/Bike Overpass 1,054,000$ 1,054,000$ B3 Bike Path Extension Over Tank Farm Rd 252,000$ 252,000$ Subtotal Ped & Bike 2,147,000$ -$ -$ -$ 252,000$ -$ -$ -$ 1,054,000$ -$ -$ 841,000$ Parks & Recreation P1 Central Neighborhood Park - Main Portion South of Creeks (Righetti)4,800,341$ 720,051$ 720,051$ 720,051$ 720,051$ 720,051$ 600,043$ 600,043$ P2 Central Neighborhood Park - Phase 2 Portions North of Creeks (Garay)-$ -$ P3 Pocket Park 339,849$ 50,977$ 50,977$ 50,977$ 50,977$ 50,977$ 42,481$ 42,481$ P4 Linear Park System 813,527$ 122,029$ 122,029$ 122,029$ 122,029$ 122,029$ 101,691$ 101,691$ P5 Trail Junction Park 91,997$ 13,800$ 13,800$ 13,800$ 13,800$ 13,800$ 11,500$ 11,500$ Subtotal Parks & Recreation 6,045,714$ -$ -$ 906,857$ 906,857$ 906,857$ 906,857$ 906,857$ 755,714$ 755,714$ -$ -$ Total Infrastructure Costs 17,152,709$ 25,000$ 5,234,103$ 2,042,857$ 2,535,757$ 931,857$ 1,197,257$ 906,857$ 1,809,714$ 900,443$ 727,863$ 841,000$ Sources: Orcutt Area Specific Plan (Final, May 2010); OASP Public Facilities Financing Plan - Goodwin Consulting Group, Inc. (2009) Updated:City of San Luis Obispo; Watson Planning Consultants, Inc.; The Wallace Group, Inc. Original 2010 PFFP Timing November 3, 2016 include Islay Park "skew" cost included as placeholders pending Wallace ests @ 50% of $650,000 Ambient TFRd est DRAFT PFFP Table 14-15 combined OASP Table 8.11 v4 Table 14 only-2016 cost phasing Current As Of: 11/3/2016 1.b Packet Pg. 49 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) Table 15 City of San Luis Obispo Orcutt Area Specific Plan Public Facilities Financing Plan Revenue vs. Costs - Project-Specific Infrastructure Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Improvement Total 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Transportation Revenues 8,959,804$ 1,436,524$ 1,441,754$ 1,291,434$ 1,271,354$ 637,050$ 637,050$ 406,130$ 895,186$ 315,770$ 308,756$ 318,796$ Costs (8,959,995)$ (25,000)$ (5,234,103)$ (1,136,000)$ (1,376,900)$ (25,000)$ (290,400)$ -$ -$ (144,729)$ (727,863)$ -$ Net (191)$ 1,411,524$ (3,792,349)$ 155,434$ (105,546)$ 612,050$ 346,650$ 406,130$ 895,186$ 171,041$ (419,107)$ 318,796$ Cumulative Net 1,411,524$ (2,380,825)$ (2,225,391)$ (2,330,937)$ (1,718,887)$ (1,372,237)$ (966,107)$ (70,921)$ 100,120$ (318,987)$ (191)$ Pedestrian and Bicycle Paths Revenues 2,147,228$ 344,264$ 345,515$ 309,489$ 304,677$ 152,669$ 152,669$ 97,331$ 214,539$ 75,677$ 73,996$ 76,402$ Costs (2,147,000)$ -$ -$ -$ (252,000)$ -$ -$ -$ (1,054,000)$ -$ -$ (841,000)$ Net 228$ 344,264$ 345,515$ 309,489$ 52,677$ 152,669$ 152,669$ 97,331$ (839,461)$ 75,677$ 73,996$ (764,598)$ Cumulative Net 344,264$ 689,779$ 999,268$ 1,051,945$ 1,204,614$ 1,357,283$ 1,454,614$ 615,153$ 690,830$ 764,826$ 228$ Parks and Recreation Improvements Revenues 6,045,579$ 967,869$ 966,819$ 862,254$ 849,084$ 428,280$ 428,280$ 276,825$ 616,701$ 217,560$ 212,661$ 219,246$ Costs (6,045,714)$ -$ -$ (906,857)$ (906,857)$ (906,857)$ (906,857)$ (906,857)$ (755,714)$ (755,714)$ -$ -$ Net (135)$ 967,869$ 966,819$ (44,603)$ (57,773)$ (478,577)$ (478,577)$ (630,032)$ (139,013)$ (538,154)$ 212,661$ 219,246$ Cumulative Net 967,869$ 1,934,688$ 1,890,085$ 1,832,312$ 1,353,735$ 875,158$ 245,126$ 106,112$ (432,042)$ (219,381)$ (135)$ Totals Revenues 17,152,611$ 2,748,657$ 2,754,088$ 2,463,177$ 2,425,115$ 1,217,999$ 1,217,999$ 780,286$ 1,726,426$ 609,007$ 595,413$ 614,444$ Costs (17,152,709)$ (25,000)$ (5,234,103)$ (2,042,857)$ (2,535,757)$ (931,857)$ (1,197,257)$ (906,857)$ (1,809,714)$ (900,443)$ (727,863)$ (841,000)$ Net (98)$ 2,723,657$ (2,480,015)$ 420,320$ (110,642)$ 286,142$ 20,742$ (126,571)$ (83,288)$ (291,436)$ (132,450)$ (226,556)$ Cumulative Net 2,723,657$ 243,642$ 663,962$ 553,320$ 839,462$ 860,204$ 733,633$ 650,344$ 358,908$ 226,458$ (98)$ Sources: Orcutt Area Specific Plan (Final, May 2010); OASP Public Facilities Financing Plan - Goodwin Consulting Group, Inc. (2009) Updated: Watson Planning Consultants, Inc.; The Wallace Group, Inc. November 3, 2016DRAFT PFFP Table 14-15 combined OASP Table 8.11 v4 - Table 15 only-2016 cost phasing Current as of: 11/3/2016 1.b Packet Pg. 50 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) OASP Public Facilities Financing Plan Update 17 City Council Draft November 15, 2016 APPENDIX B OASP FACILITY COST ESTIMATES 1.b Packet Pg. 51 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) (1494 : OASP PFFP) MEMORANDUM City of San Luis Obispo Orcutt Area Specific Plan (OASP)- Capital Improvements Date: October 25, 2016 To: Timothy Bochum, P.E. From: Esau Blanco, P.E. Subject: Construction Cost Estimates This memorandum summarizes the results of Wallace Group’s update to construction cost estimates as outlined in our proposal to the City dated August 3, 2016. Updated conceptual road layouts for select projects and one-page planning level construction cost estimates are attached at the back of this memorandum. Cost estimates include 25% contingency for this stage of project development and 30% for soft costs, unless otherwise noted. The cost estimates utilize public bid data therefore prevailing wage rates are factored into the overall cost. The cost estimates do not include dry utility relocations/modifications or right of way acquisition. Street Improvements T1- Orcutt Road/Tank Farm Road Wallace Group Peer Review comments are summarized here and are based on Cannon Plans dated May, 2016: 1. There does not appear to be any proposed curb drainage inlets on the west side of Orcutt Road. How will road drainage coming from north Orcutt Road get into the culvert or is it collected somewhere else? Verify drainage provisions. 2. The culvert extension is shown to be approximately 9 ft. long but it does not appear to be long enough to span the sidewalk and embankment. 3. Text for Construction Notes 27 and 35-37 were not on the sheet. 4. Consider a cross gutter Per City Standard 4310 on the north side of the intersection to improve drainage. 5. Signal Plans were not included. If the intersection will ultimately be signalized then consideration for pole/equipment locations, ADA ramps, conduit, etc. should be reviewed at this time. 2007 Cost Estimate: $928,000 2016 Cost Estimate: $1,111,000 1.b Packet Pg. 52 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) (1494 : OASP PFFP) Mr. Timothy Bochum October 25, 2016 Page 2 of 5 The 2016 cost estimate includes $300,000 for a new signal. T3 Broad Street/Tank Farm Road See the attached conceptual road layout for limits of improvements. The proposed project is the construction of a second southbound left turn lane. The design speed used for the conceptual layout is 45 mph. The length of second left turn pocket is assumed to match the existing turn pocket length. 2007 Cost Estimate: $445,000 2016 Cost Estimate: $599,000 The 2007 cost estimate also included cost for a second northbound left turn lane which has since been constructed. Signal modifications in the 2016 estimate are assumed to be minor since poles and mast arms appear to accommodate full intersection buildout for the southbound leg. T4 Orcutt Road/Johnson Avenue Information not available at this time to prepare a cost update T5 Broad Street/Prado Extension, Second Northbound Left The updated cost estimate is based on Wallace Group’s layout for the City under a separate Task Order for the Chevron development (attached for reference). 2007 Cost Estimate: $136,000 2013 Cost Estimate (Chevron): $590,000 2016 Cost Estimate: $528,000 The 2013 and 2016 costs also include a southbound right turn lane onto future Prado Road. The 2013 Cost estimate assumed $160,000 in signal modifications. The 2016 cost estimate assumes that signal modifications would be minor as long as the extension of Prado Road would place signal poles and equipment at the ultimate location. T7 Bullock Lane Realignment The City constructed the re-alignment of Bullock Lane to meet up with Laurel Lane in 2008/2009. The OASP mitigations require removal of parking on the west side of Bullock lane and construction of the typical street cross section as shown in the OASP and in the attached conceptual road layout. Construction of the OASP street cross section would also require extending the curb line and widening the east side of Bullock Lane near the intersection of Orcutt Road. Additional work includes drainage improvements including reconstruction of the culvert near the intersection of Bullock Lane and Orcutt Road. Because of the poor condition of the pavement on Bullock 1.b Packet Pg. 53 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) (1494 : OASP PFFP) Mr. Timothy Bochum October 25, 2016 Page 3 of 5 Lane a grind and overlay was also included in the cost estimate. Construction of the Class I bike/pedestrian path is include with Project B1. 2007 Cost Estimate: $356,000 2016 Cost Estimate: $1,418,000 T8 Reducing Grade on Orcutt Road at Hansen Lane See the attached conceptual road layout for limits of improvements. The profile shown in the layout is based on an assumed design speed of 45 mph and uses the Caltrans Highway Design Manual for vertical curve length and existing grade profile information provided by the City. This project would require lowering the intersection approximately three feet and transitioning to the existing roadway along both Orcutt Road and Hansen Lane as shown in the layout/profile. It is assumed that all soil would be exported although it’s possible that it could be used for the OASP development. Another critical and potentially expensive component could be construction staging and traffic handling since there are no public detours for nearby residents. This component has been estimated as a separate cost item for the project assuming no detours are available. 2007 Cost Estimate: $1,490,000 2016 Cost Estimate: $1,452,000 The cost estimates are similar and the primary reason is that the 2007 cost included about 5400 cubic yards of export whereas the 2016 cost estimate includes approximately 3000 cubic yards of exported soil. This in turn almost cancels out the cost escalation from 2007. Bridges Bridge costs were estimated based on structure square footage using Caltrans Comparative Bridge Costs, January 2016. Bridges were assumed to be precast concrete or steel girder structures (no falsework), no staging and use of spread footings. An average unit cost of $275/sq. ft. was assumed. The dimensions for Bridge B were taken from an email from Dante Anselmo with Ambient Communities dated 9/13/16. The dimensions for Bridge C are taken from a Cannon plan dated January, 2016. A 25% contingency is in included in the cost estimate. T12- Bridge A No information available T13- Bridge B, “B” Street 101 ft. x 53 ft. = 5353 sq. ft. Cost Estimate: $1.8M 1.b Packet Pg. 54 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) (1494 : OASP PFFP) Mr. Timothy Bochum October 25, 2016 Page 4 of 5 T14- Bridge C, Righetti Ranch Road Bridge 75 ft. x 63 ft. = 4725 sq. ft. Cost Estimate: $1.6M Pedestrian and Bicycle Paths B1 Pedestrian & Bicycle Paths (5800 feet) The total cost is based on 5800 feet of path and includes the section of path along Bullock Lane and continuing south to Tank Farm Road. A small section is also assumed from the railroad tracks over to Righetti Ranch Road. Costs assume that grading would start from rough finished grade of the development and does not include bridges, culverts, or other structures. Segments in parks and adjacent to lots are not included. A cost per foot of path is also provided. 2007 Cost Estimate: $649,000 2016 Cost Estimate: $841,000 ($145/ft.) B2 Pedestrian/Bike Overpass at Industrial Way The same approach was used for this cost update as was used in 2007. The Jennifer Street crossing was used as a base cost and escalated to current year. It is our understanding that the base cost provided by the City in 2007 includes all costs for the project (design, permitting construction, inspections, management, right of way, etc.) However, the Jennifer Street Bridge spans approximately 300 feet and the Industrial Way Bridge is estimated to span about 200 feet. Assuming a linear relationship, the cost for the Industrial Way Overpass was prorated (67%). This reduction is the reason that the cost is estimated to be less in 2016 than it was in 2007. This also assumes that similar features of the Jennifer Street Overpass would be incorporated into the Industrial Way Overpass. That includes staircases and bicycle/ADA compliant ramps with switchbacks. 2007 Cost Estimate: $3,850,000 2016 Cost Estimate: $3,670,000 B3 Bike Path Extension Over Tank Farm Road The bike path bridge is estimated to be 100 feet long (back-of-sidewalk to back-of- walk) and 12 feet wide. The approach embankments are estimated to be 200 feet long on either side with 50-foot long retaining walls (4 walls) and two abutment walls. The cost includes a concrete deck but does not include the pavement structural section on the approaches (covered in Project B1). 2007 Cost Estimate: $436,000 1.b Packet Pg. 55 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) (1494 : OASP PFFP) Mr. Timothy Bochum October 25, 2016 Page 5 of 5 2016 Cost Estimate: $1,008,000 Park and Recreation (P1-P4) The scope of work here was limited to reviewing unit costs for City provided cost estimates for four park sites: • Central Neighborhood Park • Pocket Park • Linear Park • Trail Junction Park The cost estimates provided by the City dated May 2016 were in general agreement with unit prices for similar items of work based on our research and comparison. Because facilities and furnishing costs can vary so widely depending on size and type, it was difficult to compare those items to other projects particularly on a lump sum basis. Mobilization seemed to be a low cost item for all four parks. Generally, mobilization is budgeted at 10% of construction but depends also if ongoing work is being performed and the contractor is already onsite. Based on recent bid data for park construction (San Miguel Park, County of SLO bid date: Sep 22, 2016) construction cost on average was about $390,000 per acre for a 3-acre park. This is comparable with the estimated cost for the Central Neighborhood Park of $3.8M for 9 acres ($420,000/acre). The other three park sites were comparable or varied, again likely due to facilities and furnishings costs. 1.b Packet Pg. 56 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) (1494 : OASP PFFP) Attachment 1 CONCEPTUAL ROAD LAYOUTS (T3, T5, T7 AND T8) 1.b Packet Pg. 57 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) (1494 : OASP PFFP) ROWROW ROWROWCONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENTPUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATIONSAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294612 CLARION COURTwww.wallacegroup.usWATER RESOURCESSURVEYING / GIS SOLUTIONSLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTUREMECHANICAL ENGINEERINGPLANNINGCIVIL AND TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERINGDATE :SCALE :DRAWING :DRAWN BY:JOB No. :®OASP CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO0061-0088LAYOUTMJH1" = 100'FILE NAME: 0061-0088 - T3 - BROAD & TANK FARM.DWG Plot Date: 9/28/2016CIVILALATTSOFECAON RFI I REGISTE R E D PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONFOR PLAN REVIEW ONLYE S AU BLANCONo. 62853100200(IN FEET)50GRAPHIC SCALE1 IN = 100 FT0T3 - BROAD ST & TANK FARM RD12.00'12.00'12.00'5.00' BIKE LANE12.00'12.00'RECONSTRUCT DRAINAGE INLET255' DUAL TURN POCKET540' APPROACH TAPER90' BAYTAPERLEGENDAPPROX. PAVEMENTWIDENINGSEE DETAIL A295' TURN POCKETDETAIL ASCALE: 1" = 40'DESIGN STANDARDSFUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATIONBROAD STREET - PRINCIPAL ARTERIALROW WIDTHBROAD STREETEXISTING - APPROX. 125 FT.PROPOSED - VARIES 125-130 FT.DESIGN / POSTED SPEEDBROAD STREET - 45 MPH POSTEDLANE WIDTHSBROAD STREETEXISTING - 12 FT.PROPOSED - 12 FT.TAPER LENGTHSRIGHT TURN - 90 FT.LEFT TURN - L=WS, 500 FT. MAX.NOTES1. PLANNING LEVEL ONLY / NOT FORCONSTRUCTION. EXHIBITS BASED ONEXISTING GIS DATA AND SAN LUIS OBISPOCOUNTY WIDE PHOTOGRAMMETRY DATED2014.2. ROW LINES SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE.6.00' SIDEWALK9/28/2016ROW1.b Packet Pg. 58 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) (1494 : OASP PFFP) 50100(IN FEET)25GRAPHIC SCALE1 IN = 50 FT01.b Packet Pg. 59 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) (1494 : OASP PFFP) ROWROWROWROWCONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENTPUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATIONSAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294612 CLARION COURTwww.wallacegroup.usWATER RESOURCESSURVEYING / GIS SOLUTIONSLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTUREMECHANICAL ENGINEERINGPLANNINGCIVIL AND TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERINGDATE :SCALE :DRAWING :DRAWN BY:JOB No. :®OASP CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO0061-0088LAYOUTMJH1" = 100'FILE NAME: 0061-0088 - T7 - BULLOCK LANE.DWG Plot Date: 9/28/2016CIVILALATTSOFECAON RFI I REGISTE R E D PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONFOR PLAN REVIEW ONLYE S AU BLANCONo. 62853EXISTING CULVERT TOBE RECONSTRUCTEDT7 - BULLOCK LNEXISTING 54" CMP CULVERTRECONSTRUCT OUTLETEND IMPROVEMENTS 100200(IN FEET)50GRAPHIC SCALE1 IN = 100 FT0100'13.00'32.00'13.00'32.00'100'OASPONSITENEW DRAINAGECATCH BASINSWESTEASTDESIGN STANDARDSFUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATIONBULLOCK LANE - RESIDENTIAL COLLECTORROW WIDTHBULLOCK LANEEXISTING - APPROX. 55 FT.PROPOSED - APPROX. 60 FT.DESIGN / POSTED SPEEDBULLOCK LANE - 35 MPHLANE WIDTHSBULLOCK LANEEXISTING - 15 FT.PROPOSED - 12 FT.NOTES1. PLANNING LEVEL ONLY / NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION.EXHIBITS BASED ON EXISTING GIS DATA AND SANLUIS OBISPO COUNTY WIDE PHOTOGRAMMETRYDATED 2014.2. ROW LINES SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE.9/28/2016LEGENDRECONSTRUCTMILL AND OVERLAY5.00'5.00'1.b Packet Pg. 60 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) (1494 : OASP PFFP) ORCUTT RD - PROFILE28029030028029030038+0039+0040+0041+0042+0043+0044+0045+0046+0047+00S=3% ±S=-6% ±PVI STA:42+27PVI ELEV:304.56'K:88.89VC:800.00'D.S. = 45 MPHBVC: 38+27F.S.: 301.56' EVC: 46+27 F.S.: 289.56'275275SCALE: HORIZ. 1"=100'; VERT. NTSCONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENTPUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATIONSAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294612 CLARION COURTwww.wallacegroup.usWATER RESOURCESSURVEYING / GIS SOLUTIONSLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTUREMECHANICAL ENGINEERINGPLANNINGCIVIL AND TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERINGDATE :SCALE :DRAWING :DRAWN BY:JOB No. :®OASP CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO0061-0088LAYOUTMJH1" = 100'FILE NAME: 0061-0088 - T8 - ORCUTT & HANSEN.DWG Plot Date: 9/28/2016CIVILALATTSOFECAON RFI I REGISTE R E D PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONFOR PLAN REVIEW ONLYE S AU BLANCONo. 62853100200(IN FEET)50GRAPHIC SCALE1 IN = 100 FT0T8 - ORCUTT RD & HANSEN LN RECONSTRUCT FENCELEGENDLIMITS OF PAVEMENTRECONSTRUCTIONEXISTING FENCETO BE RECONSTRUCTEDEXISTINGPOWER POLERECONSTRUCT FENCERECONSTRUCT FENCE800' ±FENCE TO REMAIN235' ±DESIGN STANDARDSFUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATIONORCUTT ROAD - ARTERIAL (CITY)HANSEN LANE - LOCAL (COUNTY)ROW WIDTHORCUTT ROADEXISTING - APPROX. 66 FT.PROPOSED - NO CHANGEHANSEN LANEEXISTING - APPROX. 40 FT.PROPOSED - NO CHANGEDESIGN / POSTED SPEEDORCUTT ROAD - 45 MPH DESIGN 55 MPH POSTEDHANSEN LANE - 35 MPHLANE WIDTHSORCUTT ROADEXISTING - 12 FT.PROPOSED - 12 FT.HANSEN LANEEXISTING - 12 FT.PROPOSED - 12 FT.NOTES1. PLANNING LEVEL ONLY / NOT FORCONSTRUCTION. EXHIBITS BASED ONEXISTING GIS DATA AND SAN LUISOBISPO COUNTY WIDEPHOTOGRAMMETRY DATED 2014.2. EXISTING GRADE PROFILE BASED ONCANNON PLAN DATED 5-27-2016PROPOSED GRADEEXISTING GRADE9/28/20163' ±1.b Packet Pg. 61 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) (1494 : OASP PFFP) Attachment 2 CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATES 1.b Packet Pg. 62 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) (1494 : OASP PFFP) TOTAL COST (2016 UPDATE) PROJECT T1 - ORCUTT RD/TANK FARM RD $1,111,000 PROJECT T3 - BROAD ST / TANK FARM RD SECOND SOUTHBOUND LEFT TURN LANE $599,000 PROJECT T4 - ORCUTT RD/JOHNSON AVE - PROJECT T5 - BROAD ST / PRADO RD EXTENSION, 2ND N/B LEFT TURN LANE & S/B RIGHT TURN LANE $528,000 PROJECT T7 - BULLOCK LANE REALIGNMENT $1,418,000 PROJECT T8 - REDUCING GRADE ON ORCUTT RD AND HANSEN LANE $1,452,000 PROJECT T12- BRIDGE A - PROJECT T13- BRIDGE B $1,800,000 PROJECT T14= BRIDGE C $1,600,000 PROJECT B1 - PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE PATHS (5800 FEET)$841,000 PROJECT B2 - PEDESTRIAN / BIKE OVERPASS AT INDUSTRIAL WAY $3,670,000 PROJECT B3 - BIKE PATH EXTENSION OVER TANK FARM RD $1,008,000 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE $14,027,000 ORCUTT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS PRELIMINARY OPINION OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COSTS (2016 UPDATE) SUMMARY 1.b Packet Pg. 63 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) (1494 : OASP PFFP) QUANTITY ESTIMATE UNIT COST PROJECT T1 PROJECT T1 SITE PREPARATION: Clearing & Grubbing $5,000 1 LS $5,000 Remove Existing Pavement $5 9170 SF $45,850 Demo Existing Headwall, Wingwalls, & Guardrail $10,000 1 LS $10,000 SUBTOTAL $60,850 EARTHWORK: Roadway Excavation $45 1730 CY $77,850 SWPPP Preparation & Implementation $20,000 1 LS $20,000 Erosion Control - Type D (Hydroseeding)$2,500 1 LS $2,500 SUBTOTAL $100,350 DRAINAGE: Culvert Extension (7'x7'x 9' long)$25,000 1 LS $25,000 Headwall / Wingwalls $25,000 1 LS $25,000 Catch Basin & Connection to Culvert $10,000 1 LS $10,000 Rock Slope Protection (1.25 ft. thick)$200 10 CY $2,000 SUBTOTAL $62,000 ROADWAY: Hot Mix Asphalt Type A (Assume 6.5 in)$125 530 TON $66,250 Class II Aggregate Base (Assume 11 in)$85 445 CY $37,825 Class III Aggregate Subbase (Assume 12 in)$75 485 CY $36,375 HMA Dike $35 245 LF $8,575 6-in Curb/18-in Gutter per SLO Co. Std. Dwg. C-1 (Type A)$15 345 LF $5,175 Sidewalk $10 1880 SF $18,800 SUBTOTAL $173,000 TRAFFIC ITEMS: Pavement Delineation & Signage $5,000 1 LS $5,000 Signal Pole, Arm & Head - Includes Footing, Control Box and Signal Loops $75,000 4 EA $300,000 Traffic Control $20,000 1 LS $20,000 SUBTOTAL $325,000 CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL $721,200 MOBILIZATION (10%)$72,120 CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE $793,320 10% CONTINGENCY $79,332 30% DESIGN, ENVIRONMENTAL, PERMITTING, CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT & ADMINISTRATION $237,996 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE $1,110,648 NOTES: 1. THIS ESTIMATE WAS PREPARED BASED ON CANNON IMPROVEMENT PLANS DATED MAY 27, 2016. 2. THIS PRELIMINARY OPINION OF PROBABLE COSTS IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS A GUARANTEE FOR COSTS. WALLACE GROUP HAS NO CONTROL OVER THE COSTS OF LABOR, MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT, FUTURE MARKET CONDITIONS OR CONTRACTOR'S BIDDING METHODS. THE ACTUAL COST OF CONSTRUCTION MAY VARY FROM THE ESTIMATES AND/OR THE PROJECT BUDGET. 3. LAND ACQUISITION, R.O.W. OR LEGAL COSTS NOT INCLUDED. 4. ASSUMED DEPTH IS THE STRUCTURAL SECTION OF 6.5" AC, 11" CL II BASE, 12" CL III BASE PER CITY OF SLO STD. 7110 - UNPHASED NEW COLLECTOR / ARTERIAL 5. LIMITS OF COST ESTIMATE FROM STA. 54+20.12 TO STA. 57+59.30 6. DOES NOT INCLUDE DRIVEWAY IMPROVEMENTS AT PARK 7. ASSUMED CULVERT EXTENSION LENGTH OF 9 FT 8. DRY UTILITY COSTS NOT INCLUDED UNITSORCUTT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS - ORCUTT RD/TANK FARM RD PRELIMINARY OPINION OF PROBABLE COST PROJECT T1 1.b Packet Pg. 64 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) (1494 : OASP PFFP) QUANTITY ESTIMATE UNIT COST PROJECT T3 PROJECT T3 SITE PREPARATION: Demo Existing Pavement $5 1460 SF $7,300 Demo Existing 5' Concrete Sidewalk $4 1000 SF $4,000 Demo Existing Curb and Gutter $3 200 LF $600 Remove Existing Driveway/Median Islands $5,000 1 LS $5,000 Remove Existing Pavement Markings $2,500 1 LS $2,500 SUBTOTAL $19,400 EARTHWORK: Roadway Excavation $45 620 CY $27,900 SWPPP Preparation & Implementation $10,000 1 LS $10,000 SUBTOTAL $37,900 DRAINAGE: Reconstruct Drainage Inlet $10,000 1 EA $10,000 SUBTOTAL $10,000 ROADWAY: Hot Mix Asphalt, Type A (Assume 6.5 in)$125 280 TON $35,000 Class II Aggregate Base (Assume 11 in)$85 230 CY $19,550 Class III Aggregate Base (Assume 12 in)$75 250 CY $18,750 6-in Curb/18-in Gutter per SLO Co. Std. Dwg. C-1 (Type A)$35 740 LF $25,900 Sidewalk $15 4070 SF $61,050 ADA Curb Ramps $3,000 2 EA $6,000 Concrete Driveway (Commercial)$10,000 1 LS $10,000 Slurry Seal $5 4500 SY $22,500 SUBTOTAL $198,750 TRAFFIC ITEMS: Pavement Delineation & Signage $10,000 1 LS $10,000 Signal Modification (Heads, Signage only)$25,000 1 LS $25,000 Traffic Control $25,000 1 LS $25,000 SUBTOTAL $60,000 RECONSTRUCT PLANTING AND IRRIGATION LS $25,000 CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL $351,050 MOBILIZATION (10%)$35,105 CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE $386,155 25% CONTINGENCY $96,539 30% DESIGN, ENVIRONMENTAL, PERMITTING, CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT & ADMINISTRATION $115,847 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE $598,540 1. THIS ESTIMATE WAS PREPARED WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF COMPLETE GRADING AND IMPROVEMENT PLANS. 2. THIS PRELIMINARY OPINION OF PROBABLE COSTS IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS A GUARANTEE FOR COSTS. WALLACE GROUP HAS NO CONTROL OVER THE COSTS OF LABOR, MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT, FUTURE MARKET CONDITIONS OR CONTRACTOR'S BIDDING METHODS. THE ACTUAL COST OF CONSTRUCTION MAY VARY FROM THE ESTIMATES AND/OR THE PROJECT BUDGET. 3. LAND ACQUISITION, R.O.W. OR LEGAL COSTS NOT INCLUDED. 4. ASSUMED DEPTH IS THE STRUCTURAL SECTION OF 6.5" AC, 11" CL II BASE, 12" CL III BASE PER CITY OF SLO STD. 7110 - UNPHASED NEW COLLECTOR / ARTERIAL 5. DRY UTILITY COSTS NOT INCLUDED UNITSORCUTT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS - BROAD ST/TANK FARM RD PRELIMINARY OPINION OF PROBABLE COST PROJECT T3 1.b Packet Pg. 65 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) (1494 : OASP PFFP) QUANTITY ESTIMATE UNIT COST PROJECT T5 PROJECT T5 SITE PREPARATION: Clearing & Grubbing $10,000 1 LS $10,000 Demo Existing Pavement $5 1400 SF $7,000 Remove Existing Pavement Markings $2,500 1 LS $2,500 Demo Existing 5' Concrete Sidewalk $4 2000 SF $8,000 Demo Existing Curb and Gutter $10 400 LF $4,000 Demo HMA Driveway $1,000 1 LS $1,000 Demo Wood Fencing $1,000 1 LS $1,000 SUBTOTAL $33,500 EARTHWORK: Roadway Excavation $45 500 CY $22,500 SWPPP Implementation $10,000 1 LS $10,000 Erosion Control $10,000 1 LS $10,000 SUBTOTAL $42,500 ROADWAY: Hot Mix Asphalt Type A (Assume 6.5")$125 125 TON $15,625 Class II Aggregate Base (Assume 11 in)$85 105 CY $8,925 Class III Aggregate Base (Assume 12 in)$75 115 CY $8,625 6-in Curb/18-in Gutter per SLO Co. Std. Dwg. C-1 (Type A)$35 680 LF $23,800 5' Concrete Sidewalk $15 3400 SF $51,000 Concrete Driveway (Residential)$5,000 1 LS $5,000 Slurry Seal $5 8100 SY $40,500 SUBTOTAL $153,475 TRAFFIC ITEMS: Pavement Delineation & Signage $15,000 1 LS $15,000 Signal Head Modification/Signage $25,000 1 LS $25,000 Traffic Control $10,000 1 LS $10,000 SUBTOTAL $50,000 MISCELLANEOUS: Reconstruct Storm Drain Catch Basin $10,000 1 LS $10,000 Wood Fencing $10,000 1 LS $10,000 Planting & Irrigation $10,000 1 LS $10,000 SUBTOTAL $30,000 CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL $309,475 MOBILIZATION (10%)$30,948 CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE $340,423 25% CONTINGENCY $85,106 30%- DESIGN, ENVIRONMENTAL, PERMITTING, CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT $102,127 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE $527,655 NOTE: 1. THIS ESTIMATE WAS PREPARED WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF COMPLETE GRADING AND IMPROVEMENT PLANS. 2. THIS PRELIMINARY OPINION OF PROBABLE COSTS IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS A GUARANTEE FOR COSTS. WALLACE GROUP HAS NO CONTROL OVER THE COSTS OF LABOR, MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT, FUTURE MARKET CONDITIONS OR CONTRACTOR'S BIDDING METHODS. THE ACTUAL COST OF CONSTRUCTION MAY VARY FROM THE ESTIMATES AND/OR THE PROJECT BUDGET. 3. LAND ACQUISITION, R.O.W. OR LEGAL COSTS NOT INCLUDED. 4. ASSUMED DEPTH IS THE STRUCTURAL SECTION OF 6.5" AC, 11" CL II BASE, 12" CL III BASE PER CITY OF SLO STD. 7110 - UNPHASED NEW COLLECTOR / ARTERIAL 5. DRY UTILITY COSTS NOT INCLUDED ORCUTT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS - BROAD ST/PRADO RD, 2ND N/B LEFT TURN LANE & S/B RIGHT TURN LANE PRELIMINARY OPINION OF PROBABLE COST UNITSPROJECT T5 1.b Packet Pg. 66 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) (1494 : OASP PFFP) QUANTITY ESTIMATE UNIT COST PROJECT T7 PROJECT T7 SITE PREPARATION: Clearing & Grubbing $15,000 1 LS $15,000 Demo Existing Pavement $5 13400 SF $67,000 Cold Plane Asphalt Concrete Pavement (Assume 2" Depth)$4 4570 SY $18,280 Demo Existing Curb, Gutter, & Sidewalk $5 1200 SF $6,000 Demo Existing Culvert $20,000 1 LS $20,000 SUBTOTAL $126,280 EARTHWORK: Roadway Excavation 4 $45 1040 CY $46,800 SWPPP Preparation & Implementation $40,000 1 LS $40,000 Erosion Control - Type D (Hydroseeding)$5,000 1 LS $5,000 Mitigation Planting $50,000 1 LS $50,000 SUBTOTAL $141,800 DRAINAGE: RCB Culvert (4' x 6' X 85' long)$1,000 85 LF $85,000 Headwall / Wingwalls $40,000 1 LS $40,000 Rock Slope Protection $5,000 1 LS $5,000 Drainage Catch Basin $5,000 3 EA $15,000 18" RCP $150 85 LF $12,750 Reconstruct Culvert Outlet $20,000 1 LS $20,000 SUBTOTAL $177,750 ROADWAY: Hot Mix Asphalt Overlay (Assume 2 in.)$125 520 TON $65,000 Hot Mix Asphalt Concrete Type A (Assume 6.5")$125 450 TON $56,250 Class II Aggregate Base (Assume 11 in)$85 350 CY $29,750 Class III Aggregate Base (Assume 12 in)$75 380 CY $28,500 6-in Curb/18-in Gutter per SLO Co. Std. Dwg. C-1 (Type A)$35 1600 LF $56,000 SUBTOTAL $235,500 TRAFFIC ITEMS: Pavement Delineation & Signage $10,000 1 LS $10,000 Traffic Control $40,000 1 LS $40,000 SUBTOTAL $50,000 UTILITIES: Wet Utility Adjustments (water, sewer) $20,000 1 LS $20,000 SUBTOTAL $20,000 LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION (5 FT BUFFER)$10 8000 SF $80,000 CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL $831,330 MOBILIZATION (10%)$83,133 CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE $914,463 25% CONTINGENCY $228,616 30% DESIGN, ENVIRONMENTAL, PERMITTING, CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT & ADMINISTRATION $274,339 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE $1,417,418 NOTES: 1. THIS ESTIMATE WAS PREPARED WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF COMPLETE GRADING AND IMPROVEMENT PLANS. 2. THIS PRELIMINARY OPINION OF PROBABLE COSTS IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS A GUARANTEE FOR COSTS. WALLACE GROUP HAS NO CONTROL OVER THE COSTS OF LABOR, MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT, FUTURE MARKET CONDITIONS OR CONTRACTOR'S BIDDING METHODS. THE ACTUAL COST OF CONSTRUCTION MAY VARY FROM THE ESTIMATES AND/OR THE PROJECT BUDGET. 3. LAND ACQUISITION, R.O.W. OR LEGAL COSTS NOT INCLUDED. 4. ASSUMED DEPTH IS THE STRUCTURAL SECTION OF 6.5" AC, 11" CL II BASE, 12" CL III BASE PER CITY OF SLO STD. 7110 - UNPHASED NEW COLLECTOR/ARTERIAL. 5. CLASS I BIKE PATH COSTS ARE SHOWN AS PART OF PROJECT B1 6. DRY UTILITY COSTS NOT INCLUDED ORCUTT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS - BULLOCK LANE REALIGNMENT PRELIMINARY OPINION OF PROBABLE COST UNITSPROJECT T7 1.b Packet Pg. 67 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) (1494 : OASP PFFP) QUANTITY ESTIMATE UNIT COST PROJECT T8 PROJECT T8 SITE PREPARATION: Clearing & Grubbing (Includes Select Tree Removal)$50,000 1 LS $50,000 Remove Existing Pavement $2 33400 SF $66,800 Remove HMA Dike $5 715 LF $3,575 Remove Fence $5,000 1 LS $5,000 SUBTOTAL $125,375 EARTHWORK: Roadway Excavation $45 2960 CY $133,200 SWPPP Preparation & Implementation $50,000 1 LS $50,000 Erosion Control - Type D (Hydroseeding)$5,000 1 LS $5,000 SUBTOTAL $188,200 ROADWAY: Hot Mix Asphalt Type A (Assume 6.5")$125 1360 TON $170,000 Class II Aggregate Base (Assume 11 in)$85 1135 CY $96,475 Class III Aggregate Base (Assume 12 in)$75 1240 CY $93,000 Construct Type A HMA Dike $10 840 LF $8,400 SUBTOTAL $367,875 TRAFFIC ITEMS: Pavement Delineation & Signage $10,000 1 LS $10,000 Traffic Contol $75,000 1 LS $75,000 Stage Construction $50,000 1 LS $50,000 SUBTOTAL $135,000 MISCELLANEOUS: Construct Fence $10,000 1 LS $10,000 Replant Trees $25,000 1 LS $25,000 SUBTOTAL $35,000 CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL $851,450 MOBILIZATION (10%)$85,145 CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE $936,595 25% CONTINGENCY $234,149 30% DESIGN, ENVIRONMENTAL, PERMITTING, CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT & ADMINISTRATION $280,979 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE $1,451,722 NOTE: 1. THIS ESTIMATE WAS PREPARED WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF COMPLETE GRADING AND IMPROVEMENT PLANS. 2. THIS PRELIMINARY OPINION OF PROBABLE COSTS IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS A GUARANTEE FOR COSTS. WALLACE GROUP HAS NO CONTROL OVER THE COSTS OF LABOR, MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT, FUTURE MARKET CONDITIONS OR CONTRACTOR'S BIDDING METHODS. THE ACTUAL COST OF CONSTRUCTION MAY VARY FROM THE ESTIMATES AND/OR THE PROJECT BUDGET. 3. LAND ACQUISITION, R.O.W. OR LEGAL COSTS NOT INCLUDED. 4. ASSUMED DEPTH IS THE STRUCTURAL SECTION OF 6.5" AC, 11" CL II BASE, 12" CL III BASE PER CITY OF SLO STD. 7110 - UNPHASED NEW COLLECTOR / ARTERIAL 5. DRY UTILITY COSTS NOT INCLUDED ORCUTT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS - REDUCING GRADE ON ORCUTT RD & HANSEN LANE PRELIMINARY OPINION OF PROBABLE COST UNITSPROJECT T8 1.b Packet Pg. 68 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) (1494 : OASP PFFP) QUANTITY ESTIMATE UNIT COST PROJECT B1 PROJECT B1 EARTHWORK: Roadway Excavation $45 2790 CY $125,550 Assume 2' DG shoulder, 12' AC Ped/Bike Path, 2' DG shoulder (City of SLO 2013 Bicycle Transportation Plan) SUBTOTAL $125,550 ROAD: Hot Mix Asphalt Type A (Assume 3" thick)$125 1305 TON $163,125 Class II Aggregate Base (Assume 8" thick)$85 1719 CY $146,115 DG Shoulder (Assume 4" thick)$2 21120 SF $42,240 SUBTOTAL $351,480 MISCELLANEOUS: Paint Stripe - 3" Solid Yellow Center Line $2 5800 LF $11,600 Yield Symbols $100 20 EA $2,000 Misc Signage $250 10 EA $2,500 SUBTOTAL $16,100 CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL $493,130 MOBILIZATION (10%)$49,313 CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE $542,443 25% CONTINGENCY $135,611 30% DESIGN, ENVIRONMENTAL, PERMITTING, CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT & ADMINISTRATION $162,733 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE $840,787 NOTE:UNIT COST PER FOOT OF PATH $144.96 1. THIS ESTIMATE WAS PREPARED WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF COMPLETE GRADING AND IMPROVEMENT PLANS. 2. THIS PRELIMINARY OPINION OF PROBABLE COSTS IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS A GUARANTEE FOR COSTS. WALLACE GROUP HAS NO CONTROL OVER THE COSTS OF LABOR, MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT, FUTURE MARKET CONDITIONS OR CONTRACTOR'S BIDDING METHODS. THE ACTUAL COST OF CONSTRUCTION MAY VARY FROM THE ESTIMATES AND/OR THE PROJECT BUDGET. 3. ESTIMATE IS BASED ON 5800 FEET OF PATH AND DOES NOT INCLUDE PORTIONS IN PARKS OR ADJACENT LOTS 4. DOES NOT INCLUDE BRIDGES, CULVERTS OR OTHER CROSSING STRUCTURES 5. EARTHWORK/GRADING IS ASSUMED TO BEGIN FROM ROUGH FINISHED GRADE 6. DRY UTILITY COSTS NOT INCLUDED UNITSORCUTT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS - PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE PATHS (5800 FEET) PRELIMINARY OPINION OF PROBABLE COST PROJECT B1 1.b Packet Pg. 69 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) (1494 : OASP PFFP) QUANTITY ESTIMATE UNIT COST PROJECT B2 PROJECT B2 MOBILIZATION/DEMOLITION PRIOR SIMILAR PROJECT Jennifer Street Bridge - 1998 $2,500,000 1 LS $2,500,000 Cost Adjustment 200 ft / 300 ft (Jennifer St. span vs. Industrial Way span)-0.33 ($825,000) SUBTOTAL $1,675,000 ESCALATION: ENR Construction Cost Index Aug 1998 = 5929, Aug 2016 = 10386 $1,675,000 0.75 LS $1,259,146 SUBTOTAL $1,259,146 CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE $2,934,146 25% CONTINGENCY $733,536 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE $3,667,682 NOTE: 1. THIS ESTIMATE WAS PREPARED WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF COMPLETE GRADING AND IMPROVEMENT PLANS. 2. THIS PRELIMINARY OPINION OF PROBABLE COSTS IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS A GUARANTEE FOR COSTS. WALLACE GROUP HAS NO CONTROL OVER THE COSTS OF LABOR, MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT, FUTURE MARKET CONDITIONS OR CONTRACTOR'S BIDDING METHODS. THE ACTUAL COST OF CONSTRUCTION MAY VARY FROM THE ESTIMATES AND/OR THE PROJECT BUDGET. 3. LAND ACQUISITION, R.O.W. OR LEGAL COSTS NOT INCLUDED. 4. DOES NOT INCLUDE UTILITY RELOCATIONS ORCUTT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS - PEDESTRIAN / BIKE OVERPASS AT INDUSTRIAL WAY PRELIMINARY OPINION OF PROBABLE COST UNITSPROJECT B2 1.b Packet Pg. 70 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) (1494 : OASP PFFP) QUANTITY ESTIMATE UNIT COST PROJECT B3 PROJECT B3 BRIDGE 100' x 12' Pedestrian / Bike bridge adjacent to the railroad bridge on Tank Farm $175 1200 SF $210,000 The bridge is assumed to be made of "H" section welded steel trusses with weathered finish Erect/Install Bridge $50,000 1 LS $50,000 Cast in in place concrete deck (4" thick)$20 1200 SF $24,000 Striping/Signage $2,000 1 LS $2,000 SUBTOTAL $286,000 APPROACHES/FOUNDATION Import Fill Material, Grading $50 1700 CY $85,000 Foundation/Retaining Walls (Cast In Place Concrete- Exposed Face)$100 2000 SF $200,000 SUBTOTAL $285,000 TRAFFIC ITEMS Traffic Control $20,000 1 LS $20,000 SUBTOTAL $20,000 CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL $591,000 MOBILIZATION (10%)$59,100 CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE $650,100 25% CONTINGENCY $162,525 30% DESIGN, ENVIRONMENTAL, PERMITTING, CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT & ADMINISTRATION $195,030 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE $1,007,655 NOTE: 1. THIS ESTIMATE WAS PREPARED WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF COMPLETE GRADING AND IMPROVEMENT PLANS. 2. THIS PRELIMINARY OPINION OF PROBABLE COSTS IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS A GUARANTEE FOR COSTS. WALLACE GROUP HAS NO CONTROL OVER THE COSTS OF LABOR, MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT, FUTURE MARKET CONDITIONS OR CONTRACTOR'S BIDDING METHODS. THE ACTUAL COST OF CONSTRUCTION MAY VARY FROM THE ESTIMATES AND/OR THE PROJECT BUDGET. 3. LAND ACQUISITION, R.O.W. OR LEGAL COSTS NOT INCLUDED. 4. PAVEMENT AND STRUCTURAL SECTION APPROACHES (HMA, BASE, DG) INCLUDED IN PROJECT B1 ORCUTT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS - BIKE PATH EXTENSION OVER TANK FARM RD. PRELIMINARY OPINION OF PROBABLE COST UNITSPROJECT B3 1.b Packet Pg. 71 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) (1494 : OASP PFFP) 1.b Packet Pg. 72 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) (1494 : OASP PFFP) 1.b Packet Pg. 73 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) (1494 : OASP PFFP) 1.b Packet Pg. 74 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) (1494 : OASP PFFP) 1.b Packet Pg. 75 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) (1494 : OASP PFFP) 1.b Packet Pg. 76 Attachment: b - OASP PFFP 2016 Update City Council Draft - 11-15-2016 - consolidated document (003) (1494 : OASP PFFP)   Transportation Pedestrian and Bicycle Paths T1 Orcutt Road/Tank Farm Road T2 Broad Street/South St-Santa Barbara Road B1 Pedestrian and Bicycle Paths T3 Broad Street/Tank Farm Rd B2 Pedestrian/Bike Overpass at Industrial Way T4 Orcutt Road/Johnson Ave B3 Bike Path Extension Over Tank Farm Rd T5 Broad Street/Prado Road Extension T6 Orcutt Road Widening @ UPRR/Laurel Parks & Recreation T7 Bullock Lane Realignment T8 Relocating Hanson Road P1 Central Neighborhood Park - Main Portion South of Creeks (Righetti) T9 Transit Stops P3 Pocket Park T10 Tank Farm Roundabout (at Righetti Ranch Road)P4 Linear Park System T11 Orcutt Road Roundabout (at "A" Street)P5 Trail Junction Park Orcutt Expansion Area Bridges T12 Bridge A T13 Bridge B T14 Bridge C   T12 T14 T13 B3 B2 P1 P4 P5  P3 T3 T1 T2  T4 T5  T6 T7 T8 T11 T10  1.c Packet Pg. 77 Attachment: c - OASP PFFP - Projects Vicinity Map (1494 : OASP PFFP) Page intentionally left blank. Orcutt Area Specific Plan Slide 1 PUBLIC FACILITIES FINANCING PLAN 2016 UPDATE OASP PFFP 2016 Update •Receive presentation on program updates •Conduct public hearing Staff Recommendation: •Adopt a Resolution approving a comprehensive update of the Public Facilities Financing Plan for the Orcutt Planning Area Slide 2 Background and Community Outreach 2010:City Council approval of Orcutt Area Specific Plan (OASP) including Public Facilities Financing Plan (PFFP) 2012:Annexation of the Orcutt Planning Area 2013-2016:Approval of various Vesting Tract Maps representing 684 dwelling units April & June 2016: Parks and Recreation Commission Public Hearings including detailed review of OASP public parks October 2016:Communications and Outreach Meetings with property owners and interested parties Slide 3 What is a PFFP? Slide 4 The Public Facilities Financing Plan (PFFP) looks to share costs for projects of area-wide benefit or were identified in the EIR for the OASP. Current OASP PFFP Includes: 9 -General Street Improvement Projects 3 –Internal OASP Bridge Projects 3 –Bicycle & Pedestrian Projects 4 –Parks & Rec Projects How Does the Proposed PFFP Compare to Existing? •2010 PFFP -$10.5M in roads, bridges, pedestrian and bicycle paths and parks •2016 Consumer Price and Construction Index increases for PFFP result in $13.1M in anticipated costs •2016 PFFP Update includes current construction cost and contingency budgets approaching $17.1M •2016 PFFP Update represents an ~ 31% increase costs as detailed in the Attachment B report Slide 5 PFFP Update Process Slide 6 •Last 24 months -Discussions with developers of major subdivisions that are now under design with more detailed cost estimates for some PFFP projects •August -Wallace & Associates hired to update project cost estimates •Public Draft Update to PFFP released early October •Meeting with area stakeholders October 31st •Final revisions to the PFFP PFFP Update Process Slide 7 •Initially intended to be a “high” level update for some project cost changes but ultimately became a full revision to the PFFP including: 1.Most cost estimates now updated 2.Addition of 2 new projects into PFFP (roundabouts) 3.Modifications to OASP fair share %’s to: a.reflect potential for grant sources, and b.where appropriate, adjust for substantial cost increases 4.Incorporating completed project costs 5.Adjusting for unlikely park land acquisitions (Garay) 2016 PFFP Update also includes: Slide 8 •Modifying the anticipated number of dwelling units upward, from 937 total units to 1,063 units •Recognizing a shift to a higher proportion of multi-family residential units, resulting from recent VTM approvals and housing policies being achieved under the OASP •Confirming a reduction in City-wide Impact Fees for water and wastewater infrastructure contributions •An adjustment in the Specific Plan and EIR reimbursement fees to cover the costs of this 2016 PFFP Update, and a companion 2017 Specific Plan Update to codify these changes What is in the PFFP Update? Slide 9 OASP PFFP Update Now Includes: 11 -General Street Improvement Projects (2 new) 3 –Internal OASP Bridge Projects (same) 3 –Bicycle & Pedestrian Projects (same) 4 –Parks & Rec Projects (1 new, 1 deleted) Project Map Slide 11 One Revision to Proposed PFFP Slide 12 Project T-5 (Prado Road at Broad Street) Recommended to be reduced by 50%to a total of $264,000 for the final PFFP Update Why?The Engineer’s estimate included improvement costs for work not the responsibility of the OASP area. Result:OASP costs reduced down from $528,000 (see amended tables) PFFP Table 2 -revised Slide 13 PFFP Table 2 con’t -revised Slide 14 Project T8 –Hanson Lane Safety Imp Slide 15 Project T8 –Hanson Lane Safety Imp Slide 15 •Project cost went substantially up:$1,452,000 •OASP share reduced to 20%($290,400) •Will use that amount to match grant or additional improvements •City recently did interim improvements (Warning Signs) Project T7 –Bullock Lane Realignment Slide 16 Project T7 –Bullock Lane Realignment Slide 17 Project T 11 –Orcutt Roundabout Slide 18 Slide 19 Project T 10 –Tank Farm Road Roundabout Slide 20 PFFP Table 4 -revised Slide 8 PFFP Table 7 -revised Shows reduced fees for Project T5 revision Shows reduced fees for Project T5 revision 2016 PFFP Comparison CAR Slide 21 Infrastructure 2010 OASP- PFFP 2016 Current PFFP (CPI-Escalated) 2016 PFFP Update Difference from Current 2016 PFFP % Diff Transportation (Roads) Streets $2,627,034 $2,877,367 $4,230,000 $1,352,633 47% Bridges $1,610,000 $1,763,419 $4,080,000 $2,316,581 131% Roundabouts N/A N/A $650,000 $650,000 N/A Roads SubTotals:$4,237,034 $6,265,151 $8,960,000 $2,694,849 43% Pedestrian & Bicycle $1,775,755 $1,944,968 $2,147,000 $202,032 10% Parks & Recreation $4,448,000 $4,871,854 $6,045,700 $1,173,846 24% Totals $10,460,789 $13,081,974 $17,152,700 $4,070,726 31% 2016 PFFP Comparison Revised Slide 22 Infrastructure 2010 OASP- PFFP 2016 Current PFFP (CPI-Escalated) 2016 PFFP Update Difference from Current 2016 PFFP % Diff Transportation (Roads) Streets $2,627,034 $2,877,367 $3,965,995 $1,088,628 38% Bridges $1,610,000 $1,763,419 $4,080,000 $2,316,581 131% Roundabouts N/A N/A $650,000 $650,000 N/A Roads SubTotals:$4,237,034 $6,265,151 $8,695,995 $2,430,844 39% Pedestrian & Bicycle $1,775,755 $1,944,968 $2,147,000 $202,032 10% Parks & Recreation $4,448,000 $4,871,854 $6,045,700 $1,173,846 24% Totals $10,460,789 $13,081,974 $16,888,695 $3,806,721 29% Total Fee Comparison Slide 3 Residential Type 2010 OASP- Fee 2016 OASP Fee 2010 Citywide & Other Fees 2016 Citywide & Other Fees 2010 Total Impact Fees 1 2016 Total Impact Fees Change Single Family $12,755 $19,032 $26,822 $19,361 $39,577 $38,393 ($1,184) Multiple Family $9,154 $13,594 $21,426 $13,996 $30,580 $27,590 ($2,990) Citywide Fees Down from 2010 OASP adoption Total Impact Fees Lower Slide 23 PFFP Final Recommended Fees Residential Type Transportation Bikes & Peds Parks & Rec Total Single Family $9,745 $2,406 $6,585 $18,736 Multiple Family $6,807 $1,681 $4,899 $13,387 Where to from Here? Slide 3 •Projects will go to construction with intent to keep costs down. •Citywide AB 1600 study underway –could result in further shifting of projects into Citywide fee program •Adjustments will be made to PFFP as necessary when projects are completed or new information is acquired •Staff will continue to solicit grants and other funding to help deliver projects Recommendation –OASP PFFP 2016 Update •Adopt a Resolution (Attachment A) to approve an update the Public Facilities Financing Plan, as amended, for the Orcutt Area Specific Plan. Slide 24 Questions ? Slide 25 •Key increases in construction cost estimates include: •Major cost increase for Orcutt Road at Hanson Road (formerly a county maintained road), OASP % lowered •Major cost increase for Bullock Lane due to culvert replacement •Significantly higher costs for two internal collector road bridge crossings •The addition of new traffic control measures (roundabouts) in the OASP per updated Circulation Element policies •Parks and Recreation improvements based on the more details processing of the VTM for Righetti Ranch, and the PRC’s detailed reviews of parkland improvements this year •Key reductions in construction cost estimates include: •Reduced OASP fair share contributions for selected projects •Keeping “soft costs” for design and permits at lower targets •Eliminated “active” park improvements at Trail Junction park •Eliminated Garay park expansion and improvement fees Slide 10 Slide 7 PFFP Table 2 notes -revised Slide 3 Project T1 –Orcutt at Tank Farm Project T3 –Tank Farm Road at Broad Slide 3 Project T5 –Prado Road at Broad Slide 3 Project T7 –Bullock Lane Realignment Slide 3 Project T8 –Hanson Lane Safety Imp Slide 3 Slide 3 Project T 10 –Tank Farm Road Roundabout Project T 11 –Orcutt Roundabout Slide 3 Orcutt/TFR Slide 3 Broad/TFR Slide 3 Orcutt/Johnson Slide 3 Broad/Prado Slide 3 OASP TIS: Hansen Lane Issues Slide 3 Project Map Slide 3 OASP New Roundabouts Project B2 –Industrial Way –OASP Connector Slide 3 Project Map Slide 3 1 City of San Luis Obispo Setting the Stage for 2017-19 Financial Plan Nov 15,2016 Background Materials for Council Goal-Setting and the Financial Planning Process Setting the Stage 1st Step in Development of the two-year 2017-19 Financial Plan Input for Goal-Setting Process: Status of where we are today Progress on: Current 2015-17 MCG/OIO Capital Improvement Program General Plan Update Goal-Setting Input Advisory Bodies Goal-Setting and the Budget Process Community Surveys Community Forum January 10, 2017 Letters from Individuals Status of Current 2-yr Goals ** Letters from Community Groups Fiscal Forecast * Council Goal Setting Workshop January 28, 2017 Major City Goal Work Programs and “Strategic Budget Direction:” April 18 Preliminary Budget: May 15 Budget Workshops: June 1, 6 Adopted Budget: June 20, 2017 Long-Term Plans, Goals & Policies * ** November 15, 2016 “Setting the Stage” Workshop * December 13, 2016 “Budget Foundation” Workshop 4 Overview 1.MCG/OIO –Derek Johnson, Assistant City Manager 2.Current and Long-Term CIP –Daryl Grigsby, Public Works Director 3.General Plan Update –Michael Codron, Community Development Director Status of Major City Goals & Other Important Objectives 6 Open Space Preservation 70% COMPLETE 7 7 Open Space Preservation •Natural Resources Roundtable meetings. •Rangers implementing adopted Open Space Maintenance Plan. •3 separate land conservation opportunities in progress. •Wetland meadow and riparian planting/invasive species control at Calle Joaquin Agricultural 8 8 Multi-Modal Transportation 50% Complete 9 Multi Modal Transportation 3 new green bike lanes installed and 2 more in progress 10 new sidewalk ramps. New bike slot at Highland and Ferrini Institute of Transportation Engineers Award for the 2014 LUCE Update and Multimodal activities. Bike Rodeo Short Range Transit Plan approved by Council Service changes consistent with the plan will be implemented in summer 2017. Bob Jones Octagon Barn trail in environmental phase. Higuera and Marsh Street lighted cross walk replacement in progress 10 Housing 70% COMPLETE 11 Housing Total Housing Units. 3,989 homes under review/under construction Approved for construction: 616 Entitled, not yet permitted for construction: 1,036 Under entitlement review: 2,337 (including Specific Plans) 40 Prado the new homeless shelter. The Housing Authority’s 46 unit ‘Iron Works’ project received a tax credit award and plans to start construction in late 2016. Council also recently allocated $300,000 in Affordable Housing Funds. Legal documents have been updated to administer housing programs. Over 100 units under contract with developers to ensure they provide the necessary affordable units to meet their Inclusionary Housing requirement. 60 of those affordable units will be located in multiple subdivisions within the Orcutt Area Specific Plan. 12 13Other Important Objectives Highlights •Safety Enhancement Zone Changes. •Fall Orientation Neighborhood Wellness •Work on design/engineering and fiscal analysis ongoing with summer presentations anticipated. Laguna Lake Restoration •Primary (first dollar) insurance coverage for liability claims to an Excess Insurance Program (EIP) . Fiscal Sustainability •Joint City Council/ Planning Commission Study Session. •Street Sweeping, Sidewalk & Bubblegum Alley Steam Cleaning, Trash Pickup & Graffiti Removal, and NewsrackDowntown 13 Major City Goals and OIOs The next review of the 2015-17 Major City Goals and Other Important Objectives will occur at the 2016-17 Mid-Year Budget. Individual items requiring policy direction and/or Council approval will continue to be brought to Council for consideration and direction. 14 Status of Current CIP Projects (2015-17) As of November, 2016 Status of Current CIP Projects: Major CIP Projects Status of Current CIP Projects: Major CIP Projects Status of Current CIP Projects: Total Active Projects 28% are completed 81% are “in process” (under construction, acquisition, fleet carryover, and on-going projects) Of the projects that are in process, 96% of them are on schedule Status of Current CIP Projects: Major City Goals and Other Important Objectives These estimates are updated from the Plans adopted since last Financial Plan For the 1st time. staff includes an estimate of annual maintenance needs for existing infrastructure Total Long Term CIP is $19.4 M to maintain existing and $1.1 B to construct necessary new infrastructure to address growth and safety. The total project costs are not just a General Fund obligation but are eligible for impact fees, developer contributions, grants and other sources. Long-Term Capital Improvement Projects (Over the Next 20 Years) Example: Roundabout Long-Term CIP: Annual Maintenance Annual Maintenance Needs Asset Ideal Annual Funding Traffic Management $250,000 Pavement Management $4,400,000 Curb,Gutter,Sidewalks $1,000,000 Flood Control $5,300,000 Sidewalk Ramps $580,000 Parks Play Equipment $150,000 Water Systems $3,100,000 Sewer Systems $2,800,000 Buildings $1,570,000 Bike Path Maintenance $100,000 Open space Maintenance $150,000 Total $19,400,000 Long-Term CIP Summary by Function Function Amount Public Safety $55,850,000 Public Utilities $207,500,000 Transportation $682,858,000 Leisure, Cultural and Social Services $145,270,000 Community Development $10,500,000 General Government $23,350,000 Total $1,125,328,000 Long-Term CIP: CIP Summary by Function Example: Road Diet Tank Farm Road Project Site URL shown in green November 15, 2016 Setting the Stage: 2017-2019 Goal Setting and Financial Plan Process Status of General Plan Implementation Programs Purpose The Status of General Plan Implementation Programs report provides: Summary the status of all General Plan Implementation Programs and “key” area plans Summary of the status of action items and efforts in the Airport Area, Margarita Area and Orcutt Area Specific 2 Complete Implementation Programs 409 individual implementation programs in the General Plan 365 or 89% of them are complete or have been integrated into the City’s ongoing operations 5% increase of implemented programs since the last Financial Plan reporting 3 Incomplete Implementation Programs The incomplete programs (11% of the total) can be classified as follows: 4% (16) as being relatively easy to achieve from a resource perspective 5% (21) as being of moderate difficulty 2% (7) as being difficult to achieve 4 Implementation Programs by Element Land Use Element Circulation Element Housing Element Noise Element Conservation and Open Space Element Safety Element Parks and Recreation Element Water and Wastewater Element 5 Summary by Element 8 Summary: Status of General Plan Implementation Programs General Plan Element Complete or Ongoing Difficulty to Complete TotalLowMediumHigh No.Pct.No . Pct.No.Pct.No.Pct. Land Use 55 75%3 4%11 15%4 6%73 Housing 74 95%4 5%0 0%0 0%78 Circulation 67 97%1 1.5%1 1.5%0 0%69 Conservation & Open Space 61 90%0 0%6 9%1 1%68 Noise 5 64%1 12%1 12%1 12%8 Safety 34 97%1 3%0 0%0 0%35 Parks and Recreation 37 92.5%2 5%0 0%1 2.5%40 Water and Wastewater 32 84%4 11%2 5%0 0%38 TOTAL 365 89%16 4%21 5%7 2%409 Assessment of Resource Needs 8 HIGH -LEVEL Resource Assessment Remaining Programs Difficulty FTE's*and/or Consultant Costs min max min max Low 1 6 0 0.62 $ -$ - Medium 2 1 0.81 5.05 $ -$525,000 + High 7 1.68 1.68 +$175,000 $175,000 + Total 4 4 2.49 7.35 +$175,000 $427,000 + Area Plan Implementation Programs 6 Orcutt Area Specific Plan Mid-Higuera Area Railroad District Airport Area Specific Plan Margarita Area Specific Plan Climate Action Plan Railroad District Plan Programs 41 implementation programs have been completed or integrated into ongoing programs 37 are not yet completed Several of the incomplete programs call for bike paths along the railroad right-of-way, which may need to be adjusted to reflect the inability to acquire easements from Union Pacific Railroad 7 Mid-Higuera Area Enhancement Plan Programs None of the 24 programs in this long term plan have been completed LUCE Update calls for an update of this plan 7 Airport Area Specific Plan Programs 20 implementation programs have been completed or integrated into ongoing programs 9 are not yet completed Development proposals, such as the Chevron Remediation project and the Avila Ranch project, have necessitated re-evaluation and/or updates to the programs 7 Climate Action Plan Implementation Municipal Actions: WRRF energy efficiency project Municipal water conservation City and Community Partner Actions: Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) Civic Spark Implementation Priorities: City Council to discuss on 1/17/17 1 3 Recommendation 35 Review and discuss the accompanying background information in preparation of the 2017-19 Goal Setting Financial Process: 1.Status of 2015-17 Goals & Objectives 2.Status of General Plan Implementation 3.Status of Current Capital Improvement Plan Projects 4.Long-term Capital Improvement Plan 11r.:.2. , i'ED��..- TEM Newspaper of the Central Coast N 0 V 16 2 01 p Tl TRT TX SLIQ CTT CLERK 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 # 2781053ary 01' County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen and not �iruts�I✓UP0 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY COUNCIL OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING was, the principal clerk of the printers and publishers of I he San Luis Obispo City Council invites THE TRIBUNE, a newspaper of general Circulation, ..ii interested persons to attend a public printed and published daily at the City of San Luis meeting on Tuesday, November 15, STATE OF CALIFORNIA 2015. at 6:00 p.m. in the City Hall Coun- at which the annexed clippings is a true copy, was cil Chamber, 990 Palm Street, San Luis ss. Ol)ispo, California, relative to the follow - County of San Luis Obispo Ing. I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of theTom'—ER'AAL — F° '`°z' -'a U" $E7TING AND_ NANCIAL PLAN PIROC- County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen and not ESS interested in the above entitled matter; I am now, and at Review and discuss the background infor- all times embraced in the publication herein mentioned matlon In preparation for the 2017-19 Gal - was, the principal clerk of the printers and publishers of Setting and Financial Plan process: THE TRIBUNE, a newspaper of general Circulation, 1. Status of 2015-17 Goals and Objec- tives; and printed and published daily at the City of San Luis Obis o in the above named count and state; that notice p y � ti Status of General Plan Implementa- tion Programs; and at which the annexed clippings is a true copy, was 3. Status of Current Capital Improve - published in the above-named newspaper and not in any ment Plan Projects; and supplement thereof — on the following dates to wit; 4. I Long -Term Capital Improvement NOVEMBER 12, 2016 that said newspaper was duly PlaN and regularly ascertained and established a newspaper of For more Inlormatlon, you are Invited to eneral circulation b Decree in the Superior g yecree entered p contact Xenia Bradford of the City's Fi- nance neparlrrient at {805j 781-7125 or by Court of San Luis Obispo County, State of California, on email at%bCSdford9s_tooitv:om June 9, 1952, Case #19139 under the Government Code The City Council may also discuss other of the State of California. hearings or business items before or after the items listed above. Reports for this meeting are available for review In the City I cern or declare under the penalty of perjury that the ( ) p p y clerk's Office and online at www.slocity- .aa. Please call the City Clerk's Office at foregoing is true and correct. t805j 781-7100 for more information. The City Council meeting will be televised live on Charter Cable Channel 20 and live streaming on www.slocity.org. (Sign ire of Principal Clerk) Carrie Gallaghgr DATED: NOVEMBER 12 2016 , City clerk Clly of San Luis Obispo AD COST: $157.76 Novernhr 12, 2016 2781053 11r.:.2. , i'ED��..- TEM Newspaper of the Central Coast N 0 V 16 2 01 p Tl TRT TX SLIQ CTT CLERK 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 # 2781053ary 01' County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen and not �iruts�I✓UP0 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO SAN LUIS OBISPO CITY COUNCIL OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING was, the principal clerk of the printers and publishers of I he San Luis Obispo City Council invites THE TRIBUNE, a newspaper of general Circulation, ..ii interested persons to attend a public printed and published daily at the City of San Luis meeting on Tuesday, November 15, STATE OF CALIFORNIA 2015. at 6:00 p.m. in the City Hall Coun- at which the annexed clippings is a true copy, was cil Chamber, 990 Palm Street, San Luis ss. Ol)ispo, California, relative to the follow - County of San Luis Obispo Ing. I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of theTom'—ER'AAL — F° '`°z' -'a U" $E7TING AND_ NANCIAL PLAN PIROC- County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen and not ESS interested in the above entitled matter; I am now, and at Review and discuss the background infor- all times embraced in the publication herein mentioned matlon In preparation for the 2017-19 Gal - was, the principal clerk of the printers and publishers of Setting and Financial Plan process: THE TRIBUNE, a newspaper of general Circulation, 1. Status of 2015-17 Goals and Objec- tives; and printed and published daily at the City of San Luis Obis o in the above named count and state; that notice p y � ti Status of General Plan Implementa- tion Programs; and at which the annexed clippings is a true copy, was 3. Status of Current Capital Improve - published in the above-named newspaper and not in any ment Plan Projects; and supplement thereof — on the following dates to wit; 4. I Long -Term Capital Improvement NOVEMBER 12, 2016 that said newspaper was duly PlaN and regularly ascertained and established a newspaper of For more Inlormatlon, you are Invited to eneral circulation b Decree in the Superior g yecree entered p contact Xenia Bradford of the City's Fi- nance neparlrrient at {805j 781-7125 or by Court of San Luis Obispo County, State of California, on email at%bCSdford9s_tooitv:om June 9, 1952, Case #19139 under the Government Code The City Council may also discuss other of the State of California. hearings or business items before or after the items listed above. Reports for this meeting are available for review In the City I cern or declare under the penalty of perjury that the ( ) p p y clerk's Office and online at www.slocity- .aa. Please call the City Clerk's Office at foregoing is true and correct. t805j 781-7100 for more information. The City Council meeting will be televised live on Charter Cable Channel 20 and live streaming on www.slocity.org. (Sign ire of Principal Clerk) Carrie Gallaghgr DATED: NOVEMBER 12 2016 , City clerk Clly of San Luis Obispo AD COST: $157.76 Novernhr 12, 2016 2781053