HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-16-2018 Item 16 - Update to OASP facilities financing plan Meeting Date: 10/16/2018
FROM: Michael Codron, Community Development Director
Tim Bochum, Deputy Public Works Director
Prepared By: David Watson, Contract Planner
Diane Dostalek, Senior Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: UPDATE FOR THE ORCUTT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN PUBLIC
FACILITIES FINANCING PLAN
RECOMMENDATION
1. Hold a public meeting to receive public testimony on a proposed update to the Public
Facilities Financing Plan for the Orcutt Area Specific Plan; and
2. After closing the public meeting, adopt a Resolution (Attachment A) pursuant to Government
Code Section 66016 to approve an update to the Public Facilities Financing Plan for the
Orcutt Area Specific Plan; and
3. Authorize the Community Development Director to enter into Public Facilities Financing
P lan Fee Credit Agreement s (Attachment I) with the Righetti Ranch L.P. developers and any
other Orcutt Area Specific Plan developers, in a form subject to the approval of the City
Attorney.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF
In May 2010, Council approved the Orcutt Area Specific Plan (OASP) (Attachment B – Vicinity
Map). 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 fo r 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.
On November 15, 2016 and December 12, 2017 Council approved updates to the PFFP to adjust
costs to reflect then-current construction estimates and to revise the scope of certain projects to
better address implementation of park and traffic circulation needs in the OASP area.
Packet Page 161
Item 16
Since the last PFFP update a revised Citywide Transportation Improvement Fee (TIF) has been
adopted, incorporating new and expanded citywide transportation projects, some of which affect
the allocation of costs to the Orcutt Area. As a result, the PFFP needs to be updated to ensure the
provision of appropriate fee amounts for all OASP projects in coordination with the TIF
program. The proposed 2018 PFFP update reflects more accurate project estimates and updates
costs for projects that have been completed or are nearing completion.
DISCUSSION
Background
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)
4. Public Parks & Recreation (new public parks and recreation within the OASP Area)
Attachment C shows the 2017 PFFP list (Table 2) of improvement projects included in each of
these categories, the gross cost estimate of each project, the OASP fair share of these costs and
the final net costs to be allocated by fee to all OASP development rather than to a specific
development. Table 7 of Attachment C reflects the 2017 fee structu re for single-family and
multi-family units within the OASP.
The OASP PFFP acknowledged and recognized that the cost estimates for the fees were
estimates only and that certain adjustments would need to be made along the way. Specifically,
the PFFP included detailed provisions regarding (i) how PFFP fees would be updated, (ii) the
frequency of PFFP fees revisions, (iii) the basis for fee updates, (iv) development projects
excluded from paying the updated PFFP fees, (v) when the PFFP fees are due, and (v i) that the
fair share is defined for the projects “at the time they were built.” Examples of applicable
language in the March 2010 OASP that applied to updates of the PFFP include:
• Section 8.5.1 - “[C]hanges 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.”
Packet Page 162
Item 16
• Section 8.5.1 - “As the City will adopt new ordinances and 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.”
• Section 8.5.2 - “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.”
• Section 9.6 - “Impact fees are due at the time building permits are issued.”
These policies are significant with respect to the idea of “vested rights.” Specif ically, under the
Subdivision Map Act, an approved vested tentative tract map confers a vested right to proceed
with development in substantial compliance with the ordinances, policies, and standards in effect
at the time the vesting tentative tract map application is deemed complete. This vested right
usually includes the payment of fees in the amount when the application was deemed complete.
The application of vested rights in the context of the City’s OASP PFFP program is not black
and white, especially given the language cited above. Further discussion on the impact of certain
developments within the OASP area having a vested rights status regarding the OASP PFFP is
discussed further below under “Minimizing Risk of a Funding Shortfall.”
In addition, certain subdivisions in the OASP area were approved prior to the Citywide TIF
update which took effect on July 1, 2018.1 The 2018 Citywide TIF update substantially increased
the Citywide TIF fee and added some of the OASP PFFP projects into the Citywide T IF
program. These approved subdivisions include: Righetti Tract 3063, Jones Tract 3066, Imel
Tract 3095, West Creek Tract 3083, Taylor Ranch Tract 3044/Parcel Map SLO 17 -0115, and
Pratt Tract 3111/Parcel Map SLO 17-0127. These subdivisions will not be paying the 2018
Citywide TIF fee unless their vesting rights expire. Therefore, the OASP PFFP fee that the
approved subdivisions will be paying will be based on the PFFP list that was approved in 2016
instead of the list that omits the projects that were moved to the 2018 Citywide TIF. That ensures
that the approved subdivisions still pay their fair share of the projects that have been
subsequently moved to the 2018 Citywide TIF.
For reference, the PFFP projects that were moved to the Citywide TIF in 2018 inc lude:
1) T-3 – Broad Street/Tank Farm intersection
2) T-4 – Orcutt Road/Johnson intersection
3) T-5 – Broad Street/Prado Road extension (second northbound left turn lane)
1 Please remember that the Citywide TIF and the OASP PFFP fees are two different sets of impact fees, the former
being applied on a Citywide basis and the latter applicable to development within the OASP area.
Packet Page 163
Item 16
New subdivisions that were not vested prior to July 1, 2018, will pay the new Citywide TIF, so
their PFFP list of projects has been updated to exclude those projects that have been moved into
the Citywide TIF program. The Orcutt/Tank Farm intersection (T -1) remains in both the PFFP
list of projects and in the Citywide TIF program because they ar e two separate projects. The
PFFP project is an interim solution that includes a right -turn lane, traffic signal, and elimination
of the skew where Orcutt Road comes in to Tank Farm at an angle. The project included in the
Citywide TIF program is for a fut ure roundabout at this intersection.
In 2017, the latest update to the OASP Public Facilities Financing chapter projected an
approximate net of $16.9 million in fair share fees to be allocated to all the property owners. 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.
Prior to increasing an existing fee, Section 66016 of the Californ ia Government Code requires
the local agency to hold at least one open and public meeting, at which oral or written
presentations can be made, as part of a regular scheduled meeting. Notices must be mailed to
interested parties, and the fee increase must be approved by ordinance or resolution.
2018 PFFP Update
Summary of Changes
The 2018 revised PFFP for pre-July 1, 2018 vested subdivisions anticipates an approximate net
of $21.4 million in fair share fees to be allocated to all the property owners (Attac hment D). The
primary difference between the 2017 and 2018 projections for the pre -July 1, 2018 vested
subdivisions is cost increases for the projects based on more current construction costs estimates
and bids provided by the property owners. The 2018 rev ised PFFP for post-July 1, 2018
subdivisions anticipates an approximate net of $20.5 million in fair share fees to be allocated to
all the property owners (Attachment E). The primary difference between the 2017 and 2018
projections for the post -July 1, 2018 subdivisions are infrastructure cost increases and the
removal of certain OASP projects from the PFFP Program that are now included in the citywide
TIF program (PFFP Projects T -3, T-4 and T-5).
Packet Page 164
Item 16
Tables 1 and 2 compare the changes in the net project cost s for the OASP PFFP between the
2017 approval and the recommended revisions to the 2018 PFFP.
Table 1
(1)
(1) See Attachment C
SFR = Single-Family Residential
MFR – Multi-Family Residential
Table 2
(2) See Attachment D
(3) See Attachment E
Since 2010, the City has been increasing the PFFP Fee structure annually with Consumer Price
Index (CPI) updates to keep up with inflation. This practice will continue annually u ntil the
PFFP projects are completed.
Improvement
Net Total Cost
of the 2017
Adopted PFFP
2017
Adopted
SFR Fee
2017
Adopted
MFR Fee
Streets and Bridges $8,695,995 $9,745 $6,807
Pedestrian-Bicycle $2,147,000 $2,406 $1,681
Parks and Recreation $6,045,714 $6,717 $4,997
Totals $16,888,709 $18,868 $13,485
For Pre-7/1/2018 Vested Subdivisions (2) For Post-7/1/2018 Subdivisions (3)
Net Total
Cost of the
2018
Proposed
PFFP
2018
Proposed
SFR Fee
2018
Proposed
MFR Fee
Improvement
Net Total
Cost of the
2018
Proposed
PFFP
2018
Proposed
SFR Fee
2018
Proposed
MFR Fee
$11,229,995 $12,584 $8,791 Streets and
Bridges $10,357,195 $11,606 $8,108
$4,106,000 $4,601 $3,214 Pedestrian-
Bicycle $4,106,000 $4,601 $3,214
$6,045,714 $6,717 $4,997 Parks and
Recreation $6,045,714 $6,717 $4,997
$21,381,709 $23,902 $17,002 Totals $20,508,909 $22,924 $16,319
26.7% 26.1% Fee Increase 21.5% 21.0%
Packet Page 165
Item 16
Finally, it is important to note that even as the OASP PFFP makes assumptions 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) further adjustments to Citywide
impact fee programs, and 4) outside funding sources such as grants if acquired by the city or
others. Future adjustments to the PFFP fees may be warranted to address these changes , as
outlined in Section 8.5.1 of the OASP.
Cost Changes – Street Improvements and Bridges
The 2018 Updated PFFP for pre-July 1, 2018 vested subdivisions (Attachment D) presents cost
updates for projects T-1 (Orcutt -Tank Farm Intersection), T-9 (Transit Stops), T-10 (Tank
Farm/Righetti Ranch roundabout),T-11 (Orcutt/Ranch House Road Roundabout), T-12 (Bridge
A – Ranch House Road), T-13 (Bridge B – Tiburon Way) and T-14 (Bridge C – Righetti Ranch
Road) in this category. See Attachment F for conceptual layou t of the streets and bridges.
The cost estimate for the Orcutt/Tank Farm intersection improvement (T-1) was increased to
$1.6 million to reflect inflation in construction costs from the $930,000 estimate in the original
PFFP back in 2010.
Estimated costs to complete the transit stops for the OASP (T -9) are ranging closer to $45,000
per stop. Five stops were previously identified as necessary at a cost of $25,000 each. After
reviewing transit circulation needs in the area, it was determined that ten stops would need to be
constructed. Attachment G shows the location of the proposed transit stops.
The Tank Farm Road/Righetti Ranch Road roundabout (T -10) and the Orcutt Road/Ranch House
Road roundabout (aka “A” Street) (T -11) have increased from previously estimated costs of
$650,000 each to $2.0 million and $1.8 million, respectively. These roundabouts are funded
50% by the Righetti Ranch and West Creek subdivisions respectively, with the remaining 50%
of each improvement spread over the entire OASP.
The bridge estimates have been updated to reflect current design and construction underway by
the Tract 3063 developers (Righetti Ranch, Ambient Communities) and Tract 3083 developers
(West Creek, Robbins Reed). These three bridges were estimated in 2017 to cost $4.08 million.
Updates for 2018 reflect estimates of $4.55 million for these improvements.
Cost Changes - Pedestrian and Bicycle Paths
The scope of planned pedestrian and bicycle paths (B-1) throughout the OASP have not changed
since the adoption of the Specific Plan, but costs have increased significantly as final project
approvals have been granted and significantly higher levels of detail have been completed in
engineering and construction plans development. Costs are increasing from earlier esti mates of
$841,000 to $2.8 million.
Packet Page 166
Item 16
This increase includes inflation in construction costs from the previous estimates, a conservative
choice for paving materials to extend longevity and reduce maintenance, and a more refined
estimate based on the actual vertical terrain that the paths are traversing versus a two-
dimensional path than was previously estimated. The proposed grade separation bridge at
Industrial Way continues to use the 2010 Dokken Engineering estimate with a simple adjustment
for construction cost index that was reflected in the previous updates. The cost for the bridge
across Tank Farm road has certainly increased, but that increase is not reflected in the 2018
PFFP update. The OASP fair share participation percentage of this project is 25%. Funds
collected from the OASP for this project will likely be used to leverage grant sources in the
future. Attachment H shows the location of PFFP -funded pedestrian and bicycle facilities.
No Cost Changes – Parks and Recreation Improvements
Current cost estimates for the Parks and Recreation Improvement Fee are $6,045,714. Based on
engineering and construction plan development over the past two years, and continuing review of
park improvement projects by the Parks and Recreation Commission, these estimates are
considered appropriate for the scope of the planned improvements. No changes other than
annual CPI adjustments are recommended at this time.
Minimizing Risk of a Funding Shortfall
As discussed above, when a subdivision is vested, it comes with certain rights that limit the
subdivider’s exposure to changes in standards or increases in fees. Although all the vested
subdivisions were approved after adoption of the PFFP and the PFFP clearly states that there will
be updates to adjust costs, there is the risk that a vested subdivider could challenge the fee
increase. To minimize the risk of creating a funding shortfall if a subdivider successfully
challenges the increase, any subdivision receiving credit beyond the line item amount listed in
the 2017 PFFP will be required to enter into an agreement whereas they agree to cover the
potential shortfall in funding. This agreement will not be required if all vested parties have
submitted an agreement to the City agreeing to pay the updated PFFP fees. Currently, the City is
negotiating such an agreement with Righetti Ranch, LP, since they are the first developers
moving forward with building permits in the OASP area and are the ones constructing the Tank
Farm roundabout, which they will be seeking dollar for dollar credit against the PFFP
transportation fees. Attachment I is a draft PFFP Fee Credit Agreement which minimizing the
City’s risk for a potential funding shortfall and requires the developer benefiting from the credit
to indemnify the City for any challenge to the City’s updated PFFP fees.
Public Engagement
On September 18, 2018, City staff met with representatives from each of the vested subdivisions
to discuss the revisions to the PFFP. They requested some modifications to the costs in the l ine
items, which have been reflected in the attachments to this report. They did not express any
opposition to the PFFP update and understand that the updated estimates better reflect actual
anticipated costs and thus provide a more reliable method for reimbursement, credits and actual
delivery. Letters were mailed out to all the property owners in the OASP area notifying them of
the public meeting to be held at the Council meeting. The letter was also sent via e-mail for those
owners with e-mail addresses on file.
Packet Page 167
Item 16
CONCURRENCES
The Public Works Department and the Community Development Department concur with the
recommended action.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Orcutt Area Specific Plan (OASP) and an associated Final Environmental Impact Report
(FEIR) were approved and certified in March 2010. Implementation of the Public Facilities
Financing Plan (PFFP), including actions such as the proposed 2018 PFFP Update, were
anticipated as mitigation measures to secure needed infrastructure in supporting orderly grow th
in the OASP Planning Area.
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 app rovals 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 fo r capital projects, necessary to maintain service
within existing services areas are exempt from CEQA.
FISCAL IMPACT
Adopting the revised fee structure has no 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 projects over time via General Fund
or grant sources beyond that assumed in the PFFP. Agreements will be put in place to minimize
the risk of a funding shortfall due to a vested subdivider successfully challenging the PFFP
update. There is no cost to the City for preparing and processing this 2018 Update, as the costs of
the update are rolled into the OASP Specific Plan and EIR Reimbursement fee.
Packet Page 168
Item 16
ALTERNATIVES
1. Direct staff to re-evaluate one or more of the specific recommendations contained within the
2018 PFFP Update and return to Council with an updated document for consideration.
2. Council may elect to continue this item to provide additional clarifications or information
needed to render a decision. Should Council elect this alternative, direction should be
provided to staff as to the additional information needed.
3. Elect not to update the OASP PFFP impact fee program. This is not recommended because
the PFFP needs to be updated to reflect the revised cost estimates for necessary
infrastructure.
Attachments:
a - Draft Resolution Approving Revisions
b - Vicinity Map
c - Existing 2017 PFFP List of Projects and Fees
d - Pre-7-1-18 Vested Subdivisions PFFP Cost Updates
e - Post-7-1-18 Subdivisions PFFP Cost Updates
f - Streets and Bridges Map
g - Transit Stops Map
h - Bicycle Paths Map
i - Draft Fee Credit Agreement
Packet Page 169
Item 16
R _____
RESOLUTION NO. (2018 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
propert ies and concurrently completing infrastructure to support those developing properties ; and
WHEREAS, on November 15, 2016 and again on December 12, 2017 the City Council
adopted updates to the PFFP prepared for the City by Watson Planning Consultants and Wallace
Group, to provide adjustments to the various projects contained in the PFFP, the estimated costs
associated with completing those projects, and the apportionment of those costs to the planned
developments within the OASP; and
WHEREAS, some of the projects in the PFFP are under construction and more accurate
cost estimates have been provided for these projects; and
WHEREAS, the OASP and 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 ; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to California Government Code Section 66016, the City Council
held a properly noticed public meeting at their regularly scheduled October 16, 2018, meet ing at
which oral and written presentations were made and public testimony was recieved.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo
as follows:
SECTION 1. Continued Findings. Based on the evidence submitted and considered at
its October 16, 2018 public hearing, the City Council makes the following continued findings:
1. The Orcutt Area Specific Plan (OASP) and the OASP Public Facilities Financing Plan
(PFFP) were duly approved in May 2010, at which time a PFFP Fee Structure was
established that was intended to collect funds from developing properties in the Planning
Packet Page 170
Item 16
Resolution No. (2018 Series) Page 2
R _____
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 May 2010, updates to the PFFP have been completed previously in
November 2016 and December 2017.
4. Since May 2010, over 700 residential units have been approved fo r development in the
OASP, constituting 2/3rds of the total units expected in the Planning Area.
5. It is timely to provide this update to the PFFP cost estimates and update the PFFP Fee
Structure to insure new development fully pays its way in meeting public infrastructure
demands they create, in a timely and orderly manner.
6. The purpose of the updated PFFP fees is to further protect public health, safety, and general
welfare by providing adequate transportation and park and recreation facilities to satisfy
the needs of new development and to mitigate the impacts of new development on the
City’s capital facilities and improvements and were contemplated in various policies in the
OASP.
7. The updated PFFP fees collected pursuant to this resolution shall be used only to pay for
facilities and improvements identified in the PFFP, which is incorporated herein by this
reference, and shall not be in lieu of any other fee or tax as may be required by the
Municipal Code.
8. There is a reasonable relationship between the types of development on which the PFFP
fees are imposed and the use of the PFFP fees and the need for the facilities and
improvements.
9. As required by Government Code Section 66001 et seq., there is a reasonable relationship
between the amount of the updated PFFP fees and the cost of the facilities and
improvements attributable to the developments on which the PFFP fees are imposed.
Packet Page 171
Item 16
Resolution No. (2018 Series) Page 3
R _____
SECTION 2. Environmental Review. The Orcutt Area Specific Plan (OASP) and an
associated Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) were approved and certified in March 2010.
Implementation of the Public Facilities Financing Plan (PFFP), including actions such as the 201 8
Update of the PFFP, were anticipated as mitigatio n measures to secure needed infrastructure in
supporting orderly growth in the OASP Planning Area. 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 project s 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 e ffect on the environment, the general rule CEQA 16061 (b) (3) exemption
applies. Therefore, no further environmental review is required .
SECTION 3. Action – Adoption of Resolution. Based on the evidence and findings
noted above, the City Council hereby approves the 2018 PFFP fee update as outlined in the staff
report.
SECTION 4. The Community Development Director is authorized to revise the Public
Facilities Financing Plan to reflect the update and administer and implement these fees as provided
therein.
SECTION 5. The Community Development Director is authorized to execute an agreement
with the OASP subdividers in a form acceptable to the City Attorney whereby the vested subdivisions
agree to pay the updated 2018 PFFP fee rates and agree to cover the shortfall for any vested
subdivisions that do not sign the agreement.
SECTION 6. The Mayor and City staff are authorized to take action necessary to carry out
the intent of this Resolution.
Upon motion of _______________________, seconded by ________________________,
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was adopted this ______ day of _______________ 2018.
____________________________________
Mayor Heidi Harmon
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Teresa Purrington
City Clerk
Packet Page 172
Item 16
Resolution No. (2018 Series) Page 4
R _____
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________________
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City
of San Luis Obispo, California, this ______ day of ______________, _________.
____________________________________
Teresa Purrington
City Clerk
Packet Page 173
Item 16
Righetti
Ranch
Approved
2015
Imel
Approved
2017
Jones
Approved
2015
West
Creek
Approved
2016
Wathan
Castanos
Approved
2017
Attachment B
Pratt
Approved
2018
Packet Page 174
Item 16
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$ 3 50.0%264,000$
Second Northbound Left Turn Lane
T6 Orcutt Road Widening 383,400$ 4 89.9%344,592$
T7 Bullock Lane Realignment 1,418,000$ 70.0%992,600$
T8 Relocating Hanson Road 1,452,000$ 5 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$ 6 50.0%325,000$
T11 Orcutt Road Roundabout (at "A" Street)650,000$ 7 50.0%325,000$
Subtotal Street Improvements 7,982,800$ 4,615,995$
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$ 8,695,995$
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$ 8 50.0%1,054,000$
B3 Bike Path Extension Over Tank Farm Rd 1,008,000$ 9 25.0%252,000$
Total Pedestrian and Bicycle Paths 3,957,000$ 2,147,000$
Total Transportation Improvements 16,019,800$ 10,842,995$
Parks & Recreation
P1 Central Neighborhood Park - Main Portion South of Creeks (Righetti)4,800,341$ 10 100.0%4,800,341$
P2 Central Neighborhood Park - Phase 2 -$ 11 100.0%-$
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$ 12 91,997$
Total Parks & Recreation 6,045,714$ 6,045,714$
Total Project-Specific Infrastructure Costs 22,065,514$ 16,888,709$
Parkland Acquisition Fee (11.80 acres x's $300,000/acre)3,540,000$ 13 100.0%3,540,000$
Totals 25,605,514$ 20,428,709$
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 Wallace estimate included additional improvements beyond OASP. Participation set at 50% of $528,000. OASP cost adjusted to $264,000.
4 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.
5 OASP participation cost reduced to 20% to reflect potential local match for HSIP program, or for independent work at intersection.
6 Tank Farm Roundabout (T10) is split 50% to Tract 3063 (Righetti Ranch) and 50% divided between all OASP properties.
7 Orcutt Road Roundabout (T11) is split 50% to Tract 3083 (West Creek) and 50% divided between all OASP properties.
8 By previous action of City Council, the full contribution to the Industrial Way bike/pedestrian overcrossing by the OASP is 50%.
9 OASP participation amount adjusted to 25% to reflect future local match of Grant Request.
10 Parks construction and contingency estimates updated; "soft" costs limited to 15% of estimated projects.
11 0.9 acre expansion of Neighborhood Park into Garay omitted from fee schedule.
12 Includes passive park improvements only. Active improvements deleted from the estimate.
13 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 15, 2016
PFFP Table 2-4-5-6-7 with Parks Changes - Table2 Applic's 2016 projection Current as of: 11/23/2016Packet Page 175
Item 16
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:$8,695,995 $2,147,000 $6,045,714 $16,888,709
per Unit
Single Family $9,745 $2,406 $6,585 $18,736 $9,311,742
Multi-Family $6,807 $1,681 $4,899 $13,387 $7,576,967
Total $16,888,709
Sources:Orcutt Area Specific Plan (Final, May 2010); City of San Luis Obispo;
OASP Public Facilities Financing Plan - Goodwin Consulting Group, Inc. (2009)
Updated:Watson Planning Consultants, Inc.November 15, 2016
Cost per Unit
PFFP Table 2-4-5-6-7 with Parks Changes - Table 7 Current as of: 11/23/2016Packet Page 176
Item 16
Table 2
City of San Luis Obispo
Orcutt Area Specific Plan Public Facilities Financing Plan Pre-7/1/2018 Fee Structure for Vested Tracts
Summary of Project-Specific Infrastructure Costs
9-18-18 adjusts
Gross OASP Fair Share Net
Ref.Item Total Cost Percentage Total Cost
Transportation
Street Improvements
T1 Orcutt Road/Tank Farm Road 1,600,000$ 100.0%14 1,600,000$
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%14 299,500$
T4 Orcutt Road/Johnson Ave 359,300$ 2 100.0%14 359,300$
T5 Broad Street/Prado Road Extension 528,000$ 3 50.0%14 264,000$
Second Northbound Left Turn Lane
T6 Orcutt Road Widening 383,400$ 4 89.9%344,592$
T7 Bullock Lane Realignment 1,418,000$ 70.0%992,600$
T8 Relocating Hanson Road 1,452,000$ 5 20.0%290,400$
or Reducing the Grade on Orcutt at Hanson Rd
T9 Transit Stops (10 at $45,000 each)450,000$ 100.0%450,000$
T10 Tank Farm Roundabout (at Righetti Ranch Road)2,000,000$ 6 50.0%1,000,000$
T11 Orcutt Road Roundabout (at "A" Street)1,800,000$ 7 50.0%900,000$
Subtotal Street Improvements 11,296,800$ 6,679,995$
Orcutt Expansion Area Bridges
T12 Bridge A (Ranch House Road)900,000$ 100.0%900,000$
T13 Bridge B (Tiburon Way)1,900,000$ 100.0%1,900,000$
T14 Bridge C (Righetti Ranch Road)1,750,000$ 100.0%1,750,000$
Subtotal Orcutt Expansion Area Bridges 4,550,000$ 4,550,000$
Total Street and Bridges Improvements 15,846,800$ 11,229,995$
Pedestrian and Bicycle Paths
B1 Pedestrian and Bicycle Paths 2,800,000$ 100.0%2,800,000$
B2 Pedestrian/Bike Overpass at Industrial Way 2,108,000$ 8 50.0%1,054,000$
B3 Bike Path Extension Over Tank Farm Rd 1,008,000$ 9 25.0%252,000$
Total Pedestrian and Bicycle Paths 5,916,000$ 4,106,000$
Total Transportation Improvements 21,762,800$ 15,335,995$
Parks & Recreation
P1 Central Neighborhood Park - Main Portion South of Creeks (Righetti)4,800,341$ 10 100.0%4,800,341$
P2 Central Neighborhood Park - Phase 2 -$ 11 100.0%-$
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$ 12 91,997$
Total Parks & Recreation 6,045,714$ 6,045,714$
Total Project-Specific Infrastructure Costs 27,808,514$ 21,381,709$
Parkland Acquisition Fee (11.80 acres x's $300,000/acre)3,540,000$ 13 100.0%3,540,000$
Totals 31,348,514$ 24,921,709$
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 Wallace estimate included additional improvements beyond OASP. Participation set at 50% of $528,000. OASP cost adjusted to $264,000.
4 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.
5 OASP participation cost reduced to 20% to reflect potential local match for HSIP program, or for independent work at intersection.
6 Tank Farm Roundabout (T10) is split 50% to Tract 3063 (Righetti Ranch) and 50% divided between all OASP properties.
7 Orcutt Road Roundabout (T11) is split 50% to Tract 3083 (West Creek) and 50% divided between all OASP properties.
8 By previous action of City Council, the full contribution to the Industrial Way bike/pedestrian overcrossing by the OASP is 50%.
9 OASP participation amount adjusted to 25% to reflect future local match of Grant Request.
10 Parks construction and contingency estimates updated; "soft" costs limited to 15% of estimated projects.
11 0.9 acre expansion of Neighborhood Park into Garay omitted from fee schedule.
12 Includes passive park improvements only. Active improvements deleted from the estimate.
13 Acquisition Fee corrected to reflect approved Neighborhood Park design and revised acreage.
14 Vested projects' fair share is 100% and they will pay old Citywide TIF. Non-vested projects' fair share is 0% and they will pay current Citywide TIF.
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. September 18, 2018 DRAFT
PFFP Table 2-4-5-6-7 dd Alt Vested 9-18-18 - Table2 Vested Tracts 2018 Current as of: 9/19/2018Packet Page 177
Item 16
Table 4
City of San Luis Obispo
Orcutt Area Specific Plan Public Facilities Financing Plan Pre-7/1/2018 Fee Structure for Vested Tracts
Cost Allocation Table
Transportation
Net Daily Total Percent Total Cost per
Land Use Units Acres Trip Rate Trips Allocation Costs Unit
Cost $11,229,995
per Unit
Single Family 497 87.4 9.09 4,518 55.69%$6,254,333 $12,584
Multi-Family 566 25.9 6.35 3,594 44.31%$4,975,662 $8,791
Total 1063 113.3 8,112 100%$11,229,995
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.September 18, 2018 DRAFT
PFFP Table 2-4-5-6-7 dd Alt Vested 9-18-18 - Table 4 Current as of: 9/19/2018Packet Page 178
Item 16
Table 5
City of San Luis Obispo
Orcutt Area Specific Plan Public Facilities Financing Plan Pre-7/1/2018 Fee Structure for Vested Tracts
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 $4,106,000
per Unit
Single Family 497 87.4 9.09 4,518 55.69%$2,286,759 $4,601
Multi-Family 566 25.9 6.35 3,594 44.31%$1,819,241 $3,214
Total 1063 113.3 8,112 100%$4,106,000
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.September 18, 2018 DRAFT
PFFP Table 2-4-5-6-7 dd Alt Vested 9-18-18 - Table 5 Current as of: 9/19/2018Packet Page 179
Item 16
Table 6
City of San Luis Obispo
Orcutt Area Specific Plan Public Facilities Financing Plan Pre-7/1/2018 Fee Structure for Vested Tracts
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 (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.Pre-7/1/2018 Fee Structure for Vested Tracts
PFFP Table 2-4-5-6-7 dd Alt Vested 9-18-18 - Table 6 Current as of: 9/19/2018Packet Page 180
Item 16
Table 7
City of San Luis Obispo
Orcutt Area Specific Plan Public Facilities Financing Plan Pre-7/1/2018 Fee Structure for Vested Tracts
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:$11,229,995 $4,106,000 $6,045,714 $21,381,709
per Unit
Single Family $12,584 $4,601 $6,585 $23,771 $11,814,033
Multi-Family $8,791 $3,214 $4,899 $16,904 $9,567,676
Total $21,381,709
Sources:Orcutt Area Specific Plan (Final, May 2010); City of San Luis Obispo;
OASP Public Facilities Financing Plan - Goodwin Consulting Group, Inc. (2009)
Updated:Watson Planning Consultants, Inc.September 18, 2018 DRAFT
Cost per Unit
PFFP Table 2-4-5-6-7 dd Alt Vested 9-18-18 - Table 7 Current as of: 9/19/2018Packet Page 181
Item 16
Table 2
City of San Luis Obispo
Orcutt Area Specific Plan Public Facilities Financing Plan Post-7/1/2018 Fee Structure for maps and developments
Summary of Project-Specific Infrastructure Costs
9-18-18 adjusts
Gross OASP Fair Share Net
Ref.Item Total Cost Percentage Total Cost
Transportation
Street Improvements
T1 Orcutt Road/Tank Farm Road 1,600,000$ 100.0%1,600,000$
T2 Broad Street/South St-Santa Barbara Road 707,100$ 1 25.4%179,603$
T3 Broad Street/Tank Farm Rd 599,000$ moved to City-wide TIF 14 -$
T4 Orcutt Road/Johnson Ave 359,300$ 2 moved to City-wide TIF 14 -$
T5 Broad Street/Prado Road Extension 528,000$ 3 moved to City-wide TIF 14 -$
Second Northbound Left Turn Lane
T6 Orcutt Road Widening 383,400$ 4 89.9%344,592$
T7 Bullock Lane Realignment 1,418,000$ 70.0%992,600$
T8 Relocating Hanson Road 1,452,000$ 5 20.0%290,400$
or Reducing the Grade on Orcutt at Hanson Rd
T9 Transit Stops (10 at $45,000 each)500,000$ 100.0%500,000$
T10 Tank Farm Roundabout (at Righetti Ranch Road)2,000,000$ 6 50.0%1,000,000$
T11 Orcutt Road Roundabout (at "A" Street)1,800,000$ 7 50.0%900,000$
Subtotal Street Improvements 11,346,800$ 5,807,195$
Orcutt Expansion Area Bridges
T12 Bridge A (Ranch House Road)900,000$ 100.0%900,000$
T13 Bridge B (Tiburon Way)1,900,000$ 100.0%1,900,000$
T14 Bridge C (Righetti Ranch Road)1,750,000$ 100.0%1,750,000$
Subtotal Orcutt Expansion Area Bridges 4,550,000$ 4,550,000$
Total Street and Bridges Improvements 15,896,800$ 10,357,195$
Pedestrian and Bicycle Paths
B1 Pedestrian and Bicycle Paths 2,800,000$ 100.0%2,800,000$
B2 Pedestrian/Bike Overpass at Industrial Way 2,108,000$ 8 50.0%1,054,000$
B3 Bike Path Extension Over Tank Farm Rd 1,008,000$ 9 25.0%252,000$
Total Pedestrian and Bicycle Paths 5,916,000$ 4,106,000$
Total Transportation Improvements 21,812,800$ 14,463,195$
Parks & Recreation
P1 Central Neighborhood Park - Main Portion South of Creeks (Righetti)4,800,341$ 10 100.0%4,800,341$
P2 Central Neighborhood Park - Phase 2 -$ 11 100.0%-$
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$ 12 91,997$
Total Parks & Recreation 6,045,714$ 6,045,714$
Total Project-Specific Infrastructure Costs 27,858,514$ 20,508,909$
Parkland Acquisition Fee (11.80 acres x's $300,000/acre)3,540,000$ 13 100.0%3,540,000$
Totals 31,398,514$ 24,048,909$
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 Wallace estimate included additional improvements beyond OASP. Participation set at 50% of $528,000. OASP cost adjusted to $264,000.
4 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.
5 OASP participation cost reduced to 20% to reflect potential local match for HSIP program, or for independent work at intersection.
6 Tank Farm Roundabout (T10) is split 50% to Tract 3063 (Righetti Ranch) and 50% divided between all OASP properties.
7 Orcutt Road Roundabout (T11) is split 50% to Tract 3083 (West Creek) and 50% divided between all OASP properties.
8 By previous action of City Council, the full contribution to the Industrial Way bike/pedestrian overcrossing by the OASP is 50%.
9 OASP participation amount adjusted to 25% to reflect future local match of Grant Request.
10 Parks construction and contingency estimates updated; "soft" costs limited to 15% of estimated projects.
11 0.9 acre expansion of Neighborhood Park into Garay omitted from fee schedule.
12 Includes passive park improvements only. Active improvements deleted from the estimate.
13 Acquisition Fee corrected to reflect approved Neighborhood Park design and revised acreage.
14 Vested projects' fair share is 100% and they will pay old Citywide TIF. Non-vested projects' fair share is 0% and they will pay current Citywide TIF.
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. September 18, 2018 DRAFT
PFFP Table 2-4-5-6-7 dd Alt Non-Vested 9-18-18 - Table2 Non-Vested Current as of: 9/19/2018Packet Page 182
Item 16
Table 4
City of San Luis Obispo
Orcutt Area Specific Plan Public Facilities Financing Plan Post-7/1/2018 Fee Structure for maps and developments
Cost Allocation Table
Transportation
Net Daily Total Percent Total Cost per
Land Use Units Acres Trip Rate Trips Allocation Costs Unit
Cost $10,357,195
per Unit
Single Family 497 87.4 9.09 4,518 55.69%$5,768,244 $11,606
Multi-Family 566 25.9 6.35 3,594 44.31%$4,588,952 $8,108
Total 1063 113.3 8,112 100%$10,357,195
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.September 18, 2018 DRAFT
PFFP Table 2-4-5-6-7 dd Alt Non-Vested 9-18-18 - Table 4 Current as of: 9/19/2018Packet Page 183
Item 16
Table 5
City of San Luis Obispo
Orcutt Area Specific Plan Public Facilities Financing Plan Post-7/1/2018 Fee Structure for maps and developments
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 $4,106,000
per Unit
Single Family 497 87.4 9.09 4,518 55.69%$2,286,759 $4,601
Multi-Family 566 25.9 6.35 3,594 44.31%$1,819,241 $3,214
Total 1063 113.3 8,112 100%$4,106,000
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.September 18, 2018 DRAFT
PFFP Table 2-4-5-6-7 dd Alt Non-Vested 9-18-18 - Table 5 Current as of: 9/19/2018Packet Page 184
Item 16
Table 6
City of San Luis Obispo
Orcutt Area Specific Plan Public Facilities Financing Plan Post-7/1/2018 Fee Structure for maps and developments
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 (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.September 18, 2018 DRAFT
PFFP Table 2-4-5-6-7 dd Alt Non-Vested 9-18-18 - Table 6 Current as of: 9/19/2018Packet Page 185
Item 16
Table 7
City of San Luis Obispo
Orcutt Area Specific Plan Public Facilities Financing Plan Post-7/1/2018 Fee Structure for maps and developments
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:$10,357,195 $4,106,000 $6,045,714 $20,508,909
per Unit
Single Family $11,606 $4,601 $6,585 $22,793 $11,327,944
Multi-Family $8,108 $3,214 $4,899 $16,221 $9,180,965
Total $20,508,909
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.September 18, 2018 DRAFT
Cost per Unit
PFFP Table 2-4-5-6-7 dd Alt Non-Vested 9-18-18 - Table 7 Current as of: 9/19/2018Packet Page 186
Item 16
X
X X
X
X X X X X XXXXXXXXXX XXXYIELD
1050 Southwood Drive
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
P 805.544.7407 F 805.544.3863
RIGHETTI RANCH
TRACT 3063
PHASE II
RIGHETTI RANCH
TRACT 3063
PHASE I
RIGHETTI RANCH
TRACT 3063
PHASE III
TAYLOR RANCH
TRACT 3044
JONES RANCH
TRACT 3066
WEST CREEK
TRACT 3083
IMEL RANCH
TRACT 3095
GARAY
FIALA
JONES
HOMESTEAD
P.
TAYLOR
RIGHETTI RANCH ROAD
RIGHETTI RANCH ROADTIBURON WAYPRATTTRACT 3111EVANSANDERSONPRATTNEIGHBORHOOD
PARKGARNEYRANCH HOUSE ROAD
ORCUTT ROAD
TIBURON WAYTANK FARM ROADORCUTT ROADJ
O
H
N
S
O
N
A
V
ETANGLEWOOD
CERRO CABRILLOROCK GARDEN LANE
ROCK GARDEN LANEQUARRY CTRANC
H
H
O
U
S
E
R
O
A
D
TWIN CREEK ROAD
HILLSIDE DRIVE
BERNARDO DRIVE
BETTENFORD DRIVETWIN
CREEK
ROADHANSEN LANELEDY ROAD
PARSONS WAY
WEST DETENTION BASIN
ARBORS
DETENTION
BASIN
SANITARY SEWER
RECYCLED WATER
STORM DRAIN
WATER
DRY UTILITY
LEGEND TANGLEWOOD CR
E
E
K
BARRANCA CR
E
E
K
BARRAN
C
A
C
R
E
E
K NORTH TRIBUTARYCROTALO CREEKSE T
RI
B
U
T
A
R
Y
HANSEN CREEKHANSEN CREEK
RIGHETTI HILL
OPEN SPACE
PARSONS
HOMESTEAD
BULLOCK LANE
Packet Page 187
Item 16
X X
X
X X X XXXXXXXX XXYIELD
RIGHETTI RANCH
TRACT 3063
PHASE II
RIGHETTI RANCH
TRACT 3063
PHASE I
RIGHETTI RANCH
TRACT 3063
PHASE III
TAYLOR RANCH
TRACT 3044
JONES RANCH
TRACT 3066
WEST CREEK
TRACT 3083
IMEL RANCH
TRACT 3095
GARAY
FIALA
JONES
HOMESTEAD
P.
TAYLOR
RIGHETTI RANCH ROAD
RIGHETTI RANCH ROADTIBURON WAYPRATTTRACT 3111EVANSANDERSONPRATTNEIGHBORHOOD
PARKGARNEYRANCH HOUSE ROAD
ORCUTT ROAD
TIBURON WAYTANK FARM ROADORCUTT ROADJ
O
H
N
S
O
N
A
V
ETANGLEWOOD
CERRO CABRILLOROCK GARDEN LANE
ROCK GARDEN LANEQUARRY CTRANC
H
H
O
U
S
E
R
O
A
D
TWIN CREEK ROAD
HILLSIDE DRIVE
BERNARDO DRIVE
BETTENFORD DRIVETWIN
CREEK
ROADHANSEN LANELEDY ROAD
PARSONS WAY
WEST DETENTION BASIN
ARBORS
DETENTION
BASINTANGLEWOOD CR
E
E
K
BARRANCA CR
E
E
K
BARRAN
C
A
C
R
E
E
K NORTH TRIBUTARYCROTALO CREEKSE T
RI
B
U
T
A
R
Y
HANSEN CREEKHANSEN CREEK
RIGHETTI HILL
OPEN SPACE
PARSONS
HOMESTEAD
BULLOCK LANE
EXITISTING
ARBORS
DEVELOPMENT
PFFP BUS STOPS
IN OASP AREA
**
*
*
*
*
*
*
**
* BUS STOP
Packet Page 188
Item 16
X X
X
X X X XXXXXXXX XXYIELD
RIGHETTI RANCH
TRACT 3063
PHASE II
RIGHETTI RANCH
TRACT 3063
PHASE I
RIGHETTI RANCH
TRACT 3063
PHASE III
TAYLOR RANCH
TRACT 3044
JONES RANCH
TRACT 3066
WEST CREEK
TRACT 3083
IMEL RANCH
TRACT 3095
GARAY
FIALA
JONES
HOMESTEAD
P.
TAYLOR
RIGHETTI RANCH ROAD
RIGHETTI RANCH ROADTIBURON WAYPRATTTRACT 3111EVANSANDERSONPRATTNEIGHBORHOOD
PARKGARNEYRANCH HOUSE ROAD
ORCUTT ROAD
TIBURON WAYTANK FARM ROADORCUTT ROADJ
O
H
N
S
O
N
A
V
ETANGLEWOOD
CERRO CABRILLOROCK GARDEN LANE
ROCK GARDEN LANEQUARRY CTRANC
H
H
O
U
S
E
R
O
A
D
TWIN CREEK ROAD
HILLSIDE DRIVE
BERNARDO DRIVE
BETTENFORD DRIVETWIN
CREEK
ROADHANSEN LANELEDY ROAD
PARSONS WAY
WEST DETENTION BASIN
ARBORS
DETENTION
BASINTANGLEWOOD CR
E
E
K
BARRANCA CR
E
E
K
BARRAN
C
A
C
R
E
E
K NORTH TRIBUTARYCROTALO CREEKSE T
RI
B
U
T
A
R
Y
HANSEN CREEKHANSEN CREEK
RIGHETTI HILL
OPEN SPACE
PARSONS
HOMESTEAD
BULLOCK LANE
EXITISTING
ARBORS
DEVELOPMENT
PFFP BUS STOPS
IN OASP AREA
**
*
*
*
*
*
*
**
* BUS STOP
Packet Page 189
Item 16
1
1521860.1
RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND
WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO:
City of San Luis Obispo
Attn: City Clerk
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
No fee pursuant to Government Code § 6103
No Documentary Transfer Tax per R&T Code § 11922
No Recording Fee per Government Code § 27383
AGREEMENT
(PFFP – Tank Farm Road Round-about)
This Agreement (“Agreement”) is entered into this _____ day of __________________,
201__ (the “Effective Date”), by and between the City of San Luis Obispo, a municipal
corporation and charter city (“CITY”) and Righetti Ranch L.P., a Delaware limited partnership
(“DEVELOPER”). The CITY and DEVELOPER are sometimes hereinafter referred to
individually as a “party” and collectively as “parties.”
RECITALS
WHEREAS, DEVELOPER is the owner of that certain real property in the City of San Luis
Obispo, California commonly known as Righetti Ranch Tract 3063 (“Righetti Ranch”), Jones
Ranch Tract 3066 (“Jones Ranch”), Imel Tract 3095 (“Imel”), and the Pratt subdivisions
consisting of Parcel Map SLO 17-0127, Tract 3111, and Parcel Map SLO 18-0036 (collectively
Pratt”), all of which are hereinafter collectively referred to as the “Property” and are legally
described in Exhibit A attached hereto.
WHEREAS, DEVELOPER is currently developing the Righetti Ranch and Jones Ranch. The
development of Righetti Ranch and Jones Ranch is referred to hereinafter as the “Project” and
consists of a total of 370 residential lots and other comme rcial property and amenity space; and
WHEREAS, the Property is subject to a Public Facilities Financing Plan (“PFFP”) established in
2010 as part of the Orcutt Area Specific Plan (“OASP”) which provides for the collection of fees
and the award of credits to facilitate the financing and construction of certain public facilities
within the OASP area. The fee was updated in 2016 (the “2016 PFFP Update”) to account for
current cost estimates (the old fee was based on 2007 estimates) and to include two new
Packet Page 190
Item 16
2
1521860.1
roundabouts in the list of projects. The 2016 PFFP Update lists the PFFP Transportation fee at
$12,740 per single-family residence and is adjusted annually by CPI. The fees established under
the 2016 PFFP Update were based on the estimated costs of constructing various transportation
improvements within the OASP area. The 2016 PFFP Update includes the following transportation
infrastructure improvement projects and cost estimates:
1. T-10: Tank Farm Roundabout, located at the intersection of Tank Farm Road and Righetti
Ranch Road in the City (the “Round-about”) $650,000, of which only 50% ($325,000) is
eligible for PFFP credit
2. T-1: Orcutt Road/Tank Farm Road Street Improvements, $1,111,000;
3. T-13: Orcutt Area Bridge B, $1,800,000;
4. T-14: Orcutt Area Bridge C, $1,600,000;
5. B-1: 60% of the total Pedestrian Bicycle Paths, $841,000; and
6. T-9: Transit Stops (5 total), $25,000 per stop.
Items 1 through 6 above are hereinafter referred to as the “Transportation Improvements.” The
2016 PFFP Update estimated a total construction cost of$6,127,000 for these Transportation
Improvements, of which $5,802,000 is eligible for fee credit. Consequently, if DEVELOPER
completes the construction of each of these Transportation Improvements, Developer is entitled to
fee credits for the costs of construction of each of such improvements ; and.
WHEREAS, the actual costs of the DEVELOPER to install the Round-about are now estimated
at $2,000,000, which is One Million Three Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($1,350,000) higher
than estimated in the 2016 PFFP Update (the “Increased Round-about Costs”); and
WHEREAS, DEVELOPER’s fair share contribution to the Round-about is fifty percent (50%)
according to the 2016 PFFP Update, which equates to Six Hundred and Seventy Five Thousand
Dollars ($675,000) of the Increased Round-about Costs; and
WHEREAS… (add similar language as above two paragraphs for the increased ped and bike
path costs and increased transit stop costs); and
WHEREAS, the Increased Round-about Costs, Increased Pedestrian Bicycle Path Costs, and
Increased Transit Stop Costs are collectively referred to as the “Increased Costs”; and
WHEREAS, DEVELOPER desires to obtain a fee credit for Increased Costs against the Project’s
PFFP Transportation fees for t he costs of installing Transportation Improvements; and
WHEREAS, the Increased Costs are not part of the 2016 PFFP Update transportation fees which
means that total payments into the PFFP system will be deficient by the amount of the Increased
Packet Page 191
Item 16
3
1521860.1
Costs unless the PFFP fees are modified to reflect the actual costs of construction and there are no
successful challenges to any PFFP fee modifications; and
WHEREAS, by this Agreement, CITY and DEVELOPER desire to establish a mechanism
whereby CITY agrees to (1) consider amendments to the PFFP fees to include the Increased Costs
and other modifications deemed appropriate by the City; (2) issue PFFP Fee Credits at the modified
rate; and (3) establish a mechanism whereby CITY has the right to recapture any loss es from
DEVELOPER resulting from the Increased Costs due to a successful argument that the following
projects within the OASP area are vested under the 2016PFFP fee and therefore, not subject to
the modified rate:, specifically, the Taylor project (Tract 3044 and Parcel Map SLO 17-0115; the
“Taylor Project”). and the West Creek Project (Tract No. 3083; the “West Creek Project”).
AGREEMENT
NOW THEREFORE, for valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged,
CITY and DEVELOPER hereby agree as follows:
1. Recitals. The above recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated into this
Agreement as though set forth in full.
2. Fee Increase; Protest Waiver. The CITY shall, as soon as practically possible,
schedule a hearing for the City Council to consider an update to the PFFP fees for the
OASP (the “2018 PFFP Update”) area to reflect the Increased Costs and any other
amendments CITY deems necessary or advisable consistent with the OASP Specific
Plan (the “2018 PFFP Updated Fees”). The 2018 Updated PFFP Fees may include,
but are not limited to, increases in Transportation PFFP fees, Park Improvement fees,
and OASP Plan Preparation fees. DEVELOPER hereby waives any right to protest the
Updated PFFP Fees as against any lot within the Property. Such waiver includes any
right based on vested rights.
3. Fee Credits. CITY shall grant fee credits for the Project at the 2016 PFFP Update rate
for any PFFP projects constructed by DEVELOPER. Until the 2018 PFFP Updated
Fees are approved by the City Council, the maximum transportation PFFP fee credit
for the Project under the 2016 PFFP Update shall not exceed $5,802,000 which equals
the total amount of reimbursable Transportation Improvements listed in the 2016 PFFP
Update, provided that all of the follo wing conditions are met:
a. Appropriate securities have been submitted by DEVELOPER to guarantee
completion of the Transportation Improvements; and
b. Appropriate documentation is submitted by DEVELOPER and approved by CITY
verifying costs expended by DEVELOPER to design and construct the Transportation
Improvements
Packet Page 192
Item 16
4
1521860.1
Upon the effective date of the 2018 PFFP Update, DEVELOPER shall receive a fee
credit in the amount of such updated fees as against DEVELOPER’s documented costs
of construction of the Transportation Improvements, not to exceed the amounts
allocated in the 2018 PFFP Update for the Transportation Improvements.
DEVELOPER acknowledges and agrees that any PFFP fee credits for the Project that
are granted by CITY prior to approval and the effective date of the 2018 Updated PFFP
Fees, if any, including the fee credits that have been already issued or approved for
eighty-five (85) lots within Tract 3063, will be retroactively adjusted to reflect the 2018
Updated PFFP Fees so as not to unfairly distribute fee increases to the undeveloped
lots. Simply by way of example, if the Updated 2018 PFFP Fees equals $17,185 per
residence and eighty-five (85) building permits are issued prior to the effective date of
the 2018 Updated PFFP Fees, the total fee credit applied to the Project will be
automatically adjusted from the 2016 PFFP Update fee rate to the 2018 Updated PFFP
Fee rate of $17,185
4. Reimbursement. If the owners of the Taylor Property or the West Creek Property
successfully challenge, including the expiration of all appeals, the imposition of the
Updated PFFP Fees onto either of those developments, DEVELOPER agrees to pay to
the CITY as follows:
The number of residential units for each development which successfully challenged
the fee multiplied by the difference between the 2016 PFFP Update transportation fee
and the 2018 PFFP Updated Fees (the “Differential Payment”)
By way of example, the current PFFP Transportation fee for a single -family unit is
$12,740 per unit. If the Updated PFFP Fees result s in an increase in $4,445 per single
family residence and if CITY is unable to impose the 2018 Updated PFFP Fees on
either the Taylor or West Creek projects due to vested rights, then DEVELOPER would
owe CITY $4,445 per residential unit that is constructed in such developments in order
to offset the amount the CITY credited DEVELOPER via the PFFP Fee Credit. If
DEVELOPER does not timely pay such amounts to the CITY upon written demand,
DEVELOPER agrees that the CITY can add a pro-rata share of such amount to each
undeveloped lot within the Property.
5. Further Security. CITY and DEVELOPER acknowledge that the reimbursement
obligation set forth in Section 4 above is dependent on the timing of when construction
and building permits are issued for such projects and that, if construction of the Project
moves faster than the Taylor Project or the West Creek Project, an as applied challenge
to the 2018 Updated PFFP Fees may not be known until after all or a substantial amount
of building permits or certificates of occupancy have been issued for the Project. In
Packet Page 193
Item 16
5
1521860.1
order to account for this contingency, in the event building permits are issued for one-
hundred fifty (150) residential lots on the Property and no building permits have been
issued for residential lots on either the Taylor Project or the West Creek Project, the
DEVELOPER shall provide CITY with a payment bond, in a form subject to the
approval of the City Attorney, for the estimated amount of the total Differential
Payment as estimated by CITY’s Engineer. The total amount of the bond for the
Differential Payment shall take into account if either the West Creek Project or the
Taylor Project have paid the 2018 Updated PFFP Fees. The bond may be reduced as
payments are made subject to the approval of the CITY Engineer, such approval shall
not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. Once the full amount of the Differential
Payment has been paid, the bond may be released in full.
Indemnity. DEVELOPER agrees to indemnify, defend (with counsel acceptable to CITY) and hold
CITY, its officials, agents, employees and contractors harmle ss from any expense (including
attorney’s fees), liability or claim, injury, damage or expense which may arise or is any way related
to a challenge of the 2018 PFFP Updated Fees to cover the Increased Costs, including,by the
owners of the Taylor Project or the West Creek Project. DEVELOPER shall not be liable for any
expense, liability or claim for death, injury, loss, damage or expense to persons or property which
may arise from the sole negligence or willful misconduct of CITY, officials, agents, employe es
and contractors. The CITY shall give DEVELOPER a written notice of any challenge by either
the owners of the Taylor Project or the West Creek Project to the increase in PFFP fees to cover
the Increased Costs within ten (10) calendar days of filing of a n action. CITY’s failure to notify
DEVELOPER of such challenge shall not affect or otherwise modify DEVELOPER’s obligations
under this Agreement. The City will not settle any challenge or litigation related to any challenge
without the consent of DEVELOPER, such consent shall not be unreasonable withheld or delayed.
6. Waiver and Release. DEVELOPER acknowledges and agrees that the payment/credit
arrangement set forth in this Agreement is a reasonable and equitable way to manage
the funding of construction and reimbursement of costs for the Transportation
Improvements in light of each project’s fair share responsibilities for infrastructure
within the OASP area, each project’s vesting status, timing of project approvals,
increases in construction costs, etc. As a result, DEVELOPER on itself behalf, or on
behalf of its successors and assigns hereby remises, releases and forever discharges
CITY from any and all claims, suits, causes of actions, charges, demands, and liability
whatsoever, including any inverse condemnation and Fifth (5th) Amendment takings
claims,1 related only to City’s imposition of conditions of approval on the Project that
require the construction of the Transportation Improvements.
1 DEVELOPER and CITY acknowledge that these causes of action relate to claims under the following line
of cases: Nollan v. Cal. Coastal Commission (1987) 483 U.S. 825, 834-35; Dolan v. City of Tigard (1994)
Packet Page 194
Item 16
6
1521860.1
7. Entire Agreement/Amendment. This Agreement represents the entire integrated
agreement between the CITY and DEVELOPER regarding the granting of the PFFP
Fee Credit for the Increased Costs. This Agreement may be amended only by a written
instrument signed by both CITY and DEVELOPER.
8. Governing Law and Venue. The interpretation and implementation of this Agreement
shall be governed by the law of California, except for those provisions preempted by
federal law. However, the laws of the State of California shall not be applied to the
extent that they would require or allow the court to use the laws of another state or
jurisdiction. The parties agree that all actions or proceeding arising in connection with
the Agreement shall be tried and litigated only in the County of San Luis Obis po or the
United States District Court for the Central District of California.
9. Severability. Invalidation of any provision contained herein or the application thereof
to any person or entity by judgment or court order shall in no way affect any of the
other covenants, conditions, restrictions, or provisions hereof, or the application thereof
to any other person or entity, and the same shall remain in full force and effect.
10. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in two (2) or more counterparts, each
of which shall be deemed an original and all of which together shall constitute one and
the same instrument.
11. Notices. All notices, demands, invoices, or written communications to the parties
required or permitted hereunder shall be in writing and delivered personally or by U.S.
mail, postage prepaid, to the following addresses or such other address as the parties
may designate in accordance with this section:
CITY Director Public Works
919 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
512 U.S. 374, 391; Associated Home Builders, Inc. v. City of Walnut Creek (1971) 4 Cal.3d 633, 644; Ayres
v. City Council (1949) 34 Cal. 2d 31, 42.); v. Culver City (1996)
12 Cal.4th 854, 864
Packet Page 195
Item 16
7
1521860.1
With a copy to: City Attorney
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
DEVELOPER Righetti Ranch, L.P.
979 Osos Street, Suite E
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Attn: Travis Fuentez
Phone: (805) 573-0401
Ambient Communities
179 Calle Magdalena, Suite 201
Encinitas, CA 92024
Attn: Rob Anselmo
Phone: (619) 890-2349
12. Interpretation/Ambiguity. This Agreement negotiated by the Parties, with the advice
and assistance of their respective counsel, and shall not be construed in favor of or
against either Party, regardless of who may have drafted it or any of its terms. Any
rule of construction to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting
party shall not be applied in interpreting this Agreement.
13. Attorney’s Fees. In the event that any suit or action is instituted under or in relation to
this Agreement, including without limitation to enforce any provision in this
Agreement, the prevailing party in such dispute shall be entitled to recover from the
losing party all fees, costs and expenses of enforcing any right of such prevailing party
under or with respect to this Agreement, including without limitation, such reasonable
fees and expenses of attorneys and accountants, which shall include, without limitation,
all fees, costs and expenses of appeals.
14. Assignment. DEVELOPER shall not assign, transfer or convey any of its rights, duties
or obligations under this Agreement without the prior written approval of CITY;
provided however, that the DEVELOPER shall be able to assign any credits issued
against the PFFP fees to any buyer of lots in the OASP area. CITY shall not
unreasonably withhold approval of any assignment. Any other assignment shall be null
and void.
15. Authority to Execute. Both CITY and DEVELOPER do covenant that each individual
executing this agreement on behalf of each party is a person duly authorized and
empowered to execute Agreements for such party.
16. Counterparts. The parties agree that this Agreement may be executed in two or more
counterparts, each of which shall constitute and original and binding copy of this
Packet Page 196
Item 16
8
1521860.1
Agreement, albeit one and the same instrument. Executed photocopies of this
Agreement shall be as bind ing as the original.
17. Recordation; Covenants Run with the Land. DEVELOPER and CITY acknowledge
and agree that upon full execution of this Agreement, it shall be recorded in the Official
Records of the County of San Luis Obispo. All of the covenants, terms, provisions and
conditions in this Agreement shall run with the Property and shall apply to, and bind
the successors and assigns of, the DEVELOPER.
18. DEVELOPER and CITY acknowledge that in executing this Agreement, they have
carefully reviewed and had the o pportunity to review the terms, with counsel of their
choice and are fully aware of the extent of their rights and obligations under this
Agreement.
[Signatures on following page]
Packet Page 197
Item 16
9
1521860.1
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the first date written
above.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO,
a municipal corporation and charter city
_____________________________
Heidi Harmon, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Teresa Purrington, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
________________________________
J. Christine Dietrick, City Attorney
DEVELOPER
Righetti Ranch, LP
A Delaware Limited partnership
By: NRE Manager, LLC,
a Delaware limited liability company
Its: General Partner
By: Ambient Righetti Manager, LLC,
A California limited liability company
Its: Sole member
By: ____________________________
Travis Fuentez, President
By: ____________________________
Dante Anselmo, Vice-President
All signatures must be notarized.
Packet Page 198
Item 16
10
1521860.1
EXHIBIT A
Include legal descriptions of all the tracts listed in the first recital
Packet Page 199
Item 16
Page intentionally left
blank.
Packet Page 200
Item 16
dYvc�D ° D CD
On -o Uq
CD -tO' �� o O~d a5
til W a�� O I
ID
O Y U, "°+ ~�` td N n' o cD. �i�CD ID n tri O oo y p v�
da C/) n by (D 0. ,'�' W ,.� `" Q. OCD
'TJ o° -s
b9 O Vi W C W p. CD S• ° N• cn '� Q O1 SCD
w O �, ! �-
CD CD 5 n � n H al. Z.
CD C7 n c , CD W / W CD o
t7' CD a D o
ID
CD 10
Ln
CD o
CD CD
CD Z th CD GQ
p CD
P UQ
CD 9 CD 0CD QCD
�' `SOW A� Q. (D CD �J Q n
O� (� 't3 n
O O W CD QQ -I N N CD. W O
W CDW UQ CD
��!!
Er
(D
�0-ml
nom Qm'D wo a�c� o Q�n�
-'� N p
O w (n "O . 30 y -
g ° ==3 =-{ D 3 D o aLn
c-
m m 210 -4 3 3 m o s m O v o v o y w w
0) CD w m- m mc w g
=Q vp 7 0 '< 0) CEP N N m 3 = N n t0= oo U y.
0 9N<- �w 53ow �f mm ��0
M. N �• `w< W j O. O N� w 7 r. 7 O
c� �0�� 3m ow 1< to C) �° �� m�C�
O S oID
O
n o m c F o N o m w n A' Y, ..,r.+' ° o m= O fn
Joao- hoc°-'° om owa�� �R �Q�j(� ' ami Z. ZD S','
mww c y N r1 'r �Q=
w �o�m 0) SO r. }3 fit' 15. 3
0v �mmm °•o a°�a� T.p 4 , � C � r �a 0) min
w w m v w 0 o c o'er ?: N a 3 N N m
3.m o Qm0m 30 ^mm<v aG �.¢ti �' I' FD ry��p�w vin
O m ° N My''4i rL - / yip N w= W 0
0 CD `SNS N co 7 ON N a°i _ Tw N _ '+7
f o i aw,a o ®o 80 w ^ m= � r' � M H d oy x
m Cn yo?w xo �S x�y^�
�'�� °atec 00 m»gid (9 r.,
�1 m'� rva. Mo
CD CD 7�cN �° n W: bo fL.� i ' v s �� Q=v=°i G)f1
5 -aT �m m i v y w° r
°c<v3 ci m��o l3 �_ < o
CD 3 CD
m,Z w w om o w =
909, Mok'< N d 7 0 S. - < i
CD V
CD
mw °co 3 m c 3.
< _ m CL
CD N a N 3 .y. N
N a 2 CO
7 O n N N w . N' �', S• N m w
rn N A O N a N 7 3 0 n N
O m
CD a N m
A 0
,w.�
CD nil 'm., Oew7 O N o
�o
-2�,