Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-01-2016 Agenda Packet Tuesday, March 1, 2016 6:00 PM REGULAR MEETING Council Chamber 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo Page 1 CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Jan Marx ROLL CALL: Council Members John Ashbaugh, Carlyn Christianson, Dan Rivoire, Vice Mayor Dan Carpenter, and Mayor Jan Marx PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Council Member Rivoire PRESENTATIONS 1. PRESENTATION BY JOHN SHOALS, REPRESENTING PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY, REGARDING THE CENTRAL CALIFORNIA POWER CONNECT PROJECT (GRIGSBY/SHOALS – 10 MINUTES) 2. PRESENTATION BY FIRE CHIEF OLSON AND PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR GRIGSBY, REGARDING WINTER STORM PREPAREDNESS (OLSON/GRIGSBY – 10 MINUTES) PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA (not to exceed 15 minutes total) The Council welcomes your input. You may address the Council by completing a speaker slip and giving it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. At this time, you may address the Council on items that are not on the agenda. Time limit is three minutes. State law does not allow the Council to discuss or take action on issues not on the agenda, except that members of the Council or staff may briefly respond to statements made or questions posed by persons exercising their public testimony rights (gov. Code sec. 54954.2). Staff may be asked to follow up on such items. San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda March 1, 2016 Page 2 CONSENT AGENDA A member of the public may request the Council to pull an item for discussion. Pulled items shall be heard at the close of the Consent Agenda unless a majority of the Council chooses another time. The public may comment on any and all items on the Consent Agenda within the three minute time limit. 3. WAIVE READING IN FULL OF ALL RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES Recommendation Waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances as appropriate. 4. MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS OF DECEMBER 15, 2015 AND JANUARY 14, 2016 (MAIER) Approve the Regular and Special Meeting Minutes of the City Council meetings of December 15, 2015 and January 14, 2016. 5. HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE DETERMINATION FOR A CONTRIBUTING LIST PROPERTY AT 1009 MONTEREY STREET (CODRON/COHEN/SCOTT) Recommendation As recommended by the Cultural Heritage Committee, adopt a Resolution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, approving removal of 1009 Monterey Street from the City’s list of contributing historic resources HIST-2592-2016.” 6. GRANT FUNDING FOR THE OCTAGON BARN CENTER (JOHNSON/HILL) Recommendation Approve grant funding of $206,000 for construction of facilities at the Octagon Barn Center and adopt a Resolution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, approving a grant agreement with the Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo County;” authorizing the Mayor to execute the Grant Agreement with The Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo County. San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda March 1, 2016 Page 3 7. WASTE WATER COLLECTIONS TV VAN REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT & VEHICLE BUILD-OUT, SPECIFICATION NO. 91416 (GRIGSBY / BOCHUM / SHUCK) Recommendation 1. Authorize the Finance Director to execute a purchase order to HAAKER Equipment Company in the amount of $135,284 for the purchase of one Envirosight RovverX system, and Transit CCTV for use in a Waste Water Collections vehicle “build-out”; and 2. Authorize the surplus designation of Fleet Asset No. 0509, by sale, auction, trade-in or other method in accordance with the City’s policies and procedures as prescribed in the Financial Management Manual Section 405-L and 480. 8. AMENDMENT TO CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH MNS ENGINEERS FOR LOS OSOS VALLEY ROAD AT US 101 INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, SPECIFICATION NO. 99821 (GRIGSBY/LYNCH) Recommendation Authorize the City Manager to execute Amendment No. 2 to the Construction Management Services Agreement with MNS Engineers, dated July 1, 2014, increasing their contract by $297,354, bringing the total contract allowable monthly cumulative payments from $2,352,870 to $2,650,224 for the remainder of the contract. 9. APPROVAL OF THE FINAL MAP FOR TRACT 2977 UNIT 4, 851 HUMBERT AVENUE (TR 27-06) (CODRON/DOSTALEK) Recommendation Adopt a Resolution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, approving the Final Map for Tract 2977 Unit 4 (851 Humbert Avenue, TR 27-06),” and authorize the Mayor to execute a Subdivision Agreement. 10. COUNCIL HEARING ROOM AUDIO VISUAL UPGRADE (JOHNSON/SCHMIDT) Recommendation 1. Appropriate $48,700 from the Public, Education, and Government Access fund to upgrade the audio visual system in the Council Hearing room; and 2. Authorize the Finance & IT Director to approve a Purchase Order with Jensen Audio Visual in the amount of $48,700 from account for the purchase and installation of the upgraded AV system. San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda March 1, 2016 Page 4 PUBLIC HEARINGS 11. CONSIDERATION OF 2016 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS (CODRON/WISEMAN – 15 MINUTES) Recommendation As recommended by the Human Relations Commission, adopt a Resolution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, approving the 2016 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program;” to approve funding allocations for $454,910 of CDBG funds for the 2016 Program Year. STUDY SESSION 12. FIRE MASTER PLAN STATUS UPDATE AND DISCUSSION REGARDING COST ALLOCATION METHODOLOGY (OLSON/JOHNSON – 60 MINUTES) Recommendation Provide input to staff regarding cost allocation methodology for sustaining service lev els to developing areas of the City. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS (Not to exceed 15 minutes) Council Members report on conferences or other City activities. Time limit—3 minutes each. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (Not to exceed 15 minutes) At this time, any Council Member or the City Manager may ask a question for clarification, make an announcement, or report briefly on his or her activities. In addition, subject to Council Policies and Procedures, they may provide a reference to staff or other resources for factual information, request staff to report back to the Council at a subsequent meeting concerning any matter, or take action to direct staff to place a matter of business on a future agenda. (Gov. Code Sec. 54954.2) San Luis Obispo City Council Agenda March 1, 2016 Page 5 ADJOURNMENT The next Regular City Council Meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, March 15, 2016 at 6:00 p.m., in the Council Chamber, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California. LISTENING ASSISTIVE DEVICES are available for the hearing impaired--please see City Clerk. The City of San Luis Obispo wishes to make all of its public meetings accessible to the public. Upon request, this agenda will be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with disabilities. Any person with a disability who requires a modification or accommodation in order to participate in a meeting should direct such request to the City Clerk’s Office at (805) 781-7100 at least 48 hours before the meeting, if possible. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (805) 781-7107. City Council regular meetings are televised live on Charter Channel 20. Agenda related writings or documents provided to the City Council are available for public inspection in the City Clerk’s Office located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California during normal business hours, and on the City’s website www.slocity.org. Persons with questions concerning any agenda item may call the City Clerk’s Office at (805) 781-7100. Page intentionally left blank. San Luis Obispo Page 1 Tuesday, December 15, 2015 Regular Meeting of the City Council CALL TO ORDER A Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo City Council was called to order on Tuesday, December 15, 2015 at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Hearing Room, located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, by Mayor Marx. ROLL CALL Council Members Present: Council Members John Ashbaugh, Carlyn Christianson, Dan Rivoire, Vice Mayor Dan Carpenter, and Mayor Jan Marx Council Members Absent: None City Staff Present: Katie Lichtig, City Manager; Christine Dietrick, City Attorney; Derek Johnson, Assistant City Manager; and John Paul Maier, Assistant City Clerk; were present at Roll Call. Other staff members presented reports or responded to questions. PUBLIC COMMENT ON CLOSED SESSION There was no one desiring to speak. CLOSED SESSION A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 54956.9: No. of potential cases: One. A point has been reached where, in the opinion of the legislative body of the local agency on the advice of its legal counsel, based on existing facts and circumstances, there is a significant exposure to litigation against the local agency. The existing facts and circumstances exposing the City to litigation include allegations by the group California River Watch in a letter to the City from its counsel, Jack Silver, that the City has committed 4.a Packet Pg. 6 Attachment: a - Minutes of December 15, 2015 and January 14, 2016 (1283 : Minutes of December 15, 2015 and January 14, 2016) San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of December 15, 2015 Page 2 violations of the Clean Water Act. The letter, dated October 8, 2015, is on file with the City Clerk. B. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 54956.9: No. of potential cases: One. A point has been reached where, in the opinion of the legislative body of the local agency on the advice of its legal counsel, based on existing facts and circumstances, there is a significant exposure to litigation against the local agency. The existing facts and circumstances exposing the City to litigation are the procurement and installation of equipment included in the 2015-17 Financial Plan, but not finally approved in accordance with City purchasing guidelines. C. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL –EXISTING LITIGATION Paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Section 54956.9; Name of case: State Water Resources Control Board Case No. SWB-2008-3-0016 D. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 Property: APNs 002-416-031, 002-416-035 and 002-416-038 Negotiating parties: City of San Luis Obispo: Katie Lichtig, Derek Johnson, J. Christine Dietrick, Anne Russell, Michael Codron and Lee Johnson San Luis Obispo Court Street, LLC: Tom Copeland, Suzanne Fryer, Mark Rawson (aka San Luis Obispo Chinatown, LLC) Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment E. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL –EXISTING LITIGATION Paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Section 54956.9; Name of case: San Luis Obispo Police Officers Association v. City of San Luis Obispo; State of California Public Employment Relations Board Case No. LA-CE-729-M ADJOURN TO REGULAR MEETING OF JANUARY 5, 2016 4.a Packet Pg. 7 Attachment: a - Minutes of December 15, 2015 and January 14, 2016 (1283 : Minutes of December 15, 2015 and January 14, 2016) San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of December 15, 2015 Page 3 CALL TO ORDER A Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo City Council was called to order on Tuesday, December 15, 2015 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber, located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, by Mayor Marx. ROLL CALL Council Members Present: Council Members John Ashbaugh, Carlyn Christianson, Dan Rivoire, Vice Mayor Dan Carpenter, and Mayor Jan Marx Council Members Absent: None City Staff Present: Katie Lichtig, City Manager; Christine Dietrick, City Attorney; Derek Johnson, Assistant City Manager; and John Paul Maier, Assistant City Clerk; were present at Roll Call. Other staff members presented reports or responded to questions indicated in the minutes. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Council Member Ashbaugh led the Pledge of Allegiance. CITY ATTORNEY REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION City Attorney Dietrick presented the report on Closed Session and there were no reportable actions at this time. PRESENTATIONS 1. PROCLAMATION - RON MUNDS RETIREMENT Mayor Marx presented a Proclamation to Utilities Service Manager Munds, recognizing his upcoming retirement with the City of San Luis Obispo. 2. PROCLAMATION - COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP OF SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, INC (CAPSLO) Mayor Marx presented a Proclamation to Elizabeth "Biz" Steinberg, representing Community Action Partnership of San Luis Obispo County, Inc. (CAPSLO), recognizing CAPSLO's 50th Anniversary. Elizabeth Steinberg expressed gratitude to the Mayor and City Council for recognizing CAPSLO’s 50th Anniversary. 4.a Packet Pg. 8 Attachment: a - Minutes of December 15, 2015 and January 14, 2016 (1283 : Minutes of December 15, 2015 and January 14, 2016) San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of December 15, 2015 Page 4 3. PRESENTATION BY CHRIS KOFRON, REPRESENTING U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, PRESENTING A CONSERVATION AWARD TO THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO Recovery Permit Coordinator/Senior Biologist Kofron presented a Conservation Award to the City of San Luis Obispo, recognizing outstanding stewardship of natural resources and in particular to help conserve the endangered Chorro Creek bog thistle. 4. PRESENTATION BY RON REGIER, PERFORMING ARTS CENTER MANAGING DIRECTOR, REGARDING THE PERFORMING ARTS CENTER STRATEGIC PLAN UPDATE Performing Arts Center Managing Director Regier and Foundation for the Performing Arts Center Chair Rolph presented a PowerPoint presentation entitled “Strategic Plan 2015.” PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD Harry Busselen, San Luis Obispo, expressed concerns with the health and safety in the City; acknowledged that staff has provided information regarding flood control and inquired about a map that includes “flood hot spots”; expressed concerns with night hiking in the Irish Hills Natural Reserve, highlighting that hikers enter near the Costco Wholesale property. Donald Hedrick, San Luis Obispo, stated that actions taken by various government bodies have collaborated with global partnerships; opined that foreign partnerships negate the sovereignty of the Country; urged the City to avoid global partnerships. Paul Rys, San Luis Obispo, spoke on the presentations that highlighted improvements in neighborhood quality, stating that the City’s debt is a concern for the community; urged that the City Council enact changes to management of City employees’ health care and or pension plans, similarly to the retirement plans for the City of San Diego employees; noted that changes in the City of San Diego employees’ health care plans have proven to be cost-effective. City Manager Lichtig stated that City staff is currently working on a map that highlights “flood hot spots” and directed Public Works Director Grigsby to provide flood control information to Mr. Busselen. City Manager Lichtig clarified that the City does not offer medical insurance to its retired employees, noting that the City employees are part of the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS). City Manager Lichtig recognized Public Works Director Grigsby at the podium. Public Works Director Grigsby spoke on a change to a Request for Proposal (RFP) for Item 8, regarding the Operation and Maintenance of Fixed Route, Public Transit Services Specification 91433 as reflected in the City Council Memorandum. 4.a Packet Pg. 9 Attachment: a - Minutes of December 15, 2015 and January 14, 2016 (1283 : Minutes of December 15, 2015 and January 14, 2016) San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of December 15, 2015 Page 5 CONSENT AGENDA MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER ASHBAUGH, SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHRISTIANSON, CARRIED 5-0, to approve Consent Calendar Items 5 thru 10. 5. WAIVE READING IN FULL OF ALL RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER ASHBAUGH, SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHRISTIANSON, CARRIED 5-0, to waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances as appropriate. 6. MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 3, 2015 MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER ASHBAUGH, SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHRISTIANSON, CARRIED 5-0, to approve the Minutes of the City Council meeting of November 3, 2015 as amended. Council Member Ashbaugh recommended an amendment to packet page 11 of the minutes, deleting the words “once the.” 7. FISCAL YEAR 2014-15 ANNUAL REPORT ON DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER ASHBAUGH, SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHRISTIANSON, CARRIED 5-0, to adopt a Resolution No. 10679 (2015 Series) entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, accepting the 2014-15 annual report on Development Impact Fees and reaffirming the necessity of development impact fees and a finding that fees are needed in the Airport Area Specific Plan.” Council Member Ashbaugh recommended an amendment to packet page 16 of the City staff report, providing the following correction: “the account held $1,471,571” changed to “the account held $937,895.” In response to Council Member’s Ashbaugh’s comments, Assistant City Manager Johnson stated that the City staff report inaccurately reported the amount, noting that the staff report contains a resolution with the correct amount. 8. AUTHORIZATION FOR SLO TRANSIT OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE CONTRACT - REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER ASHBAUGH, SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHRISTIANSON, CARRIED 5-0, to authorize the issuance of a Request for Proposal (RFP) to operate and maintain the City’s Transit System as modified per the Council correspondence amending Part 1, section 2, subpart E of the RFP regarding protest procedures. 4.a Packet Pg. 10 Attachment: a - Minutes of December 15, 2015 and January 14, 2016 (1283 : Minutes of December 15, 2015 and January 14, 2016) San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of December 15, 2015 Page 6 9. 2016 STANDARD SPECIFICATION AND ENGINEERING STANDARD UPDATE MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER ASHBAUGH, SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHRISTIANSON, CARRIED 5-0, to: 1. Adopt a Resolution No. 10680 (2015 Series) entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, approving revised Standard Specifications and Engineering Standards for Construction.” 2. Authorize the City Engineer to release projects currently in design or approved by Council under the 2014 City Standard Specifications on a case by case basis. 10. ORDINANCE NO. 1627 (SECOND READING) - AMEND MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 13.16 TO ALLOW FOR LIMITED INTERIM WATER AND SEWER SERVICE ASSOCIATED WITH FIERO LANE AND CLARION COURT AREA (805 FIERO LANE) MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER ASHBAUGH, SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHRISTIANSON, CARRIED 5-0, to adopt an Ordinance No. 1627 (2015 Series) entitled “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California amending Municipal Code Chapter 13.16 to allow interim water and sewer service associated with the proposed future annexation of the Fiero Lane and Clarion Court area (850 Fiero Lane).” Paul Rys, San Luis Obispo, expressed concerns for the need of a new bridge near Clarion Lane; explained that the current Santa Fe Bridge does exist; questioned about plans to construct a new bridge; inquired about the use and need of water by members of the community, located near Clarion Court Area. In response to Mr. Rys inquiries, Community Development Director Codron explained that the plans for a new bridge is an item funded by the Airport Area Specific Plan; noted that it is a project that is eligible for grant funding and is also a project that has been considered. PUBLIC HEARINGS 11. UPDATE TO NOTIFICATION STANDARDS Community Development Director Codron and Planning Technician Van Leeuwen narrated a PowerPoint presentation entitled “Updates to notification Standards” and reviewed the contents of the report. 4.a Packet Pg. 11 Attachment: a - Minutes of December 15, 2015 and January 14, 2016 (1283 : Minutes of December 15, 2015 and January 14, 2016) San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of December 15, 2015 Page 7 Sandra Rowley, Chairperson of Residents for Quality Neighborhoods, expressed gratitude to City staff for the changes made for Public noticing times and distances; submitted a letter to the City Council urging to consider recommendations and minor changes regarding notifications that are of special interest to city residents, including: projects and demolition on historic sites; explained expanding the noticing distance for high occupancy permit requests and consider adding “minimum” to Notification Requirements. Linda White, San Luis Obispo, expressed support to the views of Residents for Quality Neighborhoods regarding Public noticing; expressed concerns with responsiveness and disconnect between City staff and the City Council; noting that lengthening the notification standards to two weeks would better improve processes; opined that by lengthening the notification standards there would be a decrease in appeals to the Architectural Review Commission, Planning Commission, and to the City Council. The City Council discussed the expansion of certain noticing requirements, approving the expansion of the postcard range to 100 feet for projects that are currently noticed to adjacent owners to increase the likelihood of public participation, noting that staff will be able to make these enhancements to the standards, without impacting the ability to achieve other process goals previously set for department. MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER ASHBAUGH, SECOND BY VICE MAYOR CARPENTER, CARRIED 5-0, to adopt a Resolution No. 10681 (2015 Series) entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, adopting revised development review notification requirements,” and direct staff to pursue the additional enhancements to public notification, outreach, and to direct staff to expand the post card range to 100 feet for the projects that are currently noticed to the adjacent owners and occupants and increasing the noticing to seven days for all projects that have a current five day requirement. BUSINESS ITEMS 12. ADOPTION OF THE OPEN SPACE MAINTENANCE PLAN Parks & Recreation Director Stanwyck and Recreation Supervisor Carscaden narrated a PowerPoint presentation entitled “2015 Open Space Maintenance Plan” and reviewed the contents of the report. Recreation Supervisor Carscaden spoke on the Key Elements proposed in the Open Space Maintenance Plan, highlighting: Maintenance Activities, Trailhead Amenities, and Open Space Locations and responded to City Council inquiries. Donald Hedrick, San Luis Obispo, spoke on the status of Laguna Lake and drought conditions that negatively affect the vegetation; urged the City Council to consider ways to improve the Laguna Lake by considering it in the Open Space Maintenance Plan. 4.a Packet Pg. 12 Attachment: a - Minutes of December 15, 2015 and January 14, 2016 (1283 : Minutes of December 15, 2015 and January 14, 2016) San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of December 15, 2015 Page 8 Greg Bettencourt, Central Coast Concerned Mountain Bikers, expressed support to the Open Space Maintenance Plan and to City staff; explained that the he frequently observes City Rangers preforming trail maintenance and resource protection. Gary Felsman, San Luis Obispo, expressed support to the Open Space Maintenance Plan, noting that he submitted a letter to the City Clerk’s Office for Public Comment concerning compliance; explained that the rules are enforced regularly and urged the City Council to consider additional rangers. Bob Shanbrom, San Luis Obispo, expressed gratitude to Natural Resource Manager Hill for his engagement with the Open Space Maintenance Plan and urged the City Council to purchase electric mountain bikes to extend patrol areas for the rangers. MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER ASHBAUGH, SECOND BY VICE MAYOR CARPENTER, CARRIED 5-0, adopt a Resolution No. 10682 (2015 Series) entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, approving the City of San Luis Obispo 2015 Open Space Maintenance Plan and adoption of a Negative Declaration,” pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15063(b)(2), including corrections RECESS Council recessed at 8:05 p.m. and reconvened at 8:16 p.m., with all Council Members present. 13. MEDICAL MARIJUANA RESOLUTION City Attorney Dietrick and Community Development Director narrated a PowerPoint presentation entitled “Medical Marijuana Resolution” and reviewed the contents of the report. Jean Sumrall, San Luis Obispo, spoke about the types of medical marijuana users in the community, noting that medical marijuana is used by many seniors to alleviate pains or illnesses that they suffer from; expressed gratitude to the City Council to consider her concerns. Ruby Gutierrez, San Luis Obispo, expressed concerns regarding the dependence of medical marijuana and mobile dispensaries; spoke on behalf of her family member who suffered from colon cancer, noting that he was prescribed with medical marijuana to help with his illness. Dan Shinn, stated that there was a misinterpretation regarding language used in the draft resolution, concerning the ban of medical marijuana dispensaries; urged staff to provide clarification for regulations of cultivation of medical marijuana; requested that the resolution be rephrased to prevent misinterpretations. 4.a Packet Pg. 13 Attachment: a - Minutes of December 15, 2015 and January 14, 2016 (1283 : Minutes of December 15, 2015 and January 14, 2016) San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of December 15, 2015 Page 9 Will Malmen, Cayucos, voiced support to Mr. Shinn’s comments, noting that the draft resolution was difficult to understand. Charles Doster, Los Osos, spoke on behalf of medical marijuana businesses and users, emphasizing the importance of medical marijuana; noted that medical marijuana treats arthritis, osteoporosis, cancer, and many illnesses; urged the City Council to clearly state a position, regarding the regulations of medical marijuana. David Flannery, Santa Margarita, expressed support to the previous speakers regarding medical marijuana; spoke on the allowance of alcohol outlets in the City; requested clear guidelines for businesses in the medical marijuana industry, opining that businesses should be able to operate similarly to bars and restaurants that serve alcohol in the downtown area. Austen Connella, submitted a speaker card and was not present during Public Comment. Bryan Davis, San Luis Obispo, spoke about his hydroponics store; explained that businesses in the medical marijuana industry are sometimes family owned businesses; stated that clarification of rules and regulations is needed to help regulate medical marijuana cultivation. Ben Wooldridge, Shell Beach, spoke on behalf of patients and medicinal growers, stating he is against the ban of medical marijuana cultivation. Sean Donahoe, California Growers Association Policy Advisor, stated that he is against bans against medical marijuana cultivation; spoke about a topic discussed by the Board of Supervisor’s regarding the consideration of a medical marijuana cultivation ordinance, highlighting that quality assurance testing for businesses in the industry is needed; urged the City Council to issue local licenses for medical marijuana businesses. Michelle Tasseff, San Luis Obispo, spoke about smoke shops that partake in illegal activities, including illegal marijuana sales; explained that a major concern is that marijuana is very accessible to teenagers; stated that the City Council of the City of Santa Maria is also considering a similar topic about medical marijuana this evening at their City Council meeting. Grady Barnhard, spoke about his mother and sister who are cancer survivors; explained that medical marijuana has helped his family members survive their ailments; urged that the City Council improve the notification processes to the Public regarding major concerns in the community. Danny Braxoixiburg, submitted a speaker card and was not present during Public Comment. Tanner Jenings, California Cannabis Hemp Initiative 2016, spoke about the local accessibility issues for medical marijuana users. 4.a Packet Pg. 14 Attachment: a - Minutes of December 15, 2015 and January 14, 2016 (1283 : Minutes of December 15, 2015 and January 14, 2016) San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of December 15, 2015 Page 10 Tristan Negranti, San Luis Obispo, opined that the section of the Resolution that states, “the City’s permissive zoning code prohibits medical marijuana businesses, operations and uses, including cultivation of medical marijuana in the City” will eliminate all of the compassion provided to the members of the community who spoke during Public Comment; presented statistics regarding a study on medical marijuana dispensaries, noting that there are increased concerns regarding opioid overdose deaths. Ryan Garcia, Morro Bay, stated that he was an Air Force combat veteran who served in Afghanistan; explained that he suffers from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, insomnia, and chronic pains; noted that medical cannabis has been beneficial to his recovery and improved the quality of his life. Wendy Brown, San Luis Obispo, spoke about the County Board of Supervisor’s Meeting held earlier in the afternoon, noting that after the Board’s discussion on the topic of medical marijuana, they determined that prohibiting cultivation of medical marijuana has been deemed inappropriate; urged City staff to study ordinances in other cities regarding medical marijuana for clarification purposes and to make regulations easier to interpret for the public. David Gehrt, spoke on his use of medical marijuana to treat his illness of Multiple Sclerosis; explained that the language used in the draft resolution states that medical marijuana is not permitted; explained that the language in the draft resolution needs to be revised for better understanding. Donald Hedrick, San Luis Obispo, spoke on the competition of illegal drugs; explained that special interest groups have control through global elitists; opined that regulation of licensed businesses is easier to control when structured. Will Wilhite, Paso Robles, spoke on behalf of veterans who are medical marijuana users; expressed gratitude to the City Council for considering concerns about cultivation of medical marijuana. Emerald White, San Luis Obispo, spoke on the improvements to patient’s health when using marijuana for medicinal purposes. Kramer Tartalia, Arroyo Grande, spoke about an accident he suffered after being struck from a car; explained that after his accident he was prescribed with opioids or medical marijuana alleviate pain from his injuries; explained that he depends on medical marijuana. Chris Bradley, Santa Maria, spoke about his friend who lost her life to cancer; explained that medical cannabis assisted her through the treatment of her cancer. Aaron McFarland, expressed support to the speakers this evening; stated that there are four states who have permitted marijuana for recreational purposes; urged the City Council to provide clarification in the draft resolution and to the current regulations. 4.a Packet Pg. 15 Attachment: a - Minutes of December 15, 2015 and January 14, 2016 (1283 : Minutes of December 15, 2015 and January 14, 2016) San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of December 15, 2015 Page 11 Aaron Eckman, Arroyo Grande, stated that the draft resolution does not allow for the City to tax the revenue accrued from medical marijuana cultivation; noted that taxable revenues from this industry can increase taxable revenues for the City to pay for improvement projects in the community, such as applying additional pedestrian crossings. Garret Raynaud, Circle of Dreams Farm, opined that there is a necessity of cultivation of medical marijuana; explained that businesses need regulations; stated that the delivery service that he provides to his patients enables medical marijuana to treat their illnesses; and explained that he suffers from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and medical marijuana has aided in his life. In response to public comments, City Attorney Dietrick explained the City’s Permissive Zoning Code regarding regulation of licenses; spoke on the ambiguity that exists, noting that there are not clear parameters regarding enforcement and regulation; stated that staff shares similar concerns with the testaments explained this evening; clarified that the recommendation is not to adopt any changes to the current status of operations in the City and responded to City Council inquiries. In response to public comments, Community Development Director spoke about the City’s Permissive Zoning Code, added that city staff may assist with public engagement through workshops provided by the Community Development Department when additional updates and information is available regarding the cultivation of medical marijuana. The City Council deliberated about regulations for the City, regarding the cultivation of medical marijuana and City Permissive Zoning Code. MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER ASHBAUGH, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER CHRISTIANSON, CARRIED 5-0, to adopt a Resolution No. 10683 (2015 Series) as amended to remove duplicate recitals, entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, reaffirming that the City’s Permissive Zoning Code prohibits marijuana businesses, operations and uses, including cultivation of medical marijuana in the City, and making a finding that the resolution is exempt from environmental review pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15061(B)(3)” and to direct staff to provide updates for State policies and Federal regulations relating to cultivation of medical marijuana. STUDY SESSION 14. 2015 WATER RESOURCES STATUS REPORT Utilities Director Mattingly and Deputy Director Floyd narrated a PowerPoint presentation entitled “2015 Water Resources Status Report” and reviewed the contents of the report. Linda White, San Luis Obispo, submitted a speaker card and was not present during Public Comment. 4.a Packet Pg. 16 Attachment: a - Minutes of December 15, 2015 and January 14, 2016 (1283 : Minutes of December 15, 2015 and January 14, 2016) San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of December 15, 2015 Page 12 Donald Hedrick, San Luis Obispo, expressed concerns with the use of fluoride in the water and the negative health affects; noted that other countries have banned fluoride in their water resources. Bob Shanbrom, San Luis Obispo, inquired about planning for the drought; urged the City Council to consider the Nacimiento Reservoir, highlighting the current drought conditions. Paul Rys, San Luis Obispo, inquired about the storage of above ground reservoirs; urged the City Council to consider the expansion of recyclable uses of water. In response to Public Comment, Utilities Deputy Director Floyd stated that he is meeting with Mr. Shanbrom to discuss current planning for the drought and spoke about the Water Resource Recovery Facility. Utilities Director Mattingly stated that the levels of the fluoride in the water have been tested and decreased and responded to City Council inquiries. By consensus, Council directed staff to receive and file the 2015 Water Resources Status Report. LIAISON REPORTS Council Member Ashbaugh announced that the Friends of Prado Day Center will be hosting an event on February 6, 2016 at the Veterans Hall. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS None. ADJOURNMENT The next Regular City Council Meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, January 5, 2016 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California. __________________________ Jon Ansolabehere Interim City Clerk APPROVED BY COUNCIL: XX/XX/2016 4.a Packet Pg. 17 Attachment: a - Minutes of December 15, 2015 and January 14, 2016 (1283 : Minutes of December 15, 2015 and January 14, 2016) Thursday, January 14, 2016 Special Meeting of the City Council CALL TO ORDER A Special Meeting of the San Luis Obispo City Council was called to order on January 14, 2016 at 3:30 p.m. in the Council Hearing Room, located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, by Mayor Marx. ROLL CALL Council Members Present: Council Members John Ashbaugh, Carlyn Christianson, Dan Rivoire, Vice Mayor Dan Carpenter, and Mayor Jan Marx Council Members Absent: None Staff Present: Katie Lichtig, City Manager; Christine Dietrick, City Attorney; Tracy McGinley, City Clerk; Derek Johnson, Assistant City Manager; Anne Russell, Interim Assistant City Attorney; Monica Irons, Director of Human Resources; Greg Zocher, Human Resources Manager; Garret Olson, Fire Chief; Deanna Cantrell, Police Chief; Michael Codron, Community Development Director; Lee Johnson, Economic Development Manager, and Rick Bolanos of Liebert Cassidy Whitmore, were present at Roll Call. PUBLIC COMMENT ON CLOSED SESSION City Attorney Dietrick called for public comment. There was no one present to speak on Closed Session Items. CLOSED SESSION A. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.8 Property: APNs 002-416-031, 002-416-035 and 002-416-038 Negotiating parties: City of San Luis Obispo: Katie Lichtig, Derek Johnson, J. Christine Dietrick, Anne Russell, Michael Codron and Lee Johnson San Luis Obispo Court Street, LLC: Tom Copeland, Suzanne Fryer, Mark Rawson (aka San Luis Obispo Chinatown, LLC) Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment Council Member Ashbaugh recused himself from the deliberations due to a conflict of interest, noting the proximity of his wife’s leased business property to the project site. 4.a Packet Pg. 18 Attachment: a - Minutes of December 15, 2015 and January 14, 2016 (1283 : Minutes of December 15, 2015 and January 14, 2016) San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of January 14, 2016 Page 2 B. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS Pursuant to Government Code § 54957.6 Agency Negotiators: Monica Irons, Katie Lichtig, Derek Johnson, Greg Zocher, J. Christine Dietrick, Jon Ansolabehere, Garret Olson, Rick Bolanos, Deanna Cantrell Represented Employee Organizations: San Luis Obispo City Employee’s Association (SLOCEA) San Luis Obispo Police Officer’s Association (POA) San Luis Obispo Police Staff Officer’s Association (SLOPSOA) International Association of Firefighters Local 3523 Unrepresented Employees: Unrepresented Management Employees Unrepresented Confidential Employees C. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Pursuant to Government Code § 54956.9 Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (d). No. of potential cases: One. A point has been reached where, in the opinion of the legislative body of the local agency on the advice of its legal counsel, based on existing facts and circumstances, there is a significant exposure to litigation against the local agency. The existing facts and circumstances exposing the City to litigation include allegations by the group California River Watch in a letter to the City from its counsel, Jack Silver, that the City has committed violations of the Clean Water Act. REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION City Attorney Dietrick reported that no reportable action was taken during the Closed Session. 4.a Packet Pg. 19 Attachment: a - Minutes of December 15, 2015 and January 14, 2016 (1283 : Minutes of December 15, 2015 and January 14, 2016) San Luis Obispo City Council Minutes of January 14, 2016 Page 3 ADJOURNMENT The City Council adjourned to s Regular City Council Meeting scheduled for Tuesday, January 19, 2016 at 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m., respectively, in the Council Chamber, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California. __________________________ Traci R. McGinley, MMC City Clerk APPROVED BY COUNCIL: XX/XX/2016 4.a Packet Pg. 20 Attachment: a - Minutes of December 15, 2015 and January 14, 2016 (1283 : Minutes of December 15, 2015 and January 14, 2016) Page intentionally left blank. Meeting Date: 3/1/2016 FROM: Michael Codron, Community Development Director Prepared By: Shawna Scott, Contract Planner SUBJECT: HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE DETERMINATION FOR A CONTRIBUTING LIST PROPERTY AT 1009 MONTEREY STREET RECOMMENDATION As recommended by the Cultural Heritage Committee (CHC), adopt a Resolution (Attachment A) determining the structure at 1009-1025 Monterey Street does not qualify for listing as a historic resource, and approving the removal of 1009 Monterey Street from the City’s lis t of contributing historic resources. REPORT-IN-BRIEF On January 25, 2016 the Cultural Heritage Committee (CHC) reviewed the request to determine the historic significance of a Contributing List property (1009 Monterey Street) located in the Downtown Historic District. The CHC found the structure located at 1009-1025 Monterey Street did not meet the eligibility requirements for historic listing and recommended the City Council remove the subject property from the City’s list of contributing historic resources (Attachment E, Draft CHC Minutes). DISCUSSION Historic Preservation is an important goal of the City’s General Plan, as described in Conservation and Open Space Element policies 3.3.1 - 3.3.5. In an effort to preserve the integrity of the City’s Historic Resources, it is important that those resources included as Contributing or Master List properties meet the historic criteria provided in the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance. The purpose of the Ordinance is to promote identification, protection, enhancement, and preservation of those resources that represent distinctive elements of San Luis Obispo’s cultural, educational, social, economic, political and architectural history. In this case, a qualified historian (Donald M. Faxon, Figure 1: Location of the subject property 5 Packet Pg. 21 Applied Earthworks, Inc.) has confirmed that this property does not meet eligibility requirements for listing (Attachment C), and the CHC has reviewed and concurred with the evaluation. Background The 0.55 acre site is located in the Downtown Historic District on Monterey and Higuera Streets, between Santa Rosa Street and Osos Street (Attachment B, Vicinity Map). The project site is zoned C- D-H (Downtown Commercial, Historic Preservation) and is within the General Retail land use designation. The site is developed with two restaurants (Que Pasa and Aisuru) and Mission Cinemas. The Fremont Theater is located to the northeast, and Mo’s Smokehouse BBQ is located to the southwest (refer to Figure 2). A Sanborn fire insurance map dated 1888 (Attachment C, Figure 4-2, page 13) shows that the subject parcel was part of the joint location of the San Luis Obispo Flour Mill complex, which was located at the intersection of Monterey and Osos Streets1. 1009 Monterey Street remained largely vacant2 until 1910, when the site was developed with the San Luis Garage (also known as the Laird Garage building). The Laird Garage occupied the site until 1945, when it was converted to a Greyhound Bus Station (refer to Figure 3). The City placed the property on its Contributing List in 1987. Architecture The architectural style of the Greyhound Bus Station was based upon the Mission Revival -style, and incorporated added Art Deco-influenced vertical elements in its smoothed-over styling, central dormered pavilion with large glass storefront waiting room window, and modern vertical signage (refer to Figure 2). This style differed from many of the more architecturally unique and famously distinctive pre-war Greyhound bus stations. The Greyhound Bus Station remained active from 1945 until 1965, and at between approximately 1956 and 1982 minor aspects of its 1 The 1888 Sanborn map also shows a small one story building, possibly a house, along Monterey Street. 2 Oil tanks were installed on the property to serve the San Luis Obispo City Electric Light Company, which was located in the northern portion of the subject parcel in 1903, and powered the Sperry Flour Company building (1005 Monterey Street). Figure 3: 2015 photograph of the subject structure Figure 2: 1945 photograph of the subject structure (Applied Earthworks) 5 Packet Pg. 22 Mission Revival detailing were re-created, and over time its storefronts were modified to accommodate a variety new businesses (refer to Figure 4). Major modifications occurred in the early 1980’s, including the remodeling of Mission Cinemas and other improvements to accommodate retail, office, and restaurant uses. Structural modifications were made for public safety under seismic loads between approximately 2004 to 2013. Current Building Condition The Laird Garage building was originally constructed as a central one-and-a-half story dormered pavilion flanked by two equal garage wings (refer to Attachment C). These wings are now storefronts designed and finished individually in a way that suggest they are separate buildings (refer to Figure 5). Original materials were brick with a stucco finish and Spanish tile roof; those materials remain but have been refinished. Areas on the rear-facing east façade near Higuera Street retain early brickwork with arched brick lintels (refer to Figure 6). As documented in the Historic Resources Evaluation Report (refer to Attachment C), the façades at 1009 and 1025 Monterey have been removed or modified significantly over time including:  The former bus entrance has been filled in to accommodate a smaller pedestrian entry;  The size, height, and area of the windows have been modified and one window no longer exists;  A large header beam that supports all of the structure above the storefront is slightly lower (perhaps one foot) than the original bus opening;  Façade openings have been added or substantially enlarged; and,  The roof and second floor office area dormer (part of the central pavilion of the former bus station) seem to retain their general appearance, shape, and parapet profile, but the paired windows of the dormer have been removed and partially in-filled. Figure 4: 1984 photograph of the subject structure Figure 6: View of east façade near Higuera Street showing brick Figure 5: 2015 photograph of the subject structure showing separate storefronts (Applied Earthworks) 5 Packet Pg. 23 Summary of the Historic Resource Evaluation of 1009-1025 Monterey Street Determinations of historic significance are based on evaluation criteria provided within the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance. The analysis below includes a discussion of findings from the Applied Earthworks, Inc. historic evaluation and the CHC’s determination. 1. Listing of a Contributing Historic Structure Section 14.01.050 of the Historic Preservation Ordinance states that “contributing list of resources or properties are buildings or other resources at least 50 years old that maintain their original or attained historic and architectural character, and contribute, either by themselves or in conjunction with other structures, to the unique or historic character of the neighborhood, district, or to the City as a whole.” Non-contributing resources are “buildings, properties and other features in historic districts which are less than 50 years old, have not retained their original architectural character, or which do not support the prevailing historic character of the district.” The Historic Preservation Ordinance contains the below historic significance criteria 3 (refer to Attachment D, Historic Preservation Ordinance). In order for a property to qualify for historic resource listing the property shall exhibit a high level of historic integrity, be at least 50 years old (less than 50 if it can be demonstrated enough time has passed to understand its historical importance) and satisfy at least one of the following criteria: Architectural Criteria (Style, Design, and/or Architect) Staff Response: As discussed above under Site Information and Current Building Condition, traces of the building’s original style remain or may have been reconstructed in the past as an attempt to return some of its original Mission Revival detailing (i.e. Spanish tile roofline, second floor dormer); however, the structure has undergone several substantial modifications and seismic structural additions to both its structural system and storefronts. The structure does not embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represent the work of a master, or possess high artistic values. Historic Criteria (Person, Event, and/or Context) Staff Response: Transportation-related infrastructure including bus transportation was a significant element of transportation needs during the first half of the 20th century (refer to Attachment C, Historic Resources Evaluation Report for additional background information). In its current condition, the subject structure no longer conveys its association with historical themes of transportation and bus stations previousl y represented by the Laird Garage and Greyhound Bus Station. In addition, the structure does not appear to be significant for association with the lives of persons important in history or events that made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of history or as a prime illustration of predominant patterns of history that would fit within the defined Period of Significance (1870-1930) for the Downtown Historic District. 3 14.01.060 Listing Procedures for Historic Resources & 14.01.070 Evaluation Criteria for Historic Resource Listing 5 Packet Pg. 24 Integrity Staff Response: The building no longer maintains authenticity and integrity because the structure has been remodeled multiple times and has undergone major repairs that have impacted its integrity and removed much of its architectural character. The building no longer retains its original feeling, workmanship, or connection to historic themes of transportation and bus stations. Conclusion Staff has not found evidence indicating the structure is historically significant. While the property remains in its original location, the structure no longer retains enough of its histo ric physical characteristics to convey its significance or association with its original historic context. Furthermore, the structure no longer retains enough of its historic physical characteristics to convey its significance or association with the transportation themes. Therefore, the property does not appear to meet eligibility criteria of the Historic Preservation Ordinance. Proposed Future Project The applicant is exploring an option to remove the current structure in order to redevelop the site with a new, five-story, mixed use structure as may be allowed in the C-D-H (Downtown Commercial, Historic Preservation) zone with Architectural Review approval. The applicant received conceptual review directional items during a Joint CHC and Architectural Review Commission (ARC) Public Meeting held on December 7, 2015, and is in the process of preparing revised plans in response to comments and requests provided during the meeting. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Section 15061(b)(3) states a project is exempt from CEQA if the activity is covered by the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant 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 determination of historical significance is not subject to CEQA because the project will not have a significant effect on the environment since it is a review of whether the subject site satisfies at least one of the criteria for historic resource listing within the Historic Preservation Ordinance. Any future development related to the proposed site will be subject to environmental review as required under CEQA. FISCAL IMPACT The proposed project will have no fiscal impacts since the property is not currently eligible for historic preservation benefits (i.e. Mills Act) and the historic designation of the property has no bearing on City fiscal resources. 5 Packet Pg. 25 ALTERNATIVES 1. Maintain 1009 Monterey Street on the City’s list of contributing historic resources, based on findings that satisfy the criteria for Historic Resource Listing of the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance (architecture, historic significance, and/or integrity). 2. Continue the item for additional information or discussion. Attachments: a - Draft Council Resolution b - Vicinity Map c - Historic Resources Evaluation Report d - Historic Preservation Ordinance excerpt e - Draft CHC Minutes (01-25-2016) 5 Packet Pg. 26 RESOLUTION NO. (2016 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING REMOVAL OF 1009 MONTEREY STREET FROM THE CITY’S LIST OF CONTRIBUTING HISTORIC RESOURCES HIST-2592-2016 WHEREAS, the applicant, on January 7, 2016, submitted an application to remove the property located at 1009 Monterey Street, San Luis Obispo (the “Property”) from the Contributing List of Historic Resources; and WHEREAS, the Cultural Heritage Committee of the City of San Luis Obispo at a public hearing held in the Council Meeting Room of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on January 25, 2016, and recommended the Council remove the Property from the Contributing List of Historic Resources; and WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on March 1, 2016, for the purpose of considering removing the Property from the Contributing List of Historic Resources (HIST-2592-2016); and, WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony of the applicants, interested parties, the records of the Cultural Heritage Committee hearing, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. Findings. The Council makes the following findings of consistency with Historic Preservation Program Ordinance eligibility criteria for the Contributing List of Historic Resources: 1. Though the subject building is within the Downtown Historic District, the character of the building is not historically significant due to its lack of historic and original architectural features and numerous modifications. 2. The structure no longer retains enough of its historic physical characteristics to convey its significance or association with the transportation themes of the first half of the 20th century. 3. The building no longer maintains authenticity and integrity because the building has been significantly modified over time and the building no longer retains its original appearance, workmanship, or connection to historic themes of transportation and bus stations. 4. Significant alternations to the original construction of the structure include modifications for structural reinforcements, approximately 50 percent of the storefront façade has been removed, one window has been removed and the size and area of additional windows was enlarged, the original large garage door was filled in, and the bus entrance has been filled in to accommodate a smaller pedestrian entry. 5.a Packet Pg. 27 Attachment: a - Draft Council Resolution (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) Resolution No. ______ (2016 Series) Page 2 5. The removal of the existing structure from the list of Contributing Historic Structures is consistent with the Historic Preservation Ordinance because the building does not meet the criteria for inclusion on the City’s list of historic resources. SECTION 2. Environmental Determination. Section 15061(b)(3) states a project is exempt from CEQA if the activity is covered by the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Since the project only involves a determination of historic significance, it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment. SECTION 3. Action. The Council of the City of San Luis Obispo does hereby determine the structure located at 1009 Monterey Street does not qualify for listing as a Historic Resource, and approves removal of 1009 Monterey Street from the City’s list of contributing historic resources. 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: ____________________________________ Jon Ansolabehere Interim City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________________________ J. Christine Dietrick City Attorney 5.a Packet Pg. 28 Attachment: a - Draft Council Resolution (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) Resolution No. ______ (2016 Series) Page 3 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 ______________, _________. ______________________________ Jon Ansolabehere Interim City Clerk 5.a Packet Pg. 29 Attachment: a - Draft Council Resolution (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) C-D PF PF-H C-DC-D-H C-R C-D-H C-DC-D-H C-R C-D O-H C-D-H C-D-H O C-D-H-PD C-D-H OO C-R PF-H O S O SHIGUERAMONTEREYPALM MARSHM O R R O S A N T A R O S A VICINITY MAP C-D HIST-2592-20161009 MONTEREY STREET ¯ 5.b Packet Pg. 30 Attachment: b - Vicinity Map (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) Historical Resources Evaluation Report for 1009-1025 Monterey Street, San Luis Obispo, California Donald M. Faxon Prepared By Applied EarthWorks, Inc. 811 El Capitan Way, Suite 100 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Prepared For Rossi Enterprises 750 Pismo Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Submitted To City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department 919 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 December 2015 5.c Packet Pg. 31 Attachment: c - Historic Resources Evaluation Report (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) ii Historical Resources Evaluation Report for 1009-1025 Monterey Street CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................1 2 METHODS .........................................................................................................................3 2.1 ARCHIVAL RESEARCH .......................................................................................3 2.2 ARCHITECTURAL FIELD SURVEY ...................................................................3 2.3 EVALUATION........................................................................................................4 3 HISTORIC CONTEXT .....................................................................................................5 3.1 SPANISH INCURSION—THE MISSION ERA (1772–1850) ..............................5 3.2 EARLY STATEHOOD SETTLEMENT (1850–1875) ...........................................6 3.3 GROWTH OF INDUSTRY AND COMMERCE (1875–1900) .............................7 3.4 POPULATION GROWTH AND MODERNIZATION (1900–1945) ....................8 3.5 DOWNTOWN GROWTH (1945–PRESENT)........................................................9 3.6 TRANSPORTATION THEME AND THE GREYHOUND BUS COMPANY............................................................................................................10 4 DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCES ................................................................................12 4.1 HISTORIC DEVELOPMENT OF THE 1009 -1025 MONTEREY PROPERTY ...........................................................................................................12 4.2 CURRENT CONDITIONS ...................................................................................18 5 SIGNIFICANCE EVALUATION ..................................................................................22 5.1 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE ........................................................................................................22 5.2 EVALUATION OF 1009-1025 MONTEREY STREET ......................................24 5.2.1 Architectural Criteria .................................................................................25 5.2.2 Historic Criteria .........................................................................................25 6 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION .............................................................27 7 REFERENCES ..........................................................................................................................29 APPENDIX A: California Department of Parks and Recreation Inventory Forms FIGURES Figure 1-1 1009-1025 Monterey Street, the Greyhound Bus Station next to the new Fremont Theatre, circa 1945 (Files of Applied Earthworks). ............................................... 1 Figure 3-1 Drawing of Mission San Luis Obispo (1793). ........................................................ 5 5.c Packet Pg. 32 Attachment: c - Historic Resources Evaluation Report (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) Historical Resources Evaluation Report for 1009-1025 Monterey Street iii Figure 3-2 A 1906 aerial view looking west at downtown San Luis Obispo along Marsh, Higuera, and Monterey Street with Osos Street at the bottom right corner (courtesy History Center of San Luis Obispo County). .......................................... 9 Figure 4-1 Aerial view of 1009-1025 Monterey Street, San Luis Obispo.............................. 12 Figure 4-2 1888 Sanborn map showing 1009-1025 Monterey Street. .................................... 13 Figure 4-3 1891 Sanborn maps showing 1009-1025 Monterey Street. .................................. 13 Figure 4-4 1903 Sanborn Map of 1009-1025 Monterey Street. ............................................. 14 Figure 4-5 Circa 1905 image showing empty lot of 1009 Monterey next to Sperry Flour Company. .............................................................................................................. 15 Figure 4-6 1926 Sanborn Map with October 1944 updates of 1009-1025 Monterey Street. . 16 Figure 4-7 1940s image of the Greyhound Bus Station (Crabb 2008). .................................. 16 Figure 4-8 1953 image of the Greyhound Bus Station (SLO Tribune 1953). ........................ 17 Figure 4-9 Circa 1984 image of 1009-1025 Monterey street. ................................................ 18 Figure 4-10 A 2015 photo of 1009 (right) and 1025 (left) Monterey Street, looking east at the south (front) façade. .............................................................................................. 19 Figure 4-11 Damage, exposed structure, and new storefronts at 1009-1025 Monterey. .......... 20 Figure 4-12 Central pavilion/dormer of former Laird Garage building. .................................. 20 Figure 4-13 View showing storefront under lowered support beam at 1009 Monterey Street. 21 5.c Packet Pg. 33 Attachment: c - Historic Resources Evaluation Report (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) 5.c Packet Pg. 34 Attachment: c - Historic Resources Evaluation Report (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) Historical Resources Evaluation Report for 1009-1025 Monterey Street 1 1 INTRODUCTION At the request of Rob Rossi of Rossi Enterprises, Applied EarthWorks, Inc. (Æ) completed a historical resources evaluation of the former Laird Garage building, now more commonly referred to as the former Greyhound Bus Station, at 1009–1025 Monterey Street, San Luis Obispo, California (Figure 1-1). The purpose of this report is to evaluate the significance of the subject property and to determine whether the building retains historic integrity through the character-defining features associated with the period of significance. Rossi Enterprises has proposed a new development for the property known as Fremont Square. Figure 1-1 1009-1025 Monterey Street, the Greyhound Bus Station next to the new Fremont Theatre, circa 1945 (Files of Applied Earthworks). The Laird Garage building is located within City of San Luis Obispo’s Downtown Historic District and is included on the City’s list of Contributing Resources as a part of the District. As such, the building qualifies as a historical resource under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Due to its local listing, demolition or rehabilitation of the building is subject to the San Luis Obispo Historic Preservation Ordinance (Municipal Code Chapter 14.01) and must conform to the City’s Historic Preservation Program Guidelines (City of San Luis Obispo 2013). 5.c Packet Pg. 35 Attachment: c - Historic Resources Evaluation Report (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) 2 Historical Resources Evaluation Report for 1009-1025 Monterey Street The city-wide Historic Resources Survey conducted in 1983 found the subject building significant for its architectural merits and age; the City placed the property on its Contributing List in 1987. Subsequently, the building was substantially altered when structural modifications were made for public safety under seismic loads; thus, an updated evaluation is needed to establish whether the building still retains its historic integrity and still merits such listing. To correctly identify changes to the character-defining features of a building, the significance of the property must first be established and the associated period of significance defined. Then the character-defining features that convey the significance of the property can be identified and assessed as to whether they are still fully present. 5.c Packet Pg. 36 Attachment: c - Historic Resources Evaluation Report (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) Historical Resources Evaluation Report for 1009-1025 Monterey Street 3 2 METHODS Æ carried out three basic tasks to complete the documentation and historical evaluation of the subject property. The first task involved background archival research to define the historic context of the property and gather available property-specific information on the construction history of the building. Second, Æ’s Architectural Historian visited the property to document the building’s architectural features. Finally, Æ evaluated the significance of the property within the historic context defined through the background research. Each of these steps is described in greater detail below. 2.1 ARCHIVAL RESEARCH During the course of the study, Æ Architectural Historian Don Faxon conducted archival research at several repositories within the city of San of San Luis Obispo. Primary resources he reviewed in support of the evaluation included: •City o f San Luis Obispo Community Development Files on Historical Properties; • U.S. Census records and index to voter registration affidavits; • Historical photographs on file at the History Center of San Luis Obispo County; and •City directories on file in the History Room of the San Luis Obispo City-County Library. Faxon also consulted: •Æ’s large in-house library of sources, including published works on the history of the city and county of San Luis Obispo, various historical maps, and a collection of San Luis Obispo County historical photographs; • Æ reports prepared for the previously developed Court Street and SLO County Government Center projects. 2.2 ARCHITECTURAL FIELD SURVEY Faxon toured the subject building on November 30, 2015 and conducted the architectural survey on December 3, 2015. He documented the building using a California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) Primary Record (523A) and Building, Structure, and Object Record (523B). The completed forms describe the building’s attributes, features, and condition, and summarize Æ’s evaluation of significance. Faxon photographed the building and its features. The completed DPR forms for the property are provided in Appendix A of this report. 5.c Packet Pg. 37 Attachment: c - Historic Resources Evaluation Report (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) 4 Historical Resources Evaluation Report for 1009-1025 Monterey Street 2.3 EVALUATION Æ evaluated the Laird Garage building by applying the criteria of historical significance presented in the City of San Luis Obispo’s Historic Preservation Ordinance with reference to the historic context presented in Section 3 of this report. Whereas the criteria provide the general standards of significance, the context delineates the specific key themes (i.e., aspects of history) to which a resource may be related. Significance is based on how well the subject resource represents one or more of these themes based on its specific history and the people associated with the resource, as well as its inherent qualities (i.e., architecture and potential to yield information about the past). To be considered a good representative of a particular theme, a resource also must retain sufficient integrity to communicate its significance. The seven aspects of integrity are location, setting, feeling, association, workmanship, materials, and design (National Park Service 1998:44). Æ’s evaluation of the property includes an assessment of all seven aspects of integrity. 5.c Packet Pg. 38 Attachment: c - Historic Resources Evaluation Report (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) Historical Resources Evaluation Report for 1009-1025 Monterey Street 5 3 HISTORIC CONTEXT The subject property is located within the City of San Luis Obispo’s Downtown Historic District. The Historic Preservation Program Guidelines identify the period of significance for the district as 1870–1930 (City of San Luis Obispo 2013). 3.1 SPANISH INCURSION—THE MISSION ERA (1772–1850) The era of Chumash contact with Europeans began with the initial Spanish exploration of California in 1542. In 1769 the Portolá expedition traveled overland from the Port of San Diego to the Port of Monterey, journeying inland from Morro Bay, and passing through the area again on their return voyage in 1770. The expedition laid the groundwork for the establishment of Franciscan missions that would eventually form a chain between the two Spanish ports. Mission San Luis Obispo de Tolosa was founded in 1772, the first Spanish establishment in Chumash territory. The first structures at the mission comprised a temporary church built of timber and tule, a granary, and a log and tule house for the soldiers of the mission guard. The following year, Francisco Palóu brought five families of Baja California Indians to the mission and erected huts to house them (Palóu 1926). In 1774 a more permanent church with adobe foundations and a superstructure of shaved limbs and tules was erected. Several fires over the next six years necessitated construction of a new church, completed in 1793, that still stands today, dominating the landscape of Mission Plaza and Chorro Street (Figure 3-1). Figure 3-1 Drawing of Mission San Luis Obispo (1793). Despite the previous setbacks, 877 baptisms had taken place at the time of the new mission church construction and there were regular surpluses of crops and livestock. In the 1790s an auxiliary rancho with more than 17,000 acres of prime farmland was established at Santa 5.c Packet Pg. 39 Attachment: c - Historic Resources Evaluation Report (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) 6 Historical Resources Evaluation Report for 1009-1025 Monterey Street Margarita (Krieger 1988). The mission vineyard, located south of San Luis Obispo Creek, encompassed an area bound by Garden, Buchon, and Santa Rosa streets. This was the second- largest vineyard in the California mission chain, consisting of 44,66 acres of grapes planted prior to 1800 (Bertrando and Bertrando 2003; Kocher 1972). Other construction projects completed in the 1790s included living quarters for the padres, dwellings and workshops for five guards and their families, and the first water-powered grist mill (Kocher 1972; Webb 1952). In 1800, Father Martinez began an aggressive construction program that would complete and beautify the mission quadrangle. Construction over the following 11 years included a weaving room, a wall to enclose the quadrangle, more than 80 permanent mission Indian houses (measuring 20 by 17 feet) made of adobe and roofed with clay tiles, dormitories, a hospital, a second grist mill, additional reservoirs, a community kitchen, two granaries, and a corral (Englehardt 1933; Kocher 1972; Mitchell 1930; Monitor 1938; Webb 1952). The Indian population at Mission San Luis Obispo reached its peak of 919 in 1803; by 1804 native villages in the area were abandoned and most of the Obispeño were living at the mission or its outposts. By the time of secularization, missionization, disease, and destruction of the native subsistence base had forced the Chumash to abandon most of their traditional lifeways. By 1838 only 170 Native Americans, including Chumash, Salinians, and Yokuts, remained at the mission (Greenwood 1978). In 1822, California became a Mexican territory and the Mexican government was intent on secularizing the missions. In essence, successful production of material resources at the missions was their doom, as “the covetous eyes of thousands of landless Mexicans [were] cast upon the missions” (Krieger 1988:32). With Native populations declining every year, the missions had no basis for occupying the large expanses of mission lands and could not defend themselves in political arenas. Additionally, political, economic, and social factors made it difficult for the Mexican government to maintain the mission chain. When a proclamation for secularization was issued in 1834, the government appointed Innocente Garcia as the administrator for Mission San Luis Obispo. In 1846 the mission was sold to Petronillo Rios, ending the Franciscan era. That same year the Bear Flag Rebellion occurred and California gained independence from Mexico; control of the territory soon fell into the hands of the United States (Krieger 1988). 3.2 EARLY STATEHOOD SETTLEMENT (1850–1875) When California achieved statehood in 1850, immigrants were mainly interested in the riches to be found in the gold fields of the Sierra Nevada. Newcomers were able to find some semblance of the culture they left behind in the northern part of the state and the San Francisco Bay area, but Southern California was seen as a wild, untamed country full of lawlessness. As a result, the population of newly formed San Luis Obispo County grew slowly. The 1850 census lists 336 residents, but ethnicity is not recorded. However, over 230 were born in California, suggesting Native American and/or Mexican heritage. Fifty-five were born in Mexico, 20 were born in America, and 26 were European immigrants. The population makeup must have remained unchanged through most of that decade, because in 1856 Henry Miller observed about 150 houses, inhabited principally by Native Americans and Mexicans (Miller 1856). A cholera epidemic in the 1850s further decimated the Native American population in the region. At least 70 Native Americans are said to have died from the disease, and many who were not 5.c Packet Pg. 40 Attachment: c - Historic Resources Evaluation Report (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) Historical Resources Evaluation Report for 1009-1025 Monterey Street 7 affected fled the area and were not seen again. The effect of the epidemic is noticeable in the 1860 census, which lists only 162 Indians within a town population of 1,808 residents. Disaster hit the county from 1862 to 1864 when great droughts caused the death of hundreds of thousands of sheep and cattle, bankrupting many of the Hispanic families who had acquired large ranchos. These families were forced to sell out to Euro-American entrepreneurs who were arriving in the area (Krieger 1988). Those new arrivals spurred development within the sleepy town. With the influx of Euro-American landholders, growth came rapidly, and by 1868 housing demand far exceeded supply. By the time authorities finally received a certificate of purchase for the town site from the U.S. Land Office in February 1871, many public improvements had taken place. Bridges spanned San Luis Obispo Creek at Mill, Court, Morro, Chorro, Nipomo, and Broad streets. Sidewalks had been constructed and trees planted. Gas and water works were established, the fire department was on call, a brick city hall was in use, the Bank of San Luis Obispo was open for deposits, and three weekly and two daily papers were available (Angel 1883:357, 361). During the 1870s, the demand for town lots was overwhelming. The town of San Luis Obispo added more than a dozen subdivisions during this decade. The Roman Catholic Church held titles to large sections of land such as the mission orchard and vineyard. Seeing an opportunity to finance their extensive building repair program, the Mission Parish began selling the Mission Vineyard subdivision lots in 1872 (San Luis Obispo County 1873). By 1875, the entire vineyard had been sold (Kocher 1972). The subdivision of the Old Mission Orchard is not recorded until 1896, indicating perhaps that the orchard remained active beyond the 1880s (San Luis Obispo County 1896). 3.3 GROWTH OF INDUSTRY AND COMMERCE (1875–1900) In 1875, 2,500 residents were concentrated in a 4-square-mile area and the outskirts of the town were sparsely settled. The City waterworks maintained a 2-mile open flume that carried water from springs above the town to a stone and cement reservoir. This water was then distributed through 5 miles of pipes that ran below all principal streets. The architecture was described as “rather primitive but of late marked improvement” (Cooper 1875:17). There were more buildings of a permanent nature, and many who had been renting were now building. Rental housing was in demand, and there was a limited supply; these had “reasonable rents at $10 to $25/month according to size and location” (Cooper 1875:23). The City waterworks serviced residences near the town center, and those elsewhere were supplied from individual wells. In 1875, Paulson reported four hotels, six livery stables, and one paper—the Weekly Tribune. He told how the city “commands trade up and down the coast and at least 100 miles to the interior” (Paulson 1875:23). Access to the outside world was through the Coast Line Stage. This company carried U.S. mail for Wells Fargo and Company to points north and south of the city. Passenger coaches also ran from the city to the harbor, and a tri-weekly stage between San Luis Obispo and the town of Cambria provided residents with a connection to the communities of Morro, Old Creek, and Cayucos. The narrow-gauge Pacific Coast Railway from Port Harford to Los Alamos, which first ran in 1876, made San Luis Obispo the commercial center of the region and provided access for passenger steamer service. Additionally, a telegraph from San Francisco to Santa Barbara ran 5.c Packet Pg. 41 Attachment: c - Historic Resources Evaluation Report (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) 8 Historical Resources Evaluation Report for 1009-1025 Monterey Street through San Luis Obispo, with an additional line from the city to the port (Jespersen 1939:78– 79). The City of San Luis Obispo was incorporated on March 20, 1876, and a codified system of ordinances was prepared and enacted. At the time of the 1880 census, there were 2,500 residents in the city. Just 3 years later, that number was reported to have increased to 3,000 (Angel 1883). The 1886 Sanborn map illustrates the commercial core of downtown growing within an eight- block area along Higuera, Monterey, Morro, Chorro, and Broad streets. General mercantile, hardware, grocery, and drug stores were intermingled with specialty stores such as a photo shop, cigar sellers, bakeries, jewelers, barbers, and tailors. Hotels, liveries, and restaurants were plentiful to meet the needs of travelers. Entertainment venues such as saloons, billiard rooms, pleasure houses, and a drama theatre were available. It appears that at the end of the nineteenth century one could find anything that they might desire in downtown San Luis Obispo. Between 1894 and 1901 the streetcars provided an important transportation link between the Ramona Hotel, the Southern Pacific Depot, and the narrow-gauge Pacific Coast Railway. The Southern Pacific Railroad did not reach the city until 1894 and, following a long period of starts and stops, finally connected to Los Angeles in 1901. This new link to the outside world increased the flow of manufactured goods into the city and gave access to additional markets for local agricultural products. 3.4 POPULATION GROWTH AND MODERNIZATION (1900–1945) The 1900 U.S. Census enumerated just over 3,000 residents in the City of San Luis Obispo. Several events spurred growth of the city in the early twentieth century. By 1901 the city was served by the Pacific Coast Railway and mainline Southern Pacific (Krieger 1988). The completion of a rail line that allowed travel and shipment of goods to the south meant greater opportunities for selling and buying commodities. The establishment of California Polytechnic State University (Cal Poly) in 1901 as a vocational school on 281 acres also was a significant draw for the city. Shortly after the turn of the twentieth century, the city began improving streets by grading roads and filling in low places with gravel (Curry 1968). Higuera Street was widened to 70 feet between Nipomo and Osos streets. New development throughout the city followed these improvements (Figure 3-2). San Luis Obispo Creek, however, was a major hindrance to commercial development of large portions of downtown. In locations where the creek traveled through the middle of a block, development on both sides of the creek had already occurred before the turn of the century. On Higuera Street between Osos and Santa Rosa streets, the creek was very close to the bottom of the established block. By the 1930 Census, the city’s population had surpassed 8,300. Additional growth occurred at the end of World War II, when military installations established in response to the war stimulated the local economy. Between 1940 and 1941, the U.S. Army converted Camp Merriam, a 2,000-acre National Guard base founded in 1928, to an infantry and artillery training camp known as Camp San Luis Obispo. Many of those soldiers, who remembered the mild climate and 5.c Packet Pg. 42 Attachment: c - Historic Resources Evaluation Report (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) Historical Resources Evaluation Report for 1009-1025 Monterey Street 9 gentle hills of the Central Coast, returned permanently to San Luis Obispo after the war (Krieger 1988:102–104). Figure 3-2 A 1906 aerial view looking west at downtown San Luis Obispo along Marsh, Higuera, and Monterey Street with Osos Street at the bottom right corner (courtesy History Center of San Luis Obispo County). 3.5 DOWNTOWN GROWTH (1945–PRESENT) Many of the returning soldiers were instrumental in the modernization of San Luis Obispo in the second half of the twentieth century. Joe Navoni and a group of veterans took over the City Garbage Company and bought trucks that could handle dumpsters. Archie Stinson, who used the GI Bill to study at Cal Poly, started a poultry processing plant that soon supplied most stores in San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara counties. On December 2, 1946, Southwest Airlines established airmail and passenger service out of the small county airport on the edge of town (McKeen 1988). In 1958, Alex Madonna and his wife Phyllis built the landmark Madonna Inn. The influx of new commerce meant that the landscape of downtown was changing. Older buildings, including many residences, were demolished to make way for more modern structures and parking lots. City landmarks such as the Clock Tower at the intersection of Chorro and Higuera streets and the Mission Mill guesthouse were demolished in the 1950s and 1960s. Many of the remaining adobes were also lost during this period. 5.c Packet Pg. 43 Attachment: c - Historic Resources Evaluation Report (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) 10 Historical Resources Evaluation Report for 1009-1025 Monterey Street Citizens, government, and downtown businesses spent a considerable amount of the 1950s arguing about what to do about San Luis Obispo Creek. Many citizens believed that the creek, then a trash-filled eyesore, could be cleaned up and a lovely plaza could be developed in front of the mission. Downtown businessmen, hungry for parking spaces for their customers, thought the creek was a waste of space and encouraged the city to pave it over (McKeen 1988). The issue would not be decided until 1968, when voters approved the closing of Monterey Street and creation of the plaza that exists there today (McKeen 1988; Tritenbach 1989). 3.6 TRANSPORTATION THEME AND THE GREYHOUND BUS COMPANY Transportation-related infrastructure was especially important in America during the first half of the twentieth century and made up a substantial percentage of a typical city’s architecture. Whether existing buildings were altered to accommodate modern vehicle needs, as with some converted stables and carriage houses, or constructed specifically as service facilities, automobile-related architecture was prevalent along major thoroughfares throughout the nation, especially along travel and tourist routes. Between 1909 and 1926, many changes related to the increase in the ownership of automobiles and the ease of travel were also taking place in San Luis Obispo. When the new state highway was opened for travel in 1915, the city was a prime location for travelers to rest on the long trip from San Francisco to Los Angeles. Early automobiles required substantial servicing, and high- competition for sales meant that many more dealerships existed than are found today. Commercial ventures catering to travelers, including hotels, motels, restaurants, and service stations, cropped up around the city (City of San Luis Obispo 1983; Krieger 1988; Morlet 2013; Palmer et al. 2001). Such services were primarily located along Monterey and Higuera streets; as an example, the block that contains 1009-1015 Monterey also was the location in the 1940s for a service station, a car wash, a car dealership, and two auto repair shops (History Center of San Luis Obispo County 1926/1945. Bus transportation was also a significant element of transportation needs during the first half of the twentieth century. The Greyhound Bus Company, a major transportation provider during that period, still exists today. The company employed 9,500 employees, had 4,750 stations and 2,500 buses, and carried passengers 200,000,000 miles annually in the 1930s (Wrenick 2007). By 1935, intercity bus lines such as Greyhound transported 651,999,000 passengers per year across America (Time 1936). Early Greyhound terminals were known as the “Greyhound Blue Tile” stations for their use of blue porcelain tile, but the Greyhound Company soon became even better known for its construction of high-styled Streamline Moderne stations around America starting in 1938. These were designed by noted architect and industrial designer W. S. Arrasmith (Wrenick 2007). At times however, as with the Laird Garage at 1009-1025 Monterey Street, local structures were converted into bus terminals because it was expedient, especially during periods when an increase in need for bus travel was immediate, such as during the period of the World War II. Fuel and material rationing made long-distance automobile travel virtually impossible during the war, and intercity bus lines became more in demand for travel than even during the Depression era. 5.c Packet Pg. 44 Attachment: c - Historic Resources Evaluation Report (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) Historical Resources Evaluation Report for 1009-1025 Monterey Street 11 To alleviate problems, bus operators and bus companies began to establish storefront depots of their own in the large cities. [L]arger and larger downtown storefront locations were established to provide for the comfort and convenience of passengers, including things such as retail space, restaurants, and newsstands [Wrenick 2007:105]). As for the drive-through design of Greyhound stations such as at 1009-1025 Monterey Street, Wrenick (2007:105) adds, “as the process evolved designers developed two basic plot plans for terminals, the island type and the parallel type, both of which referred to the nature of bus traffic as it circulated through the terminal.” The peak era of bus travel ended soon after the World War II as car ownership increased and the Federal Highway System improvements took hold in the 1950s. The closure of the San Luis Obispo bus station in 1965 coincided with significant drop in ridership as reliance on personal transportation continued to grow. This makes America’s surviving downtown bus stations important symbols of twentieth century mass transportation; they are especially significant to those who once relied on them. 5.c Packet Pg. 45 Attachment: c - Historic Resources Evaluation Report (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) 12 Historical Resources Evaluation Report for 1009-1025 Monterey Street 4 DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCES The City’s Master List of Historic Resources identifies the Laird Garage building (1009-1025 Monterey Street) as a single property, although currently two commercial spaces present architecturally differing storefronts. The construction history represents that of a single building with an addition. The subject building is located on the south side of Monterey Street between Osos and Santa Rosa streets (Figure 4-1). Figure 4-1 Aerial view of 1009-1025 Monterey Street, San Luis Obispo. 4.1 HISTORIC DEVELOPMENT OF THE 1009 -1025 MONTEREY PROPERTY For most of the nineteenth century, San Luis Obispo Creek flowed behind the parcels on the south side of Monterey Street between Osos and Santa Rosa streets, but a second waterway, a small tributary, also branched off to the northeast directly through this block and was known as Small Creek. Because of the two creeks, Higuera Street did not exist south of Monterey along this block before 1890, and then extended only part way from the east after that date until a bridge was built near the turn of the century. The downtown area around 1009-1025 Monterey Street was still being transformed from a partially undeveloped residential and agricultural business area to a more commercial and industrial zone during this period, evidenced by the first Sanborn fire insurance map at that Project Location 5.c Packet Pg. 46 Attachment: c - Historic Resources Evaluation Report (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) Historical Resources Evaluation Report for 1009-1025 Monterey Street 13 location, dating to 1888. The map depicts a small one-story building along Monterey Street, possibly a house since the east end of the block contained at least two private residences (Figure 4-2). Figure 4-2 1888 Sanborn map showing 1009-1025 Monterey Street. Figure 4-3 1891 Sanborn maps showing 1009-1025 Monterey Street. The 1888 map also shows that the subject parcel of 1009-1025 Monterey Street was a part of the joint location of the San Luis Obispo Flour Mill complex (between 1009 Monterey Street and the adjacent corner parcel of 1005 Monterey at Osos Street). Included on the site at this time was the 5.c Packet Pg. 47 Attachment: c - Historic Resources Evaluation Report (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) 14 Historical Resources Evaluation Report for 1009-1025 Monterey Street San Luis Obispo City Electric Light Company, near the southern end of the subject parcel, above San Luis Obispo Creek. This situation remained largely the same for the lots at 1005, 1009, and 1015 Monterey Street on the 1891 Sanborn map (Figure 4-3). In 1903 the San Luis Obispo City Electric Light Company moved its powerhouse farther north on the site of 1009-1025 Monterey Street to power the larger 1005 Monterey Street Flour Mill, now known as the Sperry Flour Company, or the Sperry Building. Crude oil tanks were installed in the ground under 1009 Monterey to serve the electric company. But other than these tanks and a small projection off the side of the mill, 1009 still remained largely vacant (Figure 4-4). Figure 4-4 1903 Sanborn Map of 1009-1025 Monterey Street. A contemporary photo from 1905 clearly shows the Monterey Street lot portion of the parcel still vacant between the Sperry Mill at 1005 Monterey Street and the Commercial Hotel at 1035 Monterey Street (now the Fremont Theater) ( Figure 4-5). 5.c Packet Pg. 48 Attachment: c - Historic Resources Evaluation Report (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) Historical Resources Evaluation Report for 1009-1025 Monterey Street 15 Figure 4-5 Circa 1905 image showing empty lot of 1009 Monterey next to Sperry Flour Company. The front lot of the 1009-1025 Monterey Street parcel had remained vacant for almost two decades by 1910. But by the end of that year the San Luis Garage occupied the site; the building appears to have remained much the same for the next three decades (Crabb 2008). By 1940 the Laird Garage building occupied the site until it became the Greyhound Bus Station in 1945 (Figure 4-6). Unlike many of the more architecturally unique pre-war Greyhound stations for which the company would become famous, San Luis Obispo’s did not incorporate streamlined styling with bands of windows and curved corners. Instead, the city’s Greyhound Station was based upon the existing Mission Revival–style structure, but also incorporated some added Art Deco-influenced vertical elements in its smoothed-over styling, central dormered pavilion with large glass storefront waiting room window, and modern vertical signage (Figures 4-7 and 4-8). And while purpose-built around 1910 as a garage, only those few changes—now largely eliminated—tied the building to the Greyhound Bus Company. No documentation has yet been found that suggests the Laird building’s Monterey Street vehicle entrance was enlarged for the purpose of allowing pass-through for the buses, a feature specifically employed by Greyhound as mentioned previously, but the opening required for that circulation design was another likely modification from the original 1910 garage construction. The Greyhound terminal remained active from 1945 until 1965, and at some point minor aspects of its Mission Revival detailing were re-created, even while its storefronts were being modified to accommodate new businesses (Figure 4-9). 5.c Packet Pg. 49 Attachment: c - Historic Resources Evaluation Report (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) 16 Historical Resources Evaluation Report for 1009-1025 Monterey Street Figure 4-6 1926 Sanborn Map with October 1944 updates of 1009-1025 Monterey Street. Figure 4-7 1940s image of the Greyhound Bus Station (Crabb 2008). 5.c Packet Pg. 50 Attachment: c - Historic Resources Evaluation Report (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) Historical Resources Evaluation Report for 1009-1025 Monterey Street 17 Figure 4-8 1953 image of the Greyhound Bus Station (SLO Tribune 1953). 5.c Packet Pg. 51 Attachment: c - Historic Resources Evaluation Report (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) 18 Historical Resources Evaluation Report for 1009-1025 Monterey Street Figure 4-9 Circa 1984 image of 1009-1025 Monterey street. 4.2 CURRENT CONDITIONS Æ Architectural Historian Don Faxon conducted a field evaluation on December 3, 2015, and made comparisons between the current conditions observed, conditions visible in a period photo circa 1945 (see Figure 1-1) when the relatively new Greyhound Bus Station was still fully intact and operational, and with conditions in photos taken within the past two decades. The building was originally constructed in 1910 as a central one-and-a-half story dormered pavilion flanked by two equal garage wings (Figure 4-8). These wings are now storefronts designed and finished individually in a way that suggest they are separate buildings (Figure 4-10). Original materials were brick with a stucco finish and Spanish tile roof; those materials remain but have been refinished. Areas on the rear-facing east façade near Higuera Street retain early brickwork with arched brick lintels. The old Greyhound terminal and garage are now occupied by the Que Pasa restaurant and Aisuru, and were heavily modified for structural reinforcement to accommodate potential seismic loads at some point early in the 1980s. The Monterey Street façade was substantially altered sometime after the bus station was closed, and the large garage door opening was filled in. At Aisuru (1025 Monterey Street), façade openings have been added or substantially enlarged, both vertically and horizontally; one window no longer exists, and another retains only a portion of its original opening. Large portions of the original façade are mostly gone (Figure 4-11). Above, the roof and second floor office area dormer (part of the central pavilion of the bus 5.c Packet Pg. 52 Attachment: c - Historic Resources Evaluation Report (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) Historical Resources Evaluation Report for 1009-1025 Monterey Street 19 station) seem to retain their general appearance, shape, and parapet profile, but the paired windows of the dormer have been removed and partially infilled (Figure 4-12). Figure 4-10 A 2015 photo of 1009 (right) and 1025 (left) Monterey Street, looking east at the south (front) façade. 5.c Packet Pg. 53 Attachment: c - Historic Resources Evaluation Report (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) 20 Historical Resources Evaluation Report for 1009-1025 Monterey Street Figure 4-11 Damage, exposed structure, and new storefronts at 1009-1025 Monterey. Figure 4-12 Central pavilion/dormer of former Laird Garage building. The façade at Que Pasa (1009 Monterey) has also been modified significantly (Figure 4-13). The bus entrance has been filled in to accommodate a smaller pedestrian entry, an area at street level has been filled with wood, and the size and area of the windows has been enlarged horizontally. It also appears that a large header beam that supports all of the structure above this storefront is slightly lower (perhaps 1 foot) than the original bus opening, and window heights, when compared with their heights in historic photos, show substantial modification, thus limiting any affordable options to reconstruct this entire area as it may have existed in 1910–1944 or 1945– 1965. 5.c Packet Pg. 54 Attachment: c - Historic Resources Evaluation Report (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) Historical Resources Evaluation Report for 1009-1025 Monterey Street 21 Figure 4-13 View showing storefront under lowered support beam at 1009 Monterey Street. All areas have been refinished in a way that has eliminated most of the historic detailing that existed either before or during use of 1009-1025 Monterey Street as the Laird Garage and later as the Greyhound Bus Station, especially at the central pavilion. Areas remaining have been damaged by the addition of new structural steel bracing, which remains exposed. 5.c Packet Pg. 55 Attachment: c - Historic Resources Evaluation Report (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) 22 Historical Resources Evaluation Report for 1009-1025 Monterey Street 5 SIGNIFICANCE EVALUATION This section presents the regulatory framework and Æ’s re-evaluation of the significance of the former Laird Garage/Greyhound Bus Station building at 1009-1025 Monterey Street under the City of San Luis Obispo’s Historic Preservation Ordinance. The City placed the resource on its Contributing List in 1987 as a component of the Downtown Historic District. 5.1 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE On December 7, 2010, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1557 (2010 Series) to incorporate the Historic Preservation Ordinance provisions into the municipal code. The classifications for resources and criteria for evaluating the significance of properties located in the City are provided in the Historic Preservation Ordinance, and are excerpted directly below: 14.01.050 Historic Resource Designation The following classifications shall be used to designate historic resources and properties. The primary categories of historic significance are “Master List” and “Contributing” properties. Contributing properties include those properties that by virtue of their age, design and appearance, contribute to and embody the historic character of the neighborhood or historic district in which they are located. A. Master List Resources. The most unique and important resources and properties in terms of age, architectural or historical significance, rarity, or association with important persons or events in the City’s past, which meet one or more of the criteria outlined in Section 14.01.070. B. Contributing List Resources or Properties. Buildings or other resources at least 50 years old that maintain their original or attained historic and architectural character, and contribute, either by themselves or in conjunction with other structures, to the unique or historic character of a neighborhood, district, or to the City as a whole. They need not be located in a historic district. In some cases, buildings or other resources that are less than 50 years old, but are nonetheless significant based on architecture, craftsmanship or other criteria as described in Section 14.01.070 may be designated as a Contributing Resource. C. Non-Contributing. Buildings, properties and other features in historic districts which are less than 50 years old, have not retained their original architectural character, or which do not support the prevailing historic character of the district. 14.01.070 Evaluation Criteria for Historic Resource Listing When determining if a property should be designated as a listed Historic or Cultural Resource, the CHC and City Council shall consider this ordinance and State Historic Preservation Office (“SHPO”) standards. In order to be eligible for designation, the resource shall exhibit a high level of historic integrity, be at least fifty (50) years old (less 5.c Packet Pg. 56 Attachment: c - Historic Resources Evaluation Report (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) Historical Resources Evaluation Report for 1009-1025 Monterey Street 23 than 50 if it can be demonstrated that enough time has passed to understand its historical importance) and satisfy at least one of the following criteria: A. Architectural Criteria: Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic values. (1) Style: Describes the form of a building, such as size, structural shape and details within that form (e.g. arrangement of windows and doors, ornamentation, etc.). Building style will be evaluated as a measure of: a.The relative purity of a traditional style; b. Rarity of existence at any time in the locale; and/or current rarity although the structure reflects a once popular style; c. Traditional, vernacular and/or eclectic influences that represent a particular social milieu and period of the community; and/or the uniqueness of hybrid styles and how these styles are put together. (2) Design: Describes the architectural concept of a structure and the quality of artistic merit and craftsmanship of the individual parts. Reflects how well a particular style or combination of styles are expressed through compatibility and detailing of elements. Also, suggests degree to which the designer (e.g., carpenter-builder) accurately interpreted and conveyed the style(s). Building design will be evaluated as a measure of: a.Notable attractiveness with aesthetic appeal because of its artistic merit, details and craftsmanship (even if not necessarily unique); b.An expression of interesting details and eclecticism among carpenter-builders, although the craftsmanship and artistic quality may not be superior. (3) Architect: Describes the professional (an individual or firm) directly responsible for the building design and plans of the structure. The architect will be evaluated as a reference to: a.A notable architect (e.g., Wright, Morgan), including architects who made significant contributions to the state or region, or an architect whose work influenced development of the city, state or nation. b. An architect who, in terms of craftsmanship, made significant contributions to San Luis Obispo (e.g., Abrahams who, according to local sources, designed the house at 810 Osos—Frank Avila’s father’s home—built between 1927– 30). B. Historic Criteria (1) History—Person: Associated with the lives of persons important to local, California, or national history. Historic person will be evaluated as a measure of the degree to which a person or group was: 5.c Packet Pg. 57 Attachment: c - Historic Resources Evaluation Report (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) 24 Historical Resources Evaluation Report for 1009-1025 Monterey Street a.Significant to the community as a public leader (e.g., mayor, congress member, etc.) or for his or her fame and outstanding recognition - locally, regionally, or nationally. b. Significant to the community as a public servant or person who made early, unique, or outstanding contributions to the community, important local affairs or institutions (e.g., council members, educators, medical professionals, clergymen, railroad officials). (2) History—Event: Associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history or the cultural heritage of California or the United States. Historic event will be evaluated as a measure of: (i) A landmark, famous, or first-of-its-kind event for the city - regardless of whether the impact of the event spread beyond the city. (ii) A relatively unique, important or interesting contribution to the city (e.g., the Ah Louis Store as the center for Chinese-American cultural activities in early San Luis Obispo history). (3) History—Context: Associated with and also a prime illustration of predominant patterns of political, social, economic, cultural, medical, educational, governmental, military, industrial, or religious history. Historic context will be evaluated as a measure of the degree to which it reflects: a. Early, first, or major patterns of local history, regardless of whether the historic effects go beyond the city level, that are intimately connected with the building (e.g., County Museum). b. Secondary patterns of local history, but closely associated with the building (e.g., Park Hotel). C. Integrity: Authenticity of an historical resource’s physical identity evidenced by the survival of characteristics that existed during the resource’s period of significance. Integrity will be evaluated by a measure of: (1) Whether or not a structure occupies its original site and/or whether or not the original foundation has been changed, if known. (2) The degree to which the structure has maintained enough of its historic character or appearance to be recognizable as an historic resource and to convey the reason(s) for its significance. (3) The degree to which the resource has retained its design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association. 5.2 EVALUATION OF 1009-1025 MONTEREY STREET The following sections present Æ’s evaluation of the subject property against the significance criteria identified in the City of San Luis Obispo’s Historic Preservation Ordinance. 5.c Packet Pg. 58 Attachment: c - Historic Resources Evaluation Report (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) Historical Resources Evaluation Report for 1009-1025 Monterey Street 25 5.2.1 Architectural Criteria For a property to be eligible under Architectural Criterion A of the Historic Preservation Ordinance, the resource must embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represent the work of a master, or possess high artistic values. The style, design, and architect of the subject property are also examined under this criterion. It is clear from the developmental history of the property that the Laird Garage building has undergone several substantial remodeling episodes in addition to the more destructive seismic structural additions. Although traces of the building’s original style remain or may have been reconstructed in the past as an attempt to return some of its original Mission Revival detailing, the building suffers from modifications to both its structural system and commercial storefronts. As a result of the alterations to the storefronts and structure, 1009-1025 Monterey Street does not embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represent the work of a master, or possess high artistic values. In addition, the City’s Historic Preservation Program Guidelines define the Period of Significance for the Downtown Historic District as 1870–1930. Other than the basic storefront locations, the building only remotely conveys the period of significance through its surviving Spanish tile roofline and second floor dormer. 5.2.2 Historic Criteria For a property to be eligible under Historic Criterion B of the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance, the resource must be: (1) associated with the lives of persons important to local, California, or national history; or (2) associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history or the cultural heritage of California or the United States; or (3) associated with and also a prime illustration of predominant patterns of political, social, economic, cultural, medical, educational, governmental, military, industrial, or religious history. As the former Laird Garage and Greyhound Bus Station, the building at 1009-1025 Monterey Street is associated with the historic themes of transportation and bus stations. When the building functioned as a garage offering pass-through bus circulation, customer waiting room, ticket booth, and management office, it would have represented those themes well; however, 1009-1025 Monterey Street no longer conveys its association with those themes because of substantial modifications. Moreover, the period in which the building served as a bus station, from 1945 to 1965, is not within the Period of Significance defined for the Downtown Historic District (1870–1930) in the City’s Historic Preservation Program Guidelines. Further, the loss of important structural and aesthetic relationships that allowed it to convey its later period of use as a Greyhound bus terminal prevents any easy or affordable attempt to re-list the property under either an amendment to the Historic District’s documentation based on another theme or Period of Significance, or by reconstructing the building’s appearance to its state during its association with the Greyhound bus line. As described above, while originally purpose-built as a garage, only those few elements modified to accommodate the bust terminal—now largely eliminated— would tie the Laird Garage building to the Greyhound Bus Company period. 5.c Packet Pg. 59 Attachment: c - Historic Resources Evaluation Report (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) 26 Historical Resources Evaluation Report for 1009-1025 Monterey Street Thus, based on the above review, the building at 1009-1025 Monterey Street does not appear to be significant for association with the lives of persons important in history or events that made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of history or as a prime illustration of predominant patterns of history that would fit within the defined Period of Significance for the Downtown Historic District. 5.c Packet Pg. 60 Attachment: c - Historic Resources Evaluation Report (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) Historical Resources Evaluation Report for 1009-1025 Monterey Street 27 6 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION In 1983, a city-wide Historic Resources Survey identified the subject property at 1009–1025 Monterey Street as a historical resource for its architecture and age, resulting in its placement on the City’s List of Contributing Resources; however, the significance of the property has never been evaluated formally. Æ’s archival research identified building history and newspaper articles that enriched our knowledge of the history of the property. Although the original Mission Revival commercial architecture was a significant storefront design for the downtown area, the building has been remodeled multiple times and has received major repairs that have impacted its integrity and removed much of its architectural character. In general, the façades of the combined street-level storefronts have had a significant amount of material removed; close to 50 percent is estimated. Above, roofs and second-story massing remain in better condition but have had window, pilaster, and parapet modifications and encasement. The Historic Preservation Ordinance 1557, Section 14.01.060, Listing Procedures for Historic Resources states the following: A. Historic Removal from historic listing. It is the general intention of the City not to remove a property from historic listing. Council may, however… remove the property from listing if the structure on the property no longer meets eligibility criteria for listing, following the process for listing set forth herein. Under Section 14.01.070, Evaluation Criteria for Historic Resource Listing, Section C, Integrity, the ordinance then states “Integrity will be evaluated by a measure of: (2) The degree to which the structure has maintained enough of its historic character or appearance to be recognizable as an historic resource and to convey the reason(s) for its significance. (3) The degree to which the resource has retained its design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association.” Æ found that the property at 1009-1025 Monterey, known as the Laird Garage building and formerly the Greyhound Bus Station: • Is associated with the historic themes of transportation and bus terminals; • No longer retains enough of its historic physical characteristics to convey its significance or association with the transportation themes; • Does not date from the 1870–1930 Period of Significance for the Downtown Historic District; and 5.c Packet Pg. 61 Attachment: c - Historic Resources Evaluation Report (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) 28 Historical Resources Evaluation Report for 1009-1025 Monterey Street • No longer retains enough of its historic integrity to be recognizable as a historic resource. Æ therefore concludes that the building does not contribute to the significance of the Downtown Historic District and no longer meets the eligibility criteria for inclusion on the List of Contributing Resources under Section 14.01.070, Evaluation Criteria for Historic Resource Listing, Section C, Integrity (2) and (3), under the City of San Luis Obispo Historic Preservation Ordinance. Consequently, Æ recommends that the building be removed from the City’s List of Contributing Resources. 5.c Packet Pg. 62 Attachment: c - Historic Resources Evaluation Report (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) Historical Resources Evaluation Report for 1009-1025 Monterey Street 29 7 REFERENCES Angel, Myron 1883 History of San Luis Obispo County, California, with Illustrations. Thompson and West, Oakland, California. 1966 facsimile ed. Howell-North Books, Berkeley, California. Bertrando, Ethan, and Betsy Bertrando 2003 Cultural Resource Inventory: Downtown Water and Sewer Projects 2004, City of San Luis Obispo, CA. Bertrando and Bertrando Research Consultants, San Luis Obispo, California. Prepared for City of San Luis Obispo Public Works Department, San Luis Obispo, California. City of San Luis Obispo 2013 Historic Preservation Program Guidelines. Community Development Department, City of San Luis Obispo, California. Cooper, Deguy 1875 Resources of San Luis Obispo County, California: Its Geography, Climate, Location, Soil, Productions, and Institutions. Bacon and Company Book and Job Printers, San Francisco. Crabb, Guy 2008 San Luis Obispo - 100 Years of of Business. Monterey Street. Guy Crabb Publishing, San Luis Obispo. Curry, Elliott 1968 Streets and Lanes of Early San Luis Obispo. La Vista 1(1):13–19. San Luis Obispo County Historical Society. Engelhardt, (Father) Zephyrin 1933 Mission San Luis Obispo in the Valley of the Bears. Mission Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, California. Greenwood, Roberta 1978 Obispeño and Purisimeño Chumash. In California, edited by Robert F. Heizer, pp. 520–523. Handbook of North American Indians, vol. 8, William C. Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. History Center of San Luis Obispo County 1905 Photograph from San Luis Obispo Tribune: Bus Terminal, 7 September 1953:A-14. 1926 Sanborn Map of Monterey Street with 1945 updates. On file, History Center of San Luis Obispo County. 5.c Packet Pg. 63 Attachment: c - Historic Resources Evaluation Report (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) 30 Historical Resources Evaluation Report for 1009-1025 Monterey Street Jespersen, Senator Chris N. 1939 History of San Luis Obispo County, State of California. Its People and Its Resources. Harold McLean Meier, United States of America. Kocher, Paul H. 1972 Mission San Luis Obispo de Tolosa, 1772–1972: A Historical Sketch. Blake Printing & Publishing, San Luis Obispo, California. Krieger, Daniel E. 1988 Looking Backward into the Middle Kingdom: San Luis Obispo County. 1st ed. Windsor Publications, Northridge, California. McKeen, Rose 1988 Parade along the Creek: San Luis Obispo Memories of the 1920s through ‘60s. Blake Printery, San Luis Obispo, California. Miller, Henry 1856 Account of a Tour of the California Missions. Book Club of America, San Francisco. Reprinted 1985 in Mission in the Valley of the Bears, compiled and edited by Francis J. Weber, pp. 40–41. Libra Press, Hong Kong. Mitchell, Grace Therese 1930 The Story of Mission San Luis Obispo de Tolosa. Book Club of America, San Francisco. Reprinted 1985 in Mission of the Valley of the Bears, compiled and edited by Francis J. Weber, pp. 165–166. Libra Press, Hong Kong. Monitor, The 1938 Story of the Old Mission. Book Club of America, San Francisco. Reprinted 1985 in Mission of the Valley of the Bears, compiled and edited by Francis J. Weber, pp. 165– 166. Libra Press, Hong Kong. Morlet, Aubrie 2013 Historical Resource Evaluation Report for 1029-1025 Chorro Street, San Luis Obispo, California. Applied Earthworks, Inc., San Luis Obispo, California. National Park Service (NPS) 1998 How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation. Revised. National Register Bulletin 15. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Cultural Resources Division, Washington, D.C. Palmer, Kevin (Lex), Keith Warren, and Barry A. Price 2001 Cultural Resources Inventory for the San Luis Obispo County Administration Building, San Luis Obispo, California. Applied EarthWorks, Inc., Fresno, California. Submitted to Morro Group, Inc., San Luis Obispo, California. 5.c Packet Pg. 64 Attachment: c - Historic Resources Evaluation Report (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) Historical Resources Evaluation Report for 1009-1025 Monterey Street 31 Palóu, Francisco 1926 Historical Memoirs of New California, by Fray Francisco Palóu, O.F.M. 4 vols. Translated into from the Archives of Mexico, edited by Herbert E. Bolton. University of California Press, Berkeley. Paulson, Luther L. 1875 Hand-book and Directory of San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Ventura, Kern, San Bernardino, Los Angeles, & San Diego Counties. Francis & Valentine Commercial Steam Press, San Francisco, California. Sanborn Map Company 1886 Maps of the City of San Luis Obispo (1886, 1888, 1903). On file, Los Angeles Public Library. San Luis Obispo County 1873 Recorded Map Book A-Page 143. Clerk-Recorder Department, San Luis Obispo. California. 1896 Recorded Map Book B-Page 37. Clerk-Recorder Department, San Luis Obispo. California. Time Magazine 1936 Transport: Greyhound’s Litter, 10 August 1936. Retrieved December 15, 2015. Tritenbach, Paul 1989 San Luis Obispo Discoveries. Excellence Press, San Luis Obispo, California. U.S. Census Bureau 1900–1920 U.S. Census Records. Electric document, http://search.ancestry.com, accessed by subscription, 25 June and 4 July 2013. Webb, Edith B. 1952 Indian Life at the Old Missions. W. F. Lewis, Los Angeles. Wrenick, Frank E. 2007 The Streamline Era Greyhound Terminals: The Architecture of W.S. Arrasmith. McFarland, Jefferson North Carolina 5.c Packet Pg. 65 Attachment: c - Historic Resources Evaluation Report (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) 5.c Packet Pg. 66 Attachment: c - Historic Resources Evaluation Report (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) APPENDIX A California Department of Parks and Recreation Inventory Forms 5.c Packet Pg. 67 Attachment: c - Historic Resources Evaluation Report (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) DPR 523A (1/95) *Required information State of California — The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial NRHP Status Code Other Listings Review Code Reviewer Date Page 1 of 3 Resource Name or # 1009-1025 Monterey Street -- The former Laird Garage Building P1. Other Identifier: Former Greyhound Bus Station, San Luis Obispo *P2. Location: a. County: San Luis Obispo Not for Publication Unrestricted b.USGS 7.5′ Quad: San Luis Obispo Date: 2007 T , R ; ¼ of ¼ of Section B.M. c. Address: d.UTM: NAD 83, Zone ; mE / mN e.Other Locational Data: *P3a. Description: The Laird Garage is a one-and-a-half story Mission Revival brick building finished in stucco and roofed in Spanish tile. Part of the commercial streetscape of Monterey Street within the Downtown Historic District, the mid- block building was originally erected in 1910 as a central 1&1/2 story dormered pavilion flanked by two equal garage wings. These areas are now storefronts designed and finished individually so that they appear to be separate buildings. Rear areas facing east on Higuera Street retain early brickwork with arched brick lintels. In 1987 the building was included on the City’s list of Contributing Resources as a part of the Downtown Historic District. *P3b. Resource Attributes: *P4. Resources Present: Building Structure Object Site District Element of District Other: *P5a. Photograph or Drawing: P5b. Description of Photo: *P6. Date Constructed/Age and Sources: Prehistoric Historic Both *P7. Owner and Address: Rossi Enterprises 750 Pismo Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 *P8. Recorded By: Don Faxon Applied EarthWorks, Inc. 811 El Capitan Way, Suite 100 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 *P9. Date Recorded: December 3, 2015 *P10. Survey Type: Intensive Reconnaissance Other Describe: individual building assessment *P11. Report Citation: Faxon, Don, 2015. Historical Resources Evaluation Report for 1009-1025 Monterey Street, San Luis Obispo, California. Applied EarthWorks, Inc., San Luis Obispo. Prepared for Rossi Enterprises, San Luis Obispo. *Attachments: NONE Location Map Sketch Map Continuation Sheet Building, Structure, Archaeological Record District Record Linear Feature Record and Object Record Milling Station Record Rock Art Record Artifact Record Photograph Record Other (list): 5.c Packet Pg. 68 Attachment: c - Historic Resources Evaluation Report (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) State of California — The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #/Trinomial BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD *NRHP Status Code Page 2 of 3 Resource Name or #: 1009-1025 Monterey Street -- The former Laird Garage Building DPR 523B (1/95) *Required Information B1. Historic Name: Laird Garage Building B2. Common Name: former Greyhound Bus Station B3. Original Use: Commercial Vehicle Garage B4. Present Use: Commercial Storefronts - restaurants *B5. Architectural Style: Mission Revival *B6. Construction History (construction date, alterations, and dates of alterations): The subject property bordered the area of earliest development in San Luis Obispo, and initially saw scattered residential and agricultural activity. By 1888 the property was part of the San Luis Obispo Flour Mill complex, which also included the San Luis Obispo City Electric Light Company; however, except for some crude oil tanks that served the electric company and a small building projection off the mill, the front lot of the 1009-1025 Monterey Street parcel remained vacant during the early development of the City. By 1910 the San Luis Garage had been erected on the lot. The building was originally built as a central one-and-a-half story dormered pavilion flanked by two equal garage wings. It appears to have remained much the same for the next three decades (Crabb 2008). By 1940 the Laird Garage briefly occupied the site, until it became the Greyhound Bus Station in 1945. Unlike the pre- war Greyhound Stations for which the company would become famous, San Luis Obispo’s did not incorporate streamlined styling with bands of windows and curved corners. Instead, the city’s Greyhound Station was based upon the existing Mission-style structure, but also incorporated some added Art Deco-influenced vertical elements in its smoothed-over styling, central dormered pavilion with large glass storefront waiting room window, and modern vertical signage. Only those few changes tied the building to the Greyhound Bus Company. The Greyhound terminal remained active from 1945 until 1965, and at some point had aspects of its Mission detailing recreated even while its storefronts were being modified in the 1980s to accommodate new businesses. The original garage wings are now storefronts designed and finished individually in a way that suggests they are separate buildings. The original brick with stucco finish and Spanish tile roof remain but have been refinished. Areas on the rear-facing east façade near Higuera Street retain early brickwork with arched brick lintels. The façade at 1009 Monterey has been modified significantly. The bus entrance has been filled in to accommodate a smaller pedestrian entry, and an area at street level has been filled with wood and the size and area of windows enlarged horizontally. It also appears that a large header beam that supports all of the structure above this storefront is slightly lower – perhaps one foot --- than the original bus opening and window heights, when compared with their heights in historic photos, a substantial modification not easily restored. At 1025 Monterey, façade openings have been added or substantially enlarged both vertically and horizontally, one window no longer exists, and another retains only a portion of its original opening. Large portions of the storefront area are mostly gone. Above, the roof and second floor office area dormer (part of the central pavilion of the bus station) seem to retain their general appearance, general shape, and parapet profile, but the paired windows of the dormer have been removed and partially infilled. *B7. Moved?: No Yes Unknown Date: Original Location: *B8. Related Features: all features are described above. B9. a. Architect: unknown b. Builder: unknown *B10. Significance: Theme: Transportation Area: Period of Significance: 1870 - 1930 Property Type: Commercial Garage/Bus Terminal Applicable Criteria: As the former Laird Garage and Greyhound Bus Station, the building at 1009-1025 Monterey Street is associated with the historic themes of transportation and bus stations. When the building served its original functions it would have represented those themes well; however, it no longer conveys its association with those themes because of substantial modifications. The building is not associated with the lives of persons important in history or events that made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of history or as a prime illustration of predominant patterns of history that would fit within the defined Period of Significance for the Downtown Historic District (1870-1930). Thus, the building is not eligible for the California Register of Historical Resources under Criteria 1 or 2 or Historic Criterion B of the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance. 5.c Packet Pg. 69 Attachment: c - Historic Resources Evaluation Report (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) State of California — The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #/Trinomial BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD *NRHP Status Code Page 3 of 3 Resource Name or #: 1009-1025 Monterey Street -- The former Laird Garage Building DPR 523B (1/95) *Required Information It is clear from the developmental history of the property that the Laird Garage Building has undergone several substantial remodeling episodes in addition to more destructive seismic structural additions. Although traces of the building’s original style remain or may have been reconstructed in the past as an attempt to return some of its original Mission Revival detailing, the building suffers from modifications to both its structural system and commercial storefronts. As a result of the alterations to the storefronts and structure, the building at 1009-1025 Monterey Street does not embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represent the work of a master, or possess high artistic values, and thus is not significant under California Register Criterion 3 or Architectural Criterion A of the Historic Preservation Ordinance. Other than the basic storefront locations, the building only remotely conveys the period of significance through its surviving Spanish tile roofline and second floor dormer. B11. Additional Resource Attributes (list attributes and codes): none *B12. References: Crabb, Guy, 2008. San Luis Obispo - 100 Years of of Business. Monterey Street. Guy Crabb Publishing, San Luis Obispo. B13. Remarks: none *B14. Evaluator: Don Faxon Applied EarthWorks, Inc. 811 El Capitan Way, Suite 100 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Date of Evaluation: December 2015 This space reserved for official comments. Sketch Map 5.c Packet Pg. 70 Attachment: c - Historic Resources Evaluation Report (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) 11 property may be added to the Inventory of Historic Resources through CHC review and Council approval as specified herein. B. Cultural Resources on public property. Cultural and historic features on public property, such as Bishop’s Peak granite walls and curbing, sidewalk embossing, ornamental manhole covers and hitching posts, may be added to the Inventory of Historic Resources through CHC review and Council approval as specified herein. C. Sign. A sign which contributes to the unique architectural or historic character of a building, site or historic district may be designated as a historic sign. Signs that meet at least one of the following criteria may be designated historic: (1)The sign is exemplary of technology, craftsmanship or design of the period when it was constructed, uses historic sign materials and means of illumination, and is not significantly altered from its historic period. Historic sign materials shall include metal or wood facings, or paint directly on the façade of a building. Historic means of illumination shall include incandescent light fixtures or neon tubing on the exterior of the sign. If the sign has been altered, it must be restorable to its historic function and appearance. (2)The sign is well integrated with the site and/or architecture of the building. (3)A sign not meeting either criterion may be considered for inclusion in the inventory if it demonstrates extraordinary aesthetic quality, creativity, or innovation. 14.01.060 Listing Procedures for Historic Resources A. Application for historic listing. The property owner may request that a resource to be added to the Master or Contributing List of Historic resources by submitting a completed application to the Community Development Department (“Department”), accompanied by all available information documenting the historic significance and architectural character of the resource. The CHC, ARC, Planning Commission may also recommend, or City Council may directly request, the addition of a resource to the Master or Contributing List of Historic Resources. B. Review process. The CHC shall review all applications for historic listing, whether initiated by the City or a property owner, to determine if a property proposed for listing meets eligibility criteria for historic listing. The CHC will review the eligibility criteria for a proposed listing at a noticed public hearing. The Director shall provide notification to the property owner and public, as required by City standards. At the public hearing, or in no case more than 60 days from the hearing date, the CHC shall forward a recommendation on the application to the City Council. The City Council will take an action on the application to add or not add the resource to the Master or Contributing List of Historic Resources. The decision of the City Council is final. C. Removal from historic listing. It is the general intention of the City not to remove a property from historic listing. Council may, however, rezone a property to remove Historic Overlay 5.d Packet Pg. 71 Attachment: d - Historic Preservation Ordinance excerpt (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) 12 Zoning, or remove the property from historic listing if the structure on the property no longer meets eligibility criteria for listing, following the process for listing set forth herein. 14.01.070. Evaluation Criteria for Historic Resource Listing When determining if a property should be designated as a listed Historic or Cultural Resource, the CHC and City Council shall consider this ordinance and State Historic Preservation Office (“SHPO”) standards. In order to be eligible for designation, the resource shall exhibit a high level of historic integrity, be at least fifty (50) years old (less than 50 if it can be demonstrated that enough time has passed to understand its historical importance) and satisfy at least one of the following criteria: A. Architectural Criteria: Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic values. (1) Style: Describes the form of a building, such as size, structural shape and details within that form (e.g. arrangement of windows and doors, ornamentation, etc.). Building style will be evaluated as a measure of: a. The relative purity of a traditional style; b. Rarity of existence at any time in the locale; and/or current rarity although the structure reflects a once popular style; c. Traditional, vernacular and/or eclectic influences that represent a particular social milieu and period of the community; and/or the uniqueness of hybrid styles and how these styles are put together. (2) Design: Describes the architectural concept of a structure and the quality of artistic merit and craftsmanship of the individual parts. Reflects how well a particular style or combination of styles are expressed through compatibility and detailing of elements. Also, suggests degree to which the designer (e.g., carpenter-builder) accurately interpreted and conveyed the style(s). Building design will be evaluated as a measure of: a. Notable attractiveness with aesthetic appeal because of its artistic merit, details and craftsmanship (even if not necessarily unique); b. An expression of interesting details and eclecticism among carpenter-builders, although the craftsmanship and artistic quality may not be superior. (3) Architect: Describes the professional (an individual or firm) directly responsible for the building design and plans of the structure. The architect will be evaluated as a reference to: 5.d Packet Pg. 72 Attachment: d - Historic Preservation Ordinance excerpt (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) 13 a. A notable architect (e.g., Wright, Morgan), including architects who made significant contributions to the state or region, or an architect whose work influenced development of the city, state or nation. b. An architect who, in terms of craftsmanship, made significant contributions to San Luis Obispo (e.g., Abrahams who, according to local sources, designed the house at 810 Osos - Frank Avila's father's home - built between 1927 – 30). B. Historic Criteria (1) History – Person: Associated with the lives of persons important to local, California, or national history. Historic person will be evaluated as a measure of the degree to which a person or group was: a. Significant to the community as a public leader (e.g., mayor, congress member, etc.) or for his or her fame and outstanding recognition - locally, regionally, or nationally. b. Significant to the community as a public servant or person who made early, unique, or outstanding contributions to the community, important local affairs or institutions (e.g., council members, educators, medical professionals, clergymen, railroad officials). (2) History – Event: Associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history or the cultural heritage of California or the United States. Historic event will be evaluated as a measure of: (i) A landmark, famous, or first-of-its-kind event for the city - regardless of whether the impact of the event spread beyond the city. (ii) A relatively unique, important or interesting contribution to the city (e.g., the Ah Louis Store as the center for Chinese-American cultural activities in early San Luis Obispo history). (3) History-Context: Associated with and also a prime illustration of predominant patterns of political, social, economic, cultural, medical, educational, governmental, military, industrial, or religious history. Historic context will be evaluated as a measure of the degree to which it reflects: a. Early, first, or major patterns of local history, regardless of whether the historic effects go beyond the city level, that are intimately connected with the building (e.g., County Museum). b. Secondary patterns of local history, but closely associated with the building (e.g., Park Hotel). 5.d Packet Pg. 73 Attachment: d - Historic Preservation Ordinance excerpt (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) 14 C. Integrity: Authenticity of an historical resource’s physical identity evidenced by the survival of characteristics that existed during the resource’s period of significance. Integrity will be evaluated by a measure of: (1) Whether or not a structure occupies its original site and/or whether or not the original foundation has been changed, if known. (2) The degree to which the structure has maintained enough of its historic character or appearance to be recognizable as an historic resource and to convey the reason(s) for its significance. (3) The degree to which the resource has retained its design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association. 14.01.080 Historic District Designation, Purpose and Application A. Historic (H) District designation. All properties within historic districts shall be designated by an “H” zoning. Properties zoned “H” shall be subject to the provisions and standards as provided in Ordinance 17.54 (Zoning) of the Municipal Code. B. Purposes of Historic Districts. The purposes of historic districts and H zone designation are to: (1) Implement cultural resource preservation policies of the General Plan, the preservation provisions of adopted area plans, the Historic Preservation and Archaeological Resource Preservation Program Guidelines, and (2) Identify and preserve definable, unified geographical entities that possess a significant concentration, linkage, or continuity of sites, buildings, structures, or objects united historically or aesthetically by plan or physical development; (3) Implement historic preservation provisions of adopted area and neighborhood improvement plans; (4) Enhance and preserve the setting of historic resources so that surrounding land uses and structures do not detract from the historic or architectural integrity of designated historic resources and districts; and (5) Promote the public understanding and appreciation of historic resources. C. Eligibility for incentives. Properties zoned as Historic Preservation (H) shall be eligible for preservation incentive and benefit programs as established herein, in the Guidelines and other local, state and federal programs. 5.d Packet Pg. 74 Attachment: d - Historic Preservation Ordinance excerpt (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) Draft CHC Minutes 01-25-16 Page 3 facilities. Mr. Rademaker and Ms. Rudd narrated a PowerPoint presentation, noting that this project is in the second phase; emphasized that this phase is conceptual, pending design development phase for maps, orientation, and content. Mr. Rademaker spoke on the influence of the current concepts and characteristics of kiosks from Russel Square, London and New York, New York, highlighting content presented in the different kiosks: pedestrian crossings, historical landmarks, and other pedestrian map information. Ms. Rudd explained that the maps may include additional information such as website links to historical maps and visitor information. Mr. Rademaker presented photos of the mock up kiosks in their anticipated locations respectively and spoke on the anticipated design for the City wayfinding Kiosk, noting that the style of the kiosk has been developed to reflect a similar style to the City Hall building. During the course of discussion, individual members of the committee concurred that the following recommendations should be considered: change to color contrast, refine locations of signs, and review the scale and height of the kiosks. RECOMMENDATION: Recommend the ARC approve the project based on findings and subject to conditions. ACTION: On a motion by Committee Member Papp, seconded by Chair Hill, to forward a resolution recommending approval to the Architectural Review Commission with the following revisions: (7:0) 1. Provide better color contrast between the background sign color and the map on the Downtown Orientation Map Kiosks. 2. Refine the locations of signs considering potential for sign clutter with existing signage and various sign types included in the Wayfinding Sign Program. 3. Include a context map along with the detailed map on the Downtown Orientation Map Kiosks. 4. Review the scale/height of Downtown Orientation Map Kiosks for compatibility in the Downtown. 5. Provide alternative illumination for the signs (internally illuminated cabinet signs not allowed in downtown) 6. Review cohesiveness of the different style of signage in front of City Hall. 2. 1009 Monterey Street. HIST-2592-2016; Historic Significance Determination for a Contributing List property at 1009 Monterey Street, C-D-H zone, Rossi/King Organization, applicant. (Rachel Cohen). Contract Planner Shawna Scott narrated a PowerPoint presentation and reviewed the contents of the staff report, highlighting that the building’s original style has undergone DRAFT5.e Packet Pg. 75 Attachment: e - Draft CHC Minutes (01-25-2016) (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) Draft CHC Minutes 01-25-16 Page 4 several modifications and the current structure does not retain the original historic character and is not historically significant. PUBLIC COMMENTS Applicant Rob Rossi provided a brief background of the building, presented a timeline of events, and described the current building to be in poor condition, echoing his previous comments at the meeting held on December 7, 2015. There being no others desiring to speak, Chair Hill closed the public hearing. COMMITTEE COMMENTS During the course of discussion the individual members of the Committee discussed the lack of support for the building qualifying for the City’s list of historic resources. The Committee encouraged the applicant to reflect the history of the building by incorporating graphics or artwork in the new proposed project. RECOMMENDATION: Recommend the City Council adopt a resolution removing 1009 Monterey Street from the City’s List of Contributing Historic Resources. ACTION: On a motion by Committee Member Papp, seconded by Committee Member Baer, to adopt the resolution recommending the Council to remove the property from the Contributing List of Historic Resources (7:0). 3. 2223 Monterey Street. ARCH-2363-2015; Review of a hotel project with 52 rooms and a recreational vehicle park with 24 RV hookups on the Master List Historic Motel Inn property; C-T-S & C-O-S zone; Motel Inn, L.P., applicant. (Marcus Carloni). Associate Planner Carloni narrated a PowerPoint presentation and reviewed the contents of the staff report, explaining the project in terms of its consistency with the Historic Preservation Guidelines and Secretary of Interior Standards. PUBLIC COMMENTS Applicant Rob Rossi provided a brief background of the property, presented a timeline of events, and described the project site. Mr. Rossi explained that the previously approved restaurant building includes portions of the original Historic Motel Inn and noted that it is on the city’s Master List of Historic Resources. There being no others desiring to speak, Chair Hill closed the public hearing. COMMITTEE COMMENTS Chair Hill inquired about the property being subject to the Mills Act. DRAFT5.e Packet Pg. 76 Attachment: e - Draft CHC Minutes (01-25-2016) (1264 : Determination of Historic Significance of 1009 Monterey) Meeting Date: 3/1/2016 FROM: Derek Johnson, Assistant City Manager Prepared By: Robert A. Hill, Natural Resources Manager SUBJECT: GRANT FUNDING FOR THE OCTAGON BARN CENTER RECOMMENDATION Approve grant funding of $206,000 for construction of facilities at the Octagon Barn Center and adopt a resolution (Attachment A) authorizing the Mayor to execute the Grant Agreement with The Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo County. Background City Council received a formal request for funding in the amount of $206,000 towards implementation of The Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo County’s Octagon Barn Center (“OBC”) project (Attachment B). At its regularly scheduled meeting on June 23, 2015, the City Council adopted the 2015-17 Financial Plan Capital Improvement Plan that included the requested funding for the OBC (Attachment C). The Octagon Barn, listed in the National Register of Historic Places, will serve a broad spectrum of citizens interested in historic preservation, agricultural education, open space protection and restoration, and passive recreational trail use, while also serving as a vital community gathering place. The OBC will be a trailhead location for the Bob Jones City-to-Sea Trail, while also hosting community and special events (Attachments D and E). Discussion The City’s funds will be used for two key components of the project: the “Barn Commons Open Space & Utility Shed” that includes landscaping, amphitheater, seating, shelter, restroom facilities building, trash/recycling, and display panels; and, the “Multi-Modal Trail Start Amenities & Calf Barn” that includes trailhead designation, bike racks, water station, picnic area, seating, restroom structure, informational kiosk, and trash/recycling. A Grant Agreement (Attachment F) has been prepared to facilitate the disbursement of the funds, if approved, which will ensure that the funds are only expended on the amenities described above. Funds would be disbursed on a reimbursement basis upon submittal of progress invoices for work performed. No more than 10% of the funds may be used for soft costs (architecture and engineering expenses) and all funds must be spent and construction must be completed within two years. The City enjoys a long-standing relationship with The Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo County. The City and the Conservancy have partnered on a variety of initiatives over the past 20 6 Packet Pg. 77 years, including substantial financial accommodations that have benefitted projects completed by both organizations. CONCURRENCES This Council Agenda Report was reviewed the Agenda Review Team, consisting of City Administration, City Attorney’s Office, and Finance Director. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The County of San Luis Obispo is lead agency for the Bob Jones City-to-Sea Bike Trail project. The Board of Supervisors certified the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the project on February 24, 2015. The FEIR included the development of the OBC as a staging area and trailhead in its project description. The City of San Luis Obispo does not have discretionary review authority for the project. FISCAL IMPACT If approved, funding in the amount of $206,000 is appropriated in the 2015-17 Financial Plan Capital Improvement Plan. The Octagon Barn Center project was identified by the Citizen’s Revenue Enhancement Oversight Commission (REOC) as a Measure G expenditure. City Administration staff will oversee the grant contract to ensure that all funds are properly accounted for and that progress is satisfactory and timely. ALTERNATIVES The City Council could: 1. Approve grant funding of a different amount than was programmed in the 2015-17 Financial Plan Capital Improvement Plan for the Octagon Barn Center project. 2. Deny grant funding for the Octagon Barn Center project. 3. Request changes to the terms and conditions of the Grant Agreement. 4. Continue the item with specific direction if more information or discussion time is required before taking action. Attachments: a - Resolution b - OBC Proposal for City of SLO 4-28-15 c - OBC CIP 2015-17 d - OBC Renderings e - OBC History f - Draft Grant Agreement 6 Packet Pg. 78 RESOLUTION NO. ________ (2016 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A GRANT AGREEMENT WITH THE LAND CONSERVANCY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY WHEREAS, The Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo County (“LCSLO”) has requested that the City contribute to its Octagon Barn Center project, located at 4444 Octagon Way, San Luis Obispo, by providing financial support towards construction of additional facilities and amenities at this location, and WHEREAS, said services will be available to residents of the City of San Luis Obispo, thereby serving both a public and municipal purpose, and WHEREAS, addressing Open Space Preservation and Multi-Modal Transportation are among the City’s 2015-17 Major City Goals, and WHEREAS, the Octagon Barn Center will serve a broad spectrum of citizens interested in historic preservation, agricultural education, open space protection and restoration, and passive recreational trail use, while also serving as a vital community gathering place. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: Section 1: Findings. The City Council hereby finds and declares the City’s financial support of the Octagon Barn Center serves the public interest and provides public benefits to the citizens of San Luis Obispo by facilitating the preservation and public access to a substantial and significant historic, environmental, and recreational resource, which will expand the nearby recreational opportunities available to City residents, relieve burdens on existing City facilities, and contribute to a vibrant local economy that benefits the City. Section 2: Action. The City Council hereby appropriates $206,000, approves the Grant Agreement and authorizes the Mayor to sign the Grant Agreement, an official copy of which shall be kept on record with the City Clerk, based on the following findings: The Grant Agreement and Octagon Barn Center project are consistent with General Plan policies and programs, including: a) Conservation and Open Space Element Policy 3.3.1 that states “Significant historic and architectural resources should be identified, preserved and rehabilitated.” b) Conservation and Open Space Element Program 3.6.7 that states “The City will partner with agencies, non-profit organizations and citizens groups to help identify, preserve, rehabilitate and maintain cultural resources.” c) Circulation Element Policy 4.1.1 that states “The City shall expand the bicycle network and provide end-of-trip facilities to encourage bicycle use and to make bicycling safe, convenient and enjoyable.” Section 3: Environmental Review. The Grant Agreement and Octagon Barn Center project are consistent with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. The 6.a Packet Pg. 79 Attachment: a - Resolution (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant Agreement) Resolution No. _____ (2016 Series) Page 2 R ______ County of San Luis Obispo is lead agency for the Bob Jones City-to-Sea Bike Trail project. The Board of Supervisors certified the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the project on February 24, 2015. The FEIR included the development of the OBC as a staging area and trailhead in its project description and adequately evaluated and addressed potential environmental impacts associated with the project. The City of San Luis Obispo does not have any discretionary review authority for the Project. Upon motion of _______________________, seconded by___________________________, and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was adopted this 1st day of March, 2016. ____________________________________ Mayor Jan Marx ATTEST: ____________________________________ Jon Ansolabehere Interim City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________________________ J. Christine Dietrick City Attorney IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, this ______ day of ______________, _________. ______________________________ Jon Ansolabehere Interim City Clerk 6.a Packet Pg. 80 Attachment: a - Resolution (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant Agreement) Raising A Barn, Raising a Community Octagon Barn Center City of San Luis Obispo Partnership Proposal April 2015 6.b Packet Pg. 81 Attachment: b - OBC Proposal for City of SLO 4-28-15 (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant After decades of effort along San Luis Creek: The Land Conservancy controls key pieces along the next phase in developing the Bob Jones Pathway. 4/28/2015 © Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo 2 The Octagon Barn Center is the new start of the Bob Jones Trail 6.b Packet Pg. 82 Attachment: b - OBC Proposal for City of SLO 4-28-15 (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant © Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo 3 Buckley Road Extension Geographic Orientation (North to Left) Avila Ranch City of SLO Trail Routes Existing & Preferred Future County Bob Jones City-to-Sea Trail Route Octagon Barn Center Caltrans Maintenance Yard 6.b Packet Pg. 83 Attachment: b - OBC Proposal for City of SLO 4-28-15 (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant The Octagon Barn Center Start of the Bob Jones City- to-Sea Trail (Multi-modal trailhead designation & amenities) Octagon Barn (Historic structure & event space for up to 200; 5000 sq. ft.) “Barn Commons” Open Space with “The Shed” Milking Parlor (Education & meeting space for 100) Wetland Open Space Parking Area (112 spaces) Calf Barn & Trail Start: 2 restrooms; shelter; bike racks; water station; picnic area; kiosk 1997 2009 ¼ mi. walking path The Shed: 4 restrooms; windscreen; shelter Buckley Road access 6.b Packet Pg. 84 Attachment: b - OBC Proposal for City of SLO 4-28-15 (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant Progress and Partnerships Hayashi; Caltrans; County Parks 2008 – Octagon Barn restoration complete; Land Conservancy has pending lease for 2 acres. Land Conservancy leases 4 acres from Caltrans (initiated March 28, 2008 in a letter from Aileen Loe). 5 year lease begins in July 2009. Land Conservancy approaches County Parks about joining together at the Barn for the Bob Jones Pathway Staging Area. MOU to work together is approved by Board of Supervisors, August 2008. 2010 – Subdivision map for the Hayashi parcel and 98 year lease is recorded; water provided to the site. September 25, 2010. 2012 – Conditional Use Permit accepted by Planning Commission. Estimated sunk cost in project (actual, volunteer, and pro bono effort) is now $1M. May 12, 2012. 2013 – SLOCOG allocates $461K for left hand turn lane on South Higuera. December 4, 2013 Octagon Barn joins the National Registry of Historic Places. November 12, 2013. Land Conservancy awarded grant from CNRA for completion of the water system and site landscaping. October 17, 2013 2014 – Operating Agreement approved by Parks Commission and Board of Supervisors. June 3, 2014 Funding secured to make sure sufficient funds were available for turn land/parking lot. 4/28/2015 © Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo 5 6.b Packet Pg. 85 Attachment: b - OBC Proposal for City of SLO 4-28-15 (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant Bob Jones City-to-Sea Multi-modal Trailhead Detail 4/28/2015 © Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo 6 6.b Packet Pg. 86 Attachment: b - OBC Proposal for City of SLO 4-28-15 (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant The Commons Open Space Shelter, Restrooms, Lawn, Amphitheater Key Shed Features: •Four restrooms stalls •Backdrop and windscreen for outdoor open space •Interior storage and small gathering space •Sheltered outdoor space (wind/rain); Display/info area Key Commons Features: •Multi-use open space with views of conservation lands •Outdoor seating and gathering place for 200 •Natural amphitheatre setting for classrooms, large groups, etc. 4/28/2015 © Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo 7 Shed Concept Drawing Commons Open Space Octagon Barn Center 6.b Packet Pg. 87 Attachment: b - OBC Proposal for City of SLO 4-28-15 (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant 4/28/2015 © Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo 8 Project Budget Project Components Cost Estimate In-Kind & Direct Investment (before present time) $1,000,000 Barn Parcel (lease) $0 Land for parking (lease) $0 Site Grading & Parking Lot Construction (permeable paving, bike path, permits, etc.) $1,800,000 Turn Lane Engineering & Construction $535,000 Milking Parlor Rennovation (construction, electrical, plumbing, permits, occupancy requirements, etc.) $400,000 Barn Upgrades for Occupancy & Events (fire protection, electrical connection, concrete floor, interior furnishings, safety measures, etc.) $180,000 Toilets & Plumbing (6 stalls) $150,000 Barn Commons Open Space & Utility Shed (landscaping, amphitheater, seating, shelter, restroom facilities building, trash/recycling, display, etc.) $158,000 Start-up Costs & Support Funding $150,000 Pump House & Water Tanks $143,000 Landscaping & Plant Screening (native plants, pathways, walking trail, lighting, etc. $92,000 Multi-modal Trail Start Amenities & Calf Barn (trailhead designation, bike racks, water station, picnic area, seating, restroom structure, info kiosk, trash/recycling, etc. $48,000 Permits, Fees, Insurance, Contingency $50,000 Total Cost $4,706,000 6.b Packet Pg. 88 Attachment: b - OBC Proposal for City of SLO 4-28-15 (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant 4/28/2015 © Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo 9 Anticipated Funding Sources Funding Source Income Estimate % of Total San Luis Obispo County & SLOCOG $2,485,000 53% The Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo County & Previous Major Funding Partners $1,000,000 21% Private Donor Charitable Gifts $435,000 9% EEMP Grant, State of CA Natural Resources $235,000 5% City of San Luis Obispo $206,000 4% Local Foundation (Pledge) $135,000 3% Foundations & Grants $120,000 3% Local Business Contributions $50,000 1% Private Contribution (Pledge) $40,000 1% Total Cost $4,706,000 100% 6.b Packet Pg. 89 Attachment: b - OBC Proposal for City of SLO 4-28-15 (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant City of San Luis Obispo Partnership Request 4/28/2015 © Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo 10 •Establish formal commitment of support from the City of San Luis Obispo •Enter into a MOU to memorialize the relationship between the City of San Luis Obispo and the Octagon Barn Center •Formalize partnership to establish working relationship, framework and uniform goals •Octagon Barn Center will likely be annexed into the City in the future •Assist City in meeting current Major City Goals via Octagon Barn Center Opening 2016 •Gateway facility serving residents & visitors as community open space •Multi-modal transportation hub of the Bob Jones City-to-Sea Trail and other SLO City bike paths •Funds will directly support expanding open space around the City and providing visitor-serving amenities at a new multi-modal transportation trailhead & trail hub •Inclusion of interpretive displays, info kiosk, and way-finding signage in coordination with City staff •Return on investment •Reasonable upfront investment of $206K (4% of total project cost) from 2015-2017 City Budget will leverage $4.5M from other sources •City will have no long-term liability or maintenance costs for a major amenity serving its residents and visitors •Opportunity for City naming rights and public acknowledgment on-site 6.b Packet Pg. 90 Attachment: b - OBC Proposal for City of SLO 4-28-15 (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant Project Plan & Timeline •Keep County Parks on track to get grading done within 2015 (winter/spring season) •Track work by Wallace Group on behalf of County Parks •Secure commitment from County Parks for bathroom installation •LC to develop water infrastructure per our EEMP grant [“Element 1”] (mid- 2015) •Permit issued in February 2015 •Complete Small Water Company agreement and start service (mid-2015) •Raise sufficient funds to inaugurate the Octagon Barn Center (2015-2016) •Dependent on County grading and turn lane: •Landscape in Winter, per EEMP grant [“Element II”]. •Complete fire safety (sprinklers) and access amenities for Barn. •Construct Calf Barn Restroom Building and Barn Commons Open Space (mid- 2016) •Inaugurate Octagon Barn Center (open for parking & occupancy) by late-2016 4/28/2015 © Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo 11 6.b Packet Pg. 91 Attachment: b - OBC Proposal for City of SLO 4-28-15 (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant 4/28/2015 © Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo 12 6.b Packet Pg. 92 Attachment: b - OBC Proposal for City of SLO 4-28-15 (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant /(,685(&8/785$/ 62&,$/6(59,&(62&7$*21%$51)$&,/,7<Project Description&RQWULEXWHWRWKH2FWDJRQ%DUQSURMHFWLQ…0DLQWHQDQFH5HSODFHPHQW71HZSURMHFW…)OHHW5HSODFHPHQW…1HZ)OHHW5HTXHVW70HDVXUH*3ULRULW\3DUNVDQG5HFUHDWLRQ6HQLRU3URJUDPVDQG)DFLOLWLHVNeed and Urgency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³%DUQ&RPPRQV´DUHDLVH[SHFWHGWRKDYHDVPDOODPSKLWKHDWHUZLWKVHDWLQJDQGDVKHOWHUSURYLGLQJDUHVRXUFHWRVXSSRUWFRPPXQLW\HYHQWVDQGDFWLYLWLHVReadiness to Build(N/A because County is lead agency)… 6WXG\FRPSOHWHRU7QD… (TXLSPHQWSXUFKDVHGRU7QD… 3URSHUW\RZQHGRUSURSHUW\DJUHHPHQWLQSODFH7QD…(QYLURQPHQWDODSSURYDODQGSHUPLWVFRPSOHWHRU7QD… 6SHFLILFDWLRQVRUFRQVWUXFWLRQGRFXPHQWVFRPSOHWH7QDEnvironmental Review and Permits Required (N/A because County is lead agency)… (QYLURQPHQWDO5HYLHZ7QD…%XLOGLQJ3HUPLW7QD…:DWHUZD\3HUPLWV )LVK *DPH:DWHU4XDOLW\$UP\&RUSV 7QD… 5DLOURDG7QD…2WKHU(QFURDFKPHQW3HUPLW±3XEOLF:RUNV'HSDUWPHQW7QD6.c Packet Pg. 93 Attachment: c - OBC CIP 2015-17 (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant Agreement) /(,685(&8/785$/ 62&,$/6(59,&(62&7$*21%$51)$&,/,7<Operating Program Number and Title:±&XOWXUDO$FWLYLWLHVProject Phasing and Funding Sources„1HZ6SHFLILFDWLRQ1RInitial Project Costs by Phase%XGJHWWR'DWH      7RWDO6WXG\'HVLJQ&RQVWUXFWLRQ  &RQVWUXFWLRQ0DQDJHPHQWTotal $0 $206,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $206,000Detail of ongoing costs and alternatives to ongoing costs including return on investment information:7KHRQHWLPHFRVWRIZLOOEHHQFXPEHUHGLQIRUSURMHFWH[SHQGLWXUHVWKDWPD\RFFXURYHUDORQJHUSHULRGRIWLPHWREHGHWHUPLQHGWKURXJKWKHGHYHORSPHQWRIWKHSDUWQHUVKLSDJUHHPHQWDQGDVVRFLDWHGPLOHVWRQHV 7KHSURMHFWZLOOUHVXOWLQDPLQRUH[SDQVLRQRIWKH&LW\¶V&XOWXUDO$FWLYLWLHV3URJUDPZKLFKDOUHDG\RYHUVHHVDJUHHPHQWVZLWKWKH&LW\)DUP5DLOURDG0XVHXP&KLOGUHQ¶V0XVHXP/LWWOH7KHDWUH0XVHXPRI$UWDQG+HULWDJH6RFLHW\Anticipated Facility Life Span:\HDUV%XGJHWWR'DWH    7RWDO*HQHUDO)XQG  Total $0 $206,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $206,000Project Funding by SourceReduced / Enhanced Project Alternatives…$OWHUQDWHSURMHFWLVIHDVLEOHRUDGYDQWDJHRXV± &RVWRIDOWHUQDWLYHSURMHFW…3URMHFWFDQEHSKDVHG±1XPEHURI\HDUVIRUSKDVLQJ6.c Packet Pg. 94 Attachment: c - OBC CIP 2015-17 (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant Agreement) /(,685(&8/785$/ 62&,$/6(59,&(62&7$*21%$51)$&,/,7<Project Team Assignment Program Estimated Hours3URMHFW3URSRQHQW $GPLQLVWUDWLRQ 3URMHFW6XSSRUW 7RXULVP 3URMHFW6XSSRUW 1DWXUDO5HVRXUFHV 3URMHFW6XSSRUW 7UDQVSRUWDWLRQ Location Map6.c Packet Pg. 95 Attachment: c - OBC CIP 2015-17 (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant Agreement) 6.d Packet Pg. 96 Attachment: d - OBC Renderings (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant Agreement) 6.d Packet Pg. 97 Attachment: d - OBC Renderings (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant Agreement) 6.d Packet Pg. 98 Attachment: d - OBC Renderings (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant Agreement) 6.d Packet Pg. 99 Attachment: d - OBC Renderings (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant Agreement) 6.d Packet Pg. 100 Attachment: d - OBC Renderings (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant Agreement) 6.d Packet Pg. 101 Attachment: d - OBC Renderings (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant Agreement) 6.d Packet Pg. 102 Attachment: d - OBC Renderings (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant Agreement) 6.d Packet Pg. 103 Attachment: d - OBC Renderings (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant Agreement) History The PereiraOctagon Barn A restoration project of The Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo County. 6.e Packet Pg. 104 Attachment: e - OBC History (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant Agreement) Page2 The Pereira Octagon Barn, known to longtime locals as “the Round Barn,” is a former dairy barn built in 1906 on land which was originally a Mexican-era land grant known as the Ranchita de Santa Fe. It is located just south of the San Luis Obispo city limits on South Higuera Street. In Spanish and Mexican times, this was the path of the Camino Real, the original route linking the missions established by the Spanish. The Pereira Octagon Barn is the only octagonal barn in Southern California. It is also the only barn in the county with a fully documented history and easily viewable from our most trafficked roads. Its site and surroundings are largely undeveloped and evoke the earlier rural life of the area. It has been painstakingly restored over a period of some fifteen years. It will be available to the general public for tours, talks, exhibits, and special events. In its new incarnation, the barn is one of the most important visual symbols of the vital role played by agriculture in shaping San Luis Obispo County. The Barn and Its Setting Early Dairying in San Luis Obispo County The Very Modern Mr. Fowler The creator and popularizer of the eight-sided design was the charismatic and very persuasive Orson Squires Fowler. By the mid-19th century, the impassioned Mr. Fowler had popularized the Victorian “science” of phrenology (the effort to determine character traits by measuring the contours of the human head) and had established a national business publishing self-help books, health treatises, and sometimes-controversial marital advice. Then he lit on the concept of an octagonal building as the most efficient, most desirable, most modern of designs. He published his ideas in 1848 and sparked a national fad for octagonal houses. The development of octagonal barns was not far behind. Although Fowler left the actual design of different octagon barns to the decisions of local builders, by 1900 national farm-supply companies and merchandising giants such as Sears were furnishing patterns and even pre-fab kits of lumber for polygonal and “true round” barns. Octagon Barn as a Manifestation of Pressures to Modernize Dairying in our area goes back to the 1860s, when cheap land, a suitable climate, and access to the San Francisco market led brothers Edgar and George Steele to proclaim it “cow heaven.” They established dairies in the Edna Valley, and others soon followed their lead, with dairy farms springing up in the In the later years of the 19th century, there was a growing awareness in the county that modernization would be essential to the continued success of local dairies. This led to efforts at herd improvement, mechanization, and irrigation, as well as to the establishment of a dairy science program in Cal Poly’s earliest curriculum. The improvement of barn design was also part of this trend to modernization. This trend made popular what were called “round barns.” These barns could be polygonal in design, or “true round.” The polygonal barns included structures with six, eight, nine, ten, twelve, sixteen, or even twenty sides. “ Out there at the Round Barn, when I’d deliver things, there was a sort of glass cup, shaped kind of like a beer mug, hanging on a nail, and they’d tell me to take the cup and dip up some cream with it. So I did, and sure enough, that’s so good, you get hooked on it!” –Charles Murray The circular plan of these barns was seen as a labor-saving arrangement at a time when mechanization was still mostly on the horizon. coastal valleys and, later, inland in the North County. Many immigrants found their way to this “cow heaven” and took entry- level jobs as milkers, aspiring to work their way up to leasing a piece of land and a small herd of cows and eventually to owning their own dairies. The Ticinese from Italian- speaking Switzerland and the Portuguese from the Azore Islands were the two ethnic groups most important in this migration. 6.e Packet Pg. 105 Attachment: e - OBC History (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant Agreement) Page3 Construction Details This one-story, eight-sided barn measures 78 feet across and encloses approximately 5,000 square feet of interior space. It is 45 feet tall, including a 10-feet- tall, louvered, octagonal cupola which provides ventilation and natural light. The walls are rough-sawn, irregular-width redwood boards, painted white. Much of this wood is original; some has been salvaged from sources of a similar age--most notably, from a dismantled, century-old barn in nearby Guadalupe. The barn has been re-roofed with redwood shingles obtained from “sinker logs” from British Columbia. This use of salvaged, old-growth redwood was an ecologically acceptable solution to the challenge of finding suitable roofing material for the restoration. The shingles were custom-sawn and cut to 6” x 36” to replicate the originals. This structure has proven itself for over 100 years, withstanding the strong winds from the nearby Los Osos Valley and an occasional earthquake. The Pereira Octagon Barn as a Local Manifestation of the National Trend to Modernization The Pereira Octagon Barn, built in 1906, was the only octagonal barn constructed in San Luis Obispo County. Most of our local dairy barns were “monitor-style” barns—rectangular structures with a raised ceiling along the center of the building. This style had been popular in New England, and had evolved from European church architecture. Although the peak years of popularity for octagon-style barns were the 1880s, it took a bit longer for the San Luis Obispo County to get its own eight-sided experiment. This may be attributable to the relative isolation and slow development which marked the area from its earliest days of European settlement. Manuel Carmo posed in front of the Octagon Barn in the 1970s, during which time he worked for the Pereiras. Caltrans photo of the Octagon Barn, looking south along the original route of California Highway 1 (South Higuera Street), 1929. “ The cows were fed in the barn, but could mill about. When they were milked in the barn, they were put into stanchions, facing frontwards around a smaller circle, where there was feed for them.” -John Oliveira “ No one thought of it as a special barn. It was old, and people made fun of it. The high school kids, when we’d ride the school bus into town, would tell me the same joke over and over again: ‘Did you hear about the farmer who went crazy?’ ‘No, why?’ ‘Well, he had a round barn and he couldn’t find a corner to pee in!’ I must have heard that a hundred times.” –Lois Kirchner Abbott 6.e Packet Pg. 106 Attachment: e - OBC History (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant Agreement) Page4 The Milking Parlor The Milking Parlor, also referred to as the “Milking Barn,” is a subsidiary structure built in 1938. This structure was necessary due to increasingly strict standards of sanitation which were part of the continuing need to modernize. This parlor provided a separate space in which to milk the cows—a space which would be free of the dust and manure in the octagonal barn (where the cows were fed), and with a concrete floor that could be readily cleaned, and troughs along which animal waste could be hosed away. The building was equipped with milking machines and an overhead pipe system for transport of milk (to be stored for shipment) and of water (to clean the building). People Associated with the Barn The builders of the Octagon Barn were: John Damaso, an Azorean immigrant and a carpenter by trade; Henri LaFranchi, a young Swiss immigrant and the owner of a small meat-market in San Luis Obispo, and a third, unknown man, who has been described as a “milk farmer.” They may have seen patterns for octagonal construction in farm journals, but both Damaso and LaFranchi were immigrants who had no firsthand knowledge of the many octagonal barns in dairy centers of the Midwest. John Damaso, one of the three builders of the Octagon Barn. Henri LaFranchi, another of the three builders of the Octagon Barn, shown with his bride, Ida Pelucca LaFranchi, in 1906. Some of the advantages claimed for an octagon barn were: 1. A greater volume-to-surface ratio than a rectangular barn, which meant a greater area could be enclosed using less construction material. 2. The greater open space in the octagonal interior meant less need for other structures such as calving barns, holding pens, or other out-buildings. 3. The octagon barn’s labor-saving features were most appealing at a time when mechanization was only beginning. The centralized nature of the layout would save farmers precious steps as they labored to feed, milk, and clean up after their cows. (In barns, Fowler wrote, “we need some common center in and around which to work. This form will turn the heads of all the horses and cattle, and openings to all the bays and bins, toward this center, so that one can pass from bay to stall, and from every part to every other, with half the steps required [in a rectangular or square barn]….” What Fowler didn’t state specifically, is that, with cows placed in a circular pattern and held in stanchions facing inward towards a central feeding area, the farmer has more room to tend to the “business end” of each animal. 4. The octagon shape resisted high winds and heavy storms better than rectangular barns did. Why an Octagon? “ I went to the barn with my father, sometimes. Mrs. Lima, who was Joaquin Pereira’s mother-in-law, she would be there. They had drop calves [to sell], and my father and she would talk about this in Portuguese.” –Eleanor Craveiro Plans for the Milking Parlor include refurbishment to make it a suitable place for community gatherings, displays about the history of agriculture in the county, and educational programs for schoolchildren and other visitors. In preparation for this, the stanchions and the false ceiling panels have been removed; the waste-troughs have been filled in with concrete for safety’s sake. The iron posts have been temporarily repaired with welded sleeves. 6.e Packet Pg. 107 Attachment: e - OBC History (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant Agreement) Page5 The Octagon Barn’s decayed status, just before The Land Conservancy started restoration in 1997. Restoration of a Local Treasure The fifteen-year restoration effort, carried out mostly by volunteers, is now largely complete, and the Pereira Octagon Barn stands as an icon representing the area’s agricultural past. It is testimony to the eighty-year period when dairies flourished in San Obispo County, creating the agricultural infrastructure which is still one of the area’s defining characteristics, and providing jobs for many of the area’s immigrants. It is a direct link to the days when the county’s green hills and fertile valleys were known far and wide as “cow heaven.” The first user of the barn was an Italian-Swiss immigrant, Antonio Stornetta, who leased the barn and the surrounding land for his Santa Fe dairy operation from 1907 through 1917. Mr. Stornetta was typical of the frugal and industrious Swiss who had claimed an important place for themselves in the county’s dairy industry. Joaquin and Josephine Pereira, with Josephine’s sister Eleanor and Eleanor’s husband Manuel Garcia, purchased the property in 1920 for use as part of their larger, nearby dairy in the Los Osos Valley. They were typical of many first and second- generation Portuguese Americans, who followed in the dairy tracks of the Swiss, many of whom had immigrated somewhat earlier than the Portuguese. It’s sometimes said that “the Swiss owned the dairies, and the Portuguese got their start by milking for the Swiss.” The Pereiras’ and Garcias’ business, known as the Home Dairy, was a Grade A dairy with a processing facility in town. Milk from the Home Dairy was taken to a small building at 719 Higuera Street, where it was pasteurized and bottled. Then it was delivered, in the early morning hours, to residents all over the city. The Garcias sold their portion of the barn and its land to their Pereira partners in 1925, just five years after the initial purchase. Dairying operations continued under the Pereiras into the early 1950s, when increasing competition from larger, more industrialized dairies, mostly in the Central Valley, began to make it impractical for local farmers to continue their dairying. At this time, the Pereiras, like many other dairy people, converted to a beef cattle operation. Their octagonal barn, which could not easily be made bigger, had become a sort of “white elephant” which couldn’t accommodate newer, larger farming machinery and was not needed for range-grazing beef cattle. Among those who worked the property during the Pereiras’ ownership were families by the names of Oliveira, Rodriguez, Silva, Kirchner, and Carmo. They were typical of many local dairy people who worked for shares, or who leased and worked others’ property as they saved up money to be able to purchase their own land. The property remained in the Pereira family until 1994, when it was sold to John and Howard Hayashi. By this time, the barn’s condition had badly deteriorated, and its new owners assumed it would eventually collapse or be demolished. In 1997, the Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo County, led by then-Executive Director Ray Belknap, arranged to lease and restore the barn. “Yes, we were good friends [with the Pereiras]. We were neighbors. I was raised Catholic, and when I did my first communion and went to confirmation, I’ll always remember, Joaquin [Pereira] was my sponsor, and he gave me a wallet for a gift. When I opened up the wallet, there was a five-dollar bill in there, and I thought I’d died and gone to heaven.” –Herb Filipponi 6.e Packet Pg. 108 Attachment: e - OBC History (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant Agreement) Page6 The Next Chapter The Land Conservancy, in partnership with major sponsors and partners, is working to bring the iconic Pereira Octagon Barn back into the community as a museum, bicycle trailhead (Bob Jones Trail), and meeting/event space. The history of the County’s dairy industry and the Barn’s own unique story will be told through docent tours, lectures, and signage. If you like projects such as the Octagon Barn, consider one of the following ways to help us complete our vision: • Make a donation or renew your membership with The Land Conservancy. • Volunteer your time and talent. • Give a gift membership to a friend. • Consider including The Land Conservancy in your estate plans. • Pass this information on to a friend. Your donations are very important to our organization and will help us continue to conserve land and restore special places in San Luis Obispo County for generations to come. For more information on the plans for the Octagon Barn, visit www.octagonbarn.org. THANK YOU The Land Conservancy is grateful to the following people, who have shared their memories of dairying and of the Octagon Barn in interviews for the Octagon Barn Oral History Project. Lois Kirchner Abbott Ray Belknap Maxine Bell Ercole Brughelli Dan Carpenter Ed Carson Eleanor Craveiro Eileen Brughelli Damon Herb Filipponi Bob Galbraith Roberta Galbraith Robin Galbraith Dann Graham Windy Hedding Barbara Keely Clint Machado Michael Mooney Charles Murray May Nunes John Oliveira Dolores Mello Oliveira David Pereira June Rodriguez Don Silva Ruth Munoz Silva Catherine Stornetta Donna Damaso Young 4400 Octagon Way San Luis Obispo, CA www.octagonbarn.org PO Box 12206 San Luis Obispo, CA 93406 [805] 544-9096 www.LCSLO.org CREDITS December 2012; Revised January 2013 Brochure Coordination: B.K. Richard Historical Text: Lynne Landwehr Design: Teresa Tibstra Cover page photo: The Octagon Barn, restored, with Milking Parlor (background) and Calf Barn (foreground) in June 2009 © Gary Felsman Thank you for your support! MAJOR SPONSORS: The Forbes Family Foundation, Utility Telephone, Westland Engineering, Hind Foundation, and PG&E MAJOR PARTNERS: San Luis Obispo County Parks Cal Trans 6.e Packet Pg. 109 Attachment: e - OBC History (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant Agreement) GRANT AGREEMENT OCTAGON BARN CENTER This agreement dated March ___, 2016 is between THE LAND CONSERVANCY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, a California non-profit public benefit corporation (“LCSLO”) and City of San Luis Obispo, a California Municipal Corporation and Charter City (“City”) with reference to the following: WHEREAS, LCSLO has requested that City contribute to its Octagon Barn Center (“OBC”) project, located at 4444 Octagon Way, San Luis Obispo, by providing financial support towards construction of additional facilities and amenities at this location, and WHEREAS, said services will be available to residents of the City, thereby serving both a public and municipal purpose, and WHEREAS, addressing Open Space Preservation and Multi-Modal Transportation are among the City’s 2015-17 Major City Goals, and WHEREAS, City has approved funding for the OBC project in its 2015-17 Financial Plan pursuant to LCSLO’s proposal, and WHEREAS, City has determined that the OBC will serve a broad spectrum of citizens interested in historic preservation, agricultural education, open space protection and restoration, and passive recreational trail use, while also serving as a vital community gathering place, and WHEREAS, LCSLO is restricted in its use of the OBC by an Operating Agreement with the County of San Luis Obispo, dated June 3, 2014; and a Conditional Use Permit from the County of San Luis Obispo, dated May 12, 2012, and WHEREAS, LCSLO intends to restore, construct, and operate the OBC in a manner which respects the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and the Octagon Barn’s listing in the National Register of Historic Places, dated November 12, 2013, and WHEREAS, LCSLO’s 99-year leasehold of the Octagon Barn site must be held by LCSLO and may only be sold to a valid non-profit organization, as directed by a Declaration agreed to between LCSLO and the landowners, John and Howard Hayashi, dated July 27, 2010, and WHEREAS, The County of San Luis Obispo is lead agency for the Bob Jones City-to-Sea Bike Trail project. The Board of Supervisors certified the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the project on February 24, 2015. The FEIR included the development of the OBC as a staging area and trailhead in its project description. NOW, THEREFORE, CITY and LCSLO for and in consideration of the mutual benefits, promises and agreements set forth herein, do agree as follows: 6.f Packet Pg. 110 Attachment: f - Draft Grant Agreement (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant Agreement) 1. Construction of the OBC On or before the date which is two (2) years following the execution of this Agreement, LCSLO shall complete construction of: 1.) the Barn Commons Open Space & Utility Shed, which includes landscaping, amphitheater, seating, shelter, restroom facilities building, trash/recycling, and display panels; and, 2.) Multi-Modal Trail Start Amenities & Calf Barn, which includes trailhead designation, bike racks, water station, picnic area, seating, restroom structure, informational kiosk, and trash/recycling (collectively, the “OBC Facilities”). The OBC Facilities shall be constructed at 4444 Octagon Way in San Luis Obispo. 2. Grant Amount, Allowed Expenses, and Reimbursement City agrees to pay LCSLO a one-time only grant, in the sum of $206,000, to be used for the design and construction of the OBC Facilities and may only be used for approved design and construction costs directly related to the OBC Facilities. Payments for design or “soft” costs that are paid from City grant funds will be limited to 10%, or $20,600. Design or “soft” costs are expense items that are not considered direct construction costs. Design or “soft” costs will be limited to architectural and engineering expenses directly associated with the OBC Facilities. Construction costs are defined as contractor expenses for labor, project management, material, equipment, services, utilities and other direct construction costs. Progress payment requests for the amounts shown above shall be submitted to the Assistant City Manager and shall include documentation such as copies of contractor invoices and evidence that the work progress has been accepted by LCSLO. Progress payment requests may be submitted monthly or on an as-need basis, and will be reviewed and approved for reimbursement by the City in a timely manner. 3. Construction at Other Sites If LCSLO determines that construction of the OBC Facilities at the site specified in Section 1, above, is impractical or inadvisable for any reason, then LCSLO may not use these funds for any other purpose without prior written approval of City. 4. Business Plan The City’s payment of grant funds is strictly intended to assist in the implementation of the services described in Exhibit A, “Octagon Barn Center Abbreviated Business Plan," attached hereto, which describes the intended purposes of the Octagon Barn Center; provides evidence of progress and support from other partners, donors, and grant making agencies; and, describes how the OBC will become a financially sustainable enterprise. 5. Ownership of Assets LCSLO is the owner or lessee of the property, buildings and all assets. LCSLO may only transfer its ownership interests or operation of the OBC to another non-profit service provider organized for similar public benefit purposes. The City shall be notified in writing 30 days prior to any transfer of ownership. 6.f Packet Pg. 111 Attachment: f - Draft Grant Agreement (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant Agreement) 6. Permits LCSLO shall apply for and obtain all necessary building and other related permits to construct the OBC Facilities in conformance with local, state, and federal laws. This agreement does not authorize the construction of the OBC Facilities or otherwise alter or impact the exercise of the City’s independent regulatory and land use authority, to the extent applicable. 7. Funding Source Recognition LCSLO will ensure recognition of the roles of the City in providing funding through this Agreement. The City shall be identified as a funding source in all applicable publications, press releases, etc. In addition, LCSLO will include a reference to the support provided herein in all publications made possible with funds made available under this Agreement. 8. Amendments The City and LCSLO may amend this Agreement at any time provided that such amendments make specific reference to this Agreement, and are executed in writing, signed by a duly authorized representative of each organization, and approved by the City Council. Such amendments will not invalidate this Agreement, nor relieve or release the City or LCSLO from its obligations under this Agreement, except as expressly provided in writing in any subsequent amendments. 9. Periodic Reports and Financial Assurance The LCSLO shall provide quarterly reports on both project progress and on the use of City funds. These reports shall be due at the end of the first month after the end of the calendar quarter (i.e. January, April, July, and September). City reserves the right to request and receive copies of invoices, account statements, or audits of LCSLO’s financial records pertinent to the OBC. 10. Assignability The LCSLO will not assign or transfer any interest in this Agreement without the prior written consent of the City. 11. Conflict of Interest No member of the City’s governing body and no other public official of such locality, who exercises any functions or responsibilities in connection with the planning or carrying out of the project, will have any personal financial interest, direct or indirect, in this agreement; and the LCSLO will take appropriate steps to assure compliance. LCSLO agrees to abide by the provisions of 24 CFR 84.42 and 570.611, which includes maintaining a written code or standards of conduct that will govern the performance of its officers, employees or agents engaged in the award and administration of contracts supported by Federal funds. 12. Severability If any provision of this Agreement is held invalid, the remainder of the Agreement will not be affected thereby and all other parts of this Agreement will nevertheless be in full force and effect. 6.f Packet Pg. 112 Attachment: f - Draft Grant Agreement (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant Agreement) 13. Entire Agreement This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the City and the LCSLO for the use of funds received under this Agreement and it supersedes all prior communications and proposals, whether electronic, oral, or written between the City and the LCSLO with respect to this Agreement. 14. No Agency or Employment The LCSLO is solely responsible for all activities supported by the Grant. Nothing in this Agreement creates a partnership, agency, joint venture, employment, or any other type of relationship. The LCSLO shall not represent itself as an agent of the City for any purpose, and has no authority to bind the City in any manner whatsoever. LCSLO and all of its agents, representatives, or participants in any manner in the performance of its obligations and duties hereunder, shall be employees, independent contractors, or volunteers solely of LCSLO. They shall not for any purpose be considered employees or agents of the City. 15. Indemnification The LCSLO agrees, to the fullest extent permitted by law, to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City its officers, directors, affiliates, employees, and agents, from and against any and all claims, liabilities, losses and expenses (including reasonable attorney’s fees) directly, indirectly, wholly or partially arising from or in connection with any act or omission of the LCSLO, its employees or agents, in applying for or accepting the grant, in expending or applying Grant funds, or in carrying out the project as set forth. 16. Termination The City Manager may terminate this agreement at his or her sole discretion, after a public hearing and upon ten (10) days written notice to LCSLO. Said termination shall be effective thirty (30) days after City mails notice of termination of agreement to LCSLO. Any remaining funds in excess of costs actually incurred as of the date of notice of termination pursuant to Section 3 above shall revert to City upon said termination. 17. Notices For purposes of notice under this agreement, all notices shall be considered effective upon being sent by certified mail to the following addresses: City: City of San Luis Obispo 919 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Attn: Assistant City Manager LCSLO: The Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo County 1137 Pacific Street, Suite A San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Attn: Executive Director 6.f Packet Pg. 113 Attachment: f - Draft Grant Agreement (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant Agreement) CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION By: ________________________________ Katie Lichtig, City Manager THE LAND CONSERVANCY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, A CALIFORNIA NON-PROFIT PUBLIC BENEFIT CORPORATION By: ________________________________ Kaila Dettman, Executive Director APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: ________________________________ Christine Dietrick, City Attorney 6.f Packet Pg. 114 Attachment: f - Draft Grant Agreement (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant Agreement) Exhibit A 6.f Packet Pg. 115 Attachment: f - Draft Grant Agreement (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant Agreement) ABBREVIATED BUSINESS PLAN RATIONALE FOR THE CE NTER AND GENERAL FINANCIAL MO DEL FOR ITS OPERATION BY: THE LAND CONSERVANCY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY 1137 Pacific Street San Luis Obispo, California 93401 805-544-9096 Contact: B. K. Richard, Trustee O C T A G O N B A R N C E N T E R 6.f Packet Pg. 116 Attachment: f - Draft Grant Agreement (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant Agreement) 2 | P a g e Abbreviated Business Plan RATIONALE FOR THE CE NTER AND GENERAL FIN ANCIAL MODEL FOR ITS OPERATION INTRODUCTION This Plan describes the intended purpose of the Octagon Barn Center, the rationale for investing in the project, the current status in the plan to complete development and transition into operations, and the general expectation regarding the long-term viability of the Center. The Octagon Barn Center will be a community gathering place to promote local agriculture, recreation, history, and education, while applying sustainability principles in its development and operation. The Land Conservancy wishes to make the historically important Pereira Octagon Barn1 the centerpiece of a community gathering place and resource. This 6.25 acre Center, located on South Higuera Street at the edge of San Luis Obispo City, will serve as the trailhead for the Bob Jones City-to-the-Sea Pathway and as a place for special events and community meetings. It will have an overlay of educational facilities and features. Thematically, as an expression of the Land Conservancy Mission, it will work to connect people to the land, to promote local agriculture, and to reflect principles of sustainability. The next page is a top view of the Octagon Barn Center site. The subsequent page is a rendering from a 3D computer model of what the Octagon Barn Center will look like. OCTAGON BARN CENTER PURPOSE The Land Conservancy seeks to make the Octagon Barn an important part of the recreational, cultural and social life of the San Luis Obispo County community. Because of proximity, the Center is likely to most directly benefit the citizens and businesses near the City of San Luis Obispo. The Land Conservancy will act as the staging area for the planned Bob Jones City-to-Sea Pathway and be a major stopping point on bicycle paths coming from the City of San Luis Obispo to the north and from along the proposed Buckley Road extension to the east. 1 The Pereira Octagon Barn entered the National Register of Historic Places in 2013. Antonio Stornetta as the Santa Fe Dairy, and later by Joaquin Pereira and his partners operated a dairy farm, in which the Barn was a central component, between about 190 3 and 1914 as the Home Dairy. The Octagon Barn is one of less than half a dozen known historic-period round barns extant in California (octagonal barns are in the class of round barns). 6.f Packet Pg. 117 Attachment: f - Draft Grant Agreement (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant Agreement) 3 | P a g e 6.f Packet Pg. 118 Attachment: f - Draft Grant Agreement (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant Agreement) 4 | P a g e 6.f Packet Pg. 119 Attachment: f - Draft Grant Agreement (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant Agreement) 5 | P a g e The Center will host educational, cultural, social, and commercial events:  Agriculture education events for school children, with emphasis on San Luis Obispo County history  Adult education events spanning a range of topics in agriculture and land use  Permanent exhibitions of agriculture processes and artifacts  Plays, concerts, dances, films, receptions, particularly those with agriculture or heritage themes  Special community-based events including fundraisers, meetings, and conferences  Commercial activities such as plant and produce sales, art auctions, and weddings. In all cases, the Octagon Barn Center will provide essential amenities for visitors such as water, restrooms, shelter, tire pumps, bicycle tools. There is also intent to provide limited refreshments and emergency repair items (e.g. bicycle tires). INVEST MENT RATIONALE The Octagon Barn Center will pay back on community investment in several important ways:  The Center, because of events and the attraction of visitors, will generate between $1-2M/yr. in new business revenue. This comes from prolonged stays, local purchases, and restaurant meals. The Barn may host up to 100 events per year with up to 200 people per event. The Land Conservancy expects over 150,000 visits per year.  The Center will become a southern gateway to the City of San Luis Obispo. Visitors arriving in town will stop at the site to learn more about other local attractions and get a general orientation. The Center will encourage outdoor recreation as a pathway staging area. The Bob Jones Pathway already supports over 300,000 visits per year. It is currently deterring additional use because of congestion.  The Center will foster a greater understanding of County history and agriculture. Many are not aware that the County’s financial and cultural roots are planted in a dairy industry largely developed with immigrant labor. Their ancestors remain as major community leaders to this day.  The Center is the latest demonstration of the collaborative spirit, which is rarely found in other communities. It’s why we “thrive” as writers have declared. The Center has been developed with hundreds of donations and thousands of hours of service. The Land Conservancy firmly believes that the Octagon Barn Center will become one of the iconic parts of “the real San Luis Obispo”. 6.f Packet Pg. 120 Attachment: f - Draft Grant Agreement (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant Agreement) 6 | P a g e PROJECT STATUS The Octagon Barn Center is well along in both planning and fund raising commitments. The following key milestones have been reached.  1997 – Work began on saving the Octagon Barn from collapse.  2008 – Octagon Barn restoration completed; Land Conservancy had pending lease for 2 acres. Land Conservancy leased 4 acres from Caltrans (initiated March 28, 2008 in a letter from Aileen Loe). 5 year lease began in July 2009. Lease later extended to 2034.  Land Conservancy approached County Parks about joining together at the Barn for the Bob Jones Pathway Staging Area. MOU to work together was approved by Board of Supervisors, August 2008.  2010 – Subdivision map for the Hayashi parcel and 98 year lease were recorded; water provided to the site. September 25, 2010.  2012 – Conditional Use Permit accepted by Planning Commission. Estimated sunk cost in project (actual, volunteer, and pro bono effort) reached $1M. May 12, 2012.  2013 – Octagon Barn joins the National Registry of Historic Places. November 12, 2013. Land Conservancy awarded grant from California Natural Resources Ageny for completion of the water system and site landscaping. October 17, 2013.  2014 – Operating Agreement approved by Parks Commission and Board of Supervisors. June 3, 2014. Funding secured to make sure sufficient resources are available for the South Higuera turn land and on-site parking lot improvements. The total cost of the Octagon Barn Center is in excess of $5M. The Land Conservancy has secured commitments for over $4M of that amount and is planning a capital campaign to raise the remainder of the funds, including an operations fund to start up site operations, during 2016. SCHEDULE The Land Conservancy anticipates beginning work on the site water system (pump house, tanks, three phase power) in February 2016. The current schedule for the County of San Luis Obispo to begin physical improvements to the site is September 2016. The grant from the City of San Luis Obispo enables the Land Conservancy to vigorously pursue development of the two new structures in the Center: the “Shed” and the “Calf Barn”. These structures can be built as soon as the County has completed grading the site and agreement is reached with the County on the provision of restrooms stalls (the Operating Agreement with The County obligates the County to provide six stalls). The Land Conservancy has targeted opening the Octagon Barn Center in early 2017. 6.f Packet Pg. 121 Attachment: f - Draft Grant Agreement (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant Agreement) 7 | P a g e LONG TERM SUSTAINMEN T The Land Conservancy’s financial goal for the Center is that it “break even” and not be a time or resource drain on other Conservancy staff or members, once the Center is inaugurated. The primary source of revenue for the Center will be events. The model assumes only 20 commercial Barn events per year (permitted up to 100). With other proceeds from smaller events in the Milking Parlor, small scale sales and donations, the Land Conservancy expects revenue to exceed $130,000/yr. Major expenditures will be for staff time to manage the site, waste removal, electricity, security, and maintenance. The total estimate of these expenditures is approximately $120,000/yr. The net surplus is expected to be approximately $10,000/yr. Should there be difficulty meeting expenses, the Land Conservancy can respond by hosting additional or special events, soliciting members, and/or reaching out to the community. The Land Conservancy does not anticipate needing to utilize these mechanisms. A small operations fund is planned as part of fundraising during 2016, to enable the Land Conservancy to meet expenses until the Barn Center is fully operational and known to be open for business. This fund is planned to last approximately two years. 6.f Packet Pg. 122 Attachment: f - Draft Grant Agreement (1263 : Octagon Barn Center Grant Agreement) Meeting Date: 3/1/2016 FROM: Daryl R. Grigsby, Director of Public Works Prepared By: Timothy S. Bochum, Deputy Director of Public Work Isaac Shuck, Fleet Maintenance Supervisor SUBJECT: WASTE WATER COLLECTIONS TV VAN REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT & VEHICLE BUILD-OUT, SPECIFICATION NO. 91416 RECOMMENDATION 1. Authorize the Finance Director to execute a purchase order to HAAKER Equipment Company in the amount of $135,284 for the purchase of one Envirosight RovverX system, and Transit CCTV for use in a Waste Water Collections vehicle “build-out”; and 2. Authorize the surplus designation of Fleet Asset No. 0509, by sale, auction, trade-in or other method in accordance with the City’s policies and procedures as prescribed in the Financial Management Manual Section 405-L and 480. DISCUSSION Background The replacement of a 2004 GMC van, asset number 0509, used by Waste Water Collections, was approved as part of the 2015-17 Financial Capital Improvement Plan. This van is outfitted with video camera equipment and is used daily by the Waste Water Collections division of Utilities to inspect the City’s sewer and storm drain lines. The specialized equipment in this van is critical to the efficient and compliant operations and maintenance of these systems. This specialized van precisely locates and identifies repairs and maintenance issues and allows staff to carefully evaluate and analyze the systems in an effective and timely manner. Cooperative Purchase versus Local Purchase – Specialty Equipment Purchase/Installation Staff recommends a purchase award to HAAKER Equipment Company in the amount of $135,284 for one Envirosight RovverX System and Transit CCTV vehicle build-out, including trade-in credit of the existing vehicle and equipment, taxes, and delivery. The new replacement van itself has been approved by the City Manager for purchase from a local vendor. Pursuant to City purchasing guidelines, staff explored use of a multi-year cooperative purchasing agreement with the National Joint Powers Association (NJPA) Contract No. 022014-ENS, to purchase one Envirosight RovverX system for the vehicle build. This resulted in a quote in the amount of $135,284 through its approved dealer, HAAKER Equipment Company, for a system and build that met City specifications. Per City purchasing guidelines, staff searched for a local vendor that could provide this specialty equipment and found no vendor able to do so. 7 Packet Pg. 123 CONCURRENCES Fleet and Utilities management concur with the replacement equipment recommendation and vehicle build-out made in this report. FISCAL IMPACT Approved funding for the CIP project is within budget. The remaining $33,816 will be used to purchase the replacement vehicle through a local vendor. ALTERNATIVES Defer Purchase. The City Council could choose to deny or defer the purchase of the replacement equipment and build-out of the new vehicle. Staff does not recommend this option as replacement was approved as part of the 2015-2017 Financial Plan. Denying or deferring purchase could result in less efficient operations and maintenance of the sewer and storm drain systems and loss of wastewater collections staff productivity due to the equipment age and condition. Attachments: a - HAAKER Proposal b - NJPA Envirosight Award 031814 c - NJPA - Envirosight Contract Acceptance Award Project Costs (91416) HAAKER Equipment and Vehicle Build Base Costs $141,800.00 Vehicle & Equipment Trade-In Credit ($17,000.00) Sales Tax (8.00%)$9,984.00 Delivery to San Luis Obispo $500.00 HAAKER Equipment and Vehicle Build Total Cost $135,284.00 Available Project Budget $169,100.00 Project Fund Balance $33,816.00 7 Packet Pg. 124 2070 North White Avenue, La Verne, California 91750 (909) 598-2706 ~ FAX (909) 598-1427 ~ haaker.com November 18, 2015 Mr. Bud Nance City of San Luis Obispo 25 Prado Rd. San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Dear Mr. Bud Nance: Haaker Equipment Company is pleased to offer the City of San Luis Obispo the opportunity to purchase an Envirosight RovverX, and Transit CCTV Vehicle Build-Out via a cooperative purchase through NJPA Contract Number 022014-ENS. The unit will be equipped with the following standard and optional items as outlined in the NJPA Proposal. Purchase orders for NJPA orders are submitted directly to Haaker Equipment. The customer supplied chassis must be shipped directly to the Haaker Equipment build facility in La Verne; CA. Haaker Equipment is responsible for the delivery and on-site training once the installation is complete. We appreciate the opportunity to present this proposal and look forward to being of further and continued service. Sincerely, Bryan Fox Sales Representative HAAKER EQUIPMENT COMPANY Attachment 37.a Packet Pg. 125 Attachment: a - HAAKER Proposal (1253 : Waste Water Collections TV Van Replacement Equipment & Vehicle Build-Out) SINCE 1972 2070 North White Avenue, La Verne, California 91750 (909) 598-2706 ~ FAX (909) 598-1427 ~ haaker.com December 21, 2015 City of San Luis Obispo 25 Prado Rd. San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 NJPA Contract Number: 022014-ENS Proposal RE: Proposal for One (1) Envirosight Rovver X CCTV System and Vehicle Build-out Description Price: Customer Supplied Chassis: Ford Transit 350 Ford Transit 350 Build Out: -Amber Light Package; roof mounted beacons one (1) front and one (1) rear, two (2) traffic advisors one (1) front and one (1) rear mounted and four (4) corner strobes. -Power Package; 6.3kw MEPS (Mobile Electronic Powering Systems) Road-Power source. -Automatic Transfer Switch. -Battery separator. -Shore power cord. -(5) 110volt outlets throughout; Operator Area- one (1) in electronic cabinet, one (1) desk top for monitors. Equipment Area- one (1) work bench, one (1) rear monitor, one (1) cable reel. 7.a Packet Pg. 126 Attachment: a - HAAKER Proposal (1253 : Waste Water Collections TV Van Replacement Equipment & Vehicle Build-Out) SINCE 1972 2070 North White Avenue, La Verne, California 91750 (909) 598-2706 ~ FAX (909) 598-1427 ~ haaker.com -Ceiling mounted LED lights; one (1) light in Operators Area, and two (2) lights in Equipment Area. -Solid bulkhead wall with walk through door, and window with slider. -Lonseal Industrial Rubber Flooring; textured grip style diamond plate design, installed throughout truck. -Wash Down System; water tank with outside fill hatch, 12volt water pump, hose reel with 25’ x 3/8” hose and spray nozzle. Pump switch and nozzle mounted at the rear of the truck. Operator Area: -Walls covered with grey carpet. -Roof Mounted A/C unit. -Large desk covered with Formica. Set up with two operator work stations. -File cabinet. -Two adjustable agronomical operating chairs secured to the floor. -Shelf above monitors printer storage. -MEPS Rack Mount to be re-located. Equipment Area: -Walls covered with gray FRP. -W orkbench with built in sink, constructed over heavy duty tool box, and wash-down system storage cabinet. -Cable reel frame and crawler storage; cable reel mounted on top includes slide out drawer for crawler and accessory storage. -Drivers side storage cabinet, behind cable reel. -12volt LED flood lights. -12volt ARB high output compressor. -Aluminum bottle holder over storage cabinet, 27” (for storage of cleaning bottles, marker paint, sanitizer, etc. -Utility pole storage. Monitors: -Two (2) PC Monitor 20”, includes adjustable wall mount. -Front TV Monitor 20”, includes adjustable wall mount. -Rear TV Monitor 20”, includes adjustable wall mount. Rovver X Package: RCX90 Zoom Camera; high-resolution CCD color zoom camera with 10x optical and 12x digital zoom, auto shutter, auto/manual focus, built-in LED lighting, +/-135 degree tilt, endless 360 degree rotation, pressure sensor, and twin laser diodes for measuring feature. ROVVER X 130 Crawler; Steerable crawler with two-high performance motors and 6- wheel drive. Includes pressure indicator, inclination and tilt sensors, location transmitter, integral Backeye camera, and clutch. VC200 Control Pendant; to operate crawler, reel and camera, daylight viewable touch screen, MPEG-4 video encoding, and storage to flash drive or USB Stick, online diagnostics and firmware updates, desk mount dock. RAX300 automatic motorized cable reel; with meter counter, splash-proof rating, 1000' orange transmission cable; power supply for 115/230V; wireless remote control (for equipment set up); 25' extension cable (connecting VC200 to RAX300) with 7.a Packet Pg. 127 Attachment: a - HAAKER Proposal (1253 : Waste Water Collections TV Van Replacement Equipment & Vehicle Build-Out) SINCE 1972 2070 North White Avenue, La Verne, California 91750 (909) 598-2706 ~ FAX (909) 598-1427 ~ haaker.com emergency power switch. Pressurization Kit; Regulator, air valve, and two (2) CO2 Canisters, for replacing air into camera, crawler, and accessories. Crawler lowering tool and tool kit. Aluminum Upper Manhole Roller (cable protection, sits across manhole). Aluminum Flexible Lower Manhole Roller (cable protection at pipe beginning). Options: Remote Lift Accessory; To raise/lower the RCX90 camera on the RX130 crawler. XXL Rubber Wheel for 15”-24” lines. Set of 4 Super-Aggressive Medium Grease/PVC Wheel for 8" line (Blue with Spikes). Set of 4 Super-Aggressive Medium Grease/PVC Wheel for 6” line (Blue with Spikes). Set of 4 Equipment Total: $141,800.00 Trade-In Equipment Credit: -$17,000.00 Grand Total: $124,800.00 Sales Tax 8.0%: $9,984.00 Freight: $500.00 Total Price: $135,284.00 7.a Packet Pg. 128 Attachment: a - HAAKER Proposal (1253 : Waste Water Collections TV Van Replacement Equipment & Vehicle Build-Out) 202 12th Street NE  P.O. Box 219  Staples, MN 56479  NOTICE OF AWARD TO ENVIROSIGHT, LLC  Request for Proposal #022014  SEWER VACCUM, HYDRO‐EXCAVATION, AND/OR STREET SWEEPER EQUIPMENT WITH  RELATED ACCESSORIES AND SUPPLIES  March 18, 2014  Envirosight, LLC  111 Canfield Ave., Unit B3  Randolph, NJ  07869  Dear Ms. Smith:  Congratulations!  You have been awarded an NJPA national contract for procurement of “Sewer  Vacuum, Hydro‐Excavation, and/or Street Sweeper Equipment with Related Accessories and Supplies.”   Your proposal was accepted, deemed responsive, evaluated and recommended for award by NJPA’s Bid  Evaluation Committee as a solution to meet our members’ needs.  The NJPA Board of Directors  subsequently approved a national contract award to Envirosight, LLC at their monthly meeting on March  18, 2014.  This award means that you are now an “NJPA Awarded Contract Vendor” and are part of a select group  of world‐class vendors.   Please find attached the NJPA Acceptance and Award – Forms D and E.  Tony Glenz will be your NJPA Contract Manager and will be contacting you soon to advise you on how  the contract will be launched and maintained.  Tony’s contact information is listed below:  Office Phone:    218‐894‐5491  Cell Phone: 218‐371‐1671  Email:  Tony.glenz@njpacoop.org  Sincerely,  Maureen Knight  Contracts and Compliance Manager  cc: Tony Glenz  Attachment 47.b Packet Pg. 129 Attachment: b - NJPA Envirosight Award 031814 (1253 : Waste Water Collections TV Van Replacement Equipment & Vehicle Build-Out) Attachment 57.c Packet Pg. 130 Attachment: c - NJPA - Envirosight Contract Acceptance Award (1253 : Waste Water Collections TV Van Replacement Equipment & Vehicle Meeting Date: 3/1/2016 FROM: Daryl R. Grigsby, Public Works Director Prepared By: Barbara Lynch, Deputy Director of Public Works SUBJECT: AMENDMENT TO CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH MNS ENGINEERS FOR LOS OSOS VALLEY ROAD AT US 101 INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, SPECIFICATION NO. 99821 RECOMMENDATION Authorize the City Manager to execute Amendment No. 2 to the Construction Management Services Agreement with MNS Engineers, dated July 1, 2014, increasing their contract by $297,354, bringing the total contract allowable monthly cumulative payments from $2,352,870 to $2,650,224 for the remainder of the contract. DISCUSSION Background On April 1, 2014, the City Council authorized inviting proposals for Construction Management (CM) Services for the Los Osos Valley Road - Highway 101 Interchange Project, Specification No. 99821, and authorizing the City Manager to award a contract up to $2,408,315. After evaluation of all applicant proposals and interviews, MNS Engineers Inc. ranked the highest. The anticipated total cost for the multi-year contract (pre-construction, construction, and post- construction) was $2,352,870. On July 1, 2014, the City Manager awarded a contract to MNS Engineers to provide construction management services for the project. The initial agreement language limited the cumulative payments to $418,835 as a preventive measure to control spending until additional funding was available. Additional funding became available on September 16, 2014, when Council approved the bond financing required to fund the remaining project costs. At that time Amendment 1 to the Agreement in the amount of $1,934,035, was executed to bring allowable billing to the full estimated costs for the construction management team, through the project closeout. Amendment 1 to the contract was executed on October 29, 2014. Amendment The original MNS budget proposal anticipated the construction phase to finish in February 2016; however, continued work by the Construction Management firm is needed to complete the project. This Amendment covers the extended work period as well as additional services provided. The additional services resulted primarily from three large Contract Change Orders (CCO’s), covering earthwork quantity errors, large pile driving increases, and the waterline 8 Packet Pg. 131 relocation, that accounted for approximately half of the project construction contingency balance. When large unanticipated construction changes occur, construction management also incurs additional expenses. MNS has accumulated more than $140,000 in additional inspection, surveying, and administration costs related to the CCOs. Amendment No. 2 will also provide construction oversight for the additional paving work on Calle Joaquin authorized by the Council at their January 5, 2016 meeting. Therefore, to account for additional months of construction and additional services needed for CCOs, a contract amendment is recommended. As the construction phase approaches completion, the consultant construction management team is being reduced as the workload decreases. FISCAL IMPACT The Interchange project is identified in the 2013-15 Financial Plan, Appendix B – Capital Improvement Plan, page 3-252 through 3-255. Council approved the project financing at the June 10, 2014 Council meeting. The project is partially grant funded, with 88.53% of most project expenses covered by a $16,000,000 STIP RIP Grant, with bonds funding the remaining 11.47%. The bond payments are secured by the General Fund but will ultimately be reimbursed by the City’s Traffic Impact Fees and the LOVR Sub Area Impact Fee programs. The utilization of the project grant will be maximized during the construction. Funding for increased Construction Management services will come from the remaining project management funding. Contract Project Management savings totaling $570,000 are available to support this request, and are the result of a reduced contract length for the contract Project Manager. At this time approximately $2,000,000 remains unallocated in the project budget. This will reduce that to $1,700,000. Construction Management Services Original Agreement $ 418,835 Amendment 1 $ 1,934,035 Amendment 2 (Proposed) $ 297,354 Total Construction Management Budget: $ 2,650,224 ALTERNATIVE Do not approve Amendment 2. Council could choose not to approve Amendment 2. The Interchange project is significant not only in the regional impact of its construction but in the high cost and grant obligations associated with the funding. It is critical to keep the construction team on the job to ensure complete and accurate records for the job, in its entirety. In that way, clear and uniform information will be available for auditing. The contract services also supplements City resources on labor intensive specialized set of duties. This allows City resources to maintain the service levels for typical daily duties. For these reasons, this alternative is not recommended. Attachments: a - 99821 CM Amendment 2 8 Packet Pg. 132 AMENDMENT NO. TWO TO AGREEMENT THIS AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO AGREEMENT is made and entered in the City of San Luis Obispo on Tuesday, March 1, 2016, by and between the CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, a municipal corporation, herein after referred to as City, and MNS ENGINEERS INC., hereinafter referred to as Contractor. WITNESSETH WHEREAS, on Tuesday, July 1, 2014 the City entered into an Agreement with Contractor for Construction Management Services for Los Osos Valley Road-Highway 101 Interchange Project per Specification No. 99821; and WHEREAS, on Wednesday, October 29, 2014 the City amended the monthly cumulative payment amount limit from $418,835 prior to November 1, 2014 to $2,352,870 for the remainder of the contract; and WHEREAS, the City desires to amend the monthly cumulative payment amount limit from $2,352,840 to $2,650,224 for the remainder of the contract and Contractor has submitted a proposal for this purpose that is acceptable to the City. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual promises, obligations and covenants hereinafter contained, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. The scope of services and related compensation is hereby amended as set forth: Monthly cumulative payment amount is limited to $2,650,224 for the remainder of the contract unless adjusted by addendum. 2. All other terms and conditions of the Agreement remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this instrument to be executed the day and year first written above. CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO By: ____________________________ Katie Lichtig, City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: CONTRACTOR _____________________________ By: ____________________________ City Attorney MNS Engineers, Inc. 8.a Packet Pg. 133 Attachment: a - 99821 CM Amendment 2 (1262 : LOVR CM Amendment 2) Page intentionally left blank. Meeting Date: 3/1/2016 FROM: Michael Codron, Community Development Director Prepared By: Diane Dostalek, Senior Civil Engineer SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF THE FINAL MAP FOR TRACT 2977 UNIT 4, 851 HUMBERT AVENUE (TR 27-06) RECOMMENDATION Adopt a resolution approving the Final Map for Tract 2977 Unit 4, 851 Humbert Avenue, and authorize the Mayor to execute a Subdivision Agreement. DISCUSSION Background Tract 2977 (TR 27-06) is located at 851 Humbert Avenue (Attachment A). A vesting tentative map for Tract 2977 was approved by the City Council on March 17, 2009, by Resolution No. 10066 (Series 2009) (Attachment B). The vesting tentative map (Attachment C) approved an 84-lot subdivision, including 83 lots created for development purposes and one lot for a common area. The subdivision, commonly known as the Moylan Terrace project, is an affordable housing project by the Housing Authority of the City of San Luis Obispo (HASLO). The City contributed approximately $600,000 of Affordable Housing funds to the Moylan Terrace project. Pursuant to Section 66456.1 of the Subdivision Map Act, HASLO informed the City of San Luis Obispo of its intention to file multiple final maps on the one Tract 2977 tentative map. The number and configuration of the proposed multiple final maps was not defined with the tentative map. The first final map, Unit 1, was approved by Council on October 16, 2012. The subdivision improvements associated with the Unit 1 map are shown as “Phase 1” on the approved Public Improvement Plans (PIP’s) and include construction of Lawrence Drive and Victoria Avenue. The second final map, Unit 2, was approved by Council on November 19, 2013. The subdivision improvements associated with the Unit 2 map consist of “Phases 2 & 3” as shown on the approved PIP’s and include construction of the Humbert Avenue cul-de-sac. The third final map, Unit 3, was approved by Council on May 19, 2015. The subdivision improvements associated with the Unit 3 map consist of “Phases 4 & 5” as shown on the approved PIP’s and include construction of on-site improvements only. The Unit 4 final map is the last phase for Tract 2977. The Unit 4 final map consists of 20 residential lots and one lot for common area. The subdivision improvements associated with the Unit 4 map consist of “Phases 6 & 7” as shown on the approved PIP’s and include on-site improvements only. 9 Packet Pg. 134 Approving the Final Map The tentative map has an initial two-year life per Municipal Code Section 16.10.150. With the automatic extensions granted by the State Legislature per Sections 66452.22, 66452.23, and 66452.24 of the Subdivision Map Act, this vesting tentative map now has an expiration date of March 7, 2017. Filing of multiple final maps does not extend the life of the tentative map unless off-site improvements of a certain value are constructed in accordance with Section 66452.6 of the Subdivision Map Act. There are no off-site improvements required with Tract 2977. The subdivider is allowed up to three additional years of time extensions per Municipal Code Section 16.10.155. Barring any further extensions granted by the State Legislature, and assuming the subdivider applies for and is granted the three years of time extensions allowed by the City, the tentative map has an ultimate expiration date of March 7, 2020. All phases of the final map must be filed by that time; otherwise a new tentative map will need to be processed by the subdivider. Since the number and configuration of the multiple final maps was not defined with the tentative map, the City has the authority to impose additional reasonable conditions related to the phasing of the map. No additional conditions are recommended with Unit 4 of the map. The tentative map approved one lot for a common area. The phasing of the final map has created a situation where the common lot will be created in phases instead of the one single lot originally approved. Since each phase of the map is creating a new common lot, this results in more common lots than what was originally approved with the tentative map. Language has been added to the Units 2, 3, and 4 maps indicating that these common lots are all considered a single unit and cannot be conveyed separately. The multiple common lots will then function as a single lot, so as not to exceed the total number of lots approved with the tentative map. The final map for Unit 4 is ready to be approved and recorded. Pursuant to Section 16.14.080 of the Municipal Code, the Public Works Director has determined that the final map is in substantial compliance with the tentative map and approved modifications thereof. Section 66474.1 of the Subdivision Map Act states that “a Legislative body shall not deny approval of a final or parcel map if it has previously approved a tentative map for the proposed subdivision and if it finds that the final or parcel map is in substantial compliance with the previously approved tentative map.” The approval of a final map is considered a ministerial action. Appropriate securities have been submitted to guarantee completion of the required subdi vision improvements as shown in the Subdivision Agreement (Attachment D). The resolution approving the final map (Attachment E) also authorizes the Mayor to sign the Subdivision Agreement requiring the Subdivider to complete the subdivision improvements. CONCURRENCES The Public Works Department concurs with the recommended action. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW 9 Packet Pg. 135 Approval of the final map is statutorily exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15268(b)(3) Ministerial Projects (approval of final subdivision maps) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (State CEQA Guidelines). Therefore, no further environmental review is required. Attachments: a - Vicinity Map b - Resolution No. 10066 (2009 Series) c - Vesting Tentative Map d - Subdivision Agreement e - Draft Resolution Approving Final Map f - Exhibit 1 to attachment e 9 Packet Pg. 136 TRACT 2977 9.a Packet Pg. 137 Attachment: a - Vicinity Map (1258 : Final Map Approval for Tract 2977 Unit 4, 851 Humbert Avenue) 9.b Packet Pg. 138 Attachment: b - Resolution No. 10066 (2009 Series) (1258 : Final Map Approval for Tract 2977 Unit 4, 851 Humbert Avenue) 9.b Packet Pg. 139 Attachment: b - Resolution No. 10066 (2009 Series) (1258 : Final Map Approval for Tract 2977 Unit 4, 851 Humbert Avenue) 9.b Packet Pg. 140 Attachment: b - Resolution No. 10066 (2009 Series) (1258 : Final Map Approval for Tract 2977 Unit 4, 851 Humbert Avenue) 9.b Packet Pg. 141 Attachment: b - Resolution No. 10066 (2009 Series) (1258 : Final Map Approval for Tract 2977 Unit 4, 851 Humbert Avenue) 9.b Packet Pg. 142 Attachment: b - Resolution No. 10066 (2009 Series) (1258 : Final Map Approval for Tract 2977 Unit 4, 851 Humbert Avenue) 9.b Packet Pg. 143 Attachment: b - Resolution No. 10066 (2009 Series) (1258 : Final Map Approval for Tract 2977 Unit 4, 851 Humbert Avenue) 9.b Packet Pg. 144 Attachment: b - Resolution No. 10066 (2009 Series) (1258 : Final Map Approval for Tract 2977 Unit 4, 851 Humbert Avenue) 9.b Packet Pg. 145 Attachment: b - Resolution No. 10066 (2009 Series) (1258 : Final Map Approval for Tract 2977 Unit 4, 851 Humbert Avenue) 9.b Packet Pg. 146 Attachment: b - Resolution No. 10066 (2009 Series) (1258 : Final Map Approval for Tract 2977 Unit 4, 851 Humbert Avenue) 9.b Packet Pg. 147 Attachment: b - Resolution No. 10066 (2009 Series) (1258 : Final Map Approval for Tract 2977 Unit 4, 851 Humbert Avenue) 9.b Packet Pg. 148 Attachment: b - Resolution No. 10066 (2009 Series) (1258 : Final Map Approval for Tract 2977 Unit 4, 851 Humbert Avenue) 9.b Packet Pg. 149 Attachment: b - Resolution No. 10066 (2009 Series) (1258 : Final Map Approval for Tract 2977 Unit 4, 851 Humbert Avenue) 9.c Packet Pg. 150 Attachment: c - Vesting Tentative Map (1258 : Final Map Approval for Tract 2977 Unit 4, 851 Humbert Avenue) 9.c Packet Pg. 151 Attachment: c - Vesting Tentative Map (1258 : Final Map Approval for Tract 2977 Unit 4, 851 Humbert Avenue) 9.c Packet Pg. 152 Attachment: c - Vesting Tentative Map (1258 : Final Map Approval for Tract 2977 Unit 4, 851 Humbert Avenue) 9.c Packet Pg. 153 Attachment: c - Vesting Tentative Map (1258 : Final Map Approval for Tract 2977 Unit 4, 851 Humbert Avenue) 1 SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is dated this ______ day of ___________201___ by and between MOYLAN TERRACE, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, herein referred to as "Subdivider," and the CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, herein referred to as the "City." RECITALS REFERENCE IS HEREBY MADE to that certain proposed subdivision of real property in the City of San Luis Obispo, County of San Luis Obispo, State of California, a description of which is shown on the Final Map of Tract No. 2977 Unit 4, City of San Luis Obispo, California, as approved by the City Council on the ____ day of ___________, 201___. The Subdivider desires that said Tract No. 2977 Unit 4 be accepted and approved as a Final Map pursuant to the Subdivision Regulations of the City of San Luis Obispo (Title 16 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code), and It is a condition of said regulations that the Subdivider agree to install the improvements as set forth on the plans therefore. TERMS AND CONDITIONS: In consideration of the foregoing, the Subdivider does hereby agree to construct and install the following subdivision improvements in accordance with said subdivision regulations, and in accordance with approved plans and specifications on file in the office of the City Engineer, City of San Luis Obispo, to wit: 1. CURB, GUTTERS AND SIDEWALKS 2. STREET BASE AND SURFACING 9.d Packet Pg. 154 Attachment: d - Subdivision Agreement (1258 : Final Map Approval for Tract 2977 Unit 4, 851 Humbert Avenue) 2 3. WATER MAINS and SEWER MAINS, including sewer laterals to the property line and water services to the curb stop. 4. LANDSCAPING 5. DRAINAGE STRUCTURES 6. STREET LIGHTS 7. ELECTRIC, GAS, TELEPHONE AND CABLE TELEVISION: In addition to the inspection and approval of such facilities by the City, each public utility shall be required to file a letter stating that the developer has properly installed all facilities to be provided by him, and that the said utility is prepared to provide service to residents upon request. 8. ANY &ALL OTHER IMPROVEMENTS shown on plans or required by project approvals. All of the above facilities shall be installed in the locations designated and to the plans and specifications on file and approved by said City. The lines and grades for all of said improvements shall be established by the Subdivider in accordance with said approved plans and specifications. The Subdivider agrees that the work of installing the above improvements shall begin within thirty (30) days from the date of recording of the final map, and that the work shall be completed within twelve (12) months of said recording date, unless an extension has been granted by the City, provided that if completion of said work is delayed by acts of God or labor disputes resulting in strike action, the Subdivider shall have an additional period of time equivalent to such period of delay in which to complete such work. Any extension of time hereunder shall not operate to release the surety on the Improvement Security filed pursuant to this agreement. In this connection, the surety waives the provisions of Section 2819 of the Civil Code of the State of California. 9.d Packet Pg. 155 Attachment: d - Subdivision Agreement (1258 : Final Map Approval for Tract 2977 Unit 4, 851 Humbert Avenue) 3 No building permits will be issued nor occupancy granted after the expiration date of the agreement until completion and acceptance of all public improvements unless specifically approved by the City. The Subdivider does also agree to comply with the conditions established by the Planning Commission and/or the City Council and has paid the necessary fees as indicated on the attached Exhibits 1 and 2. The restoration of lost section corners and retracement of section lines within the Subdivision shall be in accordance with Article 5, paragraph 8771 et seq., of the Professional Land Surveyors Act, Chapter 15 of the Business and Professions Code of the State of California. The Subdivider attaches hereto, as an integral part hereof, securities for the performance of this agreement, instruments of credit or bond approved by and in favor of the City of San Luis Obispo, and conditional upon the faithful performance of this agreement. Said instruments of credit or bond are in the amount of $1,831,145 for Phase 6 and $2,339,859 for Phase 7, which exceed the estimated cost of said improvements because the Subdivider required its contractor to provide a surety to Subdivider in that amount, and the City was named a dual obligee on said surety. The estimated costs of said improvements for Phase 6 are $128,000 and $180,000 for Phase 7. Subdivider agrees to remedy any defects in the improvements arising from faulty workmanship or materials or defective construction of said improvements occurring within twelve (12) months after acceptance thereof. In accordance with Sections 66499.7 and 66499.9 of the Government Code of the State of California, upon final completion and 9.d Packet Pg. 156 Attachment: d - Subdivision Agreement (1258 : Final Map Approval for Tract 2977 Unit 4, 851 Humbert Avenue) 4 acceptance of the work, City will release all but 10% of the improvement security, that amount being deemed sufficient to guarantee faithful performance by the Subdivider of his obligation to remedy any defects in the improvements arising within a period of one year following the completion and acceptance thereof. Completion of the work shall be deemed to have occurred on the date which the City Council shall, by resolution duly passed and adopted, accept said improvements according to said plans and specifications, and any approved modifications thereto. Neither periodic nor progress inspections or approvals shall bind the City to accept said improvements or waive any defects in the same or any breach of this agreement. “AS-BUILT” record drawings are to be submitted within four weeks of completion of construction and prior to City acceptance of the public improvements. If the Subdivider fails to complete the work within the prescribed time, the Subdivider agrees that City may, at its option, declare the instrument of credit or bond which has been posted by Subdivider to guarantee faithful performance, forfeited and utilize the proceeds to complete said improvements, or city may complete said improvements and recover the full cost and expense thereof from the Subdivider or his surety. The Subdivider has deposited with the City labor and materials securities in the amount of $1,831,145 for Phase 6 and $2,339,859 for Phase 7, which exceeds the 50% to 100% range required by the City’s Municipal Code for the estimated cost of said improvements because the Subdivider required its contractor to provide a surety to Subdivider in that amount, and the City was named a dual obligee on said surety. 9.d Packet Pg. 157 Attachment: d - Subdivision Agreement (1258 : Final Map Approval for Tract 2977 Unit 4, 851 Humbert Avenue) 5 Said Subdivider shall pay an inspection fee for City to inspect the installation of said subdivision improvements, and to verify that they have been completed in accordance with the plans and specifications. Title 16 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code, entitled "Subdivision," all plans and specifications on file with said City as a part of said Subdivision Map, and all other documents filed with the City by the Subdivider and approved by the City are hereby referred to for further particulars in interpreting and defining the obligations of the Subdivider under this agreement. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66474.9(b), the subdivider shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and/or its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City and/or its agents, officers or employees to attack, set aside, void or annul, the approval by the City of this subdivision, and all actions relating thereto, including but not limited to environmental review (“Indemnified Claims”). The City shall promptly notify the subdivider of any Indemnified Claim upon being presented with the Indemnified Claim and City shall fully cooperate in the defense against an Indemnified Claim. It is understood and agreed by and between the Subdivider and the City hereto that this agreement shall bind the heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns of the respective Parties to this agreement. It is agreed that the Subdivider will furnish copies of the successful bidder's contract unit prices and total bid prices for all of the improvements herein referred to. 9.d Packet Pg. 158 Attachment: d - Subdivision Agreement (1258 : Final Map Approval for Tract 2977 Unit 4, 851 Humbert Avenue) 6 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this agreement has been executed by: CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO _______________________________ MAYOR Jan Marx SUBDIVIDER Moylan Terrace, LLC, a California limited liability company By: Housing Authority of the City of San Luis Obispo, a public agency corporate and politic, Manager ________________________________ By: David Booker, Chairman of the Board ATTEST: _______________________________ INTERIM CITY CLERK Jon Ansolabehere 9.d Packet Pg. 159 Attachment: d - Subdivision Agreement (1258 : Final Map Approval for Tract 2977 Unit 4, 851 Humbert Avenue) 7 EXHIBIT 1 TRACT 2977 UNIT 4 SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT 1. The Subdivider has deposited a monumentation guarantee in the amount of $1,000 to cover the installation of survey monuments in accordance with the approved map and payment for same. Said guarantee will be released to the Subdivider upon receipt by the City of a letter from the Engineer indicating that they have completed the work and have been paid. 2. Park-in-lieu fees have been paid, as listed in the attached EXHIBIT 2. 3. Fair share traffic mitigation fees for a future traffic signal at the Broad/ Lawrence intersection and for the Broad/South/Santa Barbara intersection improvements have been paid, as listed in the attached EXHIBIT 2. 4. Water and sewer impact fees shall be paid at time of building permits through the Community Development Department per the fee schedule in effect at that time. 5. Transportation impact fees shall be paid at time of building permits through the Community Development Department per the fee schedule in effect at that time. 6. The subdivider shall comply with all requirements of Council Resolution No. 10066 (2009 Series) approving the tentative map. 9.d Packet Pg. 160 Attachment: d - Subdivision Agreement (1258 : Final Map Approval for Tract 2977 Unit 4, 851 Humbert Avenue) 8 EXHIBIT 2 TRACT 2977 UNIT 4 - FEE AND BOND LIST Amount Form Date Received Bond Release Status Bonds and Guarantees: Faithful Performance for Phase 6 $1,831,145 Dual Obligee Rider on bond 1/12/16 Can be released upon City acceptance of improvements and deposit of one-year warranty surety. Labor & Materials for Phase 6 $1,831,145 Dual Obligee Rider on bond 1/12/16 Can be released 90 days after acceptance of improvements, if no claims. (Civil Code Section 8412) Faithful Performance for Phase 7 $2,339,859 Dual Obligee Rider on bond 1/12/16 Can be released upon City acceptance of improvements and deposit of one-year warranty surety. Labor & Materials for Phase 7 $2,339,859 Dual Obligee Rider on bond 1/12/16 Can be released 90 days after acceptance of improvements, if no claims. (Civil Code Section 8412) Monument Guarantee for Phases 6 and 7 $1,000 CD 2/3/16 Can be released upon verification that monuments have been set and surveyor has been paid. 10% Warranty for Phase 6 To be collected prior to release of Faithful Performance Bond 10% Warranty for Phase 7 To be collected prior to release of Faithful Performance Bond Fees: Map Check Fee $11,409 Check 1/12/16 Improvement Plan Check Fee Paid with Unit 1 Public Works Inspection Fee Paid with Unit 1 Fair Share Traffic Mitigation Amount $9,792 Check 1/12/16 Park In-Lieu Fee1 $64,372 Check 1/12/16 Water Impact Fee1 To be collected with building permit Wastewater Impact Fee1 To be collected with building permit Transportation Impact Fee1 To be collected with building permit 1 All Impact Fees are adjusted annually (July 1) based on CPI. Credit given for demolished units and affordable housing units that exceed requirements. 9.d Packet Pg. 161 Attachment: d - Subdivision Agreement (1258 : Final Map Approval for Tract 2977 Unit 4, 851 Humbert Avenue) R _____ RESOLUTION NO. (2016 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE FINAL MAP FOR TRACT 2977 UNIT 4 (851 HUMBERT AVENUE, TR 27-06) WHEREAS, the City Council made certain findings concerning the vesting tentative map for Tract No. 2977, as prescribed in Resolution No. 10066 (2009 Series); and WHEREAS, the subdivider has completed all required subdivision improvements or will submit appropriate securities to guarantee installation of the required subdivision improvements as shown on the approved plans prior to map recordation, and all fees have been received or will be received prior to map recordation, as prescribed in the Subdivision Agreement; and WHEREAS, all conditions required per said Resolution No. 10066 (2009 Series) applicable to Tract No. 2977 Unit 4 have been met prior to final recordation of the map; and WHEREAS, approval of a final map is statutorily exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15268(b)(3) Ministerial Projects (approval of final subdivision maps) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (State CEQA Guidelines). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. The final map for Tract No. 2977 Unit 4 as shown on the attached Exhibit 1 is found to be in substantial compliance with the tentative map. SECTION 2. The Subdivision Agreement for Tract No. 2977 Unit 4 is hereby approved. SECTION 3. Approval of the final map for Tract No. 2977 Unit 4 is hereby granted. SECTION 4. 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: 9.e Packet Pg. 162 Attachment: e - Draft Resolution Approving Final Map (1258 : Final Map Approval for Tract 2977 Unit 4, 851 Humbert Avenue) Resolution No. (2016 Series) Page 2 The foregoing resolution was adopted this ______ day of _______________ 2016. ________________________________ Mayor Jan Marx ATTEST: ______________________________ Jon Ansolabehere Interim City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ________________________________ J. Christine Dietrick City Attorney IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, this ______ day of ______________, _________. ______________________________ Jon Ansolabehere Interim City Clerk 9.e Packet Pg. 163 Attachment: e - Draft Resolution Approving Final Map (1258 : Final Map Approval for Tract 2977 Unit 4, 851 Humbert Avenue) Exhibit 19.f Packet Pg. 164 Attachment: f - Exhibit 1 to attachment e (1258 : Final Map Approval for Tract 2977 Unit 4, 851 Humbert Avenue) 9.f Packet Pg. 165 Attachment: f - Exhibit 1 to attachment e (1258 : Final Map Approval for Tract 2977 Unit 4, 851 Humbert Avenue) 9.f Packet Pg. 166 Attachment: f - Exhibit 1 to attachment e (1258 : Final Map Approval for Tract 2977 Unit 4, 851 Humbert Avenue) 9.f Packet Pg. 167 Attachment: f - Exhibit 1 to attachment e (1258 : Final Map Approval for Tract 2977 Unit 4, 851 Humbert Avenue) 9.f Packet Pg. 168 Attachment: f - Exhibit 1 to attachment e (1258 : Final Map Approval for Tract 2977 Unit 4, 851 Humbert Avenue) Page intentionally left blank. Meeting Date: 3/1/2016 FROM: Derek Johnson, Interim Director of Finance & IT Prepared By: Steve Schmidt, Information Technology Manager SUBJECT: COUNCIL HEARING ROOM AUDIO VISUAL UPGRADE RECOMMENDATION 1. Appropriate $48,700 from the Public, Education, and Government Access fund to upgrade the audio visual system in the Council Hearing room; and 2. Authorize the Finance & IT Director to approve a Purchase Order with Jensen Audio Visual in the amount of $48,700 from account for the purchase and installation of the upgraded AV system. DISCUSSION Background Through the City’s Franchise Agreement with Charter Communications, the City maintains and operates the Government Access Channel 20 and receives Public, Education, and Government (PEG) access funds for the purchase and maintenance of equipment and facilities directly related to providing PEG services. The City is responsible for dispersing information to the public regarding City Council and other public meetings via televised broadcasting on Government Access Channel 20. The increased functionality and the improved ability to convey information to the public that this project would provide, qualifies the project for PEG funding. There is currently $169,425 in the City’s PEG fund account for purchases such as the one proposed. The Council Hearing Room is the most utilized conference room in the City for various City and public meetings as well as serving as the Council meeting overflow room when needed to accommodate large numbers of meeting attendees. The current audio visual system in the room is outdated and failing. Staff has recently experienced frequent system failures during very critical meetings. The existing overhead projector has been in use for approximately five years and has been serviced multiple times. Due to the age of the projector, there is increased potential for future equipment failures. Additionally, the projector generates a great deal of fan noise, which is very disruptive to the attendees. The existing audio system in the room consists of two small computer speakers that are not easily heard in the back of the room. The wireless keyboard and mouse, which have been replaced many times, do not work reliably with the current system. Proposed Upgrades The proposed new upgraded AV system for the Council Hearing Room would include: 10 Packet Pg. 169 1. Elimination of the existing overhead projector and replacement of it with a 90” LED flat panel display in the recessed area in the front of the room. 2. Installation of a new pan/tilt/zoom HD camera in the rear of the room which will be integrated into the Council Chambers broadcasting system to allow for recording and televising public meetings. (CHC, ARC, etc.).1 3. Installation of six new recessed ceiling speakers throughout the room to provide proper audio coverage. 4. Provision of wireless microphones and a new wireless video receiver which will receive wireless video from presenter’s laptops, tablets and smart phones. The receiver has a built-in wireless access point. 5. Inclusion of a new system control panel which will provide users with easy to use system control options. 6. Deployment of an existing city-owned flat panel display to be mounted on the side wall at the rear of the room to provide easier viewing for people sitting in the very back of the room. The need for this additional panel will be evaluated after the large panel has been installed. 7. Installation of various switches, signal processors, data jacks and equipment racks are also included in the proposal. 8. Installation of a new second existing city-owned flat panel display which currently sits on a cabinet in the AV closet will be mounted on a cart which can be wheeled out into the foyer and hallway to use in the event of an extreme overflow situation. This upgrade would make the Council Hearing Room the most technologically advanced meeting room in the City, thus improving the display and audio for the public. Considering the importance of the public and internal meetings held in the facility, the AV system in this room needs to be as reliable as possible. This upgrade would accomplish that objective. Sole Source Justification Staff has been using Jensen Audio/Visual for the past six years on a number of major audio visual projects. Those projects include; the new Emergency Communications Center, EOC, upgrading the City’s broadcast room and Council Chambers as well as upgrading most of the City’s conference rooms as well as the entire City surveillance camera system. Jensen AV is very familiar with all the City’s AV systems and has developed a good working relationship with City staff. At the current time, Jensen is under contract with the City Clerk’s office to maintain the Channel 20 broadcast system as well as the cameras and audio system in the Council Chambers. Jensen’s knowledge of the existing broadcast room equipment, which they installed and maintain, will enable the new Council Hearing Room equipment to easily integrate into the City’s broadcast system and Channel 20 if desired. For these reasons, staff recommends sole sourcing the Council Hearing Room AV upgrade to Jensen Audio Visual. Jensen continually provides the City with very competitively priced, high quality and reliable AV solutions. 1 Resources are not available at this time to fund the regular broadcasting of these meetings. These improvements will enable the room to broadcast meetings and provide the public improved audio and visual experience. 10 Packet Pg. 170 CONCURRENCES The Information Technology Division as well as the IT Steering Committee concur with this recommendation. FISCAL IMPACT There is sufficient funding available for this project in the PEG Government Access Fund 670 - 2491. The current PEG Fund account balance is $169,415, which would leave a balance of $120,715 remaining after the issuance of this purchase order. ALTERNATIVES Deny the request or direct staff to pursue other procurement options. Attachments: a - Jensen AV Proposal - Council Hearing Room Upgrade b - Jensen AV Purchase Order c - General Terms and Conditions 10 Packet Pg. 171 10.a Packet Pg. 172 Attachment: a - Jensen AV Proposal - Council Hearing Room Upgrade (1267 : Council Hearing Room AV Upgrade) Hearing Room AV Upgrades City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm St. San Luis Obispo, Ca 93401 USA Presented By: Jensen Audio Visual 210 E. Cota St. Santa Barbara, CA 93101 (805) 962-0110 http://www.jensenav.com Michael Dominguez Presented To: Page 2 of 24 Hearing Room AV Upgrades 2/3/2016 Jensen Audio VisualPresented By: Project Name: JENSEN-1727Project No.:3Revision: * Price Includes Accessories CONFIDENTIAL - 2016 P1 10.a Packet Pg. 173 Attachment: a - Jensen AV Proposal - Council Hearing Room Upgrade (1267 : Council Hearing Room AV Upgrade) DETAILS Jensen Audio Visual is pleased to have the opportunity to supply this proposal for your project.Below are the details of your project and our terms and conditions.Read through the entire document carefully to make sure we didn’t miss anything. Please read,initial,and sign the last page of this document to approve the project.Then return the entire document to your sales rep with your 50% initial deposit. If noted, the term "OFE" stands for "Owner Furnished Equipment". Scope of Work Executive Summary The City of San Luis Obispo would like to upgrade the existing audiovisual system in their city council hearing room. The existing audiovisual system has not been upgraded in years and is starting to have issues. The existing projector has a loud cooling fan which makes it difficult to hear when people are talking in the room. People in the back of the room are having a difficult time seeing the presented video at the front of the room. System Descriptions The system will have the following major features: ·FRONT Flat Panel Display o JAV will disconnect and remove the existing projector and will leave it in the client’s possession for reuse or disposal. JAV will install a new 90” LED flat panel display in the recessed area where the existing projection screen is located. The display will be hung using an articulating arm mount, which will provide the ability to pull the display forward and flush with wall on the front of the recessed area. JAV will have to install plywood backing on the wall in order to achieve proper support for the flat panel display. Page 3 of 24 Hearing Room AV Upgrades 2/3/2016 Jensen Audio VisualPresented By: Project Name: JENSEN-1727Project No.:3Revision: * Price Includes Accessories CONFIDENTIAL - 2016 P1 10.a Packet Pg. 174 Attachment: a - Jensen AV Proposal - Council Hearing Room Upgrade (1267 : Council Hearing Room AV Upgrade) ·SIDE Flat Panel Display o JAV will install an owner furnished 42” flat panel display on a flat/tilt mount at the back of the room. This display will replace an existing map and will be used for people who are sitting in the back of the room. JAV will install a new video extender behind the flat panel display, and will run a new cat6 shielded cable from the extender to the new equipment rack. The client will need to provide power for this new flat panel display. ·PTZ Camera o JAV will install a new pan/tilt/zoom camera at the back of the room. The new camera will be mounted on the wall. JAV will use a new video/power extender which will extend the video and power from the camera to the council chambers control room where the camera image can be broadcast. JAV will run a new VISCA control wire from the new camera to an existing camera in the council chambers so that the new camera can be controlled by a system operator in the control room. ·Speakers o JAV will install six (6) new ceiling recessed speakers; they will be placed throughout the room in order to provide proper audio coverage. The speakers will be wired in a mono configuration and will be white in color. Page 4 of 24 Hearing Room AV Upgrades 2/3/2016 Jensen Audio VisualPresented By: Project Name: JENSEN-1727Project No.:3Revision: * Price Includes Accessories CONFIDENTIAL - 2016 P1 10.a Packet Pg. 175 Attachment: a - Jensen AV Proposal - Council Hearing Room Upgrade (1267 : Council Hearing Room AV Upgrade) ·Wireless Microphones o JAV will integrate the existing 2 channel microphone receiver into the new audiovisual system. The 2 existing wireless microphones will be used as well. ·Wireless Video Receiver o JAV will integrate a new wireless video receiver in the new equipment rack, which will receive wireless video from laptops, tablets and smart phones. The receiver has a built- in wireless access point. ·Input Wall-Plate o JAV will install a new input wall-plate at the front of the room near the recessed area; the client will determine the final location. The new input wall-plate will be equipped with HDMI and VGA with audio connections. The wall-plate will be configured to automatically switch between the two available connections depending on which one is receiving a video signal. The wall-plate will be white in color. ·USB Wall-Plate o JAV will install a new USB wall-plate at the front of the room near the recessed area; the client will determine the final location. The wall-plate will be connected to the owner furnished PC. The wall-plate will be white in color. ·Output Wall-Plate o JAV will install a new HDMI output wall-plate in the back of the room; the client will Page 5 of 24 Hearing Room AV Upgrades 2/3/2016 Jensen Audio VisualPresented By: Project Name: JENSEN-1727Project No.:3Revision: * Price Includes Accessories CONFIDENTIAL - 2016 P1 10.a Packet Pg. 176 Attachment: a - Jensen AV Proposal - Council Hearing Room Upgrade (1267 : Council Hearing Room AV Upgrade) determine the final location. This wall-plate will be used to connect a second flat panel display when there are people in the back of the room that cannot see the display at the front of the room. The wall-plate will be white in color. ·Mobile Display Cart o JAV will provide a new mobile cart, complete with a flat panel display mounting bracket. JAV will attach an existing owner furnished 42” flat panel display to the top of the mobile cart. JAV will also provide a 35’ HDMI cable to connect from the display to the new HDMI output wall-plate. The mobile cart will be black in color and the horizontal shelf will be removed in order to properly fit the stand in the existing closet. ·Audiovisual Switcher o JAV will install a new audiovisual switcher in the existing cabinet located below the display location. The new audiovisual switcher will receive all of the available video signals and output them to both of the display locations. ·Digital Signal Processing o JAV will integrate a new digital signal processor in the new equipment rack, which will be configured to equalize the audio from the audio sources before they go out to the room speakers and broadcast. ·System Control o JAV will install a new 7 inch control touch panel which will be stationed in the front of the room; the client will determine the final location. The touch panel will provide the following control options: §Turn on/off displays Page 6 of 24 Hearing Room AV Upgrades 2/3/2016 Jensen Audio VisualPresented By: Project Name: JENSEN-1727Project No.:3Revision: * Price Includes Accessories CONFIDENTIAL - 2016 P1 10.a Packet Pg. 177 Attachment: a - Jensen AV Proposal - Council Hearing Room Upgrade (1267 : Council Hearing Room AV Upgrade) §Switch between available video sources §Raise/lower and mute overhead audio §Switch microphone audio from broadcast to local o The wall-plate will be white in color. ·Equipment Rack o JAV will install a new equipment rack in the existing closet located to the left of the front display. The new equipment rack will be mounted to the wall in order for the new TV stand to fit in the closet. The equipment rack provides eight-teen (18) standard rack spaces which will be used to house the new audiovisual equipment. This will make for a cleaner system, and will be easier to troubleshoot devices and inspect wiring should a problem occur. The equipment rack will house the following devices: §(1) audiovisual switcher §(1) amplifier §(2) HDMI transmitting extenders §(1) OFE network switch §(2) power conditioners §(1) OFE 2 channel microphone receiver §(1) control processor §(1) OFE cable TV receiver §(1) OFE PC §(1) Digital signal processor §(1) Wireless video receiver Page 7 of 24 Hearing Room AV Upgrades 2/3/2016 Jensen Audio VisualPresented By: Project Name: JENSEN-1727Project No.:3Revision: * Price Includes Accessories CONFIDENTIAL - 2016 P1 10.a Packet Pg. 178 Attachment: a - Jensen AV Proposal - Council Hearing Room Upgrade (1267 : Council Hearing Room AV Upgrade) Tasks: TASK 1: JAV will disconnect and remove the existing projector, projection screen, 1 surface mount speaker, and all local wiring. The removed equipment will be left in the client’s possession for reuse or disposal. TASK 2: JAV will install a new 90” flat panel display in the recessed area of the room where the existing projection screen is located. The display will be installed using an articulating arm mount. New plywood backing will have to be mounted to the wall in order to provide sufficient support for the display. TASK 3: JAV will install six (6) new ceiling recessed speakers throughout the room. New speaker wire will be daisy-chained between each of the speakers and a homerun will go to a new amplifier that will be located in the existing cabinet below the display. TASK 4: JAV will install a new input wall-plate in the front of the room; the client will determine the final location. This will require a new shielded cat6 wire be run from it to the cabinet below the display. TASK 5: JAV will install a new output wall-plate near the back of the room. This will require a new shielded cat6 wire be run from the back of the room to the cabinet below the display. TASK 6: JAV will integrate a new rolling cart and will attach an existing 42” flat panel display to the top of it. JAV will provide a new 35’ HDMI cable to connect from the display to the new output wall-plate. TASK 7: JAV will install a new control touch panel in the front of the room; the client will determine the final location. TASK 8: JAV will install a new eight-teen (18) space equipment rack which will be mounted to the wall in the existing closet. TASK 9: JAV will program the new control touch panel to control the new audiovisual system. TASK 10: JAV will install a new USB wall-plate at the front of the room which will be connected to the owner furnished PC. The client will decide the final location for the wall-plate. TASK 11: JAV will integrate the existing wireless microphone receiver into the new audiovisual system. TASK 12: JAV will install an owner furnished 42” flat panel display at the back of the room using a flat/tilt mount. A new video extender receiver will be mounted behind the display and a new cat6 shielded wire will be run from the extender to the video switcher in the new equipment Page 8 of 24 Hearing Room AV Upgrades 2/3/2016 Jensen Audio VisualPresented By: Project Name: JENSEN-1727Project No.:3Revision: * Price Includes Accessories CONFIDENTIAL - 2016 P1 10.a Packet Pg. 179 Attachment: a - Jensen AV Proposal - Council Hearing Room Upgrade (1267 : Council Hearing Room AV Upgrade) rack. TASK 13: JAV will install a new PTZ camera at the back of the room. The camera will be installed using a wall mount. JAV will use an extender to extend the video/power from the camera to the council control room system. TASK 14: JAV will run a new RS-232 VISCA cable from one of the existing cameras in the council chambers to the new camera in the hearing room for control. TASK 15: JAV will test the entire system to verify that all components are working as expected. Customer Considerations JENSEN AUDIO VISUAL ASSUMES ALL CABLE PATHWAYS IN-WALL AND IN-CEILING ARE CLEAR AND FREE OF OBSTRUCTIONS. IF A CLEAR CABLE PATHWAY CANNOT BE ESTABLISHED AND WILL HAVE A DETRIMENTAL EFFECT TO THE PROJECT TIMELINE, JENSEN AUDIO VISUAL WILL HALT INSTALLATION TO DISCUSS ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS WITH THE CLIENT. ADDITIONAL CHARGES MAY APPLY. JENSEN AUDIO VISUAL WILL REQUIRE THE CLIENT TO PROVIDE 120V POWER AT ALL AV LOCATIONS SUCH AS FLAT PANELS, PROJECTORS, SCREENS, RACK, AND INPUT PLATES PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. COORDINATE ALL POWER LOCATIONS WITH JENSEN AUDIO VISUAL. THE AV CONTROL AND AUTOMATION SYSTEM WILL REQUIRE ACCESS TO YOUR NETWORK AND POSSIBLY ACCESS TO THE INTERNET DEPENDING ON ELECTED REMOTE SUPPORT FEATURES. PLEASE HAVE YOUR IT DEPARTMENT CONTACT JENSEN AUDIO VISUAL FOR NETWORK COORDINATION WHEN APPROVING THIS PROPOSAL. YOUR AUDIO VISUAL SYSTEM INCLUDES 1-YEAR OF FREE REMOTE MONITORING AND SUPPORT. THE AV SYSTEM WILL REQUIRE ACCESS TO THE INTERNET FOR CONNECTION TO OUR CLOUD BASED MONITORING SYSTEM. JENSEN AUDIO VISUAL WILL PROVIDE ONE (2) HOURS TO TRAIN THE CLIENT ON HOW TO USE THE NEW AUDIOVISUAL SYSTEM. THE PLYWOOD BACKING FOR THE FLAT PANEL DISPLAY WILL NOT BE PAINTED. THE PLYWOOD BACKING FOR THE EQUIPMENT RACK WILL NOT BE PAINTED. Page 9 of 24 Hearing Room AV Upgrades 2/3/2016 Jensen Audio VisualPresented By: Project Name: JENSEN-1727Project No.:3Revision: * Price Includes Accessories CONFIDENTIAL - 2016 P1 10.a Packet Pg. 180 Attachment: a - Jensen AV Proposal - Council Hearing Room Upgrade (1267 : Council Hearing Room AV Upgrade) THE CLIENT WILL PROVIDE A NETWORK SWITCH FOR THE NEW EQUIPMENT. SIXTEEN PORTS ARE REQUIRED FOR THE NEW SYSTEM. Page 10 of 24 Hearing Room AV Upgrades 2/3/2016 Jensen Audio VisualPresented By: Project Name: JENSEN-1727Project No.:3Revision: * Price Includes Accessories CONFIDENTIAL - 2016 P1 10.a Packet Pg. 181 Attachment: a - Jensen AV Proposal - Council Hearing Room Upgrade (1267 : Council Hearing Room AV Upgrade) Fine print You agree that others will provide the following unless otherwise noted in the scope of work. 120V AC Power Jensen Audio Visual will require 120 VAC duplex receptacles at the head end and any display. All motorized screens/mounts shall require 120 VAC non-outlet connections. A dedicated 20 amp circuit may also be required; this must be provided by others and all locations must be coordinated with Jensen Audio Visual. Coring and other pathways Jensen Audio Visual will not create or core any pathways. All locations for equipment are assumed to be accessible when we arrive to pre-wire or install. If not, additional time and materials may be necessary at an additional cost to the customer, including asbestos related work. Mill work, acoustical ceiling repair, patching and painting Mill work, acoustical ceiling repair, patching and painting is not considered the responsibility of Jensen Audio Visual and must be provided by others. Rates: Standard Installation: $110/hr * Our standard hourly rate is based on $110/hr. (min 1 hour). *The final labor total may also include labor charges for off-site shop testing, design and engineering, and control system programming. Once all the items in your project have arrived, we will contact you to schedule your installation for the first available opening. Prevailing wage projects are based on $130/hr., please note the customer considerations section of your scope of work to determine if your project is prevailing wage. Priority Installation: $150/hr. If your project is rushed, our Priority hourly installation rate is $150/hr. In addition, overnight shipping will be applied to the final invoice. Once tracking on all the items is available, we will contact you within (1) business day to schedule your install will make arrangements to be on-site within (3) business days of item fulfillment. Terms: Jensen Audio Visual accepts payment via cash, check, or credit card. A 50% deposit is due at the time of proposal acceptance and 50% due upon completion. Jobs with a completion date beyond 30 days will be billed monthly with progress payments less the deposit due upon receipt. Progressive billing will include invoicing of materials stored at Jensen Audio Visual or its subcontractors and for engineering, labor or programming prior to on-site installation. Payment is due upon receipt of invoice. Extension of credit for billing is subject to approval by our credit department in writing. Finance charges will be computed by applying a periodic rate of 1.5%, which is an annual percentage rate of 18% to that portion of your balance which has not been paid at the end of 30 days following date of invoice. To avoid incurring the finance charge, your bill should be paid in full within thirty (30) days after date of invoice. Returns Standard stock items purchased from Jensen Audio Visual may be returned for any reason within (14)fourteen days.Custom orders are non-returnable and non-refundable.All original packaging,accessories and documentation must accompany the item and be in unmarked condition.Items must be shipped via at least 2nd day freight with insurance for the full value of the item.Returned items are subject to a 25%restocking fee.Though rare,a customer may need to return a defective product. Defective product returns are not subject to the 25%restocking fee and will be exchanged in accordance with the manufacturer’s policy within 30 days of purchase. If you need to return an item for any reason,please contact our customer service department at Page 11 of 24 Hearing Room AV Upgrades 2/3/2016 Jensen Audio VisualPresented By: Project Name: JENSEN-1727Project No.:3Revision: * Price Includes Accessories CONFIDENTIAL - 2016 P1 10.a Packet Pg. 182 Attachment: a - Jensen AV Proposal - Council Hearing Room Upgrade (1267 : Council Hearing Room AV Upgrade) (805) 962-0110 BEFORE you ship. Installation Normal business hours for Jensen Audio Visual are Monday - Friday 8a to 5p. Please take these hours into account as afterhours service will be billed at the priority rate of $150/hr. Site Conditions: Our technicians will do their best to minimize noise and disruption however, depending on your system, some noise is to be expected. During the process, power tools will be used to hang and secure the equipment and during the testing and commissioning portion, brief loud noises such as static or audio tones may be heard while the technicians stress test the audio system. If this service order requires multiple days, we will need a secure location to store equipment and tools at the end of the day. Jensen Audio Visual will provide the following: all necessary junction boxes, wall plates, low voltage power/control/audio wiring, cable pulls in free air, above ceiling, and concealed walls as well as mount, terminate, and test all equipment provided in our scope of work. Jensen Audio Visual will also provided supervisory labor at the job site if and when required. Idle time incurred by Jensen Audio Visual employees due to escorts, clearances, inability to enter workspace and other factors beyond our control will be invoiced at our current labor rates. Plenum installation Jensen Audio Visual will not provide plenum rated wire unless specified in writing. Clean Up: At the end of each day, our technicians will tidy their mess as much as is appropriate for the site conditions and your requirements. All trash will be collected and disposed of and all surfaces will be vacuumed. If you have any additional requirements please let me know. System training Jensen Audio Visual will provide a qualified trainer for the key personnel at the end of the installation. Additional or repeat training sessions are available at an additional rate. Drawing and documentation Upon request, Jensen Audio Visual will supply one (1) set of as-built drawings per installation. Warranty Jensen Audio Visual certifies that all equipment and materials furnished shall carry a ninety (90) day warranty on parts. Further, Jensen Audio Visual guarantees to furnish any qualified service personnel (during normal business hours, Monday - Friday 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM) to the installation site for the period of one (1) year from the date of installation to repair or replace defective items installed or provided by Jensen Audio Visual exclusively. Further, all equipment purchased from Jensen Audio Visual in our installed system is subject to a manufactures warranty. This warranty and instructions will be furnished to the end user as part of the installation agreement. Jensen Audio Visual will not honor any other warranty, implied or otherwise. In no event shall Jensen Audio Visual be liable, or in any way responsible for damages, or defect in the system, which were caused by neglect, vandalism, misuse, acts of God or by repairs or attempted repairs performed by anyone other than a Jensen Audio Visual service technician. Nor shall Jensen Audio Visual be liable or in any way responsible for any incidental or consequential economic or property damage. Page 12 of 24 Hearing Room AV Upgrades 2/3/2016 Jensen Audio VisualPresented By: Project Name: JENSEN-1727Project No.:3Revision: * Price Includes Accessories CONFIDENTIAL - 2016 P1 10.a Packet Pg. 183 Attachment: a - Jensen AV Proposal - Council Hearing Room Upgrade (1267 : Council Hearing Room AV Upgrade) Hearing Room 00 VIDEO EXT. PRICEITEMQTY.MSRP DISCOUNT CABLES TO GO 1.5FT S-VIDEO CABLE 1 $12.34$12.99 5% CHIEF UNIVERSAL DUAL SWING ARM WALL MOUNT 1 $646.40$808.00 20% SHIELDED RJ-45 PLUG 8 EXTRON *EXTRON BULK - SHIELDED TWISTED PAIR CABLE 150 $207.58$11.19 5% EXTRON 6 IN. VGA TO BNC FEMALE ADAPTOR 1 $36.10$38.00 5% EXTRON 6 FT. VGA-M TO BNC-M ADAPTOR 1 $45.60$48.00 5% EXTRON 12 FT. STANDARD VGA WITH AUDIO CABLE 1 $62.70$66.00 5% EXTRON 6 FT. STANDARD VGA CABLE 1 $43.70$46.00 5% EXTRON AV RCA MALE TO MALE COMPOSITE VIDEO AND STEREO AUDIO CABLES 1 $15.20$16.00 5% EXTRON DISPLAYPORT-M TO HDMI-F ACTIVE ADAPTER - 6 PIGTAIL 1 $47.50$50.00 5% EXTRON VGA/RS232 CAT5 RX 1 $439.60$628.00 30% EXTRON EIGHT INPUT HDCP-COMPLIANT SCALING PRESENTATION SWITCHER WITH DTP EXTENSION 1 $2,443.00$3,490.00 30% ESTIMATE Page 13 of 24 Hearing Room AV Upgrades 2/3/2016 Jensen Audio VisualPresented By: Project Name: JENSEN-1727Project No.:3Revision: * Price Includes Accessories CONFIDENTIAL - 2016 P1 10.a Packet Pg. 184 Attachment: a - Jensen AV Proposal - Council Hearing Room Upgrade (1267 : Council Hearing Room AV Upgrade) EXTRON HDMI TWISTED PAIR EXTENDER - TX 2 $658.00$470.00 30% EXTRON HDMI TWISTED PAIR EXTENDER - RX 2 $658.00$470.00 30% EXTRON VGA/RS232 CAT5 TX 1 $378.00$540.00 30% EXTRON TWO INPUT DTP TRANSMITTER FOR HDMI AND VGA - DECORA® WALLPLATE 1 $763.00$1,090.00 30% EXTRON HDMI TWISTED PAIR EXTENDER - DECORA WALLPLATE 1 $483.00$690.00 30% EXTRON WIRELESS COLLABORATION GATEWAY 1 $1,183.00$1,690.00 30% HOSA S-VIDEO TO DUAL BNC CABLE - 6FT 1 $15.82$16.65 5% JENSEN AV CA35 ELECTRONIC WASTE RECYCLING FEE 1 $10.00$0.00 0% KRAMER ELECTRONICS 35' STANDARD HDMI (M) TO HDMI (M) CABLE 1 $56.05$59.00 5% LIBERTY CABLE 12 FT. HDMI CABLE WITH LOCKING CONNECTOR 2 $85.48$44.99 5% LIBERTY CABLE 3 FT. HDMI CABLE WITH HIGH RETENTION CONNECTOR 1 $23.74$24.99 5% LIBERTY CABLE 6 FT. HDMI CABLE WITH LOCKING CONNECTOR 4 $113.96$29.99 5% SHARP 90" FLAT PANEL DISPLAY 1080P 1 $7,199.99$7,999.99 10% SONY 28X SD PTZ CAMERA - WHITE 1 $944.30$1,349.00 30% ESTIMATE Page 14 of 24 Hearing Room AV Upgrades 2/3/2016 Jensen Audio VisualPresented By: Project Name: JENSEN-1727Project No.:3Revision: * Price Includes Accessories CONFIDENTIAL - 2016 P1 10.a Packet Pg. 185 Attachment: a - Jensen AV Proposal - Council Hearing Room Upgrade (1267 : Council Hearing Room AV Upgrade) SOUND CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES CAMERA EXTENDER - CAT5 TO S-VIDEO 1 $490.00$700.00 30% ESTIMATE Page 15 of 24 Hearing Room AV Upgrades 2/3/2016 Jensen Audio VisualPresented By: Project Name: JENSEN-1727Project No.:3Revision: * Price Includes Accessories CONFIDENTIAL - 2016 P1 10.a Packet Pg. 186 Attachment: a - Jensen AV Proposal - Council Hearing Room Upgrade (1267 : Council Hearing Room AV Upgrade) 01 AUDIO EXT. PRICEITEMQTY.MSRP DISCOUNT BSS CONFERENCING PROCESSOR WITH AEC 1 $2,156.00$2,695.00 20% EXTRON 12 FT. 1/8 IN. TRS TO SAME 1 $15.20$0.00 5% EXTRON 70 V TWO CHANNEL AMP - 400 WATTS/CH 1 $1,253.00$1,790.00 30% HOSA 3.5 MM TS TO SAME - MONO 3 $18.81$6.60 5% HOSA XLR MALE CONNECTOR DESIGNED TO TERMINATE SINGLE-PAIR CABLE FOR BALANCED MONO APPLICATIONS. 1 $3.71$3.90 5% JBL 6.5" 2-WAY CEILING SPEAKER 70V - WHITE PAINTABLE 6 $1,058.40$196.00 10% LIBERTY CABLE S2 - BULK PLENUM 16 AWG SPEAKER WIRE - BLACK 75 $27.08$0.38 5% LIBERTY CABLE C1 - BULK PLENUM 22 AWG 2-CONDUCTOR WITH DRAIN WIRE FOR RS-232 CONTROL 330 $73.36$0.20 5% ESTIMATE Page 16 of 24 Hearing Room AV Upgrades 2/3/2016 Jensen Audio VisualPresented By: Project Name: JENSEN-1727Project No.:3Revision: * Price Includes Accessories CONFIDENTIAL - 2016 P1 10.a Packet Pg. 187 Attachment: a - Jensen AV Proposal - Council Hearing Room Upgrade (1267 : Council Hearing Room AV Upgrade) 02 CONTROL SYSTEM EXT. PRICEITEMQTY.MSRP DISCOUNT CABLES TO GO 6 FT. STANDARD CAT5E CABLE 7 $49.84$7.49 5% EASY ADAPTERS FEMALE DB-9 TO 5-POSITION TERMINAL BLOCK ADAPTER. 1 $5.58$5.87 5% EASY ADAPTERS MALE DB-9 TO 5-POSITION TERMINAL BLOCK ADAPTER. 1 $8.70$9.16 5% EXTRON 7” WALL MOUNT TOUCHPANEL - WHITE 1 $696.50$1,990.00 30% EXTRON IP LINK PRO CONTROL PROCESSOR 1 $833.00$1,190.00 30% EXTRON TWISTED PAIR EXTENDER FOR USB - TRANSMITTER 1 $483.00$690.00 30% EXTRON TWISTED PAIR EXTENDER FOR USB - RECEIVER 1 $595.00$850.00 30% EXTRON 12V, 1A, POWER SUPPLY WITH CAPTIVE SCREW CONNECTOR 1 $63.00$90.00 30% HOSA HIGH SPEED USB CABLE - TYPE A TO TYPE B - 5FT 1 $8.12$8.55 5% CAT5E MODULAR PLUG - SOLID 4 STEREN *LIBERTY CABLE BULK CAT5E CABLE - BLACK 175 $34.87$2.09 5% *LIBERTY CABLE N1 - BULK PLENUM CAT5E CABLE - BLACK 230 $103.13$2.35 5% ESTIMATE Page 17 of 24 Hearing Room AV Upgrades 2/3/2016 Jensen Audio VisualPresented By: Project Name: JENSEN-1727Project No.:3Revision: * Price Includes Accessories CONFIDENTIAL - 2016 P1 10.a Packet Pg. 188 Attachment: a - Jensen AV Proposal - Council Hearing Room Upgrade (1267 : Council Hearing Room AV Upgrade) CAT5E MODULAR PLUG - SOLID 6 STEREN TECNEC PLENUM VISCA CAMERA CONTROL CABLE - 100FT 1 $170.99$179.99 5% ESTIMATE Page 18 of 24 Hearing Room AV Upgrades 2/3/2016 Jensen Audio VisualPresented By: Project Name: JENSEN-1727Project No.:3Revision: * Price Includes Accessories CONFIDENTIAL - 2016 P1 10.a Packet Pg. 189 Attachment: a - Jensen AV Proposal - Council Hearing Room Upgrade (1267 : Council Hearing Room AV Upgrade) 03 ELECTRICAL EXT. PRICEITEMQTY.MSRP DISCOUNT EXTRON 8-OUTPUT 4.0 AMP 12V DC POWER SUPPLY 1 $413.00$590.00 30% HOSA 3 FT. STANDARD POWER CABLE 9 $94.95$11.10 5% HOSA 15 FT. POWER EXTENSION CORD 1 $42.47$44.70 5% LIBERTY CABLE C1 - BULK PLENUM 22 AWG 2-CONDUCTOR WITH DRAIN WIRE 6 $1.14$0.20 5% MIDDLE ATLANTIC RACK MOUNTED INTELLIGENT POWER CONDITIONER 2 $1,479.80$1,057.00 30% ESTIMATE Page 19 of 24 Hearing Room AV Upgrades 2/3/2016 Jensen Audio VisualPresented By: Project Name: JENSEN-1727Project No.:3Revision: * Price Includes Accessories CONFIDENTIAL - 2016 P1 10.a Packet Pg. 190 Attachment: a - Jensen AV Proposal - Council Hearing Room Upgrade (1267 : Council Hearing Room AV Upgrade) 04 HARDWARE EXT. PRICEITEMQTY.MSRP DISCOUNT CHIEF MANUAL HEIGHT ADJUSTABLE MOBILE AV CART 1 $870.80$1,244.00 30% EXTRON 1U, 19-IN. RACK SHELF 3 $273.00$130.00 30% EXTRON UNDER-DESK MOUNT KIT FOR 1/2 RACK WIDTH, TWO-PIECE ENCLOSURES 2 $70.00$50.00 30% MIDDLE ATLANTIC 18 SPACE (31-1/2"), 3' DATA WALL CAB,PLEXI DOOR,22"DEEP 1 $694.40$992.00 30% MIDDLE ATLANTIC FAN KIT FOR EQUIPMENT RACK 1 $136.50$195.00 30% MIDDLE ATLANTIC 1 SPACE (1 3/4") FLANGED ECONO-BLANK, BLACK POWDER COAT FINISH 5 $39.90$11.40 30% MIDDLE ATLANTIC L SHAPED LACING BAR, 10 PC. PACK 1 $32.20$46.00 30% MIDDLE ATLANTIC OCAP-2 - 2 SPACE (3 1/2") OPEN CAPTIVATOR SHELF, READY-TO-ASSEMBLE CONSTRUCTION, BLACK FINISH 1 $31.50$45.00 30% MIDDLE ATLANTIC 1 SPACE UNIVERSAL FACE AFTER SHELF, 8" DEEP 3 $101.31$48.24 30% PREMIER MOUNTS TILT MOUNT FITS 26-42-IN. FLAT-PANEL DISPLAYS 1 $80.00$100.00 20% ESTIMATE Page 20 of 24 Hearing Room AV Upgrades 2/3/2016 Jensen Audio VisualPresented By: Project Name: JENSEN-1727Project No.:3Revision: * Price Includes Accessories CONFIDENTIAL - 2016 P1 10.a Packet Pg. 191 Attachment: a - Jensen AV Proposal - Council Hearing Room Upgrade (1267 : Council Hearing Room AV Upgrade) 06 MISC. EXT. PRICEITEMQTY.MSRP DISCOUNT JENSEN AV OFF-SITE MOBILIZATION COSTS - TRAVEL, LODGING, AND PER DIEM 1 $1,170.00$0.00 0% $30,250.32Section Subtotal: ESTIMATE Page 21 of 24 Hearing Room AV Upgrades 2/3/2016 Jensen Audio VisualPresented By: Project Name: JENSEN-1727Project No.:3Revision: * Price Includes Accessories CONFIDENTIAL - 2016 P1 10.a Packet Pg. 192 Attachment: a - Jensen AV Proposal - Council Hearing Room Upgrade (1267 : Council Hearing Room AV Upgrade) ESTIMATE Miscellaneous Items: MISCELLANEOUS PARTS AND MATERIALS $120.001MISC. PARTS AND MATERIALS JENSEN AV STANDARD SHIPPING $1,020.001STANDARD SHIPPING $1,140.00Miscellaneous Items Total: Page 22 of 24 Hearing Room AV Upgrades 2/3/2016 Jensen Audio VisualPresented By: Project Name: JENSEN-1727Project No.:3Revision: * Price Includes Accessories CONFIDENTIAL - 2016 P1 10.a Packet Pg. 193 Attachment: a - Jensen AV Proposal - Council Hearing Room Upgrade (1267 : Council Hearing Room AV Upgrade) ESTIMATE CONTINUED... If you are interested in adding a maintenance agreement to your new system you can find more information at jensenav.com/service This proposal contains proprietary information and is confidential. It is intended only for the client and may not be reproduced or copied to third parties without the permission of Jensen Audio Visual. Please contact your rep if you are interested in purchasing the system design for bid purposes. $39,536.27Equipment: Project Summary ($8,786.95)Discount on Equipment: $14,351.90Labor: Sales Tax:$2,459.15 $1,140.00Misc. Items: Grand Total:$48,700.37 Page 23 of 24 Hearing Room AV Upgrades 2/3/2016 Jensen Audio VisualPresented By: Project Name: JENSEN-1727Project No.:3Revision: * Price Includes Accessories CONFIDENTIAL - 2016 P1 10.a Packet Pg. 194 Attachment: a - Jensen AV Proposal - Council Hearing Room Upgrade (1267 : Council Hearing Room AV Upgrade) ESTIMATE Steve Schmidt DateClient: To approve this proposal,please read and initial each section below and sign the bottom. Please return this page with your prefered method of payment. I understand that this proposal reflects the most accurate estimation of parts and labor that can be provided based on the information at hand but,it is only an estimate.Any project complications due to unforeseen circumstances may cause increases in the final invoice all changes will be discussed with the client prior to additional charges. I understand that Jensen Audio Visual keeps no stock on equipment and all items in this proposal will not be ordered until this proposal is signed and returned with a purchase order or 50%deposit.Item fulfillment typically requires 1-2 weeks.Rush shipping is available and the additional charges will be added to the final invoice. Once all of your items have been received,you will then be contacted to schedule your install for the first available time slot.Most projects are installed within 1-3 weeks after fulfillment.Priority installation is available to you for an additional $55/hr.and will guarantee your install will begin within (5)business days after all of your items have arrived. The additional charges will be added to the final invoice. Yes, I would like RUSH SHIPPING: Yes, I would like PRIORITY INSTALLATION: I understand that Jensen Audio Visual requires a 50% deposit in order to proceed for all cash, check or credit card orders. I will be paying my deposit with: If your organization issues purchase orders, please include a copy of your purchase order with your signed proposal and your 50% deposit. INITIAL INITIAL INITIAL CASH CHECK CREDIT CARD Payment Schedule Amount Due Date Initial Deposit $24,350.19 Final $24,350.18 Page 24 of 24 Hearing Room AV Upgrades 2/3/2016 Jensen Audio VisualPresented By: Project Name: JENSEN-1727Project No.:3Revision: * Price Includes Accessories CONFIDENTIAL - 2016 P1 10.a Packet Pg. 195 Attachment: a - Jensen AV Proposal - Council Hearing Room Upgrade (1267 : Council Hearing Room AV Upgrade) City of San Luis Obispo Vendor # PURCHASE ORDER FOR IT USE ONLY:LW012916A Date Send copy to vendor with any attachments Do not send to vendor VENDOR Jensen Audio Visual SHIP TO City of San Luis Obispo ORDER 210 E. Cota Street ADDRESS 990 Palm Street ADDRESS Santa Barbara, CA 93101 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Attn: Michael Dominguez Attn: Steve Schmidt 805-962-0110 Bus: 805-781-7110 VENDOR same INVOICE ADDRESS Quote General Ledger Account Capital Project Number Date Fund Program Acct Project Phase Description Amount 02/03/16 670 2491 48,700.37 TOTAL 48,700.37 Requesting Department Prepared By Dept Approval Finance/Administration Approval Finance & IT S. Schmidt Instructions:ACCOUNTING USE ONLY Department: Complete form and obtain departmental approval. Attach quotes, bid summaries, or CAO report (as required by purchasing guidelines). Route to Finance or Admin for approval.Verified By Finance: After final approval, assign PO number and return copy to department. Process encumbrance. 2/23/2016 Jensen-1727 Hearing Room AV Upgrades Per quote 2/3/16 10.b Packet Pg. 196 Attachment: b - Jensen AV Purchase Order (1267 : Council Hearing Room AV Upgrade) City of San Luis Obispo – General Terms and Conditions Exhibit B 1 1. Business Tax. The Contractor must have a valid City of San Luis Obispo business tax certificate before execution of the contract. Additional information regarding the City's business tax program may be obtained by calling (805) 781-7134. 2. Ability to Perform. The Contractor warrants that it possesses, or has arranged through subcontracts, all capital and other equipment, labor, materials, and licenses necessary to carry out and complete the work hereunder in compliance with any and all federal, state, cou nty, city, and special district laws, ordinances, and regulations. 3. Laws to be Observed. The Contractor shall keep itself fully informed of and shall observe and comply with all applicable state and federal laws and county and City of San Luis Obispo ordinances, regulations and adopted codes during its performance of the work. 4. Payment of Taxes. The contract prices shall include full compensation for all taxes that the Contractor is required to pay. 5. Permits and Licenses. The Contractor shall procure all permits and licenses, pay all charges and fees, and give all notices necessary. 6. Safety Provisions. The Contractor shall conform to the rules and regulations pertaining to safety established by OSHA and the California Division of Industrial Safety. 7. Public and Employee Safety. Whenever the Contractor's operations create a condition hazardous to the public or City employees, it shall, at its expense and without cost to the City, furnish, erect and maintain such fences, temporary railings, barricades, lights, signs and other devices and take such other protective measures as are necessary to prevent accidents or damage or injury to the public and employees. 8. Preservation of City Property. The Contractor shall provide and install suitable safeguards, approved by the City, to protect City property from injury or damage. If City property is injured or damaged resulting from the Contractor's operations, it shall be replaced or restored at the Contractor's expense. The facilities shall be replaced or restored to a condition as good as when the Contractor began work. 9. Immigration Act of 1986. The Contractor warrants on behalf of itself and all sub-Contractors engaged for the performance of this work that only persons authorized to work in the United States pursuant to the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 and other applicable laws shall be employed in the performance of the work hereunder. 10. Contractor Non-Discrimination. In the performance of this work, the Contractor agrees that it will not engage in, nor permit such sub- Contractors as it may employ, to engage in discrimination in employment of persons because of age, race, color, sex, national origin or ancestry, sexual orientation, or religion of such persons. 11. Work Delays. Should the Contractor be obstructed or delayed in the work required to be done hereunder by changes in the work or by any default, act, or omission of the City, or by strikes, fire, earthquake, or any other Act of God, or by the inability to obtain materials, equipment, or labor due to federal government restrictions arising out of defense or war programs, then the time of completion may, at the City's sole option, be extended for such periods as may be agreed upon by the City and the Contractor. 10.c Packet Pg. 197 Attachment: c - General Terms and Conditions (1267 : Council Hearing Room AV Upgrade) City of San Luis Obispo – General Terms and Conditions Exhibit B 2 12. Payment Terms. The City's payment terms are 30 days from the receipt of an original invoice and acceptance by the City of the materials, supplies, equipment or services provided by the Contractor (Net 30). 13. Inspection. The Contractor shall furnish City with every reasonable opportunity for City to ascertain that the services of the Contractor are being performed in accordance with the requirements and intentions of this contract. All work done and all materials furnished, if any, shall be subject to the City's inspection and approval. The inspection of such work shall not relieve Contractor of any of its obligations to fulfill its contract requirements. 14. Audit. The City shall have the option of inspecting and/or auditing all records and other written materials used by Contractor in preparing its invoices to City as a condition precedent to any payment to Contractor. 15. Interests of Contractor. The Contractor covenants that it presently has no interest, and shall not acquire any interest—direct, indirect or otherwise—that would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of the work hereunder. The Contractor further covenants that, in the performance of this work, no sub-Contractor or person having such an interest shall be employed. The Contractor certifies that no one who has or will have any financial interest in performing this work is an officer or employee of the City. It is hereby expressly agreed that, in the performance of the work hereunder, the Contractor shall at all times be deemed an independent Contractor and not an agent or employee of the City. 16. Indemnification for Professional Liability. To the fullest extent permitted by law, the Contractor shall indemnify, protect, defend and hold harmless the City and any and all of its officials, employees and agents (“Indemnified Parties”) from and against any and all losses, liabilities, damages, costs and expenses, including attorney’s fees and cost which arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the Contractor. 17. Contract Assignment. The Contractor shall not assign, transfer, convey or otherwise dispose of the contract, or its right, title or interest, or its power to execute such a contract to any individual or business entity of any kind without the previous written consent of the City. 18. Termination. If, during the term of the contract, the City determines that the Contractor is not faithfully abiding by any term or condition contained herein, the City may notify the Contractor in writing of such defect or failure to perform. This notice must give the Contractor a 10 (ten) calendar day notice of time thereafter in which to perform said work or cure the deficiency. If the Contractor has not performed the work or cured the deficiency within the ten days specified in the notice, such shall constitute a breach of the contract and the City may terminate the contract immediately by written notice to the Contractor to said effect. Thereafter, neither party shall have any further duties, obligations, responsibilities, or rights under the contract except, however, any and all obligations of the Contractor's surety shall remain in full force and effect, and shall not be extinguished, reduced, or in any manner waived by the termination thereof. In said event, the Contractor shall be entitled to the reasonable value of its services performed from the beginning date in which the breach occurs up to the day it received the City's Notice of Termination, minus any offset from such payment representing the City's damages from suc h breach. "Reasonable value" includes fees or charges for goods or services as of the last milestone or task satisfactorily delivered or completed by the Contractor as may be set forth in the Proposal; compensation for any other work, services or goods performed or provided by the Contractor shall 10.c Packet Pg. 198 Attachment: c - General Terms and Conditions (1267 : Council Hearing Room AV Upgrade) City of San Luis Obispo – General Terms and Conditions Exhibit B 3 be based solely on the City's assessment of the value of the work-in-progress in completing the overall workscope. The City reserves the right to delay any such payment until completion or confirmed abandonment of the project, as may be determined in the City's sole discretion, so as to permit a full and complete accounting of costs. In no event, however, shall the Contractor be entitled to receive in excess of the compensation quoted in its proposal. 19. Ownership of Materials. All original drawings, plan documents and other materials prepared by or in possession of the Contractor as part of the work or services under these specifications shall become the permanent property of the City, and shall be delivered to the City upon demand. 20. Release of Reports and Information. Any reports, information, data, or other material given to, prepared by or assembled by the Contractor as part of the work or services under these specifications shall be the property of City and shall not be made available to any individual or organization by the Contractor without the prior written approval of the City. 21. Copies of Reports and Information. If the City requests additional copies of reports, drawings, specifications, or any other material in addition to what the Contractor is required to furnish in limited quantities as part of the work or services under these specifications, the Contractor shall provide such additional copies as are requested, and City shall compensate the Contractor for the costs of duplicating of such copies at the Contractor's direct expense. 22. Required Deliverable Products. The Contractor will be required to provide: 2 hard copies of the draft or electronic copy (Adobe Acrobat format) 2 hard copies of the final project report, and 1 electronic copy (Acrobat Adobe format) of the final report. City staff will review any documents or materials provided by the Contractor and, where necessary, the Contractor will be required to respond to staff comments and make such changes as deemed appropriate. Computer files must be on 3½", high-density, write-protected diskettes or CD’s formatted for use on IBM-compatible systems. Each diskette must be clearly labeled and have a printed copy of the directory. Alternatively, files may be emailed to the City. 23. Amendments. Any amendment, modification or variation from the terms of this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be effective only upon approval by the City Engineer of the City. 24. Complete Agreement. These Purchase Order Conditions and Contractors proposal shall constitute the complete agreement between the parties hereto. No oral agreement, understanding or representation not reduced to writing and specifically incorporated herein shall be of any force or effect, nor shall any such oral agreement, understanding or representation be binding upon the parties hereto. 10.c Packet Pg. 199 Attachment: c - General Terms and Conditions (1267 : Council Hearing Room AV Upgrade) City of San Luis Obispo – General Terms and Conditions Exhibit B 4 25. Insurance Requirements. The Contractor shall provide proof of insurance in the form, coverages and amounts specified in these conditions as a precondition to contract execution. The Contractor shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Contractor, its agents, representatives, employees or sub-Contractors. Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as: 1. Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence form CG 20 10 Prior to 1993 or CG 20 10 07 04 with CG 20 37 10 01 or the exact equivalent as determined by the City). 2. Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile Liability, code 1 (any auto). 3. Workers' Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance. 4. Errors and Omissions Liability insurance as appropriate to the Contractor's profession. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Contractor shall maintain limits no less than: 1. General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. 2. Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage. 3. Employer's Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease. 4. Errors and Omissions Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City. At the option of the City, either: the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the Contractor shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. Other Insurance Provisions. The general liability and automobile liability policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: 1. The City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers are to be covered as insureds as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Contractor; products and completed operations of the Contractor; premises owned, occupied or used by the Contractor; or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Contractor. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, official, employees, agents or volunteers. 2. For any claims related to this project, the Contractor's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers shall be excess of the Contractor's insurance and shall not contribute with it. 3. The Contractor's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. 10.c Packet Pg. 200 Attachment: c - General Terms and Conditions (1267 : Council Hearing Room AV Upgrade) City of San Luis Obispo – General Terms and Conditions Exhibit B 5 4. Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the Ci ty. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A:VII. Verification of Coverage. Contractor shall furnish the City with a certificate of insurance showing maintenance of the required insurance coverage. Original endorsements effecting general liability and automobile liability coverage required by this clause must also be provided. The endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. All endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. 10.c Packet Pg. 201 Attachment: c - General Terms and Conditions (1267 : Council Hearing Room AV Upgrade) Page intentionally left blank. Meeting Date: 3/1/2016 FROM: Michael Codron, Community Development Director Prepared By: Jenny Wiseman, Planning Technician SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF 2016 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS. RECOMMENDATION As recommended by the Human Relations Commission (HRC), adopt a Resolution (Attachment D) to approve funding allocations for $454,910 of CDBG funds for the 2016 Program Year. DISCUSSION Background The City’s annual CDBG review process provides Council and the public with an opportunity to provide early input in the grant award process and assist the City Council with direct input to prioritize community needs. One of the main purposes of the process is to maintain an open, inclusive and fair grant application process. The HRC advises the Council on community needs and funding recommendations. The four major steps in the CDBG review process are as follows: 1. HRC hosts a “Needs Workshop”: The HRC hosted a public hearing on September 2, 2015, to inform the public about upcoming funding amounts, how to apply for grants, and to receive community input on grant funding needs. The HRC discussed the community needs identified during public comment and adopted grant funding priorities for Council consideration. 2. Council priority-setting: On October 6, 2015, the City Council endorsed the HRC’s recommended CDBG funding priorities for 2016. These ranked priorities established by the HRC and City Council are listed below: 1) Emergency and transitional shelter, homelessness prevention and services. 2) Develop and enhance affordable housing for low and very-low income persons. 3) Promote accessibility and/or removal of architectural barriers for the disabled and elderly. 4) Economic development (to include seismic retrofit, economic stability, low and moderate income jobs). These priorities were used by staff and the HRC in reviewing the applications to develop recommendations for the 2016 CDBG funds. 11 Packet Pg. 202 3. CDBG applications hearing: On December 2, 2015, the HRC held a public hearing to review the 2016 CDBG applications with respect to the Council’s adopted funding priorities, and forwarded its funding recommendations to the County for inclusion in the 2016 Draft Action Plan. 4. CDBG Program hearing: On March 1, 2016, the City Council will hold a public hearing to consider the HRC’s recommendations as shown in the Draft Action Plan and adopt recommendations for projects to be funded during the 2016 CDBG Program Year. This action will be submitted to the County Board of Supervisors for inclusion i n the final 2016 CDBG Action Plan for the San Luis Obispo Urban County. HRC and Staff Recommended 2015 CDBG Funding Allocations On December 2, 2015, the HRC recommended funding allocations of $454,910. The preliminary funding estimate was provided by the County based on available information from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The table below lists the projects recommended for funding by the HRC in the amount of $454,910. Applicant Project Funding Recommendation Public Services (Maximum allocation allowed: 15% of 454,910 = $68,236) CAPSLO Maxine Lewis Homeless Shelter $68,236 Housing Authority of the City of San Luis Obispo (HASLO) Affordable Housing Property Acquisition – 3680 Broad $190,692 City of SLO ADA Curb Ramps $105,000 Program Administration (Maximum allocation allowed: 20% of 454,910 = $90,982) City of SLO CDBG Administration $31,844 County of SLO1 CDBG Administration $59,138 Total $454,910 1CDBG administration funding share per the 2015-17 Cooperation Agreement between the City and County The City received seven applications for the 2016 CDBG Program Year totaling $821,898; approximately 81% more than anticipated available funding. Attachment A includes a list of the applications submitted to the City for CDBG funding and the recommended funding amounts. Attachment B includes the December 2, 2015, HRC staff report with a description of each funding request, followed by the meeting minutes as Attachment C. CAPSLO has requested $69,916 for the homeless shelter. The City is limited to using 15% of its allocation for public service uses per HUD limitations. In the past, the City has chosen to provide 100% of this allowance to the shelter to maximize the benefit of these funds. The City will continue this in 2016 for a recommendation of $68,236 in funding. In addition, the City has budgeted $48,000 from the General Fund for the shelter during the 2016-17 fiscal year. 11 Packet Pg. 203 The recommendation also reflects the maximum allowed grant allocation of 20% for program administration. The City has entered into a Cooperation Agreement with the County for program years 2015-17. This Agreement includes a provision for the County to retain 2/3rds of the 20% allocation to cover administrative costs associated with City funded projects. CDBG administration includes processing CDBG applications, completing environmental review, preparing contracts, preparing quarterly reports, and monitoring projects as they progress. The recommendation is consistent with the 2015-17 Cooperation Agreement. Final CDBG allocations from HUD have not been released; should there be an increase in CDBG funds, staff recommends any additional funding increase be allocated to HASLO’s Affordable Housing Project located at 3680 Broad, once increases for public services (15% of allocation) and program administration (20% of allocation) have been adjusted. This project meets funding priority two, developing and enhancing affordable housing, and an increase in CDBG funding could improve the project’s chances of obtaining a low income housing tax credit award. The Draft Council Resolution reflects this possible modification (Attachment D, Draft Resolution). Next Steps The 2016 CDBG funding recommendations adopted by the City Council will be forwarded to the County Board of Supervisors for inclusion in the 2016 Urban County Action Plan, which includes funding allocations for all of the participating jurisdictions. Although the CDBG fiscal year begins on July 1, 2016, funds for projects awarded by the City Council are not expected to be available until October. FISCAL IMPACT Decisions made regarding CDBG funding determine how the limited pool of funds the City receives through the Urban County allocation process is spent. To the extent that projects are funded through CDBG, the burden on the City’s General Fund to pay for those projects is reduced. As a result, projects that receive CDBG funding have a positive fiscal impact on the City if they otherwise would have been paid for out of the General Fund. ALTERNATIVES 1. The Council may modify the proposed funding amounts. 2. The Council may choose to fund an eligible CDBG application not recommended by the HRC or staff. 3. The Council may continue consideration of funding for the 2016 CDBG Program Year. Staff does not recommend this action because the City’s recommended funding priorities must be received by the County by March 25, 2016, in order to be included in the final 2016 Action Plan. 11 Packet Pg. 204 Attachments: a - 2016 CDBG Funding Recommendations b - HRC 2016 CDBG Recommendation Staff Report c - HRC 12-02-2015 - Approved Minutes d - Draft Resolution Council Reading File - 2016 CDBG Applications 11 Packet Pg. 205 2016 CDBGGeneral FundOther SourcesNo. Activity(Note 1)(Note 2)(Note 3)TotalPublic Services $68,236 Available (15% of $454,910)1Maxine Lewis Homeless Shelter 69,916$ 68,236$ 48,000$ -$ 116,236$ 2Child Advocacy Program 8,000$ -$ -$ 8,000$ 8,000$ 3SLO Hotline8,000$ -$ -$ 8,000$ 8,000$ SUBTOTAL, Public Services - 15% Max85,916$ 68,236$ 48,000$ 16,000$ 132,236$ 4Affordable Housing Property Acquisition & Construction500,000$ 190,692$ -$ 920,000$ 1,110,692$ 5Rehabilitation & Homeless Supportive Services40,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 6ADA Street Imps - Curb Ramps105,000$ 105,000$ -$ -$ 105,000$ $295,692 Available645,000$ 295,692$ -$ 920,000$ 1,215,692$ Program Administration $90,982 Available (20% of $454,910)7aCDBG Administration31,844$ 31,844$ -$ -$ 31,844$ 7bCounty of SLO (Note 4)CDBG Administration59,138$ 59,138$ -$ -$ 59,138$ 90,982$ 90,982$ 90,982$ 821,898$ 454,910$ -$ 936,000$ 1,438,910$ 1 Estimated Funding for CDBG Program Year 2016: $454,9102 Tentative General Fund allocations per current policy3 CDBG Reallocations, General Fund, Affordable Housing Fund or Grants-In-Aid Program4 CDBG administration funding share per the 2015-17 Cooperation AgreementNOTES:TOTALApplicantCourt Appointed Special Advocates (CASA)HASLOSunny Acres/ SLO HousingPublic FacilitiesSUBTOTAL, Housing/Public Facilities Transitions Mental Health Assoc.Amount RequestedCity of SLOCAPSLO 2016 CDBG Preliminary Funding RecommendationsAmount RecommendedHousingCity of SLO Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA)SUBTOTAL, Program Admin/Planning - 20% Max11.a Packet Pg. 206 Attachment: a - 2016 CDBG Funding Recommendations (1238 : 2016 CDBG Funding Recommendations) Meeting Date: December 2, 2015 Item Number: 1 2 HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT SUBJECT: 2016 CDBG Funding Recommendations PROJECT ADDRESS: Citywide BY: Jenny Wiseman, Planning Technician Phone Number: 781-7010 e-mail: jwiseman@slocity.org FILE NUMBER: GENP-2152-2015 FROM: Tyler Corey, Housing Programs Manager Situation On October 6, 2015, the City Council endorsed the HRC’s recommended Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding priorities for 2016. The priorities established by the HRC and City Council are listed below: 1. Emergency and transitional shelter, homelessness prevention and services. 2. Develop and enhance affordable housing for low and very-low income persons. 3. Promote accessibility and/or removal of architectural barriers for the disabled and elderly. 4. Economic development (to include seismic retrofit, economic stability, low and moderate income jobs). 2016 CDBG Applications The above priorities are used as the basis for making recommendations regarding the 2016 CDBG applications. The City received a total of 7 CDBG funding applications requesting $821,898. Estimated funding for the 2016 Program Year is $454,910. The following discussion provides a brief overview of each funding request and evaluates the proposals for consistency with funding priorities. This recommendation is also summarized in a spreadsheet, which was reviewed and approved by the City’s Capital Improvement Plan Committee on November 16th (Attachment 1). A copy of each of the 2016 CDBG applications is provided for HRC review (Attachment 2). Project Overview and Funding Recommendations 1.CAPSLO (Maxine Lewis Homeless Shelter): CAPSLO’s request for the homeless shelter is for $69,916. The City is limited to using 15% of its allocation for public services uses. In the past, the City has chosen to provide 100% of this allowance to the shelter to maximize the benefit of these funds. This year staff recommends funding the total public services funding amount to the shelter, anticipated to be $68,236 (15% of the City’s estimated CDBG allocation). The City has also budgeted $48,000 from the General Fund for the shelter during the 2016-17 fiscal year. General Fund support for the Homeless Shelter was previously approved in the 2015-17 Financial Plan. 11.b Packet Pg. 207 Attachment: b - HRC 2016 CDBG Recommendation Staff Report (1238 : 2016 CDBG Funding Recommendations) GENP-2152-2015 (Citywide) Page 2 2. Court Appointed Special Advocates of San Luis Obispo County (CASA) (Child Advocacy Program): CASA has requested $8,000 to provide additional advocacy services for abused and neglected children in their Child Advocacy Program. Typically the City recommends public service funds be awarded to the Homeless Shelter as that is the number one funding priority from Council. Since this program is also categorized as a public service, funding the program would reduce available funding to the Homeless Shelter, which is a higher priority. In addition, due to limitations on CDBG funding only applicable to certain budget items, the project may create a challenge for HUD program compliance and reimbursement purposes for both the service provider and staff. Staff recommends the applicant apply to the City’s Grants-In-Aid grant program to potentially fund the project. 3. Transitions Mental Health Association (SLO Hotline): Transitions Mental Health Association (TMHA) is requesting $8,000 to expand their SLO Hotline program which is devoted to calls that are categorized as suicide prevention, mental health crisis managements, mental health information, education and referrals. Typically the City recommends public service funds be awarded to the Homeless Shelter as that is the number one funding priority from Council. Since this program is also categorized as a public service, funding the program would reduce available funding to the Homeless Shelter, which is a higher priority. In addition, this program may face difficulties with verification and tracking of income qualification of clients, creating reimbursement and program compliance challenges. Staff recommends the applicant apply to the City’s Grants-In-Aid grant program to potentially fund the project. 4. HASLO (Affordable Housing Property Acquisition; Iron Works, 3680 Broad): HASLO has requested $500,000 to acquire property for the construction of a 46-unit apartment project located at 3680 Broad Street. The project is 100% affordable to low and very-low income households and will include twelve (12) one-bedroom units, nineteen (19) two-bedroom units, and fifteen (15) three- bedroom units. HASLO will be reapplying to the State for tax credits in 2016; CDBG funding will assist the application to be competitive on a regional basis. The project meets the second priority for use of CDBG funds and staff is recommending funding of this proposal in the amount of $190,692. The project has already been awarded a $920,000 Affordable Housing Fund award and has applied for County HOME funds. Iron Works has received all necessary planning entitlements; pending a 2016 tax credit award, construction should be underway by 2017. 5. SLO Housing Connection/Sunny Acres (Get Inside Program): The SLO Housing Connection, in partnership with Sunny Acres, has requested $40,000 to continue their services of providing homeless residents with housing and supportive services. In addition, they have stated that portions of requested funding be used for rehabilitation of the transitional housing located at Sunny Acres, off of Los Osos Valley Road, which is not located within City limits. Although the project meets priority number one for emergency and transitional shelter and homeless prevention, the project is not fully located within the City, and the County of San Luis Obispo found the project to be inconsistent with local land use codes. In addition, both County and City staff have concerns regarding the applicant’s ability to meet HUD grant program requirements, as well as ongoing compliance and documentation regarding client income eligibility. 6. City of San Luis Obispo (Curb Ramps): The City of San Luis Obispo, Public Works Department, requested $105,000 for curb ramp replacement projects along Marsh and Higuera Street to remove architectural barriers for disabled and elderly persons. As the Public Works Department moves through various neighborhoods and re-paves streets, the City is required to upgrade each curb ramp 11.b Packet Pg. 208 Attachment: b - HRC 2016 CDBG Recommendation Staff Report (1238 : 2016 CDBG Funding Recommendations) GENP-2152-2015 (Citywide) Page 3 to current ADA standards. The project is consistent with Council adopted priority three and staff is recommending funding in the amount of $105,000. 7.City/County (Program Administration): HUD allows up to 20% of the City’s CDBG allocation ($90,982) to be used for program administration. The City has entered into a Cooperation Agreement with the County for programs years 2015-17. This Agreement includes a provision for the County to retain 13% of the 20% allocation to cover administrative costs associated with City funded projects. CDBG administration includes processing CDBG applications, completing environmental clearances, preparing contracts, preparing quarterly reports and monitoring projects as they progress. Staff recommends funding CDBG program administration consistent with the 2015-17 Cooperation Agreement. HRC Role These recommendations are provided for the benefit of the public and HRC. The HRC’s role is to consider these recommendations in light of public testimony and either, (1) accept the allocations proposed if the HRC concurs, or (2) make changes so that the recommendation reflects the views of a majority of the Commission. The adopted priorities should guide the Commission throughout the discussion. The HRC’s recommended allocations will be forwarded to the County for incorporation into the Draft Action Plan for the 2016 CDBG program year. The entire Draft Action Plan will be considered by the Council in March 2016. Attachment 1. Funding Recommendations 11.b Packet Pg. 209 Attachment: b - HRC 2016 CDBG Recommendation Staff Report (1238 : 2016 CDBG Funding Recommendations) 2016 CDBG General Fund Other Sources No. Activity (Note 1)(Note 2)(Note 3)Total Public Services $68,236 Available (15% of $454,910) 1 Maxine Lewis Homeless Shelter 69,916$ 68,236$ 48,000$ -$ 116,236$ 2 Child Advocacy Program 8,000$ -$ -$ 8,000$ 8,000$ 3 SLO Hotline 8,000$ -$ -$ 8,000$ 8,000$ SUBTOTAL, Public Services - 15% Max 85,916$ 68,236$ 48,000$ 16,000$ 132,236$ 4 Affordable Housing Property Acquisition & Construction 500,000$ 190,692$ -$ 920,000$ 1,110,692$ 5 Rehabilitation & Homeless Supportive Services 40,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 6 ADA Street Imps - Curb Ramps 105,000$ 105,000$ -$ -$ 105,000$ $295,692 Available 645,000$ 295,692$ -$ 920,000$ 1,215,692$ Program Administration $90,982 Available (20% of $454,910) 7a CDBG Administration 31,844$ 31,844$ -$ -$ 31,844$ 7b County of SLO (Note 4)CDBG Administration 59,138$ 59,138$ -$ -$ 59,138$ 90,982$ 90,982$ 90,982$ 821,898$ 454,910$ -$ 936,000$ 1,438,910$ 1 Estimated Funding for CDBG Program Year 2016: $454,910 2 Tentative General Fund allocations per current policy 3 CDBG Reallocations, General Fund, Affordable Housing Fund or Grants-In-Aid Program 4 CDBG administration funding share per the 2015-17 Cooperation Agreement Amount Requested City of SLO CAPSLO 2016 CDBG Preliminary Funding Recommendations Amount Recommended Housing City of SLO Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) SUBTOTAL, Program Admin/Planning - 20% Max TOTAL Applicant Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) HASLO Sunny Acres/ SLO Housing Public Facilities SUBTOTAL, Housing/Public Facilities Transitions Mental Health Assoc.Attachment 111.b Packet Pg. 210 Attachment: b - HRC 2016 CDBG Recommendation Staff Report (1238 : 2016 CDBG Funding Human Relations Commission Minutes Wednesday, December 2, 2015 Regular Meeting of the Human Relations Commission CALL TO ORDER A Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo Human Relations Commission was called to order on Wednesday, December 2, 2015 at 5:10 p.m. in the Council Hearing Room, located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, by Chair Tasseff. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Julia Jones, Carol Sexton, Maria Troy, Vice Chair Robert Clayton and Chair Michelle Tasseff Absent: Commissioner Gene Strohl Staff Present: Tyler Corey, Housing Programs Manager; Monique Lomeli, Recording Secretary CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES MOTION BY VICE CHAIR CLAYTON, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER TROY, CARRIED 5-0 to approve the Minutes of the Human Relations Commission meeting of November 4, 2015. PUBLIC COMMENT There were no members of the public desiring to speak. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. 2016 Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) Funding Recommendations Housing Programs Manager Corey narrated a PowerPoint presentation, outlining the current staff recommendations for CDBG funding with an estimated total funding amount of $454,910; provided an overview of the adopted funding priorities of the program and applicant qualifications; requested input and recommendations from the Commission. In response to Commission inquiries regarding the affordability of the Housing Authority of San Luis Obispo (HASLO) project for which staff is recommending $190,692 of available funds, Housing Programs Manager Corey explained the mix of forty-six low and very-low-income units, deed restrictions, and determination of affordability; referenced the Affordable Housing Standards on the City’s website, 11.c Packet Pg. 211 Attachment: c - HRC 12-02-2015 - Approved Minutes (1238 : 2016 CDBG Funding Recommendations) City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subtitle Human Relations Commission Minutes of November 4, 2015 Page 2 indicating the “very low and lower” amounts are applicable to the HASLO development in question. In response to Commission inquiries, Housing Programs Manager Corey explained the recommendations of staff are based partially on the applicant’s demonstrated ability to meet HUD program requirements and ability to spend the grant money in a timely manner to prevent the loss of funding. Housing Programs Manager Corey reviewed a list of organizations not being recommended for funding; clarified that Court Appointed Special Advocates of San Luis Obispo and Transitions Mental Health each requested $8,000 which is an amount more suitable for the Grants-In-Aid Program; explained that Sunny Acres requested $40,000 and was not recommended due to a variety of concerns. Commissioners inquired about the reasons for not recommending funding for Sunny Acres, remarking that the effort of the organization to fill a community need is appreciated. Housing Programs Manager Corey explained that the expectation of an applicant is their ability to comply with adopted building codes; responded to further Commission inquiry, indicating that, if all other factors were addressed, a reasonable approach for grant funding may be to start with a smaller grant amount which would allow the applicant to prove their ability to comply with CDBG program requirements. Chair Tasseff opened Public Comment. Scott Smith, Executive Director of HASLO, provided a brief overview of current housing projects; expressed gratitude to the Commission for the 2015 CDBG award which contributed to the fruition of a 20 unit development for homeless veterans; stated the current housing project recommended for funding includes five units for very low income; briefly outlined the process for obtaining tax credits; responded to Commission inquiries with regard to affordability of units, the re-evaluation of tenant income, and summarized other services the organization provides; responded to public inquiry regarding on-site space for social services and explained the regulatory challenges with providing day care on housing development properties. There being no other members of the public desiring to speak, the public comment period was closed. ON MOTION BY VICE-CHAIR CLAYTON, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER TROY, CARRIED 5-0 to approve staff 2016 Community Development Block Grant funding recommendations as presented. 2. Review of 2014-2015 Grants in Aid (GIA)Year End Report Commissioner Troy presented the 2014-2015 GIA Year End Report for SLO NOOR Foundation, Partnership for the Children of SLO County, Alliance for Pharmaceutical Access, San Luis Obispo Legal Alternatives Corporation, and the Alzheimer’s 11.c Packet Pg. 212 Attachment: c - HRC 12-02-2015 - Approved Minutes (1238 : 2016 CDBG Funding Recommendations) City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subtitle Human Relations Commission Minutes of November 4, 2015 Page 3 Association, offering a brief overview of services provided by each organization and a general breakdown of how the grants were utilized by the organization. 3. Review 2016-17 Grants-in-Aid Application The Commission reviewed the final draft of the 2016 -17 Grants-in-Aid application with special reference to language used in questions 8-10; by general consensus the application was accepted as presented. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS Vice Chair Clayton initiated discussion of the proposed Templeton Behavioral Health Facility; provided time and location of the upcoming hearing for interested commissioners. ADJOURNMENT Chair Tasseff adjourned the meeting at 6:33 p.m., to the next regular meeting scheduled for Wednesday, January 6, 2015 at 5:00 p.m. in the Council Hearing Room at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo. Respectfully submitted, Monique Lomeli Recording Secretary 11.c Packet Pg. 213 Attachment: c - HRC 12-02-2015 - Approved Minutes (1238 : 2016 CDBG Funding Recommendations) R ______ RESOLUTION NO. XXXX (2016 SERIES) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE 2016 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROGRAM WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo along with the cities of Arroyo Grande, Atascadero, Morro Bay, Paso Robles, Pismo Beach, and the County of San Luis Obispo cooperatively administer several federal grant programs under the provisions of the September 23, 2014 Cooperative Agreement executed between the City and County, and under applicable U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Department (HUD) rules; and WHEREAS, pursuant to said agreement, the Urban County Public Participation Plan, and HUD rules, the City Council held a public hearing on March 1, 2016, to consider funding recommendations by the Human Relations Commission (HRC), to review applications for federal grant funding, and to consider public comments on community needs and the use of such funds; and WHEREAS, the Council has considered applications for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds, public testimony, the Urban County’s proposed One -Year Action Plan, and the HRC and staff recommendations included in the agenda report; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: Section 1. Environmental Determination. The project is exempt from environmental review per CEQA Guidelines under the General Rule (Section 15061(b)(3)). It can be seen with certainty that CDBG funding allocations could not have a significant effect on the environment. Section 2. 2016 Community Development Block Grant Program Amendments. The City’s 2016 Community Development Block Grant Program is hereby approved, as shown in Exhibit A. The Community Development Director is authorized to approve final dollar amounts once HUD releases allocations with the direction to make up differences in the two amounts. Any additional increase in funding shall be allocated to HASLO’s affordable housing project once increases for public services (15% of allocation) and program administration (20% of allocation) have been adjusted. Section 3. Board of Supervisors Consideration. The Council hereby forwards the above actions to the San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors for consideration prior to the Board’s final action on the Urban County’s 2016 Consolidated Plan. Section 4. Community Development Director Authority. The Community Development Director is hereby authorized to act on behalf of the City in executing grant agreements and other actions necessary to implement the approved Consolidated Plan and CDBG Program, including revisions to funding amounts for the 2016 CDBG Program if the City’s actual CDBG allocation is different than expected. 11.d Packet Pg. 214 Attachment: d - Draft Resolution (1238 : 2016 CDBG Funding Recommendations) Resolution No. (2016 Series) Page 2 Upon motion of , seconded by , and on the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 1st day of March, 2016. ____________________________________ Mayor Jan Marx ATTEST: ____________________________________ Jon Ansolabehere Interim City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________________________ J. Christine Dietrick City Attorney IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, this ______ day of ______________, _________. ______________________________ Jon Ansolabehere Interim City Clerk 11.d Packet Pg. 215 Attachment: d - Draft Resolution (1238 : 2016 CDBG Funding Recommendations) Meeting Date: 3/1/2016 FROM: Garret Olson, Fire Chief SUBJECT: FIRE MASTER PLAN STATUS UPDATE AND DISCUSSION REGARDING COST ALLOCATION METHODOLOGY RECOMMENDATION Provide input to staff regarding cost allocation methodology for sustaining service levels to developing areas of the City. DISCUSSION Background On March 31, 2015 the City Council authorized staff to contract with Citygate Associates, LLC (“Citygate”) for an analysis of fire-based emergency response services. This topic is particularly timely with the recent adoption of the Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) and the return of vibrant development activity throughout the City. Citygate and staff reported back to the City Council on October 20, 2015, with findings that the City is unable to meet the General Plan Safety Element response time objective of four minutes for fire and medical emergency response for 95% of all emergencies within a portion of the southern area of the City. Additional analysis showed that planned development projects in the southern region of the City will also be outside of a four-minute response region for existing Fire Department resources. In October, the City Council requested that staff and Citygate provide additional analysis and return to Council with the following items in the Fire Master Plan: 1. Revised Emergency Response Time Policy. Revise the 4-minute emergency response time policy and define total travel time for Code 3 calls for service per National Fire Protection recommended standard of 4-minute emergency response time for 90% of all emergencies. 2. Analysis of a Fifth Fire Station. Evaluate the construction and staffing of a fifth fire station in the southern area of the City in order to enhance the probability of achieving established response time standards as the area grows and places service demands on City Public Safety resources. 3. Creative Staffing Options. Explore options for incrementally addressing emergency response coverage gaps, such as initially addressing the medical response gap wit h a differently staffed and configured crew, and building toward full fire, rescue and medical services as the region develops and additional funding is realized. 12 Packet Pg. 216 4. Financing Models. Consider land based financing models for the Master Plan, such as a Community Facilities District, to finance any funding gap so that new development pays its fair share for building and operating a fifth fire station. Citygate is in the final stages of completing the analysis of fire -based emergency response services, the costs associated with adding a fifth staffed fire station, and financing models available to the City. That final report of these findings and recommendations is anticipated to come back to the City Council as a business item on April 5, 2016. Further Input on Cost Allocation Methodology Associated with Development Calculating new development’s fair share is a critical aspect in articulating financing models for a potential new fire station. This allocation methodology apportions the costs of a fifth fire station based on demand for services related to new development and partially on the citywide benefit that would be realized by an additional crew. This approach is consistent with one of the principle General Plan Policies: 1.13.9. Costs of Growth The City shall require the costs of public facilities and services needed for new development be borne by the new development, unless the community chooses to help pay the costs for a certain development to obtain community-wide benefits. The City shall consider a range of options for financing measures so that new development pays its fair share of costs of new services and facilities which are required to serve the project and which are reasonably related to the new growth attributable to the development. Hence, this policy provides that new development should pay its fair share unless the City Council explicitly determines that the City should cover those costs because doing so serves some overriding public purpose. The policy further provides that the City should consider a range of options to finance services and facilities. The basic premise is that new development should not reduce existing service levels or create unworkable strains on existing City facilities. In the 2009 Citygate Master Plan, Citygate stated, “the most beneficial next improvement in fire services the City could make would be to add a fire station in the southern City area equipped with one fire engine and a 3-person crew” (p. 5). Given the nature of fire operations, the addition of a new fire station would benefit both the developing south City area and the rest of the City. Fire crews regularly respond outside of their primary response district to provide service. With this in mind, Citygate and staff used a hybrid cost allocation methodology that factors in land- based data and historic emergency response data to calculate the proportional value of a new fire station to both the proposed development area and the established City area. Citygate and staff calculated the size of land in the proposed development areas and the size of land in the established City area based on these regions inclusion in a four-minute travel time coverage zone that would result from the addition of a fifth fire station. There are regions in the southern City area that are currently developed and within the City boundaries which are outside of four-minute travel time coverage by the existing fire stations which will reside within a four- minute travel time coverage zone only if a fifth fire station is built in the southern City area. In 12 Packet Pg. 217 the formula below, “A” is the acreage for this region of proposed development. In the formula below, “B” is the acreage for this region of developed City. There are regions of the proposed development area that are also outside of four-minute travel time coverage by the existing fire stations which will reside within a four-minute travel time coverage zone only if a fifth fire station is built in the southern City area. The ratio of these two regions is one of the factors used in the cost allocation methodology, as proposed. Citygate and staff also calculated the three-year average percent of Fire emergency responses requiring more than one City fire crew. In the formula below, “C” is the percent of emergency responses requiring more than one City fire crew. This average percent identifies the system wide benefit of adding a fifth fire station. Having a fifth fire station benefits the rest of the City by providing an additional resource for emergency responses requiring m ore than one City fire crew. The proposed hybrid cost allocation methodology apportions cost in the following manner: New develop fair share allocation (%) = A - C A + B Existing City development fair share allocation (%) = B + C A + B When: A = The total acreage of the proposed development area which would be included in a four- minute response coverage zone only by a fifth fire station; B = The acreage of existing City area which would be included in a four-minute response coverage zone only by a fifth fire station; and C = Percent of Fire emergency responses requiring more than one City fire crew. The rationale for proposing apportioning to the existing City the benefit of the percent of Fire emergency responses requiring more than one City fire crew is based on the premise that but for the addition of a fifth fire station, the full burden of these emergency responses would be borne by existing resources. If this proposed cost allocation model continues as a philosophy to inform Council and the community of the proportional benefit of a fifth fire station, Citygate and staff will return with the values of these three variables: A. a land-based calculation using geographical information system (GIS) to quantify the total acreage of the proposed development area, as provided by Community Development, which would be included in a four-minute response coverage zone only by the addition of a fifth fire station; B. a land-based calculation using GIS to quantify of the total acreage of the existing City area which would be included in a four-minute response coverage zone only by the addition of a fifth fire station; and C. the three-year average percent of Fire emergency responses requiring more than one City fire crew. For purposes of illustrating this formula only, the follow numbers are used as an example. If a fifth fire station provided four-minute response coverage to 1,000 potential development acres (value A) and 500 acres of existing City land (value B), and 5% of all emergencies required more than one fire crew (value C), then for purposes of illustrating how this formula would be applied in this fictitious example, 12 Packet Pg. 218 the cost allocation would result in new development responsible for 61.7% of costs and the existing City responsible for 38.3% of costs. If Council is interested in this methodology for informing the cost allocation strategy, Citygate and staff will return with an accurate allocation calculation based on real land-based and emergency response values. Input sought from Council City Council input on this methodology and formula will advise the financial models for the Fire Master Plan update. Furthermore, in reviewing the preliminary draft financial details, staff is aware that a funding gap is likely to exist between any fair share formula which assigns cost to development served by the fifth fire station and the anticipated additional one time and ongoing development-related revenue. CONCURRENCES The Community Development and Finance and Information Technology Departments concur with the recommendations in this report. FISCAL IMPACT There are no fiscal or budgetary impacts from the input provided by the Council. 12 Packet Pg. 219