HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/18/1998, 9 - CONSULTANT SERVICES FOR UPDATING THE CONSERVATION ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN council '?; .a
j acEnaa Repout `MUE`-
CITYOF SAN LUIS O B I S P O
FROM: Arnold B. Jonas, Community Development Director o
Prepared By: Glen Matteson,Associate Planner C-1cM l
SUBJECT: Consultant services for updating the Conservation Element of the General Plan
CAO RECOMMENDATION
(1) Approve the recommended draft workscope; (2) authorize staff to solicit consultant
proposals; and(3) authorize the CAO to contract for consultant services costing up to $74,000.
DISCUSSION
The Conservation Element is one of several sections of each city's general plan which is
required by State law. San Luis Obispo's Conservation Element dates from 1973. Since then,
there have been many changes to State planning laws and the details of the City's conservation
and planning efforts. Several of the topics covered in the 1973 Conservation Element are
covered more explicitly in documents adopted by the City more recently.
In response to goals set by the Council, the Community Development Department work
program calls for updating the Conservation Element during this budget cycle. Completing the
Conservation Element update will benefit from knowledge about wildlife habitats and energy
conservation that may not be available from staff. In fact, as noted on page 4 of the attached
request for proposals, wildlife and its habitat will be a primary focus of the study. The
resulting work will help advance the Council's goal of creating a natural resources inventory.
Consultant services are desirable for this project because Long-Range Planning Division staff
are busy with major tasks to implement the General Plan, including specific plans for
annexation areas and master plans for parts of the community. As a result, the City budget
contains funds to hire a consultant to prepare the update. Staff recommends that the work
include updating the Energy Conservation Element (adopted in 1981) and integrating the
contents of the Open Space Element (revised in 1994). The proposed schedule calls for a draft
to be ready for adoption by July 1999.
An early step in hiring consultants is to issue a request for proposals("RFP,"draft attached). The
RFP explains why consultant services are desired, describes the intended product, and outlines
the steps in evaluating and choosing a consultant. Consultants wanting to do the work then
submit proposals. Next, staff evaluates the proposals and either recommends a firm and an
agreement for Council approval or, as staff recommends in this case, contracts with the
consultant in accordance with previous Council authorization. If no acceptable proposals are
made at less than the cost limit, or if substantial changes to the workscope are proposed, staff
will bring this item back to the Council.
Council Agenda Report-Conservation Element update consultant services
Page 2
CONCURRENCES
The City's Natural Resources Manager and other departments that are most affected by
conservation policies,Public Works and Utilities,have reviewed and concur with the RFP.
FISCAL IMPACT
The Council approved funding in the amount of$74,000 for consultant services in the 1997-99
Financial Plan.
ALTERNATIVES
Council may direct staff to revise the draft RFP, subject to State requirements, or may continue
action. There is no mandated deadline for the update.
Attachment:
Draft Request for Proposals- introduction, scope, and schedule portions
Council Reading File:
Draft Request for Proposals-full text
9:2
city of
l san lues oBmspo
990 Paha Street ■ San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Notice Requesting Proposals for
CONSERVATION ELEMENT UPDATE
The City of San Luis Obispo is requesting proposals for an update of the General Plan
Conservation Element, which will include an updated Energy Conservation Element and be
integrated with the contents of the existing Open Space Element, pursuant to Specification No.
9221. All proposals must be received by the Community Development Department by 5:00 p.m.
on Friday, September 25, 1998,at City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo,CA 93401.
Proposals received after that time will not be considered. To guard against premature opening,
each proposal shall be submitted to the Community Development Department in a sealed
envelope plainly marked with the proposal title, specification number, proposer name, and time
and date of the proposal opening.
A pre-proposal conference is not scheduled for this item.
Additional information may be obtained by contacting Glen Matteson, Associate Planner, at
(805) 781-7165.
This is an excerpt of the request-for-proposal
package containing the introduction, workscope, and
schedule parts. The full text, including standard
procedural and insurance parts, is available in the
Council Reading File.
® The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to including disabled persons in all of our services,programs and activities.
Telecommunications Device for the Deaf(805)781-7410.
Specification No. 9221
TABLE OF CONTENTS
A. Description of Work 2
Request for Services
Background
Schedule
Preliminary Workscope
B. General Terms and Conditions g
Proposal Requirements .
Contract Award and Execution
Contract Performance
C. Special Terms and Conditions 12
Proposal Content and Evaluation
Ownership,Delivery and Presentation of Products
Attendance at Meetings and Hearings
D. Agreement 16
E. Insurance Requirements 18
F. Proposal Submittal Forms 20
Proposal Submittal Summary
References
Statement of Past Contract Disqualifications
Section A
DESCRIPTION OF WORK
Request for Services
The City of San Luis Obispo wants to hire a consultant to prepare an update of the General Plan
Conservation Element, which will include an updated Energy Conservation Element and be
integrated with the contents of the Open Space Element that was revised in 1994. The resulting
element must comply with State requirements for element content and address the topics identified in
the following preliminary workscope.
Background
San Luis Obispo's Conservation Element dates from 1973. Since then, there have been many
changes to State law and in the details of the City's conservation and planning efforts. In addition,
there is significant overlap among the topics the State requires be contained in the Conservation
Element and the Open Space Element. As a result, several of the topics covered in the 1973
Conservation Element are now covered more explicitly in recent General Plan element updates and
other City documents, as noted in the attached.preliminary workscope. What has not changed is a
strong citizen interest in protecting open land, clean air, and the other natural resources of the area.
Conservation-related policies are found in several General Plan elements, so there is a need and an
opportunity to consolidate them, while updating the Conservation Element. In particular, the policy
content of the updated Open Space Element reflects much sincere effort on relevant issues by
advisory groups and concerned citizens, staff, and advisory bodies. These policies should be
reaffirmed and carried forward as they relate to Conservation Element. In addition, the format of
the Open Space Element is not as direct or easy to cite as other recent element updates. A new
element should be formatted in a way that is consistent with other recent element updates and be
easy for the public and decision-makers to understand and use.
The City Council has authorized the requested work. Consultant services are desirable for this
project because Long-Range Planning Division staff are busy with major tasks to implement the
General Plan, including specific plans for annexation areas and master plans for parts of the
community. In addition, completing the desired updates will benefit from knowledge about wildlife
habitats and energy conservation that may not be available to staff. The update will be managed by
Long-Range Planning Division staff. It is expected that the outcome will benefit by the supplemental
expertise a consultant can bring to the update.
Schedule
The City intends to have a draft ready for adoption in July 1999. This requires that an administrative
draft be available by March 1999 and a public hearing draft by April 1999.
Preliminary Workscope
The scope of work will encompass the tasks necessary to update the City's General Plan
Conservation Element, which will include as an integral part an update of the Energy Conservation
Element and integration with the Open Space Element that was revised in 1994. The resulting
-2- q-�
element must comply with State requirements for element content and address the topics identified in
the following preliminary workscope.
The update must address the following topics. Note that some topics may be dealt with simply
referring to other sections of the General Plan or other documents, while other topics will require
detailed treatment within this element.
"R" means the topic is required by California Government Code 65302(d);
"P" means the topic is permitted to be covered by the Government Code;
"E" means the topic is covered by the existing Conservation Element, and so some part of the
new, integrated element should indicate the status of the topic if it is not included.
1. Water and its hydraulic force (R, E)
The City has adopted a Water and Wastewater Management Element. The water policies of this
element are repeated in the "Urban Water Management Plan" that is required by a different section
of State law. These documents adequately address the "conservation, development, and utilization"
of water by the City. Consistent with Open Space Element policies on creek protection, the City
does not contemplate using or permitting the use of the hydraulic force of any waterways within its
jurisdiction. The existing Energy Conservation Element refers to capturing some of the energy of
water descending to the treatment plant from the Cuesta Tunnel, and having an energy-efficient
water delivery system. It will be sufficient to update those references.
2. Forests (R)
Removal of eucalyptus stands and regeneration of Monterey Pines and native oaks are concerns I.
the region, though the City of San Luis Obispo does not expect to be seriously affected. Tree
removal for development sites, crops, and fire wood is an issue within the region. The City's
planning area does not contain forests in the usual meaning of the word. No commercial timber
resources exist. However, the riparian and oak-woodland plant communities are often identified by
their tree members. The City expects to address conservation of tree-related assets under topic
headings of "wildlife" and "watershed protection."
3. Soils (R, E)
The Open Space Element contains a section on "agricultural lands." It will be sufficient to integrate
the existing material. The new element should include an 8.5" X 11" map showing soil
classifications within areas that are suitable for cultivation when the element is prepared.
4. Rivers and other waters (R)
Creeks, and Laguna Lake and other wetlands, are addressed by the Open Space Element. It will be
sufficient to integrate the existing material.
5. Harbors (R)
No commercial or recreational harbors exist or are contemplated within the City's planning area.
-3- q-6
Recreational boating access at Laguna Lake is addressed by the Open Space Element, the Parks &
Recreation Element (1994), and the Laguna Lake Park Master Plan(1993).
6. Fisheries (R)
No commercial fisheries exist or are contemplated within the City's planning area. Some
recreational fishing occurs along the creeks and at Laguna Lake. The recent Federal listing of
steelhead highlights the importance of that species as a wildlife resource (see item#7 below).
7. Wildlife (R, E)
Wildlife and its habitat are expected to be the primary focus of the update. The Open Space Element
contains several policies concerning the categories of "sensitive habitats" and "unique resources," as
well as some specific habitat types. While biological survey work has been done for recent specific
plans and for individual project EIR's, little citywide survey work has been done and recorded since
the 1970's. Just before adoption of the 1994 updates, the City's ad-hoc, citizen advisory
Environmental Quality Task Force identified key habitat protection issues for locations in and near
the city. In the last year, the City has begun a natural resources inventory, under the direction of its
Natural Resources Manager and with the help of a technical advisory committee. Species lists have
been compiled and public informational brochures published (creeks), or drafted (birds), and others
are planned. Also, the San Luis Obispo County Land Conservancy has done survey work, focusing
on creeks. The Cal Poly Landscape Architecture Department has done some GIS mapping of
biological resources based on State data.
The main task for the consultant will be to compile all existing habitat -and species location
information, supplement it with field verification where that is judged to be necessary, and prepare
maps suitable for reference in evaluating proposed projects. It will not be adequate simply to
compile species lists showing what may occur within the San Luis Obispo area. In addition to small-
scale illustrative maps for the element itself, the information should be made accessible as ArcView
themes through the City's Geographic Information System. It is most important to have parcel-level
information for the area within the urban reserve line. The same type of information should be made
available for the designated greenbelt and the rest of the planning area, though a lower level of
precision in mapping is acceptable outside the urban reserve line. This work should be coordinated
with the City's Natural Resources Manager and the technical advisors and students who have been
working on habitat mapping.
The City intends also to have tabular information on habitat types (and cultivated agricultural soils)
to show the context of the City's land use jurisdiction within the larger regional setting for habitat
conservation, and to track annual changes in the amounts of land in each category that are affected
by changed land-use designations, actual development, or protection through public ownership or
easements. Attribute tables composed through ArcView would be a useful format for this
information.
It is expected that the mapped and tabular information will need to include statements so users will
be aware of the limitations. These would include the date of any original survey work and the fact
that species may exist at locations in addition to those shown. At a minimum, the habitat mapping
should accurately and completely identify the following:
• Wetlands ("jurisdictional" wetlands where projects would be subject to review by State or
Federal agencies)
-4- 9'7
• Grasslands (as defined in the Open Space Element, based on native indicator species being
ppm)
• Oak woodland
• Riparian(as a general category)
• Riparian woodland(creeks with a mature tree canopy composed largely of native species)
• Riparian locations that are particularly important for steelhead, such as spawning gravels and
dry-season pools
• Serpentine seeps
• Chaparral (depending on the variation in species composition, one or more categories in the
group of chaparral and scrub communities may be appropriate)
8. Minerals (R, E)
Mineral or petroleum production is not a significant consideration within the City's jurisdiction.
Commercially valuable sand and gravel do not occur within the city, with the possible exception of
some "red rock" deposits on the boundary between the Airport Area and the Margarita Area, which
are likely to be used in the development of those areas. In the past, clay was extracted for brick
production near Broad Street and Orcutt Road, stone was quarried from Bishop Peak, and cinnabar
(mercury ore) and magnesite were mined in some of the surrounding hills. These activities, even if
economically viable, would not be compatible.with the current urban surroundings or the City's
policies for natural resources protection. More recently, the City was asked to consider, but did not
allow, petroleum exploration on land it owns in the Lopez Canyon area. It will be sufficient to note
these facts and integrate the material from the Open Space Element.
9. Other natural resources (R,E)
See following items.
10. Reclamation of land and waters (P)
"Reclamation" has typically been associated with malting natural habitats that were valuable for
other purposes available for development, such as draining wetlands or damming and diverting
streams. The City does not intend to include reclamation activities in that sense. However, it may be
desirable to note aspects that reinforce conservation themes:
• "Reclaiming" wastewater by treating it and using it for nonpotable uses, thereby reducing the
amount of water needed from new potable sources, which is proposed;
• The Land Use Element's emphasis on using vacant land and making more intense use of
partly developed land within largely developed areas, rather than enlarging the urban area.
11. Prevention and control of the pollution of streams and other waters (P)
The Regional Water Quality Control Board has primary responsibility. The plan and regulatory
powers of this Board should be briefly described. The element should also refer to the City's
responsibilities, which are mainly:
• Operating the Water Reclamation Facility (sewage treatment plant, which will continue tr
discharge to San Luis Obispo Creek) in compliance with permit requirements
-5- 9_ F
• Limiting industrial waste discharges to the sewei system
• Conducting its own construction, repair, maintenance, and operations in ways that avoid water
pollution, and assuring that contractors carrying out such activities for the City or in city
streets do so as well (example: keeping concrete sawing residue from entering storm drains
and the creek; preventing chlorinated water from storage tanks from overflowing into
waterways)
• Reviewing development proposals and inspecting construction (example: parking lot drainage)
• Having the Fire Department, the City's hazardous materials agency, be the first response for
leaks and spills
• Providing public information, such as creek care guides and opportunities for motor oil
recycling
12. Regulation of the use of land in stream channels and other areas required for the accomplishment
of the conservation plan (P)
Overall land use policy is clearly the purview of the Land Use Element, and the existing Open Space
Element contains polices on keeping creek channels open. When the creek setback standards were
added to the Zoning Regulations, there was discussion of whether the City should have more.
restrictions on activities within creeks, such as camping or vehicle use. The City recently adopted
rules for City-owned open space similar to the rules for City parks. The update should answer: Are
more explicit policies needed for such activities on privately owned land that is designated as open
space?
Removal of natural vegetation to accommodate agriculture has been a primary concern for the
County's Agriculture and Open Space Element (in preparation). The replacement of grasslands and
chaparral with vineyards and subtropical orchards has been an issue in other coastal regions of
California. The City's Open Space Element addresses these topics to some extent. The update should
answer: Are more explicit policies or programs needed for San Luis Obispo?
13. Prevention, control, and correction of the erosion of soils, beaches, and shores (P,E)
Beach and shore erosion is not an issue. Most of the watershed is undeveloped and outside the City's
jurisdiction, where surface soil erosion is largely a result of grazing and road building practices. It
will be sufficient to integrate existing material from the Open Space Element, and to note overlap
with water quality goals.
14. Protection of watersheds (P,E)
It will be sufficient to integrate existing material from the Land Use Element and Open Space
Element into sections of the new element dealing with preventing erosion and protecting water
quality-
15. Location, quantity, and quality of rock, sand, and gravel resources (P)
See item#8 above.
-6- q-y
16. Flood control (P)
The basic policies on flood control are in the Land Use Element, the Open Space Element, and the
separately adopted Flood Management Policy (1983), which is proposed to be revised based in par,
on work being done by Questa Consulting Engineers. It will be sufficient to integrate material from
the Open Space Element into the new element, with. any elaborations that may be available and
appropriate from the Flood Management Policy update.
17. Energy (E)
The 1981 Energy Conservation Element is more explicit that the 1973 Conservation Element on this
topic, but the policies and programs need to be updated. The main issue is to what extent, if any,
should the City require or encourage projects to be more energy efficient than the State ("Title 24")
energy requirements. In particular, should solar water heating be prescribed for certain types of
projects? Also, the existing solar exposure standards were adopted where there was a desire to have
some standards, without changing the basic pattern of development allowed by the City's Zoning
Regulations and Subdivision Regulations. Are more effective or simpler standards available?
18. Materials
San Luis Obispo pioneered curb-side recycling is the 1970's. Since then, State involvement in waste
management, including hazardous wastes, and recycling has expanded substantially. The City has
responded in its own operations and through services provided to the community. The City does not
want a solid waste and recycling section for its General Plan. However, citizens should be able to
find in the updated Conservation Element a concise discussion of the City's role in conserving
minerals and fibers (and indirectly, land, water, and energy), and avoiding pollution through wast(
reduction and recycling. The element should refer to plans on these topics that have been adopted by
the City and regional agencies.
19. Historic preservation (E)
The updated element will integrate material on cultural resources from the Open Space Element,
While assuring consistency with material contained in the Land Use Element, separately adopted
guidelines, and demolition regulations.
20. Air resources (E)
Air quality is now addressed by the Land Use Element and the Circulation Element, and by the
County Clean Air Plan. It will be sufficient to refer to these other documents.
21. Esthetics (E)
The 1973 element had sections on noise pollution, odor pollution, and visual pollution. The updated
element will integrate existing material on "scenic resources" contained in the Open Space Element,
while assuring consistency with material on views and urban design contained in the Land Use
Element and the Architectural Review Guidelines. Noise is now addressed in a separate element that
was updated in 1996. Odors are covered by the nuisance provisions of the Municipal Code and the
requirements of the Air Pollution Control District, and need not be addressed other than by
reference to these documents.
-7-
�'!v
Qualificatdons
d. Experience of your firm in performing imilar services..
e. Identification of the personnel in your firm by their role in providing the desired services,
and an explanation of how their work ' be coordinated with City staff.
f. Resumes of the individuals who wou d be assigned to this project, including any sub-
consultants.
g. Standard hourly billing rates for the assi ed staff, including any sub-consultants.
h. Statement and explanation of any ' ces where your firm has been removed from a
project or disqualified from proposing o a project.
Work Program
i. Description of your approach to completi g the work.
j. Tentative schedule by phase and task for ompleting the work.
k. Estimated hours for your staff in perfon riing each major phase of the work, including sub-
consultants.
1. Services or data to be provided by the Cii y.
in. Costs for each major task and the total cost of the consultant services. The cost for firm
members to attend public meetings wh re the element is considered (minimum of three)
should be included as part of the total cc st.
n. Any other information that would assist i is in making this contract award decision.
Proposal Length and Copies
o. Proposals should not exceed 20 pages, ii cluding attachments and supplemental materials.
p. Five copies of the proposal must be subr iitted.
q. Keep glossy paper and plastic to a minin turn.mini Remember,this is a conservation element.
5. Proposal Review and Award Schedule. The following is an outline of the anticipated schedule
for proposal review and contract award:
a. Issue RFP August 21, 1998
b. Receive proposals September 25, 1998
C. Complete proposal evaluation October 2, 1998
d. Conduct finalist interviews October 12 to 16, 1998
e. Finalize staff recommendation October 21, 1998
f. Execute contract November 2, 1998
g. Start work November 6, 1998
OWNERSHIP,DELIVERY AND PRESENIAON OF
WRITTEN OR GRAPHIC PRODUCTS
1. Ownership of Materials. All original dra gs, plan documents and other materials prepared
by or in possession of the Contractor as p of the work or services under these specifications
shall become the permanent property of the 'ty,and shall be delivered to the City upon demand.
-13- / ���