HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/16/1999, 7 - 879 MORRO UTILITIES OFFICE SPACE: PROJECT BUDGET, ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES, CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES counat ,"'w&*Dft
j , AGEnba aEpont 7�
C I T Y OF SAN LUI S OBI SPO
FROM: John Moss,Utilities DirectoLyst Prepared By: Sue Baasch, Administrative
SUBJECT: 879 Monro Utilities Office Space: Project Budget,Architectural Services,
Construction Management Services
CAO RECOMMENDATION
By motion,
• Appropriate additional funds from the Water Fund ($336,100) and the Sewer Fund
($158,200)to add to the 879 Morro Utilities Office Space CIP project budget as follows:
Design Services $ 12,800
Information Services Equipment 49,600
Fees, Special Inspection,Haz Materials 275000
Construction and site work 276,000
Construction Management 22,700
System Furnishings(City standard). 106,200
• Approve phase 2 of the time and materials contract for construction consultation and
management services with Marcia Walther, at a cost not to exceed$43,400; and
• Approve phase 2 of the architectural design services contract with RRM Design Group, at a
cost not to exceed $51,000.
DISCUSSION
In a series of actions in 1998, Council approved the acquisition and renovation of 879 Morro for
Utilities Administration and Conservation staff office space. This request is to approve the
additional budget necessary to complete the project, now that the project has moved to schematic
design stage, and construction estimates have been refined based upon actual interior and exterior
designs, and seismic strengthening requirements. The 879 Morro building, located adjacent to
the Paha Street parking structure, is an unreinforced masonry building with a history of mixed
residential and commercial use, and a zoning designation of central commercial with historic
overlay. At the completion of construction, this building will be seismically strengthened and
equipped with fire sprinklers, meeting a priority goal of the City for the downtown commercial
area.
As identified in previous Council reports, the need for additional Utilities office space resulted
from two factors:
■ Utilities desired to consolidate administrative and conservation staff in cost-effective
office space geographically adjacent to City Hall. (Utilities Conservation Office staff has
7-1
Council Agenda Report-879 Morro Office Space: Project Budget,Arch & Const Mgmt Contracts
Page 2
been "temporarily" located in the old library building for several years, a holdover from
the drought era.)
■ Public Works required additional office space in 955 Morro (where Utilities
Administrative staff is currently located) for staffing additions and work task group
consolidation.
When the building at 879 Morro became available for purchase, staff recommended, and Council
concurred, that the City enter into negotiations to purchase and renovate this building. This
option met the desired objective of creating cost-effective office space close to City Hall, while
offering the additional bonus of securing under City control a building surrounded by the City
Palm Street parking structure. At some point in the future (15 to 20 years), the City parking
program could acquire the building for parking purposes.
Project Work Completed
Action Date
City purchased property at 879-883 Morro($468,034) July 14, 1998
Council approved request for proposals for architectural services and CAO to July 21, 1998
award contract,if within project design budget($63,600)
Council approved time and materials contract with Marcia Walther for July 21, 1998
construction consultation services through the schematic design/preconstruction
phase,at a cost not to exceed$9,240.
Release of Request for Proposals for Architectural Services July 22, 1998
CAO authorized award of architectural services contract(through programming October 8, 1998
and schematic design phase)to RRM Design Group,in the amount of$25,338
Project Schedule
Action Date
Seek Council authorization of total budget for project, now based on schematic February 16, 1999
design; seek Council authorization to award architectural and construction
management contracts for project completion
Seek Architectural Review Commission approval of exterior design of project March–April 1999
Prepare construction documents and final cost estimate May–June 1999
Seek Council authorization to release plans and specifications,and authorize CAO July 1999
to award to low bidder,if within project budget
Award construction contract August–September, 1999
Complete construction and renovation of 879 Morro for office space October–March 2000
Summary of Construction Costs Components
The costs identified below are conservative schematic design estimates including significant
contingency appropriate to industry standards and will be further refined as construction
documents proceed. As part of the preparation of construction documents, the architect will
prepare a final cost estimate for Council consideration at the time staff seeks Council
7-2
Council Agenda Report--879 Morro Office Space: Project Budget,Arch&Const Mgmt Contracts
Page 3
authorization to release plans and specifications for bid. The construction manager, Marcia
Walther,will review all construction documents to ensure constructability.
Cost Estimate Total
Site Costs
Demolition 52,020
Utilities 25,702
Paving 1,424
Other: contractor overhead,profit,cost
escalation,20%design contingency 37,990
Subtotal Site Cost 117,136
Building Costs
Structure 77,173
Exterior 73,564
Interior 30,846
Interior finishes 33,617
Specialty systems 6,960
Equipment 2,100
Mechanical 32,204
Plumbing 27,648
Electrical 40,700
Other contractor overhead,profit,cost
escalation,20%design contingency 170,592
Subtotal Building Cost 495,404
Construction contingency at 10% 61,253
BUILDING CONSTRUCTION COST TOTAL $673,793
Architectural Services
Staff recommends award of time and materials contract for Phase 2 — Construction Documents
and Construction Administration, to RRM Design group, in an amount not to exceed $51,000.
Following a competitive proposal process, a review committee selected RRM Design Group as
the preferred architectural firm to provide the required design services. As the original proposal
exceeded the approved budget, a negotiating team consisting of the Utilities Director and the
Utilities Administrative Analyst met with RRM Design to consider how the scope of the
proposed services could be modified to meet budget objectives without compromising the quality
of the project. After discussion, RRM submitted a revised scope of services which split the
design services into distinct phases, schematic design and construction document development.
RRM Design Group explained that this would reduce design time and expense; further,the phase
two costs would be based on actual construction costs, which was not possible at the time of
7-3
Council Agenda Report-879 Morro Office Space: Project Budget,Arch&Const Mgmt Contracts
Page 4
initial proposal. This has proven to be an effective approach. The final total design costs
recommended in this report are less than those of the original proposal.
Construction Management Services
Staff recommends award of time and materials contract, Phase 2 – Construction and Post-
construction, to Marcia Walther of Marwal Construction, in an amount not to exceed $43,400
($55/hour). On July 21, 1998, Council authorized a time and materials contract, Phase 1 – Pre-
construction and Consultation Services, with Marcia Walther, in amount not to exceed $9,240
($55/hour) . At that time, staff explained its intent to return to Council for approval of the Phase
2 contract with Marcia Walther for project construction management services at the time
construction costs and extent were more fully defined. Ms. Walther has extensive experience
and valuable knowledge of City projects, having previously served as construction manager for
the construction of Fire Station #1, Parks and Recreation offices, and the City Hall renovation.
In addition, Ms. Walther has been identified as the construction manager for the Carnegie
Library renovation,which may allow some overhead sharing between the two projects.
Project Costs
Total project costs based on expenditures to date and current estimates identified previously in
this report are shown in the following table:
Project Costs by Type
RequestedApproved Additional Total
Studies(Appraisal,Phase 1 assessment,study of
construction costs) 9,500 0 9,500
Design 63,600 12,800 76,400
Construction related expenses
Information systems(server,printer,phones) 49,600 49,600
Fees,Special Inspection,Hazardous Materials
abatement 27,000 27,000
Construction and site work 397,800 276,000 673,800
Systems furnishings 106,200 106,200
Construction Management 30,000 22,700 52,700
Acquisition 480,000 0 480,000
Total 980,900 494,300 1,475,200
Cost Effectiveness Analysis
To analyze the comparability of this project with other downtown office space, staff has prepared
the following analysis:
The capital project budget estimate is $1,475,200. This total includes design and construction
management costs, equipment and furnishings costs, as well as construction cost estimates with
20% design contingency and 10% construction contingency. If this amount is reduced by the
7-4
Council Agenda Report-879 Morro Office Space: Project Budget,Arch&Const Mgmt Contracts
Page 5
($1,475,200 less $106,200 and $49,600), the revised total construction and acquisition cost is
$1,319,400. Assuming a fifteen-year use as City office space,the monthly cost for this additional
office space is $1.83 per square foot. Assuming a twenty-year use as City office space, the
monthly cost is $1.37 per square foot. Office space in the downtown area currently rents for
$1.35 to $1.65 per square foot per month. The Utilities Department currently pays the General
Fund $1.35 per square foot per month for its 955 Morro office space through the cost allocation
plan. The City recently leased commercial space available in the Marsh Street parking structure
to a local business at a cost of$1.59 per square foot per month.
ALTERNATIVE
Maintain existing situation If Council should choose not to proceed with this project, there
would be the following impacts:
• Use of the 879 Morro structure. Under their current lease, GST-Call America plans to
vacate the 879 Morro structure by the end of May. To avoid a vacant building and loss of
potential rental income, the City Utilities Department would recommend a new lease, with
this or another tenant. The issue of seismic strengthening would need to be addressed.
• Office space needs for Utilities. Utilities Administrative staff would remain at 955 Morro,
and the Utilities Conservation Office staff would remain at the old library. Utilities would
need to evaluate how best to meet the office needs of the Conservation staff and would likely
recommend some modification of their current space and new furnishings consistent with the
City standard.
• Office space needs for Public Works. The Public Works department would need to plan
how to provide office space for the engineering inspection staff(five inspectors) who were
temporarily moved to the Corporation Yard, pending the availability of office space at 955
Morro. In addition, Public Works could not contemplate consolidating Geodata Services
with engineering at 955 Morro. .
FISCAL 51PACT
This report recommends the appropriation of an additional $494,300 to the 879 Morro capital
improvement project budget, for a total estimated project cost of $1,475,200. This includes
design; purchase of systems furnishings and information services equipment; construction and
site work; and construction management. The requested appropriation has been divided between
the Water and Sewer Funds based on the job assignments and current budget charge codes of the
Utilities staff who will occupy this building.
Project Funding by Source
Requested
Water Fund 1 670,100 1 336,100 1 1,006,200
Sewer Fund 310,800 158,200 469,000
Total 980,900 494,300 1,475,200
7-5
i
Council Agenda Report-879 Morro Office Space: Project(Budget,Afth$Const Mgmt Contracts
Page 6 _
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1 —Agreement with RRM Design Group
Attachment 2=Agreement with Mar Wal Construction, Inc.
AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW IN THE COUNCIL OFFICE_
Schematic Design Report
7-G
Attachment 1
AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into in the City of San Luis Obispo on this day
of by and between the CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, a municipal
corporation,hereinafter referred to as City,and RR M DESIGN GROUP,hereinafter referred to as Architect.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, on July 22, 1998, City requested proposals for Architectural Services for the renovation to
office space and seismic strengthening of 879 Morro per Specification No.9229.
WHEREAS,pursuant to said request,Architect submitted a proposal which was accepted by City for Said
services.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual promises, obligations, and covenants hereinafter
contained,the parties hereto agree as follows:
1. TERM. The term of this Agreement shall be from the date of this Agreement is made and
entered,as fust written above,until acceptance or completion of said services. '
2. INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE. City Specification 9229 and Architect's proposal dated
August 27, 1998 and revised scope of services dated February 8, 1999 ,are hereby incorporated in and made a part
of this Agreement.
3. CITY'S OBLIGATIONS. For providing services as specified in this Agreement as construction
documents, bid administration, and construction observation and administration, City will pay and Architect shall
receive therefor compensation in a total sum not to exceed$51,000.
4. ARCHITECT'S OBLIGATIONS. For and in consideration of the payments and agreements
hereinbefore mentioned to be made and performed by City,Architect agrees with City to do everything required by
this Agreement and the said specification as revised by the revised work scope dated February 8, 1999 submitted by
Architect.
5. AMENDMENTS. Any amendment,modification,or variation from the terms of this Agreement
shall be in writing and shall be effective only upon approval by the City Administrative Officer of the City.
7
6. COMPLETE AGREEMENT. This written Agreement, including all writings specifically
incorporated herein by reference, shall constitute the complete agreement between the parties hereto. No oral
agreement, understanding, or representation not reduced to writing and specifically incorporated herein shall be of
any force or effect,nor shall any such oral agreement, understanding, or representation be binding upon the parties
hereto.
7. NOTICE. All written notices to the parties hereto shall be sent by United States mail,postage prepaid by
registered or certified mail addressed as follows:
City Public Works Department
City of San Luis Obispo
955 Morro Street
San Luis Obispo,CA 93401
Architect RRM Design Group,Attn: Mary McGrath
3701 South Higuera Street
San Luis Obispo,CA 93401
(805)543-1794
8. . AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT. Both City and Architect do covenant that each
individual executing this agreement on behalf of each party is a person duly authorized and empowered to execute
Agreements for such parry.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties hereto have caused this instrument to be executed the day and year
first above written.
ATTEST: CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO,A Municipal Corporation
By:
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ARCHITECT
Q'Atf,A By.
rney
7
FEB-08-99 10:06 FROM-RRM DESIf 'UP T-092 P.01/09 F-925
:•'y�,' G :z EKETBIT A
ltr.R .Sala ►iycy
MdP +alt '-moi.
R R M D E S I G N G R O U P
Arrharrrurr-Planning-Enginrrnng-SmoryinS-lntrnurs-Landsrnpr ArchitrtrUrV
February 8, 1999
Via Far: 781-7198
Ms. Sue Ban h,Administration Analyst
City of San Luis Obispo Utilities Department
955 Monro Street
San Luis Obispo,CA 93401
Re: Work Scope for Phase H—Renovation to Office Space and Seismic Strengthening of the Building
Located at 879 Morro Street,San Luis Obispo
Dear Ms.Baasch:
On behalf of RRM Design Group's entire team, we are very pleased to provide you with a proposal,nd work
scope for Phase II of the renovation and seismic strengthening of your building at 879 Monro Street We are
looking forward to continuing our work on this project and to providing the City with the same higt level of
service provided in Phase L I have attached a work scope and fee proposal for Phase II which include; services
for construction documents, bid assistance and construction administration based on the construction value of
$612,539.
Thank you once again for selecting our team for your project. I look forward to our continued suc=s on this
project and to setting a start date for the balance of this project.
Sincerely,
RRM DESIGN GRO
Mary McGrath,AIA
Architect
Attachment
cc: Victor Montgomery,RRM
v/A98048%um1 C•ovLC-We&Fw -2_8,99
Sure Luis Obopu-Oakdale
3701 South figuria Strmt-San Luis Obispo,U 110rnia 91401 Phone.8u5.143 '794FAX Sug.54}4(4)9 7-9
A CW,!,Ir,,n•l........W,,l Vw:n,%I....A.....rt V.A,,IIII�.I 9......./):cry Al,,ha t 9 Cr..31 N,;.1.1 lrrl l6ri.L1 4,6,
FEB-OB-99 10:07 FROWRRY DESIGN "IP T-092 P.02/09 F-925
Crr(OF 5AN W15 OBLSPO
Renovation to Office Space and 5el5MIC 5trengthemng of 579 Morro 5treet
5peaficat+on No. 9229
II. WORK PROGRAM FOR PMA5E Il
A. PROJECT UNDERSTANDING AND APPROACH
SUMMARY OF APPROACH
The following is a project work plan developed by RRM for City of San Luis Obispo Utility Depot trent
office renovation project located at 879 Morro Street, San Luis Obispo, California. This plan of dines
services for construction documents,bid administration,and construction observation and administrate in.
Included for each task is a description of the approach and a listing of the anticipated products to be
provided based on a Building Seismic Retrofit and Remodeling Construction Budget of$612,539.
CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS AND COST FsrEAATE
Approach
Based on the approved schematic design report and estimate and with direction from the City Course d and
Utility Department, the prcject consultants will use their technical talent and professional experience in the
seismic retrofit and remodel of office buildings to produce the complete construction plans. Work will be to
all applicable codes using standard production procedures. The set will include all plans, m aerial
specifications,and engineering reports.
50%Construction Documents
Construction Document kickoff meeting
• 50%complete Construction Documents
Substantially complete structural calculations
Substantially complete specifications
• Selection of interior finish materials and colors
• Manufacturer's product data
• Meeting minutes
• Updated Project Schedule
• Updated Program Statement
• Construction cost—further development/update of the Schematic construction cost estimate
90%Consduction Documents
1. Substantial complete building construction drawings(plan check submittal package)
2. Complete product specifications
3. Complete equipment and material cut-sheets
4_ Engineering calculations and energy documentation
5. Final General Requirements of Construction
6. Final fixture and furniture plan
7. Updated construction cost estimate in CSI format
RRM Design Group
7-10
I
FEB-08-99 10:07 FROYI-RRN DESIr IUP T-092 P.03/09 F-925
CITY OF 5AN LUIS 0515FO
Renovation to Office Space and 5eemic 5trengthenmg of 879 Morro 5treet
5pecification No. 9229
CONSTRUCTION DOcumENTs AND COST ESTIMATE-coNTINUED
Final Construction Docronents
• Completed construction documents-Bid Documents
• Completed specifications-Bid Documents
• Completed structural calculations
• Construction Cost—update of the 90% Construction Document construction cost estimate to i effect
plan check comment revisions for the final Engineers Estimate
BIDADMINISTRATION
Approach
During the bidding process, speed and accuracy are crucial. With most disciplines in-house or loci 1, the
RRM approach is to establish the means to quickly respond to contractors'requests as well as client-m tiated
revisions. During bid review and negotiations,cost estimate reports will serve as a guideline for adjusi went,
if needed,of.the contract scope and amount.
Andapated Products
1. Clarifications and Addenda
2. Product substitution review
3. Pre-bid review meeting minutes
CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION AND ADMII4miuTION
Approach
Speed and accuracy are again critical during the construction phase. During construction,problems r o not
get better with time. We pursue an aggressive approach to problem solving with the contractor and w)rk to
develop creative solutions to field issues.
Tasks to be Completed
Construction Services
1. Weekly review of construction progress attended by architect with review of field reports prepat ed by
others
2. Construction progress review by consultants as needed
3. Submittal/Shop drawing review
4. Clarifications/field questions
1. Review of Contractor Application for Payment
2. Assist in the preparation of Change Orders/Architect's Supplemental Instructions,if necessary
3. Final walk-through and punch list
Record Drawings
1. Reproducible documents communicating .contractors' "red-marked" set depicting utility a avice
locations and all significant plan or constriction revisions.
RRM Design Group q
2 /-11
FEB-08-99 10:07 FROM-RRM DESIGN --"]P T-092 P.04/09 F-925
CITY of 5AN W5 O515Fo
Renovation to Office Space and 5ei5mic 5trengthenmg of 579 Morro 5treet
5pecification No. 9229
0
CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION AND ADMINISTRATION-CONTHiM
Anticipated Products
1. Written responses and graphic exhibits for supplemental instructions,cost request bulletins
2. Submittal review and tracking log
3. Change Order documents
4. Diskette with record drawings
5. Post construction evaluation
vim&8052=n-RFP-w&Pw#.2.2."
C
RW Design Group �_12
3
Attachment 2
AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into in the City of San Luis Obispo on this day
of , by and between the CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, a municipal
corporation, hereinafter referred to as City, and MAR WAL CONSTRUCTION, INC, hereinafter referred to as
Construction Manager/Inspector.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS,the City has requested a time and materials proposal for Construction Management/Inspection
Services for the renovation to office space and seismic strengthening of 879 Morro.
WHEREAS, pursuant to said request, Construction Manager submitted a proposal which was accepted by
City for Phase 1,preconstruction construction consultation services.
WHEREAS, the City is now ready to proceed to construction of said project, and Construction Manager
has submitted a scope of services for construction and project close-out services.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual promises, obligations, and covenants hereinafter
contained,the parties hereto agree as follows:
1. TERM. The term of this Agreement shall be from the date of this Agreement is made and
entered,as fust written above,until acceptance or completion of said services.
2. CITY'S OBLIGATIONS. For providing services as specified in this Agreement, City will pay
and Construction Manager shall receive therefor compensation in a total sum not to exceed$43,400. Compensation
will be paid per billed invoice,based on actual hours and materials.
3. CONSTRUCTION MANAGER'S OBLIGATIONS. For and in consideration of the payments
and agreements hereinbefore mentioned to be made and performed by City,Construction Manager agrees with City
to provide services as set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated into this Agreement. Construction
Manager further agrees to the terms set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated into this Agreement.
4. 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 Administrative Officer of the City.
7-13
5. COMPLETE AGREEMENT. This written Agreement, including all writings specifically
incorporated herein by reference, shall constitute the complete agreement between the parties hereto. No oral
agreement,understanding, or representation not reduced to writing and specifically incorporated herein shall be of
any force or effect,nor shall any such oral agreement,understanding,or representation be binding upon the parties
hereto.
6. NOTICE. All written notices to the parties hereto shall be sent by United States mail, postage
prepaid by registered or certified mail addressed as follows:
City Public Works Department
City of San Luis Obispo
955 Morro Street
San Luis Obispo,CA 93401
Construction Manager Attn: Marcia Walther
Mar Wal Construction
P.O.Box 13034
San Luis Obispo,CA 93406
(805)461-3411
7. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT. Both City and Construction Manager do
covenant that each individual executing this agreement on behalf of each party is a person duly authorized and
empowered to execute Agreements for such party.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties hereto have caused this instrument to be executed the day and year
first above written.
ATTEST: CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO,A Municipal Corporation
By:
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: CONSTRUCTION MANAGER
By:
7-14
Feb-08-99 07:38A Mary Construction Inc. 805 51-3411 P_01
EXEITBIT A
A AR CONSTRuMONnVC
AL From Concept to Completion
UCC 665115
February 5, 1999
Ms. Sue Baasch Fax: 781-7198
Administrative Analyst Total pages(4)
Utilities Department
City of San Luis Obispo
955 Morro Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Re: Utilities Department Building-Rehabilitation
Proposal for Construction Management/Resident Inspection Services
Dear Sue:
Per your request, I have outlined the scope of services necessary for the rehabilitation of the 879
Morro Street building for the Utilities Department. The.time required for the preconstruction,
construction and close-out phases of the project follow a usual standard of practice based on the
project design requirements, construction management of the contracts and resident inspection
services.
Scone of Services
DesiQ_n/Preconstruction Phase
I) Assist the City in the selection of the Architect. (Included under separate P.O.)
2) Assist the City during the design phase and develop project programming requirements.
(Included under separate P.O.)
3) Construction Documents: (Included under separate P.O.)
A. Provide constructability reviews of plans and specification for construction
management controls,maintainability and detail issues.
B. Provide the Bid documents,Agreement, and General Conditions that form the"up
front"portion of the Specifications.
4) Bid Phase: (Included under separate P.O.)
A. Coordinate bidders questions viathe"Request for Interpretation"system provided for
in the construction specifications.
B. Coordinate and conduct bid opening.
C. Review bids for compliance with specification bid requirements. Prepare
(805)461-3411
Post Office Box 13034 - San Luis Obispo, CA 93406 7-15
Feb-08-99 07:38A Marwr - Construction Inc. 805 -1-3411 P.02
recommendations of alternates for City selection based on best use of available funds
and City requirements.
D. Coordinate compilation of required contract documents for processing and approval
by the City.
E. Coordinate and conduct pre-construction conference.
Construction Phase
1) The Construction Manager (CM) is to provide administrative, management and related
services as required to coordinate the work of the Contractors with the activities and
responsibilities of the Construction Manager, the City, and the Architect to complete the
Project in accordance with the City's objectives for cost,time,and quality.The Construction
Manager is to administer all general conditions and construction support activities on behalf
of the City.
2) Conduct construction and progress meetings as required to discuss such matters. as
procedures,progress;problems and scheduling.
3) Establishment of quality control standards based on industry practices.
4) Review the General Contractor's monthly progress schedule and notify the City of non-
performance with the contract completion requirements. Recommend action to be taken to
bring the schedule back into line.
5) Recommend courses ofaction to the City when the requirements of the contract are not being
fulfilled and the non-performing party will not take satisfactory corrective action.Implement
City direction
6) Recommend changes made necessary or desirable as a result of situations incurred during
the actual construction. Review said requests for changes and submit recommendations to
the City.
7) Rqview payment applications by the Contractor for progress and final payments. Make
recommendations for certification to the City for payment.
8) Determine in general,that the work of each Contractor is being performed in accordance
with the requirements of the Contract Documents.As required, make recommendations to
the City regarding special inspections or testing and of work not in accordance with the
provisions of the Contract Documents. Subject to the review of the City,reject work which
does not conform to the requirements of the Contract Documents.
7716
Feb-08-99 07:39A Marw - Construction Inc. 805 "61-3411 P.03
9) Maintain liaison and coordinate the activities of the City, Architect, Consultants, and
cooperate with other regulatory agencies and governing bodies.
10) Provide Resident Inspection services to ensure compliance with code,plans,specifications
and quality control.Provide daily logs containing records of weather,Contractor's work on
site, number of workers, work accomplished, problems encountered, and other similar
relevant data as the City may require. Coordinate the services of special inspectors as
required.
11) Create, maintain and make available to the Contractors, a Request for.Inform4tion form,
whenever any convective change is necessary in field construction that will result in a
variance from the specifications and plans as originally issued.
l 2) Consult with the Architect and the City over any Contractor requested interpretations of the
meaning and intent of the plans and specifications,and assist in the resolution of questions
which may arise.
13) Receive and log all Shop Drawings,Product Data,Samples and other Contractor submittals
prior to transmission to the Architect. ,Coordinate with the Architect procedures for
expediting the processing and approval of Shop Drawings,Product Data,Samples and other
submittals.
14) Maintain at the project site, curfent record copies of all Agreements, Drawings,
Specifications, Addenda, Field Orders, Bulletins, Contractor Payment Requests, Change
Orders,modifications,and other relevant Contract Documents in good order and marked to
record all changes made during construction to: Shop Drawings, Product Data, Samples,
submittals, purchases, maintenance and operating manuals and instructions, other related
documents and revisions which arise out of the work in the contract
15) When the Contractor's work or a designated portion thereof is substantially complete prepare
for the City, a list of incomplete or unsatisfactory items via a"punch list".
Project Close-out
1) Following the issuance of the Certificate of Substantial completion of the Project or
designated portions thereof,evaluate the completion ofthe work of the Contractor and make
recommendations to the City when work is ready for final inspections. Coordinate and
conduct final inspections with the City and the Architect.
2) Secure and transmit to the City and Architect required guarantees,affidavits,releases,bonds,
and waivers. Coordinate delivery of all keys, manuals, record drawings, and maintenance
stocks to the City.
7-17
Feb-08-99 07:39A Marwr Construction Inc. 805 -1-3411 P.04
Fee Schedule
The costs are based on assuming a level of performance from the Architect and General Contractor
over which Marwal Construction has no control.l have included time for the design/preconstruction,
construction phase, and project close-out phases. If the City wants to increase the scope of my
services it will be based on hourly rates.already established.
Phase Hours Unit rate Total
Construction Manager/Resident Inspector.
Preconstruction (Included under separate P.O.)
Construction- 528 $55.00/hr $29,040.00
(Assumed 4 hours per day/6 months)
Project Close-out- 168 $55.00/hr $ 9,240.00
Construction Expediter:
All.Phases- 205 $25.00/hr 5,120.00
Total Proposal Costs $43,400.00
The above unit rates include all necessary business expenses including$1.0 million General Liability
and Automobile insurances. Additional insured endorsements can be provided upon request.
Again, thank you for this opportunity to be of service. Please feel free to contact me if you require
any additional information. I can be reached at the following numbers,(805)461-3411 or paged at
(805) 546-2526.
Sincerely,
Mazcia Walther ;
Marwal Construction Inc.
cc:Utilities Proposal Feb 5, 1999
7-10
Exhibit B—Mar Wal Construction,Inc.Agreement
1. Compensation for Authorized Additional Expenses. To receive compensation for
additional expenses outside the scope of the project work,Mar Wal construction Inc.,
("the Consultant")shall obtain prior written authorization from the City to incur those
expenses. Compensation for these additional expenses shall include time and materials
only without markup.
2. 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).
3. Ability to Perform. The Consultant represents that it possesses, or has arranged
through subcontracts, all capital and other equipment, labor, materials, and licenses
necessary to cant' out and complete the project work in compliance with any and all
federal,state,county,city,and special district laws ordinances,and regulations.
4. Payment of Taxes. The contract prices shall include full compensation for all taxes
which 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. Immigration Act of 1986. The Contractor warrants on behalf of itself and all
subcontractors engaged for the performance of this work that only persons authorized to
work in the United States pursuant to the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986
and other applicable laws shall be employed in the performance of the work hereunder.
7. Contractor Non-Discrimination. In the performance of this work, the Contractor
agrees that it will not engage in, nor permit such subcontractors as it may employ, to
engage in discrimination in employment of persons because of age, race, color, sex,
national origin or ancestry,sexual orientation,or religion of such persons.
8. Interests of Contractor. The Contractor covenants that it presently has no interest,and
shall not acquire any interest direct or indirect or otherwise,which would conflict in any
manner or degree with the performance of the work hereunder.The Contractor further
covenants that,in the performance of this work,no subcontractor or person having such
an interest shall be employed. The Contractor certifies that no one who has or will have
any financial interest in performing this work is an officer or employee of the City. It is
hereby expressly agreed that, in the performance of the work hereunder,the Contractor
shall at all times be deemed an independent contractor and not an agent or employee of
the City.
7-19
Exhibit B-Mar Wal Construction,Inc.Agreement
9. Hold Harmless and Indemnification. The Contractor agrees to defend, indemnify,
protect and hold the City and its agents, officers and employees harmless from and
against any and all claims asserted or liability established for damages or injuries to any
person or property, including injury to the Contractor's employees, agents or officers
which arise from or are connected with or are caused or claimed to be caused by the acts
or omissions of the Contractor,and its agents, officers or employees,in performing the
work or services herein, and all expenses of investigating and defending against same;
provided,however,that the Contractor's duty to indemnify and hold harmless shall not
include any claims or liability arising from the established sole negligence or willful
misconduct of the City,its agents,officers or employees.
10. 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.
11. 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; which
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 such breach. "Reasonable value" includes fees
or charges for goods or services as of the last milestone or task satisfactorily delivered
or completed by the Contractor as may be set forth in the Agreement payment
schedule; compensation for any other work, services or goods performed or provided
by the Contractor shall be based solely on the City's assessment of the value of the
work-in-progress in completing the overall 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.
7-20
Exhibit B-Mar Wal Construction,Inc.Agreement
12. Insurance. The Contractor shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract
insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may
arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the
Contractor, its agents, representatives, employees, or subcontractors.
Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as:
Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage(occurrence form CG 0001).
Insurance Services Office form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile Liability, code 1
(any auto).
Workers' Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability
Insurance.
Minimum Limits of Insurance. Contractor shall maintain limits no less than:
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.
Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage.
Employer's Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease.
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:
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. 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.
Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies including
breaches of warranties shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers,
officials, employees, agents or volunteers.
7-21
Exhibit B-Mar Wal Construction,Inc.Agreement
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.
Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage
shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in
limits except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, return
receipt requested, has been given to the City.
Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current
A.M. Best's rating of no less than ANII.
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.
7-22
r
r MEMORANDUM
Date: 2/16/99
To: Mayor&Members of the Council
From: Lee Price, City C r�
RE: Revised Minutes
Attached please find revisions to the minutes of January 19`x, 30'and February 2nd. The
changes,recommended by Vice Mayor Romero and Council Member Howell Marx,will provide
greater accuracy and clarity. Language highlighted is new.
City Council Meeting Page 2
• Z
Tuesday,January 19, 1999-7:00 p.m.
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL-ANTICIPATED LITIGATION
Pursuant to Government Code§54956.9(c)
Number of Cases: 1
ACTION. No action taken.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Astrid Gallagher praised staff for the Railroad District Plan. She asked staff to consider
three areas that she felt needed more work: 1)traffic on Santa Barbara and Les Osos
Street; 2)garbage_ nd graffi clean-up; and,3)safety and health concerns in the area.
APPOINTMENTS
Al. APPOINTMENTS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION (File No.305-02)
Council Member Marx reported. At the request of Council Member Schwartz,the Council
took action on the two appointments individually.
ACTION: Moved by Marx/Ewan to appoint Alice Loh to an unexpired tern to begin
immediately and end 3131102; motion carried 5:0.
Council Member Schwartz and Vice Mayor Romero recommended that the Council select a
candidate who has lived in San Luis Obispo longer and who has greater We Ianrtlri
experiences than applicant Stephen Peterson. Discussion ensued.
ACTION: Moved by Marx/Ewan to appoint Stephen Peterson to an unexpired term to
begin immediately and end 3131101; carried 3:2(Romero,Schwartz).
A2. APPOINTMENTS TO THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION (File No.306-02)
Council Member Schwartz reported.
ACTION: Moved by Schwartz/Romero to appoint Jennifer Metz to fill an unexpired
term to begin immediately,ending on 3/31101; motion carried 5:0.
ACTION: Moved by Schwartz/Romero to appoint Zeljka Howard to fill an unexpired
term to begin Immediately, ending on 3131100; motion tamed 5:0.
CONSENT AGENDA
ACTION: Moved by Romero/Ewan to approve the consent agenda as recommended
by the City Administrative Officer, motion carried 5:0. Comments: Council Member
Ewan noted he was pleased to see the cooperative agreement with the school district
(Item C4). Council Member Ewan also voiced concurrence with the recommendation
to name the trail for Gary Felsman, as he was instrumental in raising $50,000 to
purchase the open space on Bishops Peak (Item C5). Council Member Schwartz
noted that he would refrain on Item Cl due to absence.
f
City Council Meeting Page 5
Tuesday,January 19, 1999-7:00 p.m.
Mayor Settle opened the public hearing.
Appellant Brian Christianson,818 Pismo Street,distributed written comments in support of
the appeal. He asserted that the process had not been followed properly and that staff has
misled the applicants.
Brett Cross commented that the renovation project is not a minor deviation and noted that
significant changes are proposed. He suggested that staff took exception to the rules and
urged the Council to uphold the zoning regulations.
Jim Loves summarized his letter(on file with the City Clerk). He proposed that the Council
develop a new vision, let the community take a look at both malls in a facilitated community
workshop and follow the policies in the General Plan.
City Clerk Price read into the record a letter from John Conner, General Manager Embassy
Suites,encouraging the Council to move forward with the renovations to the mall(letter on
file with the City Clerk).
Andy Trackman,representing the applicants,spoke in opposition to the appeal and
addressed issues related to the design.
Bill Swackhammerrepresenting the owners of the mail (Mony Life Insurance Company),
read portions of his letter submitted to Council (on file with the City Clerk). He urged
support for the staff recommendation and,further, requested that the appeal be denied.
A letter from Joe Lew, Chairman of Gottschalks,was read into the record urging support
and approval of the plan.
In rebuttal,appellant Brian Christianson implored the Council to act in accordance with the
planned development ordinance of the municipal code.
Mayor Settle closed the public hearing.
Lengthy Council discussion followed. Council Member Marx tated that the matter should
referred to the Planning Commission becciuse.the proposed changes are not minor She
summarized her concerns and recommendations expressed in her memo to Council dated
1119/99on file with the City Clerk). Community Development Director Jonas corrected the
number of parking spaces and demonstrated an expeditious time line (4-6 months) If the
Council directs the matter to the Planning Commission. City Attorney Jorgensen advised
that the judgment by Community Development Director was reasonable and defensible,
particularly in light of the consistent instructions given to staff by Council to expedite and
facilitate revitalization of the mall.
Vice Mayor Romero commented in support of the Community Development Director's
Interpretation. Council Member Schwartz disagreed and argued that planned development
ordinance requires a preliminary plan,a final development plan and two public hearings.
Referencing Section 17.62.080(a), Council Member Schwartz emphasized that the changes
proposed require a new application and the submittal of new preliminary plans. He added
that while he supports the renovation of the mall, it must be done in a lawful way.
Mayor Settle commented that he considers the plan a removal and/or replacement of an
existing use and indicated he would support denying the appeal to allow the project to
proceed.
City Council Meeting Page 2
Saturday,January 30, 1999-9:00 a.m.
Richard Kriet suggested that the Council make parks and recreation one of the highest
priorities for the City and proposed the development of a complex that meets recreational
needs of all ages, including swimming, hiking and sports fields.
Charlie Herrera. Residents for Quality Neighborhoods,encouraged the Council to improve
neighborhoods by adding a code enforcement officer.
Richard Cransdo. spoke in support of open space acquisition and urged the Council to
acquire the Morganti Property on Los Osos Valley Road to secure its preservation.
Lora Hutson reiterated her hope that the Council will implement a domestic partnership
ordinance and review the Boy Scout lease issue.
—End of public testimony—
Facilitator Don Maruska followed up on the process and summarized the criteria for
developing effective goal statements. He noted that the Council would work on six
categories,to be defined as public safety, public utilities,transportation, leisure,cultural
and social services,community development and general government. The Council began
the long process of crafting goal statements.
After in-depth review and discussion of proposed goals by category and crafting language
for candidate major city goals,staff developed a composite list of the 29 candidate goals
for review by the Council before the selection process. Don Maruska reviewed the agreed
upon scale of prioritizing goals. After discussion,Council decided to increase each
members total number of allowable points from 75 to 80. The voting process ensued.
Clerk Price gathered the individual rating sheets and provided them to members of the
Finance Team for tabulation. Once the count was completed,Council reviewed the results
and discussed the outcome.
Council agreed to defer finalization of the major city goals until 212199. At 6:37 p.m.the
meeting was adjourned to Tuesday, February 2,1999 at 7:00 p.m.in the na hamber,
990 Palm Street,San Luis Obispo.
APPROVED BY COUNCIL: 2/16/99
Lee Price, C.M.0
City Clerk
City Council Meeting Page 5
Tuesday,February 2,1999-7:00 p.m.
Council Member Schwartz emphasized his continued concern that there are few revenue
enhancements in any of the goals.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Rick Pager noted that affordable housing is low on the list and asserted that students at Cal
Poly have all the rental housing. Mayor Settle and Council Member Manx noted that affordable
housing is a priority to the Council and pointed out that several proposed goals include
housing issues. Finance Director Statler confirmed that housing is reflected in a number of
goals.
—End of public testimony—
ACTION: Moved by Romero/Ewan to approve the goals approved,as amended;
motion carried 5:0.
C1. PARKING LOT EXTENSION: PALM& NIPOMO. SPECIFICATION NO.99550B. (File
No.601-06)
Council Member Schwartz noted that he had pulled this item for the purpose of demonstrating
for the Council the importance of deferring action on the surface parking lot until later this
year when the Council finalizes its goals. Using overhead transparencies of the downtown
concept plan to illustrate parking uses in the past,he voiced support for the Monterey/Broad
Street"dog-leg"closed to vehicular traffic,which would create a pedestrian network through
Mission Plaza. He noted that the downtown concept plan is a unique one which contains a
time-line accepted by a previous Council and expressed his disappointment in the goal
setting process because the concept plan is being set aside.
Public Works Director McCluskey provided background of the Parking and Downtown Access
Plan and how staff came to recommend this project. He explained the need for short-term
parking and a demand by a previous Council to include it in the 4-year Capital Improvement
Plan. He noted that staff will be scheduling a workshop late March or early April to review and
study the Plan. He also provided three options as it relates to the current recommendation:
1)fund/build project as proposed,2)delete mission style sidewalk requirement,or 3)build
some mission style sidewalks. Discussion ensued.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Mike Spangler spoke in support of the recommendation but cautioned the Council that most
enterprise programs fail because parking does not get built where the needs are.
–End of public testimony—
Council Member Ewan proposed that the lot be developed as recommended,with the
exception of mission style sidewalks. He also suggested that staff take a look at the lot that
will be taken out of service for awhile and look at parking in the downtown.
ACTION: Moved by Ewan/Romero to (1) approve plans and specifications for
"Parking Lot Extension: Palm& Nipomo, Specification No.955013" ace tior
ission s I_e_sidewalks,);:(2)appropriate$161,000 from the unappropriated balance
of the Parking Fund and consolidate the remaining funding in the various project
phase accounts for the construction phase; (3) authorize staff to advertise for bids
IV U-11lvu AUtNUA
- 'TE 6-16-99 ITEM #
COMMUNICATION
2/16/99 - - r
TO: City Council & Mayor 1�"
FROM: Jan Howell Marx EVA=
D DIR
IN DIR
RE: Affordable Housing: Agenda Item #1 D FIRE CHIEF
Y D PW DIRThe following are a few comments on Item#1: G D REC DIRCHF
D UTIL DIR
GENERAL CONNIMENTS: D PERS D /3
Infill: the City should create incentives for the use of affordable housing as infill. In lieu fees
should be used to promote infill and compact urban form.
Sprawl: affordable housing should not have the effect o exacerbating sprawl.
Jobs/housing imbalance: eligibility for affordable housing should go first to those in the
appropriate income group who live and work in the City. Employers should be given incentives
for creating affordable housing programs for their employees.
Waiting List: interested and eligible SLO City residents should go onto a waiting list. If they
move away before the housing becomes available,they go off the list.
Speculation: affordable housing should not be used to fuel real estate speculation, but should
work to keep down the overall cost of housing.
Maintain our Affordable Housing Supply: we need to have safeguards to maintain, conserve
and enhance our existing stock of affordable housing.
Grants: the City should seek outside funding for affordable housing projects and low income
rental assistance programs.
Mobilehome Parks: what provisions do we have for expansion of this practical source of
affordable housing in the City?
&&&&&&&&&&&
SPECIFIC COMMENTS
[Language which is bolded below is meant to be added verbatim.]
Page of Staff Report
1-1 "Land dedication"should be changed to"real property dedication' (throughout)to
allow a developer broader options, for instance the dedication of another parcel of already
developed land within city limits for affordable housing purposes and to promo Linfill.
RECEIVED
FEB 1 6 1999
8LO CITY COUNCII
1-2 The "recapture" formula to discourage rapid turnover is a step in the right direction.
The alternative of selling to another eligible low or moderate income buyer is preferable
because it maintains the supply of affordable housing units.
1-3 The decision to use the"Shared Equity"option or in-liue fees on a given project should
belong to the City, not only to the developer. The City needs to stay in control the
number of these units in light of the overall supply of affordable housing.
1-4 Table 1—why are we reducing the affordable housing requirement for expansion areas?
Doesnt this undermine the urban core?
1-15 17.91.020 Alphabetize the terms for easy reference.
1-16 K. Omit"in trust"from description of fund.
1-17 C. Shall be constructed concurrently with market rate units...
1-18 17.91.080 Dedication of Real Property
1-19 17.91.090A. Last line housing and urban design goals.
1-20 17.19.110 Shouldnt the Affordable Housing Agreement should be prepared by the City,
not the developer? That way we can have standard provisions and maintain fair
treatment and consistency.
6. The agreement should specify that rented units are not to be subletted out and that
purchased units are to be owner-occupied and not rented out. (No fueling rental market
rate increases)
1-21 17.91.130 last sentence—Priority shall be given to income eligible households with wage
earners who are City residents and are employed in the City.
17.91.140 Subject to the approval of the City,developers of affordable units...
17.91.150 Said agreement shall provide that the unit shall remain owner-occupied and
shall be recorded... [see page 1-33 Marx comment and French concurrence]
Issue: what if the housing market goes down? What protection does the City have?
17.91.151 shouldnt the recapture fee be paid to the City concurrently with the close
of escrow? [If it has to be paid before the close, the person would have to come up with
another source for the money besides the sale of the unit.]
1-22 17.91.170 Affordable units for sale subject to shared equity agreements shall be
owner occupied. [next to last sentence]
Page 1
CA-ST-ANN - CA GOVT s 65583
West's Ann.Cal.Gov.Code S 65583
> .._sT'S ANNOTATED CALIFORNIA CODES
> GOVERNMENT CODE
> TITLE 7. PLANNING AND LAND USE
> DIVISION 1. PLANNING AND ZONING
> CHAPTER 3. LOCAL PLANNING
> ARTICLE 10.6. HOUSING ELEMENTS
Copr. C West Group 1998 . All rights reserved.
Current through End of 1997-98 Reg. Sess. and 1st Ex. Sess.
S> 65583. Contents of housing element
The housing element shall consist of an identification and analysis of existing and
projected housing needs and a statement of goals, policies, quantified objectives,
financial resources, and scheduled programs for the preservation, improvement, and
development of housing. The housing element shall identify adequate sites for housing,
including rental housing, factory- built housing, and mobilehomes, and shall make
adequate provision for the existing and projected needs of all economic segments of the
community. The element shall contain all of the following:
(a) An assessment of housing needs and an inventory of resources and constraints
relevant to the meeting of these needs. The assessment and inventory shall include the
following:
(1) An analysis of population and employment trends and documentation of projections and
a quantification of the locality's existing and projected housing needs for all income
levels. These existing and projected needs shall include the locality's share of the
rF nal housing need in accordance with Section 65589 .
k An analysis and documentation of household characteristics, including level of
payment compared to ability to pay, housing characteristics, including overcrowding, and
housing stock condition.
(3) An inventory of land suitable for residential development, including vacant sites
and sites having potential for redevelopment, and an analysis of the relationship of
zoning and public facilities and services to these sites.
(4) An analysis of potential and actual governmental constraints upon the maintenance,
improvement, or development of housing for all income levels, including land use
controls, building codes and their enforcement, site improvements, fees and other
exactions required of developers, and local processing and permit procedures. The
analysis shall also demonstrate local efforts to remove governmental constraints that
hinder the locality from
meeting its share of the regional housing need in accordance with Section 65589 .
(5) An analysis of potential and actual nongovernmental constraints upon the
maintenance, improvement, or development of housing for all income levels, including the
availability of financing, the price of land, and the cost of construction.
(6) An analysis of any special housing needs, such as those of the handicapped, elderly,
large families, farmworkers, families with female heads of households, and families and
persons in need of emergency shelter.
(7) An analysis of opportunities for energy conservation with respect to residential
development.
(8) An analysis of existing assisted housing developments that are eligible to change
from low-income housing uses during the next 10 years due to termination of subsidy
contracts, mortgage prepayment, or expiration of restrictions on use. "Assisted housing
developments, " for the purpose of this section, shall mean multifamily rental housing
th-` receives governmental assistance under federal programs listed in subdivision (a) of
St on 65863.10, state and local multifamily revenue bond programs, local redevelopment
proyrams, the federal Community Development Block Grant Program, or local in-lieu fees.
1
Page 2
"Assisted housing developments" shall also include multifamily rental units that were
developed pursuant to a local inclusionary housing program or used to qualify for a
density bonus pursuant to Section 65916.
(A) The analysis shall include a listing of each development by project name and
address, the type of governmental assistance received, the earliest possible date of
change from low-income use and the total number of elderly and nonelderly units that
could be lost from the locality's low-income housing stock in each year during the
10-year period. For purposes of state and federally funded projects, the analysis
required by this subparagraph need only contain information available on a statewide
basis.
(B) The analysis shall estimate the total cost of producing new rental housing that is
comparable in size and rent levels, to replace the units that could change from
low-income use, and an estimated cost of preserving the assisted housing developments.
This cost analysis for replacement housing may be done aggregately for each five-year
period and does not have to contain a project by project cost estimate.
(C) The analysis shall identify public and private nonprofit corporations known to the
local government which have legal and managerial capacity to acquire and manage these
housing developments.
(D) The analysis shall identify and consider the use of all federal, state, and local
financing and subsidy programs which can be used to preserve, for
lower income households, the assisted housing developments, identified in this paragraph,
including, but not limited to, federal Community Development Block Grant Program funds,
tax increment funds received by a redevelopment agency of the community, and
administrative fees received by a housing authority operating within the community. In
considering the use of these financing and subsidy programs, the analysis shall identify
the amounts of funds under each available program which have not been legally obligated
for other purposes and which could be available for use in preserving assisted housing
developments.
(b) (1) A statement of the community's goals, quantified objectives, and policies
relative to the maintenance, preservation, improvement, and development of housing.
(2) It is recognized that the total housing needs identified pursuant to subdivision (a)
may exceed available resources and the community's ability to satisfy this need within
the content of the general plan requirements outlined in Article 5 (commencing with
Section 65300) . Under these circumstances, the quantified objectives need not be
identical to the total housing needs. The quantified objectives shall establish the
maximum number of housing units by income category that can be constructed,
rehabilitated, and conserved over a five-year time period.
(c) A program which sets forth a five-year schedule of actions the local
government is undertaking or intends to undertake to implement the policies and achieve
the goals and objectives of the housing element through the administration of land use
and development controls, provision of regulatory concessions and incentives, and the
utilization of appropriate federal and state financing and subsidy programs when
available and the utilization of moneys in a Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund of an
agency if the locality has established a redevelopment project area pursuant to the
Community Redevelopment Law (Division 24 (commencing with Section 33000) of the Health
and Safety Code) . In order to make adequate provision for the housing needs of all
economic segments of the community, the program shall do all of the following:
(1) Identify adequate sites which will be made available through appropriate zoning and
development standards and with public services and facilities needed to facilitate and
encourage the development of a variety of types of housing for all income levels,
including multifamily rental housing, factory-built housing, mobilehomes, emergency
shelters, and transitional housing in order to meet the community's housing goals as
identified in subdivision (b) . Where the inventory of sites, pursuant to paragraph (3)
of subdivision (a) , does not identify adequate sites to accommodate the need for groups
of all household income levels pursuant to Section 65584, the program shall provide for
sufficient sites with zoning that permits owner-occupied and rental multifamily
residential use by right, including density and development standards that could
r
Page 3
accommodate and facilitate the feasibility of housing for very low and low-income
households. For purposes of this paragraph, the phrase "use by right" shall mean the use
dr not require a conditional use permit, except when the proposed project is a
mi. _,I-use project involving both commercial and residential uses. Use by right for all
rental multifamily residential housing shall be provided in accordance with subdivision
(f) of Section 65589.5.
(2) Assist in the development of adequate housing to meet the needs of low- and
moderate-income households.
(3) Address and, where appropriate and legally possible, remove governmental constraints
to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing.
(4) Conserve and improve the condition of the existing affordable housing stock, which
may include addressing ways to mitigate the loss of dwelling units demolished by public
or private action.
(5) Promote housing opportunities for all persons regardless of race, religion, sex,
marital status, ancestry, national origin, or color.
(6) (A) Preserve for lower income households the assisted housing developments identified
pursuant to paragraph (8) of subdivision (a) . The program for preservation of the
-assisted housing developments shall utilize, to the extent
necessary, all available federal, state, and local financing and subsidy programs
identified in paragraph (8) of subdivision (a) , except where a community has other urgent
needs for which alternative funding sources are not available. The program may include
strategies that involve local regulation and technical assistance.
(B) The program shall include an identification of the agencies and officials
responsible for the implementation of the various actions and the means by which
consistency will be achieved with other general plan elements and community goals. The
local government shall make a diligent effort to achieve public participation of all
economic segments of the community in the development of the housing element, and the
program shall describe this effort.
( The analysis and program for preserving assisted housing developments required by
th mendments to this section enacted by the Statutes of 1989 shall be adopted as an
amendment to the housing element by July 1, 1992.
(e) Failure of the department to review and report its findings pursuant to Section
65585 to the local government between July 1, 1992, and the next periodic review and
revision required by Section 65588, concerning the housing element amendment required by
the amendments to this section by the Statutes of 1989, shall not be used as a basis for
allocation or denial of any housing assistance administered pursuant to Part 2
(commencing with Section 50400) of
Division 31 of the Health and Safety Code.
Copr. (C) West 1999 No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works
nATE ITEM #
February 16, 1999
K;KLE
ILO� DDIS
TO: City Council �'FlN DIR❑ FlBECHU
FROM: Michael D.McCluskey, Public Works Director IO
RIG IG ❑ F IR CHF
❑ MGMT TEAM ❑ REC CiR
SUBJECT: Cal Poly Campus Master Plan ❑ 13 PERS DIR
Item 4 on the February 16, 1999 Council Agenda
RECOMMENDATION
Point out to Cal Poly representatives that eliminating free rides on SLO Transit for students,
faculty,and staff will have deleterious effects on transportation-related facilities at Cal Poly as
well as within the City.
DISCUSSION
At the Council meeting tonight,representatives from Cal Poly will be discussing the process and
schedule for updating the Cal Poly Campus Master Plan. At the Mass Transportation Committee
meeting on February 10, 1999,the Cal Poly representative to the MTC mentioned two related
items:
1. The Campus Master Plan will consider transportation issues.
2. Cal Poly will be eliminating free rides on SLO Transit for students,faculty,and staff
• members.
Some background for new Council members: Starting in 1985 Cal Poly students, faculty,and
staff members began riding SLO Transit at no cost. By simply flashing their Cal Poly ID cards
to the bus driver they could boarded the buses without paying a fare. To make this possible, each
year Cal Poly has paid an amount to the City calculated to compensate the City for the loss of
fare revenue. The results have been impressive. In the first year,the number of annual Cal Poly
trips increased from 102,000 to 256,000. Currently,annual Cal Poly trips amount to 570,000.
The results have been cleaner air, less traffic congestion, and easier parking.
For the past three years,the revenue source Cal Poly uses to pay its annual contribution has
fallen short of the amount needed. Each year, some campus group like ASI or the Cal Poly
Foundation has provided the money needed to close the gap and allow continuation of the free
rides. Because there appears to be no bailout this year,Cal Poly is planning to sell transit passes
to close the$57,000 gap between the money available and its contract obligation to the City. In
effect there will be no more free rides.
The Mass Transportation Committee and Public Works believe that eliminating free rides will
reduce ridership by 150 percent--reversing the increase seen in 1985 when free rides were first
offered. Public Works estimates that 226,000 more automobile trips to Cal Poly will occur each
year. It seems fairly short-sighted to talk about spending millions on the Campus Master Plan
implementation while refusing to come up with a relatively insignificant$57,000 a year to
continue free rides.
• RECEIVED
1 6 1999
SLO CITY COUNCIL
.BATE=?-IA-'Yy ITEM # Comaip
CILDIR
COMMUNICATION 2/16/99 � IR
C EMRE CHIEF
To: City Council Members EkOW1I11
O MGMT TEAM
ERKIOLICE CHF
AM R
From: Tan Howell Marx � 0 A
ERS DIR
Re: EvaluatingPerformance and Nu inted Officials
PERFORMANCE:
Since it is the City Council's upcoming responsibility to evaluate the job performances of the CAO and
City Attorney and decide whether to reappoint or remove them,I request that we put"Evaluation of
Appointed Officials"on the agenda prior to such evaluation.
The present evaluation process has been used for the past ten years I believe that to do an objective job
and make sure the City is well prepared for furore challenges, City Council should take an active role in
shaping the evaluation process. As Lyndon Johnson once said(to paraphrase),your decisions can only be
as good as your information.
The present evaluation form has certain curious features,for instance,it includes questions on the
appointed employee's relations with the public and city employees,but omits any reference to his or her
primary responsibility,i.e. efficient implementation of City Council policy. The evaluation also omits
analysis of appointees'financial performance. If our appointed employees have financial discretion,
surely they should also be evaluated on that basis
To facilitate evaluating the evaluation process,Council Members would need further information,such as
copies of the CAO and City Attorney job descriptions,resumes,past performance evaluations,and
examples of evaluation criteria from several like-size,like-minded cities,i.e. Santa Cruz,Boulder
Colorado,Carmel,etc. Also,an accounting of major CAO discretionary financial decisions under
$50,000 would be helpful.
In my opinion,the public should also be given opportunity to have input into the evaluation process.
NUMBER:
In my opinion,this is also an appropriate time to put on the agenda whether the City should to continue
appointing only two officials,or whether to appoint more as the City has in the past. The full range of
officials allowed us under section 701 of the Charter includes the appointment of City Attorney and City
Administrative Officer,as well as of City Clerk and City Treasurer. These last two positions have been
independently appointed in the past At present, the City has a highly centralized structure This has the
advantage of promoting cohesive organization,but the disadvantage of providing fewer independent
advisors to the City Council and fewer democratic checks and balances We may decide to continue
with the status quo,but if so,that should be the result of deliberation.
cc: John Dunn,
Jeff Jorgenson
Ann Slate
Department Heads
RECEIVED
Fv=a 1 6 1999
SLO CITY COUNCIL
MEEM AGENDA
DATEbl-112 -21 ITEM # �
COMMUNICATIONS 2/16/99 R=CIL MOD DIR
eCAO "N DIR
To. City Council&Mayor BKGAO CURE CHIEF
W-MORNEY OfDIR
From: Jan Howell Marx 0 MGM K10RIa [POOLICE CHF
❑M6MT a'AEC DIR
fa DTIL DIR
Re: Agenda Item: Creation of cul Zone and Urban Growth Boun
SWERS DIR
Since the creation of zoning for Agriculture and Urban Growth Boundary was set as gcel by City
Council,I would hike staff to submit a draft ordinance in this regard and put it onto our agenda for
consideration in the near future.
We need to have this tool in our toolbox.This would implement the 1997 Land Use Element section
1.S.1,which states -rhe City should provide for the continuation of farming through steps such as
provision of appropriate general plan designations and zoning„
This will allow the City to utilize Agriculture zoning as an option when we annex County Ag land and
open the option of utilizing certain preservation/funding tools to protect Agricultural lands(especially
prime agricultural land)within our city limits.
Apparently,this land of zoning has been a Council goal since the early 1990's but has not been
implemented Some members of the public maintain that this failure to implement results from the fact
that agriculture zoning is opposed by City staff. I have requested copies of staff report and minutes from
the discussion of agriculture zoning in the early 1990's,but so far have received nothing
cc: John Dunn
Jeff Jorgenson
Department Heads
RECEIVED
cca 1 6 1999
SLO CITY COUNCIL
• /� 1A,p �n .GftJ
A / MEETINL AGENDA
DATE=ITEM # 3
rtTA4iTeFiNEY
CIL D OIR
PROJECT STATEMENT O FIN DIR
South Side of EI Capitan Way Gearhart 0PWDtR[3 FRE CHIEF
P Y � ) O PW ORt
Planned Development Overlay Zone—Tentative Tract MapKIORIO a POOUREC D CHF
:1 M in [7 lR1L DiR
Project Background O PERS 01
I
aAe
On May 5, 1998, the City Council adopted an ordinance for prezoning and annexation of
properties east of Broad Street in the Edna-Islay Secondary Planning Area. Pending final
approval from LAFCo,this action brings the properties on the south side of El Capitan
Way into the City limits with a medium-density residential (R-2) designation.
Project Description
The project proposes 8 single-family residences on individual lots with an open space
easement along the creek. The homes are two-story, three-bedroom units with an
attached one-car garage. One open parking space is provided in the side yard of each lot.
The homes are designed with covered front porches to provide a sense of neighborhood
and be compatible with the subdivision on the north side of El Capitan Way. The project
on the north side, Tract 2248, was annexed to the City in 1996 and subdivided and
constructed in 1997. The proposed project is in harmony with Tract 2248 and will
complete the community on the El Capitan Way cul-de-sac.
Design Objectives
The primary objective of the project is to provide housing opportunities for moderate-
income households. The housing design combines the simpler form of ownership and
construction found in R-2 districts with the private yard space typical in R-1
developments. Direct access to each unit is provided from the public street. Design
alternatives were evaluated involving shared parking, common open space, and"zero-lot
line'construction. However, these alternatives are costly and complex to administer and
contrary to the goal of providing affordable housing. Furthermore, due to the creek
location,the lots on the south side are not nearly deep enough to provide garages to the
rear as were provided on the north side of El Capitan Way.
The following amenities have been incorporated into the project design:
• Front setbacks are varied to break up a uniform "row"pattern.
• Street trees are planted at uneven intervals for variety (35 feet maximum).
• Each home includes a 10' X 10' covered front porch.
• Front yard landscaping, ground cover, and lawn are provided by the developer.
• Fencing is provided along the side property lines. A 3' foot wood fence with 1' foot
lattice and landscaping is proposed from the cross fence to the front setback line.
Rear yard (creek bank) fencing is not proposed to preserve a feeling of openness
along the creek. If individual homeowners desire an enclosed rear yard for small
children and/or animals, fencing shall not enclose more than one-half the creek
setback area. REC+EIVED
Proj/950301.60/statemnt.doc FCa 1
SLO CITY COUNCIL
1
• One 12' foot drive approach is provided per lot frontage to reduce the paving and
increase the landscaping.
• The creek and eucalyptus grove are preserved in an open space easement.
Development Standards R-2 Requirements Proposed PD Overlay
Density 12 d.u. per acre 10 d.u. per acre
Parking 2 spaces per residence 2 spaces per residence
Street Yard 20 feet 12-15 feet
Side Yard 7 feet 5 feet and 11 feet(Total 16)
Rear Yard 7 feet 57—88 feet
Creek Setback 20 feet 10-20 feet
Minimum Lot Size 6,000 sq. ft. 5,096-8,859 sq. ft.
Maximum Lot Coverage 50% 12-20%
Lot Depth to Width 3:1 3.5:1
Development Schedule
Following annexation and recordation of the tract map, the applicant intends to construct
and sell single-family residences as approved by the subdivision and PD zone.
Planned Development Overlay Zone
The design of the project varies from City standards as follows:
1. Street yard setbacks less than 20 feet- Front yards setbacks of 12 feet to 15 feet,
exclusive of front porches, are proposed in the subdivision. Front porch setbacks vary
from 5' to 12'. The garages are set back 5 feet from the front of the porch. The front
porches do not encroach on the expansive cul-de-sac as they might on a narrow
streetscape. The creek limits the developable area of these lots—reduced street yards
maximize private yard space and respect the creek bank.
2. Side yard less than 7 feet, but a combined 16 feet- Per Table 3 of the Zoning
Ordinance, the minimum required setback is 7 feet from property line. The proposed
setbacks are 5 feet on one side and 11 feet on the other. This provides a standard 5-
foot yard on one side and allows a parking space with fencing on the other. The
proposed combined space is 16 feet, an additional two feet over the required
minimum (14 feet).
3. Creek setback less than 20 feet - Exceptions from creek setbacks are intended to allow
reasonable use of sites where there is no practical alternative. Several lots on this cul-
de-sac are 60 feet from the street right-of-way to the top of creek bank. To provide a
home with a 20-foot front setback and a 20-foot creek setback within these
dimensions is not realistic. The size, shape, and topography of the site are special
circumstances that are not present elsewhere in the vicinity. These site characteristics
Proj/950301.60/statemnt.doc
l
deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by others in the vicinity, i.e., the ability to
build a reasonably sized and shaped home.
A biological survey was prepared and submitted as part of the application. The
location of the homes will not adversely impact the scenic qualities and riparian
habitat of the creek. It concludes that, "no endangered or threatened species of
concern, or candidate species, are listed as potentially being present on the site."The
report recommends the planting of 15 native trees to offset the creek setback
exception. The proposed landscaped plan emphasizes the planting of shrubs (from
the biology survey list) instead of additional large trees. The eucalyptus grove
provides tree cover—shrubs on the top of both creek banks will provide slope
stabilization.
4. Minimum lot size less than 6,000 square feet -The proposed lot sizes range from
approximately 5,100 to 8,860 square feet. The average lot size of 6,075 complies
with minimum in the R-2 zone. The proposed lot sizes are compatible with the
neighborhood character. The lot sizes are similar to the subdivision on the other side
of the cul-de-sac. The lots in Tract 2248 range in size from 5,100 to 8,600 square
feet, with the majority of the parcels being 6,100 square feet. The 5-6,000 square foot
lots provide individual ownership of parcels in a medium density area. The density
standards of the R-2 zone are not exceeded with the smaller lots and the creek is
preserved in an open space easement.
5. Lot depth to width ratio exceeds 3:1 -The underlying parcel configuration and creek
location do not allow for more conventionally proportioned lots. The applicant
desires to provide single-family units unencumbered by shared facilities or
homeowners associations. Direct access from the street is provided for each parcel.
The homes are designed for the narrower, deeper lots to take advantage of the creek
setting. Although,the lots exceed 3:1 depth-to-width, the location of the creek and
road makes the useable portion of the property quite shallow. The site design
provides appropriate setback relations between units despite the non-standard lot
configuration.
Summary of Objectives/Findings for Planned Development Zone
The proposed project takes advantage of the R-2 density and the planned development
flexibility to provide moderately priced single family dwellings within the City. The
project meets the findings required under Section 17.62.040 as follows:
1. The project is designed for moderate-income households. Three-bedroom units with
private yards appeal to families with children.
2. The project protects the creek and preserves open space by concentrating the
development along the street frontage.
Proj/950301.60/statemnt.doc
1
3. Simple, cost effective home'designs with the slightly higher density of the R-2 zone,
provides more affordable housing than otherwise possible under conventional
development.
4. The project provides private, useable open space in the rear yards and covered
porches in the front.
5. Two parking spaces, one covered, are provided for each unit.
6. The design is compatible with the neighborhood and reflects the lot size and
architectural style of Tract 2248 (north side of El Capitan Way).
7. The project provides the exceptional public benefit of an open space easement for
creek preservation. The PD flexibility in lot configuration allows the preservation of
the creekway as shown in the Edna-Islay Secondary Planning Area. This would not
be feasible under conventional development standards.
Proj/950301.60/statemnt.doc
ti\
WE
WTI ISI
•Rival
111111►
.�... �-
.0 \ ,,
�IN�i� i1�11 ��♦
' 1►
N�
" 11111��111
� • INN � .
IN
1 11 11
1 11
E� `
PAttlIN4 AIitNUA �l
DAT'- a1—�6-99 ITEM #
'COUNCIL ❑CDD DIR
MAO ❑FIN DIR
&KCAO ❑FIRE CHIEF
fl?MORNEY ❑PW DIR
G'CLERKIORI0 ❑P LICE CHF
❑MC�MT GEC DIR
❑UTILPER DIR
❑PERS a r�
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
VIA: /Betsy hn Dunn, City Administrative Officer
FROM: ul LeSage, Director of Parks &Recreation
BY: DeJamette, Recreation Supervisor
SUBJECT: Removal of Agenda Report from Council Agenda
DATE: February 11, 1999
Last week a report was submitted to Council entitled"Collaboration with SLO Coastal Unified
School District for Grant Application Submittal". The report requested approval for the City to
collaborate with Hawthorne Elementary School on a grant through the state After School
Learning and Safe Neighborhoods Partnerships Program, which funds the establishment of local
after school enrichment programs.
The grant submission deadline is March 15, 1999. Permission to collaborate on the grant needed
to be secured prior to that date, thus staff prepared the report for the February 16`h Council
meeting. Since the report was submitted, further research into the grant revealed irresolvable
issues with regard to in-kind matching requirements and the proposed program supplanting rather
than supplementing our existing after school child care program as the grant stipulates. Working
with the principal of Hawthorne Elementary School, the decision was reached to forego this
grant opportunity due to it's restrictive nature and use the next six months to research other
options which may be more appropriate to our needs.
Cc: Kathy Mills,Recreation Manager II
H:Ueports\memo hawthorn grant 299.doc
RECEIVED
FEB 11 1 1999
SLO CITY CLERK
ME ti ING AGENDA
DATE a-=ITEM #
MEMO
FeATTORNEY
e'C`DD DIR
February 11, 1999 ❑FIN DR
❑MACAO 0 FPW D RIRE �i:;FTo: Council collea e, Ewan, Marx and Romero ❑POLICE CHF
From Ken Schwartz ❑ I D I�0'Ui1L DIRO PEAS DIR 3
Copies: John Dunn, Jo M ss
Re: City Council meeting February 16, 1999
Agenda item#7, Renovation of 879 Mono
John Dunn in his February 10 memo on this item, discusses a number of viewpoints that
the Council might consider as it contemplates action. In the end he recommends
supporting staff recommendations which includes the expenditure of roughly a half of a
million dollars on a building that will be demolished in the fimure.
I have reluctantly come to the decision to support this recommendation failing any public
hearing information which convinces me otherwise. Even so, I would greatly prefer to
spend this half million on expansion of the city hall.
I don't think we should delay taking action to forward the expansion of city hall.
At the risk of sounding redundant and perhaps harsh because I have said this before, I will
say it again, our goals setting program is seductive and fails to bring the public and the
Council face to face with difficult long-range strategies and the attendant decisions that
must be made to move ahead in an orderly manner. No one wants to support additions to
City Hall because it represents"big government"so it never gets discussed in a public
forum and consequently it keeps getting put on the back burner and we operate
inefficiently taking a nibble here and a nibble there. Item 7 is just one more little nibble.
On page 2 of his memo, John sets the problem down pretty succinctly:
"Is the City Hall expansion needed and justified? Absolutely. Is it an easy sell to
our citizens,particularly considering that the Little Theater would have to leave,
given the fact that a new community center would undoubtedly have a much
greater appeal to a greater number of people than a new expanded City Hall?"
Martha and I are supporters of the Little Theater,but the Council has recently taken two
actions with respect to Little Theater location that gives them notice of future City plans.
The community center idea was nowhere in sight until this year's goals setting meetings.
The fundamental issue as I see it is, do we tumble to the electoral appeal of this over the
wdlfare of downtown- a downtown which is already nervous as Nellie because of the
unknown impacts of the Central Coast Mall renovation, Eagle Hardware and the SLO
RECEIVED
FEB 1 1 1999
SLO CITY COUNCIL
Page 2
Marketplace proposals?
The image of San Luis Obispo is downtown. That's what we sell,that's the picture we
carry in our heads and that's the image we sell in our publicity. Madonna Plaza, The
Central Coast Mall and the SLO Marketplace are everywhere/anywhere. Yes, they may
benefit us,but they won't sell us. Downtown is very,very important.
Let's bite the bullet and start the dominos falling that will result in the conversion of
inefficient surface parking lots into land that can be used to expand and enhance
downtown retail commercial and service uses. The first domino is City Hall.
May I propose that in taking action on item#7 that we concurrently direct staff to:
1. Engage architect Fred Sweeney to reevaluate his existing schematic plans for the
expansion of City Hail in light of new and evolving space needs, and to prepare an
updated schematic plan for Council consideration by late summer- early Fall, 1999.
2. Set aside a sum in this year's budget to cover the costs for the preparation of contract
documents for the expansion of City Hall;documents to be completed Winter-Spring,
2000.
3. Target budget year 2000-2001 for construction;prepare a time schedule for
termination of the Little Theater contract and other moves of City offices and
personnel to accommodate building construction.
• �n �.7) meq, •r 09 40" /Wo
MEETING AGENDA
DATE - b -UL ITEM # �,
COUNCIL 0 CDD DIA
iai��
BCAO O FIN DIR
9ACAO 0 FIRE CHIEF
10 February 1999 01UTORNEY O PW DIR
LMLERKIORIO 0 POLICE CHF 10 1999
01 MT O REC DIR
Ken Hampian, Assistant CAO a I' O urn DIR
eor e, E3PERSDIR y Qt $,L.O.
City of San Luis Obispo Clt
990 Palm St. S. p�hrlrl6 A Administration
San Luis Obispo CA 93041
Dear Ken:
You may be aware that existing legislation to allow farmers to sell directly to consumers such as occurs at
Farmers Markets is due to expire at the end of this year. Unless new legislation to extend this sunset is
supported, the bill could expire.
Expiration of the bill could result.in the end of Farmers' Markets as we know them because produce
would become subject to standardization requirements from which it is currently exempt. As a
consequence, the Thursday Night Activities/Farmers' Market could be negatively affected and ultimately
create a loss of revenue not only to the Downtown Association but to the City overall. The Thursday
Night Farmers' Market is a big part of the tourist draw to our community.
I am hoping to meet with representatives from the City of SLO, the SLO Chamber of Commerce, SLO
VCB and Certified Farmers' Market Association to determine how we--as a group--can collectively
support new legislation continuing direct marketing (field to consumer) and support the second track of
standardized regulations.
The issue is somewhat complicated and I have been in touch with the County Agricultural Commissioner
and Peter Jankay (Certified Farmers Market Association) to determine the best method of support. At this
point, it appears that leaving the lobbying effort to unknown entities could be disastrous due to a vocal
minority that is opposed to allowing continued direct sales. I've been directed to meet with the above
groups and determine if there is enough support to hire a representative (lobbyist) in Sacramento to guide
us through the process, knock on doors, meet with opponents and proponents, etc.
I've been in touch with Eric Daniels of AdvoCal in Sacramento who offers the above services and has
expressed an interest in helping us. Eric was formerly Andrea Seastrand's aide and, being from the area,
is very supportive of this cause. He has not quoted me a price but states that he can give us very
reasonable rates.
This matter is of serious concern to the Downtown Association and I hope to your organization as well. II
A meeting is scheduled for Friday, 19 February 2 PM at the Planning Conference Room at City Hall. I'm
hopeful you'll be able to attend. Eric will be on hand to answer any questions we may have about his
services.
Thank you for a prompt RSVP to this meeting. RECEIVED
FEB t, 1 1999
P.O.Box 1402•San Luis Obispo•CA•93406 SLO CITY CLERK
805/541-0286 • FAX 8051781-2647 • email da@downtownslo.com
Sincerely,
Deborah Holley'
MEQ,ANG AGENDA
DATEA-=ITEM #=
wcouncil memomnoum
IMUNCIL ,MDD MR
February 10, 1999 O'ACAO RFIRECHIEF
21TTORNEY .O' DIR
TO: City Council EKLERKIORIG .0"UCE CHF
❑ GMT TEAM ZAEC MR
Z"L MR
FROM: John Dunn, City Administrative Zon
�� , 3TM MR !4
SUBJECT: Council Agenda Report-Renova 1.of Building on Morro Street for Utilities
Department Use
I have thoroughly read the agenda report and obviously agree with its recommendation.
However, I thought I should add some elaboration, anticipating that a "bigger picture" concern
could be raised.
Going back to basics, let me describe the current situation. Essentially, the whole City Hall
operation, including 955 Morro (Public Works and Utilities) have become more crowded and
densely packed over the years. The number of city employees that are crammed into a given
space is well below the standards achieved in other communities of comparable vision and
quality. The situation has become more acute at 955 Morro in the last several years, with the
addition of several new people to Public Works and with the Utilities Department being
separated, with Water Conservation operating out of the old Library building. With new
requested positions in Public Works and Geographical Information Systems (GIS), the problem
is going to become even more strained during the next several years. Because of this growing
situation, Mike, John Moss and I have worked together over the last couple of years to find an
answer to this situation and, earlier,we examined other altematives which didn't prove workable.
All of us have known about the "long-term cure" which is to build a substantial City Hall
expansion to occupy the space of the old circa 1950's library. Some City Council members will
recall that we had an excellent architectural firm some years ago take a look at the whole "civic
center area", and to come up with an expansion plan which, while generally liked by most
people, fell into the `many years away" category, especially after the recession and City Hall
cutbacks of the early 90's.
Some of us have also known for some time that there is an interesting relationship between three
long-term City projects, the development of commercial and public space improvements on
Court Street, the development of the "Palm II" mixed-use project, including parking, and the
expansion of City Hall. To vastly over-simplify this relationship, it is believed by most of us that
we should not proceed with Court Street until the parking portion on Palm II was produced, that
we can't proceed on Palm II until 955 Monro is demolished, which can't proceed until the City
Hall addition is built.
RECEIVED
FEB 10 1999
SLO CITY CLERK
So, this note is being written to pose and deal with two questions...is this project too expensive
and should this project be done at all, given that someday we might have a new City Hall project
which would include Utilities?
Regarding the first question, yes, the project is a fairly expensive one, given the size of the
building. But, the answer is "no" when you consider that the space is absolutely essential, that
an older unreinforced masonry building is being seismically strengthened, and that a new
functional work environment of sufficient size and quality is being created for the Utilities
Department, a critically-important City function. In addition, this will allow for related
improvements, such as integrating Water Conservation with the rest of Utilities Administration,
and relocating GIS from the Community Development Department space to its department,
Public Works.
The cost issue is specifically discussed in the staff report. However, it boils down to how long
the renovated building will be used for this or another appropriate purpose. Just as a refresher to
the newer Council members, at the time the building was purchased, it was agreed that the
building would have an anticipated fifteen year or longer life, and that the building space could
ultimately be used in a beneficial way for the enlargement of the Palm Street garage, in a way
which would actually improve the function(entering/exiting)of the garage.
So the bigger question emerges as the dominant one. Should we be spending any amount of
money on a new Utilities office space given that the "ideal" but longer-term solution is the
inclusion of the Utilities Department in the new expanded City Hall. Unfortunately, there is not
an exact answer to this question, As usual, it depends. If a new City Hall expansion were to
occur in less than five years, let's say, then there might not be the rationale and justification to
proceed on this project at this time. A major exception to this thought is that the building could
be utilized as a market rate rental either for a related public agency or for private office space
until needed for the garage expansion project, and the City will be the determiner of that. Based
on everything I know, and the good Lord knows that isn't everything, I would project that the
new City Hall expansion is at least five to ten years away. Why? At the time that we
contemplated and did the early work on planning the City Hall expansion in the late `80's, the
estimated construction cost was over $8 million, meaning that today's projected costs could
easily be within the $10 to $15 million range. Is the City Hall expansion needed and justified?
Absolutely. Is it an easy sell to our citizens, particularly considering that the Little Theater
would have to leave, and given the fact that a new community center would undoubtedly have a
much greater appeal to a greater number of people than a new expanded City Hall? Not
necessarily. However, if the sun truly shines, and the City Hall expansion project can proceed
much more rapidly along the lines discussed by Council member Schwartz, the expenditure
would still be valid in that we would still have very desirable and rentable office space adjacent
to a parking garage and within the County offices/Civic Center complex.
I am taking the liberty of raising these relevant questions ahead of the Council discussion
because, given our thinking and planning and discussion over the last ten or so years, these are
very legitimate questions which deserve some thought and answers.
In conclusion, we could undoubtedly reduce the costs of the project by some amount by taking
an alternative approach, but we cannot substantially reduce the cost of the project if we want a
quality product, similar to City Hall itself and to other quality downtown buildings. Given the
fact that ultimately, City Hall expansion will be absolutely necessary, should we proceed with
J
this project? The answer is that the office space is critically needed now, that the facility creates
a desirable office space which can be used by the City as long as needed. When it is no longer
needed for City use, it would be very rentable space for another public agency or a private party,
and ultimately,the property could be made available for the Palm Street garage expansion.
Based on these factors and the facts set forth in the staff report, I strongly recommend we
proceed.
cc: Department Heads (info)
MR-fING AGENDA t is 5i on
DATE1122 ITEM # reeofl
COUNCIL LIASION REPORT
F,.
8 CDD DIR
To: Council Memb s le, Ewan, Marx and Romero eFIN DIR
From Ken Schwart 1a'FIRE CH:--
For. Council Agen ruary 16, 1999 ePwDIR
CrFOLICE CHFRe: Downtown ciation Meeting,February 9, 1999 SEC DIR
✓ Erft DIR
GfM DIR
Copies: John Dunn, Lee Price
Beyond the routine business items of the Board of Directors, four issues generated
some discussion for which our Council should be aware:
1. Downtown newspaper racks continue to be of considerable concern. They are
popping up everywhere and crowding sidewalks. They have been placed by
the newspapers,primarily the T-T,without permit or oversight by city officials.
Apparently, there was some sort of `gentlemen's agreement' regarding location
which has been violated. The DA is likely to be seeking City intervention in
an effort to bring some order to what appears to be indiscriminate placement and
chittering of the sidewalks. The issue may be touchy because of some 1'amendment
overtones.
2. Certified Farmers Market Legislation. AB2340(Cannella)was approved in 1996
to allow direct marketing from farmer to customer. The primary issue here is that
the farmer does not have to insure that his/her product is uniform as does the farmer
selling through the normal market. AB 2340 contains a December 31, 1999 sunset
clause. Obviously,the SLO County Farmers' Market organization wants this
legislation extended and is seeking support from the DA and SLO. So date no
legislator has volunteered to sponsor their bill. I suggested that given Assemblyman
Maldonado's talk at the LCC meeting last Friday,that he might be a good one
to contact. I think we should help.
3. Mike Spangler, DA Parking Committee Chair reported his committee's continuing
concern regarding the expenditure of Parking Funds for purposes outside of the
downtown parking district. He was referencing the Council's approval at our last
meeting of the Monterey Heights parking district expansion and the use ofparking
fund moneys for the start up costs of that work.
4. The Beautification Committee is working on a project(not totally clear to me)which
through signs or banners will define old Chinatown. I have been collecting some
photos of how other cities with historical Chinatowns have given recognition to those
boundaries via street signs and shared a couple of photos with a member of that
committee. (Alice Loh our new planning commissioner also has an interest in this.)
RECEIVED
FEB - 9 1999
SLO CITY COUNCIL