HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC_2015-09-22_Agenda Packet
CITY OF ATASCADERO
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA
Tuesday, September 22, 2015
City Hall Council Chambers, 4th floor
6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero, California
(Entrance on Lewis Ave.)
CITY COUNCIL CLOSED SESSION: 5:00 P.M.
1. CLOSED SESSION -- PUBLIC COMMENT
2. COUNCIL LEAVES CHAMBERS TO BEGIN CLOSED SESSION
3. CLOSED SESSION -- CALL TO ORDER
a. Conference with Labor Negotiators (Govt. Code Sec. 54957.6)
Agency designated representatives: Rachelle Rickard, City Manager
Employee Organizations: Atascadero Firefighters Bargaining Unit;
Atascadero Police Association; Service Employees International
Union, Local 620; Mid-Management/Professional Employees; Non-
Represented Professional and Management Workers and Confidential
Employees
4. CLOSED SESSION -- ADJOURNMENT
City Council Closed Session: 5:00 P.M.
City Council Regular Session: 6:00 P.M.
Successor Agency to the
Community Redevelopment
Agency of Atascadero: Immediately following the City
Council Regular Session
5. COUNCIL RETURNS TO CHAMBERS
6. CLOSED SESSION – REPORT
REGULAR SESSION – CALL TO ORDER: 6:00 P.M.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor O’Malley
ROLL CALL: Mayor O’Malley
Mayor Pro Tem Moreno
Council Member Fonzi
Council Member Kelley
Council Member Sturtevant
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Roll Call
PRESENTATIONS:
1. Employee Service Recognition Awards
2. North County Connection Recovery Month Proclamation
3. Fire Prevention Week Proclamation
4. Presentation by Peter Williamson of SLO Regional Rideshare
A. CONSENT CALENDAR: (All items on the consent calendar are considered to
be routine and non-controversial by City staff and will be approved by one motion
if no member of the Council or public wishes to comment or ask questions. If
comment or discussion is desired by anyone, the item will be removed from the
consent calendar and will be considered in the listed sequence with an
opportunity for any member of the public to address the Council concerning the
item before action is taken. DRAFT MINUTES: Council meeting draft minutes
are listed on the Consent Calendar for approval of the minutes. Should anyone
wish to request an amendment to draft minutes, the item will be removed from
the Consent Calendar and their suggestion will be considered by the City
Council. If anyone desires to express their opinion concerning issues included in
draft minutes, they should share their opinion during the Community Forum
portion of the meeting.)
1. City Council Draft Action Minutes – September 8, 2015
Recommendation: Council approve the City Council Draft Action Minutes
of the September 8, 2015 City Council meeting. [City Clerk]
2. County Health Officer
Fiscal Impact: None.
Recommendation: City Council adopt the Draft Resolution confirming the
Council’s consent to the enforcement of all health laws within the City of
Atascadero by the San Luis Obispo County Health Officer. [City Manager]
3. Muni Temps Contract Extension
Fiscal Impact: Approximately $23,000 of General Funds.
Recommendation: Council authorize the City Manager to execute a
change order in the amount of $23,000 with MuniTemps to provide
contract services for an Interim Community Development Director through
September 25, 2015 [City Manager]
UPDATES FROM THE CITY MANAGER: (The City Manager will give an oral report on
any current issues of concern to the City Council.)
COMMUNITY FORUM: (This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wanting to
address the Council on any matter not on this agenda and over which the Council has
jurisdiction. Speakers are limited to three minutes. Please state your name for the
record before making your presentation. Comments made during Community Forum
will not be a subject of discussion. A maximum of 30 minutes will be allowed for
Community Forum, unless changed by the Council. Any members of the public who
have questions or need information, may contact the City Clerk’s Office, between the
hours of 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. at 470-3400, or mtorgerson@atascadero.org.)
B. PUBLIC HEARINGS: None
C. MANAGEMENT REPORTS:
1. Professional Engineering and Environmental Services for the Phase 2 of
the Del Rio Road / US 101 Interchange Project
Fiscal Impact: The fiscal impact of the item under consideration is
estimated at $798,500 in budgeted circulation impact fee over the next 18
months. The current budget has $450,000 programmed for FY2015/2016
and another $500,000 for FY2016/2017.
Recommendation: Council:
1. Authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with Wallace Group
to provide professional engineering and environmental services for the
Project Approval and Environmental Document (PAED) phase of the
Del Rio Road / US 101 Interchange Project for fee not to exceed
$798,500; and,
2. Authorize the City Manager to execute a new or amended Cooperative
Agreement with Caltrans for the PAED phase of the Del Rio Road / US
101 Interchange Project.
COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REPORTS: (On their own initiative, Council
Members may make a brief announcement or a brief report on their own activities.
Council Members may ask a question for clarification, make a referral to staff or take
action to have staff place a matter of business on a future agenda. The Council may
take action on items listed on the Agenda.)
D. COMMITTEE REPORTS: (The following represent standing committees.
Informative status reports will be given, as felt necessary):
Mayor O’Malley
1. City / Schools Committee
2. County Mayors Round Table
3. Integrated Waste Management Authority (IWMA)
4. SLO Council of Governments (SLOCOG)
5. SLO Regional Transit Authority (RTA)
Mayor Pro Tem Moreno
1. California Joint Powers Insurance Authority (CJPIA) Board
2. City of Atascadero Finance Committee (Chair)
3. Economic Vitality Corporation, Board of Directors (EVC)
Council Member Fonzi
1. Air Pollution Control District
2. Oversight Board for Successor Agency to the Community Redevelopment
Agency of Atascadero
3. SLO Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo)
4. City of Atascadero Design Review Committee
5. SLO County Water Resources Advisory Committee (WRAC)
6. Water Issues Liaison
Council Member Kelley
1. Atascadero State Hospital Advisory Committee
2. City of Atascadero Design Review Committee
3. Homeless Services Oversight Council
4. City of Atascadero Finance Committee
Council Member Sturtevant
1. City / Schools Committee
2. League of California Cities – Council Liaison
E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND / OR ACTION:
1. City Council
2. City Clerk
3. City Treasurer
4. City Attorney
5. City Manager
F. ADJOURN
Please note: Should anyone challenge any proposed development entitlement listed on this Agenda in court, that
person may be limited to raising those issues addressed at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written
correspondence delivered to the City Council at or prior to this public hearing. Correspondence submitted at this
public hearing will be distributed to the Council and availabl e for review in the City Clerk's office.
I, Lisa Cava, Deputy City Clerk of the City of Atascadero, declare under the penalty of perjury that the
notice of addendum to the agenda for the September 22, 2015 Regular Session of the Atascadero City
Council was posted on September 15, 2015, at the Atascadero City Hall, 6500 Palma Avenue,
Atascadero, CA 93422 and was available for public review in the Customer Service Center at that
location.
Signed this 15th day of September, 2015, at Atascadero, California.
Lisa Cava, Deputy City Clerk
City of Atascadero
City of Atascadero
WELCOME TO THE ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
The City Council meets in regular session on the second and fourth Tuesday of each month at 6:00 p.m. Council
meetings will be held at the City Hall Council Chambers, 6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero. Matters are considered by the
Council in the order of the printed Agenda. Regular Council meetings are televised live, audio recorded and videotaped
for future playback. Charter Communication customers may view the meeting s on Charter Cable Channel 20 or via the
City’s website at www.atascadero.org. Meetings are also broadcast on radio station KPRL AM 1230. Contact the City
Clerk for more information (470-3400).
Copies of the staff reports or other documentation relating to each item of business referred to on the Agenda are on file
in the office of the City Clerk and are available for public inspection during City Hall business hours at the Front Counter of
City Hall, 6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero, and on our website, www.atascadero.org. Contracts, Resolutions and
Ordinances will be allocated a number once they are approved by the City Council. The minutes of this meeting will
reflect these numbers. All documents submitted by the public during Council meetings that are either read into the record
or referred to in their statement will be noted in the minutes and available for review in the City Clerk's office .
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in a City meeting
or other services offered by this City, please contact the City Manager’s Office or the City Clerk’s Office, both at (805)
470-3400. Notification at least 48 hours prior to the meeting or time when services are needed will assist the City staff in
assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility to the meeting or service.
TO SPEAK ON SUBJECTS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA
Under Agenda item, “COMMUNITY FORUM”, the Mayor will call for anyone from the audience having business with the
Council to approach the lectern and be recognized.
1. Give your name for the record (not required)
2. State the nature of your business.
3. All comments are limited to 3 minutes.
4. All comments should be made to the Mayor and Council.
5. No person shall be permitted to make slanderous, profane or negative personal remarks concerning any other
individual, absent or present
This is the time items not on the Agenda may be brought to the Council’s attention. A maximum of 30 minutes will be
allowed for Community Forum (unless changed by the Council). If you wish to use a computer presentation to support
your comments, you must notify the City Clerk's office at least 24 hours prior to the meeting. Digital presentations must
be brought to the meeting on a USB drive or CD. You are required to submit to the City Clerk a printed copy of your
presentation for the record. Please check in with the City Clerk before the meeting begins to announce your presence
and turn in the printed copy.
TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEMS (from Title 2, Chapter 1 of the Atascadero Municipal Code)
Members of the audience may speak on any item on the agenda. The Mayor will identify the subject, staff will give their
report, and the Council will ask questions of staff. The Mayor will announce when the pub lic comment period is open and
will request anyone interested to address the Council regarding the matter being considered to step up to the lectern. If
you wish to speak for, against or comment in any way:
1. You must approach the lectern and be recognized by the Mayor
2. Give your name (not required)
3. Make your statement
4. All comments should be made to the Mayor and Council
5. No person shall be permitted to make slanderous, profane or negative personal remarks concerning any other
individual, absent or present
6. All comments limited to 3 minutes
The Mayor will announce when the public comment period is closed, and thereafter, no further public comments will be
heard by the Council.
ITEM NUMBER: A - 1
DATE: 09/22/15
CITY OF ATASCADERO
CITY COUNCIL
DRAFT MINUTES
Tuesday, September 8, 2015
City Hall Council Chambers, 4th floor
6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero, California
CITY COUNCIL CLOSED SESSION: 5:00 P.M.
Mayor O’Malley announced at 5:02 p.m. that the Council is going into Closed Session.
1. CLOSED SESSION -- PUBLIC COMMENT - None
2. COUNCIL LEAVES CHAMBERS TO BEGIN CLOSED SESSION
3. CLOSED SESSION -- CALL TO ORDER
a. Conference with Labor Negotiators (Govt. Code Sec. 54957.6)
Agency designated representatives: Rachelle Rickard, City Manager
Employee Organizations: Atascadero Firefighters Bargaining Unit;
Atascadero Police Association; Service Employees International
Union, Local 620; Mid-Management/Professional Employees; Non-
Represented Professional and Management Workers and Confidential
Employees
City Council Closed Session: 5:00 P.M.
City Council Regular Session: 6:00 P.M.
Atascadero City Council
Seoptember 8, 2015
Page 2 of 8
4. CLOSED SESSION -- ADJOURNMENT
5. COUNCIL RETURNS TO CHAMBERS
6. CLOSED SESSION – REPORT
The City Attorney reported that there was no reportable action.
REGULAR SESSION – CALL TO ORDER: 6:00 P.M.
Mayor O’Malley called the meeting to order at 6:03 p.m. and Council Member Sturtevant
led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Council Members Kelley, Fonzi, Sturtevant, Mayor Pro Tem
Moreno, and Mayor O’Malley
Absent: None
Others Present: City Clerk / Deputy City Manager Marcia McClure Torgerson
Staff Present: City Manager Rachelle Rickard, Deputy Administrative Services
Director Cindy Chavez, Interim Community Development Director
Gary Broad, Public Works Director Nick DeBar, Police Chief Jerel
Haley, Fire Marshall Tom Peterson, and City Attorney Brian Pierik.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
MOTION: By Council Member Sturtevant and seconded by Mayor Pro
Tem Moreno to approve the agenda.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote.
PRESENTATIONS:
1. Proclamation Recognizing September 24-27, 2015 as Sunset SAVOR the
Central Coast Week.
The City Council presented the Proclamation to Ms. Jordan Carson.
Atascadero City Council
Seoptember 8, 2015
Page 3 of 8
A. CONSENT CALENDAR:
1. City Council Draft Action Minutes – August 11, 2015
Recommendation: Council approve the City Council Draft Action Minutes
of the August 11, 2015. [City Clerk]
2. July 2015 Accounts Payable and Payroll
Fiscal Impact: $4,384,684.98
Recommendation: Council approve certified City accounts payable, payroll
and payroll vendor checks for July 2015. [Administrative Services]
3. June 2015 Investment Report
Fiscal Impact: None.
Recommendation: Council receive and file the City Treasurer’s report for
quarter ending June 2015. [Administrative Services/City Treasurer]
4. Purchase of New Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA)
Fiscal Impact: This purchase will result in the expenditure of $307,951.87
of budgeted Vehicle and Equipment Replacement Funds.
Recommendation: Council authorize City staff to purchase the MSA G-1
SCBA’s from Bauer Compressors for $307,951.87. [Fire]
5. Salaries and Health, Welfare and Retirement Benefits for Mayor, City
Council Members, City Clerk and City Treasurer
Fiscal Impact: There will be a fiscal impact to increase compensation for
elected officials. Costs will vary based on the dental and vision coverage
selected by each individual elected official. The estimated cost is $25,700
- $32,400 annual cost increase.
Recommendation: Council adopt on second reading by title only, Draft
Ordinance A, amending Title 2 of the Atascadero Municipal Code
concerning Mayor, City Council, City Clerk and City Treasurer salaries and
health, welfare and retirement benefits for elected officials. [City Attorney]
6. Confirm the Appointment of the Director of Community Development
Fiscal Impact: The Director of Community Development starting annual
salary of $111,478 is included in the Community Development budget for
fiscal year 2015-2016.
Recommendation: Council concur and confirm the appointment of Philip
Dunsmore as Director of Community Development. [City Manager]
Mayor Pro Tem Moreno pulled Item #A-1.
Mayor O’Malley pulled Item #A-6.
Atascadero City Council
Seoptember 8, 2015
Page 4 of 8
MOTION: By Council Member Fonzi and seconded by Council Member
Sturtevant to approve item #A-2, 3, and 4 of the Consent
Calendar.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote.
MOTION: By Council Member Fonzi and seconded by Council Member
Sturtevant to approve Item #5 of the Consent Calendar.
Motion passed 4:1 by a roll-call vote. (Kelley opposed)
(Ordinance No. 591)
Item #A-1: Mayor Pro Tem Moreno asked for an addition to the August 11, 2015
minutes, to include the response from the Waste Management representative stating
their willingness to continue to have discussions on the Buy Back Center options.
City Clerk Torgerson read the following addition into the record:
City Attorney Pierik read from the staff report, “The contract further indicated that
the proposed resolution would be brought back to the City Council for approval
by August 15, 2015.” He stated that given their willingness to continue to have
discussions on this issue, he would recommend the Council request they submit
a letter to the City agreeing to extend the date to a mutually agreed upon date.
Waste Management representative Liz Gomes stated, “We can take t hat back to
our company VP and I’m sure he would be willing to, a letter would come from
us, that we are willing to extend the contract date of August 15th.”
Mayor Pro Tem Moreno asked that the City Clerk add for clarification that it is Waste
Management that was willing to continue to have discussions on this issue.
MOTION: By Mayor Pro Tem Moreno and seconded by Council Member
Fonzi to approve Item #A-1 of the Consent Calendar, as
amended.
Motion passed 5:0 by a voice vote.
Item #A-6: Mayor O’Malley introduced new employee Phil Dunsmore.
MOTION: By Mayor O’Malley and seconded by Council Member Fonzi to
approve Item #A-6 of the Consent Calendar.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote.
UPDATES FROM THE CITY MANAGER:
City Manager Rachelle Rickard gave an update on projects and issues within the City.
Atascadero City Council
Seoptember 8, 2015
Page 5 of 8
COMMUNITY FORUM:
The following citizens spoke during Community Forum: Ron Alsop, Linda Hendy,
Janelle Allen, and Sara Sullivan.
Mayor O’Malley closed the COMMUNITY FORUM period.
B. PUBLIC HEARINGS: None
C. MANAGEMENT REPORTS:
1. Water Conservation Update for Municipal Parks and Facilities
Fiscal Impact: None.
Recommendation: Council endorse the City’s water conservation efforts
for its parks and facilities. [Public Works]
Public Works Director Nick DeBar gave the staff report and answered questions from
the Council.
PUBLIC COMMENT: None
MOTION: By Council Member Fonzi and seconded by Council Member
Sturtevant to endorse the City’s water conservation efforts for
its parks and facilities.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote.
2. Draft Resolution Amending the Parking Infraction Penalties
Fiscal Impact: There is no expected expenditure of City funds related to
the adoption of the parking bail schedule. If approved, there would likely
be a slight increase in the revenue generated from fines collected for
parking infractions.
Recommendation: Council adopt the Draft Resolution amending the
Parking Violation Bail Schedule and setting the penalties for parking law
offenses. [Police]
Police Chief Jerel Haley gave the staff report and answered questions from the Council.
PUBLIC COMMENT: None
Atascadero City Council
Seoptember 8, 2015
Page 6 of 8
MOTION: By Council Member Kelley and seconded by Council Member
Sturtevant to adopt the Draft Resolution amending the Parking
Violation Bail Schedule, including the one correction on the
exhibit to the Resolution that Wrong Way Parking should be
$55.00, and setting the penalties for parking law offenses.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. (Resolution No. 2015-
076)
Mayor O’Malley recessed the meeting at 7:42 p.m.
Mayor O’Malley reconvened the meeting at 7:51 p.m.
COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REPORTS:
1. Mayor O’Malley & Council Member Fonzi
Mayor O’Malley and Council Member Fonzi would like the City Council to:
a. Discuss a potential City policy regarding project CC&Rs and amendments
to project CC&Rs.
b. Direct staff whether or not to place this issue on a future Council agenda.
Mayor O’Malley stated that the City Council has received correspondence concerning
the CC&Rs for a project that was approved 20 years ago. He explained that he and
Council Member Fonzi felt that they wanted more public process, and would like to
discuss the issue in depth. If there is Council consensus, this issue could be scheduled
on a future Council agenda for full review.
Mayor O’Malley asked the City Attorney to give some background on this issue and
explain the City’s role in project CC&Rs.
City Attorney Pierik explained the project that Mayor O’Malley referred to is the 3F
Meadows Ranch development project. This project was approved by the City Council in
1995 with the adoption of Ordinance No. 286, which created PD1 1 and included
Conditions of Approval. The CC&Rs include an amendment process that is to be
followed by the involved parties. The CC&Rs require that any amendments to the
CC&Rs, that would affect the Conditions of Approval that were granted by the City, must
be approved by the City to assure it is consistent with the Conditions of Approval.
Council Member Fonzi stated that she has talked with several property owners of Oak
Ridge Estates, and the issue of their concerns could also happen with other
developments with CC&Rs. After 20 years, the developer still owns a majority of the
parcels making him the majority holder. She explained that she would like to see the
process of City approval for CC&R amendments conducted in a more public process.
Atascadero City Council
Seoptember 8, 2015
Page 7 of 8
PUBLIC COMMENT:
The following citizens spoke on this item: Bruce Miller, Greg Munakata, and John
Whitworth.
Mayor O’Malley closed the Public Comment period.
MOTION: By Council Member Fonzi and seconded by Mayor O’Malley to
direct staff to bring back to a future Council agenda, options
available to the Council concerning project CC&Rs.
Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote.
Council Member Fonzi announced that the City Council received an invitation to an
Eagle Scout ceremony and wanted to know if City staff could prepare a letter of
congratulations from the Council to send to the Eagle Scout.
Mayor O’Malley asked Staff to prepare a letter from the Council to the Eagle Scout, with
all Council Members’ signatures.
D. COMMITTEE REPORTS:
Mayor O’Malley
1. City / Schools Committee – He plans on recommending partnering with the
School District on a Bike Plan.
2. County Mayors Round Table – Met last week. Arroyo Grande Police Chief
spoke to the Mayors on Active Shooter Preparedness Training.
3. Integrated Waste Management Authority (IWMA) – Meet tomorrow.
4. SLO Council of Governments (SLOCOG) – State continues to impact
transportation funding.
5. SLO Regional Transit Authority (RTA) – Reviewing Bus ticket sales locations.
Council Member Fonzi
1. SLO Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) – Meeting next Thursday,
and will be discussing the Paso Robles Groundwater Basin.
2. Water Resources Advisory Committee (WRAC) – Attended her first meeting
with WRAC. They discussed the desalinization proposal at Diablo Canyon.
They also discussed nuclear desal water.
Council Member Sturtevant
1. City / Schools Committee – He stated that he was unable to attend the last
meeting. He asked if an alternate could be appointed for this Committee in
case one of the two Council Members on the Committee are unable to attend.
Atascadero City Council
Seoptember 8, 2015
Page 8 of 8
Mayor O’Malley stated that he appoints Mayor Pro Tem Moreno to be the alternate for
the City / Schools Committee.
E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND / OR ACTION: None
F. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor O’Malley adjourned the meeting at 9:07 p.m.
MINUTES PREPARED BY:
______________________________________
Marcia McClure Torgerson, C.M.C.
City Clerk / Deputy City Manager
The following exhibit is available for review in the City Clerk’s office:
Exhibit A – Amendment to Item #A-1, submitted by the City Clerk
ITEM NUMBER: A - 2
DATE: 09/22/15
Atascadero City Council
Staff Report – City Manager’s Office
Designate the County Health Officer
to Enforce All Health Laws Within the City of Atascadero
RECOMMENDATION:
City Council adopt the Draft Resolution confirming the Council’s consent to the
enforcement of all health laws within the City of Atascadero by the San Luis Obispo
County Health Officer.
DISCUSSION:
State law requires every city to either appoint a local health officer or to make
arrangements with the County to exercise the required powers and duties of a health
officer. The County recently researched their records on the designation of the County
Health Officer for the cities in the County. They found that the City of Atascadero did
not have an up to date designation for the County Health Officer to act as the City’s
health officer.
In 1982, the Atascadero City Council had entered into an agreement with the County of
San Luis Obispo for Performance of City Health Functions. This agreement had
terminated in 1987. Since that time, the County’s Health Officer has continued to be on
call as Atascadero’s Health Officer, as needed.
The County is asking the Atascadero City Council to formalize the arrangement with the
County regarding a Health Officer since our mutual agreement terminated in 1987, by
adopting a Resolution confirming its consent to the enforcement of all health laws within
the City by the San Luis Obispo County Health Officer.
City staff believes jurisdiction over emergency medical services (EMS) or 911
emergency assistance services is outside the scope of the consent to a County Health
Officer. The proposed Resolution is written to indicate that the City’s consent does not
include consent over existing EMS or 911 emergency assistance services to clarify the
scope of the consent.
ITEM NUMBER: A - 2
DATE: 09/22/15
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
ALTERNATIVES:
The Council may decide to not adopt the Resolution. This is not advisable as it would
make the City in violation of State law unless the City hired a Health Officer.
ATTACHMENTS:
Draft Resolution
ITEM NUMBER: A - 2
DATE: 09/22/15
DRAFT RESOLUTION
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO CONFIRMING ITS
CONSENT TO THE ENFORCEMENT OF ALL HEALTH LAWS WITHIN
THE CITY OF ATASCADERO BY THE SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY
HEALTH OFFICER
WHEREAS, California Health & Safety Code Section 101460 requires a city to appoint
a health officer, except when the City Council has made arrangements for the county to exercise
the same powers and duties within the city as are conferred upon city health officers by law; and
WHEREAS, California Health & Safety Code Section 101375 authorizes the City
Council to consent by resolution or ordinance for the county health officer to enforce and
observe in the city all of the following: (a) orders and quarantine regulations prescribed by the
California Department of Public Health and other regulations issued under the California Health
& Safety Code; and (b) all statutes relating to the public health.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ATASCADERO:
SECTION 1. The City of Atascadero hereby confirms its consent to allow the Health
Officer of San Luis Obispo County to enforce and observe in the City of Atascadero all of the
following as provided for in California Health & Safety Code §101375: (a) orders and quarantine
regulations prescribed by the California Department of Public Health and other regulations
issued under the California Health & Safety Code; and (b) all statutes relating to the public
health.
SECTION 2. The provision of emergency medical services pursuant to California
Health & Safety Code Sections 1797 et seq. is not an order, regulation, or public health-related
statute under California Health & Safety Code Section 101375 within the enforcement authority
of the County Health Officer. The provision of emergency aid or assistance pursuant to
California Government Code Sections 53100 et seq. is not an order, regulation, or public health-
related statute under California Health & Safety Code Section 101375 within the enforcement
authority of the County Health Officer. The City of Atascadero does not consent to allow the
Health Officer of San Luis Obispo County to enforce or coordinate emergency medical services
or emergency aid or assistance as defined in this Section 2.
ITEM NUMBER: A - 2
DATE: 09/22/15
Adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting held on ____________________, 2015,
by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN
ABSENT:
ATEST:
_____________________________ ________________________________
Marcia McClure Torgerson, C.M.C. Tom O’Malley
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________
Brian A. Pierik
City Attorney
ITEM NUMBER: A - 3
DATE: 09/22/15
Atascadero City Council
Staff Report – City Manager’s Office
Extend Contract with MuniTemps
For the Services of Interim Community Development Director
RECOMMENDATION:
Council authorize the City Manager to execute a change order in the amount of $23,000
with MuniTemps to provide contract services for an Interim Community Development
Director through September 25, 2015.
DISCUSSION:
MuniTemps is a management and administrative services provider that provides highly
qualified personnel, among other professional services, to public sector agencies.
MuniTemps is an independent contractor that provides all salaries, benefits, insurance,
liability coverage and taxes of the employees; the people working for or at the direction
of Muni-Temps are employees or agents of Muni-Temps and are not employed by the
City.
Upon the departure of Warren Frace, the City’s former Director of Community
Development, the City Manager executed an agreement with MuniTemps to provide
temporary employment services for an Interim Community Development Director. From
February to June, 2015, Muni-Temps provided the City with the services of Robert
Lewis to lead the Community Development Department on an interim basis.
Robert Lewis left the City to take another job in early June. As the recruitment process
was underway, it was anticipated that a new Community Development Director would
start in early August. Through MuniTemps, Gary Broad was selected to fill the Interim
Community Development Director position. The recruitment process has been
completed and the new Director of Community Development is scheduled to begin
working September 28, 2015.
ITEM NUMBER: A - 3
DATE: 09/22/15
Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager to execute a change
order with MuniTemps to provide contract services for an Interim Community
Development Director through September 25, 2015.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The fiscal impact of the extension of the agreement for service for an additional six
weeks is estimated to be $23,000 of General Funds. The cost of the proposed
contracted services is offset by the payroll cost savings of the open position of Director
of Community Development.
ALTERNATIVES:
Council may elect to not authorize the City Manager to extend the existing agreement.
ATTACHMENTS:
None
ITEM NUMBER: C - 1
DATE: 09/22/15
Atascadero City Council
Staff Report - Public Works Department
Professional Engineering and Environmental Services
for Phase 2 of the Del Rio Road / US 101 Interchange Project
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Council:
1. Authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with Wallace Group to provide
professional engineering and environmental services for the Project Approval
and Environmental Documentation (PAED) phase of the Del Rio Road / US 101
Interchange Project for fee not to exceed $798,500; and,
2. Authorize the City Manager to execute a new or amended Cooperative
Agreement with Caltrans for the PAED phase of the Del Rio Road / US 101
Interchange Project.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF:
It has been a while since a written update has been provided to the City Council on the
progress of the Del Rio Road/US 101 Interchange Project. The City’s consultant,
Wallace Group, is nearing completion of the first of four Caltrans project development
phases; authorization is required to begin the next phase of the Caltrans approval
process. In addition, the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) has
been made aware of state and federal funding decreases for regional transportation
projects for FY2016-2020. This report discusses current and future funding
opportunities and the recommendations for pursuing completion of the interchange
project design.
DISCUSSION:
Background: During the review phase for the Walmart/Del Rio Marketplace Project in
2008, the City analyzed the project’s impact on the Del Rio Road/US 101 Interchange.
A traffic analysis study performed by the City’s traffic consultant (W -Trans) indicated the
traffic capacity of the interchange would need to be expanded to accommodate the
ITEM NUMBER: C - 1
DATE: 09/22/15
Walmart/Del Rio Marketplace project at build out. The study analyzed options to
increase capacity and recommended roundabouts at the ramp intersections based upon
future performance and cost analysis. The Walmart/Del Rio Marketplace project
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) evaluated other traffic impacts that would re sult
from the developments and found the current interchange configuration could
accommodate the Walmart development but would need to be improved to the
roundabout configuration before any permit issuance for the Del Rio Marketplace
development. The study also determined that 53% of the projected traffic generated at
the interchange would be generated by the Walmart and Del Rio Marketplace projects,
while 47% of the traffic would be generated by other, future development.
The Walmart and Del Rio Marketplace developments were conditioned to pay their fair
share (53% of the estimated interchange roundabout costs) through traffic impact fees.
These impact fees were calculated based upon a cost estimate of $4.5 million at time of
conditional approval (March 2012). This estimate was reviewed by several engineers
and seemed on par with other estimates and other actual costs for similar roundabout
projects provided to the City at that time.
In addition to these special roundabout mitigation fees, both Walmart and the Del Rio
Marketplace were further conditioned to pay the City’s Standard Traffic Impact Fees
(TIF) and to pay a maximum of $200,000 each toward cost overruns if necessary.
Overall, the Walmart and Del Rio Marketplace are conditioned to pay about $5.3 million
in TIF to the City. This averages to about $20.66 per square foot in Traffic Impact Fees.
In addition to the TIF, the projects are also responsible for constructing a third
roundabout at El Camino Real (ECR)/Del Rio Road, installing a new signal light at ECR
and San Anselmo Road, improving a half -mile of ECR as a 4-lane arterial, improving
1,000 feet of Del Rio Road, and installing amenities such as an enhanced transit stop,
Class II bike lanes, street landscaping and sidewalks.
ITEM NUMBER: C - 1
DATE: 09/22/15
The City began the Caltrans process for the Del Rio Road/US 101 Interchange Project
in November 2012 when Wallace Group was hired to perform the Project Initiation
Document (PID) phase for $562,400. This first phase involves preliminary engineering
and initial environmental work that evaluates project components such as design
alternatives, scoping, drainage, right-of-way, risks, schedule, funding, and costs in
accordance with Caltrans policies and guidelines. An Interchange Control Evaluation
(ICE) is required to confirm the type of intersection control to be used, and a Preliminary
Environmental Analysis Report (PEAR) documents the project purpose/need,
anticipated environmental technical studies and the type of environmental clearance
document needed in the next phase as well as permits needed.
The work in this phase was scoped to deliver a Project Study Report-Project
Development Support (PSR-PDS) process that Caltrans needs to approve before
moving to the oversight and processing of the next phase, Project Approval and
Environmental Documentation (PAED). Once approved, the PSR-PDS allows non-local
funding for Caltrans oversight to be programmed through the next phase. A summary
of the Caltrans project delivery process is shown as follows:
ITEM NUMBER: C - 1
DATE: 09/22/15
Wallace developed an updated current dollar project cost estimate of approximately $12
million for the interchange project as part of the PID phase. This estimate was broken
down into approximately $9 million for construction and right of way costs and $3 million
for other “soft” costs such as planning, environmental documentation, final design,
construction management, etc. This estimate was significantly higher than the $4.5
million provided at the time of conditional approval. The major contributing factors to
the higher construction costs were related to increases in soil import, land acquisition
(right-of-way), construction contingencies, and the project addition of widening the
bridge to accommodate sidewalk improvements . Also, the $4.5 million estimate seems
to underestimate appropriate “soft” costs required to deliver a project through the
Caltrans project development process. This discrepancy in the cost estimate was
discussed with the City Council at their September 23, 2014 meeting.
Funding for the interchange project was also discussed at the September 23, 2014
meeting. The $5.3 million to be collected in Traffic Impact Fees was originally
anticipated to go toward fully funding both the Walmart/Del Rio Marketplace share
(53%) of the estimated $4.5 million interchange improvements, but also the portion
attributed to future development. In September of 2014, with the new cost estimate of
$12 million, it was clear that the City would have to look for additional funding to fund
the City’s (future development’s) fair share of the interchange improvements. (Walmart
and Del Rio Marketplace have preliminarily indicated that they would be willing to
contribute fill dirt to the interchange project, valued at an estimated $1 million. This
ITEM NUMBER: C - 1
DATE: 09/22/15
brings the estimated total contribution toward the interchange project to approximately
$6.3 million or 53% of the $12 million total estimated cost.)
Staff and Council discussed other potential funding opportunities and the interchange
project’s merits to secure additional funding for the City’s share during the next round of
SLOCOG Regional Transportation Improvement Plan (RTIP) funding solicitation -
scheduled for December 2015. Given the local and regional significance to reduce both
vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, coupled with local
matching funds, the interchange project could be very competitive for RTIP funding.
The following cost sharing scenarios for various funding levels were discussed at the
September 23, 2014 meeting:
Staff was directed by the City Council to continue moving the interchange project
forward through the PID phase while working with SLOCOG on additional funding
opportunities. After the September, 2014, Wallace Group continued the PSR-PDS
development and coordination with Caltrans District 5 staff . Caltrans is required to
assess the viability of proposed projects and available funding before expending
oversight staff time. The funding shortfall was a known issue and a funding source
needed to be identified before processing could continue.
The project had not been initiated with other than local funds envisioned for the whole of
the project through construction. It had now been determined that other funding sources
were also needed. Instead of submitting a PSR-PDS that would not be reviewed due to
the established funding shortfall, Wallace Group began working closely with SLOCOG
to assess regional funding options and if possible get the project considered for the
Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). At that time the US101 Corridor Mobility Master
Plan Study was underway that was intended to inform and guide project considerations
into the renewal of the RTP. City and Wallace Group staff participated in the process
and SLOCOG approved the project as a financially constrained (or realistically
fundable) project in December, 2014. The project was then approved as part of the
Regional Transportation Plan by SLOCOG in April, 2015. At the end of the eight months
from September 2014 to April 2015 the project was now successfully included in the
regional plan for additional transportation funding.
Current Project
Budget
SLOCOG 50% Match/
Local 50% Match
SLOCOG 45% Match/
Local 55% Match
SLOCOG 40% Match/
Local 60% Match
Walmart Traffic Impact Fees 2,474,876$ 2,674,876$ 2,674,876$ 2,674,876$
Walmart Outlier Building Traffic Impact Fees 183,230 183,230 183,230 183,230
Annex Traffic Impact Fees 2,229,288 2,429,288 2,429,288 2,429,288
Other Traffic Impact Fees 268,126 712,606 1,312,606 1,912,606
Local Match 5,155,520 6,000,000 6,600,000 7,200,000
SLOCOG Contribution - 6,000,000 5,400,000 4,800,000
Capital Project Budgeted Amount 5,155,520$ 12,000,000$ 12,000,000$ 12,000,000$
101 @ Del Rio Interchange Project
ITEM NUMBER: C - 1
DATE: 09/22/15
Once the viable funding source for construction was documented, City staff and Wallace
Group continued advancing the interchange project through the Caltrans PID process.
As previously mentioned, the PSR-PDS document approval in the PID phase will
authorize Caltrans processing for the PAED phase. To be authorized for Caltrans
oversight of the PAED and PS&E phases as well as eligible for programming of funding
for construction monies at the end of the planning and design phases, a Project Study
Report (PSR) process is required. The PSR is similar to the PSR-PDS but is more
thorough in project analysis (traffic, risk, environmental, etc.) and contains more
documentation. The PSR process is not normally undertaken and approval from
Caltrans of an exception to the PSR-PDS process was required. Knowing the
importance with the timing of the next funding cycle for construction monies, Wallace
conferred with SLOCOG and then Caltrans staff who ultimately concurred and
authorized the PSR process in July, 2015. Since initiating the PSR request, Wallace
Group has been revising and editing the document into a much more robust report
including very detailed life cycle costs analysis.
As part of the PSR a Life Cycle Cost Analysis (LCCA) is required , the Caltrans LCCA
process initially indicated that the pavement surface for the roundabouts should be
required to be poured as Portland Cement Concrete (PCC). With the detailed and
warping nature of the proposed improvements Wallace Group felt this was an element
which would significantly contribute to the initial overall cost of the project related to the
design, forming, and pouring of concrete, and could also increase the risk of Change
Orders as the project construction progressed. As a result of the efforts of Wallace
Group staff who worked with Caltrans District and Headquarter staff, Caltrans ultimately
concurred that PCC was not required as the initial process had indicated and agreed
that the roundabout construction should instead be recommended to include the
traditional asphalt surfacing.
Through the efforts of Wallace Group working with various stakeholders over the course
of the last 12 months since this project was last discussed before the Council, the
project is in a much better position with Caltrans, the design has been further refined
and potential added design and construction costs have been reduced. The Wallace
Group team was also asked by the City to serve as an extension of staff in the
specialized planning review and coordination of the proposed roundabout planning and
design at Del Rio and El Camino Real by another firm working for the Walmart
development. Wallace is close to finalizing the PSR and expects Caltrans approva l
around the end of December 2015.
Up until a couple months ago, regional funding for the interchange project was looking
very promising. However, the California Transportation Commission (CTC) notified
SLOCOG in July that total programming capacity for the next funding cycle (FY2016 -
2020) has decreased from $14m in Highway funds to zero. No (zero) funding is
provided in the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) – the program that
typically funds highway improvements like the Del Rio Road/US 101 interchange
improvements. SLOCOG was anticipating $14 million in STIP monies to program in
December 2015, but this news indicated there is no capacity to add new projects and
ITEM NUMBER: C - 1
DATE: 09/22/15
the current program is “over programmed”. The net effect of this reduction in state funds
is SLOCOG has $6m in remaining federal funding to program in December.
STIP revenues are generated from adjustable price-based excise tax on gasoline sales.
These revenues have decreased due to a 5.5 cent per gallon decrease in excise tax
and the increased use of higher fuel efficient and zero-fuel vehicles. Without a long-
term funding fix, future STIP cycles will continue to be reduced. SLOCOG predicts new
STIP funding of only $3 million per year beginning FY2022 – compared to $12 million in
FY2012 and FY2014. A SLOCOG staff report (Item B-2) is attached and provides
additional detail on the funding shortfalls.
While there are efforts in Congress and at the State level, none of the current legislative
proposals provide any funding for the STIP or transit (more information on the status of
state and federal transportation legislation is discussed in the attached SLOCOG staff
report, Item B-3). Due to the continuing downturn in state and federal funding,
SLOCOG has been performing strategic planning and polling for supplemental
transportation funding since 2011 by means of a county wide sales tax for
transportation. Passage of this county-wide sales tax increase proposal is estimated to
generate $20-25 million per year. Recent polling results have been lagging the
necessary 67% threshold to pass. Nonetheless, regional funding through SLOCOG is
still likely the best bet for obtaining some amount of matching funds for the interchange
project.
The Del Rio Road/US 101 Interchange Project is included on SLOCOG’s Fin al 2014
RTIP, its long range vision plan, at a cost of $12.1 million. Funding solicitation for
projects is on a four-year cycle and updated every two years. The next funding cycle is
FY2016-FY2020. SLOCOG will be evaluating projects for inclusion in the next couple
months with action for final programming in December. Although no STIP (highway)
funds exist, SLOCOG will program $6m in federal funds.
Schedule:
The schedule below reflects the major project milestones to date, along with the staff’s
best estimate of the timing of future events. Those items where Council will have a
decision point as to whether to commit funds and move forward with the Project are
highlighted.
8/24/2011 City hires Kittelson & Associates to review and evaluate the Del Rio
Interchange ($13,200)
11/27/2012 Council award contract to Wallace Group for initial engineering and Caltrans
processing- Phase I ($562,400)
3/26/2013 Council authorize execution of agreement with Caltrans for review of
engineering and environmental studies ($104,000)
9/23/2014 Council receive update on the status of Project, including revised cost estimate
of $12 million
9/22/2015 Council receive update on the status of Project and consider authorizing Phase
II of contract with Wallace Group ($798,500)
12/31/2015 Estimated Caltrans approval of PSR (PID phase complete)
ITEM NUMBER: C - 1
DATE: 09/22/15
3/28/2017 Council consider authorization of Phase III & IV of contract with Wallace Group
(estimated $500,000)
3/31/2017 Estimated Caltrans approval of PAED Phase
9/30/2017 Council consider purchase of Right of Way (estimated at $2 million)
3/31/2018 Estimated Caltrans approval of PS&E and Right of Way Certification
3/31/2018 Council consider authorizing solicitation of construction bids and approval of
funding plan
6/30/2018 Council consider awarding necessary construction contracts (estimated $8
million including soft costs for construction management and support)
12/31/2019 Construction of Interchange Improvements complete
The next step in Caltrans project development is PAED. This phase is expected to last
about 18 months. At the end of this phase (estimated March 2017), Caltrans is
expected to provide project approval. Wallace has provided a proposal for this next
phase (PAED) for $798,500, which includes additional services related to the PSR-PDS
to PRS process change. A detailed scope of services is attached to this report.
Analysis: The main question to ask at this point is whether or not to begin the next
Caltrans project delivery phase (PAED) or delay this phase to get a better handle on the
funding opportunities. Staff recommends pushing the project development forward for
the following reasons:
1. Funding Will Occur. Although SLOCOG STIP and other highway related funding
is “doom and gloom” right now, there will be future funding opportunities for
which the interchange project is eligible. Funding has been trending downward;
however, ending all funding for highway related programs indefinitely won’t
happen. There may be a temporary pause in funding, but demand and need will
continue to grow, spurring lawmakers to fund programs or create new ones.
There have been a number of economic stimulus bills in recent memory geared
toward “shovel ready” projects.
2. Project is Competitive. The Del Rio Road interchange project is consistent with a
majority of programming policies as listed on page B-2-3 of the attached
SLOCOG staff report (B-2). Furthermore, Table 2 in that report lists the project
as a “regionally significant project in the queue”. SLOCOG staff is currently
analyzing this list of projects considering project readiness, local funding, and
matching funds to achieve project delivery goals. The project is similar to other
interchanges funded by SLOCOG over the years.
3. Local Funding. The City has matching funds in circulation impact fees that will
show SLOCOG and other funding agencies the City’s commitment to the project
is real and viable. Many agencies do not have or won’t use local funds alone for
the work needed to get the project “shovel ready”, but instead will wait for
matching funds before diving into the project development process, making the
project less competitive for construction monies.
4. Project Approval is Good for Years. The project is approved by Caltrans when
the PR is signed at the end of the PAED phase and the “shelf life” of that
approval is typically acknowledged by state staff as between 3 -5 years. Upon
ITEM NUMBER: C - 1
DATE: 09/22/15
approval of the PS&E phase, the project is ready to bid. The PS&E approval will
authorize Caltrans to issue the City an Encroachment Permit to construct. That
permit allows bidding and award scheduling to get a construction Contractor on
board (considering processing and funding availability timelines) to then allow the
Contractor to get their own encroachment permit. Encroachment permits are
allowed time extensions to coincide with funding requirements. Getting through
the PS&E phase will officially make the project “shovel ready”.
5. Economic Development. The Del Rio Marketplace development cannot proceed
without the interchange improvements. In addition, the Del Rio Marketplace is
conditioned to contribute approximately $2.4 million towards the interchange
project. The Del Rio Road/US 101 interchange is also been identified as a
commercial node which will generate additional sales tax and increase property
value and taxes.
6. Public-Private Partnership Opportunities. There may be opportunities to
construct interchange improvements through a public -private partnership,
whereby a private entity (e.g., developer) performs the construction phase for the
project.
7. Project Costs Will Increase. Costs for construction, land acquisition, engineering,
legal, and other expenses will continue to increase as time goes on and
additional process or regulatory requirements are imposed. These factors are
generally out of the City’s control and getting the project completed sooner is
anticipated to result in lower overall project costs. In addition to inflation, key
professionals may no longer work at firms previously hired to work on the project,
resulting in higher risk and backtracking costs.
Conclusion: Staff recommends continuing the Caltrans project development process for
the Del Rio Road/US 101 Interchange Project. Doing so will position the project to
obtain the best opportunity for funding, both short and long term. The project is
competitive and contributes to many of the regional goals for reducing VMT and GHG
emissions. Local funding (TIF) is available to fund project development and shows local
agency genuine commitment to the project. Project approvals (PR and PS&E) from
Caltrans are long term authorizations and are expected to be valid for at least five
years, during which time matching funds will likely occur. The project is a key
component to economic development in the area and may frustrate developers waiting
for the project if delayed. There could be an opportunity for a Public -Private partnership
to construct the project is approvals are in place. Lastly, delaying the project will surely
increase both construction and “soft” costs.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The fiscal impact of the item under consideration is estimated at $798,500 in budgeted
circulation impact fee over the next 18 months. The current budget has $450,000
programmed for FY2015/2016 and another $500,000 for FY2016/2017.
ITEM NUMBER: C - 1
DATE: 09/22/15
ALTERNATIVE:
Council may instruct Wallace to complete the PID phase and wait to authorize the
PAED phase until the funding scenarios are determined.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. SLOCOG Staff Report (Item B-2), dated August 5, 2015
2. SLOCOG Staff Report (Item B-3), dated August 5, 2015
3. Summary Scope of Services for Del Rio Road/US 101 Interchange Phase 2
B-2-1
SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: AUGUST 5, 2015 ITEM: B-2
SUBJECT: 2016 Regional Transportation Improvement Program | Revenue Update,
Status of Programmed Projects, and Programming Policies
SUMMARY
In June staff provided programming estimates for the 2016 programming cycle using best available
information for three silos of state and federal funding (RSTP, CMAQ, and STIP as defined below). At that
time staff estimated new surface transportation programming capacity through 2020 to equal $31M. This
staff report addresses the policy considerations for the programming of available transportation funding.
The total programming target for SLOCOG’s 2016 funding cycle through FY 2020 has decreased 65% from
$31M to $11M. No (zero) funding is provided in the STIP used typically for highway improvements.
California Transportation Commission (CTC) released the draft highway program Fund Estimate (FE) on
June 24th. Those funds, typically used for congestion relief improvements, are administered and
programmed in the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). The 2016 STIP FE indicates that
there is zero new capacity and the current program is “over programmed”. This means that the 2016 STIP
is basically already fully programmed, and projects currently programmed in the five-year STIP could be
delayed. The early years of the STIP is under-funded primarily due to the decrease in the price based
excise tax on gasoline. The CTC is providing no programming targets to regional agencies in the 2016
STIP.
The revised capacity of new transportation funding for the 2016 program cycle includes the following:
o Regional Surface Transportation Program (RSTP) - $5.4M thru 2018
o Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Program (CMAQ) - $4.6M thru 2018
o State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) - $0M, down from $14M
Agenda item B-3 will discuss in greater detail the state and federal legislative efforts being made to address
the instability and lack of reliable forms of transportation revenue. Agenda item B-4 will discuss the status
of local-control efforts in generating much needed transportation revenue.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff: 1) Conceptually approve “off-the-top” funding (pp B-2-6 thru B-2-8) and defer decision on a two
versus three year program cycle to October
2) Direct staff to provide an update in October on “pipeline” projects identified in Table 2 and
develop an 8-year financial assessment of funding needs for priority projects through 2023
3) Schedule action for funding recommendations in December
TTAC: Support Staff recommendation
CTAC: Support Staff recommendation
DISCUSSION
State funding for the STIP has declined considerably due to higher fuel efficient and zero-fuel vehicles and
the decrease of 5.5 cents per gallon to the price-based excise tax (lowering it from 18 cents per gallon to
12.5 cents per gallon). This decrease has a significant impact on transportation resources. For every one
billion dollars available in the STIP, SLOCOG receives a formula share equivalent to $3M per year for each
of the two years added in a STIP cycle (total funding $6M). In 2012 and 2014 the STIP Fund Estimate
APPROVED
APPROVED
B-2-2
identified $1.8B and $1.4B respectively, SLOCOG receiving closer to $12M in each of those two cycles.
Without a long-term funding fix for the STIP, future STIP cycles beginning in 2018 will continue to show a
reduction in program capacity, leaving $1B available per STIP cycle. New highway funding for SLOCOG
will be equivalent to $3M per year beginning in FY 2022 at best.
Table 1 below summarizes the revised near term state and federal revenue projections for transportation
programming for fiscal years 2017 through 2020.
Table 1
REVISED 2016 State and Federal Transportation Program Targets
($1,000s)
2014 Fund Cycle
(2014-2016)2017 2018 2019 (2020+) Total
- Urban (direct apportionment to member agencies) (NOTE 1/) 2,430 823 823 823 1,646
- Rural (direct apportionment to SLO Co.) 1,734 578 578 578 1,156
- SLOCOG Regional Shares (NOTE 2/) 6,114 2,037
<> Programs & Administration 385 355 740
<> Leverage funds for state and federal grants 330 330 660
<> Regional Discretionary Capital Funds (RSHA) 1,050 1,352 2,402
7,997 2,316
<> Rideshare Programs (Vanpool/Commuter) 180 250 430
<> Regional Discretionary Capital Funds 2,133 2,086 4,219
- Regional Shares (NOTE 4/) 4,540 - - 7,070 7,920 -
- Inter-Regional Shares (NOTE 5) 107,000 - - (60,000) -
Total 22,815 5,479 5,774 12,824 7,920 11,253
1. Regional Surface Transportation Program
2. Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (NOTE 3/)
3. State Transportation Improvement Program
DISCRETIONARY PROGRAMS (STATE AND FEDERAL FUNDS)
•Note 1. Urban funds have been allocated to member agencies through FY 2016. Apportionments are consistent with Section
182.6 (d)(1) of California Code and distributed to urban areas of 5,000 or more based on 2010 census .
•Note 2. FY 2016 reflects available programming balance after advance allocation commitments and “off the top” targets.
•Note 3. Funding resulting from non-attainment status for ozone in eastern San Luis Obispo County
•Note 4. CTC revenue assumptions; approximately 30% less than normal due to base excise tax reductions; cascading impact
resulting in the STIP being over-programmed through FY 2018. Draft 2016 STIP FE has no new program capacity for FY 2019 and
FY 2020. It should be noted that in 2000 annual highway fund apportionments were $15M/yr; and highway apportionments are
down to nearly $4M/yr in 2016 if the STIP wasn’t over-programmed . No new programming capacity in the 2016 STIP without a
legislative fix.
•Note 5 Caltrans District 5 identifies priority needs on the state highway system eligible for inter-regional STIP programming. With a
$0 STIP, Caltrans will not be able to secure ITIP funds for the “Wye” section of SR 46East ($60M). Other future funding options
may result from MAP-21 reauthorization with a program focus freight corridor completion.
Federal funding programs under Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21) have been
extended for five-months as Congress continues to debate methods to develop a stable revenue source for
the Highway Trust Fund. Reductions to both programs have been proposed by Congress and as result
staff is recommending a conservative programming approach by eliminating the 2019 year of federal
funding. At best, the reauthorization legislation for MAP-21 will maintain funding levels for the RSTP and
CMAQ programs equal to fiscal year 2015 over a six year time period to 2023. Until there is a multi-year
federal funding bill in place, staff will continue to recommend a two-year programming approach of federal
funds. More information on the status of the federal funding program will be presented in October.
Of the $11.2M in federal funding identified in Table 1, $2.7M is directly allocated to member agencies for
street and road rehabilitation purposes. The remaining $8.4.M of RSTP and CMAQ funding is programmed
at the discretion of the SLOCOG Board for programs and projects identified in the 2014 RTP. Staff
recommends $1.8M for set aside programs (see Attachment A) and the remaining $6.4M to be
programmed toward pipeline capital projects (Table 2 page B-2-3).
$8.4M
$2.7M
B-2-3
Each two year fund cycle provides opportunities for the implementation of projects and programs identified
in SLOCOG’s 20 year transportation blueprint; the 2014 RTP. Modal elements of the RTP eligible for
funding include:
o Maximizing System Efficiency (TDM)
o Highway, Streets, and Roads Improvements
o Active Transportation Improvements (BikePed)
o Public Transportation (Transit)
Programming Policies for 2016 Fund Cycle
It is SLOCOG’s practice to update programming policies and procedures to reflect state and federal
guidance based on newly enacted legislation, rule making, the current condition of funding programs/silos,
and the status of SLOCOG’s project pipeline with respect to scope, budget, and schedule. Due to the
significant reduction in funding, staff is recommending that the biennial call-for-projects be delayed
indefinitely.
All funding recommendations (tentatively scheduled for December 2015) in SLOCOG’s regional capital
improvement program will be consistent with the following programming guidance:
1. Project is an identified priority in the adopted Regional Transportation Plan (RTP).
2. Project will have a net benefit to the performance of regional transportation network consistent with
the performance goals of the RTP.
3. Project has a demonstrated need. Scoping documents (Project Study Reports and/or Project
Reports) are complete and identify anticipated project costs, unit by unit. These documents must be
consistent with adopted plans, and receive local governing council/board approval prior to SLOCOG
Board programming action.
4. Project addresses a regionally significant multimodal or interconnectivity related transportation need.
5. Project mitigates a regionally significant congestion problem.
6. Project has demonstrated cost effectiveness.
7. Project enhances or increases the equitable distribution of funding throughout the region.
8. Project includes funding contribution by the local jurisdiction (minimum match of 50%); including the
support by the local governing board.
9. Project supports the Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) goals of the 2014 RTP.
10. Off the top funding will be reserved for SLOCOG programs (Rideshare, PnR, PIDs)
11. Project is shovel-ready and can be delivered on schedule and on budget.
12. Project adds to the economic vitality of the region.
Table 2 below summarizes a review of scope, budget, and schedule for high priority regional projects.
Table 2
Project Status | Regionally Significant Projects in the Queue
No known scope, budget, or
schedule impacts
Known scope, budget, or
schedule impact SCOPEBUDGETSCHEDULEOTHERCOMMENTS
MAJOR REGIONAL ROADWAY PROJECTS (CONGESTION RELIEF)
SR 46 Corridor Improvements (Whitley 2B)Over programmed STIP creating delivery delays; could affect
schedule and budget.
SR 46 Corridor Improvements (Cholame)If no new funds in the STIP, consideration should be given to develop
a lower cost solution for this segment. DISCUSS IN OCTOBER
SR 46 Corridor Improvements (WYE)If a lower cost solution can be achieved along Cholame, shift funds
to WYE segment. DISCUSS IN OCTOBER
101 South Co Ops | Shell Beach Straits PID on schedule for completion in September
SR 227 Operational Improvements Technical analysis on schedule for completion in September
Price Canyon Rd., Ormonde - RT 227, widen Over programmed STIP creating delivery delayes; could affect
schedule and budget.
B-2-4
RT 101 Brisco Rd I/C Improvements/Aux Lane (Arroyo)Potential cost increases. DISCUSS IN OCTOBER
RT 101/RT 46W I/C Improvements, Ph 3 roundabouts (Paso)
Issues regarding applicable land use affecting project. DISCUSS IN
OCTOBER
SR 1/41, Morro Bay, operational improvements (Morro)Project ready for construction funding
RT 101 Avila Beach Dr. Intersection & PnR (Avila)PID on schedule for completion in September
RT 101/Fair Oaks Ave, Arroyo Grande, operataional imps.
(Arroyo)PAED and PSE delayed; not ready for construction funding
LAND USE NECESSITATED PROJECTS
RT 101/RT 46W I/C Improvements, Ph 2 vine st. realignment
(Paso)
Legal and land use issues affecting schedule. DISCUSS IN
OCTOBER
101 Prado Rd. I/C, Ph 1 overcrossing (SLO)
City priority; no funding discussed, scoping, and finance
plan/strategy developed
101 Del Rio Rd. I/C Improvements (Atas)City priority; lack of STIP funding affects budget and schdule
101 Union Rd. I/C, Paso Robles, Ph1 overcrossing (Paso)
City priority; Environmental underway; City circulation element
issue; no finance plan/strategy developed
US 101/Main St. Interchange improvement (Templeton)
County developing PID/PAED; Catrans providing oversight. Finance
plan and imrpovement strategy to be developed by county.
OTHER REGIONAL PROJECTS (READY TO GO)
San Luis Obispo Transit Center Project in planning stages; Regional priority.
Shell Beach Rd. Streetscape (complete street improvements)
(Pismo)City priority. Pending state ATP grant announcement
Rail Road Safety Trail, SLO City priority. Pending state ATP grant announcement
Bob Jones Trail / City to Sea, SLO Co.County priority. Pending state ATP grant announcement
Bob Jones Trail / City to Sea, SLO Co., Ph 1 (Octagon Barn to
Cloveridge)County priority. Pending state ATP grant announcement
Bob Jones Trail / City to Sea, SLO Co., Ph 2 & 3 County priority. Pending state ATP grant announcement
Atascadero to Templeton Connector "The Missing Link"
SLOCOG Priority. Project to be first submitted for state ATP
funding
Shandon Pedestrian Bridge over San Juan Creek Rd.
Pending state ATP grant announcement; Equity and Disadvantaged
Community project
Morro Bay to Cayucos Connector
SLOCOG Priority. Project to be submitted in next state ATP
funding cycle.
SR 41 Complete Streets (San Gabriel to 101) - (Atas)
Study for improvement concepts underway; ready for next phase of
funding;
Safe Routes to School Projects (MB High, Nipomo, etc)Pending state ATP grant announcement(s); Evaluate priority needs.
Assess project delivery status based on funding recommendations
of the Cycle 2 ATP grant program. Provide status in October.
RT 101/Tefft St., Nipomo, operational improvements
(Nipomo)Stalled. DISCUSS IN OCTOBER
SR 1/Halcyon Rd, south county, intersection improvements Update from County forthcoming
SR 1 / Olive St. - South Bound channelization (SLO)Update from City forthcoming
Tassajara Rd. to SR 58 (Smargarita)
Larger project (SLO to 58) identified in Caltrans 3-YR PID work
program
US 101/SR 46E - N/B Off Ramp Improvement to be included on Caltrans D5 3 YR PID work plan
OTHER REGIONAL PROJECTS (IN PROJECT DEVELOPMENT)
REGIONAL INTERCHANGE PROJECTS (ACCESS IMROVEMENTS)
Other remaining ATP grant applications submitted to Caltrans Headquarters for funding Cycle 2
ATP funding consideration.
Table 2 (Cont’d)
Project Status | Regionally Significant Projects in the Queue
Recommendation:
Conduct an eight-year financial analysis of the funding needs through FY 2023 (includes the 2016 STIP
cycle, 2018 STIP cycle) for projects identified in Table 2 (i.e. short and mid-term high priority needs). The
analysis will consider project readiness, local funding, and an assessment of how much funding is
needed to achieve project delivery goals. Present analysis in October and schedule all final funding
recommendations in December.
B-2-5
ATTACHMENT A
PROGRAMMING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROJECT NOMINATION PROCESS
Invest Strategically in Transportation - When Congress enacted MAP-21 it included a robust
performance management standards as a way to measure the national goals established in MAP-21;
providing greater accountability and transparency and help achieve the most efficient and effective
investment of transportation resources. The national goals set forward in MAP-21 are summarized
below:
• Safety - To achieve a significant reduction in traffic fatalities and serious injuries on all public
roads.
• Infrastructure Condition - To maintain the highway infrastructure asset system in a state of good
repair
• Congestion Reduction - To achieve a significant reduction in congestion on the National Highway
System
• System Reliability - To improve the efficiency of the surface transportation system
• Freight Movement and Economic Vitality - To improve the national freight network, strengthen the
ability of rural communities to access national and international trade markets, and support
regional economic development.
• Environmental Sustainability - To enhance the performance of the transportation system while
protecting and enhancing the natural environment.
• Reduced Project Delivery Delays - To reduce project costs, promote jobs and the economy, and
expedite the movement of people and goods by accelerating project completion through
eliminating delays in the project development and delivery process, including reducing regulatory
burdens and improving agencies' work practices
Programming Policies - To improve decision making through performance-based planning and
programming, a coordinated effort to develop performance targets amongst stakeholders will address the
national goals of MAP-21 as well as regional goals as set forth in the 2014 adopted Regional Transportation
Plans.
The overarching goals that set the context for transportation programming were developed as part of the
2014 Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategies as summarized below:
I. Overarching 2014 RTP Goals:
A. Promote the enhancement of regional and community livability through the integration of land
use, mobility, and design strategies.
B. Enhance the economic vitality, environmental sustainability, one's sense of community, and
accessibility to basic human services within and between communities of the region.
C. Facilitate the development and economic viability of communities in ways that reduce trips
and travel distances, preserves aesthetic resources and promotes environmental
enhancement.
D. Provide safe and convenient alternative forms of transportation.
E. Maximize the efficiency of the existing transportation system.
F. Reduce energy consumption and emissions from transportation sources.
G. Protect important farmland, valuable habitats, and natural resources
B-2-6
The RSTP, CMAQ and STIP fund programs are the bread and butter for implementation of the surface
transportation program and projects of the 2014 RTP. Each of the 2014 RTP programs (Maximizing
System Efficiency: Highways, Streets, and Roads, Public Transportation, and Active Transportation) have a
set of goals and policies that guide SLOCOG’s investment choices. Each of the RTP/SCS modal programs
and additional programming policies is discussed below. Set-Aside programming targets are included for
each of these programs to ensure key regional modal goals are achieved.
II. Maximizing Efficiency of the Transportation System (RTP Goal)
A. Effectively and economically achieve improved mobility and provide greater accessibility and
system efficiency through the increasing usage, financial support, and promotion of various
TDM (e.g. Ridesharing/Vanpool programs) and TSM strategies (e.g. signal synchronization,
channelization).
Set-Aside Programming Targets:
1. $100,000 per year through FY 2017/2018 for maintenance and preservation of existing P&R
facilities (RSTP).
2. $180,000 per year through FY 2017/2018 for Regional Rideshare Program’s commuter
systems and programs (CMAQ)
3. $70,000 for FY 2017/2018 for Regional Rideshare Program vanpool incentive program (CMAQ)
4. Evaluate all prior programmed projects for scope, budget, and schedule issues. Address
concerns in October/December.
III. Highway, Streets, and Roads Improvements (RTP Goals)
A. Implement a comprehensive strategy for the maintenance and improvement of State
Highways, Routes of Regional Significance, and major local streets and roads; reduce peak
hour traffic and provide for safe, efficient, convenient and reliable movement of people and
commodities
B. Maintain a balanced transportation system improvement strategy, emphasizing system
efficiency, intermodal connectivity, and increased alternative transportation modes and traffic
reduction strategies to reduce vehicular travel, and greenhouse gas emissions.
Set-Aside Programming Targets & Policies:
1. Highway funding (STIP) to address funding shortfalls for priority highway projects (Discuss in
October).
2. Conduct an eight-year financial analysis assessment of funding needs through FY 2023
(includes the 2016 STIP cycle, 2018 STIP cycle) for priority projects.
3. Where feasible and appropriate, maintain flexibility in programming by exchanging federal
RSTP funds with State Highway Account funds to reduce project delivery delays.
4. Integrate multi-modal improvements (Complete Streets AB 1358(2008)) as part of Street and
Road project improvements (RSTP/CMAQ): i.e. multiple project benefits address the needs of
all users for all funded projects.
5. Set aside $75,000 for FY 2017/2018 for statewide competitive Highway Safety Improvement
Program funds for priority projects identified in SLOCOG’s HSIP Systemic Safety Report.
6. Provide urban SHA apportionments to member agencies for FY 2016/2017 and FY
2017/2018 as summarized in Table A below; finalize apportionments for adoption in
December.
B-2-7
Table A
Regional Surface Transportation Program
(DRAFT Urban SHA Apportionment Table)
7. Evaluate prior programmed projects for scope, budget, and schedule issues. Address issues of
concern in October/December. Where feasible Urban SHA and MPO discretionary (RSHA &
CMAQ) funds will be considered to address budget shortfalls on projects of regional
significance.
IV. Public Transportation (RTP Goal)
A. Provide comprehensive and accessible region-wide public transit services to allow persons in
the County access to essential services, to improve air quality and overall mobility. Essential
services include educational, recreational, health care and employment opportunities.
Set-Aside Programming Targets and Policies:
1. Currently no Set-Aside has been requested nor recommended from STIP, CMAQ, and RSTP
during this funding cycle for transit purposes.
2. To ensure CMAQ funds are never lost to the region, establish a vehicle replacement back-up
list so “at-risk” CMAQ funds can be used for the purchase of vehicles on as needed basis.
Population
(2010 Census)
Apportionment
%2017 2018 2 YR TOTAL
Incorporated Cities
Arroyo Grande 17,252 8.5% 69,700 69,700 139,400
Atascadero 28,310 13.9% 114,400 114,400 228,800
Grover Beach 13,156 6.5% 53,200 53,200 106,400
Morro Bay 10,234 5.0% 41,400 41,400 82,800
Paso Robles 29,793 14.6% 120,400 120,400 240,800
Pismo Beach 7,655 3.8% 31,900 31,900 63,800
San Luis Obispo City 45,119 22.2% 182,300 182,300 364,600
Total Cities 613,300$ 613,300$ 1,226,600$
County of SLO - Urban Areas
Cambria 6,032 3.0% 24,400 24,400 48,800
Oceano 7,286 3.6% 29,400 29,400 58,800
Los Osos 14,276 7.0% 57,700 57,700 115,400
Nipomo 16,714 8.2% 67,500 67,500 135,000
Templeton 7,674 3.8% 31,000 31,000 62,000
Total County Urban 210,000$ 210,000$ 420,000$
Total 823,300$ 823,300$ 1,646,600$
County of SLO : Rural, unincorporated population of 66,136 receives a direct RSTP apportionmnt of $578k/yr
B-2-8
V. Active Transportation (previously Non- Motorized) Improvement RTP Goals
A. Develop and maintain a safe and efficient regional bicycle and pedestrian network that
promotes bicycling and walking as viable transportation choices for users of all ages and
abilities.
B. Encourage safe and efficient connections between transportation modes such as park and
ride lots, transit facilities and destinations for motor vehicles; as well as providing low
emission recreational activities such as hiking and mountain biking.
Other issues affecting policy that will influence transportation programs and projects has emerged
around public health. The following policy statements are proposed for integration as part of the
update of the 2014 RTP.
C. Provide active transportation systems that connect the places where people live, learn, work,
shop, and play by providing safe and convenient walking and bicycling and transit facilities. .
D. Promote safe and convenient opportunities for physical activity by supporting active
transportation infrastructure
Set-Aside Programming Targets and Policies:
1. Set aside $150,000 per year through FY 2017/2018 for projects of regional significance and
consistent with SLOCOG’s Active Transportation Partnership Plan in order to leverage
statewide ATP funding opportunities (e.g. Bob Jones, SLO City to Avila, Anza Trail, Salinas
River Atas-Temp, Pismo Creek, Morro Bay to Cayucos, Railroad Safety Trail (SLO).
2. Set aside $80,000 Non-Infrastructure SR2S program and Infrastructure/ATP grant match of
$75,000 per year through FY 2017/2018.
3. Assess prior programming commitment to the City of Pismo Beach for $600,000 (CMAQ or
RSTP) toward the Shell Beach Rd. Streetscape Project. Discuss in October. Final funding
recommendation to occur after state ATP grant program announcement is made.
4. Support development of walkable community cores, safe routes to school, and connecting
communities through multiple modes.
5. Support the economic vitality of the region by having a robust active transportation network.
6. Close gaps in active transportation by addressing and breaking down the barriers to bicycling
and walking.
7. Preserve and sustain the existing system.
8. Evaluate prior programmed projects for scope, budget, and schedule issues. Address issues of
concern in October/December. Where feasible Urban SHA and MPO discretionary (RSHA &
CMAQ) funds will be considered to address budget shortfalls on projects of regional
significance.
VI. Other Programmatic Set-Aside Targets
Due to the increasing number of unfunded mandates established at the state and federal level
to have robust data warehouse and reporting systems to support performance based planning
and programming requirements, and to be more competitive in statewide transportation grant
programs, the following additional set-aside target is established over two years:
1. HSIP Systemic Safety Report match ($15k), State/Fed planning grant match ($30k) aerial
imagery ($60k), reg. growth forecast ($15k), reg. model ($115k), and consultant services for
PIDs ($100K), Traffic Count ($20k), Bike Counters ($15k).
All set asides identified in this attachment are reflected in Table 1 page B-2-2.
B-3-2
Attachment 1
Summary of the DRIVE Act (S. 1647)
Approved by the Senate EPW Committee
On June 24, the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee passed approved S. 1647, the DRIVE
Act (Developing a Reliable and Innovative Vision for the Economy) a six year reauthorization of federal
highway programs and about a 3% increase in funding levels from MAP-21. Most of the additional funding
is targeted to a new National Freight Program and a program similar to the current TIGER grant program
called “Assistance for Major Projects.” As of 7-24-15 the Senate is trying to finalize a bill to send to the
House for action before the current Act (MAP-21) expires on July 31st. If that effort fails, it will be necessary
to extend MAP-21 again, and it is unknown how long that would be.
Major Provisions and differences from MAP-21
Sets policy for six years program (No funding yet)
Reauthorizes the Federal-aid highway program at
an increased funding level for six years, from FY
2016 through FY 2021.
Provides a total of $277.4 billion in spending for
highway programs, which represents an average
growth of $5.3 billion per year.
Proposed funding levels would require an
additional $92 billion in revenue beyond current
projected receipts for the Highway Trust Fund.
Provides long-term funding to improve the
interstate system and infrastructure critical to the
movement of freight, and supports increasing
efficiency in the project delivery process.
Increases support for core formula programs
Maintains existing core program structure, including: the National Highway Performance Program
(NHPP); the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP); the Surface Transportation Program
(STP); and Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ).
Increases funding for the NHPP, STP and CMAQ programs by about 12% to 14% per year and
changes funding for Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) from 2% of total authority under
MAP-21 to $850 million per year AND allocates funding by population!!!!!.
STP receives an average of $10.7 billion per year, an annual increase of more than $600 million
from MAP-21 and increases percent suballocated to local areas from 50% 55%.
Prioritizes bridges & large, nationally-important facilities
Increases funding for the maintenance of “off-system bridges” from either 15% of the total STP
apportionment or 110% of the 2014 funding set-aside to 15% of the set aside for bridges off the
National Highway System to provide $1.5 b in 2016 increasing to $1.7 b in 2021.
Substantial new funding focused on freight
Establishes formula-based freight program to provide funds to all states to for goods movement.
Expands flexibility for both rural and urban areas to designate key freight corridors that match
regional goods movement on roads beyond the Primary Highway Freight System.
Improves efforts to identify projects with a high return on investment through state freight plans and
advisory committees established under MAP-21.
SLOCOG staff comments:
Overall a good, comprehensive bill
Moves in the right direction
Funding prognosis flat at best
Restores authority to program
Transportation Alternative
Program (TAP) funds.
Maintains transit funding at 20% of
the total
Restores bus discretionary
program, an important source for
funding for buses in SLO region.
Creates new Freight Program
B-3-3
Creates new Major Projects funding program
Provides new funds for major projects of high importance to a community, a region, or the nation
through a competitive grant program called “Assistance for Major Projects” (AMP)
Includes funding set-aside for rural areas and ensures equitable geographic distribution, strong
transparency provisions and a Congressional selection and approval process.
Requires Highway Trust Fund transparency
Includes new provisions to improve the transparency of how and where transportation projects are
selected and funded, to ensure that stakeholders and the public have faith in the integrity of highway
programs and the use of federal tax dollars.
Improved transparency provisions provide to the public better accountability on how FHWA is
utilizing its administrative expenses as well as progress towards achieving national goals and
improving federal reviews of highway projects.
Increases project funding options
Updates the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) program and provides
state and local governments with new options for stretching transportation dollars and increasing
efficiency and utilization.
Cuts new TIFIA funding from $1.0 b per year to $675 million (acknowledging lack of eligible projects
due to program requirements, not lack of federal money, was the constraint).
Broadens TIFIA eligibility by removing requirement for investment-grade credit rating and also
creates a “rural projects fund” to use TIFIA funding to capitalize State Infrastructure Banks.
Accelerates project delivery and increases flexibility
Building on the reforms in MAP-21, continues to accelerate the project delivery process while
protecting the environment and public health.
Improves collaboration between the lead agency and the participating agencies, allows greater
reliance on documents prepared during the planning process, and reduces duplication between
agencies involved in the federal environmental review and permitting process.
Expands opportunities for infrastructure investment in rural areas
Provides increased flexibility to best fit the needs of rural states and local governments and adds
options to bundle small projects together to increase efficiencies and take advantage of procedures
often difficult to utilize for rural projects.
Empowers states to work with DOT to develop ways to effectively utilize flexibilities for small
projects, including rural road and bridge projects to better respond to community needs.
Funds Federal Lands and Tribal Transportation Highway Programs
Increases funding levels for these programs to support maintenance and construction of roads and
bridges on tribal and federal lands.
Authorizes funds for nationally significant federal lands and tribal transportation projects, recognizing
that there is a significant maintenance and repair backlog on these facilities.
Maintains State and Metropolitan Transportation Planning
Maintains statewide and metropolitan planning processes to continue the development towards a
performance-based approach to transportation decision making.
B-3-4
Attachment 2
Overview on State Transportation Funding Special Session
SLOCOG staff comments:
Focus on Governor’s Directive
to the Legislature is Fix it First,
maintain and repair our
transportation system.
NO directive to “improve the
transportation system.
NO Funding for Highway
Improvements, transit, or
alternative transportation.
Does NOT address the STIP
funding shortfall.
B-3-5
B-3-6
Attachment 3
B-3-7
Attachment 4
Assembly Republicans Nine-Point, $6.6 B Plan to fund transportation
infrastructure & fix our roads with existing resources
Monday, June 29, 2015
Assembly Republicans today announced a nine-point “roadmap” to provide over $6 billion in new funding to
address California’s transportation needs and fix our state’s crumbling roads and highways. Maximize
existing state dollars to repair our roadways, ease traffic gridlock, and create jobs, without raising taxes,”
said Republican Leader Kristin Olsen, of Modesto. Spending Cap-and-Trade dollars for transportation
makes sense, because better roads mean cleaner air.” “Californians are too often stuck in traffic, while
driving on crumbling roads, highways, and bridges,” said Assembly Transportation Committee Vice Chair
Katcho Achadjian, R-San Luis Obispo. “The plan will provide over $6 billion annually for critical projects to
get people out of their cars faster so they can spend more time with their families. It is a realistic plan that
we expect will gain bipartisan support in the upcoming special session.
A recent Caltrans report estimated that the state must spend approximately $8 billion annually to properly
maintain our roads and highways. Unfortunately, the recently enacted 2015-16 state budget ignored the
need to invest in our roads and get people out of gridlock. Assembly Republicans put their plan forward in
response to Governor Brown calling a special session of the Legislature on transportation. Included in the
Assembly Republican roadmap are nine specific proposals to fund our state’s transportation needs within
existing state resources, and other proposals to speed up projects to get our roads fixed.
Revising six existing funds
1. Reallocate 40% ($1 billion) of California’s Cap & Trade program revenue annually
The goal of Cap-and-Trade is to offset the impacts of greenhouse gas emissions on our environment.
Californians currently pay higher prices at the pump because fuels are now included in the Cap-and-
Trade Program, making Cap-and-Trade funds directly linked to transportation infrastructure.
Additionally, better roads mean better fuel efficiency, which leads to a clear reduction in greenhouse
gas emissions.
2. Redirect $1 billion in existing Vehicle Weight Fee revenue annually
The Vehicle Weight Fee (VWF) is a non-controversial payment made to offset the costs of damage
done to our roads by heavy trucks. During the recession, this revenue was diverted to purposes other
than road maintenance. It is time to put this money back toward its intended use.
3. Invest $200 m (half the total) in the Governor’s strategic growth fund into shovel-ready roads
projects annually
The state budget provides the Governor with $400 million a year for projects of his choosing. The
Assembly Republican plan prioritizes safe roads and reduces this discretionary pot of money by half,
freeing up $200 million for road projects that can quickly make a difference for Californians who use
cars to get around our state.
4. Eliminate redundancies at Caltrans ($500 million) annually
We support the non-partisan Legislative Analyst Office’s (LAO) recommendation in the May 14, 2014
report to eliminate the 3,500 redundant positions at Caltrans. The LAO reports this will not negatively
impact any construction projects.
5. Capture $685 m annually in savings 25% reduction of long-term vacant state positions
There are thousands of vacant positions in state government that remain unfilled for more than six
months and until recently the law required that any such position be eliminated. While some positions
are essential and difficult to fill, the majority is not and, in fact, is intentionally kept vacant so that state
agencies can capture the money and spend it elsewhere. This money is better used fixing roads than
padding state bureaucracy.
B-3-8
6. Make a formal commitment in the State Budget General Fund to provide to increase funding by
$1 billion annually
Spending in the last two state budgets grew by $8.1 billion and $7.5 billion, respectively. Early
indications are that we will have $4 billion more revenue next year. Despite this revenue surge, these
budgets completely ignored the state’s transportation needs. According to the LAO, the three-year
revenue forecast is such that we can fully fund Proposition 98 and the Rainy Day Fund, and still
dedicate $1 billion annually to transportation. We propose making transportation a top priority and a
core function of government, which must be funded as such.
Three Policy Changes to Get Our Roads Fixed
7. CEQA Relief for Highway Projects
Relief from abuses of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) could reduce costs and delays
associated with highway projects and move our transportation projects out of lawsuits and red tape.
Under our plan, highway projects would be insulated from injunctions, like the model enacted for the
Kings Basketball arena.
Highway projects could be expedited by prohibiting a court from staying or enjoining a project unless
certain specific factors are present (threat to health and safety, Native American artifacts, etc.). If we
can do it for billionaire professional sports team owners, we should be able to do it for Californians
who want out of traffic gridlock and those who will be put to work on the projects.
The present and future of our state economy relies on a strong transportation network that can reliably
move goods and services. Building and maintaining such a network of roads, highways, and bridges
should not be hung up in endless years of CEQA litigation and bureaucracy.
8. Foster Public-Private Partnerships (P3s) for transportation projects
Removing the sunset on provisions authorizing the use of development lease agreements (aka
“public-private partnerships” or P3s) for transportation projects will get roads fixed faster. Due to
limited available funding for highway construction and maintenance, P3s are an attractive option for
the state to most efficiently use limited resources to repair its deteriorating infrastructure.
SB 2X 4 (Cogdill) (Chap. 2, Statutes of 2009) authorized Caltrans and regional transportation
agencies to enter into an unlimited number of P3 agreements for a broad range of highway, road, and
transit projects, through 12-31-2016. Deletion of this sunset will maintain Caltrans and regional
agencies flexibility to leverage private investment in project design, construction, and operation.
9. Get politics out of transportation projects: Restore CTC Independence
Removing the California Transportation Commission (CTC) from the Executive Branch will restore its
status as an independent body. The CTC was created by the Legislature in 1978 as an independent
body responsible for the programming and allocating of funds for the implementation of highway,
passenger rail and transit improvements throughout California.
The Governor’s Reorganization Plan No. 2 (GRP2) of 2012 changed the CTC from an independent
agency to an entity within the newly created Transportation Agency. Keeping CTC under the control of
the Secretary of Transportation frustrates meaningful oversight of the administration, and creates the
potential for politicization of transportation funding decisions.
Assembly Republicans also sent a letter to Assembly Member Jim Frazier, Chair of the Assembly
Transportation Committee, introducing their proposal and expressing their willingness to collaborate on a
bipartisan solution.
B-3-9
Attachment 5
July 2, 2015
The Honorable Katcho Achadjian
California Assemblyman, 35th District
State Capitol, Room 4098
Sacramento, CA 95814
Subject: Special Session on Transportation
Dear Assemblyman Achadjian,
We are pleased to see the Governor’s announcement to convene a special session on transportation. We
are also pleased to see that Assembly Speaker Toni Atkins selected you to participate as a member of the
Assembly Transportation and Infrastructure Development Committee for this special session.
The purpose of this letter is to identify local implications of the funding cutbacks and forward our (staff)
suggestions for your consideration, as you begin discussing how to address the State’s transportation
funding needs. As you may be aware, this issue is particularly significant given the announcement by the
California Transportation Commission (CTC) NO ($0) new funding will be include in the upcoming fund
estimate being adopted in August for programming in the 2016 State Transportation Improvement Program
(STIP).
As you may recall, STIP funding has been used in San Luis Obispo County to fund Highway 101
improvements, widening of Highway 46 East, and improvement of interchanges like the Willow Road, Los
Osos Valley Road and Brisco Road interchanges. Until last week, the following projects were anticipated to
be considered for programming by SLOCOG in December for submittal to the CTC for action in April:
Continued widening Route 46 East,
Environmental and/or construction funding to widen Route 227 south of Airport Road
Southbound operational improvements to US 101 in the Shell Beach/Pismo area.
We have also received requests to fund additional projects including improvement of interchanges at US
101/166, US 101/Main Street, and the US 101/46W interchanges, and the future extension of Prado Road
to a new interchange at US 101 in the City of SLO.
The CTC has indicated that unless the Legislature provides additional funding in an urgency bill, they will be
forced to adopt the 2016 STIP fund estimate with no new funding in August Additionally, the CTC has
indicated that existing programmed projects may be delayed, potentially impacting the Brisco Road
interchange. It is dire news for our region and the State that funding has deteriorated to such a level that
we cannot program any new highway projects.
We are pleased the Governor has requested this special Legislative session. We want to bring to your
attention that the focus of the Governor’s proclamation is the repair and maintenance of the local and state
transportation system. While we applaud the effort, we are concerned that it does not include
“improvements” to the transportation system.
The Administration proposal and all three of the pending revenue proposals are geared solely to
maintenance and rehabilitation, including SB 16 by Senator Beall, Assembly Speaker Atkins’ transportation
concept, and Assemblyman Frazier’s transportation concept. While all of these proposals are laudable,
none addresses the funding shortfalls in the STIP addressed above.
B-3-10
We request that you address this issue directly. We need additional revenues, not just for maintenance and
rehabilitation, but also increased funding for the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). Action
is needed now, or we will have no opportunity to program funding in the 2016 STIP. This will delay projects,
increase costs, impair mobility and economic development.
We appreciate your consideration of our interests in this difficult situation and offer the following additional
input as you engage in this effort:
1. Please advocate for revenues to “improve” the transportation system with funding to go into the STIP,
as well as, funding to maintain and repair highways, streets and roads.
2. The funding needs are so acute that any proposal will likely need both shifting of funds, increased
efficiencies and revenue increases. For example, a $1 billion increase in funding will provide about $3
m to our region. An interchange or an auxiliary lane costs $15 to $30 m. Another example is, SB 16,
which raises about $3-$4 Billion per year from a variety of sources, but solely for street, road and
highway maintenance, nothing for improvements.
3. We conceptually support the measures identified by Assembly Member Baker and yourself, with
particular support for:
a. Additional CEQA relief
b. Restore Vehicle Weight Fees for street, road and highway repair. (i.e. SCA 7)
c. Removing the sunset date for Public Private Partnerships.
d. Increasing the efficiency of the transportation development process (SB 16, requires Caltrans to
submit a plan to achieve a 30% increase in efficiency).
e. Dedicating more Cap and Trade Funding for transportation purposes, addressing the remaining
40% of C&T funds that are outside the required set-asides.
f. Restoring the independence to the California Transportation Commission.
4. Other measures for consideration:
a. Further funding from Cap and Trade as a result of modifications to the Affordable Housing and
Sustainable Communities (AHSC) Program. We concur with the Southern Californian Association
of Governments (SCAG) that the AHSC is primarily funding affordable housing projects. We
concur with their proposal that the funding should be split 50/50 into an affordable housing AND
transportation program.
b. Resolve the “Gas Tax Cut”: Effective July 1, the state’s gas tax was cut by 6 cents a gallon
pursuant to state law enacted as part of the gas tax swap. Without a fix, this cut is anticipated to
reduce funding to cities and counties for local streets and roads by $470m/year statewide and has
the effect of cutting the STIP to zero funding as noted above. SB 321 (Beall) addresses this in
part by averaging the reduction over several years reducing the cut to 3 cents. This still results in
a significant cut in revenue at a time when we need to increase revenue. It would be better to
eliminate the gas/tax swap and shift back to a sales tax on the gallon of fuel.
c. Shift the 12.5 cents per gallon excise tax (previously 18.5 cents) to the original 4.75% sales tax
on fuel allowing for an increase in revenue as the price of oil increases.
5. Some of the revenue enhancements included in SB 16 and in Speaker Atkins proposal. There
seems to be some validity in sharing the pain of revenue sources through a variety of mechanisms.
On June 4, our Board supported SB 16 on a split vote. Key suggestions:
a. Provide a mechanism to collect revenue from electric cars or other non-gasoline or diesel
fuel powered vehicles.
b. Some increase in the gas and diesel excise tax, and vehicle license fee.
c. Accelerate General Fund Loan repayment (Outstanding loans exceed $1B).
d. Redirect the truck weight fees back to transportation, as noted above.
B-3-11
e. Increase efficiency of Caltrans Project Delivery Process.
6. Self Help Counties: As you are aware, 20 counties have passed measures for transportation
purposes. We support the provision in SB 16 to set aside 5% of the revenues as an incentive for
those counties, such as ours, to pass a measure. A change to a 55% threshold, similar to school
bonds, will increase the likelihood that voters in most of the remaining counties would pass such a
measure.
We hope this input is helpful as you participate in the special session. We look forward to seeing the results
of the session and hope it addresses the needs for transportation funding in a comprehensive manner.
If you have any questions regarding any of the above, feel free to have your staff contact me at 805/781-
4219.
Sincerely,
Ronald L. De Carli, Executive Director
San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG)
c. District Staff
B-3-12
Attachment 6
B-3-13
B-3-14
Attachment 7
B-3-15
B-3-16
SUMMARY SCOPE OF SERVICES FOR
DEL RIO ROAD/US 101 INTERCHANGE PHASE 2
2015-09-10 Phase 2 Scope of Services.doc Page 1 of 16
The Wallace Group Team has been working with the City on the development of the
project through the Caltrans Project Development process. The key firms involved
include Wallace Group as the Prime Consultant, Caltrans Coordination lead, design
and consultant team leader, Kittelson Associates Inc (KAI) as the lead traffic analysis
and peer review team member for roundabouts, Quincy Engineering Inc (QEI) as a
structures design specialist and production support team member, First Carbon
Solutions (FCS) for environmental studies and clearance documentation, Earth
Systems Pacific (ESP) as the lead geotechnical and hazardous material study team
member, Pacific Coast Survey and Design (PCSD) for additional survey service
support and Hamner Jewell Associates (HJA) for Right of Way support. HJA services
have been used in the initial phase and their additional support during Phase 2 is
optional and not included in the current budgeting. The Consultant team Project
Manager is Mr. Jorge Aguilar, PE. He has over 25 years of transportation expertise
focused on Caltrans and local road and bridge projects with the majority of his work
accomplished in the District 5 area which includes the County of San Luis Obispo.
Key to delivery of this phase is continuity of key staff and positive relations with
Caltrans District 5 and San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) staff.
Support for the project from these key stakeholders best positions the funding
prospects for the project in the regional programming cycle.
The following is a summary of the proposed scope of work to progress the project
from the Project Study Report (PSR) phase to and through the Project Report (PR)
and Environmental Document (ED) phase. A Caltrans signed PR and ED constitute
Caltrans Project Approval (PA) which typically termed the PAED phase. It is the intent
of this phase to produce project deliverables that overlap with the initial final design or
Plans, Specifications and Estimate (PS&E) phase of the project that follows. The
listed tasks and descriptions result from a customized blend of our approach and
some traditional tasks for the completion of a PSR and PAED.
TASK 01 – PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND QUALITY ASSURANCE
This task is focused on project management and coordination of internal and external
team member functions. Our Project Understanding and Approach is an integral part
of our scope of work and as such the conditions stated therein are hereby
incorporated into this scope. We anticipate up to an 18 month schedule for the project
to deliver this phase, the management and coordination tasks are defined and
budgeted with this understanding. Project budget will be monitored cumulatively as
task budgets are expected to vary within the total project budget. Primary
components of this task will include:
Administration of contractual and financial functions, schedule, invoicing and
budget monitoring, Status reports will be prepared on a monthly basis to
accompany invoicing for services.
City and Consultant team coordination communications. This will include
the preparation of a key team member contact list and ongoing consultations
SUMMARY SCOPE OF SERVICES FOR
DEL RIO ROAD/US 101 INTERCHANGE PHASE 2
2015-09-10 Phase 2 Scope of Services.doc Page 2 of 16
Quality Assurance and Control for our internal products will also be
accomplished with this task and will include report and plan reviews. Overall
team Quality Assurance will be performed on the deliverables produced. This
QA function will include the production of the “Design Checklist” per Caltrans
Design Information Bulletin (DIB) 78 requirements for the PSR and the PAED
phase. Constructability reviews are often differentiated from the Quality
Assurance role. We treat the construction feasibility and improvement process
seriously and assign an experienced staff member to take an objective review
of the design at various milestones. The overall plan is available for review in
our offices and will be a part of the project files.
Deliverables: Status reports and invoicing,
Schedule and updates
Project Management/Quality Assurance/Control Plan
Design Checklist
TASK 02 – PDT AND CITY MEETINGS
This task is primarily focused on initiating and continuing the formal coordination
process with Caltrans and the with the appropriate City stakeholders, as determined
by the City Project Manager (PM). A Cooperative Agreement between the City and
Caltrans for the Project Initiation Development (PID) phase has been approved.
Another Cooperative Agreement will be developed for the PAED phase. The Wallace
Group PM will assist the City in the process of reviewing the terms of a Caltrans
standard Cooperative Agreement for the review of the project through the Caltrans
process. This is an indeterminate effort that is budgeted at up to 10 hours of support
time.
The Project Charter has been developed and a Core PDT leadership team has been
established for the project. The Caltrans PM, City PM and the Consultant PM have
been working together to move the project forward. The Core PDT will continue to
work together through the completion of the PSR and the PAED phase of the project.
Caltrans meetings will be coordinated to include notices and agendas, running of the
meetings, and distribution of meeting notes that will include action items. Wallace
Group staff will participate in up to 7 Caltrans meetings on behalf of the City (QEI staff
anticipates 3 trips to participate in up to 3 Caltrans meetings and KAI anticipates up to
5 trips to participate at up to 5 meetings as a part of this task). City meetings will be
coordinated as part of the trips to participate in the Caltrans meeting.
Deliverables: Meetings (7 Caltrans, 7 City, participation as listed),
Meeting Agendas and Notes
SUMMARY SCOPE OF SERVICES FOR
DEL RIO ROAD/US 101 INTERCHANGE PHASE 2
2015-09-10 Phase 2 Scope of Services.doc Page 3 of 16
TASK 03 – PSR
A Draft PSR has been prepared conforming to the March 20, 2014 update of
“Appendix L - Preparation Guidelines for Project Study Report” contained in the
Caltrans Project Development Procedures Manual (PDPM). The PSR includes the
following sections:
1. Introduction
2. Background
3. Purpose and Need
4. Deficiencies
5. Corridor and System Coordination
6. Alternatives
7. Community Involvement
8. Environmental Determination/Documentation
9. Funding/Programming
10. Schedule
11. Risks
12. FHWA Coordination
13. Project Reviews
14. Project Personnel
15. Attachments
Location or vicinity map
Alternative Preliminary Geometrics
Preliminary Environmental
Analysis Report (PEAR)
Structures Advance Planning
Studies
Risk Register
Project Programming Request
Storm Water Data Report Signature
Sheet
Right-of-Way Data Sheet and
Conceptual Cost
Eleven-Page Cost Estimates
Traffic Operations Analysis Report
Executed Cooperative Agreement
Life Cycle Cost Analysis
Caltrans review of the Draft PSR is expected to result in up to two rounds of
comments from Caltrans on the Draft PSR before the PSR is finalized. The following
items have been incorporated into the PSR in some detail. These items will be
further refined as the project progresses from the PSR to the Project Report.
Alternatives
The Wallace Group team completed the preparation of the Intersection Control
Evaluation (ICE) and the Caltrans Project Development Team (PDT) approved the
ICE. The ICE concluded that the roundabout alternatives were superior to the
SUMMARY SCOPE OF SERVICES FOR
DEL RIO ROAD/US 101 INTERCHANGE PHASE 2
2015-09-10 Phase 2 Scope of Services.doc Page 4 of 16
signalized alternative and therefore, the signalized alternative was dropped from
consideration. We anticipate that as Caltrans reviews the PSR, minor refinements
and additional work are anticipated in this task.
Storm Water Data Report
Because this project will take place within Caltrans right-of-way, Caltrans requires the
preparation of a Storm Water Data Report (SWDR) to document the decision making
process associated with storm water best management practices (BMP)
implementation and to serve as a basis for Caltrans’ compliance and monitoring
program. A SWDR has been prepared and included in the Draft PSR. We anticipate
that revisions will be requested by Caltrans as they complete their review of the PSR.
Cost Estimates
Our team has developed construction quantities and prepared Caltrans standard
eleven-page cost estimates for each of the alternatives. This scope includes revisions
to the eleven-page cost estimates which will be included in the Final PSR.
We have prepared other supporting studies in support of the PSR such as ROW
Data sheets and Life Cycle Cost Analysis. These studies may need to be revised
based on Caltrans review of the PSR.
Comments to the Draft PSR from the PDT for the purposes of gathering comments.
A formal comment/resolution sheet will be provided from each review and accompany
each subsequent submittal. This will ensure proper documentation of comments and
that all comments are addressed. This scope allows for addressing comments from
the Administrative Draft PSR and Draft PSR submittals. The Final PSR will be
submitted as a signature ready copy for Caltrans to approve.
Deliverables: Draft PSR (26 copies, 1 pdf)
Signature ready Final PSR (2 copies, 1 pdf)
TASK 04 – ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT AND TECHNICAL STUDIES
The Wallace Group team will coordinate with the City and the First Carbon Solutions
(FCS) (formerly Michael Brandmand Associates) staff to prepare the technical studies
and environmental document for the Caltrans environmental clearance process.
Caltrans environmental clearance process is managed through the District 5 and
Central Region review staff thus engaging with the Office Chief and the Branch Chief
for environmental review. It is up to the District level level environmental reviewers to
recommend that the existing draft document be forwarded to the Central Region for
review. The environmental clearance process will be the critical path in the
schedule to get Caltrans Approval for the project and District 5 Director signature on
the Project Report. The Wallace Group Project Manager will meet with City and FCS
representatives in person an/or via teleconference on a regular basis to keep the
coordination moving forward for the life of the environmental clearance activities.
SUMMARY SCOPE OF SERVICES FOR
DEL RIO ROAD/US 101 INTERCHANGE PHASE 2
2015-09-10 Phase 2 Scope of Services.doc Page 5 of 16
FCS has completed the Draft PEAR and has responded to one round of comments
from Caltrans on the PEAR. We anticipate one additional round of comments from
Caltrans on the PEAR.
ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNICAL STUDIES
Based on Caltrans comments on the PEAR, FCS is recommending the following
technical studies be prepared to support the Initial Study/Environmental Assessment
(IS/EA).
Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas Emissions
FCS will use the San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District CEQA
Guidelines as the basis for assessing air quality and greenhouse gas emissions
impacts, including the document’s recommendations for analytical approaches,
thresholds, and—if necessary—mitigation measures. FCS will model construction
and operational criteria pollutant emissions using the applicable computer model. In
addition, FCS will model and evaluate the proposed project’s greenhouse gas
emissions, including consistency with applicable strategies intended to reduce such
emissions.
FCS will summarize the results of the analysis in the MND and will include the air
quality modeling data as an appendix to the MND.
Hot Spot and MSAT Analysis
FCS will also prepare a technical analysis providing the results of the hot spot and
MSAT analysis. The report will use the Caltrans Standard Environmental Reference
guidance for content and analysis procedures; specifically, Chapter 11 – Air Quality.
The report will include an evaluation of regional emissions, a qualitative particulate
matter (PM10 and PM2.5) hot spot analysis, a qualitative carbon monoxide (CO) hot
spot analysis, a qualitative mobile source air toxics (MSAT) analysis, and a naturally
occurring asbestos analysis.
Biological Resources
Natural Environment Study
FCS will prepare a Natural Environment Study (NES) to evaluate the potential
presence of special-status biological resources within the project vicinity. The NES
will involve the following activities:
Prepare the NES by conducting a query of the California Natural Diversity
Database (CNDDB), the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) species list,
and other pertinent databases to determine the extent of sensitive and
protected species.
Establish the Biological Study Area (BSA) and confirm this area with Caltrans
staff.
SUMMARY SCOPE OF SERVICES FOR
DEL RIO ROAD/US 101 INTERCHANGE PHASE 2
2015-09-10 Phase 2 Scope of Services.doc Page 6 of 16
Identify, in accordance with Caltrans environmental review procedures, any
existing vegetation communities and sensitive plants and wildlife identified
onsite (a map of vegetative communities and sensitive species will be
included).
Incorporate findings from the Biological Reconnaissance that will determine
the presence or potential for listed, proposed, and candidate endangered and
threatened species to occur within the BSA. The identification of any sensitive
and/or special-status plant or wildlife species onsite or immediately adjacent to
the BSA will be noted and their locations will be recorded, for submittal with
the NES/MI.
Discuss sensitive plants and wildlife in the region that were not identified
onsite and document the findings of any previous biological studies prepared
within the BSA.
Based on findings, discuss impact avoidance and minimization measures to
be employed including but not limited to: part of project development design,
work windows, exclusionary and signed fencing, pre-construction surveys and
on-site construction monitoring.
If required, compensatory mitigation approved by Caltrans will be discussed.
The potential for cumulative impacts to native species and natural
communities will be discussed for current, future and reasonably foreseeable
actions in or near the BSA. Cumulative impacts will be addressed based on
CEQA, NEPA and the Federal Endangered Species Act respective of the
definition of cumulative impacts per state and federal act.
A summary section will detail desktop and field survey conclusions and will
discuss consultations, determinations, and coordination with state and federal
regulatory agencies based on state and federal environmental laws.
FCS will summarize the NES in the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and
include the complete technical report as an appendix.
Wetlands - Jurisdictional Delineation
As required by Caltrans, FCS will conduct a formal jurisdictional delineation of waters
of the United States, including wetlands, to determine the location and extent of
federally jurisdictional features within the project site. The tasks involved in the
completion of the jurisdictional delineation are defined below. It should be noted that
regulatory agencies make the ultimate determination of jurisdiction and, therefore,
these findings will require agency concurrence.
Wetlands Delineation. An FCS qualified biologist and trained delineator will delineate
the extent of any area potentially subject to agency jurisdiction within the project site.
The delineation will be conducted in accordance with the 1987 USACE Wetland
Delineation Manual (1987 Manual), the USACE Interim Regional Supplement to the
Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region, December 2006,
as well as guidance documents and notices released by USACE. All delineated
features will be recorded within sub-meter accuracy. For linear features,
measurements of any jurisdiction would be taken at periodic intervals along the
feature and mapped onto a 1”=200’ scale topographic map. The data would be used
SUMMARY SCOPE OF SERVICES FOR
DEL RIO ROAD/US 101 INTERCHANGE PHASE 2
2015-09-10 Phase 2 Scope of Services.doc Page 7 of 16
to prepare jurisdictional maps and the delineation report. Any potential for on-site
mitigation would be noted.
Wetlands Delineation Report. A qualified biologist and trained delineator will prepare a
delineation report detailing the methodology and results of the delineation. The report
will document the extent of any potentially jurisdictional features, the quality of those
features, and assess wetland related biological resources. The report will include field
data sheets (as an appendix); color photographs of representative jurisdictional
areas; a map (at the scale required by USACE) of the limits of jurisdictional areas,
including points at which measurements were made and diagnostic soil pits
examined; and, if applicable, a table showing the area of agency jurisdiction for each
feature.
Aquatic Habitat Field Verification. A qualified biologist will coordinate with the
appropriate regulatory agencies during the course of satisfying the delineation
requirement and maintain a close working relationship with the client in order to
satisfy project objectives and attend a half-day field meeting to review and discuss
site conditions with staff of the regulatory agencies.
Cultural Resources
FCS will conduct a cultural resources study in compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the Caltrans Standard Environmental
Reference (SER) Volume 2: Cultural Resources. The scope of work consists of tasks
required to complete the following deliverables: 1) Project Area Limits map; 2)
Archaeological Survey Report; and 3) Historical Resources Compliance Report.
It is FCS’ understanding that compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act is not required at this time and that Caltrans has determined there is
no potential for historic-period built environment resources to be impacted by the
proposed project, negating the need for preparation of a Historical Resources
Evaluation Report.
Project Area Limits
FCS will prepare the Project Area Limits (PAL) map for review and approval by
Caltrans after receiving a suitable base map from the City of Atascadero. FCS
assumes the PAL will undergo two reviews by Caltrans before the PAL is accepted as
final and signed.
Archaeological Survey Report
FCS will prepare the Archaeological Survey Report (ASR) that documents methods
and findings in regard to the effort to identify archaeological resources in the PAL.
FCS assumes the pedestrian survey of the project area conducted by FCS in 2013
remains valid so a renewed survey is not necessary. The ASR will require an updated
records search at the Central Coast Information Center, compliance with AB52, and a
request for relevant historical information from local historical societies. FCS assumes
the records search will be conducted by Information Center staff and a rapid request
response will not be required. FCS also assumes that FCS will assist the City in
complying with AB52 to the point of requesting a list of California Native American
tribes from the Native American Heritage Commission, drafting letters to California
SUMMARY SCOPE OF SERVICES FOR
DEL RIO ROAD/US 101 INTERCHANGE PHASE 2
2015-09-10 Phase 2 Scope of Services.doc Page 8 of 16
Native American tribes, compiling responses, and providing recommendations to the
City as to how to proceed.
Historical Resources Compliance Report
FCS will prepare the Historical Resources Compliance Report, which summarizes all
tasks completed for the cultural resources study and supports CEQA findings. FCS
assumes figures required for the HRCR and ASR will be limited to a Project Vicinity
Map, Project Location Map, and a PAL.
FCS will summarize the ASR and HRCR in the IS/MND and include supporting
documentation in an appendix.
Visual Impact Analysis (abbreviated)
FCS will prepare an abbreviated Visual Impact Assessment to briefly describe project
features, impacts and mitigation requirements. FCS will prepare up to four (4)
computer-generated visual simulations to depict the interchange improvements from
publicly accessible viewpoints (northbound and southbound on US 101; eastbound
and westbound on Del Rio Road). The images will present “before” and “after”
conditions to allow comparison of how the proposed improvements would alter the
visual setting.
Noise
FCS will prepare a Noise Study Report (NSR) in accordance with Caltrans SER
Volume 1 Chapter 12, Caltrans Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol (May 2011), FHWA’s
updated regulations, and NEPA guidelines to assess the potential effects of the
proposed project on existing and future noise conditions. Noise measurements will
be conducted along with concurrent traffic counts at representative sensitive receptor
locations in the vicinity of the proposed project. The most recent version of the U.S.
Federal Highway Administration approved Traffic Noise Model (currently TNM 2.5),
will be used to evaluate the traffic noise levels associated with existing conditions, the
future No Build conditions, and the Build condition. Noise impacts from construction
sources will also be analyzed based on the sensitivity of the area and the
requirements of the applicable City Noise Ordinances and in accordance with
Caltrans construction noise impact guidelines. Avoidance, minimization, and
mitigation measures will be identified to address potential adverse project related
short-term construction noise impacts on sensitive receptors.
A draft and final Noise Study Report will be prepared that discusses the findings of
the field investigations, noise modeling, and barrier analysis using the latest available
template provided on the Caltrans’ Standard Environmental Reference website.
If impacts are identified, noise abatement measures must be considered.
Specifically, the feasibility of the noise abatement measures must be evaluated and a
preliminary reasonableness analysis provided for each proposed measure. However,
based on FCS’s preliminary review of the project, it is anticipated that will not be
identified due to the nature of the project site. According to Caltrans guidelines, if no
impacts are identified, then only the preparation of a noise abatement decision
memorandum is required. Therefore, this scope of work only includes preparation of
SUMMARY SCOPE OF SERVICES FOR
DEL RIO ROAD/US 101 INTERCHANGE PHASE 2
2015-09-10 Phase 2 Scope of Services.doc Page 9 of 16
a noise abatement decision memorandum that would outline the exemption of the
project from further detailed abatement analysis. However, if a detailed noise
abatement decision report (NADR) is determined to be necessary, a scope and
budget augment can be provided to include the preparation of a NADR.
Hazardous Materials Initial Site Assessment
A Hazardous Materials Initial Site Assessment for the ramp and interchange structure
area will be prepared by Earth Systems Pacific. As the geotechnical team is already
needed to support the design functions as directed by the emerging details it is
natural that the geotechnical team doing that work also conduct the anticipated soil
(such as for Aerially Deposited Lead) and groundwater assessment in the
interchange area. We are proposing to provide an Initial Site Assessment (ISA) for
the interchange project. Our scope of work will be performed in general accordance
with the guidance contained the Caltrans Preliminary Environmental Analysis Report
(PEAR) handbook. Our scope will include the following tasks:
Perform a site reconnaissance by a Certified Engineering Geologist to assess
the potential for contamination in the project area
Research of available documentation and databases related to the site and
adjacent property uses
Preparation of an ISA report intended to be used by FCS for the
Environmental Document
During our site reconnaissance, we will note physical evidence of potential
contamination or possible sources of contamination. Local government agencies or
site personnel (if applicable) will be contacted regarding present and past site uses.
The site will be photographed at that time for future reference. Adjacent site uses will
also be observed, to evaluate their potential for impact on the project. Determination
of adjacent site uses will be made from public properties or roadways. Regulatory
agency databases will be reviewed to ascertain whether known or suspected
environmental impairments are present on or around the property. Preparation of a
report summarizing the results of the ISA will be prepared following our research.
The report will include findings of the site reconnaissance and site use history
research, identify areas within the project boundaries with a potential for soil or
groundwater contamination, as well make recommendations for a Preliminary Site
Investigation (PSI), if deemed appropriate.
Traffic Analysis
Traffic Impacts during the construction of the project will be analyzed during this task.
This will include assessing the impacts of the expected closure of Del Rio Road
during the reconstruction of the Del Rio Road/US 101 interchange. Analysis could
include items such as traffic operations assessments, considering construction
sequencing and traffic flows, signalization and coordination and other freeway ramp
terminal intersection evaluation and assessment.
SUMMARY SCOPE OF SERVICES FOR
DEL RIO ROAD/US 101 INTERCHANGE PHASE 2
2015-09-10 Phase 2 Scope of Services.doc Page 10 of 16
First Administrative Draft Initial Study/Environmental Assessment
(City of Atascadero and Wallace Group)
FCS will prepare a combined Initial Study/ Environmental Assessment using the
Caltrans annotated outline for an IS/EA. FCS will submit the First Administrative Draft
IS/EA for review by the City and Wallace Group. The IS/EA format will follow the
annotated outline provided on the Caltrans Standard Environmental Reference
(SER), and it will be adequately supported by exhibits (including color GIS mapping,
as appropriate). These sections will:
1. Review the project in light of information, conclusions, and mitigation
measures included in the current Technical Studies.
2. Identify any impacts and corresponding project-level mitigation measures to
reduce such impacts to less than significant levels.
The intent of the First Administrative Draft is to allow Wallace Group and City to
internally review the IS/EA for accuracy and completeness prior to submitting to
Caltrans for review.
Deliverables
Three (3) hard copies (appendices on CD) and one (1) electronic version (via
email) of the Administrative Draft IS/EA to City of Atascadero and Wallace
Group.
Second Administrative Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
(City of Atascadero, Wallace Group, and Caltrans)
FCS will respond to one set of City and Wallace Group comments on the
Administrative Draft IS/EA, and then will complete a Second Administrative Draft
IS/EA, which will be submitted to the City of Atascadero, Wallace Group, and Caltrans
for review and comment.
Deliverables
Three (3) hard copies (appendices on CD) and one (1) electronic version (via
email) of the Administrative Draft IS/EA to Wallace Group
Three (3) hard copies (appendices on CD) and one (1) electronic version (via
email) of the Administrative Draft IS/EA to City of Atascadero
Up to ten (10) hard copies (appendices on CD) and one (1) electronic version
(via email) of the Administrative Draft IS/EA to Caltrans
SUMMARY SCOPE OF SERVICES FOR
DEL RIO ROAD/US 101 INTERCHANGE PHASE 2
2015-09-10 Phase 2 Scope of Services.doc Page 11 of 16
Draft Initial Study/Environmental Assessment
Following receipt of comments from the Wallace Group, City of Atascadero, and
Caltrans, FCS will complete revisions and prepare the Draft IS/EA.
A red-line, strike-out version of the IS/EA will be provided to Wallace Group, City of
Atascadero, and Caltrans prior to public release of the Draft IS/EA to document how
comments on the Second Administrative Draft IS/EA were addressed; however, the
intent is not to solicit new comments. Additional rounds of review can be provided
subject to a scope and budget modification.
FCS will prepare and distribute copies of the Draft IS/EA to responsible agencies and
the public for a 30-day public review period. Technical studies will be included as
appendices with the Draft IS/EA for distribution. To reduce document production and
distribution costs, technical appendices will be provided in CD.
FCS will provide 15 copies of the Draft IS/EA and the Notice of Completion form to
the State Clearinghouse to formally commence the 30-day review period. This scope
of work assumes that the City of Atascadero will be responsible for local noticing of
the availability of the Draft IS/EA, including but not limited to, newspaper noticing or
radius mailing.
Deliverables
Three (3) hard copies (appendices on CD), one (1) reproducible master copy,
and one (1) CD of the Draft IS/EA to Wallace Group
Ten (10) hard copies (appendices on CD), one (1) reproducible master copy,
and one (1) CD of the Draft IS/EA to the City of Atascadero
Ten (10) hard copies (appendices on CD), one (1) reproducible master copy,
and one (1) CD of the Draft IS/EA to Caltrans
Fifteen (15) CDs of the Draft IS/EA and completed Notice of Completion form
to the State Clearinghouse (including appendices)
Administrative Final Mitigated Negative Declaration/FONSI
Although the CEQA Guidelines do not require lead agencies to prepare written
responses to comments, given the level of agency and public interest in the Del Rio
Road Commercial Area Specific Plan Project, it is anticipated that substantive
comments will be received on the document. As such, FCS will prepare written
responses to all comments submitted concerning the adequacy of the Draft IS/EA.
This task includes submittal of a draft set of responses for review and comment by
Wallace Group and City of Atascadero as well as one set of revisions in response to
staff comments. Given the high level of uncertainty with respect to the volume and
complexity of such comments, this task will be billed on a time-and-materials basis.
An initial budget allocation has been established for this task, assuming 40 hours of
SUMMARY SCOPE OF SERVICES FOR
DEL RIO ROAD/US 101 INTERCHANGE PHASE 2
2015-09-10 Phase 2 Scope of Services.doc Page 12 of 16
combined FCS professional staff time, if additional time is required, we will approach
the City to discuss how to proceed.
Deliverables
One (1) electronic version (via email) of the Administrative Draft Responses to
Comments to Wallace Group and City of Atascadero
Final Mitigated Negative Declaration/FONSI
FCS will compile the Final MND, which will include Responses to Comments and
Errata. FCS will reproduce the Final MND in hard copy format and on CDs for City
use and distribution. FCS will send Responses to Comments directly to public
agencies that commented on the MND. This scope of work assumes that the City of
Atascadero will be responsible for distribution of copies of the Final MND to private
organizations and individuals who submitted comments.
Deliverables
Three (3) hard copies, one (1) reproducible master copy, and one (1) CD of
the Final IS/MND to Wallace Group
Ten (10) hard copies, one (1) reproducible master copy, and one (1) CD of the
Final IS/MND to the City of Atascadero
Ten (10) hard copies, one (1) reproducible master copy, and one (1) CD of the
FONSI to the Caltrans
One (1) CD containing the Final IS/MND to each public agency that
commented in the Draft IS/MND (FCS to send direct)
Prepare Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
FCS will prepare a comprehensive Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
(MMRP), pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15097. The MMRP will contain all
mitigation measures identified in the Draft IS/MND. This comprehensive MMRP will
provide City of Atascadero and Caltrans staff with a single source of reference to the
full range of mitigation measures to be implemented, to ensure achievement of the
impact avoidance envisioned in the IS/MND. For each measure or group of similar
measures, the agency responsible for ensuring proper implementation will be
identified, along with the timing and method of verification. Copies of the MMRP will
be included in the Final IS/MND submittal.
SUMMARY SCOPE OF SERVICES FOR
DEL RIO ROAD/US 101 INTERCHANGE PHASE 2
2015-09-10 Phase 2 Scope of Services.doc Page 13 of 16
Deliverables
Three (3) hard copies of the MMRP to Wallace Group (an electronic version
will be provided on the same CD as the Final IS/MND)
Three (3) hard copies of the MMRP to the City of Atascadero (an electronic
version will be provided on the same CD as the Final IS/MND)
Three (3) hard copies of the MMRP to Caltrans (an electronic version will be
provided on the same CD as the Final IS/MND)
Notice of Determination/Payment of Filing Fees
FCS will prepare the Notice of Determination, which must be filed with the San Luis
Obispo County Clerk’s Office within 5 business days of IS/MND certification. The
purpose of the Notice of Determination filing is to limit the legal challenge period to 30
days. If a Notice of Determination is not filed within 5 business days of certification,
the legal challenge period defaults to 180 days.
The Notice of Determination filing requires payment of the California Department of
Fish and Game CEQA filing fee (currently $2,101.50) and a County handling fee
(currently $50). This scope of work assumes that the City of Atascadero staff will file
the NOD with the San Luis Obispo County Clerk’s Office and pay the associated fees.
TASK 05 – PROJECT REPORT PREPARATION
Draft & Final Project Report
A Project Report will be prepared in an overlapping manner with the PSR to
incorporate the design findings and any necessary additional information from
existing or supplemental environmental technical studies. We anticipate completing
the following additional or refinement work or studies which will be included in the
appropriate sections of the project report:
Preliminary construction staging
and detour requirements
Refined alternative drawings (2
alternatives)
Summary of environmental
studies
Bridge Advanced Planning Study
drawings
Construction cost estimate for each
alternative
Schedule to complete final design and
construction
30% Plans of the preferred alternative
SUMMARY SCOPE OF SERVICES FOR
DEL RIO ROAD/US 101 INTERCHANGE PHASE 2
2015-09-10 Phase 2 Scope of Services.doc Page 14 of 16
The Project Report will conform to the April 4th 2012 update of “Appendix K -
Preparation Guidelines for Project Report” contained in the Caltrans PDPM. The
Project Report is anticipated to include the following sections:
1. Introduction
2. Recommendation
3. Background
4. Need and Purpose
a. Problem, Deficiencies, Justification
b. Regional and System Planning
c. Traffic
5. Alternatives
a. Viable Alternatives
b. Rejected Alternatives
6. Considerations Requiring Discussion
a. Hazardous Waste
b. Value Analysis
c. Resource Conservation
d. Right-of-Way Issues
e. Environmental Issues
f. Air Quality Conformity
g. Title VI Considerations
h. Noise Abatement Decision Report Section
7. Other Considerations As Appropriate
8. Programming
9. Reviews
10. Project Personnel
11. List of Attachments
Location or vicinity map
Draft Environmental Document
(DED)
Typical Cross Sections
Structures Advance Planning
Studies
Risk Register
Storm Water Data Report Signature
Sheet
Right-of-Way Data Sheet
Eleven-Page Cost Estimates
Traffic Operations Analysis Report
TMP Memo & Checklist
SUMMARY SCOPE OF SERVICES FOR
DEL RIO ROAD/US 101 INTERCHANGE PHASE 2
2015-09-10 Phase 2 Scope of Services.doc Page 15 of 16
Preliminary Geotechnical Analysis
For accuracy in estimating a preliminary geotechnical analysis is included as an
optional but recommended task. Potential geologic and geotechnical hazards and
impacts such as slope instability, erosion, settlement, subsidence, expansive soils,
and naturally-occurring asbestos will be evaluated and discussed. Potential seismic
impacts, including nearby faults and the potential for seismic-related hazards such as
fault rupture, ground shaking, liquefaction, lateral spreading, seismically-induced
landslides, and seismically-induced settlement are required to be discussed.
Preliminary seismic design values for structures will be prepared in accordance with
the 2009 Caltrans Seismic Design Criteria. Where potentially significant impacts are
identified, potential mitigation measures will be presented and recommendations for
further study will be provided. This optional geologic/geotechnical study has been
estimated at approximately nine thousand dollars and is included in our budget.
Preliminary Drainage Study
A preliminary evaluation of the hydrology and highway drainage associated with the
preferred project alternative will be prepared. Caltrans drainage criteria established
in Chapter 800 of the Highway Design Manual and regional requirements from
Caltrans District 5 will be used to guide our preliminary drainage assessment. The
goal will be to identify the need for roadside ditches, detention/retention basin,
drainage inlets and piped systems. A preliminary drainage study will be developed to
identify the level of drainage improvements and general placement of new drainage
facilities that will need to be incorporated as part of this new interchange project.
Fact Sheets for Non-Standard Design Features
Our team will complete the DIB 78 Checklist for the existing and proposed project
features. One checklist will be prepared that includes up to three alternatives, clearly
identifying which alternatives have non-standard features.
Based on the non-standard features identified in the DIB 78, we will coordinate with
Caltrans to determine which non-standard items will be included in Mandatory or
Advisory Fact Sheets. We will prepare draft and final Fact Sheets for Caltrans
approval for each of the three alternatives.
This report will be presented to and discussed with the City in draft form. The
Wallace Group team will prepare and circulate the Draft Project Report to the PDT for
the purposes of gathering comments. A formal comment sheet will be provided from
each review and accompany each subsequent submittal. This will ensure proper
documentation of comments and that all comments are addressed. All comments will
be addressed and incorporated as appropriate into the final report. This scope allows
for addressing comments from the Administrative Draft Project Report and Draft
Project Report submittals. We will also address comments from Caltrans on the Draft
Final Project Report prior to the Final Project Report being submitted as a signature
ready copy to Caltrans.
SUMMARY SCOPE OF SERVICES FOR
DEL RIO ROAD/US 101 INTERCHANGE PHASE 2
2015-09-10 Phase 2 Scope of Services.doc Page 16 of 16
Deliverables: Administrative Draft PR (8 copies, 1 pdf)
Draft PR (26 copies, 1 pdf)
Draft Final PR (26 copies, 1pdf)
Signature ready Final PR (2 copies, 1 pdf)
TASK 06 – PUBLIC EDUCATION & OUTREACH
The Wallace Group team has an extensive array of public outreach and education
experience. Kittelson Associates also has wide variety of tools and techniques
proven from other outreach efforts. We have supported and compiled videos, web
sites, brochures, and other special outreach including 2-D models of roundabouts and
student education work books that reach out to elementary age students. Should
outreach services be desired by the City, our team would work with the City to
develop a customized plan that takes advantage of the wealth of prior materials
completed for others over the years.
Deliverables: Key education and outreach materials (ie
“Roundabouts: Another Safe Intersection”)
Special user information brochure (ie cyclists)
Web page content framework
Roundabout 101 general public presentation
TASK 07 – FUNDING ASSISTANCE
Wallace Group has been working with the City and SLOCOG during the first phase of
the project to identify potential state and federal funding opportunities to close the
shortfall in funding for the project. During this task, our team will continue to work
closely with the City and SLOCOG on closing the funding gap. Given the uncertain
nature of this task we have a total budget of 40 hours. We will not exceed the 40
hours without written permission from the City.
TASK 08 – EL CAMINO REAL AND DEL RIO ROAD ROUNDABOUT SUPPORT
Wallace Group has been working with the City and Kimley-Horn (KHA) (Wal-Mart’s
engineer) to review proposed modifications to the El Camino Real and Del Rio Road
roundabout. As part of this task the Wallace Group team will continue to provide
support to the City in the form of participating in conference calls with the City and
KHA, reviewing traffic analysis prepared by KHA, reviewing conceptual roundabout
layouts, preparing exhibits on behalf of the City, and working with adjacent property
owners as directed by the City. Given the uncertain nature of this task, we will not
exceed the budgeted amount shown without written permission from the City.