HomeMy WebLinkAbout3-26-13 Agenda Packet1
City of Morro Bay
City Council Agenda
________________________________________________________________________
Mission Statement
The City of Morro Bay is dedicated to the preservation and enhancement of the quality of life.
The City shall be committed to this purpose and will provide a level of municipal service and
safety consistent with and responsive to the needs of the public.
________________________________________________________________________
REGULAR MEETING
TUESDAY, MARCH 26, 2013
PUBLIC SESSION
VETERANS MEMORIAL HALL - 6:00 P.M.
209 SURF ST., MORRO BAY, CA
ESTABLISH QUORUM AND CALL TO ORDER
MOMENT OF SILENCE
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
CLOSED SESSION REPORT
MAYOR & COUNCILMEMBERS’ REPORTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS & PRESENTATIONS
PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS
PUBLIC COMMENT - Members of the audience wishing to address the Council on City
business matters (other than Public Hearing items under Section B) may do so at this time.
To increase the effectiveness of the Public Comment Period, the following rules shall be
followed:
When recognized by the Mayor, please come forward to the podium and state your
name and address for the record. Comments are to be limited to three minutes.
All remarks shall be addressed to Council, as a whole, and not to any individual
member thereof.
The Council respectfully requests that you refrain from making slanderous, profane or
personal remarks against any elected official, commission and/or staff.
Please refrain from public displays or outbursts such as unsolicited applause,
comments or cheering.
Any disruptive activities that substantially interfere with the ability of the City
Council to carry out its meeting will not be permitted and offenders will be requested
to leave the meeting.
Your participation in City Council meetings is welcome and your courtesy will be
appreciated.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to
participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk, (805) 772-6205. Notification 72 hours
prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility
to this meeting.
2
A. CONSENT AGENDA
Unless an item is pulled for separate action by the City Council, the following actions are
approved without discussion.
A-1 APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FOR THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING
OF MARCH 12, 2013; (ADMINISTRATION)
RECOMMENDATION: Approve as submitted.
A-2 QUARTERLY PROJECT STATUS REPORT; (ADMINISTRATION)
RECOMMENDATION: Informational item only.
A-3 STATUS REPORT OF A MAJOR MAINTENANCE & REPAIR PLAN (MMRP) FOR
THE EXISTING WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT (PUBLIC SERVICES)
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that this report be received and filed
A-4 APPROVAL OF A BUDGET ALLOCATION FOR GANGWAY REPAIR AT THE
SOUTH LAUNCH RAMP (TIDELANDS PARK) COMMERCIAL BOAT SLIPS;
(HARBOR)
RECOMMENDATION: Approve a Harbor Department budget amendment to allow
repairs to the slip gangway approach walkway to the City slips on the south side of
the public launch ramp at Tidelands Park.
A-5 A PROCLAMATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MORRO BAY
DECLARING MARCH 31 – APRIL 6, 2013 AS “CHILDHOOD CANCER
AWARENESS WEEK”; (ADMINISTRATION)
RECOMMENDATION: Approve Proclamation
B. PUBLIC HEARINGS - None
C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS - None
D. NEW BUSINESS
D-1 REQUEST FOR A FEE WAIVER FOR BOAT SLIP FEES – BRIAN STACY;
(HARBOR)
RECOMMENDATION: Deny waiving past-due slip fees for City slip holder Brian
Stacy.
D-2 DISCUSSION ON THE STATUS OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE’S PROGRESS
FOR THE CITY’S 50TH ANNIVERSARY; (ADMINISTRATION)
RECOMMENDATION: Provide direction to Committee.
3
D-3 APPROVAL OF THE SERVICE RETIREMENT INCENTIVE (SRI) PROGRAM;
(ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES)
RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Service Retirement Incentive Program in
perpetuity with an annual reporting requirement every July, presented as a Council
consent item.
D-4 CONSIDERATION OF THE ADDITION OF TWO MEMBERS FROM THE
GENERAL PUBLIC FOR THE SELECTION OF A CONSULTANT FOR THE
DEVELOPMENT OF A NEW WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY (WRF);
(PUBLIC SERVICES)
RECOMMENDATION: Approve the addition of two citizen representatives for the
Consultant Services Selection Committee, open nominations and set the date for
appointment for said representatives, for the development of the new Water
Reclamation Facility.
D-5 DISCUSSION OF THE PUBLIC WORKS ADVISORY BOARD’S (PWAB) MEMO
FROM THE STREETS SUMMIT MEETING; (PUBLIC SERVICES)
RECOMMENDATION: Review and provide direction to staff.
D-6 DISCUSSION OF POTENTIAL WATER AND SEWER RATE INCREASE; (PUBLIC
SERVICES)
RECOMMENDATION: Provide direction to staff to commence the analysis of Water
and Sewer rates for potential increases and prepare a schedule for the requisite
Proposition 218 protest vote.
D-7 WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY (WRF) PROJECT STATUS UPDATE AND
DISCUSSION; (CITY COUNCIL)
RECOMMENDATION: Discuss and provide direction to staff.
E. COUNCIL DECLARATION OF FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
F. ADJOURNMENT
THIS AGENDA IS SUBJECT TO AMENDMENT UP TO 72 HOURS PRIOR TO THE DATE AND TIME SET FOR
THE MEETING. PLEASE REFER TO THE AGENDA POSTED AT CITY HALL FOR ANY REVISIONS OR CALL
THE CLERK'S OFFICE AT 772-6205 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION.
MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER
DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION AT CITY HALL
LOCATED AT 595 HARBOR STREET; MORRO BAY LIBRARY LOCATED AT 625 HARBOR STREET; AND
MILL’S COPY CENTER LOCATED AT 495 MORRO BAY BOULEVARD DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS.
IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT, IF YOU NEED SPECIAL ASSISTANCE
TO PARTICIPATE IN A CITY MEETING, PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE AT LEAST 24
HOURS PRIOR TO THE MEETING TO INSURE THAT REASONABLE ARRANGEMENTS CAN BE MADE TO
PROVIDE ACCESSIBILITY TO THE MEETING.
MINUTES - MORRO BAY CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING – MARCH 12, 2013
VETERAN’S MEMORIAL HALL – 6:00P.M.
Mayor Irons called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
PRESENT: Jamie Irons Mayor
Christine Johnson Councilmember
Nancy Johnson Councilmember
George Leage Councilmember
Noah Smukler Councilmember
STAFF: Andrea Lueker City Manager
Robert Schultz City Attorney
Jamie Boucher City Clerk
Rob Livick Public Services Director
Amy Christey Police Chief
Steve Knuckles Interim Fire Chief
Eric Endersby Harbor Director
Susan Slayton Administrative Services Director
Joe Woods Recreation & Parks Director
ESTABLISH QUORUM AND CALL TO ORDER
MOMENT OF SILENCE
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS REPORTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS &
PRESENTATIONS
CLOSED SESSION REPORT – City Attorney Robert Shultz reported that City Council met in
Closed Session on the following items: Conference with City Manager, the City’s Designated
Representative, for the purpose of reviewing the City’s position regarding the terms and
compensation paid to the following employee organizations and giving instructions to the
Designated Representative: Firefighters Association (FFA), Police Officer’s Association (POA),
and Service Employee’s International Union, SEIU Local 620; and, Conference with City
Council, the City’s Designated Representative, for the purpose of reviewing the City’s position
regarding the terms and compensation paid to the following unrepresented employees: City
Manager and City Attorney; no reportable action under the Brown Act was taken.
MOTION: Councilmember Smukler moved for approval and presentation of Item A-9, a
Proclamation Declaring April 2013 as “Autism Awareness Month. The motion was
seconded by Councilmember Christine Johnson and carried unanimously 5-0.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Marlys McPherson, as Chair of the Morro Bay Winter Bird Festival, thanked Council and the
City for their support and sponsorship of their biggest and most successful event yet. There were
546 people registered, 70% of which came from outside the County.
AGENDA NO: A-1 MEETING DATE: 3/26/2013
2
MINUTES - MORRO BAY CITY COUNCIL – MARCH 12, 2013
Hank Roth spoke on behalf of Morro Bay Beautiful advertising the upcoming City-wide Yard
Sale. This annual event is being held the weekend of April 6th and 7th. You can sign up as a
“seller” at the Chamber of Commerce, 695 Harbor, and the deadline to register is March 27th.
Brad Snook, Chair of the SLO Surfrider Association, spoke on Item D-3, Review and Discussion
of Wastewater Treatment Plant Draft Schedule of Tasks Needed to Proceed with the New
Wastewater Treatment Plant Project. It is their hope that Council will support a bolder vision
than is on the schedule; they feel it is feasible to move forward by 2017.
Garry Johnson let the public know that the Photo Expo that had been scheduled for April 18th
and 19th has been postponed to September. He also let people know that care packages for our
troops overseas are available to be mailed for $14.85. They can be picked up at Bayshore Realty
and Carla’s Country Kitchen.
Daniel Podesto spoke as President of Morro Bay 4th stating they are actively looking for
volunteers to join their group to help with both the event and fundraisers leading up to the event.
The committee meets the 1st and 3rd Friday of the month at noon, upstairs at the Embarcadero
Grill. He also announced the Annual Oyster and Beer Feast is being held at Tognazzini’s II
sometime in May; the date for the 3rd Annual Wine Raffle is also in the process being set. His
last request was to ask the Council for some help; he’d like to see an agenda item at a future
meeting, giving financial support for the event in the form of waiving some City staff costs.
Greg Frye spoke on Item D-1, Consideration of the Abandonment of a Portion of the Public
Right of Way Westerly of the Existing Back of Curb of Toro Lane. He is in favor of further
investigation and feels that his proposal will allow for additional needed parking in the area. He
would like a chance to present his concept at a Public Hearing to provide options for this land.
Brian Stacy spoke on the PG&E Seismic Surveys as well as the need for a State audit as to why
the City didn’t receive any mitigation. He also feels there is a small group of fishermen who get
all the information and then a bunch of money but the “rest of us don’t”.
Betty Winholtz spoke on Item A-3, Approval of Lease Agreement for Lease Site 93-95/93W-
95W; 901-915 Embarcadero. She questioned what the justification for a 40 year lease was as
there was nothing in the lease document that listed what the investment of money by the lessee
there was. She also wondered if there was anyone else who had received a 40 year lease like
this. She also spoke on Item D-1, disagreeing with the applicant stating that the request of
intention to abandon is not consistent with the General Plan as there is need for this property for
public use.
Doug Hamp also spoke on Item D-1 and urged Council not to jump into any quick decisions. He
feels we need to look at all the alternatives of what may be possible.
Bill Martoney spoke on Item D-1 thanking Council for bringing this forward. He recommends
not adopting the Resolution of Intent as he feels that it locks the City into the process of
abandonment.
Barbara Doerr concurs with Mr. Martoney. She feels we should preserve our environment as it
is critical to keep this land. She also spoke about her disappointment at the actions in closed
3
MINUTES - MORRO BAY CITY COUNCIL – MARCH 12, 2013
session. She feels we advertise incorrectly, and we have announcement requirements that we
don’t follow. She also provided amendments to the February 26, 2013 meeting minutes. She
further spoke on Item A-3, 47 years is an outrageous amount of time and she feels it may
establish a policy on length and terms of future leases.
Barry Branin reported on a Special Meeting on March 5th of the Cayucos Sanitary District. He
stated that Cayucos wants to move forward expeditiously and look at all of the concepts for
Cayucos before they commit to Morro Bay which he feels is a good idea. At the end of the
meeting, Chairman Enns made the comment that maybe we should think about putting the plant
at Chorro Valley or CMC.
Susan Stewart attended the Goal Setting and commended all on a really good job; it was positive
and all worked together well. She is very supportive of the Morro Bay 4th; the City service fees
are approximately 10% of their costs. If there is any way to waive some or all of those fees, it
would be very helpful.
Nancy Castle spoke promoting Supper and Singing this Friday night with dinner at 530pm and
music by Tangos & More at 7pm. She also stated that there won’t be a Sock Hop during the
Morro Bay Car Show. She also advertised the Morro Bay Fundraiser Follies whose theme is
music from the ‘50’s.
Cathy Novak spoke on behalf of the applicant for Item D-1 hoping to provide clarity to the
situation. She stated that the Resolution before Council did the following: approving the
Resolution is only the intent to abandon the right of way; the resolution doesn’t make the
abandonment final; the resolution includes a public service easement that allows the Council to
use the area for public purposes in the future; the resolution includes an easement for public
utilities; a public hearing is set for April 23rd to consider the final abandonment, Coastal
Development Permit, environmental determination and alternative options; and, it doesn’t
authorize the Council to sell all or a portion of the property. In addition, the applicant has
submitted an alternative option to Council that will provide added public benefits above and
beyond those that currently exist. Approving this only allows the opportunity to present this idea
in a public forum.
Lynda Merrill agrees with those speaking against Item D-1; she feels there needs to be more
public comment. She also is in favor of Item D-2 and Item D-3.
Mark Starbol spoke on Item D-1 and would like to see it not move forward. He is concerned
with parking especially now with the possibility of the State Park project; there could be too
many cars parking on Beachcomber. The City needs to take into account the needs of the
residents, not just tourists, when making these decisions; the public needs access to the beach. If
there are lots of cars parked there, it can cause a lot of confusion and congestion which is
dangerous.
Harold Wiebenga spoke out against an item that will be coming to Council as an appeal re:
Morro Strand State Beach. He feels the park is in total violation of all new pollution laws –
visual, dust, smell as well as state nuisance laws. He feels that State Parks have fallen short of
their responsibilities and the park should be closed.
4
MINUTES - MORRO BAY CITY COUNCIL – MARCH 12, 2013
Mayor Irons closed the public comment period.
A. CONSENT CALENDAR
Unless an item is pulled for separate action by the City Council, the following actions are
approved without discussion.
A-1 APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FOR THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING
OF FEBRUARY 26, 2013; (ADMINISTRATION)
RECOMMENDATION: Approve as submitted.
A-2 RESOLUTION NO. 19-13 AMENDING COUNCIL POLICIES AND PROCEDURES
MANUAL REGARDING MEETING GUIDELINES & PROCEDURES; (CITY
ATTORNEY)
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution 19-13.
A-3 APPROVAL OF LEASE AGREEMENT FOR LEASE SITE 93-95/93W-95W; 901-
915 EMBARCADERO (HARBOR)
RECOMMENDATION: Approve Resolution No. 17-13 for a new Lease Agreement for
Lease Site 93-95/93W-95W.
A-4 AUTHORIZATION FOR ATTENDANCE AT THE C-MANC ANNUAL
WASHINGTON D.C.; (ADMINISTRATION)
RECOMMENDATION: Approve authorization for a two-person delegation to attend
the California Marine Affairs and Navigation Conference (C-MANC) Washington
Week meetings.
A-5 APPROVAL OF THE 2013/14 BUDGET CALENDAR; (ADMINISTRATIVE
SERVICES)
RECOMMENDATION: Approve Calendar.
A-6 STATUS REPORT ON THE UTILIZATION OF BIG BELLY GARBAGE
RECEPTACLES AT THE MORRO ROCK PARKING LOT; (RECREATION &
PARKS)
RECOMMENDATION: Receive status report; no action is required.
A-7 DISCUSSION ON THE STATUS OF THE SALE OF CITY-OWNED PROPERTY AT
THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF CORAL AVENUE AND SAN JACINTO STREET,
AND AUTHORIZATION FOR STAFF TO SOLICIT A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
FOR REAL ESTATE CONTRACT SERVICES TO ASSIST IN THE SALE OF THE
PROPERTY; (CITY ATTORNEY)
5
MINUTES - MORRO BAY CITY COUNCIL – MARCH 12, 2013
RECOMMENDATION: Authorize staff to solicit proposals for real estate contract
services to assist in the sale of City-owned property located at the southeast corner
(SEC) of Coral Avenue and San Jacinto Street.
A-8 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MORRO BAY
SUPPORTING THE DEVELOPMENT OF A PUBLIC BIKE PARK WITHIN THE
CITY LIMITS (RECREATION & PARKS)
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution 20-13.
A-9 A PROCLAMATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MORRO BAY
DECLARING APRIL 2013 AS “AUTISM AWARENESS MONTH”;
(ADMINISTRATION)
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Proclamation.
Councilmember Smukler pulled Items A-2, A-3 and A-5 from the Consent Calendar.
MOTION: Councilmember Christine Johnson moved the City Council approve Items
A-1, A-4, A-6, A-7 and A-8 of the Consent Calendar as presented. The motion was
seconded by Councilmember Smukler and carried unanimously 5-0.
A-2 RESOLUTION NO. 19-13 AMENDING COUNCIL POLICIES AND PROCEDURES
MANUAL REGARDING MEETING GUIDELINES & PROCEDURES; (CITY
ATTORNEY)
Councilmember Smukler pulled this item so that he could thank Mayor Irons for his time
working with the City Attorney; he feels this is a major improvement.
MOTION: Councilmember Smukler moved for approval of Item A-2, approving
Resolution 19-13, amending Council Policies and Procedures Manual regarding Meeting
Guidelines & Procedures. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Christine
Johnson and carried unanimously 5-0.
A-3 APPROVAL OF LEASE AGREEMENT FOR LEASE SITE 93-95/93W-95W; 901-
915 EMBARCADERO (HARBOR)
Councilmember Smukler pulled Item A-3 so that Harbor Director Eric Endersby has a chance to
respond to the public’s comments/concerns. Mr. Endersby stated that this process began in
November, 2011, the lease and its terms are on the website as well as in the staff report and has
been publicly available. In this case, there is significant financial risk by the lessees.
MOTION: Councilmember Smukler moved for approval of Item A-3, Approval of
Lease Agreement for Lease Site 93-95/93W-95W, 901-915 Embarcadero. The motion
was seconded by Councilmember Leage and carried unanimously 5-0.
A-5 APPROVAL OF THE 2013/14 BUDGET CALENDAR; (ADMINISTRATIVE
SERVICES)
6
MINUTES - MORRO BAY CITY COUNCIL – MARCH 12, 2013
Councilmember Smukler pulled this item for public information purposes. Administrative
Director Susan Slayton provided a short description of the budget process.
MOTION: Councilmember Smukler moved for approval of Item A-5, Approval of
the 2013/14 Budget Calendar. The motion was seconded by Mayor Irons and carried
unanimously 5-0.
B. PUBLIC HEARINGS, REPORTS & APPEARANCES - NONE
C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
C-1 RESOLUTION NO. 15-13 ADOPTING THE MID-YEAR BUDGET AMENDMENTS;
(ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES)
Administrative Services Director Susan Slayton presented the staff report.
Councilmember Nancy Johnson has a problem with seeing the $30,000 listed as a Council
Contingency Fund and would rather see it listed in the general budget.
Mayor Irons wondered about the Measure Q Funds and asked whether or not any of these funds
could be allocated to an immediate need for streets or storm drains or should any be held back
for adjustments. Public Services Director Rob Livick stated it would cost approximately
$86,000 to prepare and provide an updated Storm Drain Management Plan which he
recommends being done. Mayor Irons would like to reagendize this to see if a Storm Drain
Master Plan would be a good use of Measure Q monies.
Councilmember Smukler doesn’t want to see the $30,000 listed as a Council Discretionary fund.
He thinks it’s important to keep these monies separate and designated for special projects as
deemed necessary and approved by a majority of Council. He thinks that updating the plan is a
good idea and an efficient use of Measure Q funds but feels it’s important that we should ask the
Measure Q Committee as to the appropriateness of the use.
Mayor Irons thinks we can leave the $30,000 where it is for now, floating it into the general fund
during the budget process wouldn’t be that difficult.
Councilmember Nancy Johnson stated that if you don’t want to put it into the general fund then
at least put it into a Special Projects Fund, not a Contingency Fund for Council.
Ms. Slayton stated that the money can be placed into a special fund called a 515 Trust & Agency
Fund, with the Council’s approval.
MOTION: Mayor Irons moved to adopt Resolution 15-13 as written, to approve the
Measure Q recommendations, and to place the $30,000 contingency monies into a 515
Trust & Agency Fund. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Nancy Johnson and
carried 5-0.
D. NEW BUSINESS
7
MINUTES - MORRO BAY CITY COUNCIL – MARCH 12, 2013
D-1 INITIATION OF THE PROCESS TO CONSIDER THE ABANDONMENT
(VACATION) OF A PORTION OF THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY WESTERLY OF
THE EXISTING BACK OF CURB OF TORO LANE, BETWEEN YERBA BUENA
AND NORTH POINT SUBDIVISION, USING THE PROCEDURES PROVIDED BY
THE CALIFORNIA STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE, SECTION 8300 ET SEQ.
(GREG FRYE, 3420 TORO LANE, APPLICANT); (PUBLIC SERVICES)
Public Services Director Rob Livick presented the staff report.
Councilmember Smukler doesn’t feel we are ready to proceed with the Resolution of Intention;
he feels we owe it to the community to take more time for the public to look at it. He also feels
Council needs to provide staff with clear direction to analyze various parking proposals, options
and benefits that can come back to the City. He has spoken with neighbors and concerned
citizens and most see parking as a key issue which has been exaggerated by the State Park issue.
After reviewing the Morro Bay Cayucos Connector EIR, he is concerned we are setting
ourselves up for pretty severe issues in the area and the connector project could backfire. He is
also interested in looking for a fair market value concept of the property.
Councilmember Nancy Johnson thinks that many of Councilmember Smukler’s concerns would
be answered if we approved the Resolution of Intention tonight and initiate the process to
consider the abandonment as the next step would be to bring it back to a Public Hearing where
all the concerns can be addressed. She also questioned the idea of developing a parking lot right
outside the state park which would encourage people to park there, enter Morro Strand, not
paying the entrance fee. She would like to move ahead with the process looking at all our
options.
Councilmember Leage agrees with Councilmember Nancy Johnson.
Councilmember Christine Johnson wondered if it was possible to bring this item forward as a
public hearing without passing the Resolution of Intention. She is most comfortable with moving
forward to a Public Hearing to discuss the issue without passing the Resolution of Intention.
Mayor Irons was concerned that the Planning Commission didn’t see the most recent proposal
from Mr. Frye. He also doesn’t see any harm in doing the Public Hearing as it answers concerns
from the public as well as gives everybody a fair opportunity to address the issue.
MOTION: Mayor Irons moved not to adopt Resolution of Intention 18-13 but direct
the applicant and staff to come forward at a Public Hearing to work out details of the
development and/or partnership and/or acquisition of the property to include exploring
and evaluating scenarios of existing and maximized parking opportunities. The motion
was seconded by Councilmember Smukler and carried 3-2 with Councilmembers Nancy
Johnson and Leage voting no.
D-2 APPROVAL OF A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) FOR CONSULTANT
SERVICES TO STUDY OPTIONS FOR MORRO BAY IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF
A WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT PROJECT; (PUBLIC SERVICES)
Public Services Director Rob Livick presented the staff report.
8
MINUTES - MORRO BAY CITY COUNCIL – MARCH 12, 2013
Discussion was held on the make-up of the Selection Committee for the Project Manager.
Councilmember Smukler suggested 2 Councilmembers be part of the selection process.
Mayor Irons showed some concern that we want the process to be expedited and hopes that the
selection committee doesn’t slow down the process.
Councilmember Leage felt that Cayucos should be involved.
Councilmember Christine Johnson would be interested in being involved but understands it also
makes sense to go with the JPA Sub-committee members.
MOTION: Mayor Irons moved approval of the RFP as proposed and cleaned up with
the Selection Committee being comprised of Mayor Irons and Councilmember Christine
Johnson along with staff. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Smukler and
carried unanimously 5-0.
D-3 REVIEW AND DISCUSSION OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT DRAFT
SCHEDULE OF TASKS NEEDED TO PROCEED WITH THE NEW WASTEWATER
TREATMENT PLANT PROJECT; (PUBLIC SERVICES)
Public Services Director Rob Livick presented the staff report reaffirming that this is a working
document that will be added to as things come up.
Questions were asked of staff and discussion held. The thought of throwing in the CMC, the
Chorro Valley and Tri-W option for possible sites was discussed.
E. DECLARATION OF FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
Councilmember Christine Johnson requested the City Develop a Consultant Services Hiring
Policy; Mayor Irons and Councilmember Smukler concurred.
Councilmember Nancy Johnson requested the Completion of the City Sign Ordinance (for June
2013); Mayor Irons and Councilmember Christine Johnson concurred.
Councilmember Smukler requested the City provide an Update on the Storm Drain Management
Plan to include Review of Funding Options; there was unanimous Council consensus for this
item.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 9:37pm.
Recorded by:
Jamie Boucher
City Clerk
1
Staff Report
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council DATE: March 21, 2013
FROM: Andrea K. Lueker, City Manager
SUBJECT: Project Status Report
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the City Council review this informational item.
FISCAL IMPACT
Not applicable.
BACKGROUND
The City Council, at their August 28, 2012 meeting passed Resolution No. 45-12 which directed,
among other items, a Delayed Project Status Report to appear each quarter on the Consent Calendar.
The report was to list the following items:
1. Project name
2. Brief description of the project
3. Name of the Department responsible
4. Brief explanation for the delay
5. Revised completion date.
Staff produced the fist report in early fall, 2012 and at that time, instead of including just the list of
delayed projects, included all Capital Projects, Measure Q Projects and Maintenance Projects over
$25,000 to allow the City Council and the public a full view of the projects budgeted for Fiscal Year
2012/13. It is staff’s intention to provide a quarterly Project Status Report reflecting this information
on an on-going basis.
AGENDA NO: A-2 MEETING DATE: 3/26/13
Prepared By: ________ Dept Review:_____ City Manager Review: ________
City Attorney Review: ________
Ci
t
y
o
f
M
o
r
r
o
B
a
y
-
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
S
t
a
t
u
s
R
e
p
o
r
t
La
s
t
u
p
d
a
t
e
d
:
3
/
2
0
/
1
3
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
N
a
m
e
De
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
S
t
a
t
u
s
D
e
l
a
y
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
Original Start DateRevised Start DateProjected Completion Date
Ca
p
i
t
a
l
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
Fir
e
S
t
a
t
i
o
n
#
5
3
,
P
h
a
s
e
I
I
P
S
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
o
f
f
i
c
e
s
a
n
d
l
i
v
i
n
g
qu
a
r
t
e
r
s
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
i
s
s
u
b
s
t
a
n
t
i
a
l
l
y
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
,
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
oc
c
u
p
i
e
d
1
2
/
8
/
1
2
.
F
i
n
a
l
2
c
h
a
n
g
e
o
r
d
e
r
s
n
e
a
r
co
m
p
l
e
t
i
o
n
.
N
o
t
i
c
e
o
f
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
i
o
n
t
o
C
C
i
n
A
p
r
i
l
In
i
t
i
a
l
d
e
l
a
y
d
u
e
t
o
c
o
m
p
l
i
a
n
c
e
w
i
t
h
F
E
M
A
f
u
n
d
i
n
g
re
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
.
S
e
c
o
n
d
d
e
l
a
y
d
u
e
t
o
d
e
l
i
v
e
r
y
o
f
of
f
i
c
e
f
u
r
n
i
t
u
r
e
.
N
o
c
u
r
r
e
n
t
d
e
l
a
y
s
.
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
clo
s
e
o
u
t
i
n
p
r
o
g
r
e
s
s
1
0
/
1
/
0
9
8
/
1
/
1
1
3
/
2
9
/
1
3
Nu
t
m
e
g
T
a
n
k
P
S
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
w
a
t
e
r
t
a
n
k
E
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l
r
e
v
i
e
w
/
c
o
u
n
t
y
p
e
r
m
i
t
t
i
n
g
Ad
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
t
r
a
f
f
i
c
,
n
o
i
s
e
a
n
d
v
i
s
u
a
l
e
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
i
n
p
r
o
g
r
e
s
s
6
/
3
0
/
1
3
De
s
a
l
U
p
g
r
a
d
e
/
E
n
e
r
g
y
R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y
P
S
Re
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
a
n
d
u
p
g
r
a
d
e
o
f
pr
o
d
u
c
t
w
a
t
e
r
p
u
m
p
s
,
T
a
n
k
s
a
n
d
Ele
c
t
r
i
c
U
p
g
r
a
d
e
s
Aw
a
r
d
e
d
t
o
S
C
I
1
/
1
1
/
1
3
.
N
o
t
i
c
e
t
o
P
r
o
c
e
e
d
a
w
a
i
t
i
n
g
re
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
o
f
C
C
C
p
e
r
m
i
t
t
i
n
g
i
s
s
u
e
s
n
/
a
4
/
3
0
/
1
3
7
/
3
0
/
1
3
Mo
r
r
o
C
r
e
e
k
B
i
k
e
&
P
e
d
B
r
i
d
g
e
P
S
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
n
e
w
b
r
i
d
g
e
t
o
c
l
o
s
e
g
a
p
i
n
N.
C
o
a
s
t
S
c
e
n
i
c
B
y
w
a
y
R
F
P
i
n
p
r
o
g
r
e
s
s
n
/
a
T
B
D
T
B
D
Bi
k
e
P
a
t
h
G
a
p
C
l
o
s
u
r
e
P
S
Im
p
r
o
v
e
b
i
k
e
p
a
t
h
,
l
a
n
e
s
a
n
d
r
o
u
t
e
s
fm
M
B
H
S
t
h
r
u
B
e
a
c
h
t
r
a
c
t
t
o
w
a
r
d
s
Ca
y
u
c
o
s
R
F
P
i
s
s
u
e
d
,
P
r
o
p
o
s
a
l
s
D
u
e
4
/
8
n
/
a
T
B
D
T
B
D
CD
B
G
S
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
G
a
p
C
l
o
s
u
r
e
s
P
S
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
m
i
s
s
i
n
g
s
e
g
m
e
n
t
s
o
f
sid
e
w
a
l
k
t
o
i
m
p
r
o
v
e
A
D
A
a
c
c
e
s
s
Pla
n
s
&
S
p
e
c
s
u
n
d
e
r
r
e
v
i
e
w
.
C
E
Q
A
a
n
d
N
E
P
A
i
n
pr
o
g
r
e
s
s
.
C
C
a
c
t
i
o
n
l
a
t
e
A
p
r
i
l
n
/
a
T
B
D
T
B
D
Bl
a
n
c
a
P
i
p
e
l
i
n
e
P
S
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
n
o
t
e
c
o
n
o
m
i
c
a
l
l
y
f
e
a
s
i
b
l
e
-
de
l
e
t
e
d
W
i
t
h
d
r
a
w
n
-
R
e
v
i
e
w
i
n
g
A
l
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
s
n
/
a
Br
a
c
k
i
s
h
W
a
t
e
r
R
e
v
e
r
s
e
O
s
m
o
s
i
s
P
S
Co
m
p
l
e
t
e
n
/
a
1
2
/
3
1
/
1
2
Ch
o
r
r
o
C
r
e
e
k
S
t
r
e
a
m
G
a
u
g
e
s
P
S
In
s
t
a
l
l
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
g
a
u
g
e
s
t
o
m
e
a
s
u
r
e
CF
S
w
a
t
e
r
f
l
o
w
P
e
r
m
i
t
t
i
n
g
n
/
a
8
/
3
0
/
1
3
Lif
t
S
t
a
t
i
o
n
3
P
S
Fo
r
c
e
m
a
i
n
a
n
d
g
r
a
v
i
t
y
s
e
w
e
r
t
r
u
n
k
lin
e
r
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
.
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
i
s
s
u
b
s
t
a
n
t
i
a
l
l
y
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
,
c
u
t
o
v
e
r
t
o
n
e
w
pu
m
p
s
a
n
d
f
o
r
c
e
m
a
i
n
o
n
3
/
8
/
1
2
.
P
u
n
c
h
l
i
s
t
w
a
l
k
t
h
r
u
sc
h
e
d
u
l
e
d
f
o
r
3
/
2
2
/
1
3
N
P
D
E
S
p
e
r
m
i
t
t
i
n
g
r
e
s
o
l
v
e
d
.
8
/
1
/
1
2
n
/
a
2
/
2
8
/
1
3
Lif
t
S
t
a
t
i
o
n
2
P
S
Re
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
W
W
l
i
f
t
s
t
a
t
i
o
n
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
.
N
o
t
i
c
e
o
f
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
i
o
n
a
p
p
r
o
v
e
d
2/
1
3
/
1
3
a
n
d
f
i
l
e
d
w
/
C
o
u
n
t
y
o
n
2
/
2
0
/
1
3
.
n
/
a
1
/
1
/
1
2
4
/
1
/
1
2
1
0
/
3
0
/
1
2
No
r
t
h
M
a
i
n
S
t
.
T
r
u
n
k
L
i
n
e
P
S
Up
g
r
a
d
e
o
r
r
e
p
l
a
c
e
J
o
i
n
t
l
y
o
w
n
e
d
Se
w
e
r
M
a
i
n
D
e
l
a
y
e
d
p
e
n
d
i
n
g
W
R
F
r
e
s
i
t
i
n
g
&
f
u
t
u
r
e
o
f
J
P
A
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
s
m
o
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
t
o
t
h
e
J
o
i
n
t
P
o
w
e
r
s
Ag
r
e
e
m
e
n
t
t
o
p
r
o
c
e
e
d
n
/
a
u
n
k
n
o
w
n
u
n
k
n
o
w
n
Hy
d
r
o
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
(
C
o
l
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
S
h
e
d
)
P
S
Re
-
s
i
d
i
n
g
a
n
d
N
e
w
D
o
o
r
s
.
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
12/31/09
Se
c
t
i
o
n
6
R
e
h
a
b
i
l
i
t
a
t
i
o
n
P
S
Re
p
a
i
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
o
f
S
e
w
e
r
M
a
i
n
i
n
t
h
e
Lo
w
e
r
Q
u
i
n
t
a
n
a
A
r
e
a
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
n
/
a
2
/
1
/
1
2
n
/
a
5
/
3
0
/
1
2
No
r
t
h
-
T
P
i
e
r
H
a
r
b
o
r
St
r
u
c
t
u
r
a
l
r
e
p
a
i
r
o
f
p
o
r
t
i
o
n
s
o
f
T
-
p
i
e
r
in
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
p
i
l
e
s
Co
a
s
t
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
P
e
r
m
i
t
a
n
d
A
r
m
y
C
o
r
p
s
o
f
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
s
p
e
r
m
i
t
s
u
b
m
i
t
t
e
d
.
S
t
a
f
f
w
o
r
k
i
n
g
w
i
t
h
C
C
C
sta
f
f
a
n
d
e
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
c
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
o
n
w
o
r
k
p
l
a
n
a
n
d
o
t
h
e
su
b
m
i
t
t
a
l
r
e
f
i
n
e
m
e
n
t
s
Em
p
l
o
y
e
e
d
e
a
t
h
,
c
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
i
l
l
n
e
s
s
,
s
t
a
f
f
t
i
m
e
co
m
m
i
t
t
e
d
t
o
o
t
h
e
r
c
a
p
i
t
a
l
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
,
H
a
r
b
o
r
s
t
a
f
f
i
n
g
re
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
s
Summer 2013 for construction8/1/13
Le
a
s
t
S
i
t
e
A
u
d
i
t
s
H
a
r
b
o
r
Sc
h
e
d
u
l
e
d
a
u
d
i
t
o
f
g
r
o
s
s
s
a
l
e
s
re
p
o
r
t
i
n
g
o
n
l
e
a
s
e
s
U
n
d
e
r
w
a
y
Au
d
i
t
o
r
s
w
a
i
t
e
d
u
n
t
i
l
s
u
m
m
e
r
w
a
s
o
v
e
r
t
o
b
e
g
i
n
i
n
de
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
t
o
l
e
a
s
e
h
o
l
d
e
r
s
,
s
t
a
r
t
d
a
t
e
t
h
e
n
s
l
i
g
h
t
l
y
de
l
a
y
e
d
u
n
t
i
l
l
a
t
e
2
0
1
2
9
/
1
/
1
2
1
1
/
1
/
1
2
7
/
1
/
1
3
Re
p
l
a
c
e
S
t
o
r
a
g
e
y
a
r
d
m
e
t
a
l
r
o
o
f
H
a
r
b
o
r
Re
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
o
f
f
a
i
l
e
d
m
e
t
a
l
r
o
o
f
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
n
/
a
n
/
a
Wa
t
e
r
R
e
c
l
a
m
a
t
i
o
n
F
a
c
i
l
i
t
y
(
W
R
F
)
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
S
u
p
p
o
r
t
PS
Fa
c
i
l
i
t
a
t
e
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
g
o
a
l
s
a
n
d
ob
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
s
f
o
r
r
e
-
s
i
t
i
n
g
t
h
e
n
e
w
W
R
F
R
P
F
p
o
s
t
e
d
,
p
r
o
p
o
s
a
l
s
d
u
e
4
/
1
5
/
1
3
n
/
a
T
B
D
n
/
a
T
B
D
Me
a
s
u
r
e
Q
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
St
r
e
e
t
s
-
c
u
r
b
s
,
g
u
t
t
e
r
s
,
p
o
t
h
o
l
e
s
R
/
P
3r
d
p
a
r
t
y
+
i
n
-
h
o
u
s
e
s
t
a
f
f
t
o
f
i
l
l
po
t
h
o
l
e
s
,
N
o
.
M
o
r
r
o
B
a
y
t
o
s
o
u
t
h
Pa
n
o
r
a
m
a
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
a
t
M
i
n
d
o
r
o
,
L
u
z
o
n
a
n
d
K
o
d
i
a
k
ar
e
s
c
h
e
d
u
l
e
d
t
o
s
t
a
r
t
3
/
2
5
/
1
3
.
S
e
c
o
n
d
c
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
o
r
t
o
as
s
i
s
t
w
i
t
h
w
o
r
k
o
n
h
i
g
h
p
r
i
o
r
i
t
y
p
o
t
h
o
l
e
s
i
n
N
.
M
B
R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e
a
v
a
i
l
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
o
n
g
o
i
n
g
o
n
g
o
i
n
g
Ongoing until funding is exhausted
St
r
e
e
t
s
-
P
a
v
e
m
e
n
t
M
g
t
P
l
a
n
P
S
Co
n
t
i
n
u
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
p
a
v
i
n
g
p
e
r
t
h
e
P
M
P
No
t
i
c
e
o
f
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
2
0
1
2
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
t
o
C
C
4
/
9
/
1
3
.
20
1
3
p
a
v
i
n
g
p
r
i
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
u
n
d
e
r
e
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
Ra
i
n
d
e
l
a
y
s
t
o
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
r
e
m
a
i
n
i
n
g
s
t
r
i
p
i
n
g
a
n
d
ma
r
k
i
n
g
s
T
B
D
T
B
D
St
o
r
m
W
a
t
e
r
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
P
l
a
n
P
S
Re
p
a
i
r
a
n
d
r
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
o
f
s
t
o
r
m
dr
a
i
n
s
s
y
s
t
e
m
s
S
t
o
r
m
D
r
a
i
n
r
e
p
a
i
r
e
d
3
/
5
/
1
3
a
t
S
o
u
t
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
o
u
t
l
e
t
C
o
n
t
i
n
u
i
n
g
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
a
s
R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e
s
a
r
e
a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
n
/
a
n
/
a
n
/
a
A-2
a
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
S
t
a
t
u
s
r
e
p
o
r
t
f
i
n
a
l
3
2
6
1
3
.
x
l
s
x
Prepared by: __RL__ Dept. Review: RL__
City Manager Review:______
City Attorney’s Review:_____
Staff Report
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council DATE: March 21, 2013
FROM: Rob Livick, PE/PLS - Public Services Director/City Engineer
SUBJECT: Status Report of a Major Maintenance & Repair Plan (MMRP) for the
Existing Wastewater Treatment Plan
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that this report be received and filed.
FISCAL IMPACT
No fiscal impact at this time as a result of this report
DISCUSSION
Staff presented an update of the MMRP status at the March 14, 2013 JPA meeting with little
transpiring in the subsequent week. Staff has met with electrical and structural engineers to
discuss the required scope of work for non-destructive testing. Additionally, staff has been
working on the preparation of the MMRP items that will be proposed for the 2013/3014 fiscal
year budget.
CONCLUSION
Staff will continue to bring a status report on the development of the MMRP at future Council
meetings as directed.
ATTACHMENT
Staff Report from the March 14, 2013 JPA meeting – Item A-2
AGENDA NO: A-3
MEETING DATE: March 26, 2013
STAFF REPORT
MORRO BAY-CAYUCOS JPA
WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council, City of Morro Bay
Honorable President and Board of Directors, Cayucos Sanitary District
From: Bruce Keogh, Wastewater Division Manager
Date: February 7, 2013
Subject:
Status Report of a Major Maintenance & Repair Plan (MMRP) for the WWTP
Recommendation:
This Department recommends that this report be received and filed.
Fiscal Impact:
There is no fiscal impact at this time.
Summary:
This staff report is intended to provide an update on the development of the MMRP for the
WWTP. At the February 14, JPA meeting the Council and District Board approved of the
development of an MMRP and made the following motion:
Direct staff to prepare a time sensitive and prioritized MMRP for the WWTP with an
anticipated rolling 2 year budget;
That the JPA solicit proposals from a qualified firm, or firms, to provide technical advice
and analysis on an as needed basis as determined by Morro Bay’s Public Services
Director and Cayucos Sanitary District Manager;
And that the Morro Bay Public Services Director and Cayucos Sanitary District Manager
report back to the JPA on a semi-annual basis on the progress and costs associated with
the MMRP.
Discussion:
Development of a MMRP will assist the City and District in projecting the budgeting of
expenditures required to keep the current plant operating in compliance with regulatory
requirements.
MBCSD staff has conducted a kick-off meeting for development of the MMRP. They discussed
strategy for development of the MMRP and establishing a time schedule for bringing this
information back to the JPA for consideration and discussion. In addition, staff has begun
reviewing Chapter 6 of the Facility Master Plan (FMP), the Electrical Facilities Overview
Agenda No. Item A - 2
Date: March 14, 2013
ATTACHMENT 1
2
(Appendix H) of the FMP, and the previous CIP developed by Cannon Engineering to begin the
process of identifying projects and prioritizing them.
MBCSD staff recommends that it is premature to solicit proposals from a qualified firm, or
firms, to provide technical advice and analysis, until further work is performed on the
preliminary steps of the MMRP. In the interim period staff can begin work developing the RFP
to solicit proposals from qualified firms.
Conclusion:
MBCSD staff will continue to bring a status report on the development of the MMRP at future
JPA meetings.
Manager/C//JPA/2013 JPA Meetings/March 14 2013 JPA Meeting/Status Report on the MMRPMarch 142013
ATTACHMENT 1
Staff Report
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council DATE: March 4, 2013
FROM: Eric Endersby, Harbor Director
SUBJECT: Approval of a Budget Allocation for Gangway Repair at the South Launch
Ramp (Tidelands Park) Commercial Boat Slips
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of a Harbor Department budget amendment to allow repairs to the
slip gangway approach walkway to the City slips on the south side of the public launch ramp at
Tidelands Park.
FISCAL IMPACT
The fiscal impact is a one-time transfer of $55,000 from the Harbor Accumulation Fund to a
Capital Project account for the repair. The current unallocated Harbor Accumulation Fund
balance is approximately $450,000.
SUMMARY
The walkway structure leading to the City slips on the south side of the public launch ramp is in
urgent need of repair. This unanticipated project was not budgeted for in the current fiscal year,
as the deterioration of the facility has occurred quicker than expected.
DISCUSSION
Recently, severe deterioration was noted in the structure supporting the walkway leading to the
gangway for the City's commercial fishing vessel slips on the south side of the public launch
ramp. While this set of slips/walkway was slated for consideration of a major rehabilitation
project in the 17/18 fiscal year as outlined on the Schedule of Five Year Capital Requirements,
the deterioration has occurred in a much more rapid pace than expected and cannot wait until the
13/14 fiscal year for funding and completion.
Maintenance of City harbor facilities and infrastructure is a department priority and an adopted
AGENDA NO: A-4
MEETING DATE: March 26, 2013
Prepared By: __EE____ Dept Review:_____ City Manager Review: ________ City Attorney Review: ________
2
goal of the City Council. Estimated cost for the repair is approximately $45,000; staff is
requesting an additional $10,000 above estimated as a contingency. In anticipation of the
allocation, project specifications and contract documents are currently being created.
CONCLUSION
Staff is requesting and recommending a one-time budget amendment of $55,000 to allow for
necessary repair and maintenance to the walkway structure leading to the south City slips at the
public launch ramp area.
A PROCLAMATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF MORRO BAY
DECLARING MARCH 31 – APRIL 6, 2013 AS
“CHILDHOOD CANCER AWARENESS WEEK”
CITY COUNCIL
City of Morro Bay, California
WHEREAS, the American Cancer Fund for Children and Kids Cancer Connection
report cancer is the leading cause of death by disease among children in the United States.
This tragic disease is detected in nearly 15,000 of our nation's young people each and every
year; and
WHEREAS, founded twenty years ago by Steven Firestein, a member of the
philanthropic Max Factor family, the American Cancer Fund for Children, Inc. and sister
organization, Kids Cancer Connection, Inc. are dedicated to helping these children and their
families; and
WHEREAS, the American Cancer Fund for Children and Kids Cancer Connection
provide a variety of vital patient psychosocial services to children undergoing cancer
treatment at City of Hope National Medical Center, Cottage Children's Hospital in Santa
Barbara, as well as participating hospitals throughout the country, thereby enhancing the
quality of life for these children and their families; and
WHEREAS, through its uniquely sensitive and comforting Magical Caps for Kids
program, the American Cancer Fund for Children and Kids Cancer Connection distributes
thousands of beautifully handmade caps and decorated baseball caps to children who want to
protect their heads following the trauma of chemotherapy, surgery and/or radiation
treatments; and
WHEREAS, the American Cancer Fund for Children and Kids Cancer Connection
also sponsor nationwide Courageous Kid recognition award ceremonies and hospital
celebrations in honor of a child's determination and bravery to fight the battle against
childhood cancer.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Morro Bay does hereby proclaim March 31 – April 6, 2013 as Childhood Cancer Awareness
Week”, recognizing the courageous children and all involved in the fight against childhood
cancer.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF I have
hereunto set my hand and caused the
seal of the City of Morro Bay to be
affixed this 26th day of March, 2013
______________________________
JAMIE L. IRONS, Mayor
City of Morro Bay, California
AGENDA NO.: A-5
Meeting Date: 3/26/2013
Staff Report
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council DATE: March 4, 2013
FROM: Eric Endersby, Harbor Director
SUBJECT: Request for a Fee Waiver for Boat Slip Fees – Brian Stacy
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends denial of Brian Stacy’s request to waive the past-due slip fees for his City
slip.
FISCAL IMPACT
As of this date, if waived, the fiscal impact would be $2,137.66 to the Harbor Enterprise Fund.
SUMMARY
Commercial fisherman and City slip holder Brian Stacy has requested the City waive his slip
fees as he feels the City has withheld information from his business. Staff disagrees with Mr.
Stacy's allegations and believes that waiving his fees are not warranted and would set a
precedent that would be unacceptable and detrimental to the Harbor Enterprise Fund both in the
short and long term.
BACKGROUND
Historically, the City Council has only waived slip or other harbor user fees for public-benefit
type attractions like the visiting tall ships.
Mr. Stacy's slip fees accrue at the rate of $160.00 per month not including the 10% late fee
charged on the total balance due. His account became delinquent on 7/11/2012. His past-due
to-date is $2,137.66, with his last payment being received on 9-13-2011 in the amount of
$1663.20 which paid for 2011/2012 commercial slip fees. Mr. Stacy's commercial fishing
qualification for his slip is valid for 2013.
Mr. Stacy claims various reasons for his delinquency, most specifically due to the negligence on
the part of City staff. He believes he has had to undertake fishery avocation activities that
effectively took him off the water and prevented him from fishing. In addition, he feels he was
denied access to mitigation and other payments associated with various fishing-impacting
AGENDA NO: D-1
MEETING DATE: March 26, 2013
Prepared By: __EE____ Dept Review:_____
City Manager Review: ________ City Attorney Review: ________
2
projects in local waters.
DISCUSSION
Mr. Stacy claims various lapses or intentional acts by City staff (specifically the Harbor
Department) that have allegedly kept him from fishing and therefore impacted his means of
making a living. He also claims he was denied access to various mitigation and/or other project
opportunities that he claims he could have partaken in and earned work and/or payment from.
While staff is sympathetic to his plight, staff disagrees with Mr. Stacy that the City is in any way
responsible for his financial situation. Staff has offered Mr. Stacy several opportunities to
remedy his account including setting up a suitable payment plan in addition to the suspension of
levying late fees on his account as a means to help him bring his account current. To date he has
declined to participate.
With the exception of visiting tall ships or other public-benefit attractions or events, staff is
unaware of the City waiving slip or dockage fees outright for any person or entity. Even if Mr.
Stacy's claims were deemed wholly or partially valid, which staff asserts they are not, waiving
fees for these reasons would not only set a bad precedent and be unfair to other slip or facility
users who might also have equally valid or compelling reasons, but would also be, in staff's
opinion, a gift of public funds.
Staff is willing, able, and regularly works with slip holders whose accounts are in arrears for a
variety of reasons in order to give them a chance to catch-up. Although the department is very
patient and willing to do as much as legally possible to aid our slip holders, in the end, fees
accrued are the sole responsibility of the slip holders and must eventually be paid. If not, the
City's only recourse is to cancel the slip agreement and either turn the account over to a
collection agency or attempt recompense with a lien action on the vessel. All of these scenarios
have been used with other slip holders at one time or another.
CONCLUSION
Staff is recommending denial of Mr. Stacy's request to waive his past-due slip fees. If granted,
this action would be unwarranted, set an arbitrary dangerous and costly precedent as well as be a
gift of public funds.
PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION
ON THE STATUS OF THE
PLANNING COMMITTEE’S PROGRESS
FOR THE CITY’S 50TH ANNIVERSARY
The Committee’s Presentation
will serve as the staff report for this item;
discussion to follow.
AGENDA NO: D-2
MEETING DATE: March 26, 2013
1
Staff Report
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council DATE: March 17, 2013
FROM: Andrea K. Lueker, City Manager
SUBJECT: Approval of the Service Retirement Incentive (SRI) Program
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the City Council approve the Service Retirement Incentive Program in perpetuity with
an annual reporting requirement every July, presented as a Council consent item.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Unknown at this time, due to the unidentified number of participating employees; however, there will be
a net savings from offering the program due to: 1) replacement/new employees beginning at a lower step
than the retiring employee; and 2) cost savings as new employees will be hired into the lower retirement
formulas; 3) costs savings during the transition time of one employee leaving and the replacement
employee coming on-board.
In the 2012/13 fiscal year, four employees applied for and received the SRI payout. Since its inception in
the 2009/10 fiscal year, a total of 11 employees have benefitted from this program. Of these 11
employees, we hired seven replacement employees into our second-tier CalPERS retirement formulas (a
total of 23 individuals are now employed in our second-tier retirement formulas). The three of those
vacancies were filled with existing employees, and one has remained unfilled. At this time, we do not
have any employees hired into the third tier retirement system.
SUMMARY:
During the budget process for the fiscal year 2012/13, the City Council offered a SRI program to
employees who were eligible to retire. The program offered a lump-sum incentive of $10,000 to be paid
to those who committed to retire by December 31, 2012. In order to be eligible for the lump sum
payment, the employee was required to complete an agreement, memorializing their commitment, by
May 31, 2012. We have offered this or a similar program every year beginning with the fiscal year
2009/10. Staff is requesting that the City Council approve the Service Retirement Incentive Program in
perpetuity with an annual reporting requirement in July of each year, presented as a Council consent
item.
AGENDA NO: D-3 MEETING DATE: 3/26/13
Prepared By: ________ Dept Review:_____
City Manager Review: ________ City Attorney Review: ________
2
BACKGROUND
Especially in recent years, a number of cities have structured retirement incentives as a means of short-
term and long-term savings. There are a number of ways to structure a retirement incentive, with the most
popular being:
1. Paying retiree health premiums for a specified period;
2. Contributing to deferred compensation account; and/or
3. Providing a one-time, lump-sum payment.
Staff has brought this program in the City Council for the past four years; 2013/14 will hopefully be the
fifth year of the Service Retirement Incentive Program.
DISCUSSION
Staff considered and evaluated various retirement incentive options and programs, and is presenting a
one-time, lump-sum Service Retirement Incentive Program (Attachment 1). The Program does not add
on-going cost to the City.
The Program creates both potential short-term and long-term savings for the City, and allows employee
flexibility. A lump sum incentive provides individuals with the flexibility to use the funds in any manner
they choose. This lump-sum incentive will be reported by the City to the Internal Revenue Service as
taxable income. The incentive payment is not considered compensation by PERS, and therefore, is not
considered in calculating an employee's single highest year for retirement benefit calculations.
Applicants will be required to sign an Agreement and Release of Claim against the City in exchange for
the incentive (Attachment 2). Eligibility for the Service Retirement Incentive Program is predicated
upon a permanent regular employee having satisfied the conditions delineated by PERS, with respect to
age and years of credited service. Only regular, permanent employees are eligible to participate in the
Program. Temporary, part-time and contract employees are not eligible to participate in this Program.
If approved, this voluntary Service Retirement Incentive Program will be communicated to all eligible
employees, for this fiscal year and each year fiscal year thereafter. By the May 31, 2013 deadline, staff
will be able to provide the exact numbers of employees who have chosen to take part in this Program.
Rather than bring this program back to City Council annually for approval, staff is requesting that this
Program be approved in perpetuity with the instruction that an annual report be presented every July as a
Council consent item. The report will include the number of individuals approved for the Service
Retirement Incentive in the current fiscal year, the number of individuals who have received the incentive
in past fiscal years, those eligible in the next fiscal year, as well as the number of employees remaining in
the City’s 1st Tier Retirement Formula.
Prepared by: __JI__ Dept. Review: __
City Manager Review:______
City Attorney’s Review:_____
Mayor’s Report
TO: Honorable City Council DATE: March 19, 2013
FROM: Jamie L. Irons - Mayor
SUBJECT: Consideration of the Addition of Two Members from the General Public
to Participate as Members of the Selection Committee for Consultant
Services for the Development of the new Water Reclamation Facility
(WRF)
RECOMMENDATION
Approve the addition of two citizen representatives for the Consultant Services Selection
Committee, open nominations and set the date for appointment for said representatives, for
the development of the new Water Reclamation Facility.
DISCUSSION
At the March 12, 2013 meeting City Council approved an RFP for Consultant Services to
study options for the new WRF project. Additionally, Council selected two Council
representatives (Mayor Irons and Councilmember C. Johnson) to serve on the consultant
selection committee. There is a desire of the community to have citizen representation on the
selection committee.
CONCLUSION
Based on the community’s request, Council can facilitate these appointments by soliciting
nominations and approving the appointments at the April 9, 2013 City Council meeting. The
nomination process should include a letter of interest, ,not to exceed two pages in length,
delivered to the City Clerk by April 2, 2013 at 5:00pm stating:
1. Why the citizen desires to serve.
2. How their individual qualifications make them the best candidate for the committee.
3. Their availability to meet the selection process schedule identified in the RFP.
http://www.morro-bay.ca.us/bids.aspx?bidID=20
AGENDA NO: D-4
MEETING DATE: March 26, 2013
Prepared by: __RL__ Dept. Review: RL__
City Manager Review:______
City Attorney’s Review:_____
Staff Report
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council DATE: March 5, 2013
FROM: Rob Livick, PE/PLS - Public Services Director/City Engineer
SUBJECT: Discussion of the Public Works Advisory Board’s (PWAB) Memo from
the Streets Summit Meeting
RECOMMENDATION
Review the attached memo from PWAB and provide direction to staff.
FISCAL IMPACT
No direct impact as a result of this action.
DISCUSSION
On January 14, 2013 the PWAB held a public meeting (The “Streets Summit”) to discuss
street maintenance and solicit public comment. The attached memorandum is a result of that
meeting as well as further discussion at the PWAB regular meeting held on February 21, 2013.
ATTACHMENTS
1. PWAB 2013 Street Summit Memo
2. January 14, 2013 PWAB Minutes
3. January 14, 2013 PWAB Staff Report: A Review of the 2012 Activities and an Update
on Pavement Management, Streets Maintenance Programs and Recommendations for
Future Work
AGENDA NO: D-5
MEETING DATE: March 26, 2013
AT
T
A
C
H
M
E
N
T
1
AT
T
A
C
H
M
E
N
T
1
Public Works Advisory Board Minutes 1 February 21, 2013
SYNOPSIS MINUTES - MORRO BAY PUBLIC WORKS ADVISORY BOARD
REGULAR MEETING – JANUARY 14, 2013
VETERAN’S HALL – 6:00 P.M.
Chairperson Makowetski called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
PRESENT: Matt Makowetski Chairperson
Ron Burkhart Vice-Chairperson
Marlys McPherson Board Member
Richard Rutherford Board Member
Stephen Shively Board Member
STAFF: Rob Livick Public Services Director
Rick Sauerwein Engineering Division Manager
Barry Rands Associate Engineer
Joe Woods Recreation and Parks Director
Mike Wilcox Maintenance Superintendent
ESTABLISH QUORUM AND CALL TO ORDER
MOMENT OF SILENCE / PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ANNOUNCEMENTS/PRESENTATIONS
Chairperson Makowetski stated he received an email regarding the City’s street sweepers, and noted the
issue would be discussed later in the meeting.
CONSENT CALENDAR
A-1 Approval of Minutes from October 18, 2012 - Recommendation: Approve minutes.
MOTION: Shively moved to approve the October 18, 2012 minutes. The motion was seconded by
Rutherford and carried unanimously. (4-0).
OLD BUSINESS – None.
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD
Chairperson Makowetski opened public comment period.
Joe Polly, resident of north Morro Bay, stated he would like to see the utility wires moved underground,
and stated he would be willing to help fund the project if it were to be approved. He expressed interest in
knowing what the public thought of this idea.
Rigmore Samuelson, resident of Morro Bay, stated she would like the City to repair the sidewalks, curbs,
and gutters along Market Street because she thinks they are uneven, may cause flooding, and may be a
hazard to the public.
AGENDA ITEM: A-1
DATE: February 21, 2013
ACTION:
ATTACHMENT 2
Public Works Advisory Board Minutes 2 February 21, 2013
Chairperson Makowetski expressed his appreciation for Samuelson’s comments and directed the public to
also visit the City’s website to post concerns about City streets.
Linda Merrill, resident of north Morro Bay, expressed concern about the large potholes in north Morro Bay.
She asked the City to revise its current policies regarding reconstruction and repair of potholes to better
address the northern area of the City. Chairperson Makowetski stated these issues will be addressed later in
the meeting.
Boardmember Shively stated his understanding was that potholes do get filled when reported. Livick
confirmed the Maintenance Division does do pothole repairs and crack fillings as routine maintenance,
whereas the Pavement Management Plan policies are reserved for larger rehabilitation efforts.
Chairperson Makowetski closed public comment period.
NEW BUSINESS
C-1 Streets Summit: An Update on Pavement Management, Streets Maintenance Programs and
Recommendations for Future Work – Recommendation: Receive update, take public testimony and
provide recommendations to City Council for the upcoming Goal Setting and Biannual Budget
Process
Livick presented the engineering section of the staff report.
Boardmember Shively asked Livick to clarify whether the City is reconstructing the base under the road as
well as the asphalt pavement itself. Livick clarified, given adequate funding, the City would completely
reconstruct the streets by grinding off the asphalt layer, digging through the red rock, compacting the soil
underneath, and then constructing the road from scratch.
Boardmember Shively asked Livick to clarify whether the ten worst streets in the City all have the same
problematic soil types. Livick stated the soil types vary.
Woods presented the maintenance and street trees sections of the staff report.
Chairperson Makowetski asked Woods about the potential for a database which would allow the public to
view the City’s queue of street repairs. Woods stated the City has not activated a queue in that regard but he
will consider the suggestion. The Pavement Management Plan rates the streets from best to worst; the
Maintenance Division will address the worst streets first, while the Engineering Division will use
preservation techniques that improve street condition before they become badly deteriorated to obtain the
greatest value form the sparse funds that are available.
Woods acknowledged there are glitches in the online citizens’ tracker module, but the City is working to
resolve them. Woods noted the Maintenance Division is fixing potholes in the northern area of the city first,
moving south, but if potholes are in extremely poor condition, the City tries to fix them as soon as possible.
Boardmember Shively asked Woods to clarify who fixes the potholes in the city. Woods stated the
Maintenance crew repairs potholes as long as the surface area is not too large; for repairs over about five
tons, the City hires contractors to do the work.
Boardmember Burkhart asked staff if a link for street repairs has been added to the City’s homepage which
would make it easier for the public to submit street repair requests. Woods clarified the City now uses a
ATTACHMENT 2
Public Works Advisory Board Minutes 3 February 21, 2013
module called Let Us Know which allows the City and the requestor to track the request. Makowetski
asked Woods whether it would be possible to add a link to the homepage specifically for street repairs.
Livick stated staff will work with City Administration to resolve the issue.
Boardmember Shively asked if root barriers are installed with new street trees. Woods stated there are
specific installation requirements for each tree installed in the city and the requirements are available on the
City’s website.
Livick revisited the engineering section of the staff report and presented several slides illustrating various
pavement techniques used by the City.
Boardmember Shively asked Livick about the feasibility of creating assessment districts to prioritize certain
areas of the City for street repairs. Livick stated the City Council has previously examined such measures
but has decided not to include them in Staff’s work program. Livick discussed alternative methods of
funding large-scale maintenance programs.
Livick stated the Pavement Management Plan update will consider the feasibility of dividing the city into
different geographical areas and establishing a yearly work plan for each area.
Chairperson Makowetski opened public comment period.
Joe Polly, resident of north Morro Bay, stated he would like to see the potholes repaired on Avalon,
Casitas, and Nutmeg Streets.
Jim Dilts, resident of Morro Bay, expressed concern that Quintana Road, south of South Bay Boulevard, is
in very poor condition and he would like it repaired as soon as possible.
Chuck Stohl, resident of north Morro Bay, asked Woods to clarify the City’s total budget for street
maintenance. Woods stated the total budget varies yearly, but the City currently has about $224,000 from
the General Fund for street maintenance. Stohl suggested, given the limited budget, the City should explore
additional approaches to raise revenue for street repairs.
Walter Heath, resident of Morro Bay, stated he does not think it is necessary to establish an assessment
district in north Morro Bay since one was not established in south Morro Bay, where streets there are in
good condition. Heath stated the streets in north Morro Bay will need to be completely reconstructed, and
to finance this project, the City will need to raise a large amount of money in a short period of time; he
suggested temporarily increasing the sales tax to do so.
Dan Glessman, author of an article published in the Bay News regarding Measure Q monies, proposed
increasing the sales tax by 0.5 percent and dedicating it completely to streets. He explained the money
generated from the increased tax could be used to pay off a loan from the League of Cities for street repair.
This approach would allow the City to reconstruct the streets within a 10-15 year period.
Ahmed Kassam, resident of north Morro Bay, expressed concern that the larger garbage trucks are
damaging newly repaired streets and he would like to see only smaller trucks using those streets until the
pavement has settled completely.
Melanie Bachman, resident of Morro Bay, requested the City extend the reconstruction area on Pacific
Street to include the portion east of Kern Avenue to Kings Avenue. She stated this portion of Pacific is in
poor condition and, because it is used heavily by pedestrians and bicyclists to access downtown, it should
ATTACHMENT 2
Public Works Advisory Board Minutes 4 February 21, 2013
be included. Bachman also noted numerous power lines have been discarded in this area and she would like
them removed.
Nancy Best, resident of Morro Bay, stated she would like Kings Avenue repaired as it is a feeder street and
is now in poor condition because it experiences large amounts of storm water runoff which have
deteriorated the pavement surface. The water tanks are nearby and when they are emptied for maintenance
purposes they should be drained via the concrete trough into the State Park to avoid further road wear.
Melinda Kendall, resident of Morro Bay, suggested repairing Kings Avenue would relieve some of the
wear and tear from the traffic circle.
John Bachman, resident of Morro Bay, expressed concern that pedestrians along Pacific Street are not
adequately protected because of the poor condition of the street, the lack of sidewalks, and the parked cars
on either side of the street. The road needs reconstruction to add curb, gutters and sidewalk.
Linda Merrill, resident of Morro Bay, expressed concern that the City has not made street repairs a top
priority during the last thirty years and would like to see the City take action soon.
Tom Templeton, resident of Morro Bay, expressed appreciation for Barry Rands’ responsiveness. He also
expressed concern that funding for street repairs is not dispersed evenly throughout the City; he would like
to see more money dedicated to fixing the streets in north Morro Bay. Street maintenance should not be a
Parks & Recreation responsibility.
Jane Heath, resident of Morro Bay, expressed concern that the City’s priorities were decided without input
from the public. She would like to see the money for street repairs distributed more equitably.
Lucian Morin, resident of Morro Bay, stated he would like to see a timeline of street repairs, and he would
also like to see a more equitable distribution of funds.
Linda Fidel, resident of north Morro Bay, stated it would be in the City’s best interest to improve the roads
in north Morro Bay since tourists do also visit that area of town.
Jen Ford, resident of Morro Bay, thanked the Board for revisiting the Pavement Management Plan and for
responding to her previous requests. She stated support for increasing taxes to fund street repairs in north
Morro Bay. Ford asked Livick to comment on the status of the triple layer cape seal on Tide Street. Livick
stated he would like to wait until the rainy season is over to assess how it withstands more traffic wear and
wet soil conditions. If successful, Livick stated this technique will be used when the City republishes the
Pavement Management Plan as it will allow the City to stretch pavement management funding further.
Chairperson Makowetski closed public comment period.
Livick commented on the garbage truck issue, stating the trucks now make multiple trips per week, and
have heavier loads than the streets were designed to hold. He also commented on the street sweepers,
noting the City may opt to incorporate this service with garbage services; then the associated costs for the
street sweeping service could be absorbed in the garbage rates.
Chairperson Makowetski asked Livick to confirm the current cost of the street sweepers, and Livick stated
it costs the City about $50,000 per year. Makowetski asked Livick if it would be possible to keep the street
sweepers away from the vulnerable residential streets in the northern area of the City because they further
damage the street surface. He would instead like to see the street sweepers concentrate on the downtown
area and the Embarcadero. Livick stated this may be a possibility in the future but the City’s current
ATTACHMENT 2
Public Works Advisory Board Minutes 5 February 21, 2013
NPDES Storm Water Permit stipulates the City must sweep all residential streets at least once per month
and twice per week in downtown area. Livick stated the permit is in the process of being amended and if
the RWQCB approved of reductions, the changes could be implemented in June.
Rands acknowledged the public’s concerns regarding equity in the Pavement Management Plan and he
stated the update will incorporate more aspects of fairness. He stated the City has applied in the past for
grants to repair streets in the northern area of the City but the grants were not successful. He agreed the
City needs to come up with more money to work on the streets in the north.
Boardmember Shively stated the funds should be equitably distributed throughout the City, perhaps based
on the number of residents in each area. He explained money in the north will not go as far as it does in the
south because streets in the north will need true reconstruction. He stated he does not think there is enough
money right now to fix all the roads in the City without an additional revenue source. He stated it requires a
two-thirds majority vote to pass a tax or bond issue in the City, and this should be considered when
alternative revenue sources are being examined.
Boardmember Rutherford asked for clarification about why no funding was allocated to street repairs in
FY2011-2012. Woods clarified that since all Measure Q allocations for streets went to the Pavement
Management Plan during FY2010-2011, the funds were allocated differently in the next fiscal year.
Boardmember Burkhart asked for clarification about whether the City’s pothole repair procedures are
proactive, reactive, or both. Wilcox stated the Maintenance Division is trying to be more proactive in their
approach to potholes. Burkhart asked specifically for the pothole at San Joaquin and Adler to be repaired.
Chairperson Makowetski made the following comments:
He asked staff to clarify whether the $250,000 that is currently dedicated to the first level of street
repair is feasible every year. Livick stated the yearly allocations are at the discretion of the City
Council.
He stated the City needs a larger revenue stream in order to fix the roads in the northern area of the
City. Sales tax, loans, and grants are all possible options. Makowetski asked for an annual
spreadsheet of available grants so that when possible, staff would be able to easily see grants are
available.
He stated another potential revenue source could come from unexpected monies wherein a certain
percentage would be devoted to street repair, especially to streets in the northern area. Additionally,
with the collection of monies from unexpected revenue sources, the City could establish an account
to accumulate matching funds, instead of in-kind funds, which would be to the City’s advantage
when applying for grants.
He noted the Pavement Management Plan does not outline goals for the City and suggested the
update establish some regarding prioritizing the type of streets to be repaired as well as specific
problem streets that need to be repaired. Traffic volumes should be a criteria for prioritizing the
PMP.
Boardmember Shively asked Livick to confirm whether it is required to rebuild the curb/gutter/sidewalk as
part of the building permit process. Livick stated there are only a few residential zoning districts in the City
that require standard curb/gutter/sidewalk, so it is not always a requirement to rebuild them in the permit
process. Shively explained how other cities either require the applicant to install such improvements or pay
into a fund that eventually makes it possible to build out that road after enough lots have paid.
ATTACHMENT 2
Public Works Advisory Board Minutes 6 February 21, 2013
Chairperson Makowetski stated he wanted to include two additional recommendations to the Program
Recommendations:
1. Goals – Include the goals discussed above which would target specific areas of the City for street
repairs.
2. Grants – Create a spreadsheet of available grants, as discussed above, with their due dates
throughout the year.
Chairperson Makowetski suggested imposing developer fees to fund curb/gutter/sidewalk installations.
Boardmember Shively noted the City would have to be careful imposing such policies because state law
AB1600 requires there must be a nexus to what the developers are paying.
Boardmember Burkhart clarified with Livick the City Council decides how much money to allocate to each
fund. Burkhart proposed the City dedicate a percentage of the General Fund specifically to street
improvements (not to maintenance). He would like a separate fund established solely for street repair
capital projects.
Chairperson Makowetski asked Rands if an amendment could be added to the Pavement Management Plan
which would designate surplus revenue to repairing the already identified problematic streets.
Livick clarified there are no grants available specifically for local street and road repairs—they are usually
incidental. According to SLOCOG, the City’s funding partner, State money for local streets and roads is
depleted, and, instead, cities are using local (countywide) initiative sales tax to fund transportation issues.
Livick suggested preparing a memorandum summarizing the recommendations from the Board and from
the public, and presenting it to the City Council for their consideration.
MOTION: Shively moved to grant Chairperson Makowetski the authority to sign the memorandum which
will be prepared by Livick.
The motion was seconded by Burkhart and carried unanimously. (4-0).
FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS - None
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 8:22 p.m. to the next scheduled meeting to be held at the Veteran’s Memorial
Hall on Thursday, February 21, 2013, at 6:00 p.m.
ATTACHMENT 2
Prepared By: __RL/JW/RS/BR__ Dept Review: __RL/JW__
Staff Report
TO: Public Works Advisory Board DATE: January 9, 2013
FROM: Rob Livick, PE/PLS – Public Services Director/City Engineer
Joe Woods – Recreation and Parks Director
SUBJECT: SSttrreeeettss SSuummmmiitt:: AA RReevviieeww ooff tthhee 22001122 AAccttiivviittiieess aanndd aann UUppddaattee oonn PPaavveemmeenntt
MMaannaaggeemmeenntt,, SSttrreeeettss MMaaiinntteennaannccee PPrrooggrraammss aanndd RReeccoommmmeennddaattiioonnss ffoorr FFuuttuurree
WWoorrkk
RECOMMENDATION
That the Public Works Advisory Board receive an update, take public testimony and provide
recommendations to City Council for the upcoming Goal Setting and Budget Process.
FISCAL IMPACT
No direct fiscal impact at this time as staff time only is being expended. The recommendations made by the
Board if adopted by City Council may require additional appropriations for street rehabilitation and
maintenance activities.
SUMMARY
The City’s Streets Program is composed of 7 primary activities; pothole repair, pavement management, sign
and signal maintenance, roadway striping, storm drain maintenance, sidewalk repair, and tree trimming. In
2009 the Engineering Division of the Public Services Department conducted its first formal pavement
condition inventory to prioritize maintenance investments. This survey revealed that the City has an average
Pavement Condition Index (PCI) of 63. The PCI is a nationally accepted best management practice that rates
roadway conditions on several factors and assigns a quantitative rating from 0 to 100. The established goal
for Morro Bay’s Pavement Management Plan (PMP) is to raise our average PCI from 63 to 70 by using a
variety of road maintenance techniques, including: Reconstruction, Overlay, Slurry Seal, Cape Seal and
Triple Layer.
BACKGROUND
The condition of streets in Morro Bay is a shared priority for City staff, residents and visitors. In general
terms, the best streets are in the south end of the City and in the downtown area due to better soil
conditions and a history of utilizing sound road construction standards. The worst streets are in the north
where soft clay soils are predominate and little or no base material was used. The lore regarding how the
streets developed in North Morro Bay is that the old county roadways that were originally constructed of
“redrock” and eventually improved with chip seals. This allows potholes and severe cracking to develop
AGENDA NO: MEETING DATE: January 14, 2013
ATTACHMENT 3
2
and spread rapidly especially in wetter rainfall years.
The estimated gas tax revenue for the 2012/2013 budget is $282,097 and partially funds the required
personnel, equipment and materials and supplies for the maintenance and engineering of the existing
street system, including signs, traffic signals, street lighting, storm drain maintenance, street tree
maintenance and the repair of streets. The amount of funding required to perform this maintenance is
approximately $587,000 for the 2012/2013 fiscal year budget. Additionally, over the past decade
supplemental funding for street and road maintenance has continued to dwindle to the point that the City
currently receives only about $88,000 of non-discretionary State Highway Account funding from the San
Luis Obispo Council of Governments biennially, based on a equitable Countywide distribution formula,
above the Gas Tax Revenue from the State to maintain its inventory of approximately 54 centerline
miles. Up until 2003 the City received enough supplemental street funding to have a fairly robust street
maintenance program, but due to many factors including State takeaways, the power plant decreasing
production and a downturn in the overall economy the City has found it necessary to cut expenditures.
For example in 1999 the City had a seven person street crew and was able to perform a variety of street
maintenance activities including an in-house street over lay program. Since 2007, Measure Q has
provided some additional sales tax revenue to improve street but the backlog of street maintenance and
repair continues grow. Streets routinely deteriorate over time typically losing approximately 1 or 2 points
a year for the first 15 years after which a much more rapid deterioration increases over time.
DISCUSSION
A sound PMP invests the majority of available funding into streets of fair condition to prevent this rapid
deterioration cycle from starting. 24 Streets were either fully or partially rehabbed in 2012 representing
39,200 feet (7.5 miles) or 14% of City Streets. Locations are noted in Attachment 3. The work cost $1.1
million (~$50,000 funded by CalRecycle) and utilized the following pavement management techniques:
1. Slurry seal – Used for streets in fair condition that had not started deteriorating rapidly and had
not received treatment since 2003 (show before and after photo). Slurry seal is a mixture of fine
aggregate and asphalt. A polymer binder is sometimes added to help it set faster so that traffic
disruptions are minimized. Slurry sealing with polymer additives is called Microsurfacing.
2. Cape Seal – For streets that had started deteriorating rapidly or required more robust treatment. A
Cape seal is a two layer process. The first layer, called a chip seal, is a layer of gravel adhered to
the pavement with a rubberized asphalt binder. The second layer is a slurry seal that smoothes the
surface and helps keep the gravel from raveling.
3. Triple Layer – The second and third layers are identical to a Cape Seal, but an additional
microsurface layer is added as a first layer to help level out irregularities and to provide added
strength to the road surface.
4. Overlays - Generally consists of the application of varying thicknesses of asphaltic concrete. It is
used when pavement surface is in poor condition but road subgrade is still structurally sound. .
5. Reconstruction – Reconstruction is used when the pavement surface and subgrade have failed;
curbs, gutters and other drainage structures are in poor condition or the addition of subsurface
underdrains is needed to achieve structural integrity; or additional lanes are needed.
ATTACHMENT 3
3
Extra Work:
1. The contractor added a triple layer on Tide Street as compensation for their delayed project start.
The success of this treatment will be observed over the years and if successful, it can be used on
other streets that would normally require reconstruction.
2. Due to construction delays, the contractor was unable to finish the work in July as originally
scheduled. Because the new fiscal year had begun and an additional $250,000 was available for
street work, it was decided to take advantage of the contractor presence and reasonable unit
prices to add additional work to the contract. Several additional streets were added to the project,
including portions of Kern, Beach, Harbor, Marina, and Pacific, using the triple layer treatment
method.
3. Refreshing of worn striping throughout the city was also added to the project. This work was
scheduled to be complete by January 14.
4. Several drainage facilities were repaired or extended, including cross gutters and curb and gutter
at four locations.
5. Street monuments were replaced/restored in 56 locations.
The general emphasis of the PMP is pavement preservation, which is the most effective use of the City’s
limited funding. For example cost to totally reconstruct one mile of typical residential street in North Morro
Bay with the poor soil conditions is approximately $1.5 million, while the cost to perform a chip or slurry
seal on a street in fair condition to preserve that pavement ranges from $120,000 to $300,000 per mile. The
Schedule for future streets and their estimated costs are included in Attachment 1.
Review of Pavement Management Plan
Morro Bay’s Pavement Management Plan (PMP) has been developed for the City to implement a
systematic program of maintenance, repair and improvement of the streets of Morro Bay. The entire
PMP is provided as Attachment 2 but a overview of the program follows.
Based on American Public Works Association’s (APWA) MicroPaver Program, the PMP sets out
optimal strategies and estimated costs for overall improvement to pavement conditions within City
limits. The foundation of the PMP is an inventory of city streets, objectively classified according to their
current condition. A Pavement Condition Index (PCI) is used to classify street conditions, with ratings
ranging from 0 to 100. A comprehensive inventory was undertaken in 2009 and PCI values projected
into 2013 based on typical deterioration rates of untreated streets and improved conditions of
rehabilitated streets. The table below shows the results of this analysis.
Street Category Miles PCI (2009) PCI (2013)
Arterial 7.9 78 82
Collector 3.2 60 61
Local Commercial/Industrial 5.5 64 62
Local/Residential 36.2 59 57
Total 53.4 63 63
The table above shows that the arterial streets such as Main, Morro Bay Blvd, and the Embarcadero are
ATTACHMENT 3
4
in the best condition while residential streets have the lowest average PCI. Residential street conditions
also vary significantly by location as shown in the table below:
RESIDENTIAL STREETS PCI BY LOCATION
Location Miles PCI
North 10.4 51.1
East Central 12.2 47.5
Downtown 5.3 61.4
South 8.9 74.8
Total 36.9 57.0
Streets with the lowest PCI are located on the north half of the City (north of Atascadero Road) where
poor soil conditions and substandard streets are most common.
The street inventory provides the basis for a strategy to maintain and improve the conditions of the
City’s transportation network. The initial selection of streets for rehabilitation is made using the
MicroPAVER program with the goal of maximizing the impact of pavement management dollars. This
generally means that the most cost-effective expenditures are directed towards preservation of streets
that are in fair condition, prior to the onset of rapid deterioration. The chart on the following page
illustrates this concept.
Financing Pavement Management
Pavement management is financed from a number of sources, including General Funds, Measure Q,
Regional Transportation funds, and various grants as they become available. The total cost to repair or
ATTACHMENT 3
5
replace all city streets is $14 million. Annual maintenance costs are projected to be $500,000 annually to
maintain the current condition. Greater or smaller annual expenses will result in a corresponding change
in street condition. The chart below projects the resulting PCI for various budgets over a ten year period.
PMP recommendations also include the implementation of an effective pothole repair program. This repair
program currently provides two types of activities: digouts and crack sealing. These types of maintenance
procedures prevent water intrusion into the supporting soil and also serve as stop-gap repairs until major
maintenance can be performed. The City’s pothole repair program has historically operated reactively,
however staff is making positive progress to a more pro-active approach.
Regular Proactive Street Maintenance
The Street Maintenance staff are currently focusing digouts on streets located in the north part of town and
working our way south. Staff has performed many of these smaller repairs with in-house resources and has
utilized private contractors to perform larger area activities. During the time period of July 2011 to October
2012, staff has performed pothole repairs utilizing over 218.31 tons of asphalt. Included in this total is 122
tons used in cross gutter repair and approximately 25 tons used has cold patch repair. The repairs have been
throughout the City with notable repairs on the following streets: Orcas, Andros, Bernardo, Kodiak and
Sicily. The total 218.31 tons were invoiced to the City in the amount of $29,291.67.
Staff continues to operate street repairs with City Council allocations from the General Fund and Measure Q
resources. Maintenance operations have been allocated approximately $20K from the G.F. for the previous
two Fiscal Years for asphalt supplies to address pothole repairs. Measure Q allocations have been
significantly higher with $140K in FY 2010/11, $0 in FY 2011/12, and currently $169K for FY 2012/13.
These Measure Q allocations have provided the needed resources to implement a pro-active pothole repair
program.
SIDEWALK REPAIR OR REPLACEMENT
Although the California Street & highways Code assigns sidewalk maintenance responsibilities to adjoining
property owners, the City continues to provide repair operations to maintain safe and usable sidewalks. This
would include repairing any damage introduced by natural or unnatural causes. Most sidewalk issues are
produced by the intrusion of street tree roots, which tend to lift sections of concrete presenting an unsafe
ATTACHMENT 3
6
condition. The City usually performs sidewalk repairs with outside private contractors but have occasionally
provided the demolition to expedite particular projects and conserve available resources. Repairs to
sidewalks, curbs and gutters or tree wells were performed at twenty locations during the past year. Specific
locations are noted in Attachment 3
STORM DRAINS
The City’s Storm Water Management Plan aims to achieve quantifiable improvements to water quality;
many Best Management Practices are used to achieve this goal. Storm drain cleaning and street sweeping
are two practices the City implements to remove potential containments before they enter the water ways.
Stormwater runoff can convey particulates and other pollutants from roadways and various impervious
surfaces in urban areas. The storm drains are cleaned twice a year and the amount of material removed from
February 2011 to December 2012 was approximately 5 yards of debris. The downtown and Embarcadero
streets are swept weekly and the remaining streets are swept twice a month. The amount of debris removed
by the street sweeper during this same time period was approximately 273 tons.
The City currently has a storm drain master plan completed by the John L. Wallace and Associates (now
known as the Wallace Group) in 1987. The plan outlines deficiencies in the City’s storm drain system; the
plan is out dated and needs to be updated. If the City were to implement the current plan, the total cost in
today’s dollars to complete the work identified in the plan would be in excess of $6-million or approximately
$850,000 a year for the next ten years if we factor in inflation. This does not include the amount needed to
repair or replace the several thousand feet of 50 plus year old corrugated metal pipe that rusts away every day
underground in Morro Bay. A goal for this year is to update the storm drain master plan along with the City’s
engineering standards to better identify the storm water needs in the City.
TREES
The City is in the process of developing an Urban Forest Management Plan (UFMP). The plan will guide
the City toward a healthy, sustainable urban forest. As part of the plan, the trees in the commercial areas are
currently being surveyed using a GPS and incorporated into a GIS mapping program. This will enable the
City to have a better idea of the health, age, species diversity, and the overall quality of the trees in this area.
The UFMP will help to determine specific levels of funding needed for tree maintenance and tree planting
over a multi-year period. The plan develops goals which provide objectives and actions in order to achieve
these goals. The plan is a living document that will grow with the urban forest and evolve with new goals,
objectives and actions as needed.
TREE TRIMMING
City street trees are maintained by both in-house staff and by private contractors. Trees in the Right of Way
are ultimately the City’s responsibility, however, certain circumstances have allowed private residents to
trim and occasionally remove trees which warrant such action. During the period of April 2011 to December
2012, staff has received 88 citizen requests for tree service. The requests submitted ranged from light
trimming to complete removal. Tree trimming is scheduled and performed during the non-nesting months of
July to January. Any tree work performed from February to June would be a matter of safety to life and/or
property. A list of locations to some of those work service requests is provided in Attachment 4. This list of
tree locations is not a comprehensive list of all the tree work completed within the above dates. Some of the
trees listed are part of the annual trimming and others are addressed by public solicitation through the City’s
work order system. Ideally, trimming of public street trees would be addressed annually with service to a
percentage of the overall urban forest and cycling the inventory every four to five years. Staff’s intent is to
ATTACHMENT 3
7
request budget allocations to cover this annual service as well as provide resources to react in cases of
emergencies and or safety issues.
CONCLUSION
Streets and associated appurtenances are vital to the economic wellbeing of our community and are sorely in
need of additional resources to maintain them in a condition that is acceptable to the citizens and visitors of
our city. Continued allocation of State gas & vehicle tax revenues, grant funding, Measure Q sales taxes
and future development impact fees are essential keep our roads from deteriorating further. Implementation
of the State Streets and Highway Codes provisions regarding sidewalk maintenance would provide a small
measure of relief.
ATTACHMENT
ATTACHMENT 1 City of Morro Bay Pavement Management Plan
ATTACHMENT 2 Schedules of Future Street Rehabilitation Projects
ATTACHMENT 3 2012 Street Rehabilitation Map
ATTACHMENT 4 Specific Project Sites
ATTACHMENT 3
8
ATTACHMENT 1: City of Morro Bay Pavement Management Plan
ATTACHMENT 3
Prepared By: RL Dept Review: RL
City Manager Review: ________ City Attorney Review: ________
Staff Report
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council DATE: June 20, 2011
FROM: Rob Livick, PE/PLS – Public Services Director/City Engineer
SUBJECT: Discussion and Adoption of the Pavement Management Plan
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the City Council review and adopts Morro Bay’s Pavement Management Plan
(PMP) as a tool for the maintenance to the City’s streets.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Ideally, an annual budget of $900,000 for the street program will be sufficient to improve the street
system beyond its current level and that the average PCI will reach the goal of 70 in ten years. While an
annual budget of $900,000 is the optimal funding level in order to improve the City’s average pavement
condition index to 70, this amount may be unrealistic given today’s financial climate; and lower annual
budgets will have less effective results. The budgets outlined in the plan range from $250,000 to
$900,000 per year. The level of funding will be set in each year’s annual budget.
SUMMARY:
In order to effectively utilize the City’s limited street maintenance budget, staff has prepared a
Pavement Management Plan (PMP) that outlines the steps needed to both rehabilitate and preserve
the pavement condition of this valuable City asset. Currently the present value of the City’s street
system is approximately $40,000,000. Once adopted, the PMP will serve as the roadmap for future
street maintenance..
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
The attached PMP has been developed by staff to implement a systematic program of maintenance,
repair and improvement of the streets of Morro Bay. The plan is based on American Public Works
Association’s (APWA) MicroPaver Program, the PMP sets out optimal strategies and estimated costs
for overall improvement to pavement conditions within City limits.
Four general maintenance and rehabilitation categories were used for this PMP program;
reconstruction, overlays (heavy and light), maintenance (street sealing) and no action. Annual pavement
maintenance and rehabilitation projects were developed for the next five years as part of the program.
Care was taken to select streets using a critical PCI (Pavement Condition Index) approach and to group
streets geographically to promote reduced construction costs using budget ranges of $250,000 to
AGENDA NO: D-3 MEETING DATE: June 28, 2011
ATTACHMENT 3
2
$900,000 per year.
An evaluation of the overall street system was also performed as part of this scope of work. The
analysis showed that the City’s overall weighted average PCI is 63. This is below the PCI value of 70
that most California cities try to maintain. The City’s arterial system PCI is better than average, but the
other three street categories (collectors, commercial/industrial, and residential) rank below the 70 PCI
benchmark.
The City’s arterial system PCI is better than average, while the other three street categories (collectors,
commercial/industrial, and residential) rank below this benchmark as shown in the table below.
Street Category Miles PCI
Arterial 7.9 78
Collector 3.2 60
Local Commercial/Industrial 5.5 64
Local/Residential 36.2 59
Total 53.4 63
TOP POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Achieve and maintain a PCI of 70 for all City streets
2. Regularly update the MicroPaver street condition database
TOP PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Institute a regular global maintenance (street sealing) program
2. Implement an effective pothole repair program
3. Implement a regular crack sealing program
4. Create a comprehensive 10-year Pavement Maintenance and Rehabilitation Program
ATTACHMENT
City of Morro Bay’s - Pavement Management Plan, June 2011
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 3
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Pavement Management Plan (PMP) has been developed for the City to implement a
systematic program of maintenance, repair and improvement of the streets of Morro Bay. Based
on American Public Works Association’s (APWA) MicroPaver Program, the PMP sets out
optimal strategies and estimated costs for overall improvement to pavement conditions within
City limits.
Four general maintenance and rehabilitation categories were used for this PMP program;
reconstruction, overlays (heavy and light), maintenance (street sealing) and no action. Annual
pavement maintenance and rehabilitation projects were developed for the next five years as
part of the program. Care was taken to select streets using a critical PCI (Pavement Condition
Index) approach and to group streets geographically to promote reduced construction costs
using budget ranges of $250,000 to $900,000 per year.
An evaluation of the overall street system was also performed as part of this scope of work. The
analysis showed that the City’s overall weighted average PCI is 63. This is below the PCI value
of 70 that most California cities try to maintain. The City’s arterial system PCI is better than
average, while the other three street categories (collectors, commercial/industrial, and
residential) rank below this benchmark as shown in the table below.
Street Category Miles PCI
Arterial 7.9 78
Collector 3.2 60
Local Commercial/Industrial 5.5 64
Local/Residential 36.2 59
Total 53.4 63
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Achieve and maintain a PCI of 70 for all City streets
2. Regularly update the MicroPaver street condition database
3. Encourage use of new technologies and materials in pavement design
PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Institute a regular global maintenance (street sealing) program
2. Implement an effective pothole repair program
3. Implement a regular crack sealing program
4. Create a Green Streets program
5. Implement a street subsurface evaluation program
6. Upgrade or Install ADA curb ramps
7. Modify and/or enforce trench cut standards
8. Coordinate with other programs and departments
a. Utility Master Planning and scheduled repairs
b. City Trees
ATTACHMENT 3
c. Bicycle Traffic
d. Non-City Utilities (Cayucos, AT&T, PG&E, etc
e. Fire
f. Police
g. Businesses and Residents
9. Create a comprehensive 10-year Pavement Maintenance and Rehabilitation Program
Ideally, an annual budget of $900,000 for the street program will be sufficient to improve the
street system beyond its current level and that the average PCI will reach the goal of 70 in
ten years. While an annual budget of $900,000 is the optimal funding level in order to
improve the City’s average pavement condition index to 70, this amount may be unrealistic
given today’s financial climate; and lower annual budgets will have less effective results. A
more realistic compromise is proposed with initial expenditures of $500,000 during the first
year and $250,000 annually thereafter, with the intention of supplementing with grants
and other external resources. The actual amount will be approved with each annual budget
process.
ATTACHMENT 3
DEVELOPMENT
OF A
PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
FOR
THE CITY OF MORRO BAY
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION I: INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 6
SECTION II: BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................................ 8
PAVEMENT DESIGN BASICS ....................................................................................................................... 8
PAVEMENT DETERIORATION .................................................................................................................... 8
Fatigue................................................................................................................................................... 8
Aging ..................................................................................................................................................... 9
TYPICAL PAVEMENT DEFECTS ................................................................................................................... 9
PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE PROCEDURES .............................................................................................. 10
Crack Sealing ....................................................................................................................................... 10
Digouts (Patching) ............................................................................................................................... 10
Slurry Seals and Micro-surfacing ......................................................................................................... 10
Cape Seals ........................................................................................................................................... 10
PAVEMENT REHABILITATION PROCEDURES ........................................................................................... 11
Conventional Overlays ........................................................................................................................ 11
Heavy Overlay: Pulverization and Resurfacing ................................................................................... 11
Heavy Overlay: AC Removal and Replacement (Mill and Fill) ............................................................. 11
Reconstruction .................................................................................................................................... 12
SECTION III: THE PMS PROGRAM ................................................................................................................ 13
BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................................................... 13
SYSTEM ASSUMPTIONS ........................................................................................................................... 13
PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE PRIORITIES .................................................................................................. 14
SYSTEM INVENTORY ................................................................................................................................ 14
ATTACHMENT 3
PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE AND REHABILITATION UNIT COSTS ............................................................ 15
VISUAL EVALUATIONS ............................................................................................................................. 16
SYSTEM UPDATES.................................................................................................................................... 16
SECTION IV: SUMMARIZED SYSTEM INFORMATION................................................................................... 17
SECTION V: PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................ 19
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................................. 19
APPENDIX 1 ................................................................................................................................................. 22
TEN-YEAR PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE AND REHABILITATION PROGRAM ............................................. 22
APPENDIX 2: PAVEMENT DEFECT DESCRIPTIONS ....................................................................................... 30
1. Alligator Cracking (Fatigue) ................................................................................................................. 30
2. Block Cracking ..................................................................................................................................... 30
3. Bumps and Sags .................................................................................................................................. 30
4. Depressions ......................................................................................................................................... 31
5. Edge Cracking ...................................................................................................................................... 31
6. Joint Reflection Cracking (from PCC slabs) ......................................................................................... 32
7. Lane/Shoulder Drop-off ...................................................................................................................... 32
8. Longitudinal and Transverse Cracking (Non-PCC Slab Joint Reflective) ............................................. 32
9. Patching and Utility Cut Patching........................................................................................................ 33
10. Polished Aggregate ......................................................................................................................... 33
11. Potholes .......................................................................................................................................... 33
12. Rutting ............................................................................................................................................. 34
13. Shoving ............................................................................................................................................ 34
14. Swell ................................................................................................................................................ 34
15. Weathering and Raveling ................................................................................................................ 35
ATTACHMENT 3
SECTION I: INTRODUCTION
This project consisted of setting up a Pavement Management System (PMS) for the City of
Morro Bay. MicroPAVER, version 6.1, an American Public Works supported PMS software
package, was used for this project.
A PMS program has several distinctive uses as a budgeting and inventory tool, while also
providing a record of pavement condition. The primary use of any PMS is a budgeting tool with
the aim of maximizing the cost effectiveness of every dollar spent on city streets The graphic
below illustrates how critical it is to allocate funds for street repair in a timely manner The
system provides project rehabilitation costs and timing based on nationwide research which
provides average pavement deterioration rates. Unit costs are based on recently bid projects.
As an inventory tool, it provides a quick and easy reference on pavement areas and usages. As
a pavement condition record, it provides age, load-related, non-load related and climate related
pavement condition and deterioration information.
A PMS is not capable of providing detailed engineering designs for each street. The PMS
instead helps to identify potential repair and maintenance candidate streets. Further
investigation, or project level analysis, of these candidate streets is used to optimize the City’s
pavement management dollars. Project level pavement analysis and engineering is an essential
feature of future pavement maintenance and rehabilitation projects. Project level engineering
examines the pavements in significantly more detail than the visual evaluation required for the
ATTACHMENT 3
PMS system and provides optimization of the design given all of the peculiar constraints of the
project streets.
The PMS software assumes average construction and material quality. Pavement life is very
sensitive to materials and workmanship quality. Poor quality new construction may result in up
to a 50 percent loss in the pavement life. In other words, poor quality new construction may last
10 to 15 years, whereas excellent quality construction may last 20 to 30 years. Investing in
quality, both in design and construction, provides significant returns in extended pavement life
resulting in lowered annual maintenance costs.
The PMP for the City of Morro Bay has five primary goals as follows:
1. Provide an accurate and complete inventory of the City’s pavements and condition.
2. Identify and quantify maintenance and rehabilitation needs for the street system.
3. Identify prioritization and optimization criteria for the street system.
4. Develop a set of pavement management policy guidelines.
5. Develop a ten year plan and budget for the City street system.
A full appreciation of a pavement management system and the value of its data and cost
projections depends on a basic understanding of pavement design basics. These are provided
in Section II: Background. Section III provides information on the PMS Program Specifics
incorporated into the program. Section IV provides Summarized System Information in the form
of easy to read tables and figures. Section V provides a set of policy and program
recommendations for future pavement management. Two appendices detail the proposed
ten-year pavement management program and a list of description of pavement distresses.
ATTACHMENT 3
SECTION II: BACKGROUND
This section is intended to introduce important pavement design definitions and calculations as
a background for understanding the Pavement Management System (PMS) assumptions.
PAVEMENT DESIGN BASICS
Pavements are a structural support system generally considered to act like a beam. But unlike
beams in buildings which generally have static loads, the pavement structure is flexed many
times from traffic loading. Cars and light trucks have little impact on the pavement structure.
Larger/Heavier trucks have very significant impacts to the pavement due to the high axle
weights. The impact of trucks is measured in equivalent single 18,000 pound axle loads
(ESALs). The total ESALs are converted into a design Traffic Index (TI) by an exponential
formula. For example, a design TI of 5 is equal to 7,160 ESALs. A design TI of 8 is equal to
372,000 ESALs. Therefore, the design TI is related to the total number of ESALs that the
pavement will support before it begins to fail, regardless of the passage of time. Normally for a
new pavement, the ESALs over a 20-year period are used. For rehabilitation procedures such
as overlays, 10 years is generally used.
The other element of pavement design is the support of the beam. The support is provided by
the subgrade soils. The support value is designated by the R-value test, which is performed by
a soils engineer.
Using the design TI and R-value, the pavement designer chooses various materials to construct
the structural section. The most common pavement section is a thin layer of asphalt concrete
over aggregate base(s)
Many options are available depending on specific project requirements and conditions.
The design method used in California is based on a 50 percent reliability. This means that the
average pavement life of all pavements constructed using the design procedure will last the
design life. It also means that about half will not last that long and the other half will last longer.
To express this concept, a design life is often expressed in a span of years, such as 17 to 23
years for 20-year design life.
PAVEMENT DETERIORATION
Pavement deteriorates from two processes: fatigue and aging. The processes occur
simultaneously. In a well designed and constructed pavement, the two processes result in the
need to rehabilitate the pavement at approximately the same time. This is called the design life.
The design life for most new pavements is 20 years. Each aging process has its own set of
pavement defects which are related to the process.
Fatigue
The first deterioration process is fatigue from heavy axle loads. As the pavement structure
flexes or bends from heavy wheel loads, the asphalt concrete layer’s ability to flex is consumed.
With sufficient bending, the asphalt concrete layer begins to break at the bottom. This cracking
progresses upward until it reaches the surface and appears as alligator cracking. If left
unattended, they will produce a pothole. These areas are repaired by removal and replacement
of the asphalt concrete in the affected areas. These repairs are commonly called digouts.
ATTACHMENT 3
Pavement structure and durability are also impacted by utility trenches. When total cumulative
quantity of digouts and utility patches reaches approximately 5 percent of the total area, the
pavement is considered to have reached its design life and requires major rehabilitation.
Aging
The major element of the pavement structure which ages is the asphalt concrete layer. To a
minor extent, aggregate bases can age if contaminated by fine soil particles which are
transported from the subsoil into the aggregate base.
Asphalt concrete is composed of aggregates and asphalt cement. The aggregates used are
generally of fair quality and do experience some breakdown over time. Aggregate aging
problems need to be addressed in maintenance procedures. The asphalt concrete binder ages
as well. As the asphalt binder ages, it loses volume through loss of volatile components in the
asphalt. As the volume decreases, the pavement will progressively crack from the resulting
tensile strain in the layer. Normally, these cracks first show up as transverse cracks. They also
show up at weak areas such as paving joints. These cracks widen and increase over time until
the pavement has a checkerboard appearance.
The aging process also causes the pavement to become more brittle. The increased stiffness
results in additional cracking from loaded vehicles. This load induced cracking from the
brittleness of the asphalt concrete is very similar to fatigue cracking in appearance. The major
agent for deterioration of the asphalt concrete binder is oxygen. The carrier of the oxygen is
water. Water enters the pavement either from the surface or as water vapor from underneath.
TYPICAL PAVEMENT DEFECTS
MicroPAVER identifies nineteen different distress types. Some of these distress types are not
applicable to the City of Morro Bay. Using our knowledge of California coastal streets, we have
reduced the number of distress types to fifteen. These fifteen are:
1. Alligator Cracking (Fatigue)
2. Block Cracking
3. Bumps and Sags
4. Depressions
5. Edge Cracking
6. Joint Reflection Cracking
7. Lane/Shoulder Drop-off
8. Longitudinal and Transverse Cracking
9. Patching and Utility Cut Patching
10. Polished Aggregate
11. Potholes
12. Rutting
13. Shoving
14. Swell
15. Weathering and Raveling
These defects are common to virtually all of the pavements as aging progresses.
For purposes of understanding the character and levels of these distresses, the pavement
defect descriptions from the rating manual are included in Appendix 2.
ATTACHMENT 3
PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE PROCEDURES
Pavement maintenance procedures are designed to slow the pavement aging process. Mainly,
the procedures are designed to protect the pavement from the adverse effects of water and to
some extent vehicle traffic.
Maintenance procedures which protect the pavement from aging are crack sealing, digouts,
slurry seals, and cape seals. When pavements have extensive cracking and are beyond their
design life, sealing can also be used as an interim holding measure or stop gap prior to major
rehabilitation.
Crack Sealing
Crack sealing prevents surface water from getting beneath the asphalt concrete layer into the
aggregate bases. Crack sealing is generally performed using hot rubberized crack sealing
material. The procedure includes routing small cracks, cleaning and sealing. The City owns and
operates its own crack sealing equipment.
Digouts (Patching)
Digouts are small areas of deteriorated pavements (usually potholes) which are removed and
replaced with new asphalt concrete. Pavement removal is accomplished by cold planing or
sawcutting and excavation. New asphalt is installed in at least two lifts. The digout depth is
determined depending on the severity and type of distress, as well as street type and
construction. Shallow patching is often used on low to medium severity distressed areas of
pavement where the underlying base is sound, while a full depth digout is required when the
failure of the base material is detected. Digouts are generally performed by the City crew,
though digouts repairs are often required in preparation for a contracted slurry seal.
Slurry Seals and Micro-surfacing
Slurry seals consist of a combination of fine aggregate and emulsified oil used on relatively
good streets to preserve and extend pavement life. Slurry seals are also a cost effective
treatment for streets whose major form of distress is severe weathering or raveling.
Micro-surfacing is similar to a slurry seal with added polymers that allow the application of
thicker layers and added service life. The added thickness of micro-surfacing makes it a good
choice to correct rutting. Micro-surfacing is used exclusively by the City of San Luis Obispo for
routine street sealing providing excellent results with a life expectancy of 8 years. The City of
Morro Bay used micro-surfacing for the first time in November, 2010 on a one-mile stretch of
North Main Street between Atascadero Road and San Jacinto.
Cape Seals
Cape seals consist of a chip seal overcoated with a slurry seal. A chip seal is an application of
small angular rock (chips) approximately 1/4” to 3/8” in maximum size embedded into a thick
application of asphalt emulsion. Most chips seals incorporate polymer modified binders.
Cape seals are used on residential and collector streets to maintain a pavement which may
need an overlay, but there are not sufficient funds available. Chip seals are placed over low to
moderate alligator cracks and block shrinkage cracking. Due to the distress covered by the chip
seal, small areas of disbonding or failure may occur and will require patching.
Cape sealed surfaces are fairly coarse compared to new paving. Due to this characteristic, they
may not be acceptable to some segments of the public.
ATTACHMENT 3
Though chip seals were used extensively in Morro Bay prior to incorporation, many of the
streets that received this treatment did not have a stable base and subsequent deterioration has
resulted. Cape seals have never been used in Morro Bay but are being considered as a
pavement treatment option in the near future on streets with a stable base. They may also be
used as an interim holding measure to “hold” the pavement together until funds become
available for major rehabilitation.
PAVEMENT REHABILITATION PROCEDURES
Pavement rehabilitation consists of procedures used to restore the existing pavement quality or
to add additional structural support to the pavement. Rehabilitation procedures include
conventional overlays; heavy overlays; and reconstruction.
Conventional Overlays
Conventional overlays generally consist of surface preparation, the optional installation of
pavement fabric, followed by the application of varying thicknesses of asphalt concrete. Surface
preparation can consist of crack filling, pavement repairs of base failures and leveling courses.
Pavement fabric is often used as a water inhibiting membrane and to retard reflective cracking.
Care must be used with fabric to avoid intersections with heavy truck braking, steep grades
(generally over 8 percent), and areas where subsurface water might be trapped.
The overlay thickness is determined by the structural requirement of the deflection analysis and
reflective cracking criteria. The reflective cracking criteria requires the thickness of the overlay to
be a minimum 1/2 the thickness of the existing bonded layers. Pavement fabric can account for
0.10 ft of asphalt for reflective cracking criteria if the structural requirements from the deflection
analysis are met.
Conventional overlays have an expected service life of 7 to 13 years if they are designed to
meet structural and reflective cracking criteria and are well constructed.
Heavy Overlay: Pulverization and Resurfacing
Pulverization and resurfacing (also known as Cold in-Place Recycling) is an alternative to
conventional overlays for streets that are structurally adequate but exhibit sufficient cracking to
warrant improvement to the asphalt surface. Pulverization and resurfacing is an intermediate
step between overlays and reconstruction. The existing asphalt concrete is pulverized, mixed
with an engineered emulsion and reapplied over the existing aggregate base. The total
structural section is increased by the recycled base. A final seal coat or thin overlay completes
the resurfacing process. This method eliminates the stress history and cracking of the old
asphalt concrete pavement, thus eliminating negative impacts on the new asphalt concrete
surface.
Pulverization and resurfacing has a life expectancy of 13 to 18 years. The life expectancy is
slightly less than full reconstruction because some residual deficiencies in thickness or quality of
the unaffected layers may still exist. Additional testing is necessary to determine if pulverization
is a viable alternative. This testing includes measuring the existing structural section and testing
the native soil for bearing capacity (R-value).
Heavy Overlay: AC Removal and Replacement (Mill and Fill)
On some thick asphalt concrete pavements, the most economical approach to rehabilitating the
pavement is to remove some of the existing asphalt concrete surface by cold planing and to
place new asphalt concrete surface which matches the existing profile. This method may be
ATTACHMENT 3
required if the pavement profile is already so thick that the additional thickness obtained from
recycling the existing pavement is unacceptable due to drainage, street geometry, or other
concerns. The removed asphalt can often be recycled and reused on other streets if concurrent
projects are planned appropriately. Depending on existing conditions, this method should have
a life of 15 to 20 years.
Reconstruction
When the pavement has severe cross section deficiencies or requires significant structural
strengthening, reconstruction may be the only alternative. Generally, existing pavement
materials are recycled and incorporated into the new pavement structure in a process called Full
Depth Reclamation. This method minimizes the importation of new base material and virtually
eliminates export of material to landfill sites. Engineered emulsion binders are mixed with the
existing materials to form a base that is equal to or superior in strength to new aggregate base.
The final surface is then applied, typically 3 to 4 inches of hot mix asphalt. Many of the
residential streets on the north side of town require reconstruction due to the poor quality of the
original construction prior to incorporation.
ATTACHMENT 3
SECTION III: THE PMS PROGRAM
This section discusses the characteristics of the PMS program and its application to the City of
Morro Bay.
BACKGROUND
During the early years of PMS software development, many companies developed private PMS
software packages focused on management of municipal street systems. Though these
programs were versatile and sophisticated, the user was also dependent upon the software
vendor for training, program updates, and software servicing. Many of the vendors had difficulty
maintaining their software, leaving agencies stranded after making a substantial investment.
The American Public Works Association identified the need for a publicly supported PMS
program independent of private vendors. The association chose the Paver program as a basis
for a municipal version. The original Paver PMS program was developed by the Army Corp of
Engineers for management of military pavements, particularly air fields. Working with the Army
Corp of Engineers, APWA-MicroPAVER was developed.
The program has features which make it applicable for a wide range of municipal pavements
throughout the country. In order to make it user friendly, the program lacks much of the
sophistication of private programs. However, it does provide good system wide models and
budgeting capacity. It also provides an inventory of pavements.
For this project, the City decided to update their MicroPAVER software to the latest version, 6.1.
It is also used by many other municipalities and counties in the region, including the Cities of
Pismo Beach and San Luis Obispo and the County of San Luis Obispo.
SYSTEM ASSUMPTIONS
The PMS program makes several basic assumptions regarding the degradation of pavements.
The basis of the system is the Pavement Condition Index (PCI). New pavements with no defects
receive a score of 100. From this score, the program deducts points based on defect type and
severity identified during the visual review. After the initial PCI for a street segment is
determined, the program reduces the PCI on an annual basis using preset deterioration curves.
Placement on the deterioration curve is determined by the date of original construction or most
recent overlay. The PCI is increased when a maintenance or rehabilitation activity is performed.
The APWA-MicroPAVER PMS program does not have the capacity to include much historic
information beyond the date of original construction or most recent overlay in determining the
current PCI or initial score. Thus, a pavement without defects is scored at 100, regardless of
age. Most pavements within the first 5 to 8 years of their life have few if any defects. Therefore,
a PCI of 100 may be applied to pavements from 0 to 8 years old. At 8 years, the pavement is
approximately 1/3 through its initial life. As the system is maintained with maintenance activity
and condition updates, the system adjusts itself to correct for these initial input variances.
The system uses standard treatments to raise the PCI based on the original PCI. The treatment
strategies include localized maintenance, global maintenance, and major rehabilitation.
Localized maintenance includes such activities as digouts and crack sealing. Global
maintenance includes activities such as slurry, micro-surfacing and cape seals. Major
rehabilitation activities include overlays and reconstruction.
The system ratings do not take into account geometric constraints in the system such as
ATTACHMENT 3
excessive crowns or lack of median curb height. These geometric constraints often make some
procedures inapplicable. An example is lack of curb height. At some point, the pavement will
have to be milled off prior to placement of a new surface layer. The system does not contain this
alternate. Neither does the system include miscellaneous costs, such as associated concrete
repairs or sidewalk improvements.
Maintenance treatment recommendations are based on certain PCI and pavement distress level
thresholds, some of which are adjustable by the user and others are not. Due to these
assumptions and program simplifications, the PMS program designated maintenance treatment
for a given street may not be precisely what that particular street requires. For example, the
program suggests major rehabilitation if the surface area of alligator cracking exceeds 0.5% of
the total street surface. Such streets can often be patched and resurfaced at a lower cost.
Making these determinations is project level engineering. The PMS program identifies candidate
streets for various treatment types. The project engineer then visually reviews the streets.
Depending on the condition, a specific maintenance treatment can be specified, or in the case
of major rehabilitation, additional testing may need to be performed to identify which specific
maintenance or rehabilitation approach may be most economical.
The goal of the PMS program is to furnish budgetary amounts in order to achieve system wide
improvements in the overall pavement condition. The goal of project engineering is to obtain the
maximum economical impact for a given subset of the system to be maintained. Using the PMS
program, management is able to realistically budget for economically maintaining the City’s
pavement system. Annually updating maintenance activity and costs keep the system current.
PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE PRIORITIES
Though the initial selection of streets, scheduling of work, and choice of treatment is made by
the MicroPAVER program with the goal of maximizing the impact of pavement management
dollars, several user-defined criteria guide the program in the way it processes data. These key
criteria include:
1. Achieve and maintain an average PCI of 70 or higher for all city streets with no street
below a PCI of 55.
2. Give priority to more heavily traveled streets. The order of priority has been set as
arterial, collector, industrial, and residential, in that order.
3. Preventative maintenance on streets with a low surface area percentage of distresses is
the best use of funds. Digout repairs followed by cape seals or micro-surfacing treatment
measures can be used as appropriate. Priority is given to streets that are in the lower
PCI range to prevent them from dropping down into a distress category that requires
more expensive rehabilitation.
4. Rehabilitation measures are generally required for streets with a PCI in the range of 55
to 70 or high surface area percentage of distresses. Priority is given to streets that are in
the lower PCI range to prevent them from dropping down into a distress category that
requires more expensive reconstruction.
5. Streets that have fallen below a critical PCI level of 55 and have known base
deficiencies shall be scheduled for reconstruction on a “worst first” basis. Stopgap
measures shall be used to keep streets safe for travel until reconstruction can take
place.
SYSTEM INVENTORY
The street classifications (arterial, collector, industrial, and residential) assigned in this report
were determined by city staff. Since pavement life is directly proportional to the types and
weight of vehicles, the City should periodically review and upgrade the classification of streets
ATTACHMENT 3
so the PMP can correctly identify rehabilitation and maintenance strategies and account for the
increased truck traffic.
All streets were measured using a vehicle mounted measuring device for length and a hand held
measuring wheel for width. Length was measured from center of intersection to center of
intersection on residential and collector streets. Intersections of arterials and collectors were
measured in only one direction unless two arterials adjoined each other, in which case the
intersection length was included in both directions. Measuring from centerline to centerline
creates an increased area in the program. This increase helps adjust for additional costs of
maintaining intersections. In the case of cul-de-sacs, lengths were adjusted to account for the
additional pavement area in the cul-de-sacs bulbs. Widths were measured from face of curb to
face of curb to provide a small amount of contingency. Widths of collectors and arterials were
adjusted to account for pavement in turn pockets.
PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE AND REHABILITATION UNIT COSTS
The following costs were used to develop the indicated budget numbers for each street segment
reviewed. The costs include miscellaneous work such as transitions, striping, digouts, etc.
The costs are averages. Small programs will have higher unit costs and large programs will
have lower unit costs. The larger the annual program size, the better the economies of scale.
Timing is also important. Bidding the work in early spring will result in significantly lower prices
than bids solicited in the late summer or fall. If small packages are used, costs could be 25 to 50
percent higher.
The costs reflect prices for work completed within the county over the past few years, including
data from within the City and estimated costs from other agencies using MicroPaver. The
developed unit costs include striping and other lump sum project costs for each street. The
costs per street were then averaged and rounded to produce the indicated unit costs. The unit
costs include a 10% contingency and a 15% allowance to account for engineering design fees
and inspection. These prices are in today’s dollars (December, 2010) and do not account for
inflation.
ATTACHMENT 3
PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE & REHABILITATION UNIT COSTS
Treatment
Description
Street Classification (Cost/SF*)
Arterial Collector Residential
Reconstruct $5.00 $5.00 $4.50
Thick Overlay $3.50 $3.50 $3.00
Thin overlay $2.50 $2.50 $2.00
Heavy Maintenance (Cape Seal) $0.60 $0.60 $0.60
Light Maintenance(Micro-surface) $0.38 $0.38 $0.38
*All Costs Include Surface Preparation, Design and Inspection
Since life cycle cost analysis is part of developing annual maintenance and rehabilitation
programs, some general life expectancies should be identified. For a typical light maintenance
treatment, a service life of 5 to 8 years can be assumed. A heavy maintenance treatment may
provide a service life of 7 to 10 years. A typical conventional overlay, whether light or heavy, has
an expected service life of 8 to 13 years. Depending on the existing pavement and soil
conditions, other rehabilitation options can be applied that will provide a service life of up to 18
years. A reconstructed pavement is expected to provide a service life of 20 years.
Depending on the existing conditions, the identified service life may vary. The projections of
future life are given to provide a broad outline for pavement maintenance budgeting. They
should not be interpreted as providing definitive predictions of future pavement performance.
VISUAL EVALUATIONS
All of the pavements were evaluated by a Cal Poly student working as an intern for the City. The
streets were rated based on the Paver Asphalt Distress Manual, which is part of the APWA-
-MicroPAVER system described in Section II. Once the data were entered into the program,
Rob Livick completed a quality assurance review of the system and verified the results in the
field. The street inventory was based on visual evaluations. Recent street maintenance
procedures could be masking the pavement’s true condition. For this reason, the City should
commit to maintaining the PMP by reviewing the system’s pavements at least every three years.
SYSTEM UPDATES
The Pavement Management System is a dynamic program. It is expected that the City will
continue to visually rate the street network and update the database at least every three years.
It is recommended that the arterial, collector and industrial streets be re-rated annually. This
constant review of the system will refine the deterioration curves used to predicate future work.
In addition to the visual review, the City should update the database by adding new streets
incorporated into the City as well as and new maintenance work performed to a particular street
segment.
ATTACHMENT 3
SECTION IV: SUMMARIZED SYSTEM INFORMATION
The City of Morro Bay currently maintains approximately 53.4 centerline miles of roadways
(approximately 8,030,178 square feet of pavement). This represents an asset with a
replacement value of approximately $40,000,000.
Data were collected for the entire street system using MicroPAVER PMS version 6.1. An
alphabetical listing is provided in Section V. The current weighted average PCI (Pavement
Condition Index) for the street system is 63.4. While it is up to the City of Morro Bay to
determine at what condition level (PCI) they want their pavements to be, most cities in California
are trying to maintain their entire street system with an average PCI of 70 or above.
The street system for the City of Morro Bay currently breaks down as follows:
Street
Classification
Centerline
Miles
Area
(Square Feet)
Percent of
System
Average
PCI
Arterials 7.9 1,531,968 19% 78
Collectors 3.2 526,700 7% 60
Local
Industrial/Commercial
5.5 1,016,700 13% 64
Local Residential 36.9 4,954,810 62% 59
Total 53.4 8,030,178 100% 63
To assist with further analysis and project development, the City was divided into four zones:
North, EastCentral, Downtown and South (see attached zone map). A summary of the
pavements in these zones is presented in the table below:
Zone Centerline
Miles
Area
(Square Feet)
Percent of
System
Average
PCI
North 11.8 1,435,800 18% 56.7
EastCentral 16.3 2,479,460 31% 59.9
Dowtown 12.6 2,427,950 30% 68.6
South 12.8 1,686,968 21% 66.1
Total 53.4 8,030,178 100% 63.3
For this PMP, each street was assigned a treatment action and budget based on the
pavement’s current rating and construction history. The cost or need has been calculated at
$14.4 million to provide the recommended treatments to all streets. Spending this amount would
result in the total system having an average PCI of well over 70. While it is recognized that the
City of Morro Bay does not have the means, budget or resources to spend that amount of
money, the number provides a bench mark for future analysis.
As part of the analysis, the anticipated PCI at various budget levels over 10 years was projected
using the MicroPAVER software. The analysis showed that a yearly funding level of about
$500,000 is required to maintain the street system at its current average condition and it would
require $900,000 annually to increase the overall PCI to 70. Anything less than $500,00 will
mean continued degradation of pavement conditions in the City. The analysis is summarized on
the graph below.
ATTACHMENT 3
• The $14 Million budget amount is the total expenditure required to provide all
recommended repairs.
CURRENT PCI (63)
ATTACHMENT 3
SECTION V: PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Achieve and maintain a PCI of 70 for all City streets: The current level of 63.3 is
below the average condition that most California cities try to maintain. It is also evident
from the level of citizen complaints that our streets need improvement. Achieving an
average PCI of 70 will not eliminate all poor streets, but it will reduce citizen complaints
and provide a more attractive and efficient transportation network.
2. Regularly update the MicroPaver street condition database: All maintenance, repair
and rehabilitation activities should be entered into the MicroPaver database so that
current street conditions can be tracked and project planning facilitated. Coordination
with the Streets Department, who are responsible for pothole repairs and other minor
maintenance activities, will be necessary. A complete reevaluation of the entire street
system should be performed every five years.
3. Encourage use of new technologies and materials in pavement design: For
example, pavement recycling technologies have greatly improved in the last decade,
providing street rehabilitation treatments that are durable, economical and less
damaging to the environment. Micro-surfacing is a relatively new form of slurry seal that
has proven to work well in nearby cities. In Morro Bay, it was used as a maintenance
treatment on North Main Street in November 2010. Staff should keep abreast of new
developments in pavement technologies and incorporate them in future work where
feasible.
PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Institute a regular global maintenance (street sealing) program: The expected life of
a good micro-surface treatment is eight years and a cape seal can be expected to last
10 years. Every street in the City should be sealed every 8 to 10 years unless it is
scheduled for major rehabilitation. Such a maintenance program will need to be phased
in over time, as there are many streets that already exceed this interval and budget does
not allow to treat them all immediately.
2. Implement an effective pothole repair program: Pothole repair prevents water
intrusion into the supporting soil and can also serve as a “stop gap” repair until major
maintenance can be performed. Pothole repair can sometimes involve a simple removal
and replacement of the top layer of asphalt, but more often requires full digout of the
underlying base and reconstruction of the entire pavement profile. Once the area of
pothole patch repairs exceeds 5% of the street area, the street is a candidate for major
rehabilitation. The Streets Division is responsible for pothole repair, which can be
performed either by City crews or by private contractors. Pothole repair requests usually
originate from citizens but a more pro-active approach coordinated with the street
sealing program will enhance both the life of the pothole repair and the seal coat.
3. Implement a regular crack sealing program: Older pavements tend to crack even if
the subgrade is stable. Cracks, however, will allow water to enter the supporting soil and
destabilize the pavement base. A regular crack sealing program will increase the
longevity of streets and delay more costly maintenance and repairs. The Streets Division
has the equipment to perform this task. Unlike potholes, which are often reported by
citizens, cracks are best identified during periodic inventories. The MicroPaver PMS
catalogues cracks that need attention. Sealing cracks prior to microsurfacing or chip
ATTACHMENT 3
seals will extend the life of the new surface.
4. Create a Green Streets program: Street reconstruction is an opportunity to “go green”
through the use of recycled pavement materials and in redesigning drainage to reduce
the amount of polluted runoff that enters our creeks and the storm drain system. Green
streets usually have bike and pedestrian-friendly components. Such a program is often a
good candidate for external grant funding to help stretch City budget dollars. A City
Council- approved grant application to develop a Green Streets program was submitted
to Caltrans in early 2011.
5. Implement a street subsurface evaluation program: Streets that are scheduled for
reconstruction may have adequate materials in the pavement profile to warrant full-depth
reclamation of these materials. Depending on the quality and thickness of the existing
materials that make up the pavement profile, and a suitable binder material can be
designed to be added during the reclamation process to form a strong base. An
evaluation of the pavement profile will provide the necessary data for engineering design
of the recycled base.
6. Install or Upgrade ADA curb ramps: Street repairs are also a good time to update and
add ADA curb ramps to current standards. In some cases, requirements attached to
funding sources or the project is a significant improvement, ADA ramps need to be
updated. Typically, when a street rehabilitation project requires ¾-inch or greater
overlay, then curb ramp upgrades are installed.
7. Modify and/or enforce trench cut standards: Trench cuts can have a significant
impact on street durability. Internal coordination with utility master plan projects will help
reduce damage to recently paved streets due to planned activities, but trenching for
emergency repairs and new developments are inevitable. Diligent enforcement of
current engineering standards for trench backfill including the one-year warranty against
settlement will help minimize trenching impacts to the pavement. The City standards
should also be updated to conform to current material specifications and trench repair
technologies.
8. Coordinate with other programs and departments: Street repair and maintenance
often impacts other activities, programs and City operations. At a minimum, the following
activities should be coordinated with street repair and maintenance:
a. Utility Master Planning and scheduled repairs: Coordination of proposed
street and utility work can avoid counterproductive efforts such as trenching in
newly repaved streets.
b. City Trees: Urban trees are a valuable resource and often the object of
passionate feelings in the City of Morro Bay. Street work may require trimming or
removal of trees to accommodate repairs or work within the drip line. All street
work should comply with the City Tree Regulations within the Municipal Code.
c. Bicycle Traffic: Class 2 bicycle lanes share the paved area of City streets, often
on the outside edge or shoulder. Pavement maintenance and overlays should be
performed such that sharp edges and ridges in the bicycle lane are avoided.
Pavement repair may also present an opportunity to correct or enhance bicycle
lane markings.
d. Non-City Utilities (Cayucos, AT&T, PG&E, etc.): Street work often requires
excavation into the underlying soil or impacts utility poles and holes. Coordination
with impacted utilities is a must.
e. Fire: The Fire department must be notified of street closures during construction
and should be consulted when street work may impact fire hydrants. Blue
ATTACHMENT 3
reflectors adjacent to fire hydrants may need to be replaced where maintenance
or repair results in their damage or removal.
f. Police: The police department must be notified of street closures and parking
restrictions during construction and any long-term changes to parking restrictions
or traffic flow due to street work.
g. Businesses and Residents: Notification of street work should be made well in
advance of the project, especially if any long-term changes are to be made (e.g
parking restrictions). Feedback from impacted business owners and residents
can often be more easily incorporated into the design phase rather than in the
middle of project implementation. Typically, work on streets within the business
district that impacts parking shall be conducted between Labor Day and
Memorial Day.
9. Create a comprehensive 10-year Pavement Maintenance and Rehabilitation
Program: Based on the above policy recommendations, pavement management system
reports, and preliminary field evaluations of the City street system, a comprehensive
plan should be prepared for the upkeep, maintenance and rehabilitation of the streets of
Morro Bay. The program should have several budget alternatives including the use of
current budget amounts projected forward. City Council can then choose amongst the
alternatives with an understanding of how the adopted program will impact the long term
condition of City streets. Though the Program lists projects over a five-year period,
budgeting should plan for ten years of work.
A preliminary street maintenance and repair plan has been created and is included in
Appendix 1 to illustrate how recommended policies and priorities will translate into a
comprehensive program.
ATTACHMENT 3
APPENDIX 1
TEN-YEAR PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE AND REHABILITATION PROGRAM
The annual programs were developed utilizing the MicroPAVER calculated PCI and pavement
management priorities outlined above. An effort was also made to group streets by treatment
type and geographical location. The optimal annual budget for a program that complies with the
policy recommendations of this report is $900,000. Plans for a $500,000 and $250,000 annual
budget have also been developed, as well as a budget that spends $900,000 in the first year,
followed by $250,000 annually thereafter.
The street maintenance and repair plan for the next ten years is based on the policy that seeks
to maximize the impact for every dollar spent on street improvements. Since it is less costly to
maintain good streets than to repair failed streets, the plan initially targets streets that can be
brought up to a very good condition (PCI > 80) at the least unit cost. In later years, streets that
are more severely degraded can be repaired or reconstructed as budget permits.
ANNUAL BUDGET: $900,000
Year One:
The focus of the first year will be on pavement maintenance (micro-surfacing and cape seals)
on streets with minimal to moderate level of distress. The streets selected for the first year of the
program are located in the south and downtown zones of the City. By targeting a constrained
geographic area and using only two treatment methods, we can expect more favorable bids.
Most of the streets to be treated will also require crack sealing and/or site-specific digout repairs
in preparation for the seal coat. Cost of these site-specific repairs are included in the budget.
In addition to pavement maintenance, a “Green Streets” program for reconstruction of streets in
the north side residential areas will be started. It is expected that grant funding will be available
to partially fund this program.
Year Two:
The second year plan is similar to the first, targeting the remaining streets to be given
micro-surface treatment maintenance in the south and downtown zones and doing cape seals of
streets in the north and eastcentral zones. One street is scheduled for an overlay.
Year Three to Year Five
The next three years will target streets that are due for overlays.
Years Six to Ten
At the end of Year Five, the entire street system will be reevaluated and projects will be
prioritized based on that evaluation.
ATTACHMENT 3
Street Treatment Street Treatment Street Treatment Street Treatment Street Treatment
Marina3CapeSeal Toro1 CapeSeal Beach2HOverlay Bonita1 HOverlay Greenwood1 HOverlay
Oak1CapeSeal Formosa1 CapeSeal Pacific2HOverlay Bernardo1 HOverlay Marina1 HOverlay
Olive3 CapeSealJava2CapeSeal Main8 HOverlay Kern1Overlay Elena2 HOverlay
Pacific1 CapeSeal Clarabell1 CapeSeal Hemlock1 Overlay Ironwood1 Overlay Seaview1 HOverlay
Napa1CapeSeal Sequoia1 CapeSealCedar Overlay Beachcomb2 Overlay Market2 HOverlay
Shasta1CapeSeal Capri1 CapeSeal Ironwood3 Overlay
Estero1 CapeSeal Tahiti2 CapeSeal West1 Overlay
Quintana3 CapeSeal Downing1 CapeSealCasitas1 Overlay
Harbor1 CapeSeal SunsetCt1 CapeSeal Errol1Overlay
Butte1 CapeSeal Damar1 CapeSeal Dunbar1 Overlay
Barlow1 CapeSealKoa1CapeSeal Norwich1 Overlay
Madera1CapeSeal Main7 CapeSealAvalon1 Overlay
Pecho1 CapeSealSandalwoo2CapeSeal
Ridgeway1CapeSeal Hillcrest1 CapeSeal
Center1 MicroSurfAzure1 CapeSeal
Merengo1 MicroSurf SequoiaCt1 CapeSeal
SurfAlley1 MicroSurf Sunset3 CapeSeal
Dana1 MicroSurfPark1 CapeSeal
Fresno1MicroSurf Mimosa1 CapeSeal
Marina2 MicroSurf Monterey4 MicroSurf
Bayshore1MicroSurf QuintanaP1 MicroSurf
Quintana2 MicroSurf BellaVist1 MicroSurf
Scott1 MicroSurf Dunes2 MicroSurf
South2 MicroSurf Acacia1 MicroSurf
Embarcade1MicroSurf Walnut1 MicroSurf
Alta1 MicroSurf Scott2 MicroSurf
Balboa1 MicroSurf Vista1 MicroSurf
LasTunas MicroSurfDriftwood2MicroSurf
Morro2MicroSurf Monterey3 MicroSurf
Dunes1 MicroSurf Main10 MicroSurf
Quintana4 MicroSurf Beach1 MicroSurf
Quintana1 MicroSurfMorro5MicroSurf
Fairview1 MicroSurf
PineyLn1 MicroSurf
Bay1 MicroSurf
Luista1 MicroSurf
Embarcadr3MicroSurf
Carmel1MicroSurf
Main13 MicroSurf
Olive2 MicroSurf
Driftwood1MicroSurf
Main9 MicroSurf
Bradley1MicroSurf
Monterey2 MicroSurf
Main12 MicroSurf
Palm1 MicroSurf
Morro1MicroSurf
Kings1 Overlay
5-Year Plan @ 900,000/year
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
ATTACHMENT 3
ANNUAL BUDGET: $500,000
Years One and Two:
The focus of the first two years will be on pavement maintenance (micro-surfacing and cape
seals) on streets with minimal to moderate level of distress. The streets selected for the first
year of the program are located in the south and downtown zones of the City. By targeting a
constrained geographic area and using only two treatment methods, we can expect more
favorable bids. Most of the streets to be treated will also require crack sealing and/or
site-specific digout repairs in preparation for the seal coat. Cost of these site-specific repairs are
included in the budget.
In addition to pavement maintenance, a “Green Streets” program for reconstruction of streets in
the north side residential areas will be started. It is expected that grant funding will be available
to partially fund this program.
Year Three to Year Five
The next three years will target streets that are due for overlays and Microsurfacing on Main
Street in the downtown area.
Years Six to Ten
At the end of Year Five, the entire street system will be reevaluated and projects will be
prioritized based on that evaluation.
ATTACHMENT 3
Street Treatment Street Treatment Street Treatment Street Treatment Street Treatment
Marina3CapeSeal Butte1 CapeSeal Beach2HOverlay Greenwood1 HOverlay Ironwood1 Overlay
Oak1CapeSeal Barlow1 CapeSealBonita1 HOverlay Beachcomb2 Overlay
Olive3 CapeSealMadera1CapeSealMarina1 HOverlay Beach1 MicroSurf
Pacific1 CapeSeal Pecho1 CapeSeal Pacific2HOverlay Main7 MicroSurf
Napa1CapeSealRidgeway1CapeSeal Main8 HOverlay Main9 MicroSurf
Shasta1CapeSeal Center1 MicroSurf Main10 MicroSurf
Estero1 CapeSeal Merengo1 MicroSurf Main11 MicroSurf
Quintana3 CapeSeal SurfAlley1 MicroSurf Main12 MicroSurf
Harbor1 CapeSealDana1 MicroSurf Main13 MicroSurf
Fresno1MicroSurf
Marina2 MicroSurf
Bayshore1MicroSurf
Quintana2 MicroSurf
Scott1 MicroSurf
South2 MicroSurf
Embarcade1 MicroSurf
Alta1 MicroSurf
Balboa1 MicroSurf
LasTunas MicroSurf
Morro2MicroSurf
Dunes1 MicroSurf
Quintana4 MicroSurf
Quintana1 MicroSurf
Monterey4 MicroSurf
QuintanaP1 MicroSurf
BellaVist1 MicroSurf
Dunes2 MicroSurf
Acacia1 MicroSurf
Walnut1 MicroSurf
Scott2 MicroSurf
Vista1 MicroSurf
Driftwood2MicroSurf
5-Year Plan @ 500,000/year
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
ATTACHMENT 3
ANNUAL BUDGET: $250,000
Years One to Four:
The focus of the first four years will be on pavement maintenance (micro-surfacing and cape
seals) on streets with minimal to moderate level of distress. The streets selected are located in
the south and downtown zones of the City. By targeting a constrained geographic area and
using only two treatment methods, we can expect more favorable bids. Most of the streets to be
treated will also require crack sealing and/or site-specific digout repairs in preparation for the
seal coat. Cost of these site-specific repairs are included in the budget.
In addition to pavement maintenance, a “Green Streets” program for reconstruction of streets in
the north side residential areas will be started. It is expected that grant funding will be available
to partially fund this program.
Year Five:
The fifth year targets two arterial streets due for heavy overlays.
Years Six to Ten
At the end of Year Five, the entire street system will be reevaluated and projects will be
prioritized based on that evaluation.
ATTACHMENT 3
Street Treatment Street Treatment Street Treatment Street Treatment Street Treatment
Marina3CapeSealShasta1CapeSeal Butte1 CapeSeal Bayshore1MicroSurf Pacific2HOverlay
Oak1CapeSeal Quintana3 CapeSeal Barlow1 CapeSealAlta1 MicroSurf Main8 HOverlay
Olive3 CapeSeal Harbor1 CapeSealMadera1CapeSealBalboa1 MicroSurf
Pacific1 CapeSeal Pecho1 CapeSealLasTunas MicroSurf
Napa1CapeSeal Ridgeway1CapeSeal Morro2MicroSurf
Estero1 CapeSeal Center1 MicroSurf Dunes1 MicroSurf
Merengo1 MicroSurf Quintana4 MicroSurf
SurfAlley1 MicroSurf Quintana1 MicroSurf
Dana1 MicroSurf Monterey4 MicroSurf
Fresno1MicroSurf QuintanaP1 MicroSurf
Marina2 MicroSurf BellaVist1 MicroSurf
Quintana2 MicroSurf Dunes2 MicroSurf
Scott1 MicroSurf Acacia1 MicroSurf
South2 MicroSurf Walnut1 MicroSurf
Embarcade1 MicroSurf Scott2 MicroSurf
Vista1 MicroSurf
Driftwood2MicroSurf
5-Year Plan @ 250,000/year
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
ATTACHMENT 3
ANNUAL BUDGET: $500,000/$250,000
This budget, which includes a high level of expenditures in the first year, uses accumulated
Measure Q funds during the first year to maximize impact on high use streets. Following years
are funded with general funds.
Year One:
The focus of the first year will be on pavement maintenance (micro-surfacing and cape seals)
on streets with minimal to moderate level of distress. The streets selected for the first year of the
program are located in the south and downtown zones of the City. By targeting a constrained
geographic area and using only two treatment methods, we can expect more favorable bids.
Most of the streets to be treated will also require crack sealing and/or site-specific digout repairs
in preparation for the seal coat. Cost of these site-specific repairs are included in the budget.
In addition to pavement maintenance, a “Green Streets” program for reconstruction of streets in
the north side residential areas will be started. It is expected that grant funding will be available
to partially fund this program.
Year Two to Year Five:
The remaining year plans are similar to the first, targeting the remaining streets to be given
micro-surface treatment maintenance in the south and downtown zones and doing cape seals of
streets in the north and eastcentral zones.
Years Six to Ten
At the end of Year Five, the entire street system will be reevaluated and projects will be
prioritized based on that evaluation.
ATTACHMENT 3
Street Treatment Street Treatment Street Treatment Street Treatment Street Treatment
Marina3CapeSeal Harbor1 CapeSealMadera1CapeSeal Main10 MicroSurf Toro1 CapeSeal
Oak1CapeSeal Butte1 CapeSeal Pecho1 CapeSeal Beach1 MicroSurf Formosa1 CapeSeal
Olive3 CapeSeal Barlow1 CapeSealRidgeway1CapeSeal Morro5MicroSurf Java2CapeSeal
Pacific1 CapeSeal Scott1 MicroSurf Dunes1 MicroSurf Fairview1 MicroSurf Clarabell1 CapeSeal
Napa1CapeSeal South2 MicroSurf Quintana4 MicroSurf PineyLn1 MicroSurf Sequoia1 CapeSeal
Shasta1CapeSealEmbarcade1 MicroSurf Quintana1 MicroSurf Bay1 MicroSurfCapri1 CapeSeal
Estero1 CapeSealAlta1 MicroSurf Monterey4 MicroSurf Luista1 MicroSurf Tahiti2 CapeSeal
Quintana3 CapeSealBalboa1 MicroSurf QuintanaP1 MicroSurfEmbarcadr3MicroSurf Downing1 CapeSeal
Center1 MicroSurf LasTunas MicroSurf BellaVist1 MicroSurfCarmel1MicroSurf SunsetCt1 CapeSeal
Merengo1 MicroSurfMorro2MicroSurf Dunes2 MicroSurf Main13 MicroSurfDamar1 CapeSeal
SurfAlley1 MicroSurf Acacia1 MicroSurf Olive2 MicroSurf Koa1CapeSeal
Dana1 MicroSurf Walnut1 MicroSurfDriftwood1MicroSurf Main7 CapeSeal
Fresno1MicroSurf Scott2 MicroSurf Main9 MicroSurfAzure1 CapeSeal
Marina2 MicroSurf Vista1 MicroSurfBradley1MicroSurf Monterey2 MicroSurf
Bayshore1MicroSurf Driftwood2MicroSurf Palm1 MicroSurf Main12 MicroSurf
Quintana2 MicroSurf Monterey3 MicroSurf Morro1MicroSurf
5-Year Plan @ 500,000 in Year 1, $250,00 in Years 2-5
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
ATTACHMENT 3
APPENDIX 2: PAVEMENT DEFECT DESCRIPTIONS
1. Alligator Cracking (Fatigue)
Description:
Alligator or fatigue cracking is a series of interconnecting cracks caused by fatigue
failure of the asphalt concrete surface under repeated traffic loading. Cracking begins at
the bottom of the asphalt surface (or stabilized base) where tensile stress and strain are
highest under a wheel load. The cracks propagate to the surface initially as a series of
parallel longitudinal cracks. After repeated traffic loading, the cracks connect, forming
many sided, sharp-angled pieces that develop a pattern resembling chicken wire or the
skin of an alligator. The pieces are generally less than 0.5 m (1.5 ft) on the longest side.
Alligator cracking occurs only in areas subjected to repeated traffic loading, such as
wheel paths. (Pattern-type cracking that occurs over an entire area not subjected to
loading is called “block cracking,” which is not a load-associated distress.)
Severity Levels:
L Fine, longitudinal hairline cracks running parallel to each other with no, or
only a few interconnecting cracks. The cracks are not spalled.
M Further development of light alligator cracks into a pattern or network of
cracks that may be lightly spalled.
H Network or pattern cracking has progressed so that the pieces are well
defined and spalled at the edges. Some of the pieces may rock under
traffic.
2. Block Cracking
Description:
Block cracks are interconnected cracks that divide the pavement into approximately
rectangular pieces. The blocks may range in size from approximately 0.3 by 0.3 m (1 by
1 ft) to 3 by 3 m (10 by 10 ft). Block cracking is caused mainly by shrinkage of the
asphalt concrete and daily temperature cycling (which results in daily stress/strain
cycling).. It is not load-associated. Block cracking usually indicates that the asphalt has
hardened significantly. Block cracking normally occurs over a large portion of the
pavement area, but sometimes will occur only in non-traffic areas. This type of distress
differs from alligator cracking in that alligator cracks form smaller, many-sided pieces
with sharp angles.
Severity Levels:
L Blocks are defined by low-severity* cracks.
M Blocks are defined by medium-severity* cracks.
H Blocks are defined by high-severity* cracks.
*See definitions of longitudinal transverse cracking.
3. Bumps and Sags
Description:
Bumps are small, localized, upward displacements of the pavement surface. They are
different from shoves in that shoves are caused by unstable pavement. Bumps, on the
ATTACHMENT 3
other hand, can be caused by several factors, including:
1. Buckling or bulging of underlying PCC slabs in AC overlay over PCC
pavement.
2. Infiltration and buildup of material in a crack in combination with traffic
loading (sometimes called “tenting”)
Sags are small, abrupt, downward displacements of the pavement surface. If bumps
appear in pattern perpendicular to traffic flow and are spaced at less than 3 m (10 ft) ,
the distress is called corrugation. Distortion and displacement that occur over large
areas of the pavement surface, causing large and/or long dips in the pavement should
be recorded at “swelling.”
Severity Levels:
L Bump or sag causes low-severity ride quality.
M Bump or sag causes medium-severity ride quality.
H Bump or sag causes high-severity ride quality.
4. Depressions
Description:
Depressions are localized pavement surface areas with elevations slightly lower than
those of the surrounding pavement. In many instances, light depressions are not
noticeable until after a rain, when ponded water creates a “birdbath” area; on dry
pavement, depressions can be spotted by looking for stains caused by ponding water.
Depressions are created by settlement of the foundation soil or are a result of improper
construction. Depressions cause some roughness, and when deep enough or filled with
water, can cause hydroplaning.
Severity Levels:
Maximum depth of depression
L ½ to 1 inch
M 1 to 2 inches
H more than 2 inches
5. Edge Cracking
Description:
Edge cracks are parallel to and usually within 1 to 1.5 feet of the outer edge of the
pavement. This distress is accelerated by traffic loading and can be caused by a weak
base or subgrade near the edge of the pavement. The area between the crack and
pavement edge is classified as raveled if it is broken up.
Severity Levels:
L Low or medium cracking with no breakup or raveling.
M Medium cracks with some breakup and raveling.
H Considerable breakup or raveling along the edge.
ATTACHMENT 3
6. Joint Reflection Cracking (from PCC slabs)
Description:
Joint reflection cracking occurs in a flexible overlay over an existing crack or joint in a
PCC slab. The cracks occur directly over the underlying cracks or joints.
Severity Levels:
L One of the following conditions exists: (1) non-filled crack width is less
than 3/8 in, or (2) filled crack of any width (filler in satisfactory condition)
M One of the following conditions exists: (1) non-filled crack width is greater
than or equal to 3/8” and less than 3 in.; (2) non-filled crack is less than
or equal to 3 in. surrounded by light and random cracking, or (3) filled
crack is of any width surrounded by light random cracking.
H One of the following conditions exists: (1) any crack filled or non-filled
surrounded by medium- or high-severity random cracking, (2) non-filled
crack greater than 3 in., or (3) a crack of any width where approximately
4 in. of pavement around the crack is severely broken.
7. Lane/Shoulder Drop-off
Description:
Lane/shoulder drop off is a difference in elevation between the pavement edge and the
shoulder. This distress is caused by shoulder erosion, shoulder settlement, or by
building up the roadway without adjusting the shoulder level.
Severity Levels:
L The difference between the pavement edge and shoulder is 1 to 2 in.
M The difference between the pavement edge and shoulder is 2 to 4 in.
H The difference between the pavement edge and shoulder is > 4 in.
8. Longitudinal and Transverse Cracking (Non-PCC Slab Joint
Reflective)
Description:
Longitudinal cracks are parallel to the pavement’s centerline or laydown direction. They
may be caused by:
1. A poorly constructed paving lane joint.
2. Shrinkage of the AC surface due to low temperatures or hardening of the
asphalt and/or daily temperature cycling.
3. A reflective crack caused by cracking beneath the surface course,
including cracks in PCC slabs (but not PCC joints)
Transverse cracks extend across the pavement at approximately right angles to the
pavement centerline or direction of laydown. These types of cracks are not usually
load-associated.
ATTACHMENT 3
Severity Levels:
L One of the following conditions exists: (1) non-filled crack width is less
than 3/8 in, or (2) filled crack of any width (filler in satisfactory condition)
M One of the following conditions exists: (1) non-filled crack width is greater
than or equal to 3/8” and less than 3 in.; (2) non-filled crack is less than
or equal to 3 in. surrounded by light and random cracking, or (3) filled
crack is of any width surrounded by light random cracking.
H One of the following conditions exists: (1) any crack filled or non-filled
surrounded by medium- or high-severity random cracking, (2) non-filled
crack greater than 3 in., or (3) a crack of any width where approximately
4 in. of pavement around the crack is severely broken.
9. Patching and Utility Cut Patching
Description:
A patch is an area of pavement that has been replaced with new material to repair the
existing pavement. A patch is considered a defect no matter how well it is performing (a
patched area or adjacent area usually does not perform as well as an original pavement
section). Generally, some roughness is associated with this distress.
Severity Levels:
L Patch is in good condition and satisfactory. Ride quality is rated as low
severity or better.
M Patch is moderately deteriorated and/or ride quality is rated as medium
severity.
H Patch is badly deteriorated and/or ride quality is rated as high severity.
Needs replacement soon.
10. Polished Aggregate
Description:
Areas of pavement where the portion of aggregate extending above the asphalt binder
is either very small or there are no rough or angular aggregate particles. A polished road
surface will have a reduced level of skid resistance.
Severity Levels:
Not defined
11. Potholes
Description:
Potholes are small, usually less than 30 inches in diameter, bowl shaped depressions in
the pavement surface. They generally have sharp edges and vertical sides near the top
of the hole.
Severity Levels:
The levels of severity for potholes less than 30 inches in diameter are based on both the
diameter and the depth of the pothole, according to the following table.
Average Diameter (in.)
ATTACHMENT 3
Maximum Depth
of Pothole
4 to 8 in.
8 to 18 in.
18 to 30 in.
1/2 to 1 in. L L M
1 to 2 in. L M H
2 in. M M H
12. Rutting
Description:
A rut is a surface depression in the wheel paths. Pavement uplift may occur along the
sides of the rut, but, in many instances, ruts are noticeable only after a rainfall when the
paths are filled with water. Rutting stems from a permanent deformation in any of the
pavement layers or subgrades, usually caused by consolidated or lateral movement of
the materials due to traffic load.
Severity Levels:
Mean Rut Depth;
L 1/4 to 1/2 in.
M 1/2 to 1 in.
H >1 in.
13. Shoving
Description:
Shoving is a permanent, longitudinal displacement of a localized area of the pavement
surface caused by traffic loading. When traffic pushes against the pavement, it produces
a short, abrupt wave in the pavement surface. This distress normally occurs only in
unstable liquid asphalt mix (cutback or emulsion) pavements.
Shoves also occur where asphalt pavements abut PCC pavements; the PCC pavement
increase in length and push the asphalt pavement, causing the shoving.
Severity Levels:
L Shove causes low-severity ride quality.
M Shove causes medium-severity ride quality.
H Shove causes high-severity ride quality.
14. Swell
Description:
Swell is characterized by an upward bulge in the pavement’s surface. A swell may occur
sharply over a small area or as a longer, gradual wave. Either type of swell can be
accompanied by surface cracking. A swell is usually caused by soil swelling in the
subgrade.
Severity Levels:
L Swell is barely visible and has a minor effect on the pavement’s ride
ATTACHMENT 3
quality.
M Swell can be observed without difficulty and has a significant effect on
the pavement’s ride quality.
H Swell can be readily observed and severely affects the pavement’s ride
quality.
15. Weathering and Raveling
Description:
Weathering and raveling are the wearing away of the pavement surface due to a loss of
asphalt or dislodged aggregate particles. These distresses indicate that either the
asphalt binder has hardened appreciably or that a poor-quality mixture is present. In
addition, raveling may be caused by certain types of traffic, e.g., tracked vehicles.
Softening of the surface and dislodging of the aggregates due to oil spillage are also
included under raveling.
Severity Levels:
L Aggregate or binder has started to wear away. In some areas, the
surface is starting to pit. In the case of oil spillage, the oil spillage, the oil
stain can be seen, but the surface is hard and cannot be penetrated with
a coin.
M Aggregate or binder has worn away. The surface texture is moderately
rough and pitted. In the case of oil spillage, the surface is soft and can be
penetrated with a coin.
H Aggregate or binder has been worn away considerably. The surface
texture is very rough and severely pitted. The pitted areas are less than 4
inches in diameter and less than ½ inch deep; pitted areas larger than
this are counted as potholes. In the case of oil spillage, the asphalt
binder has lost its binding effect and the aggregate has become loose.
ATTACHMENT 3
9
ATTACHMENT 2: Schedules of Future Street Rehabilitation Projects
FUTURE STREET WORK
Street Treatment Cost Running Total
Harbor1 CapeSeal $ 110,400 $ 110,400
Napa1 CapeSeal $ 84,960 $ 195,360
Pacific1 CapeSeal $ 40,000 $ 235,360
Quintana3 CapeSeal $ 70,865 $ 306,225
Shasta CapeSeal $ 72,770 $ 378,995
Acacia MicroSurf $ 9,065 $ 388,060
Barlow CapeSeal $ 10,680 $ 398,740
Bayshore MicroSurf $ 9,716 $ 408,456
BellaVist MicroSurf $ 8,166 $ 416,622
Butte CapeSeal $ 14,050 $ 430,672
Driftwood2 MicroSurf $ 18,700 $ 449,372
Dunes1 MicroSurf $ 20,997 $ 470,369
Dunes2 MicroSurf $ 24,468 $ 494,837
Madera CapeSeal $ 11,420 $ 506,257
Monterey4 MicroSurf $ 9,521 $ 515,778
Morro2 MicroSurf $ 11,675 $ 527,453
Pecho CapeSeal $ 15,420 $ 542,873
Quintana1 MicroSurf $ 44,925 $ 587,798
Quintana4 MicroSurf $ 22,965 $ 610,763
QuintanaP1 MicroSurf $ 3,860 $ 614,623
Ridgeway CapeSeal $ 37,490 $ 652,113
Scott1 MicroSurf $ 11,870 $ 663,983
South2 MicroSurf $ 4,620 $ 668,603
SurfAlley MicroSurf $ 4,556 $ 673,159
Vista MicroSurf $ 3,882 $ 677,041
Walnut MicroSurf $ 4,320 $ 681,361
Kings Overlay $ 187,500 $ 868,861
Bonita HOverlay $ 66,500 $ 935,361
Pacific2 HOverlay $ 91,000 $ 1,026,361
Greenwood HOverlay $ 518,700 $ 1,545,061
Beach1 MicroSurf $ 22,724 $ 1,567,785
eachcomb2 Overlay $ 198,000 $ 1,765,785
Ironwood1 Overlay $ 142,500 $ 1,908,285
Main10 MicroSurf $ 31,078 $ 1,939,363
Main12 MicroSurf $ 7,000 $ 1,946,363
Main13 MicroSurf $ 30,449 $ 1,976,812
Main7 MicroSurf $ 70,500 $ 2,047,312
Main9 MicroSurf $ 12,465 $ 2,059,777
ATTACHMENT 3
10
ATTAHMENT 3: 2012 Street Rehabilitation Project Location Map
ATTACHMENT 3
CITY OF MORRO BAY
2012 STREET REHABILITATION PROGRAM
STREETS REHABILITATED ARE SHOWN AS SOLID BLACK LINES
NOT SHOWN: TIDE AND MIMOSA STREETS
N.T.S.
Public Services Department DATE: MAY 3, 2012
REVISED: 9/28/12
HARBOR ST
PACIFIC ST
MARINA ST
BEACH ST
ATTACHMENT 3
11
ATTACHMENT 4: Specific Project Sites
4” Sidewalk & Curbs/Gutter Repair
1906 Main
1910 Main
2300 Main
2220 Main
1260 Main
354 Quintana
Napa/Harbor
4” Sidewalk Repair
2598 Main
2700 Main
2848 Main
2630 Main
Tree Well Repair
(9) tree wells between 1906 - 2848 Main
Tree Trimming Work Request Summary
9/1/2012 M Trees trimming 245 Morro Bay Blvd
M "280 Morro Bay Blvd
M "290 Terra St
M "332 MB Blvd
M "Harbor and Monterey
M "370 Quintana
M "580 Olive
M "660 Harbor - removed already
M "736 Main St.
M "790 Luisita
M "800 Morro Bay Blvd
M "310 MB Blvd
M "955 Napa Ave A - USA Already
M "975 Pecho St - Done already - grind stump
M "LK
M "Bike Path - Hwy 41 hear shoreline
M "2426 Elm St.
M "1098 Main St. - already done
M "Post Office - only on walk
M "Amchor/Pine
M "453 Estero -evluate-done
M "1001 Allesandro
M "969 Pacific St. - Morro Bay & Kern
M "2511 Juniper
M "Market (near Surf St.)
M "2980 Ironwood - done already
M "3180 Mindoro
M "North Main - Lolo's - Tree OK - Concrete Lifting
M "2730 Dogwood Ave - Tree is OK
M "2845 Hemlock - Tree is OK for now
M "898 Main - Harbor and Main - Tree Is OK
M "921 Pecho St. Tree is OK
M "461 Fairview - possible cand for removal
M "Pacific @ Bay
M "Pecho and Madera - removed already
M "Del Mar Park
M "365 Quintana
M "2269 Emerald
M "2580 Juniper
M "022 Andros St.
ATTACHMENT 3
Prepared by: __RL__ Dept. Review: RL__
City Manager Review:______
City Attorney’s Review:_____
Staff Report
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council DATE: March 20, 2013
FROM: Rob Livick, PE/PLS - Public Services Director/City Engineer
SUBJECT: Discussion of Potential Water and Sewer Rate Increase
RECOMMENDATION
Provide direction to staff to commence the analysis of Water and Sewer rates for potential
increases and prepare a schedule for the requisite Proposition 218 protest vote.
FISCAL IMPACT
Both the water and sewer funds have upcoming required future expenses for which the current
rate structures will not provide adequate funding. Additionally, the current rate structures of
both revenue streams do not produce adequate funds to meet debt coverage ratios.
DISCUSSION
Water Rates
The City’s water rates have not been increased since 1994. During that same time operational
expenses have increased more than 200%. For the past four fiscal years, the City has not met
its obligation to the State Water project for the debt coverage ratio. The City is required to
earn/charge monies through rate payers so that the amount taken in is 1.25 times more than the
amount required for operational expenses. Currently, this debt coverage ratio is only at 0.74
times the amount needed. Additionally, there are capital project needs within the system that
are necessary to maintain a safe and dependable water supply, including Desalinization Plant
upgrades and replacement of the Nutmeg Water Tank.
Sewer Rates
In October 2007, the City Council adopted a schedule of sewer rate increases to fund the
construction of the wastewater treatment plant at the current site. Due to events that have
occurred since that adopted increase, including the denial of the Coastal Development Permit
for the wastewater treatment plant at the current location and the community’s desire to
construct a new Water Reclamation Facility away from the coast, the assumptions used in the
2007 rate increase are no longer adequate . In late 2010/early 2011, finance staff worked with
RBC Capital to verify debt service coverage in anticipation of entering into a State Revolving
Fund loan, and our revenues in excess of our expenditures were insufficient to meet debt
coverage ratios. In November 2012, the Public Services Director prepared a memo to City
Council, advising them of the potential rate concerns with relocating the new Water
AGENDA NO: D-6
MEETING DATE: March 26, 2013
2
Reclamation Facility (WRF) to the Righetti property. The estimated rate adjustment of
relocating to a new site is preliminarily estimated at 38-percent above the rate structure
currently in place that was needed to build at the existing site. This proposed rate increase in
not only needed to relocate and construct the new WRF, but also to pay for the Major
Maintenance and Repairs to maintain operations at the existing plant, as well as meeting debt
coverage ratios for financing the project.
CONCLUSION
If so directed, and based on the projected needs for the maintenance of our water system, the
relocation and construction of the water reclamation facility as well as continued maintenance
of our current wastewater treatment plant and debt coverage ratio concerns, staff will bring
back options for rate structures and an implementation plan including a Prop 218 protest vote
within 120 days for Council’s consideration.
Prepared by: __JI__ Dept. Review: __
City Manager Review:______
City Attorney’s Review:_____
Mayor’s Report
TO: Honorable City Council DATE: March 21, 2013
FROM: Jamie L. Irons - Mayor
SUBJECT: Water Reclamation Facility (WRF) Project Status Update and Discussion
RECOMMENDATION
Discuss in open session, the progress to date on the Water Reclamation Facility (WRF) and
provide direction to staff as necessary.
DISCUSSION
As requested by Council, this item will be placed on the Council agenda at each meeting to
openly discuss the progress on the Water Reclamation Facility project. Direction to staff will
be given as deemed necessary.
AGENDA NO: D-7
MEETING DATE: March 26, 2013