Cities Index.
Agenda packet

Lincoln City Council
September 23, 2025

Document
Agenda packet
Meeting
September 23, 2025
Body
Lincoln City Council
Pages
15
Original file
27.9 MB
Text extracted from the city's file for reading and search. Open the original on d3n9y02raazwpg.cloudfront.net. That file is the official record.

Hazardous Materials
Low Risk
A single fire unit can manage a low-risk hazardous materials incident involving carbon monoxide alarms and other unknown hazmat investigations without symptomatic victims, less than 20 gallons of fuel, a natural gas meter incident, downed power lines, equipment, or electrical problems, or attempted burning. Automatic alarms that may originate from a hazardous material.

Moderate Risk
A two-unit response is required to control or mitigate a moderate-risk hazardous materials incident. A hazardous materials team usually does not require direct support. This type of incident involves a carbon monoxide alarm with symptomatic patients, a fuel spill of 20–55 gallons, or a gas or petroleum products pipeline break that does not threaten any exposures.

High Risk
A multiple-unit response with a hazmat team is required to control or mitigate a high-risk hazardous materials incident. Support is needed for a Level 2 hazmat incident that involves establishing operational zones (hot/warm/cold) and assigning multiple support divisions and groups. This response includes a release with 3–8 victims, gas leaks in a structure, hazmat alarm releases with victims, flammable gas or liquid pipeline breaks with exposures, fuel spills greater than 55 gallons, fuel spills in underground drainage or sewer systems, transportation or industrial chemical releases, or radiological incidents. Additional assistance may be required to expand operations past the identified critical tasks. 400
Master Plan & CRA-SOC Lincoln Fire Department
237

Maximum Risk
A multiple-unit response is required to control or mitigate a maximum-risk hazardous materials incident. Support is required from an on-duty hazmat team and their specialized equipment. This type of incident involves establishing operational zones (hot/warm/cold) and assigning multiple support divisions and groups. Examples include nine or more contaminated or exposed victims, a large storage tank failure, a hazmat railcar failure, or a weapon of mass destruction incident. This incident will require multiple alarms and may expand beyond the identified critical tasking. Recall of off-duty personnel or assistance from auto or mutual aid may occur during a disaster or when additional alarms and command staff are needed.

Wildland Urban Interface
Low Risk
A single fire unit can manage a low-risk wildland firefighting incident involving a fire minor in scope, structures not threatened, and Red Flag conditions do not exist. These include low- risk wildland or grass fires, including an outside smoke investigation, illegal or controlled burns, or small vegetation fires.

Moderate Risk
Multiple units are needed to manage a moderate-risk wildland firefighting incident involving a significant fire in brush, a brush pile at a chipping site, grass, or cultivated vegetation. Red Flag conditions do not exist, and structures may or may not be threatened.

High Risk
Multiple units or alarms are needed to manage a high-risk wildland firefighting incident. The level is associated with Red Flag warnings with structures that may or may not be threatened. This fire involves a significant wildfire in brush, grasses, and cultivated vegetation. And woodland areas. Additional alarm assignment, command staff, recall of off-duty personnel, and mutual aid assistance may require the operations to extend beyond the identified critical tasks.
401
Master Plan & CRA-SOC Lincoln Fire Department
238

Appendix C: Table of Figures
Figure 1: Lincoln, California ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 2 Figure 2: Population Density of Lincoln (2024) ................................ ................................ ............. 3 Figure 3: LFD Organization Chart (2024) ................................ ................................ ...................... 6 Figure 4: LFD Response Area ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 7 Figure 5: Mutual & Automatic Aid Resources Available to LFD ................................ ................. 8 Figure 6: Mutual & Automatic Aid Fire Stations ................................ ................................ ........... 9 Figure 7: FY 2021–FY 2025 Revenue ................................ ................................ ............................ 12 Figure 8: FY 2021–FY 2025 Expenses for LFD................................ ................................ ................ 12 Figure 9: Overtime Percentage of Salary Expense ................................ ................................ ... 13 Figure 10: Planning for the Future ................................ ................................ ............................... 19 Figure 11: LFD Staffing ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 25 Figure 12: Critical Task Analysis—Risk Level Description ................................ ............................ 30 Figure 13: Critical Task Analysis—Low Fire Risk ................................ ................................ ........... 31 Figure 14: Alarm Assignments—Low Fire Risk Incident ................................ .............................. 31 Figure 15: Critical Task Analysis—Moderate Fire Risk ................................ ................................ . 32 Figure 16: Alarm Assignments—Moderate Fire Risk Incident ................................ .................... 32 Figure 17: Critical Task Analysis—High Fire Risk ................................ ................................ .......... 33 Figure 18: Alarm Assignments—High Fire Risk Incident................................ .............................. 33 Figure 19: Critical Task Analysis—Maximum Fire Risk ................................ ................................ . 34 Figure 20: Alarm Assignments—Maximum Fire Risk Incident ................................ .................... 34 Figure 21: Critical Task Analysis—Low EMS Risk ................................ ................................ .......... 35 Figure 22: Alarm Assignments—Low EMS Risk Incident ................................ ............................. 35 Figure 23: Critical Task Analysis—Moderate EMS Risk ................................ ................................ 36 Figure 24: Alarm Assignments—Moderate EMS Risk Incident ................................ ................... 36 Figure 25: Critical Task Analysis—High EMS Risk ................................ ................................ ......... 37 Figure 26: Alarm Assignments—High EMS Risk Incident ................................ ............................ 37 Figure 27: Critical Task Analysis—Maximum EMS Risk ................................ ................................ 38 Figure 28: Alarm Assignments—Maximum EMS Risk Incident ................................ ................... 38 Figure 29: Critical Task Analysis—Low Wildland Risk ................................ ................................ .. 39 Figure 30: Alarm Assignments—Low Wildland Risk Incident ................................ ..................... 39 Figure 31: Critical Task Analysis—Moderate Wildland Risk ................................ ........................ 40 402
Master Plan & CRA-SOC Lincoln Fire Department
239

Figure 32: Alarm Assignments—Moderate Wildland Risk Incident ................................ ........... 40 Figure 33: Critical Task Analysis—High Wildland Risk ................................ ................................ . 41 Figure 34: Alarm Assignments—High Wildland Risk Incident ................................ .................... 41 Figure 35: Critical Task Analysis—Low Technical Rescue Risk ................................ ................... 42 Figure 36: Alarm Assignments—Low Technical Rescue Risk Incident ................................ ...... 42 Figure 37: Critical Task Analysis—Moderate Technical Rescue Risk................................ ......... 43 Figure 38: Alarm Assignments—Moderate Technical Rescue Risk Incident ............................ 43 Figure 39: Critical Task Analysis—High Technical Rescue Risk ................................ .................. 44 Figure 40: Alarm Assignments—High Technical Rescue Risk Incident ................................ ..... 44 Figure 41: Critical Task Analysis—Maximum Technical Rescue Risk ................................ ......... 45 Figure 42: Alarm Assignments—Maximum Technical Rescue Risk Incident ............................ 45 Figure 43: Critical Task Analysis—Low HazMat Risk ................................ ................................ .... 46 Figure 44: Alarm Assignments—Low HazMat Risk Incident ................................ ....................... 46 Figure 45: Critical Task Analysis—Moderate HazMat Risk ................................ ......................... 47 Figure 46: Alarm Assignments—Moderate HazMat Risk Incident ................................ ............. 47 Figure 47: Critical Task Analysis—High HazMat Risk ................................ ................................ ... 48 Figure 48: Alarm Assignments—High HazMat Risk Incident ................................ ...................... 48 Figure 49: Critical Task Analysis—Maximum HazMat Risk ................................ .......................... 49 Figure 50: Alarm Assignments—Maximum HazMat Risk Incident ................................ ............. 49 Figure 51: Critical Task Analysis—Low ARFF Risk ................................ ................................ ......... 50 Figure 52: Alarm Assignments—Low ARFF Risk Incident ................................ ............................ 50 Figure 53: Critical Task Analysis—Moderate ARFF Risk ................................ .............................. 51 Figure 54: Alarm Assignments—Moderate ARFF Risk Incident ................................ .................. 51 Figure 55: Critical Task Analysis—High ARFF Risk ................................ ................................ ........ 52 Figure 56: Alarm Assignments—High ARFF Risk Incident ................................ ........................... 52 Figure 57: Critical Task Analysis—Maximum ARFF Risk ................................ ............................... 53 Figure 58: Alarm Assignments—Maximum Fire Risk Incident ................................ .................... 53 Figure 59: Criteria Utilized to Determine Fire Station Condition ................................ ................ 55 Figure 60: LFD Station 33 ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 56 Figure 61: LFD Station 34 ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 57 Figure 62: LFD Station 35 ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 58 Figure 63: Summary of FFD Fire Stations ................................ ................................ ..................... 59 Figure 64: Criteria Used to Determine Apparatus & Vehicle Condition ................................ .. 61 403
Master Plan & CRA-SOC Lincoln Fire Department
240

Figure 65: Apparatus Inventory ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 62 Figure 66: Command & Staff Vehicles ................................ ................................ ....................... 62 Figure 67: NFPA 1730 Inspection Frequency ................................ ................................ .............. 71 Figure 68: Occupancy Classifications ................................ ................................ ........................ 72 Figure 69: The Community Risk Assessment Process ................................ ................................ .. 75 Figure 70: FEMA & USFA’s National Fire Service Professional Development Model ............... 76 Figure 71: LFD Training Hours (2024) ................................ ................................ ............................ 80 Figure 72: Data Skew ................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 87 Figure 73: LFD Data Skew Evaluation ................................ ................................ ......................... 88 Figure 74: Total Incident Count (FY2021–FY2024) ................................ ................................ ...... 90 Figure 75: Total Incident Density (FY2021–FY2024) ................................ ................................ .... 91 Figure 76: Rescue-Medical (300) Incident Density (FY2021–FY2024) ................................ ....... 92 Figure 77: Fire (100) Incident Distribution (FY2021–FY2024) ................................ ....................... 93 Figure 78: Top Five Most Common Incident Locations (FY2021–FY2024) ................................ 94 Figure 79: Annual Incident Volume (FY2021–FY2024) ................................ ............................... 94 Figure 80: Monthly Call Percentage (FY2021–FY2024) ................................ .............................. 95 Figure 81: Incident Volume by Day of the Week (FY2021–FY2024) ................................ .......... 95 Figure 82: Incident Heat Map by Month and Weekday (FY2021–FY2024) .............................. 96 Figure 83: Incident Volume by Hour (FY2021–FY2024) ................................ .............................. 97 Figure 84: Incident Density by Hour & Day of Week (FY2021–FY2024) ................................ ..... 98 Figure 85: 5 Mile Travel Distance from All Stations ................................ ................................ ... 100 Figure 86: 1.5 Mile ISO Engine Coverage ................................ ................................ ................. 102 Figure 87: Incident Volume by Apparatus Type (FY2021–FY2024) ................................ ......... 103 Figure 88: Incident Volume by Frontline Engine (FY2021–FY2024)................................ .......... 104 Figure 89: Average Incident Commit Time by Apparatus (FY2021–FY2024) ......................... 105 Figure 90: UHU and Average Responses (FY2021–FY2024) ................................ ..................... 106 Figure 91: Incident Concurrency FY2024 ................................ ................................ ................. 107 Figure 92: Incident Metrics Table ................................ ................................ .............................. 109 Figure 93: Call Processing by Incident Type (FY2021–FY2024) ................................ ................ 111 Figure 94: Call Processing by Hour with Volume Reference (FY2021–FY2024) ...................... 112 Figure 95: Turnout Time by Apparatus Type and Incident Category (FY2021–FY2024) ........ 113 Figure 96: Turnout Time by Shift (FY2021–FY2024) ................................ ................................ .... 114 Figure 97: Turnout Time by Hour with Workload Reference (FY2021–FY2024) ....................... 115 404
Master Plan & CRA-SOC Lincoln Fire Department
241

Figure 98: 4 & 8 Minute Modeled Travel Times ................................ ................................ ........ 116 Figure 99: Incidents and CAD Response Zones (FY2021-FY2024) ................................ ........... 118 Figure 100: First-Due Travel by Type & Zone (FY2021–FY2024) ................................ ................ 119 Figure 101: Annual Travel Time Performance by Type (FY2021–FY2024) ............................... 120 Figure 102: Travel Time by Hour with Workload Reference (FY2021–FY2024) ........................ 121 Figure 103: First Three Units Travel Time (FY2021–FY2024) ................................ ........................ 122 Figure 104: Effective Response Force—8 Minute Travel Time ................................ ................. 123 Figure 105: Total Time by Incident Category (FY2021–FY2024) ................................ .............. 125 Figure 106: Total Response Time by Hour (FY2021–FY2024) ................................ .................... 125 Figure 107: Total Response Time by District and Year (FY2021–FY2024) ................................ 126 Figure 108: Fire Incident Evaluation Chart ................................ ................................ ............... 127 Figure 109: 20-Year Population Trends with 95% Confidence Bands ................................ ..... 129 Figure 110: Population Distribution (Future) ................................ ................................ ............. 130 Figure 111: Service Demand Projection to 2033 with 95% Confidence Bands ..................... 131 Figure 112: Growth versus Reflex Time ................................ ................................ ..................... 134 Figure 113: Cardiac Arrest Sequence ................................ ................................ ...................... 135 Figure 114: Population Estimates (2014–2024) ................................ ................................ ......... 140 Figure 115: Population Density ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 141 Figure 116: Age Risks ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 143 Figure 117: Gender Percentage by Age ................................ ................................ ................. 144 Figure 118: Population with a Disability ................................ ................................ .................... 145 Figure 119: Language Barriers ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 146 Figure 120: Population in Poverty ................................ ................................ ............................. 147 Figure 121: Population without Insurance ................................ ................................ ................ 148 Figure 122: Education Levels ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 149 Figure 123: Race and Ethnicity ................................ ................................ ................................ . 150 Figure 124: Owner and Renter Occupied Housing ................................ ................................ . 151 Figure 125: Age of Housing ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 152 Figure 126: Housing Units per Building ................................ ................................ ...................... 153 Figure 127: Average Monthly High Temperatures (2011–2023) ................................ .............. 154 Figure 128: Average Monthly Low Temperature (2011–2023) ................................ ................ 155 Figure 129: National Weather Service Heat Index Chart ................................ ........................ 156 Figure 130: Average Monthly Wind Speeds (2011–2023) ................................ ........................ 157 405
Master Plan & CRA-SOC Lincoln Fire Department
242

Figure 131: Wind Rose ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 157 Figure 132: Average Monthly Precipitation (2011–2023) ................................ ........................ 158 Figure 133: Drought Conditions ................................ ................................ ................................ 159 Figure 134: Local Responsibility Areas ................................ ................................ ...................... 163 Figure 135: Fire Hazard Severity Zones................................ ................................ ...................... 164 Figure 136: Flood Risks ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 166 Figure 137: Seismic Hazards ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 168 Figure 138: Hazardous Materials Tier II Locations ................................ ................................ ..... 171 Figure 139: Major Roadways ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 173 Figure 140: Energy Systems ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 175 Figure 141: Rail Lines and Crossings ................................ ................................ .......................... 176 Figure 142: Hydranted Area ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 178 Figure 143: Wastewater Treatment Facility ................................ ................................ .............. 179 Figure 144: Communication Facilities ................................ ................................ ...................... 181 Figure 145: Regional Housing Needs Allocation (2021–2029) ................................ ................. 184 Figure 146: City of Lincoln Zoning ................................ ................................ ............................. 186 Figure 147: Project Student for the Village and Infill Development ................................ ....... 188 Figure 148: School Locations................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 188 Figure 149: Assembly Occupancies ................................ ................................ ......................... 190 Figure 150: Clinical Facilities and Hospitals ................................ ................................ .............. 192 Figure 151: Congregant Care/Nursing Homes ................................ ................................ ........ 193 Figure 152: Multi-Family Housing Units ................................ ................................ ...................... 195 Figure 153: Buildings Three Stories or More ................................ ................................ ............... 196 Figure 154: Buildings 20,000 Square Feet and Greater ................................ ........................... 197 Figure 155: Buildings with Large Fire Flows (> 2,500 gallons per minute) ............................... 198 Figure 156: ISO Earned & Available Credits for LFD ................................ ................................ 199 Figure 157: California ISO Classifications ................................ ................................ .................. 200 Figure 158: Three-Axis Risk Classification Process ................................ ................................ ..... 202 Figure 159: Three Axis Scoring ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 203 Figure 160: Probability or Likelihood of Occurrence ................................ ............................... 203 Figure 161: Consequence to the Community ................................ ................................ ......... 204 Figure 162: Impact on Operational Forces ................................ ................................ .............. 204 Figure 163: Fire Response Risk Assessment ................................ ................................ ............... 205 406
Master Plan & CRA-SOC Lincoln Fire Department
243

Figure 164: Fire Three-Axis Risk Classifications ................................ ................................ .......... 205 Figure 165: EMS Response Risk Assessment ................................ ................................ .............. 206 Figure 166: EMS Three-Axis Risk Classifications ................................ ................................ ......... 206 Figure 167: Technical Rescue Response Risk Assessment ................................ ....................... 207 Figure 168: Technical Rescue Three-Axis Risk Classifications ................................ .................. 207 Figure 169: Hazardous Materials Response Risk Assessment ................................ .................. 208 Figure 170: Hazardous Materials Three-Axis Risk Classifications ................................ .............. 208 Figure 171: Wildland Fires Response Risk Assessment ................................ .............................. 209 Figure 172: Wildland Fires 3-Axis Risk Classifications ................................ ................................ 209 Figure 173: ARFF Response Risk Assessment ................................ ................................ ............. 210 Figure 174: ARFF Risk Classifications ................................ ................................ .......................... 210 Figure 175: LFD Property Loss ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 211 Figure 176: Fires per 1,000 Population ................................ ................................ ...................... 211 Figure 177: Intentionally Set Fires (2021–2023) ................................ ................................ ......... 212 Figure 178: Initial Engine Company Salary and Benefits Estimate ................................ ......... 217 Figure 179: Study Area with Future Fire Stations ................................ ................................ ...... 218 Figure 180: 1.5-Mile Travel - Extended ................................ ................................ ...................... 219

407
Lincoln, CA

MASTER PLAN
Community Risk
Assessment:

Standard of Cover
408
FR
Purpose and Approach
2 AP Triton, LLC
•The purpose of a Master Plan is to understand where the city is in relation to:
• The risks the community faces today.
• Anticipate community growth (and therefore risk growth). • Recommend steps to position the Lincoln Fire Department to address that growth in advance with appropriate resources and infrastructure.
•In short, a Master Plan keeps the fire department and
the City from lagging behind community growth and
development.
409
FR
Process
3 AP Triton, LLC
•The Triton Team analyzed the data provided by the
departments as well as others to determine the
current levels of response performance.
•From this analysis, the team identified factors
influencing risk and response performance and has
identified opportunities for delivery system
improvement.
410
FR
Description of Community Served
4 AP Triton, LLC
•Resident population: Approximately 53,231
•Approximately 20 square miles
•Lincoln incorporated in 1890
•Operates from three fire stations
411
FR
Services Provided
5 AP Triton, LLC
•Traditional structural fire suppression
•EMS Response at the basic life support level
•Hazardous materials response at awareness level
•Life-safety programs (inspections, plan reviews)
•Community Risk Reduction
412
FR
Study
Area
6 AP Triton, LLC
413
FR
Population Density
7 AP Triton, LLC
414
FRFinancial Overview
8 AP Triton, LLC
•Funded through the city’s general fund and CIP
•Funding for some staff position from the ARPA
•Village 5A impact
•Building a new fire station
•Hiring additional personnel
•Puchasing a new apparatus and equipment
415
FRStations Overview
9 AP Triton, LLC
•Station 33 is 17-years old and is in good condition
•Station 34 is 17-years old and serves as the
headquarters for LFD
•Station 35 is 24-years old is the smallest of the three stations
416
FRApparatus Overview
10 AP Triton, LLC
•Apparatus Condition
 All three frontline engines are in good condition
 A new engine (2028), grass (2026), and brush
(2026) apparatus are on order
•There is no ladder truck
•The reserve engines are in fair condition
•The Type 3 and 6 engines are in good or poor
condition
417
FRTechnology
11 AP Triton, LLC
•LFD utilizes ImageTrend as its records management
system.
•The apparatus have mobile computers
•The department is transitioning to Tablet Command
pre-incident planning software for target hazards
418
Service
Delivery &
Performance
419
FRService Demand by Type (FY 2021-24)
13 AP Triton, LLC
Incident (NFIRS Group) Quantity % Total Responses
Lincoln Fire Department Responses
Fire (100) 580 2.35%
Overpressure (200) 5 0.02%
Rescue-Medical (300) 16,768 68.06%
Hazardous condition (400) 243 0.99%
Service (500) 3,214 13.04%
Good Intent (600) 2,621 10.64%
False Alarm (700) 1,185 4.81%
Disaster (800) 8 0.03%
Special (900) 14 0.06%
Total Responses 24,638 100%
Mutual Aid
Auto and Mutual Aid Received 246 1.00%
Auto and Mutual Aid Given1 1,030 4.18%
420
FRResponse Workload History (2021-24)
14 AP Triton, LLC
421
FR
Incidents by Hour of the Day (2021-24)
15 AP Triton, LLC
422
FR
Service Demand by Day of the Week (2021-24)
16 AP Triton, LLC
423
FR
Service Demand by Month (2021-24)
17 AP Triton, LLC
424
FR
Service Demand
by Day and Time
(2021-24)
18 AP Triton, LLC
Hour Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
0–1
1–2
2–3
3–4
4–5
5–6
6–7
7–8
8–9
9–10
10–11
11–12
12–13
13–14
14–15
15–16
16–17
17–18
18–19
19–20
20–21
21–22
22–23
23–24
425
FR
Service Demand - All
Incident Types
(2021-24)
19 AP Triton, LLC
426
FR
Service Demand –
Fires
(2021-24)
20 AP Triton, LLC
427
FR
Service Demand -
EMS
(2021-24)
21 AP Triton, LLC
428
FR
5-Mile Fire Station
Travel Distance
22 AP Triton, LLC
429
FR

1.5-Mile ISO
Engine Distance
23 AP Triton, LLC
430
FR
NFPA 1710
24 AP Triton, LLC
431
FR
Travel Time
4 & 8 minutes
25 AP Triton, LLC
432
FR911 Center Call
Processing Times
26 AP Triton, LLC
433
FRTurnout Times for
All Incidents
27 AP Triton, LLC
434
FRTurnout Times by Hour
with Workload Reference
28 AP Triton, LLC
435
FRFirst-Due Travel by Incident
Types & Zone(2021-24)
29 AP Triton, LLC
436
FRTotal Response
Time by Hour
30 AP Triton, LLC
437
FR
8-Minutes Effective
Response Force
31 AP Triton, LLC
438
FR
Incident Concurrency
32 AP Triton, LLC
Number of Working
Incidents
Historical Percent
Likelihood
2 24.5%
3 4.3%
4 0.6%
5 0.1%
More than 5 0.1%
439
FR
Population Projection
33 AP Triton, LLC
440
FR
Population Density
Projection
34 AP Triton, LLC
441
FR
Incident Volume Projection
35 AP Triton, LLC
442
Customer
Survey
443
FR
Community Survey Demographics
37 AP Triton, LLC
• 182 responses to the survey
• 96% were Lincoln residents
• 12% were business owners
• 63% were female
• 79% were White/Caucasian
• 10% were Hispanic/Latino
• 29% were 65 and older, and 28% were age 35-44
444
FRReceiving Services
38 AP Triton, LLC
445
FRReceiving Services
39 AP Triton, LLC
446
FRImportance of Services
40 AP Triton, LLC
447
FRPlanning Considerations
41 AP Triton, LLC
448
FR
Community Survey Comments
42 AP Triton, LLC
• What are your top three expectations for the fire department? • Rapid Response Times
• Highly Trained Personnel
• Proper Equipment and Resources
• Other Themes
• Community Safety and Fire Prevention
• Professionalism and Compassion
• Adequate Staffing and funding
449
FR
Community Survey Comments
43 AP Triton, LLC
• What does the fire department currently do well?
• Emergency Response & Quick Arrival
• Professionalism & Training
• Community Engagement
• Other Themes
• Compassion and Friendliness
• Resourcefulness Despite Staffing Challenges
• Fire Prevention & Public Education
450
FR
Community Survey Comments
44 AP Triton, LLC
• What changes or developments would you like to see in the department’s services over the next three to five years?
• Expand staffing, stations, and EMS capabilities to meet the demands of population growth and ensure timely, effective emergency response. • Enhance operational readiness by improving response times, adding specialized equipment like ladder trucks, and increasing attention to hazardous conditions and fire prevention.
• Strengthen community safety and engagement through wildfire risk reduction, stricter enforcement of fire-related regulations, and expanded public education and outreach programs.
451
Conclusions
and
Recommendations
452
FR
Key Findings
• The development of Village 5A will begin impacting LFD by 2028 • A minimal number of firefighters is assigned to each shift, resulting in overtime when there is a vacancy
• The operations staff is only certified at the hazardous materials awareness level
• The Fire Marshal is a shift Battalion Chief
• There is no defined schedule for inspecting all commercial properties in Lincoln
• Not all commercial occupancies have been identified for fire and life safety inspections
• If a unit is canceled en route, the aid type should be "None" 46 AP Triton, LLC
453
FR
Key Findings
• There is no quality control policy or procedure for reviewing incident reports
• LFD has not established performance goals for incident response • There is no renovation or replacement capital fund for facilities • The city does not have a first responder fee for EMS incidents • LFD only provides basic life support (BLS) for EMS responses • LFD has not developed a Vision Statement
• LFD is continuing to develop departmental standard operating procedures and policies - Complete
• Training is provided to firefighters, but no competency-based training program or annual training plan exists
47 AP Triton, LLC
454
FR
Key Findings
• The LFD does not have a dedicated training facility that meets ISO requirements.
• A fund has not been established to replace apparatus and other capital equipment.
• The 911 Center has no formal performance benchmarks for answering a call or call-processing times.
• No quality management or assurance programs are in place to review 911 calls.
• Ring time in the dispatch center is not recorded.
48 AP Triton, LLC
455
FR
Village 5A Recommendations
• Hiring additional staff to meet NFPA 1710 recommendations • Begin the planning process for a new fire station to serve area • Purchase a new fire apparatus soon because of the extended delivery times
• As the commercial area develops, a ladder truck is recommended for building three or more stories
49 AP Triton, LLC
456
FR
Fire Station(s)
50 AP Triton, LLC
457
FR
Short-Term Recommendations
• Hire an additional firefighter to assist with staffing and reducing overtime
• LFD should train its firefighters to the Hazardous Materials Operations Level
• Hire a Fire Marshal and an Inspector
• Investigate the implementation of a fire-based ALS response capability within the City of Lincoln
• Develop a schedule to inspect all commercial occupancies • Develop a Quality Control process to review incident times • Develop a Department Vision Statement
51 AP Triton, LLC
458
FR
Short-Term Recommendations
• Continue to develop and adopt department SOGs and migrate them into Lexipol as approved - Completed
• Institute a competency-based approach to training department- wide
• Develop an Annual Training Plan - Completed
• Develop Performance Goals for Incident Response
• Develop benchmarks for the 911 Center and Increase Staffing 52 AP Triton, LLC
459
FR
Mid-Term Recommendations
• Consider implementing a First Responder Fee
• Develop a dedicated Fire Training Facility
• Develop a Capital Replacement Program
53 AP Triton, LLC
460
FR
Long-Term Recommendations
• Create a renovation or replacement capital fund for its facilities 54 AP Triton, LLC
461
FR
Future Issues
• New OSHA guidelines for fire departments
• Inflation
• Cost and delivery of apparatus
• Increasing equipment costs
• NERIS – National Emergency Response Information System 55 AP Triton, LLC
462
FR
Questions
and
Discussion
56 AP Triton, LLC
463
SUBJECT:

Receive a report on the City of Lincoln Zoning Code Update Pre-Study - Discussion and Direction. (Mikaela Noble/Nita Wracker)
SUBMITTED BY:

Mikaela Noble
DEPARTMENT:

Community Development
DATE:

September 23, 2025

Item Number 9.B

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council receive a report on the City of Lincoln Zoning Code Update Pre-Study and provide direction to initiate a code update.

BACKGROUND/INTRODUCTION:

The City of Lincoln Zoning Ordinance (Title 18) was adopted in 1979. Over the years, Title 18 has been amended many times to address specific issues that have arisen. However, a comprehensive code update has not been done since Title 18 was originally adopted. City staff have encountered issues pertaining to the current standards within the zoning code (i.e., out of compliance with State law, ineffective or lengthy text, out-of-date standards, etc.) and determined that it is an appropriate time to update Title 18. As such, the Community Development Department contracted Opticos Design, Inc. (Opticos) to review Title 18 and provide recommendations on how to identify Title 18’s shortcomings and provide recommendations to improve the effectiveness and usability of our current zoning code.

FINDINGS/ANALYSIS:

Opticos staff conducted a Code Update Pre-Study (Pre-Study) – a high-level analysis of Title 18 – and provided their recommendations on areas of Title 18 that can be improved to the benefit of City staff, developers and residents alike (Attachment 1). The Pre-Study is intended to serve as an initial step to understand the need for a comprehensive update.

City staff is seeking direction from City Council to proceed with a formal Zoning Code Update.

FISCAL IMPACT:

This item has no direct fiscal impact on the City. If an agreement is negotiated with a consultant for a code update, staff will return to City Council seeking approval and funding.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1
Zoning Code Pre-Study Recommendations Memo.pdf

STAFF REPORT
464
465

City of Lincoln Zoning Code Update Pre-Study Key Findings + Recommendations Memo | Draft June 2025 Table of Contents 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 2 Summary of Key Findings + Recommendations ............................................................................................................ 2 Organization of the Memo ............................................................................................................................................ 3 2. Overall Organization and Usability of Title 18 .............................................................................................. 3 Recommendations for Organization and Usability ....................................................................................................... 3 3. Improvements to Standards ........................................................................................................................ 5 Recommendations for Prioritizing Improvements to Standards ................................................................................... 5 4. Clarity and Effectiveness of Standards ......................................................................................................... 6 Recommendations for Clarity and Effectiveness of Standards ..................................................................................... 6 Recommendations for Title 18’s Relationship to SPs and GDPs ................................................................................... 9 5. Administrative Procedures .......................................................................................................................... 9 Recommendations for Administrative Procedures ....................................................................................................... 9 6. Conclusion .................................................................................................................................................. 11 Appendix A. Proposed Organization of Title 18 ................................................................................................... 12 Appendix B. Matrix of SP/GDP Topics ................................................................................................................. 17 466

1. Introduction This Zoning Code Update Pre-Study (Study) is a high-level analysis of Title 18: Zoning (Title 18) of the Municipal Code for the City of Lincoln. The purpose of this Study is to understand the need for a comprehensive update of Title 18 and inform the update with recommended changes for improved clarity and procedural streamlining. Opticos reviewed Title 18, focusing on the following key questions: 1. Is the current structure and organization effective? 2. Is it easy to find what you’re looking for? 3. Which content works well and doesn’t need updating? 4. Which content needs replacing or substantial updating? 5. Does the content effectively serve the community’s needs? 6. Is the content clear in its intent and its requirements? This memo summarizes the key findings from Opticos’ analysis of Title 18 and offers recommendations for the City’s consideration. Summary of Key Findings + Recommendations 1. Reorganize content into appropriate divisions and chapters. Certain parts of Title 18 and the content within them would be better suited in different locations to make topics easier to find. Therefore, we include recommendations to reorganize certain parts of Title 18 and its content. 2. Don’t fix what isn’t broken. Some standards are working fine and don’t need to be changed, aside from being relocated to establish a clearer information structure. Some standards will need to be removed or replaced, while others require less significant modifications. Minor adjustments to standards can be handled on a case-by-case basis through administrative deviations written into the code (see #4 below). 3. Ensure that the code serves the community’s needs. Parts of the code are outdated and should be modernized, even more so once the Downtown Master Plan (DTMP) is implemented through new Objective Design and Development Standards (ODDS). Clarifying how the General Plan is implemented across Lincoln would also be valuable in connecting the code to the community’s vision and priorities. In addition, because so much of Lincoln is subject to Specific Plans (SPs) and/or General Development Plans (GDPs), it is frequently necessary to check multiple documents to understand which standards apply; a one-stop cross-referencing file showing which topics are regulated where will boost efficiency. 4. Review Administrative Procedures to eliminate unnecessary friction in the development process. A lot of time and expense can be avoided in the review process by making applicants aware at the outset of how to produce a code-compliant proposal and by establishing clear, objective parameters for allowable adjustments when site-specific conditions make strict compliance impractical. 467

Organization of the Memo This memo is organized into the following sections: 1. Overall Organization and Usability of Title 18. This section addresses the organization of Title 18 and examines the navigability of the document, redundancy in content, and organization of the code. 2. Improvements to Standards. This section addresses the process of determining which existing standards can be adjusted to make them more effective, which should be dropped, and which can be retained as-is. 3. Clarity and Effectiveness of Standards. This section addresses the clarity of the standards and their relationship to the General Plan, Specific Plans, and General Development Plans. 4. Administrative Procedures. This section addresses the administration of Title 18 and includes findings and recommendations for streamlining submittal requirements and review processes. This memo provides recommendations pertinent to each of the four sections to address issues identified by planning staff in Title 18. The recommendations represent potential solutions that serve as a starting point for discussion, prior to further amendments/updates to Title 18. It is important to note that findings of inconsistencies or weaknesses in Title 18 are not intended to reflect poorly on the drafters or administrators. It is to be expected that multiple amendments prepared by various authors have resulted in both substantive and stylistic inconsistencies.

2. Overall Organization and Usability of Title 18 Is the current structure and organization effective? Is it easy to find what you’re looking for? Recommendations for Organization and Usability A. Restructure Title 18. The current structure is not user-friendly for new or non-expert readers of zoning codes because, as a reader, you’re not sure where to find specific information. Moreover, the Division number is not in the reference, confusing the reader when navigating the document. Table 1. Proposed Structure of Title 18 presents the current and recommended structures. The proposed approach utilizes the City’s existing terminology and structure, except that the Articles between Chapters and Sections are removed. The proposed numbering lets the reader know which Division is involved, whereas the current numbering does not indicate that information. The proposed numbering also reduces the number of Chapters in favor of more Sections within Chapters, making finding information more user-friendly. 468

Table 1. Proposed Structure of Title 18 Current Structure Recommended Structure Title 18 Division 1 Chapter 02 Article/Section 030 Item (a) Subitem (1) Title 18 Division 1 Chapter 01 Section 010 Item A Subitem 1 Current numbering/referencing example: 18.02.030 (a) (1) 18 is the Title and Division. It is also included as the first half of all Chapters 1 Division is not included in the reference .02 refers to the specific Chapter (in this example, Introductory Provisions) but is sequential throughout the entirety of Title 18 .030 refers to the Purpose statement of the Chapter, (a) Introduces a list of purposes (1) Is the beginning of the list.

Proposed numbering/referencing example: 18.1.01.010 18 refers to the Zoning Code, Title 18 so the reader always knows the reference .1 refers to the Division number, keeping the same term as the City currently uses .01 refers to the Chapter. This would restart under each Division .010 refers to a Section within the Chapter Lists are within a Section and start with a letter (e.g., A) for a title for the list or a short paragraph introducing the list. The list then uses numbers to identify the items in the list (e.g., 1, 2, 3, etc.). Tables use the numbering of the Section followed by a letter (e.g., 18.1.01.010.A) in ascending order. B. Reorganization of Title 18. Title 18 organizes the content into 11 Divisions. The number of Divisions is not uncommon in many zoning codes due to the wide variety of topics a zoning code must address. However, the location and distribution of specific content across the Divisions could benefit from some reorganization. For example, Division 6 (CUPs, Variances, Mobile Homes, Home Occupations, Temporary buildings in Industrial Areas) includes procedures that could be consolidated into a single Division with Division 11 (Administrative Procedures and Fees). Through this consolidation, the reader only needs to look for the Division that contains all procedures. 469

Other examples are listed below: • Repetition. Much of the duplicate content is repeated in multiple areas of Title 18 (e.g., Accessory Uses). This content should be consolidated and moved to one location. The content is also repeated in different divisions and/or sections in several other topic areas. • Definitions. Definitions are scattered throughout the zoning code instead of being in one location for all definitions. While this might seem efficient by having a topic area’s definitions and standards in one location, it is cumbersome when looking for a definition if the reader doesn’t know that the definition is in a topic area. Also, having definitions in multiple areas is an easy way to get more than one definition for the same thing, causing confusion. • List of allowed uses for each District. This issue could benefit from updating the uses into categories (e.g., Residential, Retail, Services, Recreation, Public Assembly, Industrial, etc.), with only as many actual uses listed in each category to communicate the types of allowed uses. Second, the updated uses should be moved from each District to a consolidated table of allowed uses. Currently, the reader needs to read through each District to see if and how a particular use is allowed. This becomes an issue when an applicant is more committed to a particular use than a particular site, because of the need to check multiple zone descriptions to learn whether that use is allowed. A consolidated table makes this investigation much simpler. Title 18 should be reorganized to achieve three primary objectives: making it easier to find information, avoiding conflicting content, and making it easier to use the zoning code. Appendix A, Proposed Organization of Title 18, provides an example of what a reorganization of Title 18 could look like compared to the current organization. In addition to relocating some existing content, the proposed reorganization also introduces new content that we recommend making Title 18 as clear and effective as possible.

3. Improvements to Standards Which content works well and doesn’t need updating? Which content needs replacing or substantial updating? Recommendations for Prioritizing Improvements to Standards A. Evaluate existing standards to understand what needs to be added, what is important to retain, and what updates are required to make the code more effective. In any code update, this framework for evaluating existing regulations is an important early step in focusing the effort. City staff’s engagement is essential to this process, given that they understand what content is valued enough to keep and what can safely be replaced or removed. 470

Recommendation A.1: Identify content that should be removed or replaced. Standards that are unnecessary, ineffective, or out of date may be targeted for elimination. Pay particular attention to identifying standards that tend to cause more problems than they solve. Recommendation A.2: Workshop content that should be retained but needs updating. Some standards are essential for the City to continue applying, despite certain aspects that make them problematic to implement in their existing form. Acting on these items will involve identifying the relevant issues and modifying the affected standards to resolve them. Recommendation A.3: Preserve content that can be retained in its current form. These standards may be relocated within Title 18, but they don’t need to be modified if they work as intended. 4. Clarity and Effectiveness of Standards Does the content effectively serve the community’s needs? Is the content clear in its intent and its requirements? Recommendations for Clarity and Effectiveness of Standards A. Relevance of content to community needs. The City of Lincoln has not comprehensively updated its zoning code in recent years, although there have been targeted amendments and ongoing planning initiatives. Therefore, it is not surprising to find outdated content that needs updating. For example, the lists of allowed uses in each District are sometimes too brief and sometimes too specific, raising questions and delaying implementation. In addition to identifying such content, we evaluated the content for how it implements the General Plan and the community’s expectations for new buildings, site improvements, and uses. Further discussion and evaluation are needed to arrive at recommendations on this question. The current introduction to Title 18 does not clearly explain how the General Plan is implemented across the community. For example, how do Title 18’s Districts compare to each other, and why is one District used as it is? A clearer and visual explanation would help the reader and guide future requests to amend or vary from Title 18’s standards. Another key question in this evaluation involves the Downtown Master Plan area. The DTMP will be implemented through new form-based districts, replacing the current zoning. Once the parcels in the DTMP are rezoned to form-based zoning, two of the Districts currently in place will remain on limited parcels compared to today. Are the parcels remaining in the Commercial (C) and Business-Professional (B-P) Districts best served by that zoning, or should other Districts be considered? Recommendation A.1: Modernize the Introduction to Title 18. Provide a visual framework of the General Plan’s land use designations and how Title 18 implements each through zoning districts. In addition, provide visual examples of each zoning district’s intended physical character and uses. This 471

update also presents the opportunity to introduce a form-based approach to the zoning districts that will implement the DTMP. Over time, this visual framework will link the high-level vision in the General Plan and the detailed standards in Title 18. Recommendation A.2: Update and modernize content for clarity and best practices. Review all content for clear phrasing and plain language and update as necessary. Update outdated content for best practices and consistency with State Law. Apply best practices to the content in lists to provide clarity and confidence in the content. Recommendation A.3: Analyze the General Plan’s intended physical character and uses. Evaluate if the General Plan’s vision is fully implemented through the current palette of Districts and, if not, identify which Districts need to be updated or if new Districts need to be created. For example, the A-D District appears in Title 18 but not on the Zoning Map. Is it the City’s intention to map this District, and if so, in what situations? Also, is the PD District achieving the “…greater creativity...” stated in Chapter 18.32, and if not, what changes are needed to do so? Recommendation A.4: Analyze the ‘best fit’ District(s) for parcels remaining in the C and B-P Districts. Identify the parcels remaining in the C and B-P Districts and evaluate if the current zoning implements the General Plan’s vision. This question should be explored with the community and through discussions with the property owners. B. Provide Measurement Methods. We find it helpful for all readers of the zoning code to have clear guidance on how certain standards are measured, beyond the definition of terms. For example, building height, length/footprint, and slope, to name a few, often need guidance in a step-by-step format with text and diagrams for the reader to consistently know how a particular standard is to be applied and measured. Recommendation B.1: Describe All Measurement Methods in a Single Division. Include diagrams that clearly convey where and how standards such as building height, setbacks, etc., are measured, along with any relevant exceptions to these measurements. C. Present the content in a more user-friendly format. Title 18 presents most of its content in a visually complex format. For example, the Title 18 excerpt below uses a list to specify numerical requirements for building setbacks when a table could easily and more clearly communicate the requirements. This is important both for the reader and to avoid errors or unintended interpretations of the content due to an overreliance on text. Recommendation C.1: Simplify content through tables and diagrams. Some content will better serve the reader by being converted to a table. Instead of the reader needing to read lots of unnecessary text, organize standards with numerical values or standards for a variety of situations into tables. Table 2. Proposed Layout of Content in Title 18 presents an example of a table combined with a diagram to communicate the requirements and provide clarity for the reader. 472

Other content currently describing complex requirements through text will better serve the reader by being converted entirely into a diagram. Some situations may need some supporting text or a caption, while the main requirements can be communicated through a diagram or set of diagrams. Table 2. Proposed Layout of Content in Title 18 Current Layout Recommended Layout A. 18.30.070 Yards. I. No building or structure in the O-S district shall, after the effective date of the ordinance codified in this chapter, be erected or enlarged unless the following yards are provided and maintained: 1. Front Yard. There shall be a front yard of not less than 20 feet in depth. 2. Rear Yard. There shall be a rear yard for each lot of not less than ten feet. 3. Side Yard. There shall be a side yard on each side of all buildings of not less than ten feet. 4. Side Street Yard. On corner lots, there shall be a side street yard of not less than ten feet. 5. Building Sites on Rights-of-way in the General Plan. Front, side, side street, or rear yards required for lots abutting a highway or street for which proposed rights-of-way are established by the circulation element of the general plan shall be determined as provided in Section 18.42.020.

473

Recommendations for Title 18’s Relationship to SPs and GDPs A. Clarify Title 18’s role with respect to Specific Plans and General Development Plans. Lincoln is notable for having a large portion of its incorporated area subject to adopted Specific Plans (SPs) and/or General Development Plans (GDPs) meant to shape development in various neighborhoods. As a result, reviewing Title 18 in isolation rarely gives a complete picture of the development standards in effect on a given site. Without referencing the applicable plan(s), it is impossible to know what vision a project should implement or what constraints are in place. Conversely, the SPs and GDPs rarely contain a complete set of development standards without referring to the Lincoln Municipal Code or related City standards, such as fence/wall regulations, parking standards, or Public Improvement Standards. The number and type of these references vary from plan to plan. Moreover, some plans explicitly supersede Title 18 in case of a conflict between standards, while others do not. Given this situation, an applicant should consider both Title 18 and the SPs/GDPs for any proposed development. It is important to include SP and GDP boundaries within the online Interactive Zoning Map, but more can be done to clarify the relationship between these two facets. Recommendation A.1: Within Title 18, clarify the relationship between the zoning code and adopted Specific Plans and General Development Plans. In the text of the code, emphasize that Title 18’s standards are frequently modified or superseded by those contained in the SP and/or GDP applicable to a given site, thereby ensuring that applicants will be directed toward reviewing the appropriate regulations. Recommendation A.2: Maintain a matrix displaying which topics are regulated in each individual SP and GDP and which topics reference or default to the Lincoln Municipal Code. Ideally, this matrix will be organized by topic in the same manner as the reorganized Title 18 (cf. Table 1, Proposed Organization of Title 18, above) and contain cross-references to the appropriate code/plan sections, making the relevant content easier to find. See Appendix B. Matrix of SP/GDP Topics for a preliminary example of the matrix in question.

5. Administrative Procedures Are there ways to streamline the entitlement process while remaining true to the community’s vision? What sort of flexibility is needed to accommodate real-world conditions? Recommendations for Administrative Procedures A. Provide built-in flexibility. As State Laws increasingly require cities to be explicit and/or objective about their requirements, the specificity also needs to include built-in flexibility for unforeseen 474

situations (e.g., existing tree(s), a utility in a location that cannot be moved, parcel dimensions that are close to but not exactly as required, etc.). For this reason, we recommend including guidance and procedures for adjustments to standards. These are not negotiable adjustments; instead, flexibility is needed for specific situations where strict application of the standards is either not possible due to existing conditions or would result in an undesired and unforeseen outcome. When the criteria and the amount of the allowed deviation are both objective (e.g., up to a 20 % difference from the required rear setback to move a building footprint outside the critical root zone of an existing tree), such adjustments qualify as objective standards and eliminate the need for a negotiated process. Recommendation A.1: Expand Administrative Design Review provisions to add flexibility to objective standards. Make these provisions applicable to all types of projects, not just single-family residences. Be sure to account for site conditions that commonly demand a deviation from the code. Make both the deviation and the qualifying criteria objective and ensure that the allowed deviation is large enough to be meaningful. B. Don’t allow developers to ignore the applicable development and design standards. A common reason for a burdensome review process is applicants submitting “off-the-shelf” plans without understanding what the code requires or is intended to deliver. In our experience, this has led applicants to shift the responsibility of compliance over to the city staff. It remains the responsibility of the applicant to demonstrate compliance with the standards. City staff should not assume the role of rationalizing each applicant’s project with Title 18 and/or the applicable SP/GDP. If that is happening, it likely means the applicant didn’t follow the applicable standards or only followed some of them. Solving the issue of applicants frequently not wanting to follow certain standards may require a review of the zone(s)/plan(s) where this is happening to understand if the intent is still relevant across the affected area(s). Nonetheless, it is important that projects are reviewed in a timely manner without unreasonably burdening applicants or the planning department. Clear development standards and procedural requirements help ensure a streamlined and predictable process for all parties. Recommendation B.1: Develop a clear step-by-step guide to compliance and ensure that applicants proceed accordingly. Include the administrative and design-related steps necessary to ensure a smooth review process, and train planning staff to direct applicants through these steps. Incorporate standard procedures for addressing the requirements of relevant SPs, GDPs, and objective design standards. Do not assume responsibility for reconciling applications with the applicable standards without first confirming that the applicant has made a good-faith effort at compliance. 475

6. Conclusion The recommendations represent the key and overarching recommendations for updating Title 18. There are, of course, many smaller recommendations about specific content that are typically addressed as part of the update itself, and they are not in this Key Recommendations Memo. We recommend organizing a group of local community members and city staff to work through these and future recommendations for updating Title 18. The dialogue between a working group and the consultant team preparing an update is invaluable. It provides local feedback and direction to ensure that each piece of content is updated to best fit Lincoln’s needs. 476

Appendix A. Proposed Organization of Title 18 Proposed Organization of Title 18 Current Organization Recommended Organization Title 18 Zoning Division 1. General Provisions Chapter 18.02 Introductory Provisions Chapter 18.03 Definitions Chapter 18.04 Interpretation Division 2. Districts Chapter 18.06 Establishment Chapter 18.08 Boundaries and Official Maps Division 3. District Regulations Chapter 18.10 Suitability and Compliance Chapter 18.12 R-1 Single-Family Residential District Chapter 18.14 R-2 Duplex Residential District Chapter 18.16 R-3 Multiple Residential District Chapter 18.18 R-E Residential Estate District Chapter 18.20 B-P Business and Professional District Chapter 18.22 C Commercial District Chapter 18.26 L-I Light Industrial District Chapter 18.28 I Industrial District Chapter 18.29 A-D Agricultural District Chapter 18.30 O-S Open Space District Chapter 18.31 PUB Public District Chapter 18.32 PD Planned Development District Chapter 18.33 P Parks District Division 4. Uses, Yards, Heights, Parking, Loading, Ridesharing and Transportation Plans Chapter 18.34 Special Uses Title 18 Zoning Division 1. General Provisions Chapter 18.1.01 Introduction Division 2. Specific to Zoning Districts Chapter 18.2.01 Zoning Overview .010 Purpose and Applicability .020 Establishment of Zoning Districts .030 Boundaries and Official Maps .040 Form-Based Zoning Districts .050 Non-Form-Based Zoning Districts .060 Change of Zoning District .070 General Plan Consistency Chapter 18.2.02 Intended Physical Character Chapter 18.2.03 Non-Form-Based Zones .010 Table of Allowed Uses .020 R-1 Single-Family Residential District .030 R-2 Duplex Residential District .040 R-3 Multiple Residential District .050 R-E Residential Estate District .060 B-P Business and Professional District .070 C Commercial District .080 L-I Light Industrial District .090 I Industrial District .100 A-D Agricultural District .110 O-S Open Space District .120 PUB Public District .130 PD Planned Development District .140 P Parks District 477

Article 1. Special Uses Generally Article 2. Adult-Oriented Businesses Article 4. Marijuana Regulation Chapter 18.35 Redemption and Recycling Facilities Chapter 18.36 Utilities, Fences and Accessories Chapter 18.37 Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU) Chapter 18.38 Area and Yard Regulations Chapter 18.40 Height Regulations Chapter 18.41 Wireless Telecommunications Facilities Article 1. General Article 2. Permitting Article 3. Location and Design Standards Article 4. Management Chapter 18.42 Setback Measurements Chapter 18.43 Small Cellular Communication Facilities Chapter 18.44 Parking and Loading Areas Article 1. Off-Street Parking Requirements Article 2. Development and Maintenance of Parking, Loading and Similar Outdoor Areas Chapter 18.45 Ridesharing Program and Transportation Plans Article 1. General Provisions Article 2. Ridesharing Requirements Article 3. Transportation Plans Article 4. Enforcement Division 5. Nonconforming uses, lots and structures Chapter 18.46 Nonconformity Generally Chapter 18.47 Requests for Reasonable Accommodations for Persons with Disabilities Chapter 18.48 Nonconforming Use of Land Chapter 18.2.04 Form-Based Zones .010 Table of Allowed Uses .020 T3 Neighborhood (T3N) .030 T4 Neighborhood (T4N) .040 T4 Maker (T4M) .050 T4 Neighborhood Center (T4NC) .060 T4 Corridor (T4C) .070 T4 Main Street (T4MS) Chapter 18.2.05 Overlays .010 Reserved Division 3. Specific to Uses Chapter 18.3.01 Purpose and Applicability Chapter 18.3.02 Special Uses .010 Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU) .020 Adult-Oriented Businesses .030 Alcohol Sales .040 Animal Raising and Keeping .050 Animal Services .060 Automotive .070 Bed and Breakfast .080 Cellular Communication Facilities .090 Child Day Care Uses .100 Community Assembly .110 Community Care Facility .120 Eating and Drinking Establishments - Drive-Through .130 Eating and Drinking Establishments - Live Entertainment .140 Emergency Shelters .150 Family Day Care .160 Home Occupations .170 Live/Work Units .180 Marijuana Regulation 478

Chapter 18.50 Nonconforming Buildings Chapter 18.52 Nonconforming Use of Buildings Division 6. CUP’s, Variances, Mobile Homes, Home Occupations, Temporary buildings in Industrial areas Chapter 18.54 Procedures Chapter 18.56 Conditional Use Permits Chapter 18.58 Variances Chapter 18.59 Density Increase and Incentive Program Chapter 18.60 Alcohol Sales Chapter 18.61 Child Day Care Uses Chapter 18.62 Home Occupations Chapter 18.63 Temporary Buildings in Industrial Areas Division 7. Design Review Chapter 18.64 General Provisions Chapter 18.66 Design Review Board Chapter 18.67 Requirements and Procedures Chapter 18.68 Administrative Design Review Chapter 18.69 Oak Tree Preservation Division 8. Lincoln Municipal Airport Hazard Zone Chapter 18.70 General Provisions Chapter 18.72 Zones and Height Restrictions Article 1. Designation of Zones Article 2. Height Limitations Chapter 18.74 Use Restrictions Chapter 18.76 Permits, Variances and Appeals Chapter 18.78 Violations Division 9. Development Agreements Chapter 18.80 General Provision, Notices and Records Chapter 18.82 Application .190 Medical Doctor's Offices .200 Recreation Facility - Indoor .210 Redemption and Recycling Facilities .220 Retail - Food and Beverage Selling Alcohol .230 Retail – General .240 Retail - Personal Services .250 Single Room Occupancies .260 Schools .270 Telecommunications Facilities .280 Temporary Uses .290 Temporary Buildings in Industrial Areas .300 Warehousing, Storage, and Distribution Division 4. Supplemental Standards Chapter 18.4.01 Purpose and Applicability Chapter 18.4.02 Supplemental to All Zoning Districts .010 Parking and Loading Areas .020 Ridesharing Program and Transportation Plans .030 Fences and Screening .040 Landscaping .050 Energy Conservation .060 Tree Protection .070 Site Planning .080 Hazards .090 Utilities .100 Water Efficient Landscaping Chapter 18.4.03 Supplemental to Form-Based Zoning Districts .010 Building Types .020 Frontage Types .030 Architectural Elements Chapter 18.4.04 Supplemental to Large Sites Division 5. Nonconformities Chapter 18.5.01 Nonconformity 479

Chapter 18.84 Consideration Chapter 18.86 Periodic Review Division 10. Annexation Chapter 18.88 Establishment of Procedures and Fees Chapter 18.89 Placer County Conservation Program Division 11. Administrative Procedures—Fees Chapter 18.90 Fees Chapter 18.91 Traffic Impact Mitigation Fees Chapter 18.92 Amendments Chapter 18.94 Appeals Chapter 18.96 Planning Commission Chapter 18.98 Enforcement Chapter 18.99 Public Facilities Fee .010 Purpose and Applicability .020 Nonconformity Generally .030 Requests for Reasonable Accommodations for Persons with Disabilities .040 Nonconforming Use of Land .050 Nonconforming Buildings .060 Nonconforming Use of Buildings .070 Nonconforming Parcels .080 Nuisance Abatement and Enforcement Division 6. Lincoln Municipal Airport Hazard Zone Chapter 18.6.10 Purpose and Applicability Chapter 18.6.20 Zones and Height Restrictions .010 Designation of Zones .020 Height Limitations .030 Use Restrictions .040 Permits, Variances and Appeals .050 Violations Division 7. Development Agreements Chapter 18.7.10 Purpose and Applicability Chapter 18.7.20 General Provision, Notices and Records .010 Application .020 Consideration .030 Periodic Review Division 8. Annexation Chapter 18.8.01 Purpose and Applicability Chapter 18.8.02 Establishment of Procedures and Fees Chapter 18.8.03 Placer County Conservation Program Division 9. Procedures Chapter 18.9.01 Purpose and Applicability Chapter 18.9.02 Fees .010 Traffic Impact Mitigation Fees .020 Public Facilities Fee 480

Chapter 18.9.03 Administrative Procedures .010 Administrative Design Review .020 Interpretation Chapter 18.9.04 Non-Administrative Procedures .010 Public Hearings .020 Design Review Board .030 Oak Tree Preservation .040 Density Increase and Incentive Program .050 General Development Plans .060 Master Plans .070 Specific Plans .080 Conditional Use Permits .090 Variances .100 Amendments .110 Appeals .120 Planning Commission .130 Enforcement Division 10. Definitions Chapter 18.10.01 Purpose and Applicability Chapter 18.10.02 Definitions Division 11. Measurement Methods Chapter 18.11.01 Purpose and Applicability Chapter 18.11.02 Measurement .010 Area and Yards .020 Setbacks .030 Building Footprint .040 Lot Coverage .050 Height .060 Slope 481

Appendix B. Matrix of SP/GDP Topics
482
Appendix B. Matrix of SP/GDP Topics
General Development Plans Page 1 of 6
Regulated by SP/GDPReferences Lincoln Municipal CodeRegulated by SP/GDP; References Public Facilities Improvement Standards [Supersedes Title 18 when more restrictive] Aitken Ranch GDP
Auburn Ravine Oaks GDP
Auburn Ravine Apartments GDP
Bohemia Inc Rezone
Clover Meadows GDP
Comfort Ranch GDP
Creekside Village GDP
Foskett Ranch GDP2004 1995 1983 20051996 2007 2002
Setbacks for swimming pools Setbacks for swimming poolsSetbacks for swimming pools and spas Design of walls: Public Facilities Improvement Standards Design of walls: Public Facilities Improvement Standards Commercial only; Residential in GDP
Standard stalls; NEV stalls in GDP
References Chapter 16
Variances
General Development Plans
Design Review Board ReviewGDP ReviewNotificationPDD Approval RequirementsNonconformititesConditional Use Permits Architectural FeaturesArchitectural StyleFrontagesSignageSignage StandardsAdmin + Procedures Garage Design + OrientationParking Lot Tree ShadingArchitectural StandardsExterior MaterialsMassing and ArticulationRoof Form Supplemental Standards: Site
Supplemental Standards: Parking + LoadingParking Ratio
Parking stall dimensions
Access + Drive LocationsLoading Docks
ScreeningRefuse Collection Areas
LightingMailboxes
Title 18 StandardAdoptedLast Updated/AmendedPublic Realm + Infrastructure Zoning Standards
LandscapingIrrigationTree Preservation/RemovalShade StructuresDriveway Standards Fencing + Walls
Parking Setbacks
Swimming PoolsLot CoverageDistance Between BuildingsHeightResidential Open Space NuisancesAccessory StructuresADUs/Second Residential UnitDensity/FARLot Dimensions Setbacks
Street StandardsSidewalk StandardsStreetscapes or Visual/Landscape CorridorsParks + Open SpaceUtility Layout Allowed Uses
483
Appendix B. Matrix of SP/GDP Topics
General Development Plans Page 2 of 6
Regulated by SP/GDPReferences Lincoln Municipal CodeRegulated by SP/GDP; References Public Facilities Improvement Standards Variances
General Development Plans
Design Review Board ReviewGDP ReviewNotificationPDD Approval RequirementsNonconformititesConditional Use Permits Architectural FeaturesArchitectural StyleFrontagesSignageSignage StandardsAdmin + Procedures Garage Design + OrientationParking Lot Tree ShadingArchitectural StandardsExterior MaterialsMassing and ArticulationRoof Form Supplemental Standards: Site
Supplemental Standards: Parking + LoadingParking Ratio
Parking stall dimensions
Access + Drive LocationsLoading Docks
ScreeningRefuse Collection Areas
LightingMailboxes
Title 18 StandardAdoptedLast Updated/AmendedPublic Realm + Infrastructure Zoning Standards
LandscapingIrrigationTree Preservation/RemovalShade StructuresDriveway Standards Fencing + Walls
Parking Setbacks
Swimming PoolsLot CoverageDistance Between BuildingsHeightResidential Open Space NuisancesAccessory StructuresADUs/Second Residential UnitDensity/FARLot Dimensions Setbacks
Street StandardsSidewalk StandardsStreetscapes or Visual/Landscape CorridorsParks + Open SpaceUtility Layout Allowed Uses
[Specifically supersedes Title 18 in case of conflict]
Fullerton Ranch GDP
Golden Village GDP
Independence At Lincoln GDP
Joiner Ranch GDP
Laehr Estates Unit 1
Laehr Estates Unit 2 Devt. Stds.

Laehr Estates Unit 3+4 Devt. Stds.2017 2017 1985 1989 19882021 2021 accessory uses, HOP's
Encroachments into setbacks.Defaults to R-1 setbacks where not specified.

Setbacks for swimming pools
References Title 15References Title 15
front yards sound walls and fencingFences, walls, buffering yards 484
Appendix B. Matrix of SP/GDP Topics
General Development Plans Page 3 of 6
Regulated by SP/GDPReferences Lincoln Municipal CodeRegulated by SP/GDP; References Public Facilities Improvement Standards Variances
General Development Plans
Design Review Board ReviewGDP ReviewNotificationPDD Approval RequirementsNonconformititesConditional Use Permits Architectural FeaturesArchitectural StyleFrontagesSignageSignage StandardsAdmin + Procedures Garage Design + OrientationParking Lot Tree ShadingArchitectural StandardsExterior MaterialsMassing and ArticulationRoof Form Supplemental Standards: Site
Supplemental Standards: Parking + LoadingParking Ratio
Parking stall dimensions
Access + Drive LocationsLoading Docks
ScreeningRefuse Collection Areas
LightingMailboxes
Title 18 StandardAdoptedLast Updated/AmendedPublic Realm + Infrastructure Zoning Standards
LandscapingIrrigationTree Preservation/RemovalShade StructuresDriveway Standards Fencing + Walls
Parking Setbacks
Swimming PoolsLot CoverageDistance Between BuildingsHeightResidential Open Space NuisancesAccessory StructuresADUs/Second Residential UnitDensity/FARLot Dimensions Setbacks
Street StandardsSidewalk StandardsStreetscapes or Visual/Landscape CorridorsParks + Open SpaceUtility Layout Allowed Uses
[Specifically supersedes Title 18 in case of conflict]
Lincoln 270 GDP + Design Guidelines
Lincoln Aircenter GDP
Lincoln Airport Business Park Corp Yard Area GDP
Lincoln Airport Business Park East of Airport GDP
Lincoln Crossing GDP
Lincoln Gateway GDP2004 1983 198820061992 20032008 2005 list of uses and ref to Title 18 but not clear if same list as B-P, GC, LI, OS-C Secondary dwelling units, C district, LI plus others,
Interpretation of Lot Area in C
Parking behind buildings
Setbacks for swimming pools
LMC 15.28
Street Lighting: Public Improvement Standards; building lighting regulated in GDP References LMC for non-residential, MDR, and HDR; parking regulated in GDP for LDR/single-family Shared Parking; Parking in BP, Res'l District
parking stall size parking stall sizevehicle stacking
485
Appendix B. Matrix of SP/GDP Topics
General Development Plans Page 4 of 6
Regulated by SP/GDPReferences Lincoln Municipal CodeRegulated by SP/GDP; References Public Facilities Improvement Standards Variances
General Development Plans
Design Review Board ReviewGDP ReviewNotificationPDD Approval RequirementsNonconformititesConditional Use Permits Architectural FeaturesArchitectural StyleFrontagesSignageSignage StandardsAdmin + Procedures Garage Design + OrientationParking Lot Tree ShadingArchitectural StandardsExterior MaterialsMassing and ArticulationRoof Form Supplemental Standards: Site
Supplemental Standards: Parking + LoadingParking Ratio
Parking stall dimensions
Access + Drive LocationsLoading Docks
ScreeningRefuse Collection Areas
LightingMailboxes
Title 18 StandardAdoptedLast Updated/AmendedPublic Realm + Infrastructure Zoning Standards
LandscapingIrrigationTree Preservation/RemovalShade StructuresDriveway Standards Fencing + Walls
Parking Setbacks
Swimming PoolsLot CoverageDistance Between BuildingsHeightResidential Open Space NuisancesAccessory StructuresADUs/Second Residential UnitDensity/FARLot Dimensions Setbacks
Street StandardsSidewalk StandardsStreetscapes or Visual/Landscape CorridorsParks + Open SpaceUtility Layout Allowed Uses
[Specifically supersedes Title 18 in case of conflict] [Specifically supersedes Title 18] Lincoln Square GDP
Lincoln West GDP
Meadowlands GDP
Parkview Apartments GDP
Riverwalk Villas GDP
Sterling Pointe GDP2005 1994 2016 19822007 19992021
Where is Exhibit B?
Water Conservation Ord. 15.28
Sacramento County Zoning Ordinance
Italianate
486
Appendix B. Matrix of SP/GDP Topics
General Development Plans Page 5 of 6
Regulated by SP/GDPReferences Lincoln Municipal CodeRegulated by SP/GDP; References Public Facilities Improvement Standards Variances
General Development Plans
Design Review Board ReviewGDP ReviewNotificationPDD Approval RequirementsNonconformititesConditional Use Permits Architectural FeaturesArchitectural StyleFrontagesSignageSignage StandardsAdmin + Procedures Garage Design + OrientationParking Lot Tree ShadingArchitectural StandardsExterior MaterialsMassing and ArticulationRoof Form Supplemental Standards: Site
Supplemental Standards: Parking + LoadingParking Ratio
Parking stall dimensions
Access + Drive LocationsLoading Docks
ScreeningRefuse Collection Areas
LightingMailboxes
Title 18 StandardAdoptedLast Updated/AmendedPublic Realm + Infrastructure Zoning Standards
LandscapingIrrigationTree Preservation/RemovalShade StructuresDriveway Standards Fencing + Walls
Parking Setbacks
Swimming PoolsLot CoverageDistance Between BuildingsHeightResidential Open Space NuisancesAccessory StructuresADUs/Second Residential UnitDensity/FARLot Dimensions Setbacks
Street StandardsSidewalk StandardsStreetscapes or Visual/Landscape CorridorsParks + Open SpaceUtility Layout Allowed Uses
[Supersedes Title 18 in case of conflict "unless otherwise stated"]

SUD-B NEQ GDP
Sun City Lincoln Hills GDP
Terra View Estates GDP
Three D GDP
Twelve Bridges GDP
Twelve Bridges Plan Area C GDP
Village 1 GDP2019 2000 198919952012 2001 20132006 20032020 2023 See Village 1 Specific Plan
See Village 1 Specific Plan
Home occupation provisions Home occupation uses
Parking setbacks in VMUSetbacks for swimming pools
"Except as otherwise provided"
Trash enclosures Trash collection areas + enclosures
USPS standards
2 enclosed spaces for residential; other uses per LMC
References LMC for non-residential; parking regulated in GDP for residential "Except as otherwise provided"
Amendments
487
Appendix B. Matrix of SP/GDP Topics
General Development Plans Page 6 of 6
Regulated by SP/GDPReferences Lincoln Municipal CodeRegulated by SP/GDP; References Public Facilities Improvement Standards Variances
General Development Plans
Design Review Board ReviewGDP ReviewNotificationPDD Approval RequirementsNonconformititesConditional Use Permits Architectural FeaturesArchitectural StyleFrontagesSignageSignage StandardsAdmin + Procedures Garage Design + OrientationParking Lot Tree ShadingArchitectural StandardsExterior MaterialsMassing and ArticulationRoof Form Supplemental Standards: Site
Supplemental Standards: Parking + LoadingParking Ratio
Parking stall dimensions
Access + Drive LocationsLoading Docks
ScreeningRefuse Collection Areas
LightingMailboxes
Title 18 StandardAdoptedLast Updated/AmendedPublic Realm + Infrastructure Zoning Standards
LandscapingIrrigationTree Preservation/RemovalShade StructuresDriveway Standards Fencing + Walls
Parking Setbacks
Swimming PoolsLot CoverageDistance Between BuildingsHeightResidential Open Space NuisancesAccessory StructuresADUs/Second Residential UnitDensity/FARLot Dimensions Setbacks
Street StandardsSidewalk StandardsStreetscapes or Visual/Landscape CorridorsParks + Open SpaceUtility Layout Allowed Uses
[Specifically supersedes Title 18 in case of conflict]Village 5 GDP Village 7 GDP
WECO Industrial GDP
West First GDP
WWTRF GDP2018 20101990 200020002024
See Village 5 Specific PlanSee Village 7 Specific PlanSee Village 7 Specific Plan See Village 5 Specific PlanSee Village 7 Specific Plan
Home occupation uses; public utility buildings and usesHome occupation uses; public utility facilities Weed abatement + public nuisance reqs.

Setbacks for garagesSetbacks for garages
Swimming pools in residential zonesSwimming pools in residential zonesSetbacks for swimming pools LMC 15.28LMC 15.28Wetland preservation
Standards for min. enclosed spacesStandards for min. spaces required per unit2 enclosed spaces for residential; other uses per LMCClear space for garage spaces Improvement Standards
Proposed; not required
Required for architecture styles not listedAmendments
488
Appendix B. Matrix of SP/GDP Topics
Specific Plans Page 1 of 1
Regulated by SP/GDP
References Lincoln Municipal Code
[Supersedes Title 18 in case of conflict]
Lincoln 270 SP
Lincoln Crossing SP
Sterling Point SP

SUD-B NEQ SP
Three D SP
Twelve Bridges SP
Village 1 SP
Village 5 SP
Village 7 SP2004 1992 19922019199219942013201720102001 1998 2019 2017 Title 18 StandardAdoptedLast Updated/AmendedPublic Realm + InfrastructureStreet StandardsSidewalk StandardsStreetscapes/Landscape CorridorsParks + Open SpaceUtility LayoutZoning StandardsAllowed UsesDensityLot DimensionsSetbacksSupplemental Standards: SiteLandscapingIrrigation Access + Drive Locations
Fencing + WallsRefuse Collection Areas
Signage Standards
Specific Plans
Roof FormArchitectural FeaturesSignage
Loading DocksGarage Design + OrientationArchitectural StandardsExterior MaterialsMassing and Articulation Supplemental Standards: Parking + Loading
489
SUBJECT:

Adopt a Resolution Authorizing a Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) between the Economic Development
Department and the Lincoln Clay Art Center Non-Profit in an amount not to exceed $275,000 for building upgrades to the Carnegie Library Building. (Sean Scully)
SUBMITTED BY:

Sean Scully
DEPARTMENT:

City Manager's Office
DATE:

September 23, 2025

Item Number 9.C

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

City Council consider approving the attached resolution authorizing a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City of Lincoln and the Lincoln Clary Arts Center (Non- Profit) in an amount not to exceed $275,000 for phase 1 upgrades and improvements to the Carnegie Library Building and directing the Economic Development Department to develop and execute a MOU contracting for the improvements subject to City Attorney concurrence and approval.

BACKGROUND/INTRODUCTION:

Over the past number of years, the City Council has frequently discussed how to reactivate the Carnegie Library either as a restarted library location or other type of civic/cultural community use. The Economic Development Committee (EDC) has identified the reactivation of the building as a strategic priority and have been working diligently on a few different initiatives aimed at identifying opportunities and paths forward for reuse of the building. In October 2024, after almost a year of research and due diligence by a subcommittee of the EDC, the City Council approved funding and an associated MOU with Jessup University to partner on a study conducted by AMS Planning and Research to conduct a reuse study to identify opportunities for the building and barriers to its public use.

Since that time AMS has completed a variety of field work, interviews, operational and financial modeling/forecasting all in an effort to deliver a final report which is expected to be presented to the EDC in October of this year. After the study is considered by the EDC, the study will then be presented to Council for specific direction. One critical piece to the overall puzzle of this project that was not part of AMS's responsibility was identifying the specific improvements which are recommended in order to address access issues and other basic building related operational needs. This has been a particularly challenging matter for the City of Lincoln over the years as funds were limited to invest in the building and as a result very little progress has been made in addressing the needed upgrades.

STAFF REPORT
490

Concurrent to these efforts a nonprofit was established by one current members of the EDC as well as a former member named the Lincoln Clay Arts Center (Non-Profit) which was established to potentially take lead on the future use of the building (subject to Council approval) as well as to facilitate completion of the needed building improvements. This group consulted with building professionals, City staff and other experts to develop a three-phase plan of improvements. The first phase includes a series of critical improvements needed as a first step to get the building operational from a code and ADA perspective. The first phase improvements include the following:

1. Remove the remaining bookshelves

2. Remove deteriorated pergola gateway structures

3. New HVAC system

4. ADA access for main level

5. New floor covering for main level

6. Paint main level interior

7. Unisex restroom improvements per ADA

The approximate budget for phase 1 improvements is estimated at approximately $250,510.

Future phases of improvements (not requested for funding under this action) are anticipated to be funded through fundraising and other partnership opportunities.

In October of 2024 the City Council authorized a MOU between the City of Lincoln and the Economic Development Department obligating a total of $800,000 of ARPA Standard Allowance funding, of which $500,000 was designated to be used for civic amenities; one of many identified uses for that funding was building upgrades to the Carnegie Library building.

During the Council appropriation of the last portions of ARPA Standard Allowance funding a specific priority was placed on functional and necessary upgrades to the Carnegie building.

Staff had initially planned to take the phase 1 improvements and contract for their completion in compliance with the City's capital improvement process. However, upon further discussion and given the tight timeline for completion, the Lincoln Clay Arts Center Non-Profit has indicated a willingness to take lead on contracting for those improvements. As Council is likely aware, much of the standard allowance funding has been deposited to Lincoln Non- Profits for specific purposes (e.g., Lincoln Community Foundation, 4th of July Foundation, Lincoln Art League, the Salt Mine, etc). This model has proven to be an efficient way to partner with nonprofits that have missions that align with City initiatives.

Staff will develop an MOU and associated contractual documents to ensure that the funding goes toward the improvements identified within the phase 1 scope. Additionally, staff would recommend creating an alternate path in the unlikely event that the non-profit is unable to perform under the agreement (whether that be in a timely manner or for any other reason). If this were to occur, the MOU will require that the funds be transferred to the Lincoln Community Foundation who may hold the funds in trust while alternate non-profit partners are sought to complete the necessary improvements. Staff feels that this is an extremely unlikely scenario but given the timelines that exists for use of the ARPA standard allowance funding this would provide a backstop for this unlikely possibility. The MOU will also (as with all previous similar agreements) ensure that applicable rules, regulations and laws are adhered to in the expenditure of these funds.

491
FINDINGS/ANALYSIS:

The estimated project budget for phase 1 is approximately $250,510 which does include a 20% contingency (see attached budget document), however, staff would recommend that Council allocate $275,000 as it is anticipated that unknown factors with a building of this age may require additional funds to complete phase 1. Any excess funds not needed would be expended on functional and aesthetic improvements to the building which would be identified by the non-profit partner and City facilities staff.

The attached resolution authorizes the Economic Development Department to develop and execute an MOU with the Lincoln Clay Arts Center
and associated contractual documents to
ensure that the funding goes toward the improvements identified within the phase 1 scope.

The MOU will include an alternate path in the unlikely event that the non-profit is unable to perform under the agreement, whether that be in a timely manner or for any other reason. If this were to occur, the MOU will require that the funds be transferred to the Lincoln Community Foundation who may hold the funds in trust while alternate non-profit partners are sought to complete the necessary improvements. Staff feels that this is an extremely unlikely scenario but given the timelines that exists for use of the standard allowance funding this would provide a backstop to ensure funds are utilized. The MOU will also (as with all previous similar agreements) that applicable rules, regulations, laws and timeframes are adhered to in the expenditure of these funds. Finally, staff will remain involved in the project in an oversight and inspection capacity.

This MOU/Partnership and funding allocation allows the City to make significant progress toward the functional upgrade of the building for the first time in over a decade. It also unlocks the ability for the City to make very real decisions for the future use of the building, whereas in the past those concepts were impractical given the upfront investment needed to make the building accessible and useable.

FISCAL IMPACT:

City Council authorized a MOU between the City of Lincoln and the Economic Development Department obligating a total of $800,000 of ARPA Standard Allowance funding, of which $500,000 was designated to be used for civic amenities; one of many identified uses for that funding was building upgrades to the Carnegie Library building.

Staff now request, authorization for the Economic Development Department to enter into a MOU with the Lincoln Clay Arts, in an amount not to exceed $275,000. No additional budget
allocation is needed as budget authorization was approved when the MOU between the City and Economic Development Department.

ATTACHMENTS:
lincoln_clay_arts_carnegie_reso.docx
LCAC Carnegie Phase 1 05.22.25.pdf
492

RESOLUTION 2025 -XXX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF LINCOLN AUTHORIZING THE ECONOMIC

DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT TO ENTER INTO A MENORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING

WITH THE LINCOLN CLAY ARTS CENTER NON-PROFIT IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $275,000 FOR THE COMPLETION OF THE PHASE 1 IMPROVEMENTS TO THE CARNEGIE

LIBRARY BUILDING SUBJECT TO CITY ATTORNEY APPROVAL AND CONCURRENCE

WHEREAS, Over the past number of years, the City Council has frequently discussed how to reactivate the Carnegie Library either as a restarted library location or other type of civic/cultural community use; and

WHEREAS, the Economic Development Committee (EDC) has identified the reactivation of the building as a strategic priority and have been working diligently on a few different initiatives aimed at identifying opportunities and paths forward for reuse of the building; and

WHEREAS, the City of Lincoln has struggled in the past to find ways to fund necessary building upgrades to make the building usable once again; and

WHEREAS, the Lincoln Clay Arts Center non -profit has been established to assist with the reuse and upgrade of the building; and

WHEREAS, the Lincoln Arts Center, staff and other professionals have scoped and created a phase 1 project list of improvements to allow for future use or reuse of the building; and

WHEREAS, the Council has approved funding under the ARPA Standard Allowance revenues to address civic amenities including improvements to the Carnegie and other civic buildings.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LINCOLN AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. The City Council hereby authorized the Economic Development Department to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Lincoln Clay Arts in an amount not to exceed $275,000 for the purpose of completing the identified phase 1 improvements (attached) for the Carnegie Library building . The MOU shall identify that the funding shall not go toward non-profit administrative expenses or any non -profit salaries and will be for the sole purpose of improving the Carnegie building. Additionally the MOU shall identify any other reasonable requirements, timelines and laws relevant to ensure the agreement facilitates the completion of the project.

Section 2. In the event that the non-profit is unable to perform under the provisions of the MOU or for any other reason that makes phase 1 improvements not possible, the funds will be transferred to the Lincoln Community Foundation where the funds will be held in trust while another appropriate party is sought to complete the phase 1 improvements; and

Section 3. The MOU shall not be executed until approval and concurrence is received by the City Attorney for legal sufficiency.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this ___:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
493

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

____________________________________
Holly Andreatta, Mayor

ATTEST:

__________________________________
Hope Ithurburn, City Clerk

Attachment – Phase 1 Improvements

494
LCAC Carnegie Library Scope of Work Order of Magnitude Estimate Includes Prevaling Wage Rates
Demolition
Wood Entry Pergolas 40 MH 120 4,800
Dump Fees 1 LS 200 200
Total 5,000
Bookshelves 80 MH 120 9,600
Dump Fees 1 LS 300 300
Total 9,900
HVAC - Astro Air - Prevailing Wage 1 LS 31,640 31,640 Chase for ductwork 1 LS 5,000 5,000
36,640
ADA Access
Hankin Specialties 1 LS 67,181 67,181
Power, concrete, etc 1 LS 10,000 10,000
77,181
Flooring - main level 1300 SF 12 15,600
15,600
ADA Restroom Upgrades
Move toilet and tile work 1 LS 5,000 5,000
5,000
Interior Painting
Based on floor space 1300 SF 10 13,000
13,000
Total Direct Cost 162,321
General Conditions 1 LS 10% 16,232
Sub Total 178,553
Construction Management 1 LS 15% 26,783
Total 205,336
Contingency 1 LS 20% 41,067
SubTotal 246,403
Payment & Performance Bond 1 LS 2% 4,107
Total Estimated Cost 250,510
5/22/2025 LCAC Carnegie Phase 1 495
SUBJECT:

Establishment of Lincoln Staff Leadership Training Program Discussion and Direction. (Sean Scully)
SUBMITTED BY:

Sean Scully
DEPARTMENT:

City Manager's Office
DATE:

September 23, 2025

Item Number 9.D

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that Council provide feedback and direction to move forward with a Lincoln Staff Leadership Training Program.

BACKGROUND/INTRODUCTION:

Over the past three years the City of Lincoln has focused on filing vacant positions with qualified professionals to meet service demand. In addition, the City Council has prudently budgeted funds to strategically create new positions and job classifications to meet a rapidly growing and evolving service demand of a growing community. On many levels this has been a successful effort which has led to improved service, project delivery and most importantly steadily improving professional service to our community. More recently, through a series of discussions internally at a management level and at a City Council level it has been identified that adequate succession planning and leadership training is a critical need for the organization as a whole. Given that the past three years have been primarily triaging and addressing actual labor needs as well as curing insufficient resource constraints, very little time has been spent on identifying ways to plan for succession as current staff nears retirement or leaves the organization for other career opportunities.

The City Manager's office has taken this feedback and over the past 6 weeks have worked on the nucleus of an initiative to create a unique leadership program aimed at developing the current and future staff leaders of this organization. The City is currently a participant in "Leadership Lincoln
" which is a broader effort lead by a steering committee and the Lincoln Area Chamber of Commerce designed to expose community, staff and other individuals on not only City Government but also other important components of what makes a community thrive (business, non profit, education, etc). While this program is crucial to the community and helps develop future leaders in all sectors, the program being conceived under this report is specifically and intentionally designed for staff/employees of the City of Lincoln and is aimed at developing technical leadership skills for employees who are interested in advancement of their careers here within the City of Lincoln. Additionally, the program provides the opportunity for participating employees to become familiar with, understand and perpetuate the important culture of what it means to be a public servant within the City of Lincoln.

STAFF REPORT
496

Development of the program included a significant amount of research into known public sector leadership models and collaboration subject matter experts, consultants, and most importantly other municipalities inside and outside of the State that have programs that have demonstrated success. The compilation of this research and data has lead to the beginnings of a framework for a program that management believes will serve as a starting point for a program tailored to meet Lincoln's unique leadership, management and staffing needs in the short and long term.

Succession planning and Leadership Training isn't just about planning for the leaders of tomorrow, it is also about instilling important cultural aspects of our organization and community into our staff so we can all better serve the current/future needs of the community.

Local government is a labor intensive effort, virtually all services provided by the City are a function of the dedicated staff who carry forth their job duties each and every day, as such, investment in the training and development of staff is a prudent investment to ensure that the organization is growing its next generation of leaders today as they will undoubtedly be needed tomorrow. It is anticipated that this program will also provide context, skills and training for employees who may want to transfer their skills to entirely different departments within the City as well as help staff identify what their future career goals may be with the City of Lincoln.

FINDINGS/ANALYSIS:

The development of this program focused around three key questions:

1. What are we (as an organization) attempting to accomplish as part of this effort?

2. How can the program focus on leadership while also ensuring that our organizational culture and core values are embedded in the outcomes?

3. Practical matters: What types of employees is this best suited for? How long should the program be? How intensive ? etc.

The answer to question 1 is discussed in detail in the background portion of this staff report.

The second question was answered by ensuring that the draft curriculum focused on three critical common components: leadership as it is defined and practiced within our organization and public service in general; teamwork and management / the nuts and bolts of City government (across the spectrum of services); and organizational culture/core values and how those are common threads that connect all roles within local government.

As for question number 3, after significant research on other successful models it is recommended that the program generally be framed as follows:

The program would be available to any full-time employee regardless of job classification or role. This reinforces the reality that all City of Lincoln employees can and should be leaders regardless of their actual job duties.

The program is intended to be a one-year program with the first cohort limited to 10-15 individuals. Limiting the size of each cohort ensures that the participants will have ample opportunity to participate in small group settings where it is anticipated the best training can occur.

It is anticipated that the commitment would be one full workday per month dedicated to classroom and practical training (12 total sessions).

The curriculum not only focuses on skill training in leadership and teamwork it also ensures that all participants get a very specific view of all functions and services of our 497
local government. This interdisciplinary approach is intended to give the future leaders a more holistic view of the organization which will (ideally) set them up for success as they assume new or different leadership roles and positions in the future.

If the program proves to be successful, it is anticipated that there will be yearly cohorts (assuming demand remains constant) thereby giving plenty of opportunities for participation for current and future staff. Below is a sampling of the topics anticipated to be the core of the training program. Please keep in mind that, while the curriculum is mostly formed at this stage, it is still going through a series of revisions and as such a broad outline is being provided for general Council knowledge:

Session 1 – Welcome to Lincoln’s Leadership Training Program-

The session begins with a welcome and program overview, followed by participant introductions to build group connection. A guest speaker will discuss leadership and its impact on teams. Participants will use the LIFO tool to identify behavioral styles, share results, and engage in practical exercises focused on self and team understanding. The group will begin a discussion on organizational culture, core values, and stakeholder interactions—a conversation that will continue and guide future sessions in the training program.

Session 2 – Local Government 101-
Participants will explore the City Council–City Manager relationship through examples, guest speakers, and role-play, clarifying roles, motivations, and challenges. We will briefly describe their departmental responsibilities and interactions, with each other and the City Manager. The session continues with a look at how local government interacts with stakeholders. A guest speaker will discuss employee-community relationships, followed by breakout exercises to reinforce collaboration. We will continue our conversation centered on the organization’s culture, examining its core values and the ways it operates. These values will guide the rest of the training program, supporting a united and purposeful approach to leadership and teamwork.

Session 3 – Understanding and Overcoming The Five Dysfunctions of a Team - Part 1 Session 4 – Understanding and Overcoming The Five Dysfunctions of a Team – Part 2 Session 5 – Preparation, Anticipation, and Pivoting as a Leader Session 6 - Leadership in Local Government - Part 1
Session 7 - Leadership in Local Government – Part 2
Session 8 - Lessons in Leadership - Part 1
Section 9 - Nuts and Bolts Approach to How a City Works – Part 1 Session 10 - Lessons in Leadership - Part 2
Session 11 - Nuts and Bolts Approach to How a City Works - Part 2 Session 12 - Lessons in Leadership - Part 3

Although the specific details of the curriculum are still being finalized for sessions 3-12, staff will be able to provide some additional context to those sessions at the time of the meeting.

With that said, each and every session will have common themes that are specific to Lincoln, its needs, challenges and desires for the future while learning from success of other organizations and situations with commonalities to Lincoln. The program is intended to 498
develop the skills within the participating staff to understand the realities of the current organizational culture and how it can be improved upon. Additionally, broader themes of the "how to" of management, leadership, and long-term strategic thinking are key components.

Ultimately the goal of the program is to provide opportunities for professional growth of Lincoln's most important resource which is its people while providing pathways for staff to prepare for their next career goal here at the City of Lincoln. Theoretically this creates a stronger organization that is more resilient in managing major changes (nationally, statewide and locally) and ensuring that Lincoln has a more trained and adaptable staff in each and every department. It is anticipated that each session will feature guest speakers (current expert staff, elected officials, external governmental leaders, subject matter experts, etc).

Staff would recommend that the Council consider, at a future date, establishing a subcommittee to receive regular briefings from the City Manager on status and to consult on any possible changes that may be needed as the program progresses.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The primary fiscal impact of the program will the staff time associated with participating in the program one day a month. Because of the anticipated limited class size, this impact should not be substantive to any department or their associated budget, especially given that training resources and routinely budgeted for in any department. The actual implementation of the program will have some hard costs depending on the final model, but that cost is not anticipated to exceed current approved training budgets in most departments. If minor additional funds are needed those will be requested for appropriation during the quarterly budget update anticipated later this year and early in 2026.

499
In Process
8/15/2025
Ms.Kathryn Hunt, Library Director

LINCOLN PUBLIC LIBRARY
485 Twelve Bridges Dr.

Lincoln,CA , 95648
Subject: Zip Books Project ZIP 25-37
Dear Ms.Kathryn Hunt:

The California State Library is pleased to approve the grant application for the Zip Book Project for a total of $15,840 in California Library Services Act funds.

Read the enclosed award packet thoroughly and contact your grant support team if you have any questions. Hard copies of this correspondence will not follow. Keep the entirety of the correspondence for your files and consider these award materials your original documents.

This grant is governed by
the attached Grant Agreement and Certification of
Compliance, which includes the project period, reporting requirements, and payment schedule as well as the proposal outlining the project plan and budget. Please sign the claim and certification forms at the back of your award packet using the DocuSign system. Please understand that it can take from six to eight weeks from receipt of a fully executed claim form with no errors before grant funds are delivered.

If you have not received your payment after eight weeks, please contact your grant monitor.

Requirements Specific to Your Project
The following are requirements that are specific to your project. Please contact your
project support team if you have any questions about or require support in fulling these requirements.

Docusign Envelope ID: 72BB80CE-9FAF-48C6-AD19-8E92A5312EC0 67500
In Process
• It is an expectation for this project that the project manager or other project staff will attend four (4) community of practice sessions (schedule to be determined) over the course of the grant period.
• It is an expectation of this project that at least 85 percent of the materials purchased as part of this project will be added to the libraries collection. (The 85 percent number may include items shipped to other libraries to add to their collection).

Project Support Team
Awardees are provided support throughout the project period by a project support team comprised of a grant monitor and Library Programs Consultant from the State Library. The project support team is available throughout the project period to assist you.

• The Grant Monitor is available to assist you with compliance and reporting matters. The Grant Monitor assigned to your project is Monica Rivas and can be reached via email at [email protected].
• The LPC is available to assist you with programming questions. The Library Programs Consultant assigned to your project is Chris Durr and can be reached via email at [email protected].

Best wishes for a successful project.

Respectfully yours,

Greg Lucas
California State Librarian

CC: Monica Rivas, [email protected]
Annly Roman, [email protected]
Yesenia Urdarbe, [email protected]
Karen Van Gundy, [email protected]
Docusign Envelope ID: 72BB80CE-9FAF-48C6-AD19-8E92A5312EC0 68501

← All documents from this meeting