Agenda packet, regular meeting — Morro Bay City Council, June 10, 2025 (part 2 of 2)

Re
Standard of Cover Morro Bay Fire Department Morro Bay, CA Matrix Consulting Group 71

RECOMMENDATION
Establish a community standard delineating the services provided, response protocols, and benchmark objectives for the city's fire protection system.

Turnout Time
Several factors will influence the turnout time for the apparatus, including the station layout. Other factors include stairs, detours to the restroom, a policy for signaling enroute, opening the bay doors, gathering response information, and the personal protective gear that must be donned. In any case, formally establishing turnout time performance objectives provides direction to the employees and establishes their performance expectations. The public also understands and knows what to expect from their fire services.

Numerous national discussions have been about measuring turnout time related to benchmark times. These discussions have centered around the ability of the personnel to safely disengage from non-emergency tasks and move to an emergency response. For example, personnel perform morning apparatus and equipment checks, including starting and running small equipment. The issue is how quickly and safely a chainsaw can be stopped and stowed back on the apparatus.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

Formally establish a baseline performance objective turnout time of 1 minute and 30 seconds for all emergency calls 90% of the time.

The following table illustrates the turnout time for the past three years, derived by combining the last three years of turnout time data using the same filtering mechanisms as previously noted. It is shown as a fractal time ranging from 90% to 70% for emergency medical calls and fire-related calls.

Table 32: MBFD Turnout Time Comparison
90% 80% 70% Benchmark
Turnout Time – EMS 2:42 2:13 1:52 1:30
Turnout Time – Fire 2:33 2:11 1:57 1:30
For the past three years combined, the turnout time for medical calls was 2 minutes and 42 seconds for 90% of the time, and for 80% of the time, the turnout time was 2 minutes and 13 seconds.

Page 171 of 329 ends

Re
Standard of Cover Morro Bay Fire Department Morro Bay, CA Matrix Consulting Group 72
This table illustrates the achievable incremental improvement to the turnout time segment of the response time continuum. For example, improving the 90% fractal time from 2 minutes and 42 seconds to 2 minutes and 13 seconds represents a 10% improvement. Reducing the 90% fractal time to 1 minute and 52 seconds would represent a 30% improvement. Incremental improvements are measurable, and a baseline is provided to measure those improvements.

Recording the time a unit begins its response is a function of the dispatch center and the dispatcher handling the call. The process used in the San Luis Obispo Dispatch Center is for the Unit to notify the dispatcher of the response, and the dispatcher then records or time stamps the enroute time. It is possible for the dispatcher to handle several issues simultaneously, resulting in a delay in recording the enroute time. It is also possible for the unit to delay notifying the dispatcher of the response due to other radio traffic or other issues occurring simultaneously. The times and variances illustrated above are the first step to identifying any issues or problems with how response times and unit performance are captured and reported. The next step is to establish guidelines for accurately capturing the turnout time performance and identify those times when the turnout time is beyond established thresholds. This will allow for evaluating the problem and determining if it is a data issue, an operational issue, or other technical problem. The process will be further refined to improve the reliability of the data.

Improvement to the turnout time component can take several forms. Some departments have installed timers in the station at the apparatus bay doors, indicating the time elapsed since the dispatch was received. This allows the crews to see their turnout time performance instantly, and according to some departments, it has helped to improve their turnout time. Many departments have also encouraged and required the on-duty crews to place their gear at or on the apparatus instead of leaving it in the locker or other location within the station.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

Work with the communications center to ensure adequate procedures and processes for capturing the time stamps.

Install timers in the stations at the apparatus doors to indicate the elapsed time from dispatch.

Post the turnout time performance monthly by shift to allow crews to see their performance.

Create a reporting mechanism for excessive turnout times to allow for evaluation of the cause of turnout time delays.

Page 172 of 329 ends

Re
Standard of Cover Morro Bay Fire Department Morro Bay, CA Matrix Consulting Group 73
Distribution of Resources
As noted, distribution is the measure of getting initial resources to an emergency to begin mitigation efforts. With the advent of GIS technology and improved computer-aided dispatch (CAD) systems, the use of actual travel time is another more accurate measure for the distribution of resources. However, travel time is a time and distance measurement with very few controllable parts, as fire stations are used as stationary points.

In the Community Risk Assessment, the city was divided into the North and South planning zones using the E.G. Lewis Highway as a dividing point. As noted, the North Zone has a higher percentage of the population, but the South Zone has a higher volume of calls. The following table highlights the travel time for emergency calls for service in each zone.

Table 33: Planning Zone Travel Time
All Emergency Calls –
90th Percentile Times 2021 -2023 2021 2022 2023
Travel Time North Zone 6:59 6:50 7:01 7:04
South Zone 5:34 5:30 5:34 5:36
As expected, the travel time for the South Zone is better as the staffed station is located in this zone.

Between the North and South Zones, the roadway network creates a bottleneck. Main Street and Highway 1 are the only two primary thoroughfares between the two zones.

These two roadways run parallel with the pinch point at Atascadero Road. Access points from Highway 1 to some of the residential streets are limited, making Main Street a preferred route depending on the location of the call. Another factor includes any major incident in the Atascadero Road area, which could completely cut off North Zone access.

In fact, flooding in this area is a potential hazard that will affect the delivery of services.

A couple of improvements need to be made to improve service levels in the North Zone.

First, to customize the response to calls for service, the city will need to establish benchmark performance objectives based on the area's demographics. Establishing a 5- minute travel time benchmark performance objective allows the city to plan for future improvements and is the realm of an acceptable travel time. Secondly, establishing an on-duty crew at Station 54 will improve the travel time to the North Zone and ensure service levels are not interrupted should an incident occur at the pinch point. Finally, Station 54 will require significant facility improvements to house an on-duty crew safely.

Page 173 of 329 ends

Re
Standard of Cover Morro Bay Fire Department Morro Bay, CA Matrix Consulting Group 74
RECOMMENDATIONS:

The City of Morro Bay should establish a 5-minute travel time benchmark performance objective for 90% of the emergency calls for service.

Upgrade Station 54 to ensure it can safely accommodate an on-duty crew.

Establish an on-duty crew at Station 54 to improve travel time in the city's northern section and ensure response reliability during flooding events.

Concentration of Resources
Concentration is generally described as the ability of the fire protection system to get the appropriate number of personnel and resources to the scene of an emergency within a prescribed time to mitigate the incident effectively. An effective response force (ERF) is based on the critical task analysis for a specific type of incident. As previously described, an effective response force to a moderate-risk structure fire requires 16 to 17 personnel to arrive on the scene within a prescribed travel time.

As noted previously, with the current staffing model and the availability of mutual aid, establishing an effective response force of 16 personnel is, at best, challenging. Mutual aid is available from San Luis Obispo County Fire Department stations in Los Osos, Cayucos, and San Luis Obispo. These three stations have a minimum staffing of 11 personnel, and with the staffing of 4 personnel in Morro Bay, that only provides a total of 15 personnel. The Fire Chief and Deputy Fire Chief can provide additional staffing as needed, but these positions are not 24-hour positions.

The benchmark performance objective in NFPA 1710 is to have an ERF of 16 personnel arrive within an 8-minute travel time. Previously, in the system performance section, it was noted that none of the structure fires analyzed met the ERF of 16 personnel. The only mutual aid partner that can meet an 8-minute travel time objective is Station 11 in Cayucos with 3 personnel; the other mutual aid partners cannot meet the travel time component. To meet the performance objectives in NFPA 1710, the city needs to increase the minimum staffing from 4 to 13 positions and rely on mutual aid from the Fire Station in Cayucos to form an ERF of 16 personnel. Increasing the minimum staffing per shift means adding 9 positions per shift for a total of 27 positions.

The addition of these positions likely presents a fiscal challenge to the city. As an alternative, several steps can be taken to address the ERF performance challenges. The first step is to address the minimum staffing of the Morro Bay apparatus. Increasing the minimum staffing for the Morro Bay apparatus from 2 personnel to 3 personnel will improve the arrival of an ERF and firefighter safety.

Page 174 of 329 ends

Re
Standard of Cover Morro Bay Fire Department Morro Bay, CA Matrix Consulting Group 75
In April 2010, The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)8 completed studies on the effectiveness and efficiencies of various crew sizes. Their work included numerous laboratory tests and actual field tests. The study used the responses of three engine companies, a truck company, and a commanding officer with an aide for the field tests. They measured and timed twenty-two fire ground tasks using different crew sizes.

The crews arrived at the scene staggered, much like what is common in communities nationwide. The results of their sixty full-scale tests show that four-person crews were, on average, seven minutes faster than two-person crews at accomplishing the fireground tasks.

Further, the four-person crews completed their tasks 5.1 minutes faster than the threeperson crews. The field tests and tasks were performed using a typical one to two-family dwelling. The study concluded that adding a fifth person to the crews did not significantly impact the time on this type of occupancy.

Skidmore College performed another component of the above-noted study9 on the physiological effects of crew size. The average peak heart rates for firefighters on the 1st Engine were above 80% of age-predicted maximums when only two firefighters were deployed. The driver had an average peak heart rate of nearly 90% of age-predicted maximums when only two firefighters were on the Engine. The following table illustrates the average peak heart rates based on the study.

Table 34: Peak Heart Rates based on Crew Size
Driver Officer FF1 FF2 FF3
2 FF's 89% 83%
3 FF's 72% 70% 74%
4 FF's 75% 70% 75% 64%
5 FF's 71% 68% 71% 68% 58%
Note the reduced heart rate between a crew of two firefighters and three firefighters is 17% for the driver and 13% for the officer positions.

The second step is to establish performance benchmarks that address the city's unique needs. Recall that in Appendix A of the NFPA 1710 standard, the authority having jurisdiction (AHJ) is responsible for adopting performance objectives for their public safety services. Using an ERF of 10 personnel and a travel time of 12 minutes provides 8 Robertson, Bill. Report on Residential Fireground Field Experiments. National Institute of Standards and Technology. April 2010.
9 Smith, Denise, Ph. D and Benedict, Ron. Effect of Deployment of Resources on Cardiovascular Strain of Firefighters. April 2010.

Page 175 of 329 ends

Re
Standard of Cover Morro Bay Fire Department Morro Bay, CA Matrix Consulting Group 76
an opportunity for the city to achieve these objectives. The following map illustrates the areas of the city that are within these parameters.

With this staffing model, Stations 53 and 54 are staffed with 3 personnel and takes advantage of all mutual aid partners.

With a reduced effective response force, the focus should be on prioritizing life safety, implementing a defensive firefighting strategy, maintaining effective command, and continuously reassessing the situation are essential components of incident management. Ultimately, coordination and adaptability are crucial for navigating limitations and ensuring the safety of everyone involved.

Page 176 of 329 ends

Re
Standard of Cover Morro Bay Fire Department Morro Bay, CA Matrix Consulting Group 77
Recommendation
Increase the minimum staffing of the Morro Bay apparatus from two personnel to three personnel to improve firefighter safety and the effective response force.

Establish a performance objective of an effective response force of 10 personnel and a 12-minute travel time.

Page 177 of 329 ends

Re
Standard of Cover Morro Bay Fire Department Morro Bay, CA Matrix Consulting Group 78
Performance Objectives
There are two types of performance statements. The benchmark performance statement identifies the goal or target for the delivery of emergency services. The baseline performance statement identifies the actual performance of the fire department. The difference, or gap, between the two, provides the fire department with a measurable objective for improvement.

For purposes of evaluation and analysis, the following times are used in establishing the benchmark performance objectives:

Table 35: Morro Bay Fire Department Performance Objectives Time Component Time Benchmark Performance Benchmark
Call Processing One minute 90% of all emergency calls for service Turnout Time 1 minute 30 seconds 90% of all emergency calls for service Travel Time - Distribution 5 minutes 90% of all emergency calls for service Travel Time - Concentration 12 minutes 90% of all emergency calls for service Emergency Medical Services
Benchmark Performance Objectives
For 90 percent of all urgent emergency medical incidents located in the city, the response time for the arrival of the first Unit on scene, staffed with two firefighter/EMTs and an officer, shall be: 7 minutes and 30 seconds. The first arriving Unit shall be capable of maintaining scene safety, establishing command, evaluating the need for additional resources, conducting initial patient assessment, and initiating basic life support care.

Baseline Performance Objectives
For 90 percent of all urgent emergency medical incidents located in the city, the total response time for the arrival of the first Unit on scene, staffed with two firefighter/EMTs and an officer, is: 8 minutes and 44 seconds. The first arriving Unit is capable of:
maintaining scene safety, establishing command, evaluating the need for additional resources, conducting initial patient assessment, and initiating basic life support care.

Performance Comparison
The following table illustrates the performance of the Fire Department from 2021 to 2023 compared to the performance benchmark objectives.

Page 178 of 329 ends

Re
Standard of Cover Morro Bay Fire Department Morro Bay, CA Matrix Consulting Group 79
Emergency Medical Calls –
90th Percentile Times
Total Response Time 2021 – 2023
Performance
Benchmark
Performance
Baseline
Performance
Gap
Number of
Calls
First Arriving Unit City 7:30 8:44 1:14 4,482
The performance gap noted in the previous table represents the difference between the benchmark and the baseline performance. The time in red is the time over the benchmark.

Fire Suppression Services
Benchmark Performance Objectives
For 90 percent of all urgent moderate-risk structure fire incidents located in the city, the response time for the arrival of the first Unit on scene, staffed with two firefighter/EMTs and an officer, shall be: 7 minutes and 30 seconds. The first in Unit shall be capable of:
conducting an incident size-up, establishing command, requesting additional resources, assigning incoming resources, securing a water supply, providing 500 gallons of water and 1,500 gallons per minute (gpm) pumping capacity, and initiating rescue or fire attack.

For 90 percent of all urgent moderate-risk structure fire incidents in the city, the response time for the arrival of the effective response force (ERF) of 10 personnel shall be: 14 minutes and 30 seconds. The ERF shall be capable of providing 4,500 gpm pumping capability, advancing an attack line and a backup line for fire control, establishing a rapid intervention crew, completing forcible entry, searching and removing victims from harm, providing medical care for the injured, ventilating the structure, securing utilities, and performing salvage/overhaul.

Baseline Performance Objectives
For 90 percent of all urgent moderate-risk structure fire incidents located in the city the response time for the arrival of the first Unit on scene, staffed with two firefighter/EMTs and an officer, is: 9 minutes and 50 seconds. The first in Unit is capable of: conducting an incident size-up, establishing command, requesting additional resources, assigning incoming resources, securing a water supply, providing 500 gallons of water and 1,500 gallons per minute (gpm) pumping capacity, and initiating rescue or fire attack.

For 90 percent of all urgent moderate-risk structure fire incidents in the city, the response time for the arrival of the effective response force (ERF) of 10 personnel is: 42 minutes and 51 seconds. The ERF is capable of providing 4,500 gpm pumping capability, advancing an attack line and a backup line for fire control, establishing a rapid intervention crew, completing forcible entry, searching and removing victims from harm, providing medical care for the injured, ventilating the structure, securing utilities, and performing salvage/overhaul.

Page 179 of 329 ends

Re
Standard of Cover Morro Bay Fire Department Morro Bay, CA Matrix Consulting Group 80
Performance Comparison
The following table illustrates the performance of the Fire Department from 2021 to 2023 compared to the performance benchmark objective.

Moderate Risk Structure Fire Calls –
90th Percentile Times
Response Time 2021 – 2023
Performance
Benchmark
Performance
Baseline
Performance
Gap
Number of
Calls
First Arriving
Unit City 7:30 9:50 2:20 8
ERF Arrival 14:30 43:52 28:51 2
The performance gap noted in the previous table represents the difference between the benchmark and the baseline performance. The time in red is the time over the benchmark.

The Morro Bay Fire Department

Page 180 of 329 ends

Re
Standard of Cover Morro Bay Fire Department Morro Bay, CA Matrix Consulting Group 81
Facility Assessment
The City of Morro Bay currently owns two fire stations within the city limits. The main station (Fire Station 53) is located at 715 Harbor Street and houses all administrative and operational functions of the Fire Department. This station is in excellent condition and can house current personnel and the additional personnel recommended in this study.

Still, it is not located appropriately to effectively serve the northern portions of the City where Fire Station 54 is located. As illustrated in this report's Community Risk Assessment portion, the northern portions of the City can become inaccessible during flooding events, necessitating the need to staff Fire Station 54.

Fire Station 54 is located at 460 Bonita Street and is currently not staffed. It houses a 75’ aerial apparatus, but the overall condition of the facility does not allow it to house fire personnel. It needs significant improvements prior to being a usable location for housing emergency personnel and being utilized for emergency response.

The City retained Hunter Smith Architecture to provide a feasibility study and schematic design services to renovate Fire Station 54. In June 2024, the City received a report from Hunter Smith Architecture regarding options for Fire Station 54. This report provided three (3) options to accomplish the programming needs of the Morro Bay Fire Department.
• Option A: Remodel the facility within the existing footprint. • Option B: Construct a new 2-story facility at the location. • Option C: Construct a new single-story facility at the location.

Cost estimates for the three (3) options ranged from $788,411 to $2,109,949. The architect recommended option B to meet the programming needs of the Department best, but this was the most option provided. After a review of the architectural report, our project team agreed that option B was the best option for the city. Still, understanding the City's financial limitations, option C would effectively house the additional personnel recommended in this report to be located at Fire Station 54 after construction is complete.

Page 181 of 329 ends

Re
Standard of Cover Morro Bay Fire Department Morro Bay, CA Matrix Consulting Group 82
Index of Tables
Table 1: Morro Bay Demographics.........................................................................................................5 Table 2: Authorized and Current Staffing Levels....................................................................................7 Table 3: Probability .............................................................................................................................21 Table 4: Consequence.........................................................................................................................22 Table 5: Impact on the Morro Bay Fire Department..............................................................................23 Table 6: Natural Hazard Probability.....................................................................................................25 Table 7: Atmospheric Hazards Assessment ........................................................................................25 Table 8: Geologic Hazards Assessment...............................................................................................28 Table 9: Language Barriers .................................................................................................................39 Table 10: Health Insurance ...............................................................................................................40 Table 11: Critical Tasks for the Effective and Efficient Control of Structural Fires..............................49 Table 12: Critical Tasks for Hazardous Materials ..............................................................................50 Table 13: Critical Tasks for Initial Wildland Urban Interface Fires ......................................................50 Table 14: Critical Tasks for Technical Rescue Operations .................................................................50 Table 15: Critical Tasks for Effective Patient Care.............................................................................51 Table 16: Risk Score Summary .........................................................................................................52 Table 17: Planning Zones Overview ..................................................................................................56 Table 18: Planning Zone Demographics ............................................................................................56 Table 19: NFPA 1221 Performance Objective....................................................................................62 Table 20: Call Processing Performance.............................................................................................63 Table 21: Turnout Time – Benchmark Performance Objectives .........................................................63 Table 22: Turnout Time Performance................................................................................................63 Table 23: First Arriving Unit – Benchmark Performance Objectives ...................................................64 Table 24: Travel Time Performance ..................................................................................................64 Table 25: Total Response Time Performance - Distribution...................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

Table 26: First Alarm Assignment – Benchmark Performance Objectives..........................................66 Table 27: First Alarm Assignment - Recommended Personnel...........................................................66 Table 28: Travel Time Performance - Concentration ................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.

Table 29: Concurrent Calls....................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

Table 30: Morro Bay Fire Department Performance Objectives................. Error! Bookmark not defined.

Table 31: Peak Heart Rates based on Crew Size....................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

Table 32: Morro Bay Fire Department Performance Objectives................. Error! Bookmark not defined.

Page 182 of 329 ends

Community
Risk
Assessment
and Standards
of Cover

Page 183 of 329 ends

This report provides a benchmark of
performance based on standards for
an ideal or “perfect” fire service.

Page 184 of 329 ends

Background
• This was one of the 2023- 2025 City
council goal and short-term actions.
• RFP issued November 2023
• Project kickoff meeting April 2024
• Evaluates Fire and Police services
• Final report for Fire received on Feb 11,
2025
• Report still being completed by vendor for
Police evaluation
• A previous report was done in 2004 that
led to creation of Measure “Q”to fund
public safety needs.

Page 185 of 329 ends

Community Risk Assessment
Identifying
hazards
Analyzing
vulnerabilities
Evaluating
capacities and
resources
Risk analysis Developing
strategies
Implementation
and monitoring.

Page 186 of 329 ends

Scope of
work
• Response capabilities.
• Response time analysis.
• Resource locations.
• Available resources to serve the
city.
• Staffing and workforce.

Page 187 of 329 ends

Sections of the
report
Introduction and Executive summary
Fire Department Organization
Community Risk Assessment
Evaluation of Deployment and Performance
Deployment Improvement Opportunities
Performance Objectives
Facility assessment

Page 188 of 329 ends

Findings of the report
• Establish a community standard delineating the services provided, response protocols, and benchmark objectives for the city's fire protection system. • Response protocols and benchmark objectives are established in Lexipol policy manual, SLO EMSA Protocols, and standard performance evolutions.
• Formally establish a baseline performance objective turnout time of 1 minute and 30 seconds for all emergency calls 90% of the time.
• Departmental policy was adopted on 9/10/2024. 1 minute or less 90% of the time for EMS incidents and 1minute 20 seconds or less for non-EMS incidents. Policy 306.3 • Work with the communications center to ensure adequate procedures and processes for capturing the time stamps.
• Upgraded mobile data computers to allow for electronic capture of timestamps improving accuracy.

We have identified discrepancies in data collection and are working with the dispatch center to address.

Page 189 of 329 ends

Additional findings
• Install timers in the stations at the apparatus doors to indicate the elapsed time from dispatch.
• Evaluating cost of upgrading the existing station alerting system, this would be included with new system.
• Post the turnout time performance monthly by shift to allow crews to see their performance.
• We review response times during monthly officers’ meetings. • Create a reporting mechanism for excessive turnout times to allow for evaluation of the cause of turnout time delays.
• We utilize the daily log and email from crew members to notify administration of unusual response situations.

Page 190 of 329 ends

Findings
continued
• The City of Morro Bay should establish a 5-minute
travel time benchmark performance objective for 90%
of the emergency calls for service.
• Meeting this standard requires the second fire station to be staffed due to the distance from primary station
• Upgrade Station 54 to ensure it can safely
accommodate an on-duty crew.
• Conceptual drawings and cost estimates have been
completed. Options and feasibility are being evaluated. • Establish an on-duty crew at Station 54 to improve
travel time in the city’s northern section.
• Requires the addition of 2 full-time positions to fully staff a second station. If second station was operational, we could operate it with current staffing levels initially to improve service.

Page 191 of 329 ends

Response
time coverage
possible.

Page 192 of 329 ends

Staffing recommendations
• Increase the minimum staffing of the
Morro Bay apparatus from two personnel
to three personnel to improve firefighter
safety and the effective response force.

Current staffing is 4 firefighters daily increasing to 5 in the summer with Seasonal Firefighters.
• Establish a performance objective of an
effective response force of 10 personnel
and a 12-minute travel time.

Meeting this guideline would require 6 firefighters
daily plus mutual aid

Page 193 of 329 ends

Questions?

Page 194 of 329 ends

Prepared By: ___DM_______ Dept Review: ________
City Manager Review: __YK______ City Attorney Review: _________ Staff Report
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council DATE: May 28, 2025 FROM: Daniel K. McCrain, Fire Chief
SUBJECT: Bonita Street Fire Station Development

RECOMMENDED ACTION

1. Affirm that it is intent of the City Council to redevelop and staff the Bonita Street Fire Station as City funding and departmental staffing becomes available; and consider three design options;

2. Direct the Fire Chief to complete architectural drawings sufficient to create a “shovel ready” project and appropriate a total of $93,190 including the $38,466 of Fire Department Development Impact Fees to fund the remainder needed to complete these documents; and

3. Authorize the Fire Chief to seek funding sources for construction of a new 2-story living quarters (Option B) at the Bonita Street Station (Construction cost estimate $2,325,682) and

4. Include this project in the City’s Capital Improvement Project list.

ALTERNATIVES

1. Direct the Fire Chief to seek funding sources for the construction of a new 1-story living quarters (Option C) at the Bonita Street Fire Station. Estimated costs $1,455,851.

2. Direct the Fire Chief to seek funding sources for the remodel of the existing living quarters (Option A) at the Bonita Street Fire Station. Estimated costs $788,411 plus engineered retrofits.

3. Provide alternate direction.

4. Take no action.

FISCAL IMPACT
The cost estimate for the preparation of architectural drawings sufficient for a coastal development permit is $17,500. There is sufficient available funding in the Fire Department development impact fee fund for this request.

The estimated cost for construction documents is an additional $75,690 for a total of $93,190 for both phases of architectural drawings. Currently the Fire Department development impact fee fund has a balance of $38,466 if we utilize the development impact fee for CDP drawings and construction AGENDA NO: 9.b
MEETING DATE: June 10, 2025

Page 195 of 329 ends

Page 2 of 6 ends

documents there would be a shortfall of $54,724 that would need to be funded from an alternate source the recommendation is the Measure Q&E fund.

The fiscal impact of the complete project is based on estimates of probable costs provided by Jacobus and Yuang, INC.as part of a conceptual design project by Hunter Smith Architecture. The probable costs related to the construction of each proposal include the demolition of the existing living quarters, where required, and construction costs related to each option. These estimates do not include furnishings such as appliances, and furniture.  Option A- $788,411 (plus structural retrofit costs TBD)  Option B- $2,325,682 (Recommended)
 Option C- $1,455,851
 Appliances and furniture estimated costs TBD.

BACKGROUND
The City of Morro Bay currently has two fire stations. The primary station known as Station 53 is located at 715 Harbor Street. This station is currently staffed with 4 personnel daily and is the headquarters station housing Fire Department administrative staff. The second station previously identified as Station 54 is located at 460 Bonita Street in North Morro Bay. This station has been unstaffed since the 1970’s. Over the years, this station has served as a Fire Chief residence, and as storage for additional Fire Department apparatus and equipment that could be accessed by off duty and Reserve Firefighters for emergency response. The City did own a third property that was designated for a new fire station that was located at Coral and San Jacinto. This property was sold, and a portion of the proceeds were utilized to pay off the remaining loan balance from the construction of the Harbor Street Fire Station.

In October 2001, RRM Design Group conducted a response time analysis evaluating fire department response times from various locations throughout the city in both a 1 and 2 station configuration. At the time of the evaluation the city owned property at San Jacinto and Hwy 1 that was designated for a fire station so that location was evaluated instead of the Bonita Street location. Ideally, a 2-station model with one in North Morro Bay and one in South Morro Bay was found to be the ideal configuration due to a variety of factors. Single station models with a centralized fire station were evaluated and still left portions of town with extended response times and did not address resiliency for flooding and other factors that prevent travel.

In November 2003, the Morro Bay City Council commissioned an ad hoc committee to evaluate emergency services. The recommendations of that committee included moving to a daily staffing of four full time Firefighters with an optimal level of 6 daily as funding allowed. These recommendations were based on industry standards in place at this time. Another recommendation of this working group was to staff a second fire station in North Morro Bay to address a critical need for improved services to the residents in the northern portion of the city. This recommendation was supported by a response time analysis and Standards of Cover survey known as the “Flame Study”, a Fire Department community survey, and an ad hoc committee 5-year strategic plan. Some key decisions resulted from the efforts of this ad hoc committee, the first was this information was utilized to assist in the passage of Measure Q. This Measure was a ½ cent sales tax initiative to boost funding for emergency services within the city. Measure Q passed by a vote of the community in 2006. The second was the City Council approved a motion to “inform the Emergency Services Committee and staff that preferences are for two fire stations (north and south) with minimum funding of four full-time personnel on each shift augmented with Reserve Firefighters; and direct staff to bring back

Page 196 of 329 ends

Page 3 of 6 ends

information on implementing a second fire station by July 12, 2004.” This motion carried unanimously with a 5-0 vote. The third point was at the July 26, 2004, City Council meeting, Councilmember Peirce moved that “it is the intent of the City Council to re-open and staff Fire Station 54, and direct staff to seek funding expeditiously.” The motion also carried unanimously (5-0). As a result of this Council action, funding was secured and the apparatus bay at the Bonita Street station was rebuilt. Due to the economic downturn in 2008, financial constraints impacted this goal, construction of the living quarters was unable to proceed, and progress to staff a second fire station was halted. During this time, the Fire Department responded to approximately 1,500 calls for service annually with 34% occurring in North Morro Bay. Department staffing was nine full time Firefighters plus the Fire Chief for a daily staffing of three; the department relied heavily on a pool of up to 20 part-time Reserve Firefighters to augment staffing.

DISCUSSION
In the 20 years since the ad hoc committee report, the Morro Bay Fire Department’s annual call volume has increased to over 2,200 calls for service, a 32% increase. The recommended minimum daily staffing of four full-time Firefighters was finally achieved in 2022. We currently have a total of 13 full-time Firefighters allowing for one shift with a daily staffing of five personnel and two shifts with a daily staffing of four personnel. We augment this staffing in the summer with Seasonal Firefighters to assist with coverage for mutual aid requests and increased local fire activity. Out of our more than 2,200 calls for service, approximately 30-40% occur north of Highway 41. The response time standard of having an engine on scene in under 5 minutes 90% of the time is greatly exceeded in North Morro Bay. The impact of delayed service can be devastating and support the need for rapid response. Emergency services are always fighting the clock. In regard to fires, the ad hoc committee noted that fires double in size every minute and can progress to a situation known as flashover, a condition where everything in a room or structure ignites simultaneously. Survival from a flashover situation is rare even for firefighters with full protective equipment. Flashover can occur in as little as 3-5 minutes from the start of the fire in modern homes. This time has decreased from as much as 17 minutes during the 1970’s due to the transition from natural wood and fiber products to petroleum based, synthetic home furnishings. Smoke, however, is usually much more lethal than the actual heat of fire due to carbon monoxide and other toxic products of combustion that can overcome a person in minutes. In addition to fire, there are many other time sensitive situations that cause great concern. Finally, pain and suffering for even non-life-threatening injuries and illnesses is prolonged without rapid access to emergency medical care.

Some examples highlighting the need for a station in North Morro Bay beyond the routine calls for service include: in 1995, the north and south parts of the city were isolated due to flooding when 12” of rain fell in 24 hours; in 2001, 3,000 people were evacuated from the city due to an anhydrous ammonia leak and again the City was isolated north from south; and, the 2003 San Simeon Earthquake caused damage throughout Morro Bay, including damage to the headquarters fire station. A new North Fire Station would provide an alternate facility for operations. We also experienced emergencies at the power plant located in the heart of the city while it was in operation, including two non-electrical incidents related to the plant.

Most recently, in January of 2023, the City experienced flooding events as a result of an atmospheric river. These flooding events resulted in the isolation of North and South Morro Bay with all routes in and out of the city cut off for an extended period of time. During this storm event we were able to move a crew to the Bonita Street station to cover North Morro Bay. The crew placed cots for sleeping in the apparatus bay and utilized a former employees house in the Cloisters for access to a bathroom and kitchen. This arrangement was substandard in meeting the needs of the response personnel,

Page 197 of 329 ends

Page 4 of 6 ends

but it was a tactical decision made to ensure the ability to continue providing services to half of the city during an evolving emergency. During this event we were unable to rely on mutual aid resources because the entire county was affected by this storm and every route in and out of the city was closed due to flooding.

As presented in Item 9.b of this agenda packet, the City commissioned a Community Risk Assessment and Standards of Cover report to look at emergency services in Morro Bay. Matrix Consulting Group was the firm selected through an RFP process to complete this study. Matrix Consulting reviewed response data from 2021, 2022, and 2023, as well as organizational documents, policies and procedures, and mutual aid resources. As a result of their review, and interpretation of industry standards, regulations, and best practices, the following are some of the recommendations made to better align the city’s emergency response with industry standards.  Recommend upgrading and staffing the Bonita Street Station to reduce response times to North Morro Bay.
 Increase the minimum staffing on each apparatus from 2 daily to 3 daily to improve firefighter safety and the effective response force. This would increase daily staffing from 4 to 6 personnel.
 Establish a turnout time of 1:30 for all emergency calls 90% of the time.  Establish a 5-minute travel time benchmark performance objective for 90% of the emergency calls for service.
 Establish a performance objective of an Effective Response Force of 10 personnel and a 12- minute travel time. (long range goal to meet NFPA guidelines)  Establish a community standard delineating the services provided, response protocols, and benchmark objectives for the city's fire protection system To address this critically needed piece of infrastructure to support Fire Department Operations, the Fire Department conducted a Request for Proposals (RFP) for architecture services to provide schematic design options with cost estimates for a remodel and/or rebuilding of the Bonita Street Fire Station. The architect provided three schematic design ideas with feasibility analysis and cost estimates.

Option “A” (not recommended)
The first proposal Option “A” was to remodel the existing living quarters. Although this design is potentially the least expensive, staff does not recommend this option for many reasons. This option requires multiple retrofits to meet current seismic and energy efficiency standards including repairing cracks and breakage in the existing masonry structure. These retrofits decrease the existing living space down from 1,145 sf because of the need to add 2”x6” wall studs and interior drywall to run new electrical, insulation, and plumbing due to the existing block masonry exterior walls. This footprint reduces an already very limited space for adequate living area for crew members, restroom facilities, office space, and adequate storage for equipment and supplies. This option utilizes the existing footprint of the structure, limiting the design options to provide adequate space or be redesigned to accommodate future needs of the department. Although this option may be the least expensive initially, the result would still be a structure that is a mix of very old existing building and modern retrofits that does not sufficiently address the needs of the organization, potentially leading to future construction needs and costs. As with many renovation projects, unknown elements in the existing structure could be identified during the construction process that could lead to design changes or complications and increased costs. Structural engineering retrofits such as repairing the horizontal

Page 198 of 329 ends

Page 5 of 6 ends

and vertical cracking of the masonry structure, horizontal reinforcement paneling, vertical rebar and grout, as well as wall to ceiling reinforcement were estimated in the cost estimates and will likely incur additional expense once fully engineered. The total of these structural engineering expenses is unknown at this time and will be evaluated further if this option is selected, increasing the actual cost of this option. The architect and cost estimating firm were unable to provide complete cost estimates for the required structural engineering retrofits needed as these would have to be specifically engineered for this project.

Option “B” (Preferred)
Option “B” is the preferred option for this project. Although this is the most expensive of the three options it provides many benefits over the other two options. The primary benefit of this option is that it provides adequate space for all current and anticipated departmental needs and allows for future departmental growth and changes without incurring significant renovation costs in the future. This option is a 2,322 sf, 2-story structure with personnel bedrooms, bathrooms, and kitchen upstairs with office space and storage downstairs. This option will be designed around the needs of the department and will maximize the space as efficiently as possible. This design also allows for separation between the operational area and the living quarters as is an industry standard to limit exposure to contaminants related to emergency response in the living quarters; this is a design trend in the fire service to potentially reduce occupational cancers. Every aspect of the design has a specific purpose to meet operational needs and to allow for changing requirements as the fire service evolves, technologies are updated, and the needs of the community evolve.

Option “C” (2
nd Preferred alternative)
Option “C” would be the second preferred option. This is a new construction 1-story living quarters of approximately 1,410 sf. The benefits of this option over the remodel option “A” are this is a purposebuilt structure that will maximize the available buildable area of the property. This option will provide adequate living space for the crew members but not for equipment and supplies, reducing operational efficiency. Benefits of this option over option “A” include sufficient room for three desks within the office space, addition of a dining table for crew meals, each bedroom is large enough for three lockers, and indoor laundry facilities. This option also provides a fully updated facility and removes the possibility of patchwork retrofits and hidden complications possible in option “A”. One drawback of this option over option “B” is this option limits the potential for any future departmental growth or changes to the structure without incurring substantial renovation costs that increase year after year.

This option also lacks adequate storage space for the required supplies and equipment for normal operations. Due to the size of the lot and required building setbacks it is not possible to build a singlestory structure with all the required features of a modern fire station. This option would meet the goal of establishing a station in North Morro Bay to improve service to that portion of the city but will more than likely require future upgrades to fully support operations.

CONCLUSION
Having a fire station in North Morro Bay has long been identified as a critical need for the city. The Morro Bay Fire Department is in a unique position to accomplish this because the department has sufficient number of fire apparatus to staff this station, and the city already owns property and a second station. The Bonita Street Station can be utilized to meet this need, so we avoid land acquisition expenses. The second station has a fully functional apparatus bay that will not require renovation and is suitable for immediate use. The existing living quarters are uninhabitable due to the age and condition of the building. A thorough evaluation of the existing living quarters has highlighted many structural and safety deficiencies, as well as the need for substantial renovation to meet the department’s needs. Although the initial cost estimates indicate that remodeling the existing

Page 199 of 329 ends

Page 6 of 6 ends

building is the least expensive option, the cost for required structural engineering retrofits has not been fully incorporated into the overall cost of this option. This option also results in a station that would not fully meet the operational needs of the department and would require future expensive renovation as operational needs evolve. We have determined that removing the existing living quarters and building a new structure will ultimately better serve the department.

Once a vision is agreed upon, the next step in this process is the development of architectural drawings sufficient for a coastal development permit. This would create a “shovel ready project”. By having a “Shovel-ready” project we can be eligible to apply for grants, State and Federal budget appropriations and other funding opportunities. Therefore, staff is seeking approval for funding in the amount of $93,190 to complete the architectural drawings. This amount includes the use of $38,466 of development impact fee funding available to the Fire Department.

Subsequent steps would include applying for a development permit, presenting this project to the planning commission and finally creating construction documents.

The new 2-story option is the preferred design choice as this project would meet all of the department’s current and anticipated operational needs. Having adequate space for personnel, equipment, supplies and operational areas is essential. The 2-story option provides adequate storage space separation between operational areas and living areas that are not possible in the 1-story option due to the limited footprint available within the property boundaries. By building a second story we can maximize available space on a small parcel. By anticipating future departmental needs and planning ahead, we can prevent future costly renovations and unplanned additional capital expenses ultimately saving the city money. The 2-story option is similar in size and appearance with other properties on Bonita Street and will not dramatically alter the appearance of the neighborhood.

The cost of construction continues to increase annually, the construction costs for other local fire departments have ranged between $1,100 per square foot and $1,500 per square foot depending on the project and in many instances the addition of land acquisition expenses. These costs are higher than constructing a private residence due to the requirement to utilize prevailing wage contractors that a private citizen is not required to do. The estimates of probable costs for option B equate to a unit cost of $908.68 per square foot, and $874.37 for option C. These estimates allow for a 7.5% annual escalation in construction costs with construction to begin in August 2025 for estimating purposes.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Schematic Plans

2. Schematic Design and Feasibility Analysis

3. Staff Presentation

Page 200 of 329 ends

Schematic Plans
Morro Bay Fire Department
Station 2 - 460 Bonita Street
June 27 2024
Option A - Remodel Existing Facility
Option B - New Construction 2-Story Facility Option C - New Construction Single Story Facility

Page 201 of 329 ends

3/
16"=1'-0"

AS-BUILTSITEPLAN
SCALE:
(E)APPARATUSBAYTOREMAIN(NOTINSCOPE)
ELEC

LIVINGROOM

KITCHENBATHROOMCLOSETBEDROOM
CLOSET

BEDROOM
CLOSET

LIVINGQUARTERS
1,145S.F. GM
ENTRY
CLG:VAULT
CLG:VAULT
CLG:VAULTCLG:VAULT
CLG:8'-0"
CLG:8'-0"
CLG:8'-0"
CLG:8'-0"

PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL

PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
(E)CONCRETEDRIVEWAY
(E)LAWN
(E)CONCRETEDRIVEWAY
(E)LAWN
113
CA-0.0

AS-BUILT SITE PLAN

DANIEL MCCRAIN, FIRE CHIEF
715 HARBOR ST.

MORRO BAY, CA 93442

MORRO BAY

FIRE STATION
460 BONITA STREET,
MORRO BAY, CA 93442
These drawings are instruments
of service and are the property of

HUNTER SMITH
ARCHITECTURE.

All designs and other information
on the drawings are for use on the
specified project and shall not be
used otherwise without the
expressed written permission of

HUNTER SMITH

ARCHITECTURE
860 Walnut Street • Suite B • San Luis Obispo • CA 93401 HUNTERSMITH&ASSOCIATES,INC.

DBAHUNTERSMITHARCHITECTURE©2024
10-31-2025
C-38575

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
Apr 29, 2024 PLOT DATE:

PROGRESS
29APR2024

Page 202 of 329 ends

3/16" = 1'-0"

SITE PLAN - OPTION A (ONE STORY)
SCALE:
(E) APPARATUS BAY TO REMAIN (NOT IN SCOPE)

PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL

PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL

PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL

PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL
B
O
NITA
AV
E
N
U
E
3068
3068
ELEC

LIVING ROOM
BATHROOM #1
BEDROOM #1
OFFICE
GM
ENTRY
3068 3068 3068
3068
BEDROOM #2
3068 3068 3068

STORAGE
PANTRY
ROOM
BATHROOM #2 BEDROOM #3

DW SINK
OVEN

KITCHEN

COVERED

BREEZEWAY
SHOWER
SHOWER

LIVING QUARTERS
1,145 S.F.
24" SQ.

LOCK.

TYP.
24" SQ.

LOCK.

TYP.
24" SQ.

LOCK.

TYP.
48" REF
9x3 ISLAND

DINING TABLE
5'-0"

SETBACK
20'-0"

SETBACK
10'-0"

SETBACK
(E) CONCRETE DRIVEWAY (E) LAWN
(E) CONCRETE DRIVEWAY
(E) LAWN

FRONT SETBACK NOT APPLICABLE FOR

NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE
113
CA-1.0
(OPT A)

SITE PLAN - OPTION A

DANIEL MCCRAIN, FIRE CHIEF
715 HARBOR ST. MORRO BAY, CA 93442
M
O
R
R
O
B
AY
FIR
E
S
TATIO
N 460 B
O
NITA
S
T
R
E
E
T, MORRO BAY, CA 93442
These drawings are instruments
of service and are the property of

HUNTER SMITH
ARCHITECTURE.

All designs and other information
on the drawings are for use on the
specified project and shall not be
used otherwise without the
expressed written permission of

HUNTER SMITH

ARCHITECTURE
860 Walnut Street • Suite B • San Luis Obispo • CA 93401 HUNTER SMITH & ASSOCIATES, INC.

DBA HUNTER SMITH ARCHITECTURE © 2024
10-31-2025
C-38575

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
Apr 29, 2024 PLOT DATE:

PROGRESS
29 APR 2024
CODE (2018 UPDATE)

CODE ANALYSIS - MORRO BAY MUNICIPAL
TABLE 17.05.030.A: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS - RS DISTRICTS ZONE: RS-A (R1) R1 = 4301 S.F. AND GREATER LOT AREA

QUARTERS FOOTPRINT
OPERATIONS & LIVING 1238 S.F.

FOOTPRINT
APPARATUS BAY BUILDING 1634 S.F.

LOT AREA 6897 S.F.

LOT COVERAGE (%) 41.6%

STANDARD REQUIRED PROPOSED
MAX. DENSITY (UNITS/LOT) 1 UNIT 1 UNIT
MAX LOT COVERAGE (% OF LOT) 45% 41.6%
MAX. BUILDING HEIGHT 25'-0" 11'-0"

LANDSCAPING N/A N/A
MAX # OF STORIES N/A 1
MAX BUILDING WALL HEIGHT 30'-0" 10'-2"
SETBACKS FOR ZONE R1
FRONT 20'-0" *** REFER TO SITE FOR

LOCATION OF

BUILDING RELATIVE

TO SETBACKS
INTERIOR SIDE 5'-0"
REAR 25'-0"
***FRONT SETBACK NOT APPLICABLE AT NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE

Page 203 of 329 ends

1 13
A-1.0
(OPTA)

DIMENSIONAL AND

PROPOSED FLOOR

PLANS - OPTION A

DANIEL MCCRAIN, FIRE CHIEF
715 HARBOR ST.

MORRO BAY, CA 93442

MORRO BAY

FIRE STATION
460 BONITA STREET,
MORRO BAY, CA 93442
These drawings are instruments
of service and are the property of

HUNTER SMITH
ARCHITECTURE.

All designs and other information
on the drawings are for use on the
specified project and shall not be
used otherwise without the
expressed written permission of

HUNTER SMITH

ARCHITECTURE
860 Walnut Street • Suite B • San Luis Obispo • CA 93401 HUNTERSMITH&ASSOCIATES,INC.

DBAHUNTERSMITHARCHITECTURE©2024
10-31-2025
C-38575

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
Apr 29, 2024 PLOT DATE:

PROGRESS
29APR2024
(E)APPARATUSBAYTOREMAIN(NOTINSCOPE)
3068
3068
ELEC

LIVINGROOM
BATHROOM#1
BEDROOM#1
OFFICE
GM
ENTRY
306830683068
3068
BEDROOM#2
306830683068

STORAGE
PANTRY
ROOM
BATHROOM#2
BEDROOM#3
DW
SINK
OVEN

KITCHEN

COVERED

BREEZEWAY
SHOWER
SHOWER

LIVINGQUARTERS
1,145S.F.
24"SQ.

LOCK.

TYP.
24"SQ.

LOCK.

TYP.
24"SQ.

LOCK.

TYP.
48"REF9
x3ISLAND

DININGTABLE

PROPOSEDFLOORPLAN-OPTIONA
Scale:1/4"=1'-0"
1 3068
3068
ELEC

LIVINGROOM
BATHROOM#1
BEDROOM#1
OFFICE
GM
ENTRY
306830683068
3068
BEDROOM#2
306830683068

STORAGE
PANTRY
ROOM
BATHROOM#2
BEDROOM#3
DW
SINK
OVEN

KITCHEN

COVERED

BREEZEWAY
SHOWER
SHOWER

LIVINGQUARTERS
1,145S.F.
24"SQ.

LOCK.

TYP.
24"SQ.

LOCK.

TYP.
24"SQ.

LOCK.

TYP.
48"REF9
x3ISLAND

DININGTABLE
6'-2"9'-81/2"8'-7"
8'-9 1/2"
16'-8"6'-2"9'-21/2"5'-71/2"9'-51/2"
22'-11 1/2"
8'-0"
3'-6"
CLR.
8'-9"
4'-6"
3'-6"
CLR.
(E)APPARATUSBAYTOREMAIN(NOTINSCOPE)

DIMENSIONALFLOORPLAN-OPTIONA
Scale:1/4"=1'-0"
2 1/4"=1'-0"
PROPOSEDDIMENSIONALANDPROPOSEDFLOORPLANS:OPTIONA(ONESTORY) SCALE: Page 204 of 329
1 /16"=1'-0"

FRONTELEVATION(OPTIONA)
SCALE:
113
A-9.0
(OPTA)

ELEVATION - OPTION
A

DANIEL MCCRAIN, FIRE CHIEF
715 HARBOR ST.

MORRO BAY, CA 93442

MORRO BAY

FIRE STATION
460 BONITA STREET,
MORRO BAY, CA 93442
These drawings are instruments
of service and are the property of

HUNTER SMITH
ARCHITECTURE.

All designs and other information
on the drawings are for use on the
specified project and shall not be
used otherwise without the
expressed written permission of

HUNTER SMITH

ARCHITECTURE
860 Walnut Street • Suite B • San Luis Obispo • CA 93401 HUNTERSMITH&ASSOCIATES,INC.

DBAHUNTERSMITHARCHITECTURE©2024
10-31-2025
C-38575

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
Apr 29, 2024 PLOT DATE:

PROGRESS
29APR2024
F.F.
0'-0"
T.O.R
18'-3"
F.F.
0'-0"
T.O.R
11'-0"
T.O.P.
8'1"
(E)APPARATUSBAYTOREMAIN

Page 205 of 329 ends

C
ODE(2018UPDATE)

CODEANALYSIS-MORROBAYMUNICIPAL
TABLE17.05.030.A:DEVELOPMENTSTANDARDS-RSDISTRICTS
ZONE:RS-A(R1)R1=4301S.F.ANDGREATERLOTAREA

QUARTERSFOOTPRINT

OPERATIONS&LIVING
1453S.F.

FOOTPRINT

APPARATUSBAYBUILDING
1634S.F.

LOTAREA6897S.F.

LOTCOVERAGE(%)44.8%

STANDARDREQUIREDPROPOSED
MAX.DENSITY(UNITS/LOT)1UNIT1UNIT
MAXLOTCOVERAGE(%OFLOT)45%44.8%
MAX.BUILDINGHEIGHT25'-0"21'-9"

LANDSCAPINGN/AN/A
MAX#OFSTORIESN/A2
MAXBUILDINGWALLHEIGHT30'-0"21'-3"
SETBACKSFORZONER1
FRONT
20'-0"

REFERTOSITEFOR

LOCATIONOF

BUILDINGRELATIVE

TOSETBACKS

INTERIORSIDE
5'-0"
REAR
25'-0"
3/16"=1'-0"

SITEPLAN-OPTIONB(TWOSTORY)
SCALE:
113
CA-1.0
(OPTB)

SITE PLAN - OPTION
B

DANIEL MCCRAIN, FIRE CHIEF
715 HARBOR ST.

MORRO BAY, CA 93442

MORRO BAY

FIRE STATION
460 BONITA STREET,
MORRO BAY, CA 93442
These drawings are instruments
of service and are the property of

HUNTER SMITH
ARCHITECTURE.

All designs and other information
on the drawings are for use on the
specified project and shall not be
used otherwise without the
expressed written permission of

HUNTER SMITH

ARCHITECTURE
860 Walnut Street • Suite B • San Luis Obispo • CA 93401 HUNTERSMITH&ASSOCIATES,INC.

DBAHUNTERSMITHARCHITECTURE©2024
10-31-2025
C-38575

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
Apr 29, 2024 PLOT DATE:

PROGRESS
29APR2024
(E)APPARATUSBAYTOREMAIN(NOTINSCOPE)

PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL

PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
5'-0"

SETBACK
20'-0"

SETBACK
10'-0"

SETBACK
3068
3068
ELEC
ENTRY

COVERED

BREEZEWAY

OPERATIONS
1,197S.F.(GROSS)

PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL

STORAGE
UP
GM
OFFICE#1
306830683068
OFFICE#2OFFICE#3

CONFERENCE
3068

KITCHENETTE
3068
POWDER
ROOM
8068
W/D
GYM
WH
(E)CONCRETEDRIVEWAY
(E)LAWN
(E)CONCRETEDRIVEWAY
(N)PARKINGSTALLS
(3TOTAL)

Page 206 of 329 ends

1 13
A-1.0
(OPTB)

DIMENSIONAL AND

PROPOSED LOWER

FLOOR PLANS -

OPTION B

DANIEL MCCRAIN, FIRE CHIEF
715 HARBOR ST.

MORRO BAY, CA 93442

MORRO BAY

FIRE STATION
460 BONITA STREET,
MORRO BAY, CA 93442
These drawings are instruments
of service and are the property of

HUNTER SMITH
ARCHITECTURE.

All designs and other information
on the drawings are for use on the
specified project and shall not be
used otherwise without the
expressed written permission of

HUNTER SMITH

ARCHITECTURE
860 Walnut Street • Suite B • San Luis Obispo • CA 93401 HUNTERSMITH&ASSOCIATES,INC.

DBAHUNTERSMITHARCHITECTURE©2024
10-31-2025
C-38575

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
Apr 29, 2024 PLOT DATE:

PROGRESS
29APR2024
(E)APPARATUSBAYTOREMAIN(NOTINSCOPE)
3068
3068
ELEC
ENTRY

COVERED

BREEZEWAY

OPERATIONS
1,197S.F.(GROSS)

STORAGE
UP
GM
OFFICE#1
306830683068
OFFICE#2OFFICE#3

CONFERENCE
3068

KITCHENETTE
3068
POWDER
ROOM
8068
W/D
GYM
WH
8'-11/2"
16'-11/2"6'-91/2"15'-41/2"8'-11/2"
5'-0"
15'-7 1/2" 10'-1"
8'-5"
4'-0"
CLR.
8'-11/2"8'-11/2"
6'-4"
5'-8"
4'-5 1/2"
15'-41/2"
12'-10 1/2"
8'-0"
8'-0" 13'-1 1/2"
27'-0"

OVERALL
48'-21/2"

OVERALL
11'-4"

DIMENSIONALLOWERFLOORPLAN-OPTIONB
Scale:1/4"=1'-0"
2 ASNOTED
DIMENSIONALANDPROPOSEDLOWERFLOORPLANS:OPTIONB(TWOSTORY) SCALE:
(E)APPARATUSBAYTOREMAIN(NOTINSCOPE)
3068
3068
ELEC
ENTRY

COVERED

BREEZEWAY

OPERATIONS
1,197S.F.(GROSS)

STORAGE
UP
GM
OFFICE#1
306830683068
OFFICE#2OFFICE#3

CONFERENCE
3068

KITCHENETTE
3068
POWDER
ROOM
8068
W/D
GYM
WH

PROPOSEDLOWERFLOORPLAN-OPTIONB
Scale:1/4"=1'-0"
1

Page 207 of 329 ends

A
SNOTED

DIMENSIONALANDPROPOSEDUPPERFLOORPLANS-OPTIONB(TWOSTORY) SCALE:
113
A-2.0
(OPTB)

DIMENSIONAL ANDPROPOSED UPPER

FLOOR PLANS -

OPTION B

DANIEL MCCRAIN, FIRE CHIEF
715 HARBOR ST.

MORRO BAY, CA 93442

MORRO BAY

FIRE STATION
460 BONITA STREET,
MORRO BAY, CA 93442
These drawings are instruments
of service and are the property of

HUNTER SMITH
ARCHITECTURE.

All designs and other information
on the drawings are for use on the
specified project and shall not be
used otherwise without the
expressed written permission of

HUNTER SMITH

ARCHITECTURE
860 Walnut Street • Suite B • San Luis Obispo • CA 93401 HUNTERSMITH&ASSOCIATES,INC.

DBAHUNTERSMITHARCHITECTURE©2024
10-31-2025
C-38575

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
Apr 29, 2024 PLOT DATE:

PROGRESS
29APR2024
8068
DECK
GM
306830683068
BEDROOM#3

LIVINGQUARTERS
1,125S.F.(GROSS)
24"SQ.

LOCK.

TYP.

CLOSET
BATHROOM#2
SHOWER
BATHROOM#1
SHOWER
BEDROOM#1
30683068
BEDROOM#2
24"SQ.

LOCK.

TYP.
24"SQ.

LOCK.

TYP.

K
IT
CH
E
N
9x4ISLAND
DININ
GTABLE
DW
S
IN
K
OV
EN
48"
R
EF
3068
PANTRY

STORAGE
ROOM

LIVINGROOM
(E)APPARATUSBAYROOFTOREMAIN
(NOTINSCOPE)
DNSTA
IRWAY

PROPOSEDUPPERFLOORPLAN-OPTIONB
Scale:1/4"=1'-0"
1 8068
DECK
GM
306830683068
BEDROOM#3

LIVINGQUARTERS
1,125S.F.(GROSS)
24"SQ.

LOCK.

TYP.

CLOSET
BATHROOM#2
SHOWER
BATHROOM#1
SHOWER
BEDROOM#1
30683068
BEDROOM#2
24"SQ.

LOCK.

TYP.
24"SQ.

LOCK.

TYP.

KITCH
EN
9x4ISLAND

DININGTA
BLE
DW
SINK
OVEN
48"REF
3068
PANTRY

STORAGE
ROOM

LIVINGROOM
(E)APPARATUSBAYROOFTOREMAIN
(NOTINSCOPE)
DNSTA
IRWAY
16'-6"10'-5"
9'-9"
8'-4"12'-10"6'-91/2"5'-101/2"5'-101/2"
27'-0"

OVERALL
11'-8 1/2"
4'-1 1/2"
CLR.
11'-5"
3'-9"
CLR.
10'-5"
11'-1"
5'-9"
3'-8"
CLR.
3'-6"
CLR
44'-11"

OVERALL

DIMENSIONALUPPERFLOORPLAN-OPTIONB
Scale:1/4"=1'-0"
2

Page 208 of 329 ends

1 /4"=1'-0"

FRONTELEVATION(OPTIONB)
SCALE:
113
A-9.0
(OPTB)

ELEVATION - OPTION
B

DANIEL MCCRAIN, FIRE CHIEF
715 HARBOR ST.

MORRO BAY, CA 93442

MORRO BAY

FIRE STATION
460 BONITA STREET,
MORRO BAY, CA 93442
These drawings are instruments
of service and are the property of

HUNTER SMITH
ARCHITECTURE.

All designs and other information
on the drawings are for use on the
specified project and shall not be
used otherwise without the
expressed written permission of

HUNTER SMITH

ARCHITECTURE
860 Walnut Street • Suite B • San Luis Obispo • CA 93401 HUNTERSMITH&ASSOCIATES,INC.

DBAHUNTERSMITHARCHITECTURE©2024
10-31-2025
C-38575

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
Apr 29, 2024 PLOT DATE:

PROGRESS
29APR2024

FRONTELEVATION-OPTIONB(TWOSTORY)
Scale:1/4"=1'-0"
2 T.O.P
19'-0"F.F
.
0'-0"
T.O.R
21'-9"T.

O.P.
9'-0"
F.F.
10'-0"
T.O.R
18'-3"
F.F.
0'-0"
(E)APPARATUSBAYTOREMAIN

Page 209 of 329 ends

113
A-1.0
(OPT B)

DIMENSIONAL AND PROPOSED LOWER FLOOR PLANS - OPTION B

HUNTER SMITH
ARCHITECTURE.

All designs and other information
on the drawings are for use on the
specified project and shall not be
used otherwise without the
expressed written permission of

HUNTER SMITH

ARCHITECTURE
860 Walnut Street • Suite B • San Luis Obispo • CA 93401 10-31-2025
C-38575

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
PROGRESS DATE: 2024-05-10 29 APR 2024
(E) APPARATUS BAY TO REMAIN (NOT IN SCOPE)
3068
3068
ELEC
ENTRY

COVERED

BREEZEWAY

OPERATIONS
1,197 S.F. (GROSS)

STORAGE
UP
GM
OFFICE #1
3068 3068 3068
OFFICE #2 OFFICE #3

CONFERENCE
3068

KITCHENETTE
3068
POWDER
ROOM
8068
W/D
GYM
WH

FOUNDATION PLAN
HDR
S1
S1
S1
4 9
6 11.5
4 11.5
1B1
S1
S1
S1
6 11.5
6 6
PROVIDE 6" SEISMIC GAP

BETWEEN NEW AND

EXISTING BUILDING, TYP ALL
LEVELS
5" SLAB ON GRADE
W/ #4 @ 16" O.C.

DEEPENED FOUNDATION MUST

EXTEND A MINIMUM OF ONE FOOT

INTO THE UNDERLYING LIGHT BROWN

MATERIAL PER GEOTECHNICAL
ENGINEERING REPORT, TYP.

GB2 TYP, U.N.O.

GB1
GB1
GB1
GB1
GB1
GB1 GB1
GB1 GB1
GB1
1J#
9 12
S1
1B1

1.75X9.25
4X12
LVL
DF #1
STAIR STRINGER PER DET. X
1'-6"
(2)-#5 (2)-#5
F3.0
F4.0
3'-0"
4'-0"
1'-6"
1'-6"
3'-0"
4'-0"
F4.0
F3.0
F3.0
TYP
UNO 1J1 16"OC 2X8 DF#2
6 28.5'
6 31.5'
L= 3'-0"
L= 4'-0" L= 23'-5"
L= 3'-0"
FTF ENGINEERING, INC.

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION

SCHEMATIC

STRUCTURAL SET
S-200
Option B - Structural Schematic

Page 210 of 329 ends

1 13
A-1.0
(OPTB)

DIMENSIONAL AND

PROPOSED LOWER

FLOOR PLANS -

OPTION B

DANIEL MCCRAIN, FIRE CHIEF
715 HARBOR ST.

MORRO BAY, CA 93442

MORRO BAY

FIRE STATION
460 BONITA STREET,
MORRO BAY, CA 93442
These drawings are instruments
of service and are the property of

HUNTER SMITH
ARCHITECTURE.

All designs and other information
on the drawings are for use on the
specified project and shall not be
used otherwise without the
expressed written permission of

HUNTER SMITH

ARCHITECTURE
860 Walnut Street • Suite B • San Luis Obispo • CA 93401 HUNTERSMITH&ASSOCIATES,INC.

DBAHUNTERSMITHARCHITECTURE©2024
10-31-2025
C-38575

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
Apr 29, 2024 PLOT DATE:

PROGRESS
29APR2024
(E)APPARATUSBAYTOREMAIN(NOTINSCOPE)
3068
3068
ELEC
ENTRY

COVERED

BREEZEWAY

OPERATIONS
1,197S.F.(GROSS)

STORAGE
UP
GM
OFFICE#1
306830683068
OFFICE#2OFFICE#3

CONFERENCE
3068

OVERALL
48'-21/2"

OVERALL
11'-4"

DIMENSIONALLOWERFLOORPLAN-OPTIONB
Scale:1/4"=1'-0"
2 ASNOTED
DIMENSIONALANDPROPOSEDLOWERFLOORPLANS:OPTIONB(TWOSTORY) SCALE:
(E)APPARATUSBAYTOREMAIN(NOTINSCOPE)
3068
3068
ELEC
ENTRY

COVERED

BREEZEWAY

OPERATIONS
1,197S.F.(GROSS)

STORAGE
UP
GM
OFFICE#1
306830683068
OFFICE#2OFFICE#3

CONFERENCE
3068

KITCHENETTE
3068
POWDER
ROOM
8068
W/D
GYM
WH

PROPOSEDLOWERFLOORPLAN-OPTIONB
Scale:1/4"=1'-0"
1 8068
DECK
GM
306830683068
BEDROOM#3

LIVINGQUARTERS
1,125S.F.(GROSS)
24"SQ.

LOCK.

TYP.

CLOSET
BATHROOM#2
SHOWER
BATHROOM#1
SHOWER
BEDROOM#1
30683068
BEDROOM#2
24"SQ.

LOCK.

TYP.
24"SQ.

LOCK.

TYP.

K
IT
CH
E
N
9x4ISLAND
DININ
GTABLE
DW
S
IN
K
OV
EN
48"
R
EF
3068
PANTRY

STORAGE
ROOM

LIVINGROOM
DNSTA
IRWAY
6 14.5
HDR
4X6 POST ABV.

W/ HDU
4X6 POST ABV.

W/ HDU
2B3 2B3

HDR HDR HDR
2B4
2J3
2J2 2J1
HDR HDR HDR 2J1
2J2
2J1
2J1

HDR HDR HDR
2J1
2B2
2B3
HDR
HDR
HDR
S1
S1
S1
6 10
4X6 POST ABV.

W/ HDU
4X6 POST ABV.

W/ HDU
6 11.5
6 11.56 28.5'
6 31.5'
2B3
2B1 2B1 2B1

SECOND FLOOR FRAMING PLAN
2J1
2J2
2J3
16"OC
16"OC
16"OC
2x12
11 7/8
2x10
DF#2
TJ1230
DF#2
S1
2B1
2B2
2B3
2B4

1.75X9.25
4X6
6X10

5.25X11.25
4x12
LVL
DF #1
DF #1
PSL
DF #1
STAIR STRINGER PER DET. X
L= 12'-5" L= 6'-0" L= 3'-0"
L= 5'-0"
L= 4'-5"
architectural background
showing first floor plan
FTF ENGINEERING, INC.

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION

SCHEMATIC

STRUCTURAL SET
S-201
DATE: 2024-05-10
Option B - Structural Schematic

Page 211 of 329 ends

1 13
A-1.0
(OPTB)

DIMENSIONAL AND

PROPOSED LOWER

FLOOR PLANS -

OPTION B

DANIEL MCCRAIN, FIRE CHIEF
715 HARBOR ST.

MORRO BAY, CA 93442

MORRO BAY

FIRE STATION
460 BONITA STREET,
MORRO BAY, CA 93442
These drawings are instruments
of service and are the property of

HUNTER SMITH
ARCHITECTURE.

All designs and other information
on the drawings are for use on the
specified project and shall not be
used otherwise without the
expressed written permission of

HUNTER SMITH

ARCHITECTURE
860 Walnut Street • Suite B • San Luis Obispo • CA 93401 10-31-2025
C-38575
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION PROGRESS DATE: 2024-05-10 29 APR 2024 8068
GM
306830683068
BEDROOM#3

LIVINGQUARTERS
1,125S.F.(GROSS)
24"SQ.

LOCK.

TYP.

CLOSET
BATHROOM#2
SHOWER
BATHROOM#1
SHOWER
BEDROOM#1
30683068
BEDROOM#2
24"SQ.

LOCK.

TYP.
24"SQ.

LOCK.

TYP.

K
IT
CH
E
N
9x4ISLAND
DININ
GTABLE
DW
S
IN
K
OV
EN
48"
R
EF
3068
PANTRY

STORAGE
ROOM

LIVINGROOM
(E)APPARATUSBAYROOFTOREMAIN
(NOTINSCOPE)
DNSTA
IRWAY
WOOD TRUSS JOISTS @ 24" O.C.BY OTHERS ROOF FRAMING PLAN

HDR HDR HDR
HDR
architectural background
showing second floor plan
FTF ENGINEERING, INC.

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION

SCHEMATIC

STRUCTURAL SET
S-202
Option B - Structural Schematic

Page 212 of 329 ends

113
A-1.0
(OPT B)

DIMENSIONAL AND PROPOSED LOWER FLOOR PLANS - OPTION B

HUNTER SMITH
ARCHITECTURE.

All designs and other information
on the drawings are for use on the
specified project and shall not be
used otherwise without the
expressed written permission of

HUNTER SMITH

ARCHITECTURE
860 Walnut Street • Suite B • San Luis Obispo • CA 93401 10-31-2025
C-38575

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
PROGRESS DATE: 2024-05-10 29 APR 2024
(E) APPARATUS BAY TO REMAIN (NOT IN SCOPE)
3068
3068
ELEC
ENTRY

COVERED

BREEZEWAY

OPERATIONS
1,197 S.F. (GROSS)

STORAGE
UP
GM
OFFICE #1
3068 3068 3068
OFFICE #2 OFFICE #3

CONFERENCE
3068

KITCHENETTE
3068
POWDER
ROOM
8068
W/D
GYM
WH

FOUNDATION PLAN
HDR
S1
S1
S1
4 9
6 11.5
4 11.5
1B1
S1
S1
S1
6 11.5
6 6
PROVIDE 6" SEISMIC GAP

BETWEEN NEW AND

EXISTING BUILDING, TYP ALL
LEVELS
5" SLAB ON GRADE
W/ #4 @ 16" O.C.

DEEPENED FOUNDATION MUST

EXTEND A MINIMUM OF ONE FOOT

INTO THE UNDERLYING LIGHT BROWN

MATERIAL PER GEOTECHNICAL
ENGINEERING REPORT, TYP.

GB2 TYP, U.N.O.

GB1
GB1
GB1
GB1
GB1
GB1 GB1
GB1 GB1
GB1
1J#
9 12
S1
1B1

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION

SCHEMATIC

STRUCTURAL SET
S-200
Option B - Structural Schematic

Page 213 of 329 ends

C
ODE(2018UPDATE)

CODEANALYSIS-MORROBAYMUNICIPAL
TABLE17.05.030.A:DEVELOPMENTSTANDARDS-RSDISTRICTS
ZONE:RS-A(R1)R1=4301S.F.ANDGREATERLOTAREA

QUARTERSFOOTPRINT

OPERATIONS&LIVING
1460S.F.

FOOTPRINT

APPARATUSBAYBUILDING
1634S.F.

LOTAREA6897S.F.

LOTCOVERAGE(%)44.9%

STANDARDREQUIREDPROPOSED
MAX.DENSITY(UNITS/LOT)1UNIT1UNIT
MAXLOTCOVERAGE(%OFLOT)45%44.9%
MAX.BUILDINGHEIGHT25'-0"14'-0"

LANDSCAPINGN/AN/A
MAX#OFSTORIESN/A1
MAXBUILDINGWALLHEIGHT30'-0"21'-3"
SETBACKSFORZONER1
FRONT
20'-0"

REFERTOSITEFOR

LOCATIONOF

BUILDINGRELATIVE

TOSETBACKS

INTERIORSIDE
5'-0"
REAR
25'-0"
3/16"=1'-0"

SITEPLAN-OPTIONC(ONESTORY)
SCALE:
113
CA-1.0
(OPTC)

SITE PLAN - OPTION
C

DANIEL MCCRAIN, FIRE CHIEF
715 HARBOR ST.

MORRO BAY, CA 93442

MORRO BAY

FIRE STATION
460 BONITA STREET,
MORRO BAY, CA 93442
These drawings are instruments
of service and are the property of

HUNTER SMITH
ARCHITECTURE.

All designs and other information
on the drawings are for use on the
specified project and shall not be
used otherwise without the
expressed written permission of

HUNTER SMITH

ARCHITECTURE
860 Walnut Street • Suite B • San Luis Obispo • CA 93401 HUNTERSMITH&ASSOCIATES,INC.

DBAHUNTERSMITHARCHITECTURE©2024
DanaL.Hunter
10-31-2025
C-38575

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
Jun 17, 2024 PLOT DATE:

PROGRESS
17JUN2024
(E)APPARATUSBAYTOREMAIN(NOTINSCOPE)

PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL

PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
5'-0"

SETBACK
20'-0"

SETBACK
10'-0"

SETBACK
3068
ELEC
ENTRY

COVERED

BREEZEWAY

PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL

PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
GM
WASHE
R/
DRYE
R
PANTRY
306830683068
3068 3068

DW SINK
48"REF
9x4ISLAN
D

DININGTABLE

LIVINGROOM
BEDROOM#1
BEDROOM#2
BEDROOM#3

CONFERENCE
OFFICE

KITCHEN
24"SQ.

LOCK.

TYP.
24" SQ.

LOCK.

TYP.
24"SQ.

LOCK.

TYP.

GM
3068
BATHROOM#1
BATHROOM#2
3068
(E)CONCRETEDRIVEWAY
(E)LAWN
(E)CONCRETEDRIVEWAY
(N)PARKINGSTALLS
(3TOTAL)

Page 214 of 329 ends

113
A-1.0
(OPT C)

DIMENSIONAL AND PROPOSED LOWER FLOOR PLANS - OPTION C

HUNTER SMITH
ARCHITECTURE.

All designs and other information
on the drawings are for use on the
specified project and shall not be
used otherwise without the
expressed written permission of

HUNTER SMITH

ARCHITECTURE
860 Walnut Street • Suite B • San Luis Obispo • CA 93401 HUNTER SMITH & ASSOCIATES, INC.

DBA HUNTER SMITH ARCHITECTURE © 2024
Dana L.Hunter
10-31-2025
C-38575

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
Jun 17, 2024 PLOT DATE:

PROGRESS
17 JUN 2024

AS NOTED
DIMENSIONAL AND PROPOSED LOWER FLOOR PLANS: OPTION C (ONE STORY) SCALE:
(E) APPARATUS BAY TO REMAIN (NOT IN SCOPE)
3068
ELEC
ENTRY

COVERED

BREEZEWAY

WASHER/
DRYER
PANTRY
3068 3068 3068
3068 3068

DW SINK
48" REF
9x4 ISLAND

DINING TABLE

LIVING ROOM
BEDROOM #1
BEDROOM #2
BEDROOM #3

CONFERENCE
OFFICE

KITCHEN
24" SQ.

LOCK.

TYP.
24" SQ.

LOCK.

TYP.
24" SQ.

LOCK.

TYP.

GM
3068
BATHROOM #1
BATHROOM #2
3068
(E) APPARATUS BAY TO REMAIN (NOT IN SCOPE)
3068
ELEC
ENTRY

COVERED

BREEZEWAY

WASHER/
DRYER
PANTRY
3068 3068 3068
3068 3068

DW SINK
48" REF
9x4 ISLAND

DINING TABLE

LIVING ROOM
BEDROOM #1
BEDROOM #2
BEDROOM #3

CONFERENCE
OFFICE

KITCHEN
24" SQ.

LOCK.

TYP.
24" SQ.

LOCK.

TYP.
24" SQ.

LOCK.

TYP.

GM
3068
BATHROOM #1
BATHROOM #2
3068 4'-11 1/2"
20'-11" 14'-6"
34'-6 1/2"

OVERALL
10'-9 1/2" 5'-7 1/2"
8'-7"
12'-11"
45'-7"

OVERALL
10'-1"
10'-5"
12'-6 1/2"
12'-3"
12'-3 1/2"
10'-1 1/2"10'-1 1/2"
3'-5"
5'-7 1/2"
9'-1"
6'-7"
10'-3 1/2"
17'-1"
17'-9 1/2"
23'-1 1/2"
6'-7"
2'-2 1/2" 3'-5"
5'-7 1/2"
5'-7 1/2"
1'-5 1/2"
CLEAR

Page 215 of 329 ends

1 /4"=1'-0"

FRONTELEVATION(OPTIONC)
SCALE:
113
A-9.0
(OPTC)

ELEVATION - OPTION
C

DANIEL MCCRAIN, FIRE CHIEF
715 HARBOR ST.

MORRO BAY, CA 93442

MORRO BAY

FIRE STATION
460 BONITA STREET,
MORRO BAY, CA 93442
These drawings are instruments
of service and are the property of

HUNTER SMITH
ARCHITECTURE.

All designs and other information
on the drawings are for use on the
specified project and shall not be
used otherwise without the
expressed written permission of

HUNTER SMITH

ARCHITECTURE
860 Walnut Street • Suite B • San Luis Obispo • CA 93401 HUNTERSMITH&ASSOCIATES,INC.

DBAHUNTERSMITHARCHITECTURE©2024
DanaL.Hunter
10-31-2025
C-38575

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
Jun 17, 2024 PLOT DATE:

PROGRESS
17JUN2024

FRONTELEVATION-OPTIONC(ONESTORY)
Scale:1/4"=1'-0"
2 F.F.
0'-0"
T.O.R
10'-7"
T.O.P.
8'-0"
T.O.R
18'-3"
F.F.
0'-0"
(E)APPARATUSBAYTOREMAIN
T.O.R
14'-0"
T.O.P.
8'-10"

SIDEELEVATION-OPTIONC(ONESTORY)
Scale:1/4"=1'-0"
1 F.F.
0'-0"
T.

O
.

R
1 0
'
-
7 "
T.O.P.
8'-0"
T.O.R
18'-3"
F.F.
0'-0"
(E)APPARATUSBAYTOREMAIN
T.O.R
14'-0"
T.O.P.
8'-10"
3DVIEW
Scale:N.T.S.
3

Page 216 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis
Morro Bay Fire Department
Station 2 - 460 Bonita Street
June 27, 2024

Page 217 of 329 ends

TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION 3
INVESTIGATIONS 4
THE PROJECT PROGRAM 6
OPTION A - REMODEL THE FACILITY WITHIN THE EXISTING FOOTPRINT 7 OPTION B - NEW CONSTRUCTION 2-STORY FIRE STATION 9
OPTION C - NEW CONSTRUCTION SINGLE STORY FIRE STATION 13 CONCLUSION 16
APPENDICES 17

1. R-Meter Testing 18

2. Soils Report 20

3. Option A Opinion of Probable Cost 50

4. Option B Opinion of Probable Cost 59

5. Option C Opinion of Probable Cost 74

Page 218 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 3

INTRODUCTION
The City of Morro Bay commissioned Hunter Smith Architecture to provide a feasibility study and schematic design to renovate an existing, but underutilized Fire Department facility located at 460 Bonita Street (“Station 2”).

While the detached Apparatus Bay was newly constructed in 2006, the living quarters are generally in a state of disrepair. Hunter Smith Architecture and our selected consultants investigated the building’s existing condition. The initial scope of work was to apply the Fire Department’s programming needs to evaluate and provide schematic designs for two potential projects:
1 - Remodel the facility within the existing footprint
2 - Add a second story to the existing facility.

The scope of work was revised through the course of the project. This report evaluates three potential options to accomplish the Fire Department’s programming needs, each discussed in more detail in the following pages:

Option A - Remodel the facility within the existing footprint.

Option B - 2-Story new construction facility
Option C - Single story new construction facility
An opinion of probable costs for each option was provided by Jacobus & Yuang, Inc. While independently reliable, these opinions of probable costs were based upon schematic level plans and the assumptions, inclusions, exclusions, and escalations as described in each report. Full design and engineering, to be provided in future stages of this project, will further refine cost estimates. The following is a summary chart of likely building costs for each option.

At the direction of the Fire Chief, as determined in coordination with the City of Morro Bay’s Community Development Director, this facility will not be classified as an Essential Services Facility. This determination informed conceptual design and structural engineering considerations that were the basis for the opinion of probable costs. If it is later determined that the facility does need to meet Essential Services Facility Standards, compliance requirements will increase the complexity of each option investigated in this report.

Page 219 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 4

INVESTIGATIONS
The following processes informed our review of the existing structure and the subsequent schematic designs.

R-Meter Testing
The City of Morro Bay provided an R-Meter report completed by Earth Systems Pacific in 2009. The purpose of the report was to identify the location and extent of reinforcing steel in the concrete masonry walls. This report generally found insufficient levels of vertical and horizontal reinforcements within the existing Concrete Masonry Unit walls. This report is included as Appendix 1.

Updated Soils Report
A soils report was prepared by Buena Geotechnical Services in 2007 in support of the apparatus bay construction project. Greg McKay was the Project Manager who performed the report.

Greg McKay’s company is now Beacon Geotechnical, Inc. He was able to provide an update to the previously completed report and verify the suitability of existing conditions to support the proposed development, while providing data inputs for use by the Structural Engineer in their design of foundation systems. This report is included as Appendix 2.

The existing foundation was not evaluated to establish its suitability to support additional building loads. However, based on the age of the structure, it can reasonably be assumed that the existing foundation comprises a turned-down slab edge of minimal width, and is insufficient for additional load. Modern building standards, as confirmed by the Soils Report, would require over-excavation and compacted and engineered fill to be the bearing material underneath a building foundation. While this condition almost certainly does not exist in the existing building, the cost of this work is reflected in the Opinion of Probable Cost for Options B & C.

Property Survey
MBS Land Surveys provided a topographic and boundary survey of the property, documenting the location of the existing building and utilities on the site. This information is important in ensuring that any expanded building area or site work is compliant with City Zoning Ordinances, as well as providing baseline information for use in any proposed site improvements and resulting grading, drainage, and ADA path of travel upgrades.

Site Visit
Hunter Smith Architecture performed a site visit to take as-built measurements of the property. This information provided the basis for the plans that were developed in the evaluation of Option A. Though we did not perform building inspection services intended to make representations on the suitability (or lack thereof) of existing conditions, we did document readily apparent deficiencies for consideration.

As-Built Plans
Plans are not available for the existing living quarters building, and historical record indicates that the building was likely to have been built by Fire Department volunteers. It is possible that unforeseen existing conditions will be discovered during construction that may complicate any proposed remodel.

The following page illustrates the existing conditions of the facility.

Page 220 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 5 Representative vertical cracking observed on the South-East corner of the facility.

Representative electrical conduit on an exterior wall. See Option A - Engineering & Design Considerations for a potential solution.

Representative photos of the interior condition of the facility.

Page 221 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 6

THE PROJECT PROGRAM
This project was developed to assist the City of Morro Bay in evaluating the potential to create a habitable facility to function as Station 2, with the hopes of eventually expanding the Fire Department’s operations to staff the station.

With this in mind, the overall goal of the project is to provide living quarters appropriate for three different shifts, with the potential for three individuals on each shift.

Meetings with the Fire Chief informed the following specific project priorities:
• (3) individual bedrooms, each with (3) floor-to-ceiling lockers for staff storage. • (2) full bathrooms
• (3) desks, preferably in private office space.
• Appropriate kitchen facilities, ideally with multiple refrigerators • Appropriate living space for the staff of three and occasional visitors • Covered breezeway providing access from the living quarters to the detached apparatus bay.

Other possible project elements included:
• Storage and laundry areas
• Gym
• Conference or meeting area.

PARKING AREA
An opportunity to add three parking spaces to the site was evaluated. A review of existing site conditions led to the conclusion that there is insufficient space for any traditional parking layout along the East side of the facility. If desired, the potential for stacked or tandem parking along this area can be explored in future phases.

While the parking layout illustrated in Option B is traditional and familiar for commercial facilities, implementation would require discretionary review and variances from requirements for front yard landscaping and parking location found in Title 17 of the City’s Municipal Code.

DISCRETIONARY REVIEW
Aside from the parking issue previously identified, moving forward with redevelopment of this facility will require discretionary review to be covered in future phases of work. It is possible that the final designs resulting from this process will vary from the schematic designs developed to this point.

Page 222 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 7

OPTION A - REMODEL THE FACILITY WITHIN THE EXISTING

FOOTPRINT

COMPLIANCE WITH THE PROJECT PROGRAM
The design was constrained by the available space within the existing facility. Some desired programming elements could not be accommodated, including:
• A separate refrigerator for each shift
• Interior laundry facilities
• One of the desk spaces had to be located in the common living area, not in a separate office space.

On balance, the Fire Chief indicated that the schematic design, as presented, would meet the needs of the organization.

ENGINEERING & DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
Design
A 2”x6” furred wall along each exterior wall is specified in order to relocate plumbing and electrical systems and provide compliant insulation.

Structural Engineering
FTF Engineering reviewed the R-Meter Test Report and updated soils report, and identified existing deficiencies that would require retrofit for the facility to be safely habitable. The extent of these retrofits were communicated to Jacobus & Yuang for inclusion in their Opinion of Probable Costs.

A non-exhaustive list of required retrofits includes:
• Repair existing vertical and horizontal cracking with a compliant adhesive material, to be specified in future phases of work.
• The R-Meter Test Report found that the CMU walls do not have horizontal reinforcement.

Horizontal strips of Fiberglass Reinforced Paneling (FRP) should be added to the walls to provide horizontal reinforcement.
• Existing vertical reinforcement is not code-compliant, and several cells of the CMU blocking are not filled with grout. Vertical reinforcing rebar and grout will need to be added to the walls, either by removing the faces of the blocks, or by removing portions of the roof to allow access to the CMU cells.
• Improved and code-compliant roof-to-wall connections will be required.

Full engineering design, calculations, and material specifications will be completed on subsequent phases of work with the development of Construction Documents.

Page 223 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 8

OPINION OF PROBABLE COSTS
Jacobus & Yuang provided an Opinion of Probable Costs for the conceptual level design and engineering as discussed. Assumptions, inclusions, and exclusions that informed their opinion of costs are detailed in their report. As a public works project, prevailing wage rates were utilized.

Jacobus & Yuang determined their opinion of probable cost based upon construction beginning in August of 2025, and a 7.5% annual escalation in construction costs. With these parameters, and others discussed in their report, their Opinion of Probable Costs for Option A is $788,411, equating to a unit cost of $688.57 per square foot.

This cost estimate includes foundation work limited to the area of the new restroom to be constructed.

The full Opinion of Probable Cost for Option A is included in this report as Appendix 3.

Page 224 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 9 OPTION B - NEW CONSTRUCTION 2-STORY FIRE STATION

COMPLIANCE WITH THE PROJECT PROGRAM
Our initial scope of work asked us to evaluate the potential to add a second story to the existing facility.

However, in the course of investigating existing conditions and providing conceptual-level design and engineering for Option A, it became clear that a significant amount of work would be required to retrofit the existing foundation and first floor bearing walls to support a second story.

In coordination with the Fire Chief, the decision was made to adjust our approach to evaluate the potential to demolish the existing structure and build a conventional 2-story wood framed building. In conjunction with this, sitework was added to this scope of work to provide three on-site parking spaces at the front of the building.

ENGINEERING & DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
Design
The Fire Chief indicated that the design, as presented, would meet the Fire Department’s organizational needs. Revisions to the design continue to be possible through future phases of work.

Engineering
A seismic gap requires 6” of separation between the existing Apparatus Bay and the new living quarters. While the new facility can be attached to the Apparatus Bay, joining two buildings of different construction contributes to complexity and cost.

Schematic structural engineering layouts were provided by FTF Engineering, and informed the Opinion of Probable Costs provided by Jacobus & Yuang, Inc.

Page 225 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station Page 226 of 329 10 Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station Page 227 of 329 11 Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 12

OPINION OF PROBABLE COSTS
Jacobus & Yuang provided an Opinion of Probable Costs for the conceptual level design and engineering as discussed. Assumptions, inclusions, and exclusions that informed their opinion of costs are detailed in the report. As a public works project, prevailing wage rates were utilized.

Jacobus & Yuang determined their opinion of probable cost based upon construction beginning in August of 2025, and a 7.5% annual escalation in construction costs. With these parameters, and others discussed in their report, their Opinion of Probable Costs for the building portion of Option B is $2,109,949, equating to a unit cost of $908.68 per square foot. This includes the demolition of the existing living quarters.

In addition to this, their Opinion of Probable Costs for the sitework shown on the conceptual design is $215,733, equating to a unit cost of $157.13 per square foot.

The full Opinion of Probable Cost for Option B is included in this report as Appendix 4.

Page 228 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 13

OPTION C - NEW CONSTRUCTION SINGLE STORY FIRE STATION

COMPLIANCE WITH THE PROJECT PROGRAM
Option C provides a more spacious living area than Option A by extending the exterior walls towards the side and rear setbacks, while providing an area for parking in the front yard. The following elements distinguish Option C from Option A:
- There is sufficient room for three desks within the office space. - The addition of a dining table adjacent to the kitchen. - Each bedroom is larger and can more comfortably fit three full-height lockers. - Laundry facilities interior to the living space.

Additionally, Option C would provide a fully updated facility, and remove the potential for patchwork retrofits and hidden complications that may complicate construction and increase costs.

ENGINEERING & DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
Design
The interior layout of Option C is similar to Option A, while better providing for the desired programming elements. The front entry is re-located to the front elevation of the living quarters, and the roof as designed allows for increased natural light within the living area.

Engineering
As an addition to the scope of work, schematic engineering was not provided for this conceptual design. Standard and common foundation and framing systems, partially informed by the schematic engineering provided in Option B, and a similar seismic gap were assumed in the development of the Opinion of Probable Costs.

Page 229 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 14 Proposed Floor Plan - Option C

Page 230 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 15

OPINION OF PROBABLE COSTS
Jacobus & Yuang provided an Opinion of Probable Costs for the conceptual level design as discussed.

Assumptions, inclusions, and exclusions that informed their opinion of costs are detailed in their report.

As a public works project, prevailing wage rates were utilized.

Jacobus & Yuang determined their opinion of probable cost based upon construction beginning in August of 2025, and a 7.5% annual escalation in construction costs. With these parameters, and others discussed in their report, their Opinion of Probable Costs for the building portion of Option C is $1,232,864 equating to a unit cost of $874.37 per square foot. This includes the demolition of the existing living quarters.

In addition to this, their Opinion of Probable Costs for the sitework shown on the conceptual design is $222,987, equating to a unit cost of $148.66 per square foot.

The full Opinion of Probable Cost for Option C is included in this report as Appendix 5.

Page 231 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 16

CONCLUSION
Hunter Smith Architecture remains available to assist the City of Morro Bay in evaluating and applying the information from this report to provide the best possible project for the Fire Department. Each item below includes pros, cons, and potential reductions to the scope of work to meet budget expectations for each option:

OPTION A - REMODEL THE EXISTING FACILITY
PROS - This is the most budget friendly option to provide a habitable facility.

CONS - Hidden elements in the existing facility may be found during construction, resulting in complications and delays. Additionally, though the facility would be retrofitted, old building elements would still be present in the finished product.

POTENTIAL REDUCTION TO THE SCOPE OF WORK - Potential revisions to the schematic design shown may include re-evaluating elements of the interior layout to better support Fire Department Operations. However, limited potential exists to reduce the project scope of work or resulting cost.

OPTION B - NEW CONSTRUCTION 2-STORY FACILITY
PROS - This design most fully meets the Fire Department’s programming needs.

CONS - This is the most expensive option, both in absolute terms and in terms of unit costs ($/ square foot).

POTENTIAL REDUCTIONS TO THE SCOPE OF WORK - Potential reductions to the project scope of work and cost may include reductions to interior floor area and removal of the upstairs deck.

OPTION C - NEW CONSTRUCTION SINGLE-STORY FACILITY
PROS - This design better meets the Fire Department’s programming needs than Option A, while providing a more cost effective alternative than Option B. The entirety of this facility would be new and built to today’s building standards.

CONS - Some of the programming elements included in Option B are not able to fit in Option C.

POTENTIAL REDUCTIONS TO THE SCOPE OF WORK - Potential revisions to the schematic design may include reductions to the interior floor area and a simplified roof system.

APPENDICES & ENCLOSURES
The following appendices are included in this report

1. R-Meter Test Report, Earth Systems Pacific (2009)

2. Soils Report, Beacon Geotechnical, Inc. (2024)

3. Opinion of Probable Cost - Option A, Jacobus & Yuang, Inc. (2024)

4. Opinion of Probable Cost - Option B, Jacobus & Yuang, Inc. (2024)

5. Opinion of Probable Cost - Option C, Jacobus & Yuang, Inc. (2024) Enclosures to this report include the schematic level floor plans, site plans, and structural engineering provided for Options A & B.

Page 232 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 17

APPENDICES

Page 233 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 18 R-Meter Testing

Page 234 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station Page 235 of 329 19 Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 20

Geotechnical Engineering Report
For
Proposed Residential Addition

460 Bonita Street
Morro Bay, California
March 28, 2024
F-103434
Prepared For
Hunter Smith Architecture
By
Beacon Geotechnical, Inc.

P.O. Box 4814
Paso Robles, California 93447
Soils Report

Page 236 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 21

March 28, 2024 F-103434

Hunter Smith Architecture
860 Walnut Street, Suite B
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Project: Proposed Residential Addition
460 Bonita Street
Morro Bay, California
Subject: Geotechnical Engineering Report
As authorized, we have performed a Geotechnical Study for the above referenced project. The accompanying Geotechnical Engineering Report presents the results of our subsurface exploration, laboratory-testing program and conclusions and recommendations for geotechnical engineering aspects of project design. Our services were performed using the standard of care ordinarily exercised in this locality at the time this report was prepared.

Based on our study, it is our opinion that the site is suitable for the proposed development from a geotechnical engineering standpoint provided the recommendations of this report are successfully implemented.

We have appreciated this opportunity to be of service to you on this project.

Please call if you have any questions, or if we can be of further service.

Respectfully submitted,
Beacon Geotechnical, Inc.

Greg McKay
Project Manager

Copies: 3-Smith
1-File
Nicholas A. McClure
Geotechnical Engineer

Page 237 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 22 March 28, 2024 F-103434
1 Contents
1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................... 2

1.1 Description................................................................................................. 2 2 SCOPE OF WORK ..................................................................................... 2

2.1 Purpose ..................................................................................................... 2

2.2 Report Contents ......................................................................................... 2 3 SITE SETTING ..........................................................................................3

3.1 Location. .................................................................................................... 3

3.2 Site Description . ....................................................................................... 3 4 SITE CONDITIONS ................................................................................... 3

4.1 Soil Conditions ........................................................................................... 3

4.2 Groundwater .............................................................................................. 3 5 SEISMIC HAZARDS ................................................................................... 3

5.1 Nearby Faults ............................................................................................. 3

5.2 Liquefaction ............................................................................................... 4

5.3 Landslide Hazards ....................................................................................... 4

5.4 Seismic Design Parameters .......................................................................... 4 6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................. 5

6.1 General Grading ......................................................................................... 5

6.2 Specific Site Development, Grading Pads, and Foundation Excavations ............ 6

6.3 Slope Construction ...................................................................................... 8

6.4 Utility Trenches .......................................................................................... 8

6.5 Structural Design – Foundations .................................................................. 8

6.6 Slabs on Grade ......................................................................................... 10

6.7 Structural Design – Lateral Resistance Parameters ...................................... 10

6.8 Structural Design – Settlement Considerations ............................................ 11

6.9 Structural Design – Retaining Walls ............................................................ 11 7 REFERENCES CITED ............................................................................... 12 8 ADDITIONAL SERVICES .......................................................................... 13 9 PROJECT LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS .................... 13

Page 238 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 23 March 28, 2024 F-103434
2 1. INTRODUCTION
This report presents results of a Geotechnical Engineering Study performed for the proposed residential addition to be located in Morro Bay, California.

1.1 Description

1.1.1. It should be noted that grading and foundation plans were not provided for the purpose of this report. Prior to any construction, this firm should review the grading and foundation plans to verify or modify the recommendations offered herein. We anticipate that the site will be developed by building at or near existing grade.

1.1.2. The proposed structure is assumed to be one (1) or two (2) stories of wood framed construction.

1.1.3. Structural considerations for maximum wall loads of 1.65 kips per square foot and maximum point loads of 20.0 kips were used as a basis for the recommendations of this report. If actual loads vary significantly from these assumed loads, Beacon Geotechnical, Inc. should be notified as re-evaluation of the recommendations contained herein may be required.
2 SCOPE OF WORK

2.1 The purpose of the geotechnical investigation that led to this report was to evaluate the soil conditions of the site with respect to the proposed development. These conditions include surface and subsurface soil types, expansion potential, settlement potential, bearing capacity, and presence or absence of subsurface water. The scope of our work included:
• Reconnaissance of the site.
• Drilling, sampling, and logging of two (2) borings to investigate soils and groundwater conditions.
• Laboratory testing of soil samples obtained from subsurface exploration to determine their physical and engineering properties.
• Geotechnical analysis of the data obtained.
• Consultation with owner representatives and design professionals. • Preparation of this report.

2.2 Contained in the report are:
• Discussions on local soil and groundwater conditions. • Results of laboratory and field tests.
• Conclusions and recommendations pertaining to site grading and structural design.

Page 239 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 24 March 28, 2024 F-103434
3 3 SITE SETTING

3.1 The site of the proposed development is located in Morro Bay, California, with the approximate geographical coordinates 35°23’11.42” N and 120°51’20.63” W. See the Vicinity Map in Appendix A.

3.2 The proposed addition site is a relatively level yard area. 4 SITE CONDITIONS

4.1 Soil Conditions

4.1.1 Evaluation of the subsurface indicates that soils are generally light brown silty clayey sand with gravel overlain by light brown silty very clayey sand and brown silty clayey sand with gravel.

4.1.2 Soils encountered at approximate bearing depths should be designed as Site Classification D in accordance with the local building code.

4.1.3 Expansion determination indicates that the bearing soils lie in the “Medium” range.

4.2 Groundwater

4.2.1 Groundwater was not encountered to a maximum depth of sixteen (16) feet.
5 SEISMIC HAZARDS
This portion of Central California is subject to significant seismic hazards from moderate to large earthquake events. Ground shaking resulting from earthquakes is the primary geologic hazard at the project site. Ground displacement resulting from faulting is a potential hazard at or near faults.

5.1 Nearby Faults

5.1.1 The site does not lie within an Earthquake Fault Zone identified on a State of California Earthquake Fault Zone Map.

5.1.2 Faults closest to the site, which would most affect the proposed project:

Nearby Active Faults Approximate Distance (km) Magnitude MW Los Osos Fault
Rinconada Fault
Hosgri Fault
San Andreas Fault Zone

6.4 21.0

35.8 64.1

6.9 7.5

7.3 8.0

Page 240 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 25 March 28, 2024 F-103434
4 5.2 Liquefaction
Earthquake-induced vibrations can be the cause of several significant phenomena, including liquefaction in fine sands and silty sands. Liquefaction results in a complete loss of strength and can cause structures to settle or even overturn if it occurs in the bearing zone. If liquefaction occurs beneath sloping ground, a phenomenon known as lateral spreading can occur. Liquefaction is typically limited to the upper 50 feet of the subsurface soils and to soils that have a relative density of less than 70%.

5.2.1 Based on the quality and conditions of the in-place soils and the absence of groundwater in our boring explorations, it is our opinion that the potential for liquefaction and/or lateral spreading is low at this site.

5.3 Landslide Hazards

5.3.1 The site topography and exposed soil types indicate that the potential for landslides is minimal at this site. Furthermore, no evidence of previous landslides was observed at the site.

5.4 Seismic Design Parameters
The following estimated ground motion parameters have been established using the methods outlined in the 2022 California Building Code with reference to the acceleration contour maps provided by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP-2015). These ground motion parameters represent the Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE) spectral response of seismic events experiencing 5 percent damped acceleration and having a 2 percent probability of exceedance within a 50-year period.
2022 California Building Code Seismic Parameters
Parameter Value
Seismic Design Category D
Site Class D
Short Period Spectral Acceleration, Ss 0.962
1-second period spectral acceleration, S1 0.357
Short period site coefficient, Fa 1.115
1-second period site coefficient, Fv 1.943
Adjusted short period spectral acceleration, Sms 1.073
Adjusted 1-second period spectral acceleration, Sm1 0.694 Short period design spectral acceleration, SDS 0.715
1-second period design spectral acceleration, SD1 0.463

Page 241 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 26 March 28, 2024 F-103434
5 6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The site is suitable for the proposed development from a geotechnical engineering standpoint provided the recommendations contained herein are properly implemented into the project.

6.1 General Grading

6.1.1 Grading, at a minimum, should conform to Chapter 18, and any additional locally approved appendices relating to grading, of the 2022 California Building Code.

6.1.2 The existing ground surface should be initially prepared for grading by removing all vegetation, trees, large roots, debris, non-complying fill, and all other organic material. Voids created by removal of such material should not be backfilled unless the underlying soils have been observed by a representative of this firm.

6.1.3 The bottom of all excavations should be observed by a representative of this firm prior to processing or placing fill.

6.1.4 Fill and backfill placed at 2%-3% above optimum moisture content in layers with loose thickness not greater than eight (8) inches should be compacted to a minimum of 90% of maximum dry density obtainable by the ASTM D 1557 Test Method.

6.1.5 Import soils used to raise site grade should be equal to or better than on-site soils in strength, expansion, and compressibility characteristics.

Import soils can be evaluated but will not be pre-qualified by the geotechnical engineering firm. Final comments on the characteristics of the import soils will be offered after the material is at the project site.

6.1.6 Due to the expansive soils present within the building area, roof draining systems should be designed so that water is collected and diverted into solid drain lines discharging into an approved drainage area away from the structures.

6.1.7 Final site grade should be such that all water is permanently diverted away from the structure and is not allowed to pond. The ground immediately adjacent to the building shall be sloped 5% for a minimum of ten (10) feet measured perpendicular to the face of the wall. All diverted water is to be directed to an approved drainage.

Alternative grading methods can be found in 2022 California Building Code Section 1804.4.

6.1.8 The above referenced site drainage conditions should be maintained over the course of the life of the structure. Proper long-term performance of the foundation and building pad may be compromised if the surrounding site drainage and grading is adversely modified.

Page 242 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 27 March 28, 2024 F-103434
6 6.1.9 It should be noted that uniform soil moisture conditions around the perimeter of the structure will help decrease the potential for differential swelling and heaving associated with expansive soils. Postconstruction care should be taken to create long-term landscaping and irrigation solutions that do not allow for frequent changes in soil moisture content or irregular application of water around the perimeter of the structure.

6.1.10 It is recommended that Beacon Geotechnical, Inc. be retained to provide intermittent geotechnical engineering services during site development, grading, and foundation construction phases of the work to observe compliance with the design concepts, specifications, and recommendations, and to allow design changes in the event that subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to the start of construction.

6.1.11 Plans and specifications should be provided to Beacon Geotechnical, Inc. prior to grading. Plans should include the grading plans, and foundation details. Structural loads should be shown on the foundation plans.

6.1.12 Should soils become unstable during grading due to excessive subsurface moisture, alternatives to correct instability may include aeration or the use of gravels and/or geotextiles as stabilizing measures. Recommendations for stabilization should be provided by this firm as needed during construction.

6.1.13 All water associated with drainage and runoff should not be discharged onto slope faces. All outflow of drainage structures and drainage facilities should be designed by the project Civil Engineer to minimize erosion.

6.2 Specific Site Development, Grading Pads, and Foundation Excavations

6.2.1 Due to the loose near surface soils present in the addition area, all foundations supporting the proposed addition should be excavated to extend a minimum of one (1) foot into the underlying light brown material (noted as soil type A3 in the project boring logs) encountered at a depth of four (4) feet below existing grade. To achieve uniform bearing conditions, the footings will likely need to be deepened in areas. A representative of this firm should be notified to monitor footing excavations.

6.2.2 Where the excavation runs immediately adjacent to the existing structure, the excavation section extending a
minimum of five (5) feet away from an existing building or improvement should be constructed in slots. Slot widths shall not be greater than ten (10) feet in order to maintain the stability of the adjacent property.

Page 243 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 28 March 28, 2024 F-103434
7 6.2.3 Excavations should comply with the OSHA Trenching and Excavation Safety standards and shoring shall be used, as necessary.

6.2.4 Prior to excavating the footings, areas below any slabs, flatwork areas, sidewalks should be overexcavated to a depth of two (2) feet below existing grade or two (2) feet below finish grade, whichever is deeper. The resulting surface should be scarified an additional one (1) foot, moisture conditioned to 2%-3% above optimum
moisture and recompacted to a minimum of 90% of maximum dry density.

6.2.5 It should be noted that overexcavation, recompaction, and presaturation of soils below slab areas does not mitigate the effects of the expansive soils.

6.2.6 In order to help mitigate the effects of the expansive soils below concrete slabs within the additions or surrounding flatwork areas, the upper eighteen (18) inches of fill directly below concrete slab areas shall be non-expansive (EI < 10) import. It should be noted that the four (4) inch sand layer directly below the slab may be included in the measurement of the eighteen (18) inch non-expansive section. The lower fourteen (14) inches of fill should be recompacted to 90% of maximum dry density and the upper four (4) inches of fill should be clean free draining sand.

6.2.7 Any excavated material from foundation and septic or drainage systems should be properly recompacted in accordance with all the recommendations for engineered fill. Alternatively, excavated soil may be hauled off site when adequate placement area is not available at the project location.

6.2.8 Areas outside the building area to receive fill, exterior slabs-on-grade, sidewalks, and paving should be overexcavated to a depth of one (1) foot below finish subgrade or existing grade whichever is deeper. The exposed surface should be scarified, moisture conditioned and recompacted.

6.2.9 On-site soils may be used for fill once they are cleaned of all organic material, rock, debris, and irreducible material larger than eight (8) inches.

6.2.10 Although not encountered in our borings, should any trash, debris or subsurface structures be encountered during grading, removals will be necessary to adequate depths and horizontal limits as recommended by this firm at the time of grading.

Page 244 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 29 March 28, 2024 F-103434
8 6.2.11 Grading inspections shall be performed in accordance with the 2022 California Building Code Table 1705.6. See Appendix B for project specific grading observation requirements.

6.3 Slope Construction

6.3.1 All hillside grading and construction of fill slopes should conform to the minimum standards listed in Chapter 18 of the 2022 California Building Code.

6.3.2 Fill slopes should be keyed and benched into firm natural ground when the existing slope to receive fill is 10:1, horizontal to vertical, or steeper. The keys should be tilted into the slope, should be a minimum of one equipment width wide, and should extend a minimum of three (3) feet deep at the outside edge.

6.3.3 Fill slopes should be overfilled, compacted, and cut back to planned configurations. This will yield better compaction on the slope faces than other methods.

6.3.4 Lined drainage swales and down drains should be provided at the tops of all cut and fill slopes to divert drainage away from the slope faces.

6.3.5 Cut and fill slopes should not be constructed steeper than 2:1 (horizontal to vertical). Setbacks of structures from slopes should be maintained as per the 2022 California Building Code.

6.4 Utility Trenches

6.4.1 Utility trench backfill should be governed by the provisions of this report relating to minimum compaction standards. In general, service lines inside of the property lines may be backfilled with native soils and compacted to a minimum of 90% of maximum dry density. Backfill of offsite service lines will be subject to the specifications of the jurisdictional agency or this report, whichever is more stringent.

6.4.2 A representative of this firm is to monitor compliance with these recommendations.

6.5 Structural Design – Foundations

6.5.1 The addition should be supported on deepened interconnected continuous footings extending a minimum of twelve (12) inches into the underlying light brown material, noted as soil type A3 in the project boring logs.

6.5.2 Although deeper footing depths are expected for the addition, based on the project soil conditions, it is assumed that the footings will extend a minimum of twenty-four (24) inches below lowest adjacent grade.

Page 245 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 30 March 28, 2024 F-103434
9 6.5.3 Based on the project soil conditions and considering the expected footing depths, footings should be reinforced with one (1) #5 bar top and bottom with additional horizontal #5 bars placed at sixteen (16) inches on center in footings extending deeper than twenty-four (24) inches below grade.

6.5.4 At slab-on-grade foundation areas and in order to address the expansive properties of the soils below slabs within the building areas, footings and grade beam spacing should be designed to be spaced at a maximum of twenty (20) feet on center each way. Interior grade beams not supporting the building bearing loads may be designed for a reduced depth of eighteen (18) inches below grade and may be reinforced with one (1) #5 bar top and bottom. The structural engineer of record may incorporate additional and/or alternative means of mitigating the expansive soils and should clearly state the design conditions on the project foundation plans and details.

6.5.5 Deepened interconnected continuous footings may be designed based on an allowable bearing value of 1650 psf.

6.5.6 Allowable bearing values are net (weight of footing and soils surcharge may be neglected) and are applicable for dead plus reasonable live loads.

6.5.7 Bearing values may be increased by one-third when transient loads such as wind and/or seismicity are incorporated into designs using the alternate load combinations in 2022 California Building Code Section 1605.3.2.

6.5.8 Lateral loads may be resisted by soils friction on floor slabs and foundations and by passive resistance of the soils acting on foundation stem walls. Lateral capacity is based on the assumption that any required backfill adjacent to foundations and grade beams is properly compacted.

6.5.9 For structures to be constructed above slopes, the outside faces at the bottom of footings should provide a minimum horizontal distance of fifteen (15) feet from the slope face.

6.5.10 Conventional continuous footings for buildings where the ground surface slopes at 10:1, horizontal to vertical, or steeper should be stepped so that both top and bottom are level.

6.5.11 Reinforcement of footings bottomed in soils in the “Medium” expansion range should be designed by the Project Structural Engineer to properly resist the effects of the expansive soil. Additionally, soils should be presaturated to 130% of optimum moisture content to a depth of three (3) inches below the base of the footing excavation.

6.5.12 Footing excavations extending deeper than twenty-seven (27) inches below lowest adjacent grade do not require pre-saturation.

Page 246 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 31 March 28, 2024 F-103434
10 6.5.13 Foundation excavations should be observed by a representative of Beacon Geotechnical, Inc. after excavation, but prior to placing reinforcing steel or forms.

6.6 Slabs on Grade

6.6.1 Due to expansive soils present at the project, concrete slabs shall be a minimum of five (5) inches thick, reinforced with a minimum of #3 bars spaced at twelve (12) inches on center, each way.

6.6.2 Concrete slabs should be supported by compacted structural fill as recommended earlier in this report.

6.6.3 Reinforcement dowels shall be provided at the connection between concrete slabs on grade and continuous footings.

6.6.4 The plans and details shall clearly denote granular, sandy nonexpansive import soils below slab areas.

6.6.5 Although supporting the structure on deepened footings and recompacting imported non-expansive material below slabs as recommended earlier in this report will provide a foundation system that mitigates the effects of the expansive soils and satisfies the minimum intent of the building code. It should be noted that slabs requiring improved performance may be improved with thickened concrete sections and greater
reinforcement. The cost/benefit evaluation to increase the slab conditions should be coordinated by the structural engineer based on performance expectations of the project.

6.6.6 Slabs constructed over non-expansive import should be directly underlain with a minimum of four (4) inches of clean and free draining sand. Areas where floor wetness would be undesirable should be underlain with a 10mil moisture barrier to reduce moisture transmission from the subgrade soils to the slab. The membrane should be placed at mid-height in the clean sand.

6.6.7 Prior to setting the vapor barrier, soils below slab areas shall be presaturated so that the expansive sub-grade soils below the nonexpansive import are presaturated to 130% of optimum moisture content to a depth of twenty-seven (27) inches below lowest adjacent grade.

6.6.8 Reinforcement and slab thickness should be determined by the Project Structural Engineer.

6.7 Structural Design – Lateral Resistance Parameters

6.7.1 Resistance to lateral loading may be provided by friction acting on the base of foundations. A coefficient of friction of

0.32 may be applied to dead load forces. This value does not include a factor of safety.

Page 247 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 32 March 28, 2024 F-103434
11 6.7.2 Passive resistance acting on the sides of foundation stems equal to 300 pcf of equivalent fluid weight may be included for resistance to lateral load. This value does not include a factor of safety.

6.7.3 A one-third increase in the quoted passive value may be used when considering transient loads such as wind and seismicity.

6.8 Structural Design – Settlement Considerations

6.8.1 Maximum expected settlements approximately 3/4 inches are anticipated for foundations and floor slabs designed as recommended.

6.8.2 Differential settlement between adjacent load bearing members should be less than one-half the total settlement.

6.8.3 The majority of settlement should occur during construction. Post construction settlement should be minimal.

6.9 Structural Design – Retaining Walls

6.9.1 Conventional cantilever retaining walls bearing in soils prepared in accordance with the “Grading Pads – Site Development and Foundation Excavations” section of this report and backfilled with compacted soils may be designed for the lateral pressures listed below:

Active Case 45 pcf
At Rest Case 70 pcf
Passive Case 300 pcf
Max. Toe Pressure 1650 psf
Coefficient of Sliding Friction 0.32

6.9.2 Retaining walls extending greater than six (6) feet in height should be designed for an additional seismic horizontal line load of 12H2 (#/ft-ofwall) assumed to be acting at a height of 0.33H (ft) above the base of the wall, where H is the height of the wall in feet. This seismic surcharge should be added to an active pressure design utilizing an active pressure of 45 psf.

6.9.3 It should be noted that where structural retaining walls would otherwise be designed based on an at-rest pressure case, the seismicand-active design results should be compared to the at-rest design results and the governing conditions should be used for the purpose of the project.

6.9.4 In addition to the static soil pressures described above, it is important to note that the active pressure condition will only fully develop if the retaining wall structure is allowed to move a sufficient distance. The necessary lateral movements required to establish the active pressure condition are shown below,

Page 248 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 33 March 28, 2024 F-103434
12 Non-Expansive Granular Soil 0.001H – 0.004H
Expansive Cohesive Soil 0.01H – 0.04H
where H represents the height of the wall. At-rest pressures should be used for design purposes where retaining wall systems connected or adjacent to building structures would be adversely affected by the above referenced lateral displacements.

6.9.5 Design pressures noted above are applicable to a horizontally retained surface behind the wall. Walls having a retained surface that slopes upward from the wall should be designed for an additional equivalent fluid pressure of 1 pcf for the active case and 1.5 pcf for the at-rest case, for every two degrees of slope inclination. Walls positioned on or near descending slopes should be evaluated by this firm on an individual basis.

6.9.6 The pressures listed above were based on the assumption that backfilled soils will be compacted to 90% of maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 1557 Test Method.

6.9.7 The lateral earth pressure to be resisted by the retaining walls or similar structures should include the loads from any structures or temporary loads that influence the wall design.

6.9.8 A back drain or an equivalent system of backfill drainage should be incorporated into the retaining wall design. Backfill immediately behind the retaining structure should be a free-draining granular material.

Alternatively, the back of the wall could be lined with a geodrain system.

6.9.9 Compaction on the uphill side of the wall within a horizontal distance equal to one wall height should be performed by hand-operated or other lightweight compaction equipment. This is intended to reduce potential “locked-in” lateral pressures caused by compaction with heavy grading equipment.

6.9.10 Water should not be allowed to pond near the top of the wall. To accomplish this, the final backfill site grade should be such that all water is diverted away from the retaining wall.
7 REFERENCES CITED
USGS, Online, Geologic Hazards Science Center, United States Geological Society, in Cooperation with California Geological Society (CGS), www.geohazards.usgs.gov/qfaults/ca/California.php

Page 249 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 34 March 28, 2024 F-103434
13 8 ADDITIONAL SERVICES
This report is based on the assumption that an adequate program of monitoring and testing will be performed by Beacon Geotechnical, Inc. during construction to check compliance with the recommendations given in this report. The recommended tests and observations include, but are not necessarily limited to the following:

8.1 Review of the building and grading plans during the design phase of the project.

8.2 Observation and testing during site preparation, grading, placing of engineered fill, and foundation construction.

8.3 Consultation as required during construction.
9 PROJECT LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS

9.1 The analysis and recommendations submitted in this report are based in part upon the data obtained from the borings drilled on site. The nature and extent of variations between and beyond the borings may not become evident until construction. If variations then appear evident, it may be necessary to re-evaluate the recommendations of this report.

9.2 The scope of our services did not include environmental assessment or geological study. The scope of services did not include investigation for the presence or absence of wetlands, hazardous or toxic materials in the soil, surface water, groundwater, or air. Any statements in this report or on the soil boring logs regarding odors, unusual or suspicious items or conditions observed are strictly for the information of the client.

9.3 Findings of this report are valid as of this date, however, changes in a condition of a property can occur with passage of time whether they be due to natural processes or works of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate standard may occur whether they result from legislation or broadening knowledge. Accordingly, findings of this report may be invalidated wholly or partially by changes outside our control. Therefore, this report is subject to review and should not be relied upon after a period of one (1) year.

9.4 In the event that any changes in the nature, design, or location of the structure and other improvements are planned, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report shall not be considered valid unless the changes are reviewed, and conclusions of this report modified or verified in writing.

Page 250 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 35 March 28, 2024 F-103434
14 9.5 This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner or his representatives to ensure the information and recommendations offered herein are called to the attention of the project architect and engineers. It is also the responsibility of the owner or his representatives to ensure the information and recommendations offered herein are incorporated into the project plans and specifications and the necessary steps are taken to see that the contractor and subcontractors carry out such recommendations in the field.

9.6 Beacon Geotechnical, Inc. has prepared this report for the exclusive use of the client and authorized agents. This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices. No other warranties, either expressed or implied, are made as to the professional advice provided under the terms of this agreement.

9.7 It is recommended that Beacon Geotechnical, Inc. be provided the opportunity for a general review of final design and specifications in order that earthwork and foundation recommendations may be properly interpreted and implemented in the design and specifications. If Beacon Geotechnical, Inc. is not accorded the privilege of making this recommended review, we can assume no responsibility for misinterpretation of our recommendations.

END OF TEXT
Appendices

Page 251 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 36

APPENDIX A

Vicinity Map
Site Plan
Quaternary Fault Map
Investigation Parameters
Unified Soil Classification Table
Boring Logs

Page 252 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 37

PROJECT #: F-103434
SITE

Page 253 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 38

PROJECT #: F-103434
1 2

Page 254 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 39

Map Showing Nearby Quaternary Aged Faults (USGS, Online) SITE
PROJECT #: F-103434

QUATERNARY FAULT MAP

Page 255 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 40

INVESTIGATION PARAMETERS
• The borings were drilled to a maximum depth of sixteen (16) feet below the existing ground surface to observe the soil profile and to obtain samples for laboratory analysis. The borings were drilled on March 7, 2024 using a mobile drill rig and/or hand augering equipment. The approximate locations of the borings were determined in the field by pacing and sighting and are shown on the Site Plan in this Appendix.
• Blow counts were obtained within the test borings with Standard Penetration Test (S.P.T.) equipment. The blow counts were obtained by driving the sampler with a 140-pound hammer dropping thirty (30) inches in accordance with ASTM D 1586-11.
• Bulk samples of the soils encountered were gathered from the auger cuttings.
• The final logs of borings represent our interpretation of the contents of the field logs and the results of laboratory testing performed on the samples obtained during the subsurface investigation. The final logs are included in this Appendix.

Page 256 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 41

UNITED SOIL CLASSIFICATION (ASTM D-2487)

UNITED SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART
F-103434

Page 257 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 42

LOG OF BORING
for:
460 Bonita Street
Site Location: Morro Bay, CA F-103434
Driller/Helper:

Rig Type: Hand Auger BORING NO. 1
Auger Diameter: 4”
Date: March 7, 2024
GROUNDWATER Not Encountered SAMPLE TYPE
Time Depth U= Undisturbed Ring Sample using 10lb Hammer With 18” Drop Depth
(ft.)
Blow
Type
Blows
per ft.

Drilling
comments
Voids Moisture Description USCS Beacon
Soil ID
0 Loose Brown silty clayey sand with gravel SM-SC A1
U +3%
Light brown silty very clayey sand SC-SM A2
U +2%
Medium Dense Light brown silty clayey sand with gravel SM-SC A3 5 U -1%

10 U -2%
15 U -1%
Total Depth @ 16.0’
20 25
30 35
40 45
50

Page 258 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 43

LOG OF BORING
for:
460 Bonita Street
Site Location: Morro Bay, CA F-103434
Driller/Helper:

Rig Type: Hand Auger BORING NO. 2
Auger Diameter: 4”
Date: March 7, 2024
GROUNDWATER Not Encountered SAMPLE TYPE
Time Depth U= Undisturbed Ring Sample using 10lb Hammer With 18” Drop Depth
(ft.)
Blow
Type
Blows
per ft.

Drilling
comments
Voids Moisture Description USCS Beacon
Soil ID
0 Loose Brown silty clayey sand with gravel SM-SC A1
Light brown silty very clayey sand SC-SM A2

Medium Dense Light brown silty clayey sand with gravel SM-SC A3 5 Total Depth @ 5.0’

10 15
20 25
30 35
40 45
50

Page 259 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 44

APPENDIX B
Laboratory Testing Parameters
Laboratory Results
Bench & Keyway Detail
Deepened Footing Detail
2022 CBC -- Table 1705.6

Page 260 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 45

LABORATORY PARAMETERS
• Samples were reviewed along with field logs to determine which would be analyzed further. Those chosen for laboratory analysis were considered representative of soils that would be exposed and/or used during grading, and those deemed to be within the influence of the proposed structure. Test results are presented in this Appendix.
• ASTM D2487-11 Standard Practice for Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes (Unified Soil Classification System)
• ASTM D1557-12e1 Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Modified Effort
• ASTM D2216-10 Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Determination of Water (Moisture) Content of Soil and Rock by Mass
• ASTM D4318-10e1 Standard Test Methods for Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils
• ASTM D4829-11 Standard Test Method for Expansion Index of Soils

Page 261 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 46

LABORATORY RESULTS

Boring Max. Opt.

Depth USCS Density Moisture E.I. P.I.
(pcf) (%)
Material A1 1@0’-2’ SM-SC 117.7 11.9 28 8
Material A2 1@2’-4’ SC-SM 115.8 13.4 57 16
Material A3 1@4’-16’ SM-SC 118.2 11.5 25 7

Page 262 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 47

PROJECT #: F-103434
Underlying soil material
per boring logs and
grading recommendations

Page 263 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 48

PROJECT #: F-103434

Page 264 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 49

Page 265 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 50 Camarillo, CA 93010
Tel (213) 688-1341 or (805) 339-9434
PREPARED FOR:
330 North Lantana Street, Suite 28, #220

HUNTER SMITH ARCHITECTURE
BY:

JACOBUS & YUANG, INC.

JYI# C2756A

OPINION OF PROBABLE COST

MORRO BAY FIRE STATION
May 14, 2024

CONCEPTUAL DESIGN

RENOVATION

LIVING QUARTERS
Option A Opinion of Probable Cost

Page 266 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 51 Prepared By: Jacobus & Yuang, Inc.

JYI NO: C2756A
LOCATION: MORRO BAY, CA DATE OF ESTIMATE: 14-May-24
CLIENT: HUNTER SMITH ARCHITECTURE DATE OF REVISION:

ITEM
NO.

DESCRIPTION QTY U
N
I
T

UNIT COST TOTAL

CONSTRUCTION
COST
COST SUMMARY $
LIVING QUARTERS RENOVATION 1,145 SF $688.57 788,411

TOTAL OPINION OF CONSTRUCTION COST WITH

PRORATES PLUS ESCALATION
1,145 SF $688.57 788,411

ESCALATION CALCULATION
BASE MONTH May-24
CONSTRUCTION START MONTH Aug-25
CONSTRUCTION DURATION (MONTHS) 8
CONSTRUCTION MIDPOINT Dec-25
% ANNUAL ESCALATION 7.50%
ALLOWANCE FOR ESCALATION 12.14%

GENERAL NOTES
1 ESTIMATE ASSUMES THAT ALL COMPONENTS WILL BE BID AS A SINGLE BID PACKAGE 2 ESTIMATE ASSUMES 8-HOUR SHIFTS DURING REGULAR WORK HOURS 3 ESTIMATE ASSUMES BID COVERAGE FROM AT LEAST 4-5 RESPONSIVE BIDDERS 4 SPECIFIC EXCLUSIONS:
1 PROJECT SOFT COSTS (EXCLUDING CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY) 2 F, F & E (GROUP II EQUIPMENT) EXCEPT AS NOTED
3 PROJECT MANAGEMENT FEES
4 ESCALATION BEYOND THE PARAMETERS SHOWN ABOVE
5 BEDROOM FURNISHINGS
6 KITCHEN EQUIPMENT
7 HVAC EQUIPMENT
8 AUDIO-VISUAL SYSTEM
9 PAGING/PUBLIC ADDRESS SYSTEM
10 FIRE ALERTING SYSTEM
11 SECURITY SYSTEM
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: MORRO BAY FIRE STATION - LIVING

QUARTERS RENOVATION
SUBJECT: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OPINION OF PROBABLE COST -

COST SUMMARY

THE ESTIMATE IS BASED ON CONCEPTUAL DESIGN DRAWINGS PREPARED BY HUNTER SMITH ARCHITECTURE DATED 04/29/2024, RECEIVED 05/03/2024.

Page 1 ends

Page 267 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 52 Prepared By: Jacobus & Yuang, Inc.

JYI NO: C2756A
LOCATION: MORRO BAY, CA DATE OF ESTIMATE: 14-May-24
CLIENT: HUNTER SMITH ARCHITECTURE DATE OF REVISION:

ITEM
NO.

DESCRIPTION QTY U
N
I
T

UNIT COST TOTAL

CONSTRUCTION
COST
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: MORRO BAY FIRE STATION - LIVING

QUARTERS RENOVATION
SUBJECT: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OPINION OF PROBABLE COST -

COST SUMMARY
SPECIFIC INCLUSIONS:
1 PREVAILING UNION WAGE RATES IN THE AREA OF THE PROJECT 2 ESCALATION TO MIDPOINT OF CONSTRUCTION
3 SELECTIVE BUILDING DEMOLITION
4 HAZARDOUS MATERIAL ABATEMENT
5 DEPRESSED BATHROOM SLAB
6 ALLOWANCE FOR REWORK TO EXISTING FIRE SPRINKLER WET SYSTEM 7 ALLOWANCE FOR REPLACEMENT OF WATER HEATER AND AUXILIARY EQUIPMENT 8 HVAC REMODEL LIMITED TO DUCTWORK, CEILING DIFFUSERS, AND CONTROLS REPLACEMENT 9 ELECTRICAL SYSTEM EXCLUDING EQUIPMENT
10 ALLOWANCE FOR TELEPHONE/DATA SYSTEM
11 FIRE ALARM SYSTEM
DEFINITIONS:

OPINION OF COST
BID
An offer to enter a contract to perform work for a fixed sum, to be completed within a limited period of time.

MARKET CONDITIONS:

Number of bids Percentage Differential

1............ + 25 to 50%
2-3.......... + 10 to 25%
4-5.......... + 0 to 7%
6-7.......... + 0 to - 7%
8 or more.... + -7 to -15%
Accordingly, it is extremely important to ensure that a minimum of 4-5 valid bids are received Jacobus & Yuang, Inc., however, cannot and does not guarantee that bids, or cost proposals for construction will not vary from this Opinion of Cost or Estimate.

In the current market conditions for construction, our experience shows the following results on competitive bids, as a differential from JYI final estimates:

An Opinion of Cost is prepared from a survey of the quantities of work-items prepared from written or drawn information provided at the Conceptual or Schematic stage of the design.

Historical costs, information provided by contractors and suppliers, plus judgmental evaluation by the Estimator are used as appropriate as the basis for pricing.

Allowances as appropriate will be included for items of work which are not indicated on the design documents, provided that the Estimator is made aware of them, or which, in the judgement of the Estimator, are required for completion of the JYI cannot, however, be responsible for items or work of an unusual nature of which we have not been informed.

Page 2 ends

Page 268 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 53 Prepared By: Jacobus & Yuang, Inc.

JYI NO: C2756A
LOCATION: MORRO BAY, CA DATE OF ESTIMATE: 14-May-24
CLIENT: HUNTER SMITH ARCHITECTURE DATE OF REVISION:

WORK AREA: 1,145
ITEM
NO.

DESCRIPTION EST QTY U
N
I
T

UNIT COST TOTAL
CONSTRUCT.

COST
SUMMARY OF ESTIMATE $

1.0 GENERAL CONDITIONS SEE PRORATES BELOW

2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS 12.4% 54.40 62,292

3.0 CONCRETE 3.9% 16.93 19,383

4.0 MASONRY 1.3% 5.63 6,442

5.0 METALS 0.4% 1.75 2,003

6.0 CARPENTRY 3.3% 14.63 16,757

7.0 THERMAL & MOISTURE PROTECTION 0.7% 3.21 3,672

8.0 OPENINGS 6.6% 28.87 33,054

9.0 FINISHES 22.2% 97.03 111,099

10.0 SPECIALTIES 3.4% 15.04 17,223

11.0 EQUIPMENT

12.0 FURNISHINGS 0.9% 4.01 4,596

13.0 SPECIAL CONSTRUCTION

14.0 CONVEYING EQUIPMENT

21.0 FIRE SUPPRESSION 0.8% 3.50 4,005

22.0 PLUMBING 11.6% 50.79 58,151

23.0 HVAC 6.7% 29.46 33,726

26.0 ELECTRICAL 16.7% 72.83 83,395

27.0 COMMUNICATIONS 5.3% 23.32 26,700

28.0 ELECTRONIC SAFETY & SECURITY 3.7% 16.03 18,357
SUBTOTAL 100.0% 437.43 500,855
PRORATES:

GENERAL CONDITIONS / GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 12.50% 54.68 62,607 DESIGN / ESTIMATE CONTINGENCY 15.00% 73.82 84,519
SUBTOTAL 565.92 647,981
CONTRACTOR'S MARK-UP:

CONTRACTOR'S FEE 6.50% 36.79 42,119
BONDS & INSURANCE 2.00% 11.32 12,960
SUBTOTAL 614.03 703,060
ESCALATION:

ESCALATION 12.14% 74.54 85,351
TOTAL OPINION OF CONSTRUCTION COST 688.57 788,411
SUBJECT: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OPINION OF PROBABLE COST -

ESTIMATE DETAIL
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: MORRO BAY FIRE STATION - LIVING

QUARTERS RENOVATION

Page 1 ends

Page 269 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 54 Prepared By: Jacobus & Yuang, Inc.

JYI NO: C2756A
LOCATION: MORRO BAY, CA DATE OF ESTIMATE: 14-May-24
CLIENT: HUNTER SMITH ARCHITECTURE DATE OF REVISION:

SUBJECT: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OPINION OF PROBABLE COST - WORK AREA: 1,145

ESTIMATE DETAIL
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: MORRO BAY FIRE STATION - LIVING

QUARTERS RENOVATION

1.0 GENERAL CONDITIONS $

SEE PRORATES ABOVE

SUBTOTAL

2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS $

SELECTIVE BUILDING DEMOLITION
REMOVE (E) EXTERIOR DOOR/FRAME, PER LEAF 1 EA 321.00 321 REMOVE (E) 8'L x 4'H EXTERIOR WINDOW/FRAME 1 EA 466.00 466 SAWCUT/REMOVE 3.17'W x 7'H PORTION OF (E) 8" EXTERIOR
CMU WALL FOR NEW EXT. DOOR OPENING
1 EA 999.00 999
SAWCUT/REMOVE 3.17'W x 2.67'H PORTION OF (E) 8"

EXTERIOR CMU WALL BELOW EXISTING WINDOW OPENING
1 EA 516.00 516
SAWCUT/REMOVE 0.33' thk x 3.17'W PORTION OF (E) 8"

EXTERIOR CMU WALL ABOVE EXISTING WINDOW OPENING
1 EA 343.00 343
REMOVE (E) INTERIOR DOOR/FRAME, PER LEAF 7 EA 289.00 2,023 REMOVE (E) INTERIOR POCKET DOOR 1 EA 328.00 328
REMOVE (E) LAVATORY COUNTER 4 LF 37.31 149
REMOVE (E) KITCHEN COUNTER 10 LF 52.47 525
REMOVE (E) KITCHEN COUNTER W/ 12"W HIGH COUNTER 8 LF 73.46 588 REMOVE (E) UPPER CABINET 9 LF 37.31 336
REMOVE (E) INTERIOR WALLS, COMPLETE 1,100 SF 3.50 3,848 REMOVE (E) WALL TILES 74 SF 4.37 324
REMOVE (E) FLOOR FINISHES & WALL BASE 1,145 SF 2.35 2,687 REMOVE (E) CEILING FINISHES & FRAMES, COMPLETE 1,145 SF 2.91 3,338 REMOVE (E) CONCRETE CURB 32 LF 11.66 373

SAWCUT/REMOVE PORTION OF (E) SLAB-ON-GRADE PER

NEW BATHROOM
116 SF 6.09 707
PROTECT (E) EXT. DOOR/FRAME, PER LEAF 1 EA 116.60 117
PROTECT (E) EXT. WINDOW/FRAME 146 SF 5.83 851
MISC. SELECTIVE DEMO & PROTECTION WORK 1,145 GSF 1.23 1,413

PLUMBING DEMO WORK

POD/REMOVE (E) WATER HEATER, AUXILIARY EQUIPMENT,
& ALL ASSOCIATED PIPING, COMPLETE
1 EA 1,283.00 1,283

POD/REMOVE (E) PLUMBING FIXTURES & ALL ASSOCIATED

PIPING, COMPLETE
4 EA 1,180.00 4,720

POD/REMOVE (E) SHOWER/DRAIN & ALL ASSOCIATED

PIPING, COMPLETE
1 EA 1,327.00 1,327

HVAC DEMO WORK

REMOVE (E) CEILING DIFFUSERS & ALL ASSOCIATED

DUCTWORK, COMPLETE - ASSUME NO EQUIPMENT DEMO
1,145 GSF 4.66 5,340

ELECTRICAL DEMO WORK

REMOVE (E) BRANCH POWER & LIGHTING, COMPLETE -

ASSUME NO EQUIPMENT DEMO
1,145 GSF 17.49 20,025

HAZARDOUS MATERIAL ABATEMENT
ALLOWANCE FOR HAZARDOUS MATERIAL ABATEMENT 1,145 GSF 8.16 9,345 SUBTOTAL 62,292

Page 2 ends

Page 270 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 55 Prepared By: Jacobus & Yuang, Inc.

JYI NO: C2756A
LOCATION: MORRO BAY, CA DATE OF ESTIMATE: 14-May-24
CLIENT: HUNTER SMITH ARCHITECTURE DATE OF REVISION:

SUBJECT: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OPINION OF PROBABLE COST - WORK AREA: 1,145

ESTIMATE DETAIL
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: MORRO BAY FIRE STATION - LIVING

QUARTERS RENOVATION

3.0 CONCRETE $

SLAB-ON-GRADE/CURBS
NEW BATHROOM DEPRESSED SLAB 116 SF 11.66 1,353
JOIN TO (E) SLAB/WALL 62 LF 64.13 3,976
CONCRETE CURB & TIE TO (E) SLAB 56 LF 43.72 2,449
REPAIR/PATCH PORTION OF (E) BATHROOM SLAB 15 SF 13.99 210

CUT & PATCH (E) SLAB-ON-GRADE PER NEW PLUMBING

FIXTURE SEWER LINES - PER FIXTURE
7 EA 1,399.00 9,793
MISC. CONCRETE WORK ALLOWANCE 1,145 GSF 1.40 1,602
SUBTOTAL 19,383

4.0 MASONRY $

EXTERIOR CMU WALL
8" CMU INFILL, 1.67'W x 4'H 1 EA 584.00 584
8" CMU INFILL, 3.25'W x 4'H 1 EA 1,137.00 1,137
8" CMU INFILL, 3.25'W x 7'H 1 EA 1,809.00 1,809
TIE TO (E) 8" CMU WALL/SLAB 38 LF 76.95 2,912
SUBTOTAL 6,442

5.0 METALS $
MISC. METALS
MISC. METALS ALLOWANCE 1,145 GSF 1.75 2,003
SUBTOTAL 2,003

6.0 CARPENTRY $

FINISH CARPENTRY
24"W KITCHEN CABINET/COUNTER 14 LF 641.00 8,974
LAVATORY COUNTER 6 LF 350.00 2,100
PLAM UPPER CABINET 9 LF 437.00 3,933

ROUGH CARPENTRY
MISC. ROUGH CARPENTRY ALLOWANCE (blockings, nailers,
sills, straps, etc.)
1,145 GSF 1.53 1,750
SUBTOTAL 16,757

7.0 THERMAL & MOISTURE PROTECTION $

MISCELLANEOUS
MISC. CAULKING & SEALANTS ALLOWANCE 1,145 GSF 1.46 1,669 MISC. FIRESTOPPING ALLOWANCE 1,145 GSF 1.75 2,003
SUBTOTAL 3,672

8.0 OPENINGS $
EXTERIOR DOOR + HARDWARE
HM DOOR/HM FRAME, 3'W x 6.67'H + H.W. + PAINT 2 EA 3,648.78 7,298

Page 3 ends

Page 271 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 56 Prepared By: Jacobus & Yuang, Inc.

JYI NO: C2756A
LOCATION: MORRO BAY, CA DATE OF ESTIMATE: 14-May-24
CLIENT: HUNTER SMITH ARCHITECTURE DATE OF REVISION:

SUBJECT: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OPINION OF PROBABLE COST - WORK AREA: 1,145

ESTIMATE DETAIL
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: MORRO BAY FIRE STATION - LIVING

QUARTERS RENOVATION
REPAINT (E) EXT. DOOR/FRAME - ALLOWANCE 1 EA 320.64 321

EXTERIOR WINDOWS
REPAINT (E) EXT. WINDOW FRAMES - ALLOWANCE 169 LF 11.66 1,970 INTERIOR DOORS + HARDWARE
SC WD DOOR/HM FRAME, 3'W x 7'H + H.W. + PAINT 7 EA 3,352.13 23,465 SUBTOTAL 33,054

9.0 FINISHES $

EXTERIOR WALLS
REPAIR CRACKS & REPAINT (E) EXT. CMU WALL 783 SF 5.83 4,564 2" x 6" STUD FURRING + GWB/PAINT - INT. OF EXT. WALL 778 SF 24.19 18,834 PAINT TO (E) CMU WALL - INT. OF EXT. 227 SF 4.08 928

INTERIOR WALLS
2" x 4" STUD + GWB/PAINT BOTH SIDES 871 SF 29.73 25,907 2" x 6" STUD + GWB/PAINT BOTH SIDES 242 SF 32.30 7,813
WALL TILE, ASSUME 8'H 430 SF 34.98 15,041
BATT INSULATION 1,113 SF 1.52 1,687

FLOOR FINISHES
CERAMIC FLOOR TILE + WALL BASE - BATHROOM 116 SF 46.64 5,410 CARPET FLOOR + WALL BASE - BEDROOMS/OFFICE 352 SF 12.53 4,412 VINYL TILE + WALL BASE - REST OF AREA 677 SF 14.28 9,670

CEILING FINISHES
2' x 2' ACT T-BAR CEILING SYSTEM 1,029 SF 12.24 12,598
GWB CEILING + STUD FRAMES + PAINT 116 SF 23.32 2,705
MISC. CEILING SOFFITS/BULKING ALLOWANCE 1,145 GSF 1.34 1,530 SUBTOTAL 111,099

10.0 SPECIALTIES $
MISC. SPECIALTIES
BEDROOM LOCKER, 24" x 24" 9 EA 1,275.88 11,483
EXT./INT. SIGNAGE, ROOM I.D. 10 EA 204.04 2,040
RESTROOM ACCESSORIES, PER FIXTURE 6 EA 408.09 2,449
KITCHEN SINK ACCESSORIES 2 EA 291.49 583
MISC. SPECIALTIES ALLOWANCE 1,145 GSF 0.58 668
SUBTOTAL 17,223

11.0 EQUIPMENT $

KITCHEN EQUIPMENT

NOT INCLUDED

SUBTOTAL

12.0 FURNISHINGS $

WINDOW SHADES
WINDOW SHADES, MANUAL 146 SF 31.48 4,596

Page 4 ends

Page 272 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 57 Prepared By: Jacobus & Yuang, Inc.

JYI NO: C2756A
LOCATION: MORRO BAY, CA DATE OF ESTIMATE: 14-May-24
CLIENT: HUNTER SMITH ARCHITECTURE DATE OF REVISION:

SUBJECT: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OPINION OF PROBABLE COST - WORK AREA: 1,145

ESTIMATE DETAIL
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: MORRO BAY FIRE STATION - LIVING

QUARTERS RENOVATION

BEDROOM FURNISHINGS

NOT INCLUDED
SUBTOTAL 4,596

13.0 SPECIAL CONSTRUCTION $

THIS SECTION NOT APPLICABLE

SUBTOTAL

14.0 CONVEYING EQUIPMENT $

THIS SECTION NOT APPLICABLE

SUBTOTAL

21.0 FIRE SUPPRESSION $

FIRE SPRINKLER WET SYSTEM
RE-WORK TO (E) FIRE SPRINKLER - ALLOWANCE 1,145 GSF 3.50 4,005 SUBTOTAL 4,005

22.0 PLUMBING $

PLUMBING SYSTEM

ALLOWANCE FOR WATER HEATER & ALL RELATED

AUXILIARY EQUIPMENT, & ROUGH-INS AT, COMPLETE
1 EA 14,574.47 14,574
PLUMBING FIXTURES + ROUGH-INS AT 7 EA 2,331.91 16,323
ROUGH-INS FOR 7 EA 3,497.87 24,485
MISC. PLUMBING SYSTEM/TESTING 1,145 GSF 2.42 2,769
SUBTOTAL 58,151

23.0 HVAC $

HVAC SYSTEM

HVAC EQUIPMENT ASSUME EXISTING
DUCTWORK, DIFFUSERS, & ALL ACCESSORIES 1,145 GSF 23.32 26,700 RE-WORK TO (E) CONTROLS 1,145 GSF 4.08 4,673
MISC. HVAC SYSTEM/TESTING 1,145 GSF 2.06 2,353
SUBTOTAL 33,726

26.0 ELECTRICAL $

ELECTRICAL SYSTEM

ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT ASSUME EXISTING

ALLOWANCE FOR PANEL BOARD REPLACEMENT, NEW

SECONDARY FEEDER, & ALL ASSOCIATED WORK
1 EA 23,319.00 23,319
BRANCH POWER, COMPLETE 1,145 GSF 17.49 20,025
LIGHTING, COMPLETE 1,145 GSF 34.98 40,051
SUBTOTAL 83,395

Page 5 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 58 Prepared By: Jacobus & Yuang, Inc.

JYI NO: C2756A
LOCATION: MORRO BAY, CA DATE OF ESTIMATE: 14-May-24
CLIENT: HUNTER SMITH ARCHITECTURE DATE OF REVISION:

SUBJECT: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OPINION OF PROBABLE COST - WORK AREA: 1,145

ESTIMATE DETAIL
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: MORRO BAY FIRE STATION - LIVING

QUARTERS RENOVATION

27.0 COMMUNICATIONS $

TELEPHONE/DATA
ALLOWANCE FOR TEL/DATA SYSTEM, COMPLETE 1,145 GSF 23.32 26,700 SUBTOTAL 26,700

28.0 ELECTRONIC SAFETY & SECURITY $

FIRE ALARM SYSTEM
ALLOWANCE FOR FIRE ALARM SYSTEM, COMPLETE 1,145 GSF 16.03 18,357

SECURITY SYSTEM

NOT INCLUDED
SUBTOTAL 18,357

Page 6 ends

Page 274 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 59 JYI# C2759A

OPINION OF PROBABLE COST

MORRO BAY FIRE STATION
May 17, 2024

CONCEPTUAL DESIGN
NEW 2-STORY BUILDING
Camarillo, CA 93010
Tel (213) 688-1341 or (805) 339-9434
PREPARED FOR:
330 North Lantana Street, Suite 28, #220

HUNTER SMITH ARCHITECTURE
BY:

JACOBUS & YUANG, INC.

Option B Opinion of Probable Cost

Page 275 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 60 Prepared By: Jacobus &Yuang, Inc.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: MORRO BAY FIRE STATION - NEW 2-STORY BUILDING JYI NO: C2759A LOCATION: MORRO BAY, CA DATE OF ESTIMATE: 17-May-24
CLIENT: HUNTER SMITH ARCHITECTURE DATE OF REVISION:

ITEM
NO.

DESCRIPTION QTY U
N
I
T

UNIT COST TOTAL

CONSTRUCTION
COST
COST SUMMARY $
SITEWORK 1,373 SF $157.13 215,733
2-STORY BUILDING 2,322 SF $908.68 2,109,949

TOTAL OPINION OF CONSTRUCTION COST WITH

PRORATES PLUS ESCALATION
2,322 SF $1,001.59 2,325,682

ESCALATION CALCULATION
BASE MONTH May-24
CONSTRUCTION START MONTH Aug-25
CONSTRUCTION DURATION (MONTHS) 12
CONSTRUCTION MIDPOINT Feb-26
% ANNUAL ESCALATION 7.50%
ALLOWANCE FOR ESCALATION 13.50%

GENERAL NOTES
1 ESTIMATE ASSUMES THAT ALL COMPONENTS WILL BE BID AS A SINGLE BID PACKAGE 2 ESTIMATE ASSUMES 8-HOUR SHIFTS DURING REGULAR WORK HOURS 3 ESTIMATE ASSUMES BID COVERAGE FROM AT LEAST 4-5 RESPONSIVE BIDDERS 4 SPECIFIC EXCLUSIONS:
1 PROJECT SOFT COSTS (EXCLUDING CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY) 2 F, F & E (GROUP II EQUIPMENT) EXCEPT AS NOTED
3 PROJECT MANAGEMENT FEES
4 ESCALATION BEYOND THE PARAMETERS SHOWN ABOVE
5 CONCRETE TOPPING AT SECOND FLOOR
6 BEDROOM FURNISHINGS
7 KITCHEN EQUIPMENT
8 GYM EQUIPMENT
9 LAUNDRY EQUIPMENT
10 AUDIO-VISUAL SYSTEM
11 RADIO SYSTEM
12 PHOTO-VOLTAIC PANELS
SUBJECT: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OPINION OF PROBABLE COST -

COST SUMMARY

THE ESTIMATE IS BASED ON CONCEPTUAL DESIGN DRAWINGS PREPARED BY HUNTER SMITH ARCHITECTURE DATED 04/29/2024, RECEIVED 05/13/2024.

Page 1 ends

Page 276 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 61 Prepared By: Jacobus &Yuang, Inc.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: MORRO BAY FIRE STATION - NEW 2-STORY BUILDING JYI NO: C2759A LOCATION: MORRO BAY, CA DATE OF ESTIMATE: 17-May-24
CLIENT: HUNTER SMITH ARCHITECTURE DATE OF REVISION:

ITEM
NO.

DESCRIPTION QTY U
N
I
T

UNIT COST TOTAL

CONSTRUCTION
COST
SUBJECT: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OPINION OF PROBABLE COST -

COST SUMMARY
SPECIFIC INCLUSIONS:
1 PREVAILING UNION WAGE RATES IN THE AREA OF THE PROJECT 2 ESCALATION TO MIDPOINT OF CONSTRUCTION
3 DEMOLITION OF EXISTING BUILDING
4 HAZARDOUS MATERIAL ABATEMENT
5 BUILDING PAD OVEREXCAVATION ASSUMED AT 5-FOOT DEEP PLUS 5-FOOT BEYOND BUILDING FOOTPRINT 6 UNDERPINNING TO EXISTING APPARATUS BAY FOOTING
7 ASPHALT SHINGLES ASSUMED AS ROOFING MATERIAL
8 KITCHEN HOOD
9 FIRE SPRINKLER WET SYSTEM
10 PLUMBING SYSTEM
11 HVAC SYSTEM
12 ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
13 COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM
14 FIRE ALARM SYSTEM
15 FIRE ALERTING SYSTEM
16 SMOKE AND GAS ALARM SYSTEM
17 SECURITY SYSTEM
DEFINITIONS:

OPINION OF COST
BID
An offer to enter a contract to perform work for a fixed sum, to be completed within a limited period of time.

Jacobus & Yuang, Inc., however, cannot and does not guarantee that bids, or cost proposals for construction will not vary from this Opinion of Cost or Estimate.

An Opinion of Cost is prepared from a survey of the quantities of work-items prepared from written or drawn information provided at the Conceptual or Schematic stage of the design.

Historical costs, information provided by contractors and suppliers, plus judgmental evaluation by the Estimator are used as appropriate as the basis for pricing.

JYI cannot, however, be responsible for items or work of an unusual nature of which we have not been informed.

Page 2 ends

Page 277 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 62 Prepared By: Jacobus &Yuang, Inc.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: MORRO BAY FIRE STATION - NEW 2-STORY BUILDING JYI NO: C2759A LOCATION: MORRO BAY, CA DATE OF ESTIMATE: 17-May-24
CLIENT: HUNTER SMITH ARCHITECTURE DATE OF REVISION:

ITEM
NO.

DESCRIPTION QTY U
N
I
T

UNIT COST TOTAL

CONSTRUCTION
COST
SUBJECT: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OPINION OF PROBABLE COST -

COST SUMMARY
MARKET CONDITIONS:

Number of bids Percentage Differential

1............ + 25 to 50%
2-3.......... + 10 to 25%
4-5.......... + 0 to 7%
6-7.......... + 0 to - 7%
8 or more.... + -7 to -15%
Accordingly, it is extremely important to ensure that a minimum of 4-5 valid bids are received In the current market conditions for construction, our experience shows the following results on competitive bids, as a differential from JYI final estimates:

Page 3 ends

Page 278 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 63 Prepared By: Jacobus &Yuang, Inc.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: MORRO BAY FIRE STATION - NEW 2-STORY BUILDING JYI NO: C2759A LOCATION: MORRO BAY, CA DATE OF ESTIMATE: 17-May-24
CLIENT: HUNTER SMITH ARCHITECTURE DATE OF REVISION:

NET SITE AREA: 1,373
ITEM
NO.

DESCRIPTION EST QTY U
N
I
T

UNIT COST TOTAL
CONSTRUCT.

COST
SUMMARY OF ESTIMATE $

1.0 GENERAL CONDITIONS SEE PRORATES BELOW

2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS 38.0% 37.52 51,510

31.0 EARTHWORK 12.1% 11.96 16,418

32.0 EXTERIOR IMPROVEMENTS 20.0% 19.73 27,089

33.0 UTILITIES 29.8% 29.42 40,389
SUBTOTAL 100.0% 98.62 135,406
PRORATES:

GENERAL CONDITIONS / GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 12.50% 12.33 16,926 DESIGN / ESTIMATE CONTINGENCY 15.00% 16.64 22,850
SUBTOTAL 127.59 175,182
CONTRACTOR'S MARK-UP:

CONTRACTOR'S FEE 6.50% 8.29 11,387
BONDS & INSURANCE 2.00% 2.55 3,504
SUBTOTAL 138.44 190,073
ESCALATION:

ESCALATION 13.50% 18.69 25,660
TOTAL OPINION OF CONSTRUCTION COST 157.13 215,733
SITE AREAS:

CONCRETE PAVEMENT 1,092 SF
LAWN 281 SF
BUILDING FOOTPRINT 1,197 SF
GROSS SITE AREA 2,570 SF
SUBJECT: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OPINION OF PROBABLE COST -

SITEWORK

Page 1 ends

Page 279 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 64 Prepared By: Jacobus &Yuang, Inc.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: MORRO BAY FIRE STATION - NEW 2-STORY BUILDING JYI NO: C2759A LOCATION: MORRO BAY, CA DATE OF ESTIMATE: 17-May-24
CLIENT: HUNTER SMITH ARCHITECTURE DATE OF REVISION:

NET SITE AREA: 1,373
ITEM
NO.

DESCRIPTION EST QTY U
N
I
T

UNIT COST TOTAL
CONSTRUCT.

COST
SUBJECT: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OPINION OF PROBABLE COST -

SITEWORK

1.0 GENERAL CONDITIONS $

SEE PRORATES ABOVE

SUBTOTAL

2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS $

SITE DEMOLITION (HAULING INCLUDED)
REMOVE (E) 1-STORY CMU-ENCLOSED BUILDING INCLUDING

FOUNDATION & ALL ASSOCIATED UTILITIES, COMPLETE
1,145 SF 26.00 29,770
REMOVE (E) PLANTING/IRRIGATION - WEST PORTION 355 SF 3.00 1,065

REMOVE (E) LAWN/IRRIGATION - NORTH & EAST PORTION

PER EXTENT OF OVEREXCAVATION
281 SF 3.00 843
SAWCUT (E) CONCRETE PAVING 50 LF 13.00 650
REMOVE (E) CONCRETE PAVING & BASE 789 SF 6.00 4,734
MISC. SITE DEMO & PROTECTION WORK 1,373 SF 1.35 1,853

HAZARDOUS MATERIAL ABATEMENT

ALLOWANCE FOR HAZARDOUS MATERIAL ABATEMENT -

PER DEMOLISHED BUILDING
1,145 SF 11.00 12,595
SUBTOTAL 51,510

31.0 EARTHWORK $

SITE PREPARATION
SITE CLEARING 2,570 SF 0.28 718
ROUGH GRADING 2,570 SF 0.78 2,010
FINE GRADING 1,373 SF 0.95 1,304
SCARIFY & COMPACT (E) SUBGRADE 1,092 SF 0.83 904
BUILDING PAD OVEREXCAVATION - ASSUME 5'D BELOW
SLAB + 5' BEYOND BUILDING FOOTPRINT
346 CY 27.93 9,658
EROSION CONTROL/SWPPP 1,373 SF 1.33 1,824
SUBTOTAL 16,418

32.0 EXTERIOR IMPROVEMENTS $

HARDSCAPE
CONCRETE PAVING + BASE - ASSUME 4"/ 4" 1,092 SF 13.00 14,196 JOIN TO (E) CONCRETE PAVEMENT 120 LF 61.00 7,320

LANDSCAPE
LAWN + IRRIGATION, MATCH EXISTING 281 SF 17.00 4,777

MISCELLANEOUS
PARKING STALL STRIPING 3 EA 112.00 336
MISC. SITE IMPROVEMENTS/SIGNAGES 1,373 SF 0.34 460
SUBTOTAL 27,089

Page 2 ends

Page 280 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 65 Prepared By: Jacobus &Yuang, Inc.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: MORRO BAY FIRE STATION - NEW 2-STORY BUILDING JYI NO: C2759A LOCATION: MORRO BAY, CA DATE OF ESTIMATE: 17-May-24
CLIENT: HUNTER SMITH ARCHITECTURE DATE OF REVISION:

NET SITE AREA: 1,373
ITEM
NO.

DESCRIPTION EST QTY U
N
I
T

UNIT COST TOTAL
CONSTRUCT.

COST
SUBJECT: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OPINION OF PROBABLE COST -

SITEWORK

33.0 UTILITIES $

PLUMBING UTILITIES (ALLOWANCES)
STORM DRAINS + POC TO EXISTING 1,373 SF 3.61 4,953
SANITARY SEWER + POC TO EXISTING 1,373 SF 4.17 5,720
DOMESTIC WATER + POC TO EXISTING 1,373 SF 5.28 7,254
FIRE WATER + POC TO EXISTING 1,373 SF 4.72 6,487

ELECTRICAL UTILITIES (ALLOWANCES)
INCOMING POWER + POC TO EXISTING 1,373 SF 7.62 10,464
INCOMING COMMUNICATIONS + POC TO EXISTING 1,373 SF 4.01 5,511 SUBTOTAL 40,389

Page 3 ends

Page 281 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 66 Prepared By: Jacobus &Yuang, Inc.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: MORRO BAY FIRE STATION - NEW 2-STORY BUILDING JYI NO: C2759A LOCATION: MORRO BAY, CA DATE OF ESTIMATE: 17-May-24
CLIENT: HUNTER SMITH ARCHITECTURE DATE OF REVISION:

GROSS FLOOR AREA: 2,322
ITEM
NO.

DESCRIPTION EST QTY U
N
I
T

UNIT COST TOTAL
CONSTRUCT.

COST
SUMMARY OF ESTIMATE $

1.0 GENERAL CONDITIONS SEE PRORATES BELOW

2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS 0.2% 1.04 2,414

3.0 CONCRETE 10.0% 57.31 133,081

4.0 MASONRY

5.0 METALS 1.9% 10.75 24,955

6.0 CARPENTRY 21.5% 122.61 284,703

7.0 THERMAL & MOISTURE PROTECTION 2.8% 16.03 37,224

8.0 OPENINGS 6.6% 37.57 87,226

9.0 FINISHES 17.0% 97.16 225,606

10.0 SPECIALTIES 1.6% 9.10 21,129

11.0 EQUIPMENT 0.2% 1.37 3,173

12.0 FURNISHINGS 0.5% 2.96 6,869

13.0 SPECIAL CONSTRUCTION

14.0 CONVEYING EQUIPMENT

21.0 FIRE SUPPRESSION 2.0% 11.17 25,945

22.0 PLUMBING 6.7% 38.07 88,393

23.0 HVAC 8.6% 49.14 114,100

26.0 ELECTRICAL 13.3% 76.09 176,680

27.0 COMMUNICATIONS 2.5% 14.00 32,508

28.0 ELECTRONIC SAFETY & SECURITY 4.6% 25.98 60,323
SUBTOTAL 100.0% 570.34 1,324,329
PRORATES:

GENERAL CONDITIONS / GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 12.50% 71.29 165,541 DESIGN / ESTIMATE CONTINGENCY 15.00% 96.25 223,481
SUBTOTAL 737.88 1,713,351
CONTRACTOR'S MARK-UP:

CONTRACTOR'S FEE 6.50% 47.96 111,368
BONDS & INSURANCE 2.00% 14.76 34,267
SUBTOTAL 800.60 1,858,986
ESCALATION:

ESCALATION 13.50% 108.08 250,963
TOTAL OPINION OF CONSTRUCTION COST 908.68 2,109,949
SUBJECT: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OPINION OF PROBABLE COST - NEW 2-STORY BUILDING

Page 1 ends

Page 282 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 67 Prepared By: Jacobus &Yuang, Inc.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: MORRO BAY FIRE STATION - NEW 2-STORY BUILDING JYI NO: C2759A LOCATION: MORRO BAY, CA DATE OF ESTIMATE: 17-May-24
CLIENT: HUNTER SMITH ARCHITECTURE DATE OF REVISION:

GROSS FLOOR AREA: 2,322
ITEM
NO.

DESCRIPTION EST QTY U
N
I
T

UNIT COST TOTAL
CONSTRUCT.

COST
SUBJECT: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OPINION OF PROBABLE COST - NEW 2-STORY BUILDING
BUILDING AREAS:

FIRST FLOOR (FOOTPRINT) 1,197 SF
SECOND FLOOR - STAIRWELL NOT INCLUDED 1,125 SF
BUILDING GSF: 2,322 SF

Page 2 ends

Page 283 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 68 Prepared By: Jacobus &Yuang, Inc.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: MORRO BAY FIRE STATION - NEW 2-STORY BUILDING JYI NO: C2759A LOCATION: MORRO BAY, CA DATE OF ESTIMATE: 17-May-24
CLIENT: HUNTER SMITH ARCHITECTURE DATE OF REVISION:

GROSS FLOOR AREA: 2,322
ITEM
NO.

DESCRIPTION EST QTY U
N
I
T

UNIT COST TOTAL
CONSTRUCT.

COST
SUBJECT: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OPINION OF PROBABLE COST - NEW 2-STORY BUILDING

1.0 GENERAL CONDITIONS $

SEE PRORATES ABOVE

SUBTOTAL

2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS $

SELECTIVE DEMOLITION
REMOVE (E) APPARATUS BAY ROOF FASCIA 42 LF 19.16 805
SAWCUT/REMOVE 12"W PORTION OF (E) APPARATUS BAY

ROOFING & FRAMES, COMPLETE
40 LF 40.23 1,609
SUBTOTAL 2,414

3.0 CONCRETE $

FOUNDATION
UNDERPINNING TO (E) APPARATUS BAY FOOTING 37 LF 1,680.00 62,160 SPREAD FOOTING 3 CY 1,340.85 4,544
GRADE BEAM 35 CY 1,117.38 38,684

SLAB-ON-GRADE/CURB
SLAB-ON-GRADE/BASE, 5"/4" + V.B. 1,197 SF 15.80 18,910
CONCRETE CURB 134 LF 27.93 3,743
MISC. CONCRETE
CONCRETE TOPPING - BALCONY FLOOR 230 SF 8.38 1,927
MISC. CONCRETE WORK ALLOWANCE 2,322 GSF 1.34 3,113
SUBTOTAL 133,081

4.0 MASONRY $

THIS SECTION NOT APPLICABLE

SUBTOTAL

5.0 METALS $
MISC. METALS
METAL GUARDRAIL W/ HANDRAIL + PAINT - STAIR 20 LF 363.15 7,263 METAL HANDRAIL, WALL MOUNT + PAINT - STAIR 20 LF 89.39 1,788 METAL GUARDRAIL + PAINT - BALCONY 43 LF 279.34 12,012
MISC. METALS ALLOWANCE 2,322 GSF 1.68 3,892
SUBTOTAL 24,955

6.0 CARPENTRY $

FINISH CARPENTRY
24"W KITCHEN CABINET/COUNTER 19 LF 615.00 11,685

Page 3 ends

Page 284 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 69 Prepared By: Jacobus &Yuang, Inc.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: MORRO BAY FIRE STATION - NEW 2-STORY BUILDING JYI NO: C2759A LOCATION: MORRO BAY, CA DATE OF ESTIMATE: 17-May-24
CLIENT: HUNTER SMITH ARCHITECTURE DATE OF REVISION:

GROSS FLOOR AREA: 2,322
ITEM
NO.

DESCRIPTION EST QTY U
N
I
T

UNIT COST TOTAL
CONSTRUCT.

COST
SUBJECT: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OPINION OF PROBABLE COST - NEW 2-STORY BUILDING
FIXED KITCHEN ISLAND, 4'W x 9'L - 2.33'W LOW COUNTER &

1.67'W HIGH COUNTER
1 EA 3,437.00 3,437
LAVATORY COUNTER 11 LF 335.00 3,685
PLAM UPPER CABINET 15 LF 419.00 6,285
ALLOWANCE FOR PANTRY STORAGE CABINET 14 LF 642.00 8,667 MISC. FINISH CARPENTRY ALLOWANCE 2,322 GSF 1.45 3,376

ROUGH CARPENTRY
EXT. WALL STUD, 2" x 6" 2,650 SF 19.00 50,350
INT. WALL STUD, 2" x 6" 472 SF 20.00 9,440
INT. WALL STUD, 2" x 4" 1,980 SF 16.00 31,680
WOOD POST, 4" x 4" 54 LF 17.00 918
WOOD POST, 4" x 6" 252 LF 22.00 5,544
WOOD HEADER 128 LF 17.00 2,176
WOOD BEAM, 4" x 6" DF#1 27 LF 17.00 459
WOOD BEAM, 4" x 12" DF#1 14 LF 34.00 476
WOOD BEAM, 6" x 10" DF#1 8 LF 42.00 336
WOOD BEAM, 5.25" x 11.25" PSL 22 LF 74.00 1,628
2ND FLOOR FRAMES - 2" x 12" DF#2 @ 16" O.C. 722 SF 47.00 33,934 2ND FLOOR FRAMES - 11 7/8" TJI230 @ 16" O.C. 491 SF 45.00 22,095 BALCONY FLOOR FRAMES - 2" x 10" DF#2 @ 16" O.C. 230 SF 21.00 4,830 ROOF FRAMES - WOOD TRUSS JOIST @ 24" O.C. 1,380 SF 25.00 34,500 WOOD FASCIA 154 LF 27.00 4,158
EXT. SHEAR PLYWOOD 1,196 SF 6.00 7,175
EXT. PLYWOOD SHEATHING OTHER THAN SHEAR 1,304 SF 6.00 7,825 INT. SHEAR PLYWOOD 462 SF 6.00 2,771
2ND FLOOR PLYWOOD SHEATHING 1,125 SF 5.00 5,625
BALCONY FLOOR PLYWOOD SHEATHING 230 SF 5.00 1,150
ROOF PLYWOOD SHEATHING 1,408 SF 6.00 8,446
SWITCHBACK WOOD-FRAMED STAIR W/ 3'W x (17) TREADS +
22 SF MIDLANDING INCLUDING FINISHES, COMPLETE
1 FLT 6,014.00 6,014
MISC. ROUGH CARPENTRY ALLOWANCE (blockings, nailers,
holdowns, bolts, sills, caps, straps, etc.)
2,322 GSF 2.60 6,038
SUBTOTAL 284,703

7.0 THERMAL & MOISTURE PROTECTION $

ROOFING
ROOFING, COMPLETE - ASSUME ASPHALT SHINGLES 1,408 SF 11.90 16,751 ROOF SEISMIC JOINT/CAP + FLASHING 40 LF 55.87 2,235
ALLOWANCE FOR GUTTER 94 LF 34.64 3,256
ALLOWANCE FOR DOWNSPOUT 67 LF 20.67 1,385

BALCONY
WATERPROOFING 230 SF 11.17 2,570

MISCELLANEOUS
MISC. CAULKING & SEALANTS ALLOWANCE 2,322 GSF 1.68 3,892

Page 4 ends

Page 285 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 70 Prepared By: Jacobus &Yuang, Inc.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: MORRO BAY FIRE STATION - NEW 2-STORY BUILDING JYI NO: C2759A LOCATION: MORRO BAY, CA DATE OF ESTIMATE: 17-May-24
CLIENT: HUNTER SMITH ARCHITECTURE DATE OF REVISION:

GROSS FLOOR AREA: 2,322
ITEM
NO.

DESCRIPTION EST QTY U
N
I
T

UNIT COST TOTAL
CONSTRUCT.

COST
SUBJECT: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OPINION OF PROBABLE COST - NEW 2-STORY BUILDING
MISC. SHEET METALS ALLOWANCE 2,322 GSF 1.12 2,595
MISC. FIRESTOPPING ALLOWANCE 2,322 GSF 1.96 4,540
SUBTOTAL 37,224

8.0 OPENINGS $
EXTERIOR DOOR + HARDWARE
ROLL-UP DOOR, 8'W x 6.67'H + PAINT 1 EA 4,955.34 4,955
SLIDING DOOR/FRAME, 8'W x 6.67'H + PAINT 1 EA 4,657.22 4,657 HM DOOR/HM FRAME, 3'W x 6.67'H + H.W. + PAINT 2 EA 3,815.69 7,631

EXTERIOR WINDOWS
EXT. WINDOWS (SLIDING) 206 SF 128.50 26,471
INTERIOR DOORS + HARDWARE
SC WD DOOR/HM FRAME, 3'W x 6.67'H + H.W. + PAINT 11 EA 3,505.77 38,563 CLOSET DOOR/FRAME, (2) - 1.5'W x 6.67'H + PAINT 1 PR 2,654.94 2,655

INTERIOR WINDOWS
SIDELITE, 13"W x 6.67'H 3 EA 764.67 2,294
SUBTOTAL 87,226

9.0 FINISHES $

EXTERIOR WALLS
CEMENT PLASTER + LATH/V.B. + PAINT 2,190 SF 27.66 60,565 GWB + PAINT - INT. OF EXT. 2,650 SF 8.38 22,208
BATT INSULATION 2,650 SF 1.45 3,849
WALL SEISMIC JOINT/CAP 28 LF 55.87 1,564
PAINT TO EXPOSED WOOD POSTS 72 SF 7.82 562

INTERIOR WALLS
GWB + PAINT 4,904 SF 8.38 41,097
WALL TILE, ASSUME 8'H 518 SF 33.52 17,364
BATT INSULATION 2,452 SF 1.45 3,562

FLOOR FINISHES
CERAMIC FLOOR TILE + WALL BASE - BATHROOM 142 SF 44.70 6,347 CARPET FLOOR + WALL BASE - BEDROOMS/OFFICES 598 SF 12.01 7,183 VINYL TILE + WALL BASE - REST OF AREA 1,592 SF 13.69 21,791

CEILING FINISHES
2' x 2' ACT T-BAR CEILING SYSTEM 2,190 SF 11.73 25,694
GWB CEILING + STUD FRAMES + PAINT 142 SF 22.35 3,173
MISC. CEILING SOFFITS/BULKING ALLOWANCE 2,322 GSF 1.24 2,887

BALCONY FLOOR
NON-SLIP FLOOR COATING - ALLOWANCE 230 SF 11.17 2,570

EXTERIOR SOFFIT
PAINT TO U/S BALCONY & JOISTS 135 SF 11.17 1,508
PAINT TO U/S 1ST FLOOR SOFFIT & JOISTS 106 SF 11.17 1,184 PAINT TO ROOF EAVES 165 SF 11.17 1,844

Page 5 ends

Page 286 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 71 Prepared By: Jacobus &Yuang, Inc.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: MORRO BAY FIRE STATION - NEW 2-STORY BUILDING JYI NO: C2759A LOCATION: MORRO BAY, CA DATE OF ESTIMATE: 17-May-24
CLIENT: HUNTER SMITH ARCHITECTURE DATE OF REVISION:

GROSS FLOOR AREA: 2,322
ITEM
NO.

DESCRIPTION EST QTY U
N
I
T

UNIT COST TOTAL
CONSTRUCT.

COST
SUBJECT: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OPINION OF PROBABLE COST - NEW 2-STORY BUILDING
PAINT TO WOOD BEAMS 84 SF 7.82 654
SUBTOTAL 225,606

10.0 SPECIALTIES $
MISC. SPECIALTIES
BEDROOM LOCKER, 24" x 24" 9 EA 1,222.72 11,004
EXT./INT. SIGNAGE, ROOM I.D. 16 EA 195.54 3,129
RESTROOM ACCESSORIES, PER FIXTURE 8 EA 391.08 3,129
KITCHEN SINK ACCESSORIES 2 EA 279.34 559
JANITORIAL ACCESSORIES 1 EA 502.82 503
FEC 2 EA 754.23 1,508
MISC. SPECIALTIES ALLOWANCE 2,322 GSF 0.56 1,297
SUBTOTAL 21,129

11.0 EQUIPMENT $

EQUIPMENT
RANGE HOOD + SUPPORT 1 EA 2,067.15 2,067
GARBAGE DISPOSER 2 EA 553.10 1,106
KITCHEN EQUIPMENT N.I.C.

LAUNDRY EQUIPMENT N.I.C.

GYM EQUIPMENT N.I.C.

SUBTOTAL 3,173

12.0 FURNISHINGS $

WINDOW SHADES
WINDOW SHADES, MANUAL 228 SF 30.17 6,869
FF & E

NOT INCLUDED
SUBTOTAL 6,869

13.0 SPECIAL CONSTRUCTION $

THIS SECTION NOT APPLICABLE

SUBTOTAL

14.0 CONVEYING EQUIPMENT $

THIS SECTION NOT APPLICABLE

SUBTOTAL

Page 6 ends

Page 287 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 72 Prepared By: Jacobus &Yuang, Inc.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: MORRO BAY FIRE STATION - NEW 2-STORY BUILDING JYI NO: C2759A LOCATION: MORRO BAY, CA DATE OF ESTIMATE: 17-May-24
CLIENT: HUNTER SMITH ARCHITECTURE DATE OF REVISION:

GROSS FLOOR AREA: 2,322
ITEM
NO.

DESCRIPTION EST QTY U
N
I
T

UNIT COST TOTAL
CONSTRUCT.

COST
SUBJECT: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OPINION OF PROBABLE COST - NEW 2-STORY BUILDING

21.0 FIRE SUPPRESSION $

FIRE SPRINKLER WET SYSTEM
FIRE SPRINKLER WET SYSTEM, COMPLETE- ALLOWANCE 2,322 GSF 11.17 25,945 SUBTOTAL 25,945

22.0 PLUMBING $

PLUMBING SYSTEM

ALLOWANCE FOR WATER HEATER & ALL RELATED

AUXILIARY EQUIPMENT, & ROUGH-INS AT, COMPLETE
1 EA 16,760.00 16,760
PLUMBING FIXTURES + ROUGH-INS AT 11 EA 2,230.00 24,530
FIXTURES ROUGH-INS FOR 11 EA 3,350.00 36,850
EXTRA FOR LAUNDRY WASHER ROUGH-INS 1 EA 610.00 610
EXTRA FOR DISHWASHER ROUGH-INS 1 EA 500.00 500
EXTRA FOR BALCONY DRAIN 1 EA 840.00 840
NATURAL GAS 2,322 GSF 1.90 4,411
CONDENSATE DRAINS 2,322 GSF 1.68 3,892
SUBTOTAL 88,393

23.0 HVAC $

HVAC SYSTEM
HVAC SYSTEM, COMPLETE 2,322 GSF 40.00 92,880
EXTRA FOR BATHROOM/POWDER ROOM EXHAUST 3 EA 3,350.00 10,050 EXTRA FOR KITCHEN EXHAUST SYSTEM 1 EA 11,170.00 11,170
SUBTOTAL 114,100

26.0 ELECTRICAL $

ELECTRICAL SYSTEM

ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT, PANEL BOARDS, GROUNDING, &

SECONDARY FEEDERS
1 LS 83,800.00 83,800
BRANCH POWER, COMPLETE 2,322 GSF 10.00 23,220
LIGHTING, COMPLETE 2,322 GSF 30.00 69,660
SUBTOTAL 176,680

27.0 COMMUNICATIONS $

COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM
TEL/DATA SYSTEM 2,322 GSF 8.00 18,576
PAGING/PUBLIC ADDRESS 2,322 GSF 4.00 9,288
CABLE TV 2,322 GSF 2.00 4,644
SUBTOTAL 32,508

Page 7 ends

Page 288 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 73 Prepared By: Jacobus &Yuang, Inc.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: MORRO BAY FIRE STATION - NEW 2-STORY BUILDING JYI NO: C2759A LOCATION: MORRO BAY, CA DATE OF ESTIMATE: 17-May-24
CLIENT: HUNTER SMITH ARCHITECTURE DATE OF REVISION:

GROSS FLOOR AREA: 2,322
ITEM
NO.

DESCRIPTION EST QTY U
N
I
T

UNIT COST TOTAL
CONSTRUCT.

COST
SUBJECT: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OPINION OF PROBABLE COST - NEW 2-STORY BUILDING

28.0 ELECTRONIC SAFETY & SECURITY $

ELECTRONIC SAFETY SYSTEM
FIRE ALARM SYSTEM 2,322 GSF 5.59 12,973
FIRE ALERTING SYSTEM 2,322 GSF 3.07 7,135
SMOKE/GAS ALARM SYSTEM 2,322 GSF 11.17 25,945

SECURITY SYSTEM
SECURITY SYSTEM 2,322 GSF 6.15 14,270
SUBTOTAL 60,323

Page 8 ends

Page 289 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 74 Option C Opinion of Probable Cost
JYI# C2763A

OPINION OF PROBABLE COST

MORRO BAY FIRE STATION
June 24, 2024

CONCEPTUAL DESIGN
NEW 1-STORY BUILDING
Camarillo, CA 93010
Tel (213) 688-1341 or (805) 339-9434
PREPARED FOR:
330 North Lantana Street, Suite 28, #220

HUNTER SMITH ARCHITECTURE
BY:

JACOBUS & YUANG, INC.

Page 290 of 329 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 75 Prepared By: Jacobus & Yuang, Inc.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: MORRO BAY FIRE STATION - NEW 1-STORY BUILDING JYI NO: C2763A LOCATION: MORRO BAY, CA DATE OF ESTIMATE: 24-Jun-24
CLIENT: HUNTER SMITH ARCHITECTURE DATE OF REVISION:

ITEM
NO.

DESCRIPTION QTY U
N
I
T

UNIT COST TOTAL

CONSTRUCTION
COST
COST SUMMARY $
SITEWORK 1,500 SF $148.66 222,987
1-STORY BUILDING 1,410 SF $874.37 1,232,864

TOTAL OPINION OF CONSTRUCTION COST WITH

PRORATES PLUS ESCALATION
1,410 SF $1,032.52 1,455,851

ESCALATION CALCULATION
BASE MONTH Jun-24
CONSTRUCTION START MONTH Aug-25
CONSTRUCTION DURATION (MONTHS) 9
CONSTRUCTION MIDPOINT Dec-25
% ANNUAL ESCALATION 7.50%
ALLOWANCE FOR ESCALATION 11.57%

GENERAL NOTES
1 ESTIMATE ASSUMES THAT ALL COMPONENTS WILL BE BID AS A SINGLE BID PACKAGE 2 ESTIMATE ASSUMES 8-HOUR SHIFTS DURING REGULAR WORK HOURS 3 ESTIMATE ASSUMES BID COVERAGE FROM AT LEAST 4-5 RESPONSIVE BIDDERS 4 SPECIFIC EXCLUSIONS:
1 PROJECT SOFT COSTS (EXCLUDING CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY) 2 F, F & E (GROUP II EQUIPMENT) EXCEPT AS NOTED
3 PROJECT MANAGEMENT FEES
4 ESCALATION BEYOND THE PARAMETERS SHOWN ABOVE
5 BEDROOM FURNISHINGS
6 KITCHEN EQUIPMENT
7 LAUNDRY EQUIPMENT
8 AUDIO-VISUAL SYSTEM
9 RADIO SYSTEM
10 PHOTO-VOLTAIC PANELS
SUBJECT: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OPINION OF PROBABLE COST -

COST SUMMARY

THE ESTIMATE IS BASED ON CONCEPTUAL DESIGN DRAWINGS PREPARED BY HUNTER SMITH ARCHITECTURE DATED 06/17/2024, RECEIVED 06/17/2024.

Page 1 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 76 Prepared By: Jacobus & Yuang, Inc.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: MORRO BAY FIRE STATION - NEW 1-STORY BUILDING JYI NO: C2763A LOCATION: MORRO BAY, CA DATE OF ESTIMATE: 24-Jun-24
CLIENT: HUNTER SMITH ARCHITECTURE DATE OF REVISION:

ITEM
NO.

DESCRIPTION QTY U
N
I
T

UNIT COST TOTAL

CONSTRUCTION
COST
SUBJECT: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OPINION OF PROBABLE COST -

COST SUMMARY
SPECIFIC INCLUSIONS:
1 PREVAILING UNION WAGE RATES IN THE AREA OF THE PROJECT 2 ESCALATION TO MIDPOINT OF CONSTRUCTION
3 DEMOLITION OF EXISTING BUILDING
4 HAZARDOUS MATERIAL ABATEMENT
5 BUILDING PAD OVEREXCAVATION ASSUMED AT 3-FOOT DEEP PLUS 5-FOOT BEYOND BUILDING FOOTPRINT 6 ASPHALT SHINGLES ASSUMED AS ROOFING MATERIAL
7 KITCHEN HOOD
8 FIRE SPRINKLER WET SYSTEM
9 PLUMBING SYSTEM
10 HVAC SYSTEM
11 ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
12 COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM
13 FIRE ALARM SYSTEM
14 FIRE ALERTING SYSTEM
15 SMOKE AND GAS ALARM SYSTEM
16 SECURITY SYSTEM
17 INCOMING SITE UTILITIES
DEFINITIONS:

OPINION OF COST
BID
An offer to enter a contract to perform work for a fixed sum, to be completed within a limited period of time.

Jacobus & Yuang, Inc., however, cannot and does not guarantee that bids, or cost proposals for construction will not vary from this Opinion of Cost or Estimate.

An Opinion of Cost is prepared from a survey of the quantities of work-items prepared from written or drawn information provided at the Conceptual or Schematic stage of the design.

Historical costs, information provided by contractors and suppliers, plus judgmental evaluation by the Estimator are used as appropriate as the basis for pricing.

JYI cannot, however, be responsible for items or work of an unusual nature of which we have not been informed.

Page 2 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 77 Prepared By: Jacobus & Yuang, Inc.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: MORRO BAY FIRE STATION - NEW 1-STORY BUILDING JYI NO: C2763A LOCATION: MORRO BAY, CA DATE OF ESTIMATE: 24-Jun-24
CLIENT: HUNTER SMITH ARCHITECTURE DATE OF REVISION:

ITEM
NO.

DESCRIPTION QTY U
N
I
T

UNIT COST TOTAL

CONSTRUCTION
COST
SUBJECT: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OPINION OF PROBABLE COST -

COST SUMMARY
MARKET CONDITIONS:

Number of bids Percentage Differential

1............ + 25 to 50%
2-3.......... + 10 to 25%
4-5.......... + 0 to 7%
6-7.......... + 0 to - 7%
8 or more.... + -7 to -15%
Accordingly, it is extremely important to ensure that a minimum of 4-5 valid bids are received In the current market conditions for construction, our experience shows the following results on competitive bids, as a differential from JYI final estimates:

Page 3 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 78 Prepared By: Jacobus & Yuang, Inc.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: MORRO BAY FIRE STATION - NEW 2-STORY BUILDING JYI NO: C2763A LOCATION: MORRO BAY, CA DATE OF ESTIMATE: 24-Jun-24
CLIENT: HUNTER SMITH ARCHITECTURE DATE OF REVISION:

NET SITE AREA: 1,500
ITEM
NO.

DESCRIPTION EST QTY U
N
I
T

UNIT COST TOTAL
CONSTRUCT.

COST
SUMMARY OF ESTIMATE $

1.0 GENERAL CONDITIONS SEE PRORATES BELOW

2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS 38.9% 36.88 55,318

31.0 EARTHWORK 9.5% 9.06 13,583

32.0 EXTERIOR IMPROVEMENTS 21.2% 20.12 30,180

33.0 UTILITIES 30.4% 28.87 43,300
SUBTOTAL 100.0% 94.92 142,381
PRORATES:

GENERAL CONDITIONS / GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 12.50% 11.87 17,798 DESIGN / ESTIMATE CONTINGENCY 15.00% 16.02 24,027
SUBTOTAL 122.80 184,206
CONTRACTOR'S MARK-UP:

CONTRACTOR'S FEE 6.50% 7.98 11,973
BONDS & INSURANCE 2.00% 2.46 3,684
SUBTOTAL 133.24 199,863
ESCALATION:

ESCALATION 11.57% 15.42 23,124
TOTAL OPINION OF CONSTRUCTION COST 148.66 222,987
SITE AREAS:

CONCRETE PAVEMENT 958 SF
LAWN 552 SF
BUILDING FOOTPRINT 1,410 SF
GROSS SITE AREA 2,920 SF
SUBJECT: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OPINION OF PROBABLE COST -

SITEWORK

Page 1 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 79 Prepared By: Jacobus & Yuang, Inc.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: MORRO BAY FIRE STATION - NEW 2-STORY BUILDING JYI NO: C2763A LOCATION: MORRO BAY, CA DATE OF ESTIMATE: 24-Jun-24
CLIENT: HUNTER SMITH ARCHITECTURE DATE OF REVISION:

SUBJECT: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OPINION OF PROBABLE COST - NET SITE AREA: 1,500

SITEWORK

1.0 GENERAL CONDITIONS $

SEE PRORATES ABOVE

SUBTOTAL

2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS $

SITE DEMOLITION (HAULING INCLUDED)
1240 REMOVE (E) 1-STORY CMU-ENCLOSED BUILDING INCLUDING

FOUNDATION & ALL ASSOCIATED UTILITIES, COMPLETE
1,240 SF 26.00 32,240
355 REMOVE (E) PLANTING/IRRIGATION - WEST PORTION 355 SF 3.00 1,065 785 REMOVE (E) LAWN/IRRIGATION - NORTH & EAST PORTION

PER EXTENT OF OVEREXCAVATION
785 SF 3.00 2,355
SAWCUT (E) CONCRETE PAVING 61 LF 13.00 793
540 REMOVE (E) CONCRETE PAVING & BASE 540 SF 6.00 3,240 MISC. SITE DEMO & PROTECTION WORK 1,500 SF 1.32 1,985

HAZARDOUS MATERIAL ABATEMENT

ALLOWANCE FOR HAZARDOUS MATERIAL ABATEMENT -

PER DEMOLISHED BUILDING
1,240 SF 11.00 13,640
SUBTOTAL 55,318

31.0 EARTHWORK $

SITE PREPARATION
SITE CLEARING 2,920 SF 0.28 816
ROUGH GRADING 2,920 SF 0.78 2,284
FINE GRADING 1,510 SF 0.95 1,434
SCARIFY & COMPACT (E) SUBGRADE 958 SF 0.83 793
BUILDING PAD OVEREXCAVATION - ASSUME 3'D BELOW
SLAB + 5' BEYOND BUILDING FOOTPRINT
242 CY 27.93 6,747
EROSION CONTROL/SWPPP 1,500 SF 1.01 1,509
SUBTOTAL 13,583

32.0 EXTERIOR IMPROVEMENTS $

HARDSCAPE
958 CONCRETE PAVING + BASE - ASSUME 4"/ 4" 958 SF 13.00 12,454 JOIN TO (E) CONCRETE PAVEMENT 123 LF 61.00 7,503

LANDSCAPE
552 LAWN + IRRIGATION, MATCH EXISTING 552 SF 17.00 9,384

MISCELLANEOUS
PARKING STALL STRIPING 3 EA 112.00 336
MISC. SITE IMPROVEMENTS/SIGNAGES 1,500 SF 0.34 503
SUBTOTAL 30,180

33.0 UTILITIES $

PLUMBING UTILITIES (ALLOWANCES)
STORM DRAINS + POC TO EXISTING 1,500 SF 3.54 5,308
SANITARY SEWER + POC TO EXISTING 1,500 SF 4.10 6,146

Page 2 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 80 Prepared By: Jacobus & Yuang, Inc.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: MORRO BAY FIRE STATION - NEW 2-STORY BUILDING JYI NO: C2763A LOCATION: MORRO BAY, CA DATE OF ESTIMATE: 24-Jun-24
CLIENT: HUNTER SMITH ARCHITECTURE DATE OF REVISION:

SUBJECT: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OPINION OF PROBABLE COST - NET SITE AREA: 1,500

SITEWORK
DOMESTIC WATER + POC TO EXISTING 1,500 SF 5.21 7,822
FIRE WATER + POC TO EXISTING 1,500 SF 4.66 6,984

ELECTRICAL UTILITIES (ALLOWANCES)
INCOMING POWER + POC TO EXISTING 1,500 SF 7.45 11,174
INCOMING COMMUNICATIONS + POC TO EXISTING 1,500 SF 3.91 5,866 SUBTOTAL 43,300

Page 3 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 81 Prepared By: Jacobus & Yuang, Inc.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: MORRO BAY FIRE STATION - NEW 2-STORY BUILDING JYI NO: C2763A LOCATION: MORRO BAY, CA DATE OF ESTIMATE: 24-Jun-24
CLIENT: HUNTER SMITH ARCHITECTURE DATE OF REVISION:

GROSS FLOOR AREA: 1,410
ITEM
NO.

DESCRIPTION EST QTY U
N
I
T

UNIT COST TOTAL
CONSTRUCT.

COST
SUMMARY OF ESTIMATE $

1.0 GENERAL CONDITIONS SEE PRORATES BELOW

2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS

3.0 CONCRETE 6.4% 35.84 50,532

4.0 MASONRY

5.0 METALS 0.3% 1.68 2,363

6.0 CARPENTRY 20.6% 115.18 162,398

7.0 THERMAL & MOISTURE PROTECTION 4.4% 24.48 34,511

8.0 OPENINGS 6.7% 37.40 52,735

9.0 FINISHES 17.4% 97.17 137,004

10.0 SPECIALTIES 2.2% 12.21 17,211

11.0 EQUIPMENT 0.4% 2.25 3,173

12.0 FURNISHINGS 0.5% 2.89 4,073

13.0 SPECIAL CONSTRUCTION

14.0 CONVEYING EQUIPMENT

21.0 FIRE SUPPRESSION 2.0% 11.17 15,755

22.0 PLUMBING 7.4% 41.18 58,060

23.0 HVAC 9.4% 52.22 73,636

26.0 ELECTRICAL 15.0% 83.86 118,247

27.0 COMMUNICATIONS 2.7% 14.80 20,875

28.0 ELECTRONIC SAFETY & SECURITY 4.7% 25.98 36,631
SUBTOTAL 100.0% 558.30 787,204
PRORATES:

GENERAL CONDITIONS / GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 12.50% 69.79 98,401 DESIGN / ESTIMATE CONTINGENCY 15.00% 94.21 132,841
SUBTOTAL 722.30 1,018,446
CONTRACTOR'S MARK-UP:

CONTRACTOR'S FEE 6.50% 46.95 66,199
BONDS & INSURANCE 2.00% 14.45 20,369
SUBTOTAL 783.70 1,105,014
ESCALATION:

ESCALATION 11.57% 90.67 127,850
TOTAL OPINION OF CONSTRUCTION COST 874.37 1,232,864
SUBJECT: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OPINION OF PROBABLE COST - NEW 1-STORY BUILDING

Page 1 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 82 Prepared By: Jacobus & Yuang, Inc.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: MORRO BAY FIRE STATION - NEW 2-STORY BUILDING JYI NO: C2763A LOCATION: MORRO BAY, CA DATE OF ESTIMATE: 24-Jun-24
CLIENT: HUNTER SMITH ARCHITECTURE DATE OF REVISION:

SUBJECT: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OPINION OF PROBABLE COST - NEW GROSS FLOOR AREA: 1,410 1-STORY BUILDING

1.0 GENERAL CONDITIONS $

SEE PRORATES ABOVE

SUBTOTAL

2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS $

SEE SEPARATE SITEWORK ESTIMATE FOR DEMOLITION

SUBTOTAL

3.0 CONCRETE $

FOUNDATION
SPREAD FOOTING, ASSUME 36' x 36" x 18" 1 CY 1,340.85 1,341 GRADE BEAM, ASSUME 18" x 18" 18 CY 1,117.38 19,740

SLAB-ON-GRADE/CURB
SLAB-ON-GRADE/BASE, 5"/4" + V.B. 1,410 SF 15.80 22,275
4"W CONCRETE CURB 30 LF 23.46 704
6"W CONCRETE CURB 164 LF 27.93 4,581
MISC. CONCRETE
MISC. CONCRETE ALLOWANCE 1,410 GSF 1.34 1,891
SUBTOTAL 50,532

4.0 MASONRY $

THIS SECTION NOT APPLICABLE

SUBTOTAL

5.0 METALS $
MISC. METALS
MISC. METALS ALLOWANCE 1,410 GSF 1.68 2,363
SUBTOTAL 2,363

6.0 CARPENTRY $

FINISH CARPENTRY
24"W KITCHEN CABINET/COUNTER 13 LF 615.00 7,995
FIXED KITCHEN ISLAND, 4'W x 9'L 1 EA 3,437.00 3,437
LAVATORY COUNTER 5 LF 335.00 1,675
PLAM UPPER CABINET 8 LF 419.00 3,352
ALLOWANCE FOR WASHER/DRYER UPPER CABINET 7 LF 419.00 2,724 MISC. FINISH CARPENTRY ALLOWANCE 1,410 GSF 1.36 1,918

ROUGH CARPENTRY
EXT. WALL STUD, 2" x 6" 1,522 SF 19.00 28,918
INT. WALL STUD, 2" x 6" 272 SF 20.00 5,443
INT. WALL STUD, 2" x 4" 795 SF 16.00 12,720
WOOD POST, ASSUME 4" x 4" 110 LF 17.00 1,870
WOOD POST, ASSUME 4" x 6" 52 LF 22.00 1,144
WOOD HEADERS, ASSUME 4" x 6" 82 LF 17.00 1,394
WOOD BEAM, ASSUME 4" x 12" 18 LF 34.00 612

Page 2 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 83 Prepared By: Jacobus & Yuang, Inc.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: MORRO BAY FIRE STATION - NEW 2-STORY BUILDING JYI NO: C2763A LOCATION: MORRO BAY, CA DATE OF ESTIMATE: 24-Jun-24
CLIENT: HUNTER SMITH ARCHITECTURE DATE OF REVISION:

SUBJECT: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OPINION OF PROBABLE COST - NEW GROSS FLOOR AREA: 1,410 1-STORY BUILDING
WOOD BEAM, ASSUME 6" x 12" 18 LF 51.00 918
ROOF FRAMES, ASSUME 2" x 12" @ 24" O.C. 1,708 SF 34.00 58,072 WOOD FASCIA 224 LF 27.00 6,048
EXT. SHEAR PLYWOOD 715 SF 6.00 4,292
EXT. PLYWOOD SHEATHING OTHER THAN SHEAR 807 SF 6.00 4,840 ROOF PLYWOOD SHEATHING 1,708 SF 6.00 10,248
MISC. ROUGH CARPENTRY ALLOWANCE (blockings, nailers,
holdowns, bolts, sills, caps, straps, etc.)
1,410 GSF 3.39 4,778
SUBTOTAL 162,398

7.0 THERMAL & MOISTURE PROTECTION $

ROOFING

ROOFING, COMPLETE (DEVELOPED AREA) - ASSUME

ASPHALT SHINGLES
1,708 SF 11.90 20,325
ROOF/WALL SM FLASHING W/ REGLET 46 LF 30.73 1,413
ROOF EDGE FLASHING 224 LF 7.82 1,752
ALLOWANCE FOR GUTTER 95 LF 34.64 3,291
ALLOWANCE FOR DOWNSPOUT 50 LF 20.67 1,034

MISCELLANEOUS
MISC. CAULKING & SEALANTS ALLOWANCE 1,410 GSF 1.68 2,363 MISC. SHEET METALS ALLOWANCE 1,410 GSF 1.12 1,576
MISC. FIRESTOPPING ALLOWANCE 1,410 GSF 1.96 2,757
SUBTOTAL 34,511

8.0 OPENINGS $
EXTERIOR DOOR + HARDWARE
HM DOOR/HM FRAME, 3'W x 6.67'H + H.W. + PAINT 2 EA 3,815.69 7,631

EXTERIOR WINDOWS
EXT. WINDOWS (SLIDING) 135 SF 128.50 17,347
CLERESTORY WINDOWS 36 SF 117.32 4,224
INTERIOR DOORS + HARDWARE
SC WD DOOR/HM FRAME, 3'W x 6.67'H + H.W. + PAINT 6 EA 3,505.77 21,035 CLOSET DOOR/FRAME, (2) - 1.4'W x 6.67'H + PAINT 1 PR 2,498.43 2,498 SUBTOTAL 52,735

9.0 FINISHES $

EXTERIOR WALLS
CEMENT PLASTER + LATH/V.B. + PAINT 1,522 SF 27.66 42,091 GWB + PAINT - INT. OF EXT. 1,522 SF 8.38 12,755
BATT INSULATION 1,522 SF 1.45 2,211

INTERIOR WALLS
GWB + PAINT 2,134 SF 8.38 17,884
WALL TILE, ASSUME 8'H 404 SF 33.52 13,543
BATT INSULATION 2,134 SF 1.45 3,100

FLOOR FINISHES
CERAMIC FLOOR TILE + WALL BASE - BATHROOM 114 SF 44.70 5,095 CARPET FLOOR + WALL BASE - BEDROOMS/OFFICE 498 SF 12.01 5,982

Page 3 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 84 Prepared By: Jacobus & Yuang, Inc.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: MORRO BAY FIRE STATION - NEW 2-STORY BUILDING JYI NO: C2763A LOCATION: MORRO BAY, CA DATE OF ESTIMATE: 24-Jun-24
CLIENT: HUNTER SMITH ARCHITECTURE DATE OF REVISION:

SUBJECT: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OPINION OF PROBABLE COST - NEW GROSS FLOOR AREA: 1,410 1-STORY BUILDING
VINYL TILE + WALL BASE - REST OF AREA 798 SF 13.69 10,923

CEILING FINISHES
2' x 2' ACT T-BAR CEILING SYSTEM 1,270 SF 11.73 14,900
GWB CEILING + STUD FRAMES + PAINT 140 SF 22.35 3,129
MISC. CEILING SOFFITS/BULKING ALLOWANCE 1,410 GSF 1.28 1,803

EXTERIOR SOFFIT
PAINT TO ROOF EAVES 271 SF 11.17 3,028
PAINT TO EXPOSED WOOD BEAMS & POST 72 SF 7.82 560
SUBTOTAL 137,004

10.0 SPECIALTIES $
MISC. SPECIALTIES
BEDROOM LOCKER, 24" x 24" 9 EA 1,222.72 11,004
EXT./INT. SIGNAGE, ROOM I.D. 9 EA 195.54 1,760
RESTROOM ACCESSORIES, PER FIXTURE 6 FIX 391.08 2,346
KITCHEN SINK ACCESSORIES 2 EA 279.34 559
FEC - ALLOWANCE 1 EA 754.23 754
MISC. SPECIALTIES ALLOWANCE 1,410 GSF 0.56 788
SUBTOTAL 17,211

11.0 EQUIPMENT $

EQUIPMENT
RANGE HOOD + SUPPORT 1 EA 2,067.15 2,067
GARBAGE DISPOSER 2 EA 553.10 1,106
KITCHEN EQUIPMENT N.I.C.

LAUNDRY EQUIPMENT N.I.C.

SUBTOTAL 3,173

12.0 FURNISHINGS $

WINDOW SHADES
WINDOW SHADES, MANUAL 135 SF 30.17 4,073
FF & E

NOT INCLUDED
SUBTOTAL 4,073

13.0 SPECIAL CONSTRUCTION $

THIS SECTION NOT APPLICABLE

SUBTOTAL

14.0 CONVEYING EQUIPMENT $

THIS SECTION NOT APPLICABLE

SUBTOTAL

Page 4 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 85 Prepared By: Jacobus & Yuang, Inc.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: MORRO BAY FIRE STATION - NEW 2-STORY BUILDING JYI NO: C2763A LOCATION: MORRO BAY, CA DATE OF ESTIMATE: 24-Jun-24
CLIENT: HUNTER SMITH ARCHITECTURE DATE OF REVISION:

SUBJECT: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OPINION OF PROBABLE COST - NEW GROSS FLOOR AREA: 1,410 1-STORY BUILDING

21.0 FIRE SUPPRESSION $

FIRE SPRINKLER WET SYSTEM
FIRE SPRINKLER WET SYSTEM, COMPLETE- ALLOWANCE 1,410 GSF 11.17 15,755 SUBTOTAL 15,755

22.0 PLUMBING $

PLUMBING SYSTEM

ALLOWANCE FOR WATER HEATER & ALL RELATED

AUXILIARY EQUIPMENT, & ROUGH-INS AT, COMPLETE
1 EA 12,570.48 12,570
PLUMBING FIXTURES + ROUGH-INS AT 7 EA 2,234.75 15,643
FIXTURES ROUGH-INS FOR 7 EA 3,352.13 23,465
EXTRA FOR LAUNDRY WASHER ROUGH-INS 1 EA 1,340.85 1,341
NATURAL GAS 1,410 GSF 1.90 2,678
CONDENSATE DRAINS 1,410 GSF 1.68 2,363
SUBTOTAL 58,060

23.0 HVAC $

HVAC SYSTEM
HVAC SYSTEM, COMPLETE 1,410 GSF 39.11 55,143
EXTRA FOR BATHROOM EXHAUST 2 EA 3,352.13 6,704
EXTRA FOR KITCHEN EXHAUST SYSTEM 1 EA 11,173.76 11,174
EXTRA FOR DRYER VENT THRU ROOF 1 EA 614.56 615
SUBTOTAL 73,636

26.0 ELECTRICAL $

ELECTRICAL SYSTEM

ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT, PANEL BOARDS, GROUNDING, &

SECONDARY FEEDERS
1 LS 67,042.55 67,043
BRANCH POWER, COMPLETE 1,410 GSF 11.17 15,755
LIGHTING, COMPLETE 1,410 GSF 25.14 35,449
SUBTOTAL 118,247

27.0 COMMUNICATIONS $

COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM
TEL/DATA SYSTEM 1,410 GSF 8.38 11,816
PAGING/PUBLIC ADDRESS 1,410 GSF 4.19 5,908
CABLE TV 1,410 GSF 2.23 3,151
SUBTOTAL 20,875

28.0 ELECTRONIC SAFETY & SECURITY $

ELECTRONIC SAFETY SYSTEM
FIRE ALARM SYSTEM 1,410 GSF 5.59 7,878
FIRE ALERTING SYSTEM 1,410 GSF 3.07 4,333
SMOKE/GAS ALARM SYSTEM 1,410 GSF 11.17 15,755

Page 5 ends

Schematic Design & Feasibility Analysis | Bonita St. Fire Station 86 Prepared By: Jacobus & Yuang, Inc.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: MORRO BAY FIRE STATION - NEW 2-STORY BUILDING JYI NO: C2763A LOCATION: MORRO BAY, CA DATE OF ESTIMATE: 24-Jun-24
CLIENT: HUNTER SMITH ARCHITECTURE DATE OF REVISION:

SUBJECT: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OPINION OF PROBABLE COST - NEW GROSS FLOOR AREA: 1,410 1-STORY BUILDING

SECURITY SYSTEM
SECURITY SYSTEM 1,410 GSF 6.15 8,665
SUBTOTAL 36,631

Page 6 ends

Page 302 of 329 ends

6/5/2025
1 Bonita Street Fire
Station Proposal
1 2

Page 303 of 329 ends

6/5/2025
2 Findings of the
2004 “Flame
Report” and 2025
Standard of Cover
reports
• The City Council approved a motion to “inform the
Emergency Services Committee and staff that preferences are for two fire stations (north and south) with minimum funding of four full-time personnel on each shift augmented with Reserve Firefighters; and direct staff to bring back information on implementing a second fire station by July 12, 2004.” This motion carried unanimously a (5-0) vote
• July 26, 2004, City Council meeting, Councilmember Peirce moved that “it is the intent of the City Council to re-open and staff Fire Station 54, and direct staff to seek funding expeditiously.” The motion carried unanimously. (5-0). • The annual call volume has increased to over 2,200 calls for service, a 32% increase. • 30-40% of calls for service occur in North Morro Bay. • Recommend upgrading and staffing the Bonita Street Station to reduce response times to North Morro Bay. • Establish a 5-minute travel time benchmark performance objective for 90% of the emergency calls for service. • Increase daily staffing to 6 firefighters.

Station
locations
• Station 53 located at 715
Harbor Street. • Station 2 previously referred to
as Station 54 located at 460
Bonita Street in North Morro
Bay
3 4

Page 304 of 329 ends

6/5/2025
3 Need for a second Fire Station
Benefits of a second station
• Reduced response times. • Improved service to North Morro Bay. • Redundancy of services for disaster resiliency. • Increased effective response force daily. • Potential improvement to ISO rating 5 6

Page 305 of 329 ends

6/5/2025
4 Calls for service • Highest concentration of calls for service located near the Bonita Street Station and south of
Station 53. • Annual call volume • 2021- 1,806
• 2022- 1,965
• 2023 2,208
• 2024- 2,282 a 21% increase since 2021
Coverage of a twostation response model • 4 minute or less drive time to all areas in Morro Bay FD jurisdiction. • Improved level of service to North Morro Bay. • Allows for continuity of operations.
7 8

Page 306 of 329 ends

6/5/2025
5 Travel time examples
Drive time from Station 1 to Nutmeg Drive time from Station 2 to Nutmeg Station 1 to Blanco Street Station 2 to Blanco Street
9 10

Page 307 of 329 ends

6/5/2025
6 Current condition
of Station 2
11 12

Page 308 of 329 ends

6/5/2025
7 Apparatus
Bay
Potential options for Station 2
13 14

Page 309 of 329 ends

6/5/2025
8 Option A (remodel of existing building)
Preferred Station 2 design (option B)
15 16

Page 310 of 329 ends

6/5/2025
9 Ground Floor
Second Story
17 18

Page 311 of 329 ends

6/5/2025
10 Floor plans
designed to
optimize space
Option C
19 20

Page 312 of 329 ends

6/5/2025
11 Other houses on Bonita Street
21 22

Page 313 of 329 ends

6/5/2025
12 Next steps in the process
Creation of architectural drawings
sufficient for a Coastal
Development permit- $17,500 and
construction documents $75,690
Identify funding sources for
construction of living quarters
Construction of living quarters
Addition of 2 full Time firefighters
to allow for adequate minimum
staffing
Summary
Option “A”- (not
recommended) Remodel
of existing building,
estimated cost $788,411
(plus engineered
retrofits)
1 Option “B” (preferred
option) New 2-story
building, estimated cost
$2,325,682
2 Option “C (2nd choice)
New 1-story building, estimated cost $1,455,851
3 Design costs total
$93,190. funding for this
would include $38,466
DIF fees +$54,724
measure Q/E funds
4 23
24

Page 314 of 329 ends

6/5/2025
13 What are we asking for?

1. Affirm that it is intent of the City Council to redevelop and staff the Bonita Street Fire Station as city funding and departmental staffing become available.

2. Direct the Fire Chief to complete architectural drawings sufficient for both the coastal development permit and construction documents and allocate the funding needed to complete these documents;

3. Select a design option and authorize the Fire Chief to seek funding sources for the construction of a new living quarters at the Bonita Street Station.

4. Inclusion of this project in the City’s Capital budget.

Questions?
25 26

Page 315 of 329 ends

Prepared By: GK Dept Review: ______
City Manager Review: _YK________ City Attorney Review: _______ Staff Report
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council DATE: June 4, 2025 FROM: Greg Kwolek, Public Works Director
Damaris Hanson, Utilities Division Manager
SUBJECT: Consideration of State Water Transfer Policy Update

RECOMMENDED ACTION
Review the San Luis Obispo Flood Control and Water Conservation District (District) on the District’s Draft Proposed State Water Transfer Policy Update and:

1. Direct the Public Works Director to send a letter of support to the District Board as agenda correspondence; and

2. Provide any feedback on the draft policy to staff to include in the letter of support.

ALTERNATIVES
The City Council may:
 Direct staff to not send a letter of support to the District Board; or  Provide other direction to staff.

FISCAL IMPACT
None.

BACKGROUND
State Water serves as the City’s main source of water, typically supplying 80-90% of the City’s water supply. Currently, without State Water the City cannot produce enough water to meet its demand. However, the recycled water project promises to address the City’s overreliance on State Water in the near future. The “Supplemental Information on Morro Bay Water Supply” attachment provides more detail on the makeup of the City’s water supply portfolio.

The City receives State Water through a subcontract with the District, which has subcontracts with several cities and public water agencies within the County. The District plays an intermediary wholesaler role due its position as the contractor with the California Department of Water Resources (DWR). Generally, the City along with other District subcontractors as well as the District itself have more water under contract than is ever used. This unused water is stored and is available for use in later years when drought conditions cause DWR to lower water allocations.

However, this stored water is not a reliable source of water because DWR “spills” this stored water every few years, effectively eliminating completely the availability of the stored water to the District and its subcontractors, including Morro Bay.

The DWR water “spills” have resulted in tens of thousands of acre feet in lost District water over the decades. As a subcontractor, Morro Bay currently has limited water management flexibility beyond requesting State Water amounts due to the nature of the subcontract with the District.

The District may currently sell or transfer excess State Water, but it is limited by District Board policies set in 2003.

AGENDA NO: 9.c
MEETING DATE: June 10, 2025

Page 316 of 329 ends

DRAFT STATE WATER MANAGEMENT POLICY
To develop guidelines on more flexible tools to use excess State Water, District staff recently collaborated with the State Water Subcontractors Advisory Committee (SWSAC) which City staff is part of, an advisory board to the District Board (i.e., the San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors), to create a draft State Water Transfer Policy Update document (Attachment 1) for the District Board’s consideration. The eventual aim of these policies is to allow the District to develop programs and opportunities for the District and its subcontractors to maximize the utility of State Water allocations through greater sale, transfer, and water banking.

The draft policy identifies the existing subcontractors, including Morro Bay, as the highest priority users of State Water. As such, it provides subcontractors first right of refusal before sales and transfers are made. It also includes a future, yet to be defined investment recovery program to compensate subcontractors for legacy costs contributed to the State Water system.

Importantly, the draft policy indicates the District will not enter into any long-term contracts with water users until the subcontractors and the District have negotiated updated State Water subcontract agreements that provide Subcontractors with more defined water transfer, banking, and/or storage authorities. These authorities will allow the City great flexibility in how Morro Bay’s excess allocation, which is approximately 300 acre feet per year, are managed. For Morro Bay, this will mean the City can ensure greater water resiliency and cost recovery for managing the system.

The draft policy proposes the District maintain a 5,000 acre foot per year reserve that is not eligible for sale or transfer. This reserve would help the District meet Subcontractor obligations and prevent potential water supply shortfalls during future drought conditions. The District has historically backstopped subcontractor water shortfall with District stored water.

This draft policy was presented to the Public Works Advisory Board (PWAB) for comments at their May meeting. The PWAB did not share comments directly related to the draft policy but two members expressed concern about Los Osos Community Services District connecting to the Chorro Valley Pipeline due to potential capacity and infrastructure issues.

CONCLUSION
Given that the draft policies, when coupled with a future negotiation on the City’s subcontract with the District, will allow the City more control over water management for purposes of cost recovery and water supply resiliency, and given the District’s proposed retention of 5,000 acre feet per year to ensure water supply reliability during extended droughts, City staff is supportive of the District’s draft policy. It is expected that District staff will be presenting the State Water Transfer Policy Update to the District Board in July 2025 for their consideration.

ATTACHMENTS

1. State Water Transfer Policy Update

2. Supplemental Information on Morro Bay Water Supply

Page 317 of 329 ends

SWP Water Transfer Policies
San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and
Water Conservation District
4/18/2025, DRAFT

Page 1 of 6 ends

State Water Project Water Transfer Policies
I. INTRODUCTION
A. Background
The State Water Project (SWP) Water Supply Agreement (Master Contract) is a long-term contract between the Department of Water Resources (DWR) and the San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (District) which provides for the annual purchase and delivery of up to 25,000 acre-feet (AF) of SWP water (Project Water) to San Luis Obispo County. The District, as a wholesaler of Project Water, has in turn contracted with local public water agencies and others for delivery of Project Water within its service area (each a Subcontractor and collectively, the Subcontractors) pursuant to certain agreements (collectively, the SWP Subcontracts).

Additionally, the District has a side agreement with the Central Coast Water Authority (CCWA) for annual treatment of up to 4,830 AF of Project Water (CCWA Agreement), and coordinates delivery operations with DWR and CCWA for the delivery of Project Water to the District’s turnouts within the DWR-owned SWP Coastal Branch pipeline.

One of the primary purposes of these Policies is to establish a framework for the District and Subcontractors that promotes flexibility and cost recovery to minimize the long-term financial burden on county taxpayers and ratepayers.

B. Description of the Coastal Branch System
In the 1990s, the District (on behalf of its Subcontractors) and CCWA (on behalf of its Santa Barbara County members) partnered with DWR to plan and design “Phase II” of the SWP Coastal Branch Aqueduct (“Phase I” was completed in 1968). This extension of the SWP brought Project Water supplies into San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara counties starting in 1997.

The DWR-owned pipeline (with pumping plants and storage tanks) and CCWA treatment plant (collectively, the Coastal Branch System) were developed to provide supplemental water for municipal use. For the District, the facilities were sized to deliver up to 4,830 AF annually based on its SWP Subcontracts at the time.

The Coastal Branch System delivers treated water to three turnouts in San Luis Obispo County – Shandon, Chorro Valley, and Lopez – before continuing south to serve communities in Santa Barbara County (see Exhibit A). Once the water passes through these District turnouts, it enters local distribution systems and becomes subject to local agreements, policies, and oversight. In some areas, the District or County may continue to have responsibilities – either as a water service provider or in their role as a land use and permitting authority – depending on local governance.

C. SWP Allocation
The “SWP Allocation” is the “Annual Table A Amount” of 25,000 acre-feet (AF) available to the District under the Master Contract and represents the maximum annual amount of Project Water Attachment 1

Page 318 of 329 ends

SWP Water Transfer Policies
San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and
Water Conservation District
4/18/2025, DRAFT

Page 2 of 6 ends

that can be delivered to the District under certain conditions. A portion of the District’s SWP Allocation is committed to the Subcontractors (the Subcontracted Amount) for municipal (domestic) supply use. The Subcontractors’ annual Water Supply Agreements total 4,830 AF, and Drought Buffer Water Agreements total 5,747 AF (for a combined total Subcontracted Amount of 10,577 AF).

The Subcontractors’ Water Supply Agreements are long-term “take-or-pay” arrangements (i.e., for annual delivery of up to 4,830 AF) and provide them with the first right each year to schedule monthly Project Water deliveries to the three existing SWP turnouts within the District. Under certain conditions, this benefit means the Subcontractors may decide to utilize 100% of the District’s conveyance capacity within the Coastal Branch in a given month or “delivery year” (Jan. 1 to Dec. 31). However, the take-or-pay condition means that regardless of whether the Subcontractors use 100% of the available Coastal Branch capacity needed to take delivery of the subcontracted amount under their Water Supply Agreements (i.e., the 4,830 AF), they are still obligated to pay 100% of the annual DWR Coastal Branch and CCWA treatment plant costs that are allocated to the District. Accordingly, Subcontractors shall have the first right to utilize all Project Water and Coastal Branch System capacity (conveyance and treatment) made available to the District under the Master Contract and CCWA Agreement.

The remaining portion of the 25,000 AF of SWP Allocation not subcontracted is held in reserve by the District, and totals 14,423 AF (the District’s Reserve Amount). Consistent with the requirements of the Master Contract the District’s Reserve Amount is paid for primarily by property tax revenue which enables the District to maintain the balance of its contracted SWP water supply from DWR for the long-term benefit of the County.

When there is available Project Water in a given year that is not needed by the District to fulfill the Subcontractors’ Water Supply Agreements, then that water is considered surplus Project Water (the District’s Surplus Water).

II. GENERAL
A. Relationship to Previously Adopted Policies
These Policies replace / supersede the District’s 2003 Excess Entitlement Policies approved by the Board of Supervisors sitting as the District Board (Board) on January 14, 2003.

B. Application and Interpretation
These Policies apply to all of the District’s Project Water. The purpose of these Policies is to establish a framework that will guide District staff, the Board and its Subcontractors in maximizing the Project Water supply. The goal is to fully utilize the District’s Surplus Water within the County, and develop opportunities to optimize the Subcontracted Amount with a recognition that water transfers/exchanges (on an annual, multi-year, or permanent basis) are going to be one of the primary water management tools to achieve these objectives.

Page 319 of 329 ends

SWP Water Transfer Policies
San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and
Water Conservation District
4/18/2025, DRAFT

Page 3 of 6 ends

These Policies are intended to apply and be limited to water management decisions concerning water delivery contracts within DWR’s SWP conveyance facilities, primarily those within the Coastal Branch, as shown in Exhibit A. Although these policies apply to the entire annual SWP water supply available to the District, the District is only a wholesaler of the Project Water, and so the Policies are limited to SWP water transfers within the District’s contracted share of the DWRowned part of the SWP system. The District is a separate legal entity from the County of San Luis Obispo, and recognizes that other laws, regulations, and policies may govern how, where, or under what conditions the Project Water can be used locally. As such, these policies are not intended to address water management decisions about Project Water once that water is within local systems, that is, once that water has passed through the DWR-owned turnout (i.e., Shandon, Chorro Valley, Lopez, etc.). Water management actions for the water at that point are subject to the respective policies and contractual arrangements of the local systems (e.g., Chorro Valley Pipeline, Zone 3/Lopez, etc.). However, these policies shall not be deemed to limit future discretionary actions by the District Board.

C. SWP is a Supplemental Supply – Primarily for Urban Water Needs (But Not Exclusively) Given that SWP water is an imported supply and subject to extended delivery interruptions (annually, for up to several weeks at a time) for operations maintenance, it is to be integrated into local systems without becoming the primary supply necessary for a public water system serving domestic needs.

For the County of San Luis Obispo, SWP water supply was developed as a supplemental supply to meet municipal water needs. Domestic use shall be considered the highest priority use of all SWP water made available for local use in the County under the Master Contract. Domestic use is needed for sustenance, public health and safety, and welfare. State Water shall be used first to address public health, ensure reliable access to safe, affordable drinking water and sanitation. It recognizes that domestic use occurs both within the public water supply system service areas and outside of those areas in the rural areas of the County where domestic water supplies are from individual water supply wells.

As part of a future program, the District will incorporate a reserve of 5,000 acre-feet (20% of its 25,000 AF SWP allocation) for short-term use only. This reserve is intended to help meet Subcontractor obligations and support countywide water resiliency and response needs. It will not be available for long-term contracts.

III. PRIORITIES (GUIDING PRINCIPLES FOR HOW THE DISTRICT’S SWP ALLOCATION

SHOULD BE PRIORITIZED)
A. FIRST – Prioritize Needs of Subcontractors.

The Subcontractors shall have first rights to Project Water. The District will prioritize meeting the needs of its Subcontractors before making Project Water available to third parties. If any Subcontractor plans to acquire additional supplies or to sell surplus supplies, the District will attempt to meet the needs of the Subcontractors first, before entering into transactions with third parties. In addition:

Page 320 of 329 ends

SWP Water Transfer Policies
San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and
Water Conservation District
4/18/2025, DRAFT

Page 4 of 6 ends

- District Surplus Water made available to third parties must not harm the District’s ability to meet its obligations to the existing Subcontractors.
- Transfers/exchanges of the District’s Surplus Water with third parties can only be considered – whether temporary (short-term/single-year or multi-year) or permanent (longterm) – under a second-priority/standby basis in which the Subcontractors’ first right of refusal to use the District’s Surplus Water is preserved, and they retain the first priority option for delivery scheduling.
- Financial considerations shall be provided to Subcontractors providing capacity to deliver second-priority water. This ensures deliveries of transferred water do not detrimentally impact the ability of the District to fulfill existing delivery contracts for the other subcontractors.

B. SECOND – Prioritize Local Public Water Agencies and Purpose of Use.

After all Subcontractors' Project Water needs are met, the District will give preference to local Public Water Agencies (within San Luis Obispo County), with water allocated according to the purpose of use (via direct delivery, in-lieu, or groundwater recharge):
- 1st Order – Emergency Use: Project Water needed for emergency use to ensure public safety and well-being. The intention is to give priority to transfers that address a public health need or a water shortage emergency pursuant to Water Code Section 350. - 2nd Order – Domestic Use: Use of Project Water as a supplemental supply to improve water system resiliency and reliability for drinking, sanitation, and fire protection for urban and rural water users.
- 3rd Order – Agricultural Use: Use of Project Water for production agricultural irrigation or other farm and ranch purposes.
- 4th Order – Non-Domestic Use: Water allocated for non-domestic, non-agricultural purposes such as industrial, commercial, recreational or other non-essential uses.

C. THIRD – Prioritize Place of Use.

The original delivery location established under each of the Subcontractors' Water Supply Agreements is considered the preferred place of use. However, when capacity allows, requests for emergency or domestic use at other locations should take precedence over requests for agricultural or non-domestic use at a preferred place of use.

Among requests of the same priority (e.g., two domestic use requests), preference is given to those uses within the same/upstream financial reach – to minimize the “allocation without capacity” issue.

Downstream deliveries (including transfers or new water supply agreements involving turnout locations beyond the financial/conveyance reaches with dedicated capacity for that allocation) can be considered only under short-term (single-year) or on a second-priority/standby basis in which the Subcontractors’ first right of refusal is preserved, and they retain priority for delivery scheduling.

Page 321 of 329 ends

SWP Water Transfer Policies
San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and
Water Conservation District
4/18/2025, DRAFT

Page 5 of 6 ends

D. FOURTH – Prioritize Internal Temporary Transfers/Exchanges within the District. (Temporary reallocation to balance supply among local entities.) If water remains available after meeting the needs described in Orders 1-4, the District will consider transfers or exchanges of District Surplus Water between local entities within the District, to balance out the supply.

E. FIFTH – Consider External Temporary Transfers/Exchanges.

Consider only after internal priorities are met; temporary transfers only, for achieving water management objectives and/or cost recovery.

F. SIXTH – Additional Considerations.

Additional consideration should be given to uses that:
- Help the District manage the District’s Surplus Water to better match the variation in local domestic need that varies from year-to-year and seasonally. - Store available and/or unscheduled water deliveries for later use during times of water shortages to support municipal, groundwater basin replenishment, and agricultural benefits provided these uses are integrated with domestic or other priority uses. - Complement demonstrated efforts to maximize the efficiency and beneficial use of locally available supplies.
- Solve or mitigate water supply problems in key watersheds/groundwater basins identified by the Board.
- Support SWP supply planning objectives and create opportunities for the District and Subcontractors to benefit from revenue-generating water market activities that offset or recover costs.
- Align with State, District, or County water management plans, strategies, and priorities.

IV. CRITERIA FOR USE
Requests for use of the District’s Surplus Water must meet the following Board-established criteria:

A. Eligible Users – Subcontractors, public water agencies, special districts, and groundwater sustainability agencies established to serve municipal/domestic, agricultural, or basin water management needs.

B. Restrictions on Contracting – Water cannot be contracted to non-public water agencies, or private individuals, private organizations, or institutions; the District will not establish new agreements for delivery of Project Water to entities whose primary mission is not focused on water supply management or water delivery operations for domestic, agricultural, or basin management needs.

Page 322 of 329 ends

SWP Water Transfer Policies
San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and
Water Conservation District
4/18/2025, DRAFT

Page 6 of 6 ends

C. Approval Requirements – The County or a designated public water agency / special district must request and approve the contract for supplemental use – whether for domestic, agricultural, or non-domestic use.

D. Emergency Use – Allowed if both County Board and requesting agency declare an “Emergency Condition”; use is subject to emergency declarations and all costs at that time.

E. System Reliability – Use of the District’s Surplus must not compromise the SWP system reliability or reduce delivery capabilities to the Subcontractors.

F. Financial Considerations – All costs must be paid by the water user. Uses shall not detrimentally impact existing subcontractors from a financial standpoint. There shall be no increase in administrative costs to the Subcontractors.

G. Investment Recovery – An investment recovery program is necessary to recover current and past costs. An amendment(s) to the SWP Subcontracts is anticipated to be the mechanism by which the investment recovery program is created and implemented, the development of which will necessitate the involvement of the Subcontractors.

H. Regional Water Collaboration – Requests should demonstrate how the proposed use of Project Water supports regional water supply reliability and maintains or strengthens existing partnerships that improve regional water resilience for the County.

I. Compliance with Obligations and Laws – Transfers and exchanges shall be carried out consistent with all applicable requirements and obligations, including but not limited to these policies, Master Contract, Subcontracts, and all applicable laws and regulations, including the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

V. IMPLEMENTATION
The District Board acknowledges that the existing SWP Subcontracts do not provide for a water transfer program. These Policies are intended to guide the District staff and Board in considering transfer requests and in preparing amendments to the SWP Subcontracts that would make implementation of said requests possible by creating a defined process for temporary and permanent transfers; and it is not anticipated that any new long-term contracts will be established between the District and others for use of the District’s Surplus Water until the updated SWP Subcontracts are in place.

Notwithstanding, as indicated above, these Policies shall not be deemed to limit future discretionary actions by the District Board, including, without limitation, approval of a permanent transfer of existing water supply amounts under the SWP Subcontracts while the amendments needed to provide for the program contemplated herein are completed.

Page 323 of 329 ends

LEGEND:
....... �. �-··
I
� 101
••...
---• .. NACIMIENTO ••

PIPELINE

PASO ROBLE
1 WHALE ROCK

RESERVOIR

LE ROCK

CA AQUEDUCT MAIN CANAL (SWP)
I•• I COASTAL BRANCH AQUEDUCT, Ph.1 (SWP): CANAL
• - - COASTAL BRANCH AQUEDUCT, Ph.2 (SWP): PIPELINE
• •••••• LOCAL TREATED WATER PIPELINE (SLOCFCWCD)
••••••• LOCAL RAW WATER PIPELINE
• PUMPING PLANT (SWP)
■ STORAGE TANK (SWP)

A TURNOUT (SWP)
35 1N CO NTY
5 BERRENDA MESA

WATER DISTRICT
(KCWA)
•

STATE WATER PROJECT (SWP) COASTAL BRANCH AQUEDUCT CONVEYANCE CAPACITY SLOCFCWCD1 SBCFCWCD2 TOTAL

SWP CONTRACTED CONTRACTED CONTRACTED

REACH CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY
NO. SWP REACH DESCRIPTION (AFY) (AFY) (AFY)
31A AVENAL GAP TO DEVIL'S DEN 25,000 45,486 N/A
3 PUMPING PLANT
33A DEVIL'S DEN PUMPING PLANT 4,830 42,986 47,816
TO TANK 1 SITE
338 TANK 1 SITE TO CHORRO 4,830 42,986 47,816

VALLEY TURNOUT
34 CHORRO VALLEY TURNOUT TO 2392 42,986 45,378

LOPEZ TURNOUT
35 LOPEZ TURNOUT TO 0 42,986 42,986

GUADALUPE TURNOUT

CONTRACTED
SLOCFCWCD1 CAPACITY

TURNOUT TURNOUT DESCRIPTION (AFY)
SHANDON 2-INCH PIPELINE CONNECTION NEAR INTERSECTION OF TOBY 100 WAY AT SAN JUAN RD., SHANDON, CA 16-INCH PIPELINE CONNECTION NEARBY THE SOUTH PORTAL
CHORRO VALLEY OF CUESTA TUNNEL, 3 MILES NORTH OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, 2,338 CA
8-INCH PIPELINE CONNECTION NEAR INTERSECTION OF
LOPEZ ORCUTT RD. AT LOPEZ DR., 3 MILES NORTHEAST OF ARROYO 2,392

GRANDE, CA
NOTES:

1. SLOCFCWCD =SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT

2. SBCFCWCD = SANTA BARBARA COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT

3. TOTAL CONTRACTED CAPACITY WITHIN PHASE 1 OF THE COASTAL BRANCH IS NOT AVAILABLE AT THIS TIME. KERN COUNTY WATER

AGENCY HAS CONTRACTED CAPACITY TO DELIVER STATE WATER TO BERRENDA MESA WATER DISTRICT (AG) WHICH UTILIZES CAPACITY IN THE COASTAL BRANCH CANAL. THERE IS ADDITIONAL CAPACITY FOR SANTA CLARITA (DDWD) AND A FUTURE SJV CONTRACTOR.

OWNERSHIP O&M

DWR DWR

DWR CCWA

DWR CCWA
OWNERSHIP O&M

DWR CCWA

Page 324 of 329 ends

State Water Project
Excess Entitlement Policies
Approved by Board of Supervisors January 14, 2003
Excess Entitlement - Definition
The District State Water Project “Excess” Entitlement is the portion of the District’s total entitlement that is not contracted to others for their deliverable or drought buffer uses.

Priority of Use

1. Prior to transferring the excess entitlement for any other use, contractors of state water entitlement with capacity in Phase II of the Coastal Aqueduct shall have the first right to utilize the excess entitlement for “drought buffer” (reliability) purposes under the terms of a drought buffer agreement.

2. Preference shall be given to local agencies and water purveyors regardless of whether a transfer is on an annual, multi-year, or a permanent basis.

3. No permanent transfer of the excess entitlement for use outside District boundaries shall be made prior to a final update of the District’s Master Water Plan adopted by the Board of Supervisors, and then only if the transfer is consistent with the then adopted Master Plan. (See ‘Note’ below)

4. No multi-year transfer for use outside District boundaries shall be made with a term in excess of five years prior to a final update to the District’s Master Water Plan adopted by the Board of Supervisors, and then out of District transfers can only take place if the transfer is consistent with the adopted Master Plan.

5. On any out -of-District transfer, preference shall be given to those that provide: a) revenues that recover current costs and some or all of the District’s past costs, b)

Page 325 of 329 ends

maintain the District’s right to use the water in the future, or c) which are used for environmental mitigation.

6. The Public Works Director is authorized to determine the annual amount of the excess entitlement to transfer to the State Water Project “Turnback Pools” established under the existing terms of State Water Agreements. In making that determination, the Public Works Director shall first consider local needs and how the use of the Turnback Pool might impact other potential transfers.

Note:

These policies were adopted by the Board of Supervisors “with the understanding there will be no permanent sales outside the District.”

Page 326 of 329 ends

Supplemental Information on Morro Bay Water Supply
6/5/2025

MORRO BAY WATER SUPPLY
The City of Morro Bay’s primary source of water is imported water from the State Water Project (SWP). During periods when SWP supplies are limited or unavailable (i.e. extended droughts or SWP shutdowns) the City relies upon water pumped from the Morro Valley Groundwater Basin (Morro Basin). During 2024, State Water provided 82% of the City’s drinking water and the Morro Basin Wells provided the remaining 18%. In addition to SWP and Morro Basin water, the City is in the process of implementing a Recycled Water Project that is intended to provide 412.5 acre feet of additional water during its initial phase for injection into the Morro Basin. More detail on the City’s current and future sources of water are available below.

State Water Project
In 1963, the San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (District) entered into a long-term water supply contract (Contract) with the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) for a Table A allocation of up to 25,000 acre-feet per year (AFY) of water from the SWP. In the 1990s, the City and 10 other agencies (Subcontractors) entered into contracts with the District to take delivery of up to 4,830 AFY of treated SWP water, referred to as their Water Service Amount (WSA). The District then entered into an agreement with the Central Coast Water Authority (CCWA) for the construction and operation of a water treatment plant to treat the Subcontractors SWP water prior to delivery in San Luis Obispo County.

The City’s SWP water is conveyed from the San Joaquin-Sacramento Delta via the California and Coastal Branch Aqueducts. The water is then pumped up to and treated at the Polonio Pass Water Treatment Plant, which is near the junction of Highways 41 and 46. From the water

Page 327 of 329 ends

Supplemental Information on Morro Bay Water Supply
6/5/2025
treatment plant, the water is then delivered via gravity to the City through the Coastal Branch and Chorro Valley Pipelines (see map above).

The Subcontractors additionally entered into agreements with the District for an additional 5,707 AFY of SWP water, referred to as “drought buffer” to provide additional water supply reliability for years when SWP allocations are less than 100%.

The City has a WSA of 1,313 AFY and a Drought Buffer of 2,290 AFY, as shown in Table 1. To calculate the amount of SWP available to the City in a given year, its WSA and Drought Buffer are summed and multiplied by DWR’s Annual Allocation (e.g. 50% for 2024). Though City SWP deliveries within a given year cannot exceed its WSA, the District has the ability to store unused SWP water in San Luis Reservoir for use in future dry years (Stored SWP).

Subcontractor WSA (AFY) Drought Buffer (AFY) Total Allocation CSA 16 (Shandon) 100 - 100
CMC 400 400 800
County Ops Center 425 425 850
Cuesta College 200 200 400
City of Morro Bay 1,313 2,290 3,603
City of Pismo Beach 1,240 1,240 2,480
Oceano CSD 750 750 1,500
SMMWC 275 275 550
Avila Beach CSD 100 100 200
Avila Valley MWC 20 20 40
San Luis Coastal USD 7 7 14
District Unsubscribed Allocation 14,463 14,463
Total 4,830 21,170 25,000
In 2021, the District and other SWP Contractors approved changes to the SWP Contracts that allow the District and Subcontractors to more easily transfer or sell excess SWP supplies to other water users in the state. These potential transfers/sales provide an opportunity for the District and Subcontractors to obtain cost recovery through sale of additional water that they don’t need. In 2024, the District and Subcontractors sold 13,500 AF of surplus SWP and received ~$5.6M in cost recovery, in which Morro Bay received a credit for approximately $160,000. Historically, the District and SWP Subcontractors have lost on average ~8,000 AFY1 of SWP Water to spills at San Luis Reservoir and/or due to an inability to put allocated SWP water into storage. Additionally, Subcontractors have had on average ~1,500 AFY2 of unused SWP delivery capacity. Both the loss of SWP water and unused delivery capacity represent potential significant cost recovery opportunities for the District and Subcontractors.

Morro Basin
The Morro Basin Wellfield is located near Lila Kaiser Park, consists of 6 wells, and can provide water from the Morro Basin to meet the City’s needs for a limited period of time. The City has permits with the State Water Resource Control Board that allows for the extraction of up to 581 AFY of water from the Morro Basin, which by itself does not meet the City’s current water demand.

1 From 1996 to 2023, it is calculated that the District/Subcontractors lost 221,383 AF or 7,907 AFY on average of SWP water due to spills at San Luis Reservoir and/or an inability to take delivery or put into storage SWP water allocated in a given year.
2 From 2009 to 2023, it is calculated that the Subcontractors took delivery of an average of ~3,330 AFY of SWP water through the Polonio Pass Water Treatment Plant and Phase 2 of the Coastal Branch pipeline.

Page 328 of 329 ends

Supplemental Information on Morro Bay Water Supply
6/5/2025
Further, there is no guarantee the wells can pump out 581 AFY from Morro Basin, especially during drought years. Finally, the water pumped from the Morro Basin has elevated levels of nitrates that require treatment through the City’s Brackish Water Reverse Osmosis (BWRO) facility prior to entering the distribution system. Approximately 25% of the water extracted from Morro Basin is rejected as concentrate during the treatment process and discharged into the ocean. As a result, the maximum water the City can currently produce from the Morro Basin is 435.75 AFY, or approximately 40% of the City’s 1100 AFY average annual demand.

Recycled Water
The City is in the process of implementing an Indirect Potable Reuse (IPR) recycled water project that will allow it to augment the recharge to the Morro Basin and extract additional groundwater during periods of extended drought that could significantly reduce SWP allocations. The IPR recycled water project will utilize injection wells to inject advanced purified recycled water from the newly constructed Water Resources Center into the Morro Basin and extract that water through existing production wells to provide a local, reliable, resilient water supply for the City.

By utilizing IPR recycled water injection and extraction during low SWP allocation years to preserve its SWP and Stored SWP water supplies for potential extended drought years, it is expected that the City can reliably meet its water supply needs under current and future build-out demand conditions. As the City’s demands increase with future development and/or additional cost recovery strategies are identified, it may be beneficial to increase the capacity of the IPR program to provide additional drought proof water and/or additional cost recovery opportunities through sale of surplus water.

Page 329 of 329 ends

Morro Bay City CouncilJune 10, 2025

Morro Bay City Council
June 10, 2025