Agenda packet — San Luis Obispo City Council, May 2, 2023 (part 1 of 3)

City Council
AGENDA

Tuesday, May 2, 2023, 5:30 p.m.

Council Chambers, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo
The City of San Luis Obispo has returned to in-person meetings. Zoom participation will not be supported. For those attending in-person, the Council Chamber will be at limited capacity and masks are strongly recommended. Council meetings may be viewed remotely on Channel 20 and the City's YouTube Channel: http://youtube.slo.city
INSTRUCTIONS FOR PUBLIC COMMENT:

Public Comment prior to the meeting (must be received 3 hours in advance of the meeting):

Mail - Delivered by the U.S. Postal Service. Address letters to the City Clerk's Office at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, 93401.

Email - Submit Public Comments via email to [email protected]. In the body of your email, please include the date of the meeting and the item number (if applicable). Emails will not be read aloud during the meeting.

Voicemail - Call (805) 781-7164 and leave a voicemail. Please state and spell your name, the agenda item number you are calling about, and leave your comment. Verbal comments must be limited to 3 minutes. Voicemails will not be played during the meeting. *All correspondence will be archived and distributed to councilmembers, however, submissions received after the deadline will not be processed until the following day.

Public Comment during the meeting:

Meetings have returned to an in-person format. To provide public comment during the meeting, you must be present in the Council Chambers.

Electronic Visual Aid Presentation. To conform with the City's Network Access and Use Policy, Chapter 1.3.8 of the Council Policies & Procedures Manual, members of the public who desire to utilize electronic visual aids to supplement their oral presentation are encouraged to provide display-ready material to the City Clerk by 12:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting. Contact the City Clerk's Office at [email protected] or (805) 781-7114.

Pages

1. CLOSED SESSION: STARTS AT 4:30 PM

1.a CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Erica A. Stewart will call the Closed Session Meeting of the San Luis Obispo City Council to order in the Finance & IT Conference Room located in the Finance Department, downstairs in City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo.

1.b PUBLIC COMMENT FOR CLOSED SESSION ITEMS ONLY
Public comment will only be accepted for Closed Session items.

1.c CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS
Pursuant to Government Code §54956.8
Property:

APN 001-207-018
Agency Negotiators:

Derek Johnson, J. Christine Dietrick, Shelly Stanwyck, Matt Horn, Emily Jackson, Rick Scott, Michael Codron
Negotiating Parties:

M4L Walnut Land and Property, LLC.

Under Negotiation:

Price and terms of payment

1.d ADJOURNMENT
The City Council will hold a Regular Meeting on May 2, 2023 at 5:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo.

2. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Erica A. Stewart will call the Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo City Council to order.

3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Council Member Andy Pease will lead the Council in the Pledge of Allegiance.

4. PRESENTATIONS

4.a NATIONAL TOURISM WEEK PROCLAMATION AND CALIFORNIA

TOURISM MONTH PROCLAMATION
Mayor Stewart will present two proclamations declaring the week of May 7 - 13, 2023 as "National Tourism Week" and the month of May as "California Tourism Month."

4.b PUBLIC SERVICE APPRECIATION WEEK PROCLAMATION
Mayor Stewart will present a proclamation declaring the week of May 7 - 13, 2023 as "Public Service Appreciation Week."

4.c PROCLAMATION HONORING DETECTIVE LUCA BENEDETTI &

DETECTIVE STEVE OROZCO AND DEDICATION OF A FREEWAY
SIGN FOR THE BRIDGE AT BUENA VISTA AND HWY 101

HONORING DETECTIVE LUCA BENEDETTI
Mayor Stewart will present a proclamation in honor of Detective Luca Benedetti & Detective Steve Orozco. The City Council will also accept the dedication of a memorial freeway sign for the bridge at Buena Vista and Hwy 101 honoring Detective Luca Benedetti.

4.d CITY MANAGER REPORT
Receive a brief report from City Manager Derek Johnson.

5. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
Not to exceed 15 minutes. The Council welcomes your input. State law does not allow the Council to discuss or take action on issues not on the agenda, except that members of the Council or staff may briefly respond to statements made or questions posed by persons exercising their public testimony rights (Gov. Code sec. 54954.2). Staff may be asked to follow up on such items.

6. CONSENT AGENDA
Not to exceed 15 minutes. Matters appearing on the Consent Calendar are expected to be non-controversial and will be acted upon at one time. A member of the public may request the Council to pull an item for discussion. Pulled items shall be heard at the close of the Consent Agenda unless a majority of the Council chooses another time. The public may comment on any and all items on the Consent Agenda within the three-minute time limit.

Recommendation:

To approve Consent Calendar Items 6a to 6e.

6.a WAIVE READING IN FULL OF ALL RESOLUTIONS AND

ORDINANCES
Recommendation:

Waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances as appropriate.

6.b MINUTES REVIEW - APRIL 6, 2023 AND APRIL 18, 2023 COUNCIL

MINUTES
9 Recommendation:

Approve the following minutes of the City Council:
• April 6, 2023 - Special Meeting
• April 18, 2023 - Regular Meeting

6.c REVIEW OF A MILLS ACT HISTORICAL PROPERTY CONTRACT
FOR THE CALL HOTEL AT 1703 SANTA BARBARA AVENUE (HIST0616-2022) 21 Recommendation:

As recommended by the Cultural Heritage Committee, adopt a Draft Resolution entitled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, approving a Historic Property Preservation Agreement between the City and the owner of the Call Hotel at 1703 Santa Barbara Avenue (Application No. HIST-0616-2023)” under the terms described in the draft agreement.

6.d RECEIVE THE CARBON NEUTRAL CITY FACILITIES PLAN, FLEET

ELECTRIFICATION ROADMAP, AND THE ELECTRIC VEHICLE

INFRASTRUCTURE ROADMAP
43 Recommendation:

Receive and file the Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan, the Fleet Electrification Roadmap, and the Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Roadmap.

6.e CONSIDERATION OF THE 2022-23 HUMAN SERVICES GRANT

FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE HUMAN RELATIONS

COMMISSION
171
Recommendation:

As recommended by the Human Relations Commission,
approve the 2022-2023 Human Services Grants funding
allocations in the amount of $150,000; and

1. Authorize the City Manager to execute agreements with each grant recipient.

2. 7. STUDY SESSION

7.a STUDY SESSION: DIVERSITY, EQUITY, AND INCLUSION

PROGRAM UPDATE AND STRATEGIC PLAN FRAMEWORK
(Estimated Time: 75 minutes)
199
Recommendation:

Hold a Study Session to receive an update on the implementation of the Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) Major City Goal (MCG) and provide direction on the development of the City’s DEI Strategic Plan.

8. PUBLIC HEARING AND BUSINESS ITEMS

8.a INTRODUCE TWO (2) ORDINANCES AMENDING THE ZONING MAP AND AMENDING MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 9.10 FOR THE

CANNABIS BUSINESS PROGRAM AND ADOPT A RESOLUTION

UPDATING THE MERIT CRITERIA FOR COMMERCIAL CANNABIS
OPERATOR PERMIT APPLICATIONS (Est. Time: 20minutes)
217
*Note: This item will be heard prior to Item 7a, Study Session on the DEI Program update and Strategic Plan Framework.

Recommendation:

As recommended by the Planning Commission, introduce a
Draft Ordinance entitled, “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, amending the City’s Zoning Map to expand the Cannabis Business Overlay Zones where cannabis businesses may be located as may be allowed or conditionally allowed by the underlying base zones and the rules and regulations established in the City’s Municipal Code (RZ-0118-2023)”; and

1. Introduce a Draft Ordinance entitled, “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, amending Chapter 9.10 (Cannabis Regulations) of the Municipal Code adding requirements for owners that lease real property to commercial cannabis operators (CODE-0164-2023)”; and

2. Adopt a Draft Resolution entitled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, approving updates to the cannabis operator permit ranking criteria.”

3. 8.b ENDORSEMENT OF THE DIVERSITY, EQUITY, AND INCLUSION

UPDATE TO THE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT AND NOTICING MANUAL
(Estimated Time: 45 minutes)
283
Recommendation:

Endorse the updated Public Engagement and Noticing Manual to serve as a strategic guide for staff to increase diverse participation in City programs, projects and policy decisions.

8.c AMENDMENTS TO THE COUNCIL POLICIES AND PROCEDURES

MANUAL TO IMPLEMENT HYBRID CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS (AB
2449) (Estimated Time: 45 minutes)
313
Recommendation:

Adopt a Draft Resolution entitled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, establishing policies and procedures for compliance with Assembly Bill 2449 relating to teleconference participation in Legislative Meetings” which would implement hybrid City Council meetings.

9. LIAISON REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
Not to exceed 15 minutes. Council Members report on conferences or other City activities. At this time, any Council Member or the City Manager may ask a question for clarification, make an announcement, or report briefly on their activities. In addition, subject to Council Policies and Procedures, they may provide a reference to staff or other resources for factual information, request staff to report back to the Council at a subsequent meeting concerning any matter or take action to direct staff to place a matter of business on a future agenda. (Gov. Code Sec. 54954.2)

10. ADJOURNMENT
The City Council will hold a Special Closed Session Meeting on Tuesday, May 9, 2023 at 4:30 p.m. in the Council Hearing Room at City Hall. The next Regular Meeting of the City Council will be held on May 16, 2023 at 5:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo.

LISTENING ASSISTIVE DEVICES for the hearing impaired - see the Clerk.

The City of San Luis Obispo wishes to make all of its public meetings accessible to the public. Upon request, this agenda will be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with disabilities. Any person with a disability who requires a modification or accommodation in order to participate in a meeting should direct such request to the City Clerk’s Office at (805) 781-7114 at least 48 hours before the meeting, if possible. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (805) 781-7410.

City Council meetings are televised live on Charter Channel 20 and the City's YouTube Chanel: http://youtube.slo.city. Agenda related writings or documents provided to the City Council are available for public inspection in the City Clerk’s Office located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California during normal business hours, and on the City’s website
https://www.slocity.org/government/mayor-and-city-council/agendas-andminutes. Persons with questions concerning any agenda item may call the City Clerk’s Office at (805) 781-7114.
1 Council Minutes
April 6, 2023, 1:00 p.m.

Council Hearing Room, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo
Council Members

Present:

Council Member Emily Francis, Council Member Andy Pease, Council Member Michelle Shoresman, Vice Mayor Jan Marx, Mayor Erica A. Stewart
City Staff Present: Derek Johnson, City Manager, Christine Dietrick, City Attorney, Teresa Purrington, City Clerk
_____________________________________________________________________

1. CALL TO ORDER
A Special Meeting of the San Luis Obispo City Council was called to order on April 6, 2023 at 1:00 p.m. in the Council Hearing Room at City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, by Mayor Stewart.

2. PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS ON THE AGENDA ONLY
Public Comment:

None
--End of Public Comment--

3. CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP (Times are approximate)
 Review and Discuss Council Members' Clifton Strengths (35 minutes)  Engage in Governance Strengths Exercise (60 minutes)
 Discuss Use of Various Governance Roles to Reach Major City Goals and Effective Partnerships with Other Agencies (60 minutes)  Debrief Community Forum and Goal-Setting Process (20 minutes)  Discuss Specific Council Items (70 minutes)
o Communication
o Council Onboarding Process
o Meeting Format/Conditions
Facilitator: Sommer Kehrli, Ph. D., Chief Executive Officer, The Centre for Organizational Effectiveness

Page 9 of 351 ends

2 Sommer Kehrli provided an overview of the agenda.

Review and Discuss Council Members' Clifton Strengths - Sommer Kehrli led a discussion on the Council Members' strengths and how they work together.

Engage in Governance Strengths Exercise - Council participated in an exercise on six Council governance roles and then discussed how those roles can be used to affect change.

Debrief Community Forum and Goal-Setting Process - Council discussed what worked and what could be done differently during the Community Forum and Goal-Setting process.

Discuss Specific Council Items: Council provided the following topics for future Brown Bag Lunch discussions:
 Advisory Body Selection
 Council Member Orientation
 Council Interns
 Liaison Reports
 Legislative Advocacy 101

4. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 5:37 p.m. The next Regular Meeting of the City Council will be held on April 18, 2023 at 5:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo.

APPROVED BY COUNCIL: XX/XX/2023

Page 10 of 351 ends

1 Council Minutes
April 18, 2023, 5:30 p.m.

Council Chambers, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo
Council Members

Present:

1. CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo City Council was called to order on April 18, 2023 at 5:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, by Mayor Stewart.

2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Council Member Shoresman led the Council in the Pledge of Allegiance.

3. PRESENTATIONS

3.a SEXUAL ASSAULT ACTION MONTH PROCLAMATION
Mayor Stewart presented a proclamation declaring the month of April as "Sexual Assault Action Month" to Dave Juhnke on behalf of Lumina Alliance.

3.b INTRODUCTION - CHERE VALENCIA, PAYROLL ANALYST
Finance Director Emily Jackson introduced Chere Valencia, Payroll Analyst.

3.c CITY MANAGER REPORT
City Manager Derek Johnson provided a report on upcoming projects.

3.d CITYWIDE USER AND IMPACT FEE STUDY PRESENTATION
Business Manager Rebecca Bernstorff provided a presentation on a Citywide User and Impact Fee Study.

Page 11 of 351 ends

2 4. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
Public Comment:

Dan Carpenter
Jeffery Specht
--End of Public Comment--

5. CONSENT AGENDA
Mayor Stewart requested that Item 5e and 5k be pulled from Consent.

Council Member Pease requested that Item 5g be pulled from Consent.

Public Comments:

Item 5c - Kevin Kerr
Item 5f - Jeffery Specht
Item 5h - Scott Collins
---End of Public Comment---
Motion By Council Member Pease
Second By Council Member Shoresman
To approve Consent Calendar Items 5a to 5j.

Ayes (5): Council Member Francis, Council Member Pease, Council Member Shoresman, Vice Mayor Marx, and Mayor Stewart
CARRIED (5 to 0)

5.a WAIVE READING IN FULL OF ALL RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES Waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances as appropriate.

5.b MINUTES REVIEW - APRIL 4, 2023 COUNCIL MINUTES
Approve the minutes of the City Council meeting held on April 4, 2023.

5.c ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 1726 (2023 SERIES) AMENDING TITLE 17 (ZONING REGULATIONS) OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO IMPLEMENT HOUSING ELEMENT PROGRAM 2.15 AND POLICY 6.6 TO PROVIDE A

DOWNTOWN FLEXIBLE DENSITY PROGRAM
Adopt Ordinance No. 1726 (2023 Series) entitled, “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, amending Title 17 (Zoning Regulations) of the Municipal Code to incorporate a Downtown Flexible Density Program for qualifying residential projects. Project is consistent with the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration for the 2018 Comprehensive Zoning Regulations Update (Downtown Flexible Density Program, CODE-0017-2023).”

Page 12 of 351 ends

3 5.d REVIEW AND ACCEPT THE 2022 GENERAL PLAN ANNUAL REPORT As recommended by the Planning Commission, review and accept the 2022 General Plan Annual Report.

5.f APPROVE AMENDMENTS TO APPOINTED OFFICIALS’ COMPENSATION

1. Adopt Resolution No. 11408 (2023 Series) entitled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, amending a Contract of Employment for the City Manager” to approve an amendment to the City Manager’s employment
contract; and

2. Adopt Resolution No. 11409 (2023 Series) entitled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, amending a Contract of Employment for the City Attorney” approving amendment to the City Attorney’s employment contract; and

3. Authorize the Mayor to execute amended contracts of employment with the City Manager, adjusting his salary and deferred compensation contribution, and approve mediation training for the City Attorney.

5.h AFFORDABLE HOUSING FUND AWARD AND ELIGIBLE FEE
DEFERRAL LOANS TO HASLO FOR THE 736 ORCUTT ROAD
APARTMENT AND 279 BRIDGE STREET FAMILY APARTMENT

PROJECTS
Adopt Resolution No. 11411 (2023 Series) entitled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, approving Affordable Housing Fund Awards to the Housing Authority of San Luis Obispo for the 736 Orcutt Road Apartments and the 279 Bridge Street Family Apartments in the amount of $3,200,000” approving:

1. Award of Affordable Housing Funds in the amount of $2,000,000 and eligible fee deferral loan to assist the Housing Authority of San Luis Obispo (HASLO) with the rehabilitation and construction of the 736 Orcutt Road Apartments located at 736 Orcutt Road; and

2. Award of Affordable Housing Funds and in the amount of $1,200,000 and eligible fee deferral loan to assist the Housing Authority of San Luis Obispo (HASLO) with the construction of the Bridge Street Family Apartments located at 279 Bridge Street.

Page 13 of 351 ends

4 5.i AUTHORIZE STAFF TO SUBMIT A JOINT APPLICATION FOR HOMEKEY ROUND 3 GRANT PROGRAM IN CONJUNCTION WITH
PEOPLE’S SELF HELP HOUSING CORPORATION

1. Adopt Resolution No. 11412 (2023 Series) entitled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, authorizing Joint Application to and participation in the Homekey Program” in conjunction with People’s Self Help Housing Corporation (PSHHC) for a 20-30 unit permanent supportive and transitional housing project located at 920 Olive Street in a total not to exceed $18,000,000; and

2. Direct staff to work with PSHHC to complete due diligence necessary for the application; and

3. Authorize the City Manager, or their designee, to execute the grant documents; and

4. Direct Staff to return to the City Council with a Memorandum of Agreement outlining partnership service, program, and funding commitments prior to accepting Homekey funds.

5.j APPROPRIATE AWARDED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT
(APCD) GRANT FUNDS AND FUTURE PG&E REBATES TO THE

TRANSIT FACILITY ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING
INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT, SPECIFICATION 1000535

1. Authorize the Finance Director to appropriate $482,677 of awarded grant funding from the Air Pollution Control District (APCD) to the project account (Spec. 2000535); and

2. Authorize the Finance Director to appropriate up to $50,000 of grant funding from PG&E to the project account (Spec. 2000535) once awarded; and

3. Adopt Resolution No. 11413 (2023 Series) entitled, "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, authorizing appropriation of Air Pollution Control District (APCD) Grant Funds and PG&E Funds to support the Transit Facility Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Project, Specification Number 1000535."

Page 14 of 351 ends

5 Pulled from Consent by Mayor Stewart.

5.e ANNUAL MONITORING FOR THE SAN LUIS RANCH DEVELOPMENT

AGREEMENT, MITIGATION MEASURES, AND PROJECT CONDITIONS
Vice Mayor Marx declared a conflict on this item and recused due to owning property within the development.

Motion By Council Member Shoresman
Second By Council Member Francis
Receive and file the annual monitoring report for the San Luis Ranch Development Agreement, mitigation measures, and required project conditions.

Ayes (4): Council Member Francis, Council Member Pease, Council Member Shoresman, and Mayor Stewart
Recused (1): Vice Mayor Marx
CARRIED (4 to 0)
Pulled from Consent by Council Member Pease.

5.g ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PUBLIC WORKS
DIRECTOR TO ESTABLISH A “PARK LOCAL” PILOT PROGRAM
Motion By Council Member Francis
Second By Council Member Shoresman
Adopt Resolution No. 11410 (2023 Series) entitled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, authorizing the Public Works Director or their designee to implement the Park Local Pilot Program” that provides a continuation of the first hour free in the gateless parking structures to registered San Luis Obispo County residents.

Ayes (5): Council Member Francis, Council Member Pease, Council Member Shoresman, Vice Mayor Marx, and Mayor Stewart
CARRIED (5 to 0)
Pulled from Consent by Mayor Stewart.

5.k AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER AND THE COMMUNITY

DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR TO ADMINISTRATIVELY SUSPEND

ENFORCEMENT OF SAN LUIS OBISPO MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER

8.11, CONSISTENT WITH THE NINTH COURT OF APPEAL RULING

Page 15 of 351 ends

6 Council Member Pease declared a conflict on this item and recused due to her employment in the building industry.

City Attorney Christine Dietrick provided a brief report and responded to Council questions.

Public Comments:

Eric Veium
Randy Carminati
---End of Public Comment---
Motion By Vice Mayor Marx
Second By Council Member Shoresman
To approve that there is a need to take immediate action to authorize the City Manager and Community Development Director to implement administrative measures currently necessary, or as subsequently may become necessary in response to subsequent judicial actions, to comply with the ruling of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal in California Restaurant Association v. City of Berkeley (Case No. 21-16278.)
Ayes (4): Council Member Francis, Council Member Shoresman, Vice Mayor Marx, and Mayor Stewart
Recused (1): Council Member Pease
CARRIED (4 to 0)
Motion By Vice Mayor Marx
Second By Council Member Shoresman
Adopt Resolution No. 11414 (2023 Series) entitled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, authorizing the City Manager and the Community Development Director to administratively suspend enforcement of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code Chapter 8.11, consistent with, and only as required by, the decision of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal Ruling in California Restaurant Association v. City of Berkeley and any subsequent judicial proceeding or order of the Court related to the timing and application of the ruling.”
Ayes (5): Council Member Francis, Council Member Pease, Council Member Shoresman, Vice Mayor Marx, and Mayor Stewart
Recused (1): Council Member Pease
CARRIED (4 to 0)

Page 16 of 351 ends

7 6. PUBLIC HEARING AND BUSINESS ITEMS

6.a AUTHORIZATION TO ADVERTISE ARTERIALS 2023 PROJECT,
SPECIFICATION NO. 2001001-1 (Estimated Time: 20 minutes) Public Works Director Matt Horn and CIP Program Administrative Manager Greg Cleary provided an in-depth staff report and responded to Council questions.

Public Comments:

None
---End of Public Comment---
Motion By Mayor Stewart
Second By Council Member Francis

1. Approve the project plans and specifications for Arterials 2023, Specification Number 2001001-1, for a total amount of $9,688,450; and

2. Authorize staff to advertise for bids; and

3. Authorize the City Manager to award the construction contract, including the Base Bid and any Additive Alternates, if the lowest responsible bid is within the publicly disclosed funding amount of $7,350,000; and

4. Authorize the City Engineer to approve Contract Change Orders up to the available project budget.

Ayes (5): Council Member Francis, Council Member Pease, Council Member Shoresman, Vice Mayor Marx, and Mayor Stewart
CARRIED (5 to 0)

6.b 2023-25 FINANCIAL PLAN – STRATEGIC BUDGET DIRECTION AND MAJOR CITY GOAL WORK PROGRAM REVIEW (Estimated Time: 150 minutes)
Finance Director Emily Jackson and Budget Analyst Natalie Harnett provided an in-depth staff report and responded to Council questions.

Public Comments:

David Baldwin
Bettina Swigger
---End of Public Comment---

Page 17 of 351 ends

8 Motion By Vice Mayor Marx
Second By Council Member Shoresman

1. Review the strategic budget direction report; and

2. Provide feedback and guidance to the City Manager regarding the recommended strategic budget direction and proposed budget allocations to commence budget adoption on June 6, 2023. Council provided the following feedback:
o To move forward with overall rough appropriation as outlined in the staff report and return on June 6, 2023 with the Financial Plan. o To scope an item around parking minimums for consideration at the June 6, 2023 City Council Meeting.

3. Authorize participation in the Excess Protection Program (EPP) for workers’ compensation coverage.
o Authorize the City Manager to accept a Memorandum of
Coverage (MOC), when finalized, from California Joint Powers Insurance Authority (CJPIA) for the Excess Protection Program for workers’ compensation coverage and execute any
necessary documentation to enroll in that program.
o Adopt Resolution No. 11415 (2023 Series) entitled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, to authorize and approve pooling of Self-Insurance through the Excess Workers’ Compensation Protection Program of the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority”. This includes contemporaneous execution by the Mayor of an
application for a Certificate of Consent, from the California Department of Industrial Relations, for the City to self-insure workers’ compensation liabilities.
o Authorize City Manager to execute an agreement with Athens Administrators for third-party administration services for the workers’ compensation program.

Ayes (5): Council Member Francis, Council Member Pease, Council Member Shoresman, Vice Mayor Marx, and Mayor Stewart
CARRIED (5 to 0)

Page 18 of 351 ends

9 7. LIAISON REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
Vice Mayor Marx updated the Council on the IWMA Board meeting. She also attended the ribbon cutting for the SLOMA lawn sculpture and Cal Poly Arts preview Reception.

Council Member Shoresman attended the Fire Recruit graduation and pinning ceremony, the SLOMA ‘Art after Dark’ event, and the Better Together Lunch.

Council Member Francis attended the following meetings: SLOCOG, CAPSLO orientation, and WRAC. She also attended the Fire Recruit graduation and pinning ceremony. Council Member Francis attended the Cal Cities Leaders’ Summit in Sacramento, which was paid for by the City.

Council Member Pease attended the SLOCOG meeting in Arroyo Grande and the WRAC meeting.

Mayor Stewart also attended the Cal Cities Leaders’ Summit in Sacramento, which was paid for by the City. She also attended the Fight for Trans Rights rally, spoke to the College Corp group, and attended the Cal Poly Open House.

8. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 10:25 p.m. The next Regular Meeting of the City Council will be held on May 2, 2023 with Closed Session at 4:30 p.m. in the Council Hearing Room and the Regular Meeting at 5:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo.

APPROVED BY COUNCIL: XX/XX/2023

Page 19 of 351 ends

Page 20 of 351 ends

Item 6c
Department: Community Development
Cost Center: 4003
For Agenda of: 5/2/2023
Placement: Consent
Estimated Time: N/A
FROM: Michael Codron, Community Development Director
Prepared By: Walter Oetzell, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: REVIEW OF A MILLS ACT HISTORICAL PROPERTY CONTRACT FOR THE CALL HOTEL AT 1703 SANTA BARBARA AVENUE (HIST-0616- 2022)

RECOMMENDATION
As recommended by the Cultural Heritage Committee, adopt a Draft Resolution entitled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, approving a Historic Property Preservation Agreement between the City and the owner of the Call Hotel at 1703 Santa Barbara Avenue (Application No. HIST-0616-2023)” under the terms described in the draft agreement.

POLICY CONTEXT
The recommended action on this item is supported by historical preservation policies set out in § 3.0 of the Conservation and Open Space Element of the City’s General Plan, particularly Program 3.6.2, regarding participation in financial incentive programs to encourage maintenance and restoration of historic properties, and also with the purpose of encouraging private stewardship of historic buildings through incentives, as provided by § 14.01.010 (B)(3) of the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance.

DISCUSSION
The owner of the Call Hotel at 1703 Santa Barbara
Avenue (Figure 1) submitted an application to
enter into a Mills Act historical property contract
with the City (see Draft Agreement, Attachment B).

Known variously as the Call Hotel, the Parkview
Hotel, and today as “The Establishment,” it has
served as a hotel and as a boarding house, its
current use. The applicant provides additional
Historical Background (see Request Letter,
Attachment C) for the building, describing its
relationship to former owners Silas and Nancy Call,
and an original location on Morro Street (near Palm). It was included on the Master Inventory of Historic Structures established in 1983 with the adoption of Resolution 5197.

Figure 1: The Call Hotel

Page 21 of 351 ends

Item 6c
The Mills Act Program
The Mills Act Program enables California cities to enter contracts with owners of historical property (as designated by a legislative body) to provide them with tax relief in exchange for an agreement to actively participate in the restoration and maintenance of historical resources. A Mills Act contract is effective for an initial 10-year period and then is automatically extended annually for an additional year, unless, after the initial term, either the City or the owner, by written notice, decides not to renew the contract. During the effective term of the contract, the property owner must improve, rehabilitate, or maintain the property consistent with the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, and provide visibility of the historical resource from the public right-of-way.

The Conservation and Open Space Element (COSE) of the General Plan describes the City’s goals and policies for the protection of cultural resources. It is the City’s policy that significant historic resources be rehabilitated and preserved (COSE § 3.3). Participation in the Mills Act Program is one of the means by which the City encourages the maintenance and restoration of historic properties (COSE § 3.6.2). A property must be on the City’s Master List of Historic Resources in order to be enrolled in the program.

Currently, there are 64 properties participating in the program, with the last request approved by the Council in July 2022.

Previous Council or Advisory Body Action
On March 27, 2023, the Cultural Heritage Committee reviewed this application for participation in the Mills Act Historic Preservation Program, and the terms of the draft preservation contract, and by a vote of 4-0-2 (two Commissioners absent, one vacancy), recommended that the Council approve the contract.

Public Engagement
Public notice of this hearing has been provided to owners and occupants of property near the subject site, and published in The New Times and posted on the City’s website. The agendas for this meeting have been posted at City Hall and online, consistent with adopted notification procedures for development projects.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Entering into a “Mills Act Contract” with the owners of historical property is not subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because it is not a project as defined in CEQA Guidelines § 15378 (Definitions – Project). Implementation of the Mills Act is a government fiscal activity which does not involve commitment to any specific project resulting in a potentially significant physical impact on the environment (CEQA Guidelines § 15378 (b) (4)).

FISCAL IMPACT
Budgeted: No Budget Year: 2022-2023
Funding Identified: No

Page 22 of 351 ends

Item 6c
Fiscal Analysis:

Funding
Sources
Total Budget
Available
Current
Funding
Request
Remaining
Balance
Annual
Ongoing
Cost
General Fund $N/A $ $ $
State
Federal
Fees
Other:

Total $ $0 $ $0
After the Mills Act contract is recorded, the County Assessor values the property by an income capitalization method, following guidelines provided by the State Board of Equalization. Because of the timing and the method of valuing the restricted property, it is difficult to accurately estimate the tax savings and resulting fiscal impacts to the City under a particular historical property contract. However, the Office of Historic Preservation (California Department of Parks and Recreation) estimates that property owners participating in the program may realize property tax savings of between 40% and 60% each year for newly improved or purchased older properties. The City’s property tax revenue will be reduced accordingly.

ALTERNATIVES

1. Decline to enter into a Mills Act Historical Property Contract with the property owner. This alternative is not recommended. The contract provides a tax relief incentive that is a tool for achieving the City’s goals for historical preservation.

2. Continue consideration of the request to a future date for additional information or discussion

ATTACHMENTS
A - Draft Resolution approving a Mills Act Contract for 1703 Santa Barbara Ave.

B - Draft Historic Property Preservation Agreement (HIST-0616-2022) C - Applicant Request Letter (HIST-0616-2022)

Page 23 of 351 ends

Page 24 of 351 ends

RESOLUTION NO. ____ (2023 SERIES)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS

OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A HISTORIC PROPERTY

PRESERVATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE
OWNER OF THE CALL HOTEL AT 1703 SANTA BARBARA AVENUE
(APPLICATION NO. HIST-0616-2023)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo is authorized by California Government Code § 50280 et seq. (known as “the Mills Act”) to enter into contracts with the owners of qualified historical properties to provide for appropriate use, maintenance, and rehabilitation such that these historic properties retain their historic characteristics; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted Resolution No. 9136 (2000 Series), establishing the Mills Act Historic Property Tax Incentive Program as an ongoing historic preservation program to promote the preservation, maintenance, and rehabilitation of historic resources through financial incentives; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo has designated this property as a historic resource of the City of San Luis Obispo pursuant to the policies in the City’s Historic Preservation Program Guidelines; and WHEREAS, The Lobby, LLC is the owner of that certain qualified real property, together with associated structures and improvement thereon, located on Assessor’s Parcel Number 003-552-006, located at 1703 Santa Barbara Avenue, in the City of San Luis Obispo, California, also described as The Call Hotel; and WHEREAS, the City and Owner, for their mutual benefit, now desire to enter into an agreement to limit the use of the property to prevent inappropriate alterations and to ensure that character-defining features are preserved and maintained in an exemplary manner, and repairs and improvements are completed as necessary to carry out the purposes of California Government Code, Chapter 1, Part 5 of Division 1 of Title 5, Article 12, Sec. 50280 et seq., and to qualify for an assessment of valuation pursuant to Article

1.9, Sec. 439 et. seq. of the Revenue and Taxation Code; and WHEREAS, the Cultural Heritage Committee of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on March 27, 2023, for the purpose of reviewing the proposed historic property preservation agreement, and recommended that the City enter into the agreement; and

Page 25 of 351 ends

Resolution No. _____ (2023 Series) Page 2
R ______
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on May 2, 2023, for the purpose of considering approval of the historic property preservation agreement, and has duly considered all evidence, including the record of the Cultural Heritage Committee hearing and recommendation, testimony of the applicant and interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendation by staff, present at said hearing; and WHEREAS, notices of said public hearings were made at the time and in the manner required by law.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:

SECTION 1. Findings. Based upon all the evidence, the City Council makes the following findings:
a) Conservation and Open Space Element Program 3.6.2 states that the City will participate in financial assistance programs such as property tax reduction programs that encourage maintenance and restoration of historic properties. b) The Call Hotel, located at 1703 Santa Barbara Avenue, has been recognized as a historic asset in the community by its designation as a Master List Historic Property by the City Council on August 16, 1983 (Resolution 5197). As such, maintaining the structure will meet the City’s goals for historic preservation listed in policies 3.3.1 through 3.3.5 of the Conservation and Open Space Element.

SECTION 2. Environmental Determination. The City Council has determined that the above actions do not constitute a project, as defined in California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines § 15378, and are not subject to environmental review.

SECTION 3. Historic Property Preservation Agreement Approved. The City Council hereby approves the “Historic Property Preservation Agreement between the City of San Luis Obispo and the Owner of the Historic Property Located at 1703 Santa Barbara Avenue,” to be entered into by the City and the property owner, The Lobby, LLC.

SECTION 4. Community Development Director Authorized to Sign Agreement for City. The City Council hereby authorizes the Community Development Director to execute said agreement on behalf of the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo.

Page 26 of 351 ends

Resolution No. _____ (2023 Series) Page 3
R ______
SECTION 5. Recordation of the Agreement. No later than twenty (20) days after the parties enter into said agreement, the City Clerk shall cause the agreement to be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder of the County of San Luis Obispo.

On motion of Council Member ______________, seconded by Council Member ______________, and on the following roll call vote:

AYES:

NOES:

REFRAIN:

ABSENT:

The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this ______ day of __________ 2023. ___________________________
Mayor Erica A. Stewart
ATTEST:
________________________
Teresa Purrington
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, on _______________________. __________________________
Teresa Purrington
City Clerk

Page 27 of 351 ends

Page 28 of 351 ends

HISTORIC PROPERTY PRESERVATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN

THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO AND THE OWNER OF THE HISTORIC PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1703 SANTA BARBARA AVENUE, IN THE CITY AND THE COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA.

THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this________ day of ________ , 2023, by and between the City of San Luis Obispo, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as the “City”), and The Lobby, LLC (hereinafter referred to as “Owner”), and collectively referred to as the “parties.”
Section 1. Description of Preservation Measures. The Owner, their heirs, or assigns hereby agrees to undertake and complete, at their expense, the preservation, maintenance, and improvements measures described in “Exhibit A” attached hereto.

Section 2. Effective Date and Term of Agreement. This agreement shall be effective and commence upon recordation and shall remain in effect for an initial term of ten (10) years thereafter. Each year upon the anniversary of the agreement’s effective date, such initial term will automatically be extended as provided in California Government Code Section 50280 through 50290 and in Section 3, below.

Section 3. Agreement Renewal and Non-renewal.
a. Each year on the anniversary of the effective date of this agreement (hereinafter referred to as “annual renewal date”), a year shall automatically be added to the initial term of this agreement unless written notice of nonrenewal is served as provided herein.
b. If the Owner or the City desires in any year not to renew the agreement, the Owner or the City shall serve written notice of nonrenewal of the agreement on the other party. Unless such notice is served by the Owner to the City at least ninety (90) days prior to the annual renewal date, or served by the City to the Owner at least sixty (60) days prior to the annual renewal date, one (1) year shall automatically be added to the term of the agreement as provided herein.
c. The Owner may make a written protest of the notice. The City may, at any time prior to the annual renewal date, withdraw its notice to the Owner of nonrenewal. d. If either the City or the Owner serves notice to the other party of nonrenewal in any year, the agreement shall remain in effect for the balance of the term then remaining.

Section 4. Standards and Conditions. During the term of this agreement, the historic property shall be subject to the following conditions:

Page 29 of 351 ends

Historic Preservation Agreement
1703 Santa Barbara Avenue

Page 2 ends

a. Owner agrees to preserve, maintain, and, where necessary, restore or rehabilitate the building and its character-defining features, including: the building’s general architectural form, style, materials, design, scale, proportions, organization of windows, doors, and other openings; interior architectural elements that are integral to the building’s historic character or significance; exterior materials, coatings, textures, details, mass, roof line, porch, and other aspects of the appearance of the building’s exterior, as described in Exhibit A, to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director or his designee.
b. The building’s interior closely relates to the property’s eligibility as a qualified historic property. The Owner agrees to allow pre-arranged tours on a limited basis, to the approval of the Community Development Director or his designee. c. All building changes shall comply with applicable City specific plans, City regulations and guidelines, and conform to the rules and regulations of the Office of Historic Preservation of the California Department of Parks and Recreation, namely the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and Standards and Guidelines for Historic Preservation Projects. Interior remodeling shall retain original, character-defining architectural features such as oak and mahogany details, pillars and arches, special tile work, or architectural ornamentation to the greatest extent possible.
d. The Community Development Director shall be notified by the Owner of changes to character-defining exterior features prior to their execution, such as major landscaping projects and tree removals, exterior door or window replacement, repainting, remodeling, or other exterior alterations requiring a building permit.

The Owner agrees to secure all necessary City approvals and/or permits prior to changing the building’s use or commencing construction work. e. Owner agrees that property tax savings resulting from this agreement shall be used for property maintenance and improvements as described in Exhibit A. f. The following are prohibited: demolition or partial demolition of the historic building; exterior alterations or additions not in keeping with the standards listed above; dilapidated, deteriorating, or unrepaired structures such as fences, roofs, doors, walls, windows; outdoor storage of junk, trash, debris, appliances, or furniture visible from a public way; or any device, decoration, structure, or vegetation which is unsightly due to lack of maintenance or because such feature adversely affects, or is visually incompatible with, the property’s recognized historic character, significance, and design as determined by the Community Development Director.
g. Owner shall allow reasonable periodic examination, by prior appointment, of the interior and exterior of the historic property by representatives of the County Assessor, the State Department of Parks and Recreation, the State Board of Equalization, and the City as may be necessary to determine the owner’s compliance with the terms and provisions of this agreement.

Page 30 of 351 ends

Historic Preservation Agreement
1703 Santa Barbara Avenue

Page 3 ends

Section 5. Furnishing of Information. The Owner hereby agrees to furnish any and all information requested by the City which may be necessary or advisable to determine compliance with the terms and provisions of this agreement.

Section 6. Cancellation.
a. The City, following a duly-noticed public hearing by the City Council as set forth in Government Code Section 50285, may cancel this agreement if it determines that the Owner has breached any of the conditions of this agreement or has allowed the property to deteriorate to the point that it no longer meets the standards for a qualified historic property; or if the City determines that the Owner has failed to preserve, maintain, or rehabilitate the property in the manner specified in Section 4 of this agreement. If a contract is cancelled because of failure of the Owner to preserve, maintain, and rehabilitate the historic property as specified above, the Owner shall pay a cancellation fee to the State Controller as set forth in Government Code Section 50286, which states that the fee shall be 12 ½% of the full value of the property at the time of cancellation without regard to any restriction imposed with this agreement.
b. If the historic building is acquired by eminent domain and the City Council determines that the acquisition frustrates the purpose of the agreement, the agreement shall be cancelled and no fee imposed, as specified in Government Code Section 50288.

Section 7. Enforcement of Agreement.
a. In lieu of and/or in addition to any provisions to cancel the agreement as referenced herein, the City may specifically enforce, or enjoin the breach of, the terms of the agreement. In the event of a default, under the provisions to cancel the agreement by the Owner, the City shall give written notice of violation to the Owner by registered or certified mail addressed to the address stated in this agreement. If such a violation is not corrected to the reasonable satisfaction of the Community Development Director or designee within thirty (30) days thereafter; or if not corrected within such a reasonable time as may be required to cure the breach or default of said breach; or if the default cannot be cured within thirty (30) days (provided that acts to cure the breach or default may be commenced within thirty (30) days and shall thereafter be diligently pursued to completion by the Owner); then the City may, without further notice, declare a default under the terms of this agreement and may bring any action necessary to specifically enforce the obligations of the Owner growing out of the terms of this agreement, apply to any court, state or federal, for injunctive relief against any violation by the owner or apply for such relief as may be appropriate. b. The City does not waive any claim of default by the Owner if the City does not enforce or cancel this agreement. All other remedies at law or in equity which are not otherwise provided for in this agreement or in the City’s regulations governing historic properties are available to the City to pursue in the event that there is a breach or default under this agreement. No waiver by the City of any breach or default under this agreement shall be deemed to be a waiver of any other subsequent breach thereof or default herein under. c. By mutual agreement, City and Owner may enter into mediation or binding arbitration to resolve disputes or grievances growing out of this contract.

Page 31 of 351 ends

Historic Preservation Agreement
1703 Santa Barbara Avenue

Page 4 ends

Section 8. Binding Effect of Agreement. The Owner hereby subjects the historic building located at 1703 Santa Barbara Avenue, San Luis Obispo, California, Assessors Parcel Number 003-556-006, to the covenants, reservations, and restrictions as set forth in this agreement. The City and Owner hereby declares their specific intent that the covenants, reservations, and restrictions as set forth herein shall be deemed covenants running with the land and shall pass to and be binding upon the Owner’s successors and assigns in title or interest to the historic property.

Every contract, deed, or other instrument hereinafter executed, covering or conveying the historic property or any portion thereof, shall conclusively be held to have been executed, delivered, and accepted subject to the covenants, reservations, and restrictions expressed in this agreement regardless of whether such covenants, restrictions, and reservations are set forth in such contract, deed, or other instrument.

Section 9. Notice. Any notice required by the terms of this agreement shall be sent to the address of the respective parties as specified below or at other addresses that may be later specified by the parties hereto.

To City: Community Development Director
City of San Luis Obispo
919 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
To Owner: The Lobby, LLC
1243 Palm St
San Luis Obispo CA 93401
Section 10. General Provisions.
a. None of the terms, provisions, or conditions of this agreement shall be deemed to create a partnership between the parties hereto and any of their heirs, successors, or assigns, nor shall such terms, provisions, or conditions cause them to be considered joint ventures or members of any joint enterprise.
b. The Owner agrees to hold the City and its elected and appointed officials, officers, agents, and employees harmless from liability for damage or from claims for damage for personal injuries, including death, and claims for property damage which may arise from the direct or indirect use or activities of the Owner, or from those of their contractor, subcontractor, agent, employee, or other person acting on the Owner’s behalf which relates to the use, operation, maintenance, or improvement of the historic property. The Owner hereby agrees to and shall defend the City and its elected and appointed officials, officers, agents, and employees with respect to any and all claims or actions for damages caused by, or alleged to have been caused by, reason of the Owner’s activities in connection with the historic property, excepting however any such claims or actions which are the result of the sole negligence or willful misconduct of City, its officers, agents, or employees.

Page 32 of 351 ends

Historic Preservation Agreement
1703 Santa Barbara Avenue

Page 5 ends

c. This hold harmless provision applies to all damages and claims for damages suffered, or alleged to have been suffered, and costs of defense incurred, by reason of the operations referred to in this agreement regardless of whether or not the City prepared, supplied, or approved the plans, specifications, or other documents for the historic property.
d. All of the agreements, rights, covenants, reservations, and restrictions contained in this agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the parties herein, their heirs, successors, legal representatives, assigns, and all persons acquiring any part or portion of the historic property, whether by operation of law or in any manner whatsoever.
e. In the event legal proceedings are brought by any party or parties to enforce or restrain a violation of any of the covenants, reservations, or restrictions contained herein, or to determine the rights and duties of any party hereunder, the prevailing party in such proceeding may recover all reasonable attorney’s fees to be fixed by the court, in addition to court costs and other relief ordered by the court. f. In the event that any of the provisions of this agreement are held to be unenforceable or invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, or by subsequent preemptive legislation, the validity and enforceability of the remaining provisions, or portions thereof, shall not be affected thereby.
g. This agreement shall be construed and governed in accordance with the laws of the State of California.

Section 11. Amendments. This agreement may be amended, in whole or in part, only by a written recorded instrument executed by the parties hereto.

Section 12. Recordation and Fees. No later than twenty (20) days after the parties enter into this agreement, the City shall cause this agreement to be recorded in the office of the County Recorder of the County of San Luis Obispo. Participation in the program shall be at no cost to the Owner; however the City may charge reasonable and necessary fees to recover direct costs of executing, recording, and administering the historical property contracts.

Page 33 of 351 ends

Historic Preservation Agreement
1703 Santa Barbara Avenue

Page 6 ends

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and Owner have executed this agreement on the day and year written above.

OWNER
____________________________________ ______________________________ Name: Date
Lobby, LLC

CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
____________________________________ ______________________________ Michael Codron Date
Community Development Director
ATTEST:
___________________________________
Teresa Purrington, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
____________________________________
J. Christine Dietrick, City Attorney

ALL SIGNATURES MUST BE NOTARIZED

Page 34 of 351 ends

Historic Preservation Agreement
1703 Santa Barbara Avenue

Page 7 ends

EXHIBIT A

MAINTENANCE AND IMPROVEMENT MEASURES FOR THE CALL HOTEL LOCATED AT 1703 SANTA BARBARA AVENUE, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA

1. Owner shall preserve, maintain, and repair the historic building, including its characterdefining architectural features in good condition, to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director or designee, pursuant to a Mills Act Preservation Contract with the City of San Luis Obispo for property located at 1703 Santa Barbara Avenue. Character-defining features shall include, but are not limited to: roof, eaves, dormers, trim, porches, walls and siding, architectural detailing, doors and windows, window screens and shutters, balustrades and railings, foundations, and surface treatments.

2. Owner agrees to make the following improvements and/or repairs during the term of this contract but in no case later than ten (10) years from the contract date. All changes or repairs shall be consistent with the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties:
 Termite tenting and pest treatment;
 Foundation improvements, including additional supports, correction of settling, repair of cripple walls (including installation of shear walls) where necessary;  Repair or reconstruction, as appropriate, of the rear stairway;  Repair or replacement, as appropriate, of original double-hung windows that are not functional;
 Repair or reconstruction, as appropriate, of two brick chimneys;  Repair of water damage to interior surfaces;
 Repair of cracking in walls (due to shifting of the building)  Repair of the historic building façade;
 General maintenance and upkeep, including painting and gutter repair or replacement.

OWNER
____________________________________ ______________________________ Name: Date
The Lobby, LLC

Page 35 of 351 ends

Historic Preservation Agreement
1703 Santa Barbara Avenue

Page 8 ends

A Notary Public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.

State of California }
County of San Luis Obispo }
On __________________ , before me ______________________________________________ , Date Name and Title of the Officer
personally appeared, ____________________________________________________________ , Name of Signer(s)
who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.

I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

WITNESS my hand and official seal.

Signature __________________________________
Signature of Notary Public Place Notary Seal Above
A Notary Public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.

I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

WITNESS my hand and official seal.

Signature __________________________________
Signature of Notary Public Place Notary Seal Above

Page 36 of 351 ends

Page 37 of 351 ends

Page 38 of 351 ends

Page 39 of 351 ends

Page 40 of 351 ends

Page 41 of 351 ends

Page 42 of 351 ends

Item 6d
Department: Administration
Cost Center: 1005
For Agenda of: 5/2/2023
Placement: Consent
Estimated Time: N/A
FROM: Greg Hermann, Deputy City Manager
Prepared By: Chris Read, Sustainability Manager
SUBJECT: RECEIVE THE CARBON NEUTRAL CITY FACILITIES PLAN, FLEET

ELECTRIFICATION ROADMAP, AND THE ELECTRIC VEHICLE

INFRASTRUCTURE ROADMAP

RECOMMENDATION
Receive and file the Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan, the Fleet Electrification Roadmap, and the Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Roadmap.

POLICY CONTEXT
 Land Use Element of the General Plan Policy 9.4 – Climate Action Plan - The City shall maintain and implement its Climate Action Plan to reduce community and municipal GHG emissions consistent with State laws and objectives.  Resolution No. 11159 (2020 Series) adopted the Climate Action Plan for Community Recovery with the goal of community carbon neutrality by 2035 and a sub-goal of carbon-neutral municipal operation by 2030.  Resolution No. 11263 (2021 Series) adopted the Lead by Example Plan which operationalizes the municipal operations sub-goal and includes sector specific goals to eliminate fossil fuel use in buildings, facilities, equipment, and vehicles.  Resolution No. 11381 (2022 Series) adopted the 2023-27 Climate Action Work Program, which reaffirmed the communitywide and municipal climate action goals.

DISCUSSION
Background
In 2021, Council adopted Lead by Example: A Plan for Carbon Neutral City Operations.

The plan lays out specific tasks required to achieve Council’s goal of carbon-neutral municipal operations by 2030. The goal includes sector-specific work in the area of building and facility energy use (electricity and natural gas), fleet vehicles, solid and organic waste, land conservation and management, and employee commute. Figure 1 provides Building, Facility, and Fleet goals and objectives.1

1 On April 18, 2023, City Council adopted Resolution No. 11414 (2023 series), which authorizes the City Manager and Community Development Director to administratively suspend enforcement of it’s all electricnew building requirements as it seeks additional information about a recent court ruling on the topic. The ruling does not affect the City’s ability to manage its own buildings and fleet.

Page 43 of 351 ends

Item 6d
Figure 1. Lead by Example Buildings, Facilities, and Fleet Goals and Objectives In the first Lead by Example work plan period, which coincided with the 2021-23 Financial Plan, the City pursued early “no regrets” actions including the first purchase of light duty electric vehicles, LED lighting retrofits, procurement of electric buses, installation of a battery backup system at the Water Treatment Plant, introduction of green waste bins to City office spaces, and a pilot application of compost to Johnson Ranch for purposes of carbon sequestration, among many others.

Concurrent with these actions, the City has also been completing strategic plans to identify specific steps required to achieve Lead by Example’s goals.2 Funded through the 2021-23 CIP and operational budget, and supplemented with grant funding from Central Coast Community Energy, the City spent the last 18 months completing strategic planning roadmaps that provide direction for action through 2030 in the two largest emissions sectors in the City’s operations: energy use in buildings and facilities (42% of total emissions) and fleet (41% of total emissions).

Key Findings
The intent of this Report is to inform Council that building and fleet decarbonization work is progressing and to provide a condensed summary of key findings from each roadmap.

Attachments A-C provide the full list of findings and supporting analysis. Key findings identified by the technical consulting team include:3

2 The enabling Lead by Example actions for these strategic plans are Energy 1.1 complete Energy Master Plan to develop the approach to decarbonization, comprehensive energy management, and efficiency across buildings and facilities; and Fleet 1.4 Advocate to Central Coast Community Energy (3CE) to fund a fleet electrification plan to advance the goal and objectives of the Fleet sector. 3 The roadmaps were authored by a technical consulting team that includes Glumac, Optony Inc., and EcoShift Consulting. Glumac has recently completed similar building and facility decarbonization planning for for the entire University of California system, and Optony has completed fleet planning work for agencies throughout the Bay Area.

Page 44 of 351 ends

Item 6d
Facility and Building Electrification Roadmap
 The City of SLO’s municipal facilities are well maintained and efficient. The City has established best practices around preventative maintenance and has invested in various energy efficiency projects to limit the City’s environmental impact and reduce operational costs.
 The most significant use of natural gas is at the SLO Swim Center which comprises approximately 69% of the use in the studied facilities.4  Including emissions from electricity in the baseline year, five facilities contributed 77% of total greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions; the SLO Swim Center alone contributed 51% of the total facility related GHG emissions.  By using existing Federal funding and City funds in the 2023-25 Financial Plan, along with a dedicated amount of approximately $78,000 in 2025-26, $765,000 in 2026-27, and $550,000 per year for fiscal years 2025-27 through 2030-31, the City can achieve its building electrification goals, but will require additional external grant funding.
 The project team designated the SLO Swim Center, City Hall, and Fire Station 1 as “priority facilities”. The priority projects include supplemental heat pump pool heating, heat pump mechanical systems, heat pump domestic hot water, LED lighting upgrades, and improvements to support an eventual microgrid.

Fleet Electrification Roadmap
 A total of 211 out of 325 vehicles provided by the City were studied for electrification.5 Of this subset, 76% can be readily replaced with equivalent electric vehicles that are currently commercially available, predominantly sedans, SUVs, and pickup trucks.
 Vehicle range is not a barrier to vehicle electrification for the City of San Luis Obispo. For 100% of the vehicles assessed, the recommended EV option could satisfy 100% of the existing vehicle’s historical driving behavior.  Including known incentives and rebates, electrifying the subset of these vehicles coming due for replacement from 2022 to 2030 will save approximately $900,000 in total cost of ownership, a 6% savings relative to purchasing and operating fossil fuel vehicles.
 Availability of medium- and heavy-duty electric vehicles is a challenge limiting the City’s ability to electrify its entire fleet.
 The Fleet Electrification Roadmap notes that Police Department fleet vehicles account for 24% of the City’s total fleet assets and 36% of total fleet emissions and are therefore a key opportunity for emissions reduction. While near term opportunities exist for potential transition of administration vehicles, patrol vehicles have specific operational needs associated with vehicle performance and associated charging infrastructure and will not be a target for transitioning to allelectric in the near term.

4 Note that the study does not include Utilities Enterprise Fund facilities (the Water Resource Recover Facility and Water Treatment Plant.)
5 This amount excludes non-street legal assets (trailers, generators, etc.), vehicles that are already electric, and certain heavy-duty vehicles such as fire engines.

Page 45 of 351 ends

Item 6d
 The electric vehicle market is highly dynamic. While purchase prices and recommended vehicle models included in this report have high levels of certainty through 2025, supply chain and manufacturer delays are already impacting procurement timelines.

Fleet Charging Infrastructure
 Three sites were identified by the City as priority sites that will support a majority of vehicle electrification over the next two decades. Those priority sites are the Corp Yard, 919 Palm Parking Garage, and Fire Station 1, which currently serve as domicile facilities for the majority of the fleet.
 Analysis suggests that across all sites 31 Level 2 ports and 6 Level 3 ports would be required by 2025 and an incremental 37 Level 2 ports and 15 Level 3 ports by 2030.
 Including known incentives, the installation of recommended charging infrastructure is estimated to cost approximately $2.8 million through 2030.

Although the City has programmed investments for this work in its Capital Improvement Program, the City will require additional outside grants and rebates to achieve its infrastructure needs.
 The City could research alternative project development approaches, such as a third-party owner and operator models, to reduce capital cost requirements.

Next Steps
The key findings and detailed roadmaps provided in Attachments A-C show that the technology exists to make substantial progress toward Council’s Lead by Example buildings, facilities, and fleet goals. The roadmaps provide recommended implementation scenarios and staff is already completing early tasks.

Although the final roadmaps provided in this Report are being presented to Council after the April 17, 2023, Strategic Budget Direction item, the roadmaps were substantially complete in early calendar year 2023 and directly informed the 2023-25 budget development process. Examples of projects in the proposed 2023-25 Financial Plan include design work for an electric heat pump water heater for the SLO Swim Center and installation of electric vehicle chargers for City fleet.

Deliverables provided for the roadmaps also include workbooks that allow staff to change the procurement scenarios based on resources available in any given year. Staff will use these tools to keep on track as it progresses toward the target year of 2030. As directed by the Lead by Example plan, staff will return to Council in early 2024 with a report on implementation progress.

Previous Council or Advisory Body Action
 December 2022 – Council adopts Climate Action Plan Volume 3: 2023-2027 Work Plan, which reaffirms and readopts the Lead by Example goal of carbonneutral municipal operations by 2030.  July 2021 – Council adopts Lead by Example: A Plan for Carbon Neutral Municipal Operations

Page 46 of 351 ends

Item 6d
 June 2021 – Council adopts the 2021-23 Financial Plan, which includes tasks to complete planning documents provided in this report.

Public Engagement
As a municipal operations document, the City primarily engaged internally, working with the Fleet Manager, Deputy Director for Maintenance Operations, and Facility Maintenance Supervisor to ensure that the reports reflected conditions on the ground.

The City has also connected with other facilities departments including the City of Santa Cruz and the San Luis Coastal Unified School District to learn and share findings.

CONCURRENCE
Public Works and Administration concur with this report.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The California Environmental Quality Act does not apply to the recommended action in this report, because the action does not constitute a “Project” under CEQA Guidelines Sec. 15378.

FISCAL IMPACT
Budgeted: Yes Budget Year: 2022-23
Funding Identified: Yes
Fiscal Analysis:

Funding
Sources
Total Budget
Available
Current
Funding
Request
Remaining
Balance
Annual
Ongoing
Cost
General Fund $120,000 $0 $0 $0
State
Federal
Fees
Other: $70,000
Total $190,000 $0 $0 $0
Roadmap funds ($190,000) were included in the 2021-23 Financial Plan ($120,000) and through a Central Coast Community Energy Grant ($70,000).6 Funds to implement projects identified in the roadmaps will be included in the proposed 2023-25 Financial Plan and through 2027-28 in the five-year Capital Improvement Program. Receiving and filing this report does not commit Council to the funding amounts contained in the roadmaps.

6 The $120,000 from the 2021-23 Financial Plan includes $100,000 for Capital Improvement Project #103 entitled “City Facility Energy Infrastructure Plan” and a one-time operational resource of $20,000 for a project entitled “Microgrid Feasibility Study.”

Page 47 of 351 ends

Item 6d

ALTERNATIVES
Council could decide not to receive and file the reports. This action is not recommended by staff because the reports provide a clear framework for achieving Council’s goals.

ATTACHMENTS
A - Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan
B - Fleet Electrification Roadmap
C - Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Roadmap

Page 48 of 351 ends

1 PRESENTED BY

CARBON NEUTRAL CITY

FACILITIES PLAN
March 2022

CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO

Page 49 of 351 ends

2 Table of Contents

1. Executive Summary_________________________________________________ 3

2. Background Information _____________________________________________ 9

2.1 City of San Luis Obispo.......................................................................................................9

2.2 Project Background...........................................................................................................11

3. City Facilities _____________________________________________________ 13

3.1 Existing Conditions ...........................................................................................................13

3.2 Energy Use & GHG emissions...........................................................................................17

4. Building Decarbonization ___________________________________________ 19

4.1 Projects and Recommendations ........................................................................................19

4.2 Building Decarbonization Projects......................................................................................21

4.3 Results.............................................................................................................................29

4.3 High Priority Projects.........................................................................................................30

5. Renewable Energy_________________________________________________ 41

5.1 Solar PV...........................................................................................................................41

5.2 Fire Station 1 Microgrid ........................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

6. Definitions _______________________________________________________ 56

7. Appendix ________________________________________________________ 58 Building Energy Assessments .................................................................................................58 CESA Training Materials.........................................................................................................58

Page 50 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 3

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

CARBON NEUTRAL FACILITIES PLAN
In 2020, the City of San Luis Obispo (SLO) took a bold
step in support of mitigating the impacts of climate
change by adopting the Climate Action Plan for
Community Recovery (CAP). This plan put forth a goal
to engage in projects and initiatives that contribute
positively towards achieving community carbon
neutrality by 2035 and municipal operations carbon
neutrality by 2030.

The Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan (CNCFP)
provides an implementation roadmap and strategic
decarbonization framework for the City to achieve the
goal of carbon neutral municipal operations. The
recommended strategies will reduce the City’s GHG
emissions and impact on climate change, hedge
against variable energy cost in the future, and improve city resilience of emergency operations during a public safety power shutoff (PSPF). The CNCFP enables the
City of SLO to Lead by Example and to inspire
community members to take action to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions in their own homes and businesses.

The CNCFP provides a comprehensive analysis of the City’s existing facilities and fleet of vehicles to identify key actions and projects that can reduce SLO’s carbon emissions and annual utility bills.

Specific strategies identified for the City include energy efficiency, building electrification, solar PV, microgrids and clean energy procurement. The fleet electrification roadmap is provided under the City Fleet Electrification Plan. The Consultant Team included energy, engineering and sustainability experts from Glumac, EcoShift (Blue Strike Environmental) and Optony.

EXISTING CONDITIONS
This carbon neutrality plan focuses on buildings maintained through the General Fund and does not include water and wastewater treatment buildings and infrastructure. Based on assessment of utility bills for the covered facilities over the last several years, the City consumes approximately 2,600,000 kWh of electricity and 90,000 therms of natural gas annually, resulting in 1,068 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent emissions (MTCO2e).

The City of San Luis Obispo’s municipal facilities are well maintained and efficient facilities. The City has established best practices around preventative maintenance and has invested in various energy efficiency projects to limit the City’s environmental impact and reduce operational costs. The facilities and maintenance team has proactively converted fluorescent lighting fixtures to LED over time at buildings across the City.

Energy
Efficiency
Building
Electrification
Electric
Vehicles
Solar PV
Microgrids
Clean Energy
Procurement
Carbon
Neutral City
Facilities
Plan
Figure 1: City of SLO Carbon Neutral Strategies

Page 51 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 4
The majority of San Luis Obispo’s buildings utilize natural gas for space and domestic hot watery systems. Converting these existing fossil fuel heating systems to all-electric alternatives will be important strategy for the City to achieve carbon neutrality. The most significant use of natural gas is at the SLO Swim Center which comprises approximately 69% of the City’s use, within General Fund facilities. Figure 2 shows a breakdown in GHG emissions of city owned facilities based on utility use and emissions factors in 2019. This year was selected as the baseline year in the CNCFP since it represented typical operation before the impacts of COVID 19 on City operations. The top 5 facilities contributed 77% of GHG emissions, with the SLO Swim Center alone contributed 42% of the total facility related GHG emissions.

Figure 2: City of San Lui s Obispo Faciliti es GHG Emissions The SLO Swim Center, Fire Station 1 & 911 Dispatch Center, and City Hall were designated as “priority facilities” for the City to move forward with implementing building decarbonization projects in the immediate short term. These facilities generally had the highest natural gas use within the General Fund facilities. The priority projects include heat pump mechanical systems, heat pump domestic hot water, heat pump pool heating, LED lighting upgrades, and solar PV + microgrid. This will serve as an example and foundation for future electrification and efficiency projects with the City of San Luis Obispo, both at City owned facilities and within the greater local community.

SLO Swim Center
42%
Corporation Yard
9%
Police Station
7%
City Hall
7%
911 Dispatch Center
5%
836 Pacific Parking
5%
Fire Station 1
4%
Other Buildings
21%

Page 52 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 5

DECARBONIZATION STRATEGIES
Through building audits and meetings with facilities staff, various decarbonization projects and strategies were identified throughout the City. As electrical grids become cleaner in coming years and eventually move away from fossil fuels, the key driver in building decarbonization will be the elimination of natural gas systems in buildings. The following table includes recommended projects and potential impacts for the City of San Luis Obispo in four categories: Building Decarbonization, Renewable Energy, Microgrids and Electric Vehicles.

Table 1: City of San Luis Obispo Carbon Reduction Strategies Strategies
Recommendations &
Approach Projects Impact
Building
Decarbonization
Electrify all city buildings
by 2030 and continue to
invest in energy efficiency
upgrades
• LED Lighting Retrofits
• Heat Pump Water Heaters
• Space Heating Electrification
• Swim Center Electrification
• Induction Cooking
Fossil Fuel Free Buildings
Eliminate natural gas use to
reduce total building energy
by 40% and emissions by
360 MTE annually
Renewable
Energy
Implement priority solar PV
projects by 2024 and
procure 3CE Prime 100%
clean power as soon as
possible. Continue
exploring other locations
for solar PV
• Phase 1 Solar Installations
o Swim Center
o Bus Yard
o Fire Station 1
• 3CE Prime “Opt-up” Power
100% Clean Electricity
Produce 1,400,000 kWh
onsite with 832kW of solar
PV to offset around 50% of
electricity for City Facilities
Microgrids
Develop a clean energy
microgrid at Fire Station 1
and 911 Dispatch Center
• 131 kW solar PV
• 63 kW | 511 kWh BESS
• 300 kW backup diesel
generator (existing)
Resilient City Services
Provide at least 6 hours
during an outage without
reliance of diesel generators
Electric
Vehicles1
Transition all light duty
vehicles to a fully electric
fleet by 2030
• Near Term (2023-2025)
• Mid Term (2026-2030)
• Long Term (2030-2040)
All Electric Vehicles
Reduce gasoline and diesel
by 77,000 gallons and
emissions by 849 MTE
annually
1 Refer to the City of SLO Fleet Electrification reports for additional information.

Page 53 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 6

SCENARIO PLANNING
The project team evaluated various implementation scenarios to inform the City of San Luis Obispo ’s facility decarbonization investment strategy and timeline. The analysis was provided using the Climate and Energy Scenario Analysis (CESA) tool which quantifies the financial and environmental impacts from various combination of energy and carbon mitigation measures. The following implementation scenarios were evaluated for the City of San Luis Obispo.

1. Business-as-Usual (BAU)
Continued operation of existing campus systems

2. Scenario I: Baseline Implementation
Implement high priority projects by 2027, all other projects by 2032 Requires carbon offsets to achieve Council’s goals

3. Scenario II: 2030 Carbon Neutrality
Implement high priority projects by 2027, all other projects by 2030 (phased implementation)

4. Scenario III: 2030 Carbon Neutrality (Expedited)
Implement high priority projects by 2027, all other projects by 2030 (early implementation)

5. Scenario IV: 2028 Carbon Neutrality
Implement high priority projects by 2027, all other projects by 2028 The following image shows results of the scenario analysis from the CESA tool. These scenarios were compared against the City’s goal of being carbon neutral by 2030 and also a Science Based Target2 for Scope 1 and 2 GHG Emissions. Scenarios II, III and IV all meet the City’s carbon reduction goals and exceed the cumulative emissions reduction required for a science-based target. The option to procure 100% clean electricity through 3CE3 starting in either 2023 or 2030 was also evaluated.

Figure 3: City of San Lui s Obispo Faciliti es Scenario GHG Emissions 2 Science-Based Targets Initiative (SBTi) provide GHG emissions targets for organizations that will support reducing GHG emissions in line with the Paris Agreement goals to limit warming to 1.5°C. 3 Central Cost Clean Energy (3CE) is the local Community Choice Aggregator (CCA)

Page 54 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 7
All of the potential scenarios include transitioning to a fleet of electric vehicles as outlined in the City of San Luis Obispo Fleet Electrification reports. The remaining emissions after 2030 are from medium and heavy-duty vehicles that currently have no electric options.

It is recommended that the City of San Luis Obispo pursue an implementation roadmap that targets fully electrifying all buildings by 2030 as outlined in Scenario II. This scenario includes a strategy to implement high priority projects with significant GHG emissions reductions as soon as possible, and phasing other electrification projects between 2027 and 2030. This will meet the City’s carbon neutrality targets and fits best within the City’s current capital outlay. The resulting outcome will be a 52% reduction in cumulative GHG emissions through 2030 with electricity provided from 3CE Prime.

Table 2: City of San Luis Obispo Facility Decarboni zation Scenarios – GHG Emissions & Investment Cumulative GHG Emissions Building Decarbonization Projects Scenario 2021-2030
[MTE]
Reduction
[%]
Implementation
[years]
Avg Investment
[$ / yr]
Baseline 18,903
Business as Usual (BAU) 15,490 18% - -
Scenario I 11,992 37% 2025-2032 $530,000
Scenario II + 3CE Prime 9,116 52% 2025-2030 $700,000
Scenario III + 3CE Prime 8,873 53% 2025-2030 $675,000
Scenario IV + 3CE Prime 8,167 57% 2025-2028 $1,000,000
Scenarios III and IV offer a more expedited pathway for the City to be carbon neutral and should be considered if additional funding and project management resources become available. Additional funding sources could include the general fund or other external sources through the Inflation Reduction Action (IRA) and grant programs.

Figure 4: City of San Luis Obispo Facility Decarbonization Scenarios - Cum ulative GHG Emissions 18%
37%
52% 53% 57%
39% 42% 45%
Science Based Target
0 2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
18,000
20,000
Baseline BAU Scenario I Scenario II Scenario III Scenario IV GHG Emissions 2021-2030 [MTE]
Scenario Emissions 3CE Prime starting 2023

Page 55 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 8

RECOMMENDATIONS
It is recommended that the City moves forward with the implementation roadmap that targets fully electrifying all buildings by 2030, as outlined in Scenario II. This includes high priority projects with significant GHG emissions reductions as soon as possible and phasing other electrification projects over time. The following framework can be used to guide future capital planning efforts within the City.

Table 3: City of San Lui s Obispo - Facilities Decarbonization Framework

1. Increase and Expedite Building Decarbonization Investments 1A. Implement high priority building electrification project by 2027 $1.5M required – facilities include City Hall, Swim Center and Fire Station 1 1B. Complete LED retrofits at all City facilities by 2024 $0.25M required – phased implemented through CIP process 1C. Complete other building electrification and energy efficiency projects by 2031 $2.0M required – budget $700k per year from 2028-2030 (75% internal, 25% external)

2. Generate or Procure 100% Clean Electricity
2A. Implement priority solar projects in 2023 and 2024
Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) – no capital required, paid through operational savings 2B. Develop Fire Station 1 and Dispatch Center microgrid by 2025, pending grant funding $0.650M for battery energy storage (BESS) and microgrid controls – currently pursuing grant funding 2C. Procure 100% Clean Electricity through 3CE starting in 2023 $20k annual cost for carbon free electricity – reduce City emissions by 521 MTE 2D. Solicit proposal for sites with low priority solar projects Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) – no capital required, paid through operational savings

3. Transition City Fleet to Electric Vehicles
3A. Implement EV charging infrastructure projects, phased through 2030 $5.2M required – $1.7M between 2023-2025 and $3.5M between 2026-2030 3B. Phased procurement of electric vehicles for all suitable vehicles by 2030 $0.5M premium for EVs between 2023-2025 – EV is anticipated to have a lower total cost of ownership (TCO)

4. Establish Carbon Neutral Facility Management Policies 4A. Develop a staffing and implementation strategy, including new delivery options Review options including additional staff, outsourced Project Management / Construction Management services, design-build
3B. Establish standards for new construction design and ongoing maintenance Performance requirements, no new natural gas equipment replacement policy Recommendations provided in the CNCFP report are based on best available information and results should not be construed as absolute. The project deliverables were developed as a dynamic resource for SLO which will allow the City to adjust and adapt over time. It is recommended that SLO continually tracks their progress towards carbon neutrality on an annual basis and updates their CNCFP every four years, as outlined in the Lead by Example plan.

Page 56 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 9

2. BACKGROUND INFORMATION

2.1 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO

CITY OVERVIEW
San Luis Obispo is located in California’s Central Coast Region. San Luis Obispo is situated just eight miles from the ocean and is home to California Polytechnic State University. The City owns and operates a variety of buildings that are critical to a functional and resilience of San Luis Obispo. This study focuses on buildings maintained through the General Fund and thus does not include water and wastewater treatment buildings and infrastructure. Figure 5 provides a map of General Fund facilities that were included in this study.

Figure 5: City of San Lui s Obispo General Fund Facilities

Page 57 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 10

CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO POLICY
Several City policies form the basis of the Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan. These include the Climate Action Plan for Community Recovery, Lead by Example, and the 2021-2023 Financial Plan and Capital Improvement Plan. The City of San Luis Obispo 2021-23 Goals include climate action strategies to “proactively address the climate crisis, continue to update and implement the Climate Action Plan for carbon neutrality, including preservation and enhancement of open space and the urban forest, alternative and sustainable transportation, and planning and implementation for resilience.”

CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FOR COMMUNITY RECOVERY
In 2020, the City took a bold step in fighting climate change by adopting the Climate Action Plan for Community Recovery (CAP). This plan built upon the existing Climate Action Plan established in 2012 and put forth a goal of community carbon neutrality by 2035. The CAP is built upon 6 pillars, which are shown in the figure below. Pillar 1, Lead by Example is what drives the CNCFP. A plan update was adopted by City Council in December of 2022 that reaffirms and recommits to these goals.

Figure 6: Foundational 6 Pillars of the Climate Action Plan for Community Recovery.

Page 58 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 11
LEAD BY EXAMPLE: A PLAN FOR CARBON NEUTRAL MUNICIPAL OPERATIONS Pillar 1 of the CAP is Lead by Example. This pillar goes one step further than the overall community carbon neutrality by 2035 goal and defines a goal of carbon neutral government operations by 2030.

This pillar was operationalized as the Lead by Example plan, which was adopted by Council in 2021 and includes more detailed goals for municipal operations including energy use in buildings, city owned vehicles, and solar power purchase. Through Lead by Example, the City can inspire community members to take action within their own homes and habits to reduce carbon.

2.2 PROJECT BACKGROUND
In the Winter of 2021, the City engaged a team of consultants, Glumac | Optony | EcoShift, to develop a Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan (CNCFP) for the existing municipal building stock and vehicle fleet. The intent of the CNCFP project was to develop a strategic roadmap for decarbonization measures to not only reduce the City’s Scope 1 & 2 emissions, but also shelter the City from the variable cost of energy and risk of power shutoffs, adopt new technology and Lead by Example.

Through Leading by Example, the City hopes to inspire community members to take action towards carbon reduction in their own lives. The findings of this CNCFP will help guide San Luis Obispo’s energy strategy over the next eight years as the City works toward becoming carbon neutral by 2030.

This engineering study includes a robust assessment of City energy sources, demands, and utilization to identify clean energy alternatives and strategies to improve the efficiency of building operations.

Through the course of their investigation, the consultant team identified numerous clean energy projects to reduce GHG emissions.

The CNCFP translated the identified energy efficiency and electrification projects into a planning tool that supported the development of a strategic roadmap for GHG reductions to achieve carbon neutrality. To accomplish this, the consultant team developed a custom-built climate and energy scenario analysis (CESA) tool to inform their recommendations for pursuing various GHG emission reduction projects. After the site investigation and energy analysis phases of the project were completed, all the clean energy projects identified across the City were input to the CESA tool.

The CESA tool allows for users to develop multiple clean energy implementation plans to reach the City’s 2030 carbon neutrality target. As users are developing these prospective implementation scenarios, the tool continually tracks key metrics such as energy savings, emissions reductions, total project cost, net present value, etc. The CNCFP team developed multiple potential strategic energy plan scenarios and conducted a sensitivity analysis in the tool to help shape and guide the recommendation outlined in this report. The scenario analysis tool was developed to be a dynamic asset that will be turned over to City of San Luis Obispo’s sustainability department at the conclusion of the project for their continued analysis and tracking of progress.

The strategic energy recommendations and scenarios developed in the CNCFP report are based on the best available information provided to the consultant team at this time. The project deliverables were developed with the intention and ability to be a dynamic resource for San Luis Obispo as the City navigates towards their 2030 carbon neutrality target. The team understands San Luis Obispo is a dynamic, growing municipality and needs an energy strategy that is flexible and can adapt to an everchanging environment. It is recommended that San Luis Obispo continually tracks their progress

Page 59 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 12
towards carbon neutrality on an annual basis and updates their CNCFP every four years, as outlined in the Lead by Example plan.

ENERGY UTILITIES
The City of San Luis Obispo’s electricity is served by Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E), and natural gas is served by Southern California Gas Company (SoCal Gas). The Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) program in California also allows for the City to purchase electricity from Central Coast Clean Energy (3CE)4, the local CCA that serves communities in the central coast region from Santa Barbara to Santa Cruz County. When purchasing electricity from a CCA the power is still physically delivered to buildings by PG&E’s transmission lines.

In accordance with the California Power Source Disclosure Program5, utilities in California are required to disclose their electricity power mix and average annual GHG emissions factors. The following tables provide a summary of the energy generation mix of each electricity option and the average GHG emissions factor in 2021.

Table 4: 2021 Electri city Power Mix SCE vs Constellation PG&E
Base Plan
3CE
Choice
3CE
Prime
CA State
Average
Eligible Renewables 47.7% 38.4% 100.0% 33.6%
Biomass and Biowaste 4.2% 1.6% 0.0% 2.3%
Geothermal 5.2% 7.4% 0.0% 4.8%
Eligible Hydroelectric 1.8% 0.7% 0.0% 1.0%
Solar 25.7% 17.8% 50.0% 14.2%
Wind 10.9% 11.0% 50.0% 11.4%
Coal 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 3.0%
Large Hydroelectric 4.0% 11.8% 0.0% 9.2%
Natural Gas 8.9% 0.0% 0.0% 37.9%
Nuclear 39.3% 0.0% 0.0% 9.3%
Other 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.2%
Unspecified Power 0.0% 49.8% 0.0% 6.8%
GHG Emissions
[lbs Co2e/MWh] 98 494 0 456
The source of electricity has significant impact on GHG emissions from City facilities. The CNCFP used emissions factors from 3CE Choice, which algins with CA state averages, in this study for the current electricity supply. 3CE has an adopted policy and is on track to achieve 100 percent carbon free resources by 2030, which would lower the effective GHG emissions coefficient to 0 lbs CO2e/MWh. California as a state has committed to having 100% carbon free power by 2045 which will be required for all utilities. Through 3CE the City of San Luis Obispo has the ability to purchase 100% carbon free electricity now to reduce their GHG emissions and meet their climate action goals. 4 https://3cenergy.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/2021-3CE-Power-Content-Label-1.pdf 5 https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and-topics/programs/power-source-disclosure

Page 60 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 13

3. CITY FACILITIES

3.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS
The City of San Luis Obispo operates 31 different properties within the General Fund. This excludes the water treatment facilities and two historic structures. These buildings vary greatly in use, and include facilities such as City Hall, SLO Swim Center, four fire stations, a variety of parks, multiple offices, and community use centers. Buildings vary in age and condition. The Police Station has been included in this study, but is planned to be demolished and replaced within the planning horizon of this document.

Primary uses of electricity are lights, plug loads, fans, and cooling. San Luis Obispo’s Facilities Maintenance team has been proactive in their efforts to convert from older style fluorescent lighting fixtures to LED alternatives, with several buildings already 100% LED. Electric vehicle plug load is expected to be an increasing source of electricity load at City Facilities; this topic is addressed separately in the City Fleet Electrification Plan.

Primary uses of natural gas within San Luis Obispo’s buildings are heating, domestic hot water, cooking and pool heating. The majority of San Luis Obispo’s buildings have rooftop package units with direct expansion (DX) cooling and natural gas heat or indoor natural gas furnaces. Larger buildings such as the Police Station and City Hall have air handling units with natural gas boilers. With the exception of three facilities, all buildings have natural gas hot water heaters. The Fire Stations, Ludwick Center, and Senior Center have natural gas cooking equipment. The most significant use of natural gas is pool heating at SLO Swim Center. The natural gas pool heating boilers and domestic hot water system at the Swim Center comprise approximately 69% of the City’s natural gas use in General Fund buildings facilities.

The energy audit process for the CNCFP was a collaborative effort between the City and the consultant team. Walk through audits were performed at 20 City operated properties. Facilities not included in the audits included parks with restroom only facilities and low usage historical buildings such as Jack House and the residence at 610 Monterey. These audits were used to document existing conditions and identify energy efficiency and electrification projects. The major systems observed during the audits are described below. Each audit included the following:
> Review of as-built engineering drawings
> Building walkthrough, identifying any issues with HVAC or lighting > HVAC system identification and operability observed.
> Lighting system observation
> DHW system type observation
> Known building system issues recorded
> Building occupancy schedule and diversity of space types noted > Identification of potential sources of high energy usage, such as fountains, elevators, large computer labs, etc.

Page 61 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 14

BUILIDNG SUMMARY
The following table summarizes all City operated buildings included in this study. Building information was compiled through site assessments, as-built building records and drawings, as well as conversations with facilities staff. Additional building specific information is provided in the Building Energy Assessments summaries provided in the Appendix of this report.

Table 5: City of San Lui s Obispo Faciliti es wi th major systems identifi ed.

Facility Address HVAC System
Domestic
Hot Water
System
LED
Lighting
Other
Natural
Gas Uses
Art Center 1010 Broad Street
Baseball Stadium 900 Southwood Drive N/A N/A 0%
Bus Yard 29 Prado Road RTU - DX & Natural Gas Natural Gas 90% City Hall 990 Palm Street VAV AHU – NG Boiler & AC Chiller Natural Gas 100% Corporation Yard 25 Prado Road Natural Gas Furnace & Split System Natural Gas 70% Cooking, Car Wash
County/City Library 995 Palm Street Heat Pump Fan Coil N/A N/A County/City Museum 696 Monterey Street Natural Gas Furnace & DX AC Electric 20% Fire Station 1 2160 Santa Barbara
Street RTU - DX & Natural Gas Natural Gas 95% Cooking
Fire Station 2 136 North Chorro Natural Gas Furnace & Window AC Natural Gas 15% Cooking Fire Station 3 1280 Laurel Lane Natural Gas Furnace & Window AC Natural Gas 20% Cooking Fire Station 4 1395 Madonna Road Natural Gas Furnace & Window AC Natural Gas 20% Cooking Historic Adobe 466 Dana Street
Jack House 536 Marsh Street
Johnson Park 1020 Southwood Drive N/A N/A 5%
Laguna Lake Golf
Course
11175 Los Osos Valley
Road N/A N/A N/A
Laguna Lake Park 1395 Madonna Road N/A N/A 5%
Little Theater 888 Morro Street RTU - DX & Natural Gas Natural Gas 10% Meadow Park 2333 Meadow Street Natural Gas Furnace Natural Gas 50% Mission Plaza Broad and Monterey N/A N/A 35%
Mitchell Park 1415 Santa Rosa St N/A N/A 25%
Parking Structure 842 Palm Street N/A N/A 100%
Parking Structure 836 Pacific Street N/A N/A 90%
Parking Structure &
Office 919 Palm Street Water to Water Heat Pump Electric 90% Parks and Recreation
Office 1341 Nipomo Natural Gas Furnace & DX AC Natural Gas 30% Police – Auxiliary
Buildings 1016 Walnut Street Natural Gas Furnace & DX AC Natural Gas 20% Police Station 1042 Walnut Street VAV AHU – NG Boiler & AC Chiller Natural Gas 15% Recreation Center 864 Santa Rosa RTU - DX & Natural Gas Natural Gas 40% Cooking Residence 610 Monterey
Senior Center 1445 Santa Rosa Natural Gas Furnace & Heat Pumps Natural Gas 100% Cooking SLO Swim Center 900 Southwood Drive RTU - DX & Natural Gas Natural Gas 40% Pool Heat Throop Field 375 Ferrini Drive N/A N/A 0%
Utilities Offices 879 Morro Street RTU - DX & Natural Gas Electric 40% 911 Dispatch Center 1135 Roundhouse Ave Natural Gas Furnace w/ Cooling Coil Natural Gas 25%

Page 62 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 15

TYPICAL BUILDING SYSTEMS

HVAC SYSTEMS
Each facility has its own space conditioning system with no city operated central utility plant. Common HVAC equipment types at these buildings include rooftop packaged units (RTUs), natural gas furnaces/air handling units and DX cooling
equipment. Two of the larger buildings, City Hall and the Police Station, are served by variable volume air handling units (VAV AHUs). The VAV AHU at both facilities has cooling needs served by an air cooled chiller and heating served by a natural gas boiler.

DOMESTIC HOT WATER
With the exception of three facilities, all building domestic hot water needs are served by natural gas water heaters. Most water heaters appear to be in good condition with no early retirement expected.

Figure 7: Rooftop Unit (RTU) wi th Dx
Cooling + Natural Gas Heating – Ludwick
Recreation Center.

Figure 8: Typical natural gas water
heater at Ci ty Hall

Page 63 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 16

LIGHTING
The City has been proactive in its efforts to replace older style fixtures with LED alternatives. While most buildings still have some amount of LED lighting, the transition to LED has begun in many buildings. The Swim Center, Santa Rosa Park, Damon Garcia Sports Complex and Baseball Stadium have outdoor sport lighting systems. Of the four facilities, only the Swim Center has been upgraded to LED sport lighting.

MISCELLANEOUS SYSTEMS
Several buildings are outfitted with natural gas cooking equipment.

These buildings include the fire stations, Corp Yard, Senior Center and Recreation Center. SLO Swim Center has natural gas pool heating equipment.

Figure 9: Natural gas boiler for
pool heat at SLO Swim Center

Page 64 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 17

3.2 ENERGY USE & GHG EMISSIONS
The City of San Luis Obispo purchases power through PG&E and natural gas through SoCalGas.

Energy data was collected through a variety of sources, including CC-LEAP, Energy Star Portfolio Manager, and City utility bill records. Because of the a-typical usage patterns for much of the Covid 19 pandemic, a judgment call was made for each building regarding whether data from 2019, 2020 or 2021 should be used as representative. For buildings in which only partial data was available, data for missing months was projected based on building type, expected load profile, and historical data.

SLO Swim Center is the highest energy consuming facility and accounts for nearly 70% of the City’s natural gas usage and over 40% of the total energy use at general fund facilities. Natural gas demands are primarily driven by pool heating equipment, domestic hot water systems for the showers, and the constant volume heating units serving the Bath House building. Electricity usage is driven primarily by pool pumps and associated equipment. The City has taken steps towards reducing electricity at the pool by turning down the pool pumps overnight and installing LED underwater and sport lighting on the pool deck.

Table 6: City Facility Energy Use, Ordered Largest to Smallest Facility
Electricity
Usage - kwh
Natural Gas
Usage - therm Total Mbtu
Total Energy
Usage
SLO Swim Center 391,561 68,902 8,227 43.6%
Corporation Yard 246,671 8,493 1,692 9.0%
Police Station 231,060 6,324 1,421 7.5%
City Hall 233,788 4,936 1,292 6.8%
911 Dispatch Center 250,760 426 899 4.8%
836 Pacific Parking Structure 246,166 - 841 4.5%
Fire Station 1 153,351 1,553 679 3.6%
919 Palm Parking Structure and Office 160,342 - 548 2.9% 842 Palm Parking Structure 122,372 - 418 2.2%
Fire Station 3 41,708 2,237 366 1.9%
Bus Yard 61,175 1,364 345 1.8%
Ludwick Community/Recreation Center 52,422 659 245 1.3% Fire Station 4 35,946 1,183 241 1.3%
Fire Station 2 40,343 1,025 240 1.3%
Little Theater 57,689 129 210 1.1%
Parks and Recreation Office 32,580 968 208 1.1%
Senior Center 22,855 1,011 179 0.9%
Utilities Offices 26,027 757 165 0.9%
Laguna Lake Park 38,456 - 131 0.7%
Baseball Stadium 38,244 - 131 0.7%
Laguna Lake Golf Course 28,116 - 96 0.5%
County/City Library (shared facility 24,102 - 82 0.4%
County/City Museum (shared facility) 12,415 254 68 0.4% Art Center 16,415 - 56 0.3%
Meadow Park 10,535 43 40 0.2%
Police – Auxiliary Buildings 10,390 - 35 0.2%
Jack House 4,339 2 15 0.1%
Johnson Park 806 - 3 0.0%
Historic Adobe - - - 0.0%
Mission Plaza - - - 0.0%
Mitchell Park - - - 0.0%
Residence - - - 0.0%
Throop Field - - - 0.0%
Total 2,590,634 100,266 18,874

Page 65 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 18
Carbon emissions have been calculated based on building electricity and natural gas usage and applying eGRID and Energy Star Portfolio Manager emissions factors. Emissions track electricity and gas usage – the more energy a building uses the higher the emissions. As electrical grids become cleaner in coming years and eventually move away from fossil fuels, the key driver in building decarbonization will be the elimination of natural gas systems in buildings.

Figure 10: Ci ty Facilities Energy Emissions Breakdown – 2019 Baseline Annual emissions associated with the City’s building stock are driven primarily by the Swim Center electricity and natural gas usage. The next three drivers of city emissions are Corporation Yard, Police Station, and City Hall. The Police Station is planned to be demolished and rebuilt before 2030, and as such has been excluded from the carbon emissions reduction analysis.

Figure 11: GHG Emissions of Top 10 Carbon Intensive Ci ty Facilities 535.0 532.5
Natural Gas Emission
[Metric ton CO2]
Electricity Emission
[Metric ton CO2]
0 50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
GHG Emissions [MTE]
Natural Gas Emissions Electricity Emissions

Page 66 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 19

4. BUILDING DECARBONIZATION

4.1 PROJECTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

SUMMARY OF STRATEGIES
The carbon neutrality plan provided an assessment of existing building conditions and energy use to identify building decarbonization measures across all city owned facilities. Building projects were grouped into the following categories. Additional information for specific measures is outlined in sections below.

LED Lighting Retrofit
Retrofit of existing light fixtures with LED sources or installation of new LED fixtures with modern lighting controls. Potential savings of 50-70% of lighting electricity use.

Electrification – HVAC Systems
Convert existing natural gas heating system including rooftop units (RTUs) and furnaces to an all-electric heat pump heating system. Potential savings of 60-80% for heating energy use (kBtu).

Electrification – Domestic Hot Water Heaters
Convert existing natural gas water heaters to electric heat pump water heaters. Potential energy savings of 70-80% for water heating energy use (kBtu).

Electrification – Process Gas Equipment
Specialty electrification projects include replacement of gas equipment such as kitchen stoves/ovens and clothes dryers with electric alternatives.

Electrification – Pool Heating
Provide supplemental heat pumps to provide pool heating at the SLO Swim Center.

Potential energy savings of 60-70% (kBtu) for converting to heat pumps.

BUILDING APPLICATION
Outlined below are all the buildings audited and applicable building decarbonization measures to each building. For each EEM, calculations were completed to provide an estimated energy savings. Results from these calculations for each building are outlined in the Energy Audit Summary Reports provided in the Appendix.

Page 67 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 20
Table 7: Decarbonization Measures at Ci ty Facilities
City Building
LED LightingHydronic Heat PumpsHeat Pump RTU
w
Split System Heat PumpsHeat Pump Water HeaterElectric Clothing DryersElectric Induction CookingHeat Pump Pool Heating Art Center
Baseball Stadium Y
Bus Yard Y Y
City Hall Y Y
Corporation Yard Y Y Y Y Y
County/City Library (shared facility Y
County/City Museum (shared facility) Y Y
Fire Station 1 Y Y Y Y
Fire Station 2 Y Y Y Y Y
Fire Station 3 Y Y Y Y Y
Fire Station 4 Y Y Y Y Y
Historic Adobe
Jack House
Johnson Park Y
Laguna Lake Golf Course
Laguna Lake Park Y
Little Theater Y Y Y
Meadow Park Y Y Y
Mission Plaza Y
Mitchell Park Y
842 Palm Parking Structure
836 Pacific Parking Structure Y
919 Palm Parking Structure and Office
Parks and Recreation Office Y Y Y
Police – Auxiliary Buildings Y Y Y
Police Station
Ludwick Community/Recreation Center Y Y Y Y
Residence
Senior Center Y Y Y
SLO Swim Center Y Y Y Y
Throop Field
Utilities Offices Y Y
911 Dispatch Center Y Y Y Y

Page 68 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 21

4.2 BUILDING DECARBONIZATION PROJECTS
Energy efficiency and electrification projects were identified based on building use and current system types. Efficiency projects include those which do not involve fuel switching from natural gas to electricity. LED lighting upgrades fall in the efficiency category. Electrification projects involve switching a natural gas using technology to an electric alternative. Replacing natural gas furnaces with electric heat pumps would fall in the electrification category. Summaries of the various efficiency and electrification projects are below.

LED LIGHTING UPGRADES
EXISTING CONDITIONS:

The City’s Facilities team has retrofitted non-LED lighting fixtures (T5, T8, CFL) with new LED bulbs either partially or fully at many City facilities. These efforts should continue at the remaining buildings that have not been fully retrofitted.

PROJECT SUMMARY:

Interior fluorescent lamps and all exterior lamps should be replaced with equivalent LED lamps.

Fluorescent T8 and T5 lamps can be replaced with linear LED lamps in the same fixture, or a complete fixture replacement may be chosen for aesthetic reasons. Similarly, screw and plug-in CFL bulbs can be replaced directly by equivalent LED lamps. If controls are also required to be upgraded, then replacing the entire fixture may be the best option because many LED fixtures have advanced occupancy and daylighting controls fully integrated dimming capabilities.

Projects were identified based on feedback from facilities staff on what buildings have been fully converted to LED fixtures.

ENERGY SAVINGS:

Energy savings are typically 50% to 70% when fluorescent lamps are replaced by LEDs. For example, a typical T8 bulb uses 32W per bulb plus 10% to 15% additional energy by the ballast, versus 16W for an equivalent LED lamp. Additional cooling energy savings is also possible by reducing the heat load added the space from lighting fixtures. Energy savings were calculated based on existing lighting fixtures, proposed replacements and estimated space utilization.

COST CONSIDERATIONS:

LED lighting retrofit costs were estimated based on specific building fixtures. The average construction was generally estimated to be roughly $2.00 per square foot. This assumed that LED bulbs are installed by City staff in existing fixtures. If the City replaces the entire fixture and upgrades lighting controls the installation cost will be higher.

LED lighting retrofits result in additional operational and maintenance cost savings as fixtures have a longer expected useful life and do not need to be replaced as frequently.

Page 69 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 22

HYDRONIC AIR TO WATER HEAT PUMPS
EXISTING CONDITIONS:

The space conditioning needs of San Luis Obispo City Hall are currently served by a natural gas boiler and air-cooled chiller. The air-cooled chiller was recently installed in 2017 and is in excellent working condition. The natural gas boiler was installed in 1996 and is reaching the end of its useful life.

PROJECT SUMMARY:

There is opportunity to take a major step towards building electrification at City Hall by replacing the natural gas boiler with an all-electric air to water heat pump (AWHP) system. Refer to High Priority Project summaries for additional project specific information. With enough ventilation air it is possible to locate the new AWHP within the existing mechanical room, however, the project team recommends installing the AWHP on a concrete pad outdoors adjacent to City Hall and Little Theater.

A primary consideration for the building operations
team is the heating hot water (HHW) supply
temperature reset necessary with the new system.

The existing system was designed for a noncondensing boiler, requiring 180°F supply water.

AWHP function at lower supply water temperatures,
with a max of 149°F with a max set point ideally below
140°F or less. It has been shown that many variable
air volume (VAV) box coils and air handling unit coils
function are still capable of providing 90°F supply air temperature at lower hot water temperatures. The hot
water reset should be tested and verified through a
commissioning process as part of the AWHP
installation.

Heat pumps are less efficient at low load conditions. To reduce equipment cycling at low loads, the City may consider installing a buffer tank. The project team recommends providing space for a future buffer tank, with necessity determined by design engineer. The AWHP will have a primary pump and needs to be piped with a decoupler bridge to HHW distribution pumps (similar to a primary secondary arrangement). Building BMS needs to enable the AWHP and run pumps.

ENERGY SAVINGS:

Energy savings from replacement of local building natural gas boilers with AWHP have been calculated assuming the efficiency of existing boilers is 80-85% and the coefficient of performance of AWHP units is generally between 2.5 and 4.0, varying based on weather conditions.

COST CONSIDERATIONS:

The cost of the AWHP is just one factor to consider when evaluating the replacement of natural gas heating hot water boilers. The installation cost may vary widely between buildings depending upon the cost to remove the existing boilers, the scope of necessary modifications to heating hot water piping, and any upgrades that may be needed to the building’s electrical system. It is estimated that AWHPs will have a construction cost of $450 per MBH of heating.

Figure 12: AERMEC Heat Pump Unit

Page 70 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 23

HEAT PUMP ROOFTOP UNITS
EXISTING CONDITIONS:

Many buildings in San Luis Obispo are heated and cooled via constant volume packaged rooftop units.

These buildings include Bus Yard, Fire Station 1, Little Theater, Recreation Center, SLO Swim Center and Utilities Offices. Units are outfitted with natural gas heat and often a direct-expansion (DX) refrdidgerant cooling coil.

PROJECT SUMMARY:

Rooftop units (RTUs) with natural gas furnaces should be replaced with new high performance heat pump RTUs. The efficiency of older units is significantly worse than modern heat pump units. Typical cooling efficiency for existing RTUs is a SEER between 8.5-10, whereas for a new heat pump unit the expected cooling efficiency is up to 16 SEER. Existing RTUs have a heating efficiency around 80%, or a COP of 0.8. Heat pump RTUs have a heating efficiency between 2.5-4 COP.

Heat pump RTUs can usually be installed in the same location as the existing RTUs, but may require a curb adaptor in some instances. Converting from natural gas furnaces to electric heat pumps will not necessarily add electrical load if the existing RTUs have cooling. The electrical load is dependent on the equipment size and should be assessed on an individual unit basis. Existing RTUs should be replaced at the end of their expected life with the electric heat pump alternative. Early retirement of some good condition RTUs may be necessary to meet city decarbonization goals.

Figure 13: Packaged Heat Pump Rooftop Uni t (RTU).

ENERGY SAVINGS:

Energy savings of replacing natural gas furnaces in RTUs with heat pumps were calculated using the building energy models. Heat pump efficiency has coefficient of performance (COP) between 2.5 and

4.0, varying based on weather conditions, compared to 80% with existing furnaces.

COST CONSIDERATIONS:

Heat pump RTUs are a slight premium compared to existing natural gas fired units, roughly 10% more expensive for equipment costs. It is estimated that new heat pump RTUs will have a construction cost of $4,000 per ton of cooling.

Page 71 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 24

HEAT PUMP SPLIT SYSTEMS
EXISTING CONDITIONS:

Most buildings in San Luis Obispo are heated and cooled via forced air natural gas furnaces. These furnaces are often outfitted with a DX cooling coil as well. Buildings with natural gas furnaces include Fire Stations 2, 3, and 4, as well as Corporation Yard, County/City Museum, Meadow Park, Parks and Recreation Offices, and several others.

PROJECT SUMMARY:

Natural gas furnace systems should be converted to a heat pump split system. In buildings with recently replaced furnaces, it is possible to reuse the existing furnace as an air handling unit and replace the heating/cooling coils with a coil served by an outdoor heat pump unit. For older units it is recommended to replace the furnace entirely with a fan coil unit with coil served by an outdoor heat pump. Many buildings with existing furnaces have outdoor condensing units.

Typical cooling efficiency of new heat pump units is between 13-19 SEER, while the older units have a typical efficiency around 10 SEER. In heating mode new heat pump systems will have a typical efficiency between 2-3.5 COP, compared to a n efficiency around 85-90%, or 0.85-0.9 COP.

Converting from natural gas furnaces to electric heat pumps will add electrical load to buildings. Added load shall be verified by design engineer and compared to available electrical capacity.

The new outdoor heat pump may be installed on the equipment pad/location previously occupied by the condensing unit. Indoor fan coil may be placed in similar equipment location to the existing furnaces in either vertical or horizontal orientation. Basis of design units would be York HMH7.

ENERGY SAVINGS:

Energy savings of replacing natural gas furnaces with split system heat pumps were calculated using the building energy models. Heat pump efficiency has coefficient of performance (COP) between 2.5 and 4.0, varying based on weather conditions, compared to 80% with existing furnaces.

COST CONSIDERATIONS:

Heat pump RTUs are a slight premium compared to existing natural-gas fired units, roughly 10% more expensive for equipment costs. It is estimated that new heat pump split systems will have a construction cost of $3,900 per ton of cooling. Facilities with needed electrical upgrades will experience a higher estimated cost.

Figure 14: Outdoor Heat Pump Unit Figure 15: Indoor Ventilation Unit

Page 72 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 25

HEAT PUMP WATER HEATERS
EXISTING CONDITIONS:

Tank natural gas water heaters are standard at most City of San Luis Obispo buildings. Several buildings have instantaneous natural gas water heaters. At the individual building level water heaters are not typically a significant source of greenhouse gas emissions, but on aggregate they represent a significant portion of natural gas emissions.

PROJECT SUMMARY:

Natural gas hot water heaters should be electrified with air to water heat pump hot water heaters. Typical efficiency of a gas water heater is between 80%-90%, whereas a heat pump water heater will have efficiency between 2.5-4 COP, greatly increasing efficiency and eliminating reliance on natural gas. In some locations with very little domestic hot water load it may make sense to electrify using instant hot electric resistance hot water heaters.

Electric resistance water heaters and heat pump water heaters will add electrical load to buildings. Water heaters represent a relatively low portion of building energy usage, and it is unlikely there will be issues with insufficient building electrical capacity. Small commercial heat pump water heaters are similarly sized to small commercial natural gas water heaters, and in most cases can be installed in the same location, with a confirmation of airflow circulation for operation of an AWHP in that location.

The best solution for electrification will depend upon the water demand in the building, current hot water system and distribution, and any space constraints since a heat pump water heater does have minimum space requirements for installation.

ENERGY SAVINGS:

The typical efficiency of a gas water heater is between 80%-90%, whereas a heat pump water heater will have efficiency between 3-4 COP, greatly increasing efficiency and eliminating reliance on natural gas. Energy savings have been calculated assuming natural gas water heaters have a uniform energy factor (UEF) of 0.7 (the UEF accounts for stand-by energy losses) and new hybrid AWHP have a UEF of 2.8.

COST CONSIDERATIONS:

It was assumed that all water heaters would be replaced with heat pump units to provide more conservative cost budgets. It is estimated that new 100-gallon heat pump water heater will have a construction cost of $16,000 per 100-gallon water heater and $9,000 per 60-gallon water heater.

Figure 16: Hybrid Electri c
Heat Pump Water Heater -
AO Smith Voltex

Page 73 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 26

ELECTRIC INDUCTION COOKING
EXISTING CONDITIONS:

Fire stations, Ludwick Recreation Center, Senior Center and Corp Yard all have natural gas cooking equipment.

PROJECT SUMMARY:

Natural gas cooking appliances such as stovetops and ovens will need to be replaced with equivalent appliances that use electricity.

Cooking equipment has a relatively long equipment life, so cooking equipment may need to be retired before end of life to meet decarbonization goals.

ENERGY SAVINGS
Energy savings were estimated based on calculated cooking natural gas demand and estimated equipment efficiency. Natural gas stoves have a typical efficiency around 40%. If gas ranges have pilot lights, that efficiency drops to as low as 20%6. Induction cooking has an efficiency around 80%7.

COST CONSIDERATIONS
The upfront cost to purchase and operate electric appliances is slightly more expensive than gas appliances and often requires significant electrical upgrades. Costs were estimated on a project-byproject basis. Various incentives are available through the CA Foodservice Instant Rebates Program8 .
6 https://www.greenbuildingadvisor.com/article/efficient-cooking 7 https://www.aceee.org/files/proceedings/2014/data/papers/9-702.pdf 8 https://www.caenergywise.com/instant-rebates/
Figure 17: Electric Commercial Oven

Page 74 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 27

HEAT PUMP POOL HEATERS

EXISTING CONDITIONS
Competition pool heating at SLO Swim Center is currently served by two Lochinvar natural gas boilers.

The natural gas boilers were installed in 2012 and are in excellent working condition. Natural gas usage at SLO Swim Center accounts for approximately 42% of the city’s carbon emissions.

PROJECT SUMMARY
There is opportunity to take a major step towards building electrification and decarbonization by shifting load off the natural gas boilers with an electric air to water heat pump (AWHP) system. The natural gas boilers would remain functional for peak heating days and resiliency purposes, with approximately 75% of the total pool heating load (competition and therapy pool) shifted onto the AWHP system.

Boilers serving the competition pool should be electrified using a modular 1250 MBH air to water heat pump (AWHP) and associated piping and controls. The AWHP would be installed upstream of the existing heat exchanger (HX) and shift load off the natural gas boilers. Natural gas boilers would remain functional during peak conditions only and serve as a fully redundant back up. Hot water temperatures of the heating side HX loop would need to be reset from 145°F to 125-130°F.

Temperatures on pool side HX loop would remain. The project team recommends installing the AWHP on a concrete pad outdoors adjacent to the existing mechanical room housing the competition pool equipment.

A primary consideration for the building operations team is the integration and tie in with existing pool heating loop and equipment. The AWHP will be installed outside the existing mechanical room, meaning that the unit will have to be piped back to the main loop. While the recommendation is to integrate with the existing loop with no additional heat exchanger, there is an option to install a second heat exchanger and heating loop to provide the primary means of pool heat. Feasibility of both options is to be analyzed and verified by the design engineer.

An additional consideration is the operating temperature of the mechanical side (not pool side) of the HX. Standard AWHP function at lower supply water temperatures, with a max of 130°F and recommended max set point of 120°F or less (higher temperature options are available, but they are more expensive). The hot water reset is not anticipated to be a major concern for the Swim Center so long as the pool side temperature is maintained, however, it will require monitoring by the operations team to verify.

Phase 2 and 3 electrification at the Swim Center involve electrifying the therapy pool heating system and removing the peaking natural gas boiler at the competition pool. These phases will likely require in an upgrade to the facilities electrical service.

ENERGY SAVINGS:

Pool heating energy was estimated using metered data. Energy savings were estimated by assuming pool natural gas boilers have 80% efficiency and new AWHP have a COP of 4-5 to produce 115F supply hot water.

COST CONSIDERATIONS:

It is estimated that heat pump pool heaters will have a construction cost of $450 per MBH of heating.

Page 75 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 28

ELECTRIC CLOTHING DRYERS
Several San Luis Obispo facilities have natural gas clothing dryers. It has been confirmed that Fire Station 1 has a natural gas dryer and it is assumed that dryers at the other fire stations and Corp Yard are also natural gas, though this needs to be verified by the city. There are many commercially available electric clothing dryers. Design engineer is to verify that added electrical load is permissible with current building electrical service.

Page 76 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 29

4.3 RESULTS
Energy savings associated with each measure are captured within the CESA tool and reported for reach building in the Appendix of this report. The following chart shows the cumulative energy use and savings by implementing the recommended strategies. San Luis Obispo can reduce energy use in city facility by 41% by 2030 through building decarbonization measures and will see a 67% reduction with the proposed solar PV projections, procured through a power purchase agreement (PPA).

Figure 18: Total Energy Use (MMBTU) and Energy Savings (%) from Building Decarbonization Projects
3% 4% 4%
13%
39% 41%
67%
72%
0 2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
18,000
20,000
Total Energy (MMBTU)
Electricity Natural Gas

Page 77 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 30

4.3 HIGH PRIORITY PROJECTS

CITY HALL ELECTRIFICATION
Project Name: Heating Hot Water Electrification
Building: City Hall
Preliminary Budget: $450,000
Project Type: Deferred Maintenance, Electrification
Project Summary: The space conditioning needs of San Luis Obispo City Hall are currently served by a natural gas boiler and air-cooled chiller. The air-cooled chiller was recently installed 2017 and is in excellent working condition. The natural gas boiler was installed in 1996 and is reaching the end of its useful life.

There is opportunity to take a major step towards building electrification by replacing the natural gas boiler with an all-electric air to water heat pump (AWHP) system.

Recommendations: The project team recommends replacing the existing 760 MBH boiler with one (1) 600 MBH air to water heat pump. With enough ventilation air it is possible to locate the new AWHP within the existing mechanical room, however, the project team recommends installing the AWHP on a concrete pad outdoors adjacent to City Hall and Little Theater. With the AWHP system heating hot water supply temperatures will be reset from 180°F to 140°F. Temperature resets should be tested on VAV box and AHU coils to ensure existing coils are functional at 140°F.

Key Considerations: A primary consideration for the building operations team is the heating hot water (HHW) supply temperature reset necessary with the new system. The existing system was designed for a non-condensing boiler, requiring 180°F supply water. AWHPs function at lower supply water temperatures, with a max of 149°F and recommended max set point of 140°F or less. It has been shown that many VAV box coils and air handling unit coils function just as well at 140°F or below and are still capable of providing 90°F supply air temperature. The hot water reset is not anticipated to be a major concern for City Hall, however, it will require monitoring by the operations team to verify.

Heat pumps are less efficient at low load conditions. To reduce equipment cycling at low loads the City of San Luis Obispo may consider installing a buffer tank. The project team recommends providing space for a future buffer tank, with necessity determined by design engineer.

City Hall has a 120/208V electrical service. While electrical capacity is not expected to be an issue, the design engineer will need to verify with AWHP manufacturer the availability of 208V equipment.

The AWHP will have a primary pump and needs to be piped with a decoupler bridge to HHW distribution pumps (similar to a primary secondary arrangement). Building BMS needs to enable the AWHP and run pumps.

Page 78 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 31
Next Steps: 1. Provide a Schematic Design to very verify required equipment capacity, size of mechanical pad and available space adjacent to City Hall.

Provide a full detailed cost estimate.

2. Review HHW temperature reset with coils of concern.

CONCEPTUAL LAYOUT
The AWHP can be installed outside of the City Hall and connected through the existing boiler room

EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATION
The AERMEC NYK air-to-water heat pump (AWHP) unit was used for budgeting. A 120/208V unit can provided with a factory installed transformer.

Page 79 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 32

EXISTING CONDITIONS
The building has a 1200A service at 120/208V and has spare capacity according to plans from the 1996 Seismic and HVAC Upgrades project – this should be verified. The electrical services and main switch board was upgrades from 800A in 1996.

The existing boiler was installed in 1996 and is nearing the end of it’s expected useful life.

Page 80 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 33

SWIM CENTER ELECTRIFICATION
Project Name: Pool Heater Electrification – Phase 1
Preliminary Budget: $750,000
Project Type: Electrification
Project Summary: The competition pool heating needs of San Luis Obispo Swim Center are currently served by two Lochinvar natural gas boilers. The natural gas boilers were installed in 2012 and are in excellent working condition. Natural gas usage at SLO Swim Center accounts for approximately 42% of the city’s carbon emissions. There is opportunity to take a major step towards building electrification and decarbonization by shifting load off the natural gas boilers with an electric air to water heat pump (AWHP) system. The natural gas boilers would remain functional for peak heating days and resiliency purposes, with approximately 75% of the total pool heating load (competition and therapy pool) shifted onto the AWHP system.

Recommendations: The project team recommends installing a modular 1250 MBH AWHP, piping, and controls to serve the competition pool. The AWHP would be installed upstream of the existing heat exchanger (HX) and shift load off the natural gas boilers. Natural gas boilers would remain functional during peak conditions only and serve as a fully redundant back up. Hot water temperatures of the heating side HX loop would need to be reset from 145°F to 125-130°F. Temperatures on pool side HX loop would remain. The project team recommends installing the AWHP on a concrete pad outdoors adjacent to the existing mechanical room housing the competition pool equipment.

Key Considerations: A primary consideration for the building operations team is the integration and tie in with existing pool heating loop and equipment. The AWHP will be installed outside the existing mechanical room, meaning that the unit will have to be piped back to the main loop. While the recommendation is to integrate with the existing loop with no additional heat exchanger, there is an option to install a second heat exchanger and heating loop to provide the primary means of pool heat. Feasibility of both options is to be analyzed and verified by the design engineer.

SLO Swim Center has a 277/480V 400 amp electrical service. AWHP standard configurations are designed for 480V.

Page 81 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 34
Next Steps: 1. Provide a Schematic Design to very verify required equipment capacity, feasibility of integration with existing heating loop, size of mechanical pad and available space adjacent to SLO Swim Center. Provide a full detailed cost estimate.

2. Review electrical system capacity and verify upgraded service for Phase 1 is not necessary.

CONCEPTUAL LAYOUT
The AWHP can be installed outside of the mechanical room likely in the equipment yard and connected to the existing hot water distribution through the mechanical room. A high-level system schematic is shown below.

Page 82 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 35

EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATION
An AERMEC NRP air-to-water heat pump (AWHP) unit was used for budgeting.

Page 83 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 36

EXISTING CONDITIONS
The mechanical building has a 400A service at 277/480V and has spare capacity according to plans from the 2013 Pool Heater Replacement drawings. This should be verified with onsite conditions.

Page 84 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 37
The pool includes two natural gas boilers which are both in good working condition.

Page 85 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 38

FIRE STATION ELECTRIFICATION

PROJECT SUMMARY
Project Name: Building Electrification – HVAC, Domestic Hot Water, Cooking Building: Fire Station 1 and 911 Dispatch Center
Preliminary Budget: $318,000
Project Type: Electrification, General Maintenance
Project Summary: There is opportunity to take a major step towards city decarbonization with the electrification of building heating, domestic hot water and cooking systems at Fire Station 1 and 911 Dispatch Center. The building heating systems are nearing the end of useful life and can be replaced with heat pump options. Similarly, natural gas water heaters can be replaced by heat pump options. Electric induction ranges can be used in place of traditional natural gas ranges.

Recommendations:

Fire Station 1: The building heating needs of Fire Station 1 are currently served by seven natural gas/DX rooftop units. The natural gas rooftop units were installed in 2021 and are nearing the end of their useful life. It is recommended to replace these units with seven 5-ton packaged heat pump units capable of providing heating and cooling with no natural gas. Basis of design units would be Carrier Weather Maker with heat pump heating.

Design to confirm if supplemental electric resistance is required. Domestic hot water is served by a tank type natural gas water heater. This heater will be replaced by a heat pump option. Basis of design would be AO Smith HPTU. Cooking is currently served by a natural gas range. Proposed replacement option is an electric induction range—manufacturer to be decided by SLO team. Any electrical upgrades should be coordinated with the microgrid and EV Charging projects
911 Dispatch Center: The building heating needs of 911 Dispatch are currently served by four natural gas forced air furnaces. Cooling is provided by cooling coils served by an outdoor condensing unit. It is recommended to replace these units with four air source heat pump units. Heat pump units include an outdoor condensing unit and indoor fan coil type unit. Fan coil may be placed in similar equipment location in either vertical or horizontal orientation. Basis of design units would be York HMH7. Domestic hot water is served by a tank type natural gas water heater. This heater will be replaced by a heat pump option. Basis of design would be AO Smith HPTU.

Cooking is currently served by a natural gas range. Proposed replacement option is an electric induction range—manufacturer to be decided by SLO team. In addition to these electrification measures it is recommended that the SLO team complete conversion of lighting to LED at 911 Dispatch. It is estimated that the building is currently 10% LED.

Page 86 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 39
Key Considerations: Replacement heat pump options will be installed outdoors. Both 911 Dispatch and Fire Station 1 have outdoor condensing units currently in place. Heat pump units can be installed in similar location.

While electrical capacity at Fire Station 1 and 911 Dispatch are not expected to be an issue, the design engineer will need to verify.

Next Steps: 1. Provide a Schematic Design to very verify required equipment capacities.

2. Review electrical system capacity and verify upgraded service is not necessary.

EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATION
Fire Station 1: Carrier Weather Maker Heat Pump RTU

Page 87 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 40
911 Dispatch Center: York HMH7 with Indoor York JHET Air Handler

Page 88 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 41

5. RENEWABLE ENERGY

5.1 SOLAR PV
Solar photovoltaics (PV) systems were identified as the best on-site renewable energy system for the City of San Luis Obispo to generate renewable energy. Increasing solar photovoltaics within the City will help reduce the resilience of energy systems within San Luis Obispo and help to reduce utility costs for the City.

PRIORITY SOLAR LOCATIONS
The City of San Luis Obispo has been engaged with ForeFront Solar to provide solar systems at three locations throughout the city. Collectively the solar PV arrays will provide 42% of the electricity required at General Fund facilities, after being fully electrified. The projects will be delivered through a power purchase agreement (PPA) which will finance the systems and use utility bill savings to cover the cost of the system. The following shows the proposed cumulative cost savings from the proposed systems.

Figure 19: ForeFront Solar Proposal - PPA Procurement

ADDITIONAL SOLAR LOCATIONS
The following locations can also be considered in a second phase. There locations could accommodate solar PV systems and would be less cost effective compared to the priority sites.

Facility Solar PV Capacity
[kW]
Year 1 Generation
[kWh]
Annual Offset
[%]
City Hall 80 123,000 53%
Fire Station 2 30 49,500 +100%
Fire Station 3 31 51,150 +100%
Fire Station 4 26 42,900 +100%

Page 89 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 42

SWIM CENTER
Figure 20: SLO Swim Center Solar PV Layout

SYSTEM INFORMATION
• 409.5 kW-DC PV
• 687,763 kWh Year 1 production
• 87% offset of future load
• EVCS included
• 600A service upgrade required
• Requires PG&E IX App
• PPA Rate: $0.1664
• PPA Escalator: 0%
• Pre-Solar Utility Bill: $196,039
• Year 1 Savings: $39,131
• 20 Year Savings: $2,272,149
• Assumes 2.7% Annual Utility Rate Energy Increases
• Assumes 5% Utility Demand Rate Increases

Page 90 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 43

BUS YARD
Figure 21: Bus Yard Solar PV Layout

SYSTEM INFORMATION
• 295.6 kW-DC PV
• 510,186 kWh Year 1 production
• 13% offset of existing load (assumes NEM-A benefitting City’s B-19 meter) • No service upgrade required
• Currently waiting on PG&E transformer upgrade
• Tentatively planned for March 2023
• PPA Rate: $0.1787
• PPA Escalator: 0%
• Pre-Solar Utility Bill: $878,366
• Year 1 Savings: ($3,166)
• 20 Year Savings: $695,085
• Assumes 2.7% Annual Utility Rate Energy Increases
• Assumes 5% Utility Demand Rate Increases

Page 91 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 44
FIRE STATION 1
Figure 22: Fire Station 1 Solar PV Layout

SYSTEM INFORMATION
• 131 kW-DC PV
• 221,685 kWh Year 1 production
• 55% offset of both meters
• Assumes EV energy consumption of 98,400 kWh
• No service upgrade required
• Requires PG&E IX App
• Solar only, resiliency ready
• No BESS, microgrid
• PPA Rate: $0.1994
• PPA Escalator: 0%
• Pre-Solar Utility Bill: $109,248
• Year 1 Savings: $6,400
• 20 Year Savings: $491,186
• Assumes 2.7% Annual Utility Rate Energy Increases
• Assumes 5% Utility Demand Rate Increases

Page 92 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 45

5.2 FIRE STATION 1 MICROGRID

MICROGRIDS
Establishing microgrids at critical facilities within the City of SLO will improve the resilience of the City during an emergency when there is a loss of power. A microgrid can integrate various distributed energy resources and be optimized around lowering real time carbon emissions and utility costs, thus supporting the City’s resilience, sustainability, and financial goals. A feasibility study was provided to assess developing a microgrid at the Fire Station 1 and 911 Dispatch Center campus which is an emergency facility that is critical for the resilience of the City and County of San Luis Obispo.

Figure 23: Microgrid System Diagram

BACKGROUND & SUMMARY
The City owned parcel is home to both Fire Station 1, located at 2160 Santa Barbara Ave, and the 911 Dispatch Center, located at 1135 Roundhouse St. With both facilities having separate Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) meters, the total business-as-usual (BAU) consumption across all campus facilities is approximately 390,000 kWh per year. The site space available for solar PV and BESS is limited due to things like available parking areas, roof type and age, parcel size, flow of traffic for large emergency apparatuses, etc. Much of the current site electricity consumption can be met with a solar PV carport system, as was previously contracted with ForeFront Power (“ForeFront”), though a bit larger than originally discussed. This newly proposed 131 kW-DC solar PV carport system should offset approximately 55% of the anticipated near-future annual electricity consumption at campus facilities and save an estimated $491,186 over the course of the 20-year PPA term.

A BESS can be used to meet most, or all of the resilience needs of the site, though PG&E will limit the capacity of the BESS to meeting current demand of the site. In addition, the existing building electrical service has a remaining capacity of approximately 200 kW, which limits the amount of combined onPage 93 of 351 Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 46
site PV and BESS capacity unless pursuing a potentially costly service upgrade. Typically, a BESS has benefits over a generator because it can be used to reduce utility demand charges as well as electricity costs during peak times, whereas a generator is only used during utility outages.

With a utility rate switch, the BESS would provide $14,918 in additional bill savings as well as reduce CO2 emissions by approximately 1,116 pounds per year as compared to the existing diesel generator utilization. In anticipation of future Public Safety Power Shutoff (PSPS) events and worsening natural disasters, the proposed 63 kW / 511 kWh BESS microgrid would provide 6 hours’ worth of noninterrupted back-up power to the Fire Station 1 and 911 Dispatch Center campus 88% of the year.

For the BESS to work with the PV and grid to reduce demand and affiliated charges for both meters, the interconnection would have to be upstream of the feeder split from the generator. However, since the sites have relatively low and non-peaky demand profiles, the opportunity for demand savings is reduced, To avoid interconnection complexity, the BESS is sized sizing and complexity can be reduced by focusing on resiliency in coordination with the generator and just the Fire Station 1 meter.

Based on the significant upfront cost as well as guidance from the City regarding the ForeFront PPA, we recommend a short-term hold on proceeding with a BESS microgrid until additional state and/or federal funding is available. In the immediate term, we recommend proceeding with the solar PPA with ForeFront with design for future BESS microgrid. Based upon the time constraints related to NEM2.0 availability and supply chain constraints related to procurement, Optony recommends that the City proceed with PV-only at the Fire Station 1 and 911 Dispatch Center campus at the present time with the intent to have the future BESS fully or partially funded by external sources in the near future. Since said future BESS would benefit the site and City from an environmental, resilience, and gross financial perspective, the City should plan to submit applications for any and all future grant opportunities.

Additionally, the City should coordinate with ForeFront to ensure that the solar installation at the Fire Station 1 and 911 Dispatch Center campus is as ready as possible to be "plug-and-play" with a future on-site BESS development. The City should also note that, since PV installation with a PPA would result in ownership of the solar remaining with ForeFront, a future PV-tied BESS microgrid retrofit would almost certainly have to receive the approval of ForeFront, and possibly may have to be built and interconnected by them. We recommend continuing conversations with the ForeFront team regarding the eventual inclusion of a battery and how that will impact the existing PPA terms.

SITE DESIGN & KEY ASSUMPTIONS
As seen in Figure 24, the proposed solar PV design consists of a 131 kW-DC carport array located above the parcel’s southernmost parking lot. This PV system is anticipated to produce approximately 221,685 kWh in Year 1. Dependent on future funding opportunities, the proposed BESS for integration into the existing microgrid ready PV system is 63 kW / 511 kWh, which is recommended to be installed near the existing generator and switchgear on the north side of the mechanic facility and will not trigger a utility service upgrade. By utilizing all available space at the Fire Station 1 and 911 Dispatch Center campus to develop rooftop and parking lot carport arrays, PV generation can be maximized to account for most if not all of the current and future annual electricity consumption on site. This further decreases the amount of annual GHG emissions from the use of non-renewable energy as well as can be paired with a battery microgrid to provide resilience to the campus and additional demand savings through peak shaving and energy arbitrage. Upon site condition review and evaluation of available space, ForeFront found that the limited and broken-up spaces of rooftop solar would not be financially beneficial to include in a PPA. The most efficient build would be single, medium sized carport array,

Page 94 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 47
which in turn keeps PV and BESS sizing below an electrical capacity number that would necessitate a utility service upgrade.

Figure 24: Proposed Solar PV Design
In addition to the constraints on the site, the City already holds solar development contracts with ForeFront, which allows the project to benefit from rapid action. By working with ForeFront to install a solar system that has microgrid ready components, the City can maximize savings in anticipation of the future installation of a BESS. Solar and battery installation pricing continues to increase with ongoing supply-chain constraints as well as the quickly approaching NEM2.0 application deadline of mid-April 2023. Below are key assumptions used in the analysis of the proposed solar PV and BESS microgrid:

KEY ASSUMPTIONS
The analysis provided in this report is as an illustration of the potential financial, resilience, and environmental benefits of solar PV and battery energy storage systems. The assumptions and price points used in the financial modeling are based on current local market conditions within PG&E territory, as of March 1, 2023. Certain laws, regulations, tax incentives, rebates, programs and thirdparty provided information that is subject and anticipated to change over time. • Proposed Microgrid Ready PV System Size: 131 kW-DC
• Proposed BESS: 63 kW / 511 kWh
• BESS Max Depth of Discharge: 50%
• Assumed BESS Price: $800 per kWh
• Assumed BESS O&M Price: $20 per kW
• Assumed Incentives: 30% base ITC + 10% adder
• Utility Electricity & Demand Rates: B-10 (Fire Station 1); B-19 (911 Dispatch Center) • Utility Electricity Cost Escalation Rate: 3%9
• PV Panel Degradation Rate: 0.5% per year
9 This may vary depending on release of PG&E rates.

Page 95 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 48
• BESS Degradation Rate: 3% per year
• Discount Rate: 3%

OWNERSHIP STRUCTURES
A high-level description of each applicable financial structure is provided below. These descriptions provide useful background for the financial analysis presented and can be used by the City to inform consideration of future projects. In general, the Direct Purchase financing structure provides the greatest long-term savings for entities eligible for incentives but in turn requires a significant initial project investment and ongoing O&M associated costs for the lifespan of the systems. A third-party ownership option typically provides the greatest savings for tax-exempt entities and is thus appealing for local governments, but the expansion of entities eligible for the Investment Tax Credit (IRA) as part of the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) of 2022 makes cash purchase typically more desirable.

DIRECT PURCHASE
The City would use existing cash reserves, grant funding, or a loan to purchase the system outright.

Under this scenario, the site owner is responsible for all ownership concerns, including O&M, regular system cleaning, insurance, and monitoring of system production. This requires a significant up-front capital expenditure and ongoing operational costs but can often result in higher total savings than other ownership and financing structures. Usually, public agencies cannot take advantage of tax credit benefits, but the recently passed IRA is an exception for both solar and storage installations and extends eligibility of the ITC.

THIRD-PARTY OWNERSHIP – POWER PURCHASE AGREEMENT
This structure enables site owners to receive electricity from a solar PV system at no upfront costs and allows the tax incentives (i.e., ITC) for solar installations to be monetized by the third-party. The City would enter a contract of typically 20 years with a third-party to purchase all energy produced by a solar PV system installed on the property in question. This third-party would own the solar PV system and be fully responsible for all ownership costs, including financing, O&M, insurance, and system output. The site host pays a fixed rate for the electricity produced by the solar array for the duration of the contract.

In PPAs that include a storage system, the simplest approach is to spread the additional cost of the storage system across the energy produced by the solar array and discharged by the battery and increase the fixed rate for electricity. PPAs typically include a yearly price escalator between 0-3%.

The value of this escalator relative to the rate at which utility prices increase will affect the savings in future years. Monthly payments may be lower than current or projected utility bills starting on day one, resulting in immediate savings. It is important to note that, if the City moves forward with a project, final pricing will be offered by developers and are subject to the assumptions utilized in the analysis.

INCENTIVES
As part of the recently passed IRA, the City is anticipated to be eligible for the full ITC base amount.

The ITC is a federal tax credit for up to 30% that allows for significant cash-flow benefits and can lead to lower pricing for the installation of solar PV and battery energy storage via a direct reimbursement from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). There are also additional ITCs, often referred to as adders, available for projects that meet specific requirements surrounding the use of domestic content or being located in an IRS defined energy community and/or low-income areas that have the potential to increase the base 30% ITC amount by 10%-20% per adder. The energy storage configuration in this analysis assumes that the battery is restricted to only charging from on-site solar energy and therefore

Page 96 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 49
is eligible to claim the full 100% ITC value. It is important to be aware of the time-sensitive nature of this tax credit, which is scheduled to step down beginning 2033.

The City may also be eligible for the anticipated Microgrid Incentive Program through PG&E. This program is intended to fund clean energy microgrids to support critical infrastructure facilities that keep communities safe.10 The CPUC approved $200M with the anticipated launch date in 2023. The Grants Management department of the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services11 may have an/or release grants surrounding battery storage as well as California Grants Portal.12

MICROGRID MODELING

RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT
Based on the proposed battery microgrid design and the historical energy consumption of the shared campus, the 63 kW/ 511kWh BESS would provide a 24-hour full ride-through (assuming NO loadshedding) in approximately 18% of annual grid outages. Modeling shows that a 6-hour ride-through, again without any load-shedding, would be possible in 100% of situations and a 12-hour ride-through possible in 83%. This assumes that the BESS remaining charge is limited to 50%. This ensures the battery has enough capacity at any given time to provide at least 6 hours’ worth of backup power in the event of an outage or PSPS event. When accounting for the existing on-site 300 kW diesel generator that can provide additional back-up support to guarantee a full 24-hour ride through during extenuating circumstances and acknowledging that a larger battery capacity would require a costly utility service upgrade to the existing electrical switchgear, the solution that appears to best fit the constraints substantially is the system size developed in coordination between ForeFront and Optony and presented as the proposed BESS.

Figure 25: Availabl e Microgrid Hours During Grid Outage 10 https://www.pge.com/en_US/safety/emergency-preparedness/natural-disaster/wildfires/microgrid-incentiveprogram.page?WT.mc_id=Vanity_mipworkshops 11 https://www.caloes.ca.gov/office-of-the-director/policy-administration/finance-administration/grants-management/ 12 https://www.grants.ca.gov/

Page 97 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 50

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
With the consideration of the City’s community-wide Climate Action Plan goal of carbon neutrality by 2035, the environmental impacts of the proposed solar PV and BESS microgrid have been analyzed.

The current PG&E energy mix used to power the Fire Station 1 and 911 Dispatch Center campus is estimated to produce approximately 332,726 pounds of CO2 per year per kWh of electricity.13 In the long term, the City's participation with Central Coast Community Energy (CCCE) will cut out most or all of those carbon dioxide emissions. However, use of the generator, while infrequent as depicted in Figure 3, will create some additional emissions. The PV will generate clean, local energy, whilst the BESS will take the place of most if not all of the associated generator emissions, rendering the generator use unnecessary except in the most long-lasting emergency situations.

By supplementing the utilization of the onsite 300 kW
diesel generator with solar PV and BESS, the City can
reduce the amount of CO2 emissions from burning
fossil fuels. The City is estimated to reduce CO2
emissions by 496 pounds for every hour the generator
does not need to run.14 This assumes the generator
utilizes an average of 22.1 gallons of diesel per hour, based on specifications of similar makes and models
on the market.15 Considering the average outage
length in the given area is approximately 2 hours3 and
interruptions occur approximately 1.125 per year, the
City would reduce its annual greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions by approximately 1,116 pounds.

FINANCIAL MODELING
Among facility reliability options, BESS is a more beneficial option than a diesel generator because, in addition to significantly lower GHG emissions, the BESS can also operate to reduce utility demand (power needed instantaneously from the electrical grid) and can shift energy needs from higher-priced periods of the day to lower-priced periods, through energy arbitrage. In many cases, the electrical bill savings from demand shaving and energy arbitrage can produce a compelling payback period for BESS. With the addition of a BESS, the City would experience an additional $15,000 in utility bill savings. There is widespread anticipation that grants from state and federal sources will become available in the near future, enabling the City's resilience goals to be met through over-arching infrastructure hardening, rather than having to be met through localized spending from the City's general fund. Additionally, the federal government's Investment Tax Credit could enable 30% or more of the future costs of a BESS installation to be compensated back to the City or credited to a future developer. The following analysis was provided for a cash purchase of the BESS systems. Please refer to Table 9 for key financial inputs and metrics and Table 10 for the associated pro forma. 13 https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=74&t=11
14 https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gases-equivalencies-calculator-calculations-and-references 15 https://www.generac.com/Industrial/products/diesel-generators/configured/300kw-diesel-generator Figure 26: PG&E Power Outages

Page 98 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 51
Table 8: Key Financial Inputs & Metri cs – Cash Purchase Key Financial Metrics Key Inputs
BESS Cost per kWh $800 Bill Savings Year 1 $14,918 BESS Degradation 3% Upfront Payment $408,800 25-Year Bill Savings $472,009 Discount Rate 3% 25-year O&M Cost $45,939 25-Year IRR 4% Payback Period 17 years Total Project Costs $454,739 25-Year ROI 40%
Total Incentives $163,520 25-Year NPV $32,548
Net Payments $291,29
Table 9: Cash Purchase Pro Forma
Years Project Costs O&M Direct Pay - ITC Electric Bill Savings Total Cash Flow Cumulative Cash Flow Upfront $ (408,800) $ - $ - $ - $ (408,800) $ (408,800) 1 $ - $ (1,260) $ 163,520 $ 14,918 $ 177,178 $ (231,622) 2 $ - $ (1,298) $ - $ 14,825 $ 13,527 $ (218,095)
3 $ - $ (1,337) $ - $ 14,713 $ 13,376 $ (204,719)
4 $ - $ (1,377) $ - $ 14,582 $ 13,205 $ (191,513)
5 $ - $ (1,418) $ - $ 14,429 $ 13,011 $ (178,503)
6 $ - $ (1,461) $ - $ 14,254 $ 12,793 $ (165,709)
7 $ - $ (1,505) $ - $ 14,054 $ 12,549 $ (153,160)
8 $ - $ (1,550) $ - $ 13,831 $ 12,281 $ (140,878)
9 $ - $ (1,596) $ - $ 13,581 $ 11,985 $ (128,893)
10 $ - $ (1,644) $ - $ 13,304 $ 11,660 $ (117,233)
11 $ - $ (1,693) $ - $ 20,256 $ 18,563 $ (98,671)
12 $ - $ (1,744) $ - $ 20,137 $ 18,393 $ (80,278)
13 $ - $ (1,796) $ - $ 19,994 $ 18,198 $ (62,080)
14 $ - $ (1,850) $ - $ 19,823 $ 17,973 $ (44,108)
15 $ - $ (1,906) $ - $ 19,624 $ 17,718 $ (26,390)
16 $ - $ (1,963) $ - $ 19,395 $ 17,432 $ (8,958)
17 $ - $ (2,022) $ - $ 19,135 $ 17,113 $ 8,155
18 $ - $ (2,083) $ - $ 18,842 $ 16,759 $ 24,915
19 $ - $ (2,145) $ - $ 18,514 $ 16,369 $ 41,284
20 $ - $ (2,209) $ - $ 18,150 $ 15,941 $ 57,224
21 $ - $ (2,276) $ - $ 27,501 $ 25,225 $ 82,450
22 $ - $ (2,344) $ - $ 27,350 $ 25,006 $ 107,456
23 $ - $ (2,414) $ - $ 27,165 $ 24,751 $ 132,206
24 $ - $ (2,487) $ - $ 26,945 $ 24,458 $ 156,665
25 $ - $ (2,561) $ - $ 26,687 $ 24,126 $ 180,790
Total $ (408,800) $ (45,939) $ 163,520 $ 472,009 $ 180,790 $ -

Page 99 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 52

RATE STRUCTURE ANALYSIS
With the consideration of the PG&E-CCCE 3Cchoice program, the City would experience further bill savings in the form of reduced energy and demand charges by switching from the current rate schedules on both meters to B-19 Option S (voluntary). The tables below display a representation of estimated current and new electric bills for the Fire Station 1 and 911 Dispatch Center campus after the installation of a PV and BESS microgrid. The analysis is based on the most current rates (updated March 1st, 2023) under the facility’s existing PG&E/CCCE commercial tariffs, B-10 and B-19, and anticipated switch to B-19 Option S. According to the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), customers taking service under NEM 2.0 may add battery storage to existing PV systems without altering their status.16
Table 10: Comparison of Current and New Electrici ty Bills Site Current Charges New Charges
(w/o rate change)
New Charges
(w/ rate change)
Fire Station 1 $31,837 $12,194 $10,402
911 Dispatch Center $49,453 $27,858 $24,429
Table 12: Current Fire Station 1 Electri c Bill (PG&E/CCCE B -10) 16 https://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PublishedDocs/Efile/G000/M498/K526/498526033.PDF

Page 100 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 53
Table 13: Current 911 Di spatch Center Electric Bill (PG&E/CCCE B -19) Table 1411: New Fire Station 1 Electri c Bill (PG&E/ CCCE B -10)

Page 101 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 54
Table 15: New Fire Station 1 Electri c Bill (PG&E/CCCE B-19 Option S) Table 126: New 911 Dispatch Center Electric Bill (PG&E/CCCE B -19)

Page 102 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 55
Table 137: New 911 Dispatch Center Electric Bill (PG&E/CCCE B -19 Option S)

Page 103 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 56

6. DEFINITIONS
Air Conditioning (AC) Typical term for building heating and cooling equipment.

Air Cooled Chiller (AC Chiller) A piece of mechanical equipment that cools water (chilled water) by rejecting heat to air.

Air to Water Heat Pump (AWHP) A piece of mechanical equipment that transfers heat from outside air to water for the purpose of building heat or domestic hot water heat. Air to water heat pumps may also run in the opposite cycle and reject heat from a water based system to outside air for the purpose of cooling a building.

Building Management System (BMS) A building control system that monitors various systems in a building.

Business as Usual (BAU) The business as usual or maintain the status quo case for use in scenario analysis.

Chilled Water (CHW) Is the means of cooling in a building served by equipment with chilled water cooling coils.

Climate Energy Scenario Analysis (CESA) A tool for comparing different pathways to carbon neutrality. Provides metrics about carbon and cost.

Coefficient of Performance (COP) A means of measuring mechanical equipment efficiency. 1 COP = 100%.

Direct Expansion (DX) A means of cooling air with a refrigerant based coil and compressor system.

Domestic Hot Water (DHW) Hot water used in sinks, showers, pools, etc.

Electric Vehicles (EV) Fully electric vehicles.

Greenhouse Gas (GHG) The bioproduct of combustion based systems. These gases trap heat in the earth’s atmosphere and warm the earth’s surface.

Heat Exchanger (HX) A mechanical device used to transfer heat from one fluid loop or airstream to another.

Heating Hot Water (HHW) The means of delivering heat in a building served by a boiler or heat pump system.

Heating Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC) Industry standard acronym.

Kilowatt Hour (kWH) Energy metric typically used for electricity.

Megawatt Hour (MWH) Energy metric typically used for electricity.

Metric Tons of Carbon Dioxide Equivalent Emissions (MTCO2e or MTE) Metric to quantify greenhouse gas emissions.

Natural Gas (NG) Fossil fuel based energy typically used for building heat, domestic hot water, and cooking.

Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) A long term electricity supply agreement typically using solar.

Page 104 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 57
Rooftop Unit (RTU) A packaged mechanical unit that delivers heating and cooling. Units typically run constant volume and are typically served by natural gas heat and direct expansion cooling.

Seasonal Energy Efficiency Ratio (SEER) Energy efficiency rating typically used for packaged DX cooling equipment. A ratio of cooling capacity to power input.

Thousand British Thermal Units (MBH) Energy unit typically used for natural gas and heating hot water.

Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) The overall cost of a product or project over the equipment or project’s lifespan. Includes direct and indirect costs.

Variable Air Volume Air Handling Unit (VAV AHU) Typical mechanical HVAC unit used in buildings with multiple zones of usage.

Water to Water Heat Pump (WWHP) A mechanical piece of equipment that transfers heat from one water source, such as groundwater, to a building side water source.

Page 105 of 351 ends

Carbon Neutral City Facilities Plan 58

7. APPENDIX

BUILDING ENERGY ASSESSMENTS

CESA TRAINING MATERIALS

Page 106 of 351 ends

Fleet Electrification Study
Vehicle Report

Page 107 of 351 ends

THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.

Page 108 of 351 ends

Cover photo by Robert Smrekar on Flickr.

REPORT PREPARED BY:

Optony Inc.
5201 Great America Parkway, Suite 320
Santa Clara, CA 95054
www.OptonyUSA.com
March 2023

Page 109 of 351 ends

THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.

Page 110 of 351 ends

TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS..................................................................................................................................................1 LIST OF FIGURES.........................................................................................................................................................4 LIST OF TABLES ..........................................................................................................................................................4 ACRONYMNS .............................................................................................................................................................4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...............................................................................................................................................1 KEY FINDING S ...................................................................................................................... 1 FLEET COMPOSITION..................................................................................................................................................3 DATA SOURCE S .................................................................................................................... 3 FLEET C OMP OSITION AND C HAR AC TERISTIC S .......................................................................... 3 Summary of Fleet Assets..................................................................................................................................................3 VEHICLE CATEG ORIZ ATION .................................................................................................... 6 Studied Fleet.....................................................................................................................................................................6 Exclusions .........................................................................................................................................................................6 VEHICLE ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY & RESULTS...........................................................................................................8 ELECTRIFIC ATION TIMEL INE .................................................................................................. 8 ELECTRIC VEHICLE SELECTION ............................................................................................... 9 Light-duty Vehicle Selection...........................................................................................................................................10 Medium- and heavy-Duty vehicles.................................................................................................................................11 Analysis Process..............................................................................................................................................................12 RANGE SUITAB ILITY .............................................................................................................13 TOTAL C OST OF OWNER SHIP (TCO) ANAL YSIS ........................................................................13 TCO Methodology...........................................................................................................................................................13 TCO By Department & Electrification Category .............................................................................................................14 ESTIM ATED C AP ITAL B UDGE T NEEDS FOR VE HICLE REPLACEME NT ...........................................20 Discussion of Ownership Models: Owned vs Leased .....................................................................................................21 CARBON REDUCTIONS FROM FLEET ELECTRIFICATION...............................................................................................22 Other Emissions Reduction Options...............................................................................................................................23 NEXT STEPS..............................................................................................................................................................24 IMMEDIATE (2023-2025) ELECTR IFIC ATION OP TIONS & TOTAL COST OF OWNER SHIP ................24 Other Near-Term Vehicle Replacements .......................................................................................................................24 APPENDIX A: VEHICLE INCENTIVES............................................................................................................................28 APPENDIX B: FLEET DATABASE & DETAILED TCO ANALYSIS (EXCEL ATTACHMENT) .....................................................31 APPENDIX C: COST OF CARBON ABATEMENT CALCULATIONS ....................................................................................34

Page 111 of 351 ends

LIST OF FIGURES
FIG URE 1. ENTIRE FLEET – C OMPOSITION ........................................................................ 4 FIG URE 2. ENTIRE FLEET – AG E BY MOD EL YEAR .............................................................. 4 FIG URE 3: STUD IED FLEET - D ETAILED FUEL TYPE ............................................................. 5 FIG URE 4. C ITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO’S FLEET C OMPOSITION & ASSESSMENT APPROAC H ...... 7 FIG URE 5. FLEET ELEC TRIFIC ATION TIMELINE ................................................................... 9 FIG URE 6: TC O OF SHORT -TERM VEHIC LE PURC HASES (2023 -2025) – “BEST FIT” FOR ELEC TRIFIC ATION .........................................................................................................15 FIG URE 7: TC O OF SHORT -TERM VEHIC LE PURC HASES (2023 -2025) – FULL ELEC TRIFIC ATION ...................................................................................................................................16 FIG URE 8: TC O OF MID-TERM VEHICLE PURCHASES (2026 -2030) – BEST FIT FOR ELEC TRIFIC ATION .........................................................................................................17 FIG URE 9: TC O OF MID-TERM VEHICLE PURCHASES (2026 -2030) – POTENTIAL ELEC TRIFIC ATION .........................................................................................................18 FIG URE 10: ESTIMATED C APITAL BUDG ET NEED S – “BEST FIT” FOR ELEC TRIFIC ATION.........20 FIG URE 11: ESTIMATED C APITAL BUDG ET NEED S – ALL POTENTIAL ELEC TRIFICATION .........20 FIG URE 12: ANNUAL CARBON EMISSIONS OF VEHIC LE FLEET BY D EPARTMENT - 2021 .........22 FIG URE 13: EMISSION RED UC TION SC ENARIOS THROUG H 2040 ........................................23

LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 1: FLEET SUMMARY BY D EPARTMENT AND ANNUAL MILEAG E D RIVEN ........................ 5 TABLE 2: TC O OF SHORT -TERM VEHIC LE PURC HASES (2023 -2025) – “BEST FIT” FOR ELEC TRIFIC ATION .........................................................................................................15 TABLE 3: TC O OF SHORT -TERM VEHIC LE PURC HASES (2023 -2025) – FULL ELEC TRIFIC ATION ...................................................................................................................................16 TABLE 4: TC O OF MID-TERM VEHIC LE PURC HASES (2026 -2030) – BEST FIT FOR ELEC TRIFIC ATION .........................................................................................................17 TABLE 5: TC O OF MID-TERM VEHIC LE PURC HASES (2026 -2030) – POTENTIAL ELEC TRIFIC ATION .........................................................................................................18 TABLE 8: UPFRONT C OST & TC O SUMMARY FOR IMMED IATE VEHIC LE ELEC TRIFIC ATION .......24 TABLE 6: INC REMENTAL C OST OF CARBON RED UC TION – “BEST FIT” SC ENARIO ..................34 TABLE 7: INC REMENTAL C OST OF CARBON RED UC TION – POTENTIAL ELEC TRIFIC ATION SC ENARIO ....................................................................................................................35

ACRONYMNS
AC Alternating Current
BEV Battery Electric Vehicle (See also EV & PEV)
DC Direct Current
DCFC Direct Current Fast Charge (DC Fast Charger)
EV Electric Vehicle
EVSE Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EV charger)
ICE Internal Combustion Engine
kW Kilowatt
kWh Kilowatt hour
PEV Plug-in Electric Vehicle (See also EV & BEV)
PHEV Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle
TBD To Be Determined
TCO Total Cost of Ownership
V Volt
ZEV Zero-Emissions Vehicle

Page 112 of 351 ends

1 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report provides a systematic assessment of current City of San Luis Obispo-operated vehicles1 with the primary goals of identifying vehicle electrification opportunities, establishing an electrification timeline based on vehicle replacements and the City’s mandate for fleet electrification, and determining the costs and emissions benefits of fleet electrification.

The analysis assessed relevant vehicle data in the City’s records including data provided by the City’s Fleet Services Supervisor. Available data included vehicle makes, models, ages, purchase date and price, fuel type, usage and costs, and miles travelled. Quantitative data was supplemented by interviews with appropriate City of San Luis Obispo staff to better understand how vehicles are used and the anticipated future mobility needs of each department.

The purpose of this report is to document the analysis of each fleet asset studied, and include the following research elements:
1) Fleet baseline summarizing vehicles studied, fleet composition, and categorization of fleet by electrification potential
2) Appropriate vehicle needs of each department to guide fleet electrification, including a schedule and recommendation for electrification of each analyzed vehicle, or category of vehicle. 3) Analysis of Total Cost of Ownership and capital budget needs associated with fleet electrification 4) Analysis of potential carbon emissions reductions associated with fleet electrification

KEY FINDINGS
▪ After accounting for non-street legal assets (trailers, generators, etc.) and vehicles that are already electric, 211 out of 325 total vehicles provided by the City were studied for electrification. Of this subset:
o 76% can be replaced with equivalent electric vehicles that are currently commercially available, predominantly sedans, SUVs, and pickup trucks.
o Most of the remaining vehicles (11% of 211) have potential electric candidates for replacement but challenges, primarily related to cost-effectiveness or operational requirements, remain. o About 6% of the vehicles studied do not have a potential candidate for electrification currently available or announced in the market.
o The remaining 7% of the vehicles studied were requested not to be electrified by the City. This includes fire engines, four F-550s operated by the Fire Department, an undercover police vehicle, and some vehicles being phased out of operations.
▪ Electric vehicle range is not a barrier to vehicle electrification for the City of San Luis Obispo. For 100% of the vehicles assessed, the recommended EV option could satisfy 100% of the existing vehicle’s historical driving behavior.
▪ 161 of San Luis Obispo’s fleet can be replaced with equivalent electric vehicles that are currently commercially available and likely to be cost-effective (“Best Fit” for Full Electrification). 64 of the vehicles in this category are in 1 City of San Luis Obispo Transit vehicles were not included in the study.

Page 113 of 351 ends

2 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY the Police or Fire Departments and implementation will need to be phased to avoid compromising department operations.
▪ At current vehicle costs, excluding incentives, electrifying the subset of these vehicles coming due for replacement from 2022 to 2030 will cost approximately $2.1 million over the lifespan of the vehicles, approximately a 15% increase in operating costs. With known incentives and rebates, the City will observe savings of up to $912,174 over the lifespan of the vehicles, approximately a 6% reduction in operating costs. This estimate does not include the cost of installing and maintaining EV chargers.
▪ Today, incentives available to the City of San Luis Obispo for fleet electrification include Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) tax credits (up to $7,500 for light duty, and up to $40,000 for medium- and heavy-duty vehicles) and a Central Coast Community Energy (CCCE) rebate of $5,000 per vehicle. Additional incentives exist for EV charging infrastructure.
▪ The carbon emissions reductions corresponding with electrification of the City’s “Best Fit” vehicles is an estimated 265 MTCO2 (31%) from 2021 fleet-related emission levels by 2025 and 531 MTCO2 (63%) by 2030. If the City expands its vehicle electrification efforts to include vehicles that are potentially electrifiable, it can achieve fleet carbon emissions reductions of 291 MTCO2 (34%) from 2021 levels by 2025 and 643 MTCO2 (76%) by 2030. ▪ Following the replacement schedule detailed in this report, SAN LUIS OBISPO can electrify 47% of its light-duty vehicles by 2025 and 99% by 2030 (“Best Fit” Electrification Scenario). ▪ Availability of medium- and heavy-duty electric vehicles is a challenge limiting SAN LUIS OBISPO’s ability to electrify its fleet. None of these vehicles are electrifiable with currently available electric vehicles that do not have cost-effectiveness or operational concerns. Considering potentially electrifiable vehicles, 10% can be electrified by 2025 and 48% by 2030. However, to achieve this level of electrification the City will have to address operational and budget concerns during the purchasing process.

Under the Best Fit Electrification Scenario, vehicles in the Police Department represent the most cost-effective opportunity for carbon emissions reductions on a capital cost basis, with 36% of total fleet emissions coming from a department that has only 24% of the City’s total fleet asset. Annual operational cost savings for the Police Department under the Best Fit scenario are estimated at $139,000.

CHALLENGES OF VEHICLE ELECTRIFICATION PLANNING IN A DYNAMIC MARKET The electric vehicle market is highly dynamic. Purchase prices and available vehicle models included in this report have high levels of certainty through 2025, although supply chain and manufacturer delays may impact procurement. Thereafter, less certainty exists with respect to vehicle purchase prices and options, however based on Optony’s professional opinion, cost comparable vehicles will be available for most of the City's needs through the end of the decade as described in detail in this report.

Page 114 of 351 ends

3 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY

FLEET COMPOSITION
This section describes the data sources used in this report and summarizes the composition of San Luis Obispo’s municipal fleet.

DATA SOURCES
The City of San Luis Obispo’s fleet data was gathered from various data sources and a comprehensive database was compiled for further analysis. The data sources used in this project include the following:
▪ City Fleet Inventory: This database served as the primary data source for the vehicle study. The City’s Fleet Inventory is an Excel-based database generated using data from AssetWorks, the City’s fleet asset management software, maintained by the City’s Fleet Services Supervisor that contains information on each vehicle, such as equipment ID, make, model, year, fuel type, power train, department, odometer reading, purchase year and purchase price. During the project, this database was updated in collaboration with City staff to remove vehicles that had been recently retired and add vehicles that had been recently purchased but not added to the inventory prior to project kick-off. Additionally, City staff indicated specific off-road assets that would be upgraded to electric street-legal assets in the future. The fleet inventory included data on assets besides vehicles (e.g., trailers, generators) but those items were not included in the study. ▪ National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHSTA) Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) Decoder: To supplement vehicle information included in the City Fleet Inventory, the NHSTA VIN Decoder, an online software tool that interprets VINs and provides an extensive list of characteristics corresponding to that VIN, was used to gather additional vehicle characteristics. Specifically, it was used to gather the Gross Vehicle Weight Rating (GVWR) and Body Type of each vehicle.

In addition to the above-mentioned data sources, qualitative data was collected through discussions with City Fleet and Facilities staff, such as vehicle duty cycles and emergency response requirements. In all, the data collection efforts described above led to the creation of a comprehensive fleet database, attached to this report as Appendix A, which served as the basis for all further analyses.

FLEET COMPOSITION AND CHARACTERISTICS

SUMMARY OF FLEET ASSETS
This section provides descriptive statistics to understand the current condition and composition of San Luis Obispo’s fleet.

The final fleet database included a total of 325 units, including light-, medium-, and heavy-duty vehicles. After reduction of the 114 vehicles that will not be electrified, 185 were included in the electrification analysis and are represented in the figures below.

Figure 1 depicts the breakdown of the fleet by vehicle type. Over half of the analyzed fleet falls under two vehicle categories: Pickup and Truck. The “Pickup” category includes light- and medium-duty vehicles ranging from smaller pickups such as the Ford Ranger to larger pickups such as the Ford F-350.

Page 115 of 351 ends

4 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY FIGURE 1. ENTIRE FLEET – COMPOSITION
Figure 2 shows a count of all vehicles by their model year. Newest model years are shown first, followed by progressively older model years from left to right.

FIGURE 2. ENTIRE FLEET – AGE BY MODEL YEAR

Page 116 of 351 ends

5 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY In terms of the powertrain, the large majority (92.8%) of the studied fleet are internal combustion engines (ICE) followed by hybrids (3.8%) and battery electric vehicles (BEV or EV) (3.3%). Split out by fuel type in Figure 3, the majority (83.4%) of the fleet use only unleaded gasoline, followed by renewable diesel (12.8%), and electricity (3.3%).2
FIGURE 3: STUDIED FLEET - DETAILED FUEL TYPE
Table 1 summarizes the entirety of the City’s fleet and includes the number of assets in each City department, total annual mileage, and average annual vehicle mileage by department. Among the City’s various departments, the Public Works Department has the largest fleet with 68 vehicles, followed by Police (51 vehicles) and Utilities (46 vehicles).Error! Reference source not found. Notably, the Police Department vehicles account for nearly 40% of vehicles miles travelled by the City fleet but only make up 24% of the fleet.

TABLE 1: FLEET SUMMARY BY DEPARTMENT AND ANNUAL MILEAGE DRIVEN3

DEPARTMENT NUMBER OF
ASSETS
% OF TOTAL
ASSETS

TOTAL ANNUAL

MILES TRAVELED

ANNUAL MILES

PER ASSET
% OF TOTAL

ANNUAL MILES
POLICE PATROL 25 12% 304,330 12,173 27%
POLICE ADMIN 26 12% 145,904 5,612 13%
FIRE 28 13% 105,581 3,771 9%
UTILITIES 46 22% 211,767 4,604 18%
PUBLIC WORKS 68 32% 296,888 4,366 26%
IT 3 1% 12,278 4,093 1%
PARKS AND REC 8 4% 44,798 5,600 4%
COMMUNICATIONS 6 3% 21,293 3,549 2%
ADMIN 1 0% 4,842 4,842 0%
2 Based on the fleet composition in 2022 and does not include any changes from expected 2023 replacements, which does include conversion of additional vehicles to EVs.
3 Total and average annual usage are calculated from lifetime vehicle usage according to the City’s fleet inventory

Page 117 of 351 ends

6 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY TOTAL 211 1,147,681 -

VEHICLE CATEGORIZATION
The fleet inventory provided by the City of San Luis Obispo consists of 325 assets. For this study, the database was further categorized into the following groups, as depicted in Figure 4 and described below:

STUDIED FLEET
211 vehicles were studied in detail. However, not all of these vehicles can be fully electrified based on currently available technologies. Therefore, based on the vehicle body type (as will be discussed later), these fleet vehicles were further categorized into sub-categories:
▪ “Best Fit” for Full Electrification: 161 vehicles that can be fully replaced with an equivalent EV available on the market today. It is important to note that 64 of the vehicles in this category are in the Police or Fire Departments and implementation will need to be phased to avoid compromising department operations. Specific considerations related to vehicle selection for these departments are included under Electric Vehicle Selection. ▪ Potentially Electrifiable: 24 vehicles are potentially electrifiable using EVs available on the market today, but questions remain around cost-effectiveness, vehicle-specific operational and outfitting requirements and whether vehicle replacements that are not “like for like” are supported by internal stakeholders. Further analysis by City staff is needed prior to a purchasing decision being made. This category is further summarized below:
o There are 16 medium-duty single chassis cab that have equivalent EV options available, but options may not be cost effective based on the current market prices. o There are 7 vehicles that have potential “like for like” vehicle options but may be cost prohibitive.

Examples include all electric fire engines (e.g., Pierce Volterra Pumper), electric street sweepers (e.g., Global M3 Electric Sweeper) and heavy-duty trucks (e.g., Peterbilt 540EV). o There are 2 vans in the Police Department that, while electric options for the vehicle chassis are available, have extremely specialized uses (e.g., Crime Scene Investigation and Prisoner Transport) requiring continued vetting to determine if an EV option is available and suitable. ▪ No Electric Option: 26 vehicles in San Luis Obispo’s fleet have no electric option currently available. This category includes specialty vehicles like heavy-duty dump trucks that the City converted to renewable diesel in 2017.

EXCLUSIONS
114 units were excluded from the detailed analysis. These exclusions were applied in cases where there was no need for further study because the asset was already electrified or had been replaced immediately prior to the project. This category includes units 0804 and 0806 (Toyota Priuses) which are being replaced in 2022 with Chevy Bolts that are already on order.

Page 118 of 351 ends

7 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY FIGURE 4. CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO’S FLEET COMPOSITION & ASSESSMENT APPROACH

Page 119 of 351 ends

8 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY

VEHICLE ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY & RESULTS
After the initial assessment of the fleet and identification of the studied vehicles, the next step in the analysis was to analyze the data to identify specific electrification opportunities. The fleet electrification methodology consisted of the following major steps:
▪ Step 1 - Electrification Timeline: An electrification timeline was established based on expected replacement years for each vehicle provided by the City Fleet Services Supervisor and incorporated the City’s adopted Climate Action Plan goal of 100% electric light-duty vehicles and 50% electric medium- and heavy-duty vehicles by 2030. ▪ Step 2 - Electric Vehicle Selection: EV options were identified and selected, either for complete replacement of vehicles based on the availability of equivalent EVs, or other electrification options such as partial electrification, powertrain replacement, or renewable diesel.
▪ Step 3 – Range Suitability: Existing vehicle use was analyzed, primarily focused on miles driven to determine whether each proposed EV replacement has sufficient battery range to meet existing driving behavior. ▪ Step 4 - Total Cost of Ownership Analysis for a Fully Electrified Fleet: Total cost of ownership (TCO) of conventional ICE vehicle replacements were compared to recommended EV models. This step included comparing a combination of capital costs (vehicle purchase price) and operating costs over the expected lifespan of the vehicle for each replacement option.

While the Fleet Electrification Methodology is presented as a linear process, in order to have the highest confidence in its procurement decisions and to adapt to an evolving market, it is recommended that Step 2 and Step 3 (above) are completed every-other year concurrent with the Financial Plan and Capital Improvement Program development process and as the vehicles in the electrification timeline come up for replacement and the City begins implementing fleet electrification.

ELECTRIFICATION TIMELINE
Figure 5 depicts the electrification timeline and the number of vehicles to be replaced and electrified each year over the next 19 years. Vehicles are split by the electrification potential categorization described under the Vehicle Categorization section. All vehicles analyzed are expected to be replaced by 2030.

It is important to note that the City can accelerate or delay this timeline based on available budget, but that delays require larger investments in later years.

Page 120 of 351 ends

9 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY FIGURE 5. FLEET ELECTRIFICATION TIMELINE
As electrification options for medium- and heavy-duty vehicles become increasingly available, the number of vehicles eligible for full electrification will increase. The potential impacts of this trend are demonstrated in Figure 13 under the Full Electrification Scenario.

ELECTRIC VEHICLE SELECTION
This analysis assigns at least one potential EV option to each existing vehicle in the City’s fleet, while clearly defining which vehicles had “best fit” options and which had more uncertainty surrounding the suitability of the available EV options. The following discussion provides additional information on the current and expected market availability of EV options for various vehicle sizes, giving context to the limitations of the analyses presented in this report, and future opportunities that may enable the City to determine a clearer path toward electrification of its medium- and heavy-duty vehicles. A summary of all vehicles, ICE and Electric, included in the analysis can be found in Appendix B.

Page 121 of 351 ends

10 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY

LIGHT-DUTY VEHICLE SELECTION
Sedans, SUVs & Light Duty Vans
As of 2022, there are a range of battery-powered vehicles suitable for municipal fleets currently priced in the range of $35,000 to $55,000 (not including sales tax) with a range greater than 100 miles. The most common choices are the Tesla Model Y or Chevrolet Bolt, both of which were considered as potential EVs for San Luis Obispo’s fleet. Other light-duty electric vehicles available for immediate fleet purchase include the Chevrolet Bolt EUV; Ford Mustang Mach-E; Volkswagen ID4; Tesla Model 3; Hyundai Ioniq 5 & Kona; and Kia Niro. The EV models selected for inclusion in this analysis prioritized models and OEMs with which the City is familiar, which are easily purchased through existing procurement contracts and attempted to standardize across vehicle types in support of the City’s efforts to standardize its fleet at large around preferred OEMs.

San Luis Obispo also operates 8 light-duty vans, ranging from smaller Ford Transit to Ford T-350s. The 2023 Ford eTransit is currently available and would be an appropriate replacement vehicle for this group of existing vehicles. An estimated 126 miles of range is more than sufficient for the daily driving needs of the City’s vehicles. Ford is offering three different vehicle weights of the eTransit, as well as chassis cab and cutaway options, which make the eTransit an appropriate option to replace the larger light-duty vans, as well as potentially a portion of the medium-duty vans in the City’s fleet.

Pickup Trucks
The City fleet includes 80 pickup trucks, mostly Ford Ranger, Ford F-150, Ford F-250, and Ford F-350. When considering electrification of the smaller pick-up trucks (1/2- and 3/4-ton trucks such as the F-150 and F-250), recent all-electric options have come to market including the Ford F-150 Lightning and Lordstown Endurance. With 10,000 pounds of towing capacity, range of 230-300 miles and a price point $60,000 to $75,000, the Ford F-150 Lightning is a promising option for municipal fleets and was included as the primary option in this analysis.

Alternative pickup trucks that could be appropriate for the fleet once proven are the Rivian R1T (starting at $75,000) and Lordstown Endurance (starting at $65,000), both of which are available on the market today. Other pickup trucks are also available or nearing production by companies like Bollinger, Chevrolet, GMC, and Toyota in 2023-2024.

For the 19 larger pickup trucks in San Luis Obispo’s fleet, options remain limited and there are no equivalent all electric options on the market. The two options deemed to be the best fit were the SEA Electric Ford 450 and the Lightning Motors Ford 550, chassis conversion options. Considering these two options, there is no perfect path for electrification of these vehicles. Significant concerns exist related to a chassis conversion option like Lighting Motors, including upfront cost, warranty/repair issues and availability of parts in the future. 21 of the larger trucks were recommended to be downsized to a 1/2-ton option at the recommendation of the City’s Fleet Services Supervisor, however, downsizing to a 1/2-ton option may not be possible across the board due to operational requirements like utility bodies.

There are additional companies besides Lightning Motors that offer EV chassis conversions that can be fitted with a utility body, such as Motiv Power Systems. Motiv’s E-450 and F-450 options are also larger than the F-250 and F-350s the City commonly operates today. Any chassis conversion option can require long lead times for ordering and are often significantly more expensive to purchase.

Page 122 of 351 ends

11 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY Police Department
While admin vehicles in the Police Department can be replaced with standard light-duty options, the unique operational needs of patrol and special unit vehicles require additional consideration.

Police Departments throughout the country, such as Westport, Connecticut, Bargersville, Indiana and Fremont, California have deployed electric patrol vehicles, all manufactured by Tesla. The Fremont Police Department reports that their initial vehicle, a Tesla Model S, has behaved favorably in the role of a patrol vehicle despite not being pursuit-rated, with considerably less downtime than the Ford Explorer Utility Interceptor models which comprise the majority of their patrol vehicle fleet. Following this success, they purchased and deployed a Model Y in September 2021. Moving forward, the Model Y is likely to be the most appealing option as it provides a balance between size and purchase price.

However, as mentioned above, while the Tesla vehicles have the performance required in a police application, no models currently have an official pursuit rating from the Michigan State Police or LA Sheriff’s Department, the two entities in the Country in charge of testing vehicles for police use. Prior to deployment, Fremont PD had to receive approval from the City’s Risk Management department since the Tesla vehicle did not have an official pursuit rated designated. In light of this, another potential model for the Police Department to consider is the Mustang Mach E GT Performance, which received an official pursuit designation in September 2021 from the Michigan State Police. Similar to the Model Y, the Mach E is a crossover vehicle that should provide sufficient interior capacity, battery range, and performance at comparable pricing to Ford vehicles currently purchased.

As it is advantageous for special unit vehicles, such as those used by detectives or in undercover operations, to be a range of models, the analysis included a range of light-duty electric options matching the body type of the existing vehicles.

However, it is understood that these vehicles must blend in with surrounding traffic and concerns exist that electrifying these vehicles ahead of the general market may limit this ability. Additionally, the lack of sufficient public fast charging infrastructure may limit these vehicles’ ability to perform during extended deployments. As such, while a range of EV options could be suitable, piloting will be required by San Luis Obispo’s police department to determine comfort with specific models.

Finally, the Police fleet includes 8 motorcycles which have potential for electrification. There are products on the market, such as the Harley Davidson Live Wire. Zero Motorcycles’ police and security model was tested and determined to be too small for patrol applications.

MEDIUM- AND HEAVY-DUTY VEHICLES
Medium-duty and heavy-duty electric vehicle offerings are generally limited to OEM options approaching production but not yet available or semi-custom, electrified or hybrid versions of commercially available vehicle platforms such as the Ford and Izuzu chassis conversions Motiv, SEA and Lightning. Today’s limited offerings will be augmented by increasingly numerous commercially available medium- and heavy-duty electrified vehicle platforms by manufacturers like Nikola, AVEAI, Mitsubishi, Daimler, and Tesla. In effect, numerous zero emission replacement options will be available for a significant percentage of diesel and gas-powered fleet components before 2030, though the timeline is difficult to accurately predict beyond manufacturers’ announcements within the next two production years.

Page 123 of 351 ends

12 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY Fire Department
Fire trucks pose a particular challenge for fleet electrification. Stringent performance requirements mean that an EV option must be purpose built. Per the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) classifications, electric options from fire truck Types 1-7 were researched. Two potential options for Type 1 fire trucks exist, the Rosenbauer Concept Fire Truck and the Pierce Volterra Pumper, neither of which are in full production as of writing but are expected by 2023. The Volterra Pumper is in service with the Town of Madison, Wisconsin4 and the Los Angeles Fire Department entered a Rosenbauer RTX into service in May 20225. Both vehicles cost on the order of $1.3-1.5 million which is more expensive than SAN LUIS OBISPO’s existing fire engines with similar capability, although prices seem to be increasing. Purchase records from the City show that similar vehicles cost the City between $400,000 and $600,000, with a more recent mid-2022 purchase of a $900,000 engine.

No options were found for Types 2-7, although First Priority Group6, a large upfitter of emergency and command center vehicles primarily operating on the East Coast, offers various emergency response and command center vehicle options in collaboration with another chassis conversion company Roush Cleantech.

Medium- and Heavy-Duty Trucks & Chassis Cabs
Excluding fire engines and ambulances, the City fleet has 21 vehicles (Class 3 or higher) that range from fire apparatuses to flatbed trucks to specialty heavy duty vehicles, operating primarily in the Public Works, Fire, and Utilities departments.

While all of the heavy-duty vehicles were identified as having no electric options, here are a limited number of all-electric options are offered by OEMs and chassis conversion companies. Options included in the analysis offered by OEMs include the Peterbilt 220EV and 520EV and the Global Environmental Products M3 Electric Sweeper. The purchase price of the EV options ($700,000) and low mileage of the existing vehicle precludes the EV options from being cost-effective, but the City could decide to purchase these vehicles, likely using incentive programs such as HVIP discussed in Appendix A, to achieve emissions reductions. Options included in the analysis from chassis conversion providers include SEA NPR EV, Lightning Motors Ford F550 and Motiv E450 Utility Truck. Motiv offers two different bodies, a box truck and a work truck, fit on a Ford E-450 chassis.

Overall, for the City’s heavy-duty municipal fleet vehicle use cases, cost-effective EVs are likely still five-to-ten years away, even when accounting for incentives.

ANALYSIS PROCESS
In order to assign EV alternatives to existing vehicles, each existing vehicle was assigned a label based on its Gross Vehicle Weight Rating and Body Type (e.g., medium duty van). Up to five ICE replacement possibilities and five EV alternatives were assigned to each vehicle label for analysis and the selected replacements were applied to every vehicle with that label. Considering all the vehicle type and department specific considerations above, individual vehicles were updated manually to ensure that only relevant models were included in the comparison and a single model was designated as the 4 https://www.wpr.org/madisons-fire-department-tests-out-fire-truck-runs-electricity 5 https://www.lafd.org/news/lafd-chief-debuts-arrival-first-electric-fire-engine 6 https://www.1fpg.com/electrified

Page 124 of 351 ends

13 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY primary option and used to inform that total cost of ownership and capital budget need calculations completed later in the analysis.

RANGE SUITABILITY
For every EV option assigned to an existing vehicle during the Vehicle Selection process, the “EV Range Viability” was calculated, comparing the range and battery capabilities of the EV option to the driving patterns of the existing vehicle. “EV Range Viability” is determined by doubling the average daily distance driven by each vehicle and confirming the EV replacement range exceeds the maximum daily distance. All of San Luis Obispo’s “Best Fit” and “Potentially Electrifiable” vehicle recommendations (211 total assets) boast viable ranges based on the vehicles historical driving, so EV range is not a major barrier to electrification for the City’s fleet. Most vehicles with EV alternatives falling below 100% of trips within range have Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle (PHEV) options that would switch to gas once the battery was depleted, meaning that while the vehicle could not complete all trips on electric propulsion it would not become stranded on longer trips.

Accounting for Idling, Auxiliary Loads & Vehicle Weight Variations EVs do not idle in the same way as ICE vehicles, but the equipment requiring idling (e.g., air conditioning) will still create a draw on the battery. A significant portion of the City’s fleet is police vehicles, most of which idle for a large percentage of their daily operations. To account for idling of police vehicles, the daily kWh energy usage was adjusted to reflect the higher energy needs and was applied directly as a 25% reduction of the battery state-of-charge of the EV based on operations in police fleets similar in size to San Luis Obispo’s.

The analysis did not require a reduction of the battery state-of-charge due to the added weight of auxiliary equipment because the City’s police fleet is expected to be almost exclusively replaced by Ford F-150 Lightning Special Service Vehicles (SSVs), which are designed specifically for police departments and the equipment included by the manufacturer is accounted for in the vehicle specifications.

TOTAL COST OF OWNERSHIP (TCO) ANALYSIS

TCO METHODOLOGY
Total cost of ownership (TCO) refers to a calculation of adding capital and operating costs of an asset to determine the total cost of that asset over its lifespan. As part of the analysis, the TCO for two different scenarios of vehicle replacement was calculated: (1) an existing vehicle is replaced with an equivalent ICE vehicle and (2) that same existing vehicle is replaced with the equivalent, or nearly equivalent, EV determined the vehicle selection process. Given the age of some of the City’s vehicles, the changing availability of vehicle models in the market and to simplify the analysis, a representative ICE vehicle replacement for each vehicle body type (e.g., Ford Escape for SUV) was used as the equivalent ICE replacement vehicle to create the scenarios in the TCO analysis. The “Representative ICE Replacement” was determined in collaboration with the City’s fleet staff. For heavy-duty vehicles, the ICE replacement vehicle was deemed to be identical to the existing model. It is important to note that the replacement ICE vehicle choice presented here is used to represent the approximate cost of replacing an existing vehicle with a new ICE vehicle and may not perfectly reflect the City’s actual procurement choice to replace an existing vehicle.

For both scenarios, the TCO is the sum of the following cost components:

Page 125 of 351 ends

14 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY ▪ Total purchase price: The sum of the Manufacturer Suggested Retail Price (MSRP) and any auxiliary equipment.

The MSRPs of the vehicles were discussed with the City of San Luis Obispo to ensure that the actual price paid by the City (incorporating fleet procurement discounts) of the proposed vehicles were factored into the analysis.

Available incentives from the Inflation Reduction Act and Central Coast Community Energy were included in the calculation for total purchase price.
▪ Annual fuel cost: This was calculated based on the estimated annual mileage of the studied vehicle. For this calculation, unleaded gasoline is priced at $4.00 and renewable diesel at $5.45, according to the City’s report on their fuel prices. Annual fuel cost for EVs was calculated using the cost of electricity at the domicile facility of the ICE vehicle being replaced. This cost was determined to be $0.26/kWh according to the City’s electricity rate from PG&E (B19S) and does not include costs from any potential increase in demand charges. The potential impacts of escalations in fuel costs (liquid fuel and electricity) can be observed in the Fleet Electrification Pro-Forma provided to San Luis Obispo.
▪ Annual Operations and Maintenance (O&M) cost: The City of San Luis Obispo provided life-to-date maintenance costs for each vehicle in the fleet. For the TCO comparison, an average cost of $0.06 per mile was used for EVs.

The TCO calculations did not include the cost of Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE), as that is being addressed in the Charging Infrastructure Report. All components included in the TCO calculations were calculated over the expected lifespan of the existing vehicle, which ranges from 6 to 20 years depending on the vehicle type.

The TCO calculations do not account for the possibility that electric police patrol vehicles could last longer that than the 6-year lifespan expected of the City’s ICE police patrol vehicles. Initial indications from the City of Fremont’s police patrol pilot project deploying a Tesla Model S as a pursuit vehicle have indicated that the reduced maintenance needs of EVs will likely result in an expected lifespan of longer than 6 years. Despite these indications, this assumption is still being proven through real-world application. Thus, TCO calculations for this project assumed a simple case where both ICE vehicles and EVs in the Police Department are owned for the same amount of time.

Resale Value
The resale value of the vehicle at the end of its lifecycle was not considered in the TCO analysis and was set to zero for both ICE vehicles and EVs. Due to the relatively short amount of time that EVs have been on the market, there is not robust data on the resale value of an EV in use for 10 years. Currently, the City returns revenue earned from sale of retired vehicles to the vehicle replacement fund (VRF) if the vehicle was originally purchased using general funds. Revenue from the sale of water, sewer, and parking vehicles is returned to the City’s department-specific enterprise funds.

TCO BY DEPARTMENT & ELECTRIFICATION CATEGORY
To summarize the TCO calculations across the entire fleet, a summary of TCO by department is included below. Given the large number of vehicles analyzed, detailed TCO calculations for each vehicle are presented in Appendix B.

The following figures summarize the TCO for all expected vehicle electrification purchases by City departments over three time periods, from short-term (2023-2025), medium-term (2026-2030) and long-term (2031-2040). These figures only include City departments that are projected to have vehicle replacements in the given period.

Page 126 of 351 ends

15 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY Under each period, there are figures representing two scenarios. The first figure provides a TCO comparison for only the vehicles included in the Best Fit for Full Electrification category and the second figure provides a TCO comparison for all vehicles with a potential electrification option. Since this second scenario includes EV options that may not be cost effective, the TCO of the electric vehicles is generally higher than for the ICE vehicles.

The time periods segment vehicle purchases by purchase year, but the costs displayed include operating costs expected over the lifetime of the new vehicle stretching from the purchase date through the end of its lifespan. For example, an EV purchased in 2023 with a 10-year life span realizes annual savings for the City through 2033, compared to the alternative scenario of purchasing an ICE vehicle. Those savings are aggregated in the figures below. Dollar amounts are provided in nominal dollars.

FIGURE 6: TCO OF SHORT-TERM VEHICLE PURCHASES (2023-2025) – “BEST FIT” FOR ELECTRIFICATION TABLE 2: TCO OF SHORT-TERM VEHICLE PURCHASES (2023-2025) – “BEST FIT” FOR ELECTRIFICATION DEPARTMENT TOTAL EV TCO ($) TOTAL ICE TCO ($) INCENTIVE TOTAL ($) POLICE $1,124,560 $1,314,269 $214,000
FIRE $242,285 $323,318 $39,500
UTILITIES $811,896 $962,338 $193,000
PUBLIC WORKS $1,695,761 $1,867,344 $417,500
IT $103,741 $116,767 $16,000
PARKS AND REC $165,603 $179,614 $30,500
COMMUNICATIONS $94,891 $119,811 $31,000
ADMIN $- $- $-
TOTAL $4,238,736 $4,883,462 $941,500

Page 127 of 351 ends

16 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY FIGURE 7: TCO OF SHORT-TERM VEHICLE PURCHASES (2023-2025) – POTENTIAL ELECTRIFICATION TABLE 3: TCO OF SHORT-TERM VEHICLE PURCHASES (2023-2025) – POTENTIAL ELECTRIFICATION DEPARTMENT TOTAL EV TCO ($) TOTAL ICE TCO ($) INCENTIVE TOTAL ($) POLICE $1,124,560 $1,314,269 $214,000
FIRE $242,285 $323,318 $39,500
UTILITIES $1,214,812 $1,317,395 $283,000
PUBLIC WORKS $2,304,390 $2,369,253 $552,500
IT $103,741 $116,767 $16,000
PARKS AND REC $165,603 $179,614 $30,500
COMMUNICATIONS $94,891 $119,811 $31,000
ADMIN $- $- $-
TOTAL $5,250,282 $5,740,428 $1,166,500

Page 128 of 351 ends

17 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY FIGURE 8: TCO OF MID-TERM VEHICLE PURCHASES (2026-2030) – “BEST FIT” FOR ELECTRIFICATION TABLE 4: TCO OF MID-TERM VEHICLE PURCHASES (2026-2030) – “BEST FIT” FOR ELECTRIFICATION DEPARTMENT TOTAL EV TCO ($) TOTAL ICE TCO ($) INCENTIVE TOTAL ($) POLICE $1,573,061 $2,099,446 $337,378
FIRE $921,867 $1,430,136 $141,000
UTILITIES $1,044,723 $1,197,615 $225,000
PUBLIC WORKS $1,132,371 $1,260,147 $258,500
IT $49,416 $39,401 $7,000
PARKS AND REC $118,579 $120,137 $29,000
COMMUNICATIONS $108,926 $122,090 $27,000
ADMIN $59,169 $59,843 $14,500
TOTAL $5,008,112 $6,328,816 $1,039,378

Page 129 of 351 ends

18 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY FIGURE 9: TCO OF MID-TERM VEHICLE PURCHASES (2026-2030) – POTENTIAL ELECTRIFICATION TABLE 5: TCO OF MID-TERM VEHICLE PURCHASES (2026-2030) – POTENTIAL ELECTRIFICATION DEPARTMENT TOTAL EV TCO ($) TOTAL ICE TCO ($) INCENTIVE TOTAL ($) POLICE $2,077,471 $2,530,398 $432,378
FIRE $921,867 $1,430,136 $141,000
UTILITIES $2,190,899 $1,958,113 $495,000
PUBLIC WORKS $2,526,052 $2,271,946 $573,500
IT $49,416 $39,401 $7,000
PARKS AND REC $685,124 $629,024 $164,000
COMMUNICATIONS $108,926 $122,090 $27,000
ADMIN $59,169 $59,843 $14,500
TOTAL $8,618,923 $9,040,951 $1,854,378
When only considering the Best Fit scenario, over the lifespan of the vehicles purchased, near-term electrification is estimated to increase costs for the City ($100,000 more expensive) without incentives and mid-term electrification has the potential to save the City about $300,000 without incentives. Under the Potential Electrification scenario, near-term electrification is estimated to cost the City about $600,000 over the lifetime of the vehicles and mid-term electrification is expected to cost the City about $1,400,000. The Potential Electrification scenario is more expensive for the City primarily due to the current cost differences between ICE and EV heavy-duty options, including fire engines. TCO calculations in the long-term do not include any assumptions for reduced purchase prices of EV models over the next 10 years, which are

Page 130 of 351 ends

19 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY likely to change the financial outlook. There are a few uncertain factors that could impact these savings estimates, as described below:
▪ If purchased EVs last longer than current ICE vehicles, the estimated savings will increase. ▪ If purchased EVs last less than current ICE vehicles, the estimated savings will decrease. ▪ If it is determined that EV Police pursuit vehicles can consistently outlast the expected 6-year lifespan of ICE pursuit vehicles, savings in the Police Department could increase significantly.

Overall, falling MSRPs of long-range EVs, lower fuel costs and lower maintenance costs combine to enable EVs to provide cost savings, as well as emissions reductions, to the City’s fleet. This is particularly true for vehicles with high mileage, such as the Police Department where high fuel and maintenance costs represent additional room for cost savings.

Page 131 of 351 ends

20 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY

ESTIMATED CAPITAL BUDGET NEEDS FOR VEHICLE REPLACEMENT
Despite the potential for TCO savings resulting from vehicle electrification, in most cases, based on current market prices, replacing an existing vehicle with an electric option will require higher upfront capital costs than replacing the same vehicle with an ICE option. Figure 10 and Figure 11 include estimated annual capital budget required to purchase EVs for the City’s fleet. The total size of the green and blue bars combined is the capital cost that would be necessary without incentives; the blue bar in isolation is the capital cost that will be required with incentives. Savings are observed in the total cost of ownership due to fuel and maintenance savings making up the gap between the blue and red bars over the lifetimes of the vehicles.

FIGURE 10: ESTIMATED CAPITAL BUDGET NEEDS – “BEST FIT” FOR ELECTRIFICATION FIGURE 11: ESTIMATED CAPITAL BUDGET NEEDS – POTENTIAL ELECTRIFICATION

Page 132 of 351 ends

21 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY It is important to note that the budget needs included in Figure 11 include EV options that may not yet be in full production or are chassis conversions requiring custom building, both of which increase purchase costs. For example, the Pierce Volterra Pumper is an all-electric fire engine option that, while deployed in at least one real-world application in the U.S., has not reached widespread adoption and costs approximately $1.2 million to purchase. It should be expected that capital budget requirements for models like the Volterra will fall between now and when the City is required to make replacement decisions in the outer years.

DISCUSSION OF OWNERSHIP MODELS: OWNED VS LEASED
The City traditionally purchases fleet assets and that is the ownership structure that was assumed throughout this analysis.

The City of San Luis Obispo should continue to purchase and own vehicles because it is the most cost-effective approach for the fleet. Leasing electric vehicles, particularly light-duty options, is an increasingly available ownership model with the potential to further reduce the burden of vehicle maintenance. Leasing opportunities for municipal fleets are offered through Sourcewell and the Climate Mayors EV Collaborative.7 There are two common types of leasing: fleet leasing or lease financing. Fleet leasing refers to a contract that enables vehicle leasing, often a large number of vehicles, that encompasses maintenance costs, fuel costs and other services. It is appealing for fleets that do not have in-house maintenance operations and are interested in outsourcing a significant portion of fleet management. Lease financing refers to a contract that provides a vehicle without fleet management services and is similar to the structure of a lease for a personal vehicle. Within lease financing, there are two common types: closed- and open-ended leases. Closed-ended leases have a set term, after which the City returns the vehicle.

Closed-ended leases enable fleets to phase new vehicle models into their fleet quickly and monthly payments are often lower than other options, but the City does not retain ownership of the asset at the end of the lease.8 Open-ended leases 7 https://driveevfleets.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/NCL_OneSheet_ClimateMayors.pdf 8 Saving Money with Electric Vehicle Leasing: A Case Study of City Fleets, Electrification Coalition, November 2020

Page 133 of 351 ends

22 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY are essentially a financing mechanism allowing the City to pay down the cost of a vehicle over the term of the lease, often down to a $1 buy out, enabling the City to maintain ownership of the asset at the end of the lease term.

Historically, a public agency such as the City of San Luis Obispo may have chosen to lease EVs from a 3rd party in order to realize incentives that were not available to entities that are tax-exempt. As of the time this report is being developed, the EV rebates available from the federal government through recent bills have been extended to City governments and other public agencies.

Page 134 of 351 ends

23 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY

CARBON REDUCTIONS FROM FLEET ELECTRIFICATION
Figure 12 summarizes total, annual carbon emissions from the City’s fleet by percent contribution of each department. To account for the impacts of COVID-19 on vehicle use, fuel usage from 2019 and 2021 was used to calculate baseline carbon emissions. The total carbon emissions associated with the City’s fleet is 845 MTCO2. 9 FIGURE 12: ANNUAL CARBON EMISSIONS OF VEHICLE FLEET BY DEPARTMENT- 2021 The expected carbon reductions from fleet electrification are presented below based on the Fleet Replacement and Electrification Timeline. Figure 13 includes projected carbon reductions under three electrification scenarios matching those discussed previously in this report.
▪ “Best Fit” for Full Electrification (Current Technology): The first scenario considers the electrification of only vehicles that can be fully electrified based on current technology (i.e., those vehicles categorized as “Best Fit” for Full Electrification).
▪ “Potential Electrification” (Current Technology Plus): This scenario considers the electrification of all “Best Fit” vehicles as well as the Potentially Electrifiable vehicles. ▪ Full Electrification: The final scenario includes all vehiclesin the previous scenarios as well asthe full electrification of all vehicles identified as having no electric option currently available in the market, including full electrification 9 This is calculating emissions of the 211 studied vehicles. Eight vehicles (3745, 5446, 5458, 5470, 8327, 8328, 2827, 7106) did not have fuel usage provided and estimated annual GHG emissions were calculated based on vehicle mileage.

Page 135 of 351 ends

24 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY of vehicles that are currently only candidates for partial electrification via an ePTO. This is included as a representative scenario and does not specify vehicle models/technologies used to achieve electrification but assumes sufficient technology advancement to electrify every vehicle that comes up for replacement through 2040.

FIGURE 13: EMISSION REDUCTION SCENARIOS THROUGH 2040
By 2030, the Best Fit scenario (blue line), above, represents a 63% reduction in carbon emissions, the Best Fit + Potential scenario (yellow line) represents a 76% reduction in carbon emissions and the Full Electrification scenario (orange line) represents an 88% reduction in carbon emissions. Extending the Full Electrification Scenario leads to a 93% reduction in carbon emissions from the City fleet by 2040.

ERROR! REFERENCE SOURCE NOT FOUND.

While the past few years have witnessed significant growth in the availability and adoption of consumer electric vehicles, the electromobility industry is in a period of rapid growth. While many additional models are expected to become available in the next few years, municipal fleets like the City of San Luis Obispo’s are typically comprised of significant numbers of specialty vehicles including medium and heavy-duty vehicles for which few electric substitutes are currently available from mass-market suppliers. In cases where electric substitute vehicles will not be commercially available through standard procurement mechanisms in the near-term, several other options may be worth considering, including:
▪ Partial electrification: One way to reduce emissions on ICE vehicles for which cost-effective EV substitutions are not available is the electrification of auxiliary loads with stored energy using mobile batteries. Several aerial bucket

Page 136 of 351 ends

25 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY trucks in the Utilities department have been identified as potential candidates. Under this option, traction power would still be provided by gas or diesel engines, but batteries could be used to reduce idle times, saving fuel and cutting emissions.

NEXT STEPS
IMMEDIATE (2023-2025) ELECTRIFICATION OPTIONS & TOTAL COST OF OWNERSHIP A summary of the identified EV alternatives and associated total cost of ownership for immediate vehicle replacements (2023-2025) is included to guide immediate action by the City of San Luis Obispo. Table 6 summarizes the total upfront investment and TCO for the ICE and the best fit EV alternative for all vehicles to be replaced for each year. This table also identifies the total number of vehicles to be electrified, which is consistent with the numbers presented in the Electrification Timeline. This table only includes vehicles that were identified as a “Best Fit” for Full Electrification. The number of vehicles to be electrified could be increased if the City confirms feasible models for vehicles in the Potential Electrification category.

TABLE 6: UPFRONT COST & TCO SUMMARY FOR IMMEDIATE VEHICLE ELECTRIFICATION

REPLACEMENT
YEAR
# OF VEHICLES
TO BE

ELECTRIFIED

ICE VEHICLE RECOMMENDED EV ALTERNATIVE

MSRP TCO MSRP TCO

TCO REDUCTION

FROM VEHICLE

ELECTRIFICATION
2023 33 $979,603 $2,090,883 $1,314,722 $1,882,257 $208,626 2024 22 $632,998 $1,390,270 $775,028 $1,160,097 $230,173 2025 15 $448,400 $1,071,686 $587,514 $905,274 $166,412
TOTAL 70 $2,061,001 $4,552,839 $2,677,265 $3,947,628 $605,211 The recommended vehicle replacement timeline detailed in this report aims to ensure the City achieves its goal of reaching full electrification of light-duty vehicles and 50% electrification of medium- and heavy-duty vehicles by 2030. This is considered the best-case scenario for the City and may be modified during implementation to account for procurement challenges and budget limitations. The City may modify the vehicle replacement timeline by editing the replacement year of each vehicle in the Fleet Electrification Pro Forma, which is a separate Excel-based deliverable.

OTHER NEAR-TERM VEHICLE REPLACEMENTS
About one tenth of the vehicles studied in this analysis do not have a clear electric option currently available in 2023 or imminently available in 2024 and the City will need to reassess the electrification potential of each of those vehicles as they come up for replacement. Depending on the vehicle, the City can either pursue an alternative electrification or emissions reduction option or delay the vehicle replacement and wait for an equivalent EV to become available, even if it means extending a vehicle’s service life beyond what is optimal.

Page 137 of 351 ends

26 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION VEHICLE STUDY In 2023 and 2024 there are 6 vehicles that will come up for replacement that are categorized in the Potential Electrification or No Electric Options category. For these vehicles, the City can consider the following options to determine the appropriate course of action.
▪ Option 1 – Reassess the Market: The City can search for available equivalent options to identify any new models/technologies that have entered the market since the end of 2023. ▪ Option 2 – Vehicle Downsizing: In some cases, the City is already implementing vehicle downsizing, but there is potential to expand that practice to more vehicles in the fleet. For example, 21 Ford F-250 pick-ups will be replaced with Ford F-150 Lightnings. Through conversations with City staff operating the pickup trucks, it can then be determined whether an individual vehicle can be downsized, or if specific operational requirements prevent that. ▪ Option 3 – Delayed Replacement: If no suitable EV option is identified and vehicle downsizing is not an option, the City can consider keeping the vehicle in the fleet for a year or two more to wait for a viable EV option. The budget for replacing the existing vehicle could be earmarked for an appropriate EV replacement if it becomes available during the delay time.
▪ Option 4 – Pilot Chassis Conversion Technology or Less Cost-effective OEM Offering: In cases where there is a suitable electric option, but that option may be from an aftermarket vendor or is a new EV model that is significantly more expensive than its ICE counterpart, the City may still want to purchase the EV option to meet environmental goals and pilot new technologies within the fleet.

Page 138 of 351 ends

THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.

Page 139 of 351 ends

28 APPENDIX A: VEHICLE INCENTIVES

Page 140 of 351 ends

29 APPENDIX A: VEHICLE INCENTIVES
The City of San Luis Obispo’s efforts toward fleet electrification and installing EV charging infrastructure are eligible for rebates from the Inflation Reduction Act and the City’s community choice aggregator, Central Coast Community Energy (CCCE). This section summarizes those funding opportunities.

INFLATION REDUCTION ACT
New plug-in battery electric vehicles (EVs) purchased in 2023 or after may be eligible for a tax credit from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). The Inflation Reduction Act includes a Commercial Clean Vehicle credit, which applies to both businesses and tax-exempt organizations (such as local governments). For EVs, this credit equals the lesser of 30% the vehicle’s price or the incremental cost of the vehicle, up to $7,500 for light-duty vehicles under a GVWR or 14,000 pounds and $40,000 for vehicles above. There is no limit on the number of credits that can be claimed. There are a few additional requirements, including minimum battery sizes (7 kWh for light-duty and 15 kWh for medium- and heavy-duty), vehicle use case (the vehicle must be used primarily in the United States and must not be for resale), and manufacturer. A list of qualified manufacturers may be found here:
https://www.irs.gov/credits-deductions/manufacturers-for-qualified-commercial-clean-vehicle-credit, while more information on the tax credits available to commercial fleets as a whole may be found here:
https://www.irs.gov/credits-deductions/commercial-clean-vehicle-credit.

CENTRAL COAST COMMUNITY ENERGY (CCCE)
For as long as funds are available, purchase of fleet EVs (light, medium, and heavy duty) are eligible for direct rebates under CCCE’s Electrify Your Fleet program. The City of SAN LUIS OBISPO is eligible for up to $150,000 in rebates through the program.10
10 https://3cenergy.org/rebates/electrify-your-fleet-2/

Page 141 of 351 ends

30 HYBRID AND ZERO-EMISSION TRUCK AND BUS VOUCHER INCENTIVE PROJECT (HVIP) Purchasers of EVs and PHEVs, including local governments, can access grant funding provided by California Air Resource Board (CARB) on a first-come, first-served basis. For FY22-23, the total program funding is $250M.

Eligible vehicles can be found using the online HVIP catalogue. Base funding amounts per gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) are included in the table below.11
11 https://californiahvip.org/

Page 142 of 351 ends

31 THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.

Page 143 of 351 ends

32 APPENDIX B: FLEET DATABASE & TOTAL COST OF OWNERSHIP APPENDIX B: FLEET DATABASE & DETAILED TCO ANALYSIS (EXCEL ATTACHMENT) The detailed results of the Total Cost of Ownership calculations have been provided to the City separately from this document in an Excel spreadsheet. This comprehensive vehicle database allows the City to sort results by any category necessary including Department and Replacement Year.

Page 144 of 351 ends

THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.

Page 145 of 351 ends

34 APPENDIX C: COST OF CARBON ABATEMENT

Page 146 of 351 ends

35 APPENDIX C: COST OF CARBON ABATEMENT CALCULATIONS
To provide guidance for the City’s budget towards the most cost-effective vehicles for emissions reductions, the following tables summarize the marginal cost, or savings, of vehicle electrification on a capital cost and total cost of ownership basis, the associated carbon reductions, and the cost of carbon abatement on a dollar per ton basis.

Incentives and rebates are included in marginal cost values. The incremental cost of carbon reductions is calculated for 2023–2030 under the Current Technology and Potential Electrification scenarios described above.

TABLE 7: INCREMENTAL COST OF CARBON REDUCTION – “BEST FIT” SCENARIO DEPARTMENT # OF

VEHICLES
CARBON

REDUCTIONS
(MTCO2)

MARGINAL

CAPITAL
COSTS ($)

MARGINAL

TOTAL COST OF

OWNERSHIP
($)

COST OF
ABATEMENT –

CAPITAL COST
($/MTCO2)

COST OF
ABATEMENT –
TCO ($/MTCO2)
2023 – 2025 VEHICLE REPLACEMENTS
POLICE 18 142.14 $123,400 -$189,710 $868 -$1,335
FIRE 4 2.97 $41,271 -$81,033 $13,884 -$27,260
UTILITIES 16 35.26 $121,473 -$150,442 $3,445 -$4,266
PUBLIC WORKS 30 92.90 $318,715 -$171,582 $3,431 -$1,847 IT 2 5.86 $22,300 -$13,026 $3,808 -$2,224
PARKS AND REC 3 4.87 $35,971 -$14,011 $7,392 -$2,879
COMMUNICATIONS 3 1.84 -$3,928 -$24,920 -$2,133 -$13,531 ADMIN 0 0.00 $0 $0 INF INF
2026 – 2030 VEHICLE REPLACEMENTS
POLICE 29 127.68 -$1,740 -$526,385 -$14 -$4,123
FIRE 12 25.73 $113,828 -$508,269 $4,424 -$19,753
UTILITIES 17 41.25 $186,357 -$152,892 $4,518 -$3,707
PUBLIC WORKS 19 79.20 $223,371 -$127,777 $2,820 -$1,613 IT 1 0.46 $17,000 $10,015 $37,361 $22,010
PARKS AND REC 2 6.21 $27,343 -$1,558 $4,404 -$251
COMMUNICATIONS 3 3.80 $15,900 -$13,164 $4,179 -$3,460
ADMIN 1 1 3.50 $13,671 -$674 $3,905

Page 147 of 351 ends

36 TABLE 8: INCREMENTAL COST OF CARBON REDUCTION – POTENTIAL ELECTRIFICATION SCENARIO DEPARTMENT # OF

VEHICLES
CARBON

REDUCTIONS
(MTCO2)

MARGINAL

CAPITAL
COSTS ($)

MARGINAL

TOTAL COST OF
OWNERSHIP ($)

COST OF

ABATEMENT
– CAPITAL
COST
($/MTCO2)

COST OF

ABATEMENT
– TCO
($/MTCO2)
2023 – 2025 VEHICLE REPLACEMENTS
POLICE 18 142.14 $123,400 -$189,710 $868 -$1,335
FIRE 4 2.97 $41,271 -$81,033 $13,884 -$27,260
UTILITIES 18 45.49 $273,623 -$102,583 $6,015 -$2,255
PUBLIC WORKS 33 103.28 $560,141 -$64,862 $5,423 -$628
IT 2 5.86 $22,300 -$13,026 $3,808 -$2,224
PARKS AND REC 3 4.87 $35,971 -$14,011 $7,392 -$2,879
COMMUNICATIONS 3 1.84 -$3,928 -$24,920 -$2,133 -$13,531 ADMIN 0 0.00 $0 $0 INF INF
2026 – 2030 VEHICLE REPLACEMENTS
POLICE 32 132.31 $156,910 -$452,926 $1,186 -$3,423
FIRE 12 25.73 $113,828 -$508,269 $4,424 -$19,753
UTILITIES 23 62.50 $714,733 $232,786 $11,435 $3,724
PUBLIC WORKS 26 121.80 $832,222 $254,106 $6,833 $2,086
IT 1 0.46 $17,000 $10,015 $37,361 $22,010
PARKS AND REC 5 28.98 $242,368 $56,099 $8,363 $1,936
COMMUNICATIONS 3 3.80 $15,900 -$13,164 $4,179 -$3,460
ADMIN 1 1 3.50 $13,671 -$674 $3,905

Page 148 of 351 ends

Page | 1

CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION EVI NEEDS REPORT Fleet Electrification Study
Charging Infrastructure Report

Page 149 of 351 ends

THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.

Page 150 of 351 ends

Cover photo by Robert Smrekar on Flickr.

REPORT PREPARED BY:

Optony Inc.
5201 Great America Parkway, Suite 320
Santa Clara, CA 95054
www.OptonyUSA.com
March 2023

Page 151 of 351 ends

THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.

Page 152 of 351 ends

TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................................2 BACKGROUND.........................................................................................................................................................................4 APPROACH SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................................5 METHODOLOGY.......................................................................................................................................................................6 INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS & CAPITAL COST ESTIMATES................................................................................................... 11 IMPLEMENTATION OF EV CHARGING INFRASTRUCTURE .................................................................................................. 14 APPENDIX A: FLEET ELECTRIFICATION PRO FORMA........................................................................................................... 16 APPENDIX B: INCREMENTAL COST OF CARBON REDUCTION ............................................................................................ 17

LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1: CUMULATIVE VEHICLE ELECTRIFICATION BY FACILITY...................................................................................... 4 FIGURE 2: EVI ANALYSIS APPROACH.................................................................................................................................... 5 FIGURE 3: ESTIMATED EV CHARGING INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS (2025 – BASE NEEDS) .............................................12 FIGURE 4: ESTIMATED EV CHARGING INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS (2030 - BASE NEEDS WITH BUILDING UPGRADES)13

ACRONYMS & DEFINITIONS
EVI Electric vehicle infrastructure; referring to the charging station, required mounting, conduit, transformers and other balance of system equipment needed to supply electricity to electric vehicles.
kW Kilowatt; a unit of power equal to 1,000 Watts; when used for solar PV system sizes, refers to the maximum instantaneous output of a solar panel (module) or system (for larger PV systems rating is generally in MW, Megawatt, or 1,000 kW).
kWh Kilowatt-hour: a unit of energy equal to 3,600 kilojoules, or equivalent to the product of 1 kW of constant power used or produced, over 1 hour.

Levelized Cost of
Charging (LCOC)
Levelized cost of charging is a metric used to compare the cost of serving EV load across multiple sites with different metering scenarios, load management strategies and DER mixes. It is calculated by dividing the total annual cost of serving load ($) by the total load served (kWh).

Managed Charging The practice of adjusting an EV charging profile to optimize for cost and charge when electricity is cheaper or reduce coincident peak load.

Time-of-Use (TOU) A utility billing structure for electricity where the retail price of electricity varies depending on the time of day, time of year and/or day of the week in which the electricity is being used.

Unmanaged
Charging
The practice of allowing EV charging profiles to match natural driver/vehicle behavior, such that charging begins at the time of plug in and ends at the driver plug out time, or when the vehicle battery is fully charged (whichever occurs first).

Page 153 of 351 ends

1 THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.

Page 154 of 351 ends

2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report accompanies the vehicle study for the City of San Luis Obispo’s fleet electrification plan. The City’s has set a goal to transition its municipal fleet by reaching 100% electrification of light-duty vehicles and 50% electrification of medium- and heavy-duty vehicles by 2030. As a result, there is a need for the City to install EV charging infrastructure at its primary domicile locations. Three sites were identified by the City as priority sites that will support a majority of the vehicle electrification over the next two decades. Those priority sites are the Corp Yard, 919 Palm Parking Garage, and Fire Station 1, which currently serve as domicile facilities for the majority of the fleet, and 1109 Walnut, as well as the future new Public Safety Center.

Analysis suggests that across all sites 31 Level 2 ports and 6 Level 3 ports would be required by 2025 and an incremental 37 Level 2 ports and 15 Level 3 ports by 2030. Installation of the 89 total ports is estimated to cost approximately $5,327,288 through 2030 and will support the charging of 211 fleet vehicles located at 10 sites. The total EV charging infrastructure project cost will be approximately $2,883,769 after incentives.

The cost estimates are subject to variability and uncertainty given the rapid expansion and evolving nature of the EV industry. Recent research has shown that charging infrastructure costs are subject to a similar experience curve as the solar industry, with material costs expected to decline over time, while soft costs such as site assessment, utility interconnection, and permitting remain high, unpredictable, and site-specific.1In order to minimize costs and ensure the successful implementation of EV charging infrastructure, it is recommended that the City engage in planning and coordination with stakeholders, including PG&E, during the implementation of the enclosed recommendations. It is also recommended that the City utilize incentives and grants from PG&E, the State, and Federal governments to offset the costs of EV charging infrastructure installation.

Overall, the installation of EV charging infrastructure for the City’s municipal fleet is a critical step in reducing carbon emissions and leading by example to promote the use of clean energy transportation. By following the enclosed recommendations, the City can achieve its goal of 100% electric light-duty and 50% electric medium- and heavy-duty vehicles by 2030.

On the following page, Table 1 summarizes infrastructure needs across 11 domicile facilities based on 2025 and 2030 infrastructure buildout, which are detailed in this report. In the table, the infrastructure needs in 2030 are cumulative and include 2025 needs. It is assumed that the majority of make-ready infrastructure costs are incurred in the first phase of construction (2023-2025) and additional charging stations are added by 2030. 1 Chris Nelder and Emily Rogers, Reducing EV Charging Infrastructure Costs, Rocky Mountain Institute, 2019, https://rmi.org/ev-charging-costs

Page 155 of 351 ends

3 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION EVI NEEDS REPORT

PROJECTED INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS BY SITE
This section summarizes infrastructure needs for 2025 and 2030 across all domicile facilities. In Table 1, the infrastructure needs in 2030 are cumulative and include 2025 needs.

TABLE 1: SUMMARY OF INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS
SITE
2025 2030
# OF EVs (%
OF TOTAL) # OF PORTS VEHICLE TO PORT RATIO
# OF EVs (%
OF TOTAL) # OF PORTS VEHICLE TO PORT RATIO
919 PW ADMIN 12 (80%)
3 x 6.6 kW
4 x 11.5 kW
1 x 25 kW

1.5 15 (100%)
7 x 6.6 kW
4 x 11.5 kW
2 x 25 kW

1.15 CORP YARD 33 (52%)
2 x 6.6 kW
12 x 11.5 kW
1 x 25 kW

2.2 63 (100%)
4 x 6.6 kW
22 x 11.5 kW
2 x 25 kW
1 x Freewire

2.2 LAGUNA LAKE GOLF COURSE 0 (0%) 2 x 11.5 kW 0 1 (100%) 2 x 11.5 kW 0.5 MARSH PARKING STRUCTURE 2 (50%) 1 x 6.6 kW 2.0 4 (100%) 1 x 6.6 kW 1 x 11.5 kW 2.0
NEW POLICE DEPARTMENT 0 (0%) No ports in 2025 0 30 (100%) 8 x 6.6 kW
1 x 11.5 kW
8 x 25 kW

1.8 SLO SWIM CENTER 3 (100%) 1 x 6.6 kW
1 x 11.5 kW 1.5 3 (100%) 1 x 6.6 kW1 x 11.5 kW 1.5
WASTEWATER PLANT (WRRF) 5 (50%) 1 x 6.6 kW
1 x 11.5 kW 2.5 10 (100%) 1 x 6.6 kW1 x 11.5 kW 5.0
WATER TREATMENT PLANT (WTP) 1 (33%) 1 x 11.5 kW 1 3 (100%) 1 x 11.5 kW 3.0 FIRE STATION 1 4 (25%) 1 x 6.6 kW
2 x 11.5 kW 1.3 16 (100%) 7 x 6.6 kW8 x 11.5 kW 1.1
842 PACIFIC PARKING 5 (71%) No ports No new ports
recommended 0 (100%) No ports No new ports recommended
1109 WALNUT PD 11 (55%) 4 x 25 kW 2.75 20 (100%) 2 x 6.6 kW 8 x 25 kW 2.0

Page 156 of 351 ends

4 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION EVI NEEDS REPORT

BACKGROUND
The report provides an analysis of the future electric vehicle infrastructure (EVI) needs across ten of the City of San Luis Obispo’s fleet domicile facilities. Additional analysis is provided for priority sites expected to house most electric vehicles purchased by the City. The sites chosen for additional study are the Corp Yard, 919 Palm Parking, Fire Station 1, 1109 Walnut, and the Public Safety Center after it is constructed. The report builds directly on previous analysis by the Project Team that identified vehicle electrification opportunities and a vehicle electrification timeline for the City’s fleet. Figure 1 summarizes the vehicle electrification timeline and growth in annual electricity load for the City’s domicile facilities. The infrastructure needs identified for each site are based on the timeline below and focused on 2025 and 2030.

As presented in the report, vehicles are assigned to different domicile facilities by Optony. Though some of these vehicles may occasionally be parked in alternative locations, for clarity they are currently sorted according to their initial domicile assignment in the year they are electrified, per Optony’s recommendations based on the City’s requests and needs. For example, police vehicles may domicile at 1109 Walnut, 919 Palm Parking, and City Hall due to construction at the current Police Station location. Those police vehicles electrifying before the completion of the new Public Safety Center building are assigned in this report to those facilities, while police vehicles electrifying after the completion of the new Public Safety Center are assigned to that facility. Despite this, the full EV load that the new Public Safety Center will eventually need to shoulder is being accounted for in making charger recommendations for that facility.

FIGURE 1: CUMULATIVE VEHICLE ELECTRIFICATION BY FACILITY

Page 157 of 351 ends

5 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION EVI NEEDS REPORT

APPROACH SUMMARY
Figure 2, below, outlines the general approach used in the detailed EVI analysis. Each step in this approach is further discussed in the following sections.

FIGURE 2: EVI ANALYSIS APPROACH
•Based on the Current Technology Plus scenario
identified in the vehicle analysis, calculate
annual expected EV charging needs (kWh) by
domicile facility
Aggregation of Energy
Needs by Site
•Analyze fueling transaction reports, telematic
data and qualitative data on vehicle operations
to determine accurate vehicle duty cycles,
minimum dwell times and probabilistic
distributions of charging times
Duty Cycle Analysis
•Based on duty cycle analysis, calculate
required minimum port ratings (kW) for each
site, or a mix of port ratings depending on
vehicle type
Identify Required Port
Ratings
•Leverage probablistic charging distributions to
model 10-year load growth from vehicle
electrification down to the 15-min interval
(only completed for priority sites)
Load Modeling
•Determine amount (# of ports) of charging
infrastructure required to support future load
and estimate cost of required infrastructure
Charging Infrastructure
Needs Identification &
Cost Estimate
•Calculate annual energy costs associated with
operation of required infrastructure and EV
load growth based on relevant electrical rates
and determine the levelized cost of charging
on a per kWh basis
Energy Cost Simulation

Page 158 of 351 ends

6 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION EVI NEEDS REPORT

METHODOLOGY
When determining required charging infrastructure to support fleet electrification, there are two primary constraints that must be solved for:
• First, charging ports must have power high enough to charge vehicles during their dwell time. Appropriate port ratings (kW) may vary by vehicle type or use case.
• Second, there must be enough charging ports to provide sufficient energy to every vehicle parked at each domicile facility.

Solving for both constraints enables site-specific recommendations of charging infrastructure needs to be made for every domicile facility based on the energy needs and operating patterns of the vehicles at a given site, enabling a fleet to costeffectively plan for implementation.

Since the purpose of long-term charging infrastructure planning is to enable San Luis Obispo to cost-effectively phase implementation of charging infrastructure with future needs in mind, this analysis relies on the “Current Technology Plus” scenario for vehicle electrification identified during the vehicle analysis. While it is likely that, due to expected expansion of medium- and heavy-duty electric vehicle options, San Luis Obispo will not purchase the exact electric models identified during the vehicle analysis, the required energy needs calculated will remain reflective of future needs. Thus, leveraging an aggressive vehicle electrification scenario ensures that charging infrastructure recommendations are sufficient to support all possible vehicle electrification and avoid the need for expensive retrofits.

DATA SOURCES
Two primary data sources were used to assess the dwell times, identify required port ratings and calculate charging probabilities for San Luis Obispo’s fleet.
▪ Fueling Transactions: A record of every fueling transaction completed by existing ICE vehicles in 2019 and 2021 was analyzed to inform required port ratings and provide insight into when vehicles currently fuel. Based on the best fit EV for each existing vehicle, existing fueling events were converted to charging events to assess minimum, maximum, and average charging times that could be expected if each existing vehicle were converted to electric and continued to fuel as it does today. Additionally, the time distribution and length of these synthetic charging events were used to create charging probabilities (discussed further below). ▪ Staff Interviews: Interviews with fleet staff were used to supplemental qualitative information on how vehicles operate. Interviews focused on areas that were not reflected in the quantitative data collected, namely emergency operations of Utility vehicles and shift patterns of Police patrol vehicles.

DUTY CYCLE ANALYSIS & PORT POWER RATINGS
Fueling transaction data and staff interviews were leveraged in different ways to analyze vehicle duty cycles in order to identify dwell times and combined with expected per vehicle energy needs to identify required port ratings for each facility. In some cases, multiple port ratings were identified for a single facility due to differences in the operations of subsets of vehicles located at a particular facility. For police patrol vehicles in the City’s fleet, average dwell times were approximately 12 hours between shifts. Dwell times were compared with vehicle energy needs to identify a common port

Page 159 of 351 ends

7 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION EVI NEEDS REPORT power rating needed to provide the required daily energy during an average dwell time. For the Corp Yard, a facility with many medium- and heavy-duty vehicles, these initial recommendations were refined based on vehicle type. Fueling transactions converted to charging events were analyzed to filter out vehicles, usually those with large battery capacities, that may require charge times longer than the average dwell time in certain instances when the battery is depleted. The result was identification of two subsets of vehicles that required ports with higher power than the initial 6.6 kW recommendation.

POLICE VEHICLES
Due to their unique duty cycles and operational demands, vehicles in the police department were analyzed separately.

These vehicles were split into two categories reflecting different duty cycles: admin and patrol. Admin units are assumed to follow similar duty cycles as a standard vehicle in the City’s fleet, with daily driving and long overnight dwell time. Patrol vehicles were assumed to require charge times that could be achieved during an off shift. An analysis of the daily energy needs for special units indicated that 25 kW ports would be sufficient to provide every vehicle’s average daily energy requirement in about 1.5 hours, and full charge (from 0% to 100%) in approximately 3 hours.

A summary of the vehicle dwell times identified by facility is provided in Table 2.

TABLE 2: VEHICLE DWELL TIME BY SITE

SITE DWELL TIME
POLICE DEPARTMENT 11-13 hours between shifts, periodic emergency responses

CORP YARD
No dwell times calculated (no telematic data)

MARSH PARKING STRUCTURE
919 PW ADMIN

SLO SWIM CENTER

WASTEWATER PLANT (WRRF)

WATER TREATMENT PLANT (WTP)
FIRE STATION 1

SLO TRANSIT (NO VEHICLES)

MANAGED CHARGING POTENTIAL
For many fleets, employing managed charging strategies that use the charging station software to limit the hours in the day when vehicles can charge are effective for reducing the cost of charging. In the case of San Luis Obispo, however, modeling for EV charging was based off an average cost of electricity at each domicile. As such, a managed charging scenario may result in additional savings beyond what is reported here.

LOAD MODELING & OVERALL INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS
After determining port ratings, the number of ports required must be calculated. On facilities with a small number of vehicles this was determined by adding charging ports and manually calculating the minimum number of ports that could provide the required daily energy in the expected dwell time. For larger sites, a sophisticated probabilistic load modeling technique was used, as described below.

Page 160 of 351 ends

8 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION EVI NEEDS REPORT

CHARGING PROBABILITIES
To enable accurate modeling of load growth over time and identification of total charging infrastructure needs in 2025 and 2030 at sites with many vehicles, a site-specific, annual, probabilistic method was used. Depending on the characteristics of the vehicles domiciled at each site, the distribution of fueling transactions and the distribution when vehicles are parked determined from the telematic data were converted to a probability distribution that indicated the chance that a vehicle was charging in each 15-min interval of a given week. For emergency vehicles, such as those in the Police Department, there is limited flexibility available in vehicle fueling patterns. Given operational requirements, vehicles, even after conversion to electric, must charge in the same way that they are fueling today. Emergency vehicles do not have 12 hours overnight to charge. As such, the distribution of current fueling transactions is the most appropriate data source to determine when those vehicles will be charging once they are converted to electric. In contrast, vehicles without daily emergency response requirements, such as those in the Public Works department, have significant flexibility to change fueling patterns once they are electrified. For these vehicles, the distribution of when vehicles are parked is the most appropriate data source to determine when those vehicles will be charging once they are converted to electric.

The weekly charging probability profile represents an average expectation for which time intervals are most and least likely to be used for charging by a vehicle during a work week. Since probability distributions differ depending on the number of EVs at a site, and that number is expected to increase each year, different distributions were created for each year at each site. Once probability profiles were established, projected EV load profiles were constructed by site and by year based on the total number of vehicles, required port ratings and annual energy requirements of those vehicles.

LOAD PROFILE BUILDER
In order to simulate the electric load profiles from charging of a future electric vehicle fleet, the Project Team utilized an internal modeling tool to build time dependent load profiles. The load profile builder leverages the weekly probability profiles discussed above to take an index of 672 numbers (the number of 15-minute intervals in a week), where each number represents the likelihood that a random charging interval will occur on that day and time. Once the charging probability indices are determined, the user provides additional inputs to the load profile builder. The load profile builder was given these fixed inputs for each department site in each year studied:
▪ Number of EVs at each facility2
▪ The total annual amount of electrical energy needed to fuel all EVs domiciled at each facility from 2023 to 2035 ▪ Maximum number of ports available
▪ The power rating of each port, as determined for each site, with different port ratings for different sub-classes of fleet vehicles, as appropriate3
▪ The site’s rate structure, if applicable
▪ Whether the load profile should be built to allow unrestricted charging according to driver behavior and ignore TOU pricing impacts; or manage charging to avoid highest TOU cost impacts ▪ The time at which overnight and weekend charging treatment should be assumed for vehicles which are exclusively used during normal business hours, and parked during nights and weekends These choices are given to the load profile builder as inputs in a control panel of a spreadsheet-based simulator. Over the 2 This determines the maximum number of vehicles charging at any given time, since the number of ports active is assumed to be less than or equal to the number of vehicles.
3 Example: Police patrol vehicles have a different dwell times and behavior from Police administrative vehicles and required higher powered ports

Page 161 of 351 ends

9 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION EVI NEEDS REPORT course of a non-leap year, there are 35,040 charging intervals. 4 For each charging port (as based on inputs given above) the load profile builder creates a vector of 35,040 intervals and repeatedly generates a signal of whether that port should be active or inactive based on the probabilities given at the outset. The load profile builder then takes the sum of all charging in all intervals across all ports. The user is given this annual total along with an error signal which compares the total delivered energy to the required annual energy as determined in the fixed inputs. If the total amount of energy delivered is below the amount needed, an adjustment factor is increased to boost the utilization of each port in proportion to its probability profile. This boost forces more charging events into the most preferred charging intervals as determined by driver behavior from the data sources described above. However, if the total energy allotted by the load profile builder exceeds the amount of energy needed the user can decrease the number of ports or manage charging by restricting charging only to certain intervals (e.g., overnight and weekends).

TOTAL PORT NEEDS
From the simulations of annual charging completed for each site, the total port needs for each power rating can be identified by analyzing the maximum number of coincident ports in use. To account for variations in vehicle charging needs, a safety factor of 20% is applied to the maximum coincident port number to determine the final recommended port counts.
4 365 days per year x 24 hours per day x 4 intervals per hour (with each interval at 15 minutes)

Page 162 of 351 ends

10 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION EVI NEEDS REPORT

INFRASTRUCTURE COST ASSUMPTIONS
The cost assumptions for charging hardware and installation costs in this study are specifically for California and are primarily drawn from a 2019 study by the International Council on Clean Transportation.5This study aggregated data from past studies, as well as costs reported to public utility commissions via utility programs. Data on charger component costs aggregated through industry interviews by the Rocky Mountain Institute confirmed that the costs in the ICCT study were in an accurate range. Representative of the limited data available, both the ICCT and RMI studies built significantly on data from a 2013 Electric Power Research Institute study.6 Given the age of the EPRI data, costs figures may have fallen in the intervening years. However, the cost range remains sufficiently broad to warrant a conservative approach.7 Table 3 includes a summary of the cost figures used to calculate total cost.

TABLE 3: SUMMARY OF EVI COST ASSUMPTIONS

CHARGER HARDWARE COSTS
(PER PORT) INSTALLATION COSTS
CHARGER TYPE COST ($) # OF PORTS

INSTALLED
L2 COST PER
PORT (6.6 KW)
L2 COST PER
PORT (11.5 KW)

DCFC COST PER
PORT (25 KW)

FREEWIRE COST

PER PORT
LEVEL 2 (6.6 KW) $1,925 1 $39,600 $39,600 $52,600 $46,400 LEVEL 2 (11.5 KW) $2,500 2 $19,800 $19,800 $49,600 $43,400 DC FAST (25 KW) $15,746 3-5 $24,400 $24,400 $48,600 $42,400 FREEWIRE $172,000 >6 $17,800 $17,800 $47,600 $41,400
The hardware costs used are per port and assume networked capability. Installation costs include labor, permits, taxes and the cost of make-ready electric infrastructure on the customer side of the meter. Make-ready electric infrastructure on the customer side of the meter generally includes wiring, conduits, trenching, service panels and switchgear upgrades (when needed) and can vary significantly from site to site.8 The cost figures above include only wiring, conduit and service panel costs. Trenching costs for installation are not considered in the cost estimates calculated for this study because site layouts have not been determined.

Cost assumptions are used to provide a starting point in estimating infrastructure costs. City staff can adjust cost assumptions for key sites in the Fleet Electrification Pro-Forma accompanying this report.

ELECTRIC VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE INCENTIVES & FINANCING
There are regional and state-wide efforts in California to provide incentives to accelerate electric vehicle infrastructure deployment. One opportunity is the statewide Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) which provides a market-based mechanism for ongoing operational incentives to off-set energy costs. The City can earn credits based on the number of kilowatt hours dispensed by City-owned EVI and monetize those to reduce operational costs. Additionally, the City can receive incentives through its CCA, Central Coast Community Energy (CCCE) and the SLO County Air Pollution Control 5 Michael Nicholas, Estimating electric vehicle charging infrastructure costs across major U.S. metropolitan areas, International Council on Clean Transportation, August 2019, https://theicct.org/sites/default/files/publications/ICCT_EV_Charging_Cost_20190813.pdf 6 Electric Power Research Institute, Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment Installed Cost Analysis, 2013, https://www.epri.com/research/products/000000003002000577 7 Initial data reported to the California Energy Commission via the CALeVIP project shows even higher installation costs than assumed in this report. However, these costs result from a small sample size that CEC indicates may have been skewed by a few high-cost sites. As a result, these costs have not been included in this study.

The data is available here: https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and-topics/programs/clean-transportation-program/california-electric-vehicle/calevip-level. 8 Reducing EV Charging Infrastructure Costs, Rocky Mountain Institute, 2019

Page 163 of 351 ends

11 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION EVI NEEDS REPORT District (APCD). SLO APCD incentives cover up to Level 3 chargers for public agencies, and cover 50% of installation, engineering, design, and equipment costs for non-low-income communities. Service upgrades may not be covered by APCD incentives and are not assumed to be covered in cost modelling. Incentives available to the City for fleet EVI are estimated at $2,443,519 or 45.9% of the total EVI project cost.

In addition to incentives, increasingly available 3rd-party financing options for fleets may be useful for San Luis Obispo to address capital costs required for charging infrastructure. Some charging infrastructure developers and vendors offer “charging as a service” options that enable a fleet to defer capital costs of infrastructure in favor of shifting those costs to the operating budget and paying them off on a per kWh basis over time. Charging as a service can be explored further as the City explores procurement options.

INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS & CAPITAL COST ESTIMATES
Unlike vehicle electrification, which has the potential for total cost of ownership savings, the infrastructure required to charge electric vehicles is a cost that the City of San Luis Obispo is required to bear in support of their fleet electrification goals. A primary challenge when identifying charging infrastructure needs is identifying the minimum number of charging ports at each location required to satisfy the fleet’s daily energy needs while balancing operational considerations such as dwell time. One way to minimize the total cost of EVI is to minimize installation costs through futureproofing. Instead of installing a handful of charging stations to meet immediate need and then having to remove those, expand power capacity and re-install more chargers as fleet electrification continues, total costs can be minimized by installing make-ready electrical infrastructure to support future charging needs at the time of initial installation. Long-term planning of charging infrastructure allows fleets to futureproof effectively.

OPERATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS OF VEHICLE TO PORT RATIOS
For every domicile facility considered, the recommendations indicate a vehicle to port ratio greater than 1:1.

Implementing vehicle to charger ratios higher than 1:1 minimizes EVI hardware and installation costs but has operational considerations, as not every vehicle can be plugged in at the same time. This challenge can be managed in a variety of ways ranging from staff training to software solutions. A first solution is to recognize that during standard operations, the City’s vehicles do not need to be charged every night. San Luis Obispo is about 13 square miles in area and it is important to recognize that, especially as electric vehicle ranges increase, the common perception that EVs need to charge daily is a misconception. Across the sites analyzed in this report, the average daily energy needs per vehicle ranges from 3.3-15.28 kWh per day, with a maximum of 15.28 kWh per day at the Police Department. In contrast, the vehicle types modeled have between 12-138 kWh battery capacities. This is a clear indication that the majority of vehicles in the City’s fleet will not be required to charge on a daily basis.

A second option that may be appropriate for large sites, such as the Corp Yard or new Public Safety Center, that require more complex management is to have additional staff on hand that rotate the vehicles overnight.

Finally, the recommendations provided below are for “fully powered” ports, meaning charging ports that have sufficient circuit capacity to provide a power output at their nameplate capacity. In some cases, it may be advantageous for the City to add additional charging ports, without taking the capital-intensive step of expanding the recommended power capacity, to enable more vehicle to be plugged in at once and leverage software to balance charging across ports.

Page 164 of 351 ends

12 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION EVI NEEDS REPORT PROJECTED INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS: COSTS
The section presents projected electric vehicle infrastructure costs for each site based on build out to meet 2030 needs.

The costs listed are total costs for a given site and are not reflective of project-specific costs if the San Luis Obispo pursues phased implementation of the required charging infrastructure. All charts are after incentives.

Figure 3 summarizes the estimated costs by component across all sites for base infrastructure needs in 2025. Costs include all charging station hardware and installation costs, as well as costs for procurement management (as applicable) and estimated overhead for Public Works staff.

FIGURE 3: ESTIMATED EV CHARGING INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS (2025 – BASE NEEDS) Beyond costs for charging hardware, conduit, wiring and trenching, additional electrical infrastructure upgrades to building equipment can add cost if charging infrastructure is connected to the building meter, or a new service is needed.

Table 4 summarizes the remaining power capacity on each facility’s main switchgear compared to the additional power needed in the recommended charging scenario. The charging needs of the Police Department are listed under the 919 Palm Parking, 1109 Walnut and Corp Yard. This review of the City of San Luis Obispo’s domicile facilities indicated that current power capacity at Fire Station 1, Corp Yard, and 919 Palm Parking is not sufficient to support all future charging.

This means that switchgear upgrades or a software solution such as adaptive load management will be required, depending on the needs of the site. Adaptive load management is a solution that leverages software to balance the power a set of charging stations is drawing to ensure that the total draw never exceeds the building capacity. While costs for load management software vary based on power and quantity of chargers, it is safe to say that the solution can be a less capitalintensive than a service upgrade, but requires the ability to curtail charging ports, which is not recommended for police vehicles.

Page 165 of 351 ends

13 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION EVI NEEDS REPORT TABLE 4: REMAINING POWER CAPACITY VS. POWER NEEDED

SITE NAME ESTIMATED CAPACITY

AVAILABLE (KW)
2040 CHARGING
NEEDS (kW)

SUFFICIENT
CAPACITY?
GOLF COURSE Unknown 23 TBD
WATER TREATMENT PLANT Unknown 11.5 TBD
SLO SWIM CENTER 36.23 18.1 Yes
MARSH PARKING LOT 80.83 18.1 Yes
WASTEWATER PLANT Unknown 18.1 TBD
FIRE STATION 1 19.03 138.2 No
CORP YARD 129.63 337.1 No
919 PW ADMIN 13.17 142.2 No
1109 WALNUT Unknown 213.2 TBD
Figure 4 summarizes the estimated costs by component across all sites for base infrastructure needs in 2030, with the addition of estimated building electrical capacity upgrades.

FIGURE 4: ESTIMATED EV CHARGING INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS (2030 - BASE NEEDS WITH BUILDING UPGRADES)

UTILITY UPGRADE COSTS
If the required charging infrastructure exceeds the capacity of the nearest transformer on the distribution system, makeready costs on the utility side of the meter have the potential to exceed costs on the customer side of the meter. All site needs should be reviewed by the City to determine if additional upgrades may be needed to support charging.

Page 166 of 351 ends

14 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FLEET ELECTRIFICATION EVI NEEDS REPORT

IMPLEMENTATION OF EV CHARGING INFRASTRUCTURE
It is crucial that the City act on immediate term recommendations for EV charging infrastructure to ensure there is sufficient charging capacity for the fleet as it transitions to EVs. Because the City already has some EVI installed, the recommendations within this report consider 2025 to be the construction year for immediate needs, although infrastructure can be installed sooner if preferred.

The Pro Forma, found in Appendix A of this report, details the cost estimates for each phase of construction (2025 and 2030), along with recommended equipment for each site. Details from the Pro Forma can be used by the City to determine project budget and informing the procurement process, such as publishing a request for proposals for design or design and build.

RECOMMENDED 2025 EV CHARGING INFRASTRUCTURE
SITE # OF PORTS FOR 2025
# OF PORTS FOR MAKE
READY (2025

CONSTRUCTION)
919 PW ADMIN
3 x 6.6 kW
4 x 11.5 kW
1 x 25 kW
7 x 6.6 kW
4 x 11.5 kW
2 x 25 kW

CORP YARD
2 x 6.6 kW
12 x 11.5 kW
1 x 25 kW
4 x 6.6 kW
22 x 11.5 kW
2 x 25 kW
1 x Freewire
LAGUNA LAKE GOLF COURSE 2 x 11.5 kW 2 x 11.5 kW
MARSH PARKING STRUCTURE 1 x 6.6 kW 1 x 6.6 kW
1 x 11.5 kW
NEW POLICE DEPARTMENT None
4 x 6.6 kW
1 x 11.5 kW
8 x 25 kW
SLO SWIM CENTER 1 x 6.6 kW
1 x 11.5 kW
1 x 6.6 kW
1 x 11.5 kW
WASTEWATER PLANT (WRRF) 1 x 6.6 kW
1 x 11.5 kW
1 x 6.6 kW
1 x 11.5 kW
WATER TREATMENT PLANT (WTP) 1 x 11.5 kW 1 x 11.5 kW
FIRE STATION 1 1 x 6.6 kW
2 x 11.5 kW
7 x 6.6 kW
8 x 11.5 kW
842 PACIFIC PARKING None None
1109 WALNUT 4 x 25 kW 2 x 6.6 kW
8 x 25 kW

Page 167 of 351 ends

THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.

Page 168 of 351 ends

APPENDIX A: FLEET ELECTRIFICATION PRO FORMA (EXCEL ATTACHMENT) The City of San Luis Obispo fleet electrification pro forma has been provided to the City as a separate Excel attachment.

APPENDIX A: FLEET ELECTRIFICATION PRO FORMA

Page 169 of 351 ends

APPENDIX B: INCREMENTAL COST OF CARBON REDUCTION FROM FLEET ELECTRIFICATION

TIME PERIOD
CARBON

EMISSIONS
REDUCED (MTCO2)

MARGINAL
CAPITAL COST ($)

MARGINAL
TCO ($)

CHARGING

INFRASTRUCTURE
COSTS ($)

ESTIMATED COST OF

CARBON REDUCTION
($/MTCO2)
2023-2025 264.97 $954,249 $(377,749) $1,952,774 $5,944
2026-2030 380.2 $2,106,633 $(422,028) $3,294,640 $7,555 APPENDIX B: INCREMENTAL COST OF CARBON REDUCTION

Page 170 of 351 ends

Item 6e
Department: Administration
Cost Center: 1010
For Agenda of: 5/2/2023
Placement: Consent
Estimated Time: N/A
FROM: Greg Hermann, Deputy City Manager
Prepared By: Nestor Veloz-Passalacqua, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Manager SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF THE 2022-23 HUMAN SERVICES GRANT

FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE HUMAN RELATIONS

COMMISSION

RECOMMENDATION

1. As recommended by the Human Relations Commission, approve the 2022-2023 Human Services Grants funding allocations in the amount of $150,000; and

2. Authorize the City Manager to execute agreements with each grant recipient.

POLICY CONTEXT
The Human Relations Commission’s (HRC) purpose is to advise and make recommendations to City Council and the City Manager which promote and advance inclusion, mutual understanding, respect, and equitable treatment to all members of the SLO City community. The Human Relations Commission’s recommendations to City Council help address social concerns and the needs of the community. The Human Services Grants (HSG) program provides financial support to non-profit organizations that promote the economic and social wellbeing of the citizens of San Luis Obispo.

DISCUSSION
Background:

The City’s Human Services Grants (HSG), formerly titled Grants-in-Aid, had a Council approved change of name in 2022 to better reflect the objectives of the grant program.

The HSG program provides financial support to non-profit organizations that promote the economic and social well-being of the community members of San Luis Obispo. Grants are made to local organizations or agencies based in neighboring communities whose services contribute to the quality of life of City residents. The Human Relations Commission (HRC) advises the City Council on funding priorities and grant recommendations.

Page 171 of 351 ends

6e
Funding Priorities:

On November 16, 2021, the Council adopted the following as the primary funding priority for the 2022-2023 HSG:
 Homelessness prevention, including affordable and alternative housing, support services, and transitional housing
To allow maximum flexibility for funding recommendations dependent upon the received applications, the following priorities were also approved but were not ranked:
 Hunger and malnutrition prevention
 Supportive physical and mental health services for those in need  Services for seniors, veterans and/or people with disabilities in need  Supportive, developmental, and care services for children and youth in need  Services encouraging diversity, equity, and inclusivity in marginalized communities, including access to language services.

HSG Application Process
In December of 2022, the HRC formally launched its annual HSG process by advertising the availability of grant funds and information regarding the upcoming HSG timeline to the general public, past applicants and agencies and groups from underserved and underrepresented communities through the Office of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI). HSG applications were due on January 27, 2023. The City received grant applications from 29 agencies requesting funding for programs totaling $379,245.

Attachment A includes a complete list of the applications submitted to the City for HSG funding and the HRC’s recommended funding amounts. The HSG Program Application Summary, provided as Attachment B, further describes each program.

HRC Review Process
On February 6 and 23, 2023, the HSG subcommittee of Vice Chair Kasprzak, Commissioner Carlotti, and Commissioner Souza met to review grant applications and make preliminary funding recommendations. The subcommittee members considered the funding priorities set by Council, the location of the target population to be served, and the incurred expenses proposed to be offset by HSG dollars to guide their funding recommendations. On March 1, 2023, the HSG subcommittee presented preliminary grant recommendations to the full HRC during a noticed public hearing. During the discussion, the subcommittee engaged with the other Commissioners to adjust the preliminary recommendations and voted to approve the funding recommendations reflected in Attachment A. HRC found that the projects recommended for funding further Council’s adopted goals to address community needs and promote the economic social well-being of San Luis Obispo community members.

Page 172 of 351 ends

6e
Grant Contracts
Upon Council approval of HSG funding allocations, the City will enter into a contract with each organization that has been awarded grant funding. The HRC and the City staff will review grant project reports throughout the year. Organizations awarded grant funding are required to provide a mid-year report and a year-end report describing administrative functions, metrics and outcomes, and use of funds related to the application for each grant project. Reports are reviewed by staff and the HRC for completeness and compliance.

Public Engagement
The public, and more specifically non-profit service organizations, were engaged throughout the HSG award process. Non-profit service organizations received communication of available funding, technical assistance during the application period, a detailed grant web application outlining funding criteria, and how to access support from staff. This item is on the consent agenda for the May 2, 2023, City Council and will follow all required posting and notification. The public can submit comments on this item at or before the meeting.

FISCAL IMPACT
Budget: Yes Budget Year: 2022-2023
Funding Identified: Yes
Fiscal Analysis:

Funding
Sources
Total Budget
Available
Current
Funding
Request
Remaining
Balance
Annual
Ongoing Cost
General Fund $150,000 $150,000 $ 0$
State
Federal
Fees
Other
Total $150,000 $150,000 $ 0$
As adopted in the 2021-2023 Financial Plan, the allocated 2022-2023 budget for the HSG program was $150,000. HSG projects will be implemented for a period of one year starting at the beginning of the 2023-2024 Fiscal Year.

Page 173 of 351 ends

ALTERNATIVES

1. The Council may modify the proposed grant funding amounts. The Council should provide direction on the modifications desired.

2. The Council may choose to fund eligible HSG applications not recommended by the HRC. This action is not recommended by staff because thorough consideration was given to recommended awardees.

ATTACHMENTS
A - Human Services Grant HRC Preliminary Funding Recommendations B - Human Services Grant Program Application Summary
C - 03-01-2023 HRC Meeting Minutes

Page 174 of 351 ends

Attachment AApp. Organization Project/Program Grant
Request
HRC
Preliminary
Recommenda
tion
1 5 Cities Homeless
Coalition
Rapid Re-Housing &
Homeless Prevention
Assistance
$10,000 $10,000
2 Big Brothers Big
Sisters
Community and Site Based
Mentoring for Vulnerable
Youth
$15,000 $5,000
3 City Farm 2024 Youth Empowerment
Program $15,000 $15,000
4 Community Action
Partnership
CAPSLO Homeless
Prevention Services $10,000 $10,000
5 Community Action
Partnership CAPSLO SAFE $10,000 $5,000
6 Court Appointed
Special
Advocates
General CASA Program
Support $7,500 $3,750
7 Dignified Hope
Care Community
Services
Senior Caregiving $20,000 $0
8 Diversity Coalition Diversity Education $5,000 $0
9 Family Care
Network, Inc. General Operating Support $10,000 $5,000
10 Food Bank No-Cook Bags for
Homeless Residents $12,000 $6,000
11 Hospice of SLO
County Caregiver Support $20,000 $10,000
12 Literacy for Life Literacy Program $5,000 $5,000
13 Long Term Care
Ombudsman
Services of SLO
County
Ombudsman Services $4,000 $2,500
14 Lumina Alliance Emergency Shelter
Operating Support $15,000 $7,500

Page 175 of 351 ends

App. Organization Project/Program Grant
Request
HRC
Preliminary
Recommenda
tion
15 Mission
Headstrong
Mission Headstrong Seed
Money and Autism
Personal Training Program
$52,500 $0
16 One Cool Earth Garden-based Nutrition
Education $7,000 $0
17 People's Self Help
Housing
Supportive Housing
Program for Low-Income
Households
$25,000 $0
18 Restorative
Partners Opportunity to Fund $16,094 $8,000
19 San Luis Obispo
Child
Development
Center
Child and Family Play
Therapy $20,000 $0
20 San Luis Obispo
Climate Coalition
Empowering Diverse
Communities in Climate
Action
$5,000 $0
21 San Luis Obispo
Committee for
Education on
Alcoholism, dba
Middlehouse
Grant for Alumni Housing $5,000 $5,000
22 San Luis Obispo
Committee for
Education on
Alcoholism, dba
Middlehouse
Grant for Client Housing $3,200 $0
23 San Luis Obispo
Legal Assistance
Foundation
Senior Legal Services
Project $10,000 $7,000
24 Senior Angels of
the Central Coast
Senior / Disabled Adult
Wish Program $5,000 $0
25 Senior Nutrition
Program/Meals
that Connect
Meals that Connect $10,000 $10,000

Page 176 of 351 ends

App. Organization Project/Program Grant
Request
HRC
Preliminary
Recommenda
tion
26 Shower the
People Shower the People $20,000 $20,000
27 Smart Share
Housing
Solutions, Inc.

Affordable housing
production: homeshares,
ADUs, THOWs and micro
village Waterman Village
$11,820 $8,400
28 Tolosa Children's
Dental Center Healthy Smiles $20,000 $0
29 United Way 211 SLO County $15,000 $6,850
TOTAL $379,245 $150,000

Page 177 of 351 ends

San Luis Obispo City CouncilMay 2, 2023

San Luis Obispo City Council
May 2, 2023