Agenda packet — Thousand Oaks City Council, July 18, 2023 (part 1 of 3)

City Council
REGULAR MEETING
Tuesday, July 18, 2023
Andrew P. Fox City Council Chambers
Closed Session: 5:00 PM
Regular Session: 6:00 PM
If you would like to submit a written comment, please complete the online Comment Form. Please see Public Input section below for more information.

The Brown Act prohibits a person from having to register to attend a City Council meeting. The Zoom app requires registration if you would like to attend via video/teleconference. If you do not wish to register to attend the City Council meeting via Zoom, City Council chambers is open and accessible to the public.

If you would like to speak on an agenda item REMOTELY (NOT in person), please complete the online Speaker Form. Please see Public Input section below for more information.

In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), if you need special assistance to participate in the City Council meeting, please contact the City Clerk Department (805) 4492151 within 48 hours of the meeting.

Kevin McNamee, Mayor
Al Adam, Mayor Pro Tem
Bob Engler, Councilmember
David Newman, Councilmember
Mikey Taylor, Councilmember
Executive Team
Andrew P. Powers, City Manager Tracy M. Noonan, City Attorney Ingrid Hardy, Assistant City Manager Akbar Alikhan, Deputy City Manager Kelvin Parker, Community Development Director Jaime Boscarino, Finance Dir./City Treasurer Laura B. Maguire, City Clerk Clifford G. Finley, Public Works Director Jonathan Serret, Cultural Affairs Director Tim Giles, Human Resources Director Jim Friedl, General Manager, CRPD Jennifer Patterson, Library Services Director Jeff Shea, Fire Chief Alexandra South, Strategic Communications/Public Affairs Dir.

Jeremy Paris, Police Chief
MISSION STATEMENT:

Extraordinary Service to the Citizens We Serve is Our Purpose The following is provided to assist with public participation:

MISSION STATEMENT:

Extraordinary Service to the Citizens We Serve is Our Purpose The following is provided to assist with public participation:

AGENDA AVAILABILITY: The City Council Agenda is posted at the entry to the Civic Arts Plaza/City Hall, 2100 E. Thousand Oaks Boulevard, Thousand Oaks [main posting location pursuant to the Brown Act, G.C. 54954.2(a)]. Agenda packet and “Live and Archived” meetings and minutes are available on the City’s website at www.toaks.org. Televised City Council Meetings are broadcast live and rebroadcast Thursdays at 6:00 p.m. and Sundays at 10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on TV (Frontier Channel 3, Spectrum Channel 10).

Meeting videos are also available on YouTube (CTO Meetings) immediately following the live broadcast.

PUBLIC INPUT: To provide your comments to the City Councilmembers please submit comments via the online Comment Form. Written comment cards will also be available for submission at the meeting. If you would like to speak REMOTELY (NOT in person) on an agenda item during the meeting, please complete the online Speaker Form (you will be asked to provide an email address and telephone number). Be advised that those participating via Zoom do so at their own risk. The City Council meeting will not be cancelled if any technical issues occur during the meeting. If you would like to speak IN PERSON, speaker cards will be available at the meeting and MUST be submitted in person. Doors open half an hour before meeting start time. Persons addressing the City Council are requested to state their name and community of residence for the record. If you need further assistance, please email the City Clerk Department at [email protected] or call (805) 4492151. Please be advised that communications directed to the City Council are public records and are subject to disclosure pursuant to the California Public Records Act and Brown Act unless exempt from disclosure under the applicable law. Communications will NOT be edited for redactions and will be printed/posted as submitted.

SPANISH INTERPRETATION: If you need interpretation of your communications to the City Council from Spanish into English, please contact the City Clerk Department at (805) 4492151 or by email at [email protected]. Notification of at least 48 hours will usually enable the City to make arrangements.

INTERPRETACIÓN AL ESPAÑOL: Si necesita una interpretación del español al inglés para sus comunicaciones al Consejo de la Ciudad, comuníquese con el Departmento del Secretario Municipal al (805) 4492151 o por correo electrónico a [email protected]. Por favor, avísenos con al menos 48 horas de anticipación para que la ciudad pueda hacer los arreglos necesarios.

CONSENT CALENDAR: Matters listed on Consent Calendar that do not require significant reporting and/or discussion for decision or considered to be routine, will be approved by one motion as recommended.

There will be no separate discussion unless Councilmember or staff member requests separate discussion prior to approval.

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION: Any agenda related information received and distributed to the City Council after the Agenda Packet is produced is included in Supplemental Packets. Supplemental Packets are produced as needed, typically a minimum of two—one available on the Thursday preceding the City Council meeting and the second on Tuesday at the meeting. Both the Thursday and Tuesday Supplemental Packets are available for public review on the City’s website.

JUDICIAL REVIEW: Any legal action by an applicant seeking to obtain a judicial review of the City Council’s decision on a Hearing or issue listed on this Agenda may be subject to the 90day filing period, of and governed by, Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6. Also refer to TOMC Section 14.05.

1. CALL TO ORDER: Closed Session 5:00 p.m.

2. ROLL CALL:

1. CALL TO ORDER: Closed Session 5:00 p.m.

2. ROLL CALL:

3. CLOSED SESSION:

A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – Anticipated Litigation: Significant Exposure to Litigation; Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2); (Notice of Threatened Litigation CVRA).

4. CLOSED SESSION REPORT:

5. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:

6. REQUESTS FOR CONTINUANCE OF ANY PUBLIC HEARING OR AGENDA ITEM:

7. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS: None

9. CONSENT CALENDAR:

A. General, Utilities, Golf Course, and Theatres Demands RECOMMENDATION:

Ratify July 12, 2023; approve July 19, 2023, July 26, 2023, August 2, 2023, August 9, 2023, August 16, 2023, August 23, 2023, August, 30, 2023, and September 6, 2023, subject to review and ratification
B. Minutes of City Council meeting of July 11, 2023
RECOMMENDATION:

Approve
C. Electronic Claim Filing
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ELECTRONIC CLAIMS FILING
RECOMMENDATION:

1. Adopt resolution regarding the electronic filing of claims pursuant to Government Code § 915(a)(3).

2. Find that this action is not a project as defined under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

D. Ventura County Stormwater National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit Implementation and CostSharing Agreement
RECOMMENDATION:

1. Approve City’s continued participation in the collective countywide costsharing programforstormwaterNationalPollutantDischargeEliminationSystem(NPDES) ygy
Implementation and CostSharing Agreement
RECOMMENDATION:

1. Approve City’s continued participation in the collective countywide costsharing program for stormwater National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit implementation.

2. Authorize City Manager to execute the 2023 NPDES Implementation and CostSharing Agreement to develop, implement, and fund the Ventura Countywide Stormwater Quality Management Program to comply with Order No. R420210105 adopted on July 23, 2021.

3. Find that this action is not a project as defined under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

E. Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons at Pedestrian Crosswalks (CI 5588) RECOMMENDATION:

1. Authorize staff to advertise the Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons at Pedestrian Crosswalks (CI 5588) for construction bids.

2. Authorize acceptance of the Federal Highway Safety Improvement Program Cycle 10 Grant in the amount of $179,000 from the Federal Highway Administration for the construction of Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons.

3. Find that the Project is Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to 14 CCR 15301.

F. 2024 Pavement Management Program Update (MI 2608)
RECOMMENDATION:

1. Award Professional Services Agreement with Nichols Consulting Engineers (Fountain Valley, CA) in the nottoexceed amount of $217,500 for the 2024 Pavement Management Program (MI 2608), plus extra services of $21,750, with a term ending June 30, 2024.

2. Approve expenditure in the amount of $244,250 ($217,500 agreement, plus $21,750 extra services, and $5,000 for City furnished materials and supplies) from A/C #13356106315500 (MI 2608 2024 Pavement Management Program Update).

3. Find that this action is not a project as defined under the California Environmental Quality Act.

G. Hill Canyon Treatment Plant Facility Exterior Painting Project Phase II (MI 2619) RECOMMENDATION:

1. Authorize staff to advertise construction bids for the Hill Canyon Treatment Plant (HCTP) Facility Exterior Painting Project Phase II (MI 2619).

2. Find that the Project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to 14 CCR 15301.

H. 2023 League of California Cities Annual Conference Business Meeting RECOMMENDATION:

1. Designate Councilmember Bob Engler as Voting Delegate and designate Legislative Affairs Manager Mina Layba as Alternate Voting Delegate to represent H. 2023 League of California Cities Annual Conference Business Meeting RECOMMENDATION:

1. Designate Councilmember Bob Engler as Voting Delegate and designate Legislative Affairs Manager Mina Layba as Alternate Voting Delegate to represent the City at the 2023 League of California Cities (Cal Cities) Annual Conference Business Meeting, scheduled for September 22, 2023.

2. City Clerk to affirm and sign the 2023 Annual Conference Voting Delegate Alternate Form for City Manager’s Office staff to submit to Cal Cities by the August 28, 2023 deadline.

3. Find that this action is not a project as defined under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

I. Thousand Oaks Boulevard Wastewater Pipe and Maintenance Hole Lining Project (CI 5686)
RECOMMENDATION:

1. Authorize staff to advertise the Thousand Oaks Boulevard Wastewater Pipe and Maintenance Hole Lining Project (CI 5686) for construction bids.

2. Find that the Project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to 14 CCR 15301.

J. Zero Emission Bus Rollout and Implementation Plan
RESOLUTION ADOPTING THOUSAND OAKS TRANSIT ZERO EMISSION BUS ROLLOUT AND IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
RECOMMENDATION:

1. Adopt resolution approving the Thousand Oaks Transit Zero Emission Bus Rollout and Implementation Plan as is required by State regulations 13 CCR § 2023 and § 2023.1 – 2023.11.

2. Find that this action is not a project as defined under the California Environmental Quality Act.

K. South Branch Arroyo Conejo Floodplain Improvements Study (MI 2527) RECOMMENDATION:

1. Approve a Memorandum of Agreement between the City of Thousand Oaks and the Ventura County Public Works Watershed Protection District to manage the completion of a Hydrology Deficiency Study of the South Branch Arroyo Conejo.

2. Contingent upon approval of Memorandum of Agreement by Ventura County, approve a Professional Services Agreement with Kasraie Consulting (Ventura, CA), in an amount nottoexceed $262,402 for the preparation of a drainage and hydrology study for the South Branch Arroyo Conejo Project, plus extra services of $26,240, with a term ending June 30, 2026.

3. Authorize expenditure in the amount of $288,642 ($262,402 agreement plus extra services of $26,240) from A/C #00152106425500 (MI 2527, South Branch Arroyo Conejo Study).

4. Find that this action is not a project as defined under the California Environmental Quality Act.

LCitMAthitDiSR
services of $26,240) from A/C #00152106425500 (MI 2527, South Branch Arroyo Conejo Study).

4. Find that this action is not a project as defined under the California Environmental Quality Act.

L. City Manager Authority During Summer Recess
RESOLUTION DELEGATING CERTAIN INTERIM AUTHORITY TO CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDATION:

1. Adopt resolution granting City Manager authority for designated actions during summer recess, July 19, 2023, through September 11, 2023.

2. Find that this action is not a project as defined in the California Environmental Quality Act.

M. Arroyo Conejo Open Space Acquisition (865 W. Hillcrest Drive) RECOMMENDATION:

1. Approve Purchase and Sale Agreement with Escrow Instructions for Assessor Parcel Number 6630093225 between the City of Thousand Oaks and Zada Susan W TR et al, and authorize City Manager, or designee, to execute the Purchase and Sale Agreement and all other documents necessary to effectuate the purchase of APN 6630093225 (Owner: ZADA SUSAN W TR ET AL) by the City of Thousand Oaks, including the authority to accept the deed, subject to resolution of any liens and encumbrances affecting said parcel.

2. Approve budget appropriation and expenditure of funds in the amount of $620,000 ($610,000, plus closing costs nottoexceed $10,000) for APN 6630093225 from A/C #51200003111000 (Community Recreation and Open Space Endowment Fund – Fund Balance) to A/C #51244106798100 (CI 1227, Capital – Land).

3. Find this real property acquisition is consistent with the General Plan as to location and purpose.

4. Find that this action is categorically exempt from California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, 14 CCR Sections 15313 and 15325).

N. Surety Bond Claim for Hanover Insurance Company against Thousand Oaks Fitness LLC DBA Athletic Society
RECOMMENDATION:

1. Approve settlement of surety bond claim with Hanover Insurance Company relating to Thousand Oaks Fitness LLC DBA Athletic Society in the amount of $43,645.17 and execute the Full & Final Release and Assignment related to the claim.

2. Find that this action is not a project as defined under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

O. Security Patrol and Guard Services at Royal Oaks Site RECOMMENDATION:

1. Award service contract for security guard and patrol services at the cityowned Royal Oaks site to Taurus Protection, Inc. (Taurus), of Thousand Oaks, CA, effective August 1, 2023 and ending July 31, 2026 with two annual options to extend, with a nottoexceed amount of $378,000 over the lifetime of the contract. Contract nottoexceed total includes $343,827 for regular services and $34,173 for additional/as tdi

2. Authorize expenditure in the total amount of $132,000 from A/C #0013583671 5660 (General Fund, Contracted Services – Security), for FY 202324 and FY 2024

25. 3. Find that this action is not a project as defined under the California Environmental Quality Act.

P. ORDINANCE FOR SECOND READING:

ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 1, “GENERAL PROVISIONS,” BY ADDING CHAPTER 16, “DISTRICTBASED ELECTIONS,” OF THOUSAND OAKS MUNICIPAL CODE TO ESTABLISH DISTRICTBASED ELECTORAL SYSTEM, ADOPT MAP DESCRIBING BOUNDARIES OF EACH DISTRICT, AND IDENTIFY DISTRICTS TO HOLD DISTRICTBASED ELECTION IN 2024 AND 2026 TO IMPLEMENT DISTRICTBASED ELECTIONS (ELECTIONS CODE § 10010) (Introduced 7/11/2023; 41, Newman dissenting)
ORD. NO. 1715NS
RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt
Q. ORDINANCE FOR SECOND READING:

ORDINANCE ADOPTING SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 24 (2150 WEST HILLCREST DRIVE), AND ITS ASSOCIATED ZONE CHANGE; AND AUTHORIZING LAND USES AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN SAID SPECIFIC PLAN
(APPLICANT: LATIGO HILLCREST LLC) (Introduced 7/11/2023; 50) ORD. NO. 1716NS
RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt
R. ORDINANCE FOR SECOND READING:

ORDINANCE APPROVING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH LATIGO
HILLCREST, LLC, RELATING TO DEVELOPMENT OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2150 WEST HILLCREST DRIVE (APN #6670113075), THOUSAND OAKS, CALIFORNIA (DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 202270777DAGR) (Introduced 7/11/2023; 50)
ORD. NO. 1717NS
RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt

10. PUBLIC HEARINGS: None

11. STUDY SESSIONS: None

12. DEPARTMENT REPORTS:

ACitfThdOkFY202324dFY202425LiltiPltf

11. STUDY SESSIONS: None

12. DEPARTMENT REPORTS:

A. City of Thousand Oaks FY 202324 and FY 202425 Legislative Platform RECOMMENDATION:

1. Receive report and approve FY 202324 and FY 202425 Legislative Platform.

2. Find that this action is not a project as defined under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

13. COMMITTEE/COMMISSION/BOARD REPORTS: None

14. CITY COUNCIL AS SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THOUSAND OAKS REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY REPORTS: None

15. COUNCIL ISSUES/RECOMMENDATIONS:

A. City Attorney Compensation and Employment Agreement Amendment RESOLUTION APPROVING COMPENSATION AND TENTH AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT FOR CITY ATTORNEY
RECOMMENDATION:

1. Adopt resolution approving compensation and tenth amendment to employment agreement for City Attorney (Contract No. 97992012).

2. Find that this is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act.

B. City Manager Compensation and Employment Agreement Amendment RESOLUTION APPROVING COMPENSATION AND SEVENTH AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT FOR CITY MANAGER
RECOMMENDATION:

1. Adopt resolution approving compensation and seventh amendment to employment agreement for City Manager (Contract No. 113822017).

2. Find that this is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act.

16. CITY MANAGER:

A. Announcements and upcoming issues

17. PUBLIC NOTICES: None

18. ADJOURNMENT: Adjourn to Regular Meeting September 12, 2023 Agenda Post Date/Time: Jul 13, 2023, 5:00P.M.

CCD:61040\h:\common\agenda\2023\071823.docx

DRAFT MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL/THOUSAND OAKS PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY Thousand Oaks, California July 11, 2023

1. CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Kevin McNamee called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. in Council Chambers, 2100 Thousand Oaks Boulevard, Thousand Oaks, California.

2. ROLL CALL:

Present: Councilmembers/Authority Directors Engler, Newman, Taylor, Adam, and Mayor/Authority Chair McNamee present in chambers.

Also present: City Manager/Authority Executive Director Andrew P. Powers, City Attorney Tracy M. Noonan, Assistant City Manager Ingrid Hardy, Deputy City Manager Akbar Alikhan, City Clerk/Authority Secretary Laura B. Maguire, Finance Director/City Treasurer/Authority Treasurer Jaime Boscarino, Community Development Director Kelvin Parker, Public Works Director Cliff Finley, Cultural Affairs Director Jonathan Serret, Human Resources Director Tim Giles, Library Services Director Jennifer Patterson, Police Chief Jeremy Paris, Chief Assistant City Attorney Patrick Hehir, Assistant City Attorney David Womack, Deputy Community Development Director Fabiola Zelaya Melicher, Planning Division Manager Stephen Kearns, Interim Planning Division Manager Krystin Rice, Senior Planner Iain Holt, Associate Planner Justine Kendall, Assistant to the City Manager Melissa Hurtado, Deputy City Clerk Sandra Delgado, Information Technology Supervisor Atanas Beltchev, Cable Operations Supervisor Carl Jarecky, Senior Video Specialist Richard Swingler, Senior Video Specialist Ryan Palmer, Records Management Specialist Judy Freeman, and Senior Recording Secretary Dominga Zambrano.

3. CLOSED SESSION
A. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION – Title: City Attorney; Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957 (b)(1)
B. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION – Title: City Manager; Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957 (b)(1)
C. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS – City designated
representatives: Mayor Kevin McNamee and Human Resources Director Tim Giles; unrepresented employee: City Attorney; Pursuant to Government code Section 54957.6
D. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS – City designated
representatives: Mayor Kevin McNamee and Human Resources Director Tim Giles; unrepresented employee: City Manager; Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6
City Attorney Noonan announced Closed Session held at 5:00 p.m.

4. CLOSED SESSION REPORT: City Attorney Noonan announced there was nothing to report at 6:00 p.m.

5. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor McNamee led the pledge of allegiance.

Item No.9B

DRAFT MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL/THOUSAND OAKS PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY Thousand Oaks, California 2 July 11, 2023

6. REQUESTS FOR CONTINUANCE OF ANY PUBLIC HEARING OR AGENDA ITEM:

Mayor McNamee announced remainder of public hearing for Item 10B – Proposed 333-Unit Mixed-Use Apartment Complex - 2150 W. Hillcrest Drive – will be heard after Item 10A – Transition to District Elections and Item 11A – Overview of Draft General Plan.

7. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS: None.

8. PUBLIC COMMENTS: To be heard before 6:45 p.m. If additional speakers for public comments remain at 6:45 p.m., remainder of speakers may be called at the end of the meeting. (Resolution Nos. 2011-066/067)
Speakers: David Mead, Thousand Oaks; Rossanna Guerra, Thousand Oaks; Bryan Scott, Thousand Oaks; Joshua Gray, Conejo Valley Chamber of Commerce Director of Government Affairs and Tourism.

Written Statements: Judy O’Connor, city of residence unknown.

City Manager Powers addressed public comments.

9. CONSENT CALENDAR:

A. General, Utilities, Golf Course, and Theatres Demands RECOMMENDATION:

Ratify June 21, 2023, June 28, 2023, and July 5, 2023; approve July 12, 2023, subject to review and ratification
Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Adam to approve staff’s recommendation.

Passed 5-0 by the following vote:

Ayes – Engler, Newman, Taylor, Adam, McNamee
Noes – None
B. Minutes of City Council meeting of June 20, 2023
RECOMMENDATION:

Approve
Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Adam to approve staff’s recommendation.

Passed 5-0 by the following vote:

Ayes – Engler, Newman, Taylor, Adam, McNamee
Noes – None

Item No.9B

DRAFT MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL/THOUSAND OAKS PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY Thousand Oaks, California 3 July 11, 2023

9. CONSENT CALENDAR: (Continued)
C. Thousand Oaks Public Financing Authority Annual Update RECOMMENDATION:

1. Receive and file annual update.

2. Find that this action is not a project as defined under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Adam to approve staff’s recommendation.

Passed 5-0 by the following vote:

Ayes – Engler, Newman, Taylor, Adam, McNamee
Noes – None
D. CI 5527 Conejo Canyons Bridge Standby Letter of Credit RECOMMENDATION:

1. Authorize Finance Director to apply for Irrevocable Standby Letter of Credit (Letter of Credit) as required by California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) for performance security in an amount not to exceed $250,000.

2. Delegate authority to the Finance Director to complete Wells Fargo Bank Letter of Credit application and administer Letter of Credit, including renewals and periodic reductions, until canceled by CDFW.

3. Find that this action is not a project as defined under the California Environmental Quality Act.

Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Adam to approve staff’s recommendation.

Passed 5-0 by the following vote:

Ayes – Engler, Newman, Taylor, Adam, McNamee
Noes – None
E. California Automated Permit Processing Program Grant RECOMMENDATION:

1. Accept California Automated Permit Processing (CalAPP) Program Grant in a not-to-exceed amount of $80,000 for implementation and compliance with Senate Bill (SB) 379 (Wiener, 2022).

2. Find that this action is not a project as defined under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Adam to approve staff’s recommendation.

Passed 5-0 by the following vote:

Ayes – Engler, Newman, Taylor, Adam, McNamee
Noes – None
Item No.9B

DRAFT MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL/THOUSAND OAKS PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY Thousand Oaks, California 4 July 11, 2023

9. CONSENT CALENDAR: (Continued)
F. Interceptor Capital Improvement Program Unit W (CI 5445) RECOMMENDATION:

1. Approve Sixth Amendment to Professional Services Agreement Contract No. 12186-2019 with AECOM Technical Services, Inc. of Los Angeles, CA, for Condition Assessment and Preliminary Design Phase Services on the Unit W Capital Improvement Program Project in the amount of $31,000, for a revised not-to-exceed amount of $297,749.

2. Authorize expenditure in the amount of $31,000 from A/C #624-8250-682- 8300 (CI 5445, Wastewater Interceptor Capital Improvement Project Unit W).

3. California Environmental Quality Act: A Mitigated Negative Declaration was approved for this project by City Council on February 22, 2022.

Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Adam to approve staff’s recommendation.

Passed 5-0 by the following vote:

Ayes – Engler, Newman, Taylor, Adam, McNamee
Noes – None
G. Grant R. Brimhall Library Aquarium Maintenance
RECOMMENDATION:

1. Approve a three-year agreement with Aquatic Contractors (Thousand Oaks, CA) for supplies and maintenance of the 3,600-gallon saltwater aquarium at the Grant R. Brimhall Library effective July 1, 2023, through June 30, 2026, in a notto-exceed amount of $138,300.

2. Authorize expenditure in the amount of $46,100 for each fiscal year from A/C #110-7310-673-4200 (Library Fund/Building Repairs and Maintenance).

3. Find that this action is not a project as defined under the California Environmental Quality Act.

Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Adam to approve staff’s recommendation.

Passed 5-0 by the following vote:

Ayes – Engler, Newman, Taylor, Adam, McNamee
Noes – None
Item No.9B

DRAFT MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL/THOUSAND OAKS PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY Thousand Oaks, California 5 July 11, 2023

9. CONSENT CALENDAR: (Continued)
H. Conejo Canyons Bridge at Hill Canyon Treatment Plant (CI 5527) RECOMMENDATION:

1. Approve Sixth Amendment to Professional Services Agreement No. 11855- 2018 with Stantec Consulting Services, Inc., Santa Barbara, CA, in the amount of $37,853 for additional design and engineering services related to Conejo Canyons Bridge at Hill Canyon Treatment Plant (CI 5527) for a new not-toexceed total amount of $396,460 and extending the term of the Agreement to June 30, 2024.

2. Approve expenditure in the amount of $37,853 from A/C #001-4410-671-8300 (CI 5527, Conejo Canyons Bridge at HCTP).

3. Find that this action is not a project as defined under the California Environmental Quality Act.

Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Adam to approve staff’s recommendation.

Passed 5-0 by the following vote:

Ayes – Engler, Newman, Taylor, Adam, McNamee
Noes – None
I. Bus and Car Wash Project (CI 5468)
RECOMMENDATION:

1. Approve Professional Services Agreement with Stantec Consulting Services, Inc., (Los Angeles, CA) in a not-to-exceed amount of $406,949 for engineering and design of the Bus and Car Wash Project (CI 5468), plus extra services of $40,000, with a term ending June 30, 2024.

2. Authorize expenditure in the amount of $451,949 ($406,949 Agreement, plus extra services of $40,000, and $5,000 City Furnished Materials and Supplies) from A/C #651-5550-682-8300 (CI 5468, Bus and Car Wash).

3. Find that this action is not a project as defined under the California Environmental Quality Act.

Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Adam to approve staff’s recommendation.

Passed 5-0 by the following vote:

Ayes – Engler, Newman, Taylor, Adam, McNamee
Noes – None
Item No.9B

DRAFT MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL/THOUSAND OAKS PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY Thousand Oaks, California 6 July 11, 2023

9. CONSENT CALENDAR: (Continued)
J. La Granada Reservoir Improvements (CI 5292)
RECOMMENDATION:

1. Authorize staff to reauthorize the La Granada Reservoir Improvements Project (CI 5292) for construction bids.

2. Find that the Project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to 14 CCR 15302.

Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Adam to approve staff’s recommendation.

Passed 5-0 by the following vote:

Ayes – Engler, Newman, Taylor, Adam, McNamee
Noes – None

10. PUBLIC HEARINGS:

A. Transition to District Elections Hearing #4 - District Boundary Maps and Sequencing of Elections
ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 1, “GENERAL PROVISIONS,” BY ADDING CHAPTER 16, “DISTRICT-BASED ELECTIONS,” OF THOUSAND OAKS

MUNICIPAL CODE TO ESTABLISH DISTRICT-BASED ELECTORAL SYSTEM,

ADOPT MAP DESCRIBING BOUNDARIES OF EACH DISTRICT, AND
IDENTIFY DISTRICTS TO HOLD DISTRICT-BASED ELECTION IN 2024 AND 2026 TO IMPLEMENT DISTRICT-BASED ELECTIONS (ELECTIONS CODE § 10010)
1ST READING
RECOMMENDATION:

1. Receive report from National Demographics Corporation (NDC) on focus and draft maps proposed to date, process for obtaining public input on draft maps and potential sequencing for district-based elections pursuant to Elections Code Section 10010.

2. Conduct public hearing to receive public input on district boundaries and sequencing of elections.

3. Designate a preferred map and sequence of elections for inclusion in the ordinance.

4. Read ordinance in title only, waive further reading, and if no objection, introduce ordinance to designate the district map and sequence of elections to transition from an at-large election system to a district-based election system.

5. Find that this action is not a project as defined in the California Environmental Quality Act.

Item No.9B

DRAFT MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL/THOUSAND OAKS PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY Thousand Oaks, California 7 July 11, 2023

10. PUBLIC HEARINGS: (Continued)
A. Transition to District Elections Hearing #4 - District Boundary Maps and Sequencing of Elections (Continued)
Hearing, advertised as required by law, opened to consider item. Presented by Kristen Parks, Consultant – National Demographics Corporation. City Attorney Noonan and Assistant City Attorney Womack responded to questions.

Speakers: Karen Wilburn, Newbury Park; Clint Fultz, Thousand Oaks; Jackson Piper, Newbury Park; Sylvia Navarro, Thousand Oaks; Catherine Willott, Thousand Oaks; Effie, city of residence unknown; Danielle Blum, city of residence unknown; Mylo Wagner, city of residence unknown; James Osborne, Thousand Oaks; Greceldy Hau, Newbury Park; Helen Reveles, Thousand Oaks; Bonnie Shubb, Newbury Park; Carole Shelton, Thousand Oaks; C.J. Keavney, Newbury Park; Willard Lubka, Thousand Oaks; Rossanna Guerra, Thousand Oaks; Betty R. Stapleford, Thousand Oaks; Patrissha, Thousand Oaks; Chaise Rasheed, Thousand Oaks; Suzanne Gunther, Newbury Park; Richard Gunther, Newbury Park; Sally Hibbits, Westlake Village; Joan Edwards, city of residence unknown; Kelvin Hau, Newbury Park; Lauren Gill, Newbury Park; Diego Garcia, Newbury Park; Tie Gutierrez, Thousand Oaks; Brian Pletcher, Thousand Oaks; Jason Dominguez, city of residence unknown; Janie Ahlberg, Thousand Oaks.

Written Statements: Sandra Martinez, city of residence unknown.

Mayor McNamee closed the public hearing.

Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Adam to approve staff’s recommendation and designate Map 106B as the preferred map including the sequence of elections as outlined on the map with Districts 4 and 5 on the ballot in 2024 and Districts 1, 2, and 3 on the ballot in 2026.

Passed 4-1 by the following vote:

Ayes – Engler, Taylor, Adam, McNamee
Noes – Newman
City Council recess at 8:45 p.m.; reconvened at 9:07 p.m.

Item No.9B

DRAFT MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL/THOUSAND OAKS PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY Thousand Oaks, California 8 July 11, 2023
*11. STUDY SESSIONS:

A. Overview of Draft General Plan 2045 (2019-70760 GPA) RECOMMENDATION:

1. Receive presentation on the Draft General Plan 2045.

2. Find that the presentation does not constitute a project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The adoption of a General Plan is considered a project under CEQA and an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) will be released for this project prior to adoption. No action is being taken at this time.

Overview of Draft General Plan 2045 (2019-70760 GPA) Study Session presented by Community Development Director Parker and Matt Raimi, Principal – Raimi + Associates. City Manager Powers, City Attorney Noonan, and Interim Planning Division Manager Rice responded to questions. Senior Planner Holt and Melissa Stark, Senior Planner – Raimi + Associates, available for questions.

Speakers: Karen Wilburn, Newbury Park; Jackson Piper, Newbury Park; George Senko, Thousand Oaks; George Rosenthal, Newbury Park; Bryan Scott, Thousand Oaks; Peter Gilchrist, Newbury Park; Patricia Hostmyer, Thousand Oaks; R. Scott Horn, Newbury Park; Lorrie Dingman, Newbury Park; James Wolf, Thousand Oaks; Clara McNamara, city of residence unknown.

Written Statements: Dee Crawford, Newbury Park.

Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Adam to waive City rules and procedures on adding an item to an agenda and to direct staff to bring back a report at the September 12, 2023, City Council meeting regarding the creation of a Senior Mobile Home Park Overlay zone, a possible moratorium on changing mobile home parks from senior parks to family parks, and opportunities for senior mobile home land ownership.

Passed 5-0 by the following vote:

Ayes – Engler, Newman, Taylor, Adam, McNamee
Noes – None
Motion by Councilmember Engler to approve staff’s recommendation.

Passed 5-0 by the following vote:

Ayes – Engler, Newman, Taylor, Adam, McNamee
Noes – None
Item No.9B

DRAFT MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL/THOUSAND OAKS PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY Thousand Oaks, California 9 July 11, 2023

10. PUBLIC HEARINGS: (Continued)
B. Proposed 333-Unit Mixed-Use Apartment Complex – 2150 W. Hillcrest Drive (Continued from June 20, 2023)

RESOLUTION ADOPTING AND CERTIFYING FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL

IMPACT REPORT AND APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, ZONE CHANGE; SPECIFIC PLAN; DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT; DEVELOPMENT PERMIT; AND PROTECTED TREE PERMIT FOR THE USE OF CERTAIN PROPERTY WITHIN SAID CITY AT 2150 WEST HILLCREST DRIVE (APN #667-0-113-075) [APPLICATIONS: 2021-70169-LU; 2022-70776-Z; 2022- 70778-SP; 2022-70777-DAGR; 2022-70773-DP; 2022-70780-PTP AND 2022- 70774-EIR (LATIGO HILLCREST, LLC)]
RES. NO. 2023-043

RESOLUTION APPROVING SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW SALE AND

CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOL FOR CERTAIN PROPERTY WITHIN SAID CITY AT 2150 WEST HILLCREST DRIVE (APN #667-0-113-075)
[APPLICATION: 2022-70779-SUP (LATIGO HILLCREST, LLC)]
RES. NO. 2023-044
ORDINANCE ADOPTING SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 24 (2150 WEST HILLCREST DRIVE), AND ITS ASSOCIATED ZONE CHANGE; AND AUTHORIZING LAND

USES AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN SAID SPECIFIC PLAN
(APPLICANT: LATIGO HILLCREST LLC)
1ST READING

ORDINANCE APPROVING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH LATIGO

HILLCREST, LLC, RELATING TO DEVELOPMENT OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2150 WEST HILLCREST DRIVE (APN #667-0-113-075), THOUSAND OAKS, CALIFORNIA (DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 2022-70777-DAGR) 1ST READING
RECOMMENDATION:

1. Adopt resolution to certify the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) 2022- 70774-EIR in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and approve General Plan Land Use Element Amendment (LU) 2021-70169-LU, Zone Change (Z) 2022-70776-Z; Specific Plan (SP) 2022-70778-SP; Development Agreement (DAGR) 2022-70777-DAGR; Development Permit (DP) 2022-70773-DP, and Protected Tree Permit (PTP) 2022-70780-PTP.

2. Adopt resolution to approve Special Use Permit (SUP) 2022-70779-SUP.

3. Read ordinance in title only, waive further reading, and if no objection, introduce ordinance to approve Zoning Change (Z) 2022-70776-Z and Specific Plan (SP) 2022-70778-SP.

4. Read ordinance in title only, waive further reading, and if no objection, introduce ordinance to approve Development Agreement (DAGR) 2022-70777- DAGR.

Item No.9B

DRAFT MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL/THOUSAND OAKS PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY Thousand Oaks, California 10 July 11, 2023

10. PUBLIC HEARINGS: (Continued)
B. Proposed 333-Unit Mixed-Use Apartment Complex – 2150 W. Hillcrest Drive (Continued from June 20, 2023) (Continued)
Hearing, advertised as required by law, continued from June 20, 2023, to consider item. Presented by Associate Planner Kendall. Chief Assistant City Attorney Hehir responded to questions. Community Development Director Parker, Deputy Community Development Director Zelaya Melicher, and Planning Division Manager Kearns available for questions.

Speakers: Doug Baker, Thousand Oaks; Carole Shelton, Thousand Oaks; Katrina Maldonado, Newbury Park; Danielle Borja, Conejo Valley Chamber of Commerce CEO.

Written Statements: None.

Mayor McNamee closed the public hearing.

Mayor received City Council concurrence to continue past 11:00 p.m.

Motion by Councilmember Newman to approve staff’s recommendation.

Passed 5-0 by the following vote:

Ayes – Engler, Newman, Taylor, Adam, McNamee
Noes – None

12. DEPARTMENT REPORTS: None.

13. COMMITTEE/COMISSION/BOARD REPORTS: None.

14. CITY COUNCIL AS SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THOUSAND OAKS REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY REPORTS: None.

15. COUNCIL ISSUES/RECOMMENDATIONS: None.

16. CITY MANAGER:

A. Announcements and upcoming issues
City Manager Powers provided an update on the July 18, 2023, City Council meeting.

17. PUBLIC NOTICES: None.

Item No.9B

DRAFT MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL/THOUSAND OAKS PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY Thousand Oaks, California 11 July 11, 2023

18. ADJOURNMENT: City Council adjourned at 11:07 p.m. to Regular Meeting on July 18, 2023.
___________________________________
Kevin McNamee, Mayor/Authority Chair
City of Thousand Oaks City Council/Thousand
Oaks Public Financing Authority
Attest:
_______________________________________
Laura B. Maguire, City Clerk/Authority Secretary
City of Thousand Oaks City Council/Thousand
Oaks Public Financing Authority
AGENDA POSTED: July 6, 2023
MINUTES APPROVED:
*indicates item taken out of order
The presence of electronic signature certifies that the foregoing is a true and correct copy as approved by the City of Thousand Oaks City Council on the date cited above.

CCD:610-70\h:\common\agenda\2023\07-11-23.docx
Item No.9B
TO: Andrew P. Powers, City Manager
FROM: Laura B. Maguire, City Clerk
DATE: July 18, 2023
SUBJECT: Electronic Claim Filing
RECOMMENDATION:

1. Adopt resolution regarding the electronic filing of claims pursuant to Government Code § 915(a)(3).

2. Find that this action is not a project as defined under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

No Additional Funding Requested. Minimal staff time and costs to prepare this report are included in the Adopted FY 2023-24 General Fund Budget.

BACKGROUND:

In 2000, the Uniform Electronic Transaction Act became effective in the State of California. This act authorized use of an electronic signature for transactions and contracts among parties in California, including a government agency. In early 2019, the City Clerk Department and the City Attorney’s Office adopted a City policy to implement a pilot program to begin using electronic and digital signatures for contracts. In 2021, City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1679-NS, formalizing and adopting the electronic and digital signature policy. Since adoption of the policy, the City has electronically executed contracts, resolutions, ordinances, minutes, and other City documents.

The Government Claims Act (the Act) provides that prior to bringing a lawsuit for damages against a public entity, a claimant must submit a written claim to the entity. Claims against local public entities must be presented in accordance with specified procedures; that is, by either mailing the claim or delivering it in person to the City Clerk. Once received, claim documents are date stamped, scanned, and circulated to various parties both in the City and outside the City for processing and investigation. In 2020, however, as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, the City began to accept claims electronically, with digital images of signatures.

Item No.9C
Electronic Claim Filing
July 18, 2023

Page 2 ends

In 2020 the legislature approved Senate Bill (SB) 1473 authorizing electronic claim submissions if the local public entity expressly authorizes electronic submissions by ordinance or resolution [Government Code § 915(a)(3)]. The bill also provided that, for claims submitted electronically, the local, public entity may send any notices required under the Act to the electronic address from which the claim was received, or to an alternative electronic address if requested.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS:

Electronic filing has significant public benefit, offering convenience and streamlining of various processes. The claims process is another City service that will benefit from offering an electronic filing option. Electronically filing claims is faster, more efficient, reduces staff time, and reduces material waste compared to mailing or otherwise circulating hard copies for approval. Additionally, receiving claims quicker through electronic filing facilitates a timely and potentially more accurate investigation since there is not as great a time delay. Electronic filing simplified compliance with the health orders and social distancing requirements during the COVID-19 emergency and has also benefitted the City after the pandemic by increasing the speed and efficiency in finalizing processes. The attached resolution (Attachment #1) would expand the City’s existing electronic and digital signature policy as outlined in Ordinance No. 1679-NS while also complying with the government code regulation that requires a resolution to allow electronic and digital signatures on claims.

SB 1473 requires public agencies to adopt an ordinance or resolution to allow claims to be submitted electronically. The resolution provides the required authorization for the City to accept electronically filed claims effective immediately.

The resolution also allows the City to handle claims correspondence electronically for those who have filed e-claims. Although the City will offer electronic filing, claim forms may continue to be submitted in hard copy.

COUNCIL GOAL COMPLIANCE:

Meets the following City Council goals:

B. Provide municipal government leadership which is open and responsive to residents, and is characterized by ethical behavior, stability, promoting public trust, transparency, confidence in the future, and cooperative interaction among civic leaders, residents, business representatives, and staff, while recognizing and respecting legitimate differences of opinion on critical issues facing the City.

C. Operate City government in a fiscally and managerially responsible and prudent manner to ensure that the City of Thousand Oaks remains one of California's most desirable places to live, work, visit, recreate, and raise a family.

Attachment:

Attachment #1 – Resolution
CCD:100-20\lm\H:\COMMON\Claims\Claim Forms and Instructions\071823 EClams Staff Report.docx Item No.9C
CCD:100-20\lm\H:\COMMON\Claims\Claim Forms and Instructions\071823 EClams Reso Att 1.docx

Page 1 ends

RESOLUTION NO.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY

COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

THOUSAND OAKS AUTHORIZING

ELECTRONIC CLAIMS FILING
WHEREAS, the Government Claims Act, pursuant to California Government Code § 945.4 requires a claimant to present the City with a written claim prior to commencing a lawsuit against the City for damages; and WHEREAS, California Government Code § 915(a)(3) authorizes a claimant to present a claim to the City electronically if the City adopts an ordinance or resolution that establishes requirements for electronic claim submissions; and WHEREAS, California Government Code § 915.4(a)(3) authorizes the City to send notices related to electronic claim submissions to the email address associated with the claim, or an alternative email address if the claimant so requests; and
WHEREAS, in the modern workplace, the use of electronic records has become routine in the regular course of business, with employees of public and private entities increasingly using various electronic forms of communication; and WHEREAS, the use of electronic records and communications has drastically increased in the past years; and
WHEREAS, obtaining claims and other documents electronically reduces staff time, complainant time, and material waste compared to mailing and handling of hard-copy claims; and
WHEREAS, receiving claims quicker through electronic filing facilitates a timely and accurate investigation; and
ATTACHMENT #1
Item No.9C
CCD:100-20\lm\H:\COMMON\Claims\Claim Forms and Instructions\071823 EClams Reso Att 1.docx

Page 2 ends

WHEREAS, this Electronic Claims Filing Resolution outlines the means by which the City will accept electronic claims and the method of sending notices regarding such claims.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Thousand Oaks does hereby authorize the acceptance of electronically filed government claims against the City of Thousand Oaks.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of July, 2023, by the following vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:
_______________________________
Kevin McNamee, Mayor
City of Thousand Oaks, California
ATTEST/CERTIFY:
_____________________________
Laura B. Maguire, City Clerk
Date Attested:_________________

APPROVED AS TO FORM
Office of the City Attorney
_____________________________
Tracy Friedl, Assistant City Attorney
APPROVED AS TO ADMINISTRATION:
______________________________
Andrew P. Powers, City Manager
The presence of electronic signature certifies that the foregoing is a true and correct copy as approved by the City of Thousand Oaks City Council on the date cited above.

Item No.9C
TO: Andrew P. Powers, City Manager
FROM: Clifford G. Finley, Public Works Director
DATE: July 18, 2023
SUBJECT: Ventura County Stormwater National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit Implementation and Cost-Sharing Agreement
RECOMMENDATION:

1. Approve City’s continued participation in the collective countywide cost-sharing program for stormwater National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit implementation.

3. Find that this action is not a project as defined under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

No Additional Funding Requested. Minimal staff time to prepare staff report and authorize agreement is included in the Adopted FY 2023-24 Stormwater Fund Budget. This agreement allows for the equitable distribution of the Ventura County Watershed Protection District’s (District) Benefit Tax Assessment Program (Assessment) to offset costs of the Ventura Countywide Stormwater Quality Management Program (Program) for the participating Ventura County agencies, including the City of Thousand Oaks.

BACKGROUND:

On April 14, 1992, the Ventura County Board of Supervisors (Board) approved the Program and authorized the use of the Assessment to finance the activities and requirements contained within the countywide MS4 Stormwater Permit (Permit). Subsequently, on June 30, 1992, the District (as the Permit’s Principal Permittee) entered into four separate District-zone-based implementation Item No.9D
VC NPDES Permit Implementation and Cost Sharing Agreement July 18, 2023

Page 2 ends

agreements with the ten Ventura County cities and the unincorporated areas of the County (the Permit’s Co-Permittees). Collectively, these four agreements are known as the 1992 Implementation Agreement (1992 Agreement) for the Program. The 1992 Agreement identified the responsibilities of the parties to the Permit and set forth the methodology for the use of the Assessment financing to fund the Program in their respective jurisdictions. In each subsequent fiscal year, the Board resolved to include funding for the NPDES program through the Assessment as outlined in the 1992 Agreement.

Additional program costs for the Principal Permittee, as well as the Co-Permittees’ costs associated with the 2010 NPDES MS4 Stormwater Permit (2010 Permit), prompted further efforts to equitably share the increased costs. The result of that effort was the development of the current 2010 NPDES Implementation Agreement (2010 Agreement).

In 2016, City Council and the Board approved the First Amendment to the 2010 Agreement extending the term one year past the new Permit’s effective date. The Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board) adopted the new Regional MS4 Stormwater Permit (2021 Permit) on July 23, 2021, with an effective date of September 11, 2021. Accordingly, the 2010 Agreement was set to expire on September 11, 2022.

The 2021 Permit requirements were to be in full effect as of September 11, 2021, unless the option to develop a Watershed Management Plan (WMP) for compliance was chosen. Permittees were given three months after the effective date to submit a Notice of Intent (NOI) to the Regional Board declaring their desire to develop a WMP. The WMP is a voluntary alternative compliance option provided in the 2021 Permit that describes customized strategies, control measures, and schedules that each Permittee will implement to comply with applicable water quality limits and requirements within their watershed(s). On December 7, 2021, the entire Ventura Countywide Stormwater Program, including the City, submitted a NOI signed by the individual city managers and the Board to the Regional Board to select the development of the WMP as the path to compliance for the 2021 Permit. The WMP is due to the Regional Board by September 11, 2023. The City has been working collaboratively with the other Ventura County Permittees and a consultant to develop the WMP with the intent to submit to the Regional Board before the deadline. In 2022, all the Ventura County Permittees approved the Second Amendment to the 2010 Agreement extending the term of the 2010 Agreement until September 11, 2023, to coincide with the WMP due date.

Item No.9D
VC NPDES Permit Implementation and Cost Sharing Agreement July 18, 2023

Page 3 ends

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS:

The 2021 Permit removes the “Principal Permittee” designation and designates all parties as Co-Permittees of the 2021 Permit. The Co-Permittees are seeking to enter into a new 2023 Implementation Agreement (2023 Agreement). The 2023 Agreement (Attachment #1) recognizes the Co-Permittees’ continued cooperation to administer and fund the Program as an integral part of ensuring their collective compliance with the 2021 Permit, and in their mutual best interests designates their responsibilities for continued administration and funding of the Program through the Assessment.

The 2023 Agreement will become effective upon approval of all 12 Co-Permittees and will expire September 11, 2027, one year past the term of the 2021 Permit, which expires on September 11, 2026. If the Regional Board extends the term of the 2021 Permit, the Co-Permittees have the option to amend the 2023 Agreement to extend its terms.

City Attorney’s Office has reviewed and approved the initial draft of the 2023 Agreement which is fundamentally the same as the previous approved agreements. This draft is still under review by the other Co-Permittees and is due to be finalized by July 20, 2023. Staff requests delegation to execute the final agreement be given to the City Manager contingent on final approval from the City Attorney’s Office.

COUNCIL GOAL COMPLIANCE:

Meets the following City Council goals:

F. Provide and enhance essential infrastructure to ensure that the goals and policies of the Thousand Oaks General Plan are carried out and the City retains its role and reputation as a leader in protecting the environment and preserving limited natural resources.

PREPARED BY: Paul Jorgensen, Water Quality Supervisor
Jason Siegert, Environmental Compliance Analyst
Attachments:

Attachment #1 –2023 Implementation Draft Agreement
DPW:290-10\pj\js\cp\ev\Council\2023\071823\ NPDES Permit and Cost Sharing staff report.docx Item No.9D
MAY 22 DRAFT VERSION

Page 1 of 10 ends

DPW:290-10\pj\js\cp\ev\C:\inetpub\wwwroot\multitenant\temp\Attachment 1 2023 Implementation Draft Agreement.pdf

VENTURA COUNTY STORMWATER PERMIT IMPLEMENTATION

AND COST-SHARING AGREEMENT
This "AGREEMENT" is made and entered into by and between the County of Ventura (the "COUNTY"), the Ventura County Watershed Protection District (the "DISTRICT"), and the Cities of Camarillo, Fillmore, Moorpark, Ojai, Oxnard, Port Hueneme, San Buenaventura, Santa Paula, Simi Valley and Thousand Oaks (individually, a "CITY" and collectively, the "CITIES").

Hereinafter, the COUNTY, the DISTRICT, a CITY, and the CITIES may be referred to individually as a "PARTY" and collectively as the "PARTIES".

RECITALS
WHEREAS, Congress in 1987 amended Section 402 of the Federal Clean Water Act [33 U.S.C.A. 1342(p)] to require the federal Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") to promulgate regulations for stormwater discharges; and
WHEREAS, the EPA regulations require a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (“NPDES”) permit for the discharge of stormwater into waters of the United States; and WHEREAS, the PARTIES own and operate separate municipal storm sewer systems ("MS4") that discharge stormwater and urban runoff into waters of the United States; and WHEREAS, in 1992, the PARTIES jointly filed an application with the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board ("REGIONAL BOARD"), the state agency responsible for regulating water quality in Ventura County, for a NPDES permit covering their MS4s and stormwater discharges; and
WHEREAS, the REGIONAL BOARD in 1994 adopted Order No. 94-082, which regulated the PARTIES' MS4s and stormwater discharges; and WHEREAS, the REGIONAL BOARD in 2000 replaced Order No. 94-082 with Order No. 00-108; and
WHEREAS, the REGIONAL BOARD on May 7, 2009 replaced Order No. 00-108 with Order No. 09-0057; and
WHEREAS, the REGIONAL BOARD on July 8, 2010 adopted Order No. 2010-0108, which replaced Order No. 09-0057, designated the PARTIES as “Co-Permittees”, and designated the DISTRICT as the “Principal Permittee”; and
WHEREAS, the REGIONAL BOARD on July 23, 2021 adopted Order No. R4-2021- 0105 ("PERMIT"), which replaced Order No. 2010-0108, designated the PARTIES as “CoPermittees”, and removed the designation of “Principal Permittee; and WHEREAS, since 1992, the PARTIES have entered into a series of agreements ("Implementation Agreement") that set forth their responsibilities to develop, implement, and fund “” the Ventura Countywide Stormwater Quality Management Program (the ATTACHMENT #1
Item No.9D
MAY 22 DRAFT VERSION

Page 2 of 10 ends

DPW:290-10\pj\js\cp\ev\C:\inetpub\wwwroot\multitenant\temp\Attachment 1 2023 Implementation Draft Agreement.pdf “COUNTYWIDE PROGRAM”), an integrated stormwater discharge management program to comply with EPA and REGIONAL BOARD permits and regulations governing their MS4s and stormwater discharges and protecting and improving water quality in Ventura County; and WHEREAS, the Implementation Agreement provides, among other things, for the DISTRICT’s collection of assessments on behalf of the PARTIES to fund the COUNTYWIDE PROGRAM through the Ventura County Watershed Protection District Benefit Assessment Program (“BA PROGRAM”); and
WHEREAS, the PARTIES have approved extensions of the Implementation Agreement in order to provide for the ongoing administration and annual funding of the COUNTYWIDE PROGRAM; and
WHEREAS, the current Implementation Agreement expires on September 11, 2023; and WHEREAS, the PARTIES recognize that their continued cooperation to administer and fund the COUNTYWIDE PROGRAM is an integral part of ensuring their collective compliance with the PERMIT and thus is in their mutual best interests; and WHEREAS, given the July 2021 adoption of the PERMIT, the PARTIES desire to update the Implementation Agreement as provided herein to set forth their responsibilities for continued administration and funding of the COUNTYWIDE PROGRAM.

NOW, THEREFORE, the PARTIES agree as follows:

1. PURPOSE
A. This AGREEMENT is intended to establish the PARTIES’ roles and responsibilities to administer and fund the COUNTYWIDE PROGRAM.

B. The PARTIES’ roles and responsibilities to implement, administer, and fund any individual PERMIT compliance activities will be memorialized in separate agreements as needed.

2. MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE
A. There is established a Ventura County Stormwater Permit Management Committee ("MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE"), consisting of 12 members with one representative appointed by the legislative body of each CITY, the board of supervisors of the COUNTY, and the legislative body of the DISTRICT. The MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE may appoint a non-voting representative and alternate from the REGIONAL BOARD upon request of the REGIONAL BOARD. The non-voting REGIONAL BOARD member shall comply with all requirements applicable to the MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE. All MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE members shall be senior level managers or staff appointed by the legislative body of each PARTY and the REGIONAL BOARD.

B. The MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE's primary objective is to review and direct the administration and funding of the COUNTYWIDE PROGRAM to assist with the PARTIES' Item No.9D
MAY 22 DRAFT VERSION

Page 3 of 10 ends

DPW:290-10\pj\js\cp\ev\C:\inetpub\wwwroot\multitenant\temp\Attachment 1 2023 Implementation Draft Agreement.pdf compliance with the PERMIT. In this capacity, the MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE is responsible for directing, reviewing, and approving COUNTYWIDE PROGRAM work and budgets, including but not limited to those related to tasks and functions set forth in Exhibit A, as well as other items such as compliance/regulatory documents and comment letters related to the PERMIT prepared on behalf of the PARTIES.

C. The MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE shall meet as needed but not less than quarterly.

D. The MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE will be chaired by the DISTRICT representative.

E. Each member of the MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE will have one vote for any motion. All budgetary motions must be approved by a 2/3 majority vote of the MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE (8 of 12), and any non-budgetary motion must be approved by majority vote (7 of 12).

F. Any PARTY may appeal any action or decision of the MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE to the DIRECTORS COMMITTEE. All appeals shall be in writing and submitted to the DISTRICT, identify the action or decision of the MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE to be reviewed by the DIRECTORS COMMITTEE, and include any explanation or materials in support of the appeal. Upon receiving a written appeal, the DISTRICT shall promptly provide it to the DIRECTORS COMMITTEE for review and notify the MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE of the appeal at the next MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE meeting.

G. In addition to the COUNTYWIDE PROGRAM, the MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE shall be responsible for directing and reviewing the work and materials prepared by any subcommittee, including but not limited to approving and directing the activities, work, and budgets of any subcommittee and the BA PROGRAM.

3. DIRECTORS COMMITTEE
A. There is established a Public Works Directors Committee ("DIRECTORS COMMITTEE") within the MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE. The DIRECTORS COMMITTEE is composed of 12 members, consisting of the public works director of each CITY, the public works director of the COUNTY, and the director of the DISTRICT (“the DIRECTORS”).

B. The primary purpose and function of the DIRECTORS COMMITTEE is hearing and deciding appeals of actions and decisions of the MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE pursuant to Section 2(F). Actions or decisions of the MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE shall be reversed only upon a 2/3 majority vote of all the DIRECTORS (and not upon a 2/3 majority vote of DIRECTORS attending any given DIRECTORS COMMITTEE meeting). Upon granting an appeal, the challenged MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE action or decision shall be vacated and returned to the MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE for subsequent consideration and action (if any).

4. COUNTYWIDE PROGRAM
Item No.9D
MAY 22 DRAFT VERSION

Page 4 of 10 ends

DPW:290-10\pj\js\cp\ev\C:\inetpub\wwwroot\multitenant\temp\Attachment 1 2023 Implementation Draft Agreement.pdf A. Responsibility to Implement
i. On behalf of the PARTIES, the DISTRICT will perform the COUNTYWIDE PROGRAM activities set forth in Appendix A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, which may be updated from time to time by the MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE.
ii. If the MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE selects another PARTY, person, or firm to perform the COUNTYWIDE PROGRAM activities in Appendix A, then a reasonable amount of time will be afforded to the new PARTY, person, or firm to ensure a smooth transition of the performance of COUNTYWIDE PROGRAM activities and to minimize any DISTRICT loss of infrastructure or staff levels due to the change. iii. By February 1 each year, the DISTRICT will prepare a projected annual budget for the following fiscal year's implementation of the COUNTYWIDE PROGRAM for the MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE's review and approval. The projected annual budget will include, but not be limited to, estimates for labor and fixed costs for each program activity. The MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE shall review, propose and discuss any changes to, and approve an annual budget prior to the start of the next fiscal year consistent with the voting requirements of Section 2(E). iv. The DISTRICT will retain all COUNTYWIDE PROGRAM- and PERMIT-required documents and fiscal records for no less than five (5) years and, upon reasonable request, make them available to any PARTY, the REGIONAL BOARD, and/or the EPA.

B. Responsibility to Fund
i. The PARTIES acknowledge that each of them is responsible to fund a portion of the budget for the performance of activities necessary to comply with the PERMIT and, by pooling their resources to implement the COUNTYWIDE PROGRAM activities set forth in Appendix A, each PARTY receives the benefit of better coordination and cost sharing for PERMIT compliance.
ii. The DISTRICT will pay 50% of the annual costs associated with performance of the COUNTYWIDE PROGRAM activities set forth in Appendix A, following adoption of an annual budget by the MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE pursuant to Section 4(A)(iii).
iii. Collectively, the COUNTY and the CITIES will pay 50% of the annual costs associated with the performance of the COUNTYWIDE PROGRAM activities set forth in Appendix A, following adoption of an annual budget by the MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE pursuant to Section 4(A)(iii). Individually, the COUNTY and each CITY will pay an amount of the annual costs they are collectively responsible for based on the proportional rate that each of them is assigned under the BA PROGRAM for the annual budget adopted by the MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE pursuant to Section 4(A)(iii).

Item No.9D
MAY 22 DRAFT VERSION

Page 5 of 10 ends

DPW:290-10\pj\js\cp\ev\C:\inetpub\wwwroot\multitenant\temp\Attachment 1 2023 Implementation Draft Agreement.pdf

5. FUNDING SOURCES
A. The DISTRICT will annually collect, on behalf of the COUNTY and the CITIES, benefit assessments through the BA PROGRAM. Promptly thereafter, the DISTRICT shall notify the PARTIES of the assessments collected via the BA PROGRAM for the prior fiscal year.

B. The PARTIES will fund their respective share of COUNTYWIDE PROGRAM costs either (i) by direct payment to DISTRICT or (ii) by deducting an amount from the assessments collected by the DISTRICT through the BA PROGRAM. By February 1 each year, each PARTY must submit written notice to the DISTRICT indicating its funding preferences for the following fiscal year’s COUNTYWIDE PROGRAM. At a minimum, each PARTY's notice will include the following:
i. The dollar amount of any annual assessment collected through the BA PROGRAM to be applied by the DISTRICT towards the PARTY's annual responsibility to fund the COUNTWIDE PROGRAM.
ii. The dollar amount of any direct payment to the DISTRICT to be applied towards the PARTY's annual responsibility to fund the COUNTWIDE PROGRAM. iii. The dollar amount of any annual benefit assessment collected through the BA PROGRAM to be returned to the PARTY.

C. The PARTIES, through the MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE, will work to identify and evaluate programs and opportunities to secure additional funding to implement programs and projects to satisfy their individual and collective compliance obligations under the PERMIT, including but not limited to a ballot measure(s) to generate revenue for stormwater programs and projects.

6. INDIVIDUAL PERMIT COMPLIANCE
A. Each PARTY acknowledges that the PERMIT imposes regulatory requirements on its respective MS4, on its stormwater discharges, and/or within its jurisdiction that are not addressed or satisfied by the COUNTYWIDE PROGRAM, and therefore agrees that each PARTY is responsible for complying with PERMIT requirements applicable to its respective MS4, its stormwater discharges, and within its jurisdiction.

B. Nothing in this AGREEMENT prohibits any PARTY from entering into a separate agreement with another PARTY or PARTIES to jointly implement and administer activities, projects, and/or programs to comply with any PERMIT requirement(s) shared by or common to them. Such agreements may include the PARTIES' responsibility to pay for individual PERMIT compliance activities, projects, and/or programs, including a cost-sharing formula. Such agreements will not be appended to, but may reference, this AGREEMENT.

7. PERMIT NONCOMPLIANCE; INDIVIDUAL PARTY LIABILITY
Item No.9D
MAY 22 DRAFT VERSION

Page 6 of 10 ends

DPW:290-10\pj\js\cp\ev\C:\inetpub\wwwroot\multitenant\temp\Attachment 1 2023 Implementation Draft Agreement.pdf Notwithstanding anything in this AGREEMENT to the contrary, each PARTY is solely responsible for all costs and liabilities related to any violation of or noncompliance with the PERMIT requirements applicable to its MS4, its stormwater discharges, and/or within its respective jurisdiction, including but not limited to the payment of penalties and interest and costs related to implementing corrective actions and providing a legal defense.

8. DISPUTE RESOLUTION
A. COUNTYWIDE PROGRAM Activities. Any MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE member may appeal any final decision of the MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE related to the COUNTYWIDE PROGRAM, including but not limited to the allocation of responsibilities and costs for activities, to the DIRECTORS COMMITTEE. An appeal may be reversed only upon a two thirds (2/3) vote of the DIRECTORS COMMITTEE.

B. Individual PERMIT Compliance Activities. Disputes related to individual PERMIT compliance activities shall be decided by the PARTIES participating in those activities, including pursuant to any dispute resolution provisions included in any agreement amongst the participating PARTIES. The MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE and the DIRECTORS COMMITTEE shall not have any authority to settle disputes related to individual PERMIT compliance activities.

10. AMENDMENTS TO AGREEMENT
This AGREEMENT may be modified or updated if a separate written agreement is approved by the PARTIES, signed and approved by their respective governing bodies, or in accordance with the delegated authority therefrom. The PARTIES will re-evaluate this AGREEMENT with the adoption of each new NPDES permit and prior to the finalization of any new major funding source for the COUNTYWIDE PROGRAM. Any amendment must comply with applicable requirements and regulations of the REGIONAL BOARD. If the PERMIT is amended or revised during the term of this AGREEMENT (except in the case of adopting a new TMDL into the PERMIT), then the PARTIES may re-negotiate the financial terms of this AGREEMENT.

11. WITHDRAWAL FROM THE AGREEMENT
A. Any PARTY may withdraw from this AGREEMENT upon giving at least 180 days’ written notice to the DISTRICT and the REGIONAL BOARD. The DISTRICT will notify the remaining PARTIES within 10 business days of receipt of any notice of withdrawal.

B. The withdrawing PARTY will remain responsible to pay the costs of COUNTYWIDE PROGRAM activities through the end of the fiscal year in which the withdrawal becomes effective.

C. Upon the effective date of a PARTY’s withdrawal, the withdrawing PARTY will be responsible to individually comply with all PERMIT requirements established by the REGIONAL BOARD.

Item No.9D
MAY 22 DRAFT VERSION

Page 7 of 10 ends

DPW:290-10\pj\js\cp\ev\C:\inetpub\wwwroot\multitenant\temp\Attachment 1 2023 Implementation Draft Agreement.pdf D. Upon the effective date of a PARTY's withdrawal, cost allocations to the remaining PARTIES will be recalculated in the following fiscal year.

12. FEDERAL AND STATE REGULATIONS AND GUIDELINES
The PARTIES intend this AGREEMENT to be consistent with the terms of all applicable federal and state NPDES permit regulations or guidelines as presently written and as may be amended during the term of this AGREEMENT. If any provision of this AGREEMENT conflicts with any federal or state regulation or guideline, then the federal or state regulation or guideline will take precedence, and all remaining provisions of this AGREEMENT will remain in force and effect.

13. TERM
This AGREEMENT will be effective September 12, 2023 and will expire one (1) year after the PERMIT expires unless the AGREEMENT is extended by an amendment approved pursuant to Section 10.

14. TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT
Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, this AGREEMENT may be terminated upon the written consent of two thirds (2/3) of the PARTIES.

15. NOTICES
All notices and correspondence will be deemed duly given, if (a) sent by certified U.S.

Mail; (b) delivered by hand; (c) deposited in the U.S. Mail, postage prepaid and notice to the addresses of such mailing by phone immediately after deposit in the U.S. Mail; (d) emailed and notice to the recipient by phone immediately after sending the email (if email is provided in the below table); or (e) faxed to the receiving PARTY and confirmation by phone immediately after sending the fax. All notices and correspondence must be sent or delivered to the following:

Ventura County Watershed Protection District
Attn: Watershed Protection District Director
800 South Victoria Avenue
Ventura, CA 93009
PHONE: (805) 654-2040
FAX: (805) 654-3350
EMAIL:

County of Ventura
Attn: Public Works Director
800 South Victoria Avenue
Ventura, CA 93009
PHONE: (805) 654-2073
FAX: (805) 654-3952
EMAIL:

City of Camarillo
Attn: Public Works Director
601 Carmen Drive
Camarillo, CA 93010
PHONE: (805) 388-5307
FAX: (805) 388-5318
EMAIL:

City of Fillmore
Attn: Public Works Director
250 Central Avenue
Fillmore, CA 93015
PHONE: (805) 524-3701
FAX: (805) 524-5707
EMAIL:

Item No.9D
MAY 22 DRAFT VERSION

Page 8 of 10 ends

DPW:290-10\pj\js\cp\ev\C:\inetpub\wwwroot\multitenant\temp\Attachment 1 2023 Implementation Draft Agreement.pdf City of Moorpark
Attn: City Engineer/Public Works Director
799 Moorpark Avenue
Moorpark, CA 93021
PHONE: (805) 517-6255
FAX: (805) 532-2555
EMAIL:

City of Ojai
Attn: Public Works Director
401 South Ventura Street
Ojai, CA 93023
PHONE: (805) 640-2560
FAX: (805) 640-2571
EMAIL:

City of Oxnard
Attn: Public Works Director
305 West Third Street
Oxnard, CA 93030
PHONE: (805) 385-8280
FAX: (805) 385-7907
EMAIL:

City of Port Hueneme
Attn: Public Works Director
250 North Ventura Road
Port Hueneme, CA 93041
PHONE: (805) 986-6568
FAX: (805) 986-6660
EMAIL:

City of San Buenaventura
Attn: Public Works Director
501 Poli Street
Ventura, CA 93001
PHONE: (805) 654-7800
FAX: (805) 652-0865
EMAIL:

City of Santa Paula
Attn: Public Works Director
P.O. Box 569
Santa Paula, CA 93061-0569
PHONE: (805) 933-4212
FAX: (805) 525-3742
EMAIL:

City of Simi Valley
Attn: Public Works Director
2929 Tapo Canyon Road
Simi Valley, CA 93063
PHONE: (805) 583-6786
FAX: (805) 583-6300
EMAIL:

City of Thousand Oaks
Attn: Public Works Director
2100 Thousand Oaks Blvd.

Thousand Oaks, CA 91362
PHONE: (805) 449-2457
FAX: (805) 449-2475
EMAIL: [email protected]

16. ASSIGNMENT
A PARTY may assign its rights and obligations under this AGREEMENT only with the written consent of every other PARTY, which consent may not be unreasonably withheld.

17. SUCCESSORS IN INTEREST
Except as otherwise provided herein, this AGREEMENT will inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the successors and assigns of the PARTIES. Except as expressly set forth herein, this AGREEMENT is not intended to benefit any person or entity that is not a PARTY to this AGREEMENT.

18. SECTION HEADINGS
Item No.9D
MAY 22 DRAFT VERSION

Page 9 of 10 ends

DPW:290-10\pj\js\cp\ev\C:\inetpub\wwwroot\multitenant\temp\Attachment 1 2023 Implementation Draft Agreement.pdf Headings at the beginning of each numbered section of this AGREEMENT are solely for the convenience and are not a material part of this AGREEMENT.

19. NO AGENCY CREATED
Nothing in this AGREEMENT is intended to create a separate entity or agency and no PARTY to this AGREEMENT is the agent of any other PARTY and nothing in this AGREEMENT will be construed as permitting or authorizing any PARTY to this AGREEMENT to act in any capacity as an agent of the other except as expressly provided herein. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the PARTIES acknowledge that they are entering into this AGREEMENT for their mutual benefit, and the PARTIES agree to execute such further agreements and documents and take such further actions as may be reasonably necessary to implement this AGREEMENT.

20. ENTIRE AGREEMENT
This AGREEMENT contains the entire understanding of the PARTIES with respect to the matters contained herein, and it supersedes all prior oral and written agreements or understandings between the PARTIES with respect to the matters contained herein.

21. SEVERABILITY
The invalidity in whole or in part of any provision of this AGREEMENT will not void or affect the validity of the other provisions of this AGREEMENT.

22. INTERPRETATION
The language in all parts of this AGREEMENT will be construed under the laws of the State of California according to its normal and usual meaning and not strictly for or against any PARTY. Exclusive venue for any action involving this AGREEMENT is in Ventura County. In the event of litigation in a United States District Court, exclusive venue is the Central District of California.

23. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT
Each PARTY covenants that the individual executing this AGREEMENT on its behalf is duly authorized and empowered to execute this AGREEMENT on behalf of the PARTY.

24. EXECUTION IN COUNTERPARTS
This AGREEMENT may be executed and delivered in any number of counterparts or copies by the PARTIES. When each PARTY has signed and delivered at least one counterpart to the other PARTIES, each counterpart will be deemed an original, and taken together, will constitute one and the same AGREEMENT, which will be binding and effective as to all the PARTIES.

Item No.9D
MAY 22 DRAFT VERSION

Page 10 of 10 ends

DPW:290-10\pj\js\cp\ev\C:\inetpub\wwwroot\multitenant\temp\Attachment 1 2023 Implementation Draft Agreement.pdf [SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE]
DPW:290-10\pj\js\cp\L:\Purchasing\Council Items for HCTP\Ven Co Stormwater NPDES Permit and Cost Sharing\Attach 1.docx Item No.9D
TO: Andrew P. Powers, City Manager
FROM: Clifford G. Finley, Public Works Director
DATE: July 18, 2023
SUBJECT: Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons at Pedestrian Crosswalks (CI 5588)
RECOMMENDATION:

1. Authorize staff to advertise the Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons at Pedestrian Crosswalks (CI 5588) for construction bids.

3. Find that the Project is Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to 14 CCR 15301.

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

No Additional Funding Requested. Minimal staff time and costs required to advertise for bids are included in the Adopted FY 2023-24 Capital Improvement Program Budget. $259,000 is included in the Adopted FY 2023-24 Capital Budget including $179,000 in Federal Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) Grant funding. The estimated total project cost is $283,000. Additional funding for construction costs will be requested at the time of construction contract award depending on bids received.

BACKGROUND:

In May 2021, the City prepared a Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP) for the purpose of improving commuter, bicyclist, and pedestrian safety in Thousand Oaks. Through the development of the LRSP, data analysis was conducted to determine which countermeasures can improve roadway safety. Ten intersections Item No.9E
RRFBs at Pedestrian Crosswalks CI 5588
July 18, 2023

Page 2 ends

were identified as candidates for upgraded pedestrian enhancements based on a number of factors, including traffic conflicts, road speeds, horizontal and/or vertical curves, street width, long pedestrian crossing distances, and documented citizen concerns (Attachment #1).At all ten locations, implementing high-intensity LEDs embedded with Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) will command the attention of drivers and significantly improve driver yield rates up to 98 percent based on Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) findings. The flashing LED's are highly visible under all weather conditions. The City has experienced improved yield rates at a number of marked crosswalks where RRFBs have been employed and seeks to implement additional RRFBs at locations where data suggests pedestrian safety improvements can be achieved.

In September 2020, staff submitted an HSIP Grant application to Caltrans for the project. The HSIP Grant [H10-07-038] in the amount of $179,000 was awarded/allocated in June 2023.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS:

The project will install and/or upgrade RRFBs at ten existing marked crosswalks per the most current State of California Manual Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) standards. Six of the ten locations are at marked school crosswalks and are either directly adjacent to a school, within one block, and/or within a school zone. All locations are on roadways that are 60 feet or wider measured from curb to curb. One location is at an equestrian crossing equipped with flashing beacon warning lights several hundred feet in advance of the crossing point. These standard yellow beacons will be upgraded to RRFBs with a marked pedestrian crosswalk added to the street.

The project plans and specifications were completed in-house and available for review upon request to the Public Works Department by email at [email protected] or by phone at (805) 449-2400.

Once bids are received, staff will make a recommendation at a future City Council meeting for the award of the construction contract.

The tentative schedule for completion of the project is as follows:

Bid Opening September 2023
Award of Construction Contract October 2023
Start of Construction November 2023
Project Completion Summer 2024
Item No.9E
RRFBs at Pedestrian Crosswalks CI 5588
July 18, 2023

Page 3 ends

The estimated costs are as follows:

1. Construction Estimate (including contingency) $ 280,000

2. City Furnished Materials/Services $ 3,000
Total Estimated Project Cost $ 283,000
$259,000 is included in the Adopted FY 2023-24 Budget (including $179,000 from the HSIP Grant). The total project cost (including contingencies) is estimated at $283,000. Additional appropriation at the time of construction award may be required depending on the actual bids received.

The RRFB at Pedestrian Crosswalks Project is categorically exempt from CEQA per Section 15301 (repair/maintenance of an existing facility).

Community Outreach: Staff embarked on a public outreach plan in December 2022, with a particular focus on residents located adjacent to the project. In advance of presenting the proposed improvements to the Traffic & Transportation Advisory Commission (TTAC) in February 2023, staff hosted outreach meetings at six of the crosswalk locations and sought feedback from the affected residents, specifically those that front and live in close proximity to the marked crosswalks.

Various other communication tools and strategies, including, press releases, website updates, and social media posts will continue to be utilized to inform the public and receive feedback.

This project meets City Council’s Top Ten Priorities #6, “Public Works + Infrastructure Investments across the community”.

CIP PROJECT PRIORITY (as outlined in FY 2023-24 and FY 2024-25 CIP Program Budget)
Priority One – Addresses Health & Safety, legal and regulatory requirements, or a top City Council Priority.

COUNCIL GOAL COMPLIANCE:

Meets the following City Council goals:

Item No.9E
RRFBs at Pedestrian Crosswalks CI 5588
July 18, 2023

Page 4 ends

PREPARED BY: Saeed Zolfaghari, Associate Engineer
Attachments:

Attachment #1 –Vicinity Map
DPW:850-20\ev\Council\2023\07182023\CI 5588\RRFB staff report.docx Item No.9E
Cl 5588 - RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACONS (RRFBS) PROJECT Legend
RRFBs
1) Avenida De Los Arboles at Calle Castano
2) Lynn Road at La Grange Avenue
3) Wendy Drive at Erinlea Avenue
4) La Granada Drive at Wilder Street
5) Avenida De Las Flores at Avenida De Las Plantas
6) Janss Road at Hendrix Avenue
7) Avenida De Las Plantas at Calle Tulipan
8) Camino Calandria at Darlington Ave
9) Wildwood Avenue at Sundance Street
10 Rancho Dos Vientos at Via El Cerro
N
A
0 0.5 1 2
��Miles VICINITY MAP
ATTACHMENT #1
DPW:850-20\ev\Council\2023\07182023\CI 5588\RRFB Att 1.pdf Item No.9E
TO: Andrew P. Powers, City Manager
FROM: Clifford G. Finley, Public Works Director
DATE: July 18, 2023
SUBJECT: 2024 Pavement Management Program Update (MI 2608) RECOMMENDATION:

1. Award Professional Services Agreement with Nichols Consulting Engineers (Fountain Valley, CA) in the not-to-exceed amount of $217,500 for the 2024 Pavement Management Program (MI 2608), plus extra services of $21,750, with a term ending June 30, 2024.

2. Approve expenditure in the amount of $244,250 ($217,500 agreement, plus $21,750 extra services, and $5,000 for City furnished materials and supplies) from A/C #133-5610-631-5500 (MI 2608 - 2024 Pavement Management Program Update).

3. Find that this action is not a project as defined under the California Environmental Quality Act.

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

No Additional Funding Requested. $250,000 is included in the Adopted FY 2023-24 Gas Tax Fund Budget. The total project cost is estimated at $245,000.

BACKGROUND:

Since the late 1980s, the Federal Highway Administration has required recipients of Federal Highway funds to implement a Pavement Management Program (PMP) for proper utilization of federal grant funds provided. The PMP evaluates approximately 380 miles of City Street pavements, of which 65 percent are residential and the remainder arterial and collectors. Since 1991, the City has used consultant services for its PMP. Every five years a citywide pavement condition assessment survey is conducted, and a new pavement condition inventory is developed, to update the City’s PMP. The most recent survey was performed in 2019 and, therefore; a new survey and pavement inventory for the 2024 PMP Update is required.

Item No.9F
2024 Pavement Management Program Update MI 2608
July 18, 2023

Page 2 ends

The PMP is used for developing the ten-year Capital Project Plan (updated every four years) for the City’s annual street rehabilitation projects. The program uses a benefit-cost analysis to determine maintenance at the most beneficial point in the life cycle of the asphalt. This is critical as minimal pavement maintenance early in a street’s life cycle will prevent expensive rehabilitation in later years. This PMP is expected to continue utilizing proven pavement treatments.

Additionally, the City needs to perform an inventory of existing signs in the public right of way to establish a plan for replacing the signs which are damaged or are not in compliance with retro-reflectivity requirements set forth by the State of California Manual Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD).

The consultant will utilize automated equipment to collect field data for the PMP and sign inventory.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS:

The City requires services from a professional consulting firm for the preparation of the 2024 PMP Update and the Sign Inventory. In accordance with Government Code section 4526 and Thousand Oaks Municipal Code section 3-10.401, on May 12, 2023, the City publicly advertised a formal Request for Proposals/Qualifications (RFP/Q) for professional consulting firms to provide the required professional services for the project. The RFP/Q was published in the Thousand Oaks Acorn newspaper and on the City’s e-procurement website.

Unlike the low bid requirements of the Public Contract Code, contracts for professional services should only be awarded to firms or persons who have demonstrated an adequate level of experience, competence, training, credentials, resources, staffing, and other professional qualifications necessary for more than satisfactory performance of the services solicited. The award of a professional services agreement is based upon a variety of factors that demonstrate the best value to the agency for the solicited scope of service. The cost of the service may be considered as one of those factors; however, the lowest cost is not the sole factor in deciding who will be awarded the contract.

On June 12, 2023, the City received three proposals from the following consulting firms:

1. Nichols Consulting Engineers Fountain Valley, CA

2. IMS Infrastructure Management Services Tempe, AZ

3. Bucknam Infrastructure Group Oceanside, CA
A team of Public Works staff evaluated the proposals based on the following qualification criteria:

Item No.9F
2024 Pavement Management Program Update MI 2608
July 18, 2023

Page 3 ends

· Project understanding and approach;
· Relevant experience (projects of similar size and scope); · Quality, clarity, responsiveness, and conformance with terms of the RFP/Q; · Qualifications and availability of key persons working on the project; · Team members’ (sub consultants) qualifications; and
· Reasonableness of completion schedule and estimated level of effort dedicated to completing each task.

After careful review and consideration of the above criteria, the proposal from Nichols Consulting Engineers (NCE) was determined to provide the most value in meeting the City’s needs for this project. The scope of work and consulting fees have been negotiated and finalized with NCE. Staff recommends City Council approve the Professional Services Agreement with NCE in the amount of $217,500, plus extra services of $21,750 (Attachment #1), for preparation of the 2024 PMP Update and the Sign Inventory.

This action is not a project as defined under the California Environmental Quality Act because this action will not result in a direct or foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment [14 CCR 15060(c)].

This project meets City Council’s Top Ten Priorities #6 to, “Invest in Public Works + Infrastructure Investments across the Community.”
CIP PROJECT PRIORITY (as outlined in FY 2023-24 and FY 2024-25 CIP Program Budget)
Priority Two – Necessary, but not essential, and there could be consequences if deferred.

COUNCIL GOAL COMPLIANCE:

Meets the following City Council goal:

PREPARED BY: Michelle McCarty, Engineering Associate
Attachments:

Attachment #1 – Professional Services Agreement with NCE DPW:850-20\ev\Council\2023\MI 2608\ 2024 Pavement Management Program staff report.docx Item No.9F
DPW:850-20\ev\Council\2023\MI 2608\ 2024 Pavement Management Program Att 1.docx

Page 1 ends

ATTACHMENT #1
Project Name: 2024 Pavement Management
Program (MI 2608)

AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

BETWEEN THE CITY OF THOUSAND OAKS
AND

NICHOLS CONSULTING ENGINEERS
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this 18th day of July 2023, by and between CITY OF THOUSAND OAKS, a municipal corporation ("City"), and NICHOLS CONSULTING ENGINEERS ("Consultant").

City and Consultant agree as follows:

1. RETENTION OF CONSULTANT
City hereby retains Consultant, and Consultant hereby accepts such engagement, to perform the services described in Section 2. Consultant warrants it has the qualifications, experience, and facilities to properly and timely perform said services.

2. DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES
The services to be performed by Consultant are as follows:

Professional services in conjunction with the evaluation of the city’s street network and City’s sign inventory. Services and deliverables shall generally include implementation of the Pavement Management Program (PMP) with GIS integration and are more particularly set forth in the Scope of Work, attached as Exhibit “A,” which is incorporated herein by reference.

Consultant will perform tasks and services in a professional manner and in accordance with the standards of Consultant’s profession. Except as otherwise specifically provided in this Agreement, Consultant will provide all of the administrative, professional and other personnel necessary to perform such services, all supplies and materials, equipment, printing, vehicles, transportation, office space and facilities required for the services, and all tests, test analyses, calculations, and all other means whatsoever to complete the services in the manner and within the time provided herein.

3. COMPENSATION AND PAYMENT
(a) Maximum and Rate. The total compensation payable to Consultant by City for the services under this Agreement SHALL NOT EXCEED the sum of $217,500 (herein "not to exceed amount"), and shall be earned as the work progresses on the following basis:

In lump sum amounts per the payment schedule set out in Consultant’s Schedule of Fees, attached as Exhibit “B” and incorporated herein.

Item No.9F
DPW:850-20\ev\Council\2023\MI 2608\ 2024 Pavement Management Program Att 1.docx

Page 2 ends

(b) Payment. Consultant shall provide City with written verification of the actual compensation earned, in a form satisfactory to City's Project Manager. Invoices shall be made no more frequently than on a monthly basis, and describe the work performed (including, if applicable, a list of hours worked by personnel classification). All payments shall be made within 30 days after City’s approval of the invoice. (c) Extra Services. Additional work not reasonably encompassed by the Scope of Services described in Section 2 may be agreed upon only by execution of a written Amendment to this Agreement. No liability or right to compensation for extra services shall exist without such Amendment. Unless otherwise stated in the Amendment, applicable rates for extra services shall be at the rates set forth in Exhibit “B.”

4. CITY PROJECT MANAGER
The services to be performed by Consultant shall be accomplished under the general direction of, and coordinate with, City's "Project Manager", as that staff person is designated by City from time to time, and who presently is Michelle McCarty.

5. TERM, PROGRESS AND COMPLETION
The term of this Agreement is from the date first written above to June 30, 2024 unless term of this Agreement is extended, or the Agreement is terminated as provided for herein.

City Manager or his or her designee shall have the authority to extend the term of this Agreement in writing no more than 3 separate times, for a period of 1 year each.

Extensions of time shall be memorialized by execution of a written amendment.

Consultant shall not commence work on the services to be performed under the Agreement until (i) Consultant furnishes proof of insurance as required by paragraph 9 below, and (ii) City’s Project Manager gives written authorization to proceed with the work.

All services shall be completed within the term of this Agreement,

6. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS
All drawings, designs, data, photographs, reports and other documentation (other than Consultant's drafts, notes and internal memorandum), including duplication of same prepared by Consultant in the performance of these services, are the property of City. City shall be entitled to immediate possession of the same upon completion of the work under this Agreement, or at any earlier or later time when requested by City. City agrees to hold Consultant harmless from all damages, claims, expenses, and losses arising out of any reuse of the plans, specifications, graphics, brochures, reports, and other documentation for purposes other than those described in this Agreement, unless written authorization of Consultant is first obtained.

Item No.9F
DPW:850-20\ev\Council\2023\MI 2608\ 2024 Pavement Management Program Att 1.docx

Page 3 ends

7. PERSONAL SERVICES/NO ASSIGNMENT/SUBCONTRACTS
This Agreement is for professional services, which are personal to City.

Vivek Jha is deemed to be especially experienced and is a key member of Consultant's firm, and shall be directly involved in performing, supervising or assisting in the performance of this work. This key person shall communicate with, and periodically report to, City on the progress of the work. Should said individual be removed from assisting in this contracted work for any reason, City may terminate this Agreement.

This Agreement is not assignable by Consultant without City's prior written consent.

The following portions of the work described in this Agreement may be subcontracted out to other parties by Consultant: Pavement data collection (Märker Geospatial, LLC), and asset management & roadway imaginary (Transconomy).

8. HOLD HARMLESS AND INDEMNITY
(a) Hold Harmless for Consultant's Damages. Consultant holds City, its elected officials, officers, agents, employees and volunteers, harmless from all of Consultant's claims, demands, lawsuits, judgments, damages, losses, injuries or liability to Consultant, to Consultant's employees, to Consultant’s contractors or subcontractors, or to the owners of Consultant's firm, which damages, losses, injuries or liability occur during the work or services required under this Agreement, or performance of any activity or work required under this Agreement.
(b) Defense and Indemnity of Third Party Claims/Liability.

To the maximum extent allowed by law, Consultant shall indemnify, defend with legal counsel approved by City, and hold harmless City, its officers, officials, agents, employees and volunteers from and against all liability including, but not limited to, loss, damage, expense, cost (including without limitation reasonable legal counsel fees, expert fees and all other costs and fees of litigation) of every nature arising out of or in connection with Consultant’s negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct in the performance of work hereunder or its failure to comply with any of its obligations contained in the Agreement, except such loss or damage which is caused by the sole or active negligence or willful misconduct of City. Should conflict of interest principles preclude a single legal counsel from representing both City and Consultant, or should City otherwise find Consultant’s legal counsel unacceptable, then Consultant shall reimburse City its costs of defense, including without limitation reasonable legal counsel fees, expert fees and all other costs and fees of litigation. The Consultant shall promptly pay City any final judgment rendered against City (and its officers, officials, employees and volunteers) with respect to claims determined by a trier of fact to have been the result of Consultant’s negligent, reckless or wrongful performance. It is expressly understood and agreed that the foregoing provisions are intended to be as broad and inclusive as is permitted by the law of the State of California and will survive termination of this Agreement.

Consultant’s obligations under this section apply regardless of whether or not such claim, charge, damage, demand, action, proceeding, loss, stop notice, cost, expense, judgment, civil fine or penalty, or liability was caused in part or contributed to by an Indemnitee.

Item No.9F
DPW:850-20\ev\Council\2023\MI 2608\ 2024 Pavement Management Program Att 1.docx

Page 4 ends

However, without affecting the rights of City under any provision of this Agreement, Consultant shall not be required to indemnify and hold harmless City for liability attributable to the active negligence of City, provided such active negligence is determined by agreement between the parties or by findings of a court of competent jurisdiction. In instances where City is shown to have been actively negligent and where City’s active negligence accounts for only a percentage of the liability involved, the obligation of the Consultant will be for that entire portion or percentage of liability not attributable to the active negligence of City.
(c) Nonwaiver. City does not waive, nor shall be deemed to have waived, any indemnity, defense or hold harmless rights under this section because of the acceptance by City, or the deposit with City, of any insurance certificates or policies described in Section 9.

In no event shall the cost to defend charged to the Consultant exceed the Consultants proportionate percentage of fault. The Consultant will never be held liable for consequential, liquidated, incidental, or similar damages. (d) Standard of Care. Consultant shall perform its Services consistent with and limited to that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the engineering and consulting profession practicing under similar conditions, and at the same time and locality where the Services are performed.
(f) Duty of Comply with laws. Consultant shall apply the reasonable standard of care to comply with applicable laws and regulations in effect at the time the services are performed.
(h) Litigation Support. Consultant shall receive compensation for preparing for and/or appearing in any litigation at the request of CITY, except: (1) if such litigation costs are incurred by the Consultant in defending its work or services or those of any of its sub-Consultants; or (2) as may be required by the indemnification requirements of the Consultant. Compensation for litigation services requested by the CITY shall be paid at a mutually agreed upon rate and/or at a reasonable rate for such services. (i) Force Majeure. Neither party to this Agreement will be liable to the other party for delays in performing the services, nor for the direct or indirect cost resulting from such delays, that may result from labor strikes, riots, war, acts of governmental authorities, health crises, extraordinary weather conditions or other natural catastrophe, or any other cause beyond the reasonable control or contemplation of either party.

9. MINIMUM SCOPE AND LIMIT OF INSURANCE
Without limiting Consultant's indemnification of City, and prior to commencement of Work, Consultant shall obtain, provide, and maintain at its own expense during the term of this Agreement, and any extension thereof, policies of insurance of the type and amounts described below and in a form that is satisfactory to City.

Coverage shall be at least as broad as:

Item No.9F
DPW:850-20\ev\Council\2023\MI 2608\ 2024 Pavement Management Program Att 1.docx

Page 5 ends

(a). Commercial General Liability (CGL): Consultant shall, at Consultant's sole cost and expense and throughout the term of this Agreement, and any extensions thereof, carry General Liability insurance coverage at least as broad as Insurance Services form CG 00 01 in an amount not less than $2,000,000 per occurrence, $4,000,000 general aggregate for bodily injury, personal and advertising injury and property damage, including without limitation, blanket contractual liability. (b). Automobile Liability: Consultant shall, at Consultant's sole cost and expense and throughout the term of this Agreement, and any extensions thereof, carry Automobile Liability insurance coverage at least as broad as Insurance Services form CA 00 01 or the exact equivalent covering bodily injury and property damage for all activities of Consultant arising out of or in connection with the work to be performed under this Agreement, including coverage of any owned, hired, non-owned, or rented vehicles, in an amount not less than $1,000,000 combined single limit for each accident. (c). Worker’s Compensation: Consultant shall, at Consultant's sole cost and expense and throughout the term of this Agreement, and any extensions thereof, carry workers’ compensation statutory benefits as required by law with employer’s liability limits no less than $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease. Consultant shall submit to City, along with the certificate of insurance, a Waiver of Subrogation endorsement in favor of City, its elected officials, officers, agents, employees and volunteers for all work performed by Consultant, its employees, agents and subcontractors. (d). Professional Errors and Omissions Insurance: Consultant shall, at Consultant’s sole cost and expense throughout the term of this Agreement, and any extensions thereof, carry professional errors and omissions coverage of no less than $1,000,000 per occurrence or claim, $2,000,000 aggregate, with tail coverage for an extended reporting period of three (3) years.

If Consultant maintains higher limits than the minimum shown above, City requires and shall be entitled to coverage for the higher limits maintained by Consultant. Any available insurance proceeds in excess of the specified minimum limits of insurance and coverage shall be available to City.

Other Insurance Provisions
Additional Insured Status
City, its elected officials, officers, agents, and employees are to be covered as additional insureds on the CGL policy with respect to liability arising out of work or operations performed by or on behalf of Consultant including materials, parts, or equipment furnished in connection with such work or operations. General liability coverage can be provided in the form of an endorsement to Consultant’s insurance (at least as broad as ISO Form CG 20 10 11 85 or if not available, through the addition of both CG 20 10 10 01 and CG 20 37 10 01 if a later edition is used). The provision shall also apply to any excess liability policies. In addition, Consultant shall ensure that the automobile liability policy contains a provision covering City as an additional insured and shall obtain an endorsement to that effect if it does not.

Item No.9F
DPW:850-20\ev\Council\2023\MI 2608\ 2024 Pavement Management Program Att 1.docx

Page 6 ends

Excess Insurance
The limits of insurance required in this agreement may be satisfied by a combination of primary and umbrella or excess insurance. Umbrella or excess policies shall provide coverage at least as broad as specified for underlying coverages and covering those insured in the underlying policies. Coverage shall be “pay on behalf” with defense costs payable in addition to policy limits. There shall be no cross-liability exclusion of claims or suits by one insured against the other. Any umbrella or excess insurance shall contain or be endorsed to contain a provision that such coverage shall also apply on a primary and no-contributory basis for the benefit of City as required in written contract or agreement before City’s own insurance or self-insurance shall be called upon to protect it as a named insured.

City’s Rights of Enforcement
In the event any policy of insurance required under this Agreement does not comply with these specifications or is cancelled and not replaced, City has the right but not the duty to obtain the insurance it deems necessary and any premium paid by City will be promptly reimbursed by Consultant, or City will withhold amounts sufficient to pay premium from Consultant’s payments. In the alternative, City may cancel this Agreement.

City’s Right to Revise Specifications
City reserves the right at any time during the term of the Agreement to change the amounts and types of insurance required by giving Consultant ninety (90) days advance written notice of such change. If such change results in substantial additional cost to Consultant, City and Consultant may renegotiate Consultant's compensation.

Primary and Non-Contributory Coverage
For any claims related to this Agreement, Consultant's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects City, its elected officials, officers, agents, and employees.

Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be excess of Consultant's insurance and shall not contribute with it and shall be at least as broad as CG 20 01 04 13.

Notice of Cancellation
Each insurance policy required above shall provide that coverage shall not be canceled, except with notice to City.

Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions
Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by City. City may require Consultant to provide proof of ability to pay losses and related investigations, claim administration, and defense expenses within the retention.

Item No.9F
DPW:850-20\ev\Council\2023\MI 2608\ 2024 Pavement Management Program Att 1.docx

Page 7 ends

Acceptability of Insurers
All insurance policies shall be issued by an insurance company currently authorized by the Insurance Commissioner to transact business of insurance in the State of California, with a current A.M. Best’s rating of no less than A:VII, (unless otherwise acceptable to City).

Waiver of Subrogation
All insurance coverage maintained or procured pursuant to this Agreement shall be endorsed to waive subrogation against City, its elected officials, officers, agents, or employees or shall specifically allow Consultant or others providing insurance evidence in compliance with these specifications - to waive their right of recovery prior to a loss.

Consultant hereby waives his own right of recovery against City, and shall require similar written express waivers and insurance clauses from each of its subcontractors. Copies of these waivers shall be submitted to City prior to commencement of work.

Claims Made Policies
If any of the required policies provided coverage on a claims-made basis:
(a). The Retroactive Date must be shown and must be before the date of the Agreement or the beginning of contract work.
(b). Insurance must be maintained, and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least five (5) years after completion of the work required under this Agreement.
(c). If coverage is canceled or non-renewed, and not replaced with another claimsmade policy form with a Retroactive Date prior to the Agreement effective date, Consultant must purchase “extended reporting” coverage for a minimum of five (5) years after completion of Agreement work.

Verification of Coverage
Consultant shall provide City with copies of certificates (on City certificate form or an Accord form as modified per City direction) for all policies, with the appropriate named additional insured coverage and an endorsement that they are not subject to cancellation without 30 days prior written notice to City. All certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by City before work commences. However, failure to obtain the required documents prior to the work beginning shall not waive Consultant's obligation to provide them. City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements required by these specifications, at any time.

Subcontractors
Consultant shall require and verify that all subcontractors maintain insurance meeting all the requirements stated herein, and Consultant shall ensure that City is an additional Item No.9F
DPW:850-20\ev\Council\2023\MI 2608\ 2024 Pavement Management Program Att 1.docx

Page 8 ends

insured on insurance required from subcontractors. For CGL coverage, subcontractors shall provide coverage with a form at least as broad as CG 20 38 04 13.

10. RELATION OF THE PARTIES
a. Consultant is and shall at all times remain as to the City a wholly independent contractor. The personnel performing the services under this Agreement on behalf of Contractor shall at all times be under Consultant's exclusive direction and control. Neither City nor any of its officers, employees, agents, or volunteers shall have control over the conduct of Consultant or any of Consultant's officers, employees, or agents except as set forth in this Agreement. Consultant shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its officers, employees or agents are in any manner officers, employees or agents of the City. Consultant shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever against City, or bind City in any manner. b. No employee benefits shall be available to Consultant in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Except for the fees paid to Consultant as provided in the Agreement, City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Consultant for performing services hereunder for City. City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to Consultant for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder.

11. CORRECTIONS
In addition to the above indemnification obligations, Consultant shall correct, at its expense, all errors in the work that may be disclosed during City's review of Consultant's report or plans. Should Consultant fail to make such correction in a reasonably timely manner, such correction shall be made by City, and the cost thereof shall be charged to Consultant or withheld from any funds due to Consultant hereunder.

12. TERMINATION BY CITY
City may terminate without cause any or all of the services agreed to be performed under this Agreement upon 30 calendar days’ written notice. If termination is for cause, no advance notice need be given. In the event of termination, Consultant shall have the right and obligation to immediately assemble work in progress for the purpose of closing out the job. All compensation for actual work performed and charges outstanding at the time of termination shall be payable by City to Consultant within 30 days following submission of a final statement by Consultant unless termination is for cause. In such event, Consultant shall be compensated only to the extent required by law.

13. ACCEPTANCE OF FINAL PAYMENT CONSTITUTES RELEASE
The acceptance by Consultant of the final payment made under this Agreement shall operate as and be a release of City from all claims and liabilities for compensation to Consultant for anything done, furnished, or relating to Consultant's work or services.

Acceptance of payment shall be any negotiation of City's check or the failure to make a written extra compensation claim within 10 calendar days of the receipt of that check.

However, approval or payment by City shall not constitute, nor be deemed, a release of Item No.9F
DPW:850-20\ev\Council\2023\MI 2608\ 2024 Pavement Management Program Att 1.docx

Page 9 ends

the responsibility and liability of Consultant, its employees, subcontractors, agents and consultants for the accuracy and competency of the information provided and/or work performed; nor shall such approval or payment be deemed to be an assumption of such responsibility or liability by City for any defect or error in the work prepared by Consultant, its employees, subcontractors, agents and consultants.

14. AUDIT OF RECORDS
Consultant shall maintain, in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, complete and accurate records of all activities and operations relating to this Agreement. Records, including but not limited to, timecards, employment records, work progress reports, reimbursements, invoices, project records, proprietary data and information, as well as licensed software and any electronic records shall be kept for a period of four years beyond the termination of this Agreement. Consultant agrees that City, or its authorized representative, shall have the right to examine, audit, excerpt, copy or transcribe any of the records pertaining to this Agreement at any time during normal business hours. Consultant shall reimburse City for all reasonable costs of the audit, including travel time and auditor costs, should such audit reveal an overcharge of five (5) percent or more. Any overcharge will be considered a breach of this Agreement and could be cause for termination. The obligations of this section shall be explicitly included in any subcontracts or other agreements entered into by Consultant with respect to this Agreement.

15. WAIVER; REMEDIES CUMULATIVE
Failure by a party to insist upon the strict performance of any of the provisions of this Agreement by the other party, irrespective of the length of time for which such failure continues, shall not constitute a waiver of such party's right to demand strict compliance by such other party in the future. No waiver by a party of a default or breach of the other party shall be effective or binding upon such party unless made in writing by such party, and no such waiver shall be implied from any omissions by a party to take any action with respect to such default or breach. No express written waiver of a specified default or breach shall affect any other default or breach, or cover any other period of time, other than any default or breach and/or period of time specified. All of the remedies permitted or available to a party under this Agreement, or at law or in equity, shall be cumulative and alternative, and invocation of any such right or remedy shall not constitute a waiver or election of remedies with respect to any other permitted or available right of remedy.

16. CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Consultant is unaware of any City employee or official that has a financial interest in Consultant's business. During the term of this Agreement and/or as a result of being awarded this Agreement, Consultant shall not offer, encourage or accept any financial interest in Consultant's business by any City employee or official.

17. CONSTRUCTION OF LANGUAGE OF AGREEMENT
The provisions of this Agreement shall be construed as a whole according to its common meaning of purpose of providing a public benefit and not strictly for or against Item No.9F
DPW:850-20\ev\Council\2023\MI 2608\ 2024 Pavement Management Program Att 1.docx

Page 10 ends

any party. It shall be construed consistent with the provisions hereof, in order to achieve the objectives and purposes of the parties. Wherever required by the context, the singular shall include the plural and vice versa, and the masculine gender shall include the feminine or neutral genders or vice versa.

18. MITIGATION OF DAMAGES
In all situations arising out of this Agreement, the parties shall attempt to avoid and minimize the damages resulting from the conduct of the other party.

19. GOVERNING LAW
This Agreement, and the rights and obligations of the parties, shall be governed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of California. Should litigation occur, venue shall be in Superior Court of Ventura County.

20. TAXPAYER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
Consultant shall provide City with a complete Request for Taxpayer Identification Number and Certification, Form W-9, as most recently issued by the Internal Revenue Service.

21. NON-APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS
Payments due and payable to Consultant for current services are within the current budget and within an available, unexhausted and unencumbered appropriation of City funds. In the event City has not appropriated sufficient funds for payment of Consultant’s services beyond the current fiscal year, this Agreement shall cover only those costs incurred up to the conclusion of the current fiscal year.

22. MODIFICATION/AMENDMENT OF AGREEMENT
Any amendment, modification, or variation of the terms or tasks of this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be effective only upon the mutual written approval of the City and Consultant.

23. USE OF THE TERM “CITY”
Reference to “City” in this Agreement includes the City Manager or any authorized representative acting on behalf of City.

24. PERMITS AND LICENSES
Consultant, at its sole expense, shall obtain and maintain during the term of this Agreement all appropriate permits, licenses, and certificates that may be required in connection with the performance of services under this Agreement.

Item No.9F
DPW:850-20\ev\Council\2023\MI 2608\ 2024 Pavement Management Program Att 1.docx

Page 11 ends

25. CAPTIONS
The captions or headings in this Agreement are for convenience only and in no other way define, limit or describe the scope or intent of any provision or section of the Agreement.

26. AUTHORIZATION
Each party has expressly authorized the execution of this Agreement on its behalf and binds said party and its respective administrators, officers, directors, shareholders, divisions, subsidiaries, agents, employees, successors, assigns, principals, partners, joint venturers, insurance carriers and any others who may claim through it to this Agreement.

27. ENTIRE AGREEMENT BETWEEN PARTIES
Except for Consultant's proposals and submitted representations for obtaining this Agreement, this Agreement supersedes any other agreements, either oral or in writing, between the parties hereto with respect to the rendering of services and contains all of the covenants and agreements between the parties with respect to said services.

28. PARTIAL INVALIDITY
If any provision in this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remaining provisions will nevertheless continue in full force without being impaired or invalidated in any way.

29. NOTICES
Any notice required to be given hereunder shall be deemed to have been given by submitting said notice via email as follows:

TO CITY: Attention: Michelle McCarty
Public Works Department
City of Thousand Oaks
[email protected]
TO CONSULTANT: Attention: Vivek Jha
17050 Bushard Street, Suite 200
Fountain Valley, CA 92708
Email: [email protected]

30. SIGNATURES
(a) Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in two or more counterparts, each of which together shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument.
(b) Scanned Signatures. In the event that any signature is delivered by facsimile transmission or submitted electronically as a scanned image (i.e. files with .pdf, Item No.9F
DPW:850-20\ev\Council\2023\MI 2608\ 2024 Pavement Management Program Att 1.docx

Page 12 ends

.tiff or .jpeg extensions), such signature shall create a valid and binding obligation of the party executing (or on whose behalf such signature is executed) with the same force and effect as if such facsimile or scanned signature page were an original thereof. (c) Digital/Electronic Signatures. This Agreement may be executed through the use of digital or electronic signatures provided they meet the requirements of the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce (ESIGN) Act and the California Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (UETA) and are produced using a City-approved method. The presence of an electronic signature on this document shall be construed as the parties’ consent to do business electronically.

In concurrence and witness whereof, this Agreement has been executed by the parties effective on the date and year first above written.

NICHOLS CONSULTING ENGINEERS
Margot Yapp, PE, CEO & President
Michael Leacox, PG, CEG, Vice President &
Treasurer

CITY OF THOUSAND OAKS
Kevin McNamee, Mayor
ATTEST:

Laura B. Maguire, City Clerk
Item No.9F
DPW:850-20\ev\Council\2023\MI 2608\ 2024 Pavement Management Program Att 1.docx

Page 13 ends

APPROVED AS TO ADMINISTRATION:

Andrew P. Powers, City Manager
APPROVED BY DEPARTMENT HEAD:

Clifford G. Finley, Public Works Director
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Office of the City Attorney
Tracy Friedl, Assistant City Attorney
Item No.9F
DPW:850-20\ev\Council\2023\MI 2608\ 2024 Pavement Management Program Att 1.docx

Page 14 ends

EXHIBIT A

SCOPE OF WORK
Consultant shall perform the following Tasks:

Task 1- Pavement Condition Assessment:

Consultant shall implement an automated continuous and objective surface condition survey that includes crack survey, surface texture survey, rut depth measurement, and roughness survey. Survey to include 100 percent of tested lanes. Collected data shall be stored electronically for direct transfer into the StreetSaver software. Equipment used shall provide a high degree of repeatability and objectivity. Documentation of the accuracy and repeatability may be required.

Task 2 - Data Entry and Update Existing Pavement Database:

Task 2.1 - Consultant shall upload the City-wide pavement condition data, obtained in Task 1, into the City’s pavement management software database. In addition, new road segments which have been constructed since 2019 and are not included in the City’s pavement database shall be added by Consultant.

Task 2.2 – Consultant shall prepare the PMP to provide annual recommendations indicating the rehabilitation strategy, year of implementation, cost, and improved serviceability. Consultant should update the PMP cost of rehabilitation strategies based on the actual cost received in the 2020 and 2022 Pavement Program.

Consultant will make the following assumptions:
• City’s StreetSaver database uses a custom GIS shapefile which can be updated using the ‘GIS Update’ tool.
• No significant updates are required for the existing section inventory, such as GIS linkage, re-sectionalization, combining/splitting sections, update of descriptive attributes including section limits, lengths, widths, functional classes, etc. • The number of newly constructed sections to add does not exceed 2% of the current section inventory (approximately 100 sections). Additional sections may be added based on a time and materials basis.
• City will provide a tabular list identifying new sections with at least the following information: Street Name, Begin Location, End Location, and Functional Class.

City will provide the M&R historical records will include the following information:
• street name and identifiers
• beginning and ending limits of work
• type of treatment
• date of treatment
Task 3 - Pavement Management Scenarios:

Task 3.1 - Consultant shall provide different rehabilitation scenarios in the PMP report (up to three scenarios) for all streets and separately for arterial/collectors and Item No.9F
DPW:850-20\ev\Council\2023\MI 2608\ 2024 Pavement Management Program Att 1.docx

Page 15 ends

residential streets. The PMP should have the ability to export the database information in MS Excel and MS Access formats. The scenarios should analyze the funding and overall average pavement condition for the next 10 years.

The current City Street maintenance strategies include the following treatments:

1. Slurry Seal

2. Micro-surfacing

3. Thin Maintenance Overlay (TMO)

4. 1" to 3" Asphalt Rubber Hot Mix (ARHM) Overlay

5. Cold in Place Recycling
Task 3.2 - Consultant shall evaluate the above pavement strategies and provide recommendations if different pavement maintenance strategies would be beneficial to the City.

Task 3.3 - Consultant shall provide software training (up to 6 hours) for up to 5 staff in order to understand the data, interpret reports, and analyze processes.

Task 4 - Integrating of Pavement Management Program with Geographic Information Systems:

Consultant shall integrate data with the City geographical information system (GIS). City utilizes ESRI's ArcGIS Pro. City will make available a street centerline layer map, which includes street names in a shape file format or Geo database and Consultant shall provide a link to that map. Consultant shall establish linkages that provide for pavement management data by a test section basis and avoid averaging pavement management data. Efforts should be made in the pavement management system data collection process to help in this linking by attempting wherever possible to collect pavement data on an intersection-to-intersection basis.

The ArcGIS Pro information provided should include:
a. The capability to create maps and graphical displays that illustrate, functional Classification, traffic volumes, pavement distress data, existing and projected pavement condition, recommended or planned improvement projects and history of pavement rehabilitation programs.
b. The capability to aggregate data to various levels of geography that are predetermined, or user-defined.
c. The capability to buffer street improvement projects and select parcels to help in notifying residents and owners of planned projects.

The City will provide the following items:
• City will provide updated GIS maps
• City will provide the GIS schema
• City will to provide traffic volumes where available to be included in the GIS database
Task 5- Sign Inventory (Automated Method):

Task 5.1 - Consultant shall collect street-level imagery using a vehicle-mounted mobile device and an image-processing application with cloud storage. This task Item No.9F
DPW:850-20\ev\Council\2023\MI 2608\ 2024 Pavement Management Program Att 1.docx

Page 16 ends

assumes one pass is required for all two-lane streets, two passes for roads with 3-4 lanes, one per each direction to sufficiently collect asset imagery. Some segments shall receive additional passes due to vehicle routing or data quality purposes. The spatial accuracy of GIS locations will be within three feet (subject to human review).

Task 5.2 - Consultant shall utilize this imagery to process the extraction of asset attribute information noted in the below table. The collected imagery will then be processed using a combination of primarily automated asset extraction workflows and some additional manual (human) visual review of processed street-level images and aerial ortho-imagery from publicly accessible roads and map services, respectively. The extracted information will be entered into a standalone GIS feature class (ESRI File Geodatabase). Table 1A lists asset attributes that will be provided in the final project deliverable.

Task 5.3 - Consultant shall conduct the sign inspection using the retro-reflectivity Visual Nighttime Inspection Assessment method. The Visual Nighttime Inspection Assessment method consists of a pick-up or SUV using a two-person crew (driver and a 60+ year-old inspector). The inspection will be driven in the outside travel lane of all publicly maintains roadways with low-beam lights at or near the posted speed limit during nighttime conditions. Visual nighttime study will be performed per requirements of the MUTCD section 2A.09: Assessment categories to include; “Adequate”, “Marginal”, and “Fail”.

Signs that are exempt from the Visual Nighttime Inspection include Parking/ Standing/ Stopping/ walking/ hitchhiking/ adopt-a-highway/ Blue or Brown backgrounds/ Street Name, and exclusive use of bikes or pedestrians.

The signs that are not in compliance with MUTCD and signs that are not required to meet minimum retro-reflectivity levels by MUTCD, will not be tested for retroreflectivity. All data collected in the sign inventory by the consultant shall be entered into a Sign Module on the City’s StreetSaver account.

Item No.9F
DPW:850-20\ev\Council\2023\MI 2608\ 2024 Pavement Management Program Att 1.docx

Page 17 ends

Table 1. Attributes of Sign Inventory included in the Final Deliverables Task
Road
ROW
Asset
Feature
Class GIS Attributes
5 Signs Point
▪ GIS location [latitude/
longitude]
▪ Street name (nearest)
▪ Address (nearest)
▪ Sign ID (unique)
▪ Sign type
[Warning/Regulatory/
Guide/Street Name/
Miscellaneous]
▪ MUTCD code
▪ MUTCD description
▪ Pole ID (unique)
▪ Signpost (support)
type
▪ Post count (per Pole
ID)
▪ Sign count (per Pole
ID)
▪ Sign installation order
(vertically per Pole ID)
▪ Sign width
(estimated) [inch, no
decimals]
▪ Sign height
(estimated) [inch, no
decimals]
▪ Sign mounting height
(estimated) [feet, no
decimals]
▪ Size estimation error
(disclaimer for
estimating sign width,
height, and mounting
height)
▪ Sign text (if readable)
▪ Sign facing direction
[NB/SB/EB/WB]
▪ Physical condition
[Good/Fair/Poor]
comments1
▪ Sign Inspection
(FHWA – MUTCD Retro
reflectivity using Visual
Nighttime method)
▪ Photo of each sign
linked to a database.
▪ Inspection date,
inspectors name
▪ Entry of data to Street
Saver sign inventory
module
1 Standardized comments from human review (if any) including sign orientation (e.g., leaning) or non-standard sign description.

Item No.9F
DPW:850-20\ev\Council\2023\MI 2608\ 2024 Pavement Management Program Att 1.docx

Page 18 ends

EXHIBIT B
Item No.9F
TO: Andrew P. Powers, City Manager
FROM: Clifford G. Finley, Public Works Director
DATE: July 18, 2023
SUBJECT: Hill Canyon Treatment Plant Facility Exterior Painting Project Phase II (MI 2619)
RECOMMENDATION:

1. Authorize staff to advertise construction bids for the Hill Canyon Treatment Plant (HCTP) Facility Exterior Painting Project Phase II (MI 2619).

2. Find that the Project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to 14 CCR 15301.

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

No Additional Funding Requested. Minimal staff time and costs required to advertise for bids are included in the Adopted FY 2023-24 Wastewater Fund Capital Budget (MI 2619). $650,000 will be carried over in the project from FY 2022-23 to FY 2023-24. The estimated total project cost is $650,000. Additional funding for construction costs will be requested at the time of construction contract award depending on bids received.

BACKGROUND:

The Hill Canyon Treatment Plant (HCTP) treats wastewater from the community of Thousand Oaks. Constructed in the 1960s with major improvements over the following decades, the HCTP provides tertiary-level wastewater treatment.

HCTP has numerous facilities that require ongoing maintenance and upkeep. A previous painting project focused on the building/structure exteriors and was completed in 2021 under MI 2584. This Phase II project focuses on the piping and remaining (non-building/structure) items requiring regular painting to be protected from the elements (piping, valves, bollards, etc.). The building/structure paint has been maintained over previous years, but the repainting of several metallic components is now required. The work includes preparation of areas identified to be painted: piping, valves, equipment, bollards, and replacement of the joint sealant in the flow equalization basins (FEBs) which has not been replaced in decades (Attachment #1).

Item No.9G
HCTP Facility Exterior Painting Project Phase II (MI 2619) July 18, 2023

Page 2 ends

The project specifications outline the requirements for the preparation of the areas to be painted, application of primer and finish coating products, and removal and reapplication of joint sealants in the FEBs. Staff prepared plans and specifications outlining the improvements to solicit bids from prospective contractors.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS:

The necessary work for the HCTP Facility Exterior Painting Project Phase II Project includes the following items:

1. Mobilization/Demobilization

2. North Headworks

3. North Headworks Piping

4. Primary Clarifiers 1-4 Pump Areas

5. Piping

6. Screw Press Sludge Feed Pumps

7. Secondary Clarifier Wall Paint Removal

8. RAS/WAS Interior Painting

9. UW Pump Station Piping and Pumps

10. Recycled Water PS Piping and Pumps

11. FIP Piping and Pumps

12. Bioreactor Valve Assemblies and Piping

13. South Headworks Piping

14. Exposed Water Piping (Fire/Domestic)

15. Bollards (plant wide)

16. FEB Joint Sealant Removal and Replacement

17. Vent Pipe

18. Project Closeout
The tentative schedule for completion of the project is as follows:

Bidding Summer 2023
Award of construction contract Sept-Oct 2023
Start construction Fall 2023
Construction completion Early 2024
The estimated project costs are as follows:

Design and Engineering (previous) $ 10,000
Construction Phase, including support & contingency (future) $640,000 Total $650,000
The overall project cost (including contingencies, design services during Item No.9G
HCTP Facility Exterior Painting Project Phase II (MI 2619) July 18, 2023

Page 3 ends

construction/testing, project management) is estimated at $650,000. $650,000 will be carried over in the project from FY 2022-23 to FY 2023-24. Additional appropriation at the time of construction award will be requested if necessary, depending on the actual bids received.

The project plans and specifications are complete and available for review upon request to the Public Works Department by e-mail at [email protected] or by phone at (805) 449-2400.

Once bids are received, staff will make a recommendation at a future City Council meeting for award of the construction contract.

The project is categorically exempt from CEQA per Section 15301 (repair/maintenance of an existing facility).

Community Outreach: This project will be limited to work at HCTP and is not expected to impact any neighboring residences. The work will be at various locations within the HCTP and will have limited impact to plant operation. Construction related impacts to hiking trail users will be minimal.

This project meets City Council’s Top Ten Priorities #6: “Public Works + Infrastructure Investments across the community”.

CIP PROJECT PRIORITY (as outlined in FY 2023-24 and FY 2024-25 CIP Program Budget)
Priority Two – Necessary, but not essential, and there could be consequences if deferred.

COUNCIL GOAL COMPLIANCE:

Meets the following City Council goal:

C. Operate City government in a fiscally and managerially responsible and prudent manner to ensure that Thousand Oaks remains one of California’s most desirable places to live, work, visit, recreate, and raise a family.

PREPARED BY: Nader Heydari, Deputy Public Works Director Attachments:

Attachment #1 – Vicinity and Location Map
DPW: 850-20\cg\dlz\Council\071823\\MI 2619\HCTP Painting Project Phase II staff report.docx Item No.9G
ATTACHMENT #1
Secondary Clarifiers
Digesters
Primary
Clarifiers
Cogeneration Engines
Primary
Clarifiers
Thickening Building
Arroyo Conejo
Wetlands
Solar Panels
Biosolids Drying
(to be abandoned)
Bioreactors
Chlorine Contact Channel
Flow Equalization Basins
Operations Building
Bioreactor Basins
Filters
Dewatering / Generator Building
0 150 300 600
Feet
HILL CANYON ±

WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT

PROJECT LOCATION
HILL CANYON TREATMENT PLANT I I ·--. .. ~')
·-r ,...··?~_/ SANTA ROSA ROAD ,....: ...... ._.....,_,,,,.----' "" j ·----L-'" c:{ .-< (., .. ____ .-, // ~ : .. ·.·.,·· .. .. · .. ·.····· ·~N . ,-,,....,.,_""-.... I lll A~'" .. ~'?_ .'::'..f?.,l;' ... ' Os l / 0 "- ' ... --.............. /-) ,/ .~~+. CL """·), J'~~f!.~~ .. ............. :.::> ,f/ I ..... ~o <'''--- ............. ,;......... . --...-..; . Lr"-·-......, / \ / " ' ; 0 A '",,J "-. c: JAllSS;RO () \ 'AAA ! I ":~ l.S. .() f.:f ;-........ ::: .. .-:~ ... ::~:J...... .. o't_' .~~· .. ::!_~.~2~<> i 1--' • CD T - .V 7 ············· ... __ f {\ / . .. .. ,!._~ ........ .. ,., ........ "'-"'--· <> 0:: Q:' : >': 1' ) \ /' : l- a ' ·., HILLCR " \:&-~ gf , IU i ttlf "·.: . • ~ ,, _ _ .RD R ~ 't, "~ ~: w:
') c,"1'~-....... 2AO :_ ..._ ... / "·-. .. -:.-±::::::::::::::: ................. ., \ .r ~~..... .. ...... l.,/ .. ~:· .. ·.·- ----~ 1' ...... ~.~'!~ ~~~~'F, ... ,i ......... ..' .. .,./'f .. 1-:
/ , 7 -:·· .\ • _ .. 't: c~ -.... ... ~~~·· ............... ~\ ~ .. , ~/ / , .... ··k~~. · 1 f I ~ ··._.· .. ~. 0 ·./ .. 1· ': -! •• I I , I '-1
--... c I T y ~! 0 F / T i H'-··o u ! s __ ~- -~-. 0 A K s ri --.. ~.s,' ~ // ....... ') ....... ""!'""' ·-_::;. ...... :----· 1' +~ ... ~Vo . ~-- ........... · -·· ~ .... , ,. ... · , -... "\ 4 / ~OAo ·. -~ : "· ,' \
·:.-._· ----- ;·---' •. ,. ',~!~!;~!?, ", ............ ·-.......................... l._, i\ "\~l · \"·;::"''"'"" ................... . - - ................. . (,., ................................ >" ~):,t. ................. ~~=======~ -- -~ // -..... ~;,,,,· cl t / ..... .> ...... ,,,,,,. .. ,/ ..

I... /,/ ._ .... DPW: 850-20\cg\dlz\Council\071823\\MI 2619\HCTP Painting Project Phase II Att 1.pdf Item No.9G
TO: Andrew P. Powers, City Manager
FROM: Alexandra South, Director of Strategic Communications & Public Affairs
DATE: July 18, 2023
SUBJECT: 2023 League of California Cities Annual Conference Business Meeting
RECOMMENDATION:

2. City Clerk to affirm and sign the 2023 Annual Conference Voting Delegate Alternate Form for City Manager’s Office staff to submit to Cal Cities by the August 28, 2023 deadline.

3. Find that this action is not a project as defined under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

No Additional Funding Requested. Minimal costs related to staff time and travel are included in Adopted FY 2023-24 General Fund Budget.

BACKGROUND:

The Cal Cities Conference was created to enable cities to share ideas, success stories, and lessons learned through sessions and discussion forums pertaining to various areas of municipal interest including:
• Communications
• Community Services
• Disaster Planning
• Environmental Quality
• Finance
Item No.9H
2023 Cal Cities Annual Conference Business Meeting
July 18, 2023

Page 2 ends

• Housing
• Infrastructure and Public Works
• Management and Administration
• Personnel
• Planning/Land Use/Economic Development/Redevelopment
• Public Safety
• Telecommunications/Technology
• Youth and Children
Upon completion of the conference, the selected voting delegate, on behalf of their designated city, is given the opportunity to cast a vote on matters pertaining to Cal Cities policy.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS:

The Cal Cities Conference is scheduled on Wednesday, September 20 through Friday, September 22, 2023, at the SAFE Convention Center in Sacramento. The Cal Cities President refers resolutions to individual policy committees (e.g., Revenue and Tax, Public Safety, Transportation, Communications, and Public Works, etc.) for review and recommendation at the Conference. Resolutions are then considered by the General Resolutions Committee. The General Resolutions Committee refers approved resolutions to the Annual Business Meeting. The Annual Business Meeting—or “General Assembly”—will take place on Friday, September 22, 2023, to consider and take final action on conference resolutions.

Resolutions approved by the General Assembly become Cal Cities Policy. Cal Cities Policy is important because it serves as a legislative guide for Cal Cities lobbyists and board of directors in supporting municipal interests and concerns.

In order to vote at the Annual Business Meeting, each city must designate a voting delegate. In 2006, an amendment to the Cal Cities bylaws increased the number of voting delegate alternates from one to two.

In the event Councilmember Engler is unable to attend the Annual Business meeting, Legislative Affairs Manager Layba will participate on behalf of the City.

Cal Cities allows cities to designate staff as Alternate Voting Delegate.

COUNCIL GOAL COMPLIANCE:

Meets the following City Council goal:

B. Provide municipal government leadership which is open and responsive to residents, and is characterized by ethical behavior, stability, promoting public trust, transparency, confidence in the future, and cooperative interaction among civic Item No.9H
2023 Cal Cities Annual Conference Business Meeting
July 18, 2023

Page 3 ends

leaders, residents, business representatives, and staff, while recognizing and respecting legitimate differences of opinion on critical issues facing the City.

PREPARED BY: Mina Layba, Legislative Affairs Manager
Attachment:

Attachment #1 – 2023 Voting Delegate Form
CMO:150-20\wl\H:\COMMON\City Council\Council Items\2023 Staff Reports\071823\2023 Cal Cities Voting Delegate.docx
Item No.9H
1400 K Street, Suite 400, Sacramento, CA 95814 • 916.658.8200 • calcities.org DATE: Wednesday, June 21, 2023
TO: Mayors, Council Members, City Clerks, and City Managers RE: DESIGNATION OF VOTING DELEGATES AND ALTERNATES
League of California Cities Annual Conference and Expo, Sept. 20-22, 2023, Sacramento SAFE Credit Union Convention Center
Every year, the League of California Cities convenes a member-driven General Assembly at the Cal Cities Annual Conference and Expo. The General Assembly is an important opportunity where city officials can directly participate in the development of Cal Cities policy.

Taking place on Sept. 22, the General Assembly is comprised of voting delegates appointed by each member city; every city has one voting delegate. Your appointed voting delegate plays an important role during the General Assembly by representing your city and voting on resolutions.

To cast a vote during the General Assembly, your city must designate a voting delegate and up to two alternate voting delegates, one of whom may vote if the designated voting delegate is unable to serve in that capacity. Voting delegates may either be an elected or appointed official.

Please complete the attached voting delegate form and email it to Cal Cities office no later than Monday, August 28.

New this year, we will host a pre-conference information session for voting delegates to explain their role. Submitting your voting delegate form by the deadline will allow us time to establish voting delegate/alternate records prior to the conference and provide preconference communications with voting delegates.

Please view Cal Cities’ event and meeting policy in advance of the conference.

Action by Council Required. Consistent with Cal Cities bylaws, a city’s voting delegate and up to two alternates must be designated by the city council. When completing the attached Voting Delegate form, please attach either a copy of the council resolution that reflects the council action taken or have your city clerk or mayor sign the form affirming that the names provided are those selected by the city council.

Please note that designating the voting delegate and alternates must be done by city council action and cannot be accomplished by individual action of the mayor or city manager alone.

Council Action Advised by August 28, 2023
ATTACHMENT #1
Item No.9H
Conference Registration Required. The voting delegate and alternates must be registered to attend the conference. They need not register for the entire conference; they may register for Friday only. Conference registration is open on the Cal Cities website.

For a city to cast a vote, one voter must be present at the General Assembly and in possession of the voting delegate card and voting tool. Voting delegates and alternates need to pick up their conference badges before signing in and picking up the voting delegate card at the voting delegate desk. This will enable them to receive the special sticker on their name badges that will admit the voting delegate into the voting area during the General Assembly.

Transferring Voting Card to Non-Designated Individuals Not Allowed. The voting delegate card may be transferred freely between the voting delegate and alternates, but only between the voting delegate and alternates. If the voting delegate and alternates find themselves unable to attend the General Assembly, they may not transfer the voting card to another city official.

Seating Protocol during General Assembly. At the General Assembly, individuals with a voting card will sit in a designated area. Admission to the voting area will be limited to the individual in possession of the voting card and with a special sticker on their name badge identifying them as a voting delegate.

The voting delegate desk, located in the conference registration area of the SAFE Credit Union Convention Center in Sacramento, will be open at the following times:

Wednesday, Sept. 20, 8:00 a.m.- 6:00 p.m. and Thursday, Sept. 21, 7:30 a.m.- 4:00 p.m. On Friday, Sept. 22, the voting delegate desk will be open at the General Assembly, starting at 7:30 a.m., but will be closed during roll calls and voting.

The voting procedures that will be used at the conference are attached to this memo.

Please share these procedures and this memo with your council and especially with the individuals that your council designates as your city’s voting delegate and alternates.

Once again, thank you for completing the voting delegate and alternate form and returning it to Cal Cities office by Monday, Aug. 28. If you have questions, please contact Zach Seals at [email protected].

Attachments:
• General Assembly Voting Guidelines
• Voting Delegate/Alternate Form
• Information Sheet: Cal Cities Resolutions and the General Assembly Item No.9H
1400 K Street, Suite 400, Sacramento, CA 95814 • 916.658.8200 • calcities.org General Assembly Voting Guidelines

1. One City One Vote. Each member city has a right to cast one vote on matters pertaining to Cal Cities policy.

2. Designating a City Voting Representative. Prior to the Cal Cities Annual Conference and Expo, each city council may designate a voting delegate and up to two alternates; these individuals are identified on the voting delegate form provided to the Cal Cities Credentials Committee.

3. Registering with the Credentials Committee. The voting delegate, or alternates, may pick up the city's voting card at the voting delegate desk in the conference registration area. Voting delegates and alternates must sign in at the voting delegate desk. Here they will receive a special sticker on their name badge and thus be admitted to the voting area at the General Assembly.

4. Signing Initiated Resolution Petitions. Only those individuals who are voting delegates (or alternates), and who have picked up their city’s voting card by providing a signature to the credentials committee at the voting delegate desk, may sign petitions to initiate a resolution.

5. Voting. To cast the city's vote, a city official must have in their possession the city's voting card and voting tool; and be registered with the credentials committee. The voting card may be transferred freely between the voting delegate and alternates but may not be transferred to another city official who is neither a voting delegate nor alternate.

6. Voting Area at General Assembly. At the General Assembly, individuals with a voting card will sit in a designated area. Admission to the voting area will be limited to the individual in possession of the voting card and with a special sticker on their name badge identifying them as a voting delegate.

7. Resolving Disputes. In case of dispute, the credentials committee will determine the validity of signatures on petitioned resolutions and the right of a city official to vote at the General Assembly.

Item No.9H
CITY: ________________________________________
2023 ANNUAL CONFERENCE

VOTING DELEGATE/ALTERNATE FORM
Please complete this form and return it to Cal Cities office by Monday, August 28, 2023.

Forms not sent by this deadline may be submitted to the Voting Delegate Desk located in the Annual Conference Registration Area. Your city council may designate one voting delegate and up to two alternates.

To vote at the General Assembly, voting delegates and alternates must be designated by your city council. Please attach the council resolution as proof of designation. As an alternative, the Mayor or City Clerk may sign this form, affirming that the designation reflects the action taken by the council.

Please note: Voting delegates and alternates will be seated in a separate area at the General Assembly. Admission to this designated area will be limited to individuals (voting delegates and alternates) who are identified with a special sticker on their conference badge. This sticker can be obtained only at the voting delegate desk.

1. VOTING DELEGATE
Name:

Title:

2. VOTING DELEGATE - ALTERNATE
Name:

Title:

Email: _______________________________
Email: ______________________________

3. VOTING DELEGATE - ALTERNATE
Name:

Title:

Email: _____________________________

ATTACH COUNCIL RESOLUTION DESIGNATING VOTING DELEGATE AND ALTERNATES OR ATTEST: I affirm that the information provided reflects action by the city council to designate the voting delegate and alternate(s).

Name: ____________________________________ Email: _________________________________ Mayor or City Clerk: ________________________ Date: __________ Phone: ________________ (circle one) (signature) Please complete and email this form to [email protected] by Monday, August 28, 2023.

Thousand Oaks
Robert Enger [email protected]
Councilmember
Mina Layba
Legislative Affairs Manager
[email protected]
Laura Maguire, City Clerk [email protected]
( )
07/19/23 805-449-2165
Item No.9H
Sixty days before the
Annual Conference and
Expo, Cal Cities members
may submit policy
proposals on issues of
importance to cities. The
resolution must have the concurrence
of at least five additional member cities
or individual members.

How it works: Cal Cities
Resolutions and the General Assembly
General Assembly
General Resolutions
Policy Committees
Developing League of California Cities policy is a dynamic process that engages a wide range of members to ensure that we are representing California cities with one voice. These policies directly guide Cal Cities advocacy to promote local decision-making, and lobby against statewide policy that erodes local control.

The resolutions process and General Assembly is one way that city officials can directly participate in the development of Cal Cities policy. If a resolution is approved at the General Assembly, it becomes official Cal Cities policy. Here’s how Resolutions and the General Assembly works.

The petitioned resolution
is an alternate method
to introduce policy
proposals during the
annual conference. The
petition must be signed by
voting delegates from 10% of member
cities, and submitted to the Cal Cities
President at least 24 hours before the
beginning of the General Assembly.

Petitioned Resolutions
The Cal Cities President
assigns general resolutions
to policy committees where
members review, debate,
and recommend positions for
each policy proposal. Recommendations are
forwarded to the Resolutions Committee.

Who’s who
The Resolutions
Committee includes
representatives from
each Cal Cities diversity
caucus, regional
division, municipal
department, policy
committee, as well as
individuals appointed by
the Cal Cities president.

Voting delegates
are appointed by each
member city; every city
has one voting delegate.

The General Assembly
is a meeting of the
collective body of
all voting delegates —
one from every
member city.

Seven Policy
Committees meet
throughout the year to
review and recommend
positions to take on
bills and regulatory
proposals. Policy
committees include
members from each Cal
Cities diversity caucus,
regional division,
municipal department,
as well as individuals
appointed by the Cal
Cities president.

During the General Assembly, voting delegates
debate and consider general and petitioned
resolutions forwarded by the Resolutions Committee.

Potential Cal Cities bylaws amendments are also
considered at this meeting.

Cal Cities policy
development is a
member-informed
process, grounded
in the voices and
experiences of city
officials throughout
the state.

For more information visit www.calcities.org/general-assembly Prior to the Annual Conference and Expo
Resolutions Committee
The Resolutions Committee
considers all resolutions.

General Resolutions approved1
by either a policy committee
or the Resolutions Committee
are next considered by the General
Assembly. General resolutions not approved,
or referred for further study by both a policy
committee and the Resolutions Committee
do not go the General Assembly. All
Petitioned Resolutions are considered by the
General Assembly, unless disqualified.2
• Voting delegates will receive increased communications to prepare them for their role during the General Assembly.
• The General Assembly will take place earlier to allow more time for debate and discussion.
• Improvements to the General Assembly process will make it easier for voting delegates to discuss and debate resolutions.

What’s new in 2023?
During the Annual Conference and Expo
1 The Resolution Committee can amend a general resolution prior to sending it to the General Assembly. 2 Petitioned Resolutions may be disqualified by the Resolutions Committee according to Cal Cities Bylaws Article VI. Sec. 5(f).

CMO:150-20\wl\H:\COMMON\City Council\Council Items\2023 Staff Reports\071823\2023 Voting Delegate Form.PDF
Item No.9H
TO: Andrew P. Powers, City Manager
FROM: Clifford G. Finley, Public Works Director
DATE: July 18, 2023
SUBJECT: Thousand Oaks Boulevard Wastewater Pipe and Maintenance Hole Lining Project (CI 5686)
RECOMMENDATION:

1. Authorize staff to advertise the Thousand Oaks Boulevard Wastewater Pipe and Maintenance Hole Lining Project (CI 5686) for construction bids.

2. Find that the Project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to 14 CCR 15301.

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

No Additional Funding Requested. Minimal staff time and costs required to advertise for bids is included in the Adopted FY 2023-24 Wastewater Fund Budget. $4,650,000 is available in the Adopted FY 2023-24 Wastewater Capital Fund Budget. Estimated project costs total $4,210,000.

BACKGROUND:

The City provides wastewater service to nearly 38,000 customers, representing more than 100,000 residents. The Public Works Department maintains 415 miles of wastewater pipelines and 8,300 maintenance holes in the City’s wastewater system. Wastewater pipelines and maintenance holes are video inspected on an ongoing basis to identify issues, including deteriorated conditions that warrant refurbishment.

One method for addressing aging conditions in the wastewater system is via lining technology. Since the start of the City’s wastewater lining program in 2002, more than 26.5 miles of pipeline and over 700 maintenance holes have been rehabilitated using the lining method.

Item No.9I
TOB Wastewater Lining Project - CI 5686
July 18, 2023

Page 2 ends

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS:

Staff has identified a total of approximately 9,500 linear feet of wastewater pipelines and 40 maintenance holes along Thousand Oaks Boulevard (TOB) between Moorpark Road and Conejo School Road (Attachment #1) that need protective lining under this project ahead of the proposed 2024 Paving Project where the same stretch of TOB will receive pavement resurfacing treatment in Spring of 2024. The wastewater lining project will improve the performance, integrity, and longevity of the City’s wastewater system, which will help avoid more expensive replacements in the future.

The lining system consists of cleaning wastewater lines, cutting/removal of tree roots, and lining the pipes with Cured-in-Place Pipe (CIPP) system. The rehab of the wastewater maintenance hole includes the removal of steps to mitigate safety concerns and the application of gunite/mortar and polyurethane protective lining.

The project plans and specifications have been completed using in-house resources and are available for review upon request to the Public Works Department by email at [email protected] or by phone at (805) 449-2400.

Staff is recommending that the project be advertised for bids. Once bids are received, staff will make a recommendation at a future City Council meeting for the award of the construction contract.

The estimated costs for the project are as follows:

1. Construction Estimate (including contingency) $ 4,200,000

2. City Furnished Materials/Services $ 10,000
Total $ 4,210,000
The tentative schedule for completion of the project is as follows:

Bid Opening September 2023
Award of Construction Contract October 2023
Start of Construction November 2023
Project Completion Spring 2024
The project is categorically exempt from CEQA per section 15301 (Existing Facilities).

Item No.9I
TOB Wastewater Lining Project - CI 5686
July 18, 2023

Page 3 ends

Community Outreach: Staff has established a public outreach plan for the project, with a particular focus on the residents and businesses located adjacent to the project as well as the public. Various communications tools and strategies, including community meetings (if needed), press releases, website updates, and social media posts will continue to be utilized to inform the public and receive feedback.

This project meets City Council’s FY 2023-24 Top Ten Priorities #6 - “Public Works and Infrastructure Investments”.

CIP PROJECT PRIORITY (as outlined in FY 2023-24 and FY 2024-25 CIP Program Budget)
Priority Two – Necessary, but not essential, and there could be consequences if deferred.

COUNCIL GOAL COMPLIANCE:

Meets the following City Council goals:

PREPARED BY: Gareth Madrid, Engineering Assistant
Attachments:

Attachment #1 – Vicinity & Location Maps
DPW: 850-10\ev\Council\2023\071823\CI 5686\TOB Wastewater Lining Project staff report.docx Item No.9I
S Conejo School Rd
ATTACHMENT #1
DPW: 850-10\ev\Council\2023\071823\CI 5686\TOB Wastewater Lining Project Att 1.pdf Item No.9I
TO: Andrew P. Powers, City Manager
FROM: Clifford G. Finley, Public Works Director
DATE: July 18, 2023
SUBJECT: Zero Emission Bus Rollout and Implementation Plan RECOMMENDATION:

1. Adopt resolution approving the Thousand Oaks Transit Zero Emission Bus Rollout and Implementation Plan as is required by State regulations 13 CCR § 2023 and § 2023.1 – 2023.11.

2. Find that this action is not a project as defined under the California Environmental Quality Act.

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

No Additional Funding Requested. Minimal staff time to prepare report is included in the Adopted FY 2023-24 Transportation Fund Budget. Failure to comply with the State requirement to adopt a plan in FY 2023-24 could result in financial penalties and inability to apply for State and Federal grant funds to support the transition to zero-emission buses.

BACKGROUND:

In 2019, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) Innovative Clean Transit (ICT) regulations went into effect. Small transit programs, like Thousand Oaks Transit (TOT), must begin purchasing zero-emission buses (ZEBs) in 2026. By 2029, 100 percent of purchases must be ZEB. By 2040, all public transit agencies must be 100 percent ZEB.

A small transit agency like TOT is required to submit a Board-approved ZEB Rollout and Implementation Plan (Plan), to CARB by June 30, 2023. In May 2023, at the request of the consultant hired to prepare the plan, the City received an extension from CARB and has until September 22, 2023, to submit its Boardapproved Plan.

The Plan describes how a transit agency will achieve a full transition to ZEB and must include information on the types of vehicles to be purchased, a purchasing schedule, a schedule for related infrastructure build-out, identify potential funding Item No.9J
ZEB Rollout and Implementation Plan
July 18, 2023

Page 2 ends

sources, and describe training and implementation strategies. The Plan is intended to assist transit agencies with long-term planning, addresses potential challenges, and provides solutions to ensure a smooth transition from fossil-fuel to zeroemission vehicles.

In September 2022, through a competitive process, the City selected Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. (Stantec) to prepare the Plan. Stantec has also prepared plans locally for the Ventura County Transportation Commission (VCTC), Gold Coast Transit District (GCTD), and the City of Moorpark.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS:

Stantec analyzed TOT’s existing fixed route bus and dial-a-ride services and gathered service and fleet data such as fleet composition, daily vehicle mileage, route topography, route design, existing transit infrastructure, available space for new infrastructure, current and projected ridership, and potential passenger loads.

They then evaluated the feasibility of transitioning to either Battery Electric Buses (BEBs) or Fuel Cell Electric Buses (FCEBs).

The Plan identified that for fixed route bus services, a transition to FCEBs while preferable due to their longer operating range, is unfeasible given the significantly higher cost to construct the necessary infrastructure and the lack of space available. The Plan identified that a transition to BEBs is feasible, but it likely will require an expanded vehicle fleet and the use of opportunity charging at the Thousand Oaks Transportation Center (TOTC). Opportunity charging occurs generally at layover locations like the TOTC. The additional charging for several minutes for every trip extends the range of the buses. With schedule adjustments and mid-day vehicle exchanges, a successful transition to BEBs can be achieved.

Based on TOT’s existing fleet replacement schedule, the Plan recommends that the ZEB procurement begin in early 2024 and gradually continue through 2030 as fossil fuel vehicles reach the end of their useful lives and are retired. With the preferred fleet composition established, the next steps in the analysis include determining the facility upgrades and modifications required to support ZEB operations.

A financial model was developed to compare the costs of doing business-as-usual with fossil fuel vehicles versus a 100 percent BEB fleet to determine operational cost savings and additional capital funding required. The Plan estimates implementing a fully zero-emission bus and dial-a-ride fleet will cost $44.2 million (cumulative capital and operating costs) compared to $22.9 million for businessas-usual (fossil fuel technology) over a 17-year timeframe (through the end of FY 2039-40). This $21.3 million increase in program costs includes incremental capital costs for fleet acquisition and expansion ($15.6 million), as well as infrastructure Item No.9J
ZEB Rollout and Implementation Plan
July 18, 2023

Page 3 ends

improvements for charging and power storage ($8.4 million), partially offset by $2.7 million in lower operating costs due to lower fuel and maintenance costs. The cost of BEBs can be up to double that of fossil fuel vehicles. Both types of vehicles have the same useful life; however, due to the limited range of BEBs, the fleet may need to expand incrementally to maintain existing service levels. The Rollout Plan currently recommends increasing the existing owned vehicle fleet size by six expansion vehicles. These potential expansion vehicles would increase our owned fleet size by 35 percent from 17 owned vehicles to 23 owned vehicles. The expansion of the fleet size and the installation of EV infrastructure are upfront costs of the transition that drive up the comparative costs between a zero-emission fleet and a fossil fuel fleet over the time period of the plan (through 2040). However, there will be ongoing operational savings annually, increasing as the percentage of fossil-fueled vehicles is reduced.

Staff has already secured over $8.4 million in grant funding for this transition, which will fully fund basic infrastructure improvements, the first six dial-a-ride vehicles, and the first six heavy-duty bus purchases. There are significant opportunities at both the State and Federal levels, once the Plan is approved, to apply for additional grant funding to fund the $13.1 million funding gap. The Plan lists over 25 different potential funding sources to help mitigate the cost impacts of the transition. Staff will continue to seek out these funding opportunities. Staff is confident the transition can be achieved without the need for General Fund support or impacts to the transit program’s support for streets and roads funding.

This Plan is a living document that is intended to provide a practical framework for TOT to deploy and transition to ZEBs. Adoption of this Plan does not commit the City to any specific vehicle or infrastructure purchase schedules, though staff is expecting this transition can be accomplished before the end of FY 2028-29, well in advance of the mandate deadline and likely ahead of other agencies in the area.

The Plan will be revisited and adjusted regularly in response to funding needs, grant opportunities, changes in service delivery, and the needs of TOT. City Council will need to review and approve any revisions to the existing Plan. The Plan as presented succeeds in providing an objective and reliable framework and an implementation strategy that will allow the City to achieve the required transition ahead of the mandatory timeline. This Plan provides a prudent and feasible approach for the City to implement ZEBs that will allow TOT to continue to provide high-quality and cost-effective services that exceed customer expectations.

Staff recommends the adoption of the resolution approving the Thousand Oaks Transit Zero Emission Bus Rollout and Implementation Plan (Attachment #1).

Item No.9J
ZEB Rollout and Implementation Plan
July 18, 2023

Page 4 ends

COUNCIL GOAL COMPLIANCE:

Meets the following City Council goals:

PREPARED BY: Tyler Nestved, Assistant Transit Planner
Attachment:

Attachment #1 – Resolution Approving the ZEB Rollout and Implementation Plan
DPW: 940-10\tn\etm\Council\2023\071823\ZEB Transition Plan staff report.docx Item No.9J
ATTACHMENT #1
RESOLUTION NO.

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

THOUSAND OAKS ADOPTING THE THOUSAND OAKS

TRANSIT ZERO EMISSION BUS ROLLOUT AND

IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
WHEREAS, the City of Thousand Oaks Transit (TOT) is a small transit agency that utilizes a fleet of owned transit vehicles to operate public transit services; and WHEREAS, on December 14, 2018, the California Air Resource Board (CARB) adopted the Innovative Clean Transit (ICT) Regulation, a Replacement of the Fleet Rule for Transit Agencies 13 CCR § 2023 and § 2023.1 – 2023.11; and WHEREAS, the ICT Regulation requires that transit agencies gradually transition to a 100 percent zero‑emission bus (ZEB) fleet. Beginning in 2029, 100 percent of new purchases by transit agencies must be ZEBs, with a goal for full transition by 2040; and WHEREAS, the ICT Regulation requires a ZEB Rollout Plan from each transit agency, approved by its Board, to show how it is planning to achieve a full transition to zero-emission technologies by 2040 by June 30, 2023, for small transit agencies; and WHEREAS, TOT received an extension from CARB to submit the board-approved ZEB Rollout Plan by September 22, 2023.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Thousand Oaks hereby approves the Thousand Oaks Transit ZEB Rollout and Implementation Plan set forth in full in Exhibit A to this Resolution.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that insofar the provisions of any ordinance, Resolution, document, or previous action, of the Board, the City Manager, or the Accountable Executive, are inconsistent with the provisions of this Resolution, or any policy adopted by this Resolution, this Resolution and City Council policies adopted herein shall control.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of July 2023, by the following vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Kevin McNamee, Mayor
City of Thousand Oaks, California
ATTEST/CERTIFY:

Laura B. Maguire, City Clerk
Date Attested: ______________________
Item No.9J
DPW: 940-10\tn\\Council\2023\071823\ZEB Transition Plan staff report.docx

Page 2 ends

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Office of the City Attorney
Tracy Friedl, Assistant City Attorney
APPROVED AS TO ADMINISTRATION:

Andrew P. Powers, City Manager
The presence of electronic signature certifies that the foregoing is a true and correct copy as approved by the City of Thousand Oaks City Council on the date cited above.

Item No.9J
ZEB Strategy and Final
Report
Thousand Oaks Transit
ZEB Rollout and Implementation Plan
Final Report
June 2023

EXHIBIT A
Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
ZEB Strategy and Final Report
ZEB Rollout Plan and Analysis Services
June 23, 2023
Prepared for:

Thousand Oaks Transit
Prepared by:

Stantec Consulting Services Inc.

DPW: 940-10\tn\etm\Council\2023\071823\ZEB Transition Plan Exh A to Resolution.pdf Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
Release Version
This document entitled ZEB Strategy and Final Report was prepared by Stantec Consulting Services Inc. (“Stantec”) for the account of TOT (the “Client”). Any reliance on this do prohibited. The material in it reflects Stantec’s profe limitations stated in the document and in the contract between Stantec and the Client. The opinions in the document are based on conditions and information existing at the time the document was published and do not take into account any subsequent changes. In preparing the document, Stantec did not verify information supplied to it by others. Any use which a third party makes of this document is the responsibility of such third party. Such third party agrees that Stantec shall not be responsible for costs or damages of any kind, if any, suffered by it or any other third party as a result of decisions made or actions taken based on this document.

Project Team
Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
801 South Figueroa Street Suite 300
Los Angeles CA 90017-3007
Rev. Description Date
0 Draft Report Issued to TOT 06/09/2023
Comments received 06/15/2023
1 Revised Report Issued to TOT 06/23/2023
2 Final Report Issued to TOT 06/28/2023
Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
i
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................... V ABBREVIATIONS .................................................................................................................... IX

1.0 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................ 1

2.0 REGULATORY CONTEXT ............................................................................................ 4

2.1 INNOVATIVE CLEAN TRANSIT..................................................................................... 4 ICT Exemptions...............................................................................................................6

3.0 APPROACH TO ZEB PLANNING ................................................................................10

4.0 SUMMARY OF KEY EXISTING CONDITIONS.............................................................12

4.1 FLEET...........................................................................................................................12 Existing EV Charging.....................................................................................................14

4.2 OPERATING RANGES .................................................................................................15 Demand Response........................................................................................................16

4.3 FACILITY ......................................................................................................................17

5.0 PREFERRED/RECOMMENDED FLEET COMPOSITION.............................................19

5.1 FLEET AND POWER MODELING OVERVIEW ............................................................19 Fixed Route Modeling Inputs .........................................................................................20 Fixed Route Modeling Process......................................................................................22 DAR Modeling Inputs.....................................................................................................24 DAR Modeling Process .................................................................................................25

5.2 FIXED-ROUTE MODELING RESULTS.........................................................................26

5.3 DAR MODELING RESULTS .........................................................................................28

5.4 ZE FLEET RECOMMENDATIONS AND IMPLICATIONS..............................................31

5.5 CHARGING PROFILES ................................................................................................32 Charging Profile for TOT and Moorpark.........................................................................32

6.0 FLEET PROCUREMENT PLAN....................................................................................34

7.0 MAINTENANCE FACILITY INFRASTRUCTURE MODIFICATIONS ............................38

7.1 PROPOSED MAINTENANCE FACILITY MODIFICATIONS..........................................38

7.2 GRID CONNECTION UPGRADES................................................................................40

7.3 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON CHARGE READY TRANSPORT
PROGRAM....................................................................................................................40

7.4 COMMUNICATION INFRASTRUCTURE......................................................................43

7.5 FIRE PROTECTION CONSIDERATIONS.....................................................................44

7.6 FALL PROTECTION AND SAFETY INFRASTRUCTURE CONSIDERATIONS ............44

7.7 BACK-UP PLANNING...................................................................................................45

8.0 FINANCIAL EVALUATION AND IMPACTS..................................................................47

8.1 BASE CASE APPROACH.............................................................................................48 Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
ii

8.2 ZEB CASE (BE FLEET) APPROACH............................................................................48

8.3 COMPARISON AND OUTCOMES................................................................................50

9.0 OPERATIONAL AND PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS ...............................................52

9.1 PLANNING, SCHEDULING, AND RUNCUTTING .........................................................52

9.2 OPERATOR NEEDS.....................................................................................................53

9.3 MAINTENANCE NEEDS ...............................................................................................54

9.4 CHARGING NEEDS......................................................................................................55

9.5 O&M CONTRACTOR PROCUREMENT GUIDANCE....................................................57

9.6 VEHICLE PROCUREMENT GUIDANCE.......................................................................58

9.7 BATTERY DEGRADATION...........................................................................................62

10.0 TECHNOLOGY.............................................................................................................63

10.1 SMART CHARGING .....................................................................................................63

10.2 FLEET TRACKING SOFTWARE AND TELEMATICS...................................................68

11.0 WORKFORCE CONSIDERATIONS .............................................................................71

11.1 IMPLICATIONS OF BEBS ON WORKFORCE ..............................................................71

11.2 TRAINING.....................................................................................................................72 Coordination with Emergency Responders....................................................................73

12.0 POTENTIAL FUNDING SOURCES ..............................................................................74

13.0 SERVICE IN DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES ........................................................83

14.0 GHG IMPACTS.............................................................................................................84

15.0 OTHER TRANSITION ITEMS .......................................................................................86

15.1 JOINT ZEB GROUP AND ASSESSMENT OF MULTI-OPERATOR VEHICLE PROCUREMENT ..........................................................................................................86

15.2 CHANGE MANAGEMENT.............................................................................................87

16.0 PHASING AND IMPLEMENTATION.............................................................................88 APPENDICES...........................................................................................................................92 APPENDIX A: PDF OF SITE PLANS.......................................................................................93 APPENDIX B: FINANCIAL MODELING INPUTS AND ASSUMPTIONS .................................94 APPENDIX C: COST ESTIMATES...........................................................................................95 96 Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
iii

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: ZEB implementation phasing plan, 2024-2040 .............................................................vi Table 2: CARB Standard Bus ZEB Purchase Schedule (As a Percentage of Total New Bus Purchases for Small Transit Agencies)................................................................. 5 Table 3: Required documentation for ZEB purchase exemptions............................................... 7 Table 4: Other agency vehicles stored at the Thousand Oaks Municipal Service Center ..........12 Table 5: TOT current revenue service fleet ...............................................................................14 Table 6: ZEB specifications for energy modeling.......................................................................21 Table 7: Elevation analysis........................................................................................................22 Table 8: Bus specifications for DAR modeling...........................................................................25 Table 9: Average fuel efficiency and expected ranges for fixed route modeling.........................28 Table 10: Proposed Fleet Purchase Schedule ..........................................................................36 Table 11: Proposed Infrastructure Phasing Schedule................................................................36 Table 12: Annual average vehicle mileage by vehicle type .......................................................47 Table 13: Average fuel efficiency by vehicle type......................................................................48 Table 14: Proposed Fleet Purchase Schedule –BE Fleet.........................................................49 Table 15: Cost Comparison 2023-2040, ZEB Case...................................................................50 Table 16: Summary of Heavy-Duty Vehicle Options..................................................................59 Table 17: Summary of Medium-Duty Vehicle Options ...............................................................61 Table 18: Charge Management System Vendor Comparison (based on manufacturer's information).................................................................................................................65 Table 19: Potential Training Methods........................................................................................73 Table 20: Grants and potential funding options for ZEB transition.............................................75 Table 21: FTA Zero-Emission Fleet Transition Plan requirements.............................................82 Table 22: Total Annual Emissions in Tons of CO2 per year.......................................................84 Table 23: Other bus transit agencies in Ventura County ...........................................................86 Table 24: ZEB implementation phasing plan, FY2024-2040......................................................89 Table 25: Summary of cost inputs.............................................................................................94 Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
iv

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Current Thousand Oaks Transit services .................................................................... 2 Figure 2: Schematic representation of the steps in the ZEB planning process ..........................10 Figure 3: TOT fixed route bus ...................................................................................................13 Figure 4: TOT Dial-A-Ride cutaway...........................................................................................13 Figure 5: New Level 2 EV chargers at the MSC. .......................................................................14 Figure 6: Hourly weekday vehicle requirements........................................................................15 Figure 7: Daily vehicle mileage .................................................................................................16 Figure 8: Daily mileage for DAR vehicles (2019).......................................................................17 Figure 9: Aerial image of facility (Source: Google Maps)...........................................................18 Figure 10: Modeling overview ...................................................................................................19 Figure 11: Schematic of the inputs for bus specifications ..........................................................20 Figure 12: Elevation profile example (Route 40)........................................................................22 Figure 13: Relationship between routes, blocks, and vehicle assignments................................23 Figure 14: ZEVDecide energy modeling process ......................................................................24 Figure 15: ZEVDecide energy profile process (DAR services) ..................................................26 Figure 16: Fixed-route success rate, BEBs ...............................................................................27 Figure 17: Fixed-route success rate, FCEBs.............................................................................27 Figure 18: BEB modeling results for DAR vehicle assignments—cutaways (top) and vans (bottom)..............................................................................................................29 Figure 19: FCEB modeling results for DAR vehicle assignments—cutaways (top) and vans (bottom)..............................................................................................................30 Figure 20: TOT Facility Charging Profile ...................................................................................33 Figure 21: Fleet composition.....................................................................................................37 Figure 22: TOT ZEB Site Conceptual Master Plan ....................................................................39 Figure 23: SCE Charge Ready Program Flow Chart, Source: SCE...........................................41 Figure 24: SCE-Built Infrastructure option for the CRT program, Source: SCE .........................42 Figure 25: Customer-Built option for the CRT program, Source: SCE.......................................42 Figure 26: Backup mobile diesel generator at LA Metro Division 13 facility.................................45 Figure 27: Breakdown of Cost Categories for the Base Case and ZEB Case Scenarios ...........51 Figure 28: Annual Total Cost Comparison, ZEB Case...............................................................52 Figure 29: Depot Planning Tool to Understand Scheduling and Operations of BEBs (Source: Siemens)......................................................................................................53 Figure 30: A BEB plugged into a charger in Charleston, SC......................................................55 Figure 31: A BEB Passenger Van Plugged into a Charger........................................................56 Figure 32: A BEB recharging during a layover in Los Angeles, CA............................................57 Figure 33: Example of New Flyer Connect 360. .......................................................................68 Figure 34: Example of Lighting eMotors daily report summary. ................................................69 Figure 35: Example of TTC eBus KPIs. ....................................................................................70 Figure 36: CalEnviroScreen pollution burden percentiles in TOT service area ..........................83 Figure 37: Annual GHG emissions comparisons .......................................................................84 Figure 38: Equivalent benefits of implementing a ZEB fleet at TOT...........................................85 Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
v

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Thousand Oaks Transit (TOT) provides fixed-route, dial-a-ride (DAR), and local shuttle service services to Thousand Oaks residents and surrounding areas. In 2021, TOT provided 87,753 unlinked passenger trips with a fleet comprised of buses, cutaways, and minivans. 1 This document serves to guide TOT through its zero-emission bus (ZEB) transition to achieve a 100% zero-emission (ZE) fleet by 2040 as required by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) Innovative Clean Transit (ICT) mandate. It provides a detailed plan of the technology, needs, and strategies that will help TOT transition to a ZEB fleet. The previous phases of this project (summarized in this report) laid the foundation for this plan by assessing TOT’s existing conditions and modeling energy requirements needed to meet TOT’s service through a ZEB fleet. With th fleet was refined through a collaborative optimization process that led to the preferred fleet composition of battery electric (BE) vehicles.

With the preferred fleet composition established, the next steps included determining the facility upgrades and modifications required to support ZEB operations at TOT’s transit facility. In addition, a financial model was developed to compare a base case (or business-as-usual with fossil fuel vehicles) and a case with a 100% BE fleet. A phasing and implementation plan was also developed.

Overall, implementing the preferred BE fleet will cost $40.6 million (cumulative capital and operating costs) compared to $22.9 million for business-as-usual (fossil fuel technology) within a 17-year timeframe (through 2040). Stated otherwise, the transition to ZEBs under the preferred fleet concept adds incremental capital and operating costs of $17.7 million over the 17-year period. While the higher increase comes due to capital cost of fleet acquisition ($15.6 million more than the base case) and infrastructure ($4.8 million), over a 17-year timeframe the electric fleet is expected to save close to $2.7 million in operational expenses (fuel and maintenance).

Based on TOT’s existing fleet replacement schedule, this pla begins in 2024 and gradually continues through 2030 as fossil fuel vehicles reach the end of their useful lives and are retired. The full phasing and implementation plan is outlined in Table 1.

This plan is a living document that is intended to provide a practical framework for TOT to deploy and transition to ZEBs in response to CARB’s mandate . Like any other strategic plan, the implementation and transition plan should be revisited and adjusted in response to funding realities, changes in service delivery, and the needs of TOT and its ridership, particularly given the long-term outlook. Taken together, this plan provides a prudent and feasible approach for TOT to implement ZEBs that allows the agency to provide high-quality and cost-effective services that exceed customer expectations. 1 NTD 2021 Annual Agency Profile:
https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/transit_agency_profile_doc/2021/90165.pdf Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
vi
Table 1: ZEB implementation phasing plan, 2024-2040
Year Facility
Modifications
ZEB Fleet
Procurements
Training:
operators,
maintenance staff,
technicians
Training - other
Capital
Expenses
(2023$)
Operating
Expenses
(2023$)
Total
Expenses
(2023$)
2024 General sitework
8 chargers (60 kW)
with single
dispensers
4 chargers (60 Kw)
with dual
dispensers
Main switchgear
5 35-ft buses,
6 cutaways OEM training OEM training for all other staff $9,555,000 $610,000 $10,165,000 2025 2 35-ft buses,
2 cutaways Annual refreshers
Local fire and
emergency response
department
introduction to new
technology
$3,113,000 $764,000 $3,877,000
2026
2 chargers (60 Kw)
with dual
dispensers
2 cutaways OEM training No activity $708,000 $745,000 $1,453,000 2027 None N/A Annual refreshers
Local fire and
emergency response
department
introduction to new
technology
$0 $716,000 $716,000
2028 None 2 cutaways OEM training OEM training for all
other staff $388,000 $726,000 $1,114,000
2029 None N/A Annual refreshers
Local fire and
emergency response
department
introduction to new
technology
$0 $698,000 $698,000
Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
vii
Year Facility
Modifications
ZEB Fleet
Procurements
Training:
operators,
maintenance staff,
technicians
Training - other
Capital
Expenses
(2023$)
Operating
Expenses
(2023$)
Total
Expenses
(2023$)
2030
4 chargers (60 kW)
with single
dispensers
Emergency power
1 MW battery
system
4 35-ft buses,
6 cutaways Annual refreshers No activity $6,118,000 $954,000 $7,072,000 2031 None 2 cutaways OEM training
Local fire and
emergency response
department
introduction to new
technology
$330,000 $920,000 $1,250,000
2032 None 4 cutaways OEM training OEM training for all
other staff $628,000 $886,000 $1,514,000
2033 None N/A Annual refreshers
Local fire and
emergency response
department
introduction to new
technology
$0 $851,000 $851,000
2034 None N/A OEM training No activity $0 $819,000 $819,000 2035
4 chargers (60 kW)
with single
dispensers
3 level 2 chargers
5 35-ft buses Annual refreshers
Local fire and
emergency response
department training
on new technology
$3,824,000 $786,000 $4,610,000
2036 None 2 35-ft buses,
8 cutaways OEM training OEM training for all other staff $2,284,000 $754,000 $3,038,000 2037 None 2 cutaways Annual refreshers
Local fire and
emergency response
department training
on new technology
$245,000 $724,000 $969,000
2038 None 2 cutaways OEM training No activity $233,000 $695,000 $928,000 Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
viii
Year Facility
Modifications
ZEB Fleet
Procurements
Training:
operators,
maintenance staff,
technicians
Training - other
Capital
Expenses
(2023$)
Operating
Expenses
(2023$)
Total
Expenses
(2023$)
2039 None N/A Annual refreshers
Local fire and
emergency response
department training
on new technology
$0 $667,000 $667,000
2040 None 2 cutaways OEM training OEM training for all
other staff $211,000 $639,000 $850,000
Total $27,637,000 $12,954,000 $40,591,000
Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
ix
Abbreviations
ADA
AHJ
AHSC
APCD
AQMD
ATS
AVTA
BEB
BESS
BTM
CARB
CMAQ
CMO
CMS
CPCFA
CRRSSA
CTC
DAR
DER
EIA
EPA
ESS
Americans with Disabilities Act
Authorities Having Jurisdiction
Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities Program
Air Pollution Control District
Air Quality Management District
Automatic transfer switch
Antelope Valley Transit Authority
Battery electric bus
Battery electric storage system
Behind the meter
California Air Resources Board
Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program Clean Mobility Options
Charge management system
California Pollution Control Financing Authority
Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act California Transportation Commission
Dial-A-Ride, demand response
Distributed energy resource
Energy Information Agency
Environmental Protection Agency
Energy Storage System
Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
x
EV
FCEB
FHWA
FTA
GHG
HVAC
HVIP
IC
ICT
JPA
KPI
LCFS
LCTOP
LPP
LTF
MCT
MHD
NFPA
NREL
OCPP
OEHHA
O&M
PG&E
PPE
PSPS
Electric vehicle
Hydrogen fuel cell electric bus
Federal Highway Administration
Federal Transit Administration
Greenhouse gas
Heating, ventilation, and air conditioning
Hybrid and Zero-Emission Truck and Bus Voucher Incentive Program Internal combustion
Innovative Clean Transit
Joint Powers Authority
Key performance indicators
Low Carbon Fuel Standard
Low Carbon Transit Operations Program
Local Partnership Program
Local Transportation Fund
Moorpark City Transit
Medium-Heavy-Duty
National Fire Protection Association
National Renewable Energy Laboratory
Open Charge Point Protocol
Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
Operations and maintenance
Pacific Gas & Electric
Personal Protective Equipment
Public Safety Power Shutoff
Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
xi
PV
RAISE
RFP
RTPA
SCE
SCCP
SGR
SOC
STA
STEP
STIP
TDA
TIRCP
TOT
TOU
TTC
ULB
USDOT
ZE
ZEB
ZEV
Photovoltaics
Local and Regional Project Assistance Program
Request for Proposal
Regional Transportation Planning Agency
Southern California Edison
Solutions for Congested Corridors Program
State of Good Repair
State of charge
State Transit Assistance
Sustainable Transportation Equity Project
State Transportation Improvement Program
Transportation Development Act
Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program
Thousand Oaks Transit
Time-of-use
Toronto Transit Commission
Useful life benchmark
United States Department of Transportation
Zero-emission
Zero-emission bus
Zero-emission vehicle
Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION
Thousand Oaks Transit (TOT) provides transit service to Thousand Oaks and surrounding areas. It provides fixed-route, Dial-A-Ride paratransit, and a free local shuttle service called Kanan Shuttle. In addition, TOT participates in the East County Transit Alliance (ECTA) CONNECT InterCity Dial-A-Ride (CONNECT), for DAR travelers within eastern Ventura County. Each service is outlined in more detail below.
• Fixed route: Fixed-route service is comprised of five local bus routes. Routes run from 5:00 AM – 8:00 PM Monday through Friday, and 7:00 AM –8:00 PM on Saturdays (Figure 1). • Dial-A-Ride paratransit: The Dial-A-Ride service is a door-to-door program for passengers 65 years of age or older, or for ADA cardholders. Service runs from 5:00 AM –8:30 PM on weekdays, and 7:00 AM –8:00 PM on weekends.
• Kanan Shuttle: The Kanan Shuttle offers free service to residential areas located near Kanan Rd. in Oak Park and Agoura Hills. Riders can transfer to Metro Route 161 and Los Angeles Department of Transportation (LADOT) Commuter Express routes 422 and 423 for service to surrounding communities.
• CONNECT InterCity Dial-A-Ride: CONNECT service is provided through a cooperative agreement between the cities of Thousand Oaks, Moorpark, Simi Valley, and the County of Ventura as member agencies of the ECTA. It is available in most of eastern Ventura County and allows riders to travel outside local Dial-A-Ride service areas. Riders must be 65 years or older and/or ADA cardholders and must be residents of a designated Primary Service Area.

Although TOT provides these services and stores the vehicles at its municipal facility, the City of Thousand Oaks does not own the vehicles that are used to provide the Kanan Shuttle or CONNECT services. As such, these vehicles are not included in the subsequent analysis and fleet phasing plans.

Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 2 Figure 1: Current Thousand Oaks Transit services
TOT operates a fleet of 31 vehicles: 8 buses, 8 minivans, 5 cutaway buses, 9 smaller cutaways, and 1 trolley.2 Of the 31 vehicles, TOT owns 17 vehicles and leases the remaining 14. Subsequent sections of the report and fleet phasing plans include TOT-owned vehicles only.

All vehicles are stored at the Thousand Oaks Municipal Service Center (MSC). The City of Thousand Oaks owns the Thousand Oaks MSC and the Thousand Oaks Transportation Center. TOT is part of the Ventura County Air Pollution Control District (APCD), South Central Coast Air Basin (SCCAB), and Southern California Edison (SCE) utility territory.

With a service area population of 424,048 and a fleet of 31 vehicles, TOT is classified as a small transit agency under the Innovative Clean Transit (ICT) mandate and is required to submit a zero-emission (ZE) rollout plan to the California Air Resources Board (CARB) by June 30, 20233.

This document serves as the source for TOT’srollout plan submission to CARB and provides a detailed plan of the technology, needs, and strategies that will help TOT transition to a zero-emission bus (ZEB) fleet. To develop this rollout plan, the following steps were taken to determine the optimal ZEB strategy for TOT.
• A review of existing conditions to understand characteristics and constraints for TOT’soperations and service area. This included a primer on different ZEB technologies to provide a scan of the market and technologies, including battery-electric buses (BEBs) and hydrogen fuel cell electric buses (FCEBs).
2 The trolley is not currently in service.
3 CARB ICT defined large transit agencies as operating in “an last published by the Bureau of Census before December 31, 2017 and has at least 100 buses in annual maximum service.” Agencies that do not meet this definition are cate Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 3 • Energy and power modeling to understand performance under different ZE technology alternatives, their viability, and suitability for TOT’sneeds. A quantitative and qualitative assessment of modeling results was used to determine the preferred ZE fleet composition for TOT.

This report is intended to act as a roadmap to guide TOT through the ZEB transition to 100% ZEB deployment and implementation by 2040, as well as to fulfill the CARB guidelines as outlined in the ICT mandate. As CARB has reminded transit agencies, the ICT-regulated rollout plan is intended to be a living document that can and should be regularly revisited and updated over time as ZE technologies continue to evolve and service delivery approaches change with time.

Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 4 2.0 REGULATORY CONTEXT
This section provides a review of the ICT regulation to provide a basis for why the ZEB transition is taking place and to provide TOT staff and Thousand Oaks City Council members with information on how ICT and ZEB implementation fits within and impacts TOT operations and future plans.

2.1 INNOVATIVE CLEAN TRANSIT
CARB adopted the ICT regulation in December 2018, which requires all public bus transit agencies in the state to gradually transition to a completely ZEB fleet by 2040. This regulation is in accordance with preceding state legislation SB 375 and SB 350. SB 375, the Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Program, creates initiatives for increased development of transit-oriented communities, betterconnected transportation, and active transportation. Relatedly, SB 350 supports widespread transportation electrification through collaboration between CARB and the California Public Utilities Commission.

ICT also states that transit agencies are required to produce a ZEB rollout plan that describes how the agency is planning to achieve a full transition to a ZE fleet by 2040 as well as outlining reporting and record-keeping requirements. Specific elements required in the rollout plan include:
• A full explanation of how the agency will transition to ZEBs by 2040 without early retirement of conventional internal combustion engine buses;
• Identification of the ZEB technology the agency intends to deploy; • How the agency will deploy ZEBs in disadvantaged communities; • Identification of potential funding sources;
• A training plan and schedule for ZEB operators and maintenance staff; • Schedules for bus purchase and lease options (including fuel type, number of buses, and bus type); and
• Information on the construction of associated facilities and infrastructure (including location, type of infrastructure, and timeline).

Small California transit agencies, such as TOT, are mandated to submit ZEB rollout plans to CARB by June 30, 2023. ICT also requires the ZEB purchase schedules for both large and small agencies.

Beginning in 2021 and continuing annually through 2050, each transit agency is also required to provide a compliance report4. The initial report outlines the number of and information on active buses in the agency’s fleet as of December 31, 2017. Subsequent repo details on each bus purchased, owned, operated, leased, or rented (including make, model, curb weight, 4 https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2019-10/ictfro-Clean-Final_0.pdf Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 5 engine and propulsion system, bus purchases, and any information on converted buses), ZE mobility option information (if applicable), and information on renewable fuel usage (including date purchased, fuel contract number, and effective date, as applicable).

Table 2 below outlines the ZEB purchase schedule requirement for small transit agencies for heavy-duty transit vehicles. Specific vehicle types, such as motor coaches, cutaways, double decker, and 60-ft. vehicles, are exempt from this purchase schedule until 2026 or later (dependent on Altoona testing being completed). Whereas large agencies are required to start purchasing ZEBs in 2023, small agencies are exempt until 2026, in that year a minimum of 25% of new bus purchases must be ZE.

Table 2: CARB Standard Bus ZEB Purchase Schedule (As a Percentage of Total New Bus Purchases for Small Transit Agencies)5
Year Percentage
2023 -
2024 -
2025 -
2026 25%
2027 25%
2028 25%
2029 and after 100%
Specifically, the ZEB rollout plan required to be submitted to CARB by mid-2023 must include the following components, broken down by CARB into nine sections:
• Section A: Transit agency information
• Section B: Rollout plan general information
• Section C: Technology portfolio
• Section D: Current bus fleet composition and future bus purchases • Section E: Facilities and infrastructure modifications • Section F: Providing service in disadvantaged communities • Section G: Workforce training
• Section H: Potential funding sources
• Section I: Start-up and scale-up challenges
5 In this report, standard buses refer to 35-ft. or 40-ft. unless otherwise stated Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 6 To account for circumstances beyond a transit agency’s with ICT regulations, the mandate laid out specific provisions for exemptions. Exemptions will be permitted for the following circumstances:
• If the required ZEB type is unavailable;
• If daily mileage needs cannot be met;
• If gradeability needs cannot be met;
• If there are delays in infrastructure construction;
• If a financial emergency is declared by the transit agency; and • In circumstances where incremental capital or electricity costs for charging cannot be offset after applying for all available funding and incentive opportunities.

Finally, CARB acknowledges the continuous evolution of ZEB technologies as well as the service design and delivery of transit services. And as such, CARB encourages transit agencies to treat ZEB rollout plans as living documents that should be adjusted over the course if its life as agencies deploy ZEBs.

ICT Exemptions
As discussed above, the ICT regulation has specific provisions for exemptions if at least one the following criteria are met. If the exemption is granted, transit agencies may purchase conventional ICE bus(es) instead of ZEB(s).
6 1. Delay in bus delivery is caused by ZEB infrastructure construction setbacks beyond the transit agency’s control. ZEB infrastructure includes charging stations, hydrogen stations, and maintenance facilities. The following circumstances would qualify a transit agency for exemption:
a. Change of a general contractor
b. Delays obtaining power from a utility
c. Delays obtaining construction permits
d. Discovery of archeological, historical, or tribal cultural resources e. Natural disaster
A transit agency may also request an exemption if they can provide documentation that demonstrates the needed infrastructure cannot be completed within the two-year extension period or in time to operate the purchased buses after delivery, whichever is later.

2. When available ZEBs cannot meet a transit agency’s da(due to operating conditions and the operating range of a ZEB).
6 https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2019-10/ictfro-Clean-Final_0.pdf Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 7 3. If available ZEBs do not have adequate gradeability daily needs for any bus in its fleet.

4. When a required ZEB type for the applicable weight class based on gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) is unavailable for purchase. A ZEB bus type is considered unavailable for purchase for any of the following reasons:
a. The ZEB has not passed the complete Bus Testing and not obtained a Bus Testing Report
b. The ZEB cannot be configured to meet applicable requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act
c. The physical characteristics of the ZEB would result in a transit agency violating any federal, state, or local laws, regulations, or ordinances

5. When a ZEB cannot be purchased by a transit agency due to financial hardship. Financial hardship would be granted for the following reasons:
a. If a fiscal emergency is declared under a resolution by a transit agency’s governing following a public hearing
b. A transit agency can demonstrate that it cannot offset the incremental cost of purchasing all available ZEBs compared to the cost of the same type of conventional bus c. A transit agency can demonstrate that it cannot offset the managed, net electricity cost for depot charging BEBs when compared to the fuel cost of the same type of conventional ICE buses
If a transit agency wishes to request an exemption, they must provide documentation demonstrating the criteria are met. Required documentation for each exemption is summarized in Table 3. In addition, a request for exemption for a particular calendar year’s compliance obligation by November 30th of that year.7
Table 3: Required documentation for ZEB purchase exemptions Criteria Required Documentation

1. Delay in bus delivery and
infrastructure construction
• A letter from the agency’s governing
• A letter from the contractor, utility, building department, or other involved organizations explaining the reasons for delay and estimating the project completion date
7 https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2019-10/ictfro-Clean-Final_0.pdf Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 8 Criteria Required Documentation

2. Available ZEBs cannot
meet transit agency’s daily
mileage needs
• An explanation of why the exemption is needed
• A current monthly mileage report for each bus type
• A copy of the ZEB RFP and resulting bids showing rated battery capacity
• If available, measured energy use data from ZEBs operated on daily assignments in the transit

3. Available ZEBs do not
have adequate
gradeability performance
to meet the transit
agency’s daily needs
• Documentation showing no other buses in the fleet can meet the gradeability requirements and the ZEBS of that bus type cannot be placed into service anywhere else in the fleet • Topography information including measurement of the
grade(s) where the ZEBS would be placed in service
• A description of the bus types that currently serve the route(s)
• An explanation of why the gradeability of all available ZEBs are insufficient to meet the transit
• A copy of the ZEB RFP, specifying th
required gradeability and the resulting bids
• If available, empirical data including grades, passenger loading, and speed data from available ZEBs operated on the same grade

4. When a required ZEB for
the applicable weight class
based on GVWR is
unavailable for purchase
• A summary of all bus body-types, vehicle weight classes being purchased, chassis, reasons why ZEBs are unavailable for purchase
• Current fleet information showing how many ZEBs of that bus type are already in service and how many are on order
• If applicable, documentation showing that ADA requirements cannot be met
Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 9 Criteria Required Documentation
• If applicable, a letter from its governing body that details how the physical characteristics of the ZEB would violate federal, state, or local law

5. When a ZEB cannot be
purchased by a transit
agency due to financial
hardship
• A resolution by the transit agency’s
a fiscal emergency
• Documentation showing the transit agency cannot offset the initial capital cost of purchasing ZEBs
Taken together, CARB recognizes the challenges that transit agencies will face when adopting ZEBs and wants to avoid hardships around finances and service delivery. As such, if TOT faces certain challenges for a particular year, for example, if it does not have sufficient capital funds available to purchase a planned ZEB procurement, then TOT can apply for an exemption to CARB by documenting that TOT cannot offset the incremental cost of a ZEB compared to a conventional fossil fuel vehicle. Nonetheless, the ZEB rollout and transition plan in this document is built upon assumptions that TOT will have sufficient funding to carry out the transition. As such, the CARB ICT plan is a living document that is flexible and can be amended to account for circumstances that require exemptions or shifting of ZEB procurement or other implementation steps.

Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 10 3.0 APPROACH TO ZEB PLANNING
The graphic in Figure 2 provides a high-level schematic of the major steps in this project to derive a recommended fleet concept and develop an implementation plan.

Figure 2: Schematic representation of the steps in the ZEB planning process The first step involved a review of existing conditions of TOT’s fleet, facilities, and service delivery to provide a foundation and understanding of TOT’s operations and business proces impacted by a transition to a ZEB fleet. A summary of these key findings is provided in Section 4.0. An assessment of the facility provided insights into the constraints and opportunities for implementing ZEBs, as well as the condition of the facilities, buildings, and existing service cycle. A market scan was also conducted to analyze the current ZEB technologies, their limitations, and in-development technologies that can help shape TOT’sfuture ZEB fleet.

Next, we used computer modeling to simulate the performance of BEBs and FCEBs on TOT’s service blocks and vehicle assignments. The modeling provided predicted performance, including fuel economy, operating ranges, and feasibility of the different ZEB technologies. The analysis revealed that a fleet of BE vehicles would minimize operational changes, and largely could replace fossil fuel vehicles on a 1:1 basis. The modeling process and ZE fleet concepts are summarized in Section 5.0.

Subsequently, working with TOT staff, we developed a fleet transition/implementation plan that transitions the fossil fuel fleet to BE vehicles, along with a phasing strategy for chargers and facility modifications. Section 6.0 describes the fleet and facility phasing strategy, and Section 7.0 describes the modifications required at the operations and maintenance facility.

With the site plans and identification of required facility modifications and impacts on capital and operating costs, Stantec developed a financial analysis for the ZEB rollout through 2040 (Section 8.0).

Analysis of Operations
and Exisiting Conditions
+
Market Scan of ZEB
Technologies
Fleet Modeling
Power
+
Facilities
Requirements
Reliability, Resiliency
and Sustainability Financial Analysis Strategic Rollout Plan Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 11 Operating and planning considerations (Section 9.0), applicable technology (Section 10.0), workforce training (Section 11.0), potential funding sources (Section 12.0), service in disadvantaged communities (Section 13.0), and greenhouse gas (GHG) impacts (Section 14.0) are also reviewed and discussed.

All steps described here, along with others found in this document, provide TOT with a comprehensive ZEB rollout plan and strategy.

Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 12 4.0 SUMMARY OF KEY EXISTING CONDITIONS
The Existing Conditions Report provided a comprehensive review of TOT’sexisting conditions, encompassing operations, facilities, and finances to lay the groundwork for the route modeling and to understand current operating conditions.

4.1 FLEET
It is important to note that TOT stores vehicles owned and operated for other transit services at the Thousand Oaks MSC. This includes Moorpark City Transit (MCT) buses, Kanan shuttle service cutaway buses, ECTA CONNECT cutaways, and Inter-City Dial-A-Ride cutaways. These vehicles are summarized in Table 4. In addition, MCT plans to purchase two electric buses that will be stored at the MSC.

Table 4: Other agency vehicles stored at the Thousand Oaks Municipal Service Center Agency/Service Qty. Make Fuel type Service type
Moorpark City Transit 5 El Dorado Bus CNG Fixed route
Kanan 3 Ford E450 Cutaway CNG Shuttle
ECTA 5 Starcraft Cutaway Gasoline Inter-city DAR
Although these non-TOT vehicles are stored at the same facility, they are not considered to be a part of TOT’s fleet in this report and are not considered in part of TOT’s ZEB .

TOT’s current revenue fleet is comprised of 31 vehicles(Figure 3), 8 minivans, 5 cutaway buses (Figure 4), 9 smaller cutaways,8 and 1 trolley.9 Of the 31 vehicles, TOT owns 17 vehicles and leases the remaining 14.

Table 5 shows a breakdown of the fleet roster. Fuel types are a combination of CNG, diesel, and propane for fixed route services and gasoline and CNG for paratransit cutaways. Most vehicles are within their useful life benchmarks as outlined by TOT’s minimum useful life standards. A private contractor, MV, owns, operates, and maintains 12 DAR vehicles on TOT’s behalf. 8 MV provides two cutaways without costs for emergency purposes. This would bring the count to 11 if included. 9 The trolley is not currently in service.

Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 13 Figure 3: TOT fixed route bus
Figure 4: TOT Dial-A-Ride cutaway
Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 14 Table 5: TOT current revenue service fleet
In-Service
Year Qty. Make Fuel type
TOT
minimum
useful life
Current
age10
Service
type
2018 2 Ford Transit Gasoline 4 years 4 years DAR
2019 8 Dodge Caravan Gasoline 4 years 3 years DAR
2019 6 Ford Transit CNG 4 years 3 years DAR
2015 2 Starcraft Cutaway Gasoline 5 years 7 years DAR
2008 2 Orion VII CNG 12 years 14 years Fixed-Route
2015 2 Gillig CNG 12 years 7 years Fixed-Route
2014 2 Ford E450 CNG 5 years 8 years Fixed-Route
2018 1 Ford E550 Diesel 7 years 4 years Fixed-Route
2019 4 Gillig CNG 12 years 3 years Fixed-Route
2017 1 Hometown Trolley Propane 10 years 5 years Fixed-Route Existing EV Charging
TOT has already installed two, dual-port pedestal Level 2 chargers were installed at the MSC (Figure 5).

These are intended for future EV Cutaway charging.

Figure 5: New Level 2 EV chargers at the MSC.
10 Current age determined from model year not in-service year Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 15 4.2 OPERATING RANGES
TOT inherently has challenges to a ZEB transition because vehicles are kept in operation all day, creating long block lengths. These may be difficult for ZEBs to operate due to potential range limitations, and a lack of time for midday charging or refueling.

Figure 6: Hourly weekday vehicle requirements
Figure 6 shows that TOT’s vehicles are in operation for th e majority of the service day, with services starting around 5:00 AM and ending close to 8:00 PM.11 This confirms that vehicles need to be in service constantly throughout the day to cover the service area. This could present a challenge for ZEB implementation because vehicles might not have time for midday charging or refueling.12 TOT schedules its service so that one vehicle is operating on one route all day. Figure 7 shows that vehicles also travel long distances to provide service to TOT customers throughout the day. This figure shows the distribution of routes (and vehicles) by their daily mileage completed. For example, one vehicle travels 271 miles, another travels 251 miles, and so on.

This shows that TOT vehicles are traveling 238.5 miles on an average weekday with vehicle mileages ranging from a minimum of 187 miles to 271 miles. While full modeling will be conducted to understand the feasibility of translating service to ZEBs, the limited range of ZEBs may prove challenging to 11 There are zero routes running at 8:00 PM or after.
12 The data analyzed was from September 2022.
5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
0 0
1 2
3 4
5 6
5:00
AM
6:00
AM
7:00
AM
8:00
AM
9:00
AM
10:00
AM
11:00
AM
12:00
PM
1:00
PM
2:00
PM
3:00
PM
4:00
PM
5:00
PM
6:00
PM
7:00
PM
8:00
PM
Vehicles in Operation
Hour of the Day
Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 16 implement on a 1:1 vehicle replacement basis without on-route/ opportunity charging, midday charging, reblocking, or some other strategies to help make ZEBs more feasible in this service area.

Figure 7: Daily vehicle mileage
Demand Response
TOT provides DAR paratransit service using a combination of cutaways and vans. Demand response vehicle mileage varies widely as there is no fixed schedule and service is based on demand. Run-level data for 2019 was analyzed to gain an understanding of the variation of how far the vehicles travel within a day and to ultimately provide a range of expected fuel efficiencies for DAR transitions to ZEVs. While it is understood that the future demand for DAR is unknown and may be impacted due to COVID-19, it is important to plan for a “normal case” scenario, so pre -COVID data was used.

The box and whisker plot in Figure 8 is designed to show the variation in daily vehicle mileages. For each vehicle the box and whisker plots below show different statistics regarding mileage per day: the minimum (bottom whisker), first quartile (bottom of the box), median (line within the box), third quartile (top of the box), and maximum (top whisker). Outliers are displayed as the dots above and below each entry (defined as numbers below the lower and upper limits as determined by the interquartile range) and the X in the middle of each box is the mean for that dataset. 5,518 runs were analyzed for 2019, with an average distance of 95 miles and a median distance of 83 miles. However, the largest distance traveled in one day by one vehicle is 418 miles. Some vehicles traveled more than the average current operational range of ZEVs, presenting potential range-related issues with ZEV implementation for DAR service.
271.1
251.3
232.3
187.1
250.7
0 50
100
150
200
250
300
40 41 42 43 44
Daily vehicle mileage
Route number
Daily Vehicle Mileage
Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 17 Figure 8: Daily mileage for DAR vehicles (2019)

4.3 FACILITY
TOT’s facility is at the City’s MSC campus located at 1993 Rancho Conejo Blvd, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320 (Figure 9). The transit agency’s facility occupies a port-acre MSC site.

The MSC site includes the City’s public works departm ent, a public CNG fueling station, photovoltaic canopies over a majority of the bus parking at the south end of the site, a vehicle wash, fueling islands, a transit maintenance and operations building, parking for the transit and public works vehicles, and a separated employee parking lot. The multiple buildings comprising the facility were constructed and expanded over the past several decades but are typical of similar public works and transit facilities.

Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 18 Figure 9: Aerial image of facility (Source: Google Maps) The bus facility has three access points for ingress and egress of transit vehicles. One from the north side of the bus yard via Rancho Conejo Blvd. The other access points are both along the southeast side of the facility on Conejo Center Drive. Employee parking is on the northeast corner of the property and can be accessed from either street. Since employee parking is in a separate lot, cross traffic of fleet and personal vehicles is not an issue.

When returning to the facility, operators park the buses in the transit vehicle parking areas, connect the slow-fill CNG fueling dispensers and then return to dispatch. Service workers will then take a bus through the exterior drive-through vehicle wash and does interior cleaning functions as needed. Buses are then re-parked in their designated area, ready to roll-out for the next block.

There are two significant considerations for implementing zero-emissions vehicles at the current facility.

First is a lack of space. The bus yard, shared with public works, is currently at capacity with the current parking approach. An alternative to the current parking configuration would be reconfigure the bus yard with stacked parking which could eliminate some of the drive aisles. This could be challenging to operate with a mixed fleet of vehicles and services.

Overall, the Existing Conditions Report revealed that TOT’sfacility, operations, and service area characteristics provide some challenges for a ZEB transition. Factors like a service area with dispersed destinations present potential challenges for range and charging needs. In addition, TOT’s fleet has a large number of cutaway vehicles, which have few ZE options that enable long daily distances. The Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 19 demand response service delivery model is also inherently difficult to plan for because daily service miles are dictated by demand and not adherent to a fixed schedule.

5.0 PREFERRED/RECOMMENDED FLEET COMPOSITION
This section describes the modeling and analysis that was used to develop viable fleet concepts and specify a preferred ZEB fleet for rollout planning purposes.

5.1 FLEET AND POWER MODELING OVERVIEW
Energy modeling uses a two-pronged approach to understanding ZEB feasibility using Stantec’s mod tool, ZEVDecide. The two-pronged approach first examines route-level operations, and secondly, examines fuel economy by aggregating route-level outputs to provide block/vehicle level fuel/energy requirements. In this way, Stantec and TOT will understand how ZEBs perform under TOT’soperating conditions, providing a more realistic estimate of operating range and energy consumption, ultimately informing technology selection.

Figure 10 provides a schematic overview of the modeling process. The predictive ZEB performance modeling depends on several inputs, such as actual passenger loads, driving dynamics, topography, vehicle specifications, and ambient conditions subject to the environment in which the agency operates.

Figure 10: Modeling overview
The process for modeling fixed-route services is described first, followed by the modeling process for DAR services.

Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 20 Fixed Route Modeling Inputs
ZEVDecide’s modeling process predicts ZEB drivetrain power requirements specific to given acceleration profiles. One key component to the modeling is the bus design or bus specifications that include curb weight and frontal dimensions (factors needed to account for aerodynamic drag and rolling resistance coefficients), auxiliary, and HVAC (Figure 11).

Figure 11: Schematic of the inputs for bus specifications The following inputs are included in the model to determine the feasibility of different ZEB technologies under TOT’soperating conditions.

Bus/vehicle specifications: the key bus specifications used in the modeling process for each service type are detailed in Table 6. We modeled 35-ft buses that are either BEB and FCEB. It is important to note that on the market today, there are more BEB equivalents than FCEB equivalents. Overall, models and vehicle ranges are limited compared to fossil fuel models.

Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 21 Table 6: ZEB specifications for energy modeling
35-ft BEB 35-ft FCEB
Battery (kWh) or
tank size (kg) 435 kWh 37.5 kg
Curb Weight (lbs.) 28,556 29,700
Service Type Fixed-route Fixed-route
Representative driving cycles: Assigning representative driving cycles, also called acceleration profiles or duty cycles, is the other major step in the energy modeling. A driving cycle is a speed versus time profile that is used to simulate the vehicle performance, and consequently, the energy use.

Representative diving cycles were assigned to all routes based on TOT’soperations and observed driving conditions. The driving cycles were created from data collection of real-world operations or from chassis dynamometer tests and have been convened by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) in a drive cycle database called DriveCAT 13.

Passenger loads: As the total weight of a ZEB impacts its performance, it is important to understand and capture passenger loads in the modeling process. To examine the impacts of passenger loads and its associated weight14, all fixed route blocks were modeled with a high (75% of seated capacity full) and low (25% of seated capacity full) passenger load. This allows for comparison of efficiency and performance between when the vehicle is almost full vs. when the vehicle is almost empty.

Ambient temperature: The ambient temperature has a significant impact on the fuel economy of the ZEBs since it is directly related to the power output from the batteries or fuel cells required for the heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) system.

Stantec developed a correlation matrix between ambient temperature and power requirements from the HVAC system. For example, moderate daily temperatures (between 55°F and 65°F) can have a nominal power demand on the HVAC system of up to 4 kW. Colder temperatures (below 45°F) or hotter temperatures (above 70°F) can represent more strenuous loads of up to 12 kW. The power requirement for modeling purposes was set based on an annual average low temperature average of 44°F 15.

Topography and elevation: TOT’sservice area is influenced by elevation and topography. Therefore, it is important to account for the impacts of terrain and elevation on ZEB energy efficiency and performance. 13 NREL DriveCAT - Chassis Dynamometer Drive Cycles. (2019). National Renewable Energy Laboratory. www.nrel.gov/transportation/drive-cycle-tool 14 Estimated average passenger weight—170 lbs.
15 US Climate Data https://www.usclimatedata.com/climate/thousand-oaks/california/united-states/usca1549 Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 22 The first step in the route elevation analysis is to determine the elevation gains and losses seen across TOT’sroutes. Furthermore, the total elevation gains will inform the maximum and average grades across each route. From there, an analysis of elevation based on route alignments was undertaken for each route (Table 7).

Table 7: Elevation analysis
Route Average slope Max slope Weighted
average slope
40 2.3% 11.9% 4.8%
41 2.1% 10.1% 4.7%
42 2.1% 7.4% 4.0%
43 1.5% 7.7% 3.9%
44 1.8% 7.4% 3.5%
Each route shapefile (derived from GTFS data) was downloaded into Google Earth to create an elevation profile to understand the total elevation gains/losses seen for each route in the system. For example, the elevation profile for Route 40 is shown in Figure 12. Additionally, the average and maximum grades for each route were similarly determined using these elevation profiles, which were used as the inputs for the topography analysis.

Figure 12: Elevation profile example (Route 40)
Source: Google Earth
Fixed Route Modeling Process
Using the inputs above, the first step in modeling is obtaining route-level fuel economy and energy use for the ZEBs using the driving cycles assigned to each route/service type. Then, to account for the impacts of interlining, deadheading, etc., the modeling aggregates route-level results to produce a vehicle-level fuel economy and energy use metric. The process of going from a route to vehicle assignment is outlined in Figure 13 and Figure 14.

Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 23 Figure 13: Relationship between routes, blocks, and vehicle assignments Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 24 Figure 14: ZEVDecide energy modeling process
After the route-level modeling is completed, fuel economies are then aggregated by block using the trip mileage to determine the total energy consumption for each block. Finally, to understand the fuel economy and total daily energy consumption of each vehicle operated on a representative service day, blocks are aggregated at the vehicle level, so that vehicles that are assigned multiple blocks throughout a day are modeled appropriately.

For TOT, all vehicles assigned to fixed-route services complete one block per day (and are assigned to a single route), so block-level and vehicle assignment-level results are equivalent.

The results of the modeling provide insight into:
• Fuel economy and energy requirements.
• Operating range.
• The feasibility of different ZEB technologies/electrification. For BEBs, this is determined through the state of charge (SOC); the vehicle assignment can be successfully completed with a BEB if it can complete its scheduled service with at least 20% battery SOC. For FCEBs, if a bus consumes less than 95% of its tank capacity, the vehicle assignment is counted as successful.

DAR Modeling Inputs
For TOT’sDAR services, we modeled cutaways and vans, in both BE and hydrogen FCE technologies.

The modeled vehicle specifications are outlined in Table 8 below. For both classes of vehicles, BE technologies are more common and market ready; in fact, while a FCE passenger van is commercially available, no FCE cutaways are commercially available. There are a number of smaller EV cutaways on the market including those built on a Ford Transit chassis and OEM chassis. The only currently existing Representative driving
cycles assigned to
each route
Aggregate drive cycles
to get total fuel
economy for each route
at designated
passenger load level
Aggregate fuel
economy by block,
using trip distance to
determine total block
energy consumption
Deadhead mileage
was modeled with 0%
passenger load
Aggregate blocks by
vehicle assignment to
determine total daily
energy consumption by
vehicle
Determine feasible ZEB
options and fleet mix
based on daily energy
requirements and
SOC/H2 use
Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 25 FCE cutaway is a cutaway with its engine removed and outfitted with a hydrogen fuel cell and a small battery, along with a 13-kg hydrogen tank instead of the internal combustion engine as the power train.

Table 8: Bus specifications for DAR modeling
Technology
type
Curb weight
(lbs.)
Battery (kWh) or tank
size (kg)
Example
BE Cutaway
BE Passenger
Van
14,500
14,330 120 kWh
FCE Cutaway
FCE
Passenger
Van
16,500
10,360

13.5 kg
As demand response services do not follow a fixed route and schedule, modeling inputs required adjustment to account for variations in service delivery. Inputs other than the bus specifications for the DAR modeling include:
• Passenger load: assumes an average of four passengers onboard. • Topography and elevation: the methodology does not consider topography directly. Instead, the model used driving speed information for all weekday trips in 2019 to predict the fuel economy. • Ambient temperatures: the same as fixed route modeling.

DAR Modeling Process
For each vehicle trip record in 2019, the total energy requirement per vehicle was used to calculate the total energy consumed by each vehicle per day. A statistical analysis was conducted on the entire dataset to determine the average fuel efficiency and daily energy use per vehicle to evaluate success levels with the BE or hydrogen cutaway and van options. Furthermore, the energy requirement of each individual trip was then aggregated at the vehicle level to estimate the total energy consumed by each vehicle per day (Figure 15).

Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 26 Figure 15: ZEVDecide energy profile process (DAR services) The results of the modeling provide insight into:
• Average fuel economy.
• Probability of energy/fuel requirements.
• Probability of operating range.
• The feasibility of different ZEB technologies.
o For BE vans and cutaways, success is determined through SOC. The vehicle assignment is considered successful when a BE vehicle can complete its scheduled service with at least 20% battery SOC.
o For hydrogen vans and cutaways, if a vehicle consumes less than 95% of its tank capacity, the vehicle assignment is counted as successful.

5.2 FIXED-ROUTE MODELING RESULTS
Based on the feasibility criteria for the vehicle modeling, the fixed-route services of TOT were unsuccessful when modeled with a 35-ft BEB equipped with a 435-kWh battery pack, either assuming low passenger loads or high passenger loads (Figure 16). The main reasons for this low rate of success are due to the long mileages and that buses stay out in service over 12+ hours per day.

Total energy
requirement per trip for
each vehicle in 2019
was calculated
Total energy consumed
per day per vehicle was
determined
(accumulation of trips)
Statistical analysis to
generate Paretos,
median, averages, and
deviation
Determine feasible
ZEB options based on
daily energy
requirements and
SOC/H2 use
Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 27 Figure 16: Fixed-route success rate, BEBs
For the FCEB modeling, Figure 17 demonstrates that at both low and high passenger loads, FCEBs are very successful at electrifying TOT’s fixed -route services.

Figure 17: Fixed-route success rate, FCEBs
Table 9 below summarizes the expected average fuel efficiency and operating ranges for each technology type.
0%
20%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
BEB High Passenger BEB Low Passenger
Fixed Route Success Rates (BEB)
80%
100%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
FCEB High Passenger FCEB Low Passenger
Fixed Route Success Rates (FCEB)
Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 28 Table 9: Average fuel efficiency and expected ranges for fixed route modeling Vehicle type Average fuel efficiency Est. Maximum Range (mi) 35-ft BEB 1.87 kWh/mi 210
35-ft FCEB 7.68 mi per kg 235
Overall while the modeling shows low success rates for BEBs and high success rates for FCEBs, when considering which technology to adopt, elements beyond the modeling need to be considered, and those are discussed further in Section 5.4.

5.3 DAR MODELING RESULTS
As demand response services do not follow a fixed route and schedule, modeling inputs required adjustment to account for variations in service delivery. Therefore, instead of assigning representative driving cycles or studying a representative day, the model considered the average driving speeds for each individual run; all runs and vehicle assignments from 2019 were modeled.16 The box and whisker plot below (Figure 18) is designed to show the variation in SOC for cutaway modeling results (top) and passenger van modeling results (bottom). Each vehicle entry in the plot shows different statistics regarding expected SOC per day: the minimum (bottom whisker), first quartile (bottom of the box), median (line within the box), third quartile (top of the box), and maximum (top whisker).

Outliers are displayed as the dots above and below each entry (defined as the number below the lower and upper limits as determined by the interquartile ranX’ in the middle of each mean for that dataset. A vehicle assignment is noted as a success if it completes daily service with 20% or more battery charge.
16 1,299 total demand response runs in 2019.

Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 29 Figure 18: BEB modeling results for DAR vehicle assignments—cutaways (top) and vans (bottom)
Overall, 49% of service operated could be electrified with BE cutaways, while 61% of service could be electrified with BE vans. Estimated fuel efficiency is 1.22 kWh/mi, while the expected range is 75-115 miles. In our modeling, the vans are more efficient since they are lighter and thus have better fuel efficiencies than cutaways. Failures Failures
Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 30 For FCE vans and cutaways, the charts below (Figure 19) show that over 90% of service can be electrified with FCE cutaways, and 95% of daily service can be electrified by FCE vans.

Figure 19: FCEB modeling results for DAR vehicle assignments—cutaways (top) and vans (bottom)
The modeling estimates that the hydrogen vehicles could achieve 140-155 mi per tank, with an average fuel efficiency of 13 mi per kg. However, it is important to note that no FCE cutaways actually exist in service, so these results are speculative at this point. Failures Failures Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 31 5.4 ZE FLEET RECOMMENDATIONS AND IMPLICATIONS
The feasibility of ZE implementation depends on many factors, including vehicle specifications, elevation, route mileage, and climate. Moreover, other strategic elements also factor into the feasibility of a ZE technology choice. Based on the modeling results, TOT has a few fleet composition choices to complete their ZEB transition.

While the results of the modeling show that hydrogen is more successful at elec there are several realities that make hydrogen less of a better fit for TOT:
• First, TOT’s smaller fleet means that the demand fosmall, making the justification for a hydrogen fueling facility difficult. Hydrogen fueling infrastructure generally has a fixed cost of over $6 million and is better suited for larger fleets at scale. A $6+ million investment in fueling infrastructure is likely more than charger infrastructure for TOT’s • Second, TOT’s yard, while ample, has some space lim
will take up more space that isn’t readily available. BEB chargers, on the other hand, can be located and clustered remotely, have a smaller footprint, and the dispensers can be placed on the fuel islands where the individual CNG dispensers are currently located. • Third, FCEBs are more expensive than BEBs by a factor of ~1.5x. Moreover, as discussed above, the BEB market is more mature than the FCEB market, particularly for smaller vehicles.

Also, TOT has already invested in acquiring BEBs.
• Fourth, while the modeling results of the electrification success in Figure 16 looks stark when examined as a ‘pass or fail’ when digging into the detailed results of SOC and range, the results are more nuanced. The modeling shows that several of the modeled blocks fail because they fall short by tens of miles, which means that TOT could use BEBs for service but would need to deploy certain strategies. These strategies include on-route charging to top up buses so they can complete their service, as well as potentially swapping out vehicles during the day for fully charged vehicles.

Stantec and TOT staff workshopped different alternatives for fleet concepts, including an entirely FCEB fleet, an expanded BEB fleet with re-blocking and vehicle swapping, and on-route charging. Based on TOT’s preferences and planned work at the Thousand Oaks , we estimated that a fast (>300 kW) charger for on-route charging could successfully support entirely 100% BEB operations.

For DAR vehicles, the strategy for electrification will include a combination of vehicle swapping as well as potential charging during layovers at the Transportation Center. Furthermore, as battery technology continues to improve, there is good reason to believe that fuel economy with improve and range will improve as well.

Therefore, after careful consideration of the modeling results, operational realities, discussions with agency staff and stakeholders, and logistical considerations, Stantec recommends a fleet of BEBs with on-route charging capabilities.

Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 32 5.5 CHARGING PROFILES
Based on modeling results, operational realities, future service plans, discussions with the agency and stakeholders, and logistical considerations, converting TOT’s current fleet to BEB vehicles would be straightforward. A fleet expansion of two 35-ft BEBs17 and four cutaways would be needed to operate in a similar manner as the CNG and diesel vehicles. The following infrastructure would be needed to support the planned TOT-owned revenue fleet at the Maintenance Facility:
• 16 at 62.5-kW vehicle chargers with a 1:1 charger-to-dispenser ratio to serve 16 BEBs • 6 at 60-kW vehicle chargers with a 2:1 charger-to-dispenser ratio to serve 12 electric cutaway vehicles
• 3 level II chargers using a combination of 2:1 and 1:1 charger-to-dispenser ratio to serve 5 vans or light duty vehicles
Charging Profile for TOT and Moorpark
Given the fleet operations and considering the desire to avoid peak network times for charging, 16 charging connections of 62.5-kW each with single dispensers would be sufficient to support the total fixed-route fleets charging while also providing charging ports for spare vehicles and potential expansion at the facility. Furthermore, three additional 60-kW chargers, each with single dispensers, will be installed at the facility to support the fixed route services of Moorpark18. Additionally, TOT will install three level 2 chargers, two with dual dispensers and one with a single dispenser for a total of five level 2 connectors for the smaller vehicles; and six chargers each at 60-kW with dual dispensers for a total of 12 cutaway charging locations.

The proposed charging profile (Figure 20) would create a peak power demand of 660 kW, and no charging would be required between the hours of 4:00 pm and 9:00 pm to avoid using electricity when it is most expensive (network peak hours). These charging profile considers the charging of the TOT and the Moorpark fleet. However, often times utilizes require to have an installed power capacity equal to the installed charging equipment, therefore, the connected load to support all equipment would be equal to

1.47 MW
17 The addition of two 35-ft BEBs will also be needed to expand the services from five to six fixed routes and has been accounted under the CMAQ awarded funding.
18 The MCT chargers have been accounted for in the charging profile but were excluded in the cost estimation and financial assessment.

Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 33 Figure 20: TOT Facility Charging Profile
0 2
4 6
8 10
12 14
0 100
200
300
400
500
600
700
12:00 AM
1:30 AM3:00 AM4:30 AM6:00 AM7:30 AM9:00 AM
10:30 AM
12:00 PM
1:30 PM3:00 PM4:30 PM6:00 PM7:30 PM9:00 PM
10:30 PM
12:00 AM
1:30 AM3:00 AM4:30 AM6:00 AM7:30 AM9:00 AM
10:30 AM
12:00 PM
1:30 PM3:00 PM4:30 PM6:00 PM7:30 PM9:00 PM
10:30 PM
Number of Active Vehicles
Power (kW)
Total Power Vehicles in Service
Peak Power
Peak Hours Peak Hours
Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 34 6.0 FLEET PROCUREMENT PLAN
Based on the preferred fleet concept of a BE fleet, we used TOT’sfleet replacement schedule to develop a procurement plan for transitioning fossil fuel vehicles to ZEVs. Several factors were considered in the development of this replacement schedule:
• CARB requirements: CARB has set out requirements that the transition to 100% ZE fleets be completed by 2040 and that 100% of new vehicle purchases are required to be ZE starting in 2029. The earliest procurements for a small fleet operator need to take place in 2026 with at least 25% of all purchases being ZEV. Also, the transition should avoid the early retirement of any conventional (fossil fuel) vehicles.
• Useful life benchmarks (ULB): the ULB of ZEVs must be taken into consideration to ensure that vehicles are safe and in good repair. For this analysis, we assumed the following ULBs based on TOT’s fleet replacement practices and preferences:
o Heavy duty buses: 12 years
o Large cutaways: 7 years
o Small cutaways: 5 years
o Vans: 4 years
• Grant funding: TOT has grant funding for 4 replacement BEBs, 2 expansion BEBs, and six replacement BE cutaways from the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) Improvement Program. ZEV phasing was designed to align with CMAQ procurement timelines. • Service levels: In order to provide the same level of DAR service with ZEVs, the DAR fleet will expand by four vehicles. This is due to ZEV operating range limitations.

Table 10 shows the purchase schedule of ZEVs for the fixed route service fleet and DAR fleet, with the timeline extending from 2023 to 2040. The fleet expansion of two fixed-route vehicles is in response to a planned additional route for TOT, and CMAQ funding will be used for the two additional buses. Based on the route modeling and analysis, the fleet size should be able to accommodate TOT’sservice plan, provided service levels grow modestly. For the DAR fleet, because of the limited operating ranges of BE vehicles, our working assumption is that TOT will need to grow its fleet by four vehicles to deliver the same levels of service. Table 11 shows the infrastructure phasing schedule and Figure 21 provides a year-by-year overview of the cumulative number of vehicles of each type in fixed route fleet and DAR fleet.

The fleet phasing schedules show that TOT will meet and exceed all the CARB-mandated deadlines for ZEB purchases and transitions. Namely:
• ZEB purchases began in 2024, with the mandate starting in 2026.

Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 35 • 100% ZE fleet replacement should be completed by 2040 according to ICT, however, TOT would meet this requirement by 2030. Actual phasing will also depend on the TOT’s future competitive funding to finance capital requirements of the transition, as well as supply chain realities related to the delivery of new vehicles.

Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Table 10: Proposed Fleet Purchase Schedule
FLEET
FORECAST 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 Total retirements 0 -9 -2 0 0 -2 0 -10 -2 -4 0 0 -5 -10 -2 -2 0 -2 ZEV purchases 0 11 4 2 0 2 0 10 2 4 0 0 5 10 2 2 0 2
Fleet % ZEV 0% 58% 71% 74% 74% 83% 83% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% ZEV purchase % NA 100% 100% 100% NA 100% NA 100% 100% 100% NA NA 100% 100% 100% 100% NA 100% Added vehicles - 2 2 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Total Vehicles in
Fleet 17 19 21 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 Table 11: Proposed Infrastructure Phasing Schedule
Year Item Description
2024/2025 General sitework, main switchgear, 8 single dispenser fast chargers, 4 dual dispenser fast chargers 2026 2 dual dispenser fast chargers
2030 4 single dispenser fast chargers, emergency power, 1 MW battery system 2035 4 single dispenser fast chargers, 3 level 2 chargers Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Figure 21: Fleet composition
0 5
10 15
20 25
2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 Number of vehicles
CNG Bus Diesel CU CNG CU CNG Van BEB BE CU
Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

7.0 MAINTENANCE FACILITY INFRASTRUCTURE

MODIFICATIONS
This section outlines the proposed facility modifications for ZEB implementation at TOT’sbus operations and maintenance facility. The conceptual plan has been developed proposing ground-mounted dispensers/chargers for the BEB fleet. The facility has sufficient space opportunity for ground-mounted dispensers, avoiding the reduction in parking space while maintaining yard flexibility as all of the electrical utility equipment can be located along the edge of the property.

Since the new charging equipment is located in the same areas as the slow-fill CNG dispensers, the infrastructure will need to be phased such that CNG fueling can still be maintained during the transition to an all-electric fleet. Supportive on-site CNG system will need to remain until the last CNG vehicle is retired. The phasing should be relatively direct for TOT to implement. The slow-fill dispensers will need to be removed one parking position at a time. The CNG dispensers have a classified area around them, meaning that no electrical devices can be within this area.

The existing service cycle can be maintained as-is since no modifications are required due to the transition to BEBs. Since buses are currently fueled using slow-fill CNG, electric charging is essentially the same process of “fueling”vehicles while they are parked.

7.1 PROPOSED MAINTENANCE FACILITY MODIFICATIONS
The following summarizes the proposed improvements for the new BEB charging stations and associated infrastructure (see Figure 22: TOT ZEB Site Conceptual Master Plan):
• A new 1,500 kVA transformer and 2,500 A switchboard to provide adequate additional power to the facility, along with associated equipment pads and bollards. The rating of the transformer is to accommodate the connected load (based on the total number of installed chargers) even when the active load is anticipated to be lower as described by the charging profile discussion in section 5.5. A new switchgear to have the connection for a temporary generator;
• A minimum of 16 fast chargers at 62.5-kW with a 1:1 charger-to-dispenser ratio (SAE J1772- compliant) to serve a maximum of 16 TOT electric buses. An example of these type of charger are the ChargePoint CPE250 that can be paired together to provide up to 125kW to each bus, one at the time (sequential charging). Additionally, since each bus will have one dedicated dispenser connected to a charger, all vehicles can charge simultaneously at

62.5kW, also called parallel charging;
• A minimum of 6 fast chargers at 60-kW with a 1:2 charger-to-dispenser ratio (SAE J1772- compliant) to serve a maximum of 12 electric cutaway vehicles. With this configuration two dispensers are connected to only one charger and cutaways will only be able to charge at 60kW at the time, meaning, sequential charging;
• Three additional level 2 chargers are also show for non-revenue vehicles, two with dual dispensers and one with a single dispenser, for a total of five charging locations; Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ • New ATS (automatic transfer switch) between BESS and switchgear; • A new 1 MW battery-energy storage system (BESS) to store on-site generated power from the existing PV system;
• Equipment pads and associated bollard protection around chargers and dispensers; • Power main feeder and sub feeders;
• Communication system panel/distribution cabinet and conduits to each charger; • Pavement/base replacement/repair for trenching associated with electrical distribution for locations where new electrical service and switchboard will be allocated; • No proposed modifications to the buildings or existing photo-voltaic canopies; Figure 22 provides a conceptual site layout for TOT’s facility and the necessary BEB infrastructure.

Vehicles shown in green represent TOT’s fleet while vehMCT buses housed at the MSC. See Appendix A: PDF of Site Plans for the full site plan.

Figure 22: TOT ZEB Site Conceptual Master Plan
Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

7.2 GRID CONNECTION UPGRADES
The facility will require new electrical service connections from SCE. The utility will likely require that a service study be performed to identify any transmission or distribution system upgrades that may be needed to support the additional power demands. It will be up to the utility to determine if the local power distribution system has the capacity to serve TOT’s new charging loads as well as any other planned loads in the area.

The recommendations here are focused on those infrastructure upgrades that are to be located on the agency’s facility and do not include any system upgrades that the service study may identify. The extent and timing of the system upgrades will determine the net cost to the agency, as well as the applicability of programs like the Charge Ready Transport program.

There is a possibility that the current installed SCE transformer can support a small portion of BEB fleet without major upgrades. To evaluate this, TOT would need to coordinate with SCE and conduct a load assessment for the current transformer to determine how many chargers can be connected as an interim step to deploy BEBs prior to completing major grid connection upgrades.

7.3 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON CHARGE READY TRANSPORT

PROGRAM
Supporting the transition to electric vehicles, the Charge Ready Transport (CRT) program operated by Southern California Edison (SCE) can provide funding for the installation of infrastructure supporting deployment of EV trucks, buses, and off-road equipment. Along with funding for infrastructure, SCE also provides logistics support for construction including site design and permitting. This program provides funding for all infrastructure up to the charging station, utility costs, and infrastructure on the customer side up to the charging station. The SCE CRT program started in 2019 and was envisioned to last five years, until 2024. Information about the extension of this program past 2024 is not currently available.

Charging infrastructure is split into utility side (transformer, meter, etc.) infrastructure, and consumer side (control panel, charging stations, etc.) infrastructure. Consumer side construction of charging infrastructure can be done through SCE or managed in-house, whereas utility side infrastructure is always constructed by SCE. Charger connections (dispensers) must be deployed on a 1:1 ratio with EVs using chargers approved by SCE and they will require a purchase commitment of any future vehicles if the infrastructure is set up ahead of time. The graphic below shows the proces Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Figure 23: SCE Charge Ready Program Flow Chart, Source: SCE The SCE-Built Option (Figure 24) provides all the modifications from the utility side and the customer side (behind the meter), supplying all the needed grid upgrades and connections so that the customer only has to purchase the chargers and connect them. Additionally, the CRT program provides up to 50% rebates for the purchased chargers if they are on the pre-approved list of vendors from SCE. However, this option requires that the agency provide easements or entrance rights so that SCE can have direct and unrestrictive access to the property. The easement will be requir obligation to the CRT Program and could potentially be quit-claimed back to the owner after the term of the program expires. Such entrance rights may represent a risk from a legal standpoint to certain clients.

Furthermore, another risk is the limited options of approved charger vendors on the SCE list and may limit the configuration options and final design of the yard if using this approach.

Of significant importance and limitation, this approach is restrictive to adding additional distributed energy resource (DER) connections, such as a connection to on-site generators, solar photovoltaic, or battery (energy storage) systems to the SCE meter and switchgear. There are currently no exceptions to this in the SCE-Built option.

Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Figure 24: SCE-Built Infrastructure option for the CRT program, Source: SCE In the Customer-Built Option (Figure 25), SCE covers the infrastructure on the utility side, but the customer is responsible for all the behind the meter infrastructure. While the CRT program offers a reimbursement of the cost of up to 80%, the actual cost of the rebate is up to SCE to determine. While this option will actually allow for the installation of DER supplemental equipment, it will not be covered by the CRT program and will require separate trenching and conduit. The same equipment vendor limitations apply for the Customer-Built Option as described above.

Figure 25: Customer-Built option for the CRT program, Source: SCE The general customer requirements of the CRT program are:

Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ • Lease or purchase at least two medium or heavy-duty battery powered EVs or convert at least two fossil-fuel vehicles to electric.
• Select, purchase, and install SCE-approved charging equipment in the quantity approved by SCE.
• Keep the charging equipment operational for at least ten years. • Provide data related to charging equipment usage for a minimum of five years. • Grant easement(s) depending on the built option, as described above.

As part of the program, SCE will:
• Perform on-site visits to evaluate site’s electrical infr • Develop utility-side and customer-side of the meter cost estimates. • Design, secure permit, project manage and install the necessary infrastructure depending on the selected built option.
• Install a separate meter dedicated to the EV charging infrastructure and waive customer demand charges through 2024 with commercial EV rates.
• Make final inspections once the charging equipment is installed.

For potential future applications where TOT wishes to integrate any additional system to their charging infrastructure, the Customer-Built Option would need to be used, in which TOT assumes responsibility for all modifications on the customer-side and then a reimbursement request is submitted to SCE where up to 80% could be paid back. It is important to note that the 80% rebate is a maximum rebate and the cost is determined by SCE based on their own costs to install the applicable infrastructure and equipment, not 80% of TOT’scost for installing the work.

Taken together, TOT will need to decide how to finance, construct and implement the charging infrastructure at its facility, acknowledging that while the SCE CRT program is potential beneficial, it does come with drawbacks and constraints. The Customer-Built approach would be the only way to utilize the CRT program if TOT intends to provide a generator connection and/or a BESS connection to the charging infrastructure.

7.4 COMMUNICATION INFRASTRUCTURE
Infrastructure for data communications within the charging system will include IP Ethernet wiring between each charger and its associated dispensers, as well as between each charger and a local data switch. The actual wiring will be conventional Cat 6 Ethernet cable between devices or fiber, which would require a telecom cabinet. As the maximum length allowed for ethernet is 328 feet, the dispensers cannot be too far from their respective charger. Although longer distances are possible with fiberoptic cable, the DC power cables that need to run parallel with the ethernet cables begin to have problems with voltage drop at this distance, so 328 feet is a recommended limit.

Once the ethernet lines from each charger are routed b
contained within TOT’slocal network and managed directly by the agency. Alternately, the data can be routed to a cloud-based system—as needed to provide smart charging and data aggregation—that is managed by a third party and/or is provided by the charger manufacturer. However, this would likely require coordination and approval of security and access, as it would necessitate outside entities Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ operating within TOT’slocal network. Additionally, is recommended for TOT to implement a Wi-Fi network in the yard for smart charging communication to buses while any other communication upgrade is occurring or as an alternative to traditional communications systems.

7.5 FIRE PROTECTION CONSIDERATIONS
With the implementation of BEBs, fire protection and life-safety concerns can be significant. However, due to the relatively new advent of these associated technologies, building and fire protection codes have not specifically addressed most of these concerns. National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 855 ‘Standard for the Installation of Stationary Energ
potentially be applied to BEB storage, but this particular standard is excessive relative to the capacity of the batteries onboard buses and considering all of TOT’s buses are stored outside. T enhanced fire protection systems has not been determined as a baseline requirement for BEB implementation and would be left up to the discretion of the local fire marshal and the local building officials. The need for additional fire lanes or fire
need to be discussed with the local fire department but is unlikely considering the size of the fleet stored onsite and the relatively open nature of the site with drive aisles between all of the bus parking. Similar precautions should be followed for hydrogen-powered vehicles.

Since TOT’s buses would all be charged under th e existing photovoltaic solar canopies, an NFPA 13 compliant automatic sprinkler system could be required
defined by the California Fire Code.

Furthermore, all modifications to the facility should be reviewed with the local Authorities Having Jurisdiction (AHJs), in particular the fire marshal. Fire truck access to the site and hydrant access will need to be reviewed and approved by the pertinent AHJs prior to implementation of any additional infrastructure for charging equipment or solar canopies. However, since the site is designed for bus movements, fire truck access is relatively straightforward and should be accommodated without significant changes to the facility.

In summary, no fire protection systems are required for minimal BEB implementation but considerations for covered canopies could trigger additional fire protection system upgrades to the facilities.

7.6 FALL PROTECTION AND SAFETY INFRASTRUCTURE

CONSIDERATIONS
Fall protection systems are recommended for any vehicle maintenance and inspection shop. Additional fall protection systems should be considered to safely access the rooftop of buses for potential battery inspection and maintenance. Note that not all BEB manufacturer’s locathe roof of the vehicle. If considerable rooftop access is necessary in the future, the agency should consider additional fall protection systems in the shop.

Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

7.7 BACK-UP PLANNING
Transit agencies need to consider the portion of service (and thus of their ZEB fleet) that will be deployed or operated during grid-outage conditions. Ensuring that vehicles can charge during schedule or unscheduled shutdowns is essential not only to maintain transit service but enable charging for vehicles used during potential emergency evacuation situations.

For the purposes of the site planning and cost estimating, Stantec assumed back-up power will be provided via a temporary, mobile diesel fired generator while a potential 1 MW battery electric storage system (BESS) and solar PV is installed. See Figure 26 for example generator installation.

Figure 26: Backup mobile diesel generator at LA Metro Division 13 facility If TOT wishes to operate during a prolonged emergency or outage, the size of generator will stay the same, but the required quantity of fuel will scale linearly. The total amount of fuel required to be stored onsite or through routine deliveries will depend on the anticipated duration of the utility electrical outage and the amount of time required to get a fuel delivery of diesel fuel, as well as on environmental regulations and local policies.

Adequate space is available on-site for either a new permanent generator or accommodations for a mobile generator with load bank connection. The generator is placed relatively close to its respective distribution panel. The location was determined to attempt to minimize the reduction of parking and minimize disruption to the site. The proposed generator location would be adjacent to the new switchgear indicated in Figure 22. If permanent generators are installed, bollards should be installed surrounding the entire electrical equipment yard, but if a mobile generator is chosen as the preferred method of backup power, then the protective elements should be removable or installed in a manner to allow a mobile generator to be parked near the load bank cabinet to minimize the connection cable distance.

A permanent generator on-site will require an additional permit by the air quality management district (AQMD) and will have annual limitations on the durations it is allowed to run. However, a temporary mobile generator that has been certified by the CARB would not require a permit by the AQMD but will have further restrictions on when they can be used such as actual or imminent blackouts. Under any Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ scenario TOT should consider close coordination with both the AQMD and CARB in part of any plan to install a generator at the facility.

While diesel-fired generators will provide emergency back-up power, the property’s photovoltaics (PV) system can provide a significant amount of resiliency to TOT’s ability to powe.

With the adoption of a BEB fleet, TOT plans to harvest solar PV energy and store this energy in stationary batteries (BESS). This will be used to charge a portion of the fleet with energy that does not come ‘from the grid’. TOT will use his strategy to diminish some of the costs associated with charging, particularly during peak time-of-use periods and has already secured grant funding Nevertheless, solar arrays and stationary batteries have limitations. The power generated with solar PV arrays will likely account for a small portion of the energy requirements of a BEB fleet, and in the case of stationary batteries, once they have been used to charge a BEB, they need to be recharged, which typically takes several hours. In the event of an emergency, relying solely on solar energy is impractical.

As such, deploying complementary fossil fuel-powered generators is necessary to generate the power required to charge a BEB fleet.

Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

8.0 FINANCIAL EVALUATION AND IMPACTS
The financial evaluation for TOT’s ZEB rollout plan consisted of the mod continued use of fossil fuel vehicles or ‘business -as-usual’) and a scenario to transition the fleet to 100% BE vehicles.

For the purposes of financial modeling, it is important to understand the inherent limitations of the modeling since it is largely based on assumptions around cost inputs, service levels, operations, asset life cycles, and other factors that are difficult to predict so far into the future. Nonetheless, the financial modeling helps provide a comparative analysis of the cost and effort required to transition to a BE fleet (compared to business-as-usual) and can help provide an indication of budget and funding requirements for capital and operating costs. Note that the categories modeled here are focused on the impacts of a change in propulsion type—they do not account for service delivery costs (such as driver salaries) as these costs would be largely comparable in all scenarios.

The main assumptions for the cost modeling are:
• Financial modeling was completed in real 2023 dollars (2023$) • A 3% inflation rate where applicable
• A 7% discount rate was applied for all calculations, as per USDOT guidance • The chief sources of information to inform the financial assessment inputs were fleet and fuel data provided by TOT, Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) procurement information, as well as National Transit Database (NTD) reporting
• Annual average vehicle mileage assumptions for each vehicle type are shown in Table 12 below19:

Table 12: Annual average vehicle mileage by vehicle type Vehicle Type Annual Average Vehicle Mileage
CNG bus 47,947
CNG cutaway 12,500
Diesel cutaway 12,500
CNG van 23,108
BEB (35-ft., 450 kWh) 47,947
BE cutaway 12,500
• Average fuel efficiency assumptions are shown in Table 13. This was based on TOT existing fleet fuel data and Stantec modeling for ZEBs
19 Based on TOT fleet data.

Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Table 13: Average fuel efficiency by vehicle type
Vehicle Type Fuel Efficiency
CNG bus 3.01 miles/ CNG gallon
CNG cutaway 11.05 miles/CNG gallon
Diesel cutaway 7.76 miles/ diesel gallon
CNG van 26.58 miles/CNG gallon
BEB (35-ft., 450 kWh) 0.54 miles/kWh
BE cutaway 0.84 miles/kWh
• The ZEB Case included the operation of diesel and CNG vehicles during the transition period until fossil fuel vehicles are phased out.
• The model was completed using a consistent format for the Base Case and ZEB Case to facilitate clear comparisons between them. The modeling was developed on an annual basis from 2023 to 2040.
• The Base Case and ZEB Case account for a planned service expansion from five to six fixed routes. With the service increase, TOT will need two additional BEBs. The funding for the service and fleet expansion has been secured by TOT through CMAQ. Therefore, the two additional BEBs that will be added to the fleet are included in both the Base Case as well as the ZEB Case.

More details about the assumptions and inputs can be found in Appendix B: Financial Modeling Inputs and Assumptions. The inputs for the infrastructure modificationestimator, JYI, can be found in Appendix C: Cost Estimates.

8.1 BASE CASE APPROACH
Stantec developed the forecast for the Base Case (business-as-usual) scenario, assuming that the existing fossil fuel fleet is maintained and renewed through 2040. This model is inclusive of all scheduled fleet replacements during the 2040 project horizon. The purpose of the Base Case is for illustrative purposes to determine the comparative financial impacts of a ZEB rollout since it wouldn’t be i compliance with the ICT regulation from CARB.

Capital expenses modeled consist of fleet acquisition based on fleet replacement data provided by TOT.

Vehicle maintenance costs were also derived from information provided by TOT and costs were developed as a cost per mile expense. Similarly, fuel costs are based on data provided by TOT and forecasted based on US Energy Information Agency (EIA) trends for the respective energy types.

8.2 ZEB CASE (BE FLEET) APPROACH
The ZEB Case foresees a gradual transition to 100% ZEB operations by 2040. The transition follows the fleet replacement schedule presented in Table 14 based on these assumptions, the fleet would be 100% ZE by 2030.

Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Table 14: Proposed Fleet Purchase Schedule – BE Fleet
FLEET

FORECAST
202320242025202620272028202920302031203220332034203520362037203820392040 Total fleet
size 17 19 21 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 Total ZEVs 0 11 15 17 17 19 19 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 Fleet % ZEV 0% 58
%
71 %
74 %
74 %
83 %
83 %
100
%
100
%
100
%
100
%
100
%
100
%
100
%
100
%
100
%
100
%
100
%
Total ZEV
purchases 0 11 4 2 0 2 0 10 2 4 0 0 5 10 2 2 0 2
% ZEV
purchases NA 100%
100
%
100
%
NA 100
%
NA 100
%
100
%
100
%
NA NA 100
%
100
%
100
%
100
%
NA 100
%
The fleet phasing plan includes only vehicles that are owned by TOT. In addition, it assumes that TOT will begin procuring BE vehicles in 2024 and will not purchase any more diesel or CNG vehicles to achieve a full ZEB transition by 2030. The assumed life cycles are as follows:
• CNG bus: 12 years
• CNG cutaway: 5 years
• Diesel cutaway: 7 years
• CNG van: 4 years
• BEB: 12 years
• BE cutaway: 7 years
Modeled capital expenses consist of fleet acquisition information from TOT and market information for ZEBs. Battery replacements and midlife refurbishments are not included because they were assumed to be covered by the vehicle extended warranty.

Vehicle maintenance costs for BE vehicles were generated based on TOT’s current costs for ifossil fuel fleet and Stantec’s understanding of potential savings . Electricity costs were calculated based on SCE’s TOU EV-9 summer on-peak rate.
20 Infrastructure costs for the ZEB Case are related to facility modifications such as preparing the site for chargers, utility upgrades, and installing chargers. The MCT chargers have been accounted for in the charging profile but were excluded in the cost estimation and financial assessment. The related infrastructure is detailed in Section 7.0 and the main infrastructure components were categorized as follows:
20 https://www.sce.com/sites/default/files/inline-files/TOU-EV-7_8_9_Rate_Fact_Sheet_WCAG.pdf Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Year Cost
(in 2023$) Item Description
2024/2025 $ 2,405,809 General sitework, main switchgear, 8 single dispenser chargers, 4 dual dispenser chargers with escalation
2026 $ 305,152 2 dual dispenser chargers, escalation
2030 $ 2,176,504 4 single dispenser chargers, emergency power, 1 MW battery system, escalation 2035 $ 823,910 4 single dispenser chargers, 3 level 2 chargers, escalation Total $ 5,711,376

8.3 COMPARISON AND OUTCOMES
The cost comparison between the fossil fuel Base Case and the ZEB Case transition scenario is presented in Table 15 and Figure 27, incorporating both capital (orange) and operating (blue) expenses.

The ZEB Case has a total cumulative cost of $40,591,000 versus $22,881,000 for the Base Case, a difference of $17,710,000 or a 77% increase. While the higher increase comes due to capital cost of fleet acquisition ($15.6 million more than the base case) and infrastructure ($4.8 million), over a 17-year timeframe the electric fleet is expected to save close to $2.7 million in operational expenses (fuel and maintenance). The financial assessment does not consider any rebates, grants, credits, or other alternative funding mechanisms. Therefore, there may be several opportunities to offset the difference in the price between the two scenarios. Potential funding sources are discussed in Section 12.0. The assessment also does not consider operational costs (i.e., bus operators, service levels, etc.) that would be the same in both scenarios—the assessment is focused on relative differences between the two scenarios and the elements that would be most impacted by a change in propulsion technology.

Table 15: Cost Comparison 2023-2040, ZEB Case
Base Case ZEB Case Cost difference
(ZEB - Base)21
Fleet Acquisition $7,207,000 $22,873,000 $15,666,000
Fleet Maintenance $10,027,000 $9,997,000 $(30,000)
Fuel/Electricity $5,647,000 $2,957,000 $(2,690,000)
Infrastructure $- $4,764,000 $4,764,000
Total $22,881,000 $40,591,000 $17,710,000
21 Negative values represent savings.

Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Figure 27: Breakdown of Cost Categories for the Base Case and ZEB Case Scenarios The procurement of BE vehicles represents $15.7 million more in expenses due to the higher purchase price of BE vehicles compared to fossil fuel vehicles. The conversion and upgrades to the facility to install charging infrastructure represents another added cost of $8.4 million22.

The simplicity of ZEB propulsion systems means that maintenance costs can be lower for BE vehicle technology compared to diesel engine components in the Base Case. This can also translate to lower maintenance cost for the ZE fleet, a savings of $30,000 over the life of the project compared to the Base Case, but will ultimately depend on cost savings passed on from the O&M contractor.

Lastly, the use of electricity as fuel represents an economic benefit of $2.7 million over the life of the project when compared to the existing diesel and gasoline refueling. These savings are a direct reflection of the improved efficiency that BE vehicles have with respect to legacy technologies, with the added benefit of eliminating emissions.

Figure 28 shows the year-to-year comparison between the Base Case and the Preferred ZEB Case. The higher costs for the ZEB scenario occur during the years that facility modifications are conducted (charger installation, and in particular, yard prepared work) at the yard and when a greater number of vehicles are purchased.
22 Lower value than cost proposal of $10.42M given discount rate and inflation. Meaning, we need $10.42M now to cover the future cost of $8.4M over the implementation time. $7,207,000
$22,873,000
$0
$10,027,000
$9,997,000
$5,647,000
$2,957,000
$0
$4,764,000
$0
$5,000,000
$10,000,000
$15,000,000
$20,000,000
$25,000,000
$30,000,000
$35,000,000
$40,000,000
$45,000,000
Base Case ZEB Case
Breakdown of Total Costs
Fleet Acquisition Fleet Refurbishment/Battery Replacement Fleet Maintenance Fuel/Electricity
Infrastructure
Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Figure 28: Annual Total Cost Comparison, ZEB Case

9.0 OPERATIONAL AND PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
This section provides guidance and strategies for various operational and planning requirements when implementing BEBs.

9.1 PLANNING, SCHEDULING, AND RUNCUTTING
According to the phasing schedule, the first ZEBs will be introduced in 2024, but construction and deployment of chargers will need to be occur prior to that, preferably at least 6 months ahead of the acquisition.

Key considerations for BEB planning and scheduling include the fact that the useable energy of the battery is 80% of the nameplate capacity. In other words, while TOT may purchase buses that have a 435-kWh battery, for instance, it should plan for 80% of that capacity or ~348 kWh. Together with the modeling conducted by the Stantec team in this study, this will help guide the deployment and charging parameters for BEBs in TOT’s operations scheduling.

Developing a guide like the depot planning tool from Siemens below (Figure 29) that tracks the requirements for SOC, energy (kWh), estimated and planned mileages, and fuel economy (kWh per mile) will be important for planning and dispatching.
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
$-
$2
$4
$6
$8
$10
$12
ZEBs in Fleet (%)
Annual Cost (2022$, millions)
Annual Cost Comparison 2024-2040
Base ZEB ZEB Adoption
Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Figure 29: Depot Planning Tool to Understand Scheduling and Operations of BEBs (Source: Siemens)
Non-revenue tests during vehicle commissioning should be conducted in different parts of TOT’sservice area to establish actual range and fuel economy on longer routes, routes with topography variations, and with simulated passenger loads and HVAC testing. Regarding HVAC testing, it is important to keep in mind that energy consumption varies with seasonality.

Training for the scheduling and planning team will be needed to understand the importance of scheduling BEBs to the correct blocks. Training will also likely be needed in collaboration with TOT’s scheduling software provider to account for hybrid deployments of BEB and fossil fuel buses, and finally an entirely-BEB operation.

In the long term, it is also important to consider battery capacity degradation; most BEB battery warranties specify that expected end of life capacity is 70% to 80% of the original capacity over six to twelve years23. With an estimated 2% battery degradation per year, TOT will also need to rotate buses so that older buses are assigned shorter blocks, while newer BEBs are assigned the longest blocks.

Transit agencies can improve battery outcomes through efforts like avoiding full charging and discharging events, avoiding extreme temperature exposure, and performing regular maintenance on auxiliary systems that consume energy.

Developing specific performance measures, goals, and objectives for BEB deployment can also help to track BEB progress and understand if adjustments to the BEB deployment strategy will be required.

9.2 OPERATOR NEEDS
As BEBs have different components and controls than conventional buses, BEB bus performance also differs. Operators should understand how to maximize BEB efficiency—such as mastering regenerative braking and handling during slick conditions—and have hands-on experience prior to ZEB deployment for revenue service. Operations staff should also be briefed on expected range and limitations of BEBs 23 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 2020. Guidebook for Deploying Zero-Emission Transit Buses.

Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/25842.

Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (such as variability in energy consumption from HVAC under different weather conditions) as well as expected recharging times and procedures.

BEB operators should be able to understand battery SOC, remaining operating time, estimated range, and other system notifications as well as become familiar with the dashboard controls and warning signals. In addition, operators should be familiar with the correct procedures when a warning signal appears.

It is well known that driving habits have a significant effect on BEB energy consumption and overall performance and range (i.e., fuel economy can vary significant between operators). Training is required to assure that operators are knowledgeable on the principles of regenerative braking, mechanical braking, hill holding, and roll back. Operators should also be trained on optimal driving habits including recommended levels of acceleration and deceleration that will maximize fuel efficiency. Another option is to implement a positive incentive program that encourages operators to practice optimal driving habits for BEBs; this can be accomplished through rewards like priority parking in the employee lot, certificates, or other incentives. The Antelope Valley Transit Authority in Lancaster, California, an early adopter of BEBs, has a program of friendly competition between operators, where, for instance, an operator with the best average monthly fuel economy (the lowest kWh per mile) receives one month of a preferred parking spot in the employee lot.

Finally, BEBs are much quieter than conventional fuel buses. Operators need to be aware of this and that pedestrians or people around the bus may not be aware of its presence. Agencies have also stated that due to the vehicle’s lack of noise, some operatorparking so operator training needs to address this as well.

9.3 MAINTENANCE NEEDS
Early data suggests that ZEBs may require less preventative maintenance than their counterparts with combustion engines since they have fewer moving parts; however, not enough data currently exists to provide detailed insights into long-term maintenance practices for large-scale ZEB deployment in North America, particularly for cutaways and vans. One early finding is that spare parts may not be readily available, so one maintenance consideration is to coordinate with OEMs and component manufacturers to develop spare parts inventories and understand lead times for spare parts. It will also be important for TOT to coordinate spare parts procurement needed for ongoing BEB maintenance sooner rather than later so maintenance can be completed without interruption.

In terms of preventative maintenance, BEB propulsion systems are more efficient than internal combustion engines and thus can result in less wear and tear. Without the diesel engine and exhaust, there are 30% fewer mechanical parts on a BEB. BEBs also do not require oil changes and the use of regenerative braking can help to extend the useful life of brake pads. Early studies from King County Metro show that the highest percentage of maintenance costs for BEBs came from the cab, body, and accessories system. It is recommended that TOT require OEMs to provide a list of activities, preventative maintenance time intervals, skills needed, and required parts needed to complete each preventative maintenance task for BEBs.

Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Many current BEBs also contain on-board communication systems, which are helpful in providing detailed bus performance data and report error messages, which can assist maintenance personnel in quickly identifying and diagnosing maintenance issues.

9.4 CHARGING NEEDS
BEB recharging is substantially different than fueling a CNG or fossil fuel bus. As part of the recommendations, plug-in chargers (150 kW or 60 kW, depending on the vehicle type) are proposed for BEB charging at the main operations and maintenance facility. Once BEBs return to the yard and are parked, a service line technician would plug in the dispenser to recharge the bus. Smart charging software, described in Section 10.1 would monitor and control overall charging levels to balance energy needs with overall power demand, in essence helping ensure that BEBs are charged but that this charging is spread out to avoid large surges in power demand.

Figure 30: A BEB plugged into a charger in Charleston, SC.

Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Figure 31: A BEB Passenger Van Plugged into a Charger.

At the transit center, to enable the long service blocks of TOT’s service, on -route pantograph chargers with outputs of 350 kW would be used to top-up a BEB to extend its operating range. According to the modeling, not every route or block requires on-route charging. Furthermore, not every trip would require a top-up. Refinement of vehicle scheduling and on-route charging will need scrutiny to ensure that vehicles are recharged appropriately and that pantographs that charging should be scheduled to minimize any operational impacts to bus service, as well as continue the facilitation of passenger transfers between vehicles/routes.

Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Figure 32: A BEB recharging during a layover in Los Angeles, CA.

Regarding charger maintenance, research suggests that depot charging stations require minimal maintenance. Depot charging stations that are modular in design allow malfunctioning components to be replaced without disruption to the entire charging system.

At the transit center, safety precautions for working at heights will be necessary to service pantograph charging dispensers. A malfunction of the pantograph is a significant risk to service if a BEB cannot charge; the recommendations in this plan include a contingency charger at each transit center to help mitigate some of that risk.

9.5 O&M CONTRACTOR PROCUREMENT GUIDANCE
Like many smaller transit agencies throughout the country, TOT’s bus operation maintenance are handled by a third-party contractor. The operations and maintenance (O&M) contractor provides an all-inclusive billing rate for operations based on scheduled vehicle hours, with a fixed monthly fee for a set contract term, with option rates for additional terms.

Based on this service delivery model, one of the chief factors that could result in cost savings from a ZEB transition is maintenance and the savings would in theory flow to the O&M contractor. As a small agency, TOT’s O&M contractor provides a lean staff, so savings o Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ negligible. Nonetheless, Stantec recommends that in future procurement documents, TOT stipulates language for conditions to revisit the contracted rate once a certain portion of the fleet is transitioned to ZEBs to ensure than any cost savings realized by the O&M contractor is passed on to TOT. Example language from a recent procurement document drafted by Stantec is shown below:

The Contractor acknowledges that, as of the Commence
Buses listed in Appendix E to the SOP and includes [XX] Electric Buses. The Contractor further acknowledges that the City intends to increase the number of Electric Buses available for Service and the Contractor shall cooperate fully with the City in the transition from CNG to Electric Buses, in accordance with the terms of this Contract and the SOP. …
The Contractor shall support the City during the transition from a fossil fuel fleet to a zero-emission fleet. If the City transitions greater than 35 percent (35%) of the fleet to zero-emission buses, the City may request the Contractor to review the Hourly (or per Mile) Rate to identify reductions associated with zero-emission bus maintenance programs and requirements. Within thirty (30) days of receipt of the request from the City, the Contractor shall submit a proposal setting out the proposed new Hourly (or per Mile) Rate.

Stantec highly encourages TOT to ensure that when it goes out to procurement when the current contract ends, that protections are built in such that any cost benefits the O&M contractor accrues due to ZEB operations is passed along to the City.

9.6 VEHICLE PROCUREMENT GUIDANCE
Currently, TOT operates a fleet of heavy-duty transit buses (35-ft), cutaways and smaller vans, and this same fleet composition will be carried over through the ZEB transition. Current BEB options for these vehicle types are limited, and by extension, procurement options are more limited as well.

For 30-ft to 35-ft heavy-duty transit bus options, Gillig manufactures a 30-ft and 35-ft model equipped with a 444-kWh battery. Other well-known OEMs such as New Flyer and Proterra produce vehicles in 35-ft configuration with 490-525 kWh batteries. Finally, BYD, El Dorado National, and GreenPower also produce BEBs in 35-ft configuration with a variety of battery sizes. Table 16 below provides an overview of some 30-35-ft BEBs. The New Flyer and Proterra vehicles are on t Services master contract for vehicles that TOT can purchase from without having to develop specs or go out for bid.

For heavy-duty buses, TOT should specify two rear-mounted charging ports accepting a minimum charging rate of 60 kW (200 ADC) at 480 VDC or greater via SAE J1772 to maximize flexibility when parking and charging the vehicles, as well as SAE J3105-compliant charge bars on the roof of the buses to enable fast overhead pantograph charging.

Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Table 16: Summary of Heavy-Duty Vehicle Options
Make and
model
Battery
size
(kWh)
Notes Example Vehicle Photos
BYD
K7M-ER
K8M
266
352
Eligible for $120,000 HVIP
voucher.

Supports DC and AC
charging, and on-route
charging
Available in 30-ft and 35-ft
Gillig Low
Floor BEB
444 Eligible for $120,000 HVIP
voucher.

Available in 30-ft and 35-ft
Arboc
Specialty
Vehicles
Equess
CHARGE
350
(30-ft)
437
(35-ft)
Available in 30-ft and 35-ft
models
Plug-in capabilities only
El Dorado
(ENC)
Axess EVOBE
492
(32-ft)
738
(35-ft)
Available in 32-ft and 35-ft
models
Enabled for on-route
charging
New Flyer
Xcelsior

CHARGE NG
435 Eligible for $120,000 HVIP
voucher.

Available in 35-ft
Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Make and
model
Battery
size
(kWh)
Notes Example Vehicle Photos
Enabled for on-route
charging
Proterra ZX5 492 Eligible for $120,000 HVIP
voucher.

Available in 35-ft
Optional on-route charging
capability
There is a clear and growing need for more ZE cutaway alternatives with larger batteries and longer ranges from agencies that operate in rural settings and demand-response services, like TOT. Currently, two BE cutaways are on the market but neither have been Altoona-tested. Our modeling assumed that Altoona testing will be completed prior to any TOT procurements. A key assumption is that battery capacity will improve enough to meet the needs of TOT’s service. This assumption is growing number of ZE cutaways on the market in the past few years, improved efficiencies in batteries and fuel efficiency, and market response to a growing demand for cutaways with larger batteries and longer ranges. To provide TOT with guidance when the time comes to procure the first BE cutaway, this section discusses currently available options that come the closest to this goal.

The Lightning Systems E450 Shuttle Bus has a 129-kWh battery with a range of up to 120 miles. The vehicle is eligible for a $60,000 incentive per vehicle under the Truck and Bus Voucher Incentive Program (HVIP) 24. Another cutaway available for a $60,000 HVIP voucher is the GreenPower EV Star+ with a battery size of 118 kWh and stated range of up to 150 miles25. Finally, the Optimal-EV S1LF is a low-floor cutaway with a 113-kWh battery and 125-mile range. The vehicle utilizes Pro system. Currently, only the GreenPower EV Star+ is listed in the CalACT/MBTA Purchasing Cooperative, but as more agencies begin to purchase BEBs, it is expected that more vehicles will be added. TOT should specify two rear-mounted charging ports accepting a minimum charging rate of 60 kW (200 ADC) at 480 VDC or greater via SAE J1772 to maximize flexibility when parking and charging the vehicles.

In addition to cutaways, TOT may wish to explore passenger vans, such as the Ford eTransit van, which is not a cutaway, but can be outfitted to accommodate six ambulatory passengers with one wheelchair position, four ambulatory passengers with two wheelchair positions, or three ambulatory passengers with three wheelchair positions. There is also the GreenPower EV Star passenger van, which can seat up to 19 ambulatory passengers or nine ambulatory passengers with two wheelchair positions. 24 https://californiahvip.org/vehicles/lightning-systems-lev110e-bus-ford-e-450-with-lightning-powertrain/ 25 https://californiahvip.org/vehicles/greenpower-ev-star-plus/ Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Some example vehicles are summarized Table 17, and these are only illustrative examples. TOT should develop a competitive tendering process for its fleet procurement and use programs like the CalACT/MBTA Purchasing Cooperative to streamline procurement. TOT should also leverage A Standard Bus Procurement Request for Proposal which contains language about charger specifications, data logging and telematics, and other information that would be useful to include for vehicle and charger procurements26.

Table 17: Summary of Medium-Duty Vehicle Options
Vehicle
type
ZEB
type
Make and
model
Battery
size
(kWh)
Range
(miles)
Notes Example Vehicle Photos
Cutaway
BE Lightning
Systems E450
Shuttle Bus
129 120 Eligible for $60,000
HVIP voucher.

Supports both Level 2
and DC fast chargers.

BE GreenPower
EV Star+
118 150 Eligible for $60,000
HVIP voucher.

Supports both Level 2
and DC fast chargers.

BE Optimal-EV
S1LF
113 125 Low-floor vehicle with
ADA-compliant entry
ramp.

Uses Proterra battery
management systems.

Supports both Level 2
and DC fast chargers.
26 https://www.apta.com/research-technical-resources/standards/procurement/apta-bts-bpg-gl-001-13/ Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Vehicle
type
ZEB
type
Make and
model
Battery
size
(kWh)
Range
(miles)
Notes Example Vehicle Photos
Passenger
Van
BE Lightning
Systems
Electric Zero
Emission
Transit
Passenger Van
80-120 140-
170
Eligible for $45,000
HVIP voucher.

Low-floor vehicle and
CARB certified
Uses Proterra battery
management systems.

Supports both Level 2
and DC fast chargers.

Passenger
Van
BE
GreenPower
EV Star Battery
Electric Bus
118 150
Eligible for $60,000
HVIP voucher.

Supports both Level 2
and DC fast chargers.

9.7 BATTERY DEGRADATION
Battery degradation is unavoidable due to battery use and charging/recharging cycles. The magnitude and rate of degradation can be controlled by the user to some extent.

Following the recommendations of the manufacturer becomes especially important to preserve the battery life. This includes charging the battery to a maximum of 90% SOC and not allowing the battery to dip below 10% SOC. Furthermore, avoiding fast charging (below 300 kW) can help extend the lifespan of the batteries.

Nevertheless, natural battery degradation will always occur, and vehicle manufacturers are offering extended warranties in their purchase agreements to account for battery degradation of 20% of its nameplate capacity. Battery replacements for cutaways are also assumed to be available but might not be necessary to go beyond the warranty given the short utilization cycle that cutaways will have at TOT.

Actual experience may differ, and TOT will need to work with its vendors to understand warranty terms.

For the heavy-duty buses which are in service for longer lifetimes, we assume that at least on battery replacement near the midlife would be needed, and as such, TOT should purchase an extended warranty to cover such a replacement. Any further battery replacements would be out-of-warranty expenses.

Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

10.0 TECHNOLOGY
Technology for ZEBs will help TOT manage the fleet and its investment into zero-emission propulsion.

First, for BEBs, charge management or smart charging technology is imperative to manage electrical demand and to curb potentially costly demand charges and to mitigate maximum power requirements of bus charging. Second, fleet tracking software, also known as telematics, typically provided by an OEM will help track useful analytics related to the fleet and operations to help TOT make informed decisions.

10.1 SMART CHARGING
To optimize BEB charging by minimizing charging during peak times of the day and to restrain the total power demand required for a BEB fleet, transit agencies deploy smart charging. Smart charging refers to software, artificial intelligence, and switching processes that control when and how much charging occurs, based on factors such as time of day, number of connected BEBs, and SOC of each BEB. This requires chargers that are capable of being controlled as well as a software platform that can effectively aggregate and manage these chargers. A best practice is to select chargers where the manufacturers are participants in the Open Charge Point Protocol (OCPP), a consortium of over 50 members focused on bringing standardization to the communications of chargers with their network platform.

A simple example of smart charging is if buses A, B and C return to the bus yard and all have an SOC of about 25%, all have 440 kWh battery packs, and all are plugged in in the order they arrived (A, B, C, though within a few minutes of each other). Without smart charging, they would typically get charged sequentially based on arrival time or based on SOC, with A getting charged first in about 2.2 hours, then B would be charged after 4.4 hours, and C about 6.6 hours. But if bus C is scheduled for dispatch after three hours, it would not be adequately charged. Furthermore, while vehicles can potentially charge all at once, such strategy is not recommended since once SCE starts charging for power demand utilization, a high price tag can be passed to TOT.

But by implementing smart charging, the system would ‘’ that bus C is to be dispa therefore would get the priority, charging first in 2.

Another implementation is to mitigate energy demand when possible. For example, if two buses are each connected to their own 150 kW charger and they both need 300 kWh of energy and if the buses do not need to be dispatched for five hours, the system will only charge one bus at a time, thus generating a demand of only 150 kW, while still fully charging both buses in four hours. However, if both buses need to be deployed in two hours, the system will charge both simultaneously as needed to make rollout. A smart charging system would help optimize costs by also avoiding or minimizing charging during the most expensive times of day and help curb potential demand charges.

Well-planned and coordinated smart charging can significantly reduce the electric utility demand by timing when and how much charging each bus receives. Estimations on the ideal number of chargers is critical to the successful implementation of smart charging strategies.

Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ There are several offerings in the industry for smart charging, charger management, and fleet management from companies such as ViriCiti, I/O Systems, AMPLY Power, BetterFleet (previously Evenergi), and Siemens. Additionally, the charger manufacturers all have their own native charge management software and platforms. These platforms have management functionality and integration that often exceeds the abilities of the other platforms and provide data and functionality similar to that of the third-party systems, particularly in the yard when BEBs are connected to the chargers. However, the third-party platforms provide more robust data streams while the BEBs are on route, including real-time information on SOC and usage rates. These platforms can cost well over $1,000 per bus per month, depending on the number of buses, and type of package procured, in addition to set up costs.

BetterFleet’s cost is approximately $15,000 for initial set-up and systems integration, while ongoing operating costs can be approximately $20,000 per year.

Three leading charge management system (CMS) providers have been evaluated as shown in Table 18.

Information within this table was provided by the providers. This table indicates this point in time—at the time of procurement the features and criteria should be verified with the provider. Note that Viriciti was purchased by ChargePoint in 2021, the intent is to operate Viriciti separately from ChargePoint. A Buy America evaluation will be required for these providers.

Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 65 Table 18: Charge Management System Vendor Comparison (based on manufacturer's information) Item
No. Criteria Description Amply Power - OMEGA Viriciti - Agnostic Management Platform ChargePoint - CMS 1 Number of installations (facilities) with
multiple high voltage direct current chargers
utilizing the software
14 More than 300 300+
2 Quantify uptime % of cloud base service 99.99% 99.99% 99.99% 3 What networking protocols or modes are
supported, i.e., wired Ethernet, cellular, other
Hardwired ethernet is recommended, cellular and facility WIFI are supported Cellular is recommended, wired Ethernet, and WIFI are supported Cellular 4 OCPP 1.6 compatibility Yes Yes Yes
5 OCPP 2.0 compatibility Yes Yes Yes
6 List available data fields that can be reported
(such as starting and ending SoC, bus ID,
charging power, …)
SOC: start and end of charging session, SOC all the time whether bus in plugged in, parked or in the field.

Rate of charge (kW) of each charger port.

Bus ID all the time whether bus is plugged in or not.

Location of bus (in-depot, in field, etc.)
Charging session:

Energy dispensed
Duration of charging,
Power and energy consumed at electrical meter and dispensed at each charger port.

Charger health:

Available
Faulted
Maintenance needed, etc.

Reports:

Uptime, Downtime, and Offline chargers (in hours, percentage, and total for a group)
Energy Reports (in kWh and hours of duration)
Transactions:

Charger OEM, Charger Name, Connector type, Connector/port number (1 or 2)
Vehicle Name/Number
Start Time and End Time
Start SOC and End SOC
Power
Reason for ending charge session
Duration of Charging session
kWh Charged
Range at start of transaction
Range at the end of the transaction
A visual graph representation of Power, SOC, and Energy throughout each transaction
A complete list of charging transactions (equipped with the data previously stated)
A complete list of user logs and documentation of user interactions. 7 OpenADR2.0b or better common signals Yes. In addition to OpenADR, also support custom DR integrations including CPower and Leap Energy.

Yes
Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 66 Item
No. Criteria Description Amply Power - OMEGA Viriciti - Agnostic Management Platform ChargePoint - CMS 8 Support Network Time Protocol (NTP/UTC)
time synchronization
Yes Yes Yes
9 Describe software security features for
system integrity and reliability
AMPLY has implemented security procedures at multiple levels for protecting customer information:
• AMPLY databases are encrypted using industry standard AES-256 encryption
• Both the database and application are running inside a VPC which has tightly managed access using IAM
• The database is accessible only to the application nodes • No passwords are stored in the database and authentication is done using AWS Cognito
• Authorization is tightly managed as part of the lower layers of the Amply software framework
• Credentials are not stored in the database or code and are managed via the AWS systems manager
• Software packages and dependencies are regularly reviewed for security vulnerabilities
• Cloud infrastructure, roles & security groups are regularly reviewed for ensuring security
ISO 27000:2015
10 Capable of remote software upgrades Yes –automatic, over the air updates Yes –Updates happen though the Cloud Yes 11 Is user interface web based or is any local
app or software required
Web based UI accessible from any web enabled device The system operates through a cloud-based platform which can be accessed through any web browser on a computer or mobile device. Web base only.

Web based
12 Ability to set charge-power limit to reduce
energy charges while also maximizing bus
availability
Yes. Pause or curtail charging session during peak energy costs. Optimized charging during off-peak or vehicle dwell times to achieve target SOC by defined roll-out times.

Yes, this is a customizable application which allows the user to create and manipulate charging parameters as needs or schedules change.

Yes
13 Ability to set charging to minimize demand
charges while also maximizing bus availability
Demand (kW) management and reduction to achieve roll-out but will spread out charging. Sequential, dynamics and parallel charging capable (limitations are determined by EVSE not AMPLY system).

Yes, this is a customizable application which allows the user to create and manipulate charging parameters as needs or schedules change.

Yes
14 Ability to recognize bus stall and bus number
and evaluate charge needs by block and state
of charge (i.e., park management)
Yes Yes Yes
Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 67 Item
No. Criteria Description Amply Power - OMEGA Viriciti - Agnostic Management Platform ChargePoint - CMS 15 Manual override (computer/HMI input) for
selection of (bus) charging sequence
Yes. Manual override button located within UI accessible by a specific user creditable. Override can also be performed by email, phone call or ticket request.

Yes, users can manually prioritize groups of chargers or single chargers in order to meet the demand as needed.

Yes
16 Describe desktop output/reports for charge
telematics
• Energy Report - net (panel) load, modelled load (assuming no CMS), aggregate and individual charger load
• Charge Detail Records - plug-in and session start & stop times, session duration, session energy, vehicle start & end soc, vehicle ID • Health Records - % normal, faulted, offline and uptime for EVSEs, controllers, system & software components
• Vehicle Logs - Geo location and SOC information
• Charge Ready Transport - CRT formatted report for PG&E, SCE and other Utilities Fleet Ready Programs
• Uptime, Downtime, and Offline chargers (in hours, percentage, and total for a group)
• Energy Reports (in kWh and hours of duration)
• A complete list of charging transactions (equipped with the data previously stated)
• A complete list of user logs and documentation of user interactions.

No response
17 Is there a local controller to preserve the
same control functionality in case cloud
connectivity fails (e.g., WIFI outage)?
Yes, AMPLY Site Controller (ASC) installed at electrical main and is connected to breaker. CT's will meter 3- phases of power for real- time demand management. ASC can be hardwired to each EVSE via CAT6 to send OCPP directly to charger. If CMS cellular connection temporarily down, ASC has programmed commands to continue charging until cellular connection is restored.

With all communications we send to the charger, there are two signals that are sent: The set parameter and a failsafe value. If connection is disrupted for any reason or duration of time, the charger will revert to the failsafe value until connectivity is reestablished.

Yes
18 Other features criteria, or comments OMEGA supports algorithmic optimization across a wide set of use cases in addition to TOU energy management including load management, tariff-based optimization across usage, demand and subscription charges, factoring in unmanaged loads, demand response signals from OpenADR and other providers. It also offers flexible alerting and notifications for EVSE faults and other conditions.
• Provided system is built to scale. If charging needs change or if a new OEM is desired, the system is able to monitor any charging infrastructure (assuming that charger OEM is OCPP compliant) and easily exchange chargers in the system.
• Through an API, there is the ability to integrate with other planning or ITCMS platforms to optimize planning.
• Other features may include our agnostic telematics system, which is capable of monitoring any vehicle OEM and operates off the same platform as the charger monitoring infrastructure - decreasing operational complexity by reducing software applications and increasing visibility into energy usage/expenditure.

No response
Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 68 10.2 FLEET TRACKING SOFTWARE AND TELEMATICS
Software like Fleetwatch provide agencies with the ability to track vehicle mileage, work orders, fleet maintenance, consumables, and other items. However, with more complex technologies like ZEBs, it becomes crucial to monitor the status of batteries, fuel consumption, and so on of a bus in order to track its performance and understand how to improve fuel efficiency. Many OEMs offer fleet tracking software.

Tracking fuel consumption and fuel economy will start to form important key performance metrics for fleet management as well as help inform operations planning (by informing operating ranges, among other elements).

The screenshot below is an example of New Flyer’s tool Figure 33), Lightning’ dashboard (Figure 34), while other OEMs also offer similar tools (like ViriCiti) all depending on an agency’s preference.

Figure 33: Example of New Flyer Connect 360.27
27 https://www.newflyer.com/tools/new-flyer-connect/
Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 69 Figure 34: Example of Lighting eMotors daily report summary.

At a minimum, the fleet tracking software should track
traveled, hours online, etc. Tracking these key performance indicators (KPIs) can help compare a vehicle’s performance on different routes, under diffe
operators.

As TOT transitions from a fossil fuel fleet to ZEB fleet, it will be important to collect and compare data between the fleet types to understand the benefits (and costs) of the transition. Some example KPIs can include:
• ZEB vs. non-ZEB miles traveled,
• ZEB vs. non-ZEB maintenance cost per mile,
• ZEB vs. non-ZEB fuel/energy costs by month ($ per kWh vs. $ per gallon), • ZEB vs. non-ZEB fuel/energy cost per mile,
• Average fuel consumption/fuel economy per month,
• Total ZEB vs. non-ZEB fuel and maintenance costs per month, Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 70 • Mean distance between failures, and/or
• ZEB vs. non-ZEB fleet availability.

The Toronto Transit Commission is currently testing BEBs from three different OEMs and is tracking the following KPIs for its BEBs to compare with its fossil fuel buses (Figure 35). This example is to provide some insights into what TOT could be tracking as comparable KPIs between fossil fuel vehicles and ZE vehicles.

Figure 35: Example of TTC eBus KPIs.28
All BEB equipment should be connected to TOT’s current data collection softwa integrated with any existing data collection architecture. All data should be transmitted across secure VPN technology and encrypted.

Beyond the BEB itself, charger data should be collected as well, such as the percentage of battery charge status and kWh rate of charge. Furthermore, it will be important for TOT to track utility usage data from SCE to understand energy and power demand and costs. 28 https://www.ttc.ca/About_the_TTC/Commission_reports_and_information/Commission_meetings/2018/June_12/Reports/27_Green_ Bus_Technology_Plan_Update.pdf
Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 71 11.0 WORKFORCE CONSIDERATIONS
The deployment of a new propulsion technology will require new training regimes for operators and maintenance staff. This section describes some key training considerations as well as the implications of the adoption of BEBs.

11.1 IMPLICATIONS OF BEBS ON WORKFORCE
Early data suggest that BEBs may require less preventative maintenance than their diesel or CNG counterparts since they have fewer moving parts. However, BEBs are so new that there is not enough data to provide detailed insights into long-term maintenance practices for large-scale BEB deployments in North America.

Since BEBs have fewer moving components that can malfunction and require replacement, repair, and general maintenance, transit agencies could theoretically save on maintenance costs because: 1) fewer parts could break and need replacement (capital) and 2) less labor is needed to work on the vehicles (operating). The broader concern throughout the industry is related to a possible reduction in the number of maintenance staff required for a BEB fleet vs. a traditional diesel fleet. However, a reduction of staff should not be a major concern for the agency; marginal cost savings are possible but would need to be passed along from the O&M contractor to TOT. Generally, while fewer maintenance practices may be needed, such as oil and lube changes, new ones may emerge, such as checking cabling and other electric motor components. As technology continues to mature and become more sophisticated, technicians will need to be trained not only on machinery and high-voltage safety, but also on components that require computer and diagnostic skills.

Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 72 11.2 TRAINING
BEB manufacturers include basic training modules for bus operators and maintenance technicians that are typically included in the purchase price of the vehicle, with additional training modules and programs also available for purchase. It will be important for TOT leadership to work with its O&M operator and staff to understand how best to approach training for BEBs, and whether in addition to basic training from OEMs, further training is needed.

The minimum required training recommendations are as follows for operators and maintenance technicians:
• BEB Operator training (total 56 hours)
o Operator drive training (four sessions, four hours each) o Operator vehicle/system orientation (20 sessions, two hours each) • BEB Maintenance technician training (total 304 hours) o Preventative maintenance training (four sessions, eight hours each) o Electrical/electronic training (six sessions, eight hours each) o Multiplex training (four sessions, each session consisting of three eight-hour days) o HVAC training (four sessions, four hours each)
o Brake training (four sessions, four hours each)
o Energy Storage System (ESS), lithium-ion battery and energy management hardware and software training (six sessions, eight hours each)
o Electric drive/transmission training (six sessions, eight hours each) Acquiring the following tools and safety materials should be a top priority to ensure successful in-house ZEB maintenance and management.
• Operational training module
• High voltage interface box
• Virtual training module
• High voltage insulated tools
• Insulated PPE
• Electrical safety hooks
• Arc flash clothing
Table 19 below provides a framework of potential training methods and strategies to bolster TOT’s workforce development and successfully transition to a 100% ZEB fleet.

Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 73 Table 19: Potential Training Methods
Plan Description
Train-the-trainer
Small numbers of staff are trained, and subsequently train colleagues. This maintains institutional knowledge while reducing the need for external training.

Bus vendor training and fueling
vendor
OEM training provides critical, equipment-specific operations and maintenance information. Prior to implementing ZEB technology, TOT staff will work with the OEMs to ensure all employees complete necessary training.

Retraining & refresher training Entry level, intermediate, and advanced continuous learning opportunities will be offered to all agency staff.

ZEB training from other transit
agencies
TOT should leverage the experience of agencies who were early ZEB adopters, such as the ZEB University program offered by AC Transit.

TOT should also collaborate with partner transit agencies in the county to share lessons learned during ZEB transition
National Transit Institute (NTI)
training
NTI offers zero-emissions courses such as ZEB management and benchmarking and performance.

Local partnerships and
collaborations
TOT could work with local schools to showcase potential careers in bus and facilities management to students.

Professional associations
Associations such as the Zero Emission Bus Resource Alliance offer opportunities for sharing and lessons learned across transit agencies.

The priority in maintenance needs will be the issue of safety in dealing with high-voltage systems. All maintenance personnel in the garage, whether doing servicing, inspection, or repairs and those in other routines (e.g., plugging and unplugging BEBs) must be educated on the characteristics of this technology.

One essential component is the provision and mandate of additional Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) beyond that which is required by automotive garage workplace legislated standards or TOT’s policies. Examples of such apparel include high voltage insulated work gloves, flame retardant clothing, insulated safety footwear, face shields, special insulated hand tools, and grounding of apparatus that staff may be using. Also, procedures in dealing with accidents and injuries must be established with instructions and warning signs posted.

Current BEBs also contain on-board communication systems, which are helpful in providing detailed bus performance data and report error messages, which can assist maintenance personnel in quickly identifying and diagnosing maintenance issues.

In addition, agencywide orientation to familiarize the agency with the new technology should also be conducted prior to the first BEBs deployment.

Coordination with Emergency Responders
Finally, it is highly recommended that TOT coordinate with all local fire and emergency response departments. This can include reaching out to the fire marshal and other AHJs to inform these agencies about the storage, layout, componentry, safety devices, and other features of BEBs. This should reoccur every few years, but the specific frequency can be dependent on agency discretion. Important safety Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 74 precautions and warnings should be installed in the appropriate locations in the facility and more information can be found on NFPA’s website for emer gency response guides for different OEMs29.

12.0 POTENTIAL FUNDING SOURCES
As a clear cost driver for transit agencies, funding the ZE transition will require external financial aid.

Although TOT has secured a significant portion of funding for the fleet transition, the agency may want to monitor existing funding and financing opportunities. Additionally, as more transit agencies in the state and country consider ZEB transitions, new funding opportunities may occur. Below are major current programs available for ZEB transition in Table 20.
29 https://www.nfpa.org/Training-and-Events/By-topic/Alternative-Fuel-Vehicle-Safety-Training/Emergency-Response-Guides Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 75 Table 20: Grants and potential funding options for ZEB transition Type Agency Fund/Grant/Program Description Applicability & Details Federal Federal Transit
Administration (FTA)
Low or No Emission
Program (Low-No
Program) (5339(c))
Low-No provides competitive funding for the
procurement of low or no emission vehicles, including
the leasing or purchasing of vehicles and related
supporting infrastructure.

This has been an annual program under the FAST Act
since FY2016 and is a subprogram of the Section 5339
Grants for Bus and Bus Facilities.

There is a stipulation for a 20% local match.

In FY2021 the FTA awarded $180 million to 49 projects
for the Low-No program.30 In FY2021, Golden Empire
Transit District received $3 million to construct a
permanent hydrogen fueling station to support its electric bus operations.31
$1.1 billion has been announced for FY2022 projects.32
Buses and Bus
Facilities Program
(5339(a) formula,
5339(b) competitive)
Grants applicable to rehab buses, purchase new
buses, and invest and renovate related equipment and
facilities for low or no emission vehicles or facilities. A 20% local match is required.

FY2021 5339 funding totaled $409 million in grants to 70 projects in 39 states. $372 million has been announced
for FY2022 grants. 33
Grants for Rural Areas
(5311)
5311 grant funding makes federal resources available
to rural areas for transit capital, planning and operating assistance. Eligible activities include capital
investments in bus and bus-related activities such as
replacement, overhaul and rebuilding of buses.

The federal share is not to exceed 80% for capital
projects.

Typically, the MPO or another lead public agency is the direct recipient of these funds and distributes these to local transit agencies based on TIP allocation. Agencies can allocate these funds for the purchase of ZEBs.

Enhanced Mobility of
Seniors & Individuals
with Disabilities (5310)
5310 formula funding provides resources to help meet
the transportation needs of older adults and people
with disabilities. Eligible subrecipients (from the State for rural areas) include public transit operators. Eligible activities include capital investments in buses and
vans, wheelchair lifts and harnesses, and other
equipment.

For small urban and rural areas, the State is the direct recipient and distributes these funds as it wishes.

Agencies can allocate these funds for the purchase of
ZEBs.
30 https://www.transit.dot.gov/funding/grants/fiscal-year-2021-low-or-no-emission-low-no-bus-program-projects 31 https://www.transit.dot.gov/funding/grants/fiscal-year-2021-low-or-no-emission-low-no-bus-program-projects 32 https://www.transit.dot.gov/lowno#:~:text=On%20March%207%2C%202022%2C%20FTA,improve%20air%20quality%20and%20combat 33 https://www.transit.dot.gov/bus-program
Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 76 Type Agency Fund/Grant/Program Description Applicability & Details Federal Highway
Administration
(FHWA)
Congestion Mitigation
and Air Quality
Improvement Program
(CMAQ)
The CMAQ Program provides funds to states for
transportation projects designed to reduce traffic
congestion and improve air quality, particularly in areas of the country that do not attain national air quality
standards.

Projects that reduce criteria air pollutants regulated from transportation-related sources, including ZEBs.

United States
Department of
Transportation
(USDOT)
Local and Regional
Project Assistance
Program (RAISE)
Previously known as BUILD and TIGER, RAISE is a
discretionary grant program aimed to support
investment in infrastructure.

RAISE funding supports planning and capital
investments in roads, bridges, transit, rail, ports, and intermodal transportation.

A local match is required.34
In FY2022, $2.28 billion in funding was announced for
the RAISE Grant Program. 35
State
California Air
Resources Board
(CARB)
Hybrid and ZeroEmission Truck and
Bus Voucher Incentive
Program (HVIP)
Voucher program created in 2009 aimed at reducing
the purchase cost of zero-emission vehicles.

A transit agency would decide on a vehicle, contact the vendor directly, and then the vendor would apply for
the voucher.

Voucher rebates vary by vehicle type and model.36
$430 million in funding for the FY21-22 year was
announced in March 2022.37
Carl Moyer Memorial
Air Quality Standards
Attainment Program
The Carl Moyer Program provides funding to help
procure low-emission vehicles and equipment. It is
implemented as a partnership between CARB and
local air districts.

Transit buses are eligible for up to $80,000 funding.
34 https://www.transportation.gov/RAISEgrants/about
35 https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2022-04/RAISE_2022_NOFO_AMENDMENT_1.pdf 36 https://californiahvip.org/vehiclecatalog/
37 https://californiahvip.org/funding/
Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 77 Type Agency Fund/Grant/Program Description Applicability & Details Volkswagen
Environmental
Mitigation Trust
Funding
VW’s settlement provides nearly $130 million for zero - emission transit, school, and shuttle bus replacements.

Transit may be eligible for up to $65 million. Applications are open for transit agencies and are processed on a
first come, first serve basis.

Sustainable
Transportation Equity
Project (STEP)
STEP was a pilot that took a community-based
approach to overcoming barriers to clean
transportation. The future of STEP is currently being
determined by CARB and stakeholder groups through
the FY22-23 Funding Plan and Three-Year Plan for
Clean Transportation Incentives.38
There are two different grant types: Planning and
Capacity Building Grants (up to $1.75 million for multiple grantees) and Implementation Grants (up to $17.75
million for between one and three grantees).

Lead applicants must be a CBO, federally-recognized
tribe, or local government representing a public transit agency. Award amounts ranged from $184,000 to a
maximum of over $7 million.39
California
Transportation
Commission (CTC)
SB1 Local Partnership
Program (LPP)
The Local Partnership Program provides funding to
counties, cities, districts and regional transportation agencies to improve aging infrastructure, road
conditions, active transportation, transit and rail, and health and safety benefits. Funds are distributed
through competitive and formulaic components.40
To be eligible, counties, cities, districts, and regional transportation agencies must have approved fees or
taxes dedicated solely to transportation improvements.
$200 million is available annually.
41 Solutions for
Congested Corridors
Program (SCCP)
The SCCP includes programs with both formula and
competitive funds. Funding is available to projects that make specific performance improvements and are a
part of a multimodal comprehensive corridor plan
designed to reduce congestion in highly traveled
corridors by providing more transportation choices for
residents, commuters, and visitors.

Improvements to transit facilities are eligible projects.

Cycle 2 funding of $500 million covers two years
(FY2022 and FY2023).

To submit a SCCP application, the applicant needs to
know exactly what sources will be funding the project
and when the funds will be used, as well as which
project phase they will be used for. Total estimated
funding: $500,000,000 for FY22-2342
38 https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/lcti-step
39 https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/news/grant-awards-announced-new-195-million-pilot-funding-equitable-clean-transportation-options 40 https://catc.ca.gov/programs/sb1/local-partnership-program 41 https://www.vcstar.com/story/news/local/2021/10/22/group-proposing-transit-sales-tax-measure-countys-2022-ballot/5988391001/ 42 https://www.grants.ca.gov/grants/solutions-for-congested-corridors-program/ Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 78 Type Agency Fund/Grant/Program Description Applicability & Details California
Department of
Transportation
(Caltrans)
SB1 State of Good
Repair (SGR)
SGR funds are formula funds eligible for transit
maintenance, rehabs, and capital programs. Agencies
receive yearly SB1 SGR funding through their MPO,
based on population and farebox revenues.

Agencies can decide to devote its portion of SB 1 funds to ZEB transition.

Low Carbon Transit
Operations Program
(LCTOP)
The LCTOP provides capital assistance to transit
agencies in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions
and improve mobility. 5% and 10% of the annual Cap
and Trade auction proceeds fund this program.

Many agencies are already recipients of these funds and can use these funds to purchase ZEBs and related
equipment.

Transit and Intercity
Rail Capital Program
(TIRCP)
The TIRCP was created to fund capital improvements
that reduce emissions of greenhouse gases, vehicle
miles traveled, and congestion through modernization
of California’s intercity, commuter, and rail, bu s, and ferry transit systems.43
The five cycles of TIRCP funding have awarded $6.6
billion in funding to nearly 100 projects throughout
California.

State Transportation
Improvement Program
(STIP)
The STIP is a five-year plan for future allocations of
certain state transportation funds including state
highway, active transportation, intercity rail, and transit improvements. The STIP is updated biennially in evennumbered years. 44 ZEB procurement could compete for STIP funding. The
2022 STIP was adopted in March 2022 and included
$796 million in available funding. 45 Funding is
distributed via a formula for a variety of projects.

Transportation
Development Act
(Mills-Alquist-Deddeh
Act (SB 325))
The TDA law provides funding to improve existing
public transportation services and encourage regional
transportation coordination. There are two funding
Funding opportunities include transportation program
activities, pedestrian and bike facilities, community
transit services, public transportation, and bus and rail projects.
43 https://calsta.ca.gov/subject-areas/transit-intercity-rail-capital-prog 44 https://catc.ca.gov/programs/state-transportation-improvement-program 45 https://catc.ca.gov/-/media/ctc-media/documents/programs/stip/2022-stip/2022-adopted-stip-32522.pdf Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 79 Type Agency Fund/Grant/Program Description Applicability & Details sources: the Local Transportation Fund (LTF) and the
State Transit Assistance (STA) fund.46
California Energy
Commission
Clean Transportation
Program (Alternative
and Renewable Fuel
and Vehicle
Technology Program)
The California Energy Commission's Clean
Transportation Program provides funding to support
innovation and acceleration of development and
deployment of zero-emission fuel technologies.

A local match is often required.

The Clean Transportation Program provides up to $100
million annually for a variety of renewable and alternative fuel transportation projects throughout the state,
including specific projects for heavy-duty public transit buses.

In 2021, between $4 million and $6 million were
awarded to the following transit agencies to assist with zero-emission transit fleet infrastructure deployment:

Anaheim Transportation Network ($5 million), LADOT
($6 million), Sunline Transit ($5 million), and North
County Transit District ($4 million)
Department of
Housing and
Community
Development
Affordable Housing
and Sustainable
Communities Program
(AHSC)
The AHSC Program funds land use, housing, and
transportation projects to support development that
reduces GHG emissions. The program provides both
grants and loans that reduce GHG emissions and
benefit disadvantaged communities through increasing
accessibility via low-carbon transportation. $405 million in available funds was announced in 2021.47 The
maximum award amount is not to exceed $30 million
per project, with a minimum award of at least $1
million.48
Sustainable transportation infrastructure projects,
transportation-related amenities, and program costs
(including transit ridership) are eligible activities.

Agencies can use program funds for assistance in
construction or modification of infrastructure for ZEB
conversion as well as new vehicle purchases.

California Climate
Investments
Clean Mobility Options
(CMO) Voucher Pilot
Program
CMO awards up to $1 million vouchers to develop and
launch zero-emission mobility projects including the
purchase of zero-emission vehicles, infrastructure,
planning, outreach, and operations projects in lowincome and disadvantaged communities.49 Funding is limited.

In 2020, the CMO Voucher Pilot Program awarded $20
million worth of mobility project vouchers, with $18
million going to eligible under-resourced communities.

For example, the City of Chula Vista received funding to launch an on-demand community shuttle service in
northwest Chula Vista using four electric vehicles. Also, Fresno County Rural Transit Agency is on a wait list to potentially receive $36,885 in funding.
46 https://dot.ca.gov/programs/rail-and-mass-transportation/transportation-development-act 47 https://www.hcd.ca.gov/grants-funding/active-funding/ahsc/docs/final_ahsc_nofa_round_6.pdf 48 https://www.hcd.ca.gov/affordable-housing-and-sustainable-communities#:~:text=Communities%20Program%20(AHSC)- ,Affordable%20Housing%20and%20Sustainable%20Communities%20Program%20(AHSC),(%22GHG%22)%20emissions. 49 https://cleanmobilityoptions.org/about/#
Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 80 Type Agency Fund/Grant/Program Description Applicability & Details California Pollution
Control Financing
Authority (CPCFA)
Medium-Heavy-Duty
(MHD) Zero Emission
Vehicle Financing
Program
The CPCFA is developing a purchasing assistance
program for MHD ZEV fleets. This will provide financial support and technical assistance to fleet managers
deploying ZEV fleets. The program will be established
by January 1, 2023.50
CPCFA will designate high priority fleets based on
implications for climate change, pollution, environmental justice, and post-COVID economic recovery. A minimum
of 75% of financing must be directed towards fleets that directly impact or operate in underserved communities.

Local/Other
Ventura County Air
Pollution Control
District
Clean Air Fund (CAF)
The CAF provides financial support for projects that
reduce emissions of greenhouse gases and the global
warming impact of carbon emissions via mitigation. 51
Approximately $25,000 is available for project funding
each year on January 1st. Projects are reviewed and
recommended based on their ability to reduce air
pollution in Ventura County. 52
Ventura County
Regional Energy
Alliance (VCREA)
EV Ready
Communities
Challenge Grant:

Ventura County EV
Blueprint
VCREA and Community Environmental Council (CEC)
are creating a plan for electrifying transportation in
Ventura County. The second phase of funding that will
go towards EV charging installations in Ventura County
if approved. 53
Southern California
Edison (SCE)
SCE Charge Ready
Assists business and property owners with deploying
the infrastructure and equipment necessary to support
EV charging stations at their locations. This program
helps by providing financial incentives, infrastructure, and technical support to facilitate the installation and maintenance of EV charging stations.

Several programs and rebates are available, including
infrastructure installation, infrastructure upgrades, and meter distribution.54
50 https://afdc.energy.gov/laws/12858
51 http://www.vcapcd.org/pubs/Incentive-Programs/What-is-the-Clean-Air-Fund-Program.pdf 52 http://www.vcapcd.org/pubs/Incentive-Programs/What-is-the-Clean-Air-Fund-Program.pdf 53 https://www.vcenergy.org/electric-vehicle-blueprint/ 54 https://www.sce.com/evbusiness/chargeready
Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 81 Type Agency Fund/Grant/Program Description Applicability & Details Low Carbon Fuel
Standard (LCFS
credits)
LCFS credits are not necessarily funding to be applied
for; rather, they are offset credits that are traded
(through a broker) to reduce operating costs.

Once ZEBs are acquired and operating, agencies can
collect LCFS and ‘sell’ them to re
ZEBs.

Both hydrogen and electricity used as fuels are eligible for LCFS credits. Credit prices range, but average credit price between 2016 and 2019 was between $65 and
$200 per credit, with an average of $10,000 per vehicle.

Transportation
Development Credits
Although they are not funds for projects, Transportation Development Credits, also called “Toll Credits”, satisfy the federal government requirement to match federal
funds.55
Toll credits provide a credit towa
for certain expenditures with toll revenues. FHWA
oversees the toll credits within each state.56
55 https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/rail-mass-transportation/documents/f0010121-toll-credit-fact-sheet.pdf 56 https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/rail-mass-transportation/documents/f0009899-2-toll-credits-fact-sheet-a11y.pdf Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 82 One chief source of capital funding is the Low-No and Bus and Bus Facility Grant. In December 2021, the FTA released a Dear Colleague letter outlining new requirements for Low-No and Bus and Bus Facility Grant Applications. The letter details the requirement for a Zero-Emission Fleet Transition Plan in response to amendments in the statutory provisions for these programs as part of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. The FTA Zero-Emission Fleet Transition plan includes six major elements, presented in Table 21. Moving forward, to qualify for these funding opportunities, a transit agency must include a transition plan with these elements. TOT can use much of the material in the ZEB Rollout Plan to craft the Zero-Emission Fleet Transition Plan to apply for this important source of federal funding57. Furthermore, TOT should work together with MCT to craft a cohesive plan and message and TOT can contact Gold Coast Transit to learn how it successfully procured over $10 million of FTA Low-No funding.

Table 21: FTA Zero-Emission Fleet Transition Plan requirements Element Description
1: Long-Term Fleet Plan and Application
Request
Demonstrate a long-term fleet management plan with a strategy for how the applicant intends to use the current application and future acquisitions.
2: Current and Future Resources to
Meet Transition
Address the availability of current and future resources to meet costs for the transition and implementation
3: Policy and Legislative Impacts Consider policy and legislation impacting relevant technologies. 4: Facility Evaluation and Needs for
Technology Transition
Include an evaluation of existing and future facilities and their relationship to the technology transition.
5: Utility Partnership Describe the partnership of the applicant with the utility or alternative fuel provider.
6: Workforce Training and Transition
Examine the impact of the transition on the applicant’s current by identifying skill gaps, training needs, and retraining needs of the exiting workers of the applicant to operate and maintain ZEVs and related infrastructure and avoid displacement of the existing workforce.

Lastly, TOT could also explore leasing programs with OEMs. Proterra, for example, has a leasing program for batteries58 that agencies can use to help reduce the upfront expenses of ZEBs; nonetheless, TOT would still need to purchase vehicles or lease vehicles through bus vendors, as TOT’s fleet is composed of vehicles that are purchased from third-party vendors. Moreover, most agencies do not lease vehicles due to several factors, such as the availability of grant money to buy vehicles and the complexities of leasing using federal funds.
57 To view a list of winners and projects, please see https://www.transit.dot.gov/funding/grants/fy22-fta-bus-and-low-and-noemission-grant-awards 58 https://www.proterra.com/financing-ev-fleets-with-proterra-battery-leasing-program/ Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

13.0 SERVICE IN DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES
CARB defines Section F of the rollout plan as “Providi
on disadvantaged communities as identified by CalEnviroScreen, an online mapping tool developed by the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA). The tool identifies (at the census tract level) the state’s most pollution -burdened and vulnerable communities based on geographic, socioeconomic, public health, and environmental hazard criteria.

ICT provisions require that transit agencies describe how they are planning to deploy ZEBs in disadvantaged communities by outlining the location of the disadvantaged community (census tract) where the ZEB will be deployed, how many ZEBs, and in what year the ZEBs will be deployed.

Figure 36 shows that there are no census tracts that are cla according to CalEnviroScreen 4.0 in TOT’sservice area. However, TOT-owned and contracted vehicles are used to support disadvantaged communities in other areas.

Figure 36: CalEnviroScreen pollution burden percentiles in TOT service area While none of the census tracts in TOT’sservice area are classified as disadvantaged communities (in the top 25th percentile), TOT can make the largest impact by prioritizing ZEB deployment on services that go through the areas that are the most disadvantaged; in this case, the tract that is in the top 50th percentile, or the orange-colored census tracts.

Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

14.0 GHG IMPACTS
One of the chief reasons for transitioning to ZEBs is to reduce pollution by removing the harmful byproducts of fossil fuel combustion from traditional combustion engines. While ZEBs eliminate all tailpipe emissions, there may still be upstream carbon emissions associated with the production of energy sources that power ZEBs. This section assesses the overall impacts of ZEB transition on harmful emissions.

Based on the ZEVDecide modeling of greenhouse gas emissions (GHG), TOT’s current fleet emits an average of 268.4 tons of GHGs per vehicle in a year.59 A BE fleet dramatically decrease TOT’s annual emissions. Although BE vehicles don’t have tailpipe emissions, they have upstream emissions resulting from the carbon-intensity of the electric grid. The BE fleet would emit an average of 0.4 tons per vehicle annually based on upstream emissions.

Table 22 shows the annual emissions of the current fleet and compared to the BE fleet, and Figure 37 represents the annual total emissions by fleet graphically.

Table 22: Total Annual Emissions in Tons of CO2 per year Current fleet BE Fleet
Fleet tailpipe emissions (ton CO2/year) 1193 -
Upstream emissions (ton CO2/year) 746 265
Total Ton CO2/year 1939 265
Figure 37: Annual GHG emissions comparisons
59 All GHG calculations are presented in tons (not metric tons) of CO2 equivalent, which is calculated using the short-term 20-year global warming potential of CO2, methane, black carbon, and particulate matter. 746.0
264.8
1192.9

0.0 200.0 400.0 600.0 800.0 1000.0 1200.0 1400.0 1600.0 1800.0 2000.0 Base fleet
BE fleet
Tons CO2/year
TOT Annual GHG emissions fleet comparison
Upstream emissions Tailpipe emissions
Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Using the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) GHG equivalent calculator60, we used the annual emissions that will be displaced by the BE fleet to create relative comparisons to the benefits of GHG reduction. As presented in Figure 38, implementing an all BE fleet is equivalent to removing 373 gasolinepowered passenger vehicles from the road every year, diverting the use of 3,872 barrels of oil every year, planting 11.1 acres of trees to sequester carbon, or eliminating energy use from 211 homes per year.

Figure 38: Equivalent benefits of implementing a ZEB fleet at TOT 60 https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gas-equivalencies-calculator Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

15.0 OTHER TRANSITION ITEMS

15.1 JOINT ZEB GROUP AND ASSESSMENT OF MULTI-OPERATOR

VEHICLE PROCUREMENT
According to ICT regulation, transit agencies can pool resources when acquiring ZEB infrastructure if they:
• Share infrastructure
• Share the same MPO, transportation planning agency, or Air District • Are located within the same Air Basin
The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is the MPO for Ventura County and provides regional transportation funding and planning for Ventura County, Los Angeles County, Orange County, Imperial County, Riverside County, and San Bernardino County. TOT’s service area is located within the Ventura County APCD and South-Central Coast Air Basin. Table 23 lists the agencies that operate fixed route transit services within Ventura County. These agencies also are within the same air basin and air district. While TOT could theoretically partner with any transit agency in the SCAG region, the list was limited to Ventura County due to geographic proximity and service area overlaps that could make a joint group feasible and beneficial.

Table 23: Other bus transit agencies in Ventura County
Agency Total revenue
vehicles61
ZEB Choice Notes
Thousand Oaks Transit62 31 BEB Mix of depot and on-route charging Ventura County
Transportation Commission63
56 FCEB and BEB
Gold Coast Transit District 87 FCEB GCTD will begin construction on the hydrogen fueling facility in 2023/2024 and
plans to collaborate with VCTC for hydrogen
fueling
Simi Valley Transit 21 BEB 2019 SRTP notes BEBs are the likely technology option, but a full ZEB study is
recommended.

Camarillo Area Transit 19 TBD VCTC and Camarillo are exploring joint charging opportunities in Camarillo
Ojai Trolley 6 BEB
Moorpark City Transit 5 BEB
61 Based on NTD 2020 data.
62 Also includes Kanan Shuttle and ECTA InterCity Dial-A-Ride. 63 Includes both Valley Express Bus and VCTC Intercity.

Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Most prudently, TOT and MCT already have a high level of collaboration; continued collaboration moving forward throughout the ZEB transition would be most beneficial. Specific elements to collaborate on should include:
• Vehicle procurement –developing common specifications and procurements to have efficient pricing
• Charger procurement and installation –procuring similar equipment can help reduce prices and facilitate training and interoperability
• Training and workforce development –for maintenance staff and operators • Charging software
Beyond its close collaboration and partnership with MCT, TOT should remain in constant communication with other Ventura County agencies to understand how the agencies can work together to leverage resources and coordinate efforts on a regional level.

15.2 CHANGE MANAGEMENT
Finally, because a ZEB transition and implementation is an agencywide endeavor that also includes the need to actively consider utilities as a stakeholder and partner, an agencywide approach is required. It would be prudent for TOT to form a steering committee or task force to guide the transition to ZEBs and this may require additional City staff to serve as a program or project manager. Communication will be critical during the transition to ensure customers are made aware of potential disruptions and changes to bus operations. ZEB conversion also offers an excellent marketing opportunity for City to promote its climate and clean air commitments.

Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

16.0 PHASING AND IMPLEMENTATION
Table 24 provides an overview of the phasing plan for TOT’s ZEB rollout strategy for the BE fleet. See Section 6.0 for more details regarding the fleet replacement schedule.

This plan is a living document that is intended to provide a practical framework for TOT to deploy and transition to ZEBs in response to CARB’s mandate. Like any other strate transition plan should be revisited and adjusted in response to funding realities, changes in service delivery, and the needs of TOT and its ridership, particularly given the long-term (~20 years) outlook.

Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 89 Table 24: ZEB implementation phasing plan, FY2024-2040 Year Facility
Modifications
ZEB Fleet
Procurements
Training:
operators,
maintenance staff,
technicians
Training - other
Capital
Expenses
(2023$)
Operating
Expenses
(2023$)
Total
Expenses
(2023$)
2024 General sitework
8 chargers (60 kW)
with single
dispensers
4 chargers (60 Kw)
with dual
dispensers
Main switchgear
5 35-ft buses,
6 cutaways OEM training OEM training for all other staff $9,555,000 $610,000 $10,165,000 2025 2 35-ft buses,
2 cutaways Annual refreshers
Local fire and
emergency response
department
introduction to new
technology
$3,113,000 $764,000 $3,877,000
2026
2 chargers (60 Kw)
with dual
dispensers
2 cutaways OEM training No activity $708,000 $745,000 $1,453,000 2027 None N/A Annual refreshers
Local fire and
emergency response
department
introduction to new
technology
$0 $716,000 $716,000
2028 None 2 cutaways OEM training OEM training for all
other staff $388,000 $726,000 $1,114,000
2029 None N/A Annual refreshers
Local fire and
emergency response
department
introduction to new
technology
$0 $698,000 $698,000
Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 90 Year Facility
Modifications
ZEB Fleet
Procurements
Training:
operators,
maintenance staff,
technicians
Training - other
Capital
Expenses
(2023$)
Operating
Expenses
(2023$)
Total
Expenses
(2023$)
2030
4 chargers (60 kW)
with single
dispensers
Emergency power
1 MW battery
system
4 35-ft buses,
6 cutaways Annual refreshers No activity $6,118,000 $954,000 $7,072,000 2031 None 2 cutaways OEM training
Local fire and
emergency response
department
introduction to new
technology
$330,000 $920,000 $1,250,000
2032 None 4 cutaways OEM training OEM training for all
other staff $628,000 $886,000 $1,514,000
2033 None N/A Annual refreshers
Local fire and
emergency response
department
introduction to new
technology
$0 $851,000 $851,000
2034 None N/A OEM training No activity $0 $819,000 $819,000 2035
4 chargers (60 kW)
with single
dispensers
3 level 2 chargers
5 35-ft buses Annual refreshers
Local fire and
emergency response
department training
on new technology
$3,824,000 $786,000 $4,610,000
2036 None 2 35-ft buses,
8 cutaways OEM training OEM training for all other staff $2,284,000 $754,000 $3,038,000 2037 None 2 cutaways Annual refreshers
Local fire and
emergency response
department training
on new technology
$245,000 $724,000 $969,000
Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 91 Year Facility
Modifications
ZEB Fleet
Procurements
Training:
operators,
maintenance staff,
technicians
Training - other
Capital
Expenses
(2023$)
Operating
Expenses
(2023$)
Total
Expenses
(2023$)
2038 None 2 cutaways OEM training No activity $233,000 $695,000 $928,000 2039 None N/A Annual refreshers
Local fire and
emergency response
department training
on new technology
$0 $667,000 $667,000
2040 None 2 cutaways OEM training OEM training for all
other staff $211,000 $639,000 $850,000
Total $27,637,000 $12,954,000 $40,591,000
Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 92 APPENDICES
Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
APPENDIX A: PDF OF SITE PLANS
Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
APPENDIX B: FINANCIAL MODELING INPUTS AND ASSUMPTIONS
Table 25 presents a description as well as the sources for the cost inputs (in 2023$) of the Base Case and the ZEB Case.

Table 25: Summary of cost inputs
Main Category Item Description Inputs for Base Case Inputs for ZEB Cases Sources and comments Fleet
Acquisition
Bus
purchase
price
Purchase price of a
bus/vehicle inclusive of
options and taxes and
extended warranty
CNG bus: $591, 082
CNG cutaway:
$102,797
Diesel cutaway:
$$123,356
CNG van: $51,398
BEB: $1,308,189
CNG bus: $591, 082
CNG cutaway:
$102,797
Diesel cutaway:
$123,356
CNG Van: $51,398
BEB: $1,308189
BE cutaway: $260,971
Base Case: TOT TAM Plan adjusted for
inflation to 2023$.

ZEB Case: CalACT/MBTA, TOT, and
other market information; adjusted over
time based on price trendlines from the
California Air Resource Board.

Infrastructure
and Facility
Modifications
Infrastructure
Modification
Costs
Includes equipment,
installation, testing, civil and
electrical work, as well as
contractor’s fees and
escalation factors. Includes
backup generator, chargers,
and hydrogen gas detection,
where appropriate.

N/A $10,422,678
Engineer’s cost estimate inclusive of
escalation.

Operating Vehicle fuel
Cost of fuel (energy)
commodity for revenue
vehicles.

CNG: $3.36 per gallon
Diesel: $6.68 per gallon
Electricity: $0.27 per
kWh
Base Case: TOT fuel cost data
ZEB Case: SCE EV rates
Maintenance
Vehicle
maintenance
costs
Maintenance costs (per
mile) inclusive of labor and
parts for scheduled and
unscheduled maintenance.

CNG bus, CNG
cutaway, diesel
cutaway: $1.62 per
mile
CNG van: $0.97 per
mile
BEB and BE cutaway:
$1.46 per mile
Base Case: TOT maintenance cost data
ZEB Case: Based on industry research
Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
APPENDIX C: COST ESTIMATES
See attached file for complete report.

Item No.9J

ZEB STRATEGY AND FINAL REPORT
Item No.9J
TO: Andrew P. Powers, City Manager
FROM: Clifford G. Finley, Public Works Director
DATE: July 18, 2023
SUBJECT: South Branch Arroyo Conejo Floodplain Improvements Study (MI 2527)
RECOMMENDATION:

2. Contingent upon approval of Memorandum of Agreement by Ventura County, approve a Professional Services Agreement with Kasraie Consulting (Ventura, CA), in an amount not-to-exceed $262,402 for the preparation of a drainage and hydrology study for the South Branch Arroyo Conejo Project, plus extra services of $26,240, with a term ending June 30, 2026.

3. Authorize expenditure in the amount of $288,642 ($262,402 agreement plus extra services of $26,240) from A/C #001-5210-642-5500 (MI 2527, South Branch Arroyo Conejo Study).

4. Find that this action is not a project as defined under the California Environmental Quality Act.

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

No Additional Funding Requested. $300,000 is available in the Adopted FY 2023-24 General Fund Capital Budget. The estimated cost of this phase of the project is $288,000, to be offset by a 40 percent contribution by the Ventura County Watershed Protection District (VCWPD). VCWPD contribution/reimbursement will be received in A/C #001-5210-484-3000 (General Fund, Development Services – Consultant Reimbursement).

Item No.9K
South Branch Arroyo Conejo Deficiency Study (MI 2527)
July 18, 2023

Page 2 ends

Thousand Oaks City CouncilJuly 18, 2023

Thousand Oaks City Council
July 18, 2023