Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda Packet 08/25/1992
RELIC FEYIN COPY * sitz .- 'CAI�tfiER AGENDA ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL ` REGULAR MEETING CITY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 6500 PALMA AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR ROTUNDA ROOM AUGUST 25, 1992 7:00 P.M. This agenda is prepared and posted pursuant to the requirements of hove t Code Section 54954.2. By listing a topic on this agenda,;the City Council has expressid its intent to discuss and act on, each item. In addition to any action identified in tl a brief general description of each item, the action that may be taken shalt inctudez A refer A t to staff with specific requests for information; continuance; specific direction to staf concerning the policy or mission of the item, discontinuance of consideration; authorized m to enter into negotiations and execute agreements pertaining to the item; adoption or approval; and, disapproval. Copies of the staff reports or other documentation relating to each item of lusiness referred to on the agenda are on fite in the office of the City Clerk:(Itoom 208) and ii the Information Office (Room 103), available for public inspection during City Nall business hours. the City Clerk will answer any questions regarding the agenda. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need spec; t assistance to participate in a City-meeting-or other services offered by this city'.pi-ease contact the City Manager's Office ((805) 461-5010) or the City Cterk's Office ((805) 461-4i4 J, l6tification -�- at least 48 hours prior to the meeting or time when services are needed will assist the City staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide aces sibility to the meeting or service. vs RULES OF 9MIC PARTICIPATION: * Members of the audience may speak on any item on the ,agenda. * A person may speak for five (5) minutes. * No one may speak for a 'second time until everyone wishing to speak has had an opportunity to do so. * No one may speak more than twice on any item. * Council Members may question any speaker; the speaker may respond but, after the allotted time has expired, may not initiate further discussion. The floor will then be closed to public participation and open for Council discussion. Call to Order Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call City Council Comments: • Proclamation: "U.S. Constitution Observance Month". September, 1992 COMMUNITY FORUM: The City Council values and encourages exchange of ideas and comments from you, the citizen. The Community Forum period= is pro- vided to receive comments from the public on matters other than scheduled agenda items. To increase the effectiveness of Community Forum, the following rules will be enforced: A maximum of 30 minutes will be allowed for Community Forum, unless Councilauthorizes an extension. * All remarks shall be addressed to Council, as a whole, and not to any individual member thereof. No person shall be permitted to make slander us; profane or personal remarks against any elected official, `commissions and staff. A. COJIMITT88 RNPORTS (The following represent ad hoc or standing committees. Informative status reports will be given, as felt necessary. ) : 1. S.L.O. Council of Governments 2. S.L.O. Regional Transit Authority 3. Solid/Hazardous Waste Task Force 4. City/School Committee 5`. Traffic Committee 6. County Water Advisory Board 7: 9 onom c Round Table - 8. Colony -Roads Committee " 9. Liability Claims Review & Finance Committee 10. Homeless Coalition +�- B CONSENT CALENDAR; All matters listed under Item B,` Consent Calend mr, are consid- ered to be routine, and will be enacted by one motion in the form listed below. There will be no separate discussion Dn these items. A member of the< Council >or public may, by request, have any item removed from the Consent Calendar, which shall then a reviewed and acted upon separately after the adoption of the Co sent Calendar: 1. AWARD OF SID NO. 92-08 - MONTEREY ROAD/GMVES CREEK BRIDGE REPLACEMENT 2. AWARD OF BID NO. 92-09 - SAN ANDRES/ATASCADE O CREEK BRIDGE REPLACEMENT 3. RECEIPT OF FY1991-92 SLOCOG 'ANNUAL REPORT AID REQUEST FOR ENDORSEMENT OF PROPOSITION 156, THE PASSENGER RAIL AND CLEAN AIR BOND ACT - RESOLUTION NO. 80-92 2 li C. REGULAR BUSINESS: 1. INTRODUCTION OF UPPER SALINAS-LAS TABLAS RESOURCE CONSERVATION DISTRICT LONG-RANGE WORK PLAN 2. C.U.P. 92-007, 7025 EL CAMINO REAL - BLOCKBUSTER VIDEO SIGNAGE FINDINGS FOR DENIAL (Pacific Entertainment/Fisher) (Cont'd from 8/11/92) 3. RESOLUTION NO. 78-92 - AUTHORIZING SHORT-TERM FINANCING FOR i GOVERNMENTAL OPERATIONS FOR F.Y. 1992-93 MANDATORY WASTE COLLECTION SERVICE EXEMPTION 4. MAND - . A. Ordinance No. 254 Amending Title 5 of the City Munici- pal Code (Health and Sanitation) (Recommend (1) motion to waive reading in full and read by title only, and (2) motion to approve on first reading by title only) B. RQ'Sol_■*j^g No. 77-92 - Establishing procedures for exemp- tion from mandatory waste collection service 5. ORDINANCE .NO. 253 -- AMENDING TITLE 2, CHAPTER 3 OF THE RTAS- - CADERO MUNICIPAL CODE AS IT RELATES TO THE CITY'S PURCHASING SYSTEM (Recommend (1) motion to waive reading in full and read by title only, and (.a) motion to approve on second reading by title 'only) (Cont'd from 8/11/92) 6. CIRCULATION ELEMENT - CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED TIME SCHEDULE, INCLUDING JOINT STUDY SESSION WITH PLANNING COMMISSION (9`2992) D. ,INDIVIDUALDETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION: 1 City `Council 2. City Attorney` 3. City Clerk 4. City Treasurer 5. City Manager NOTICE: THE COUNCIL WILL ADJOURN TO A CLOSED SESSION FOR PURPOSES OF DISCUSSION REGARDING LITIGATION, ENTITLED O�E 'v• CITY OF ATASCADERO. 3 P R O C L A M A T I O N "U.S. CONSTITUTION OBSERVANCE MONTH"' September 1992 WHEREAS, The Constitution of the United States of America is an inspired document "of the people, by the people, for the people"; and WHEREAS, The people' s freedom of religion, of, speech, of the press, to peaceably assemble, to petition of their own free will and accord are inspired ideas in their U.S. Constitution; and WHEREAS, All employers, employees, citizens and taxpayers, together with all government employees under the authority of the U.S. Constitution, have invented free enterprise which produces all the jobs, food, clothing and shelter in every community in America; and WHEREAS, On September 17, 1787, two hundred land five years ago, George Washington, Chairman of the Constitutional Convention, Benjamin Franklin and thirty-seven other great Americans approved this immortal instrument of government, the Constitution of the United States of America; NOW, THEREFORE, I Robert P. Nimmo, Mayor of the City of Atas- cadero, do hereby proclaim the month of September, 1992 to be "U.S Constitution Observance Month -z, ROBERT P. NIMMO, .Mayor City of Atascadero, CA August 25, 1992 • REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Meeting Date:8-25-92 CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: B-1 Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager From: Greg Luke, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Graves Creek Bridge replacement RECOMMENDATION: Award the bid to Whitaker Contractors for $249, 358.00. DISCUSSION: The City of Atascadero received a Federal Bridge Replacement Grant for the demolition and replacement of the Graves Creek Bridge. The grant is coordinated through Caltrans the we have recently been given approval to bid the project. We received five bids with all but one coming in under the Engineers Cost Estimate of $288,000. The Bid Summary prepared by the City Clerk is -attached. Upon award of the bid, work should begin an this project within 30 days with an estimated completion date of March, 1993. FISCAL IMPACT: The Federal Bridge Replacement Grant is an 80/20 matching fund grant with the City's portion being $49,871. 60. This project is budgeted in the Capital Improvement Budget. Attachments: A - Bid Summary B - Bid from Whitaker BID SUMMARY TO: Greg Luke, Public Works Director _ FROM: Lee Raboin City Cler BID NO. : 92-08 OPENED 4. 8/11/92 PROJECT: CONSTRUCTION OF GRAVES CREEK BRIDGE AT MONTEREY ROAD The following five bids ,were received and opened as outlined: Contractor TOTAL BID Whitaker Contractors, Inc. 249,358.00 P.O. Box 910 Santa Margarita, CA 93453 Sansone Company, Inc. 252,872.50 710-21 Fiero Lane San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 R. Burke Corporation = 256,79 .-00. P.O. Box 957 San Luis Obispo, CA 93406 Nick E. Pokrajac, Inc 270,213.77 110 Main Street Templeton, CA 93465 Madonna Construction Company 310,800.00 P.O. Box 3910 San Luis Obispo, CA 93403 ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE FOR CONSTRUCTION OF GRAVES CREEK BRIDGE ON MONTEREY ROAD IN CITY OF ATASCADERO PROJECT NO. BRM-Y054(2) 05-SLO-0-ATAS PAGE 1 OF 3 ITE: ITEM ITEM UNIT OF ESTIMATE UNIT PRICE ITEM TOTAL CODE MEASURE QUANTITY (FIGURES) (FIGURES) 1 120090 CONSTRUCTION AREA oo ' SIGNS LUMP SUM LUMP SUM 63011q. 2 1575:0 BRIDGE REMOVAL LUMP SUM LUMP SUM 00 00 3 1170101 DEVELOP WATER 00 0o C I SUPPLY LUMP SU�t LUMP SUM uV SOU 190101 ROADWAY 00 EXCAVATION CY 10 30. 3UU oo 5 192003 STRUCTURE EXCAVATION(BRIDGE CY 165 39 oo -7 0. 6 192020 STRUCTURE EXCAVATION (TYPE D) CY 195 00 1 1 -70.00 t 7 193003 STRUCTURE BA KRLL 00 (BRIDGE) ( CY 100 16 . bOQ 00 3 1198001 I IMPORTED BORROW CY , 110�. Oo 560.001 1 9 260201 CLASS 2 AGGREGATE o0 BASE TON 160 0���0 30 00. LO 390103 ASPHALT CONCRETE (TYPE B) TON 120 q3 oo (6D, 0 11 490508 FURNISH STEEL PILING oc� o (HP 10 X 577) LF120 0?0� 640. P-3 ENGINEER'S ESTIti1ATE PACE 30F3 ITElvl ITEM ITEM UNIT OF ESTRAATE UNIT PRICE ITEM TOTAL NO. CODE IMEASURE QUANTITY (FIGURES) I (FIGURES) 12 490509 DRIVE STEEL PILING pp Ov S (HP 10 X 57) EA 6 1 U,o`� . 13 510051 STRUCTURAL CONCRETE. BRI E Oo 00 FOOTING CY 14 510053 STRUCTURAL fi �o 3ac� 00 Iloo,345.0' CONCRETE. BRIDGE CY -api' 15 i519001 WATERSTOP (7F- I LF 11 I as O° I x71500 ktp16 i519007 12'yEOPREyE STRi LF I 37 la.0� M '� o _ 17 1519081 I JOINT SEAL(MR 1/27) LF I 5 Jo I 1 a5U.OU 13 1199ooA UTILITY CARRIERS 3 1 SS oo (BRIDGE) 'LU.MP SUM LU.'%-tP SUM 19 520102 BAR REINFORCING . TEEL BRIDGE.) LB 54.000 U' 3U'a`fU o0 S S ( t 20 721007 ROCK SLOPS PROTECTION TON,METHOD B) TON 595 oo /54-70. S ZU.`�o (1/4 21 832003 METAL BEAM GUARD 00 ob S RAILING(WOOD POST) LF 275 33;088 TUBULAR 3 1.00 _ ov S HANDRAILING LF 134 iig5 8 23 a3098A METAL TUBE BRIDGE o 0 S RAILING(TYPE 117) LF 116 / 2; 1833142 CONCRETE BARRIER 0 00 (TYPE 26) LF 134 P-4 ��;- ENGINEER'S EST [ NtATE PAGE 3OF3 25 839531 CABLE ANCHOR S ASSEMBLY (BREAKAWAY, oo TYPE A) EAO�O� atODU. 26 839552 TERMINAL SECTION S (TYPE C) EA 4 V 1 ( � `f`f `f. �° 27 839553 EVD SECTION EA t po 0 S 01,18. t ria.° 23 99990 MOBILIZATION LUMP SUFI° LUMP SUM o o0 S�O�LCIO s I TOTAL BID'' P-5 REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Meeting Date:8-25-92 CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: B-2 Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager From: Greg Luke, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: San Andres Avenue Bridge replacement RECOMMENDATION• Award the bid to R. Burke Corporation for $250,086.50. DISCUSSION: The City of Atascadero received a Federal Bridge Replacement Grant for the demolition and replacement of the San'Andres Bridge. The design and approval process is lengthy and; we have just recently received approval to go to bid. This bridge has been closed since mid-May duel to structural decay and dry-rot. It is anticipated that the new 'bridge .will be open by March, 1993 . We received eight bids with all but one coming in under the Engineers Cost Estimate of $291, 000. The Bid Summ4ry prepared by the City Clerk is attached. FISCAL IMPACT• The Federal Bridge Replacement Grant is an 80/20 matching fund grant with the City's portion being $50,017.30. This project is budgeted in the Capital Improvement Budget. Attachments: A - Bid Summary B - Bid from R. Baker BID SUMMARY TO: Greg Luke, Public Works Director FROM: Lee Raboin City Cler BID NO. : 92-09 OPENED : 8/1892 PROJECT: CONSTRUCTION OF SAN ANDRES AVENUE BRIDGE AT ATASCADERO CREEK The following eight bids were received and opened as outlined: Contractor TOTAL BID R. Burke Corporation 250,086.50 P.O. Box 957 San Luis Obispo, CA 93406 Whitaker Contractors, Inc. 252,766.30 P.O. Box 910 Santa Margarita, CA 93453 Allied Building Contractors, Inc. -_=, _ 255,722-.-30- 3800 Lacrescenta Avenue #105 Lacrescenta, CA 91214 Nick E. Pokrajac, Inc. 262,078.00 110 Main Street Templeton, CA 93465 A.J. Diani Construction Co, Inc. 269,934.20 295 North Blosser Santa Maria, CA 93456 JMS Engineering 2820,737.00 P.O. Box 341 Cayucos, CA 93430 Sansone Company, Inc. 290,615.54 710-21 Fiero Lane San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Macro-Z Technology 327,074.00 29805 Weatherwood Laguna Niguel, CA 92677 �JV�YI -i CONTRACTOR'S LICENSING STATEMENT The undersigned islicensed in accordance with the laws of the- State of California providing for the registration of Contractors.. Contractor's License Classification and number:. �- Name of individual contractorrint or type) : (p Y1� :) Signature of owner: Business address: Business telephone: or R. BURKF CORPORA i ION Name of Firm: 12.0. BOX 957 Business address:. SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIF 93406 Business telephone: (e05) 543-h3ub Signature, title, and address of members signing on behalf of partnership: ` Name: Title: Address: Name: Title: Address: Name: Title: -n Address: Pr =, Name of Corporation• R. BURK= CORPORATION P.O. BOX 957 Business address: SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIF 93406 Corporation organized under laws of the State of: tf} ture of Piesident of Corporation Signature df);,Se.cre ry of Corporation I H/0 -'';,11'0�6NTRACTOR S LICENSING STATEMENT 1 Y. / BID SHEET ^ Unit Price Total Item Code Approx. Unit of In Fieures Amount No. No uantit Measure Description of Item 1. 120090 1 LS Construction Area Signs $ftw— S—Z=- 2. 152379 120 LF Relocate Fence *2Q—q20 3• 157550 1 LS Bridge Removal { i 4. 160101 1 LS Clearing and Grubbing S 1000 5:. 5. 190101 680 CY Roadway Excavation M (Bridge Approaches) 6. 192003 256 CY Structure Excavation (F). (Bridge) 7. 192037 26 CY Structure Excavation (F) (Retaining Wall) 8. 193003 87 CY Structure Backfill (F) (Bridge) 9. 193013 14 CY Structure Backfill $ 14 s try (F) (Retaining Wall) �' 1 $�t1 10. 260201 310 CY Class 2 Aggregate Base $ 11. 390103 190 TON Asphalt Concrete (Type B) 12. 510051 17 CY Structure Concrete, -tmw- (F) Bridge Footing //)�..,, ' 13. 510053 309 CY Structure Concrete $�� $Y/ (F) (Bridge) 14. 510060 8.5 CY Structure Concrete, (F) (Retaining Wall) Bar ReinforcingSteel 15. 520101 5,180 LB Bar •�• ( (Footing) n �0 16. 520102 52,330 LB Bar Reinforcing Steel (F) (Bridge) v�Q 17. 520103 392 LB Bar Reinforcing Steel $._J_.— ( (Retaining Wall) 00 18. 490503 70 LF Furnish Steel Piling (HP 10X42) yv a 19. 490504 5 EA Driven Steel Piling $ �f $-� (HP 10X42) PROPOSAL — 4 - BID SHEET Item Code Approx. Unit of Unit Price Total No. No. Ouantit Measure Description-of It IL► Figures Am/oounnt 20. 193030 48 CY Pervious Backfill $ SLI2- (F) 21. 721007 250 CY Rock Slope Protection (114 Ton, Method B) y 22. 832003 213 LF Metal Beam Guard Railing(Wood Post) 23. 833088 96 LF Tubular Hand Railing S� 24. 833125 112 LF Concrete Barrier S eo (Type 25) 25. 833140 96 LF Concrete Barrier S—U0 sul W (Type 26) 26. 839531 3 EA Cable Anchor Assembly � � f (Breakaway -Type A) 27. 839550 3 EA Terminal Section (Type A) ; 839551 4 EA Terminal Section (Type B) 29. 840656 540 LF Painted Traffic Stripe &' Sy-r 30. 850102 4 EA Pavement Marker S=L Reflective, Type D 31. 840509 30 LF 12- Painted Bar Stop S 32. 719200 3 EA Sewer Manhole 33. 714034 10 LF 8" Virtified Clay Pipe off= $; fqLl 34. 713240 37 LF 8" Plastic Sewer Pipe 35. 708508A 100 LF 8" C1.52 Ductile Iron Pipe S /y 36. 152402A I EA Adjust Valve Cover 37. 152432 152432 1 EA Adjust Manhole $7 ;W0 38. 208591A 1 EA Gate Valve and Box $'�� TOTAL BID $ �10 ZY31 (F) is the designation for Final Pay Quantities as defined in Section 9-1.015 "Final Pay Quantities of the Standard Specifications3 NOTE: All amounts and totals in the Bid Sheet will be subject to verification by the Owner. In case of variation between the unit and the totals shown by the Bidder, the unit price shall be considered the bid. Z50 o84.50 PROPOSAL — 5 d I' LIST OF SUBCONTRACTORS The Bidder shall list the name and address of each subcontract to whom the Bidder proposes to subcontract portions of the works as required by the provisions in "Requiring Listing of Proposed Subcontractors'" in Section 2 of the special provisions. Name under which Subcontractor is License No. . ific Licensed and Classification Mill, oroShonof fice, of Subconteactiption -' 5 �,OaCl,Q251V50,Ca. 2 0 ��yy^lO — R Yo. ix ice?- P- mo Mt I (A �O _ 63 06 tf /s_'/d•v v�.rrvcrF.�vFvE�vr��Fo o� C-s oCA NOTE: Do not list alternative subcontractors for- samewa LIST OF SUBCONTRACTORS REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: B-3 Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 8/25/92 From: Andy Takata, Acting City Manager SUBJECT: . Receipt of SLOCOG 1991/92 Annual Report and Request for endorsement of Proposition 156 - Passenger; Rail and Clean Air Bond Act RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the attached Resolution No. 80-92, supporting Proposi- tion 156. BACKGROUND: Proposition 156 is the second of three $1 billion bond meas- ures, placed on the ballot by the legislature as pest AB 973 (1989, Costa) . The first bond measure, Proposition 108, passed in 1990. The California Transportation Commission, at the urging of local agencies, prepared the 1990 State Transportation Iroprovement .Pro- gram (STIP) assuming all three bond measures wouldibe approved by the electorate. Should Proposition 156 fail in November, revenues to meet the County Minimum will be reduced by 19% statewide. This would reduce the San Luis Obispo region's highway funding by $15.5 million. To compensate for the shortfall, funds would have to be shift- ed from certain programs and geographical areas to meet the County Minimum for counties with many rail projects. Locally, we will lose funds. Several programmed projects could be at risk. The San Luis Obispo Council of Governments passed a resolution similar to the one attached to this staff report. ;Strong support by our City for Proposition 156 will not only help secure our Coun- ty Minimum, and thus our programmed STIP projects, but also secure development of a comprehensive statewide rail transportation system providing significant benefits to our region. AT:cw Attachments: • Resolution No. 80-92 SLOCOG Final Annual Report for FY91/92 RESOLUTION NO. 80-92 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO ENDORSING PROPOSITION 156, THE RAIL PASSENGER AND CLEAN AIR BOND ACT OF 1992 - WHEREAS, In 1989, the Legislature provided for three $1 bil- lion rail transportation bond measures on the ballot as part of the $18.5 billion Transportation Blueprint for the Twenty First Cen- tury; and WHEREAS, Proposition 108, the Passenger Rail and Clean Air Bond Act of 1990, which the voters approved in June 1990, was the first/ of these three measures; and WHEREAS, The second $1 billion bond measure will appear on the November 3, 1992 ballot as Proposition 156; and WHEREAS, The three rail transportation bonds are the linchpins for the entire transportation program approved by the voters in 1990; and WHEREAS, Failure to approve Proposition 156, the Passenger Rail and Clean Air Bond Act of 1992, would cause San Luis Obispo County' s "County Minimum" transportation funding from the State to be seduced. by $15.5 million, placing much needed transportation improvements .and_ previously programmed projects __%r,.._the .Cou-nty- at risk; and WHEREAS, California' s overall transportation funding would be dramatically reduced should the bond measure fail to be approved, jeopardizing hundreds of local projects and causing major re- programming and delays in both highway and rail transportation programs; and WHEREAS, Tens of thousands of jobs will be created with pas- sage of this bond measure; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, That the City of Atascadero endorses Proposition 156, the Passenger Rail and Clean Air Bond Act of 1992, on the November 3, 1992, ballot. LET IT BE FURTHER RESOLVED, A copy of this resolution shall be sent to the attention of Jim Knox of the Planning and Conservation League, 90912th Street, Suite 203, Sacramento, California 95814. On Motion by Councilmember , seconded by Council- member , the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted on the following roll-call vote: y,..►v�r��o Resolution No. 80-92 Page Two AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: CITY OF ATASCADERO ATTEST: By: ROBERT P. ',NIMMO, Mayor LEE RABOIN, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ARTHER R. MONTANDON, City Attorney �:J lr i r�.• � { San Luis Obispo Area Coordinating Council Arroyo AtaGrande Grover City Morro B and Regional Transportation Planning Agency Paso Ro Pismo Beac San Luis Obispo - San Luis Obispo County MEMORANDUM CITY MC, DATE: August 10, 1992 TO: All City Managers FROM: Ron De Carli, Executive Director RE: Transmittal of SLOCOG Annual Reportand Request for Endorsement of Prop. 156 Enclosed you will find a copy of the SLOCOG 1991/92 Annual Report,transmitted to you pursuant to Section VII, Part 1 of the Joint Powers Agreement. The Annual Report identifies all the tasks and projects which the SLOCOG and staff accomplished in the past fiscal year. In addition, SLOCOG requests your city's endorsement of Proposition 156, the Passenger Rail and Clean Air Bond Act. Proposition 156 is the second of three separate bond measures,placed on the ballot by the legislature,to fund passenger rail improvements. Should Proposition 156 fail in November,there will be revenue shortfall resulting in a$15.5 million dollar reduction in the San Luis Obispo region's highway funding. Enclosed are a sample staff report and sample resolution for your Council. 1f you have any questions on either of these issues please call me at 549-5714. County Government Center, San Luis Obispo, CA 93408 (805) 549-5612 — J 0�: : SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING AGENCY METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION AND CONGESTION MANAGEMENT AGENCY FINAL ANNUAL REPORT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1991/1992 AUGUST 5, 1992- :>Jvlr _ SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS GOVERNING BOARD City of Arroyo Grande . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Councilmember Gene Moots City of Atascadero . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Councilmember Bonita Borgeson City of Grover City . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . Mayor Chuck Comstock City of Morro Bay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mayor Rose Marie Sheetz City of Paso Robles . . . . . . . . . Mayor Chris Iverson City of Pismo Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mayor Dick Morrow City of San Luis Obispo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Councilmember Penny Rappa San Luis Obispo County, District 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Supervisor Harry Ovitt San Luis Obispo County, District 2 . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Supervisor Laurence Laurent San Luis Obispo County, District 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .;. . . . Supervisor Evelyn Delany San Luis Obispo County, District 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Supervisor Ruth Brackett San Luis Obispo County, District 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Supervisor David Blakely Council President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mayor Rose-Marie Sheetz Council Vice President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Councilmember Penny Rappa SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNCIL.OF GOVERNMENTS Staff (FY 91/92) Ronald L DeCarli . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Executive Director Steve Devencenzi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Senior Solid Waste Planner Dan Herron . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Senior Transportation Planner Michael R. Harmon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Associate Transportation Planner Julie Millsap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Assistant Transportation Planner Peter Rodgers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Assistant Transportation Planner Joy O'Connor Transportation Planning Technician Suzanne Winslow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Planning Aide Carolyn LeDuc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Secretary The 1991/92 Annual Report was prepared as required by the annually ratified Joint Powers Agreement with the California Department of Transportation. A-13-3 vV0 BACKGROUND The most significant action affecting the Council during FY 91/92 was the Federal determination that San Luis Obispo is an "urbanized county." This determination provided significant new Federal funding beginning in FY 92/92, and also mandated a number lof new planning and programming responsibilities. In response, the cities, the county and the State formally designated the San Luis Obispo Area Coordinating Council as the region's Metropolitan Planning Organization and the Congestion Management Agency. The name of'the organization was officially changed to the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments or SLOCOG. The additional workload to SLOCOG as a result of these state mandates has led to a reorganization of staff with the hiring of two Associate Planners and a three-quarter time Assistant Planner. The major project to be accomplished by this increased staffing will be the preparation of the first"Congestion Management Plan," and corresponding revision to the 1992 R ieq_onal Transportation Plan. The compilation of these two documents will also trigger a comprehensive environmental review necessitating an environmental impact report. SLOCOG has two roles as the state designated Regional Transportation Planning Agency including: 1) administration and allocation of over$4.5 million in Transportation Development Act (TDA), and 2) regional transportation planning and programming which requires a continuous, comprehensive, and cooperative transportation planning process. Thus joint planning and coordination process involves the county, the seven cities, and the State Department of Transportation (Caltrans), and plays a major role in determining improvements to the region's transit systems, airports, and the state highways. All work tasks, expected products, and time schedules are identified in the annually adopted Overall Work Program (OWP). •During-FY 91/92 major work was divided among:four program areas:1)implementation ofthe Transportation DevelopmentAct(TDA);2)-'r4nsportation Planning and Programming, including public transit, bikeways, regional streets and roads, aviation, socioeconomic and demographics, and the Regional Transportation Plain {RTP) update and management support; 3) Regional Ridesharing; and 4) Regional Planning: In the area of solid waste management, the SLOCOG Solid Waste Program was created in response to Assembly Bill 939 (Sher), (AB 939). SLOCOG was designated as the lead agency for coordinating the statutory requirements of AB 939 through a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the incorporated cities and the County of San Luis Obispo. The major responsibilities of SLOCOG as the lead agency are to: prepare required planning documents, track legislation that alters existing regulations,and serve as the clearinghouse for disseminating information between the cities, the County, and the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB). The documents required for fulfilling AB 939 are the: Source Reduction and Recycling Elements (SRRE); Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan (CoIWWP); Household Hazardous Waste Element (HHWE); and the Countywide Siting Element The SRRE'was completed and submitted to the State for review. A-13-4 _ Major accomplishments for FY 91/92 include the following: 1) Transportation Grants Secured for. a. FTA-Section 8— Planning Study,Atascadero DAR. Short-range Transit Development Plan b. FTA-Section8 — Planning Study, Transit Interface Component, Rail Feasibility Study c. FTA-Section 18 — Paso Robles DAR Van,. SLORTA RUNABOUT Van _ d. FTA-Section 16(b)(2)—Achievement House(2 buses),Central Coast Neurobehavior Center (van), Hospice (computer) e. Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation — Elfin Forest land purchase, Highway 46 reforestation f. TCI — Comprehensive Bus Rehabilitation Project, SLO Transfer Facility g. Bikeways— Santa Rosa Street Bikeway 2) Rail Feasibility Study — Approved. The San Diegen Extension appears to be a promising project. Caltrans Division of Rail is supportive of this project, Legislation to include the SLO tail corridor (SB 1691) as an eligible.corridor has been sponsored by Senator Hart and is moving forward. 3) Solid Waste Source Reduction and Recycling Elements for the County and the seven cities have been completed and submitted to the State for review. Comments received have noted that these elements are among the best in the State and only nominal clarifications are needed. 4) Americans with Disabilities Act (AOA) Regional Compliance Plan as been approved by SLORTA, SLO Transit, and SCAT. 5) Various Highway Projects are moving forward: a. Route 101/46 interchange-is under construction - b. Oak Park Boulevard is under construction a Fourth Street(Pismo Beach) is moving forward d: Route 41 realignment(Atascadero) is moving forward e. Route 1 realignment(Nipomo) right-of-way agreements secured f. Cuesta Grade/Route 101 Project EIR is underway, SLOCOG is a member of the Project Development Team 6) 1992 Regional Profile completed and is available identifying the most recent socio- demographic and economic data for the region. 7) South County Transportation Study is nearly complete. 8) Mandated Regional Housing Plan, with the fair share housing allocations, was adopted and accepted by the State. 9) Proposition 116 funding is progressing. 10.1 million dollars will be allocated by SLOCOG by December 1992 with$1.3 million for public transit (coach purchase). A-13-5 - PROGRAM SUMMARIES All major work tasks and products have been completed as identified in the FY 91/92 Overaworll Work Program (OWE• The following are brief descriptions of the work completed for each element. WE 1000 TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT (TDA) ADMINISTRATION All mandated TDA requirements were satisfied. sit sments were 1100 Unmet Transit Needs-All tasks completed on schedule. al m eran to c t�es.s The U met completed with hearings properly noticed and- announcements Needs Hearing" was held on December 4, 1991. This process was expanded to hear public testimony on unmet bicycle needs. Nearly one hundred (100) transit service needs were analyzed in the mandated Unmet Needs process. The following requests were determined� be reasonablnning to Meet: All other requests were referred to the appropriate agency for the p 1) Establishment a Templeton Dial-a-Kide; 2) Increased hourss for the Community interaction Program (CIP); 3) Late evening service to North County; 4) 8:00 A.M. bus service from North County; and 5) 4:15 P.M. bus service to South County from San Luis Obispo. e assessed these needs in light of diminishing_funding, and deferred all but In June, the Council r the first two as unreasonable to meet at this time. roved on schedule and the quarterly 1200 TDA eue disAtributed. The ann Dal TDA report was completed and submitted on schedule. payments w 1300 Performance Audits - Contracts were awarded in February 1992, for the South Say, Atascadero, and Morro Bay Dial-a-Ride (DAR) transit systems. The audits were completed in June 1992 and no adverse findings were documented. 1400 TDA Fiscal Audits-Fiscal audits for each TDA recipient were completed and submitted to the State. No adverse findings were documented. WE 2000 PUBLIC TRANSIT PLANNING p 2100 Data Com ilation/Evaluation- Monitored and coordinated a dional data s compiled. ties on an ad hoc basis. The "Final Transit Annual Operational Report' was continued while a A-13-6 2200 Technical and Grant Assistance - Staff promoted transportation services during Ridesharing Week and conducted surveys inquiring into positive bus driver attributes. Staff coordinated with the new ridesharing coordinator to promote ridesharing activities. Participation significantly increased over last years' level. Annual UMTA/Federal Transit Authority(FTA) Section 18 grants were programmed in September 1992 Apportioned funds were used to purchase one van for the Paso Robles DAR and one Runabout bus. FTA awarded grants for the-Atascadero Short-range Transit Development Plan, the Transit Interface Component, and the Rail Feasibility Study. Staff assisted with UMTA(FTA), Section 16(b)(2) applications with five out of sox project requests approved. Assistance was provided to member agencies in interpreting new requirements for legislation including Proposition 116 and Transit Capital Improvements (TCI) grants. Staff also recommended productivity improvements and facilitated cooperative agreements for services. These included: coordination with Santa Barbara County and the Regional Transit Authority to create an extension of service into Santa Maria; provision of services to the community of Templeton; additionai services to Cuesta College; and expanded services for PG&E Staff also provided information and assistance to the SLO Transit Manager on the FTA Section 9 process, submitted comments on the Draft Short Range Transit Plan, and participated in meetings on funding options for the proposed Regional Transit Center. Ongoing assistance was also provided to member agencies on new funding sources. This assistance took the form of workshops, meetings,conference calls, and written correspondence concentrating on rail, transit, bicycle, and Park-and-Ride lots. Staff also informed the general public of "Grant News" through articles in the Coordinator newsletter. Grant applications increased significantly regionwide. - 2300 Specialized Social Service Transportation Study - The State mandated study was completed as required in December. It was recommended that a Consolidated Transportation Services Agency(CTSA) be formed to coordinate and consolidate social services transportation. Staff also conducted an extensive effort to assist all fixed route services in complying with the new federal requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act(ADA). A model Compliance Plan was amended into the Work Program and submitted to the Council in January. It was designed to meet new requirements affecting San Luis Obispo City Transit,Central CoastArea Transit(LCAT), and the South County Area Transit (SCAT) system. The plan developed a single consolidated regional plan for all three systems using the Runabout as the key service provider. The model program was further refined into an overall regional consolidated plan,and adopted in June. This consolidated effort provided significant savings to the three service operators. 2400 Atascadero DAR Transit Development Plan-A consultant was hired via an RFP process, and prepared the first Short Range Transit Development Plan for the Atascadero Dial-a-Ride transit system. The final plan was completed in July and should be heard by the Atascadero City Council in August. A-13-7 .rvtr� 2500 Transit Component of Rail Feasibility Study(UMTA Grant)-The AFP was integrated with the rail study (WE 4400).,and a contract was awarded in September to Scheirmeyer Consulting Services. The firm assessed transittrail interrelationships, options for rail projects, and an examination of potential sites for future rail stations. The study was completed and accepted by the Area Council in February. The study provided information on seven (7) possible service' improvements. These improvements were categorized into two options: 1) increased service to and from the south, 2) county commuter rail feasibility, and increased service along the coastal rail corridor to San Francisco. Seven potential rail station tocatlons�were identified. The former Southern Pacific depot in Paso Robles, and the southwest Grand Avenue location in South County were recommended by the consultant. WE 3000 REGIONAL STREETS, ROADS AND HIGHWAYS 3100 Road&Highway Improvements-A Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) was prepared, adopted, and submitted to the California Transportation Commission. Tyvo major projects were included and recommended for funding: continued widening of Route 46 from Airport Road to Branch Road, and the construction of three passing lanes on Route 41 West between Morro Bay and Atascadero. Neither project was funded due,to programming over$50 million in this region during the prior funding cycle. Staff also reviewed and commented on Caltrans Highway System Operations and Protection Plan (HSOPP) projects to assure that they reflect the needs of the region. Staff has continued to monitor and facilitate action by Caltrans on the previously- programmed g mmed'Cuesta Grade_ improvement' After a strong lobby effort a consultant wa5.hiced and staff.was asked to be a member of a Caltrans Project Development Team. This is the first time SLOCOG,staff will serve in this capacity. In this role staff has had the opportunity to directly participate with the consultants in the environmental and project development process. Staff has worked directly with the consultants in reviewing project alternatives,mitigation measures,public participation,and the scoping meetings. Staff also submitted comments to Caltrans on their draft, "Long Term Transportation Strategy Document" This document will guide the multi-modal transportation improvements in the region during the next twenty years. Staff comments focused on multi-modal transportation options and intergovernmental relationships. � promote implementation ementation of recommendations in timed to rom p During the past year staff has also con P t g P y Route 1 Corridor studies, and other as 'oval Transportation Plan, the Route 101 and he Re i t P 9 applicable. 3200 General Plan and Project Review - On an ongoing basis, staff has reviewed and commented on General Plan updates (for the cities of Atascadero, Paso Robles, Pismo Beach, San Luis Obispo, and the County of San Luis Obispo), major development proposals, and proposed Road impact Fee Programs. SLOCOG comments emphasized the provision of alternative transportation modes,reduced reliance on the automobile,and a more integrated land use mix. A-13-8 � ;,AJ i.j 3300 Environmental Mitigation and Visual Enhancement- Staff has provided assistance to member agencies on a as needed basis for this new grant program. Several grant proposals were submitted this year,two were funded in July 1992: native tree reforestation for the Rt 46{101 road improvement project and the purchase of the Elfin Forest in Los Osos. 3400 South County Transportation Study - Staff has reviewed and commented on "Working Papers" #1 and #2 with the Technical Transportation Advisory Committee members from the County and the cities of Arroyo Grande, Pismo Beach, and Grover City. An Administrative-Draft was prepared and critiqued. A final report is scheduled for completion and submittal in August The study assessed land use plans and developed a traffic model for the entire study area. Traffic projections were developed and transportation deficiencies were identified to the year 2010. Major improvements were developed and prioritized. This significant study will form the basis for development of the Congestion Management Plan in the South County area. 3500 Regional Traffic Model Development- Staff has concentrated efforts on the integration of existing models an the South County. The result of these efforts provided information necessary to scope the preparation of the region wide traffic model. This model is a required element of the "Congestion Management Plan." WE 4000 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING 4100 Regional Transportation Pian Update - The Area Council modified the Overall Work Program to delay a major update of the RTP and its EIR until the following year. This action was based on the following: the RTP was significantly updated in 1990, a Congestion Management Plan is now required by December 1993 (as a result of becoming an urban'county), an environmental review on the CMP is also required, and State law requires the two dQcuments-to be consistent. Deferring the pian update and environmental review would also have the benefit of saving funding (Approximately $60,000 in consultant costs, and $40,000 in salaries) by consolidating the CMA and RTP environmental process. A reaffirmation of the 1990 RTP with only minor amendments is scheduled in August. 4200 Comprehensive Environmental impact Report-As noted above,the RTP environmental process was deferred into FY 92/93 to better integrate the RTP and CMP process. Staff will soon begin preparation of the RFP for the EIR. 4300 Aviation Planning and Programming-SLOCOG, working with each airport operator, has submitted eight proposed• projects to be considered for funding in the Aviation State Transportation Improvement Plan (STIP). Data is currently being compiled to conduct a ground access improvement program per the requirements of SB 2487. A SLO airport airline passenger survey has been completed, and a SLO Airport Employee Survey is being finalized. The feasibility of establishing a Transportation Management Association is an objective of the survey. A-13-9 4 lr 4400 Rail Planning/Improvement Feasibility Study - Study completed on schedule. An RFP was released in August 1992. A technical rail advisory committee was also formed and their input. was incorporated into the Scope of Work. In September, a consultant was secured to identify feasible rail projects and recommend appropriate funding options. This study was coordinated with WE 2500. ' Seven rail service improvements, and a host of rail improvement. recommendations, were identified, assessed and prioritized. These improvements were coordinated with the Caltrans Division of Rail. The study has laid the foundation for a modification of the State Passenger Rail Plan to extend the San Diegan north to Sen Luis Obispo. Efforts are now focusing on implementing the recommendations of the Study including lobbying for an extension of the San Deigan, rail funding eligibility, SLO station improvements, and north county and south county mufti-modal stations. 4500 Commodity Movement - The OWP envisioned a minimal update of the Commodity Movement chapter of the RTP. This effort will be deferred with the deferral of the RTP Update. Efforts year-to-date include rail options in the Rail Study and a thorough analysis of trucking issues, impacts, interaction with ISTEA, and improvement strategies in the development of the Cuesta Grade Project Elft. WE 5000 INTERGOVERNMENTAL SERVICES AND COORDINATION 5100 Intergovernmental Coordination - Extensive time and commitment has been expended in intergovernmental coordination at the Federal, State, and local levels. Staff has found this coordination as critical to the success of the organization and the ability to maximize funding and assure that the concerns of the region are adequately addressed. In this effort;staff has attended applicable monthly meetings of the statewide Regional Transportation Plan--Groups (RTPA) and the California Transportation Commission;'the COG Directors Association (5x/year)-,and the Caltrans Regional Group Coordination(6x/year) Meetings, commenting on issues of importance to the region. During FY 91/92 your Executive Director served as President of the Council of Governments Directors Association of California (CDAC). SLOCOG as benefitted °;from this office through attendance of bi-monthly meetings with the Director of Caltrans, his key staff, and Directors of the major COGs throughout the state. These efforts resulted in increasing the visibility of SLOCOG throughout the State; obtaining over ,$350,000 annually as the County minimum for Transit Improvement Grants; successfully expanding the Proposition 116 Guidelines to include bikelanes, buses, and Park-and-Ride lots as eligible projects; assuring rural county interests were included in California's official response to the federal highway reauthorization bill;participating in the development of the statewide CALCOG position on growth management; initial review of housing and federal transportation legislation; and providing input into the allocation formulas for State and federal monies. Staff has also met with the Santa Barbara Association of Governmentson several occasions to discuss growth management,rail services,and an intercounty public transit service link. Meetings have also been held with the Planning Directors Committee to develop a Regional Housing Plan, the Council's position on growth management, and to complete the Highway 101 Visual Study. A13 -10 Staff forwarded comments on key interregional issues to the city/county managers committee on growth management and solid waste. Staff also met with the committee to discuss new requirements for securing "urbanized area" status and congestion management planning. A new Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Caltrans was ratified which solidifies the SLOCOG standing as the Metropolitan Planning Organization. The new MOU outlines a refined strategy of coordination with Caltrans in the preparation of the Overall Work Program (OWP) and budget; the Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP); the Regional Transportation Plan(RTP); and the Congestion Management Program (CMP). The MOU delineates: new intergovernmental responsibilities for the Proposed State Transportation.Improvement Program (PSTIP) and Project Study Reports(PSR); includes SLOCOG on the Project Development Team for all mutually agreed upon PSRs; and includes SLOCOG in the process of developing the Highway System Operation and Protection Plan (HSOPP) and the Interregional Road System (IRRS) Plan. 5200 Legislative Program- Staff continued to monitor proposed legislation through review of interregional bulletins and membership on various committees and organizations. During FY 91/92 efforts have been focused on reviewing and jointly developing statewide positions on the proposed reauthorization of the new Federal Surface Transportation Act novy called the Intermodal Surface Transportation Act(ISTEA). Most recommendations were integrated into the final bill, signed by the President in December, providing significant flexibility in funding options. Efforts since that time have focused on interpreting the new bill, and working with statewide counterparts, in influencing draft state implementing legislation. SLOCOG adopted a legislative program in January. This program focused on: improving transportation funding, enhancing its flexibility in the use of these funds, reducing costly or repetitive processes,and-enhancing the transportation system for all segments of the-population. Based upon this policy program SLOCOG has reviewed and taken positions on over twenty legislative bills. SLOCOG has also worked directly with our new Senator, Gary Hart, to author a bill(SB 1691) to make SLO eligible for state rail bond funds, as recommended in the Rail Study (WE 4400). SB 1691 is moving through the legislature and is anticipated to be signed by the Governor. 5300 Public Participation-Staff expanded the public participation program through distribution of the Coordinator, meeting with citizen groups and social service providers, and holding public workshops on a variety of transportation proposals. Completion and distribution.of this annual report is also part of the SLOCOG effort to interact with the general public. Efforts have also continued to coordinate with transit systems, the Air Pollution Contrgl District (APCO), and the ridesharing program in participating and developing programs for Clean Air Week, Earth Week, Ridesharing Week, Bikefest, Transit Day, and College Orientation Programs. A-13-11 000 TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT AND RIDESHARING WE6 iso committees for the CAP; the Citizens 6100 Clean Air Plan- Assisted the APCD in drafting the Transportation Control Measures o the Clean Air Plan (CAP). Staff served on three advisory d the Trip Reduction Advisory Committee advisory committee,Technical Advisory Committeeae Transportation Reduction Ordnance and Staff developed an employer survey pertaining to administered the survey to County employees. SLOCOG staff has also as ssted the County in interpreting the results, and developing an employee Transportation Demand Management program. o evaluate prospective 6200 TSM, TDM and TCM Strategies - Staff has continuednd t Management and Control Management Transportation Systems Management. Ds aff has facilitated their integration into regional Techniques and strategies. Where appropriate and local plans, ordinances, and major development proposals. Graft Transit Oriented Development Guidebook for local governments and An Administrative ared. This guidebook provides guidelines for transit bus private developers has also been prep encouragepedestrian friendly stops and facilities, and design guidelines to e oveour advisory committees in Fall 1992 developments. A daft plan is scheduled for ' 6300 Pack Staff -and-Ride Lot Planning = The Park-and-Aide Lot study was adopted in July. coordinated with Caltrans the implementation of adopned,ppa`k��Ride��wh ch should be h Caltrans and the Ridesharing Coordinator to locate three operational soon. 0 ement all Staff has continued to pursue the Council's directive to end Ride inate�S uCaltrans tc itheladoption of the improvements identified in the 1991 Regional dark z d n expansion of the Halcyon lot'in of the"Study"bike lockers have been appliedfor and ordered for�re�to soc tats; benches have been applied for through Caltrans grants for six lots. Arroyo Grande has been completed. pro am - A part-time bikeway coordinator was estabtfshed in July-and has �- 6400 Bikeways 9 accomplished the following tasks: with five jurisdictions for bikeway facility and program grants. Nine applications 1) Coordinated 1 were submitted under two grant programs. Staff`�`�P�pos�on agencies 16 funding prop am(ogra of projects that would be eligible for the upcoming 2 Coordinated with all jurisdictions to develop strategiesto unfit e b k upcoming nlu ed in the Regional Transportation Plan. A calendar was designedP grant deadlines. ed to the County for the wide Impact Fee to determine costs 3) Calculations were s mdd t oval bikeways and facilities in the region. to be shared by developers for a 4 Periodic inventories of bikeway conditions were econstruct bicyclenducted and eracks, lockers, and to forwarded to appropriate jurisdictions to imp address poor conditions on bikeway segments. facilities. 5) Coordinated with the County to place bike lockers and arks at county A-13-12 6 6) Develop a bicycle safety program with the City of San Luis Obispo bicycle coordinator to be implemented at all schools and colleges in the region. This effort resulted in the initiation of' Regional Bikeways Plan to include safety and education information, contact phone numbers, and commuter tips. Staff also successfully lobbied the State to include such a program in the official State Transportation Commission Legislative Program. 7) Assisted the Ridesharing staff in promoting cycling for commuting at the annual"Bike to Work Day." Over S00 cyclists participated in the event. For the two weeks prior to the event an informational booth and promotions were conducted at Farmers Market 8) Guidelines for Bike-and-Ride service were also prepared and approved. WE 7000 TRANSPORTATION FINANCE 7100 Regionwide Supplemental Funding-Staff worked closely with County Administrative staff and their consultant to prepare the regional transportation component of the Countywide Impact Fee program. Staff has continued to monitor economic conditions in anticipation of a possible local option sales tax program. This proposal has been temporarily placed on hold.due to the poor economy and no present interest by the Council in seeking additional funding sources. 7200 Proposition 116 and Article XIX Funding Programs - Staff met with City Managers, Planning Directors, and Council delegates to develop project"wish lists." These wish lists were compiled to survey the range of proposed projects in the region. Staff provided information on all funding sources and the Transit Capital Improvement Program (TCI), along with other funding sources pertaining to transit Three TCI projects were submitted and prioritized and submitted to the State. This was the first time the region has submitted any projects under this program. -The three projects were:. 1) Regionwide bus rehabilitation for fourteen transit coaches; 2) Planning and preliminary engineering for an intermodal transit transfer center in downtown San Luis Obispo; and 3) Feasibility, environmental, and preliminary engineering studies for a multimodal rail station in Paso Robles. All three projects were funded. Funding was allocated from Proposition 116 money to two transit systems for transit bus purchases.A total of$1.3 million will be used to add three busses to the regional system and two to San Luis Obispo Transit Screening procedures were created for the remainder of the$10.1 million available locally. A-13-13 WE 8000 REGIONAL GROWTH MONITORING repare the update of the 1992 Regional Profile which has been 8100 Growth Monitoring-Staff p p distributed to appropriate agencies. This report includes, including: population, housing,recent and socio- distributed demographic information available in the region, employment ,anddpublic transportation statistics. The updated ment and income,local government revenues P Y report has been distributed to all member agencies ional 8200 Traffic Monitoring - 'Staff continued to analyze trends in tans and County information raffic growth on key n roadways and intersections. Staff updated datao Gess toward Clean Air and Traffic mitigation i determining impacts necessary to monitor p g , objectives. Staff continued to research and document total Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and ` develop a local monitoring system. WE 9000 ADMINISTRATION i 9100 Administration - Carried out work tasks on anh dul dn9O her administrative tasks were year-to-date financial reports were cos. Year-end and monthly mplete as ming, scheduling, budgeting, and financial f conducted on an ongoing basis, including program management for all activities in the Overall Work Program (OWP). task came as a result of being designated an"urban" 1 The most significant new and unanticipated of additional oun b the US Census. As a result, State and Federal an of heir 92/931 Overall Work county Y been requirements and resp that havere prerequisites required to be addressed this year. ; Program. A number of time-consuming p q resolutions from all i These prerequisites-have all been completed, and include the following: Or anization, and E supporting designation of SLOCOG ase 2/93 Overall Work9Program in accordance jurisdictions supp g g developing th the Congestion Management Agency; a dation requirements; i with federal "urban county"'requirements; new substantive funding pp development of an Indirect Cost Allocation Plan; DisadvantagedrBQs�C tmee .federal Program goals and procedures; establishment of an accounting p standards; urban area boundary map adjustments; and establishmentof the metropolitan planning area boundary. Staff participate in training courses and seminars including computer skills, 9200 Staff Training- P p prevention training, planning management and communications skills, sexual harassment seminars, and all planners seminars. Staff also attended workshops ement Programs,pertaining newplanning Qualitya and programming requirements including: Congestion g Conformity, and the new Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991.. A-13-14 WE 10000 SOLID WASTE 10100 Solid Waste Management - This section provides a brief description of the work completed for the planning process for AS 939. Source Reduction and Recycling Elements (SRRE) - A major portion of the A8 939 tasks-were completed with the submission of the Draft SRREs to the State for review. State staff commented that the SLO SRREs are among the best they have reviewed.and only minor revisions are necessary. Household Hazardous Waste Element (HHWj_ - The Draft HHW is nearing completion with a savings in funding due to in-house preparation by a subcommittee of the Solid Waste Technical Advisory Committee. Portions of the Draft will be circulated in August: Countywide Siting Element(CSE) -The CSE will be prepared as soon as the State guidelines are issued which are anticipated in September.The Siting Study was completed by the County during FY 91/92 The CSE requirements are considerably different from the recently completed study and there are some concerns that it did not adequately consider various local issues and constraints. As a consequence of the study's review, the Siting Study will be prepared with a more defined scope and additional input form the SWTAC and the SWTF. Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan (CoIWMP) -The State mandated CoIWMP will be prepared in-house at a significantly reduced cost to member jurisdictions because much of the information was collected for the SRREs. The CoIWMP requires all eight (8) SRREs to be consolidated into a single integrated plan. Tipping Fees - San Luis Obispo County provided the up front fundipg_for the prograrrt and-has nearly been reimbursed in full. A policy decision is needed regarding future collection of monies. Legislative/Grants - Staff has assisted the Countywide Integrated Waste Management Board.in their attempts to strengthen AB 939 and continues to monitor legislative proposals affecting solid _ waste issues. SLO County made application for a Market Development Zone grant through-the Integrated Waste Management Board. This grant assists starting recycled materials businesses. The grant was not awarded in the first cycle, however, staff will pursue this application in the second cycle. WE 11000 REGIONAL HOUSING PLAN 11100 Regional Housing Needs Plan-Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65583, a Regional Housing Needs Plan for the San-Luis Obispo County Region was prepared and adopted in November 1991. A comparison was made of each of the eight jurisdictions to determine market demand for housing, employment opportunities and commuting patterns, availability of sites,and public services.The objective to determine each jurisdiction's share of the regional housing needs. SLOCOG submitted the plan to the State Department of Housing and Community Development under protest that the regional share of new statewide housing units could not be provided due to resource constraints. A-13-15 r housing units Several plans were-submitted resulting in a final reduction of ruto deduce its share f 4,600 6 s regionwide. An appeal was made by the City of San Luis Obispo required to fulfill its regional housing share. The Planning Directors Committee concurred with a recommendation to deny the request which was upheld. A-13-16 COUNCIL of GOVERNMENTS COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP Technical Transportation Advisory Committee (TTAC) - Arroyo Grande . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Van Laurn, Doreen Liberto-Blanck _ Atascadero . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Henry Engen, Greg Luke Grover City . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tom Sullivan, Bob Mack Morro Bay Mike Upton, Bill Farrell Paso Robles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Bob Lata, John McCarthy Pismo Beach . . Jim Ashcraft, Ken Curtis San Luis Obispo City . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Wayne Peterson,Terry Sanrn7le, Harry Watson San Luis Obispo County . . . . . . . . . . . . . Clint Milne, Bryce Tingle Cattrans . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jerry Laumer, Shayne Sandeman Air Pollution Control District . . . . . . . . . . . Bob Carr, Larry Allen Citizens Transportation Advisory Committee (CTAC) 1 st Supervisorial District . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Melanie Dunn (Vice Chair) 2nd Supervisorial District . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mark Shaffer 3rd Supervisorial District . . . . .. . . . . . . . Steve Otto 4th Supervisorial District. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Earl Tacked Sth Supervisorial District . . . . . . . . . , George Sullivans Arroyo Grande . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Harold Moore Atasca Grover Clyero . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jim' Rodger(Chair) Grover City Scott Metcalf Morro Bay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Bancroft"B" Rohan Paso Robles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Patrick Mackie Pismo Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dick Murphy San Luis Obispo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Joe Risser Area Council Appointee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jim Merkel Area Council Appointee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Linda Dalton Area Council Appointee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Richard Kranzdorf Area Council Appointee . . . . . . . . . . . ... . Allan Massar, Gary Deno (Alternate) A-13-17 Regional Transit Productivity Committee'' Low Income Representative (Chair) . . . . . Glenna0eane Dovey ' Central Coast Area Transit . . . . . . . . . . . John Bates & Richard Randise Regional Handicapped System . . . . . . . . Clint Milne, John Wallo San Luis Obispo County Area Transit . . . Clint Milne, John Wallo San Luis Obispo Transit.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Harry Watson Morro Say Dial-A-Ride . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mike Upton Atascadero Dial-A-Ride . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Valerie Humphrey Paso Robles Dial-A-Ride . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mike Compton South County Area Transit System . . ... . . Chris Christenson Public: Dial-A-Ride Systems . . . . . . . . . . . Bancroft (8) Rohan Public: Fixed Route Systems . . . . . . . . . . Dr. Walter Rice Public: Handicapped Community . . . . . .. Allan Massar/Gary Deno CTSA Representative . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . Mark Shaffer Senior Service Representative . . . . . . . . . Dorothy Yelda Senior Transportation Service Rep . . . . . . Rene Tanner Handicapped Service Representative . . . . Phil Dauterman Bus Driver . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Henry (Gene) Gates Planning Directors Committee Atascadero . . . o . . . . . . . . . Henry Engen Arroyo Grande . . . . . . Doreen Liberto=Bianck _ r Grover City . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tom Sullivan Morro Bay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Bill Farrel Paso Robles . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . . . . Bob Lata Pismo Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ken Curtis .Ar San Luis Obispo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Arnold Jonas County of San Luis Obispo . . . . . . . . . . . Alex Hinds A-13-18 Solid Waste Task Force City of Arroyo Grande . . . . . . . . . Councilmember Pete Dougall City of Atascadero . . . . . . . . . . . . Mayor Robert Nimmo City of Grover City . . . . . . . . . . . . Councilmember Fred Monroe City of Morro Bay . . . . . . . . . . . . Michael Upton City of Paso Robles . . . . . . . . . . . John McCarthy City of Pismo Beach . . . . . . . . . . Councilmember Mike Fiorentino City of San Luis Obispo . . . . . . . . Councilmember Penny Rappa County of San Luis Obispo . . . . . Supervisor Harry Ovitt Hauler Representative . . . . . . . . . Tom Martin Recycler Representative . . . . . . . . Kurt Kupper Environmental Representative . . . Henry Hammer Public Representative . . . . . . . . . Bill Walther Solid Waste Technical Advisory Committee " City of Arroyo Grande . . . . . . . . . Doreen Liberto-Blanck City of Atascadero . . . . . . . . . . . . Greg Luke City of Grover City . . . . . . . . . . . . Bob Nicholson City of-Morro Bay . . . . . . . . . . . . Michael Upton City of Paso Robles . . . . . . . . . . . John McCarthy City of Pismo Beach . . . . . . . . . . Jim Ashcraft City of San Luis Obispo . . . . . . . . Cindy Butterfield County of Sam Luis Obispo . , . . . Bob Hendricks (aitemate Wayne Half _ Clint Milne(alternate Carmen Fojd '---- George Rowland (alternate John Scholtes) Bryce Tingle Hauler Representative . . . . . . . . . Paul Spencer Cayucos CSO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Terry Schubert Templeton CSD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Richard Dolling Nipomo CSD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ryder Ray Los Osos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Don Asquith Cambria CSO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dave Andres Cal Poly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dave Ragsdale c:\Wasp\i«\anrpcsls.le. A-i 3-19 REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: C-2 Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 08/25/92 File No: CUP 92-007 From: Henry Engen, Community Development Director .K SUBJECT: Findings for Denial - Blockbuster Video Signage Conditional Use Permit - 7025 El Camino Real (Pacific Entertainment) (Fisher) . RECOMMENDATION: At the City Council's August lith meeting, the 'action of the. Council - on a 3 : 2 vote - was to uphold the appeal of Glenda and Jerry Taft to deny CUP #92-007. The attached draft Findings for Denial have been prepared to formalize that action. BACKGROUND: The CUP request was for approval of two (2) 22 square foot yellow and blue wa11 signs faking Santa Ysabel and El Camino Real. Based upon the comments of the Council majority in_�day-ing the.- use permit, the attached Findings for Denial have been drafted. It should be noted that the applicant retains the right for signage over the public entryway facing the Payless parking lot. RECONSIDERATION REQUEST: Subsequent to .the hearing, the applicant's representative has sub- mitted the accompanying letter requesting that reconsideration be given by the Council to their action on this matter. Pursuant to the Atascadero Municipal Code, Section ' 2-1. 12(d) (see attached) , Council may reconsider this matter provided that a motion made by a member of the prevailing side carries. Should the Council vote in favor of reconsideration, the discussion should be limited to the question of whether to re-hear the matter - but not the facts of the case. Further, formal reconsideration of the CUP would require public notice for a hearing, which would mean continuing the matter to September 8th. HE:ph .lvtr,i:3r Encls: Draft Findings for Denial Communication from Robert Fisher - Auguste, 1992 Municipal Code Excerpt Staff Report - August 11, 1992 cc: Robert Fisher Pacific Entertainment (Dennis Bell) Glenda and Jerry Taft Draft Findings for Denial Conditional Use Permit #92-007 (Pacific Entertainment/Fisher) 7025 El Camino Real City Council Meeting: August 25, 1992 ENVIRONMENTAL FINDING: The proposed project will not have a significant impact on the environment. A Categorical Exemption has been determined for the project and is consistent with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) . FINDINGS• 1. The proposed wall signs for Blockbuster Video and sign program, as proposed, would be inconsistent with the character of the shopping center, immediate neighborhood, and contrary to its orderly development. 2 . The proposed yellow signage is inharmonious with the site and inconsistent with the City's Appearance Review Manual (p. '27/ 5. Signs, c. ) . JvOA. .� '�L":� �t- Littj I i-o ��►— ISI fe 'L'f � �� t 2yi3s�'' i.�tt' �N.J►'f' 'fov� �Bt1��('�' iZ.k3GO�.IS1� '{G•� TK96 /Ltsat� �����13i-►GSi7 ��2=At— tap-�13� �N i3����st3o;,�' /��ur+�'nD,t�a t-13c;s t 51�sr� Lx�i.o� S t►l�t� �tAk-►t7,�C�5 ��- tl-lt3� 7'1�`-'� pI� j.td'i _��•t5S' 1N.�F+.13___�itC`j o� �'r���,bbd�� � i�x-YL-� i�o�B fs- �l+�v�-� o� St3Yt3�z.a-1._ _ .-r T,L�O i-i .i'Na•,o ri r P(d s._ cr-. tSi3�-i3 Tt+}T T1►t3sl st'l-t-►1 f- 't�� b� f�+dr �k i5�' ay bYItJ {-4 t1l w+ - v 67 tN� h►Gi.+�.+� N�►3 "CK✓ O'�Pu�rur+ r 1`( � N '� `�'C;.[ YI�I� '(1.1t35L t-�PTL'�- i l'-1-y- i• g c';�►s its l3 �o.r�- 7 %GI S,IO� 5 0r- �U�t- "O j'I i3 I T S q f r--l -re,-4( -14;4 - N,-r��T Foy. Jvtr.i,.; r?u-1B12r.:utimP, .�� ATASCADERO MUNICIPAL CODE EXCERPT 2-1.13 inillowd ou fill ('nunrilmembcrs, and shall not be deprived of any of the rights and privileges of a Councilmember by ',reason of his acting as the presiding officer. (b) Getting the Floor: Improper References. Every Councilmember desiring to speak shall address the chair and, upon recognition by the presiding officer. shall confine himself or herself to the question under debate, avoiding all person- alities and indecorous language. (c) Interruptions. A Councilmember once recognized shall not be interrupted when speaking unless it shall be to call him or her to order or as otherwise provided by this section. If a Councilmember, while speaking, shall be called to order, he or she shall cease speaking until the question of order has been determined and, if in order, he or she shall be permitted to proceed. - (d) Motions to Reconsider. A motion to reconsider any action taken by the Council at a regular meeting may be made i only on the day such action was taken or at the next succeeding adjourned or regular meeting. Such a motion shall be made by . one of the prevailing side but may be seconded by any Coun- cilmember and may be made at any time. It shall be debatable. Nothing in this section shall be construed to prevent any Councilmember from making or remaking the same or another motion at a subsequent meeting of the Council. (Ord. 19 § 2-1.12, 1980) Sec. 2-1.13. Addressing the Council. ` (a) Any person desiring to address the Council during a {{� regular meeting shall first secure the permission of the presiding I officer to do so. (b) Taxpayers or residents of the City, or their'=autho- { rized legal representatives, may address the Council by oral communications on any matter concerning the City's business or on anv matter over which the Council has control;provided, i REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda, Item: C-1 Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Mtg. Date: 08/11/92 From: Henry Engen, Com. Dev. Director OwLIZ File No: CUP 92-007 SUBJECT: Appeal filed by Jerry and Glenda Taft of the Planning Commission's approval of Conditional Use Permit 92-007 approving wall signs for a proposed Blockbuster Video store at 7025 El Camino Real (Pacific Entertainment, applicant; Robert Fisher, representative) RECOMMENDATION: Denial of the appeal and approval of Conditional Use Permit 92-007 based on the Planning Commission's Findings and subject to their Revised Conditions of Approval. PROJECT REOUEST: The applicant is seeking approval of three 22 square foot blue and yellow wall signs on their proposed 6,000 square foot video store at the northeast corner of E1 Camino Real and Santa Ysabel Avenue. Under the current sign ordinance Planning Commissi-on appr_ova-1 is required for signs on building faces without a public entrance. In view of the building's unique location which required four building "fronts", staff recommended approval of two additional wall signs facing the abutting streets. The third sign over the public' entry faces the parking lot and is allowed by right. BACKGROUND: On July 7, 1992, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the signage request and on a 3 :2:2 vote, approved the Condi- tional Use Permit. There was discussion and public testimony as evidenced in the attached minutes excerpt. HE:ps Attachments: Letter of Appeal dated July 21, 1992 Staff Report dated July 7, 1992 Minutes Excerpt - July 7, 1992 Revised Conditions of Approval - July 7, 1992 cc: Glenda and Jerry Taft Pacific Entertainment (Dennis Bell) Robert Fisher :ULY. i 199^ _ y ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL I WISH TO SUBMIT MY APPEAL FOR THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLIED FOR BY BLOCKBUSTER :VIDEO FOR THE ADDITIONAL SIGNS AND ALSO THE COLOR OF THE SIGNS. THAKK YOU. . '7L/ LENDA TAFT 1109 EL CAM I NO REAL ATASCADERO. CALIFORNIA 9-02-7 ENCL. CHECt`: 4 Zod ©�1 z,I q z 571,3 EEl F JUL 21 1992 coMt,, ,Nirr DEVELOPMENT Jlltr.• CITY OF ATASCADERO STAFF REPORT Item: B-3 FOR: Planning ing Commission Meeting Date: July 7, 1991 BY: Robert/Malone, Assistant Planner File Nlo: CUP 92-007 SUBJECT: Consideration of a conditional use permit application for an exception to the Sign Area Standards of the Zoning Ordinance to allow two wall mounted signs on a 6,000 square foot retail commercial building. RECOMMENDATION• Staff recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit 92-007, based on the Findings contained in Attachment F and the Conditions of Approval in Attachment G. SITUATION AND FACTS: 1. Applicant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Pacific Entertainment 2. Representative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Robert Fisher, Architect 3. Project Address. .. . . . . . . . . . . .7025 El Camino_-Rgal j 4. Site Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3.6 acres 5. Zoning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Commercial Retail (CR) 6. General Plan Designation. . . . .Retail Commercial; (RC) 7. Existing use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Parking Area for ,Payless Shopping Center 8. Environmental Status. . . . . . . . .Categorical Exemption PROJECT BACKGROUND: The Planning Division approved, with conditions, an application for Precise Plan 92-008, a 6,000 square foot retail commercial building to house a Blockbuster Video store, on June 16, 1992. Because the proposed building was under 10,000 square feet a Conditional Use Permit was not required. At the tUne of preparation of this report, the 21 day public review period for the Negative Declaration posted for this project hays not passed. The building is proposed to be located at the northeast corner of El Camino Real and Santa Ysabel Avenue in the parking lot of the Payless shopping center (see Attachment A - General~ Plan Land Use - Map and Attachment B - Zoning Map) . The shopping center is comprised of eight separate parcels which is reflected in varying architectural and sign styles. The site development plans indicate generous landscaping surrounding an attractive freestanding building. The building has been carefully designed to fit in with the rather loose architectural style of the shopping center. Because of the unique circumstance that the freestanding building sits on a street corner, all building elevations have been designed so as not to turn their back on either the two streets or the shopping center (see Attachment C - Site Development Plans) . There is only one building entry, facing east into the Payless parking area. The precise plan approval includes one wall sign located over the building entry canopy using individual channel letters. Since the Zoning Ordinance permits only one wall sign per entry (AMC Section 9-4. 134) , any additional signs must be granted through the conditional use permit process. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Because the building entry faces the parking lot, the applicant wishes to locate two additional wall mounted signs on the south and west building elevations facing El Camino Real and Santa Ysabel Avenue. The proposed sign design and locations are consistent with the sign approved over the entry on the Precise Plan. The proposed signs are constructed of individual channel letters measuring 18 inches in height and spell out Blockbuster Video in capital letters. The sign length is 14 feet and the area is 22 square feet. The Zoning Ordinance permits an aggregate area of up to 100 square feet. The individual plexiglass sign faces are yellow and the returns (sides) are blue to match the franchise colors of the tenant. The blue returns on the channel letters will match the awnings of the. building and the ceramic tile accents. Color exhibits of the building elevations and sign colors will be presented at the public hearing. ANALYSIS: Staff believes the applicants request is well justified due to the unique orientation of the freestanding building on the street corner. The aggregate area of two proposed and the one previously approved sign will be within the Zoning Ordinance provision of 100 square feet maximum. The Zoning Ordinance provision for wall signs is tailored to meet the needs of conventional narrow commercial lots that face one street. The conventional arrangement usually consists of one lot with the building located adjacent to the street. The building r J,Cy 6 fy entry is either facing the street or parking area. When the entry faces the street the wall sign provision is sufficient to meet tenant identification needs. If the entry faces a side parking area, a monument sign may be located along 'the street. To properly identify the tenant of the building to passing _ motorists traveling along E1 Camino Real (especially when heading south) or Santa Ysabel, additional signs are necessary. Although the applicant has indicated to staff that the use of a monument- sign will not be considered for the project, at least two freestanding signs are permitted in the Ordinance for the Payless site. There is currently one existing monument sign identifying the Payless store located at the corner. The existing sign styles in the shopping center vary from tenant to tenant. Although a number of the major tenants ' (Payless, Coronet, Thrifty's, William Brothers, and Sprouse Ritz) have red and white roof mounted signs, the smaller tenant wall signs vary in style and color (Video Palace, Round Table Pizza , Finicky Fish, and Security Pacific Bank) . A common factor of the small tenants, however, is the use of individual channel letters located on the mansard roofs or wall over the entries. The colors and type (copy) styles vary with - Video Palace using blue/white, Round Table using white with a multi-color logo (yellow/green/red) , Finicky Fish using a wooden sign, and the Bank with a black/white/blue temporary banner. Staff believes the proposal is consistent with the - -,,Appearance--Review Guidelines for signs (page 27-28) . The sign location and use of channel letters is consistent with other shopping center tenants. The sign colors are compatible with the franchise colors used by other small tenants and are harmonious with the Blockbuster building design. CONCLUSION: Planning Staff recommends approval of the two additional signs based primarily on the unique location and orientation of the building and consistency with the intent of the Zoning Ordinance and Appearance Review Guidelines. ATTACHMENTS: A - Location Map - General Plan Land Use B - Location Map - Zoning C - Site Development Plans Landscape Plan Sign Location Plan Building Elevations with Signs Sign Elevations and Details D - Findings for Approval E - Conditions of Approval if f KZ. ATTACHMENT A - LAND USE M/ � CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 92( CITY OF ATS DERO EL CAMINO REAL �. CA 7 02 5 C�iN«e -7 ' PACIFIC ENTERTAINMENT/FISP COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT y • t — op •• .�r•.: , �� rrr¢rrr •• i p •S • 1 15�3 >w Id 1c3M o ul <,�vu.;Z I • car / tA . . M • ` ; d t�it t 7 =un �• _1111 ,►�:,�:t � . - 'ATTACHMENT C - SITE DEVELOPMEN PLAN �I CITY OF ATAaCADERO PRECISE PLAN SITE PLAN CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 92007 �. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CAMINO REAL DEPARTMENT PACIFIC ENTERTAINMENT/FIS t 1 , I � 7, Q- ( � 1MfrMtWti/(i}�� - =r(_ rwww�w.rr www• i : 1 f 11 �� f # _ 1 '05EONDITIONAL .�•%� TTACHMENT C - SITE DEVELOP MENT PLAN ,1 CITY OF ATASCADERO PRECISE PLAN LANDSCAPE PLAN 7; USE PERMIT 9200 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 7025, EL CAMINO REAL DEPARTMENT PACIFIC ENTERTAINMENT/FISHE yr�r"a n ur O •WAM A( w�•rr� .., aaawF "vas "P.• .......µ.ms..•... • P•g.6r�'� UC`t' a w�Msr..rwr � w E- tw - ' � � 1»p..s� titre �Air. 7 •/ . . �u. � �a �.ea�ir.✓nn. � v iuzu ?E'Rr•-r-si stT•s�; � �►".t'1'Z'•'• .- % `\ �i�^-._ ' J _ ��- p _ \ ` �roW,ter i TTACHMENT C — SITE DEVELOI KZ , ; CITY OF ATASCADERO MENT PLAN ' SIGN LOCATION PLAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 920( DEPARTMENT 7025 EL CAMINO REAL �-•+ PACIFIC ENTERTAINMENT/ E PROPO'ihq TYPE 'A' ON PARKING -s I BLOCKSYS'f iq.YIbEQ - - _- -r PROPOSED TYPE 'A' SIGN yJ W ' TYPE 'A' SIGN PARKING LOT �ns�sv �-7•'�� SIGN LOCATION PLAN FOR BLOCKBUSTER VIDEO PACIFIC ENTERTAINMENT GNP" wVnw.«ro w•ww� EL CAMINO•-REAL AND SANTA YSABEL AVENUE ATASCADERO -*-.�•b•� --�N• •-:•� ATTACHMENT C - SITE DEVELOF MENT PLAN .1� ..` . • ' , CITY OF ATASCADERO BUILDING ELEVATIONS WITH of 0 I:T•-7 PROPOSED SIGNS C�1 . COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 9200 DEPARTMENT 7025 EL CAMINO REAL + PACI'FIC ENTERTAINMENT/FISHE .wn ,rJ•wr1J•.IJia � I i""" �. w ------------------ Ti �.l j N =4=���A run s !1\dti iw�w•A•. .I _ 1 --.4 M mom ftivarm AT T..r •}j-- .. • • �w fwr� ar wAllwY �� `�' t�•A � 1 !T • 7 ^�9 Ar wA/ •A•IIRr , d wlR , ww••ry 1 tllRww• ,t � •IOJa•lees i ` '• M/w1.�-_-. 1 % J ----_-- •ww -wrw r �u�r wrw� � wswws wwA / ! 1 `` -- wt tl[.AilOw AT!AI•TA Nam • NltawAR7 ROCU RM 7—I 1 aw•rw ww ww••w wws - , rws uAAw rY w•�•r � � V i m1 w•awwrw•Iww�w�r•r a•JA •� rw•n!i'•L vest n•r wrA r..t rw� war•w•ra wsw.wwaw% OOM KXVA")W AT 6 GMO SM —mobLr—lt rsr�w•�— tw..u.J wrrw�ar fta west v wArw +w �w •r WT TAAVATI MAT T+MKM LCT IROJkWARVROM LAR Y••••w•n•www wal•.1•w�O�w•••A•+•a1w..�w1Wr0�r/wr T'�� 1 J y E f.•'V V l!1't M.3 TTACHMENT C - SITE DEVELO MENT LAN CITY OF TAS ERO PROPOSED SIGN ELEVATI RONS A �� DETAILS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 920 7025 EL CAMINO REAL DEPARTMENT PACIFIC ENTERTAINMENT/ I B d d NAfi1NEl LETTERS � (i A e ® .ar��. ���+ �� �� PLEX-FACE C ayte-CL IDt '-,o' ASO ALt0ttSUt LATM 012740116 WM A .OSO AL&mtwm tzrM Sam v 17 nets IOLTtlaalflli /aIA TO LOM7M IOLTU aTunt flullf TO 01727 2111 AlJfa _ ana 2111 OWN Atm IlfTtwaa"T"m N MACK INTAfNSO CITfiMN il- ILZW t7Mtst2Rw a 1STlf1A tttm of TAaT twfma OT tastmA Mtn fa - .Oq ALCItz q SAM .Aq AtlaKttat OAOs ."I Na QOt*Kfrox"fame w"" r , AUCs IWSLr t♦"M .pt NO SM KnNLAA F024 mm SUCK JARtUlt TMN is W CLEM.OOY tT 20 N.A. Soon 1A ON lli11R SM 21 >•A.R. tO1011 2t2tsttaTI0A1 VAMK 1A?" sLx-n=%L fm nmaLa cn tt! A'aA` .ATA Attttt=JN SACIO1T OWAM . To lawn tAAaTCORNER aalno W" TO at ATTSTAttuD Tn tat 0100 atJR1Rflti1L "Ill taAANX 9001011 To �b tW owfam fl1AteT � 11 AAtaMlf OLL19"mm � zftr UA60 Tla1 AOTTOtt;A AM MAT"tuA TO 9W A.L. ATTAOVlD AOAt1 SOLO Alt aT=tAt1 TO At A.L. A/TWM TYPICAL LETTER SECTION TYPICAL LETTER SECTION ON RACEWAY ,SIGN TYPE "A".- AT PARAPET FACE ATTACHMENT D - Findings for Approval Conditional Use Permit #92-007 (Pacific Entertainment/Fisher) 7025 El Camino Real July 7, 1992 ENVIRONMENTAL FINDING: The proposed project will not have a significant impact on the environment. A Catagorical Exemption has been determined for the project and is consistent with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality-Act (CEQA) . FINDINGS: 1. The proposed project is consistent with the General and Specific Plans. 2. The proposed project, as conditioned, satisfies all applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, 3. The project as conditioned, will not, because of circumstances and conditions applied in the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety, or welfare of the general public or persons residing or working in the. neighborhood -of the use, or be detrimental- or injurious to property or- improvements in-the vicinity -of--the :project, - 4. The proposed wall signs for Blockbuster Video and sign program, as conditioned, will not be inconsistent with the character of the shopping center, immediate neighborhood, or contrary to its orderly development. 5. The proposed project, as conditioned, is consistent with the City' s Appearance Review Manual and is compatible with the neighborhood character. �d�. vir•a� s ATTACHMENT E - Conditions of Approval Conditional Use Permit #92-007 7025 El Camino Real July 7, 1992 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The project shall be in conformance with all conditions contained herein, including Attachment C - Site Development Plans (Sign Location Plan, Building Elevations of Signs, Sign Elevations and Details) , and all other codes and ordinances of the City of Atascadero. Any modification of the project, or this entitlement, shall be approved by the Community Development Department prior to implementing any such changes. 2. The total permitted aggregate area for. all sign types for Blockbuster Video shall not exceed 100 square feet as stipulated in the Zoning Ordinance. This applies to both wall and freestanding signs. 3. This Conditional Use Permit shall be subject to reconsider- ation by the Planning Commission, and revocation if deemed necessary, if any conditions of approval contained herein- cease to be complied with, or if the use becomes substan- tially different from that described in this application. 4. This Conditional Use Permit .shall expire one _(:1)_year from-the date of final approval, unless: a. Substantial site work toward establishing the authorized use has been performed, as defined in Section 9-2. 114 of the Zoning Ordinance; or b. The project is completed, as defined in Section 9-2.115 of the Zoning Ordinance; or C. An extension has been granted, as defined in Section 9-2. 118 of the Zoning Ordinance; or d. A building moratorium is imposed on the project site. -_�JVlr�4a1 r MINUTES EXCERPT - PLANNING COMMISSION - JULY 7, 1902 3 . CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 92-007: Application filed by Pacific Entertainment (Robert S. Fisher) for consideration of wall signs for a Blockbuster Video building. Subject site is located at 7025 E1 Camino Real. Chairperson Highland noted that an appeal has been filed on the precise plan to establish the use on the site; the public hearing will be held by the Commission on July 21st. It has nothing to do with the conditional use permit for approval of the signs. Testimony will be accepted at this hearing relating only to the use permit for the two wall-mounted signs. It was Commissioner Waage's feeling that in light of the precise plan appeal, this particular hearing should be postponed until action has been taken on the precise •plan appeal. Chairperson Highland reminded the Commission that this would not be fair to the applicant. If the appeal is not granted, then this use permit application will have been delayed from four to six weeks. If the appeal on the precise plan is granted, the use permit action would become null and void. Discussion ensued relative - to whether this--.hearing--should include consideration of the project itself. Mr. Malone clarified that the use permit review is a specific portion of the sign standards contained in the zoning Ordinance; said portion does not necessarily open the entire project for -�_ review. At this point, Mr. Malone presented the staff report concerning a request to allow two wall mounted signs for a 6,000 square foot Blockbuster Video Store. $taff is recom- mending approval subject to four conditions. Mr. Malone suggested that a new condition be added to clarify that approval of this use permit is subject to the final approval of the precise plan. Commission questions and discussion followed. ', In response to question by Commissioner Waage, Mr. Malone explained that the report he is preparing on the precise plan appeal will focus on the three areas being appealed, but will not analyze other areas of the project that have already been approved with conditions. Commissioner Lochridge inquired how the size of the proposed building compares with some of the other buildings in the "center. " It was his feeling that a 6, 000 square foot �:111Ut *:�i building located at the corner should not be considered as one of the smaller retail shops in this center; it seems to be more of a larger, major tenant. - Public Testimony - Robert Fisher, architect for Pacific Entertainment (appli- cant) , indicated his support of staff's recommendation. He conveyed his feeling that the unique orientation and position- ing of building would warrant approval of the additional wall signs. Mr. Fisher pointed out that the square footage of each of the signs is under the aggregate area of signage allowed by the Zoning Ordinance. Jerry Taft, owner of Video Palace, 7109 E1 Camino Real, voiced his opposition of the use permit and for the sign colors. He asked why this project should be able to have three times the amount of signage that the Zoning Ordinance allows. It was Mr. Taft's feeling that the highly visible location of the Blockbuster store is advertisement in itself. In speaking to the issue of proposed colors, Mr. Taft contested the staff report noting that all of the major tenants in the center have red and white colors. He also contended that Blockbuster Video should be considered as a major tenant. Mr. Taft referended the Appearance Review Manual wherein it is stated that- the colors, materials and lighting -of- each•-sign shall be restrained and be harmonious with the building. He contended that the proposed colors (yellow and blue) are not harmonious with the center; that they are designed for competition. Mr. Taft further stated that these colors will .�f make the proposed building an entity onto itself as opposed to conforming with the rest of the center. Barbara Sims, 10835 Colorado Road, concurred with points Mr. Taft raised in that the location and size of the building requires no more advertisement. Mrs. Sims referenced businesses in town that are reprimanded for having banner signs and other types of signs; yet when it comes to a national chain, it seems that the City will grant them whatever they want. Mrs. Sims urged that the use permit be denied. Dennis Bell, managing general partner with Pacific Entertainment, spoke in support of the request noting that this freestanding building is unique in that there is no "rear" of the building; all sides are within public view. Mr. Bell theorized that if this building consisted of five smaller shops (60 by 20) , each one of those 20 foot frontages would be allowed a sign which would result with five signs on the same building. He provided further examples of how more signs could be warranted. Mr. Bell pointed out that the project r1Vll't will have only one entry and one exit and added that with the request of the additional wall mounted sign, a monument sign would not be sought. Mr. Bell emphasized that the general perception seems to be that this is a shopping center. However, the various stores on the site are independent of one another with separate lots, etc. There are no common area fees, no reciprocal parking agreements that a shopping center would have. ', With regard to the proposed colors, Mr. Bell remarked they are part of the national trade dress. As a franchisee, he must meet the corporation's criteria. - End of Public Testimony - Commissioner Hanauer referenced a similar situation (Nutrisystem) wherein the applicant was granted a sign facing the shopping center parking lot as well as a '; sign facing El Camino Real. Commissioner Waage added that the Commission has consistently limited sign requests to two signs only. Commissioner Johnson remarked that the location of a store at a corner is a unique situation. It was his feeling that precedent has already been set by this Commission as well as the Council in allowing additional signage. Commissioner Johnson commented that the CommiSsion -has- always expressed the desire to be more sensitive towards businesses; to encourage new businesses to locate in Atascadero. In this case, the signage appears to have been worked into the design of the building in a rather sensitive way; it is not excessive and is below the maximum allowable square footage. Commissioner Johnson further stated that in this particular case, he did not see where the two additional signs would clutter the viewscape or be offensive in any way. Commissioner Lochridge asserted that the situation appears to involve a competition between two video stores, but he objected to the location of the proposed video store which is of greater magnitude than the locally owned store. He voiced concern that a hardship will result since the smaller store will not get the same amount of signage that the Blockbuster Video store has applied for. Commissioner Lochridge commented that if there is not a more sensitive way in which to address a flat side of a building than to put a sign on it, it is discouraging) He urged the applicant to accept the allowable signage under the ordinance without the conditional use permit at this time. it li li r Chairperson Highland stressed that the only reason for the additional signs is the unique location that is proposed to developed regardless of what business may locate there. This particular site fronts on two street which are active ones. It was Commissioner Highland's feeling that in this case, the City is not giving a "newcomer" an additional advantage over existing businesses. Chairperson Highland reminded the Commission that the revised sign ordinance will be considered by the Commission in August at which time, there will be plenty of opportunity for input on making rational changes to the existing ordinance. Commissioner Johnson clarified that the fact that Blockbuster video is a large, national chain has nothing to do with his reasoning for supporting the use permit request. This is a unique location and the signage has been proposed in a sensitive manner. He did not agree that the building is being "wrapped" with signs, and added that the signs are less than the square footage allowed. Commissioner Waage commented that there are several unique locations in the city and the most signs granted where there was not a public entrance was one; two signs for this project are more than adequate. Commissioner Lochridge noted that the only thing unique about this site is that it -is the "front door"- to the - City. He expressed. objection to the Payless monument sig- which;- in his opinion, he did not believe to be an appropriate or wise deci- sion to make; more, sensitive signage should be in order. MOTION: By Commissioner Johnson, seconded by Commissioner Hanauer to approve Conditional use Permit 92-007 based on the Findings contained in Attachment F and the Conditions of Approval contained in Attachment G. The motion carried 3:2 with the following roll call vote with the addition of a new condition to read: 111. Approval of this project, Conditional Use Permit 92-007, is subject to the final approval of Precise Plan 92-008, a site dev- elopment plan for a 6,000 square foot commercial building at 7025 El Camino Real." AYES: Commissioners Johnson, Hanauer, and Chair- Highland NOES: Commissioners Waage and Lochridge VACANCIES: Two +JtJli;;rri� ATTACHMENT E - Conditions of Approval Conditional Use Permit #92-007 7025 E1 Camino Real As Amended by Planning Commission, July 7,1992 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. Approval of this project, Conditional Use Permit 92-007, is subject to the final approval of Precise Plan 92-008, a site development plan for a 6,000 square feet commercial building at 7025 E1 Camino Real. 2. The project shall be in conformance with all conditions contained herein, including Attachment C - Site Development Plans (Sign Location Plan, Building Elevations of Signs, Sign Elevations and Details) , and all other codes and ordinances of the City of Atascadero. Any modification of the project, or this entitlement, shall be approved by the Community Development Department prior to implementing any such changes. 3. The total permitted aggregate area for all sign types for Blockbuster Video shall not exceed 100 square feet as stipulated in the Zoning Ordinance. This applies to both wall and freestanding signs. 4. This Conditional. Use Permit shall be subject to reconsider- ation- by the Planning Commission, and revocation "if deemed necessary, -if any conditions of approval =contained -herein cease to be complied with, or if the use becomes substan- tially different from that described in this application. 5. This Conditional Use Permit shall expire one ( 1) year from the date of final approval, unless: a. Substantial site work toward establishing ',the authorized use has been performed, as defined in Section 9-2. 114 of the Zoning Ordinance; or b. The project is completed, as defined in Section 9-2. 115 of the Zoning Ordinance; or C. An extension has been granted, as defined in Section 9-2.118 of the Zoning Ordinance; or d. A building moratorium is imposed on the project site. i REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item: C-3 CITY OF ATASCADERO Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 8/25/92 From: Mark Joseph, Administrative Services Director /P7 SUBJECT: Authorize Short-Term Financing for Governmental Operations. RECOMMENDATION: 1. By motion, adopt a policy of short-term financing to meet cash-flow requirements for governmental operations, if certain conditions are met. 2. Adopt Resolution 78-92, authorizing the City Treasurer to borrow on a short-term basis, monies to pay for governmental operations for FY 92-93. BACKGROUNDIHISTORY Local Governments historically experience cash flow problems, particularly in the first half of a fiscal year. This is caused by the fact that most expenditures are relatively constant ori a monthly basis (with the exception• of -',capital expenditures) ; however, revenues --- particularly-`the property-tax -- is received in two large amounts, in December and April. Thus, during the first six months of a local jurisdiction's fiscal year, cash flow is usually negative. To compensate, local jurisdictions borrow on a short-term basis (less than one year) to cover the lean months. In FY 91- 92, according to the California Debt Advisory Commission, over 250 local agencies (mostly school districts) borrowed almost $1.8 billion to cover "interim financing". In addition, for small issuers (i.e. , those agencies that borrow less than $5 million per year) , short-term borrowing offers a potential bonus of interest earnings, providing the cost of the borrowing is less than the interest earned on those monies that would have been used to cover the short-term cash flow. - Atascadero' s situation is no different than other jurisdictions in the State. Historically, we spend more than we bring in for the first six months. The net outgo is particularly severe in July and August, wherein we are projected to spend almost $750,000 more than we will bring in. In the past, we have absorbed this loss, insofar as we had sufficient fund reserves to cover the loss. In this current year, a number of events have combined to justify re-evaluating this strategy. First, the State's IOU policy is depriving us of about $100,000 per month (note: we will receive the money eventually, but it still has a negative effect on our cash flow) . Second, our General Fund reserves are virtually depleted. Third, the variance between what we can earn in the Orange County Investment Pool (currently at 9.3%) is much higher than the projected cost of the borrowing (perhaps 5.5-6.0 percent) . The City could conceivably earn as much as $35,000 in interest if we borrow money instead of drawing down on what amounts to our "savings account". In implementing this policy of "interim financing", the City needs to consider several factors: first, the savings must be real -- that is, comparison of interest rates must also include any borrowing costs (such as loan origination fees, bond counsel, etc. ) ; second, if our savings interest rate falls, the ability to prepay without penalty must be assured; to avoid actually losing money; third, competitive bids should be solicited, to assure the City the best "spread"; and fourth, sufficient lead time should be provided to assure everything is handled in a legal and appropriate manner. For the current year, at the Treasurer' s request, staff projected our monthly cash flows (for the General Fund only) . The findings are attached as Exhibit A. Based on the formula of using the month with the maximum cumulative negative balance (November) ,' added to the following month's disbursements, the total amount needed for borrowing is $1,625,000. --Bxhibit B' is the fact sheet staff used to solicit local bank offers. Insofar as the deadline for submitting offers is Friday, August 21, a supplemental report to Council will be presented, indicating. the Bank selected and actual costs. OPTIONS 1. As a matter of policy, Council may decline short-term financing, and staff will continue drawing down our cash reserves as required to meet payroll and other authorized warrants. 2. Council may choose to decline short-term financing for this particular year, if the bids reflect a net loss to the City. FISCAL IMPACT If short-term financing is approved, the City could experience earnings up to $35,000 (assuming no loan costs and a three percentage point spread for the entire nine-month period) . These earnings will be distributed based on the relative fund balances of the City' s various funds. a:shorterm#3 EXHIBIT A n n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W M In OD N v In V I t V r A n n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 0 0 In O O M N in kO M i- 1� .moi al' In V O , M• Il1 v r-1 V 0 0 0 0 A n o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 0 0 oin, ol ui In o 0 o Ill In M M O N 1# e-1 Ill In N 01 V V 1 N Ch PI k. W rl o O O O o O o 0 to 0 O O O O O O O O '.. r� O O O O O O O O 00 H N cHi w TV Iinn v Y N n r v a Iain 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r _ wb o 0 0 0 0 o O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r„ :3 In ul o o pq o 0 0 0 a N � v V Y V A n n n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 co co 0 Ln In O O O O O O O O b pl O O O O O O O O O .-1 %0 In a h qv In V (n ul V V V 4- O 4) CD 'U r-I U U r4 4) Id W id 0 a0 Gq Oi pq •� .-1 -,4 Id to tn O m P d P9 9 4) oQ (A 4-) r i id IA J:31 14 4 w H > W �as EXHIBIT B CITY OF ATASCADERO SHORT TERM NOTE FOR GOVERNMENTAL OPERATING PURPOSES REQUEST FOR OFFERS AND TERMS GENERAL INFORMATION/CONDITIONS 1. Principal Requested: $1,625,000.00 2. Purpose: To cover short-term operating expenses of the City' s General Fund. 3. Collateral: Pledged Property, Sales and other taxes of the City of Atascadero 4. Maturity Date: April 30, 1993 5. Pre-payment Schedule: Lump sum Principal & Interest due on Maturity Date. 6. Pre-payment Penalty: None 7. Please respond by 5:00 P.M. , Friday, August 21, 1992. Return information to Mark Joseph, City Hall, Room 203 (461-5014) . TO BE COMPLETED BY RESPONDING BANK.,,._ 1. Interest Rate: 2. Total Principal/Interest Due on Maturity Date: • 3. Attach all Loan Expenses, and/or any other related costs. 4. Attach all other terms and conditions. 5. Information Supplied by: Bank: Mailing Address: Phone: Bank Officer Signature Print Name/Title r _ REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Meeting Date: 8-25-92 CITY OF ATASCADERO Agendg Item: C-4(A&B) Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager From: Greg Luke, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Mandatory Waste Collection Service Exemption E RECOMMENDATION• 1. Waive reading in full and introduce Ordinance No.254. 2 . Adopt Resolution No. 77-92, ". A resolution establishing procedures for the exemption from mandatory waste collection service", to become effective concurrently with Ordinance No.254. BACKGROUND: On May 12, 1992 the Council adopted Ordinance No. 243 amending Section 6-4. 18 of the Atascadero Municipal Code which mandates all occupied premises within the city limits to subscribe to solid waste service from the- City's refuse collector. On July 9, 1992 the Council directed staff to bring back a revision to the ordinance to allow exemptions from this mandate based on four criteria; 1) financial hardship,''.; 2) low trash generator, 3) alternate disposal method, and 4) unable to set out Nw- trash. Staff has subsequently talked with Wil-Mar Disposal Company, the Recycling Committee, and Mr. Jeff McAlister, who represents many of the residents opposed to mandatory (trash pick-up. Together, a program has been developed which is ac eptable to all parties, including staff. Attachment A is a working paper prepared by staff and reviewed by all the parties listed abo*e. The working paper describes the proposed regulations and procedures. ANALYSIS• Included as attachments are Ordinance No. 254 which authorizes exemptions to mandatory trash pick-up. Resolution; No. 77-92 is a companion document which describes the proposedprocedures for implementing an exemption program. Enacting the;, implementation program by resolution allows the program to be "fine-tuned" easier than if it were adopted entirely by ordinance. i FISCAL ANALYSIS: Exemptions to mandatory trash pick-up are generally believed to transfer additional costs from the resident exempted to the normal subscriber to trash service. A rigorous fiscal impact analysis will be performed during the upcoming audit and associated fee structure review. I>r ORDINANCE NO. 254 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AMENDING TITLE 6 OF THE CITY MUNICIPAL CODE (HEALTH AND SANITATION) WHEREAS, the City of Atascadero adopted Ordinance No. 56 establishing Title 6 of the Municipal Code pertaining to Health and Sanitation; and WHEREAS, the City of Atascadero also adopted Ordinance No. 243 amending -Title 6 of the City Municipal Code to establish mandatory refuse service; and WHEREAS, the City Council is desirous of amending the Health and Sanitation regulations to provide for certain exemptions to mandatory service. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Atascadero does ordain as follows: Section 1. Title 6 of the City of Atascadero Municipal:: Code is hereby amended as shown on the attached Exhibit A, which is hereby made a part of this ordinance by reference. Section 2 . Publication The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published once within fifteen (15) days after its passage in the Atascadero News, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, published, and circulated in the City in accordance with Section 36933 of the -- Government Code; shall certify the adopting and posting of this ordinance and shall cause this ordinance and ;this certification together with proof of posting to be entered into the Book of Ordinances of the City. Section 3 . Effective Date This ordinance shall go into effect and be in full force and effect at 12 : 01 a.m. on the 31st day after its passage. On motion by Councilman and seconded by Councilman , the foregoing Ordinance is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Ordinance No. 254 Page 2 ADOPTED: ATTEST: CITY OF ATASCADERO By: LEE RABOIN, City Clerk ROBERT P. NIMMO, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: ARTHER MONTANDON City Attorney APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: GREG LUKE Director of Public Works j -- lil 4 Ordinance No. 243 EXHIBIT A Add the following to Section 6-4. 18. Mandatory Service: "A person can receive an exemption from the mandatory service requirement providing they apply for and meet certain exemption criteria established by the City Council" i f Resolution No. 77-92 A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES FOR EXEMPTION FROM MANDATORY WASTE COLLECTION SERVICE WHEREAS, the City of Atascadero adopted Ordinance 56 establishing Title 6 of the Municipal Code pertaining to Health and Sanitation; and WHEREAS, the City of Atascadero adopted Ordinance 243 establishing mandatory waste collection service; and WHEREAS, the City of Atascadero adopted Ordinance 254 allowing for exemptions from mandatory service; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to establish regulations and procedures governing the administration of the exemption program; and NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Atascadero does resolve as follows: 1. The following categories will be granted an exemption to mandatory waste collection service providing the stated criteria is met: EXEMPTION CATEGORY PROPOSED CRITERIA TO QUALIFY 1. Financial Hardship - cost Income below "low income" is a burden to low income level as set by SLOCOG families, particularly those on fixed incomes. 2. Low trash generator or Generates less than a pick-up complete recycler - individual truck of trash per quarter practices source control, recycling, or composting techniques resulting in very small quantities of waste. 3.Alternative disposal method- Has an alternate, legal method often a business owner who can of disposing of trash not dispose of trash in commercial including haul to landfill container. 4. Unable/Inconvenient to set Physically incapable of out trash - handicapped, transporting trash containers elderly, long/steep driveways or long/steep driveway or other unique circumstances which impede carrying trash containers. Resolution No.77-92 page two 2 . To file for an exemption an application form must be filed with the Public Works Department. Information provided on the application form must demonstrate that the applicant understands and qualifies for the exemption. In general, all information will be taken on a prima facia basis. 3. A special "bag" rate is hereby established for those who receive an exemption. The contract waste hauler will provide 30 gallon bag(s) for a cost of $2.50 each. No limit is established on the number of bags that may be purchased. 3. The contract waste hauler is directed to routinely pick up the specially designated bags on their weekly collection service. 4. The Department of Public Works will review all applications to determine eligibility. A list of all applicants granted an exemption from mandatory service would be sent to the contract waste hauler on a monthly basis, who will in turn remove these subscribers from their service roles. 5. The Department of Public Works will be responsible for policing the program. Generally, enforcement will occur only when a complaint is received. No active random checking will occur without reasonable suspicion of a violation. A violator would be subject to -revocation of their exemption. 6. Normal curbside recycling and greenwaste service will be voluntarily available at the rate of $1. 50 for curbside and $1.50 for greenwaste. 7. Each property receiving an exemption is required to submit a renewal notice on an annual basis. Failure to refile will result in a revocation of the exemption. On motion by Councilman and seconded by Councilman , the foregoing Resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: CITY OF ATASCAIDERO LEE RABOIN, City Clerk ROBERT P. NIMMO, Mayor �virrs_:; Resolution No. 77-92 Page three APPROVED AS TO FORM: ARTHER MONTANDON City Attorney APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: GREG LUKE Director of Public Works ORDINANCE NO. 243 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY '!OF ATASCADERO AMENDING TITLE 6 OF THE CITY _ MUNICIPAL CODE (HEALTH AND SANITATION) WHEREAS, the City of Atascadero adopted ', Ordinance 56 establishing Title 6 of the Municipal Code pertaining to Health and Sanitation; and WHEREAS, the City Council is desirous of amending the Health and Sanitation regulations; and NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Atascadero does ordain as follows: Section 1. Title 6 of the City of Atascadero Municipal Code is hereby amended as shown on the attached Exhibit A, which is hereby made a part of this ordinance by reference. Section 2. Publication The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published once within fifteen (15) days after its passage in the Atascadero News, a newspaper of general circulation, printed-,_-.published, and circulated in the City in accordance with Sectiof 36933 of-the Government Code; shall certify the adopting and posting of this ordinance and shall cause this ordinance and this, certification together with proof of posting to be entered into the Book of Ordinances of the City. Section 3. Effective Date This ordinance shall go into effect and be in full force and effect at 12:01 a.m. on the 31st day after its passage. On motion by Councilman Nimmo and seconded by Councilman Lilley, the foregoing Resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Borgeson, Dexter, Lilley, Nimmo and Mayor Shiers NOES: None ABSENT: None Ordinance No. 243 Page 2 ADOPTED: May 12, 1992 ATTEST: ;/ CITY OF ATASCADERO LEE IRABOIN, �ty Clerk BY: ALDEN SHIERS, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: AR ER MO ANDD City Attorney APPROVED AS O CONTENT: i GREG LUKE _ Director of Public Works = X Ordinance No. 243- EXHIBIT A Sec. 6-4. 18. Mandatory Service. All premises within the limits of the city which are occupied shall have refuse service from the City's refuse collector. Any person electing not to accept such service shall be required to pay the minimum charge for solid waste service. August 6, 1992 - WORKING PAPER It has come to my attention, after talking with a number of people involved with the mandatory trash exemption issue that a solution may be available that can be agreed upon by all parties. My conversations have been with representatives of Wil-Mar, the Recycling. Committee and Jeff McAlister. Fundamentally all parties can basically accept the Council's stated position with regard to exemptions. The Council's action was is to allow exemptions for the following categories (note that staff has proposed the criteria for qualifying for each exemption) : EXEMPTION CATEGORY STAFF PROPOSED CRITERIA 1. Financial Hardship Income below "low income" level as set by SLOCOG 2. Low trash generator or Generates less than a pick-up complete recycler truck of trash per quarter 3 . Alternative disposal method Has an alternate, legal -method of disposing •of__trash` not including haul`te--landf ill-s- 4 . Unable/Inconvenient to set Physically incapable of out trash transporting trash containers or long/steep driveway What remains is to develop a process for implementing these exemptions. The proposal I have discussed with all interested parties is as follows: 1. A system would be established to allow people who fall into the above listed categories to file for an exemption. A simple form would be developed which could be filled out and filed with the Public Works Department. The form would ask a few pertinent questions to insure the applicant understands and qualifies for the exemption. In general, all information would be taken on a prima facia basis; staff would make no attempt to verify the information provided. 2 . A special "bag" rate would be established for those who file for an exemption. Wil-Mar will provide a 30 gallon bag(s) for a cost of $2 . 50 each. No limit would be established on the number of bags purchased since purchasing multiple bags would be more costly JvirC! . than subscribing to "one-can" service. 3 . Wil-Mar would routinely pick up the specially designated bags on their weekly collection service. 4. A list of all applicants filing for and granted "exemptionry' service would be sent to Wil-Mar on a monthly basis."' Wil-Mar would then remove these subscribers from their service roles. 5. Staff will be responsible for policing the program. This would occur only when a complaint is received. No active random checking will occur without reasonable suspicion of a violation. A violator would be ineligible for an exemption for 5 years. 6. Normal curbside recycling and greenwaste _service would be voluntarily available at an established rate. (Proposed $1.50 for curbside and $150 for greenwaste) . 7. Each property receiving an exemption would be required to submit a renewal notice on an annual basis. Failure to refile would result in a revocation of the exemption. This program would be simple, yet effective. It provides. an easy way to obtain an exemption; yet limited staff time is required for administration. MEMORANDUM TO: City Council VIA: Ray Windsor, City Manager FROM: Greg Luke, Director of Public Works _ SUBJECT: Matters relating to mandatory trash pickup DATE: July 9, 1992 Since the Council enacted a mandatory trash pick-up ordinance, a variety of criticisms have been expressed both in the press and personal communication. Staff has had no direction from Council of any desire to alter the original decision. However, the agenda item to discuss a letter from Jeff McAlister at the July 14 Council meeting prompts the memo. Council's decision to proceed with mandatory pick-up is constrained and guided by the requirements of AB 939 which require 25% reduction in solid waste ,by 1995, and a 50% reduction by 2000. As these deadlines approach, the City must have the authority to control the entire waste stream. Programs which provide an incentive to recycle or otherwise reduce the volume of waste are only effective when the entire community is involved. Hence the necessity for mandatory pick-up. Several _documents have been- prepared previously for Council which discuss the need for mandatory pick-up, including equitable cost sharing of a community service, control of illegal dumping, and efficiency of collection. In addition, the City's Recycling Committee, after exhaustive research and debate has recommended _ mandatory pick-up. Conversely, many logical arguments have been presented why mandatory pick-up places an unfair burden on a certain segments of the population. The arguments fall into the following categories: 1. Financial Hardship: The current collection rate of $7.50 for one can and $19.00 for a 3-can capacity waste hauler is an onerous cost for low income families, particularly the elderly on fixed income. 2 . The Complete Recycler: Some residents are able to recycle/compost all or most of their waste and are doing so. 3 . Low Trash Generation: An individual (generally a senior citizen on fixed income) who purchases very few products that are commercially packaged, or simply buys very little of anything generates only a small quantity of waste. These people need only occasional trash pick-up. Often a family member or friend will pickup the small volume of trash on a regular basis and add it to their own trash collection. 'I 4 . Hauls to Landfill: An individual periodically hauls waste to the landfill, thus eliminating the need for commercial trash pick- up. 5. Alternate Disposal Method: A business owner may have trash dumpster at work which is also used to dispose of the domestic trash. The argument is made that mandatory trash pick-up for domestic service is "double charging" a business owner for trash collection. Other alternate disposal methods have been mentioned, such as hauling to San Luis Obispo where rates are lower. 6. Unable/Inconvenient to Set Out Trash: Handicapped, elderly, people with long driveways, and other unique situations make putting the trash on the side of the road difficult. Presumably these residents have arranged to handle their trash in a more convenient manner. 7 . Opposed on General Principles: Opposition has been expressed to Wil-Mar's exclusive contract, including speculation on excessive profit. General property rights, freedom of choice, excessive bureaucracy, lack of oversight, and a variety of other broad-based concerns have been associated with mandatory pick-up. In the event Council desires to reconsider the issue of mandatory pick-up, that is to say, repealing it, staff should be directed to set the matter for public hearing•-a:t which time the current ordinance would be agendized. - In the event Council desires to reconsider the issue of mandatory pick-up, that is to say, modifying the current ordinance to permit certain types of exemptions, it is recommended that the * issue be referred back to staff so that specific areas of concern may be addressed by staff, the Recycling Committee and Wil-Mar in an effort to resolve' the most compelling arguments against mandatory pick-up short of repealing the ordinance,. 'JV(Y WRIGHT & SANDERS TELEPHONE A LAW CORPORATION (805) 466-9026 5950 ENTRADA AVENUE FAX WILLIAM D. WRIGHT (RETIRED) BETTY R. SANDERS ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA 93422 (8051 466-9098 August 18, 1992 Honorable Mayor and Members of Atascadero City Council 6500 Palma Ave. Atascadero, CA 93422 Dear Sirs and Madam: Consistent with Council ' s direction to staff on July 9, 1992, Wil-Mar Disposal consulted with staff to form a workable plan to implement exemptions to mandatory garbage collection. The plan as presented is acceptable to Wil-Mar . We do have some reservations about the willingness of the general public to bear the cost of the exempted parties . Further , the lack of any attempt to verify the entitlement of any individual to an exemption seems fraught with the possibility of abuse. On---the- other hand, Wil-Mar cannot assume-_ he ministerial duty of the City to grant exemptions , and staff time to properly verify exemptions would clearly be burdensome. Therefore, if it is the wish of the Council to institute this program, we will cooperate in any way possible. Very truly yours , BETTY R. SANDERS BRS/lhd cc: Bill Gibbs , President Wil-Mar Disposal i M E M O R A N D U M To: Greg Luke, Public Works Director From: Kelly Heffernon, Administrative Analyst Subject: Recycling Committee's review of the proposed procedures for the exemption from mandatory waste collection service Date: August 18, 1992 Members of the Recycling Committee met on August 13th to discuss, among various other topics, the issue of mandatory garbage collection and exemptions thereof. The committee evaluated the exemption procedures and after some consideration, conferred that the proposal is acceptable. Most of the issues raised centered around the Committee's original intent behind recommending mandatory collection and if the proposed exemptions would notably compromise those goals. The Committee determined several years ago that control over the entire waste stream through mandatory collection is necessary to meet the mandates of AB 939. A couple of members voiced specific concerns about the exemption procedures: 1. Self-hauling to the landfill should nat=be -an al-lowable alternative disposal method. It was explained that the exemptions are only for hardship cases; unlimited hauling to the laAdf ill is prohibited. 2 . How can the City verify that someone is a "complete recycler"? It was explained that the process would work on the honor system and that the City would not make any efforts to substantiate the information. The assumption is that only a small minority will take the time and energy to go through the application procedure for exemption status. The Committee voiced no objections to the overallimplementation process. TO: GREG LUKE FROM: JEFF MCALISTER SUBJECT: NEW SOLID WAIST ORDINANCE #244 After reviewing the memorandum, I agree with the four items that qualify for the exemption list. -1-he four items meet the motion from the City Council as Luna stated ; hardship cases, those who promote recycling , financial --hardshipg complete recycling , low trash genera- tors, alter-native disposal methods and unable/inconvenient to set out trash. Per our conversation on August 5, 1992 we discussed that not only advertisement in the Atascadero paper, but, Wil-Mal would send out an exemption sheet or a notice on their monthly bill after the ordinance was passed . I know you quoted section 2 of publication , but, not all residents Subscribe to the Atascadero News and an item of this impor- tance, residents should be notified by normal utility billing . Item *7 states that residence receiving the exemption would have to renew notice on an annual basis. Failure to refile would result in a revocation of the exempt-ion . This is an unnecessary burden 'on the City ' and the Residence. Once an exemption has been f-iled it-should remain effective unles-,s- it-em 5 is inacted violation of exemption, residence moves or residence decides to enroll in garbage service. The fiscal analysis on exemptions to mandatory trash pick-Lip are believed to transfer additional costs from residence exempt to the normal subscriber of trash service is a little premature. Prior to mandatory garbage service normal charges were $6.50 per 35 gallon con- tainer. After green waste and Curb side recycling the fee was raised to $7.50 and a $2.00 added to the 90 gallon container. Later ordinance #243 was passed , forcing 1100 residents on garbage service. I do not belive that 1100 residents will file for an exemption , but, Wil-Mar was Sustaining on a lower rate with less subscribers. In conclusion , if all above exemption are adopted to ordinance #244 these should take affect by the end of AUqUSt and consumers should not be penalized another month. Sincerely, j McAlister CC . Ray Windsor Robert Nimmo Donita Borgeson Marty KUdlac 1)E--t v e B c...!w I e y G e(:)r-g e Luna i REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: C-5 _ Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting? Date: 8/25/92 From: Mark Joseph, Administrative Services DirOctor SUBJECT: Adoption of Citywide Procurement Procedures. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Ordinance No. 253 on second reading. BACKGROUND: This item was presented at the Council's August 11th meeting and passed unanimously on first reading, amended as indicated. >jkjou k REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item: D-1 (A&B) CITY OF ATASCADERO Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 8/11/92 From: Mark Joseph, Administrative Services Director _ SUBJECT: Adopting Citywide Procurement Procedures RECOMMENDATION: 1. Adopt Ordinance No. 253 Amending the Atascadero Municipal Code Section 2-3, as it relates to the City' s Purchasing System (Recommend motion to waive reading in full and read by title only; and motion to approve on first reading by title only) . 2. Adopt Resolution No. 69-92, which approves the City's specific procurement procedures. BACKGROUND: Council established an ad hoc Procurement Committee to review the City's purchasing procedures. The Committee consisted. of two Councilmembers (Nimmo and Borgeson) , as well as the City Treasurer and Department Heads. The Committee met four times during Spring 1992- and-looked at a substantial amount of material on the subject. -In addition, the- Committee reviewed staff's draft procedures. Based up those comments, as well as the City Attorney's review, the attached Purchasing Manual has been finalized for Council consideration and adoption. _ In addition to the enabling resolution, portions of the ` Municipal Code need to be revised. The primary change is to lift the ceiling for formal bidding from $5,000 to $7,500. ANALYSIS Overall, the new procedures provide clear definition over who is responsible for various transactions and how those transactions should occur. The new procedures will establish a formal requisition/encumbrance system to better assure accountability, budget control and coordination. Although the system will be better coordinated through the Finance Office, departments will still have sufficient discretion to manage their daily operations. In addition to basic purchasing procedures, a number of related policies have also been included, such as Petty Cash Procedures, Budget Administration, Travel Policy, and Fixed Assets Management. Training sessions will be provided to explain the new procedures and thereby improve compliance. A Flowchart has been included to graphically show the process. DEPT. NEEDS FLOWCHART - PURCHASING SYSTEM SUPPLIES, SERVICES OR FACILITIES CITY OF ATASCADE RO EQ\ NO PROF. NO P.W. & SUP SERVICE ROJECT YES YES YES CENTRAL FORCE ACC-T. OFC. YES PURCHASING: YES OFC. DEPT, TRACKS SUPPLIE FIN. BULK. ERVICES UNDER YES NRS & COSTS ORDERS QTRLY 25,000 NO NO NO USE PETTY HANDLED INFORMAL YE CASH PROC. UNDER CEQA 25,000- UNDER E.I.R, ; YES YES F W. BID PROCEDURES $25 GUIDELINES 79,000 Np NO NO DEPT. REQ. MOST RESPON. USE OPEN VENDOR $25-$50 YES OUTINE YES P.O. P] ROC. NO NO DEPT. REQ. FORMAL P.W. ITEM(S) OVER YES BIDDING $75,000 PROCEDURES NO" MOST RESPON. VENDOR COUNCIL DEPT: GETS AWARDS BID YES 3+ QUOTES $500- $750 OVER YES HFORMAL$10,000 NO DEPT. REQ.MOST RESPONVENDOR FORMAL FINANCE OVER YES BIDDING REVIEWS; $7500 PROCEDURES ISSUES P.O. COUNCIL DEPT. REC'S AWARDS BID ITEMS/SRVCS FINANCE CUT, CHECK FOR PAYMENT A/P 1L 8/92 ORDINANCE NO. 253 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AMENDING TITLE 2, CHAPTER 3 OF THE ATASCADERO MUNICIPAL CODE AS IT RELATES TO THE CITY'S PURCHASING SYSTEM Section 1. Title 21 Chapter 3 of the Atascadero Municipal Code is amended to read as contained in the Attached Exhibit A, which is hereby made a part of this ordinance by reference. Section 2. The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published once within fifteen (15-) days after its passage in the . Atascadero News, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, published and circulated in the City in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code, shall certify the adopting and posting of this Ordinance and shall cause this ordinance and this certification together with proof of posting to be entered into the Book of Ordinance of this City. Section 3. This ordinance shall go into effect and be in full force and effect at 12:01 a.m. on the 31st day after its passage. On motion by Councilperson , seconded by Councilperson , the foregoing ordinance is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: - ABSENT: ADOPTED: CITY OF ATASCADERO By: ROBERT P. NIMMO, Mayor ATTEST: LEE RABOIN, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ARTHER MONTANDON, City Attorney CHAPTER 3. PURCHASING SYSTEM Sec. 2-3.01. System adopted. A centralized purchasing system is adopted in ';order to establish efficient procedures for the purchase of supplies and equipment, to secure supplies and equipment at the [[lowest possible cost commensurate with quality needed, toexercise positive financial control over purchases and to define authority for the purchasing function. Sec. 2-3.02. Designation of purchasing functions.' The City Manager, by separate Code provisions,; has been assigned overall purchasing responsibilities for all departments and divisions of the City. To discharge these responsibilities, the City Manager may designate such other person or persons as he shall deem necessary to assure compliance with the 'laws, rules and regulations governing the purchase of supplies ';and equipment. Sec. 2-3.03. Purchasing Officer: Duties There is created the position of Purchasing Officer who shall be the Finance Director unless otherwise specified by the City Manager. The Purchasing Officer shall have general supervision and responsibility for the purchasing of supplies and equipment. The duties of Purchasing Officer may be combined with those of any other office or position. The Purcha-0 Officer. shall: (a) Purchase and contract for supplies and equipment required by the City in accordance with purchasing 'ssprocedures; (b) Negotiate and recommend execution of contracts for the purchase of supplies and equipment; (c) Procure for the City the needed quality in supplies and equipment at least expense to the City; (d) Discourage uniform bidding to obtain as full and open competition as possible on all purchases; (e) Keep informed of current developments in the field -of purchasing prices, market conditions and new products; (f) Prescribe and maintain such forms as are reasonably necessary to the operation of this chapter and standard purchasing procedures; (g) Insure the inspection of all supplies and equipment . purchased to insure conformance with specifications; ' tel)'•' �i (h) Recommend the transfer of surplus or unused supplies and equipment between departments as needed; (i) Maintain a bidders list, vendors' catalog file and records needed for the efficient operation of the purchasing division. Certain portions of these files may be maintained - within the departments for ready reference. Sec. 2-3.04. Exemptions for centralized purchasing. The Purchasing Officer, in coordination with each department head, may establish local accounts where charges for minor purchases as needed to meet unforeseen daily operational requirements may be authorized. Such charges shall be made only by a limited number of departmental employees who have been specifically authorized by the department head and the Purchasing Officer to do so. Charges for individual items shall not exceed Twenty-five and ($25.00+ Five hundred and no/100ths ($500.00) per item and must be authorized by a purchase requisition signed by the department head concerned. Department heads shall be responsible for assuring that adequate funds are available in the designated budgetary accounts prior to authorizing any expenditure. _heehaEges shall- be by the-affeeted-depaEtmea-+ head eaeh ..+w regents-shall skew dater- pL=Iee, deseElptlea, and veadeE ef the item-eEitems-puEehaeed. The eenselida-ted-lists shall submitted aleng with a-puEehase-eFdeE-mho=iz!Rg-payment to the See. 2-3.05. Estimates e Eaeh department-shall file a + ' ,ed estimates ei its annual and-menthly requirements-fie rr, es and equipment ee ten ,. with edbudgeta" ameunts-with-the r w Of maane= and time aas-he-shall pr :be See 2-3.06 internal The T.Q=C1Ta'SZiiQCT13TeGi—ohaT1maintain and Go1i YrL Vi ner-mal epeEatiag-implies and equipment Buffieieat-te-assuEe-day- te day ePeEatleas. Departments-shall submit st ofeE sueh implies and equipment to the PuEehasing offieer eltheE by staadaEdzequisstien feEms erby et-heE means-as-made established by the _ _____as_ �- -- -- Section 2-3.07 2-3.05 Bidding Purchase of supplies and equipment shall be by bid procedures as set forth in Sections 2-3.10 2-3.08 and 2-3.11 2- 3.09, except that the Purchasing Officer may dispense with bidding under the following conditions: (a) An emergency requires that an order be placed with the nearest available source of supply; or n (b) When the amount involved is less than Five Hundred and no/100ths ($500.00) Dollars; or (c) The commodity can be obtained from only one vendor; or ,jd The commodity can be purchased through another - governmental agency's competitive bid and; such purchase is in the best interest of the City. Section 2-3-.-082-3.06 Purchase Orders. Purchase of supplies and equipment shall be made by purchase order only. A purchase order will not be issued until the Purchasing Officer first approves it. Section 2-3.09 2-3.07 Encumbrance of funds. Except in case of an emergency or. where specific authority is first obtained from the City Manager, the Purchasing Officer shall not issue a purchase order for supplies or equipment unless there exists an unencumbered appropriation in the account against which the purchase is to be charged. Section 2-3.10 2-3.08 Formal contract procedure. The purchase of supplies and equipment for any one project or activity of an estimated individual or aggregate value greater-than Five TheuBand and ne/100the ($5, 000.G49+ Seven Thousand--.Five Hundred and no/100ths ($7,500.001 shall be by written contract with the lowest responsible bidder in accordance with the following: (a) Notice Inviting bids. The responsible department,• in conjunction with the Purchasing Officer, shall prepare a notice inviting bids. The notice shall include a general description of the article to be purchased, shall state where bid blanks and specifications may be secured, the time and place for opening bids and may require security deposits. ( 1) Published Notice. The notice inviting bids shall be published at least twice, not less than five (5) days apart, in a newspaper of general local circulation at least ten ( 10) days before the date of opening of the bids. (2) Bidders List. The Purchasing Officer shall also solicit sealed bids from responsible prospective suppliers, whose names are on an established bidders list or who have made written request that their names be added to it. (3) Bulletin Board. The Purchasing Officer shall also advertise proposed purchases by notice posted on a public bulletin board in the City offices. (b) Bidder' s Security. When considered necessary the Purchasing Officer shall prescribe bidder' s security and a state- ment of the security shall be included in the notice inviting bids. Each bidder is entitled to a return of the bid security. However, a successful bidder forfeits his. bid security if he refuses or fails to execute the contract within ten ( 10) days after the notice of award of contract is mailed. If the successful bidder fails or refuses to execute the contract, the bid may be awarded to the next lowest responsible bidder, or readvertised. If the contract is awarded to the next lowest bidder, the amount of the lowest bidder's security shall be applied to the contract price difference between the lowest bid and the second lowest bid. If all bids are rejected and the request for bids readvertised, the amount of the lowest bidder's security may be used to offset the cost of receiving new bids and surplus, if any, shall be returned to the lowest bidder. (c) Bid Opening Procedures. The: City Clerk shall require all bids to be sealed and identified by the bid number as"Bid—l+New . . . . ,Lon the envelope. The Purrehasing AFF:..eE �� City Clerk shall open the bids in public at the time and place stated in the public notice. The PuEehasing Offleerm Cites Clerk shall tabulate the bids received and shall keep the tabulation open for public inspection during regular business hours for a period of not less than thirty (30) calendar days after /the bid opening. (d) Rejection of Bids. In its discretion, the City may reject all bids presented and readvertise for bide_.._ (e) Award of Contracts. Normally, contracts shall be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder, except that the Council may award a contract to a higher bidder if it specifically - determines that the best interests of the City are served by so doing. (f) Tie Bids. If two (2) or more bids received are for the same total amount or unit price, quality and service being equal, and if the public interest will not permit the delay of readvertising for bids, the Council may accept the one it chooses. (g) Performance Bonds. The Council may require a performance bond before entering a contract in such amount as it finds reasonably necessary to protect the best interests of the City. Sec. 2-3.11 2-3.09 Open market procedure. If the estimated value of the purchase of supplies or equipment is less than Five Hundred and no/100ths ($500.00) Dollars, the Purchasing Officer may dispense with formal bidding procedures. but shall BeeuEey by-telepheee-eE lettef, gree _ If the estimated value of the purchase is ThEee Theusand-F' d .. 'ie /'^0thB ($3,500). Seven Thousand Five Hundred and no/100ths K$7,500)' $7,500)' - Dollars or less, but Five Hundred and no/100ths ($500.00) Dollars or more, the Purchasing Officer shall authorize the';, purchase in the open market under the following procedure: (a) Minimum Number of Bids. The responsible department, in conjunction with the Purchasing Officer, shall obtajin at least three (3) bids and shall make the purchase from thelowest responsible bidder. (b) Notice Inviting Bids. The responsible department, in conjunction with the Purchasing Officer, shall solicit bids by written request to prospective vendors, by telephone, and/or by public notice posted on a public bulletin board in the City offices. (c) Bids. Department heads shall obtain bids either by telephone or by sealed written bids. Telephone bids will be documented by submissien ef a meme to-the in a mannor as established by the- Purchasing Officer. The Purchasing Officer shall keep a record of all open market orders and-!? ds for_a__ _ period of one (1) year after the submission of bids or the placing of orders. This record is open to public inspection. Sec. 2-3.11 2-3.10 Inspection and testing. The department receiving the supplies or equipment shall inspect the delivered items immediately upon receipt to determine conformance with the specifications set forth in the order. The Purchasing Officer shall have authority to require chemical and physical tests or any other tests deemed necessary pf samples of deliveries which are necessary to determine their g4ality and conformance with specifications. Section 2-3.12 2-3.11 Surplus supplies and equipment. All departments shall submit to the Purchasing Officer at such times and in such forms as he prescribes, repotts showing all supplies and equipment which are no longer use&� or which have become obsolete or worn out. The Purchasing Officet may sale, dispose, exchange or trade in on new supplies and equipment all supplies and equipment which cannot be used by an agency or which have become unsuitable for City use. a:ordinance #14 Circulation Element Update Revised Schedule (August, 1992) Administrative Draft Circulation Element August;, Public:Deft Circulation Element September 21 Initial Study,Notice of Preparation for EIR September 21 Workshop with CC and PC September 29 Public scoping meeting on.BIR tate September,early(k:tober Administrative Draft EIR early Novemhcr Public Draft EIR* mid November Final FIR f3L=nber Adaption of Updated Element** after FOR is available *Public hearings on the draft element and draft EIR with the PC may begin. **Contingent on scheduling of public hearings with the PC and CC.