Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout102213 CC Agenda Combined CITY OF ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Tuesday, October 22, 2013 6:00 P.M. City Hall Council Chambers, 4th floor 6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero, California REGULAR SESSION – CALL TO ORDER: PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Council Member Moreno ROLL CALL: Mayor O’Malley Mayor Pro Tem Sturtevant Council Member Fonzi Council Member Kelley Council Member Moreno APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Roll Call PRESENTATIONS: 1. Commendation Presentation to Dan Phillips 2. Employee Service Awards A. CONSENT CALENDAR: (All items on the consent calendar are considered to be routine and non-controversial by City staff and will be approved by one motion if no member of the Council or public wishes to comment or ask questions. If comment or discussion is desired by anyone, the item will be removed from the consent calendar and will be considered in the listed sequence with an opportunity for any member of the public to address the Council concerning the item before action is taken. DRAFT MINUTES: Council meeting draft minutes are listed on the Consent Calendar for approval of the minutes. Should anyone wish to request an amendment to draft minutes, the item will be removed from the Consent Calendar and their suggestion will be considered by the City Council. If anyone desires to express their opinion concerning issues included in draft minutes, they should share their opinion during the Community Forum portion of the meeting.) 1. City Council Draft Action Minutes – September 24, 2013  Recommendation: Council approve the City Council Draft Action Minutes of September 24, 2013. [City Clerk] 2. City Council Draft Action Minutes – October 8, 2013  Recommendation: Council approve the City Council Draft Action Minutes of October 8, 2013. [City Clerk] 3. Economic Development Hot Spots Council Review and Update  Fiscal Impact: None  Recommendation: Council accept the attached updated 2013 Economic Development Hot Spot list. [Community Development] 4. Atascadero Lake Sediment Removal  Fiscal Impact: Authorization of the sediment removal would result in the expenditure of up to $70,000.00 of General Fund Reserves.  Recommendation: Council authorize the Director of Administrative Services to appropriate $70,000 from General Fund Reserves for the removal of sediment from Atascadero Lake. [Public Works] UPDATES FROM THE CITY MANAGER: (The City Manager will give an oral report on any current issues of concern to the City Council.) COMMUNITY FORUM: (This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wanting to address the Council on any matter not on this agenda and over which the Council has jurisdiction. Speakers are limited to three minutes. Please state your name for the record before making your presentation. Comments made during Community Forum will not be a subject of discussion. A maximum of 30 minutes will be allowed for Community Forum, unless changed by the Council. Any members of the public who have questions or need information, may contact the City Clerk’s Office, between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. at 470-3400, or mtorgerson@atascadero.org.) B. PUBLIC HEARINGS: None C. MANAGEMENT REPORTS: 1. North County Salinas River Trail Master Plan Public Review Draft Plan  Fiscal Impact: There is no fiscal impact at this time.  Recommendation: City Council review SLOCOG’s Draft North County Salinas River Trail Master Plan, and provide a letter of support, or recommended changes, for the Plan to SLOCOG. [Community Development] COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REPORTS: (On their own initiative, Council Members may make a brief announcement or a brief report on their own activities. Council Members may ask a question for clarification, make a referral to staff or take action to have staff place a matter of business on a future agenda. The Council may take action on items listed on the Agenda.) D. COMMITTEE REPORTS: (The following represent standing committees. Informative status reports will be given, as felt necessary): Mayor O’Malley 1. City / Schools Committee 2. County Mayors Round Table 3. Integrated Waste Management Authority (IWMA) 4. SLO Council of Governments (SLOCOG) 5. SLO Regional Transit Authority (RTA) Mayor Pro Tem Sturtevant 1. City / Schools Committee 2. City of Atascadero Finance Committee 3. Community Action Partnership of SLO County 4. League of California Cities – Council Liaison Council Member Fonzi 1. Air Pollution Control District 2. City of Atascadero Design Review Committee 3. Oversight Board for Successor Agency to the Community Redevelopment Agency of Atascadero 4. SLO Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) – alternate Council Member Kelley 1. Atascadero State Hospital Advisory Committee 2. City of Atascadero Design Review Committee 3. Economic Vitality Corporation, Board of Directors (EVC) 4. Homeless Services Oversight Council Council Member Moreno 1. California Joint Powers Insurance Authority (CJPIA) Board 2. City of Atascadero Finance Committee (Chair) E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND / OR ACTION: 1. City Council 2. City Clerk 3. City Treasurer 4. City Attorney 5. City Manager F. ADJOURNMENT Please note: Should anyone challenge any proposed development entitlement listed on this Agenda in court, that person may be limited to raising those issues addressed at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at or prior to this public hearing. Correspondence submitted at this public hearing will be distributed to the Council and available for review in the City Clerk's office. I, Lori Mlynczak, Deputy City Clerk of the City of Atascadero, declare under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing agenda for the October 22, 2013 Regular Session of the Atascadero City Council was posted on October 15, 2013, at the Atascadero City Hall, 6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero, CA 93422 and was available for public review in the Customer Service Center at that location. Signed this 15th day of October, 2013, at Atascadero, California. Lori Mlynczak, Deputy City Clerk City of Atascadero City of Atascadero WELCOME TO THE ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL MEETING The City Council meets in regular session on the second and fourth Tuesday of each month at 6:00 p.m. Council meetings will be held at the City Hall Council Chambers, 6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero. Matters are considered by the Council in the order of the printed Agenda. Regular Council meetings are televised live, audio recorded and videotaped for future playback. Charter Communication customers may view the meetings on Charter Cable Channel 20 or via the City’s website at www.atascadero.org. Meetings are also broadcast on radio station KPRL AM 1230. Contact the City Clerk for more information (470-3400). Copies of the staff reports or other documentation relating to each item of business referred to on the Agenda are on file in the office of the City Clerk and are available for public inspection during City Hall business hours at the Front Counter of City Hall, 6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero, and on our website, www.atascadero.org. Contracts, Resolutions and Ordinances will be allocated a number once they are approved by the City Council. The minutes of this meeting will reflect these numbers. All documents submitted by the public during Council meetings that are either read into the record or referred to in their statement will be noted in the minutes and available for review in the City Clerk's office . In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in a City meeting or other services offered by this City, please contact the City Manager’s Office or the City Clerk’s Office, both at (805) 470-3400. Notification 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 accessibility to the meeting or service. TO SPEAK ON SUBJECTS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA Under Agenda item, “COMMUNITY FORUM”, the Mayor will call for anyone from the audience having business with the Council to approach the lectern and be recognized. 1. Give your name for the record (not required) 2. State the nature of your business. 3. All comments are limited to 3 minutes. 4. All comments should be made to the Mayor and Council. 5. No person shall be permitted to make slanderous, profane or negative personal remarks concerning any other individual, absent or present This is the time items not on the Agenda may be brought to the Council’s attention. A maximum of 30 minutes will be allowed for Community Forum (unless changed by the Council). If you wish to use a computer presentation to support your comments, you must notify the City Clerk's office at least 24 hours prior t o the meeting. Digital presentations must be brought to the meeting on a USB drive or CD. You are required to submit to the City Clerk a printed copy of your presentation for the record. Please check in with the City Clerk before the meeting begins to announce your presence and turn in the printed copy. TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEMS (from Title 2, Chapter 1 of the Atascadero Municipal Code) Members of the audience may speak on any item on the agenda. The Mayor will identify the subject, staff will give their report, and the Council will ask questions of staff. The Mayor will announce when the public comment period is open and will request anyone interested to address the Council regarding the matter being considered to step up to the lectern. If you wish to speak for, against or comment in any way: 1. You must approach the lectern and be recognized by the Mayor 2. Give your name (not required) 3. Make your statement 4. All comments should be made to the Mayor and Council 5. No person shall be permitted to make slanderous, profane or negative personal remarks concer ning any other individual, absent or present 6. All comments limited to 3 minutes The Mayor will announce when the public comment period is closed, and thereafter, no further public comments will be heard by the Council. ITEM NUMBER: A-1 DATE: 10/22/13 1 CITY OF ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Tuesday, September 24, 2013 City Hall Council Chambers, 4th floor 6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero, California City Council Regular Session: 6:00 p.m. Successor Agency: Immediately following the City Council Regular Session REGULAR SESSION – CALL TO ORDER: 6:00 P.M. Mayor O’Malley called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. and Council Member Fonzi led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: Present: Council Members Kelley, Moreno, Fonzi, and Mayor O’Malley Absent: Mayor Pro Tem Sturtevant Others Present: City Clerk / Assistant to City Manager Marcia McClure Torgerson ITEM NUMBER: A-1 DATE: 10/22/13 Atascadero City Council September 24, 2013 Page 2 of 8 Staff Present: City Manager Rachelle Rickard, Administrative Services Director Jeri Rangel, Community Development Director Warren Frace, Public Works Director Russ Thompson, Police Chief Jerel Haley, Fire Chief Kurt Stone, and City Attorney Brian Pierik. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: MOTION: By Council Member Fonzi and seconded by Council Member Moreno to approve the agenda. Motion passed 4:0 by a roll-call vote. PRESENTATION: 1. Energy Awareness Proclamation The City Council presented Nikki Streegan with San Luis Obispo County with the proclamation. A. CONSENT CALENDAR: 1. City Council Draft Action Minutes – September 10, 2013  Recommendation: Council approve the City Council Draft Action Minutes of September 10, 2013. [City Clerk] 2. Draft Resolution – Directing Staff of the Charles Paddock Zoo to Proceed with the Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA) Accreditation Process  Fiscal Impact: None  Recommendations: Council adopt the Draft Resolution directing staff to proceed with the Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA) Accreditation process. [City Manager] MOTION: By Council Member Kelley and seconded by Council Member Fonzi to approve the Consent Calendar. Motion passed 4:0 by a voice vote. (Item #A-2: Resolution No. 2013-056) UPDATES FROM THE CITY MANAGER: City Manager Rachelle Rickard gave an update on projects and issues within the City. ITEM NUMBER: A-1 DATE: 10/22/13 Atascadero City Council September 24, 2013 Page 3 of 8 COMMUNITY FORUM: The following citizens spoke during Community Forum: Jim Patterson (Exhibit A), Jerry Clay, and Brian Alter. Mayor O’Malley closed the COMMUNITY FORUM period. B. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. PLN 2011-1417 / ZCH 2011-0163 2007 - 2014 Housing Element Implementation of Program and Policies (City of Atascadero)  Fiscal Impact: There is no projected fiscal impact with the proposed changes to the City’s Zoning Ordinance.  Recommendations: Planning Commission Recommends: 1. City Council introduce Draft Ordinance A for first reading, by title only, to approve PLN 2011-1417 (Zone Text Change ZCH 2011-0163), Housing Element Implementation Programs and Residential Code modifications; and, 2. City Council introduce Draft Ordinance B-1 for first reading, by title only, to approve PLN 2011-1417 (Zone Text Change ZCH 2011-0163) approving an emergency shelter ordinance in a site specific location with an optional meal program as a Conditional Use Permit (CUP); and, The Council has requested the following alternative ordinance be prepared for consideration: 3. City Council introduce Draft Ordinance B-2 for first reading, by title only, to approve PLN 2011-1417 (Zone Text Change ZCH 2011-0163) approving an emergency shelter ordinance in a site specific location and allow for an open meal program as a “by right” use subject to standards within the proposed draft ordinance; and, Planning Commission Recommends: 4. City Council introduce Draft Ordinance C for first reading, by title only, to approve PLN 2011-1417 (Zone Text Change ZCH 2011-0163), introduction of a Single Room Occupancy Unit (SRO) ordinance. If the City Council adopts Draft Ordinance B-1, Staff recommends the City Council provide direction on the following items: ITEM NUMBER: A-1 DATE: 10/22/13 Atascadero City Council September 24, 2013 Page 4 of 8 5. Direct Staff to utilize city funds for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) fee for an open meal program if the council adopts draft Ordinance B-1. 6. Direct Staff to allow ECHO to continue the open meals program until a final decision is made on the conditional use permit. Staff Recommends Council: 7. Specify that the masonry wall at the rear of the EC HO property must be completed within 12-months of the approval of the ordinance. [Community Development] Community Development Director Warren Frace gave the staff report on Draft Ordinance A and answered questions from the Council. PUBLIC COMMENT: The following citizens spoke on Draft Ordinance A: Jerry Clay. Mayor O’Malley closed the Public Comment period. MOTION: By Council Member Moreno and seconded by Council Member Kelley to introduce Draft Ordinance A for first reading, by title only, to approve PLN 2011-1417 (Zone Text Change ZCH 2011- 0163), Housing Element Implementation Programs and Residential Code modifications. Motion passed 4:0 by a roll-call vote. Community Development Director Warren Frace gave the staff report on Draft Ordinance B-1 & B-2 and answered questions from the Council. Ex Parte Communications  Council Member Moreno received several emails and visited the ECHO site.  Council Member Fonzi received several emails, visited the site and received several phone calls.  Mayor O’Malley received several emails, worked in Mental Health, was on the ECHO Board, and has spoken to a few neighbors of ECHO.  Council Member Kelley received several emails and has served on the ECHO Board.  Both Mayor O’Malley and Council Member Kelley announced that even though they have served on the ECHO Board, they can remain neutral and vote accordingly. ITEM NUMBER: A-1 DATE: 10/22/13 Atascadero City Council September 24, 2013 Page 5 of 8 The following citizens spoke on Draft Ordinance B-1 & B-2: Jerry Clay, Tilman Moune, Dan Ulrich, Brian McAlister, Isabel Perez, Pearl Munak, Bill Watt, Elizabeth Sotco, Art Gibson, Crystal Strong, Lindsay Hampton, Steve Weiss, Sharon Turner, Lee Perkins, John Richardson, Debra Skinner, Nancy Wolf, Susan Warren, Kim McNeil, Amy Betterage, Solon Tulue, Shirley Sommers, David May, Bob Hurd, Charlotte Byrne, Mike Byrne, Jim Patterson, Gwen Coughrey, Michael Sherer, Jay DeCou, John Sanders and Chris Keith. Mayor O’Malley closed the Public Comment period. Mayor O’Malley recessed the meeting at 8:15 p.m. Mayor O’Malley reconvened the meeting at 8:25 p.m. There were additional clarification questions for Staff from the Council. MOTION: By Council Member Moreno and seconded by Council Member Fonzi to: 1. Introduce Draft Ordinance B-1 for first reading, by title only, to approve PLN 2011-1417 (Zone Text Change ZCH 2011- 0163) approving an emergency shelter ordinance in a site specific location with an optional meal program as a Conditional Use Permit (CUP); and, 2. Direct Staff to utilize City funds for a Conditional Use Permit fee for an open meal program; and, 3. Direct Staff to allow ECHO to continue the open meals program until a final decision is made on the Conditional Use Permit; and, 4. Specify that the masonry wall at the rear of the ECHO property must be completed within 12-months of the approval of the ordinance, and be a minimum of 6 feet in height on the residential side. Motion passed 3:1 by a roll-call vote. (Kelley opposed) Mayor O’Malley announced that he is recusing himself on Draft Ordinance C, even though his Bed and Breakfast is not affected by this ordinance, but that someone with a similar business could be affected. Community Development Director Warren Frace gave the staff report on Draft Ordinance C and answered questions from the Council. The following citizens spoke on Draft Ordinance C: Jay DeCou, Pearl Munak, and Susan Warren. Mayor O’Malley closed the Public Comment period. ITEM NUMBER: A-1 DATE: 10/22/13 Atascadero City Council September 24, 2013 Page 6 of 8 MOTION: By Council Member Fonzi and seconded by Council Member Moreno to introduce Draft Ordinance C for first reading, by title only, to approve PLN 2011-1417 (Zone Text Change ZCH 2011- 0163), introduction of a Single Room Occupancy Unit (SRO) ordinance with the following amendments: 1. Excluding the RMF Zone; and, 2. Amend unit size maximum to 400 square feet, if State law will allow; and, 3. Increase the supervisory ratio to 1:8; and, 4. Maximum occupancy per unit will not exceed two (2). Motion passed 3:0 by a roll-call vote. (Mayor O’Malley abstained) 2. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Funding Reallocations  Fiscal Impact: None  Recommendations: Council: 1. Direct staff to eliminate the Community Services Foundation Youth Scholarships award from the 2013 CDBG cycle, and add the City of Atascadero Youth Scholarships 2013 to the CDBG cycle; and, 2. Direct staff to include the 2012 funding for the North County Adaptive Sports Program in the 2013 CDBG cycle. [Public Works] City Manager Rachelle Rickard gave the staff report and answered questions from the Council. PUBLIC COMMENT: None MOTION: By Council Member Kelley and seconded by Council Member Moreno to: 1. Direct staff to eliminate the Community Services Foundation Youth Scholarships award from the 2013 CDBG cycle, and add the City of Atascadero Youth Scholarships 2013 to the CDBG cycle; and, 2. Direct staff to include the 2012 funding for the North County Adaptive Sports Program in the 2013 CDBG cycle. Motion passed 4:0 by a roll-call vote. C. MANAGEMENT REPORTS:  Economic Development Hotspots Council Review and Update  Fiscal Impact: The Hot Spot list does not have a direct fiscal impact on the City, but each project on the list has the potential for both positive and negative fiscal impacts depending on how a project is structured. Fiscal decisions on specific projects would require future Council actions at which time actual fiscal impacts would be analyzed.  Recommendation: Council give direction on reprioritizing Economic Development Hotspot projects. [Community Development] ITEM NUMBER: A-1 DATE: 10/22/13 Atascadero City Council September 24, 2013 Page 7 of 8 Community Development Director Warren Frace gave the staff report and answered questions from the Council. PUBLIC COMMENT: The following citizens spoke on this item: Ben Efraim. Mayor O’Malley closed the Public Comment period. The City Council gave Staff the following amended Hot Spot list: Future Projects: 1. DeCou Lumber property 2. West Front Village restaurant pads 3. Dove Creek commercial parcel Active Projects: 1. Home Depot/Spring Hill Center 2. Walmart/Annex (Del Rio site) 3. Downtown/Hoff property 4. Colony Square Backburner Projects: 1. Spencer’s Center 2. Montecito Road abandoned motel 3. K-Mart Shopping Center corner COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REPORTS: The City Council Members made brief announcements. D. COMMITTEE REPORTS: None E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND / OR ACTION: None F. ADJOURNMENT TO THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF ATASCADERO Mayor O’Malley adjourned the meeting at 10:37 p.m. MINUTES PREPARED BY: ITEM NUMBER: A-1 DATE: 10/22/13 Atascadero City Council September 24, 2013 Page 8 of 8 ______________________________________ Marcia McClure Torgerson, C.M.C. City Clerk / Assistant to the City Manager The following exhibit is available for review in the City Clerk’s office: Exhibit A – Jim Patterson handout – Community Design ITEM NUMBER: A-2 DATE: 10/22/13 CITY OF ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Tuesday, October 8, 2013 6:00 P.M. City Hall Council Chambers, 4th floor 6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero, California REGULAR SESSION – CALL TO ORDER: Mayor O’Malley called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. and Council Member Kelley led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: Present: Council Members Kelley, Moreno, Fonzi, Mayor Pro Tem Sturtevant, and Mayor O’Malley Absent: None Others Present: City Clerk / Assistant to City Manager Marcia McClure Torgerson Staff Present: City Manager Rachelle Rickard, Administrative Services Director Jeri Rangel, Community Development Director Warren Frace, Public Works Director Russ Thompson, Police Chief Jerel Haley, and City Attorney Brian Pierik. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: MOTION: By Mayor Pro Tem Sturtevant and seconded by Council Member Fonzi to approve the agenda. Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. ITEM NUMBER: A-2 DATE: 10/22/13 Atascadero City Council October 8, 2013 Page 2 of 5 PRESENTATIONS: 1. Rideshare Month Proclamation The City Council presented Angela Nelson the proclamation. 2. Fire Prevention Week Proclamation The City Council presented Fire Captain Keith Aggson the proclamation. 3. National Domestic Violence Awareness Month Proclamation The City Council presented Jennifer Adams, Executive Director of RISE, the proclamation. A. CONSENT CALENDAR: 1. July 2013 Accounts Payable and Payroll  Fiscal Impact: $4,539,280.83  Recommendation: Council approve certified City accounts payable, payroll and payroll vendor checks for July 2013. [Administrative Services] 2. PLN 2011-1417/ZCH 2011-0163 2007-2014 Housing Element Implementation of Program and Policies  Fiscal Impact: There is no projected fiscal impact with the proposed changes to the City’s Zoning Ordinance.  Recommendations: Council: 1. Adopt on second reading by title only, Draft Ordinance A, to approve PLN 2011-1417 (Zone Text Change ZCH 2011-0163); and, 2. Adopt on second reading by title only, Draft Ordinance B-1, to approve PLN 2011-1417 (Zone Text Change ZCH 2011-0163); and, 3. Adopt on second reading by title only, Draft Ordinance C, to approve PLN 2011-1417 (Zone Text Change ZCH 2011-0163). [Community Development] Mayor O’Malley stated that he will be abstaining for Item #A-2.3. Mayor Pro Tem Sturtevant stated that he will be abstaining for Item #A -2 due to his absence for the first reading of these ordinances. MOTION: By Council Member Moreno and seconded by Council Member Fonzi to approve Item #A-1 of the Consent Calendar. Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. ITEM NUMBER: A-2 DATE: 10/22/13 Atascadero City Council October 8, 2013 Page 3 of 5 MOTION: By Council Member Moreno and seconded by Council Member Fonzi to approve Item #A-2.1 of the Consent Calendar. Motion passed 4:0 by a roll-call vote. (Sturtevant abstained) (Ordinance No. 570) MOTION: By Council Member Moreno and seconded by Council Member Fonzi to approve Item #A-2.2 of the Consent Calendar. Motion passed 4:0 by a roll-call vote. (Sturtevant abstained) (Ordinance No. 571) MOTION: By Council Member Moreno and seconded by Council Member Fonzi to approve the Consent Calendar. Motion passed 3:0 by a roll-call vote. (O’Malley & Sturtevant abstained) (Ordinance No. 572) UPDATES FROM THE CITY MANAGER: City Manager Rachelle Rickard gave an update on projects and issues within the City. COMMUNITY FORUM: The following citizens spoke during Community Forum: Ryan Radkey. Mayor O’Malley closed the COMMUNITY FORUM period. B. PUBLIC HEARINGS: None C. MANAGEMENT REPORTS: 1. Historic Atascadero City Hall Private Party Reservations  Fiscal Impact: The proposed rental rates are designed to minimize the fiscal impact on the General Fund. The rental rates and security deposits should cover all costs while hosting a special event at the Historic City Hall. After a one to two year period of rentals, a cost -analysis should be completed to ensure that there is no impact on the general fund.  Recommendation: Council adopt the recommended rental rates and contract for private reservations at the Historic Atascadero City Hall. [City Manager’s Office] ITEM NUMBER: A-2 DATE: 10/22/13 Atascadero City Council October 8, 2013 Page 4 of 5 Mayor O’Malley announced that he will be stepping down on this item because he owns the Portola Inn and also provides room rentals. Management Analyst Audrey Banks gave the staff report and answered questions from the Council. PUBLIC COMMENT: The following citizens spoke on this item: Donald Cross. Mayor O’Malley closed the Public Comment period. MOTION: By Council Member Fonzi and seconded by Council Member Kelley to adopt the recommended rental rates and contract for private reservations at the Historic Atascadero City Hall, and direct staff to (1)book no more than two events per month, and (2)return to Council with a report after five events have taken place. Motion passed 4:0 by a roll-call vote. (O’Malley abstained) COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REPORTS: The City Council Members made brief announcements. D. COMMITTEE REPORTS: Mayor O’Malley 1. Integrated Waste Management Authority (IWMA) – Mayor O’Malley has been appointed to Chair. Mayor Pro Tem Sturtevant 1. League of California Cities – Council Liaison – Announced that he and the City Manager, City Clerk, Fire Chief, and Council Member Moreno attended the League of California Cities Annual Conference in Sacramento. Council Member Fonzi 1. Air Pollution Control District – Council Member Fonzi has been appointed to Chair. Council Member Kelley 1. Economic Vitality Corporation, Board of Directors (EVC) – They are working on bringing airline services for the SLO airport from Denver, Colorado. ITEM NUMBER: A-2 DATE: 10/22/13 Atascadero City Council October 8, 2013 Page 5 of 5 E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND / OR ACTION: None F. ADJOURNMENT Mayor O’Malley adjourned the meeting at 7:17 p.m. MINUTES PREPARED BY: ______________________________________ Marcia McClure Torgerson, C.M.C. City Clerk / Assistant to the City Manager ITEM NUMBER: A-3 DATE: 10/22/13 Atascadero City Council Staff Report - Community Development Department Economic Development Hot Spots Council Review and Update RECOMMENDATION: City Council accept the attached updated 2013 Economic Development Hot Spot list. DISCUSSION: Background: On September 24, 2013 the City Council reviewed and updated the Economic Development Hot Spot list. At the meeting the Council reprioritized the “Future Projects” and “Active Projects” list. In addition, a “Backburner Projects” list was added. All the Council’s changes are shown on Attachment A. FISCAL IMPACT: None ITEM NUMBER: A-3 DATE: 10/22/13 Attachment A: Updated 2013 Economic Development Hot Spot List ITEM NUMBER: A-4 DATE: 10/22/13 Atascadero City Council Staff Report – Public Works Department Atascadero Lake Sediment Removal RECOMMENDATION: Council authorize the Director of Administrative Services to appropriate $70,000 from General Fund Reserves for the removal of sediment from Atascadero Lake. DISCUSSION: Atascadero Lake is currently experiencing historic low water levels and severely degraded water quality. Conditions at the Lake are the result of both the minimal rainfall this past winter and the continued build-up of organic material on the bottom of the Lake. Each summer the algae blooms are becoming more and more pronounced, and the associated decomposition of the algae causes the oxygen content in the Lake to plummet in late summer, resulting in worsening fish die-off events. The fish die-off in early October was exponentially worse than those experienced in 1999, 2003 and 2008. Clearly the fish die-offs are due to declining water quality and elevated water temperatures associated with the shallow water depth, and the build -up of biological sludge material. In response to the water quality problems the City implemented emergency measures, not requiring State permits, to lessen further fish die-offs, including: 1. Installation and 24-hour operation of three surface aeration fountains. 2. Deployment of high capacity trailer mounted bypass pump to increase aeration in deepest part of Lake near dam. 3. Deployment of several 3-inch pumps to move and aerate water strategically along existing shoreline. 4. Daily (as required) removal and landfill disposal of dead fish. The current low water levels present an opportunity to efficiently and inexpensively perform remedial work on the Lake that would result in immediately improved water ITEM NUMBER: A-4 DATE: 10/22/13 quality. However the window of opportunity is closing as the winter rainy season is approaching in the coming weeks. Work would need to occur prior to November 15th. Projects within the boundary of the Lake fall under the jurisdiction of the California Department of Fish & Wildlife (F&W) (previously CA Fish & Game) permits, which can include consultation with the Regional Water Quality Control Board and several federal agencies (ACOE, US Fish & Wildlife). The “normal” permit process would not allow for the work to be performed prior to upcoming winter rains. Staff r ecently submitted a F&W Streambed Alteration Permit, and was advised a n expedited permit could be issued within a week (at the time of report preparation). This timeframe would allow the City to benefit from the current low water surface elevation. The following section outlines staff’s proposed sediment removal project:  Remove dry sediments and biological solids exposed by the low water levels at the southern end of the lake, and channel around the man -made island. Some material may be used to enlarge the island towards the middle of the lake.  Removal would be by mechanical equipment windrowing the dry and damp sediments into linear piles, picked up by rubber tired loaders, transported out of the lake bed and loaded into dump trucks staged in the circu lar drive area off of Lakeview Drive.  A temporary access ramp would be created in the non -vegetated edge of the Lake adjacent to the circular drive.  The City will contract with the biological consultant firm of Althouse & Meade to perform pre-construction endangered species surveys, and monitor sediment removal and best management practices for environmental protection as work proceeds. FISCAL IMPACT: Project construction costs will vary based on the level of volunteer services or no -cost services that may be negotiated by the City with local contractors or soil suppliers. The estimated costs, assuming most of the trucking and disposal cost is absorbed by an end user is $70,000.00. Authorization of the sediment removal would result in the expenditure of up to $70,000.00 of General Fund Reserves. ITEM NUMBER: A-4 DATE: 10/22/13 ALTERNATIVES: Council: 1. May direct staff not to remove sediment at the Lake at this time.  Staff would proceed with acquisition of a long-term (5 to 10-years) permit from Fish & Wildlife and plan lake water quality improvements in upcoming budget(s). 2. May direct staff to attempt to locate volunteer(s) that will remove the sediment for little or no cost.  At the time of the staff report preparation, minimal support of donated services was secured. While interested, most contractors declined, or had not assured staff that they could offer services at no charge. Additionally the Fish & Wildlife permit may not allow for material to be sold or profited from its reuse forcing the material to be trucked to the landfill. 3. May direct staff to modify current normal Field Operations and Maintenance activities and perform the sediment removal in house.  The sediment removal project would require at least six Operations Staff to work on the project for a period of approximately two weeks. During this time they would be unable to do the routine maintenance activities in the Parks, Streets and Zoo. Activities such as mowing, garbage pickup, bathroom maintenance, road repairs and zoo accreditation projects would be put on hold. In addition, this time of the year is typically dedicated to storm drain preparation for the upcoming rainy season. Should this work be delayed or not performed the City runs the risk of increased storm damage due to inadequate clearing of culverts, drainage swales and drain inlets. ATTACHMENTS: None ITEM NUMBER: C-1 DATE: 10/22/13 Atascadero City Council Staff Report – Community Development Department North County Salinas River Trail Master Plan Public Review Draft Plan RECOMMENDATION: City Council review SLOCOG’s Draft North County Salinas River Trail Master Plan, and provide a letter of support, or recommended changes, for the Plan to SLOCOG. REPORT-IN-BRIEF: SLOCOG recently released the Draft North County Salinas River Trail Master Plan for public review. The Plan defines feasible short-term and long-term multi-use trail alignments and improvements for the Anza trail through the Salinas River corridor in Northern San Luis Obispo County. SLOCOG has requested that the jurisdictions in North County review the proposed plan and provide a letter of support or c omments to SLOCOG. The City is not required to adopt the Plan as it is SLOCOG’s document; although the City may consider incorporating the Trail Master Plan into the City’s Bike Plan and General Plan in the future for implementation purposes. Public comments on the Draft Master Plan will be accepted by SLOCOG staff between October 9th and November 8, 2013. The public review Draft Master Plan is available at www.slocog.org as well as on the project website, www.salinasrivertrail.com and by request at the SLOCOG offices at 1114 Marsh Street in San Luis Obispo. All comments on the Draft Master Plan document are due to SLOCOG by November 8, 2013, by 5:00pm. Response to all comments procured during the public review period will be addressed in the preparation of the Final Master Plan document. SLOCOG staff has scheduled the December 4, 2013, SLOCOG Board Meeting for adoption of the Final Northern San Luis Obispo County Salinas River Corridor Anza Trail Master Plan. ITEM NUMBER: C-1 DATE: 10/22/13 DISCUSSION: Background: The concept for a trail master plan began as a collaborative vision by North County jurisdictions, and a Steering Committee was convened in 2010. The Steering Committee includes representatives from the City of Atascadero, City of Paso Robles, County of SLO Parks and Planning Departments, Caltrans, National Parks Service, and SLOCOG. In March 2011, the Atascadero City Council adopted a resolution to participate in the planning of a North County Salinas River Corridor / Anza Regional Trail Master Plan. In 2011 SLOCOG secured a Caltrans Community Planning Grant ($175,000) and a Regional State Highway Account (RSHA) local match ($100,000) to prepare a Master Plan. In August 2012, a contract was awarded to the consultant team KTU&A (out of San Diego) and sub-consultants including Rick Engineering (San Luis Obispo), PMC (San Luis Obispo), and JBG Consulting (San Luis Obispo) in the amount of $257,000 to identify existing conditions, analyze opportunities and constraints, develop design criteria and a draft trail alignment and alternatives, and develop an implementation plan. Project Vision: A Master Plan is needed to identify feasible short-term and desirable long- term alignments for a comprehensive multi-use North County trail system. The trail would be located along the Salinas River and the historic Anza corridor to provide a catalyst for economic development, collaborative programs, travel between communities, and well as local recreation. Many segments of trail have been previously constructed, however, there has not been an overall master plan in place to provide much needed trail connections. Once completed, the Trail Master Plan will serve as a guide so that various trail implementing entities can construct individual segments over time and ensure that these pieces will ultimately be part of an overall coherent trail system along the Salinas River. The Salinas River Corridor Anza Trail Master Plan will cover a 35 mile segment of the Anza Trail in the Salinas River Corridor from the community of Santa Margarita to the Salinas River Trail – Study Area ITEM NUMBER: C-1 DATE: 10/22/13 community of San Miguel. While the overriding goal is a continuous north-south route, the plan also includes creating trail connections and loops that will accommodate local trips, connect to important local and regional destinations, and to provide amenities and support facilities to make the main route and local branches more engaging and functional within communities and neighborhoods. Project Goals: • Regional Multi-Purpose Trail System - Safe and fully integrated off -highway trail system between communities • Anza Trail Connection - Federal designation and recognition for historical route • Regional Destination Recreation - Opportunity for “Eco Tourism” for hiking, biking, horseback riding, bird watching and more • Regional River Restoration - Opportunity for organized networks of river restoration groups for project construction and maintenance system support • Ecosystem Education - Interconnected programs for watershed health & stewardship • Outdoor Classrooms - Hands-on learning • “Follow the River ~ Follow the Dream” Art Program - Inspirational river art program that provides beauty and learning opportunities along the river • Funding - Leverage funding for plans and construction projects through multi - agency collaboration Development of the Trail Master Plan: Over the past year, the project consultant has met with property owners, held workshops, and compiled information from a number of site studies to create the Draft Master Plan. Complete workshop summaries, documents, and presentations from the workshops are available at http://salinasrivertrail.com/. The following tools were used to obtain information regarding the desired trail alignments:  Three Public Workshops  Five Steering Committee Meetings  Meetings & ongoing correspondence with the Atascadero Ad Hoc Trail Committee  Numerous individual Stakeholder Interviews and Trail Intercept Surveys  Project Website and Facebook Page  Trail Plan Survey (on website)  Full 35 mile bike-through field review ITEM NUMBER: C-1 DATE: 10/22/13 There are four (4) main documents which have been produced and are available for download on the project website www.salinasrivertrail.com : 1. Existing Conditions Report 2. Opportunities and Constraints Analysis 3. Standards and Design Guidelines 4. Draft Master Plan, includes: - Draft Trail Alignments - Implementation Plan - Prioritization Trail Types  Type 1 - Soft Surface Trails: unimproved natural surface trail in river channel, or firm natural surface trail at channel edge  Type 2 - Firm Surface Trails: near river or above river bank  Type 3 - On / Near Road Facilities: either on river bank or bicycle facility on roadway ITEM NUMBER: C-1 DATE: 10/22/13 Trail Route Alignment & Alternatives: The consultant has identified a recommended preferred route, as well as some of the needed improvements. The preferred route maps a 33.6 mile soft surface trail and a 35.4 mile hard surface route from Santa Margarita to San Miguel. However, the intent of this study is to offer alternative routes. If a route is found to be too difficult to implement, it can be replaced with another route. In total, the following alternative routes have been identified:  Type 1: 77.1 miles soft surface trails identified  Type 2: 72.9 miles firm surface paths identified  Type 3: 113 miles on/near road routes identified ITEM NUMBER: C-1 DATE: 10/22/13 . Trail routes were identified and ranked using a list of factors, including but not limited to:  Ownership of lands  Quality of the trail experience  User comfort and safety  Proximity to destinations, population & transportation routes  Flood zones  Costs  Soils & landslide risk  Vegetation impacts  System connectivity & creation of looped trails The biggest challenges with defining routes are related to avoiding flooding along the Salinas River, and avoiding private property whenever possible. In addition, easements and lands controlled by Union Pacific Railroad, Caltrans and the State Hospital require additional coordination. Trail Alignment Overview ITEM NUMBER: C-1 DATE: 10/22/13 Conclusion: SLOCOG recently released the Draft Salinas River Trail Master Plan for public review. The Plan defines feasible short-term and long-term multi-use trail alignments and improvements for the Anza trail through the Salinas River corridor in Northern San Luis Obispo County. The vision is to create a Master Plan for a river‐ themed, comprehensive multi-use North County trail system that provides a catalyst for economic development and collaborative programs between communities. Once completed, the Trail Master Plan will serve as a guide so that various trail implementing entities can construct individual segments over time and ensure that these pieces will ultimately be part of an overall coherent trail system along the Salinas River. SLOCOG has requested that the jurisdictions in North County review the proposed plan and provide a letter of support or comments to SLOCOG. Public comments on the Draft Master Plan will be accepted by SLOCOG staff between October 9th and November 8, 2013. All comments on the Draft Master Plan document are due to SLOCOG by November 8, 2013, by 5:00pm. Although SLOCOG is the lead on the Salinas River Trail Master Plan, the plan will have the potential to affect the City of Atascadero. SLOCOG has put together a public process and retained experienced consultants that produced a plan with a lot of options that can evolve over time. The Plan provides a plan for a trail system that will connect the North County. This trail system promises to provide new recreational opportunities for residents and tourists while also providing opportunities for bicycle commu ters. Despite the project's benefits, there are always questions regarding maintenance, security and neighborhood compatibility concerns with trails. Due to the size and scope of the project, it will be built in many phases over the coming decades as fun ding becomes available. Ideally, these issues are best addressed as individual segments are built through a public participation process. The Council should keep these issues in mind as it considers its recommendation to SLOCOG. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact at this time. There is no monetary match required for the City of Atascadero. The trail planning project is funded by a Caltrans Community Planning Grant ($175,000) and a Regional State Highway Account (RSHA) local match ($100,000). City staff participation (in-kind) for coordination, public outreach and input has been required. If the Final Trail Master Plan is adopted by SLOCOG and then later incorporated into the City’s planning documents, more opportunities will open up for grant funding of trail construction projects. Maintenance and other ongoing costs will be addressed at the time of trail segment construction. ITEM NUMBER: C-1 DATE: 10/22/13 ALTERNATIVES: The City Council could request additional information and refer this item back to staff. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1: Location Map of the Salinas River Corridor & Trail Plan study area Attachment 2: Atascadero Route Detail Maps Attachment 3: 10/10/13 SLOCOG Draft Trail Plan Master Plan ITEM NUMBER: C-1 DATE: 10/22/13 Attachment 1: Location Map of the Salinas River Corridor & Trail Plan study area ITEM NUMBER: C-1 DATE: 10/22/13 Attachment 2: Atascadero Route Detail Maps Home Depot El Camino Real The Lakes ITEM NUMBER: C-1 DATE: 10/22/13 Attachment 2: Atascadero Detail Maps El Camino Real Downtown 41 Bridge across Salinas River ITEM NUMBER: C-1 DATE: 10/22/13 Attachment 2: Atascadero Detail Maps State Hospital Golf Course ITEM NUMBER: C-1 DATE: 10/22/13 Attachment 2: Atascadero Detail Maps Paloma Park Halcon Road Salinas River Trail Master Plan Draft Master Plan - 10/10/2013 1-1Northern San Luis Obispo County Salinas River Anza Corridor Trail Master Plan This master plan is a partnership of the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) and the County of San Luis Obispo, and funded by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). A Steering Committee oversaw master plan development with representatives from the communities of Templeton, Paso Robles and Atascadero, as well as San Luis Obispo County, SLOCOG, Caltrans and the National Park Service. This plan addresses an approximately 35 mile section of the Salinas River corridor between the communities of Santa Margarita and San Miguel in northern San Luis Obispo County. This is a designated trail corridor in the County’s Parks and Recreation Element that runs the length of the Salinas River in San Luis Obispo County. The Salinas River Trail Master Plan defines both feasible short- term and desirable long-term alignments for a regional trail through the North County sub-region. It defines specific future trail alignments within the Salinas River corridor. It also summarizes geographic conditions in six reaches that comprise the overall study area and it summarizes master plan recommendations and estimated costs. This master plan is intended to serve as a guide so that dif- ferent partners can construct individual trail segments over time and ensure that these pieces will ultimately be part of a coherent trail system that connects at the proper location and provides access from varying origins and destinations. It includes trail design concepts and standards that can be tailored for various trail reaches in urban and rural areas, and different communities along the trail. The following sections provide an overview of the plan’s background, goals, objectives and study area. This includes a description of the public and stakeholder participation process integral to the planning process, as well as master plan document organization. Introduction and Summary 1 1.1 Master Plan Purpose This master plan will serve as a guide for municipalities that engage in constructing individual components of the project and help to direct efforts toward a coherent regional trail system. The plan addresses the development of the Salinas River Trail (SRT) along a 35 mile section between the communities of San Miguel and Santa Margarita. Northern San Luis Obispo County is primarily agricultural and the area’s gently rolling terrain and light traffic make it a popular for recreational cycling venue for local riders. The local weather and natural scenic nature of the area also makes it a popular area for hiking, equestrian use and walking or running. A primary opportunity for the trail is to become an officially designated National Historic Trail. Such designation would increase awareness of California’s cultural heritage, draw historic trail enthusiasts, and provide cultural educational op- portunities for local schools and other cultural organizations. Additionally, Anza Trail designation opens up the opportunity for other grants for enhancements such as trail improvements, interpretive signs, trail furniture such as shade structures and benches, viewing and information kiosks, as well as program- matic activities. Given the trail alignment’s natural surroundings, trail construc- tion will provide opportunities for environmental restoration and enhancements, improved watershed health and other ecosystem benefits. The potential for stewardship programs and hands-on learning through “outdoor classrooms” could open up a range of opportunities to work with local youth, scouts, Cal Poly University, seniors and others on projects that transcend borders and boundaries. “An increase in the number of people walk- ing and biking for transportation and recreation has a range of benefits, includ- ing some that can be measured, such as improved traffic level of service, reduced greenhouse gas emissions, traffic and park- ing congestion. However, some impacts that are harder to quantify are no less impor- tant. These include improved public health, an enhanced sense of place and community, and economic development.” Source: Plan Scope of Work 1-2 Figure 1-1: Regional Map Northern San Luis Obispo County Salinas River Anza Corridor Trail Master Plan 1-3 1.2 Salinas River Trail Background As the regional transportation planning agency, SLOCOG was awarded a Caltrans Transportation Planning Grant to prepare a river-themed multi-purpose Anza Trail System along the Salinas River corridor. The SLOCOG 2010 Regional Transporta- tion Plan (RTP) identifies a North County section of the Anza Trail along the Salinas River corridor. The regional Salinas River corridor trail system concept grew out of the City of Paso Robles’ Salinas River Vision, which in- cluded creating a “destination” trail system along the Salinas River corridor, connecting San Miguel and Santa Margarita. The trail was intended to be designed for use by bicycle commuters between communities, as well as provide for rec- reational uses, including hiking, bird watching, horse riders, cycling and others. The Salinas River Trail was intended to be a destination trail that attracts a wide range of user groups that could also provide significant economic development opportunities to attract more tourism to the region. Study area cultural resource surveys indicate that humans have inhabited the river valley for thousands of years. Though the river itself is not generally navigable, its corridor was a significant regional route, used first by Native Americans followed by the Spanish. In 1775, the Viceroy of New Spain authorized Juan Bautista de Anza to command an expedition of soldiers and their families to occupy and settle the port of San Francisco. His route through the Salinas River Valley became the El Camino Real, the principal overland route used by Spanish explorers and missionaries and early Mexican settlers, and the critical emigration and supply route from Sonora to the missions and settlements of Alta California. Most of the master plan study area within the Salinas River Valley coincides with this route. Congress authorized the Juan Bautista de Anza National Historic Trail in 1990. The 1,200 mile trail, which is part of the National Parks System, is one of only a few long distance National Historic Trails. As originally planned, it would run from Nogales, Arizona, to San Francisco, California, follow- ing as closely as possible the historic route taken by Anza. However, since the expedition started in Culiacan, Sinaloa, Mexico, plans are under way to include the 600 miles of the route that lie within Mexico to make it the world’s first Inter- national Historic Trail. This National Historic Trail corridor travels northward through San Luis Obispo County, along Highway 101 to Santa Margar- ita, then follows the Salinas River to Paso Robles. This master plan addresses the Anza Trail corridor from Santa Margarita north to Paso Robles. The remainder of the study area lies along the river north of Paso Robles (where the Anza Trail corridor swings northwest away from the river), continuing to San Miguel. While there are no specific funding sources allocated for Anza Trail projects, the National Parks Service does certify trail sec- tions that meet the Anza Trail requirements and has a cost sharing program that provides a 50 percent match of up to $30,000 per project. Certified Anza Trail sections can also use the Anza Trail emblem on distance markers and interpretive signs. Parts of the existing trail system within Atascadero has such signage. 1.3 Vision, Principles, Goals and Objectives The SRT is envisioned to be a continuous interconnected public trail system along the Salinas River in northern San Luis Obispo County, designed to foster appreciation and steward- ship of the scenic and natural resources through hiking, biking and horseback riding, provide a non-motorized transporta- tion link between the area’s municipalities, and enhance local economic development through tourism. A vision statement was developed during the first public workshop crafted from attendee input (See Appendix C: Stakeholder and Public Outreach): “The future Salinas River Trail will provide North County with access and views to river valley natural open space. The trail will be designed for both transportation and recreation, will be safe for pedestrians, cyclists and equestrians alike, and will be respectful of the environ- ment and private property. The trail’s connectivity and accessibility, along with its well-maintained amenities, will be a draw for both residents and tourists that will provide economic benefits and an educational link to the Salinas River’s habitat, history and culture”. 1-4 Figure 1-2: Vicinity Map Northern San Luis Obispo County Salinas River Anza Corridor Trail Master Plan 1-5 Figure 1-3: Juan Bautista de Anza National Historic Trail The master plan’s main objective is a river-themed, braided trail connection that provides a catalyst for economic devel- opment and collaborative programs between communities. This master plan process addressed the objectives defined in the project RFP: • Regional Multi-Purpose Trail System: Create a safe and fully integrated off-highway trail system between com- munities for recreationalists and commuters alike. • Anza Trail Connection: Obtain federal designation and recognition for historical route. • Regional Destination Recreation: Create an opportunity for “Eco Tourism” for hiking, biking, bird watching and more. • Regional River Restoration: Create an opportunity for or- ganized networks of river restoration groups for project construction and maintenance system support. • Ecosystem Education: Provide opportunities for intercon- nected programs for watershed health and stewardship. • Outdoor Classrooms: Facilitate a hands-on learning envi- ronment that transcends borders and boundaries. • “Follow the River ~ Follow the Dream” Art Program: Pro- vide opportunities for an inspirational art program that provides beauty and learning opportunities along the river. • Funding: Leverage funding for plans and projects through multi-agency collaboration. While the overriding goal remains a continuous north-south route, it also includes creating trail connections and loops to accommodate local trips, connections with important lo- cal and regional destinations, and providing amenities and support facilities to make the main route and local branches more engaging and functional. These connections and loops are the envisioned “braided” trail connections. Working with the Steering Committee, the following princi- ples, goals and objectives guided master plan development: 1. Protection, Enhancement and Access to Nature and Culture (N) Nature Guiding Principles River corridors are often home to a highly diverse assemblage of sensitive plant and animal species. Access to these areas should be allowed since they include the visual resources that draw people to the river and represent an opportunity to educate the public about environmental stewardship, which in turn, helps to protect sensitive river corridors. Access can be allowed through appropriate planning and trail systems design. A trail is not only about connecting places, but is also about connecting people with nature and with history. Where impacts to sensitive areas cannot be avoided or mitigated, the trails should be realigned. Introduction and Summary 1-6 1 Nature Goal Statement N1: Provide a trail system that respects natural, visual and cultural resources. Nature Objectives • NO1: Avoid damaging or impacting the resources that at- tract users to a natural resource-based trail system, includ- ing landform, water, biological resources and visual assets. • NO2: Understand and respond to environmental condi- tions so that the trail and associated public access do not detract from the scenic resources nor damage sensitive places that the trail seeks to make accessible. • NO3: Encourage access as a sense of discovery, play, recre- ation and exposure to nature. • NO4: Protect the historical and cultural resources along the corridor, while simultaneously highlighting and providing educational information about them. 2. Water Quality and Quantity (W) Water Guiding Principles The Salinas is known as the “upside down” river since it flows from south to north and most of its flow is underground. Flood plains and active floodways need to be taken into account to avoid trail damage. Water quality should not be impacted by trail alignments and they should, in fact, be designed to help improve water quality where possible. Groundwater is also an important resource that needs to be protected. Water Goal Statement W1: Place trails and enhancements in areas that are not subject to highly erosive floodwaters and assure trail development does not increase flooding or degraded water quality, but instead increases water quality and flood protection. Water Objectives • WO1: Keep the trail close to the river as an integral com- ponent of the trail experience and public ownership op- portunities, but not so close as to subject permanent im- provements to flood damage. • WO2: Allow low investment soft-surface trails with limited amenities to be located in the floodplain/floodway zones, realizing that these trails may need to be re-established af- ter larger flooding events. • WO3: Provide well-defined connections between the hard surface and the soft surface trails that will endure through flooding and help to make it clear where to re-establish the soft surface trails. • WO4: Integrate engineered and non-engineered solutions to drainage along the trail improvements that protect the improvements, but also help to improve water quality. • WO5: Utilize soft surface trails to limit runoff and water quality issues where possible, while still providing a hard- surface trail backbone that also addresses water quality and water quantity issues, such as using surfacing that de- creases runoff and limits petro-chemical leaching. • WO6: Utilize natural processes to help cleanse water through bio-swales, wetlands and other non-engineered solutions and habitat enhancements. 3. Connectivity (C) Connectivity Guiding Principle Citizens should be able to walk, run or ride along the river connecting open space, scenic views, historical sites and areas of quiet contemplation. The public should also be able to use the trails to get to school, work, recreation and shopping. Connectivity Goal Statement • C1: Provide a safe and fully integrated off-street trail system between communities for local commuting purposes, as well as recreational purposes for local citizen and visitors. Connectivity Objectives • CO1: Accommodate local trips, connect to important local and regional destinations, and provide amenities and sup- port facilities to make the main route and local branches more engaging and functional. • CO2: Connect trails to local destinations to provide a com- plete regional trail network. • CO3: Work closely with agencies to support eco-tourism (i.e. hiking, biking, bird watching) as part of trail planning. 4. Property Rights and Public Access (P) Property Rights and Public Access Guiding Principles Public access needs to be balanced with private property rights. Well-designed trails can be made to minimize adjacent impacts to properties. There are many public benefits that can be derived from trail systems, but they should not be realized at the expense of private property rights. However, without the cooperation of private property owners, the desired trail may never be realized. This plan needs to set out the potential direct and indirect benefits to property owners and make assurances that impacts will be kept to a minimum. Property Rights and Public Access Goal Statement P1: Provide a trail system that is fully connected with minimal out-of-direction and out-of-experience alignments, while protecting private property interests. Private Property and Public Access Objectives • PO1: Obtain access first through publicly owned lands or public rights-of-way. Then consider easements or land purchase from willing property owners where direct con- nections are essential. If a property owner is unwilling, then consider alternative alignments around the proper- ties in question. • PO2: Provide information to property owners on the laws and policies that protect property owners from public ac- cess risk and liability. • PO3: Communicate the financial, environmental, health, economic and social benefits of trail systems to property owners and the general public. • PO4: Plan and design trails to not have a negative affect on adjacent property owners. Assure property owners that trails will not be placed adjacent to their properties without these concerns being addressed in project design features and alignments. Northern San Luis Obispo County Salinas River Anza Corridor Trail Master Plan 1-7 • BO4: Promote the positive economic aspects of the pro- posed trail system for both local land and business own- ers, as well as the benefits relating to supporting local ven- ues, points of interest and tourist-related industries. 7. Implementation (I) Implementation Guiding Principle The value of a regional trail system is based upon the conti- nuity of facilities and the elements connected by the trails. Though economic and political realities will require the system to be built as segments, all efforts need to be con- centrated on providing a connected trail system to achieve the desired benefits and to gain the support of the user base and broader community. Implementation Goal Statement • I1: Provide a plan that is both visionary, as well as realistic, so that it can be implemented. Implementation Supporting Objectives • I01: Create a plan that is cost-effective to implement and maintain. • IO2: Leverage the collective strength of multiple agen- cies to access funding, and then collaborate to efficient- ly manage plan and project implementation. • IO3: Create an overall master plan map to support part- ner agencies’ progress in building their piece of the trail. • IO4: Identify specific trail projects that can be pursued in the near-term, as well as projects that will require more detailed studies, planning or negotiations before implementation. • IO4: Provide tools and data to support trail building ef- forts and/or easements as part of major development projects. Trail alignments, standards and intended con- nections are all important to communicate early in the design review process. Potential Implementation Performance Measures The In order for the region, SLOCOG, the County and the local municipalities to keep track of the progress of the overall trail system and to motivate continued implementation, the fol- lowing metrics should be monitored and reported on when programming, requesting or summarizing the successes or goals attainment of the project: • PM1: Number of miles of trails • PM2: Number of connections within the trail network • PM3: Number of trail network access points • PM4: Number of educational programs • PM5: Number of river program volunteers • PM6: Number of trail-related businesses • PM7: Property values along the trail network • PM8: Amount of litter along the trail network • PM9: Number of trail-related incidents • PM10: Trail user satisfaction 5. Trail Experience (E) Trail Experience Guiding Principles Safety and connectivity are the important foundations for a trail system. Trail amenities make a simple connection into a public resource. Trail design treatments can make the dif- ference between a low impact and highly desired trail or an impactive, unsustainable and little-used trail system. Trail surfaces, fencing, barrier controls, revegetation, site furnish- ings and educational signage are all features that can improve the trail experience. Trail Experience Goal Statement • E1: The Trail system should enhance the user experience by taking advantage of visual and physical access to the river resources and only add features that reinforce the ex- isting character and river context. Trail Experience Objectives • EO1: Design trails that support user interest by incorporat- ing visual, topographic, historic and natural features. • EO2: Design trails in an attractive and clear manner that encourages users to stay on them. • EO3: Route trails to highlight the river corridor context. • EO4: Work closely with local, regional, State and federal agencies to plan for the improvement, management and operation of the Anza Trail and provide both a regional and local interpretive program on natural processes and historic context. • EO5: Create opportunities for an inspirational river art pro- gram that provides beauty and learning opportunities along the river (“Follow the River ~ Follow the Dream” Art Program). 6. Community Building (B) Community Building Guiding Principle A public trail program represents an opportunity for the general public, agencies and private interests to cooperate on a project that has the potential to benefit a broad sector of the community. Properly done, trail systems can grow and area’s economic base, positively affect local property values and support local businesses. Community Building Goal Statement • B1: Create a river themed, braided trail system that pro- vides a catalyst for economic development and collabora- tive programs between communities. Community Building Supporting Objectives • BO1: Create a plan that is well accepted by the residents, the community and involved agencies. • BO2: Support collaboration among local officials, planners, residents and community groups to create a balanced plan that addresses infrastructure, community identity, site character, human activities and nature. • BO3: Work closely with volunteer groups to develop river health, recreation and awareness programs. Introduction and Summary 1-8 1 1.4 Public Input Every effort was made to inform the public about the project and encourage participation in formulating the master plan. A project web site (salinasrivertrail.org) was created early in the process, and linked to the SLOCOG web site. The site was designed to make background information, workshop reports and draft documents readily accessible. SLOCOG issued a press release at the start of the project, and articles appeared in the San Luis Obispo Tribune/San Luis Obispo.com advertis- ing the public workshops and the link to the project web site. The consultant team provided information to and collected input from the community via public workshops and direct stakeholder outreach. Input from the three public workshops and outreach is summarized below. Appendix C: Stakeholder and Public Outreach, provides detailed documentation of comments voiced during the workshops, as well as other written comments received. 1.4.1 Public Workshop #1: Project Goals, Objectives, Opportunities and Constraints The first public workshop was held at the Templeton Com- munity Center on December 12, 2012. The meeting purpose was to introduce the planning effort to the community, present key findings from the preliminary existing conditions analysis, identify key vision themes to characterize the future trail, and gather input on project area preferences, assets, needs, and issues. 1.4.2 Public Workshop 2: Design Criteria, Opportunities and Constraints and Draft Trail Alignments The second public workshop was held on March 18, 2013 at the Atascadero Community Center to review project oppor- tunities and constraints and to discuss trail types and typical locations. It began with a PowerPoint presentation of the design criteria, relevant policies and statutes, associated sup - port features and design concepts, as well as the workshop format, which included interactive exercises with breakout groups to involve the public in the details of trail planning. 1.4.3 Public Workshop 3: Draft Trail Master Plan The third and final public workshop was held at City of Paso Robles’ City Council Chambers on July 15, 2013 to review more refined alternative trail alignments. This was an open house format to review the master plan content and celebrate plan accomplishment and to obtain final comments. 1.4.4 Stakeholder Interviews At the outset of this planning effort, the project team collabo- rated on a comprehensive stakeholders list based on contacts gathered from previous planning efforts in the region, as well as through a brainstorming session with the project Steering Committee. The goal was a list of key individuals and organizations that should be considered and informed about the process. The overall stakeholder database eventually contained over 200 potential contacts, and was supplemented with infor- mation from the three project workshop sign-in sheets. The master list included individuals and organizations such as jurisdictions (cities, county and community services districts), agencies and entities (National Park Service, environmental agencies, local tribes), local advisory committees, transporta- tion entities (Caltrans and Union Pacific Railroad), property owners, and individuals (historians and local decision mak- ers). The list was used to disseminate key information about upcoming project events and important project website updates. Throughout the first half of 2013, the consultant team con- ducted approximately 15 face-to-face and telephone inter- views with organizations and agencies representing a range of expertise, affiliations and connections to the study area. These interviews were designed to discuss goals and objec- tives, gather their input on the project, and engage them in the effort with an invitation to upcoming workshops. Key stakeholders interviewed for this effort included: • Friends of Margarita Proud • California Department of State Hospitals • Central Coast Motorcycle Association • Amigos De Anza • Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo County • Upper Salinas Watershed Coalition • Atascadero Mutual Water Company • Los Padres National Forest • Atascadero Association of Realtors • Paso Robles Association of Realtors • SLOCOG Citizen’s Advisory Committee • Northern Chumash Tribal Council • Atascadero Back Country Horsemen • SLO CO Trails Commission • Union Pacific Railroad See Appendix C: Stakeholder and Public Outreach, for ad- ditional information. Northern San Luis Obispo County Salinas River Anza Corridor Trail Master Plan 1-9 Providing connections to visitor services and destinations is an opportunity for making the SRT useful to visitors and locals while enhancing the area’s tourist economy. Lodging tends to be concentrated along Highway 101, especially in the larger communities of Paso Robles and Atascadero. Measured at Paso Robles, highs of 90°F or higher occur an average of 87 days each year and lows of 32°F or lower occur an average of 54 days. The annual precipitation is 12.57 inches falling over an average of 42 days, primarily from November through March. A defined study area and criteria for alternative alignment prioritization were developed with Steering Committee input. Alignments were analyzed for multiple trail types, ranging from soft surface within the riverbed to on-road paved routes, where necessary. This resulted in a preferred alignment on which the recommendations and cost estimates were based. Study Area Reaches To support trail planning organization, the overall study area was divided into six reaches, as illustrated in the figures on the following pages. Note that the maps depict all routes analyzed within each reach, from which a preferred route was then selected and described further in Chapter 4: Master Plan Recommendations. The maps include all six types of possible trails as described in subsequent sections of this document. Not all alternative routes will be or should be implemented. Overlapping and parallel routes exist on these maps, primarily to offer a variety of choices for implementation in case one or another route becomes too challenging to implement or where a possible fatal flaw makes an alternative impossible or improbable to implement. 1.4.5 Online Survey An online survey was maintained throughout the project to collect respondent demographics, desires, concerns and their potential use of the planned SRT. A substantial number of questions were directed specifically at adjacent property owners to assess their opinions on potential issues related to trail development. The 104 survey responses helped to provide an understanding of the demand for a future river trail, preferred activities, desired trail amenities, as well as likelihood for support. Survey results are summarized in Ap- pendix C: Stakeholder and Public Outreach. 1.5 Study Area The master plan addressed a study area of approximately 35 miles along the Salinas River between the communities of Santa Margarita and San Miguel, as shown in Figure 1-1. Between Santa Margarita and Paso Robles, the study area is located in both the Salinas River corridor and along the na- tionally designated Anza Trail corridor. North of Paso Robles the Anza Trail corridor diverges northwest away from the river, while the study area continues along the Salinas River to San Miguel. The region is characterized by a sandy river bed within a gently sloping alluvial valley that transitions into rolling hills that frame the valley. Several generally east-west flowing drainages run into the Salinas River. The river itself runs north, conveying runoff towards the Pacific Ocean at Monterey Bay. The river is shallow above ground, periodically dry for long periods, with much of its flow underground due to the riverbed’s porosity and numerous aquifers. Study area communities include San Miguel, population 2,336, Templeton, population 7,674, Paso Robles, population 42,751, Atascadero, population 28,310 and Santa Maria, popu- lation 1,259 and Garden Farms, population 386. (Source: 2010 Census.) These are primarily a combination of bedroom and agricultural communities, with commercial areas. Livestock grazing and wine grape cultivation are the predominant ag- ricultural activities along the river. Native vegetation includes riparian woodlands, oak woodlands and chaparral.Throughout this master plan, unpaved routes are referred to as “trails,” while paved routes are called “paths.” The master plan study area is composed of six “reaches,” broken down fur-ther into discrete “segments.” Introduction and Summary 1-10 1 Reach 1 – Santa Margarita to Garden Farms (Santa Margarita Road to Halcon Road in Atascadero) Approximately seven miles long, this reach is anchored by the communities of Santa Margarita and Garden Farms. This portion of the proposed trail alignment is bound on the west by Highway 101 and El Camino Real on the east and falls within the historical Juan de Bautista de Anza trail corridor. However, access to the Salinas River corridor is approximately 1.5 miles east of any proposed trail alignment. There are no existing formal or informal trails within the communities of Santa Margarita and Garden Farms, but there are existing recreational trails near Halcon Road that are part of the Las Lomas subdivision in the City of Atascadero. Reach 2 – Atascadero (Halcon Road to the Lakes of Atascadero) Approximately six miles long, Reach 2 is located in the heart of the City of Atascadero. This portion of the proposed trail alignment diverges from El Camino Real along Halcon Road and runs parallel along the Salinas River. It is bound on the west by the Union Pacific Railroad and Rocky Canyon Road on the east. This portion of the proposed trail alignment falls within the historical Juan de Bautista de Anza trail corridor and benefits from a majority of formal and informal trails within the City of Atascadero. The City of Atascadero Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) property is home to the Juan de Bautista de Anza “South” Trail section, while approximately two miles of the Juan de Bautista de Anza “North” trail sec- tions are located on property along the Salinas River owned by the Atascadero Mutual Water Company (AMWC). In addi- tion, the Jim Green Trail is located in this reach, which could serve as a potential local trail loop to the SRT. Reach 3 – Atascadero to Templeton (The Lakes of Atascadero to Main Street in Templeton) Approximately six miles long, Reach 3 includes the northern portion of the City of Atascadero east of Highway 101 and the community of Templeton. It is bounded on the west by the Union Pacific Railroad and by the Salinas River on the east. This portion of the proposed trail alignment falls within the historic Juan de Bautista de Anza trail corridor and benefits from a majority of existing formal and informal trails within the City of Atascadero. Approximately two miles of Juan de Bautista de Anza “North” and “De Anza Estates” trail sections are located on property along the Salinas River owned by the AMWC and on a designated open space property owned by Grave Creek Estates. In addition, the City of Atascadero “Rail Trail,” which runs parallel with the Union Pacific Railroad and Ferrocarril Road, could serve as a potential trail loop or alternative route of the SRT. One of the critical trail connec- tors between the City of Atascadero and the community of Templeton is located in this reach at Paso Robles Creek. Reach 4 – Templeton to Paso Robles (Main Street in Templeton to 13th Street in Paso Robles) Approximately six and half miles long, Reach 4 is the con- nection point between Templeton and the southern limits of the City of Paso Robles. This portion of the proposed trail alignment is bounded by Highway 101 on the west and Neal Spring Road on the east, and falls within the historical Juan de Bautista de Anza trail corridor. The City of Paso Robles owns a majority of the properties along the Salinas River includ- ing the “Salinas River Parkway Preserve” a 153 acre property with intended purpose to provide recreational uses for the community. This portion of the proposed trail alignment benefits from existing informal trails along the Salinas River and almost three miles of formal trails within the City of Paso Robles, including the Charolais Corridor, the Salinas Parkway, the River Road and South River Road Trails. Reach 5 – Paso Robles to San Miguel (Paso Robles to Wellsona Road) Approximately five and a half miles long, Reach 5 follows the Salinas River Corridor north of the City of Paso Robles towards the community of San Miguel. This portion of the proposed trail alignment is bound on the west by Highway 101 and North River Road on the east and leaves the historic Juan de Bautista de Anza trail corridor, which continues northwest towards Lake Nacimiento. There are no existing formal or informal trails within this reach of the proposed trail align- ment. This reach of the SRT has numerous challenges in that the majority of the properties along the Salinas River are pri- vately owned and that North River Road is extremely narrow with little or no shoulders. However, a preferred alignment along North River Road may be desired to avoid conflicts with private land owners, while improving pedestrian safety and allowing potential trail users to experience the Salinas River Corridor. Reach 6 – San Miguel (Wellsona Road to San Miguel) Approximately three and a half miles long, Reach 6 is the northernmost reach of the proposed trail system and is anchored by the community of San Miguel. This reach is bounded by Highway 101 on the west and North River Road on the east. There are no existing formal or informal trails within this reach. This reach has numerous challenges in that the majority of the properties along the Salinas River are pri- vately owned and that North River Road is extremely narrow with little or no shoulders. However, a preferred alignment along North River Road may be desired to avoid conflicts with private land owners while improving pedestrian safety and allowing potential trail users to experience the Salinas River Corridor. Northern San Luis Obispo County Salinas River Anza Corridor Trail Master Plan 1-11 Figure 1-4: Reach Key Map San Miguel Templeton Atascadero Santa Margarita Garden Farms Paso Robles 1-12 Figure 1-5: Reach 1 (Santa Margarita to Garden Farms) Northern San Luis Obispo County Salinas River Anza Corridor Trail Master Plan 1-13 Figure 1-6: Reach 2 (Atascadero) 1-14 Figure 1-7: Reach 3 (Atascadero to Templeton) Northern San Luis Obispo County Salinas River Anza Corridor Trail Master Plan 1-15 Figure 1-8: Reach 4 (Templeton to Paso Robles) 1-16 Figure 1-9: Reach 5 (Paso Robles to San Miguel) Northern San Luis Obispo County Salinas River Anza Corridor Trail Master Plan 1-17 Figure 1-10: Reach 6 (San Miguel) Introduction and Summary 1-18 1 1.6 Master Plan Organization This Master Plan document is organized into five chapters with supporting appendices: Chapter 1: Introduction Provides an overview of master plan background, goals, objectives and recommendations. It describes document organization and the public and stakeholder participation process that was integral to its preparation. Chapter 2: Setting Provides an overview of the study area setting. It summarizes land uses, attractions and destinations, public lands, and existing and planned bike facilities. In addition, this chapter describes environmental resources within the trail corridor and analyses constraints associated with agricultural, bio- logical and cultural resources, as well as geologic hazards. Lastly, this Chapter reports on economic resources, including a summary of tourism-supporting services and amenities. Chapter 3: Design Standards and Guidelines Summarizes standards and guidelines for pedestrian, bicycle and trail facilities that may be part of the SRT network. Mul- tiple public agencies own property within the study area, including Caltrans and DPR. Chapter 4: Master Plan Recommendations Describes the recommended improvements that will comprise the Northern San Luis Obispo County SRT. These recommendations reflect pertinent design standards and guidelines, existing conditions, physical opportunities and constraints, regulatory, legal, and guiding documents, and public and agency comments on the preliminary studies and recommendations. Chapter 5: Action Plan Describes the typical implementation steps to take a SRT project from master plan through construction, along with general timeframes for project steps. It lists the recommended SRT improvements reach by reach, summarized from Chapter 4. For each reach, the list includes the types of permits that may be required, the agencies and entities that would likely be parties to the project, and basic operation and manage- ment requirements. Potential project phases and priorities are then described. 1.7 Recommendations Summary Environmental resources are summarized in Chapter 2: Setting, and in supporting appendices with more detailed environmental data. The trail alignments and improvements described in Chapter 4: Master Plan Recommendations, were carefully designed to respond to environmental resources, permitting criteria and performance standards. These recom- mendations were also informed by public and stakeholder in- put and opinions expressed through three public workshops, several steering committee meetings, an online survey, and extensive communication and coordination among the key landowning and regulatory agencies. 1.7.1 Recommended Improvements Summary Recommended improvements are described and mapped in detail in Chapter 4. Chapter 5 outlines the associated imple - mentation steps, permits, responsible parties and conceptual project phasing. For quick reference, see Figures 1-5 through 1-10 for specific alignments. Reach 1 – Santa Margarita to Garden Farms (Approx. 6 miles - See Figure 1-5) Reach 2 – Atascadero (Approx. 7 miles - See Figure 1-6) Reach 3 – Atascadero to Templeton (Approx. 6 miles - See Figure 1-7) Reach 4 – Templeton to Paso Robles (Approx. 6 miles - See Figure 1-8) Reach 5 – Paso Robles to San Miguel (Approx. 6.5 miles - See Figure 9) Reach 6 – San Miguel (Approx. 3.5 miles - See Figure 1-10) Northern San Luis Obispo County Salinas River Anza Corridor Trail Master Plan 1-19 1.7.2 Estimated Costs Table 1-1 presents a summary of estimated costs by reach. Detailed cost estimates are included in Appendix H, and trail features are described in Chapters 3 and 4. Table 1-1: Costs by Reach Table 1-2: Construction Unit Costs Construction costs include trail, staging area and drainage crossing improvements. Implementation includes surveys, technical studies and design, environmental compliance and project administration. Permitting includes fees to acquire applicable local, state and federal permits. Table 1-2 summarizes unit costs for many of the trail types and associated drainage crossing options. These costs are calibrated by actual bid prices for comparable facilities or similar trail projects. However, costs can vary dramatically by the amount of work included in terms of volume, the bidding climate present at the time of the bid, and on a number of major unforseen conditions that are likely to surface during the design, engineering, environmental review and permit- ting stages of the plan implementation. The drainage crossing options, which in most cases cannot be determined until later stages of design, are the reason for the wide range of potential costs for most trail reaches. The costs shown here should only be used for preliminary programming of budgets, but should not be relied upon for final budgeting, which needs to occur after design, engineering, and permitting have been initiated. TRAIL TYPE CROSS SECTION & UNIT COSTS COMPOSITE COSTS Type 1A: Unimproved 3’-6’ Natural Surface Trail in Active River Channel Vegetation clearance Unimproved side trail Unimproved trail Unimproved side trail Vegetation clearance Total cost per lineal foot Total cost per mile * assumes some vegetation clearing, with some trailhead signage 1 0 2 0 1 4 Cost per sf: $3.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $3.00 Cost per linear foot of trail:$3 $0 $0 $0 $3 $6 $31,680 Type 1B: Improved 4’-6’ Firm Natural Surface Trail Vegetation clearance zone Compacted side trail Improved graded natural trail Compacted side trail Vegetation clearance zone Total cost per lineal foot Total cost per mile * assumes improved graded trail, moderate extensive vegetation clearing, with some signage 1 0 4 0 1 6 Cost per sf: $3.00 $2.00 $2.00 $2.00 $3.00 Cost per linear foot of trail: $3 $0 $8 $0 $3 $14 $73,920 Type 2A: 10’-12’ Class 1 Path with a 3’-4’ Firm Surface Trail next to Path Vegetation clearance Graded & compacted side trail Standard asphalt on compacted base Graded & compacted side trail Vegetation clearance Total cost per lineal foot Total cost per mile * assumes paired paved and unpaved trail. Paved component to Caltrans Class I stds.0 2 10 4 0 16 Cost per sf:$2.00 $3.00 $6.00 $3.00 $2.00 Cost per linear foot of trail:$0 $6 $60 $12 $0 $78 $411,840 Type 2B: 10’ Class 1 Multi-use Path with Separate Firm Surface Trail Nearby Vegetation clearance zone Graded & compacted shoulder with drainage Standard asphalt on compacted base Graded & compacted side trail Vegetation clearance zone Total cost per lineal foot Total cost per mile * assumes physically seperated paired paved & unpaved trail. Paved component to Caltrans Class I stds.0 2 10 4 2 18 Cost per sf:$1.00 $3.00 $6.00 $3.00 $3.00 Cost per linear foot of trail: $0 $6 $60 $12 $6 $84 $443,520 Type 3A: 10’-12’ Class 1 Multi-use Path with a graded shoulder Vegetation clearance zone Graded & compacted shoulder with drainage Standard asphalt on compacted base Graded & compacted side trail Vegetation clearance & revegetation zone Total cost per lineal foot Total cost per mile * assumes physically seperated paired paved & unpaved trail. Paved component to Caltrans Class I stds.1 1 8 1 1 12 Cost per sf: $1.00 $3.00 $5.00 $1.00 $1.00 Cost per linear foot of trail: $1 $3 $40 $1 $1 $46 $242,880 Type 3B: Class 2 Bicycle Lane or Class 3 Bikeway Vegetation clearance zone Graded & compacted side trail Class 2 or 3 Painted Bicycle Lanes Graded & compacted side trail Vegetation clearance zone Total cost per lineal foot Total cost per mile * assumes Class 2 & 3 painted bicycle lanes/markings. Constructed to Caltrans’ stnds and some signage.0 0 6 0 0 6 Cost per sf: $0.00 $0.00 $0.50 $0.00 $0.00 Cost per linear foot of trail: $0 $0 $3 $0 $0 $3 $15,840 Preliminary Design, Engineering, Permitting, Construction and Administration Costs, I Probable Cost Reach 1 $6,565,249 Reach 2 $5,848,123 Reach 3 $6,504,159 Reach 4 $4,371,995 Reach 5 $3,283,578 Reach 6 $3,291,112 Total $29,864,215 1 Construction costs include trail, staging area, and drainage crossing improvements. Implementation includes surveys, technical studies, and design; environmental compliance; and project administration. Permitting includes fees to acquire applicable local, state, and federal permits. Introduction and Summary 1-20 1 1.7.3 Next Steps This master plan is a planning-level study of SRT location and configuration. Actual trail project implementation will require additional site-specific study, planning and design, as outlined in the action plan in Chapter 5. Projects will require environmental study and documentation, as well as review and permitting consistent with the complexity of the specific improvements, affected sensitive resources, and any related regulatory and easement requirements. A primary objec- tive of the master plan was to identify and, if possible, avoid significant constraints, as well as address anticipated criteria and requirements. Primarily for this reason, significant effort went into alternative alignment analysis, and the prioritization criteria developed for this effort are described in Appendix J.