Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 051090 - Special Mtng COMMUNITY FORUM ATASCADERO GENERAL PLAN: DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN SINN ■ t�- rou«e[o � 1915 1979 COME VOICE YOUR OPINION The Downtown Planning Consultants for the City of Atascadero will be presenting their proposed plan to the City Council and for public comment at a Community Forum to be held at 7:00 p.m.on Thursday.May 10. 1990 in the Rotunda Room of the Atascadero Administration Building. The firm of Wurster,Bernardi&Emmons has been working with the City's Downtown Steering Committee In preparation of the draft plan. The pian Is available for review at the Atascadero Library and City Clerk's Office. it may also be purchased for $5.00 In Room 311 of the Administration Building. M31f!A-2 Approved as Read 6/12/90 ATASCADER0 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES MAY 10r 8990 Mayor Dexter called the meeting to order at 7:04 p .m. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Maggie Rice, Chamber of Commerce. CALL:ROLL Present : Councilmembers Mackey, Lilley, Shiers and Mayor Dexter Absent : Councilwoman Borgeson Staff Present : Ray Windsor , City Manager ; Arther Montandd'7, City Attorney; Gregory Luke, Public Works Director ; Mark Joseph , Administrative Services Director ; Steve DeCamp , City Planner and Lee Dayka, City Clerk Councilwoman Borgeson arrived at 7:05 p .m. DRAFT DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN PRESENTATION: Henry Engen gave background and staff report . His recommendation was to proceed with the public hearing process before the Planning Commission and explained that the ultimate objective was adoption of a specific element to the General Plan for the _ downtown. ~ -~ Mayor Dexter presented members of the Downtown Steering Committee. Mr . Engen introduced Mr . Larry Cannon, Executive Vice President of Wurtster , Bernardi & Emmons, Inc . , who gave a slide presentation of the Draft Downtown Master Plan. He reported that when asked for preliminary reactions to the plan from the Downtown Steering Committee, there was more consensus than originally anticipated . Mr . Cannon summarized the goals of the plan and outlined the four concepts: Circulation Plan, Parking Plan, Land Use Plan and the Urban Design Plan. The consultant explained that the plan was a ten-year program and suggested that after five years, the plan be re-examined . He stressed that the success of a revitalization program depends on daily efforts of the City, property owners, Chamber of Commerce and School District . Mr . Cannon additionally recommended that the City appoint a Downtown Task Force and consider hiring a CC, 5/10/90 1 Downtown Coordinator . Mr . Cannon commended the Downtown Steering Committee for their energetic directionand availed himself for CO questions. In response to questions from Councilwoman Mackey regarding recommendations for a downtown coordinator , Mr . Cannon indicated that the proposed funding would allow a half-time coordinator for a period of three years. Mayor Dexter referred to the Carlton Hotel , stating that if given the right treatment , it could become a key area of the downtown. Councilman Shiers thanked the Steering Committee for their efforts and commented that , overall , he was glad to see the plan. He suggested that with new building construction in the downtown, buildings be two-story allowing for commercial uses on the first level and residential housing on the top level . Mr . Cannon responded to the comments made by Mayor Dexter and Councilman Shiers. He remarked that one drawback to residential uses as suggested by Mr . Shiers would be parking and further explained that residences of this nature usually appeal to those with subsidized incomes who may not frequent the shops. In response to the Mayor ' s comments about the Carlton Hotel , Mr . Cannon cautioned that revitalization seldom hinges upon one large project , but rather on many, small , single individual actions. He added that activity needs to be visible and oriented outward to the street . Councilman Shiers expressed concern for current truck traffic on Traffic Way. Mr . Cannon stated that there was no apparent solution and suggested working with CALTRANS to resign Traffic Way. Councilwoman Borgeson added that the Steering Committee sees this matter as a priority and has recommended that the area be studied by traffic engineers and City staff. Councilman Lilley was in support of the concept and added that he was pleased to see consensus on the Steering Committee. He stressed concern for community reaction and favored Mr . Cannon ' s recommendation for organizing a task force. Mr . Lilley briefly addressed historical street lighting . He reported that as a result of working with PG&E in an effort to determine cost effectiveness, he has discovered that the operation may be very expensive. Councilwoman Mackey stated that she was anxious to hear public reaction to the downtown plan. Councilwoman Borgeson highlighted what she felt to be the most important concepts developed by the Steering Committee. CC 5/10/90 2 Public Comments: Maggie Rice, Chamber of Commerce, complimented the Committee and supported the plan in general and adoption in concept . She submitted written comments and recommendations (see Exhibit A) and highlighted issues of parking and signage as crucial to the vitality of the downtown. In addition, she urged commitment to a government/civic center . John Himes, President of the Business Improvement Association, read a memorandum (see Exhibit B) urging Council to immediately appoint a Downtown Task Force, headed by a full-time Downtown Coordinator . Robert Nimmo , 7375 Bella Vista, advised that the General Plan ' s proposed population of 32,000 be considered while addressing the Downtown Master Plan. He opposed residential housing in Zone 4 (Diagram 7 - Land Use Plan) stating that a more appropriate use would be for a larger government center , a civic center and possible branch offices of County government . He added that recreational facilities for senior citizens could also be planned for this area and suggested that the government center provide street level Council Chambers to allow access to all . Bill Smith , 7540 San Marcos, expressed excitement and support of the Master Plan. He inquired of Council what kind of payback could be expected for the expenditures and efforts. Mr . Cannon responded that the plan be looked upon as a business invenstment and reiterated re-examination at the end of five years to access progress and methods of funding . Councilwoman Borgeson added that a task coordinator could be responsible for making interval progress reports. Carol Lawall , 1.0755 Colorado Road , stated that she was born and raised in Fresno and made reference to the decline of its ' downtown Fulton Mall . She indicated that a number of facts contributed to its ' failure, including one-way streets, parking fees, crime and a general lack of convenience. She added that while the City of Fresno was rejuvenating the downtown, it was also allowing development of a large shopping mall , which was in direct conflict with the downtown. Ms. Lawall referred to proposed development for a large retail outlet center in the south end of Atascadero and expressed concern that it could be devastating to small retail business downtown. She urged Council to give consideration to what took place in Fresno and to show dedication to the revitalization of the downtown when they , are asked to consider such a proposal . Carol DeHart-Briggs, 9105 Santa Barbara Road , supported centralized commercialization of the downtown remarking on the unique qualities of Atascadero . She was in opposition to CC 5/10/90 3 • • proposed development for the south end of town and recommended placing emphasis on the existing attributes of downtown rather than on any one large, commercial development . Jim Berger , co-owner of American Classics on E1 Camino Real , stated concerns with regard to freeway signage. He opposed the plan ' s elimination of freeway signs and gave testimony of a personal study conducted with the use of a freeway banner . He urged Council to reconsider this issue and look at the Sign Ordinance as it pertains to freeway signage more seriously. Bob Prophet , a member of the Steering Committee, addressed the issue of obtaining a sign permit stating that the process is too cumbersome and that the City needs to come to grips with the procedure. Mike LeSage, former City Attorney for the City of Paso Robles, spoke in support of freeway signage. He stated that if the City is to encourage a downtown area that focuses on small , independent businesses, it must allow those businesses some way to be viable, including signage for those that are freeway oriented . He added that signage can be creative and suggested that a theme be established . Mr . Cannon responded to the comments with regard to signage. He stated that if everyone were allowed to have a freeway sign, there would be quite a forest of signs. He reiterated that the focal point of Atascadero is City Hall and that it would not be enhanced by 30 or 40 freeway signs. The consultant advised not to let signage get out of control and encouraged mutual support and promotion among downtown merchants. Additional Council discussion followed . Councilwoman Borgeson clarified that the Steering Committee was opposed to pole signs, but not to signs on the back of a building facing the freeway. Mayor Dexter called for a recess at 8:52 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 9: 10 p.m. Council discussion continued . Councilwoman Borgeson asked that the Planning Commission give attention to the sign permit process and added that creative signage should be encouraged . Mayor Dexter commented that in order to keep our business at home, the merchants must offer as much variety as possible. In addition, he noted favorably that more commercial establishments are staying open later . Councilman► Lilley supported the creation of a task force to develop the specific ordinances necessary for implementation and incorporation of the Downtown Master Plan into the General Plan. CC 5/10/90 4 9 • MOTION: By Councilwoman Borgeson and seconded by Councilman Shiers to accept the Draft Downtown Master Plan in concept and refer back to the Planning Commission for public hearing ; motion unanimously carried . Councilman Lilley voiced his hope that the public would not take the Council ' s adoption in concept as a decision not to listen to creative solutions to the kinds of issues brought up with regard to parking and signage. He indicated that these are challenging issues that call for more discussion and expressed commitment to hearing the concerned views of the public . MOTION: By Councilwoman Mackey and seconded by Councilwoman Borgeson to direct the City Manager to consult with members of the City Council and the Business Improvement Association to bring back recommendations for a Downtown Task Force. Motion unanimously carried . Closing comments followed from Council . Councilwoman Mackey stated that the plan was a good start , although she did not subscribe to all of it . She stressed that Council must listen to downtown property owners in relation to parking and signage. Councilwoman Borgeson stated that she would like to see focus placed on a "main-street program" emphasizing physical improvements of the downtown rather than on a re-developmental approach John Himes, president of the BIA, noted that there would be a period of transition before such time as the plan would be in affect and asked that it be recognized that some temporary decisions may need to be made. Councilman Lilley expanded on the comments of Mr . Himes stating that many merchants have staked faith on the revitalization of downtown and that the Council may need to consider an interim set of rules. He added that these interim rules may serve as a test to determine what is really going to work and what is not , and suggested that this be the first charge of the task force. Councilwoman Borgeson offered that the conditional use approach could be used where individual merits of a project could be considered . Mayor Dexter announced that he has visited other cities who have completed a downtown revitalization program and has put together a photograph album illustrating what he has observed . He invited those interested to view his album. CC 5/10/90 5 0 • THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 9125 P.M. TO A CLOSED SESSION OF COUNCIL ON MONDAY, MAY 14, 1990 AT 4:00 P.M. FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISCUSSING PAYROLL MATTERS. MINUTE ECORD D AND PREPARED BY: L E DAYKA, City Clerk Attachments: Exhibit A - Atascadero Chamber of Commerce Exhibit B - Downtown Business Improvement Association CC"5/10/90 6 tl lone � h fasca&roam9er cf commerce c�Z 6550 EL CAMINO REAL • ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA 93422 May 8 , 1990 TELEPHONE: (805) 466-2044 TO: ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL FROM: ATASCADERO CHAMBER OF �OT�RCE SUBJECT DOWNTOWN MASTER PLAN The Chamber of Commerce agrees with the proposed Master Plan in general and believes that the city should accept the plan in concept. It should not, however, be adopted into the General Plan except as recommendations at this point. Much more work on specific issues must be done before it is locked into stone. It is recommended that a Task Force be immediately appointed with a city staff member assigned as coordinator liaison. The Task Force should con- sist of representatives from the following : Business Improvement Assoc. Chamber of Commerce, a business owner -- not representative of the BIA, a business property owner, and a member at large not affiliated with any organization and has no business or financial interest in the downtown area. We believe that establishment of the Task Force to be the number one priority. Circulation Improvements It isrecognizedthat the recommended improvements listed and prioritized on page 40 are of the utmost importance. Most of the unwanted downtown traffic cannot be eliminated without highway 41 relocation and highway 101 Traffic Way ramp improve- ments . mprovements . Parking Plan 1 . Entrada Avenue On Street Parking. This seems reasonable as little else seems possible at this time. 2. Traffic Way Parking Lot This should be completed quickly to show that something is being accomplished and encourage other projects. 3 . Mid-Block Parking Lots These areas should provide the best showcase for a PARKING IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT! A parking district would enable the (cont' d) PAGE TWO . M selling of bonds to turn these open areas to landscaped parking zones. The district could also provide funds to restructure the rear of these businesses as a "second front" of the stores, so as to add to the convenience of shoppers . Also could provide funds for signing on street entrance to let people know where parking is! 4 . Lewis Avenue Parking We disagree to the purpose of acquiring parking this far from most businesses unless the underlying reason is to provide parking for overflow city and fire department employee parking. 5 . Revised Downtown Parking Standards We state the remarks of an Atascadero business owner which we believe accurately reflects the problem and proposes a solution: "In my opinion, to say these are reduced standards is to say "Dr. Gobbels" was the tooth fairy! First, most of the downtown buildings have no or little parking other than street parking. Most of the old buildings along El Camino Real have almost no parking on site. As an example, I owned at one time, 5800 El Camino Real, 3000 square feet of building. It has been a dry goods store, a sporting goods store, a bank, a T.V. Video Store, and lately, an antique store. It is now vacant, and for sale or lease. Under this downtown parking requirement, ten (10) car spaces will be required to open it for retail business. It has no legal parking, Three stack parking spots are in a dirt alley alongside the building that will not pass code! There is no parking available anywhere near. The market refuses to share parking as he needs it all for his market and office upstairs . This same problem exists up and down El Camino Real in the downtown center, and both sides of the street. The only way to allow these buildings to stay viable is to create parking districts and access the entire area to pay to create parking that will adequately service their businesses . " The fill in of the small vacant lots in the C.B.D. cannot even be considered until parking requirements are mitigated. To impose these parking requirements, as proposed, will keep most stores empty when they change owners or tenants. (cont'd) PAGE THREE 6 . Signage Signage and parking are very important to the vitality of downtown and must be addressed specifically early on. The requirements as presented in the Paster Plan are entirely too restrictive. This would serve to further stifle downtown business . The signage portion of the plan should be a high priority of the task force particulary that which deals with freeway signage. The Chamber recognizes that many of the downtown improvements cannot be accomplished without a funding mechanism. We recommend that the already established Redevelopment Agency be activated to determine a study area for project consideration as soon as possible. In conclusion : One of the few incentives the city can provide to downtown revitalization is to make a commitment to downtown by adopting a long range capital improvements program to include a govern- ment center to meet the needs of 'a city of 32, 000. If we continue to disperse to other areas on an expediency basis , such as been done with the Police Dept. and Library, there will never be a centralized downtown. If the city adopts and commits to a long range plan for a Civic Center, the very existance of that plan will encourage business and professional people to have confidence in the future of downtownandwill want to be a part of it. C C 5-11090 &�k )8 J tolVIT Powe BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION P. O. BOY 1607 j • ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA 93423 TO: Atascadero City Council FROM: Business Improvement Association (BIA) SUBJECT: Atascadero Downtown Master Plan The Downtown Master Plan is a great step in the right direction. However, caution must be exercised in it's implementation. The plan as presented is very complicated; not only doe it affect the vitality of the downtown, but it affects the lives of the many individuals who depend on the downtown for their liviihood and survival. The BIA recommends that the plan be accepted in concept as presented; that the Council immediately appoint the suggested Downtown Task Force and that they hire the suggested full-time Downtown Coordinator as soon as possible. The Task Force should consist of the following: o The Downtown Coordinator o A BIA Representative o A Chamber of Commerce Representative o A downtown business owner who is not active in the BIA o A downtown business property owner o A citizen of the city who has no business, financial or political interest in the downtown The Task Force should then be 'charged with the responsibility of implementing the various segments of the plan through the Planning Commission and City Council. Specific areas of immediate concern with the proposed plan are sign and parking requirements.'They are too restrictive as presented. The lifeblood of a small business is advertising and promotion. Signs are a critical part of a business' ability to attract customers. Atascadero as a city does not attract customers; so it is very critical that businesses be given every opportunity to attract customers through signs. Atascadero is not a tourist attraction; therefore, a pedestrian oriented downtown with restricted signs will not be beneficial to the local business person until such time as the City takes the necessary steps to make Atascadero a tourist attraction. Freeway sign requirements In particular need additional thought and consideration. Parking requirements as presented in the plan are far too restrictive and prohibit new business from opening in the Downtown area which in turn affects the general vitality of the area. We should follow San Luis Obispo's lead by establishing a system of in-lieu fees. Downtown San Luis Obispo managed to survive nicely with less than required parking until they were able to solve their problem by building parking garages. In conclusion, caution must be exercised in the implementation of any plan. Not only should Atascadero be a good place to live, but it should be a good place to do business and to earn a living. We must be careful not to be too theoretical or academia. We must be realistic and work within the framework of our resources.