Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 02/10/1987 CINDY WILKINS DEPUTY CITY CLERK AGENDA ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING ATASCADERO ADMINISTRATION BUILDING FOURTH FLOOR, ROTUNDA ROOM FEBRUARY 10,' 1987 7:30 P, M.' RULES OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION * Members of the audience may speak on any item on the agenda. * A_person may speak for three (3) minutes. If a group has a spokesperson, the spokesperson may speak for five (S) minutes. * No one may speak for a second time until everyone wishing to speak has had an opportunity to speak. * No one may speak more than twice on any item. * Council members may question any speaker ; the speakers may respond; but after the alloted time has expired, may not initiate further discussion. * The floor will then be closed to public participation and open for Council discussion. Call to Order Pledge of Allegiance Invocation Pastor Guy Godfrey Roll Call ** Recognition of Award Received by Dial-A-Ride ** Introduction of Kurt Stone, New Employee, Fire Department (Approximate Time 30 min. ) COMMUNITY FORUM The City Council values and encourages exchanges of ideas and comments from you the citizen. To increase the effectiveness of Community Forum, the following rules of public participation will be strictly enforced: * A maximum of 30 minutes will be allowed for Community Forum, unless Council authorizes an extension. * All remarks shall be addressed to Council as a whole and not to any individual member thereof. 0 * No questions shall be asked of a Council Member or City Staff without permission of the Mayor * No person shall be allowed to make slanderous, profane, im- pertinent, or personal remarks against any Council Member. * Any person desiring to submit written statements may do so by for- warding to Council prior to the Council Meeting nine (9) copies to the City Clerk by 5:OO p.m. on the Wednesday preceeding the Council Meeting. (Approximate Time 5 min. ) A. CONSENT CALENDAR All matters listed under Item A, Consent Calendar , are considered to be routine, and will be enacted by one motion in the form listed below. There will be no separate discussion of these items. A member of the Council or public may, by request, have any item removed from the Consent Agenda, which shall then be added to and taken up at the end of the "New Business" agenda. 1. Approval of Minutes of Regular Council Meeting of January 26 1987 2. Denial of Claim by Mary Phillips in the Amount of $162,407.88 3. Approval of Establishing Stop Intersections at: A. Resolution 17-87 Cayucos at San Anselmo B. Resolution 18-87 - Cayucos at Valdez C. Resolution 19-8 - Nogales at Dulzura D. Resolution 20-87 - Dulzura at Gancho 4. Approval of Resolution 16-87 - Establishing a 30-Minute Parking Limit - South Side of Cascada Ave from El Camino 145 Feet East 5. Acceptance of Final Lot Line Adjustment 7-87 - 9099 La Linia Shores/Volbrecht Surveys B. HEARINGS, APPEARANCES, AND REPORTS (Approximate Time - 15 Minutes) 1. General Plan Amendment 1G-87 and Zone Change 30-86 City Wide Areas A. Public Hearing B. Resolution 9-87 - Approving Amendment to the General Plan Land Use Map Revising Minimum Lot Size from 1/2 Acre Without Sewer to 20,000 Square Feet With Sewer in High Density Single Family Areas with Sewer 2 C. Ordinance 145 — Amending Official Zoning Maps Revising the Minimum Lot Size in the Limited Single Family Residential (LSF-X) and Residential Single Family, 1/2 Acre Minimum (RSF-X) (FIRST READING) (Approximate Time - 15 Minutes) 2. General Plan Amendment 1E-87 and Zone Change 28-86 6280 Tecorida - Grinnell A. Public Hearing B. Resolution 8-87 - Approving Amendment to the General Plan Land Use Map from High Density Multi-Family to Retail Commercial C. Ordinance 144 - Amending Official Zoning Maps from Residential Multiple Family, 16 Units/Acre to Commercial Retail (FIRST READING) C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS (Approximate Time - 5 Minutes) 1. Zone Change 29-86 - 8130-8300 E1 Camino Real - Massicotte Hinckley/Mc Namara (related to General Plan Amendment 1F-87) A. Ordinance 146 - Amending Official Zoning Maps from Industrial Park to Commercial Service (SECOND READING) (Cont'd from 1/26/87) (Approximate Time - 15 Minutes) 2. Mayor to Enter into Contractual Agreement with John H Ross & Assoc. dba Ross, Levin, and Macintyre for Architectural Services on the Police Facility with Costs Not Exceeding $28,713 (Cont'd from 5/12/86) D. NEW BUSINESS (Approximate Time - 15 Minutes) 1. Authorization for Public Works Department to Solicit Request for Proposals for Engineering Services on Design of San Andreas Bridge and Garcia Road Bridge E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION 1. City Council 2. City Attorney 3. City Clerk 4. City Treasurer 5. City Manager 3 • =a j AGENDA �U 01 ITEM ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES January 26, 1987 Atascadero Administration Building The regular meeting of the Atascadero City Council was called to order at 7:34 p.m. by Mayor Mackey, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. An invocation was given by Rev. Larry Etter, Atascadero Community Church. ROLL CALL Present: Councilmembers Borgeson, Handshy, Molina, Norris and Mayor Mackey Absent: None STAFF Mike Shelton, City Manager ; David Jorgensen, Administrative Services Director; Bud McHale, Police Chief; Henry Engen, Community Development Director; Paul Sensibaugh, Public Works Director ; Capt. - Mike McCain, Fire Department; Jeffrey Jorgensen, City Attorney; Boyd Sharitz , City Clerk; Cindy Wilkins, Deputy City Clerk Introduction of new employees: Kim Treece, Police Officer, introduced by Chief Bud McHale; Scott McSeveney, Firefighter , introduced by Capt. Mike McCain. Mayor Mackey proclaimed February 8-14 , 1987, as International Forgive- ness Week. COMMUNITY FORUM George Schroft, resident, expressed he has had difficulty retrieving personal property from the custody of the Police Dept. due to short- staffing, and he spoke in support of increasing the APD' s personnel budget. Mr. Schroft was directed by Chief McHale to meet with the Watch Commander at his earliest convenience, preferably during the day, to discuss the possible release/return of his property. A CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Approval of Minutes of Regular Council Meeting of January 12, 1987 2. Approval of Finance Director ' s Monthly Report - December 1986 • 3. Approval of Treasurer ' s Monthly Report - December 1986 4. Recognition of December Employee of the Month- Matt Bailey, Po- lice Department 1 5. Authorization for Parks and Recreation Department to Solicit B0 for Tractor 6. Authorization for Fire Department to Solicit Bids for Fire Engine Replacement 7. Authorization for Public Works Department to Solicit Bids for: A. Tractor-Backhoe for Street Division B. Used Motor-Grader for Street Division 8. Approval of Tentative Parcel Map 30-85 - 905 El Camino Real - Subdivision of 102.62 Acre Parcel into 4 Parcels - Rochelle/Webb/ Atascadero Limited (Bethel) 9. Approval of Tentative Parcel Map 29-86 9990 El Camino Real Subdivision of 1.09 Acres into 2 Lots of .64 and .45 acres - Hawkins/Twin Cities Engineering 10. Approval of Tentative Parcel Map 34-86 - 8730 Coromar Rd. - Subdivision of 1.11 Acres into 2 Lots of . 50 and . 61 Acres - Bryson/Volbrecht Surveys 11. Acceptance of Final Parcel Map 10-85 - 3280 San Fernando Road - - Barnes/Twin Cities Engineering 12. Acceptance of Final Parcel Map 32-85 - 11400 Santa Ana Road Davis/Twin Cities Engineering 13. Acceptance of Final Parcel Map 1-86 - 10870/10900/11020 Santa Ana Road - First Nationwide Mortgage/Twin Cities Engineering 14. Acceptance of Final Parcel Map 18-86 - 11505 Santa Ana Road - Davis/Twin Cities Engineering 15. Acceptance of Final Parcel Map 19-86 - 2470/2500 San Fernando Road - Davis/Twin Cities Engineering 16. Acceptance of Final Parcel Map 22-86 - 5120 & 5300 San Benito - St. Clair/Cook/Bland/Volbrecht Surveys/Golden West Development 17. Acceptance of Final Parcel Map 23-86 - 5100 San Benito - St. Clair/Cook/Bland/Volbrecht Surveys/Golden West Development 18. Acceptance of Final Lot Line Adjustment 4-86 - 7205 Santa Cruz - Davis/Twin Cities Engineering 19. Acceptance of Final Lot Line Adjustment 6-86 - 10755/10855 Atascadero Road - Garcia/Cuesta Engineering 20. Acceptance of Final Lot Line Adjustment 9-85 - 9095 La Linia• Meyers/Volbrecht Surveys Councilwoman Borgeson requested Item #8 be pulled (moved to New Busi- ness) for discussion. 2 • MOTION: By Councilwoman Norris to approve Items Al-20, minus #8, seconded by Councilman Molina; passed unanimously by roll- call. .� B. HEARINGS, APPEARANCES AND REPORTS 1. General Plan Amendment 1B-87 and Zone Change 26-86 - 8505 San Gab- riel Road (Portion of Lot 27, Block 13, Atascadero Colony) Trumpp Mr. Engen, Commun. Devel. Director, gave staff report. Public Comment Mr. Trumpp, applicant, spoke in support of his request and reiterated discussions he had with members of Planning Divn. staff prior to his submittal of application and fees. Mr. Art Williams, who owns property adjacent to Mr . Trumpp, responded to question of Councilwoman Borgeson that he has not evidenced that subject property may be on native American Indian lands (burial sites) ; he spoke in support of a refund to Mr. Trumpp, noting he has discussed with Mr. Trumpp the option of reapplying when sewer becomes available on San Gabriel. Council discussed with Mr. Jorgensen, City Attorney, options for pos- sible refund of Mr. Trumpp' s fees. MOTION: By Councilman Molina to deny GPA 1B-87 & ZC 26-86 without prejudice, seconded by Councilman Handshy; passed 3:2, with Councilmembers Borgeson and Norris opposed. MOTION: By Councilwoman Borgeson to direct staff to refund one-half ($375) of total fees paid ($750) by Mr . Trumpp due to misun- derstanding in communication, seconded by Councilwoman Norris; passed by 4:1 roll-call, with Mayor Mackey opposed. 2. General Plan Amendment 1F-87 and Zone Change 29-86 - 8130-8300 E1 Camino Real (Portion of Lot 5A, 6 and 7, Block 7, Atascadero Col- ony) - Massicotte/Hinckley/McNamara: A. Public Hearing B. Proposed Res. No. 13-87 - Approving Amendment to General Plan Land Use Map from Industrial Park to Service Commercial C. Proposed Ordinance 146 - Amending Official Zoning Maps from Industrial Park to Commercial Service (FIRST READING) Mr. Engen, Commun. Devel. Director , gave staff report. There were no • comments from the public. MOTION: By Councilman Molina to adopt Res. No. 13-87 , seconded by Councilwoman Norris; passed unanimously. MOTION: By Councilman Molina to read Ord. No. 146 by title only, s4b onded by Councilwoman Norris; passed unanimously. Mayor Mackey read Ord. 146 by title. _- MOTION: By Councilman Molina that this constitutes the first reading of Ord. 146, seconded by Councilwoman Norris; passed unani- mously. 3. Proposed Parking Conditions on El Camino Real from San Anselmo to San Gabriel Roads: A. Public Hearing B. Proposed Res. No. 11-87 - Establishment of 2-Hour Parking Limit C. Proposed Res. No. 12-87 - Prohibiting Parking from 2 a.m. to 6 p.m. on Tuesdays Mr. Sensibaugh, Pub. Works Director, gave staff report. No public comment regarding proposed Res. No. 11-87. MOTION: By Councilwoman Norris to adopt Res. No. 11-87, seconded by Councilwoman Borgeson; passed unanimously by roll-call. Public Comment Rev. Larry Etter, resident, asked how the no parking on Tuesdays w* be enforced; Police Chief McHale responded that only clergy will be cited and that enforcement will take place when activity permits. MOTION: By Councilwoman Borgeson to adopt Res. No. 12-87, seconded by Councilwoman Norris; passed unanimously by roll-call. COUNCIL RECESSED FOR BREAK AT 8 :29 P.M. MEETING WAS CALLED BACK TO ORDER AT 8:37 P.M. C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Ordinance 143 - Zone Change 24-86 - 9425 E1 Bordo (Lots 27, 28, 29, 30 & 31, Tract 5, Atascadero Colony) - Revision of Existing Recreational with a Planned Development Overlay Zoning to Residen- tial Single Family 1-1/2 Acre Minimum Lot Size - Jensen/La Prade (SECOND READING) (Cont'd from 1/12/87) Mr. Engen, Commun. Devel. Director, gave staff report. There were no public comments. MOTION: By Councilman Molina to read Ord. 143 by title only, seconded by Councilman Handshy; passed unanimously. Mayor Mackey read Ord. 143 by title. -- • 4 f MOTION: By Councilman Molina that this constitutes the second reading and adoption of Ord. 143, seconded by Councilman Handshy; passed unanimously by roll-call. 2. Budget/Personnel Request - Building Division, Community Develop- ment Department - "Permit Services Coordinator" Position (Cont'd from 1/12/87) Mr. Engen gave staff report and responded to questions from Council. MOTION: By Councilman Molina that Council concur with staff recommen- dations, as outlined in staff report, and direct staff to recruit for a Senior Building Inspector concurrent with a salary survey of Building Division positions, seconded by Councilwoman Norris; passed unanimously. 3. Traffic Signal Maintenance Contract Proposal with Lee Wilson Electric, Arroyo Grande for $1,800 (Cont'd from 1/12/87) Mr. Sensibaugh, Pub. Works Director , stated this item pulled in order to give the attorney for Wilson Electric an opportunity to review the proposed contract. D. NEW BUSINESS 1. Resolution 14-87 - Atascadero Police Officers Association (APOA) Settlement on Wages, Benefits and Other Conditions of Employment Mr. Bill Avery, Labor Consultant, noted that this is a hearing for the APOA employees to present their case before the Council, after which he will make responding comments. Public Comment Bryan Berry, elected Pres. of APOA, read prepared statements which summarized the history of negotiations (which were requested in April of 1986) for the period July 1, 1986 - July 1, 1987, and spoke in support of the Association' s settlement requests, focusing on the issues of accrual of compensatory time off, 40-hour work week and, primarily, minimum staffing concerns. Jerry Lennon, General Counsel for the California Orgn. of Police and Sheriffs, spoke in support of the settlement requests of the APOA as summarized by the previous speaker, expressing opposition to the adop- tion of Res. 14-87 suggesting the title is misleading and should be amended to read, "The Unilateral Imposition of Wages and Working Con- ditions Upon the Police Department" . He proposed, as alternative • solutions, either (1) award a-6% wage increase effective July 1, 1986, and leave the conditions of the current MOU in place, or ('2) direct those members of staff responsible for negotiations to sit back down with the APOA so a joint resolution may be brought back before Council for consideration. Art Cunningham, 8495 E1 Dorado, questioned Mr. Avery' s credibilo (not his credentials) , expressing he doesn' t feel he can be unbiased or objective in this matter since he is being..,paid by the City; as a taxpayer he expressed concern about adequate police protection. He also supports replacing a broken window glass on the police side of the Admin. Bldg. Jeff Fredericks, APD Officer , addressed the proposed amendments to the language in the MOU regarding overtime (Condition #4) ; he noted the wording gives rise to the possibility of an officer working a stretch of 20 shifts in a row without being paid overtime. He emphasized the officers seek parity with (as opposed to gain over) other City employ- ees. Joe Knyal, resident, questioned comments by Mr. Avery in a KPRL inter- view this morning regarding the inflationary factor ; he questioned Mr. Avery' s credentials. Steve Davis, resident, spoke in support of increase requested by APOA in the interest of saving lives (relates to delays incurred by present minimum staffing) . Amber Silva, local realtor, spoke in support of APOA requests in view of needs resulting from Atascadero' s fast-increasing population. Myron Nalepa, Monterey Rd. resident, noted the results of a 1979 s vey by the Atas. News revealed the #1 reason the people voted incorporation was to have an adequate, local police department. He urged that Council reconsider the APOA' s proposal in view of staffing concerns expressed. Mr. Avery, Labor Consultant, summarized the history of the negotia- tions with the APOA and addressed the points raised by representatives for them (i.e. , staffing issues, compensatory time, overtime, and comparisons to other employee group issues) ; he summarized the recom- mendations before Council. MOTION: By Councilman Molina to adopt Res. No. 14-87, seconded by Councilman Handshy; passed by 3:2 roll-call, with Councilmem- bers Borgeson and Norris opposed. COUNCIL RECESSED FOR BREAK AT 9:34 P.M. MEETING WAS CALLED BACK TO ORDER AT 9 :46 P.M. 2. Resolution 15-87 - Authorization to Purchase 3 Police Department Patrol Cars APD Chief McHale gave staff report. There were no public comments. MOTION: By Councilman Handshy to adopt Res. No. 15-87 , seconded • Councilman Molina; passed unanimously by roll-call. 0 0 • *3. Approval of Tentative Parcel Map 30-85 - 905 E1 Camino Real Sub- division of 102.62 Acre Parcel into 4 Parcels Rochelle/Webb/Atas- cadero Limited (Bethel) (* This item previously Item A-8. Mr. Engen, Commun. Devel. Director, gave brief staff report. Council- woman Borgeson expressed property access concerns and that she feels there should be a clear indication of development proposed on subject property; Mr. Engen responded, summarizing the proposal and uses. MOTION: By Councilman Handshy to approve TPM 30-85, seconded by Councilman Molina; passed 4:1, with Councilwoman Borgeson opposed. MOTION: By Councilman Molina to recess as Council and convene as ACSD Board of Directors, seconded by Councilman Handshy; passed unanimously. E. ATASCADERO COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT 1. Authorization to Solicit Bids for Tractor-Backhoe Mr. Sensibaugh, Pub. Works Director , gave staff report. MOTION: By Director Molina to authorize staff to go out to bid, sec- onded by Director Norris; passed unanimously. 2. Resolution 10-87 - Sewer Annexation Proposal - Lot 42, Block 12 (Lake View Drive) into Sanitation Improvement District No. 1 Mr. Sensibaugh, Pub. Works Director , gave staff report. MOTION: By Director Borgeson to adopt Res. No. 10-87, seconded by Director Handshy; passed unanimously by roll-call. MOTION: By Director Molina to adjourn as ACSD Board and reconvene as City Council, seconded by Director Handshy; passed unanimous- ly. F. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION City Council - Councilman Handshy reported on his recent attendance at a meeting in Los Angeles of the Western Regional Workshop on the forthcoming bicentennial celebration of the signing of the U.S. Constitution; he strongly urged that our community start getting involved by establishing a bicentennial committee. Mayor Mackey proposed the City work jointly with the school district. • Councilman Molina noted, at--the last City/Schools Committee meeting, it was tentatively agreed to request Council authorization for a safety and feasibility study for the Lewis Ave. Bridge. Councilwoman Norris thanked Maggie Rice, Chamber of Commerce, f• the coffee and cookies made available at these meetings. Mayor Mackey commented on several items: - reported on League of CA Cities, Channel Counties Divn. , meeting on 2/13/87 in Morro Bay, urging City representatives to attend, if possible. - reported she discussed extra-sized trucks with Mr . Sensibaugh today, noting certain legislation needs to be in place by 4/1/87; she referred this topic to the City Attorney for review. - reported receipt of a letter inviting City to participate in the selection of candidate (s) for 1986 Young American Medals for Bravery and Service -- for people under 19 yrs. of age who have performed outstanding acts of courage or service during the pre- vious calendar year. - reported the CA Water Commission will hold its regular monthly meeting on Fri. , 2/6/87, which is open to the public and in- cludes a tour of Diablo Canyon; reservations for transportation and security clearance are required. - she has a report from the Chamber of Commerce which she will circulate. 9 - reported the Rotunda Rm. is repaired and can now accommodate a larger capacity; Council may wish to discuss a policy for its uses as a future agenda item. - reported she received a call today from a boy working on his Eagle Scout Badge who wants to install curb and iron fencing around the statue in the Sunken Gardens. City Manager - Mr. Shelton proudly announced the birth of a new son, Jared, on Wednesday, January 21st, weighing in at 8 lb. 13 oz. CONGRATULATIONS MIKE AND FAMILY ! ! ! ! MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:15 P.M. TO JANUARY 30 , 1987, AT 10:00 A.M. , IN THE 4TH FLOOR CLUB ROOM FOR THE PURPOSE OF REVIEW OF CITY COUNCIL GOAL-SETTING AND MID-YEAR BUDGET STATUS. MINUTES RECORDED BY: PREPARED BY: BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk CINDY WILKINS, Deputy City MFOG '617 AGENDA M E M O R A N D U M To: Mike Shelton, City Manager a - From: David G. Jorgensen, Admin. Svcs. Director Date: February 2, 1987 Subject: Claim of Mary Phillips, et al RECOMMENDATION City Council deny the above-mentioned claim in the amount of $162, 407. 88, which was submitted on November 17, 1986. BACKGROUND Claimant alleges their dog was taken from them illegally after it had bitten some children. file: mclmphil D% �7 1 ``A MEMORANDUM _ TO: Council THROUGH: Mike Shelton, City Manager ' FROM: Paul Sensibaugh, Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Resolutions Establishing Stop Intersections at Various Locations DATE: February 3, 1987 Recommendation: The Traffic Committee recommends that Council adopt the following resolutions establishing Stop intersections at the locations indicated. Resolution No. 17-87 Cayucos at San Anselmo Resolution No. 18-87 Cayucos at Valdez Resolution No. 19-87 Nogales at Dulzura Resolution No. 20-87 Dulzura at Gancho Background: The Traffic Committee has received requests for these stop signs from various residents in the neighborhood. The locations have been observed by the committee and stop intersections determined to be appropriate at these locations. Discussion: The safety at all of these intersections will be improved with the installation of the stop signs. Fiscal Impact: The cost to the City is approximately $300 and can be paid out of the 1986-87 Fiscal Year Budget - Capital Improvement ($. 50 tax) PMS/vjh • l�- RESOLUTION NO. 17-87 RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO DESIGNATING A STOP INTERSECTION _ ON CAYUCOS AVENUE AT THE INTERSECTION WITH SAN ANSELMO AVENUE WHEREAS, Section 4-3. 801 et seq, of the Atascadero Municipal Code allows the City Traffic Engineer to determine the location of STOP intersections, and to place and maintain appropriate signs or markings indicating the same; and WHEREAS, the Atascadero Traffic Committee has recommended that establishing a STOP intersection on Cayucos Avenue at the inter- section with San Anselmo will alleviate a hazardous traffic con- dition; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Atascadero directs the City Traffic Engineer to place and maintain appropriate signs or markings indicating a STOP intersection at the location listed above. On Motion by s and seconded by , the foregoing Resolution is hereby adopted in its • entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: ATTEST: BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk MARJORIE MACKEY,Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: JEFFREY G. JORGENSEN PAUL M. SENSIBAUGH City Attorney Director of Public Works/ City Engineer • 0 RESOLUTION NO. 18-87 RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO DESIGNATING A STOP INTERSECTION ON CAYUCOS AVENUE AT THE INTERSECTION WITH VALDEZ AVENUE WHEREAS, Section 4-3.801 et seq. of the Atascadero Municipal Code allows the City Traffic Engineer to determine the location of STOP intersections, and to place and maintain appropriate signs or markings indicating the same; and WHEREAS, the Atascadero Traffic Committee has recommended that establishing a STOP intersection on Cayucos Avenue at the inter- section with Valdez Ave. will alleviate a hazardous traffic con- dition; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Atascadero directs the City Traffic Engineer to place and maintain appropriate signs or markings indicating a STOP intersection at the location listed above. On Motion by ,and seconded by ' the foregoing Resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: ATTEST: BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk MARJORIE MACKEY,Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: JEFFREY G. JORGENSEN PAUL M. SENSIBAUGH City Attorney Director of Public Works/ City Engineer RESOLUTION NO. 1g -87 - RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO DESIGNATING A STOP INTERSECTION ON NOGALES AVENUE AT THE INTERSECTION WITH DULZURA AVENUE WHEREAS, Section 4-3.801 et seq . of the Atascadero Municipal Code allows the City Traffic Engineer to determine the location of STOP intersections, and to place and maintain appropriate signs or markings indicating the same; and WHEREAS, the Atascadero Traffic Committee has recommended that establishing a STOP intersection on Nogales Avenue at the inter- section with Dulzura Ave. will alleviate a hazardous traffic con- dition; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Atascadero directs the City Traffic Engineer to place and maintain appropriate signs or markings indicating a STOP intersection at the location listed above. On Motion by ,and seconded by , the foregoing Resolution is hereby adopted in its • entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: ATTEST: BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk MARJORIE MACKEY,Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: JEFFREY G. JORGENSEN PAUL M. SENSIBAUGH City Attorney Director of Public Works/ City Engineer RESOLUTION NO. 20-87 RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO DESIGNATING A STOP INTERSECTION ON DULZURA AVENUE AT THE INTERSECTION WITH GANCHO AVENUE WHEREAS, Section 4-3.801 et seq. of the Atascadero Municipal Code allows the City Traffic Engineer to determine the location of STOP intersections, and to place and maintain appropriate signs or markings indicating the same; and WHEREAS, the Atascadero Traffic Committee has recommended that establishing a STOP intersection on Dulzura Avenue at the inter- section with Gancho Ave. will alleviate a hazardous traffic con- dition; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Atascadero directs the City Traffic Engineer to place and maintain appropriate signs or markings indicating a STOP intersection at the location listed above. On Motion by ,and seconded by , the foregoing Resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: ATTEST: BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk MARJORIE MACKEY,Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: JEFFREY G. JORGENSEN PAUL M. SENSIBAUGH City Attorney Director of Public Works/ City Engineer 1 Y //144 i - # TEPA MEMORANDUM } TO: City Council ` \ THROUGH: Mike Shelton, City Manager FROM: Paul Sensibaugh, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Establishment of 30 Minute Parking - Cascada Avenue DATE: February 3, 1987 Recommendation: The Traffic Committee recommends approval of Resolution No. 1:6-87 establishing 30 minute parking on the South side of Cascada Avenue 145 feet from the curb return on El Camino, exclusive of the driveway. Background: Prior to the construction of the new stores fronting E1 Camino Real at the Lucky Plaza the Traffic Committee recommended No Parking be established along the frontage of the Plaza due to sight limitations when exiting the shopping center onto El Camino Real. With the elimination of parking on E1 Camino the store owners facing El Camino feel that there is now insufficient park- ing adjacent to their stores. The owner of Open Air Flowers has requested that the parking on the South side of Cascada be limited to 30 minutes to help alleviate his customer parking pro- blems. Although there is ample parking behind the shopping center employees are apparently reluctant to use this due to the remote location and cite safety and vandalism problems associated with that parking lot. Fiscal Impact: The Cost to the City is approximately $50.00 and can be paid out of the 1986/87 budget. 1� RESOLUTION NO. 16-87 ` RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO ESTABLISHING A 30 MINUTE PARKING ZONE ON CASCADA AVENUE FROM EL CAMINO REAL 145 FEET TO THE EAST (EXCLUSIVE OF THE DRIVEWAY) WHEREAS, Section 4-2.1101 et seq. of the Atascadero Municipal Code allows the City Traffic Engineer to determine the location of limited time parking and to place and maintain appropriate signs or markings indicating the same; and WHEREAS, the Atascadero Traffic Committee has recommended that establishment of a 30 Minute parking zone on Cascada Avenue from El Camino Real 145 feet to the East (exclusive of the drive- way) will eliminate long term parking and thus alleviate a customer parking problem. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Atascadero directs the City Traffic Engineer to place and maintain the ap- propriate signs or markings to establish a 30 Minute parking zone as indicated above. On motion by ,and seconded by , the foregoing Resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: ATTEST: BOYD C. SHARITZ,City Clerk MARJORIE MACKEY, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: JEFFREY G. JORGENSEN PAUL M. SENSIBAUGH City Attorney ____ Director of Public Works • City Engineer 2 ti • M_E M_0_R A N_D_U M_ TO: City Council February 10, 1987 VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager % I FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Acceptance of Final Lot Line Adjustment 7-86 LOCATION: 9099 La Linia APPLICANT: Jim Shores (Volbrecht Surveys) On November 10, 1986 , the City Council approved Lot Line Adjust- ment 7-86 , subject to certain findings and conditions and in concurrence with the recommendation of the Planning Commission. • The required findings and conditions have been complied with and the final lot line adjustment is recommended for approval. HE:ph cc: Jim Shores Volbrecht Surveys • l� X 141BI 6 oat' L.LA 7-8( o� ° q N, 0 'j AB e ejl :hn e. oal� kni �� ►� � o u V qo �n l(4 p a n obN p Vv t x a� oX `� 14 M EMO RAND U M TO: City Council February 10, 1987 VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager K__ FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment 1G-87 .and Zone Change 30-86 LOCATION: High Density Single Family Area APPLICANT: Atascadero City Planning Commission REQUEST: To revise the Land Use Element Text to revise the mini- mum lot size from 2 acre to 20,000 square feet under High Density Single Family Designation and revise the Zoning Ordinance text of the RSF-X(Residential Single Family) and LSF-X(Limited Single Family) S(Suffix re- • vising the minimum lot size from 2 acre; without sewer to 20,000 square feet ; with sewer) BACKGROUND: Original request by staff was to revise minimum lot size requirement from acre to 20,000 square feet. After conducting a public hearing on January 19 , 1987, the Planning Commission recommendation was to revise the minimum lot size requirement from 2 acre to 20,000 square feet, utilizing the net acreage formula, "in areas served by sewer". (attached revised staff report) RECO1114ENDATION: 1. Approval of revised Resolution No. 9-87 2. Approval of revised Ordinance No. 145 (1st Reading) HE:ph Attachments : Revised Staff Report, dated 1/19/87 Revised Draft Resolution No. 9-87 Revised Draft Ordinance No. 145 City of Atascadero Item: C.1 STAFF REPORT (revised) 0_ _ FOR: PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Date : Jan. 19, 1987 BY: Joel Moses , Associate Planner File No: GP: 1G-87 ZC: 30-86 SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment GP: 1G-87 and Zone Change AC : 30-86 to revise the Land Use Element text to revise the minimum lot size from z acre to 20,000 square feet under High Density Single Family Designation and re- vise the Zoning Ordinance text of the RSFX(Residential Single Family) and ) X(Suffix revising the minimum LSFX(Limited Single Familylot size from 2 acre without sewer to 202000 square feet with sewer) BACKGROUND: General Plan Amendment GP: 1G-87 and Zone Change AC: 30-86 were initiated by the Planning Commission during the preliminary review of Cycle 1-1987 General Plan Amendments at the request of members of the general public. Public hearing notice was published in the Atascadero News on December 7, 1984. A. LOCATION: General Plan Areas Designated High Density Single Family Zoning Map Areas Designated RSF-X(Residential Single Family, 2 acre minimum lot size) LSF-X(Limit Single Family, 2 acre minimum lot size) B. SITUATION AND FACTS: 1. Request. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .To revise the existing General Plan text and the Zoning Ordinance text. Revise the General Plan High Density Single Family minimum lot size from 2 acre to 20,000 square feet and the minimum lot size from 2 acre ;with out sewer to 20, 000 sq. ft;-with sewer 2. Applicant. , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Atascadero City Planning Commission 3. Zoning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .RSF-X(Residential Single Family 2 acre minimum lot size) and LSF-X (Limited Single Family 2 acre mi imum lot size) i 0 • STAFF REPORT January 19, 1987 GP: 1G-87 & ZC: 30-86 Page Two 4. General Plan Designation. . . . . . . .High Density Single Family {2 acre minimum lot size) 5. Environmental Status. . . . . . . . . . . .Negative Declaration C. ANALYSIS : As noted during the preliminary review of General Plan Amendment Cycle 1-1987, the Planning Commission, in response to a request, ini- tiated General Plan Amendment GP: 1G-87 -and coinciding Zone Change ZC: 30-86. The request was made by John Falkenstien, a Civil En- gineer and Alan Volbrecht, Licensed Land Surveyor. They based their request on problems that had been found along Coromar Road. The prob- lem being that the lot sizes had been calculated for size based on the property going to the center of the road. It has been determined that the property may not count the road to make-up the required 2 acre lot size. for spliting. The proponents noted that 20,000 square foot minimum lot size would allow for the spliting of the property in the area. The current General Plan, High Density Single Family designation allows a minimum lot size of 2 acre (213,780 square feet) (Exhibit A) . The proposal would reduce the lot size to 201000 square feet. This would be a 1, 780 square foot reduction in lot size or an area of approximately 50' x 35 ' . The Zoning Ordinance reflects the General Plan with the use of the "X" suffix in the LSF (Limited Single Fam- ily) and RSF(Residential Single Fmily) (Exhibits B&C) . Locations of the present areas designated for High Density Single Family (RSF-X and LSF-X) as shown on Exhibits D,E & F note that seven (7) existing areas will be effected, not counting any revisions now being contem- plated. Of these areas , most are fully developed areas with few potential new lots being created lot sizes are already below the 2 acre minimum lot size. Two (2) of the areas do contain large lots that are capable of being split. These two areas , Coromar/ Atascadero Ave. and the east side of Sombrilla, are currently par- tially developed and additional lot spliting is expected in these areas . The change in the minimum lot size would have little effect on the overall number of lots that could be created, with the ex- ception of the lots that are just below 1 acre before spliting. Impacts from the revision would be minimal due to the small number of potential new lots. Traffic and required services would also be minimal. Specific site impacts would be reviewed and mitigated at the time of subdividing. Septic would be of little concern due to the fact that the areas are served by sewer or will be served in the near future.. with the exception of one area along Portola Road at Carmelita. STAFF REPORT January 19, 1987 GP: 1G-87 & ZC: 30-86 Page Three D. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of General Plan Amendment GP: 1G-87 and Zone Change ZC: 30-86 based on the proposed draft resolution and draft ordinance (Exhibits G and H) . JM:ph ATTACHMENTS: EXHIBIT A - General Plan Text EXHIBIT B - Zoning Ordinance Text EXHIBIT C - Zoning Ordinance Text EXHIBIT D - General Plan Map EXHIBIT E - Zoning Map Section EXHIBIT F - Zoning Map Section EXHIBIT G - Draft Resolution No. 9-87(revised) EXHIBIT H - Draft Ordinance No. 145 (revised) s • In much of Atascadero Colony, the original subdivision created lots which are excessively long and narrow, as much as five times longer than wide. Many of these lots are rather small and located in areas destined for urban development. These lots are particularly difficult to maintain in their present form, and taking them down to more usable sizes is sometimes even more difficult. Special studies related to these areas must explore the most practical approach to their highest use, including the need for more stringent standards for re- view of lot splits. Single-Family Residential The existing and future distribution of single-family residen- tial uses can be partly interpreted from Table V-1. This table indicates that the largest number of developed single- family lots occurs in Octant NE-1 . This octant also has 424 vacant lots, most of which occur in residential categories. Growth potential, however, is greater in Octants NW-0 and SE-0 . Octant NW-0 has 1, 353 vacant lots principally in low- density residential categories. Four classifications of single-family residential density are proposed in this Plan. The principal uses found in each clas- sification are proposed as follows : Land uses shall be limited to single-family dwellings, acces- sory buildings and uses, home occupations , public parks and playgrounds, schools, libraries and board and care facilities . Minimum lot size for the creation of new lots shall be one- half acre. This is greater than the one-quarter to one-half acre recommended in the 1968 General Plan.. High Density Minimum lot size for the creation of new lots shall be one-half acre. Moderate .Density Minimum lot size for the creation of new lots within the Urban Services Area shall be one acre if served by sewers and 12 acres if not served by sewers . Low Density Minimum lot sizes within the Urban Services area shall range from 1; to 22- acres while the minimum lot size outside the Urban Services Area shall be 22 acres . Deter- mination of appropriate lot sizes should be based on such factors as slope of access road to the building site; availability of services, especiall. -a��g � GO1IL^eGfrL N � from the center of the community; g neighboring lands; percolation and GEJNAL RAN AMOLMaT GP-16:87 access roads to the building site. ZINE Cad' W&C ZC%3D -bL, ZO,,�SQ FTZE h SQL:7D nr. 59 . V A27, • • DOPTED JUIIE (d) Skilled Nursing Facility, where the number of residents under care is greater than six (See Section 9-6.134) (e) Residential care, where the .number of residents under care is greater than six (See Section 9-6.135) (f) Organizational houses (g) Pipeline (h) Bed and Breakfast (i) Caretaker residence (See Section 9-6.104) (j) The following uses where established in a residential struc- ture of historical importance are satisfied. (1) Broadcasting studios (2) Business support services (3) Libraries and museums (4) Offices (5) Personal Services (6) School-business and vocational (k) Kennels (See Section 9-6.111) 9-3.154. Minimum Lot Size: The minimum lot size in the Residen- tial Single Family Zone shall be one-half (1/2) acre and may range up to two and one-half (2 1/2) acres.—Tfie size of a lot shall be consis- tent with the land use designation set forth in the General Plan and shall be indicated by the symbols set forth in the following chart, which shall be shown on the Offical Zoning Maps as provided by Section 9-3.104 (d) . FSYM]30L;;; MINIMUM LOT SIZE r one-half (1/2) acre one acre,when sewers are available one and one-half (1 1/2) acres, when sewers are not available Z one and one-half (1 1/2) to two and one-half (2 1/2) acres based on performance standards set forth in this Section. (a) Performance Standards: The following performance standards shall be evaluated for each lot which is appended with the "Z" symbol in determining its minimum lot size: (1) Distance from the Center of the Comr D(HjB T-g .ZDM)jj& OED.�- G-CAL--M FUN A1YI� ttLX7f GP IG �7 3-12 ZG-AIC CKKUE A 1uI1111a LLT 5)ZC h MIZC TO MOW 60V1KE ITT ADOPTED JUNE 27 , 1* (g) Pipeline (h) Bed and breakfast (i) Caretaker residence (See Section 9-6.104 (j) The following uses where established in a residential struc- � ,:' �,�, ture of historical importance: (1) . Broadcasting studios (2) Business -support services (3) Libraries and museums (4) Offices _,X:Prf (5) Personal Services (6) School - business and vocational 9-3.164. Minimum Lot Size: The minimum lot size in the Limited Residential Single Family Zone shall be _one-half (112) acre and may range up to two and one-half (2 1/2) acres. The size of a lot shall be consistent with the land use designation set forth in the General Plan and shall be indicated by the symbols set forth in the following chart, which shall be shown on the Official Zoning Maps as provided by Section 9-3.104 (d) . SYMBOL MINIMUM LOT SIZE X one-half acre one acre, when sewers are available one and one-half (1 1/2) acres, when sewers are not available Z one and one-half (1 1/2) to two and one-half (2 1/2) acres based on per- formance standards set forth in this Section (a) Performance Standards: The following performance standards shall be evaluated for each lot which is appended with the "Z" symbol in determining its minimum lot size: (1) Distance from the Center of the Community: Using the Atascadero Administration Building as the center of the community, the lot size factor based on this performance standard shall be: 1 DISTANCE LOT SIZE FACTOR 0 - 4000 ' 0 . 08 4000 ' - 6000 ' 0..10 6000 ' - 8000 ' 0.12 1. To be measured as radial distan WIPIT C • ZONING O DINIRIC TL_u tained in the Planning Departme GL'IJM L. A)1'fJ AW1tX101 CLT EY IG •87 ZDhE CKW(gE ZG:W-56 3-17 M I U MIA uIr 51 ZG '/Z AG fel; `f t7 W.OGD_<av KU =. n� • X\ � \ L .............. .................... .............. t .............::.... . :.................. ................... t� . .... .��;.. \ �.�. ......... .. !. .......... :: 9 l ................ .............. ...... .01 r ...... ...... .... .. ... ... .. .... .......... .:::::::::. :: ' r .......... :: ;e�o 00., 00 e`e 7J q r k _ .. . f AUL15 DE�1Gl.t14��� f=DtL y Cf1�G�^�/,L�77.1 AIT1 5y 1 IU&L �F�P7`�ri—ll LY7� , t s 9 l2-'1(,1.1..iT bbl I NA 1)Ul U M LLT! S) Lt,/ � : :: a 1980 Ie , e e 000, e e 00" eoe e . ccooao� 000, neo>` soe Fi a00000 1..1 mmmmmm L ' ��. \♦ nzzz z `;p Z y,y,o,. I - Z�Zlzzxc V M Tn u \ D j T~T L J 2 3 n D n • o �� )`�•'' y e`e�ee; 000, - �� 00 00 e ooa�omm (�1 � H N O A;n G - I\ JG vu`OUJue >)- prm>mm a z • vmcni MM mzm DOC i CsE?JLXAL TLA N MAP mR_ � I dIA- ALR M /1't4EUNILbT-CF-16 .87 70lUL C UZE ZC-Z,&-E�6 {MIU kIL M LLT 517E %.IYEFL TD •i,. ' ��` ZO,a)O HYAAVE F'CT. r,, `r11 4 VIA ` . ,. � e`er s�. ►�•. 1 • • ,� ■ :� :.11 .FAM i .� pru IPA 11111P IMF DO 2$$ � D l�se�! �.e o �`•� • � ' 'SLI" �© 1�■.=�����°®tet• fill � G „� �• � l�, 111 .■! 1 I)I /Il�;�lh' ,, -, ��I ♦11111_ 1111ill 111111 H ♦♦� ,JIM `' • 111 ENTER _ . Evil six sit . po md ■ ILI 1110, MAN • 11,E/����� Q�'� ���1 � �i::� .� , Re WAN 00 W �2.1 A WA WA 2;--;:t S, gg PC RW y s In. Ii • 0 WPM _► . :ISS � �� ° P.-JIM • EXHIBIT G GP: 1G-87 ZC: 30-86 RESOLUTION NO. 9 -87 A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO APPROVING GENERAL PLAN MAP AMENDMENT TO AMEPID THE GENERAL PLAN OF THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE CITY' S ' GENERAL PLAN PERTAINING TO REVISING THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE FROM 2 ACRE; WITHOUT SEWER TO 20,000 SQUARE FEET; WITH SEWER,. IN THE HIGH DENSITY SINGLE FA14ILY AREAS. (GP: 1G-87 CITY OF ATASCADERO) WHEREAS, an application has been filed to amend the City of Atas- cadero's • General Plan pertaining to the minimum lot size in the High . Density Sirle Family areas. .WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero con- ducted a public hearing on the subject matter on January 19, 1987, and recommended approval of the amendment ; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Atascadero conducted a public hearing on the subject matter on 1987 ; and, WHEREAS, Government Code Section 65323 provides that a general plan be amended by the adoption of a resolution; and WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Atascadero finds as follows : 1. The proposed General Plan Amendment recommended by the Plan- ning Commission is consistent with the goals and policies of the City' s General Plan. 2. The proposed General Plan Amendment provides a logical repre- sentation of the residential site within the existing land use pattern. 3. The proposed General Plan Amendment is compatible with sur- rounding land use and zoning. 4. The proposed . General Plan Amendment will not have a signifi- cant adverse effect upon the environment. The Negative Decla- -- ration prepared for this project is adequate. NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does resolve to approve General 'Plan Amendment GP: 1G-87 as follows : 1. Amendments to the General Plan Text as shown on Exhibit A. On motion by and seconded by the motion was approved by the following roll cal vote: • AYES NOES: ABSENT: By: DATE ADOPTED: MARJORIE MACKEY, Mayor City of Atascadero, California Resolution No. 9-87 EXHIBIT G Page Two ATTEST: BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: MICHAEL SHELTON, City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: JEFFREY G. JORGENSEN, City Attorney PREPARED BY HENRY ENGEN, Community Development Director In much of Atascadero Colony, the original subdivision created lots which are excessively long and narrow, as much as five times longer than wide. Many of these lots are rather small and located in areas destined for urban development. These lots are particularly difficult to maintain in their present form, and taking them down to more usable sizes is sometimes even more difficult. Special studies related to these areas must explore the most practical approach to their highest use, including the need for more stringent standards for re- view of lot splits. Single-Family Residential The existing and future distribution of single-family residen- tial uses can be partly interpreted from Table V-1. This table indicates that the largest number of developed single- family lots occurs in Octant NE-1 . This octant also has 424 vacant lots, most of which occur in residential categories. Growth potential, however, is greater in Octants NW-0 and SE-0 . Octant NW-0 has 1, 353 vacant lots principally in low- density residential categories. Four classifications of single-family residential density are proposed in this Plan. The principal uses found in each clas- sification are proposed as follows : Land uses shall be limited to single-family dwellings, acces- sorybuildings gs and uses, home occupations , public. parks and playgrounds, schools, libraries and board and care facilities . Minimum lot size for the creation of new lots shall be one- half acre. This is greater than the one-quarter to one-half acre recommended in the 1968 General Plan.. High Density Minimum lot size for the creation of new lots shall b 20=,QL1�h..C'' HOOT lUM SELVE %z AM &JdI=- SEVEFS AZE NOTA Ulf I LAB L:E Moderate Density .Minimum lot size for the creation of new lots within the Urban Services Area shall be one acre if served by sewers and 12 acres if not served by sewers. Low Density Minimum lot sizes within the Urban Services area shall range from 12 to 2h acres while the minimum lot size outside the Urban Services Area shall be 2h acres . Deter- mination of appropriate lot sizes should be based on such factors as slope of access road to the building site; availability of services, especiall r�C6-f161TA RMOLVTION 7 .57 from the center of the community; g neighboring lands; percolation and GMEV"L C AIA ANIENDWW access roads to the building site. GF: IG:81-7 141CA4 UM5M Sf IVGi.I;r-MIL`! 59 . NIUIV'yN 19 517E '171L TD W,CW T FT/� . EXHIBIT H GP: 1G-87 ORDINANCE NO. 145 ZC: 30-86 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AMENDING SECTIONS 9-3.154 AND 9-3. 164 OF THE OFFICIAL ZONING TEXT OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO BY REVISING THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE IN THE LSF-X AND RSF-X FROM i ACRE; WITHOUT SEWER TO 20,000 -SQUARE _FEET; -WITH SEWER (ZC: 30-86 CITY OF ATASCADERO) WHEREAS, the proposed Zoning Map Amendment is consistent with the General Plan as required by Section 65860 of the California Government Code; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendment is in conformance with Section 65800 et seq. of the California Government Code concerning zoning reg- ulations ; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendment will not have a significant adverse effect upon the environment. The Negative Declaration prepared for the project is adequate. NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does ordain as follows : Section 1. Council Findings . 1. The proposed land use ma change results in a logical P grepresen- tation of the existing residential area. 2. The proposal is compatible with the surrounding land use and i zoning. 3. The proposal will not result in any significant adverse environ- mental impacts upon the environment. 4. The proposal is consistent with the policies of the General Plan land use policies and other elements of the General Plan. Section 2. Zoning Change. Sections 9-3.154 and 9-3.164 of the Official Zoning Text of the City of Atascadero on file in the City Community Development Depart- ment is hereby amended to revise the minimum lot size from 2 acre to 20, 000 square feet in the RSF-X and LSF-X zones and designations . Section 3. Zoning Text Sections 9-3.154 and 9-3.164 of the Official Zoning Text of the City of Atascadero on file in the City Community Development Department is hereby amended as shown on the attached Exhibits A and B which are hereby made a part of this ordinance by reference. 0 • EXHIBIT G Ordinance No. 145 Page Two. Section 4. Publication. The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published once within fifteen (15) days after its passage in the Atascadero News , a newspaper of general circulation, printed, published, and circu- lated in the City in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code ; shall certify the adopting and posting of this ordinance and shall cause this ordinance and this certification together with proof of posting to be entered into the Book of Ordinances of this City. Section 5. Effective Date. This ordinance shall go into effect and be in full force and effect at 12 :01 a.m. on the 31st day after its passage. On motion by and seconded -by the motion was approved by the following roll cal vote AYES: NOES : ABSENT: By: MARJORIE MACKEY, Mayor City of Atascadero, California ATTEST: BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: MICHAEL SHELTONV City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: . JEFFREY G. JORGENSEN, City Attorney PREPARED BY: HENRY ommunity eve opment irector • • ADOPTED JUNE 27, 1983 (d) Skilled Nursing Facility, where the number of residents undel care is greater than six (See Section 9-6 .134) Ilk- (e) Residential care, where the -number of residents under care is greater than six (See Section 9-6 .135) (f) Organizational houses (9) Pipeline (h) Bed and Breakfast (i) Caretaker residence (See Section 9-6.104) (j) The following uses where established in a residential struc- ture of historical importance are satisfied. (1) Broadcasting studios (2) Business support services (3) Libraries and museums (4) Offices (5) Personal Services (6) School-business and vocational (k) Kennels (See Section 9-6.111) �0120MUftE Fe9F LUIS5E--u t-Z 'A Attu LVRL)ze SEU�rc t5 NDT 9-3.154. Minimum Lot izeAZLE The minimum"plot size in the Residen- tial Single Family Zone shall be a a ��z`r -a�rand may range up to two and one-half (2 1/2) acres. The size of a Zoe shall be consis- tent with the land use designation set forth in the General Plan and shall be indicated by the symbols set forth in the following chart, which shall be shown on the Offical Zoning Maps as provided by Section 9-3.104 (d) . LSYMBOL MINIMUM LOT SIZE Mari�u1 Z Fc& VJ[7,a SEV�T,► A,_^[,E wPr� �yyLre LS jjOr tee- AVAIL�LE one 1) acre, when sewers are available one and one-half (1 1/2) acres, when sewers are not available one and one-half (1 1/2) to two and one-half (2 1/2) acres based on performance standards set forth in this Section. (a) Performance Standards: The following performance standards shall be evaluated for each lot which is appended with the "Z" symbol in determining its minimum lc%+ ci ,7-* 9L - OU11617 A OL[•JIMANCE 1,/5_ (1) Distance from the Center of the Con ZCNECPffiLC ZC: 3D'1U, L'3F•X AKID TZSF•X 3-12 NI1NIMUM U[751ZE r' C D MGL IF ADOPTED JUNE 27, 103 (g) Pipeline (h) Bed and breakfast (i) Caretaker residence (See Section 9-6 .104) (j) The following uses where established in a residential struc- � .'at --ture of historical importance: --- --_-•_-« ++arF>s:5z� ,w"` (1) Broadcasting studios (2) Business support services (3) Libraries and museums (4) Offices` rte,'` ' _• ��M• - (5) Personal Services 16) School School - business and vocational " ,t :> =60 56U-09 FST-WITH 5EWEE A ACE LU#=- NCF AUA IL,�f5LE 9-3.164. Minimum Lot Size: The minimum*7lot size in the Limited Residential Single Family Zone shall begone= if--+l )-acre--and may range up to two and one-half (2 1/2) acres—The size of-a lot shall be consistent with the land use designation set forth in the General Plan and shall be indicated by the symbols set forth in the following chart,',which shall be shown on the Official Zonin by Section 9-3.104 (d) . WLC,D':-LUK(f fDDF LUTM SEWL-1 SYMBOL MINIMUM LOT SIZE V2ly-QL• GME-EESEXE-Z L5 NOT AVAILAELE x !ene- a _. ms.e Y one acre, w en sewers are available one and one-half (1 1/2) acres, when sewers are not available Z one and one-half (1 1/2) to two and one-half (2 1/2) acres based on per- formance standards set forth in this Section (a) Performance Standards: The following performance standards shall be evaluated for each lot which is appended with the "Z" symbol in determining its minimum lot size: (1) Distance from the Center of the Community: Using the Atascadero Administration Building as the center of the community, the lot size factor based on this performance standard shall be: 1 DISTANCE LOT SIZE FACTOR 0 - 4000 ' - 0 .08 4000 ' - 6000 ' 0.10 6000 ' 8000 ' 0141EFF E GTZMINAMCC j-'/5- 1. yS1. To be measured as radial distar ME CI-IIAM ZC: 3D -SG tained in the Planning Departm( L5F-X AND IZ5F-)( MtNI�llUVV1 L TS'ZE '/Z/'C 7D ZMf1)VF 3-17 r= M E M O R A N D U M TO: City Council February 10, 1987 VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager K)_ FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment 1E-87 and Zone Change 28-86 LOCATION: 6280 Tecorida Road APPLICANT: James Grinnell REQUEST: Request to revise the existing General Plan Land Use Element Map from High Density Multiple Family to Retail Commercial and corresponding Zone Change from RMF-16 (Residential/Multiple Family 16 units per acre with a FH(Flood Hazard) Overlay) to CR(Commercial Retail with a FH(Flood Hazard) Overlay) BACKGROUND: On January 19, 1987, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the above-referenced matter and recommended approval of request subject to the findings and conditions contained in the attached staff report. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Approval of Resolution No. 8-87 2. Approval of Ordinance No. 144 (1st Reading) HE:ph cc: James Grinnell Attachments : Staff Report, dated 1/19/87 Draft Resolution No. 8-87 Draft Ordinance No. 144 City of Atascadero Item: C.2 STAFF REPORT • FOR: PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Date: Jan. 19 , 1987 BY: Joel Moses , Associate Planner File No: GP: 1E-87 ZC: 28-86 Project Address : 6280 Tecorida Road SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment GP: 1E-87 and Zone Change ZC: 28-86 to revise the existing General Plan Land Use Element and Zoning Map at 6280 Tec- . orida Road. The General Plan Land Use designation is proposed to be revised from High Density Multi-family to Retail Commercial. The Zon- ing Ordinance Map is proposed to be revised from RMF/16 (Residential Multiple Family 16 units per acre with a FH(Flood Hazard) overlay) to CR(Commercial Retail) with a FH(Flood Hazard) Overlay. BACKGROUND: As a part of the preliminary review of General Plan Amendment Cycle 1-1987, the City expanded the area covered by the initial application to cover an intervening lot connecting the area to Marchant. The site has three outstanding Precise Plans ; PP31-86, PP32-86 and PP 33-86 for multiple family development that will be valid until July 7, 1987. • Public hearing notice was published in the Atascadero News on December 7, 1984, and copies were sent to all record property owners within 300 feet of the subject site. A building permit for the site has been ap- plied for. A. LOCATION: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6280 Tecorida Road B. SITUATION AND FACTS : 1. Request. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .To revise the existing General Plan Land Use Element Map from High Density Multiple Family to Retail Commercial and corres- ponding Zone Change from RMF-16 (Residential/Multiple Family 16 units per acre with a FH(Flood Hazard) overlay) to CR(Commercial Retail with a FH(Flood Hazard) Overlay) . 2. Applicant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .James Grinnell 3. Site Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Approximately 1.50 acres A K STAFF REPORT January 19, 1987 GP: 1E-87 & ZC: 28-86 Page Two 4. Streets. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Tecorida - unimproved residential street. Marchant - improved col- lector. 5. Zoning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .RMF-16 (FH) (Residential Multiple Family 16 units per acre) with a Flood Hazard Overlay. 6. Existing Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Vacant 7. Adjacent Zoning and Use. . . . . . . . .North: CR(FH)PD-3 Gas Station to Entire Study Area South: RMF-16 - Residential East: Freeway West: RMF-16 (FH) - Residential and Vacant 8. General Plan Designation. . . . . . . .High Density Multiple Family (Max- imum 16 units per acre) 9. Terrain. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Level sloping to the East 10. Environmental Status . . . . . . . . . . . .Negative Declaration C. ANALYSIS: The applicant' s proposal is based on a proposed motel project for the site(Exhibit E) . The applicant also has three valid Precise Plans proposing multiple family residential development for the site. These approvals will be good until July 7, 1987, under the present RMF-16 (FH) Zoning. The sites present General Plan designation of High Density Multiple Family (16 units per acre) and corresponding RMF-16 zoning would allow approximately 24 residential units over the four individual lots . The site is also covered by a flood hazard overlay and the Amapoa/Tecorida drainage fee area. Any construction on the site will have to be done with due consideration to the need for major drainage improvements. The site' s development is also constrained by several large gas lines passing through the site. The site's consideration for a revision is strongly supported by the surrounding development and future uses that could be established. The site is located just off of a major traffic route (Morro Road) and a freeway intersection makes the site prime for intense urban development either residential or commercial. The site is adjacent to existing commercial development and if the three parcels are de- veloped with one project, it could be integrated closely into the existing and future development in the area. • r STAFF REPORT January 19, 1987 GP: 1E-87 & ZC: 28-36 Page Three ANALYSIS - Cont' d As previously noted, some specific site development problems do exist - gaslines & drainage. Traffic impacts from the development of the site could be substantial. The State of California (CalTrans) has responded noting impacts to the intersection of Morro Road and E1 Camino Real; along with the intersection of Morro Road and Mar- chant with increase in delays and congestion mainly during peak hours , and due to the fact that the off-ramp' s present left hand channeli- zation cannot be increased.. CalTrans response was to a potential motel on the site. The site is approved for multi-family development and a change in designation should not significantly change the amount of traffic that would be generated. Future signalization of the Morro Road/Marchant intersection could mitigate any impact along with site designs . D. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends , based on the proposed application and findings , approval of General Plan Amendment GPL 1E-87 revising the existing .General Plan Land Use designation from High Density Multi-family and Zone Change ZC: 28-86 from RMF-16 (FH) to CR(FH) as provided in Draft Resolution (Exhibit D) and Draft Ordinance (Exhibit E) . JM:ph ATTACHMENTS : EXHIBIT A - Location Map - Zoning EXHIBIT B General Plan Map EXHIBIT C - Ownership Map EXHIBIT D - Draft Resolution EXHIBIT E - Draft Ordinance EXHIBIT F - Site Plan • � � • '� X111 ► All won A slim � � 1 dL A WMA On - . ••�v ',� _` QAWW A,p to NA W, YZA iii , Ww- s. �p► map ► % • �`G: `�I �♦s CSI .r � v 1••.1 ' n q uor y 20 • ! � � ® n ® I� d uut I r ili: a• a• v d ' ■u■1•• PTO •..�eo � � u■' f r r r■■r w ® s ■ q> ® s w e ���; .uu t. moll Vi n m a ♦ � nu q 9 W 6• �; iii: ■u. .uu r u• a• O_ • - •un1■■ ® y o ® � O. �•iii:::1.■, v � anuu■.. u u.•u.. �\V fA ♦ � '� u..ub.vu nu■■■a�■a.cur u0o .:ul■rr em.... i1 ■r:::::: 1I •..JI:� • • • • 1 �1 X�'•� i'�� is ON si sit JOE �• .1 ► ly s d s :�:1 �. • 1' 1• •• a ® m a• a ® m ® � + 40 a m d• r Is a• • .> n w n w a w i�, • • C b m b b b m q, rrs r4 a Ir ® a• m 1 � . m O o• EXHIBIT D GP: 1E-87 ZC: 28-86 RESOLUTION NO. 8-87 A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO APPROVING GENERAL PLAN MAP AMENDMENT TO AMEND THE GENERAL PLAN OF THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN PERTAINING TO 6280 TECORIDA ROAD FROM HIGH DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY TO RETAIL COMMERCIAL (GP: 1E-87) WHEREAS, an application has been filed to amend the City of Atas- cadero's General Plan pertaining to 6280 Tecorida Road; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero conducted . a public hearing on the subject matter for an enlarged study area on January 19, 1987, and recommended approval of the amendment ; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Atascadero conducted a public hearing on the subject matter on 1987 ; and, WHEREAS, Government Code Section 65323 provides that a general plan be amended by the adoption of a resolution; and WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Atascadero finds as follows : 1. The proposed General Plan Amendment recommended by the Plan- ning Commission is consistent with the goals and policies of the City' s General Plan. 2. The proposed General Plan Amendment provides a logical repre- sentation of the. residential site within the existing land use pattern. 3. The proposed general plan amendment is compatible with sur- rounding land use and zoning. 4. The proposed General Plan Amendment will not have a signifi- cant adverse effect upon the environment. The Negative Declar- ation prepared for this project is adequate. NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does resolve to approve General Plan Amendment GP: 1E-87 as follows : 1. Amendments to the General Plan Map as shown on Exhibit A. On motion by and seconded by the motion as approve by the following roll call vote - AYES : oterAYES : NOES: ABSENT: DATE ADOPTED: By: MARJORIE MACKEY, Mayor City of Atascadero, California �k� G µ + A r nd ys s 8 52 -o NG 0. 5t�'LS w /� W w iO U W { O O 47 Q P /37.Z3 d N s P-\ -oa `a m A ♦y ' � tis o� 09 \ tp O\� t.9 o w \ =�9 oz 1 �. .• ,99 Of loci NZ rip N \ Og d 1Nd �d 9- !L"7SN-!P P.rrF G�� 1C b7 + ZC- Ze -,S =TZ IDA GMN KnL I-TD M F -TD MZ�7 COW . m a i u•m � ■ /1 � � r e ♦ ool ! !P uu ♦ , r \ J •i::fir i:�.m •• • m m r .n ■0.1 a s a r ® r . ■1 r r s r i r r � Q n •`■/ 1, r a �► 1' e • •�� a _ N+ a A \\ .p b m e. � o.l■ � V�b b e, ♦ ■ ou■ 1: ■11■ ••11/ � r u• m r 4 • - E/■■•/ e r � ® r ® G/•uuu s � s 4 '��•nu■ \ nnu Yf \� 111//■.t■■■ 1 1■.■/\.O■■\meq 2•uw FEN I W10 ♦ • i ♦ � fum Mw .■■■■ So IL 41, • / ■ ■. 1 fwJI 1 — � �— �� ■ i m m 1► 1► `� � � 1 • u • r r m � m r "� ® � �� / � .�� a In r N. s ® ♦ ' ■ ■ • • ■ r r a r�3- r s • m r m r 1 Ic t► � . • w r / n m - ■ • C t m C r b r •I ti � m a w m �Ia, m q . •`M Y • p p p p 11 p .• ■ � r a m m e m a � J //�� • � M s�, r 1► m Y b �• • EXHIBIT E GP: 1E-87 ZC: 28-86 ORDINANCE NO. 144 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AMENDING SECTION MAP NUMBER 17 OF THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAPS OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO BY REZONING CERTAIN PROPERTY AT 6280 TECORIDA ROAD FROM RMF-16(FH) TO CR(FH) (ZONE CHANGE 28-86 GRINNELL) WHEREAS, The proposed zoning map amendment is consistent with the General Plan as required by Section 65860 of the California Government Code; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendment is in conformance with Section 65800 et seq. of the California Government Code concerning zoning regu- lations ; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendment will not have a significant adverse effect upon the environment. The Negative Declaration prepared for the project is adequate. NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does ordain as follows : Section 1. Council Findings . 1. The proposed land use map change results in a logical repre- sentation of the existing residential area. 2. The proposal is compatible with the surrounding land use and zoning. 3. The proposal will not result in any significant adverse environ- mental impacts upon the environment. 4. The proposal is consistent with the policies of the General Plan land use policies and other elements of the General Plan. Section 2. Zoning Change. Map Number 17 of the Official Zoning Maps of the City of Atascadero on file in the City Community Development Department is hereby amended to reclassify the following described property from RMF-16 (FH) to CR(FH) . Lots 21, 22, 23 and portion of 20, Block UA of the Atascadero Colony. Section 3. Zoning Map. Map number 17 of the Official Zoning Maps of the City of Atascadero on file in the City Community Development Department is hereby amended as shown on the attached location map which is hereby made a part of this ordinance by reference. t Ordinance No. 144 EXHIBIT E Page Two Section 4. Publication. 0 The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published once within fifteen (15) days after its passage in the Atascadero News, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, published, and circulated in the City in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code ; shall certify the adopting and posting of this ordinance and shall cause this ordinance and this certification together with proof of posting to be entered into the Book of Ordinances of this Ciy. Section 5. Effective Date. This ordinance shall go into effect and be in full force and ef- fect at 12 :01 a.m. on the 31st day after its passage. On motion by and seconded by , the- foregoing or inance is hereby adopted in its en- tirety by the o owing roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: DATE ADOPTED: By: MARJORIE MACKEY, Mayor ATTEST: City of Atascadero, California BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: MICHAEL SHELTON, City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: JEFFREY G. JORGENSEN, City Attorney PREPARED BY: HENRY ENGEN Community Development Director t�+ As lose � . � � • � �� X11 � ► fell fill SEE Willits ��• �I v °ii �.► - ---��/t, �..�>�/' �� ,Y ' X11 '� , ��'" 'i i -moi �%� ��►� '�'��� � �►. ' °����° � �� •�=f� �Il::r���' ►�'% • �� ��'►j ♦♦moi ��!�l��,I l.�►. aIN �►. a�.pJ� ��► •: w PAN N PAPI �s i X / �► r .'^ s . f� lie f / y' 7717 z M n A R a H .l N r 4 Y �• h V L N r o a EMI 13ITF5ME 7M Ili m C GP• 1 G S7 ZG Z� Sb C:) co LUL TYSODDA GvjmwL-L z EAF•IG(FP) TD CZ(FP) „ jz M_E M_O_R A_N_D U_M_ TO: City Council February 10, 1987 VIA: Michael Shelton, City Manager FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Zone Change 29-86 : Second Reading of Ordinance No. 146 (E1 Camino Real and Via Obra: McNamara/ Massicotte/Hinckley) BACKGROUND/RECOMMENDATION: This Ordinance had first reading approval on January 26, 1987. Recommend approval of Ordinance No. 146, second reading. HE:ph Enclosure: Draft Ordinance 146 STAFF REPORT • GP:1F-87 EXHIBIT E ZC:29-86 A' ORDINANCE NO. .146 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AMENDING SECTION MAP NUMBER 19 OF THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAPS OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO BY REZONING CERTAIN PROPERTY ON EL CAMINO REAL AND VIA OBRA ROAD FROM IP (INDUSTRIAL PARK) TO CS(COMMERCIAL SERVICE)-(ZONE CHANGE ZC:29-86 : MCNAMARA/MASSICOTTE/HINCKLEY) WHEREAS, the proposed zoning map amendment is consistent with the General Plan as required by Section 65860 of the California Government Code; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendment is in conformance with Section 65800 et seq. of the California Government Code concerning zoning regulation; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendment will not have a significant adverse effect upon the environment. The Negative Declaration prepared for the project is adequate. NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does ordain as follows : Section 1. Council Findings . 1. The proposed land use map change results in a logical represen- tation of the existing commercial areas . 2. The proposal is compatible with the surrounding land use and zoning. 3. The proposal will not result in any significant adverse environ- mental impacts upon the environment. 4. The proposal is "consistent with the policies of the General Plan land use policies and other elements of the General Plan. Section 2. Zoning Change. Map Number 19 of the Official Zoning Maps of the City of Atascadero on file in the City Community Development Department is hereby amended to reclassify the following described property from IP(Industrial Park) to CS(Commercial Service) . Ptns. of Lots 6, 7, 8 & 9 of Block 7 of the Atascadero Colony as shown on attached Exhibit A. Ordinance No. 146 Page Two Section 3. Zoning Map. Map Number 19 of the Official Zoning Maps of the City of Atasca- dero on file in the City Community Development Department is hereby amended as shown on the attached location map which is hereby made a part of this ordinance by reference. Section 4. Publication. The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published once within fifteen (15) days after its passage in the Atascadero News , a newspaper of general circulation, printed, published, and circulated in the City in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code; shall certify the adopting and posting of this ordinance and shall cause this ordinance and this certification together with proof of posting to be entered into the Book of Ordinances of this City. Section 5. Effective Date. This ordinance shall go into effect and be in full force and ef- fect at 12:01 a.m. on the 31st day after its passage. On motion by and seconded by the foregoing ordinance is hereby adopted in its en- tirety by the Following roll call vote : AYES : NOES: ABSENT: DATE ADOPTED: By: MARJORIE M. MACKEY, Mayor ATTEST: City of Atascadero, California BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: MICHAEL SHELTON, City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: JEFFREY G. JORGENSEN, City Attorney PREPARED BY: HENRY ENGEN, Community Development Director . 18 �• •` .�° FT7C M IF GNDU�TI`LIY1L+:ttfr >\T•EI• ' p�.V.7 ♦A•t to ��t.��•• f� \�a�`� •�� �LOL1/� '.`: AT-Tfi 135 -S' ' ' ,{peJ ,• -Tbr ', „�° .XT-Ta•145 OPM01: ,� 1:•, :. �;' Ar'19'x3. Iz•al • .t��}") 'AT•81-185 -ti•al r, • •t) � ,}•�• • ',y .s' _ ,{ AT• 81 25G fSS.'B �+ -- ,// lv. �• ... {� ,SIR .,•;- �:� •.'�t .•>. . . 't� q•C - /p��y/'�t (, ,�..J• ,t '1t!'�,•/ • .'` - .'tom f Y ,� \ .,�3,, •• y' • d•do{.'n�. Jul Ii/ ,�`• /�.f• / ,dt! �. •y „s'. •.,i• •:.�:`- rs^' REVISIOY ! DATI ,tit, .. f} :� :: .S�,t .; �•� ;it• ' , 1_�.� :a'.• :i�.l • ' T ,j: r • _.... .� fFA rrs'v' • y�z�a�~ Y t. 'i6°r. � - .3 .�t••„ r � j t !•' _ - � • r i • •�/�yi �J\.�,- ' �, ol�.�' 3-4.4 .,Oil ±x•f sL• : .t.,.i.. j;.�,v♦ .'M1 y •'�:1: ;�_• •• s a RetJ�L 1 •4 tires I ti i ��. • + r �•`J. V� i'' :, ♦r t� ti .r Y` �r•k .. •. •.y.• b 06 f•C •�•. ,i1r 'a• 2 � • � '.: ,�''ac � l]:. •r3" .:a.-,:' t - .`t � 3r`�T{�t'. .'}. ••e` �4 s 2 'y 9"� '•ix.'•Y ra: ii. 1r r y `. :.. jr.;..s -X �r t '3 `+ r . s t ati i,. .• f v � y •, _ j 2 i Mr t,, ,� O'• r' 7 y\.n.•�'1 -�•� '• :Oo•�`;• .r-t /,`1`t •.J.r 1 - �/%�'.: . a ty .ti.4aW a r• a, • ti 6 /' P•7 �., •C v. JF- '• Zte.' } S . .�: ; .O r - ♦.' �•y: ',r •r2 ,r •:' .f.tti dt46' ~' T Y •t•• •,•. a°•'v. -• rt... is •' �,• ••`. _ `.' � •'•. •K- i. is S." . ,.... 17. i:. 7 • }//^ e ♦t' - I tP •.e ��•,.� Y.••'7� • .:t .w +at may' .t: •.r:,•i•'1��.. ` • st K t0 !'V to Gfay t.y Y It •Ih >• '• .r' f ` t i LOT 7;, xa „1'�. 2S:y, s. • \ _ 5 .. .S1 >fi��� '10•A ry �. ,� •••`�2 1� :t �' +If }II ^w - all .v t, ♦�♦ ,y. •♦•�•'D�7 pal Irl i ] ..Zf .t 1{I,r 9g + ti'••6. ,� 1 1 ... ¢tOL► o,S•�} ."/ .. f ,r ,`; ��.� fw, Gni T• •! � .1. iLo�: ::'�,'^' i .fir ^I •tl so -Z S ' T nc;;:�i��1i*•,; w CT i••�L �li'Rf '°' ]I•' •F- tz. o •. ti RSF34 w '• - ,vS •. 1 •..'' `•' tt ,V i .. rr.�pJP .,•• ]ire✓ - -\ y�..� wr s+ 7yJ` 1 �It OS► � . . •:•'� .,� �;:'�'s� 'a •� � s�''� ,,,, . . •_.SMF/ �'•� ��;.: •• r t P-''. �•� 'w' Y .,�1..�• P {'A 1.1•y'- '••• /• g ! ��,:. ♦ .moi,' >r� • It • .I• .. 16 �' 1� _ ♦ -�- y }tea ., a• e• -a3'' i. i♦-.~�`, .s r' '1 .�*f?'•• • • i•, 1 -��'l 'fit 1L• �/'• ,may ��,e;%i` .1'{It ' - - .• S�0 i 10•A ♦Ib• g�it Y • ✓7•.0, f•• -i.� `L:1 , � ' L , t y � r� ,.RJ ti+.• �u .. a� r,L •• ••i♦ t .r r rf•.i r'•w.to f _� ••.+ a3 1= •d♦ .t O _ .. .. 22 . w�r~~i•t�t.l: �-Itz:_.�!-a•a♦t - t •` : 3 'L o• y'`7i ,s' •,�'. 5��c::.t{it.f',.l.�.y.►.•`.r�..LAi',.iTtr5j•ri'GXY., •`:y.t t1wswI2f 22 RS -29 .4,..., . .,,Li.wltu.u.0 Ir.�.•►.%lS li.i.•:•aw.t a.- •1 ! 20 at rt2q-rel<m s'r.�..Vu.+•.•�4••v..«...� • \ ` .•' !...'T...r 27.rf7A,a.u.u., Ita.^.-«s Ir.. 23 .14 ••t.•• la � • �; ''.rlraMt.aw,y.•!�}N� ('::.ta• • • r tj• � ,(• ,}'r: tib,• rte, .�♦ 'rHtt '• t T •%1Wr� • ,• � :-/"(C .tet♦ �� .L��:t_ j1: 3��Y���„ "= C,TTY OF ATASC , -r.... 1 y •- ' ORBrT' A OIZDIUMVI E 146 " ZljnlE Ci'Wt\1GE 29 -Blo . . .� , .��\; >^� 1 �- '1 E;� 2439-EW 0.�,RJo F-E rncA1RAAV,A•mh55ICIJ1TE HIMytL-�,V 17 TD C SV M E M O R A N D U M TO: CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS VIA CITY MANAGER MIKE SHELTON FROM: CHIEF OF POLICE SUBJECT: CONTRACTUAL SERVICES AGREEMENT - POLICE FACILITY ARCHITECT DATE: FEB. 4, 1987 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that we contract with the S.L.O. firm of John H. Ross & Associates, Inc. , dba Ross Levin & MacIntyre Architects for architectural services to include programming, site analysis, and schematic design of a police service facility for the City of Atascadero. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED By motion, authorize the Mayor to sign an agreement contracting with the architectural firm of John R.Ross and Associates, :Inc. , dba Ross Levin and MacIntyre Architects for architectural services to encompass the elements listed above at an initial cost not to exceed *$28,713. • BACKGROUND In keeping with Council direction, thus far, the following stages have been completed toward the police facility project: 1. Requests for proposals were mailed out during January, 1986. 2. Presentation interviews were held March 14, 1986. Six firms (including four local and two out-of-county) were interviewed by a board consisting of Councilman Bear Handshy, Admin. Services Director Dave Jorgensen, Community Development Director Henry Engen and myself. 3. During November, 1986, a lease agreement was reached with S.L.O. County and the City of Atascadero authorizing our use of the site on Capistrano adjacent to the S.L.O. County Mental Health Offices for construction of A.P.D. 4. Through funding sources including: General Fund, Vandenburgh Project, revenue sharing and development fees, Council has now authorized an expenditure of $635,00(Y'-for the design and construction of a police facility. 5. City Attorney Jeff Jorgensen, in concert with City Staff negotiated an updated contractual services agreement (see attached) with the architectural firm proposed this week. *In the event City elects to use consultant for the final design (balance of architectural services) for this project, consultant will credit fifteen per- cent of the full fee for architectural services. 'Includes anticipated $100, 000 development fee and $. 50 tax in I� 'F-Y- 1987 /88 . I CONCLUSION As indicated, the services described herein are preliminary and call for the - programming, site analysis and schematic design of the police facility. Following completion of these tasks, we would then contract for the remaining architectural services including final design and development of working construction drawings and coordination of actual construction through project completion. With this initial step, we are charging the architect with the design of a police services facility within the parameters of the $635,000 currently budgeted. Architect will also assess the needs of the police department both present and future and thus design the facility so that it may be easily expanded in a functional manner. FISCAL IMPACT As indicated in the contract, the cost of the listed preliminary services is $28,713, and upon contracting for the remaining services, consultant will credit the City fifteen percent of the full, standard architectural service fees. The amount reflected falls well within the previous Council allocation. R RICHM cHALE RHM:sb Attach: • MEMORANDUM City of Atascadero February 3, 1987 TO: Michael Shelton, City Manager -',-JR. H. Bud McHale, Police Chief FROM: Jeffrey G. Jorgensen, City Attorney SUBJECT: Atascadero Police Service Facility - Consultant Services Agreement Attached is the revised agreement. I have discussed the revisions with the architect and Police Chief, and the agree- ment is acceptable and ready for the February 10, 1987. Council agenda. Sincerely, WFRJE . JO ENSEN ney JGJ: fr A3 :MMATA328 Attachment cc: Rod Levin, AIA } Ua�l CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made this 10th day of February, 1987, by and between the CITY OF ATASCADERO, hereinafter referred to as "City", and JOHN R. ROSS & ASSOCIATES, INC. , dba ROSS LEVIN & MACINTYRE ARCHITECTS, hereinafter referred to as "Consultant". Witnesseth For and in consideration of the mutual covenants herein contained, the parties hereto agree as follows: Article 1 Responsibilities of Consultant A. Scope. Consultant will provide the following architectural services as described herein and under Exhibit "A" for the City project hereinafter described: Atascadero Police Service Facility - Programming, site analysis and schematic design of a police service facility for the City of Atascadero. Exhibit "A" is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as though here fully set forth. B. Coordination. In the performance of Consul- tant's service under this Agreement, Consultant agrees that he 1 will maintain such coordination with City officials as may be requested and desirable, including primary coordination with the Project Coordinator, herein designated as the Police Chief, and also with the following City officials: the City Manager. C. Consultant's Services. Insofar as they may be applicable to the project contemplated by this Agreement, Consultant shall render the services and furnish the work tasks as described in Exhibit "A", commencing with receipt of a written Notice to Proceed signed by the Project Coordinator and by the City Manager. Article 2 Responsibilities of City City shall cooperate with Consultant on all phases of the work covered by this Agreement and will make available to him, as his needs indicate, all existing maps, topographic maps, aerial photographs, soils reports, and other similar data in possession of City covering the site as selected. City shall also be responsible for providing such staff production assistance as is specified in Exhibit "A". Article 3 Fee and Provision for Payment City will pay Consultant a fee equal to $28, 713 . 00 for work contracted in this Agreement and billed for based on 2 the payment schedule in Exhibit "B". Exhibit "B" is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as though here fully set forth. Any additional applicable hourly rate billings as authorized in Article 4 shall be based on the Fee Schedule contained in Exhibit "B". Article 4 Payment for Extra Work or Changes Any claim for payment for extra work or changes in the work will be paid by City only upon certification by the City Manager that the claimed extra work or change was authorized in advance by the Project Coordinator and the City Manager, and that the work has been satisfactorily completed. Claims for such extra work must be submitted by Consultant within thirty (30) days of completion of such work and must be accompanied by a statement of itemized costs covering said work. Article 5 Termination of Agreement Either party hereto shall have the right to termi- nate this Agreement upon giving ten (10) days written notice of such termination to the other party. In the event of the termination of this project in its entirety, notwithstanding any other fee provisions of this Agreement, based upon work accomplished by Consultant prior to notice of such termina- 3 . tion, City shall determine the amount of fee to be paid to Consultant for his services based upon the provisions in Exhibit "B", and such findings of City shall be final and conclusive as to the amount of such fee. In the event of termination of any portion of this project, Consultant shall be entitled to the reasonable value of his services involved in the termination, as determined by City, upon a finding which shall be final and conclusive as to the amount of fee due and owing. Article 6 Time of Completion Consultant agrees to diligently pursue his work under this Agreement and to complete the work as described in Exhibit "A" in a satisfactory manner within ninety (90) days of receipt of the Notice to Proceed. Consultant shall not be responsible for any delay which is caused by City review, action or inaction of City, or acts of God, but shall be responsible for his own fault or negligence or that of any of his subcontractors. If the work is not completed by Consultant in the time specified for each item, or within any period of exten- sion authorized in writing by the Project Coordinator, it is understood that City will suffer damages and Consultant will pay to City, as fixed and liquidated damages (not as a penalty) , the sum of $100. 00 for each calendar day of the 4 delay until the work is completed and accepted. Consultant is liable for the amount thereof, and City may deduct said sums from any money due or that may become due to Consultant. Within seven (7) calendar days of commencement of work under this Agreement, Consultant shall submit to City for approval, a completion schedule in graphic form clearly delineating all important increments and review dates. Article 7 Conflicts of Interest No member, officer, or employee of City, during his or her tenure, or for one (1) year thereafter, shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in this Agreement or the proceeds thereof. Article 8 Ownership of Data The ownership of all data collected for use by Consultant under this Agreement, together with working papers, drawings, and other materials necessary for a complete under- standing of the plans and necessary for the practical use of the plans shall be vested in City. Ownership of original drawings and documents shall be vested in City. Consultant may retain a copy of all work for his own use. Consultant shall provide ten (10) copies of Schematic Design Documents to City as part of this Agreement. • 5 0 City acknowledges that Consultant's plans and specifications are instruments of professional services. Nevertheless, the plans and specifications prepared under this Agreement shall become the property of City upon completion of the work. City agrees to hold harmless and indemnify Consultant against all damages, claims, and losses arising out of any reuse of the plans and specifications without the authorization of Consultant. Article 9 Covenant Against Contingent Fees Consultant warrants that he has not employed or retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for him, to solicit or secure this Agreement, and that he has not paid or agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for him, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift, or any other consideration contingent on or resulting from the award or making of this Agreement. For breach or violation of this warranty, City shall have the right to annul this Agreement without liability or, in its discretion, to deduct from the contract price or consideration or otherwise recover, the full amount of such fee, commission, percentage fee, gift, or contingency. • 6 Article 10 Contract Personnel The work to be done pursuant to this Agreement shall be done by RODNEY R. LEVIN, A.I.A. , a licensed architect, No. C-4259, and such other personnel in the employ or under the supervision of Consultant who shall be approved by City. The City official who shall be vested with the right of approval of such additional personnel or outside contracting parties shall be the City Manager. City reserves the right to reject any of Consultant's personnel or proposed outside consultants, and City reserves the right to request that acceptable replacement personnel be assigned to the project. Article 11 Indemnity Clause Consultant shall pay for the cost of defense, indemnify, and save harmless the City of Atascadero, its officers, agents, and employees, from any and all claims, demands, damages, costs, expenses, and liabilities arising out of this Agreement or occasioned by the negligent performance or attempted negligent performance of the provisions hereof, including, but not limited to, any negligent act or omission to act on the part of Consultant or his agents or employees or independent contractors directly responsible to him, except that the above shall not apply to the sole negligence or 7 f willful misconduct of City or City's agents, servants, or independent contractors who are directly responsible to City. Article 12 Insurance A. Errors and Omissions Insurance. Consultant shall obtain and maintain, at his own expense, prior to commencement of the work of this Agreement, professional liability (errors and omissions) insurance, in a company authorized to issue such insurance in the State of California, with limits of liability of not less than $100, 000 to cover all architectural services rendered pursuant to this Agree- ment. B. Automobile and Public Liability Insurance. Consultant shall also maintain in full force and effect for the duration of this Agreement, automobile insurance and public liability insurance with an insurance carrier satisfac- tory to City, which insurance shall include protection against claims arising from personal injury, including death resulting therefrom, and damage to property resulting from any actual occurrence arising out of the performance of this Agreement. The amounts of insurance shall be not less than the following: Single limit coverage applying to bodily and personal injury, including death resulting therefrom, and property damage or a combination thereof in an amount not less than $1, 000, 000. 8 The following endorsements must be attached to the policy or policies: (1) If the insurance policy covers on an "accident" basis, it must be changed to "occurrence". (2) The policy must cover personal injury as well as bodily injury. (3) Broad form property damage liability must be afforded. (4) The City of Atascadero, its officers, employees, and agents, shall be named as insureds under the policy, and the policy shall stipulate that the insurance will operate as primary insurance and that no other insurance effected by City will be called upon to contribute to a loss hereunder. , (5) The policy shall contain contractual liability, either on a blanket basis or by identifying this Agreement within a contractual liability endorsement. (6) The policy shall contain "cross-liability" such that each insured is covered as if separate policies had been issued to each insured. (7) City shall be given thirty (30) days notice prior to cancellation or reduction in coverage of the insurance. C. Workers Compensation Insurance. In accordance with the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code, Consultant shall be insured against liability for workers 9 r • compensation or undertake self-insurance. Consultant agrees to comply with such provisions before commencing performance of any work under this Agreement. D. Copies of Insurance to City Before Commencement of Work. Consultant shall provide certificates of insurance to City prior to commencement of the work of this Agreement. Certificates of insurance are necessary before a Notice to Proceed will be issued, and shall state that the policy shall not be cancelled or reduced in coverage without thirty (30) days written notice to City. .Approval of insurance by City shall not relieve or decrease the extent to which Consultant may be held responsible for payment of damages resulting from services or operations performed pursuant to this Agreement. Consultant shall not perform any work under this Agreement until he has obtained the required insurance and until the required insurance certificates have been submitted to City and approved by the City Attorney. If Consultant fails or refuses to procure or maintain the insurance required by these provisions, or fails or refuses to furnish City required proof that insurance has been procured and is in force and paid for, City shall have the right, at its discretion, to forthwith terminate this Agreement. Article 13 Bonding This Article is deleted. 10 Article 14 Status Consultant shall, during the entire term of this Agreement, be construed to be an independent contractor, and in no event shall any of his personnel or subcontractors be construed to be employees of City. Article 15 Non-Discrimination Consultant shall comply with the provisions of Presidential Executive Order No. 11246 of September 24, 1965, and all other orders, regulations, and laws governing non- discrimination in employment, including in particular, Section 122 (a) of the State and Local Fiscal Assistance Act of 1972 . Article 16 Modification of Agreement This Agreement may be modified only by a written amendment signed by both parties hereto. Article 17 Law Governing This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. 11 Article 18 Communications Communications between the parties to this Agreement may be sent to the following addresses: City: CITY OF ATASCADERO 6500 Palma Avenue P.O. Box 747 Atascadero, CA 93423 Attn: Michael Shelton, City Manager R. H Bud McHale, Police Chief Consultant: JOHN R. ROSS & ASSOCIATES, INC. , dba ROSS LEVIN & MACINTYRE ARCHITECTS 1129 Marsh Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Attn: Rodney R. Levin, A.I.A. ACCEPTED AND AGREED this 10th day of February, 1987. CITY: CONSULTANT: CITY OF ATASCADERO, JOHN R. ROSS & ASSOCIATES, INC . , a municipal corporation dba ROSS LEVIN & MACINTYRE ARCHITECTS i' By By MARJORIE R. MACKEY, Mayor ATTEST: BOYD C. SHARITZ, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: APPROVED AS TO FORM: 6�- R -Rak wk#-,LL R. H. BUD McHALE, Police Chief EY RG SEN Project Coordinator C' A o y JGJ: fr/2/3/87 C:AGATA316 12 ll% Exhibit "A" Responsibilities of Consultant Consultant shall furnish planning and architectural services to City for the proposed Police Service Facility consistent with the request for proposal dated January 29, 1986, and the proposal submitted by Consultant on March 6, 1986, as outlined below: The Scope of Design Services is separated into Two Phases: Phase I includes the development of a Design Program and Analysis of the Capistrano building site. Phase II includes the formulation of a Schematic Design and probable construction costs for budgeting purposes. Consultant's approach to these phases is as follows: Phase I A. First meeting with Police Department staff to review space and equipment needs as they relate to projected city-county-state growth. Inventories of personnel, furnish- ings, and equipment are logged. B. Architect and Consultant prepare Design Program draft outlining general goals, specific objectives, space needs and relationships, and site characteristics. C. Design Program draft is presented to Police Department staff for review and comment. Revisions and corrections are made. Conceptual bubble diagrams depicting spaces and relationships are completed. D. Presentation of Final Design Program draft is made to Police Department staff for approval and shared with City Manager. E. The Capistrano site for the proposed new Police Service Facility is visited by Project Coordinator, Architect, and Consultant. Analysis is made of the site. F. Graphic presentation of Capistrano site (conceptual building and parking foot print) and Design Program are submitted to City Council. G. City Council approves Site and Design Program. Phase II A. Architect and Consultant begin Schematic Design Phase. City obtains soils investigation, topographical map, and boundary survey of Capistrano site. B. Schematic Site and Floor Plan drafts are presented to Police Department staff for review and comments. C. Schematic Design is completed, depicting site, floor plans, exterior elevations, building sections, at least two colored renderings, and probable construction costs to establish budget. Coordination with Public Works, Planning, utility companies, and City's architectural review process. D. Final presentation of Schematic Design with established budget to City Council with recommendations to proceed with Project as proposed. Exhibit "B" Payment Schedule City shall compensate Consultant for the scope of services provided as follows: 1. An initial payment of $1,400.00 shall be made upon execution of this Agreement and credited to Consultant to the first payment on Consultant's account. 2. Basic compensation: (a) Basic compensation shall be a fixed fee of $28,713 . 00. (b) Payments for basic services shall be made so that basic compensation for each phase shall equal the following percentages of the total basic compensation payable: Programming and Site Analysis, Phase I (including development of a Design Program and related presentations, and formal analysis of the Capistrano site and related presentations) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40% Schematic Design, Phase II (including Schematic Design of project site, floor plans, exterior elevations, building sections, two colored renderings, landscaping, and probable construction costs) . . . . . . . . 60% 3 . Payment for extra work or changes as provided in Article 4 of this Agreement shall be based on the following fee schedule: �1 Principal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 60. 00/hour Architect. . . . . . . . . . . . 50. 00/hour (designing, engineering, and production) Associate Architect. . . . . . . 40. 00/hour Draftsman. . . 30. 00/hour Steno and bookkeeping. . . 20. 00/hour Field Supervision and Observation. . . . 60. 00/hour (Certified Architect) Consulting Engineers . . . . . . . Cost + 5% Consultation . . . . . . . . . . 300. 00/day Travel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20/mile + direct .cost Printing . 30/sqft Specifications . . . . . . . . . . At cost Telephone, long-distance . . . . . . . . At cost Greyhound, UPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . At cost 4 . Cost for topographical map, boundary survey, and any soils investigations, if required for the Capistrano site, to be analyzed by Consultant, shall be borne by City. 5. In the event City elects to use Consultant for the Final Design (balance of architectural services) for this Project, Consultant will credit fifteen percent (15%) of the full fee for architectural services. • UEM MEMORANDUM • To: City Council Through : Michael Shelton, City Manager From Paul M.QSensibaugh, Director of Public Works/City Engineer cJ Subject : Request for Proposals for Design of San Andreas Bridge and Garcia Road Bridge Recommendation : Staff recommends that Council authorize the Director of Public Works to request proposals for the engineering consulting services for the above two bridges . Backround: The City received two bridge grants in January for the San Andreas bridge over Atascadero Creek and for the Garcia Road bridge over a branch of Graves Creek. The funds are made available on a competitive basis from a previously established list of bridges that meet certain criteria for structural inadequacies , amount of traffic , etc . Two other bridges received grants last fiscal year and are now in design (Monterey Rd. over Graves Creek and Sycamore Rd. over Atascadero Creek) . At least two other bridges on the State' s list will receive future consideration but are in relatively good condition compared to the above . Other small bridges such as those on Santa Rosa, Santa Lucia, etc . are not now fundable . New bridges such as the proposed Lewis Avenue bridge are also not fundable. Discussion : The new Highway Bill which includes the Federal Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehibilitation Program for F.Y . 86-87 is expected to get timely approval and Caltrans , the administrative agency, is expected to obligate the construction funds by June 1 , 1987. To qualify for these funds which have been designated for the City, plans , specifications and engineering must be approved for advertising within one year from the notification date or a maximum of 16 months if a consultant is used. With the present work load the City Engineering Division does not have the time or manpower to do the consulting work in house for projects of this magnitude. A consultant agreement must be completed within four months of isthe date of notification of the grant . As experienced with the Sycamore Rd. bridge this time can erode quickly . It is suggested that two different consultants be used so that the bridges can be designed 12 n simultaneously . Additionally, seperate contracts would cause 1 10 administrative work if one of the bridges are not funded for r reason . The request for proposals will condition the signing of the contract on the receipt t of the funding. p ding. i Fiscal Impact : The estimated cost of the San Andreas Bridge is $340, 000, the City share of which is $68, 000 . The estimated cost of the Garcia Road Bridge is $165 , 000, the City share of which is $33, 000. The total estimated obligation to the City is $101 , 000 . The City funds available for appropiation of these monies are the Bridge Development Impact Fee and the Gas Tax allocations . Historically the Gas Tax has been used for resurfacing and reconstruction projects but can be used for bridges . This would mean that about three less miles would be resurfaced than in previously. The development fees have not met estimates but the SOc Tax Development lend encouragement to future collections of the Development Fee . Not accepting the 80% grants would not lessen the need for replacement or the assumed liability of failing bridges . The delay would mean a City cost of about $475 , 001 in today' s dollars . In anticipation of a question of a comparison of these costs w the Lewis Avenue Bridge estimate, the latter includes potential rig of-way, approaches , a walk bridge, and a traffic study that are not a significant part of the replacement of existing bridges . ;T7TE OrCALIFORNIA—BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN, Governor DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION P.O. BOX 8114 -ed SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93403-8114 Telephone: (805) 549-3111 TDD (805) 549-3259 January 15, 1987 5-SLO-0-Atas. BROS-0079 ( Garcia Road Bridge No. 49C-383 Branch Graves Creek Mr. Paul Sensibaugh - Director of Public Works City of Atascadero P.O. Box 747 Atascadero, CA 93423 Dear Mr. Sensibaugh: The California Transportation Commission under Miscellaneous Resolution G-86-10 approved the operating procedures proposed by the City-County-State Steering Committee for Local Agency projects in the Federal Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program for F.Y. 86-87. A copy of this resolution has been sent to you previously. The candidate to have a portion of California' s HBRR allocation reserved for it in this fiscal year is listed below. The amount of federal participation on eligible items of work for the project is shown for your information. Bridge Name Bridge No. Federal Participation AtBranch Graves Crk. 49C-383 $ 132,000 s Federal participation is based on 80% of the value of the following preliminary list of items of work for which the Local Agency has requested participation. Final federal participation will be based on items developed from final approved plans. ,f Mr. Sensibaugh January 15, 1987 Page 2 Preliminary Engineering $ 15,000 `R/W Acquisition 10,000 Construction: Bridge Cost $110,000 Roadway Cost 14 ,000 Construction Engineering 15,000 Total $ 140 ,000 Total Estimated Cost $ 165 ,000 To qualify for these funds the PS&E of the bridge portion must be approved for advertising by the Division of Structures. PS&E must be completed within one year from the date of this notification letter when design is done in-house; or, up to four additional months will be allowed when a consultant agreement is involved. If a consultant agreement is involved, the agreement shall be completed within four months from the date of this notification. If the new Highway Bill gets timely approval, we will attempt to have construction funds obligated for this project by June 1, 1987. Please confirm in writing whether you will comply with the requirements for qualification, and whether a consultant agreement is involved. Please submit the Field Review form with changes discussed at the field review, along with your confirmation letter. lrti(/l/ W. W. Evans Asst. Dist. Local Streets and Roads Engineer _— 0 9 TATE OF CALIFORNIA—BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN, Governor DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION .P.O. BOX 8114 SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93403-8114 Telephone: (805) 549-3111 TDD (805) 549-3259 January 14, 1987 5-SLO-0-Atas BROS-0079 ( ) San Andres Avenue Bridge No. 49C-159 Atascadero Creek Mr. Paul Sensibaugh Director of Public Works City of Atascadero P.O. Box 747 Atascadero, CA 93423 Attention George Wolfrank Dear Mr. Sensibaugh: The California Transportation Commission under Miscellaneous Resolution G-86-10 approved the operating procedures proposed by the City-County-State Steering Committee for Local Agency projects in the Federal Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program for F.Y. 86-87. - A copy of this resolution has been sent to you previously. The candidate to have a portion of California' s HBRR allocation reserved for it in this fiscal year is listed below. The amount of federal participation on eligible items of work for the project is shown for your information. Bridge Name Bridge No. Federal Participation C� cS`i2re Atascadero Creek 49C-159 $ 272,000 �8 000 Federal participation is based on 80% of the value of the following preliminary list of items of work for which the Local Agency has requested participation. Final federal participation will be based on items developed from final approved plans. Mr. Sensibau h 9 January 14, 1987 Page 2 Preliminary Engineering $ 30,000 R/W Acquisition 10,000 Construction: Bridge Cost $254,000 Roadway Cost 14 ,000 Construction Engineering 32,000 Total $ 300.000 Total Estimated Cost $ 340,000 To qualify for these funds the PS&E of the bridge portion must be approved for advertising by the Division of Structures. PS&E must be completed within one year from the date of this notification letter when design is done in-house; or, up to four additional months will be allowed when a consultant agreement is involved. If a. consultant agreement is involved, the agreement shall be completed within four months from the date of this notification. If the new Highway Bill gets timely approval, we will attempt to have construction funds obligated for this project by June 1, 1987. Please confirm in writing whether you will comply with the requirements for qualification, and whether a consultant agreement is involved. Please return the field review form with the confirming letter. W. W. Evans Asst. Dista Local Streets and Roads Engineer COUNCIL GOALS AND OBJECTIVES CTIVES SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING' JANUARY 30, 1987 AT 10:00 A.M. ADMINISTRATION BUILDING FOURTH FLOOR CLUB ROOM 10:00 Council Discussion' - Goals and Objectives Mayor Mackey has requested this time be devoted to reviewing previous objectives (attached) plus any updates and objectives from Council Member Borgeson 11:00 Continuation of Mid-Year Budget Review Capital . Improvement Projects 12:00 Adjourn to Lunch 1:00- Staff Review of Current Goals and Objectives - Accomplishments to. Date. Objectives to be delayed or deleted. Council determination/direction. 2:30 Planning Special Projects Review 3:00 Council Determination/Direction 4:00 Adjournment I PURPOSE: Enable Council as a body to review and provide policy setting direction to staff. To enable Council to review mid-year accomplishments on City Goals and Objectives and provide change in policy direction, as desired. Provide an educational setting to review goal setting procedures and reconfirm or change process. Provide early Council involvement in preparing budget goals and objectives in preparation of F.Y. 87/88 preliminary budget for Council consideration. GUIDELINE CONSIDERATIONS Staff assumes current budget goals and objectives, as adopted, constitutes current year (F.Y. 86/87 Budget) work program. Staff is committed to the achievement of these goals, absent Council direction otherwise. Budget goals and objectives are subject to change per Council direction, as appropriate. If Council desires new objectives with considerable time commit- ment, Council should direct reprioritization of the work program. New objectives requiring financial commitment must be accompanied by a financing plan. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS Staff desires to prepare an updated five-year C.I.P. budget and financial plan for Council consideration/study prior to reviewing the operating budget. The CIP Plan, as prioritized and adopted by Council, constitutes the City' s long-range capital plan. Planning Commission/City Council will be reviewing General Plan Goals and Objectives in accordance with Phase I General Plan review. Phase II of General Plan review will address General Plan elements to mirror goals and objectives. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES PREPARATION Attached material constitutes preparation guidelines used - by staff: * Definition of Goals versus Objectives * Guidelines for Writing Useful Objectives sTeoSoo :8Tt3 A51:SW aTdMTS 4T daaX speag luamliedao pue ja6eueW AgTO _ AgTTTgequn000V pue Matnag 4uatu9n9tgoe 90 S4TMTT auti4 auija(l •Q aTgiseaj pue aTgenaiyoe aq oq s9nigo9Ego - ot4siTeal aq - qol Mous oN •0 aTgejnseem pue OTJToads aq o4s9nt40aCgp •g (panaiuoe aq oq gTnsaj pua jo asodand aqs) s4Tnsaa pua go sutia4 uT sanT4091go age4g •v N F July 9, 1984 _ TO: City Council FROM: George Molina Council should make short and long term priorities. The short term priorities should be what we can acca plish in one to one-ander-half Years and see them through to conclusion. Police facility away from city hall and to be: 1. Old Bank of America building 2. New building City wide maintenence district to bring all roads up to standard. Four to five year plan. P.A. system in council meetings. Increase city revenue to make the above possible: A. Business License, B. Utility fees, etc. Committee to study redevelopment of central business district, along with relocating city hall, etc. Council should make statement that we encourage commercial development, to answer the affordable housing need, and to help promote the business climate of Atascadero. To- study and correct whatever problems are in the Building and Planning Department. Management study for cost effectiveness and employee reclarification. Policies 1. Review the budget at least three (3) times a year, 2. Change the term of Planning committee to run with term of council. r' 1 i To: City Council From: Bear Date: July 3, 1984 The City Council needs to establish goals and objectives for our City. Once this is done, then our City staff can set their goals and objectives. My priorities are not in any particular order and are divided into long and short term catagories: LONG TERM: 1. Move Police Department 2. City wide street maintenance and acquisition plan 3. Community activity center 4. Downtown parking 5. Central business area planning. SHORT TERM: 1. Management study 2. Council chambers improvement 3. Business licenses 4. Six month budget review 5. Ordinance and policy review/formulation 6. Downtown parking 7. Personnel To: Council Members From: Barbara Norris The following is my wish list for the present, the near future and the distant future. They are not in any particular order. 1. Establish a Capital Improvement Plan that is not easily changed and implement some funding in future budgets. This should also decide the issue .of housing the Police Department. 2. Establish and fund a full-time City Clerk to serve as Secretary to the Council. Assign duties as necessary to eliminate idleness. 3. Reorganize Planning and Building Departments to' improve both service and public relations. 4. Develop Master Plan for bringing all roads within City limits up to standard. 5. Encourage development of Taxi system- or extend Dial-A-Ride hours and discourage abuse of present system. 6. Find more suitable location for council meetings. 7. Encourage light industry to locate in Atascadero to produce expanded revenues and more jobs. 8. Evaluate downtown problems regarding signs and parking. 9. Refine terms of office for all commissions. n s� �p 6 G/ WX TO CITY COUNCIL From: I--?ar j. Mackey To make my list conform with yours, I will try to %vork it into the same format: To repeat: In my opinion, the GOALS AIM OBJECTIVES of the City Council and the City Staff, one and all, should be to provide the best services to the people of Atascadero in the most efficient and pleasant manner possible at the lowest cost. PRIORITIES: Immediate- Complete or start projects which we have needed and funded for some time. Public works shop building Zoo shop & food preparation area Zoo employees restroom Finish Alvord field (vrith volunteer contributions if necessary) Make progress on S. Atas. Park so it is playable in 1985• New street light at either end of Santa Rosa. SOON: I would like to see some progress on these long term problems Sign ordinance controversy Sewage- drainage problems Business license fee resolution Planning department complaints Traffic problems alleviated (new lights or channelization) Hopefully some of these problems will be addressed and solved with this new Downtown co=iittee. (including street trees, if the business people want them. ) 'Q CO Re- Po it �► C 6-� � C ' _ c� L"�✓`C�( .._cam r're,.5 ��"���it"C�. _ r. iia o rotes r- y l / l. �G ill Po) 7'4--, 4 `3 6 tea, - ----�. -- ,C3n• cQ,r a--� --t ,6T c Mfr --- APPENDIX III T•"=`�'"'=�II':r' YOU WANTED -TO KNOW ABOUT OBJECTIVES BUT WERE AFRAID TO ASK I. Why Learn This Dumb Stuff? They will be used in the budget process e They are very useful and appropriate in doing thorough Performance Evaluations • They are needed to have accountability Between the department and his/her staff and between the department head and John or me Will be used in quarterly dvaluations of department heads They actually help you MANAGE focus your efforts) - Start of year: They help set the direction for you and your department During the year: They help you know whether you are headed in the right direction End of year: They help you know if you reached your target • If you don't learn how then. . . II. Goals vs. Objectives Don't get hung up on the terminology or differences • GOALS They are more general and somewhat less quantifiable than objectives--they generally relate to broad departmental or divisional activities. To protect the environmental quality of Truckee Meadows for all citizens (HEALTH) . a -54- C • OBJECTIVES (Results) These are more specific and measureable than goals. To maintain an average daily pollution index of "X" (HEALTH) . • OBJECTIVES (Process) These describe the specific task or process used to accomplish a goal or an objective. Inspect the air pollution activities of all major companies once a quarter (HEALTH) . - Guidelines for Writing Useful Objectives • Not an easy process • Takes a lot of creative and critical thought; discussions and rewriting • The involvement of your management team will produce worthwhile results C , A. Results • If at all possible, some of your objectives should be stated in terms of end result - Why are we doing something? - What are we trying to accomplish? - What is the real purpose (end result) of a program? • E::amples 1. An objective is not to give 1,000 vaccinations E-ut rather to reduce an incident of disease by "X" (HEALTH) . 2. An objective is not to increase our book collection Sy—"X" but rather to increase the nu-�ber of users by "X" or ensure 90% user satisfaction (LIBRARY) . -55- 3 . kn objective is not to complete productivity studies but rather to improve County productivity by "X" costs (BUDGET/1�NALYSIS) . 4 . An objective is not to mow the fairways and greens more often nut rather to achieve a user satisfaction rating of 8 on the Washoe County golf course (PARKS) . 5. An objective is not just to invest X% of all cash reserves ca� ly but to obtain a Y% yield on investments (TREASURER) . 6 . An objective is not to handle "X" number of court cases but rather to win X% of cases taken to court. B. Specific not General; Measureable/Quantifiable • If objectives do not have these qualities, then you will never know if you reached your objective. e Examples: 1. To be more accurate or reduce errors is fine, but to reduce payroll encoding errors 1S - X€ is better - (COMPTROLLER) . 2 . To reduce book loss is great , but to reduce book loss from X to Y is better (LIBRARY) . 3. To -reduce the incidence of VD is OK, but to reduce the rate of increase from X€ to y€ is specific and measureable (HEALTH) . 4 . To increase citizen involvement in the prepara-tion of Master Plans is OK, but to 7 ensure X€ of citizens have input into plans is measureable (REGIONAL PLANNING) : 5. To increase the number of parents paying child support is great but to increase the number of parents paying child support from X to Y is measureable (DISTRICT ATTORNEY) . 6 . To increase the productivity of building inspectors is admirable, but to increase the number of inspections. per-cay •from "X" to "Y" iS� specific and measureable' (BUILDING INSPECTIONS) . -56- 7. To repair and install all radios as quickly as possible is admirable, but to repair X% of all radios within X days and install all new radios within Y days is specific. S. To improve the services to citizens using the (health, Recorder , Roads , telfare, Library, etc. ) departments is admirable, but we need to say how we are improving services: i.e. , • increase user satisfaction by X€ - decrease waiting time by Y - reduce citizen complaints by X - expand 'usage to X• different groups specify) C. Achievable/Feasible s You should write an objective that will push you • and your department, but make the target within reach. • The objectives should encourage reaching without J causing frustrations or discouragement. • YOU will NOT eliminate Disease, Welfare fraud, stolen books, Building Code violations, citizen complaints, runaways, grievances, clerical errors, potholes, etc. • • Not all objectives should necessarily be stated in terms of Increase or Reduce. You may want to MAINTAIN something or SLOW or ACCELERATE the rate of Increase or Decrease. • If you have never collected data before then the objective the first year may just be to OBTAIN a certain ]evel of service. e Does your program really have a major impact on a specific condition? Juvenile Detention/DA Crime Rate Probation/Sheriff/Courts Health Disease Welfare - Poverty Building & Safety Structural safety -57- • One advantage of writing objectives is that it forces us to look at the limy tations of our present programs and either accept limitations as reasonable or grange the programs. It is nice to say to complete all capital projects on time and within budget but more realistic to say complete X% of projects on time and Y% within budget estimate (PUBLIC WORKS) . D. Time Limits • We are asking for objectives that will be completed within one fiscal year or less. This is not to say that multiyear objectives are wrong. • If every objective is to be completed on June 30, it will be more difficult for you to know how well you are progressing each quarter. • Examples: Work to get US 395 completed an soon as possible . Better accountability to say "By Parch 1981 pressure State to have all E.I .R. completed of -all proposed alternatives and by December 1981 erasure the State has decided .on a specific route" (:•11AGER1s OFFICE) . Complete a study of the cost of repaving using County employees vs. contracting. A qood objective but if not completed by December 1980, the data can't be included in the budget and therefore not very useful (ROADS) . E. Audience • Most projects, programs, etc . usually focus in on one group vs. everyone • Examples: Reduce change orders by X% for Roads, General Services , Health (i.e. , Major Users) vs. all departments (PURCHASING) . State specifically,)if a program is designed for a certain audience or group (i .e. , age, income, nonmobile, sex, rural vs. city, etc. ) (HEALTH, LIBRARY, EELFARE, PARKS) . -58-