Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 06/11/1987 0 A G E N D A ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING ATASCADERO ADMINISTRATION BUILDING Fourth Floor- Club Room June 11, 1987 7:00 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 (5) minutes. * No one may speak for a second time until everyone wishing to speak has had an opportunity to do so. * No one may speak more than twice on any item. * Council members may question any speaker; the speaker may respond; but after the alloted time has expired, may not initiate further discussion. * The floor will then be closed to public participation and open for Council discussion. 1. Council review of Proposals and selection of Consultant to per- form Economic Development Analysis Study. 1 M E M O R A N D U M • TO: City Council Members June 8, 1987 FROM: Michael Shelton, City Manager SUBJECT: Council Review of Economic Development Analysis Study Proposals —Special Meeting, June 11, 1987. BACKGROUND: At the May 26, 1987 Council Meeting, Council directed a special meeting to be held on June 11, 1987 for the purpose of screening the Economic Development Analysis Study Proposals. In selecting a firm, Council may further refine the scope of services and/or redirect the approach and methodology to be addressed by the Con- sultant. Staff report for the May 26 , 1987 regular Council Meeting is at- tached less the ERA proposal. • In total there are seven proposals for Council' s consideration. ALTERNATIVE: Council may reject all proposals. MS:ph P Attachment: Staff Report, dated May 26, 1987 i ' T_ AGENDA -7 ITFJA M E M O R A N D U M -� 10TO: -tity Council Members n May 26, 1987 .z . �.. FROM Michael Shelton 'xraJ T' City Manager ` s ' ' *• UBJECT• COMMITTEE STATUS REPORT - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ANALYSIS STUDY PROPOSALS Q, c x a t r RECOMMENDATION 1 City Council hold Xa Special Study Sesision ,� 1.'t r -'t..`a.; j h ,.y t A:n .,L'it .py..iFb+K•„'S :,tYui tt5 ",£ '1 .. i -YxN xl 3 ?.t +P > review recommendations of sub-committee to appoint a _ con= �sulting firm to perform an . Economic Development Analysis .' Stud e Y Ai i2. , To consider continued City participation` in City/BIA/Chamber„' x� ,of Commerce Committee Tr' n ��`e 6 �„ h` {.,•'.a'x'��' F r' #�•A`�Ai,� �5i -ri'�}`"., ; X11 yysa -,PA 1'x.•��+�y t hV . �'tp�.i" ? T �3'f� BACRGROUND µ s x t t,f!@�•a, _. _ ?�4 �� v,,.. a�Z ,+ �, . y ' �'�y ps'� .t'pi'"��'��z�'� �2�2 er the General Plan Work Program and recommendation of the BIA/ City/Chamber of 'Commerce Committee, at the -March 10, 1987 city - Council Meeting, Council authorized staff to solicit proposals .4 for an Economic Base Analysis Stud Accordingly, Requests yry y y. for Proposals were transmitted to nine potential firms,- of which '. seven submitted proposals prior to the A ` i�' ,a�•- ,; pr it 27, 1987 deadline. At the April 24, 1987 BIA/City/Chamber of Commerce Committee r Meeting, the committee established a process to review the p proposals to report back to the committee on May 15, 1987 ins y � order to formulate a recommendation for Council. . co * a May 15, 1987 committee meeting, considerable discussion ¢ 4 4' ensued as to broadening the -proposal selection committee reviewing further the scope of serices and pros and cons of P . the recommended firm of ERA. r' A unanimous consensus was not ; x obtained r __!�Z Staff feels ' it important that the selection process be ,'open toy°'` r> T. ` interested groups allowing broad basedeffort,-',,,,.� 9 P 9 participation in an ' ��, • ' .& to promote information and understanding. It is also important that the firm address a scope of services that meets the"needs' of the community,y, and that the firm selected bring a solid technical ' � a • and experienced background to the City. ;ti Due to the lack of consensus at the meeting, staff recommends a study session -be held by Council to review the study purposes,`* r - .' scope of services, and Provide direction for :'selection of con- � ` sultant. F If Council desires, this meeting can be held pri to iAt, t to i"' �, -' .�aK r'ypt6y iti n £!C"xs ,,a r"Y'�u� , �y� � r t '.-" yc n • ° �r<` yy^v s'`� � >;� +Sr x r, , the next regularly scheduled SAM Meeting of June 9,~' 1987 at 6:30 p.m.gyp Council may also want to discuss ;further needs for �: City participaton in the City/BIA/Chamber of Commerce Commith1Pre j A MW "'ALTERNATIVES � r r.WIN 211t, tr�:z }, ,,:i ^-, ,. ,..:? �. d ,¢•�?e .-•?. . '.x, .• _ 1,r; r� �» )e �. t��wa re�r) .s;�.+'�+;; f"" q-C . ¢'' xy 1. Council may accept recommendations �of sub-committee 'and award study to ERA. rc� 2. Council may{ serve as a screening committee,? review all apple= cations, and make a selection. �Y y •4- tots 8 3. Council may refect all proposals. is 1;x �n t-rf a kt sg,r + 4, 4 Eg Jr �[+, �` ��� l' y ���} '�° F�:•._ +. :'�- �� .�; p"�l� t.-s�k,"�7�:�. " +{�, k. `€W ` '<x •, ..�. '� ,z z3,.,'i d � 'F t .,�q�ik!f¢,{ FIMPACTS vISCAL i Md'o, �- err oposal costs range from $20,000 to $50,000. tF ✓+t t{t s k !4$ `)fie" owl A ,�� + r`.'•�t ,- wvIT an, MS kv 9c�t File: Mecoanal r!"hNr'« ti1r rx , .�Y1`ry 4 4sYr� �. k�+As., 3 ! K - R r t ;Fr !r•s fi S{' S`ly # y� r,�4 '"t .,. :x x i c n.N �? r- •F' # l•+ -% � - CC: MAGG I E RICE,+ CHAMBER OF COMMERCE , :fmap tr„ is S .� d{�`.y. „t, , KIRK PEARSON, ' BIA �'�. �. t - " p too 40"T. " VIVA OW7 qMW 01, now MV 40 SMtiITT r - ? �r ) � M 'l - lot, IMM ' � w r y .r v v"5 oil s&F ,� •s s t t� k �} Un= r k + s r,:> xi. ar x "'fir•- r i�=�7 7 t y{ � 'rr,�t`a Winlit _ Of Ma stswo 74 lots KIM '," c kt t n• r4 3ar+sS Y t �.X W e y7 Rio x has, � a { 42 + .,, a "fzk r n a}any '! r + ; `x. • e n .,,v, oft Two 5t t r .;F k r i r s4yw-a '¢r Vr`�,- #Y �' ' u r. ,' ,,.a { } *E7:N ,wIG7NDA CAT= ��� lTE' # �- M E M O R A N D U M CSV ! �'ff.f � � �i _ _ .. t •'� Y �S�'+\'Rf{� �yT ZA %> City Council March 10� TO 1987 !•,. -.. .Jr. - 1 h-.+•.. W VIA Michael Shelton City Manager y-- _ 4� `� } rf i'C t"'"••fl'SY �!i {x.t. 7`..: t_.. - ". .t, - +. it .r 3 .•,, i Kms& ct s L ...... . t 7 FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director r.• r'Y. y MW i` y. _=,,Dave Jorgensen, Administrative Services Direct©r;!? ,. , .:.. -.wx:�? � .,-a t r s.: �:::.`t iC r•i.1 � 's t *.:' ..g �arna� 7t::l��fi�'"4�, "'�ri }�r � + - S -' t].. ,., nim .-. .- � .i ..!`.:� 'i YY a!:'',li t•y��-d �e �( - , (SUBJECT -: Request to Seek Proposals Economic Base Analysis, �iy1 aCit of Atascadero y y� .:,.,jg;t:. . ,. y .- 1:t-wa?•�*'+`e"r'dn.j`s2)cy'�t. �G-",+�•"}t1z + _ t'{;' -.+4-„`&-3i ,t `i x •i 1;:41'1'�S'Gty; K S'' ..R]��Yj °Yt^'-1'� rC�.=L;'G Sz�r7'�: F a '3' .2V�Mai R t3aty,Q_3y��."`'Si,"7 > f..A �',��.S�I ;+ 5, �`44L..•'.2 + .i. t •� Litre- 1.::'V �. ;. }F� �.r .•'t :�t._ t' X74 atxy BACKGROUND ,."BACKGROUND: -' e,. t 'i t-• j„, a�"'x�as:.!rry�ae +,ik's+if 3�'��.�"t'� �,''' $r a'�3' .ketr �'r+ � ;! g4 :,�^9', +�a` ' �i!'pi'E� ti _ _{`• 7"''�. -` ,. �-.�. ;1�f'' .ii'sty� �„ '* �p(,`' ,e��3°'�"+ ;'}te,�;' �t t t' .� 'A: ”` 1){q�rt, , 1"> .. .+k'1T�r+{� #rY� ;T��:.Ns ...;H.��;'•. i� . :.. �no City, s General Plan Work Program states 'the 'need for ,-"An'"Eco- .. _nomic Base Analysis to provide direction .for a strategy ;- for 1 the +, r,future". `�;q. f The Y 3City ;-has ralso :;� been ?` working with _the , .: ,gri'•�+: �,�;:BIA/City%Chamber 'Of Commerce Committee towards downtown 2revitali f° zati.on. -�aThe attached draft "Request For Proposal" Tawas endorsed 1 ,27r by ,said committee "tat :;their meeting ,of. March J_1987, ' to , �,�r ,;provide for an overall evaluation of the City' s economic :;base; rtt - >,. _? and 2. .'_to make recommendations on the economic role of the-down- : -...;,,town area as a basis for preparing a future downtown plan. . ` z JY' ,x.-- :i:♦�Tr lN. ,� `�� a 4 �,.'t v, ✓+-:•i c r�.�t •���� _ ° -� � 2 f a x. - i l n. x� .t��� FISCAL IMPACT f , • � � ) r' �•"'"1J..i 'iPi 'r ..;�..., -� i t 4 tt '',,.N {..3 w,+ u < !} _y-u+tr ,.a._.-t .j .7 '�,f 4k-!"r,c `�F !•: F't h2rs`W cy";}.t '�`'*T;!w ej� y,Y As part of this year's budget, some $50 ,000 was set ;aside ' for ,.a " redevelopment contingency monies, and an additional $50,000 for Phase I of General Plan Update. The latter has been utilized to yr employ interns and contractplanners, but will not 'be fully ex j� pen ded by end of fiscal year. '`:.It is proposed that the cost for ;t =the Economic Base Analysis be funded out of both of these author :` a ized budget accounts. The •amount would be determined on the FYI n . basis of the proposal selected, which would be. a Council decision T °based on evaluation of all the proposals .`.b3 P t 1F,-'f l T'� 4 ! .' • ''��11 y"� 7 f a�Tt.3�h ;._,%.?tt t -.' „4`.�'+�t'fit' X F ...cL w . .t.1 •:, Z..,. 1 3 ! w.t �'J'Y( `.Yy �r < ri }>�_`. f (! i.k � t,� F5' �,�K Ai RECOMMENDATION Authorize staff to solicit proposals for an Economic Base Anal ' s, :sis (see attached draft) . ' Following t'ae evaluation of -the pro "5 " �r posals, it would be brought back to the Council for formal budget _ + , action on selection of a consultant. - -.a -! .t.!-• - ,�S s�.� •�r t;r�r it `i�9f .nr+t`y '�>t t 6 r :t HE ph l 5 t •' 2 / 'i irf n .x •�"y7 t .. i�t � Yk.. cc Maggie Rice,• Chamber of Commerce t Kirk Pierson, Business Improvement Area `,� t r Jerry Bond, Chairman, Planning Commission t 7 _ .y. .�:� . ..��. -'-.cY r f,rf - 2;� L.Y.✓ �.1.,."Lf y r �,�� !t> sl , --di•.°••prY3�r�r�•]\..;�tyr �: ,Enclosures t Draft Reques for Proposal' _ _°�' y + ►� ' ' t`t :. r.,rh; ] �"� r.�."it '�!�.k r �':ti� � s;'i i T j .`_ �. - 9 -v)'•i fit] i r ..: 5 C fi .�r { a '�tt yY .#.,x�4,r az- dr .,f .;�*! s."�t 3'r`r e / t r L;•� �', Zyt t r• . � - S ,,n+""t:i a �, `Yr.,���d�'! ��'(`y 1i'=�thJ`- ¢..,>;'��``iiyy,�� � .:F ir,}.P ti A. Tc t :ir ^Sir "" ^'1�1� 7. ` ♦ l:} r:.:� f .p f �, 'v'.R'4r •!f)� wog YY�]..'��,J i a�{_. �.. -Z1 r r i n , r_.. ...� I �;� i ;5 h r'ti1!` �µtxr rtY.L�p� a-i'.�..t ,(•�' -•:� p�'^.•.i f pYtk.�y.'��;Y x'#•�f.f�r� y+.✓`i�'r-�'[�,� �sa f'�+h: �`>; - (�L y _1-.'tyr I.t..yi rR'a. '? '.-+• Y ;:._..L t eY t s►.�r 't �.r a,e;� � ,. •��� $y• .�+Y. 'n '� »_�,. r, s t2•-w�r�Y :. M� r'�.'•1G�"�.di`.s...>i`�'?f�;,s r.� ,�3 'ti•�r! w'Y� a- k ` � �T�]v r �.•rM .��:'�:• .�� .� . y, a 1 t �Y �.,ri �' �J.'s r �.,4. t�.�;`.R�'t.lY/'j• cn t + . �',q ry t 1��,.1 t�'�-r f%'.�1 }� Jz,Fr ^5,� �s ��.���-.X 5.t�h l' �i r t , i r - t ,,r „ f � y +�{t- ,r tk: � rxy It't 'a'q}t-t F t � •y�~`'� r ^ -.....;. .'. -_` i r. ..`;' t ., r _ f r r c i �r5:i*rkt ..j+� F{�'t� 2�' tiY.� 7Y - � p�'•�„�" WORK PROGRAM ECONOMIC BASE ANALYSIS CITY OF ATASCADERO PURPOSE The purpose of the study is to provide an overall evaluation of the City of Atascadero's economic base. Analysis and recommen- dations derived from overall evaluation of the City's market area should be followed by recommended strategies for the future, ;,:,, including specific 7recommendations for revisions to General �, F Plan Policies with res - .,. respect to long-range growth objectives. ,t,. r =: jWithin the context of the overall evaluation, the studywill al . ; :, y { recommend an optimum economic strategy for the downtown area ¢� s{4 It will provide the basis for subsequent preparation of a ±' r�irv,jY master plan for the downtown area. �.. 4 STUDY OUTLINE y, A. Inventory 1. Trade Area Definition 7 Examine past and present growth trends in the Atascadero market area, in the con- text of the overall region. 2. Population - Evaluate existing demographics and projec- tions of population. 3. Retail Sales - Evaluate existing retail sales, sales tax data, and other available data in relation to market area Population growth and income potential. 4. Employment - Evaluate existing data with respect to existing and projected employment levels, including industrial job potential. 5. Existing Land Use - Evaluate existing data with respect to land use patterns and vacant land inventory. B. Analysis 1. Attitude Surveys - Review previous attitude surveys compiled by the Chamber of Commerce and California Polytechnic State University with respect to shopping patterns, desires, etc. i3 rt 2. Planning Policies - Evaluate existing General Plan and f zoning policies in relation to contemporary economic development standards. C. Recommendations 1. General Plan/zoning - Based on analysis of the City' s current economic development strategies, offer specific proposals to redefine General Plan policies. Proposed General Plan language should be drafted for City consideration to incorporate into it's General Plan. It should be predicated on evaluation of the City's potential for tourism, specific categories of retail and service activities, office uses, and industry. sh 2. Downtown Development Strategy - Provide recommendations as to the optimum economic role of the downtown area within the context of overall strategies noted above. The general scale of proposed land area needed to accomo- date the extent of economic activities proposed will be provided together with steps recommended to implement such a strategy. MEETINGS City staff will coordinate appropriate meetings with the Chamber of Commerce, Business Improvement Association, Planning Commission and City Council prior to preparation of an administrative draft report. There will be a min- imum of two (2) such meetings together with one (1) meet- ing to present the final report to the City Council and Planning Commission. REPORTS Thirty (30) copies of the administrative draft report and one hundred (100) copies of the final report will be required. The final report will be based on the Consultant's professional evaluation of input received in review of the administrative draft. PRINCIPAL-IN-CHARGE/EXPERIENCE Indicate the principal representative from the consult- ing firm together with others assigned d to the work. The consultant' s experience in similar communities should be cited together with examples of work testifying to the credibility of the firm' s economic analysis to both public agencies and the private sector. FEES Proposals should indicate a lump sum figure or upset price for the work cited together with 1r w i Ccosts of unforeseen study activities (e.g. additional � ' meetings, report copies, etc.) TIME SCHEDULE Indicate the time line for completion of the work. r z r .,.,.r•- t a1, M E M O R A N D U M TO: B.I.A./City/Chamber Committee MAY 13 198May 13, 1987 FROM: Henry Engen a1-9, C"r%l N4,G1j. Community Development Director RE: ECONOMIC BASE ANALYSIS AND DOWNTOWN REVITALIZATION PROPOSALS BACKGROUND: � At the April 24th meeting, the committee established a process for < recommending a consultant to prepare the Economic Base Study for the City with a focus on downtown revitalization opportunities. . (See attached March 26, 1987 request for proposal sent to nine consulting firms.) Subsequently, a screening committee comprised of Eric Hagen, Robert Nimmo, David Jorgensen, and myself met on May 8, 1987 to review the seven responses (refer to attached RFP analysis) . It was the unani- mous conclusion of the committee to concentrate on doing a background evaluation on Economic Research Associates (see attached proposal) , and to negotiate with them in terms of possibly reducing costs ($49,040) and the overall time frame (7 months) . They had the most thorough proposal with the most extensive background in serving both public and private clients. BACKGROUND EVALUATION: -. Since the meeting on May 8th, I have contacted individuals who have employed Economic Research Assocites including persons not specifi- cally listed as a reference. A summary of comments received on the firm in general and the specific individuals who would represent the firm are as follows: "Outstanding, we utilized the firm for 1 1/2 years. " "They hired a good employee from us, and if you have him and Dave Wilcox, you will have an especially effective team. " "The work was always submitted on time, they did a fine job, and were very effective meeting with merchant groups. " - "They were easy to work with. . . .The emphasis of the study was on hotel and tourism potential and advisability of annexing a large area. . . .We were very pleased with their work, they gave us a good balance between fiscal and environmental impacts, and as a result, the annexation proposal was rejected as being negative to the City' s cash flow. " Economic Base Analysis & Downtown Revitalization Proposals "I worked with Dave Wilcox is a built_ out town seekin help with the downtown area; the have a good ve Y 9 reputation and w* had no problems with ERA; they were on time and good with the cit- izens advisory and economic development groups. . . .They handled issues well at public meetings. " "You are not going to find any skeletons in ERA' s closet. " "They are a great firm. " WORK PROGRAM REFINEMENT: In reviewing ERA's proposed scope of work, it appeared that the major _-.,--N4 negative was a seven (7) month time frame. It was determined that ....,-,.,-. some data details might not be necessary. I have talked with their � q - staff, who are in therocess of P preparing an adjustment that will result in less costs ($45,740) and a time frame of 5 months. - :This modification to the proposed work program will be distributed May 15. IN% In addition to an excellent proposal, the firm does not have any built-in bias in favor or against redevelopment as a possible tool forq; meeting community revitalization objectives. RECOMMENDATION: Recommend to the City Council that the firm of Economic Research Associates (ERA) be selected to undertake the Economic Base Analysis and Downtown Revitalization Evaluation called for in the request for proposals. HE:ps Enclosures: March 27, 1987 Request for Proposals and Work Program Economic Base RFP Analysis April 24, 1987 ERA Proposal Background of Firm Materials File: biamemo :li 3 Y 2. S761IM 1 4. Nv1LCS' +4-7ToC 3. Gi2tlE�,/ T 4,YS C . 4. n, �o a,nw G�2o X1,0 March 26, 1987 6. A;APUtFl.) SUBJECT: Request for Proposal - Economic Base Analysis . City of Atascadero Dear Consultant: 'You are invited to submit a proposal to the City of Atascadero to pre- pare an economic base analysis for the City with a focus on providing direction for downtown revitalization. The City is in the process of updating the General Plan . program states the need for an "economic base analysis to whose work rection for a strategyfor the future. " y Provide di- rection We have also beenworking with the Chamber of Commerce and a newly formed Business Improvement Association representing the downtown area (see attached map) towards revitalization of -the downtown area. Despite strong residential construction growth, there has been a not- able lag in retail sales trends which has been a concern to the City and its business community. The City encompasses over 24 square miles and was pre-subdivided pursuant to a utopian master plan in 1914. Views are mixed as to whether redevelopment should be pursued down- town. The City recognizes the need to examine the feasibility for downtown revitalization, prepare a plan based on a sound economic . analysis, and to then determine.. if redevelopment is the a tool for implementing the plan. PPropriate Your proposal should besubmittedto the Community Development Depart- ment no later than 5:00 p.m. on April 27, 1987. Request for Proposal - Economic Base Analysis City of Atascadero Page Two Please include an estimated time frame for completion, together with an indication of the principal representative who would be responsible for directing the work and making presentations to the City Council and its Advisory Agencies. Sincerely. . Henry Engen Community Development Director City of Atascadero r HE:ph Enclosures: Work Program Boundary Map WORK PROGRAM ECONOMIC BASE ANALYSIS CITY OF ATASCADERO PURPOSE The purpose of the study is to provide an overall evaluation of the City of Atascadero's economic base. Analysis and recommen- dations derived from overall evaluation of the City' s market , area should be followed by recommended strategies for the future, 4 including specific recommendations for revisions to General Plan Policies with respect to long-range growth objectives. Within the context of the overall evaluation, the study will also L • recommend an optimum economic strategy for the downtown area. x It will provide the basis for subsequent preparation of a master plan for the downtown area. STUDY OUTLINE A. Inventory_ 1. Trade Area Definition - Examine past and present growth trends in the Atascadero market area, in the con- text of the overall region. 2. Population - Evaluate existing demographics and projec- tions of population. 3. Retail Sales - Evaluate existing retail sales, sales tax data, and other available data in relation to market area Population growth and income potential. 4. Employment - Evaluate existing data with respect to existing and projected employment levels, including industrial job potential. 5. Existing Land Use - Evaluate existing data with respect to land use patterns and vacant land inventory. B. Analysis 1. Attitude Surveys - Review previous attitude surveys compiled by the Chamber of Commerce and California Polytechnic State University with respect to shopping patterns, desires, etc. a _,ti 2. Planning Policies - Evaluate existing General Plan and 4b zoning policies in relation to contemporary economic development standards. C. Recommendations 1. General Plan/Zoning - Based on analysis of the City' s current economic development strategies, offer specific proposals to redefine General Plan policies. Proposed General Plan language should be drafted for City consideration to incorporate into it's General- Plan. It should be predicated on evaluation of the City's potential for tourism, specific categories of retail {Q3 And service activities, office uses, and industry. =a {r 2. Downtown Development Strategy - Provide recommendations _ as to the optimum economic role of the downtown area within the context of overall strategies noted above. , The general scale of proposed land area needed to accomo- date the extent of economic activities proposed will be :. provided together with steps recommended to implement such a strategy. MEETINGS City staff will coordinate appropriate meetings with the Chamber of Commerce, Business Improvement Association, 1 Planning Commission and City Council prior to preparation of an administrative draft report. There will be a min- imum of two (2) such meetings together with one (1) meet- ing to present the final report to the City Council and Planning Commission. REPORTS Thirty (30) copies of the administrative draft report and one hundred (100) copies of the final report will be required. The final report will be based on the Consultant' s professional evaluation of input received in review of the administrative draft. PRINCIPAL-IN-CHARGE/EXPERIENCE Indicate the principal representative from the consult- ing firm together with others assigned to the work. The consultant' s experience in similar communities should be cited together with examples of work testifying to the credibility of the firm' s economic analysis to both public agencies and the private sector. FEES Proposals should indicate a lump sum figure or upset price for the work cited together with costs of unforeseen study activities (e.g. additional meetings, report copies, etc.) TIME SCHEDULE Indicate the time line for completion of the work. r' t � MA Boundaries of the Atascadero Business Improvement Associa .. .. ......r..... .. .�_........... ai. . . ::. ::.::.. :::: ::;:::::;-». :: ...�:+: ..............> .:....,•:: ::t::::;•>::!:�?:•>:•ii... is•::;•?:•::<;::.....::•::>:-:.. ..!.w.•::r..-•_.•..•::.:�:::o:::_ii; ?iii:.;�•�;...;;{;rte.; .i ::. ...:. :::: :::. ::. :. -... .:::::::.:,-.•f-.'-rte":. .... ::: �y:`> +::�::a`�" �ifiaQ�:;i•• ••:r:�: ........... .... . :.�:. �>::�:::: ::: :r.:::.............. . ....... ...... ............ �: ..::::v::-iii::•.::_::•::•::•::•:::.�:::<•::•::•::•:::•>:� :.�::.:. :. . ��_...:.::::::................ ;`ter:%:i:•:�::>..,.. ww•e..: w: - .. - ' ........ .... :.�?y:::w.�::::.�::::::::::w.�:{iii:titiv;,:�::::::w::.::; '. :. :.. ........................... :.... ..�. 'L•?:•. :::rSS:;F,. ..Sa :v:v:. ..... .::................:::::::::::::::::::::::.::::::::::.•: ..... •:�{.:is'} )... ...ii:•i• :..:. :ii?}?•: .:...:}:;tii.. v:.: .............................................. ....... -::. � -:1?}:•:{{%ti:::i:::7!ii:•i!,.F.•�i. ``�' i'•:!'1"'-i i??iti•:is div • w .. :._:. :.: •iii•:.vi '•i:tiff: :::: .:: ..... -: ::. .. . :�:{:i:Si:;:$::moi:{:i{?i:?{•?:•ii} �ii:i•}:; ' �:.:�::, •Y'.? i;`.i Vii:, ?ni is? :�jf?i?.�` — � ` :tii}�'!;ii•. , v:4:':�`-�-:.:.-f'�}.: . V ?. E DA A 6 •:flv 'iii'•: M x.. :4 { M ✓1:14' 6: _ .i w: ::ifyaA , 1 iti;!j��� E t r?: F z 1 V 6 P n M F d O .n M < } Q 3 _ ici�sa r .. z � ` CA 9X EAL CA E L .i XX .50111110110.11. L :.A-:::.: ..... :::::•:::•: :?•i:... ? i 1 � .W.�. -::::::.yam{viv::viii}•.-�. � - ;�-.: :::::.. ..r.r.•. '-. .� ' g7 j3-s�.»�t,.a�2 -EXY�t�I�1�cCE O Pvr-�u L/PAY;5.frr CYW--n;3 ty ��Moe", ,Qos�yiGL F n.9Y�urp,� v ct*uts c� v wEta4�'--r - - r 9!y, �hPur,�°---�_4,�m a.�7ySJ ,o�.r Ov�.�.r�o�-✓� 710 d � ,�,, PNS Pew- �1�oiJ j -�Y= 'A• ��1-�-'i S- sr�-✓� Ntl�s . /2 _- /¢ lt,-o'�itG! __.�v��sN��s' c�,,r�- �- rV���S �aSSGC. �/�-) SpQ (ucLA,m�3A) /--�-5 < • � . r CZ S— 3.3 marl�S' Pc."..rJ i YC JU?'LS�t� 7.550 0 �ic� iva Pra.v r G/Yr= 21,Ev0 -JAS',G I r i l t >7 W�J # -SS'CL;rrrG.S:` : -� o T•fc-�.s (4 hzeWlH 5� a"� au,L a trf✓LNG. 24. 500.&Q. Cs�/�.� J ; crl3rfC�',crnfy�ls -01 .l 12 �ls-' Ta SH4rz GE�� 5.o..rFa.aO ClOJO.rU,�/ z 2. /ncf.) TWEEfV Y�Z i 2!r ,r �✓CLE.�f�YfFi.r� ��c.o..rcrn��:cvrai.�+�rs.i Jr lyye, Crr � -�-- .0 Inco; c . ^rci;rJJ 0,-r r aj..► cloo t ✓OVI-------------- ff -- ---- �!i _�c sworn K S Q S_.a.r G ELC-�' _De9✓/D�v�l�o � �u_� Esc-, cam <7 u.r. P�o�f.�C �x�nc1 �. 1 ( 7 mv, .... _�3SdGIRT�,� Fs?fY �X6dv Z��1JS 7yJ,sJ svu�T� •_4 i � TGAJI PvY3t-1C/ i 124 --- — --- -- Ale C-4 Ma f ---- --, SAr ---- _ I Economics Research Associates C 0" Los Angeles,California San Francisco,California R E C EIV E O APR L 7 1037 Seattle.Washington Chicago,Illinois Boston,Massachusetts Washington, DC },: Ft.Lauderdale.Florida c M' '3�°" i j. A PROPOSAL TO THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA TO PREPARE A CITYWIDE ECONOMIC BASE ANALYSIS AND A # *' DOWNTOWN REVITALIZATION C FEASIBILITY STUDY PREPARED BY ECONOMICS RESEARCH ASSOCIATES APR[L 24,1987 PROPOSAL NO.23689 10960 Wilshire Boulevard,Suite 2400 0 Los Angeles,California 90024 0 (213)477.9585 Telex:857661