Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda Packet 02/27/1984
AGENDA ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL` Regular Meeting Iebruary 27, 1984 7:30 p.m. tascadero Administration Building Call to Order Pledge of Allegiance Invocation ' Roll Call Public Comment City Council Comments - A. CONSENT CALENDAR NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC 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. If dis- cussion is required, that item will be removed from the Consent Calen- dar and will be considered separately. Vote may be by roll call. 1. Minutes of the regular meeting of February 14, 1984 �.. (RECOMMEND APPROVAL) 2. Bid No 84-1 - for Flailer from Smith Equipment Company (REC- OMMEND BID BE AWARDED AS RECOMMENDED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR) 3. Acceptance of Lot Line Adjustment 1-83, 8325 Sierra Vista (Lots ' 56 and 57, Block 31) Gaylen Little and Don Rauch (Twin ' : Cities Engineering) (RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMIS- SION RECOMMENDATION) 4. -Acceptance of Lot Line Adjustment 3-83, 4940/4960 Alamo (Lots 12 and 13, Block T) Donna Williams (Hilliard Surveys) (RECOM- MEND APPROVAL OF 'PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION) 5. Acceptance of Tentative Parcel Map 12-83, 8045 Cristobal (Lot 16, Block 7) G.W. Johnson (Stewart) (RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION) 6. Acceptance of Tentative Parcel Map 13-83, 11050 San Marcos Road (Ptn. Lot 3, Block 41) Paul Martin (Twin Cities Engineering) (RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS) 7. Road .Name Cebada Lane Parallel to and between San Fernando Road and Santa Ana Road, Dennis Bethel and Associates (RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOM- MENDATION) 8. Tentative Parcel Map At 810930:1 (Time Extension) , 2455 El Camino Real (Lots 11, 12, 13, Block 22) , Jerry Frederick (Stewart) to extend the time allowed to complete requirements for an approved tentative map. (RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLAN- NING COMMISSION) B. HEARINGS, APPEARANCES, AND REPORTS, 1. Parking Study of the Downtown area of Atascadero 2. Report No. 27 of the City Attorney C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Ordinance No. 76 Changing certain property on Lake- view Drive from L (Recreation) to RSF-Y (Residential Single Family) second reading 2. Resolution No.. 16-84 establishing the formation of a street maintenance district for San Fernando Road D. NEW BUSINESS -1. Resolution No. 13-84 directing City Attorney to prepare an impartial analysis of the proposition relating to the police facility 2. Section 18 grant request to replace 1979 Dodge Dial-A-Ride Van 3. Discussion of Area Planning`and Coordinating Counc-il agenda for March 1, 1984 (Public Works Director) 4. Resolution No. 14-84 amending Resolution No. 12-84 by -chang ing "Measure A" to read "Measure B" on the County: ballot. t 5. Resolution No. 15-84 to the San Luis Obispo County Local Agency Formation Commission relative to a proposal to annex territory to the City of Atascadero designated as, the "Waste Water Treatment Plant Annexation" E. ATASCADERO COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT None F. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION 1. City Council 2. City Attorney 3. City Clerk 4. City Treasurer 5. City Manager NOTE: There will be a closed session to consider potential litigation; no announcement after the closed session is anticipated. t • AT - DERO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES ATASCA Regular Meeting February 14, 1984 Atascadero Administration Building The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. with the Pledge of Allegiance Reverend Ronald Goodwin of the Nazarene Church gave the invocation. A presentation was made to a member of the Atascadero Greyhounds -by Mayor Mackey. She congratulated the team for a terrific season. ROLL CALL Present: Councilmen Molina„ Nelson, Stover, 'Wilkins and Mayor Mackey. Absent: None STAFF Present: Murray Warden, City Manager; Ralph Dowell, Finance Director; Allen Grimes,, City Attorney; Georgia Ramirez, Deputy City Clerk; Mike Hicks, Fire Chief; Skip Joannes, Recreation Director; Bud McHale, Police Chief; Larry McPherson, Public Works Director; Barbara Norris, City Clerk; Larry Stevens, Planning Director and Sandi Sans, Secretary to City Manager. PUBLIC COMMENTS None COUNCILCOMMENTS None A. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Minutes of the regular meeting of January 2,3, 1984 (RECOMMENDED APPROVAL) 2. _ Treasurer' s Report - 1/1/84 to 1/31/84 (RECOMMENDED APPROVAL) 3. Finance Director' s Report 1/1/84 to 1/31/84 (RECOMMEND APPROVAL) 4.` Correction of clerical errors to Treasurer 's and Finance Director' s Reports for 12/l/83 to 12/31/83 . (RECOMMEND APPROVAL) 5. Lot line adjustment 2-83, 9185 Santa Lucia and 6055 Flores (Ptn. Lots 14 and 53, Block 15) , J.C. and Esther Viera, William McNamara, D. J. Jeffres, Fred Foss (Greathouse) to • adjust property lines to remedy the encroachment of an existing swimming pool onto an adjacent lot (RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION) 6. Tentative Parcel Map 17-83, Laurel Road (Ptn. Lot 3, Block 41) I.D.M. Enterprises (Twin Cities Engineering) to allow division of 72.7 acres into four parcels with three of 7 acreas and one of the 51.7 acres (RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION) 7. Tentative Parcel Map 19-83 8600 San Marcos Road (Ptn. Lot l Block 15) A. I. Jones (Hilliard Surveys) to divide 3.11 acres into twoparcels of 1. 61 and 1.. 5 acres. (RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION) 8,. Notice of Completion A. J. Diani Construction Co. , Inc. Bid No. 83-8 (RECOMMEND APPROVAL) 9. 1983/84 Local Transportation and State Transit Claims' Request for Council approval in order to receive funds (RECOMMEND APPROVAL) MOTION: Councilman Wilkins moved to approve items A-1 through A-9 of the Consent Calendar. The motion was seconded by Councilman Molina and unanimously carried by roll call vote. • B. HEARINGS, APPEARANCES AND REPORTS 1. Request by City of San Luis Obispo to endorse a resolution to obtain the League of California Cities support for con- stitutional amendments to allow local government greater control over annexation, subdivision proposals. MOTION: Councilman Nelson moved to endorse the resolution requested $y .City of San Luis Obispo.. Seconded by Councilman Stover with Councilman Wilkins and Molina voting no, with the motion being passed 3 :2. 2. Public Hearing on Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment 2-83,_ initiated by Planning Commission, to add "Indoor Recreation" to uses allowed within the IP (Industrial Park) and the CPK (Commerical Park Zoning District. MOTION: Councilman Molinamoved to go along with the staff' s rec- ommendation allowing` indoor recreation in the CPK Zone but not in .the IP Zone, and then referred it back to the Planning Commission for further study and recommendation. Passed 4: 1 with Mayor Mackey voting no. -2- • 3. Public Hearing on Ordinance No. 76 Changing certain property on Lakeview Drive from L (Recreation) to RSF-Y (residential single family) . MOTION: Councilman Nelson moved that Ordinance No. 76 be read by title only. Seconded by Councilman Wilkins and passed unanimously. Mayor Mackey read Ordinance No. 76 by title only. MOTION: Councilman Wilkins moved to approve the first reading of Ordinance No. 76 . Seconded by Councilman Molina and unanimously carried. C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Revised Capital Improvement Plan Further Consideration Councilman Molina requested postponement of approving the CIP. Mayor Mackey requested a study session regard- ing CIP. The date set for the study session was February 28th at 7 : 30 p.m. in Room 304. 2. Reconsideration of Advisory Measure Regarding Police Facility. There was much discussion regarding the wording of the advisory measure. The question of whether a separate police facility is needed was raised and also the amount of funds needed. Mayor Mackey asked if anyone sitting in the audience wished to make a statement on this subject. Those speaking about the issue were: Norm Norton, Wayne Handshey and Lon Allen who favored either eliminating the ballot measure entirely or modifying it to avoid any mention of costs. After much discussion Mr. Warden suggested a compromise wording which was endorsed by Mr. Nelson. MOTION: Councilman Wilkins moved, seconded by Stover to amend resolution 10-84 to be read as follows: MEASURE A: Shall the City of Atascadero provide a police facility separate from the Administration Building, at a cost to be determined later possibly using voter approved financing. f D. NEW BUSINESS 1. Resolution No. 8-84 establishing hearing dates for forming the Maintenance District for San Fernando Road. . MOTION: Councilman Nelson moved to adopt resolution 8-84. Seconded by Councilman Molina. Was unanimously carried by roll call vote. -3- 2. Recommendations regarding Unmet Transportation Needs. MOTION: Councilman Molina moved to accept staff recommendation and seconded by Councilman Nelson. The motion was passed 4 :1, with Mayor Mackey voting no. E. ATASCADERO COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT (Council will recess and convene as the Atascadero County Sanitation District Board of Directors) Councilman Wilkins moved, seconded by Councilman Molina, to recess as Council and convene as the Atascadero Sani- tation District Board of Directors. Passed unanimously. 1. Resolution No. 11-84 approving sewer extension 1-84 extending public sewer service to certain lots in the Hermosillo Avenue Area. MOTION 1: Councilman Wilkins moved to approve resolution 11-84 , seconded by Councilman Molina and unanimously carried. MOTION 2: Councilman Wilkins moved, seconded by Councilman Molina to adjourn as Board of Directors and reconvene as the City Council. Passed unanimously. F. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION 1. City Council Councilman Nelson asked what the status was of the golf course. City Manager Warden was expecting information on February 15 and would get back to the Council. 2. City Attorney Mr. Grimes briefly discussed the case of Jerry Larrison, et al. v City of Atascadero. The case is now concluded in the Superior Court and will terminate unless petitioners decide to appeal the decision of the Superior Court to the Appellate Court. 3. City Clerk Barbara Norris announced that today was the official open- ing day for filing for City Council and that three people had filed thus far. Barbara Norris introduced the new Deputy City Clerk, Georgia Ramirez. 4. City Treasurer None -4- • • 5. City Manager None There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9: 31 p.m. RECORDED BY: Barbara Norris BY: eo gia amirez, -Deputy ity Clerk �E~•Eli A G2 , It -Y-* "I FEB 1684 . CITY MGR' MEMO RAND UM TO: Murray Warden' FROM: Don Leib SUBJECT Bid No. 84-01: Flailer DATE: February 21, 1984 Bids were received February 17, 1984 for the purchase of a flail mower. The only bid received was from Smith Equipment Company, which bid as follows: Flailer $7,344.00 Sales Tax 440.64 • TOTAL $7,784.64 I have discussed this with Larry McPherson and it is recommended that we proceed with this purchase. DON LEIB DL:vh o�M N1�`it�t 0o Q t il r /" �'W y' /gtnlr4lZ p /4 ftv 2. C Av4 IC 9a 1Y E7 p nr G's*S 7- eorf /m-Pryl MFE A N.7 AG::NDA M E M O R A N D U M_ TO: CITY MANAGER February 22, 1984 FROM: PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: Acceptance of Lot Line Adjustment 1-83 LOCATION: 8325 Sierra Vista (Lots 56 and 57 , Block 31) APPLICANT: Gaylen Little and Don Rauch (Twin Cities Engineering) On October 24, 1983, the City Council approved Lot Line Adjustment 1-83, subject to certain conditions and in concurrence with the recommendation of the Planning Commission. This approval expires on October 24, 1985 The zoning is RS and the General Plan designation is Suburban Single • Family Residential. Staff review has determined that all conditions of approval have been met. On February 21, 1984 , the Planning Commis- sion reviewed the matter on its Consent Calendar and recommends accep- tance of the Final Map. LAWRENCE STEVENS MfJRiAy L. ARDEN Planning Director Ciift Man er ps • M E M O R A N D U M TO: PLANNING COMMISSION February ,21, 1984 FROM: PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT 1-83 LOCATION: 8325 Sierra Vista (Lots 56 and 57 , Block 31) APPLICANT: Gaylen Little and Don Rauch (Twin Cities Engineering) On October 24, 1983, the City Council approved Lot Line Adjustment 1-83, subject to certain conditions and in concurrence with the recommendation of the Planning .Commission. This approval expires on October 24, 1985. The zoning is RS andtheGeneral Plan designation is Suburban Single Family Residential. Staff review has determined that all conditions of approval have been met. LAWRENCE STEVENS � Planning Director ps } t � ry 0 npl A •v h�I ti NN .. I. _ 2�0'oSv N . .Oom o„ y , I� Qry o a `_ - p n0ry0onryyw W � � { I wwpw wywy ry W S' c a IV 2h yDOOoo DOo�� `ym C •y y ' '•, �Qyvyovoryry w� 'L * a v;� � i �Q 0y0�i000�ioi0 DC w ,: w Qy"t y'oyy .. - O�� crjmy - s h •i bXsai a,ca.aaas o y w s�•sas V 6 0 RC •, woe v Nom. ��.. °j^gp� � � '#� •Too �h p01g #i c3 IN, . 00, d-76'52 0 Al % 1q,2�0tiN `,O 114 � es i - .. ...-.....;u.,...........,..«.w�..:as..ra.i..o..;:a4iaus.#..�:C4�<a:..,,rc.-.i3a4._ ...,.,...�..s......,..... .,'l .. s� j . MEEEN3 AG-':NDA • M E M O R A N D U M TO: CITY MANAGER February 22, 1984 FROM: PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: LOT LINEADJUSTMENT3-83 LOCATION: 4940/4960 Alamo (Lots 12 and 13, Block T) APPLICANT: Donna Williams (Hilliard Surveys) REQUEST: Adjustment of property lines to remedy the encroachment of an existing residence onto an adjacent lot. On February 21, 1984, the Planning Commission- considered the above- referenced subject unanimously approving the Lot Line Adjustment sub- ject to Conditions 1-4 as listed in the attached Staff Report. There was no discussion as the matter was considered as part of the Consent • Calendar. No one appeared on the matter . LAWRENCE STEVENSRAY L ARDEN Planning Director C ty M ager ps aAa ei l CITY OF ATASCADERO Q� 9is s s Planning Department February 21, 1984 • i CA►DE � STAFF REPORT SUBJECT LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT 3-83 LOCATION: 4960/4940 Alamo Avenue (Lots 12 and 13, Block T) APPLICANT: Donna Williams (Hilliard, Surveys) REQUEST: Adjustment of property lines to remedy the encroachment of an existing residence onto an adjacent lot. BACKGROUND 1. Existing Zoning: RSF-Y 2. General Plan; Moderate Density Single Family Residential 3. Environmental Determination: The Planning Director has determined • the application to be a Class 5 (a) Categorical Exemption according to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act. 4. Site Conditions: The two lots contain level building areas ter- raced at different levels. Lot 13 (Parcel B) contains an existing house that crosses the property line onto Lot 12 (Parcel A) . A chain link fence defines the boundaries of the level area on each parcel. The chain link fence between the two parcels also indi- cates where the change in elevation between the lots occurs. Par- cel A (Lot 12) is elevated above Parcel B (Lot 13) . Both lots are residentially landscaped. The remainder of Lot A outside the lev- el fenced area slopes down to the street at a _60% or more slope. The applicant currently owns both lots. Both lots are below the- required minimum lot size. 5. Project Description: An addition was previously contructed on the existing house which crossed the property line onto the adjacent- lot. The applicant now desires to sell the adjacent lot. The re- quest is to allow the property line between the lots to be moved away from the existing house 13.8 feet to the chainlink fence. This is the point at which there is a grade change between the two lots. Approximately 2600 square feet ( .06 acres) of land (gross) would be transferred from Parcel A (Lot 12) to Parcel B (Lot 13) . • Lot Line Adjustment 03 (Williams) SUBDIVISION REVIEW BOARD On January 5, 1984, the Subdivision Review Board met to discuss this matter with the applicant' s surveyor, Ken Wilson, and representative, Frank Sanchez. Members of the Board in attendance were: Fred Buss, Associate Planner; Patsy West, Senior Engineering Technician; and Jim Wentzel, Planning Commissioner . Comments centered around the feasi- bility of constructing a residence of adequate size with parking and septic system (with expansion area) on the level portion (fenced area) of Lot 12 (Parcel A) . The Board requested the applicant to prepare a rough site plan to demonstrate feasibility. There was also some con- cern about the possibility of the leach field from the existing house encroaching onto the other lot. The Board wanted verification that this was not the case. This information was eventually brought in and demonstrated that Lot 12 was potentially buildable and that the leach lines did not cross the new lot line. FINDINGS 1. The application as submitted has been determined to be Categori- cally Exempt from the requirements of C.E.Q.A. 2. The application as submitted conforms with applicable subdivision regulations. RECOMMENDATION Based upon the above findings, the Planning Department recommends ap- proval of Lot Line Adjustment 3-83 subject to the following conditions 1. The lot line adjustment as generally shown on the map attachment provided herein shall be submitted in Final Map format to be ap- proved by the Planning Department prior to recordation by the County Recorder ' s Office. 2. The proposed adjusted lot lines shall be surveyed and monuments set at the new property corners prior to recordation of the Final Map. 3. The location of all improvements and easements shall be delineated on the Final Map. 4. Approval of this Lot Line Adjustment shall expire two years from the date of final approval unless a time extension has been granted pursuant to a written request prior to the expiration date. 2 Lot Line Adjustment*83 (Williams) ACTION The Planning Commission should, by motion, direct Staff as deemed appropriate. REPORT PREPARED B FR BUSS A sociate Planner REPORT APPROVED BY: LAWRENCE STEVENS -� Planning Director Ps 3 •a. -� ,I cj7 �••�X85' � ����',�:��r ,�5 � �.`+ �,sem`'��"r l`1 i----. s O�'„ .fir '�~.��C` � �►'�' ' c�,'��`.k�� 'F � i.,n^.""` R c}'``,,� �.--- .�� �,.;� - 6�� �� -,. A � a ',. r+'' G•�S ,�, Y'n .::��- '� 1^.� ( !+S ti��". .y.ate <a. R ♦ .4t � ��q�'',.�.�� �•• q>�ycr �'... :?�� �� Y� -,:�f 1`k�,s �`;�,,..-t°°^�tyG�.1•r=1Qn^', ��i�p_;, `t�3 i �4'`'., ,,�'.,�?. l,�,, � .4,,s', �`*'�_, � .qpF��Yg7�'l.'^'� ' `�-we,,,�„�„', q `��'�-'�� ai., �•��.�� ��''�`� �O .r°•�'� .f���'- ti.! k�i�'�13.>�,..--"-' 'Wit, P D:������„`�y��,�..,r'�z 6 18 � !7 \ 9\> ''.tj1 ��' �4., �✓ � �Q�s �' 9 1"�" i� � ! #"�'%[#,....---...,....._..yl < s, �j' �►�•.� 1•-� ,,•i•�s .n. ���rK ` 1:�, �/j�•�'- t�.5 `O ,�05_.• L � �.� � ��.�saS ..� 2p ,. is :1� 2 .r 5 y�c��k �G 'i� 6 b wf• 17 az 2r2 lb y�, sgs� qSiS � ?..,r.b 4;...,..,�-��r.•� ��5.>�- � � � �� ,,�'�b�,t� � WSJ � �6 ; �" t �+b6S u�• / stg• tp `1� 4g .�. 24H�20 0 's��51ty s 6 �_6G5 J44SSo , 2s � �5a > CtGAAP ;z Z` �q i 13K �10 s 9115 r 45� 4 '1 4 �"' ; ��` �t fi r c•. Zo , �..�1 i(�t �4 47254.9 2,5 j 14 x115 ���i•�6���, ��.� ¢��Z$'" �� ` ��7 j _,'� ��,'s'`":� � ' ` '� 'S ''"�'',-,' 6+�� tY'11 �!� 47so� � 75' 17941 . ` ]'� r >'=f �i� �b10� �3.,� s � � -�(:r�% ,� �. ,}1 :,• X13. 9• �... e+.:a:-�.'�� ems- �. r�r '9 �O /`• -^yti �. Y•S eif �� �2".f� `X>` � �� �� � S '�.� A/�''l� �rl�� 2 qO f Z_rev. 40 ` -'in ��^•`�'�r ,� 66 � � 3� .-.sem �3, g y�'' '= Si `,� �•� 5 � ' � ;i # y I r COs, s> t Q'-•,* �tir a� 4N � 7's': '� 1/ 1 �°� / r i i�• 1 �9� + �`-'. �r 1 t a''�,, p �` \t�/����«ai���.Y..•.•o- r•4�ti. /��5 Ss? S js �� �tr't �� 1�Q7� � •"."3.' J•t _71 y�18�+I N I) 1� :'�� ��` �� /P�' `. /� `�l 6Qo�'��J'`i 1 x�f� g�'''i 6,•"`�110`�'' s a�& ` 9�� "`•� {'li{ry60'.-s 55 �yh �� \' 5° 10 2g .5050 ,',CNO_.:? l P s tie : frAV "w # s? t29`'9s� ',�}__ /6 {�""^•-«..:.,!1V� 4 5 ��` �� �,s a�: '`w.s.va� .. ,ag809�� ,ry i�-�• Z• �(W� � 9� ro q v g90 yrs 24 / ��Q . / -.s •� Ip "r (N}`t 31, �."'�' .,,..,.n:.:... '� -y �s' .( -..,` � ➢a 9s 13 ao J. •_9� Q l A Rp}-d .�-�. �, --P : f vis s,�° 1 /✓ '> si 13S o9t .oll g 2s �7s y' .S �;1, Y� S _ _t tra4�s•� �� �6 g���, '�>'"o ,,.,..^.Q•o .,,12�\x/ toQpg ` ,+� �"`?r, ,..i , p US So/ 1 d 16S..r Y �� -� ,.C' o t,. ii\ ��66 i Y -ki.. /. �.'•�� So>S� T ,X5 q SUIS 14So 3 /Z c�1 1�_Z:`'rs �'• S*�.o E•; { ti J? f a 11 l r ' �r- 3g .ZO 4 3120 _ ~�„F4!fes• 1 S s� �. LL 1 �/�/C /+pJGR3TI �f� $ sr6j `/ / �/ / n _,.'` _._` SO t y, ' of hti M -�,; `` ` 1 (,�Jf LLl,�?ty►S 11144-119” Sb/f�c%r ys '275_ _• ¢``S i`'St�3 ''.�..r �a��°�,y'', ��y~''titi1�iR ,�� � �, �`�j! �J�W��`t<��fU j7�F't`'!� �7 •._ 1 �.rij� . / � �7- 532. - J s �Q�}fie , + tir,8 s,SLS,. , ar eo Z_ 77S l.Z'��7/ Q� 0'C IG / - \8� S���Q�4•s�.:; 4iSS?�,�I F3'r3'G 4 3Y � ��~ y' ``f iz� �rl3F ? 26 5514'1 } I < 3` 7. w Q kir •mai�y FR.+ nl y o Q � 8 Q 2 QQ �2W �NQ' oQ R � m fb I '. � O y •om N lY sl 09s b OS 09s M N M OO,OZ.9ZN FB66t_._� Hoy I ; t ClO,E/ F2 2w i� iCDI h q0 14 zt Y tl,00 oo/ \ l tl M„OO,OZ.9tN In K 7 S� m a m • t, IR MEETNIG AGENDA DATE • MEMORANDUM TO: CITY MANAGER February 22, 1984 FROM: PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: Acceptance of Tentative Parcel Map 12-83 ~LOCATION: 8045 Cristobal (Lot 16, Block ?) APPLICANT: G.W. Johnson (Stewart) On November- 14,, '1983, the City Council approved Tentative Parcel Map 12-83, subject to certain conditions and in concurrence with the recommendation of the Planning Commission. This approval expires on November 14, 1985. The zoning is RSF-Y and the General Plan designation is Moderate Den- sity Single Family Residential. Staff review has determined that all conditions of approval have been met. On February 21, 1984, the Plan- ning Commission reviewed the matter on its Consent Calendar and recom- mends acceptance of the Final Map. LAWRENCE STEVE MU Y ARDEN Planning Director e' ty M pager ps • 032 3�� g �¢ .t At o e ^ < M K a moi+ pK• iy o �W W ngi wv� I t� o W N v- w aiIA , • °m.vw,.F ~i A � o� W� tW Z �'.dr�w♦W°. _S.x p j- �wZ d' �a � e.�„ew� W hw� V^i„�.1�.M VwTo �xc V���` •¢♦ f .f'u,° a. n ] 1 r `4(O� Z m W � 2.F N tis n 1�. `+ >v 3'w y� \. �. � � �C s ��.ti• �. e i e�4 K W Z w tP� M cW �W o A tiC o Iihi: 44ti�� r,,I,e 2a� h.a 8 •� � wv'a �c�`No r `•.�� h W tef.�^w�� �= t aty� k� v' `�e S ° if I.ok Vj Q K x;43 n 40„11 it - � tii2� sjK4E rCeob`e' B a�i �� 4`pVl fC 4 !fii 11i 5) '� f'. : �a•. ,N•I bZ All t °-n Z b w r4 v@ 4� v noh M�@V4hF �Fw D(1' hW vpp::. ID P �0,.`3'ewo ¢ � R I R "'1 ti�Uti e z vZ�° • Lli a o 2..A S y. } (f `p. (Y ,S•1 a g w � .r tV �WW b�2 C9 3� j9Ao a �g1� ( ” L, `sO^ �4.:�1 N3p',�5� ���� - .;> _ •, � ���� ,�K` ���" spy -� w- `f 06 4 n `iJ. �".. a RM FtI ; -\.,xr RR f Rt' Ea♦. _ S �e t x n w al W y5 it tY Sf t ��•( 'tj D¢ 5tpt` • `...+� .,,'� .� 'RC1 ,fp PFoI4a; AA Lt ads 6' v E k0',�:si, ., �a+ s 1+2qf op�ry•.se , Mfr• �4A`foef'0a c a. f •.'.t> 4+•a.> ;. rA ...(:b ♦ .1l�-ii:�A.•t: -. � ?�...af,.• ..i.. • M E M O R A N D U M TO: CITY MANAGER February 22, 1984 FROM: PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: Acceptance of Tentative Parcel Map 13-83 LOCATION: 11050 San Marcos Road (Ptn. Lot 3 , Block 41) APPLICANT: Paul Martin (Twin Cities Engineering) On November 14, 1983, the City Council approved Tentative Parcel Map 13-83, subject to certain conditions and in concurrence with the recommendation of the Planning Commission. This approval expires on November 14, 1985. • The zoning is RS and the General Plan designation is Suburban Single Family Residential. Staff review has determined that all conditions of approvalhavebeen met. On February 21, 1984 , the Planning Com- mission reviewed the matter on its Consent Calendar and recommends acceptance of the Final Map. t � LAWRENCE STEVENS qMRRAY WARDEN Planning Director - anager ps S fPI w� 'r � � m ,.• T'rl oaa � $ mom oV� zsNg o x 0\L t _ 0090-s-m `r a-k �o v�t� d: nazi Ut o,aoZ . zt I?,a!>ao 2..2o-t •k xdz>x a Og�` i1',.�{ t: �1 $ ... u a n't Soc v _o WON, ZE A 2 yy dw.F1 g� o a & Ei'l . l W Ami. Z8, c"b } N T _.. ;. a ZVI CA Ham^' bng G 33 V N�gHa`;r H r. aao m N 1 ~eau •c3tR t3 -% - .p '!mna 11 rn R $�o ooh tlxan���aa� m �n�$ 11� � rnam]�pN<© a � ��aa�'+;�o$�aaex �Fn' �N n.S.Q,mONo Y a y "_ o coo ox-rna MEESY Yny W v�4 gON^ �oatt° m �TOCvbT^.Og L• O ��n Ytm a z a - " o it $o E o Z- N ° umia� Y:Zi�N 3 4: F3@irk �p.n�j.Yy ago{'imN�� R`r"nga� m`i1�n.;,�m¢o 3i °T,c 'p x Z y �i 3a1h�° c°r -It Baa 3 b a �-• a� � S rn (�, y �ob'ytWcio t,1 o c m rn i= R p b a Y Y a ?o am izaoo^S'' � en'?oow ' t^ � omabH tr Ja -i '�°•c m "Y�Y..2O '� �,.la �� H 'tet I x <i m �.�i VL Ho 3,$ �mp •wsj .w�.�i � ': � � Y�iC. n T �L= � � zl yY N yg�•�a O i g� Z \ 1 �Y �^na$ � •izL a' ��..I hl �ta"oa� �. � �j'd � N �m�2x�E�� day doe O g n a A� z yz baa ata ova a a $ acZn 't oo7'en 2�,o fj �x ayi Vs` of 11 1-1 � Rt �.. 6l y� T 4`e1 ►V y ]1 in a � A O O hl �a the " $ �- # NEC 14 J, VIA+, AGINDAk M E M O R A N D U M TO: CITY MANAGER February 22, 1984 FROM: PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: Road Name LOCATION: Parallel to and between San Fernando Road and Santa Ana Road APPLICANT: Dennis Bethel and Associates • On February 21, 1984 , the Planning Commission considered the above- referenced subject unanimously approving a -road name of Cebada Lane for the subject property. There was no discussion as the matter was considered as part of the Consent Calendar. No one appeared on the matter. LAWRENCE STEVENS KuROAY L RDEN Planning Director Ci Manager Ps • CITY OF ATASCADERO }9I8 Q 1979 Planning Department February 21, 1984 STAFF REPORT SUBJECT: ROAD NAME LOCATION: Parallel to and between San Fernando Road and Santa Ana Road APPLICANT: Dennis Bethel and Associates BACKGROUND On October 3, 1983, the Planning Commission approved Tentative Parcel Maps 3-83, 4-83, 5-83 and 6-83 which allowed Lots 9, 10, 1-1 and 12 of Block 25 to be split. An equivalent condition on each of these maps required that a road be constructed across the rear lot line of the parcels to serve the rear lots created. The road would access from the bend of Santa Ana Road across Lot 20 (Gordon Davis) and continue down to Lot 4 (Sanchez:) . Future connection to Graves Creek Road is unknown at this time. Current plans call for • a cul-de-sac on Lot 4. The map conditions required that the road be named as per standard road requirements. The applicant has submitted the following names in preferential order: 1. Cebada Lane (Barley Lane) 2. Calle Montura (Horse Stable Street) 3. Calle Coyote (Coyote Street) ANALYSIS The City of Atascadero has established the following policies re- garding the naming of roads : 1. All road names shall be of Spanish origin or shall be the names of non-living persons of historical import. 2. Road names shall not be duplicative of nor similar to other road names within the ;City of Atascadero or in the nearby un- incorporated areas of San Luis Obispo County. 0 0 Re: Road Name (Bethel & Associates) February 21, 1984 Page Two 3 . The establishment of a road name or the changing of an old road name to a new one shall require the approval of the Planning Commission and City Council. 4. Road name requests shall be initiated by a petition of the majority of property owners along the affected road or by the City of Atascadero. Montura has been used within the city limits and is therefore, unacceptable. Cebada, the applicant' s first choice, has not been used in the City or nearby County area and is acceptable to Staff. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Department recommends "Cebada Lane. " ACTION The Planning Commission should, by motion, direct Staff as deemed appropriate. REPORT PREPARED BY: F ED BUSS ssociate Planner REPORT APPROVED BY: LAWRENCE STEVENS Planning Director Ps n\ CQ N V n V \ 1\ p V7, Y N I Z2 OD Y� N 7 , / M O � '} l v N� N M I rt, �ly� A a� Y) � m / m \I• N F� o - N Wi nl m ' N N •r / �(\Q � ,� p `1 N �� � J V leV•+/ fes\ '1-�� a 2 LA u\� N N N Q��_ ' .y N • \\ � \ ��/ `� \ J „ Va� / ^�.�� m" 06 ICA T � , / N 1 71 � r` N I � it 00 Oc '` �J s ., DENNIS BETHEL & ASSOCIATES, INC. CIVIL ENGINEERS r 313 8 East Plaza Drive,Suite 9 • Santa Maria,California 93454 ♦ (865) 928.7666 January 28, 1984 MS-40010 City of Atascadero Planning Commission Post Office Box 747 Atascadero, CA 93423 Attn: Fred Bass SUBJECT: Tentative Parcel Map AT-5-83 Dear Mr. Busst Pursuant to our telephone conversation of January 27, 1984, th letter serves as a written request for the street naue for above ref or j6W Tentative Parcel. Map. The following stt(t t name choices are listed int det0-1ad%9 OTA*' preference 1,, Cebada Road 2.. Calla Montura 3. Calla Coyote Would you please contact me as soon as you have decided upon to be used for this project. Should you have andquestions or concerns with regard to this,.***' please feel frees to call us. Sincerely, M.J. "Shar" Se tz MS:lc MEEN::; AGENDA • M E M O R A N D U M TO: CITY MANAGER February 22, 1984 FROM: PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP AT 810930:1 (Time Extension) LOCATION: 2455 El Camino Real (Lots 11, 12, 13, Block 22) APPLICANT: Jerry Frederick (Stewart) REQUEST: To extend the time allowed to complete requirements for an approved tentative map. On February 21, 1984 , the Planning Commission considered the above- referenced subject unanimously approving the time extension for the map to December 14, 1984. There was no discussion as the matter was considered as para of the Consent Calendar. No one appeared on the matter . LAWRENCE STEVENS MU Y L WARDEN Planning Director Ci y Manager Ps CITY OF ATASCADERO 1979 • CAD Planning Department February 21, 1984 STAFF REPORT SUBJECT: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP AT 810930:1 LOCATION: 2455 E1 Camino Real (Lots 11,12,13, Block 22) APPLICANT: Jerry Frederick (Stewart) REQUEST: To extend the time allowed to complete requirements for an approved tentative map. BACKGROUND 1. Existing Zoning: RS 2. General Plan: Suburban Single Family Residential 3. Site Conditions: Thesiteslpes generally from east to west with a large borrow pit dominating the centralportion of proposed par cels B and C. The site currently experiences severe erosion with gullies cutting across proposed parcels B and C' and sediment even- tually making its way to El Camino Real. Vegetation on the site is sparse, consisting mostly of patches of native grasses on the lower portions of the site. 4. Project Description: On December 14, 1981, the City Council ap- proved Tentative Parcel Map AT 810930:1 for one year. The appli- cant subsequently applied for a one year time extension that was granted on February 15, 1983 The applicant is now requesting an addition one year time; extension for filing the final parcel map for a land division of 7. 5 acres into three parcels of 2.5 acres each. ANALYSIS On February 2, 1981. the Subdivision Review Board met with the appli- cant' s engineer, Dan Stewart, to review the request. The original approval and time extension were granted under the old zoning ordi- nance. Since the new ordinance is now in effect, time extensions must be reviewed for compliance withminimumlot size requirements before _ they can be approved. In this particular case, the five performance criteria breakdown is as follows: • Tentative Parcel AT 810930 :1 Frederick Re: Tent p Factor Average Slope (14. 8%) 773 Distance from center (10-12,000) .ib Septic (well-suited) Road (paved, 15.1 slope) .40 General neighborhood (1.93 acres) .37 Total Factor : .32 This factor total permits a minimum lot size of 2. 5 acres. Since the applicant is requesting 2. 5 acre parcels, the Board indicated that there was no reason not to grant the extension. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Department recommends approval of the time eXtension re- quest subject to the conditions set forth at the time the project was originally approved. Approval of this one year time ext ion shall expire on December 14, 1984. ACTION The Planning Commission should, by motion, direct Staff as deemed appropriate. REPORT PREPARED BY: . . A sociate Planner REPORT APPROVED BY P-lanning Director Ps 2 ' AUNAS � i i t A-I-2%z Z,Iz A-1 A-I-Z%z A-1-2k7 A-/ A-1A n A-1 q A-I-2. SITE Z <-t_N A-1 I c H A-r-z i R-q-6-2-p o US 7 p D AT8109,50: 1 2955 E-L CAMIND KDAL FT�.EZ7ET�ICKS r A �;r✓ L MI v o \ 0 0 m m O ' y 1O a 1 . o 0 CD - �__X 40- r) -r) a. Ailil rri "IF IF ty, L >> b j u Q O _ +qt 1 - b f✓Y 0 V � '� (• �r 0 30, to r (ni O n y J 40 O Jyye 4 Q u as .as 2 � *• 1 P 5.V-.,;F 1 -, n' o�tifw.IL Lor 4,G t JV n � I� � �_ `1 Nss•sS'pd"e- y>.sy•r�lnJJ t• {71L o'1 I 7ri ,, �� , � �,• 1 JQ 1 )N Irk—_ p -- ty i { (JIf4 44 oo 10 - PAA `� ti o IIIA Oil TO: CITY COUNCIL' FROM: CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: DOWNTOWN PARKING STUDY DATE: FEBRUARY 22, 1984 M E M O R A N D U M The attached parking study isforwarded for your comment at the request of the Planning Commission. Larry Stevens will give you an oral presentation. Your comments will then be returned to the Planning Commission who will develop an implementation plan and then the total package will be resubmitted to you for final approval. RRAY WARDEN . C ty Manager M E M O R A N D U M • TO: CITY COUNCIL February 21, 1984 FROM: PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: Parking Study of the Downtown Area of Atascadero On February 6, 1984 , the Planning Commission reviewed the attached re- port and directed Staff to: - forward the report to City Council for their comments - bring back an implementation program for review and approval Discussion of this matter among the Commission included the following issues: - status of Lewis Avenue bridge and the Bank of America project - effects of post office location on downtown - need for fairness in developing any new standards, for _downtown parking - discussion of various alternatives primarily including changing zoning g regulations and making efficient use of existing rights- of-way ights of-way and other public property -need for comments from Poliare� Fire ,and Pia-blc idoks.- in- .w.pare ar- in _ ta,ton_,p,z.ug�aaz�� need to develop a positive program to aid downtown area contin- uing the present approach The attached minutes for the meeting include comments from Gary Lar- son, `representing the Chamber of Commerce, Mike Lucas, and Clarence Graede. In addition, Mr. Larson submitted a written statement (dated January 12, 1984) which is attached for your information. LAWRENCE STEVENS Planning Director ps • fa scalero cliamber of commel 6550 EL CAMINO REAL - ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA 93422 12 January 1984 TELEPHONE: (805) 466-2044 TO : CITY COUNCIL PLANNING C01MISSTON FROM: ATASCADERO CHAMBER: OF C01,LERCE VIA: CITY MANAGER- PLANNING ANAGERPLANNING DIRECTOP. SUBJECT: PARKING IN THE CENTRAL BUSIdESS DISTP.ICT References : Parking Study of the Downtown Area of Atascadero Staff Report Parking Alternatives for Downtown Area dated Mar . 7 , 1983 . Chamber Statement to Council of Nov. 14 , 1983 The Board of Directors of the Atascade-ro Chamber of Commerce at their January 12 , 1984 meeting reviewed the above references and a Pos:ti;on Paper prepared by Chamber Staff and takes the position) Outlined beilow regarding parking in the Central Business District. The position, are taken after noting that the current zoning ordinance standards e eed the existing demand even after build-out (Figure I of the study) and the problem of small lots downtown which will not support busine of a sufficient scale and onsite parking too . (Mar. 7 Staff Repor t Alternative Approaches . The Chamber supports accommodating all potential deman , but, once again notes figure 1 of the study whir shows current zoning ordinance standards significantly exceed demmeF even after build-out . Alternatives to Control Demand. The Chamber supports amending carrent. parking standards , esta5 isning a planned Development Overlay district or the creation of a CBD parking district. In addition, allow -.=,e--s in the CBD which create lower parking demands . Alternatives to Accommodate Demand. The Chamber supports restaing within public rig-lit-o -ways to add additional parking spaces , t acquisition of land for parking areas to include employee parki-TVlots and the requirement for new businesses that rely on unimproved =,site parking to pave and strip . (Note the Chamber is less specific -�tha.n the study on the last item. ) It appears evident from the study that parking r.eq�,.irements can,,er re duced while stili accommodating all potential dem,, d. It is imm tint that a solution be found that will not have an a64erse 'mpact ou:he future development of the CED. i er t , s - � GARY : . Iii ISON „, r Exec . eager Minutes - Planning *emission - Regular Meetin* 2/6/84 MOTION: Commissioner Moore moved to authorize issuance of a Conditional Negative Declaration and approval of Parcel Map 19-83 subject to the Conditions as listed in the Staff Report. Commissioner Sherer seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Consideration of Staff Report on Parking Study for the downtown area. Mr. Stevens pointed out that the study involved a detailed anal- ysis and extensive studies in the downtown area. Greg Fuz, Plan- ning Intern, then proceeded to present the main points of the parking study. Commissioner Carroll inquired as to whether or not the Bank of America still intended to construct the bridge. There was brief discussion among the Commission concerning possible relocation of the post office. Gary Larsen, representing the Chamber of Commerce, noted his ap- preciation for the effort taken in preparing the report and stated that an overall look at the different alternatives should be considered. Mike Lucas, area businessman, challenged the Commissiion to do something about the parking problem and suggested that parking requirements for the downtown area be suspended. Commissioner Moore expressed concern that it was not fair to be able to treat one merchant in a particular manner than another with regard to the parking. Clarence Gaede, representing the Atascadero Ford, felt there is a definite parking problem and suggested that the City perhaps pur- chase a lot. There was further discusson concerning the unusual characteristics of the downtown area since the land was developed so many years ago. Suggestions were made of the possibility of alleys being paved and striped that would then provide more parking. Mr. Stevens noted that mutual support and effort plus a lot more cooperation needs to be made to solve the problem. Commissioner Sherer suggested that there should be an easing of parking standards in the downtown area. MOTION: Commissioner Moore forward the report to the City Coun- cil for comment and direct the Staff to bring back an im- plementation program for the downtown parking area. Com- 4 Minutes - Planning Cission - Regular Meeting /6/84 missioner LaPrade seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. 2. Consideration of Staff Report on Sphere of Influence. Mr . Stevens presented the Staff Report and reviewed the two con- cerns raised at the previous meeting. Chairman Summers noted her concurrence with the previously recom- mended boundary lines. MOTION: Commissioner LaPrade moved to continue the matter to the meeting of February 21, 1984 to bring back a revision to the boundary lines including property easterly of the Salinas River . Commissioner Moore seconded the motion and it carried with Chairman Summers dissenting. D. NEW BUSINESS 1. Consideration of a request to amend the Zoning Ordinance to revise setback requirements on flag lots. In presenting the Staff Report, the Planning Director noted that Staff recommends that an amendment be initiated. MOTION: Commissioner Moore moved to direct Staff to initiate a text amendment concerning the use of front yard set- backs on flag lots including but not limited to parking, fencing and trash enclosures. Commissioner LaPrade seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. 2. Consideration of Staff Report to annex and initiate prezoning for approximately 80 acres of land owned by the Atascadero Sanitation District. MOTION: Commissioner Moore moved to direct Staff to initiate a prezoning. Commisioner LaPrade seconded the motion and it carried unanimously. E. INDIVIDUAL ACTION AND/OR DETERMINATION 1. Planning Commission There was nothing to report at this time. 2. Planning Director 5 PARKING STUDY OF THE DOWNTOWN AREA OF ATASCADERO Prepared by: Planning Department December, 1983 Background: On March 7, 1983, Staff presented a Report to the Planning Commission which discussed the parking sitution in the downtown area and offered possible solutions for further study. This study takes a broader look at the parking situation in the Central Business District, and pro- vides several alternative options to deal with the parking problem. Introduction: The City of Atascadero Central Business District (CBD) , defined by this study to include the area between East Mall and Rosario and E1 Camino Real and Lewis, is characterized by the General Plan as "hemmed-in and lacking sufficient parking" . The primary purpose of this study is to determine the extent of the parking problem and to propose alternative approaches to address the problem. Consequently this report is organized into three sections: -The context of the parking problem is reviewed -The existing parking situation is analysed and projections of future parking demand are presented -The alternative approaches for addressing the problem are pre- sented and analysed. THE PARKING PROBLEM IN CONTEXT There is a wide-spread perception among segments of the community that the Central Business District is in a state of decline and that a major reason for that decline is insufficient parking. The General Plan reflects this perception in its specific policy proposals for the CBD. The intent of these proposals is to create an aesthetically pleasing, accessible shopping environment through increased off-street parking, improved circulation patterns, landscaping, and sign control. The inadequacy of existing off-street parking is particularly empha- sized in the Land Use Element, the Circulation Element and the Creek way Schemes. A somewhat contrasting perception of the parking situ- ation and overall viability of the CBD emerges in the Economic Study and Attitude Survey commissioned by the Atascadero Chamber of Commerce and prepared by EDCON in February, 1983. A survey of community attitudes done by EDCON as part of their econ- omic analysis of the Atascadero business sector reveals that 65% of Atascadero residents feel that the existing parking situation in the CBD is not detrimental to shopping in that area. Significantly, those responding that the existing parking situation is detrimental to their shopping believe that on-street parking is deficient. Moreover, through analysis of per capita expenditures and per capita sales, the EDCON study reveals that a substantial amount of money is spent by Atascadero residents outside of the community. Specifically, the apparel, general merchandise, and auto dealership sectors within the Community are perceived as inadequate because of limited quality, sel- ection and higher prices. The shortcomings of the Atascadero retail sector and CBD, as indicated by the EDCON study, are primarily due to non-parking related factors. The shortcomings of the CBD as perceived by the General Plan are, in 0 • large part, aesthetic and parking/circulation related. These somewhat contrasting perceptions of the relationship between the CBD' s decline and the existing parking situation call for greater clarification than is provided by either the General Plan or the EDCON study. The analysis of the existing and future downtown parking sit- uation that follows is intended to clarify these contrasting percep- tions. AN ANALYSIS OF DOWNTOWN PARKING - PRESENT AND FUTURE As a result of several months of data collection, a significant amount of information has been compiled that provides insight into the exist- ing supply of, and demand for, parking spaces in the downtown Atasca- dero area. The downtown area defined in this study extends from Atas- cadero Creek to Rosario Avenue from south to north, and El Camino Real to Lewis Avenue from west to east. This area roughly corresponds to the boundries of the CBD prescribed by the Atascadero General Plan. The type of information collected in this sudy can be broken down into the following categories: Land Use Data: Including existing acreages, lot coverage and building square footage for each broad category of use. This data was derived from the the 1981 Land Use Survey, Assessor ' s Parcel Maps, and visual surveys of the area. Projected Build-Out: Including a per block estimate of future building square footage based on two-story height and 54% lot coverage for all acreage in the study area with the exception of the Sunken Gardens and Administration Building. Traffic Flow Data: Including hourly and average daily traffic counts obtained from mechanical traffic counters placed throughout the study area. Vehicle Turnover Data: Including the percentage of parking spaces that change occupancy within a given time period. Turn- over percentages are calculated at two hour intervals and 15 minute intervals for selected areas. This data was obtained by observation in the field. Vehicle Accumulation Data: Including the number of vehicles parked per block at selected time periods. This data was also obtained by observation in the field. Existing Supply of Parking Spaces: Including a block-by-block count of all on and off-street parking spaces. Existing Demand for Parking Spaces: Including block-by-block average and peak demand based on data obtained by measuring vehicle accumulation. Peak demand refers to the highest observed level of accumulation. The per block data is expressed in terms of spaces demanded and per thousand square feet of existing build- ing floor space. 2 Projected Demand for Parking Spaces: Including projections of the number of spaces demanded at build-out based on the following: 1. Existing demand per thousand square feet of existing floor space; 2. City Zoning Ordinance parking standards for office and general merchandise uses; 3. 3. 3 spaces per thousand sqare feet of floor space - de- rived from the 1977 San Luis Obsipo Parking Study pre- pared by Wilbur, Smith and Associates. These projections are done block by block and in total. Projec- tions of totals are broken down into average and peak demand. Projected peak demand is determined by applying the existing ratio of peak to average demand to projected average demand. Thus, the average demand in each projection is 77% of the projected peak. ANALYSIS A survey of the supply of existing parking spaces shows that there are 1149 spaces within the study area -- 766 off-street and 383 on-street spaces. Vehicle accumulation data shows that the maximum number of cars parked within the study area on weekdays between 8 and 4 p.m. is 674. The average number of parked cars within the study area dur- ing these same time periods is 515. It should be noted, however, that is these observations were made on weekdays only and in the summer months therefore, the "peak" amount of parked cars observed in this study may actually be higher. On an average basis, though, these observations should be an accurate representation of the current demand for parking as reflected by vehicle accumulation. Analysis of this data leads to several interesting conclusions. Cur- rent parking supply exceeds current demand by 634 spaces on average. Current off-street parking supply exceeds current total peak demand by 92 spaces (If Benos parking is excluded, total off-street parking ex- ceeds total peak demand by 17 spaces) . A similar conclusion can be reached through a block by block analysis if both on and off-street supply is considered; however , if on street supply is not included in a block-by-block analysis, there are several blocks with deficiencies in existing parking. These blocks face Palma, and are located between Traffic Way and West Mall. One additional deficient block is located south of the Chamber of Commerce Office. It should be noted that data obtained by observation in the field indicate that vehicles do not remain parked for very long periods of time in these areas. Thus, demand at any given time tends to be more easily accommodated. It should also be keep in mind that, although these blocks attract more parkers than their off-street supply can accomodate, the combined on and off-street parking supply for these blocks far exceeds current demand. While the current parking situation does not reveal any critical im- balance between demand and supply, every demand projection at build- out exceeds the total existing supply of parking spaces. For the pur- pose of this study, build-out is defined as the maximum amount of building square footage allowed in the CBD within the time frame of 3 the General Plan. This time frame is assumed to extend to 1998. The actual construction within the CBD is assumed to be limited to two stories, as prescribed by the General Plan, and 54% average lot cover- age, the existing average lot coverage. Projected build-out demand based on an extrapolation of existing demand produces a 105 space average shortage overall. Amore precise measure of the shortage of parking spaces measures the difference be- tween the midpoint of projected peak and and average demand and ex- isting supply (1629-1254/2 + 1254) . This results on an average short- age of 293 spaces. Using this method of measuring the shortage creates a built-in allowance for higher than average demand by provid- ing a cushion of additional parking spaces. On a per block basis, 5 of 12 blocks have deficiencies if the total amount of spaces per block is counted. Three deficient blocks face Palma and the other two deficient blocks are to the immediate north and south of the Chamger of Commerce. Every block is deficient if only off-street spaces are counted. Before moving to a discussion of the various projections of future parking demands, the current parking situation near the Post Office should be examined. The area surrounding the Post Office, Entrada and Palma between Traf- fic Way and West Mall, is known for its congestion at certain hours of the day. At the time data for this study was collected, the maximum occupancy of all spaces in this area did not exceed 85%, while the average occupancy ranged between 54 and 72%. At these occupancy lev- els, off-street parking was fully utilized, but on-street parking remained available. In order to more precisely determine the avail- ability of on-street parking for that area, the turnover rate of parked vehicles was observed. Turnover was first measured at two hour intervals - this revealed that the highest turnover occurred between 11 and 1 p.m. (i.e. 75% of all parked vehicles at 11 a.m. were no longer parked in the same place at 1 p.m. ) . A more detailed study of the turnover between 11 and 1 p.m. measured at 15 minute intervals, showed an average on-street turnover of 50-60% within each 15 minute period. A similar turnover study was done for Traffic Way and El Camino Real. Onstreet turnover is gener- ally greater in the Post Office area than elsewhere as shown by Figures Therefore, although at certain peak hours and seasons, parking avail- ability in the vicinity of the Post Office is constrained, turnover studies show that people parking in this area remain parked for very short periods of time on the average. While it is not feasible to provide enough parking to accommodate every peak demand due to the limited amount of vacant land available, it possible to redesign on-street parking to provide more spaces. Two examples of how this can be done will be presented in a section to follow. It can be noted here, though, that discussions with the Postmaster can be initiated in order to discover ways to minimize peak traffic flows and disperse parking demand move evenly throughout the day. With this picture of the existing parking situation in mind, an examination of parking demand projected for the future can proceed. 4 r 0 Projected demand at build-out using zoning ordinance standards for offices (1/400 s. f. ) , and general merchandise stores (1/600 s. f. of storage space, assuming 20% of floor space devoted to storage and 1/300 s. f. of sales area) , results in overall average deficits of 1148 spaces for office uses and 1610 spaces for general merchandise uses. Of course, on a per block basis, all blocks are deficient. The final demand projection at build-out is derived by using the aver- age parking space requirements for selected retail uses in various cities determined by Wilbur Smith and Associates for the 1977 San Luis Obispo Parking Study. An average ratio equaling 3. 3 spaces per thou- sand square feet of retail space is used. Again, as in the previous projections, this leads to an average overall shortage of 1877 spaces at build-out. Each individual block is deficient. In assessing these projections, the projection based on an extrapola- tion of existing demand seems most reasonable. This projection esti- mates a 6.1% annual increase in parking demand between now and 1998. Total demand in 1998 is projected to be approximately twice current demand. Projected demand based on zoning ordinance standards for gen- eral merchandise stores predicts an 11.8% annual increase in parking demand. Total demand in 1998 is projected to be five times current demand. It must be recognized though that the zoning ordinance stand- ards are meant to apply City wide; therefore, the unique characteris- tics of the CBD, such as high density and small lots, are not taken into account. Finally, the projection based on the ratio of 3.3 spaces per thousand square feet of floor spaces predicts a 12. 5% an- nual increase in parking demand. This results in a 1998 demand that is six times current demand. Relying on any of these projections requires that certain assumptions hold true. Namely, past trends in population, income, employment, expenditure and construction should continue without major _. change. Some potential events that can alter these demand projections are as follows: 1. General Plan or Zoning changes within or outside the study area; 2. Development of competitive "retail magnets" ; 3. Addition or elimination of major traffic generating sources within the study area; 4. Significant changes in economic activity; 5. Changes in the "cost" of parking (i.e. meters, enforcement, etc) 6. Changes in the desirability of shopping within the area; 7. Changes in public improvements. • In summary, an analysis of the data leads to the following conclu- sions: 5 • 0 -The existing supply of on and off-street parking spaces in the CBD exceeds current demand by 634 spaces on average. -The existing off-street supply exceeds current demand by 92 spaces if Beno' s is counted and 17 spaces if Beno' s is excluded. -On a block by block basis, six of twelve blocks are presently deficient in parking if only off-street parking are considered. -The most reasonable projection of parking demand at build-out is based on existing levels of demand. This projection forecasts an overall average shortage of 105 spaces. When allowance is made for higher than average demanded, the projected shortage is 293 spaces. On a block by block level, five blocks are left deficient. -The projections of demand based on zoning ordinance standards and the San Luis Obispo Parking study, while based on sound data, are not reflective of the particular circumstances characteristic of the Atascadero CBD, namely relatively high density, small lot sizes, and high rates of parking turnover. Thus in contrast to the General Plan perception that a parking problem currently exists, this data generally shows the opposite. In this respect, the preceding conclusions are consistent with perceptions, of the Atascadero general public as measured by the EDCON study. This report goes beyond the EDCON study in that a projection of future demand is made which leads to the conclusion that there will be a • shortage of parking spaces in the future. This 293 space future park- ing shortage leads to the consideration of alternative approaches aimed at preventing this shortage from occurring. Number or Frequency of Sites Having a Particular Demand l - 1 - Transp,Accommodate peak demands on-site rather Transp:Keep parking"tight" than on the streets to encourage more transit use and ride- sharing l Eco. Increase accessibility and Deo.: economic utility of land and convenience to users Eco. Reduce cost o(con- Deo,: strutting parking l spaces to developers, and ultimately,con- sumers t Comm. Prevent spillover onto PI.: adjacent sites and Env.dr Reduce amount of land .neighborhoods Comm. devoted to parking _ P1 areas to lessen envi- ronmental and compat- ibility problems Urb. Avoid circulation prob- Des.: lems within parking Urb. Enhance pedestrian en- I areas Des.: vironment,reduce bulk of buildings,and im- prove site layouts LOWER HIGHER i (Ratio of Number of Parking Spaces per 1000 Square Feet) t MNIMUM STANDARD Figure 1.Policv objectives affecting the setting of all parking requirements Source:Alex Hekimian and Robert M.Winick,"Status Rtport:Montgom- cry Co.,Maryland." 6 0 r ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES . The chart reproduced above illustrates the choices faced by local decision-makers in addressing parking problems. On one hand, city policy might be to take action to accomodate all potential demand. This has the beneficial effects listed on the right side of the chart. On the other hand, city policy might be to control the growth of park- ing for reasons listed on the left side of the chart. In looking to the General Plan for policy guidance, it is possible to make conflicting interpretations as to which policy direction to em- phasize. The need for "ample" off-street parking is mentioned several times in connection with CBD policy proposals. The General Plan also states that the CBD should be "planned for human activity rather than car storage" . A policy decision is required before specific alterna- tive approaches can be chosen. Once this policy decision has been made, the following alternatives can be considered. These alterna- tives can act to accommodate or to control parking demand. A combina- tion of alternatives can achieve a desired mix of accommodation and control. Alternatives to Control Demand: City Ordinances: -Amend the zoning ordinance to provide for fees in lieu. New uses which cannot provide parking required by the zoning ordinance will be allowed to pay a fee per space for the amount of deficient spaces on-site. The fee can be deter- mined by estimating the average cost of providing parking spaces in the CBD. This cost can be estimated as follows: (monthly -rental rate/s. ft.) expected rate of return (cost/sq.ft. of making improvements) X 400 With monthly rental rates ranging from . 70 to 1.00 per square foot; with tr:e expected rate of return ranging be- tween 15 and 25%; and ;,ith the cost of making improvements approximating 1.00 per square foot; an appropriate fee in lieu would be between $1500 and $3000 per space. The revenue from the fees can be used to establish a fund for future improvements, to sub-idize public transit, or to provide loans to local businesses for parking improvements. A variati n of this approach is to issue certificates of waiver for parking spaces "bought out" with fees in lieu. These certificates, entitling the holder to a waiver of a certain number of parking spaces, would be transferrable if the original purchaser moves from his downtown location. In this way, businesses only pay once for the parking defic- iencies they create, and they can recoup their fees if they leave the downtown area. Transfers of certificates could be recorded with the City' s business license data. 7 • 0 -Amend the parking standards in the zoning ordinance, es- tablish a Planned Development Overlay zone, or create a CBD Parking district. Parking requirements would equal the old number of required spaces multiplied by some factor less than one (reduction factor). As an example, calcula- tions show, that the number of parking spaces projected by extrapolating existing demand equals between 45 and 55% of the total number of spaces required at build-out using zon- ing ordinance standards for general merchandise stores and offices. Thus, parking requirements prescribed by the zon- ing ordinance can be multiplied by a factor of . 50 to com- pensate for this difference. This alternative can also be combined with the fee in lieu approach. As an example, a parking district can be established which prescribes a re- duction factor of 0. 70. In addition to this reduction, a maximum of five additional spaces could be waived in ex- change for fees in lieu. -Allow uses in the CBD which create lower parking demands. Provisions can be made to allow RMF in the blocks between West Mall and Traffic Way and Palma and Lewis. This could increase the likelihood of combining the small lots in the area. Pedestrian traffic could increase at the expense of vehicular traffic because of the close proximity of the dwellings to places of employment, schools and stores. -Establish a metering program and increase enforcement ac- tivity. This will tend to increase turnover and restrict demand. The initial cost will be high, -but over time the metering and enforcement program may pay for itself. Alernatives to Accomodate Demand: -Re-stripe within the public right-of-way to add additional parking spaces. At minimal cost, a significant number of parking spaces can be added. Some alternatives are illus- trated in the accompanying diagrams. Acquisition of land for parking areas. Acquisition in- cludes fee simple purchase and easments. The cost may prohibitive. Once land is obtained, the cost of improve- ments will approximate $1. 00/s. f. . There are several vacant lots in the CBD area that are potential subjects for acqui- sition and there are several areas where the potential to obtain easements is quite good. Acquisition may or may not be a sound strategy depending on the urgency of the parking shortage and the source of funding for the acquisition. Land or rights to land may be purchased now for future use and leased in the meantime. Require onsite parking for new uses to conform to existing standards. This will prevent any significant enlargement of existing businesses and may limit new business from en- tering the area. 8 -Require new businesses that rely on unimproved on-site parking to pave and stripe the number of spaces that con- stitute the number of spaces required by the previous use and the number of spaces required by the new use. -Establish a lot coverage requirement, either city-wide or part of a CBD overlay zone, which limits the maximum amount of lot space allowed to be built on. This can be a constant percentage or a variable percentage related to the height of the structure. As an example, it can be required that no more than 60% of the net area of the lot be built upon if the proposed structure is single story. If the structure is multi-story, the percentage can be reduced to 50%. The portion of the lot not built upon can be devoted to landscaping and parking. Conclusion: One purpose of this Staff Report has been to determine the extent of the CBD parkingg problem presently and as it may develop in the future. It has been shown that the existing situation may not be as critical as was once believed. It has also been shown that there will be a shortage of parking spaces at build-out based on the pro- jection of existing demand into the future. This Staff Report has also raised the question of what overall policy(s) will guide the decision about what to do about parking in the CBD. Finally, several alternatives were presented that act to control and/or accommodate parking demand. 9 r m i m Z o N y d o z _ d f r � I 0 TRAFFIC WAY m D _I l-- - -_- J -- - z I I ni I co ENTRADA AVENUE 0 --y r-- D mQQ OD WEST MALL D D < < m m z❑ m C: c. m m EAST MALL TSCADERO CRE K i e i C 'Tj fi m sv - x � � N �,,fry's. � u, r ale XI � w 9• 0 m 00 rn v d' y U O 110 N ;•;i:• .r•'{'`• :;s r'•r'},r{%} ;;:;:.;+ir:;ti::'{•,'•':; ;.,%;i'jf •,.{ {:r'':?!%yiv:+.%iji r:%e'Y::�:�":ti{ •C .h Ci w V 1-3 UN r:,k 1 co %lo s� t w w '%%r�;{ 'r:1}:��''%� ::::•:.:•f:rch'a:#%;:.'::.cid%}:.••'::.s:;�v:%�} � w O ,f, fr,• Ir;O::. :y_J..•,:;:v:'•:ti ;:y r•.:`,S}'•r :i:{.rti:?k% 4.1 CD m Co ;t,{r.:%:c:%;+:,:ti h�fr:•:?:$•}!�'::�r?::::•'.;::;i.:?;r}� n:��k;?}'•'{�: t>f.�<><t )� w tD tlj n H O rh (7 SL n t� bd x �-3 C n C �4 �u n w S✓ Al O W Ul r� (D O (D O (D !� W C1 va rt n rt (D F� UI rt ti �} F' H (D Y w �l C C !; SZ ! W Pl (D W• (D W• m la, tt x 'Z7 N Fi FJ ri (] LT1 O (D O fi U) � F-' (D ft W W F— W• AD A) t+ N :h. Sv F N :F � (D Ul W• F-' * m � uz * - to t-� � � co N � (D � n c %D co co F- co x1 x N C-" N vi co U-1 J rn F., O (D G7 o p °O c (t y d p n � (D f O O W N CO 1-3 LTI o f 1-3 z0\0 t1i G) o x * x: * x :t * * * * * * x I oo H W � 0) M- I 1 I by :F Q m J O N N J Oo x C' lfl I O 00 O O 00 H H O 1 O F-J W O Ol [A C of 00 A to H C7 G) G) Q (n * OD KD W * * x * * * * * * * * * * * * Ci * to 00 00 N Ul W FJ I'D --1 O A Ut to W C X :F W O O F" O -_l N H --1 W O 4�1 lA to N N O dl W O to N l0 to d 0 K � y H C G) * C * X H :F :E :t• �F :a :E :F �F �F :F �• �F �E k- �F :F :F :F :F :F X• �F :F ,;`�-, .; r, m m z Hx n rt ' Ah aL m c a F3 pi H C1 F— ro c XNN i Q ............. ............ y ak.. Z O � TRAFFIC WAY D m ME / —I ENTRADA AVENUE Q OD 44R. 4 ' 4 4 4 `"':`---- C ''s:::. r''' WEST MALL 4444 ;:: D �alx � m a EAST MALL H �: �'.'�'�'' ZSR;:-:�;;•�'.•'��'�":'.' S EMIENIM0\1 �k 1 • H Fl tel% 11 Fl- 1 CD • Pi z • 1 FJ- EMEMENIN a l ///////N/NNN A 11 11 1 r m 0 m z I i tzi r H P r r Ln y P• rt d �A � N F'• H o\o 61 O «`3 'z LQ c o (t r- --, I U) rt O rt b o (D F� C cn uI H j C � a (D o 0 Ln w vwi C cn : r OAIN C) M k w (D .. a) w N Ln Q 0 N 00 w z 0 LTJ N F-' z oTraffic Way D J N Q1 l0 Co t— w .A N lfl O Co m 41-1 CD N\ b Ln N Al (D W �A � N• O - Al Ul O Ln C A Entrada Avenue Q C) O N (D VI N (D N CO U1 N P Co H Co w (D Co O ((� Co Co W West Mall m OD 00 CD O o D ¢ (D C) CD H (D O N rn F� East Pull c N Ln N� o00 14157/82328 Now qmw r m m F-3 � 0 1-d IF ►-� d z \ z 0 O cn rh t-1 I H i o n rt �� M ~ w b ((DD(D11-0 1 O C G) p A W N CD Z 00 N o Traffic Way � m t� N � 5 rn ~ Cn Entrada Avenue C \ Q w (D N N \ �J \ (D (D N A Co West Mall cn G) ::S wx \ (D o G) � � C w East Mall \ 7. 6 / 5. 6 rn Now r m m o O ° o x z rt rh rt H pi Cn I�— to rt H H • K N \ Z .61 0 Aft ((D rpt 0 rt f-h ('616 to � rt n N ro n rij Lo N A) (D cn F- (D \ \ .a 0) Co rt W ,A rn w 00 N O ((DD O n (D •• t7j `A o z Traffic Way 0 D (D Ql 00 N N {- lfl ti Ln P) (D v P,5 F � U) C \ Entrada Avenue Q N y -< N (D \ (D t \ (D N (D 0o N a' 00 W West Mall � w � CO N �O O w w H J � C w C \ East Mall H w �" 106 / 82 • m m m z tV d d H C H O l O fi'/ ('D f �51 , i o I � z 0 TRAFFIC WAY m D P -- - -nFn - --- -- --, z CD I r iNTRAD> AVENUE 0 0 1 > r L 2Ji C7 ILQ OD WEST MALL t D c m m z z c c ni m H G C EAST MALL H T.A SCADERO CREEK FJ N ►-� l0 y 1-3 O O , 11 t (It " �I N i rt 0' rt r(D H (!1 f-1 '-0 (D (D O En (D H F- H H N (n C11'Z3 N w di Ul F-' Al ft 00 O CJ ri N N N N N (D U] F, am J J J J J N �2 l0 l0 l0 l0 l0 • w II II If If 11 O . . . N �A A Ul Ul W I . . s ': $ �P O0 F� J l0 M (D 5C o\o o\o o\P o\o o\o (t 0) W N En Fo III P 0) J (A rt 01 �1 l0 O Cx7 C m En d 0 F- F- H N N COT] O Ul 0, Ul CD \ \ \ \ \ H LT1 W W W W W Z ZI LTJ 01 Ol Ol Ol 01 J J J J J L77 L=J II II II II 11 O n H 1--d c O D N m 00 00 N 1 C) LTJ CJ oW o\o 0\0 o\o o\o > (� n to Fj o Fd (D G) H Z ri- C tri c Ln N W W W N LTJ U1 C J O F ' J a) �d Q W N 00 N Ul Y31 Ol dl Ol 61 � Ol Ol a) ON M II II II II. II y _� D. lr�- to Al O N J 110 J N ft co o\o o\o o\o 0\0 o\o Al Fz7 H G) C t�J H 9C F- F-j F-I �10 1-3 H O O TS Al 5 rt " I ((D N Ul rt � K ((D H N (D rt 1 1D En Z N W N W N IA IA b O l0 N 0\ F-' Ql r(j 0) Fl PW V7 Ul Ul Ul Ul • 0 (D :2r O O O O O (D Ul (D II II II II II U) fl � Ul a) Ut 01 Ul O • [xj 00 4�-. N N N `.1 F-' 41 0\0 0\0 0\0 O\o 0\0 I • • • tT7 rt a ro Fj wNUI o. C 0 F- Z 00 FJ %.0 %.0 m n --{ C) � � � U c O N , N N N td �g J J H tI] W �P JSP .P 1P .P 'Z, n m II 11 II II t7J tlj II > Z O W W W N n F3 "J --ry V F--' W Ul Ul iP O x 'y' 0\0 --1 0\0 0\0 0\0 i h a O 0\0 F n n tai n > n In H O C n F3J I'd G H (D :vl d Cn > U) ntij ---( � N t1i Cf)H FC VIO F- W N N F— P N W 00 O W W W W N II � II II II it' N y U.) .P w QIP 00 O 00 Ul F� 00 O 0\0 It 0\0 0\0 0\0 0\0 6y W N �J H G7 C t=J ;C y y O O rt rahI (KD ~ Ui fi61 I H Ah En ti (D H 10 N (D H n ct In Ul Ul Ul Ul Ln O N rt (D U) :3' U) N \ II II II II II K nP 00 -1 .A 01 �:s tij x o\o o\o o\o o\o 0\0 I . N ro U2 rt N -.IIli fP m tlo vl N O rr tZI o cn z > Z cn C O rn -i U-1 ro i 00 .A:' Ul Ul Ol H LTJ td —+ N t� N F- f ' Z n lJ N N N N N LTJ [rJ Ul Ul Ln Ul Ln z. O II II II II II x j-3 mj Ln Ln m m a O (� O .A �o 0 0 � t-h n o\o o\o o\o olo ow t11 y O C I M ro ro � o y t Z (D tri d to m --{ c7j cn C %D %.0 I'D II II it II —� II , to U-1 W c I-+ N w crl �o y 0\0 m 0\0 0\0 o\o O n� OP rt Iv H G7 C x H F- m m Z �N "< l x � rpaN (D Z IFIJ G) 0 U) o\o U) 0\0 (n tIj A) O, W Ol n C) � cn ro m (D tIj t�o � p, m rt (n ct cn o o I dP N Sv (D ¢) (D ¢7 (� 0\0 0\0 o\p 0\0 Cr Cr t-I t7i to (ro �j 0 0 n x W N a1 l.n Ul h t.0 F- o - tz1 0\0 0\0 F1 a Z N o Traffic Way W J tSl W N N al ^� 00 —) ro (.n W t+ +H4") VJ In N Q) --) Co (D O W o\o o\o F— o\o o\o O ow, P. ow / /1 � U1 M Ul J C Co Entrada Avenue Q —rn flcn— > > -{ OO l0 --) C W N C o\o o\o W 1—' (D W N (D (D `D `l C77 N U'i W N l0 W t o\o o\o o\o oW �K Co West Mall N t-J w O A la N J .P Fil H Ol U1 W J N C) w �a Joao rn � C 0\0 0\0 0\0 0\0 0\0 0\0 X H W N N Ln East Mall 'P. 00 48 45o 0 0\0 0\0 7 3 6 9% ml A: *'. FO • ti O -?.. • • a • i .Y3:f1111}S:4 171 • "n Ln 0\0 CD pt E:i;{iiiti ti:ii•:a$?EEE'::E:Ui::ji<:^fi :a�?jjEis:<::�4r�::?:;a'{.:';.iiiiil'if>:�iC'riiiiiYr?i'f:v:::$xv �:?{???�:fi��:'S L3:�L�'E:::fi::•:;k: :{::f•'EEE::::?::f E;E«:::i.`�. -,},•:»tt,?N\if.f::.!.;a:::.:�:::2fi?�•�:a?3":•:E':EEE: :^a:'{E?s:;r!'f•;x.-;xa:?.wxn1••:^:r f3J: ?ayiii?fia:::a:::'L:iiaa:%:{::Yi}[::4'.??n?Y};}x:v '1 '::'\•... .iJv:Cnv:,l.,f .:h::•.v:::::n•v: v::f.N k\t`fi.+.nw`�2'•-K.`.'%:-r.-:••.;,:..:,h.::xa`i':?:';:�:�{}:.vf•::: .,.`�.]}f.:?::Sx1?,..E?E:�x`:'?:::::'.'::3a?};aY:;...:•::�+:h1: ,`.:?::£:i:ifi?::::}>.:it' ,t•2:.:: n::•x.`4;x:..,.... ...Sx.�ha.!:iR;tu•:::n:i,.::::...,:.L...::: •x411:,XN:�;:?.aE:a•. ...f ...a rrr n....::• :EE :v.\..,,Xf}+n^f:..-:n:•:n�'a::.v:• ...2:I:v nv L:..n.. iin,Y,.n:,v"\tif•.•X.:}.:vv..;..v.Y.�fv. ??.w:r1:;i: K:$;a{:r3:�i ,N.•}rs••:h)?{?:........\ +w: :at.?,:vk>:i :::::i'::E:x`•2 fid,v,Y t:t+:E:?.•�i\.^iv:t'fii:... .XE.vY :+;.kC. �..}�+ :?�v ff: :f;�• ::tL+jr. :?3r h'�1'F Y.Ci•. v..h f xX•xy v?:a�xXr'? �:a:�r iv„`?�f:,:•J:•:4`..:: •:x».'i•... + "i1'f�:;E'+?%::a: .:•=:-°Gr%:J�::.\.. \t.4s::x j::;:,....:n,,t'r..::::•nri iti"J,:�:::{•.v.{•}::: ..x...rh..at:n4;,.v,... .r-.1}}:•313T}}}:::::::.;fa?'rJ:;•:p}.'4, , x:•;?N+twrrL1...,•.»+;..w,},nai:??i•: a'-.?;:fiE as n},:}}}wax.}}•;.}::ra E' :r�.�v:;} .,+y.. X,:.n.,.,ta',i;•',.». .err.'% ;?f::� :.L.sS#} i:�v .:'r"::�:.:,:.'. :.::.:::n• ?r.L: �?'r+t?,,v.Lk•.•:.rh.' ..u. ..'r?'. C:+45Y• .a::•:.+:{. ;Ei�' L'fv: i;3;.. }.'Jh'k.:'•i+f�i:•'.:i}f:;r?L:f:..r. .f..E a.. ,,y?•� .aha! y Si r °:tvr .fnt �,C:ain, :•`ye ;:;a::;;i;:;;i4?f•::. ...t.w::::::::::!';^r ...�. .r;;+h....,i4. •a; ::.�.� .<.:r:N;:1:•?}RS::,.::....:>;+..:.1a1;};•n�:.:x•. .;max ...: ....: 't�ixv } ..X4•;{;.';:u•>}2i}};v.:;;vfiiif\�:?�:t::�:rv::ri.'] -..x�N..n if°`tt3:::•:}:3n,..t.n..,.x\,,......,............... nY: ,.x4:n.n::. n...:;ii1:;::`:=;k::E.'';a::aai:?::?}:Yww1;;•}}}!} .ri;•1 .....:, n::::.:.{n.....v1:n::v:•w;::::{::f;:1 o1x;411;. ,.,:..:::nw;.. .. tCt•::v:•: n:•n•:::n:::'+::v'::{::::v:n:v.•"...::}3•':-:.}' � t, .n}v:nv::::n..vfxCxln....}.`.; ...,,h}};:;L}::?i;?:fi(h:;; :nnv,:•::n:;:v n.:v'v'::::::.ff;:;..t \\}•:n:....n......?.h { :C l .......:...:.................•:;....• a::...... � .. .:..::...:1:.:.:-:. f.:::Ctii:?:w^L?:?{:yv4s:4;]n?;�� �t'•:�E::}i::1;. ::S:a•}}:?}:v1:::•;n•........:::.:.:n:v.......Y1::'i .. ...:..:.n::.,:'::}\,..:' :....:::... ...{:>;f:}:v.:.. +4i}.4•nv::..... rr�;•}if ::•S+:N.};.i.•S:Jiiii:f::i : V:}.4J:}?,v'::;�vv .....:......... +::::::C:-:�4:!!v'•I!:%i::?{::: vYJJi:::4?+. '- :nC....in:..:nv::n)]Yi::Y.ix:?i.: ;J,...t::!;:. ,:3:nn.:::]n:!}•:$x;' 1.. .,/,.�.'TE::rh,iv,"M+'1iiT.;-}tW"C:4">, hf.CJ;: N'.•k::;:<:;i..':'<?5?i}S;1a??:::::Y:hr a.»faa?}:;:11 ..'. ?:.'xf.;:,..? ...K ....�.:......n...............:.......,.:::.•:::::::v }�.........: .:..::::::..::...:::..:...n:.,::.:i1:v:..:.:.:v.::n:,.:.:::]::: .,:.;.,..•:n•2.}X;::Nn.r,:::k::•i:':'+,;'i?F,.<::n};.-' _ ....................::x;•:•;:CaXrviC{;C•:}'Y:•1:JJ:.�: ......Sn�n .. .;Ss.. :::::.x;r::::fJ1:C;:}+n;{{;;is x::::n•. ......;:,. ':.,...nvC..:nv?J:t•int4:•;}S:n:•...::•:n::+........ ::C...........:.:...... .:'..:.......a::ii.i1:.'v::::i :....:::JS.:v,...:i..... .nx}.....n...;is .vxvr:uL ;.... 't \ :mm�;•:!C4:1]X4j::•}.f..:n;;n:i4;4>ir?:::a::::a::C is .....:::::::::ii lErSti xzy, K 4•.<:4>t:Ehsr:x::hn.:f?:?a::f�r;:� �:.vn• ry:..... .........:::.f:::. :i.v..:.:{!.;....,�.... .vv:4;{•}:}}.::..::::....�:.::: .0 n., .. vvv?::::�:?:$:i?iti:'u,'.:i:ij>5::; '........:............nv;•;o:::::::C4'.....:, .............n•.......•ae........::.::::..::::n:fxt+a:nv.................::.: S. i4\......4 :...................... ...,....n......r..... .......................,:.v:. ...5wi;; x...,.;. :x•;:fJ:iy:+.Jv,v. ...................vvnn...n..n............ ::.:.v::.v::;r........,:::;•::::::.v:n...n:CC•J:.v:.. •.:..:.. .,.t::-. ...?::;4'a4:•:•}}Y.'�i':ii?i}:.y:,.xnn.. t':hL. .......:.......... n..v....... ...v,......:.............................. .. n,v::,;.,v y.. n:;::xa?1�x;L',x;1 :................x,..,...........::::::::•:::•..•.:: ...,........::.:::::::::::::::::::::.:�::::::... Pn•;::;•;...... \,,.{,.t•:?.l..:o,14,tt ....v....................................,.... ..................................:..............:::::S:ta:;a:;{:;:;:}3:a:::-].�:J:.::: ...v;.?;.nf'.::......nt>.. }.tv. L:n f•.v:n•::::n::::::.v:nv:::n.n:{.n..:,1 ................. ..nv. r:........................................... �:?:=.?.}111»JS:;4;::�:::::.:.�:::::.�::::::. ;r::;!{:i?Y]:- ......:.:..f.•::,:u:J... ...:::f}:;aJ1x;;:Jw:;411:{.111::::.::::::.11:;;;': ?v,.,...:a..4-v',4'^'?i;,....:. f:x. //n:vvv:::n:v::::•vn:::vnvn:::::::v::::;r: ..i:C�::CS:;o1}Y:.:w:]:.i:::::......:..:n.............•:.v,•::;......,-......y:.:' f''•4Y: + ,.S .. .:.., ..r:::: ...... ..::.>:::. !-:.::::.:.:::.:::.},..::::::Jra];}:1}::::::n.:::.:;;t:�:ao}:at?}o::J:;;;:;;:;a::a1:o: ..lr•.... .:....t4•rn•. ,..,,..n•:::::::.:nia;•r•. .....{....... .:.. _. • .?3.. o,.....tA......Nry?xf}:•}'t;t:Fi "+:'::::::::::::: .n........ ...................................:... o-?011;.............:....,:::.�::::::.;'>J111:1:01;:::5s:i:li t�.1:01:t:1:i;:i!:SSS:f1}. Xx;+::..... ,...r..:...:. :t•;;xyg:;E;a> .:......................,:::::.:....,.iJ:+.:is 'n:::nv:.v.... n, I JiL':•: v'L.v :.:.:...:..w::.ftt++i!ilt......•.c-.._.. :a:J.::'S:..:::.S.:SS.:.;:..w.:�::.:::::::2: ....ac............. .. ..:........ ::/::.::'::::.::.:::�.:::::.:1;{,....:.:.:::..::..,:::::1;.;..;::..1,;.,x'..:;:: ti... ,,..:•::.... ,,gaxia;::�:.cv:;::. . R3..v+.�:::::n:::::tv.v:nv,•rx•:.:n•:n:.::::1::.. ,............................... ... .. .i,f? .. ...... .. .................. .::.:::: :.{f::_::ra;:Si:;:i�::;t}:Si:;.`;6}:a:::;E;o -E•!.C.�:w•:n:::v::}::..t.:::::..:,.;:..txa/, :4::1::[??a?1?;4;c:. m..xr;::.,nw:::::::4}}:!{::?i:nb;n.+f1}:i•:n•.;: ..:..::..:::::..:....:.:.1:1;.x:....:::.. ....... St. :n.. .....::::n�:":':::'11]]i:t.}:......:::nv:..,v: ! •;txia?::.JR•Yr•;::Cx ......... .r ..a n..:•»;+4'f:,,t..v;::: jt:;fJ:f?}.!!a?.1;.}. nv....-.•.:.:+.v.r:.:k{3....n......... :>SS;Si1:i:C.J}}:a:Oi::............................ ,ni1]}'.1:{Nnr. ..:{.;.•.}}1:4..; ,...t.n::v, ...,.. .......::. ::..:..�::::::::.:...n::::::::::::::.;...:.:: -�.:. :.:::..:.::. :....v..y •Cf.,.::.:.+.4:,:i»:::Sf},t,•n::::ly:n..+x:\*f .......::p::nJY, i :;.••nv'J.;•v:�'.v:rr::::w:::::::.:v::;x•n:•. :..... :::..:.::.:::}SS:::v?:.:::.gin.....•.. +n,.:..v.;.. :.-::?:... {.}}:n'4Jy.4'•+:v.x:,.?:•xCVJ:v:{{xw.:v:•v.:::•.;:. :: ...::.:.... .. ... .;::,.;:..,' - ,:•:.v}?:.•••. nti..- •'+.++f}SS:.:tC:i.1]SYJi1:f i -.. �: •. to 4 h} Q ..... {.: •4 t"Y\�2 `j YT A tv L 4\ tt X v, f th{ } ,4 C '_?yt§f�y4�o-r,.;t'�4 �\ `+L�•*�',a K4 at`q`� }'l 'f ,. 1„\•t]c 4 ' w •,} iE`4,'PKX3`y`'t"t,:J' 4:EK x,�? \XK �::: a}`f'v?}'` �`,�'"� `a`'a f 'rCMn r�`.•K'ak:^a`''.., `KCa ffi``.�?�k,?-3.14 4, .. ',4`�E3 'E ..:4:;;.axz2•,}.;,,:.:.•:•: ::A.".:ka•, <. ,k+•{::X,t:•,: :;rf..•,i.;x,K• .;'3:;: ;a n:. •Q*.n. ,.Y};:?x.?x.v:,..4h. .x:;'.,•.. .n .'J:::;?:ti;lh;.C.: ..}•»i 4�::3:%:1:1 !:h:4. ••:\4......:..a...n...,{K�,t+ ,•K4x•3r'M .;..+..::.. r:�4.k, t;•}xaa•::A; :.0}:}:;;..0...:�a�:.;.:.. t,..:x::3::;f}:; L.?t a... f:•}r?i.}:N:n�.X?:;'.:a:'.•^;kr:f'R?:!y::::a;:.:; •:;,::::::::.�:::::::::::::::::.�:::t:;:.1:.1:1':.:;.>;;•:.. n:?2•$°.rt.•:,. .*a...:.}.k, x......4, ..,4.•..n..\.,:0�..';i.... „ar.•,f.,,.•.,•;>,:>•x:•:.... v+xt0];>:f;;x:;:.::r:<:a;x{f;1r-....Sa,,;?.1:::::. ..:E.x:.{:.:::>nLJ x•n:a•...a.. ...,....`:LS f•r...}. ..... ...:.;. ............::::::::.:;.::........::..:...........:. .. .............Lc:..:n:::..✓.,t,•:.�.:..,{r:•a t 4•bc;�:n.}: :.4ab::.nx.�:N:•?..X:}+'t3}:41;:tb:L':"•a::•`.?:: :::::.:::.::::::. ?:.•r •{L;?•?];:avx:•.,,:fi:.::�:.}Ror;nx ..,}f•`+�.',f3. ... ..Yx:.'i::?:i a� ..r...:.3...:.,..,.. ,::.',42` •:,f:;.:1..::Ox ,?;`?.L:: �`:'f:;}.,.,a.:a•`.•aA�k\Y$,<4:0x?.t3'>:Ek% C's r;"::}+i,:: t`.r,`:L:3...,c::'S;'a.ar.:n:'o::?::{::}a:7••1:'!<•`fN:4}°<�:... :^:k\f4t,}v�•,b`,: /.:ci.: \ 1'f•{<:}a3.n:f>Jr.>..:,: .n;ti?.i.w•i:•y1::...n.+x•::3..:!}:a3>tx,a•:,f>.'+xfi;:•1., ..4\.fi:. ..r3 tu?x:}xt:•:x:.y.; _ ?a'.,:: n•{••::;:,;,.};.. .n.A•:: i:.�:.\ k.:: X•X?t?,...::::::n,•,n,k:41a:::: :x?o:a11:a:4::;;.J:.J:J1:.1::;o:c::.1::0YJ:;.:O}:.1:.1:.111:: :.L.,,,.. t,•. ...;:: ,..».%}-,•n•.. ,............. ...................._. o,a,.;.n.::;.•,,.,:x•:•:x4ka?i`:•i;a:•:::f:}•:,L...•;..........: .. ♦}. v:.:::::.., ' X ';'fn ...v.».:•>in;ta::?}?}l:$$;<a{Sf:}:j;:E�y 3: ... ............ n:.:.:•v.hxv::::r vw:W:,v,.:nvv,lt+vr y.'?'.J.':iv.. n.::i''i�: ..5.. \.. - y' x.\. ..'rte. ..�»t:G ?+tL::.}•tx•1.'•:.w:}:.x.}:::J::{::..?:.::i. :................................................... vvn.n ..... ..v.......nvv::n•r.1nv�`...?t4 .,{v.4. \,;...n].. n'vv1E4••:}•4ry:?a?�kt••:•b::�;Etih:}+{}:}.:;fL;}:.n:. 'i *:::x:}\�.xt•?C uvN,nv.v{..,v::::,:�vy.}:.vTHJ..v.,vr. , ..v.v. ,4 }};r}. ,...... ,n•...., .nf k}v•. u .},.\Kvi..r .+\:•.ij••:L•:a•;n.;;?}:}f::f4:i '•x,.t:•• ttaa:fi t?n\... n.4. ,!n.,,:n t f:f}1:f];:t41i1:?•S:�S:4i]:oJ::f1J;i:>:::..:..:.:..:. Av x vihL•Xv}•>.x:4:;3tih:•:n+.,v?'.4�ti'x'. '{:.vx4}}.. �v.nf�}t4,: .}:i. a'x', :aWry:\},i::;: jw;,J?};:j?:i::: L:.':?.}a:*c`.',•''3-k;:; :?.9».ati a•8»�844�+..,},fv:v::.`fitic 4 •:;cuf[.,•'n"?i`?::•1�:?,:. .�. :: a4nasls O.LfY+;4� f0.3Li:;hfi:tt+'gL` Ca,K�� �ar•L�.�,v+4.. ,6`'+\tG`, iti 4 ti+tvt��� A•{.f N ,.., kr...r.... :ci 4X4;•;1. �,. . .._...<:. Sxhk • �Y a�.:fi?4 K Sa`{A,t,fi 'S�.a4 ?. nkX:t � ...';�•.�'.`Y% • t�u A�:3:��, �0.1 4n n?4w•rax.., .4tt.M;•EE ;.YhJ'. 4.... 44 ..x.,Lx1v�"r a4.,•q n`3r.. •.:.sXi: ...\... XJ,:J, ,,.,kL:i,;.i,.t„•,ff.Q::•: Y4,C::+. 3f&�E:;3$i`r.;: .»k+•}»rara•Lrx;•:N,., ..» :J}•3v,`: 4:.w:>:x:;:,...,.n..t•X t}.a..: X!.a;•. ?:ti.h ..»�kLt:, ,.M�,?:+6,t,..:::.:n Lrn•.vrtxkf,`.;:r>:i�}.:�xS�'+f:•.v:nE:.;E,4".'f:'!2: ..........n.........:..:.::...:::...:.:.n::..:.:..; , .....»:v:'•...... ,., vv v„v!;a?5 kttaaa-.`Xv+:: •.. �..:}S}.::: v} ,i k :,♦+•; v+4::.-fix,..?:G,. '-:X„K.»`?;t ;v3-'+ KE•L:C::::f;iiT 4- v?C•ff1{>:fuiv»,v+}::.:��•.tt n?f r:Y'?np <;}}iia,°vi.;\... 4i:},::";.'t!�.?{::t ?S::}i'0i.•`',<:r.'?::?a,Y..O:.},.i.•<;kn••5-Y'r?": .t. 44;c,}., r..,�' ..:§.f 'E1r:f:}o :CS;:J}::'t::t:.:.ii:.]}'.:]ii1J::'.t:41Ji}]:::.;v:1:a: •.• +?t ,yJ t vk.?}.:;,\...: '•:Xx.4i;„:..t : a ;Y.t., Sn-aw:{!.,, `.S',N`ua4..x°Y4fi,K,v.•:' ..2.<''Lt$.: SaxCtX;n�,•,t <•,•?;•• ,�-•;:•.••.a. ..Sn•n r;,h�,n.,.::::,.. �� � x 4X•3:?.:h' ,x-t.5. yr?Y�-�f,>>5fJ ''C ,t�,��•":E:.L�' c .. y 1. - : • ' r m c� m O Cz p W n t7J b . ..............., H (,� w o M tri O ro C> aA � n opo � � • x � H ro to K ro o 1 a u r C 0.0 C) < .. ..::rrc: ';.>i>i>:o. ..•,.•:::a::.....:..::::::•}}+....::..::.::.niti?v:..i:;::rTn..:;.'r:'i);;;>:S::i2::k:;::::::iv?:}.v.,`•. 44 A•:.+.: }.;44�rv::,..iv vvi:::.};. ,:v::::n:..vuy}i v?iCr:•,.•S' v.......:::. v......r:w:;.}-.;:: :::i::,:.....::: .:: -+ '.::}, ..:....... ..;•?++T}}i::•:•;;:i'i}TiT:nC::::::+:::...... F..,.v:;i:::}::T:::::::i+::;;;;i�i Ti:i::$::i:iT'{:�:i..:_:::::::;:iiT:};.ii�;;.} ' .::fe•T:: :.......... ... :.'T.?1!:;.'�:!,Y,.;:N)f}::i},IM,C:::H'l�?.ii!!1>•�RYM�}.. ..... :............................::::.:.:..::.::.. .::.... ..n?>i ir.;i:<T++:.iii::;•}:;•: iST'L.`r::�;::i::. m t �:......:....::....:.... ........�:::. -:. ';.}iTTT}}}::?:';;;;;::::::.,:i}i}:;•;}}:;;;"�:::icd:ii+triiv::{rn;;++:i.�yxi`::::<:::v::::nv:v:,;;.TTs}}•+u::vi �yws .j ..F D �f141flflf!llFtlilfli.. z o --D � TRAFFIC WAY D m _ ...�:.},t;•i;:is•'rt.,;:::.:`•J:i, n4'C.... .•i roti v.}•v c ENTRADA AVENUE C Q .00 I OD ci r D ::K::::' WEST MALL D D rxj a'z < H m m z z C c >` mt7i { �C '?#'. ... H jj:i. H H EAST MALL::;:::;: .::::............. \ •v:�vn: :v:Tnvnw .......::....... j r m m (N-J rn.,o z M � � tQ H O H (D G7 (o O (D H p Or F-3 rn a to CD (D O O z d (D 0 ON N t7i t-' w 00 ' Traffic Way o D w J N lJ1 \ ro t-I G7 110 sv (D Entrada Avenue C (D io (D t \ (D I-' (D -� N QQ N WOD J West Mall Ln ax \ H � � N C (D N H • C Co East Mall N 3.43/5.2 rn m m rT C m z o X F3 ct H O a cn m C-4 F- H C M H H (7 (D G7 t J tr1 K I C7 tr tri CO b A) r z w tri In En ty C7 U N N t1i (D � d fr tri (D C7 0 00 z W � tIj o >v z , FJ' Traffic Way --� 0 z (D P) U.) z Co ro ti N (D N Cn � C Entrada Avenue Q C C (D (D 00 o (D (D .� QQ Od W West Mall cn ,� G7 (D N G7 A� (DED C C2, (D �J 1InC I- East Mall 281 r m i m Z 0 a y 0 ti (V y0 `o d O H z H H U) M y r0- -- Fil � ,I r KD H H t-d H i � 7 t f ( c) o ro � Z n I � dtTj 1 1 rf.t •Sy:::rJ'r. ?f?:••: r m r— 1— Iv�'i,:�i i'::{}?:i�:ti:.:'1 n:4::;:.�•. `Y+Flt:�ls{Y:'ii:;�7ii:�iFi'�Tii4.%iLi?:ir.%i'Ki�iw ''�':i3:�'' :•�r•? �'r':{?::S••'•• Z O TRAFFIC WAY D m � D ENTRADA AVENUE {'•{r 'iF r { . :� :x :•fr•tFe,:• ?4:. :r�S%�: +{r,.Y:•v:::ry xr.. v,:b:vS'. VA•?. }.:4::rti t.:;f,;V•:?�:�•:;% :�}�!:fr•�:.:�..v;� .•.:bv;:'.}:•}{.,li: ..�:f •iv•:•Sf•'•`r.S•F :;r{•rS•, {J{ r%F•rrrF• S'F:Y.•t>.i% �;•.'•x•:{t;:!•4{•}3r: :;,�4.. ,1:� �rt:�i•��'>?r�+''vd:!::. =�'%��.•r�:'+:�`.. :,3 :bt;{, }.,; ,{f;•.:r-�°.�:'�4.•'r ,.�r•:. •r.r.. •.a�r?:••..Y. }t�}:: f� tiff:: ./.rt,,Fr!?,•,r. �'::y�::° � r ?if':'• .-- 4.T.•AF.r.r} •{•'{S{:..r..F.: rrYYFi ISFr:•} '••r.• '•:lF:'.J .f. •.'r .i i}rr %ti/:Sif:•}':r''r'''i''r.S r..Y.•::•: y.•: :.}:r/•'i !.' :•.{tv::?:Jl:`r .%''{•;:h (� '}•vv...... �,���rr'-3.•:..•.• .r :•::';•:-.•4!r?rr�.•:�4:•:r r,Jf r.•+ ./r::{.:::. :::Yav':v;''•' >�?a/.!. .,F.$.��.'i':S rr Y:•::l:rb..✓fY :.� :xY::: :•:$$�:t..;;M. $:;M'{: :•'v,: .'rf�?}•'?' .rr.Y.r:vr,•::.•v:r. 4,}:rr�r•: •.:•.Y::•:::. r � n::i ;r�•�.. r;d,' �Q ii:•yY::ti{:•::i�'v:b..;.:•,..•r. ':p�: �•i??:•.'•}}i:S S:rirrr}::•i��:� F^C r'.j.?rr#: ,F•. r/{��:•?.;{tivy. n,4:{':.F.{Y. :.a>:t• r v r• .4�J.::s: '` !{rF.�.}�. r»r�" ttti S}::%%: •::?t:: m 'v\r: iii::•••:•:Y::bir%i:+ •:�lv.Y: S•:,i,:. .r Jr�r7?i• v:r.• D •:�'•.•:•'• .v�:.•:.Y,.:rr¢:?{ .;vn•:'�?:?}{:.^•.;:;,_Y„.r, :rb. :..f:r.r:i•:'•';•�'�:����'.�•.'--•.•rF,. .rf.•. %t b v ..Y.J, ::}:•:• lr,.;f,.t�;:�:rj/!�:} t•F:r .;F.;nF.,r:/ .�:r�hr {}:+.,+r,{.: !e!!R'+"4:::;:.,Y ,t,,.rrf ;ryrr..rr}'; .r r }?�:�': r � rr:; ::i•}}rr}: //y'' W�)?}::•::•}..-.•::•i.Y'i .rf'j.,YJr.r :�f�!.•: Yr,.:. :•r:w:F — ..v... •bbv% :•:F.r:..r•r. :•b v.•F••' 3 ..f�:JF...rq•:fr•:�g� WEST MALL D D U] < < G1 m n m Z N. Z H c::, G7 C: �� m � x :•>.. ..... EAST MALL - >f:: .4F:. . ......:..:.. !7F—AFMC WAY 0 2 o ,� - I I r- I� wr N t�►- -� I ->, + ALC,` I < m z 1 Tn i \ i l tlj 1 I i i x . H H PALMA AVENUE i X I x 21�' i ).dM3Alxla I _ I X z I � � k I � Z � > I I x LEVU 1 S AVENUE H H fz �O f H C tI] N . X r Fr Ile_ 17, a : i I IN � A rn ro t� PATH To GfLEEK x r m m (D :d IE 3 �d ' (D HH W O N Z t' H O � tri t.I d rn m O 11- 0 -3 H b LA) c1 b d Co m N 00 Sv S?+ H m \ \ U) G) d N `P (D U1 LTJ J 00 \ •• N �P W > O c z z (D H d z tri (D c� d Ln O N N Q . tr1 Ln I-' (n o Traffic Way F- Co 00 In Z \ \ N I--' V b N ti CD (D Fl- C) C 1° Entrada Avenue \ Q CC N C Co N (D Ln N N (D I-' (D OJN' W !Q Co ------------ West Mall 47 N Co East Mall Ln W 247/206 r m m � E > ro v 1V > y ( o Cr m a � r� m H n U� m �l C7 I� O F' Q Cn CD y > m w Cf)m t o > N w H rr ti Cf) w O (n d d 0. C > Z ti (D Fl- w d (DD W M I w b tIj E-3 Co N z �P 0s m z . Traffic Way D ro � N N rn J ro N t-I N � P) in U �A C Entrada Avenue v (D N fD ILQ 001 W West Mall Cn H N FI C N x N H o East Mall H F- 2 71 oda �1 0\0 oP o) 0\0 op dP N 0 "d F-' N W 4�:. Ln 0) _I 00 lD O ;3' (D O O O O O O O O O O SL 11 � (D ft LQ 1 O � n C • ` �n ' (D ro '. o • o y z H •. , ti O O • $ �� M Fd z (o n n �> 7.� H CD rd II H +. t I z ~ ` b t1i cr) o o C d ro I ® C^ (Q W �FlH o H H H. 0\0 0\0 0\0 0\0 0\0 O\p oP I N A U-1 Ol O to ."V N xry�O O O O O O O O O O � F'i "{r a r,}r;7,' .r•+ •'•.{C''T{}:{.{.•yr. + • �J z rt C5 ~ :# .yam;} $y:' ,c'" ~f '`�: `4.` •'' Post Office Area `u 0 O (J ':,,'' `:':,`�1' 'f'r•~i�Cf•%Y f.,.>r{,•.:yv'},}r:�.v ':•..A,`.f} b O CZ � Traffic Way 1 � m " � d 0 ::: ::::., North El Camino Real Ln � ,��^�'' %::{�r{th,,fi;.. �� v �.¢:{#?rf£ �,��~ `Tr ate • �'•,•::•{:�•``;+T�r•;` •r:r'•Iy`.�,r:;�.�',`v�{dTk;.'i�.'f.:r.:`/}�+�C :+�$rrT,�{^r,{?f•,h� �i O• - �P Ln i b N .... L-1 T'Ork'r�..>% 1,r}<%.• :,••••:;{%is f ti{ }::•'%ri'�:'{''iC;ray'.{;::??•:f{:• 1-3 G) 1.� f{h{';�Sr''''':~�'1�,r,,,{+'V}•'}: {}'1,':�ti••1JY:}.}'¢::T{'1;T 1{{:;:;�;}�:`.�;{�;.•:�{�{ {:.• M f'1y':r:{T}% ''V�1'•'•'rh�•.. �1t. ''•'•% �'''` h'1V•:�•yi{.}:{.;.1,�y''';I�I' {.}}yr �.,••.�, }�,rfM1r' 'y1;'•{'}�,{: '•`��;}J'p'�.'{4t4:i}:{•.r:},4ti '{ •. J}': f,: 1},�{, tiY:••:ryrr{V%'%•% if}NT{'•:{;:;TSL''•:•'''{;{'�{. N ir{y�{s,.'f;�.,;r~};.}yt::k:;x'r'y {'��.,.{�+v~+.L x•, {'.T, _'`]SFr~ r tij 10 ro FIj � y� ui O > z C) C) tijtri En Ul . .......is ............. ......... b y y I� off ''`+T• H 1-3 Fd U, t7j n tij rn CIO o C) C O � 1QQ H O LFJ N °f{�;r,,•� r,;:`j�'r� ::;+�r:;xf5.,fi 'r;''`{r1•.3e:r{f/`., `p Ul rb H a 1 � N ........... O ":::::::::: x y x N' H � C I 3 edcon 1 Phase 1 Report Attitude Survey Submitted to: Atascadero Chamber of Commerce February 15, 1983 2239 townsgate road, suite 203 thousand oaks • california 91361 805/495-1089 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page TECHNICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF SURVEY. . . . . . . . . . . 2 DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 EMPLOYMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 PLACE OF BANKING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 RETAIL GOODS AND PERSONAL SERVICES . . . . . . . . . 4 Summary of Attitudes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Place of Purchase and Reasons . . . . . . . . . 8 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13 ISSUES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17 Growth and Industrial Expansion . . . . . . . .17 Proposed Extension of Highway 41. . . . . . . .17 Proposed Bridge to Connect Lewis and.San Ysabel Avenues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17 Parking in Downtown Atascadero. . . . . . . .20 • F Y LIST OF TABLES Table Pae 1 SUMMARY OF SURVEY SAMPLE DATA, JANUARY 1983. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2 SELECTED DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS, JANUARY 1983. . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3 SELECTED EMPLOYMENT CHARACTERISTICS, JANUARY 1983. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4 PLACE OF BANKING, JANUARY 1983. . . . . . . 7 5 ATTITUDES CONCERNING SHOPPING IN ATASCA- DERO, JANUARY 1983. . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 6 PERCENT OF THOSE SURVEYED NOT MAKING HOUSEHOLD PURCHASES, BY CATEGORY, JANU- ARY 1983. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10 7 SUMMARY OF HOUSEHOLD PURCHASES, BY CATEGORY, JANUARY 1983. . . . . . . . . . . . .12 8 REASONS FOR PURCHASE BY HOUSEHOLDS r IN AREAS OTHER THAN ATASCADERO, JANUARY 1983. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14 9 SUMMARY OF PRIMARY REASONS FOR PURCHASES BY HOUSEHOLDS IN AREAS OTHER THAN ATAS- CADERO, JANUARY 1983. . . . .15 10 OTHER AREAS WHERE PURCHASES BY HOUSEHOLD TAKE PLACE, JANUARY 1983. . . . . . . . . .16 11 ATTITUDES CONCERNING SELECTED LOCAL ISSUES, JANUARY 1983. . . . . . . . . . . .18 Phase I w ATTITUDE SURVEY EDCON has been retained by the Atascadero Chamber of Commerce to undertake a three-phased study program: Phase 1 - Attitude Survey Phase 2 - Convention/Tourism Analysis Phase 3 - Economic Analysis Each phase will be the subject of a separate memorandum report. Contained herein is Phase 1, Attitude Survey. The Attitude Survey undertaken by EDCON had these two primary goals: 1. To determine attitudes concerning Atascadero 's retail goods and personal service sector; and, 2. To determine opinions about four local issues: a. Industrial growth b. Proposed Highway 41 extension c. Proposed bridge connecting Lewis and San Ysabel Avenues d. Parking in Atascadero's Central City The persons interviewed were heads-of-households in the Atascadero sphere of influence. Heads-of-households was the primary data base, because, while the survey had two primary goals, emphasis was given to attitudes about Atascadero's retail goods and personal services sector in sample design. In addition to obtaining the afore-stated information, selected demogra- phic characteristics of the respondents were ascertained; a brief employ- ment analysis undertaken; and place of banking determined. In the following paragraphs of this memorandum report, these topics are discussed: 1. Technical characteristics of survey 2. Demographic characteristics 3. Employment 4. Place of banking 5. Retail goods and personal services 6. Issues `9 TECHNICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF SURVEY EDCON undertook 404 telephone interviews in the Atascadero area. The survey method used was that of random digit dialing. The survey sample was prepared by Survey Sampling, Inc. To obtain 404 completed surveys, statistically required were 1,400 telephone numbers. This level provided for disconnected telephones; those telephones not answered or busy; those telephones answered where respondents did not want to be interviewed; and those surveyed. The data base was further refined to those residences with a 466 prefix only. There are approximately 5,300 working residential tele- phones in this category. The potential sample, then, included 1,400 residen- tial` telephone numbers with a 466 prefix. Statistically, these were divided into ten replicates of 140 telephone numbers each. One replicate represents a statistical cross-section of the total residential numbers with the 466 prefix. Because of he are ' t sample design, there inherent biases. .Only households with working telephones and a 466 prefix could be interviewed. It is esti- mated that about 91% of households in that geographic area covered by the 466 prefix have working telephones . Conclusions of the study, then, can only be extended to this foundational group. Included, however, is most of Atascadero's sphere of influence. The questionnaire used for the survey is presented in Appendix "A". Heads- of-households were interviewed, with household data required for the retail goods and personal services section of the survey. For other questions, like "issues", personal opinions were expressed. Because of the head-of- household orientation, there was also a survey bias. Respondents could fall into one of six age categories: 18 - 25; 26 - 35; 36 - 45; 46 - 55; 56 - 65; and, over 65. Heads-of-households tend to be older; thus, the age range of those interviewed is skewed toward the older age ranges. This has an impact on demographic and employment data obtained in the survey, and the effect of this will_ be discussed subsequently. The head-of-house- hold orientation further refines the study conclusions to be generally applicable to those heads-of-households living in the geographic area covered by the 466 telephone prefix, and having a working telephone number. Prior to undertaking the formal survey, a test program of twenty interviews was pursued. The results were analyzed, and one change made in the original survey format. This was an alteration in the method of recording data under Question 2b. In Table 1, a summary of selected survey sample data is presented. Comple- ted were 404 surveys. To achieve this number, 877 telephone numbers were dialed, for a ratio of approximately two numbers dialed for every survey completed. This is an excellent ratio, as statistically required should have been 3.5 telephone numbers dialed for every survey completed. Of those people who answered the telephone (514) , 79%, or 404, agreed to be surveyed. Again, this is an excellent response. The survey time ranged from five to eight minutes per interview. -2- Table 1 Summary of Survey Sample Data January 1983 Type of Survey Conducted Telephone Sample Method Used Random Digit Dialing Sample Size Potential (residential telephones with a 466 prefix) 5,300 (approximate) Completed Telephone Calls 404 (7.6%) Distribution of Telephone Calls Attempted and Percent of Completed Number Total Telephone Calls Completed Households Agreeing to be Surveyed 4041/ 46.1% Households Refusing to be Surveyed 110 12.5 Subtotal 514 58.6°o Telephones Disconnected or No Such Number 233 26.6% Telephones Busy or Not Answered 130 14.8 Subtotal 363 41.4% I Total 877 100.0% 1/ - 79% of households answering their phone. Source: EDCON DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS Selected demographic characteristics for those persons interviewed are presented in Table 2. Again, it must be emphasized that the primary poten- tial audience for interviewing were heads-of-households. The ratio between males and females interviewed was 45%:55%. Based on the 1980 census, the total sexual distribution in Atascadero was male, 48%: female, 52%. The age ranges of those interviewed are, again, skewed toward the older category, with the major difference, when compared to population, being a lower per- centage of 18-to-25-year-olds responding, and a greater percentage of over- 65-year-olds. Those persons interviewed who are currently married totalled 76%, with 24% single. Compared with the same age ranges in the 1980 Census, and the percent married, these are slightly above those determined through the Census. The number of years the respondent has resided in Atas- cadero is, because of the head-of-household orientation , skewed toward a longer time period of residency. Finally, noted in Table 2 is household income. The distribution of household income is slightly below that repor- ted by the 1980 census , because of a higher percentage of retired people incorporated in the former. EMPLOYMENT Selected employment characteristics were ascertained through the survey. The intent of this section was not to develop a comparative employed/un- employed profile, but to generate general information on the distribution of employees per household, and where employed; and, the distribution of unemployed persons perhousehold, and reasons for unemployment. In all house- holds interviewed, at least one person was employed, and at least one was unemployed. For those employed, 68% had jobs in .the private business sector, while 32% worked for a government agency. Reasons for unemployment included 56% who were retired; 11% who did not want to work; 8% who were disabled; 6% who could not find work; and, 20% who were not working for a variety of other reasons. This data- is summarized in Table 3. PLACE OF BANKING This area was explored in the survey to determine if there was a greater correlation between place of residence, place of employment, or place of retail goods and personal services purchases, and banking. Results of the survey (please refer to Table 4) indicate that place of residence is the primary criterium, with 90% of the respondents banking in Atascadero. This conclusion is further supported by reasons for selection of the banking location , with 90% responding "convenience". RETAIL GOODS AND PERSONAL SERVICES This subject of the survey was that given primary importance in sample and survey design. First discussed is a summary of attitudes concerning purchase of retail goods and personal services (generally referred to as "shopping") in Atascadero. This is followed by a review of place of purchase for given categories by those people surveyed. Subsequent to place of pur- -4- Table 3 Selected Employment Characteristics January 1983 Number Percentl/ Number of Adults, Excluding Children, Who Are... Employed 0 0 0 1 134 29% 2 290 63 3 or more 36 8 Total 460 100% Unemployed 0 0 O 1 142 44% 2 160 50 3 or more 21 6 Total 323 1001% Industry Group in Which Employed Private Business 313 68% Government 147 32 Total 460 1001% Reasons for Unemployment Retired Private Business 122 38% "x Government 59 18 Subtotal 181 56% Do Not Want to Work 34 1.1 Cannot Find Work 19 6 Disabled Permanent 15 5 Temporary 9 3 Subtotal 24 8 Other 65 20 Total 323_ 100% -1/ - Totals may not equal 1001, due to independent rounding. 'Source: EDCON Table 2 Selected Demographic Characteristics January 1983 J _Amount Percent of Number. Total Sex of Persons Interviewed Male 181 45% Female 223 55 Total 404 100% Age Range of Persons Interviewed 18 - 25 years of age 23 6% 26 - 35 103 25 36 - 45 82 20 46 - 55 56 14 56 - 65 59 15 Over 65 81 20 Total 404 100% Marital Status of Persons Interviewed Single 95 24% Married 309 76 Total 404 100% Number of Years Respondent Has Lived in Atascadero One Year or Less 15 4% One to Three Years 68 17 Three to Five Years 62 15 A* Five to Ten Years 84 21 More than Ten Years 175 43 Total 404 100% Approximate Household Income in 1982, Excluding Children's Earnings Under $10,000 47 11% 10,000 - 19,999 104 26 - 20,000 - 29,999 100 25 30,000 - 39,999 59 15 40,000 - 49,999 23 6 50,000 and above 24 6 Refused to Answer 47 it Total 404 100% 1/ - Rounded to nearest whole percent. Source: EDCON chase, discussed are reasons for purchases in areas other than Atascadero. Summary of Attitudes One question asked survey respondents concerned their satisfaction with shopping opportunities in Atascadero. They could either answer "yes" or "no": 61% answered "yes", and,39% responded "no" . Then, for the "no" respondents, a question was posed concerning what could be done by Atas- cadero merchants to better serve "shopping"needs. A summary of the major conclusions is presented in Table 5. These can be classed into two primary conclusions, however: 1. Approximately 65% of those responding "no" to satistaction with "shopping" opportunities in Atascadero indicated a need for more discount stores. Correspondingly, 16% responded that lower prices should be provided. With more discount store space, theoretically, prices would be lower. These two points can then be combined into an 81% response for lower price. 2. Approximately 51% responded with a need for more department store space in Atascadero, and 39% for more variety. Again , with the combination of these two factors , 90% of the respon- dents see variety as a detractor, which could be partially offset by the addition of more department store space. The restaurant response to this question is insignificant, because the crux of the query was "shopping" opportunities. Restaurants were explored later in the survey. Place of Purchase and Reasons The categories for retail goods and personal services explored in this sur- vey were nine: 1. Building materials and garden supplies 2. Restaurants 3. Clothing and accessories 4. Automotive repairs and supplies . 5. Automobile 6. Home furnishings and appliances 7. General merchandise 8. Miscellaneous retail shops (example: gift shops) 9. Personal services Table 6 presents a summary of those households which did not make purchases in each of the nine categories during 1982. The upper range was automobiles , where 71% did not acquire an automobile in 1982; and home furnishings and appliances , with 49% not purchasing these items. For the lower levels of the range, every household expended funds for general merchandise and per -8 Table 4 - Place of Banking January 1983 Amount Location Number Percent Town Atascadero 362 90% San Luis Obispo 12 3 Paso Robles 10 2 Morro Bay 1 <1 Subtotal 385 95% Other Credit Union 2 4% No Bank 10 2 Refuse to Answer 7 2 Total 404 100% Reasons Convenience 363 90% Near Work 20 5 Refused to Answer 21 5 Total 404 100% . Note: means "less than". Source: EDCON • Table 5 i Attitudes Concerning Shopping in Atascadero January 1983 . Percent of Number Total Are you satisfied with shopping opportunities in Atascadero? Yes 248 61% No 156 39 Total 404 100% What could be done by Atascadero merchants to better serve your shopping needs (for those answering "no" to question above)? Provide better restaurants 11 7% Provide more variety 61 39 Lower prices 25 16 Centralize shopping areas 23 15 Open evenings 5 3 Add more discount stores 102 65 Add more department stores 80 51 Add more shoe stores 13 8 Add young teen stores 3 2 w Add men's stores 13 8 Add major garden store 3 2 Add health food store 1 41 Note: "< " means "less than". 1/ - Rounded to nearest whole percent. Source: EDCON Table 6 • . ercent of Those Surveyed Not Making Household Purchases , By Category January 1983 Amount Category Number Percent—V Building Materials and Garden Supplies 22 5% Restaraunts 15 4 Clothing and Accessories 2 tl Auto Repair and Supplies 19 5 Automobile 288 71 Home Furnishings and Appliances 197 49 General Merchandise 0 0 Miscellaneous Retail Shops (e.g. , gift shops) 2 41 Personal Services 0 0 Note: " < " means "less than". 1/ - Percent of total survey sample (N =-404 interviews) Source: EDCON sonal services. In addition, clothing and accessories, and miscellaneous retail shops were visited by more than 99% of those households responding. Persons interviewed were asked to indicate, by percent, where their purchase of items in. each of the nine categories took place in 1982. There were ten percentage ranges given for classification of response, from 1% - 10% through 91% - 100%. Further, the options for response were divided into: 1. Atascadero 2. South County 3. North County 4. Outside San Luis Obispo County For those categories where interviewed persons reported 91% - 100% of their purchases in Atascadero, it was assumed that the other three areas had little or no competitive appeal . Contrarily, where the response level was 90% or less for Atascadero purchases, reasons for expenditures in other areas were analyzed. Table 7 presents a summary of this information. Listed below are those categories falling within three general ranges - high, medium, and low. These are subjective gradients, with "high" indicating a substantial percentage of expenditure in Atascadero, and "low" represen- ting a low percentage of household expenditures there. 1. High range a. General merchandise (91%) b. Building materials and garden supplies (82%) c. Auto repair and supplies (76/) ; 2. Mid-range a. Miscellaneous retail shops (6301) b. Home furnishings and appliances; and, personal services (49°o each) 3. Low range a. Automobiles 320 o, b. Restaurants 28% c. Clothing and accessories (22%) The reason for purchases in other areas was further explored. Survey respon- dents were asked to indicate why they shopped in other areas , based on six factors: 1. Convenience 2. Broader selection 3. Lower price 4. Better quality -11- 4*1 ,a) Co O O O O O O O N N y CU d r N O R 44 u N S- 0 O d S 41 r C R be i CIO .0 N 01 N Ln to t- qT F�S M M 'cf M .-+ N of sf V• Z 4- O 2p N R 1- C Y 1l fl N %0 Lo M LA G1 O U!- 1 L d O rn E 41N R U O ci L L OTO o) 41 41 R 4- .0 00 CDN Qt t0 O O n N N N M 01 1- O M N N d R ZI N #i R M Q U M n U vC- C7 �--• r O R t R U Q!rJ i N O d O S 'C V- 4- p O r l OC qJ 4J R N CO N l0 N0) rr M M O E C 41 CO N N fes. M s7 O� to c to i u � tc O s- =3 L 0 h 4- O O L O dI •-+ .a �7 � O M n t0 tl E .••� N 2•Q Lo LO M = M O O N M ti Z O� N N y C 4) u N C O R N L 0- N R 0- Q) :3 i CAN �. O. O C1 N Cc NV) Q C L O R N R C d N NR N R L ) N u R u 0 rn c'c d1 y u ro � v L 6 dC A v N •r t N •> Z R N N CN L O v Gl Y R N G7 C1 Q/ N p . Qtr R Qt i T In r L O_n i y -0 o o � o O u.. ro r c o Rt E E L a: o u Y •r-N E C to L i , _ 7 V m 0-1U N i i d _ E I M M e} N M .^•� U] .� N - E Cn � N l0 10 N z Y cl ae U N O- L d dI ti � Ln O Of M N cT n Z Y C Q/ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 L N d L EI O O O O O O O O Z Y C� 32 Q) .bi N � � .•� M 1`� ti O1 V N M N d N ,9 O L L QJ L O ^••� cf C' V �O V O O N C Y aQco ao C o, a aLr >, aci N O M ti �o Co A V 6 Y p O'3 i V- 10 LI N i N N lLMO In O M E N O C 4 E t0 U'� N N N cT N N Vf C 2 A�+ W Y G A4 w co to N M M m to M U N M of Lo M M M of L S- c Q) 0tj O L tr L Qj a v N O 10 n m O Ln O E to OD M. O� V to M 10 C _ Z I ~ N o+ C r C C Y L C 2E Q) O O n W M O W v 'Ir Y i y v r c a c d a cu n c vV > ko L C C 4 m M to ct M N M N O Z Q) I .p N Q1 O c w v o a c Y N L O- Ql r• O. O 7 I V Q N Q! C L V u� a C al O Y U N � Q1 CJ T ✓ � C L V O L ^ C A N N C ^ L O U f Ql ai N QI Q) i d N 1p Q L� -C G i C a= _ � H •• e+l Vf i a.+ O O Cl v :J of Ql L V� an C • • 5. Atmosphere 6. Other a smorgasbord of miscellaneous responses) ( 9 ) P Table 8 presents each of the nine categories , and the responses, numeri- cally and percentage-wise, for each of the six reasons for shopping in areas other than Atascadero. This data is then summarized in Table 9, by category. The top primary responses for each reason are presented below: 1. Broader selection air and 0 a. Auto re supplies 0 p pp � s (53/) b. Miscellaneous retail shops (430) c. Clothing and accessories (42`,'0) d. Home furnishing and appliances (390) 2. Convenience a. Personal services (540/0') b. General merchandise (280) c. Miscellaneous retail shops (240) d. Auto repair and supplies (180) 3. Lower price a. Clothing and accessories (330) b. Building materials and garden supplies (320) c. General merchandise (27") d. Home furnishings and appliances (260) 4. Better quality a. Automobile (31%) b. Home furnishings and appliances (230) c. Restaurants (200) d. Clothing and accessories (170) For the "atmosphere" category, this was a primary factor for restaurants only, with 200 responding here. In the "other" category, the top response was for personal services. This includes reasons like "friends" and "referrals In Table 10, the place of other purchases is presented, by category. For the South County, the percentage of purchases ranges from 430 for building materials and garden supplies , to 560 for general merchandise, and miscel- laneous retails shops. The North County ranges from a low of 160 for mis- cellaneous retail shops to 40%, for building materials and garden supplies, and restaurants. Outside San Luis Obispo County ranges from 110 for personal services to 390 for automotive repair and supplies . Conclusions The key question evolving from these survey conclusions is : What can be done in Atascadero to keep more retail goods and personal services expen- ditures local? There is strength in the building materials and garden -13- Summary f� Table 9 Su ry o lip Reasons for Purchases by Households in Areas Other Than Atascadero January 1983 Category Percent Building Materials and Garden Supplies Lower Price 3211 Broader Selection 28 Convenience 18 Better Quality 16 Total 94% Restaurants Broader Selection 35% Better Quality 22 Atmosphere 20 Total 77% Clothing and Accessories Broader Selection 42% Lower Price 33 Better Quality 17 Total 92% Automotive Repair and Supplies Broader Selection 53% Convenience 18 Total 71% Automobile Broader-Selection 33% Better Quality 31 Lower Price 17 Total 81% Home Furnishings and Appliances Broader Selection 39% Lower Price 26 Better Quality 23 Total 88% General Merchandise Broader Selection 3511 Convenience 28 Lower Price 27 Total 90% Miscellaneous Retail Stores Broader Selection 43% Convenience 24 Better Quality 16 Lower Price 15 Total 98% Personal Services Convenience 54% Other 20 Broader Selection 17 Total 91% Source: EDCON 3� r oo 4-) +-) C) (D C) C) C) C) C) C) C) N O O e-1 r-4 e--i QJ O f- (A U ro S_ .X-- Cl) U O rt3 G2 CL O Ln N S- .- •C3 O (1) -04-) o\\� r-a -0C) C r, to M -4 m m I� m -4 O co •r O '-1 e-1 M N M M N N e"4 .0 U (A N O N N +-) r C) (A co O O O i-) O _J O Q O 2 U _ rt3 4- (0 t 4-3 CL F- S_ O C) O W Ln W n ^ l0 m O O M N O S_ Z O Ri i-)-C- -0 C1]C) N •� •O S- N r 4-) CO t O N (3) i-) _ •r S- O O M cY CT) cY M co ko to -:I- Q) tQ) Cm Q O O ch ct Lf) cY c3- Lt) Lf) Ln N N O O C U O Z M ((�^ 00 OtA Ln N U N � -0 i Q) r Q) S. r Q J N =3 0-0 M 3 (o =3 co L 1- t C O U O U N N O (o (1) O 04-) E o\° Cl- =<c •r m N CO d' CC) -{ C31 F- ko LC) M LO N 4- C S- O Q) t t 4-3 M 3 C C (V •r 4- N U Cl O to S_ 0- Q) Q) O os S_ CL -C N 0) S_ QJ N t Q) C) r (n tZ N Q) CL Q) U C1 •r N C CL r CL QJ (A O C1. O O Ln C1 - S- ¢ L/) (O S_ -p !� O C •v r N RS C Q) •� N N (d N (TJ r Q) L r 4-) N rt3 U r N •0 QJ (3) •r U RS L7� C CL' U S_ ¢ C1 C rtS •r (CS N C N S- O (v L3 +-) (0 Q) (U r Q) Q) N CD C > r- C C LTJ C S_ C i C i-) - M r r 1t3 O 'r m r O O Li- (- r C QJ •0 rt) .0 E E S_ Q) O U QJ T 4-.) -P O O W W U N L i-� to O +-) +- E C N S_ =. m O aJ .- Z3 =3 O (1) cll O U, m CL: U Q Q = C7 :K CL V) supplies sector, and the general merchandise categories. Population growth will create expanding markets for all goods and services, thus generating more space. Personal services , too, will likely increase with population. In addition, however, a retail sector development program should be pursued. A discount store, like Target; and a mid=range department store, like J.C. Penney, should be sought. Concurrently, a promotional program to encourage home-town shopping should be inaugurated, emphasizing benefits to the communi- ty of increased sales tax revenues. Additional restaurants are needed; and, with the development of other shopping complexes , and altered tenant mix in existing facilities , more clothing and accessory stores should be encouraged. These conclusions will be given a statistical base in Phase 3 of this study, Economic Analysis. ISSUES A second reason for this survey was to elicit responses concerning four key issues in Atascadero. These, again, were: 1. Growth and industrial expansion 2. Proposed extension of Highway 41 3. Proposed bridge connecting Lewis and San Ysabel Avenues 4. Parking in the Center City ,_4• Table 11 presents a summary of responses concerning these issues. These are personal opinions of heads-of-households. They do not, accordingly, represent a cross-section of all Atascadero residents 18 years of age and over, li.ving within the geographic area covered by the 466 telephone pre- fix. However, the conclusions are indicative of• the community at large. Growth and Industrial Expansion Of those interviewed, 401 believe that 4.dus.�l growth in Atascadero should be ,encouraged; 60 either believe that it should be discouraged, or neither be encouraged nor discouraged. Respondents are in favor of clean -industries, like electronics firms, locating there: "yes" - 83°o; ""no"" - 17%. They are less favorable to the expansion of the tourism industry: "yes" - 62%; '"no" - 38%. Proposed Extension of Highway 41 Approximately 57% of those interviewed knew about the proposed extension of Highway 41 through Atascadero. Only 40°o, however, felt that the exten- sion was needed. A like amount, 391, indicated that it was not needed. There was a substantial number, 210,1, indicating "no opinion Proposed Bridge to Connect Lewis and San Ysabel Avenues This issue was much less visible than the proposed extension of Highway 41. Only 30 of those interviewed knew about the proposed bridge. Of those who knew about it, 57°6 felt that it was needed and were in favor of it; -17- Table 11 At P udes Concerning Selected Local Issues January 1983 Amount Growth and Industrial Expansion Number Percent 1. What comment most accurately expresses your opinion about growth in Atascadero? It should be encouraged. 160 40% It should be neither encouraged nor dis- couraged. 148 37 It should be discouraged. 96 23 Total 404 100% 2. Would you be in favor of clean industries, like electronic firms, in Atascadero? Yes 335 83% No . 69 17 Total 404 100 3. Would you be in favor of tourism industry expansion in Atascadero? Yes 251 62% No 153 38 Total 404 100% Proposed Extension of Highway 41 1. Are you aware of the proposed extension of Highway 41 through Atascadero? Yes 229 5701 No 175 43 Total 404 100 2. Which comment most accurately expresses your opinion about this proposed extension? It is needed. 92 40% It is not needed. 90 39 No opinion 47 21 Total 229 10001 Table 11 (continued) Proposed Bridge to Connect Lewis Avenue and San Ysabel Avenue 1. Do you know about the proposed bridge which would connect Lewis Avenue and San Ysabel Avenue? Yes 123 30% No 281 70 Total 404 100% 2. Which comment most accurately expresses your opinion about this proposed bridge? The bridge is needed and I favor it. 70 57% The bridge is not needed, and I do not favor it. 19 15 The bridge is needed, but I am net in favor of it. 7 6 No opinion 27 22 Total 123 100; Parking in Downtown Atascadero 1. Is parking in downtown Atascadero a detriment to your shopping there? Yes 142 35% No- - 262 65 Total 404 100% 2. -What do you perceive the parking problems to be? Not enough parking/street parking inadequate 162 60 Shops too spread out 20 7 Post Office area congested 76 28 Inconvenient 10 5 Total 268 100% Source EDCON 21% felt that the bridge was not needed, or that it was needed, but they were not in favor of it; 22% had no opinion, comparable to the percentage for the Highway 41 extension. Parking in Downtown Atascadero When asked whether or not parking in downtown Atascadero was a detriment to their shopping there, the "no" response (65%) exceeded the "yes" re- sponse (35%) by a ratio of approximately two to one. The key perceived parking problems were: 1. Not enough parking, and street parking inadequate - 60%; and, 2. Congestion around the post office area - 28%. This concludes the Attitude Survey report. Phases 2 and 3 of the study program, Convention/Tourism Analysis ; and Economic Analysis, respectively, will be the subject of separate memorandum reports. ti -20- ATASCADERO QUESTIONNAIRE (draft #2) 1. Introduction (personal a. Good (morning) (afternoon) (evening). b. Is this a head of the household? (If not obvious) Yes (go to ld.) No (go to lc.) c. Could I speak to either the man or woman of the house? Yes (go to ld.) Qualified "Yes"; e.g., could I ask what you are calling for? (go to id.) No (Thank you, and hang up.) d. This is from EDCON. We are conducting a survey name for the Atascadero Chamber of Commerce, and I would like to ask you several questions. May I? Yes (go to If.) No (go to le.) e. Could I explain the purpose of this survey to you? Yes (go to lf.) No (Thank you, and hang up.) Not right now (Make an appointment for calling back - When may I call you back? ) f. The purpose of the survey is to determine attitudes: 1) about availability of goods and services in Atascadero; and, 2) local issues such as economic growth and road improvements. g. For those who answered "no" to ld., but allowed you to explain survey purpose: Would you answer these questions for me? Yes (go to 2a.) No (Thank you, and hang up.) 2. Shopping (household) a. I would like to ask you several questions about your shopping patterns this past year. Are you satisfied with the shopping opportunities in Atascadero? Yes (go to 2b., then 2d.) No (go to 2b., then 2c.) b. T am going to read you a list of items, and possible place of purchase for each. Please tell me the appropriate percent of your 1982 expenditure in each place, and reasons for purchases in places other than Atascadero. INTERVIEWER - GO TO EXHIBIT I c. What could be done by Atascadero merchants to better serve your shopping needs? (INTERVIEWER - Use one to three words to summarize each phrase.) d. In which town do you bank? Why? 3. General Information (household) a. What is your marital status? Single Married b. How many related individuals occupy your household? d -2- c. What are their ages ranges and sexes? Number in Sex Household Age Range Male Female 12-17 18-25 26-35 36-45 46-55 56-65 over 65 d. How long have you lived in Atascadero? One year or less 1-3 years 3-5 years 5-10 years More than 10 years e. INTERVIEWER: What is the sex and age range of the person you are inter- viewing? Sex: Male Female Age Range (from 3b.) i e 4. Issues (personal1 ) Now I want to ask your personal opinion on some local issues: a. Which comment most accurately expresses your opinion about growth in Atascadero? It should be encouraged.__ It should be neither encouraged nor discouraged._ It should be discouraged. b. Would you be in favor of clean industries, Tike electronic firms, in Atas- cadero? Yes No c. Would you be in favor of tourism industry expansion in Atascadero? Yes No d. Are you aware of the proposed extension of Highway 41 through Atascadero? Yes (go to 4e.) No (go to 4e.) e. Which comment most accurately expresses your opinion about this proposed extension? AM It is needed. It is not needed. No opinion f. Do you know about the proposed bridge which would connect Lewis Avenue and San Ysabel Avenue? Yes (go to 4g.) No (go to 4h.) g. Which comment most accurately expresses your opinion about this proposed bridge? The bridge is needed, and I favor it dy; The bridge is not needed, and I do not favor it The bridge is needed, but I am not in favor of it No opinion .r. 14 -3- h. Is parking in downtown Atascadero a detriment to Your shopping there?e? Yes • (go to 4i.) No (go to 5a.) RP i. What do you perceive the parking problems to be? (INTERVIEWER - Use one to three words to summarize each phrase.) p - 5. General Information (household, continued) a. How many adults in your household, excluding children, are presently employed? 0 1 2 3 or more b. In which 'rdustry group are you employed? Private Government c. How many adults in your household, excluding children, are currently unemployed? 0 (go to 5e.) 1 (go to 5d.) 2 (go to 5d.) 3 or more (go to 5d.) d. Why is that? (Write number next to question; total responses should equal number of unemployed.) Retired, private business Retired, government Cannot find work Do not want to work Disabled, temporary Disabled, permanent Other e. What will your approximate household income be this year, excluding chil- dren's earnings? Under $10,000 10,000-19,999 20,000-29,999 30,000-39,999' 40,000-49,999 50,000 and above qP Thank you for responding to this survey. Goodbye. y . 1 t sao S s laJs�� asp A d� �V sa sa•`!y E�,�,n y P °y 1, a!� j cw .i ouj t c Cad �S I l i C I d a � I , Il � jjl !�'gp I1IIIlINf I Il lfll II I I ' o Q u 0 J m O O O O co C = O 7 N 7 to N N r T N i C J C N C T T O O N O O CTE O C O q V O q L 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 =0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 to 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U N N M V'In 1p h CJ m'+ IO .-�N M O'to !�W .-� 10 .--I N M V In 10 h co O, cc m iN 7- .zhr.-; L NMV tOhfG O� YO ^NM V t1)�Jh CI O� 0 0 O . s - say lip SIP 9 s _.. .. s6vlysl P`! ahoy v '!190004 . . Y 4b v o CJ V 7 v _ C — ' 16 C, CJ ., 4. a�ods .a v X 41 o sae,, s 454,y o0�b Sal s!p`�a�F� c 9 •A P 1! •0 8 I i 0 v b V C N cu Q N A /O Q L C i O O r- C In L N Q i O 6 N Q1� L G L C V •C QJ O_ O 'OI > m lode c O a� t Ql O L O CJ +� +� h7z!_:`4k9 �y �/ w_I ADMINISTRATION BUILDING r°a R "f..'- '• `� ._ iY AT N POST.OFFICE BOX 747 POST OFFICE BOX 749 ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA 93423 ATASCADERO,.CALIFORNIA'93423 PHONE: (805) 466-8000 PHONE: (805) 466-5678 CITY COUNCIL. CITY CLERK CITY TREASURER C POLICE DEPARTMENT adei W&• 747 CITY MANAGER INCORPORATED JULY 2, 1979 ' O,POST OFFICE BOX ATASCADERCALIFORNIAA 93423 FINANCE DEPARTMENT PHONE:.(805) 466.8600 PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT FIRE-DEPARTMENT RECREATION DEPARTMENT - 6005 LEWIS AVENUE ATASCADERO,CALIFORNIA 93422 ^+" - PHONE:'.(805):466-2141 RE: cEIVE1 F t d G e, 1984 CITY MGR. REPORT OF THE CITY ATTORNEY For the Council Meeting of February 27, 1984 No. 27 1. RECENT DECISIONS OF INTEREST a. U.C.L.A. Exempt From Paying Sewer Service Charge The C.A.2nd has held that -a city cannot impose a sewer service charge on tax exempt government property in order to finance capi- tal improvements of local sewer systems. (Regents of the Univer- sity of California v. City of Los Angeles, C.A.2nd, Oct. 26`, 1983.) b. Voter Approval Needed to Fund Plan With Property Taxes` The C.A.lst has ruled that a tax levied for the purpose of funding a state pension pian is unauthorized under ,Article XIII(A) of the California Constitution if it does not have prior voter approval. (Valentine v. City of Oakland, C.A.lst, Oct. 20, ,1983.) c. Improper Adjustment Mechanism Kills Rent Control Ordinance The C.A.lst has held that a rent control ordinance which precludes a timely consideration of general adjustments in rent ceilings is unconstitutional and that the subject of tenants' rights to with- hold rent is preempted by state law. (Fisher v. City of Berkeley, C.A.lst, Oct. 24, 1983.) i REPORT OF THE CITY ATTORNEY February 27, 1984 - Page 3 • fd. Police Owed No Duty to Protect. Inebriate The C.A.5th has held that a police officer does not owe a duty of care to an inebriated person when the officer takes no affirmative steps to place the inebriate in custody and the person is later in- jured. (Stout v. City of Porterville, C`.A.5th, Nov. 10, 1983.) e. Title VII Claim Timely Where "Systematic Policy" Bias The U.S.C.A.9th has held that an employee's sex discrimination claims were not time-barred, as the court considered that the sys- tematic policy of discrimination deterred the employee from seeking her "full employment rights" or "threatens to adversely affect...in the future." (Serge v. Four-Phase Systems, Inc., U.S.C.A.9th, Oct. 18, 1983.) f. County Financially Liable for Ambulance Services The C.A.2nd has held that a county is financially liable for costs incurred as a result of provision of ambulance services to the indigent under statutory law, notwithstanding contracts between the county and cities of the county. (City of Lomita v. County of Los ' Angeles, C.A.2nd, Nov. 2, 1983.) g. Equal Pay Demands Lack Proof of Equal Job Skills The U.S.C.A.9th has held that a demand for equal pay must be sup- ported by a-showing that the claimant has a job requiring substan- tially the same skills and duties as that of the person being used for comparison. Hein- v.- Oregon Collect of Education, U.S.C.A.9th, Oct. 17, 1983.} h. Councilman's Financial Interest Voids Purchase Contract The C.A.lst has ruled that a city employee with a financial inter- est in a contract cannot enter into it while acting in his official- capacity as a City Councilman. (Thomas v. Call, C.A.1st, Nov. 16, 1983.) i. Attorney's Fees and Costs Awarded for Frivolous Appeal The C.A.2nd has held that upon a finding of a frivolous appeal, the California Rules of Court allow the reviewing court to impose attorney's fees and costs against a party without providing due process safeguards, (Mitchell v. W. :Altee Burpee Co., C.A.2nd, Nova 18, 1983. REPORT OF THE CITY ATTORNEY February 27, 1984 - Page 3 j. Woman Applicant Established Presumption of Hiring Bias The U.S.C.A.9th has held that an employer who rejects a qualified woman applicant has the burden of proving the legitimacy of its hiring practices and that government employees who unconstitu- tionally invade the privacy of an applicant are liable for their actions. (Thorne v. City of El Segundo, U.S.C.A.9th, Nov. 21, 1983.) k. Ordinance Deemed Adjudicatory Not Supported by Findings The C.A.2nd has held that the City of Camarillo's growth control ordinance is adjudicatory in nature, rather than legislative, and review standards should be based on whether the City Council's decision was supported by adequate findings. (Pacifica Corp. v. City of Camarillo, C.A.2nd, Nov. 23, 1983.) 1. Probationary Employee May Be Terminated at Will The C.A.3rd has held that an employee with probationary status may be terminated at the will of his employer. This was provided for by the Sacramento County rules. The court held the employee was not entitled to an administrative appeal under Government Code § 3304. (Floyd v. County of Sacramento, C.A.3rd, Oct. 26, 1983.) m. Substitute Law Cures Zoning Ordinance Defect The C.A.2nd has ruled that an appellate court must base its deci- sion regarding the constitutionality of a zoning ordinance on the law operative at the time of final judgment. Thus, where the city amended its zoning ordinance between the time of the litigation challenge and the trial, the amended ordinance prevails. (City of Whittier v. Walnut Properties, Inc. , C.A.2nd, Dec. 8, 1983.) n. EnvironmentalReportMust Address Noise Factor The C.A.5th has held that a city's general plan and its accom- panying environmental impact report must include noise factor con- siderations, in accordance with California Environment Quality Act provisions. (Guardians of Turlock's Integrity v. Turlock City Council, C.A.5th, Dec. 7, 1983.) Rent Control Ordinance for Mobilehome Park Upheld The Cal.Sup.Ct. has held that a rent control ordinance which con- tains guidelines for determining the fair return on rental property and includes adequate rent adjustment mechanisms is constitutional. �^ Thus, the court sustained the rent control ordinance of the City of Carson, finding that it set out sufficient guidelines for the rent REPORT OF THE CITY ATTORNEY February 27, 1984 - Page 4 review board and provided constitutionally adequate rent adjustment mechanisms. (Carson Mobilehome Park Owners Association v. City of Carson, Cal.Sup.Ct. , Dec. 19, 1983.) p. Officers' Unbecoming Conduct is Basis for Suspension The C.A.2nd has held that any police conduct with could possibly be construed as illegal is a legitimate basis for departmental disci- pline. (Heise v. Gates, C.A.2nd, Dec. 20, 1983.) q. Federal Immigration Act Enforceable by Local Police The U.S.C.A.9th has held that state and local police departments have the authority under both federal and state statutes to arrest for criminal violations of the Federal Immigration and Naturaliza- tion Act where probable cause to believe the suspect had illegally entered the United States exists. (Gonzales v. Peoria, U.S.C.A. 9th, Dec. 16, 1983.) r. Court Orders Rehearing on Oakland's Eminent Domain Case The C.A.lst has held that the lower court erred in determining its trial in favor of the Oakland Raiders, reversed the judgment in favor of the City of Oakland. (City of Oakland v. Superior Court, C.A.1st, Dec. 29, 1983.) s. Oxnard Barred from Charging Building Fee The C.A.2nd has invalidated the development fee ordinance to fund capital improvements of the City of Oxnard because it found the .. fees had no reasonable relationship between construction projects and the need for new public facilities. (Building Industry Asso- <_r cid of Southern California v. Cit of Oxnard, 2 Civ. 67484.) t. County Must Follow State's Annexation Procedures The C.A.2nd has held that county laws are preempted by state laws where the state legislature has exhibited the intent to occupy the field to the exclusion of municipal regulation. Thus, the court found that annexation laws are state laws and they prevail. A city does not have the authority to reject an annexation to the city. (Ferrini v. City of San Luis Obispo, C.A.2nd, Dec. 28, 1983.) u. Employer Must Give Union Information Requested The U.S.C.A.9th has ruled that a union is entitled to be provided with information regarding an employer's business relationships with other firms if the information is needed to enable the union to carry out its duties. (N.L.R.B. v. Realty Maintenance, Inc. , U.S.C.A.9th, Jan. 13, 1984.) REPORT OF THE CITY ATTORNEY February 27, 1984 - Page S 2. STATUS OF PENDING LITIGATION a. Larrison v. City of Atascadero At a hearing on February 10, 1984, Presiding Judge Warren Conklin sustained the City's fifth demurrer, this time without leave to amend, to petitioners' fourth amended petition for writ of mandate filed by nine police officers to obtain merit increases in their salaries since completion of their probationary periods and to col- lect the aggregate sum of $19,247 as damages for unpaid back sal- aries. The case is now concluded in the Superior Court and will terminate unless petitioners decide to appeal the decision of the Superior Court to the Appellate Court. b. Gearhart v. City of Atascadero The City's demurrer to petitioner's third amended petition to force the City to grant him a permit to collect solid waste was sustained with thirty days leave to amend on November 10, 1983. Since another amended petition has not been filed within the time allotted by the court, the City has filed a motion to dismiss the case and enter judgment, to be heard on March 1, 1984. This would conclude then the case in the Superior Court; however, petitioner may appeal the Superior Court's decision to the Appellate Court. 3. STATUS OF PENDING PROSECUTIONS a. People v. Latham The above prosecution is for violation of § 9.3.142 and 19.040.0 of the Atascadero Municipal Code, establishing a residential use on a vacant lot by the use of a bus as a residence and building a structure without building permits. The defendant plead not guilty at he arraignment, and pretrial is set for March 1, 1984, with trial to be held on March 20, 1984. Respectfully bmitted, Z ALLEN GRIMES City Attorney AG•fr • �fbtCa 44 .! AQ7ZNL)A TE ITEM# ORDINANCE NO. 76 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AMENDING MAP NO. 22 OF THE 'OFFICIAL ZONING MAPS OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO BY CHANGING CERTAIN PROPERTY ON LAKEVIEW DRIVE FROM L (RECREATION) TO RSF-Y (RES- IDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY) . THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO ORDAINS as follows: Section 1. Council Findings. After conducting a public hearing, the City Council finds and determines that: 1. The proposed zone change from L (Recreation) to RSF-Y (Res- idential Single Family) is in conformance with the General Plan and its policies regarding ,open space around Atascadero Lake. 2. Approval of this project is consistent with Section 65854- 65856 of the Government Code and 'Section 9-1.115 of the Zon- ing Regulations of the City of Atascadero. 3. The ;proposed Zone Change to RSF-Y will be more compatible with existing zoning and uses on surrounding property. Section 2. Zoning Change, Map No. 22 of the Official Zoning Maps of the City of Atascadero` on file in the Planning Department is hereby amended to reclassify the following described property from L (Recreation) to RSF-Y (Residential Single Family) : Lots 43-45 and 36-41 of Block 12 of Atascadero Colony. Block 12ofAtascadero Colony. Section 3. Zoning Map. Map No. 22 of the Official Zoning Maps of the City of Atascadero on file in the Planning Department is hereby amended as shown on at- tached Exhibit "A" which is hereby made a part of this ordinance by reference. • Ordinance No. 76 Section 4. Publication. The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to beP ublished 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 oraiance 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. The foregoing ordinance was introduced on February 14, 1984 and adopted at a regular meeting ,of the City Council held on AYES: NOES: ABSENT: MARJORIE M. MACKEY, Mayor • ATTEST: BARBARA NORRIS, City- Clerk APPROVED AS FARM: ALLEN GRIMES City Attorney Y APPROVED As PPR VEDAS CONTENT: 4/k, Y L WARDEN, City Manager 2 v� H>s'o N � s s > 0 " -A t3 D' NsaOoo'E Cj 'v>s e Y � ` N -JL X 'a .p 21 zso� EXHIBIT A j -P ORDINANCE # �' ZONE CHANGE 2-83 S" L (Recreation) to RSF-Y } 40 o°aO1 N � s \\ N"o°4b�E\ Z w P4 (h �o W � w � N o c e°rr•i; RECEIVED FEB 1984 MEM 0 R A N D U M CITY MGR. - - - - - - - - - - TO: Murray FROM: Larry McPherson SUBJECT: Street Maintenance District 84-1 San Fernando DATE: - February 17, 1984 Attached is a resolution 'establishing' a street maintenance district for San Fernando Road. This resolution is recommended to be approved by Council subject to the protest hearings scheduled for their meeting of February 27, 1984. This is the final step in establishing the maintenance assessment district for this location. Upon approval of the resolution and the Public Works Director's report with the assessment map, this information will be submitted to the office of the Auditor-Controller of the County so that these assessments may be placed on the tax rolls. The assessments shown in the report with the resolution are estimated first year costs and include major maintenance to establish street paving fora presently unpaved road. Future years assessments will be much lower, since only routine maintenance of the reconstructed roadway will be done. If Council approves the Resolutions and attachments, we will submit these documents to the Auditor-Controller to be added :to the 1984-85 tax bill /L l ENCE McPHERSON !ll���LM:vh RESOLUTION NO. 16 84 RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO ESTABLISHING THE FORMATION OF A MAIFTENANCE DISTRICT TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS FOR CERTAIN IMPROVE- MENTS AND MAINTENANCE PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 1911 (STREETS & HIGHWAYS CODE SECTION 5820-5856); AND ORDERING IMPROVEMENTS AND THE FORMATION OF MAINTENANCE DISTRICT84-1: SAN FERNANDO ROAD AND CONFIRMING THE ASSESSMENT. WHEREAS, the Council has initiated proceedings for the formation of a Maintenance District pursuant to the provisions of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, to be known and designated as "Maintenance District 84-1: San Fernando Road", hereinafter referred to as "the District" and WHEREAS, the Council set a hearing on the formation of said Maintenance District held on the 27th day of February, 1984, at 7:30 p.m., -in the Council Chambers of the City Council; and WHEREAS, at this time, the Council has heard testimony and evidence and is desirous of proceeding with the formation proceedings and confirmation of the improvements and maintenance and levy of assessments; NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Atascadero as follows: Section 1 The above recitals are true and correct. Section 2. Upon the conclusion of the public hearing, the written protests filed, and not withdrawn, did not represent property owners owning 0 more than fifty percent 50% of the area of assessable lands within the ( y P ) _ District, and all protests are hereby overruled and denied. -Section 3. The Council hereby confirms the maintenance and assessment work for the District as set forth in the Engineer's Report and as referred to in the Resolution of Intention as previously adopted relating to said assess- ment levy. Section 4. The diagram and assessment as set forth in the Engineer's Report are hereby confirmed and adopted by this Council. Section 5. The adoption of this resolution constitutes a levy of the assessment for the fiscal year commencing on the 1st day of July, 1983, and ending on the 30th day of June, 1984, all in w-cordance with the report of the City Engineer. Section 6. The estimates of costs, the assessment diagram, the assess- ments, and all other matters set forth in the Engineer's Report, as submitted, are hereby approved and adopted by this Council and hereby confirmed. Section 7. The works of improvement and maintenance contemplated by the Resolution of Intention shall be performed pursuant to law, and the County Auditor shall enter on the County Assessment Roll, the amount of the assessment, and said assessment shall then be collected at the same time and in the same manner as the County taxes are collected. After collection by said County, the net amount of the assessment shall be paid to the City Treasurer of the City. Section 8. The City Treasurer shall herein establish a special fund known as " City of Atascadero Maintenance District 84-1: San Fernando Road", into which the City Treasurer shall place all monies collected by the Tax Collector pursuant to the provisions of this resolution and law, and said transfer shall be made and accomplished as soon as said monies have been made available to the City Treasurer. Section 9. The City Clerk is hereby ordered and directed to file a certified copy of the diagram and assessment roll with the County Auditor, together with a certified copy of this Resolution upon its adoption. Section 10. The City Clerk is hereby further ordered and directed to file a certified copy of the diagram and assessment roll with the County Tax Collector, together with a certified copy of this Resolution upon its adoption. Section 11. A certified copy of the assessment and diagram shall be filed in the office of the Public Works Director, with a duplicate copy on file in the office of the City Clerk and open to the public for inspection. Section 12. Any parcels or lots of land known as public property, as the same is defined in Section 22663 of Division 15, Part 2 of the Streets and Highways Code which are included within the boundaries of the District, shall be omitted and exempt from any assessment made under these proceedings. On motion by Councilman and seconded by Councilman the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: MARJORIE R. MACKEY, Mayor ADOPTED: ATTEST: BARBARA NORRIS, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: &�Ox ALLEN GRIMES, City Attorney UkAY L. WARDEN, City Manager PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR'S REPORT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 84-1 SAN FERNANDO ROAD Attached is an estimate of the costs for the improvement of San Fernando Road. Said improvements would include rough grading and a 2" asphalt concrete maintenance cap to provide an approximate 16 foot roadbed on this street. Accompanying this report is a diagram of the district delineating the exterior boundaries thereof and every lot of land therein for the proposed work, improvements and maintenance. Also attached is the listing of individual assessor's parcel numbers along with the assessment for F.Y. 1984-85 for each of the benefitting lots as approved with the resolution. SAN FERNANDO ROAD Assessor's Parcel Property Owner Assessment 49-241-08 R. Freiler $1128 2130 San Fernando Road Atascadero, CA 93422 29-241-12 DR & C Burbach 1128 2020 San Fernando Road Atascadero, CA 93422 49-241-31 RO & A Churchill 1128 2040 San Fernando Road Atascadero, CA 93422 :.:. 49-241-30 EA Pimentel 1128 ` vA 2060 San 'Fernando Road Atascadero, CA 93422 49-241-39 CJ & AM Vreeken 1128 2100 San Fernando Road Atascadero, CA 93422 49-241-40 BM & R Aggson 1128 2130 San Fernando Road Atascadero, CA 93422 49-271-15 A. Grimes 3384 D. Messer 2200 San Fernando Road Atascadero, CA 93422 49-271-16 J & C Gutierrez 1128 2170 San Fernando Road Atascadero, CA 93422 49-271-17 DG & CA Perry 1128 2150 San Fernando Road Atascadero, CA 93422 49-251-36 TL & LN Tolbert 1128 1701 San Fernando Road Atascadero, CA 93422 49-251-37 WE & LA Dunn 1128 1731 San Fernando Road Atascadero, CA 93422 Assessor's Parcel Property Owner Assessment 49-251-38 WE Dunn 1128 1731 San Fernando Road Atascadero, CA 93422 -``x ;49-281-01 RG & AL Brewer 1128 1801 San Fernando Road Atascadero, CA 93422 ----49-281-03 DA & SA Gehre 1128 1861 San Fernando Road Atascadero, CA 93422 49-281-04 GC Zidbeck 1128 1869 San Fernando Road Atascadero, CA 93422 �-- -4.9-281-02 SL & SL Thomas 1128 1876 San Fernando Road Atascadero, CA 93422 4.9-281-10 �' NIR Rogers 1128 2005 San Fernando Road Atascadero, CA 93422 49-281-09 EB & M McCoy 1128 2025 San Fernando Road Atascadero, CA 93422 49-281-07 RL & SE Bellis 1128 2035 San Fernando Road Atascadero, CA 93422 49-281-08 DB & RE Wilkinson 1128 2045 San Fernando Road Atascadero, CA 93422 49-281-11 CL & HGE Springer 1128 2053 San Fernando Road Atascadero, CA 93422 49-281-12 CE Springer 1128 2085 San Fernando Road Atascadero, CA 93422 Assessor's Parcel Property Owner Assessment 49-281-05 C.E. Springer 1128 2135 San Fernando Atascadero, CA 93422 50-051-01 GH Andrews 1128 2155 San Fernando Road Atascadero, CA 93422 50-051-22 CW & E Hessick 1128 ' P.O. Box 25 Atascadero, CA 93423 50-051-23 CW & E Hessick 1128 P.O. Box 25 Atascadero, CA 93423 50-051-24 AE & RD Scarson 1128 2205 San Fernando Road Atascadero, CA 93422 N N N un C). { w 0 Ln tV Iv IJ: \n t i v c) = r cn ~' t w C) N; Ul N �] i � N F••' C:) N w LI1 N pp N F., co I F ' o Lrl w w N Iv N N . N. CC) 00 �A i1Fl ico 00 Fl1 � W 4th aw, CO: co lam-' co LnFl N 0 I m o -� o IV w C) N 00 o ca N. t `I o w i N w 1 N ,p .p 1 N 00w F., 41 w Co F� -.. N I \\ fS1 FJ.L3 Ln p N/y v F-• 1 /FI F N� 1 I 1 O of W O rr (D 0 a a z Iv In rt U) z y P-t w Z m o a W co 0 n 7o • z °) w a z 03 t-I ( x d 0 a o o ~ n o d ~ x Q' '� F''' ti ra F-4 n El rt H H cn ol N H (D tv r n o a G r* a �l P13 G n � � n - sJ r t ri:'+`^ w `"'"• °'' *rac+-rS+hYr..`�ri ?"^�`'3 ..t"`r-s`"- ': m - 3 �3-`'� i`•-?-...C'r ,r ,�= r�' +"s--'-^.r��« --`". tee+ y. .�}--iy`^„5 '� .'iY� `a'�g'�'1 - `"' INCORPORATED JULY 2, 1979 _ ADMINISTRATION BUILDING i POST OFFICE BOX 747 ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA 93423 PHONE: (805) 466-8000 DATE: f Z Z TO: LAUI ✓ lCl"lteRSe4 5 Tk e FROM: e-Te S5AN FQN UBJECT: L A hI t�� aC`� -`K P,c?t1 ✓Ej� 29-1 /V(. + S ///��!k `1 i � L �y � [ V /(T 7 3709 l ��s 3 j= Lots = 2Q CQsf CITY ATTORNEY FIRE DEPARTMENT POLICE DEPARTMENT. P. O. BOX 749 6005 LEWIS AVENUE ATASCADERO, CA 93423 (805) 466-8600 ATASCADERO, CA 93422 ._.,yc (805) 466-5678 (805) 466-2141 RESOLUTION NO. 13-84 RESOLUTION OF THE ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL DIRECTING THE CITYATTORNEY TO PREPARE AN IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS OF THE PROPOSITION RELATING TO THE POLICE FACILITY The Council of the City of Atascadero resolves as follows: WHEREAS, this Council has submitted to the voters of the City of Atascadero, pursuant to section 5353 of the Elections Code, an advisory proposition with respect to the construction of a police facility; WHEREAS, section 5011 of the Elections Code provides that the City Council may direct the City Clerk to transmit a copy of the measure to the City Attorney and have the City Attorney prepare an impartial analysis of the measure showing the effect of the measure on the existing law and the operation of the measure, and WHEREAS, the City Council desires that such an analysis of the measure be made by the City Attorney; NOW, THEREFORE, be ,it _resolved by the Council of the City of Atascadero as follows: Section 1. The Cit Clerk is hereby directed to transmit a' Y Y copy of the advisory measure provided by Resolution No. 10-84, as amended by Resolution No. 12-84, relating to a police facility,` to the City Attorney for the preparation by the City Attorney of an impartial analysis of the police facility measure pursuant to the provisions of section 5011 of the, Elections Code. Section 2. The City Clerk and the City Attorney shall carry, out their respective duties in implementing the provisions of this resolution. The City Clerk shall cause the analysis to be printed preceding the arguments for and against the measure. The analysis shall not exceed five hundred (500) words in length. Section 3 . The City Clerk shall transmit a copy of this resolution to the County Clerk' s Office to the attention of the Election Division. • -1- AG: fr/2/1,7/84 Resolution No. 13-84 Page 2 i AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED MARJORIE R MACKEY, MAYOR ATTEST: BARBARA NORRIS, City Clerk APPROVED AS 0 FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: r • ALLEN GRIMES, City Attorney M RAY WARDEN, City Manager • -2- RECE1V � FEB G � 1984 CITY MGR. MEMORANDUM TO: Murray . FROM: Larry McPherson SUBJECT: Section 18 Grant Request to Replace 1979 Dodge Dial-A-Ride Van DATE: February 21, 1984 It is recommended Council authorize staff to file a Section 18 Grant request for funds in the amount of $22,717 in order to replace one 1979 Dial-A-Ride van. It will be required that the City provide $5,679 in matching funds to secure this federal grant. As a part of the application process, it is necessary that a . minute order show Council approval of the grant and authorize staff to execute the application and grantagreements. Attached is the title sheet of the grant application. LA14RENCE McPHERSON LM:vh • i pp Art T OMB Approval No.29-80218, FEDERAL ASSTS t Z APPA• a. NUMEER 3. STATE a.HUMBER CANrS 83-1 LICA- OI 1. TYPE ❑ REAPPLICATION APPLI• b. DATE Y month y IDENTI- b. DATE Year month day ACTION APPUCATION CATION 19 gl9 1 FIER ASSIGNED 19 (IW*rk& ❑ NOTIFICATION OF INTENT (Oct.) Leave m) ❑ REPORT OF FEDERAL ACTION Blank 4. LEGAL APPLICANT/RECIPIENT 5. FEDERAL EMPLOYER IDENTIFICATION NO. s.Applicant Nage City of Atascadero b. Or atutlon Unit City 6. c. Strost/P.O. Box P.O. Box747 PRO= a.KUMSER • d. city Atascadero s• Can* : San Luis Obisp ARAM b. TITLE F. 1• st.1• California 9. ZIPCode: -93423 Fedoras Public Transportation for b. Contact Person (Name Lawrence McPherson catateu) Rural and Small Urban Area Ica d:teleyhone No.) 7. TITLE AND DESCRIPTION OF APPUcANrs PROJECT 8. TYPE OF APPLICANT/RECIPIENT At Ststo H-Communi�r AetIonAgancy Equipment Replacement Request Section 18 Funds 5-1nt rstate t-Higher Eduattona irWitution FSubstate }Indian Tribe District K-Other(Specify): This request is to D-County q purchase a handicapped lift E-Cou F-School District equipped, 16 passenger bus to replace 1979 Dodge Ni-S�adsl Purpose D.shiet Enter appropriate Utter bus for the Atascadero Dial-A-Ride transportation Stem. - - 9. TYPE OF ASSISTANCE system. "age Grant D-Insumace 04upplemental Grant E-Other Enter appro. C•Losn priate totter(s) IR I 10. AREA OF PROJECT IM?ACT (Names of cities,counties. 11. ESTIMATED NUM- 12. TYPE OF APPUCATION s . F PERSONS Stat", to ER O N 8 ) B A-New FRerisioa E-JWgmsntatian BENEFITINti B-Renewal D-CoatiausUon Enter approprk"Utter 13. PRCPOSSD FUNDING 14. CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS OF: 15. TYPE OF CHANGE'(For isa or ice) a. APPLICANT b.PROJECT A-Increase Dollars F-0Other (Specify): a. FEDERAL s .00 B-Daaaass Dollars C-IncreaDtion b. APPLICANT -- .00 D-Decresse Duration 16. PROJECT START 17. PROJECT E-Cancellation t STATE .OU DATE Year month day DURATION Enter appro- d.LOCAL .00 1983 12. Month# prrate ktter(s) e. OTHER __ 00 18. ESTIMATED DATE TO Year month day 119. EXISTING FEDERAL IDENTIFICATION NUMB BE SUBMITTED TO f. TOTAL S 28.39600 FEDERAL AGENCY Is, 1983 10 1 2R FEDERAL AGENCY TO RECEIVE REQUEST (Name.City.State,Zip cods) 21. REMARKS ADDED Urban Mass Transportation Administration p Yes ❑ No 2Z. a. To tb3 hest of my knowledge and belief, b. !ftaqaired by 0118 Cinuisr A-05 this application was submitted, pursuant to an• Nore- Response data In this preappllatlon/application are sh :as thersia. to appropriata c(earlashouses and all responses aro attached: sponse attached THE true and correct, the document has been APPLICANT duly authorized by the eo»rolag body of CERTIFIES the applicant and the applicant will comply ❑ ❑ THAT► with the attached assurance If the aw*- ! ❑ ❑ aace Is approred. (3) ❑ ❑ 23. a.TYPED NAME AND TITLE Is. SIGNATURE c. DATE SIGNED CERTIFYING: Lawrence McPherson Year month day REPRE- SENTATIVE Director of Public Works 19 83 9 1 24. AGENCY NAME 25. APPLICA• Year month day TION RECEIVED 19 21L ORGANIZATIONAL UNIT 27. ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE 21L FEDERAL APPLICATION IDENTIFICATION 29. ADDRESS 3M FEDERAL GRANT IDENTIFICATION 31. ACTION TAKEN 32. FUNDING Year month day 34. Year month day STARTING 13 a. AWARDED a. FEDERAL $ .00 33. ACTION DATE► 19 DATE 19 ❑ b. REIECTED b. APPLICANT .00 35. CONTACT FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMA• 36. Year month day TION (Name and telephone %umber) ENDING Q o. RETURNED FOR e. STATE .00 DATE 19 AMENDMENT d. LOCAL .00 37. REMARKS ADDED ❑d. DEFERRED a. OTHER .00 [] a. WITHDRAWN L TOTAL f .00 ❑ Yes ONO 31L a. In taking aborti action, any comments recelved from clearinghouses were con. Is. FEDERAL AGENCY A-95 OFFICIAL • aldersd. If agency response is due under provisions of Part 1,OMB Circular A45, (Name and telsyhone no.) FEDERAL AGENCY It has been or to being made. A-95 ACTION STANDARD FORM 424 PAGE 1 (10-75) Prsseribed by GSA,Federal JMonaeonso"Circular r4-r i. • RESOLUTION NO. 14-84 RESOLUTION OF THE ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 12-84 CHANGING MEASURE A TO READ MEASURE B ON THE COUNTY BALLOT` The Atascadero City Council resolves as follows: That pursuant to a requestfromthe County Clerk's Office Election Division to change Measure A to read Measure B on the County ballot, Section 2 of Resolution No. 12--84 is amended as follows: "Measure B: Shall the City of Atascadero provide a police facility separate from the Administration Building, at a cost to be determined later, possibly using voter approved financing." ON MOTION by Councilman , and seconded by Councilman 01 the: foregoing resolution is hereby adopted` in its entirety on the following vote: AYES . NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: MARJORIE R. MACKEY, Mayor APPROVED AS O FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: 1 ALLEN GRIMES, City Attorney MU Y L WARDEN, City- _Manager ATTEST: BARBARA NORRIS, City Clerk M E M O R A N D U M • TO: CITY COUNCIL February 22, ` 1984 FROM: PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: ANNEXATION 1-84 APPLICANT: City of Atascadero LOCATION: 8005' Gabarda REQUEST: To 'annex approximately 80 acres of land owned by the Atascadero Sanitation District containing the new wastewater treatment plant. On February 6, 1984, the Planning Commission reviewed the subject matter as outlined "in the attached Staff Report and recommended as follows: initiate a prezoning for the property to P (Public) • - proceed with the annexation request There was no comment at the meeting. The City Council is requested to adopt the attached resolution and authorize the filing of the application and other required information with LAFCO. l -LAWRENCE STEVE S �ty�M WARDEN Planning Director ager PS • RESOLUTION NO. 15-84 • A RESOLUTION OF THE ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL TO THE SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION RELATIVE TO A PROPOSAL TO ANNEX TERRITORY TO THE CITY OF ATASCADERO DESIGNATED AS THE "WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANT ANNEXATION. " WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Atascadero, in a public meeting reviewed the proposed "waste water treatment plant annexation"' WHEREAS, this proposal is made pursuant to Section 35040 of the Government Code of the State of California. WHEREAS, the proposed annexation is listed as a categorically ex- empt project under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Cate- gory 19) . WHEREAS, the territory proposed to be annexed is uninhabitated as that term is defined in the Government Code of the State of California. WHEREAS, access to the waste water treatment site is available only over City-maintained roads. WHEREAS, all services to the waste water treatment site are pro- vided through the City of Atascadero. WHEREAS, the site is adjacent to the City of Atascadero and the extension of the City boundaries to include the wastewatertreatment site is consistent with provisions of MORGA. WHEREAS, the waste water treatment facility services only property located within the City of Atascadero, except for the use of reclaimed water by the Chalk Mountain Golf Course. WHEREAS, the Atascadero Sanitation- District operates the waste water treatment plant and its Board of Directors is the City Council of the 'City- of Atascadero. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Atascadero that: 1. The City Council does hereby consent to the proposed annexa- tion of the waste water treatment plant facility and does request the San Luis Obispo County Local Agency Formation Commission to approve the annexation of the territory de- • scribed in attached Exhibit "A" as shown on Attached Exhibit � s RESOLUTION NO. 15-84 2. The proposed "waste water treatment plant annexation" be wholly approved by the San Luis Obispo County Local Agency Formation Commission unconditionally. 3. The application and processing fees be waived for this annexation. On motion by Councilman and seconded by Councilman , the foregoing resolution is adopted in its entirety by the following roll call vote: MARJORIE M. MACKEY, Mayor AYES: NOES: ABSENT: DATE ADOPTED: ATTEST: BARBARA NOR IS, City Clerk APPROVED AS 0 FORM: ;Zav/T, ED AS CONTENT: WARDEN, City Manag r- 2 • PROPOSED ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF ATASCADERO LEGAL DESCRIPTION: All that portion of real property of the unrecorded Lot 3 of Rancho Atascadero, County of San Luis Obispo, State of California, lying adjacent to and southerly of Block 9 of the Atascadero Colony as shown on a map in Book 3A, page 7 of Maps, in the office of the County Recorder. County of San Luis Obispo, lying easterly of the easterly right of way line of the Southern Pacific Railroad, and lying northerly of the southeasterly boundary and its northeasterly extension, of the existing Atascadero County Sanitation District disposal facilities designated as Phase I on Exhibit "A" of that Agreement recorded in Book 1816, Page 812, Official Records, in the office of the County Recorder in said County, more particularly described as: Beginning at the south corner of said Block 9, being a point on the easterly line of the right-of-way of the Southern Pacific Railroad; thence, along the southeasterly line of said Block 9, North 39' 22 ' East, 2500 feet, more or less, to the centerline of the Salinas River; thence, along said centerline, South 12045 ' East, 3300 feet to a point; thence, continuing along said centerline, South 57055 ' East, 350 , feet, more or less, to a point on the northeasterly extension of said southeasterly boundary of said Atascadero County Sanitation District disposal facilities; thence, southwesterly along said extension and boundry, South 27'211 West, 1650 feet, more or less, to the south corner of said facilities, said corner lying on the said easterly line of said railroad right-of- way thence, along said right of way line, North 62039' West, 365. 00 feet, more or less, to the beginning of a curve concave to the northeast, whose raduis is 1950. 00 feet; thence, continuing on said right of way, along the arc of said curve, a distance of 1480.00 feet through a central angle of 43029 ' to a point; thence, continuing along said right of way, North 19010 ' West, 1775.00 feet, more of less, to the point of beginning. d �� _. Q t t .,J 4 �� ,f 4 Y _ q t A 'Ili t i I . R 1 q 1+! Yfr` fi t �) 4. 'P i Y+ Ot t 4 r '.';`g# s T�, �,x r i k p ,$ +`.+: t� ill' :ai Fri: ,r'�; a pa L t f+ ,% z F, r 0 �. 1 ,�i ..}tt'4Y' r 4 ak A11 f'..x �' P 3 w �i ".+t �'J 4 _h h4 J 'a' � , i —11 4 r >,'' s d "„ g'. .fit 't,_- ity s a y �*,` �`'"^*"' lll� F�._,r rY �'sem. �"s# K"rxr '1 8 , k.J�sa .,"�> ry t r? ) a z -" d,. s,'" ti -" �vim `. '° '1S r:' -1.1+1-. " 'k f '^.t•:+y rte"2 t -4"t" s:9k�, S„-C1 a f y -� ��• �J) ;; r YksT x +.. c ; a F nw t s + 23. :u s - 3 x ,{; < °." `�w� :tom�.'rc. -� r'`'£"^i <:• aY4< r ,+. '7. � i �:.ssc. ° +. 'st#i 4a" -`srr. ''"." 'z ;e rs r; ur.. >k n.,Il 7 r" a - e �- ,..da: x`°`,may ,. _ .i, r ;' .b. ;'r� :+�- 'e' 'sm x.. -:' v'as> r, - ,,x, "" r ,{, Fes+"1 4 .. ,� n $' 'lh�m"` F4"a i}s�,.. t`,ws a�'�,N',r+?rw1.# _"'' o �^K y �,.3... "�,r ,._ s., $.,. 43; ,9 "7" R. , t �+' u a" �".:is; M nF'S,,.nx, u +rf3r4(�,z jvs» q 'Sa„ X rpt* i ''*M'+q "S+f� :, i Xibrrotas't �gy ywat�. �k'. ¢ ti t .�+ �ffy. �,s��' a.3� t r .5 �.:,k+ys� ..r',, ',-"'" fir.,. 11 r` .,...,,#' �'` Y ?w'...P in t J { n a �` '�, F`Jr' s qct Yom' '` "2�rir + s 4` S tNw tr .¢ a 7 Y %= fit+, '. fr 'r as ei �`4 } r x ' `n✓ ,'L'"' ,H' a 3f" .14.�'r"� rk f. °J a "" { .�a' I { t 4, IK"', { > -r 4-, '..£,� ',t `— `K3. 5 �... ,<x - �,yr a °* r' i* a a $ - t '` � r'E-salle ». �- k a Cz a 4fi�y"'L ?fy+E 'f' -d �, +,.'� k ' C'Y 4 w ;.. 5 t`+r a t -'#-Ai-t ,, �^; z. Aax .` -• P r �' r x fN� r y _h r i j. s ac N -t t!��"+ i rh K i t i 3 .Zt F R �yN "i'.r 4 ,I"''T r F �d +y 4„,t r F'[+ J J4 � �" v ! .k - C } i- 'tt#M �� t- `'..,(�'J'', i. -/__ _.,.__*.._,`.. " ,�,1: , ��r'. '.,��, - , �,.," b 1 �'. dot y'. 5 i. rY tr r H rl { � r '.'w ke I J v d k s- ,,,r," s -' y. r, x y 4 b...1� .7 "P F t r f '.3 , f TY t ,,t h t _t ", Yt ! NS F 4 % 2 f ''1 i_ y ifs `• C F N ""Sr., ; +<.1 ,M 4 (k i s. "�.k F '� ;?I. r 3s ,t by N j� i'^ M ! �"�.. } { its A-j. l S :'LF 5 Ifs -5 4 y .f �c ? 'a` `r tea:. �' ...a :�� +.,�..f�/ ,>w @` _ ,l s t f ht '�� xa. c y� "-.,l3,>'a,x''�,.s s n ¢ q_F a xµ Q f 2 ti .r} f;'t, } 'N'°!:za_3�S Ncr a y a, P ""'`.,b .+,. r ', r* r Y� r k:,!0 `? ' 3- a°r• i�tz� r r ✓x S + K "' ..,:, �,� k r ^raw C.5 k1.1;r! `e i"w { 51 'µ{ ��. r 2"� L 4 �. T 3 t _ t a 1. 11,1� k 4 A �yw H ;t's„" f 'r' yc Y r K `.,' ryn'. y" .+�C". - a1?, a fi a'� `�f�`31 �i°°z ?4" t E F ay.c -.,� - 1. "° ``"y .ay+`;+r x� r M ; 44 _ ,ti 1',.-' 'd'' p. , n eon - r 't -�'r v �r :.,� t>r %r'f'zwrx E' t +. a y, , 'P < v°i"(J fia , ""Vyu--.jF {r abh+�' e.�xth �- t '", — , ,_+.3.`ti� ;4h. 's=°:�`F x- ,-„yt_s`� NOW ., ea ..�_ Z /a "'%Fri^ ° 5^ .''3v4�`,aF'i,-"5 „,",g""''': .t'.r 1-11 x > a - k M *`- a s f O wd._-;m,+W, m ""^X" '�'n aJ er su S r 'F J r "S x } ,i w,y3+r{ .� 1X'i. r. y y *t r i lti a „t+. 3 ,.m; Y a= t '��kw 'i > �5 ^s�...:. J r �r, , rk , st, °1 '^ S .C' f11� . JY t'x°-` * -, - �.., 0,4+'.0, .: `� 11�11 �- t q�3.+: � '� `rii X'r^t*'r t x..4-�, 4, X, '*a a-xa-'"w"k€4'4'k" �A�` ;' *rF y 4£,2:.� 7 - f y ';k}�-„ ,{S•{ s ti <+5 a �.:~ 'S� CR a~ a-Y� "y" _� Fi, o �'":s�t°� zt.� Y""' IF rib '" n'`-,9� '"' � '. '�.r ..+ ns. r tr kS,� c, t "- 'r•i�.ty.' r" Z - ,r tl ' i.e a ,4� ��' z . i�4 :�� ; y q,� mM 6 . "0 ��,f��: � r - . - a O O f� e ^ E YO s y � O :- v co e�r d I''� CpM� _ f ,, 4 ll r'�s a.rE "yr�jd'��{`'''7`.�'� � s,,, '" "yrs�: �' ,`yt +' ,2'-�+rY+.r^,% «£'�sdc,.'i,i .s -�*tea. ,y;r'I+ i'`� ; '+ti 3 ,,"tn.+,. ..a�,1 'p¢4-'. as I'd tt Lam_ - ns ° g • i �_A_kat p r,r, CITY OF ATASCADERO 1918 1979 Planning Department February 6 , 1984 STAFF REPORT SUBJECT Annexation 1-84 - Initiation of Prezoning APPLICANT: City of Atascadero LOCATION: 8005 Gabarda Avenue REQUEST: To annex and prezone approximately 80 acres of land owned by the Atascadero Sanitation District containing the new waste water treatment plant. BACKGROUND 1. Past Action: The City now functions as the Atascadero Sanitation District. -The new treatment plant, which is now complete, is lo- cated outside the City limits. 2. Existing Zoning: Public Facilities 3. General Plan: Public 4. Environmental Determination: The proposed annexation would be categorically exempt under C.E.Q.A. guidelines (Class 19) . An environmental determination on the prezoning can be accomplished as part of the hearing on that matter. 5. Site Conditions: The site contains approximately 80 acres of flat land located on the southeast edge of the City of Atascadero. The site also contains portions of the Salinas River bank and river bottom. The site is presently developed with a wastewater treat- ment plant including control buildings, sedimentation basins and aeration ponds. The river bank on the east side of the site is vegetated with native trees and grasses. All access to the site is through the City along Garbada Road. 6. Project Description: The Planning Department has prepared an ap- plication to annex the site into the City. The site also needs to be prezoned to Public so that upon annexation an appropriate zon- ing will be established. ! ! Re: Annexation 1-84 - Initiation of Prezoning STAFF COMMENTS AND ANALYSTS The overall purpose of the annexation of the sewer treatment plant is to move a City-operated (i.e. Sanitation District) facility into the City limits and to preclude the possibility of the payment of taxes by the City to the County. This situation can result when one agency owns property within another jurisdiction. With the absorption of the sewer district, the plant belongs to the City and is located in the County. In reviewing the potential impact, the site's annexation will have little effect. Its access comes through the City along Gabarda Road, a dedicated road maintained by the City. All services to the site will be by the City. Protective services for the site (police and fire) , if not annexed, may cause some confusion due to jurisdictional boundaries. The annexation would be a logical extension of the City with logically defined boundaries and would not result in the creation of a County island within the City. Related to the annexation request to L.A.F.C.O. , a designation is needed as to future zoning. The prezoning that is adopted will become the permanent zoning upon annexation. The General Plan has been in- terpreted to designate this site as Public. A proposed zoning of P (Public) would conform to the General Plan designation. Procedurally, the process for prezoning is the same as that of rezoning. The Plan- ning Commisson or Cty Council must initiate the zoning change. FINDINGS 1. Access to the waste water treatment site is available only over City-maintained roads. 2. All services to the waste water treatment site are provided though the City of Atascadero. 3. The site is adjacent to the City of Atascadero and the extension of the City boundaries to include the waste water treatment site is consistent with provisions of MORGA. 4. The waste water treatment facility services only property located within the City of Atascadero, except for the use of reclaimed water by the Chalk Mountain Golf Course. 5. The Atascadero Sanitation District operates the waste water treat- ment plant and its Board of Directors is the City Council of the City of Atascadero. 2 0 • Re: Annexation 1-84 - Initiation of Prezoning RECOMMENDATION - The Planning and Public Works Departments recommend as follows: 1) That a hearing to prezone the sewer plant site to P be initiated; and, 2) That, based on the above Findings, Annexation 1-84 be recommended for approval. REPORT PREPARED BY: JOEL OSES ( l Asso fate Planner REPORT APPROVED BY: Ir4w IJ4�� LAWRENCE STEVENS Planning Director LAWRENCE MCPHERSON Public Works Director Ps 3 r ei ,.a ,, � • �'Y� C�^� '� C v ���i'.; � '�•_ ,-v ' � � .ri of i� ' r y 't q"„"� •�� /�` a II 12 F Qprh \ ,�2'/,� Nil - - �—�J i Ly' Rte`��' \y�\� �f'/.'.+^�F,o- ��� �•@_..�.�c�f�L�"`i +1,w-- "y..`�� y( - Mi l f { �; zy �.I IX ' /�� •� -I. �� it rr� �� � r t� ���� "� � / /r +� pp,c