Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 08/24/1993 PUBLIC REUIEW COPY PI EASL DO NOT_REMOVE UTMER AGENDA ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING NATIONAL GUARD ARMORY 6105 OLMEDA AVENUE, ATASCADERO AUGUST 24, 1993 7:00 P.M. Note Location Change This agenda is prepared and posted pursuant to the requirements of Government Code Section 54954.2. By listing a topic on this agenda, the City Council has expressed its intent to discuss and act on each item. In addition to any action identified in the brief general description of each item, the action that may be taken shall include: A referral to staff with specific requests for information; continuance; specific direction to staff concerning the pofic y or mission of the item,discontinuance of consideration,authorization to enter into negotiations and execute agreements pelgining to the item, adoption or approval; and, disapproval. • Copies of the staff reports or other documentation relating to each item of business referred to on the agenda are on file in the office of the City Clerk (Room 208)and in the Information Office (Room 103), available for public inspection during City Hall business hours. The City Clerk will answer any questions regarding the agenda. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to partxipate in a City meeting or other services offered by this City,please,contact the City Manager's Office ((805) 461-5010) or the City Clerk's Office ((805) 461.5074). Notifica- tion at least 48 hours prior to the meeting or time when services are needed will assist the City staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility to the meeting or service. RULES OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: * Members of the audience may speak on any item on the agenda. * A person may speak for five (5) minutes. * No one may speak for a second time until everyone wishing to speak has had an opportunity to do so. * No one may speak more than twice on any item. * Council Members may question any speaker; the speaker may respond but, after the allotted time has expired, may not initiate further discussion. * The floor will then be closed to public participation and open for Council discussion. Call to Order Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call City Council Comments: o Council Reorganization - Appointment of Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem COMMUNITY FORUM: The City Council values and encourages exchange of ideas and comments from you, the citizen. The Community Forum period is provided to receive comments from the public on matters other than scheduled agenda items. To increase the effective- ness of Community Forum, the following rules will be enforced: * A maximum of 30 minutes will be allowed for Community Forum, unless Council authorizes an extension. * All remarks shall be addressed to Council, as a whole, and not to any individual member thereof. * No person shall be permitted to make slanderous, profane or personal remarks against any elected official, commissions and staff. A. COMMITTEE REPORTS (The following represent ad hoc or standing commit- tees. Informative status reports will be given, as felt necessary.): 1 . S.L.O. Council of Governments 2. S.L.O. Regional Transit Authority 3. Solid/Hazardous Waste Task Force 4. City/School Committee 5. Traffic Committee 6. County Water Advisory Board 7. Economic Round Table 8. Colony Roads Committee 9. Liability Claims Review & Finance Committee 10. Nacimiento Water Purveyors Advisory Group B. CONSENT CALENDAR: All matters listed under Item B, 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 on these items. A member of the Council or public may, by request, have any item removed from the Consent Calendar, which shall then be reviewed and acted upon separately after the adoption of the Consent Calendar: 1. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 13, 1993 2 i 2. CITY TREASURER'S REPORT - JULY, 1993 3. RESOLUTION NO. 104-93 - Authorizing agreement with Ford Motor Credit Co. to lease-purchase six police patrol vehicles 4. RESOLUTION NO. 103-93 -Authorizing agreement with the County of San Luis Obispo to provide Animal Control Services 5. ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES FOR REPLACEMENT OF WASTEWATER PUMPING STATION #1 - Award contract to Engineering Development Associates 6. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 18-90, 7970 SINALOA AVE. - Acceptance of final map to establish a Planned Development Overlay zone (PD7) dividing one existing parcel of approx. one-quarter ac. into three parcels of 3,426, 3,435 and 4,066 sq. ft. for single-family residential use (Besty 7. APPROVAL OF APPLICATIONS FOR FUNDING UNDER THE TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT ACTIVITIES (TEA) GRANT PROGRAM A. Resolution No. 101-93 - Approving application for funds for the TEA program under the Intermodal Surface ransportation Efficiency Act of 1991 for the acquisition of Stadium Park B. Resolution No. 102-93 - Approving application for funds for the TEA program under the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 for Highway 101 Landscaping C. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. HIGHWAY 41 REALIGNMENT & BRIDGE REPLACEMENT A. Resolution No. 100-93 - Endorsing Alternate A-Modified realignment of State Highway 41 and bridge replacement across the Salinas River 2. URGENCY ORDINANCE NO. 272 - Amending the Atascadero Municipal Code defining dangerous weapons and prohibiting hunting within the City limits (City Council-initiated) (Cont'd from 8/10/93) 3. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE GRANT: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT - First of two required hearings 3 D. REGULAR BUSINESS: 1. ORDINANCE NO. 271 - Amending the Zoning Ordinance text to modify the parking requirements of the Pedestrian Commercial Zone (Zone Change 93-002; City of Atascadero) _ (Recommend (1) motion to adopt on second reading by title on/y) 2. DISCUSS FILLING COUNCIL VACANCY (Cont`d from 8/10/93) 3. SELECT VOTING DELEGATE FOR LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES ANNUAL CONFERENCE, OCTOBER 16-19, 1993 E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION: 1. City Council 2. City Attorney f 3. City Clerk 4. City Treasurer 5. City Manager * NOTICE: The City Council will adjourn to a Closed Session for purposes of discussion regarding pending litigation, entitled Whitaker v. City of Atascadero, pursuant to Govt. Code Sec. 54956.9. 4 t!1 i� a tiU lu Mart Kudl:ac 4740 Del Rio Rd August 11 , 1993 ` " ` 1 ( Atas adero,Ca. 93422 OF Ms . Lee Raboin, City Clerk OFFlCE City of Atascadero, - 6500 Palma Ave Atascadero,Ca. 93422 Dear Lee, This is to confirm that I will step down as Mayor effective August 24, 1993, which will be the next meeting of the City Council. I wish to direct staff to post on the August 24th meeting agenda,that nominations will be open for Mayor. Due to travel to and from Las Vegas starting- August 2 th, i feel this to be in the best interest for all . i If you have any questions, please contact me, Since��61�, � � / j�"Marty Kudlac, Agenda Item: 'B-1 Meeting Date: 08/24/93 ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL JULY 13, 1993 MINUTES The Mayor called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Councilpe son Nimmo led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: Present Councilmembers Bewley, Nimmo, L-un` and Mayor Kudlac Absent: Councilmember Borgeson (vacation) Also Present: Muriel "Micki" Korba City Treasurer a d Lee Raboin, ;City Clerk Staff Present: Andy Takata, City Manager/Director of Community Services; Henry Engen,Community Development Director; Art Montandon,City Attorney;Mark Jos 3ph,Administrative Services Director; Bud McHale, Polic Chief; ,John Nell, Assistant City Engineer and Mark Nlarkwort, Chief of Wastewater Operations COUNCIL COMMENTS: Mayor Kudlae formalized committee,appointments for the comity year. In addition, he announced that the proposed contract with Camino Real Fashion Outlets, Inc. (Golden WestDevelopment) would 'not be presented until the meeting of July 27, 1993. COMMUNITY 'FORUM: There were no comments from the public. A. COMMITTEE REPORTS (The following represent ad hoc cr standing commit- tees. Informative status reports were given, as follows): CC 07/13/93 Page 1 1 S.L.O. Council of Governments/Regional Transit Authority - Councilman Nimmo announced that the next meeting would be July 14, 1993 in San Luis Obispo. B. CONSENT CALENDAR: _ The Mayor read the Consent Calendar, as follows: 1. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JUNE8, 1993 2. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JUNE 22, 1993 3. TENTATIVE' PARCEL MAP 91008, 14000 MORRO ROAD - Subdivision of 80.92 acres into four parcels of 24.35, 11.61, 11.26: and 32.15 acres {net) (Rockstad) 4. SURFACE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM and STATE HIGHWAY ACCOUNT FUNDING APPLICATIONS 5. PLANNING COMMISSION VACANCIES - Authorization to recruit 6. ANNUAL RATIFICATION OF SLOCOG JOINT,*--OWERS AGREEMENT 7. RESOLUTION NO, 79.93 - Requesting alternative method of Property Tax apportionment 8. RESOLUTION NO. 80-93 • Adopting 1993/94 Fiscal Year Budget 9. RESOLILITION NO. 81-93 - Adopting 1993194 Salary Schedule and Position Authorization - 10. RES„QLUTION NO. 82-93 - Adopting the 1993/94 Gann limit 11. RESOLUTION NO 83-93 - Recommending continuation of current Developer Fee Schedule The City Clerk requested that Items'#B-1 and 2 be continued until the next meeting. In addition, she pulled Item #6 for clarification. Councilman Luna asked that Item#13- 8 be pulled for commentary. CC 07/13/93 Page 2 MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo, seconded by Councilman Bewley to approve Consent Calendar Items 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, 10 & 11; motion passed 4:0. Re: B-6 ANNUAL RATIFICATION OF SLOCOG JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT The City Clerk presented Resolution No. 84-93 authorizing the Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) and recommended adoption. MOTION: By Councilman Luna, seconded by CouncilmanNimmo to approve Resolution No. 84-93 authorizing the annual ratification of SLOCOG Joint Powers Agreement; motion carried unanimously. Re: B-8 RESOLUTION NO. 80-93 - Adopting 1993/94 Fiscal';Year Budget Councilman Luna pointed out that the City was left without a-staff accountant, city engineer, and others. He shared concern that there was`very little contingency funding for the unexpected and expressed words of caution. MOTION: By Councilman Luna, seconded by Councilman:Nimmo to approve Resolution No. 80-93 adopting the 1993/94 Fiscal Year Budget. Discussion on the motion: Councilman Nimmo commented that he concurred with Councilman Luna and verbalized similar warning. Vote on the motion: Motion to approve the budget passed 4:0 by roll call vote. C. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS A. Resolution 76-93 - Approving an amendment to the Parks&Recreation Element to designate a community center in a downtown location (GPA 92-004/City of Atascadero) Henry Engen presented the staff report and recommendation to approve. There were no questions from the Council Public Comment: Eric Greening, 7365 Valle, stated he was in support of the general plan amendment CC 07/13/93 Page 3 as proposed as long as it did not preclude the use of the Pavilion basement for . recreational uses. Mr. Engen noted that there was no conflict with the recommendation and the use as suggested by Mr. Greening. MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo, seconded by Councilman Luna to adopt Resolution No. 76-93; motion passed 4:0 by roll call vote. B. Resolution 77-93 - Approving an amendment to the Land Use Map of the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan from Low to High-Density Residential, 7000-7060 Los Arboles (GPA 92-008/Los Arboles Property Owners Association) Ordinance No. 270 - Amending Map 17 of the Official Zoning Maps by rezoning certain real property at 7000-7060 Los Arboles from RMF/10 (FH) to RMF/16 (PD7)(FH) (ZC 92-012/Los Arboles Property Owners Association) (Recommend (1) motion to waive reading in full and read by title only, and (2) motion to introduce on first reading by title only) Councilman Bewley stepped down due a potential conflict of interest relating to this item. Henry Engen provided the staff report and recommendation to approve. He noted that affirmative action would require a unanimous vote of the three voting councilmembers present. Councilman Luna remarked that he had some apprehensions relating to the Findings of Approval and revealed that he did not support the amendment because it represented high density development in a low density neighborhood. Mayor Kudlac indicated he favored the application because it provided a source of affordable housing. Public Comment: Eric Michielssen, 5300 Aguila, provided background on the application and encouraged approval. ---End of Public Testimony--- MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo, seconded by Mayor Kudlac to approve Resolution No. 77-93. Discussion on the motion: Councilman Luna reiterated that he did not support CC 07/13/93 Page 4 • the recommendation and suggested that the matter, in light of Councilwoman • Borgeson's absence, be put over until the next meeting when all five councilmembers would be present to deliberate. Mr. Michielssen agreed to the continuance. Motion withdrawn. By mutual consent the matter was continued until July 27, 1993. Councilman Bewley returned to the dias. 2. RESOLUTION NO. 75-93 - Adopting sanitation service charges to be added to the 1993-94 Property Tax Bill Henry Engen provided background, the staff report and recommendation to authorize placing sewer service rates onto the tax rolls. There were no Council comments or questions. Public Comments: Bill Mazzacane, Executive Director of the Chamber of Commerce, voiced objection to the rates and described them as inequitable. He contended that the Council's previous action to adopt a revised sewer rate schedule was not well-noticed and asserted that the rates will affect small retailers adversely. He urged the Council to ensure that pertinent water use information be obtaj"d from the Atascadero Mutual Water Company as quickly as possible to be analyzed and compared with the new . sewer rates. Ruth Rentschler, local business owner and resident, exclaimed than her new rate was unfair and asked how adjustments would be made once a comparative study is made with water company data. Henry Engen explained that the new rates would be set for one year and proposed that any changes as a result of further analysis would have to come back to the Council for consideration. Councilman Luna';pointed out that it has been determined that some businesses have not been paying any sewer service rates for twelve years. Mrs. Rentschler asserted that adjustments should be made before fees go on the tax rolls. Rush Kolemaine, Potrero Road resident, pointed out that vacancy factors at local motels and apartments should be taken into consideration and proposed that adjustments be made as soon as possible once actual usage and impact have been examined. ---End of Public Testimony--- MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo, seconded by Councilman Luna to CC 07/13/93 . Page 5 approved Resolution No. 75-93. Discussion on the motion: Mayor Kudlac commented that some rates may be unjust and suggested that the matter come back for review in two or three months. Mr. Engen noted that staff was striving to gain Water Company cooperation and would keep the Council posted on those efforts. Councilman Luna observed that substantial problems result when necessary improvements and upgrades to city infrastructure are not made. He recommended that fixed costs, as well as usage, be considered and urged approval. Vote on the motion: Motion to approve passed 4:0 by roll call vote. 3. RESOLUTION NO. 78-93 - Authorizing placement of delinquent solid waste charges on the 1993/94 Property Tax Rolls Mark Joseph presented the staff report and recommendation.`He noted that this was the first year of mandatory garbage pick-up and it was the first time the City was placing delinquent accounts on the tax rolls. Because of this, he explained, staff and Wil-Mar were working to smooth out some of the problems that are encountered when a new process is initiated. There were no Council comments or questions. Public Comments: • Jim Edwards, 2100 EI Camino Real, opposed placing the solid waste charges on the tax rolls and suggested that Wil-Mar do their own collections. Bill Kelly, 4730 San Benito Road, stated he was out of town for seven months of the year and objected to being charged for garbage service when he isn't home and generating trash. David Broadwater reported he owned a rental on Portola and explained that he had just paid Wil-Mar $52.00 representing past-due charges left unpaid by his tenants. He expressed concerns relating to the process and asserted that property owners must be given notice if tenants fall behind. Jim Lewis, 5495 Mercedes, expressed similar concerns and stated he had only just learned his renters were delinquent. Betty Sanders, representing Wil-Mar Disposal, reported that Wil-Mar was aware of the problem relating to tenants and landlords; and offered a compromise. She indicated that the garbage company would be willing to forgive specific property owners of the CC 07/13/93 Page 6 debts left unpaid by tenants if they would be willing to cooperate with Wil-Mar in locating those former tenants. She added that Wil-Mar was taking into consideration all input from the public in an effort to improve the process. Councilman Luna stated that he wanted assurance that anyone who has paid charges will not be assessed. Ms. Sanders reported that the list of assessments will not be sent to the County until it has been updated to reflect all payments received. Councilman Nimmo remarked that, as a landlord himself, a satisfactory solution is for the property owner to pay the garbage bill and pass on the chargle to the renter. Mr. Kelly, speaking again, stated that there had not been enough information included in the notice to property owners about the protest hearing. Mr. Broadwater also addressed the Council again and indicated that he supported the concept of mandatory pick-up. He suggested that Wil-Mar provide proper notice to landlords when a tenant is late. Councilman Luna remarked that although the matter is indeed between the tenant and landlord, the point is that accounts are delinquent. Jim Lewis spoke once more and claimed that he was not notified for six months that the trash bill was late. ---End of Public Testimony--- Brief discussion ensued about the deadline for paying off a delinquent charge. Ms. Sanders reiterated that Wil-Mar was willing to wait until the last possible moment. The City Attorney advised that Council could go ahead and adopt.the resolution with a provision reflecting a cut-off date. He pointed out that although it would not be possible to add new names or parcels it was possible to remove those who have paid from the list before it goes to the County, even after the resolution is adopted. MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo, seconded by Councilman Luna to adopt Resolution No. 78-93, and further, to delay forwarding the final list to the County (until the last minute). Discussion on the motion: It was suggested that Wil-Mar place Friday, July 16, 1993 at 5:00 p.m. as the deadline to receive all delinquent charges. In addition, it was agreed that Wil-Mar and City staff would review for accuracy the final list before it is sent to the County by their deadline of July 23, 1993. Mr. Joseph indicated that staff would provide the Council',with a copy of the final list. CC 07/13/93 . Page 7 '' Vote on the motion: Motion to approve passed 4:0 by roll call vote. D. REGULAR BUSINESS: No items scheduled E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR-ACTION: 1. City Manager Andy Takata previewed the agenda for July 27, 1993. AT 8:25 P.M., THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED. THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING OF THE ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL WILL BE TUESDAY, JULY 27, 1993. MINUTES RECORDED D PREPARED BY: r LEE RA601N, City CI i CC 07/13/93 Page 8 Benda item: B-2 Meeting Date: 8/24/93 Note: The City Treasurer's Report was not available at the time of agenda preparation and will be provided at a later date. f.. 000001 REPORT. TO CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item: B_3 CITY OF ATASCADERO Through: Andy Takata, City Manager Meeting Date: 8/24/93 From: Mark Joseph, Administrative Services Dire for ��4 SUBJECT: Award Bid for Lease-purchase of Six PolicB Patrol Vehicles RECOMMENDATIONS: 1) By motion, award bid to Downtown Ford (Sa ramento, C.A. ) for the purchase of six new 1993 Police patrol vehicles including extended three-year warranty, in the amount of $125,458.68. 2) Approve Resolution 104-93, authorizing a ease-purchase agreement with Ford Motor Credit Company to finance the costs noted above BACKGROUND/ANALYSI8 Due to the large number of patrol vehicles wit over- 100,000 miles, and the two-year delay in acquiring any new patrol vehicles, Council approved $45,000 for the first of a three-year lease-purchase of six patron vehicles. The Police Chief was able to utilize the State Bid, thereby eliminating the need fora separate bidding process. With Council's approval, staff will complete the credit application and the vehicles should be received in eptember.' Six semi-annual, payments of $22,379.44 will be requ'red, due in March and September, starting September 1, 1994. C rrent year payments will equal $44,758.88, which is slightly u der the budgeted amount. The terms of the leasing arrangement are attached. a:pdveh #25 00000A1_ JUL 19 193 13: 58 FROM COMM LNDG-MUNICIPAL# i PAGE . 002 LEASE/PURCHASE FINANCING VROPOSAL FOR City of Atascadero CA PROPOSAL # 39425 A OPTION # 1 Number of Payments : 6 Payment Timing Semiannual 'In Advance Payment Amount $22, 379.44 Payment Factor .178381 Total Amount Funded $125, 458.68 Annual . Percentage Rate 5 .60 APR AND PAYMENT FACTOR APPLY TO TOTAL AMOUNT FINANCED' BETWEEN $75,000 AND $149,999. DOCUMENTATION AND FUNDING MUST BE COMPLETED BY 10/01/93 ****** ****** EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION ****** ****** DESCRIPTION MANUF. QNTY DELIVERY DATE EQUIPMENT -COST 1193 ,Crown Spic Ford 6 08,/02/03 $97,761.00 Police Sedan Sales Tax 7.`25% Ford 6 08,/02/93 $7,087 .68 ESP Premium Ford 6 08/02/93 $20,610.00 Care Main/Wear {3yrs/100,000 TOTAL EQUIPMENT COST AFTER V0 /TRADE $125,458.68 The above financing proposal has been arranged by 'Ford Motor Credit Company, for submission to City of Atascadero , CA This proposal is for financing only and is subject to 1 . completion of mutually acceptable documentation substantially in the form of the enclosed ° sample documents. 2. A review'' of the proposed essential' use of the equipment and a final credit review of city of Atascadero , CA by the funding' source. 3. No material adverse change in the financial condition of City of Atascaderc, , CA prior to funding. 4. Receipt of a copy of the last three years' audited financial statements for City of Atascadero , CA . 5. No change; in Federal or applicable- state ,or local tax law, regulations, case law, rulings, or other interpretations by the internal Revenue Service that would affect adversely any Federal, state, or local tax- benefit assumed in determining the above proposal . Few 01J0(1 RESOLUTION NO. 104-93 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT',WITH FORD MOTOR CREDIT COMPANY TO LEASE-PURCHASE SIX PATROL VEHICLES The City Council of the City of Atascadero, California, hereby resolves as follows: 1. The Mayor is hereby authorized to execute an agreement with: Ford Motor Credit Company to lease-purchase six police patrol vehicles, including extended warranties and all other agreements or documentstrequired to effectuate the terms of agreement. 2. The City Manager is hereby authorized to make minor corrections or modifications of a mathematical or clerical nature. 3. The Finance Director is herebyi""authorized to: appropriate funds, if necessary; release and expend funds; and issue warrants to comply with ' he terms of this agreement. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Atascadero held on the day of , 1993. CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA By: MARTY KUDLAC,', Mayor ATTEST: LEE RABOIN, City Clerk 000004 REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item: B-4 CITY OF ATASCADERO Through: Andy Takata, City Manager Meeting Dat 8/24/93 From: Mark Joseph, Administrative Services Dire for SUBJECT: Renewing annual Animal Control Contract with the eounty RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution 103-93, renewing the City' s contract with the County for animal control services. ANALYSIS: For the last several years, the 'contract with the County for animal services has undergone several changes, from a fee-for- service format, to a fixed fee based on varying levels of service. This latest format offers Atascadero the ability to select whatever `level of service it prefers, and yet assures a , fixed price, so that costs can be forecasted better. The attached resolution and draft contract sets an annual cost at $55,000 per year. This provides the full range of animal control services (Package "D" ) , thereby freeing City police resources for law enforcement purposes. addition, '$5,000 is included for spay/neuter discounts. The'dontract is for three years, expiring June 30, 1995. Annual costs may be adjusted to reflect County increases, not to exceed five percent per year. The City can modify its service levels each year. The total of $60,000 was included in the FY 1993-94 budget. a:ani.malcon #3A RESOLUTION` NO. 103-93 A RESOLUTION OF .THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO TO PROVIDE ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES The City Council of the City of Atascadero, California, hereby, resol.ves as follows: 1. The Mayor is hereby authorized' to execute an agreement with: San Luis Obispo County to provide animal control services for the City of Atascadero. i 2. The City Manager is hereby authorized to make minor corrections or modifications of a mathematical or clerical nature. 3. The Finance Director is hereby authorized to: appropriate funds, if necessa release and expend funds; and issue warrants to cb ply with the terms o this agreement. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Atascadero held on the day of , 1993. I CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA By:Y MARTY KUDLAC, Mayor ATTEST: LEE RABOIN, City Clerk 000006 • - � .�TC.%1�.1�CLO� County o f Sari ,uiJ OkJpo DEPARTMENT OF ANIMAL REGULATION :' P.O. BOX 3760 SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 83403-3760 885 OKLAHOMA AVE. do 805 549-4400 1993-94 Proposed City Contract Packages - PACKAGE "A" BASIC SERVICES (Necessary to comply with State mandated codes) 1. SHELTER PROVISIONS/ANIMAL DISPOSAL The availability of a shelter to provide care for unlimited stray animals transported by citizens from the city incorporated boundaries.This shall include the administration necessary for surrender of animals at the shelter, the care of animals during the 72 hour hold period, and final disposal of animal through redemption, adoption, or destruction. 2. ANIMAL BITE INVESTIGATIONS QUARANTINES The taking of animal bite reports and subsequent quarantine of bite animals per California State Codes. The keeping of such records and reporting of information t94he State Health Department. 3. RABIES CONTROL/SUSPECT RABID ANIMAL HANDLING/TESTING The response to and attempted capture of suspect rabid wildlife and domestic animals. The destruction of such animals,proper laboratory preparation for rabies testing,transport of tissue to the County Health Department for testing, and proper disposal of remains when found to be positive. PACKAGE "B" BASIC SERVICES ('A') PLUS EMERGENCY SERVICES The addition of EMERGENCY SERVICES to the basic services described above in package "A". 4. EMERGENCY SERVICES The response to and attempted capture of injured domestic animals, transport of and medical aid to animal when needed for stabilization and subsequent sheltering of animal as per provisions stated in basic services. Emergency services shall be provided 24 hours a day, seven days a week. PACKAGE "C" BASIC SERVICES ('A') PLUS EMERGENCY SERVICES ('B') PLUS FIELD PICK UP OF ANIMALS (IE., DOG, CAT, OTHER, DOA) The addition of UNLIMITED ANIMAL PICK UP to the services provided in packages 'A" and "B" above. 5. FIELD PICK UP OF ANIMALS The response to and pick up of unlimited stray confined animals.The transport to and care of impounded animals per sheltering in the basic service described above. Pick up shall include dogs, cats, other/wAdl'rfe as well as DOA's. sre=" ^ensk�wp51 °c'tTac3`rptl Page 1 of 2 Revision Date: 11 March 93 ,000007 N N ill PACKAGE D . BASIC SERVICES ('A') PLUS EMERGENCY SERVICES ('B') PLUS STRAY FIELD PICK UP ('C') PLUS CITIZEN COMPLAINTS (BARKING, LEASH LAW, CRUELTY) NUISANCE ABATEMENT/COURT PROCEEDINGS FIELD ENFORCEMENT (PATROL REQUESTS, CITATIONS) This package shall provide for ALL animal regulation services historically preformed for contracting cities on previous contracts. Contract fees shall cover unlimited response by the Department of Animal Regulation in the performance of services included within the contract package. Cities shall be billed for the contract fees on a quarterly basis. f are usc\s1r\wp5t wpa Page 2 of 2 Revision Date: 11 March 93 000008 P AGREEMENT FOR ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES This Agreement is made and entered into this 1st day of July, 1993, by and between the County of San Luis Obispo, hereinafter referred to as "County", and the City of_ ,!hereinafter referred to as - "C WITNESSETH: THAT WHEREAS, The City is desirous of contracting with the County for performance of the hereinafter described animal control services within its boundaries by the County of San '.;Luis Obispo through the Department of Animal Regulation; and WHEREAS,the County is agreeable to providing such services in accordance with the provisions of the San Luis Obispo County Code Title 9 which provides for the licensing of dogs,.the establishment of a public pound, and for the collection and care of stray, diseased and vicious animals_; and f, WHEREAS,the County of San Luis Obispo has established the Department of Animal Regulation to enforce the ordinances of the County Code Title 9 within the unincorporated areas of the:County; and WHEREAS, the City is desirous of contracting for said Animal Control Service. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED AS FOLLOWS: DEFINITIONS - Used throughout as follows: Household Pets or Small Animals means but is not limited to cats, dogs, canaries, fish, hamsters, rabbits, turtles, and reptiles and other kindred animals usually and ordinarily'kept as household pets. Livestock or Large Animals means horses, ponies, mules, cattle, goats, swine and all other domestic or domesticated animals other than household pets. Small Wikll'rfe means racoons, possums, foxes and other similar sized wildlife. 1. Service Package Options BASIC SERVICES - are defined as follows: 1) The receipt of household pets at the shelter or at drop off kennels. 2) Sheltering of all household pets received at the shelter in accordance with state regulations, local ordinances, and policies governing humane treatment of such animals. 3) Services for returning impounded animals to their owners, adoption ofor humane destruction of animals received or brought to the shelter. 4) Investigation of all animal bite involving humans and the quarantine of biting animals pursuant to state regulations and local ordinances. 5) Investigations of exposures to rabid animals or suspect rabid animals at large and the quarantine or . destruction of animals which were in contact with rabid animals. e r �Q=`lr�wp� c�^ITB n wpd Page 1 of 5 Revision Date: 11 March 93 000009 r EMERGENCY SERVICES - defined as follows: Emergency and after hour services for any of the following: 1) Injured/Sick dogs or cats. 2) Arrest hold animals. 3) Calls that have been approved by the Watch Commander and referred to Animal Regulation. FIELD SERVICES - Defined as follows: Response of an Animal Regulation Officer during regular business hours to pick up any of the following within city limits on an unlimited basis: 1) Confined Stray Animal Pick Up 2) Dead Stray Animal Pick Up f" 3) Owned Animal Pick Up (fee paid by citizen) 4) Owned Dead Animal Pick Up (fee paid by citizen) 5) Euthanasia of Owned Animals (fee paid by citizen) 6) Transportation to Veterinarians of Owned Animal;(fee paid by citizen) ADDITIONAL FULL SERVICES - Defined as follows: CITIZEN COMPLAINTS: The fielding of and response to complaints from citizens including, but not limited to: barking dogs, leash law violations and animal cruelty. NUISANCE ABATEMENT: All activities involved in the processing of nuisance abatement orders, including preparation for court proceedings when necessary. FIELD ENFORCEMENT: The addition of further field enforcement other than field pick up as described in"FIELD SERVICES"above, but not limited to: random patrol, patrol requests, ordinance violation citation and agency assists. 2. Services To Be Provided by County A. Maintain an Animal Regulation Department-to provide management and supervision of the program, to keep records and statistics,and enforce licensing as established in policy and approved by the Animal Control Advisory Committee as defined hereafter. B. Animal Shelter- maintain, or cause to maintain an Animal Shelter to provide for the care, housing and disposal of animals impounded within the city or County or delivered by city or County residents. C. Specific Agreements -to provide pursuant to specific package contracts with each city: • D. Operation Permit Services to provide Permit Servi es c to all citizens of the County regardless of jurisdiction. areQ:L, tivvp51',coraacLwpd Page 2 of 5 Revision Date: 11 March 93 000010 3. Animal Regulation and Control Advisory Committee - There shall be an Animal Regulation and Control Advisory Committee whose responsibility it will be to review and recommend on all matters of Departmental Policy regarding overall program administration, level and quality of service, budget, and ordinance development and amendments. This Advisory Committee shall be made up of: one representative from each City.contracting with the County, one representative from the County's Veterinarians' Association, one representative from an animal welfare society, one representative from the County Health Department, one representative of the Highway Patrol, one representative from the Department of Animal Regulation, one- representative of the County Administrative Office, and one representative from the County Sheriff's Department. The Committee shall receive staff support from the Department of animal Regulation. 4. Cooperation - To facilitate the performance of the foregoing functions, it is hereby agreed that the County shall have the full cooperation and assistance from the City, its officers, agents, and employees. 5. Employee Compensation and Uabifiity-City shall not be called upon to assume any liability for the direct payment of any salaries, wages, or other compensation to any County personnel performing services hereunder, or any liability other than that provided in the Agreement. The City shall not be liable for compensation or indemnity to any County employee for injury or sickness arising out of his/her employment. 6. Indemnification - Nothing in the provisions of the Agreement is intended to create duties or obligations to or rights in third parties not parties to this contract or affect the legal liabilo of either party to contract by imposing any standard of care respecting the regulation and enforcement of laws regarding animals different from the standard of care imposed by law. It is understood and agreed that neither City, nor any officer or employee thereof is responsible for any damage or liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by the County under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to the County under'',this.Agreement. It is also understood and agreed that pursuant to Government Code 895.4'County shall defend, indemnify and save • harmless the City, all officers and employees from all claims, suits or actions of every name, kind and description brought for or on account of injuries to or death of-any person or damage to property resulting from anything done or omitted to be done by the County under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to the County under this Agreement except as otherwise provided by Statute. It is understood and agreed that neither County nor any officer or employee thereof is responsible for any damage or liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by the City under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to the City under this Agreement. It is also understood and agreed that pursuant to Government Code Section 895.4, City shall defend, indemnify and save harmless the County,all officer and employees from all claims, suits or actions of every name, kind and description brought for on account of injuries to or death of any person or damage to property resulting from anything done or omitted to be done by City under connection with any wont, authority or jurisdiction delegated to the City under this Agreement except as otherwise provided by Statiute. 7. Employee Status - All persons employed in the performance of the services and functions specified in paragraph 2 of this Agreement shall be County employees; no present City employee shall become a County employee by reason of this Agreement;and no person employed hereunder shall have any City pension,Civil Service, or any similar status or right. For this Agreement, and for the sole purpose of giving legal status to the performance of the duties and responsibilities herein, every County officer and the employee engaged in their performance of any service hereunder shall,where necessary, be deemed an officer or employee of City while performing the services for City. 8. Prosecution - it shall be the duty of the City Attorney, exercising the discretion vested in his office, to prosecute violations of the Cly Animal Ordinance, and take appropriate legal action with respect to the abatement of any public nuisance involving animals occurring within City's corporate limits. 9. Tern and Renewal -This Agreement shall be effective on the 1st day of July, 1993, and shall terminate on the 30th day of June, 1995. All fees, charges, and payments required by paragraph 12 (A-C) and paragraph 15 shall be adjusted each July 1 st of the three year duration of the contract. This aidjustment shall be for any increase in County's cost of providing services. The Department appropriation Budget shall be used to determine percentage of increase. This percentage shall not exceed five (5) percent for any one year of the areg u�er�sltiap5l\corttraQ.roO Page 3 of 5 Revision Date: 11 March 93 000011 contract period. This contract is subject to cancellation by either party by notification in writing of the desire to terminate contract. Notification shall be required 30 days in advance of the termination date. A. City Notification - no later than April 1 of each year, each city shall be notified of its pro-rata share of Basic Services and Humane Education, the hourly rate for City Requested Services, and the amount needed for Spay/Neuter Services. The city shall notify the County no later than July 1 of their agreement to pay for basic services and other services in each subsection. B. Actual Costs - Participants shall pay a set fee in accordance with paragraph 10 hereof. Attachment A reflects the annual cost. 10. County Billing-County shall bill city quarterly for their contracted services. Billing shall be submitted at the end of each quarter. City shall remit payment within ten days of receipt of billing. 11. Modification - This contract constitutes the entire understanding of the parties hereto and no changes, amendments or alterations shall be effective unless in writing and signed by both parties. 12. Ordinance Conformity- City agrees to adopt animal control ordinances Which conform to and are not in conflict with Chapter 9 of the San Luis Obispo County Code. Changes and modifications to City codes may be conducted with the County Department of Animal Regulation's consultation before adoption. County Department of Animal Regulation may also make recommendations to City for changes or modifications to their City ordinance. 13. Books and Records - County agrees to keep such books and: ecords and in such form and manner as County Auditor-Controller shall specify. Said books shall be ooe -or examination by City at all reasonable times. 14. Notices-Any notice required to be given pursuant to the terms and provisions hereof shall be in writing and ,shall be sent by certified or registered mail to the County at: Department of Animal Regulation P.O. Box 3760 San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-3760 and to the City at: 0 aveg:us-ls*N-p51Wor*r&cL-pd Page 4 of 5 Revislon Date: 11 March 93 000012 IN WITNESS THEREOF, City of by resolution duly adopted by its City Council causes this Agreement to be signed by its mayor and attested by its clerk, and County of San Luis Obispo by order of the Board of Supervisors causes these presents to be subscribed by Chairman'of said Board and seal of said Board to be affixed hereto attested by clerk of said: CITY OF COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO By: By: Mayor Chairman, Board of Supervisors f , ATTEST: ATTEST: By: By: City Clerk Board of Supervisors By: County Counsel Date: ere�us�s�na�5�V—traMv4pd Page 5 of 5 Revision Date: '0100-13- SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF ANIMAL REGULATION AGREEMENT FOR ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES ATTACHMENT"A" (Actual Cost) Package "A" Package "B" Package "C" Package "D" Atascadero 25,000 27,000 47,000 55,000 areg_vservst%vwp5INcon"ctvVd Page 1 of 1 Revision Date: Y�Mipph � County of San c ui-4 Obilpo DEPARTMENT OF ANIMAL REGULATI-ON P.O. BOX 3760 SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93403-3760 885 OKLAHOMA AVE. AC 805 549-4400 To: Advisory Committee Members From: Sgt. E.C. O'Shaughnessy Subject: Proposed Contracts/Package Information Date: May 13, 1992 The information enclosed has been reviewed by the subcommittee working on;tfie City Contracts. It should be noted that we are still working on the exact procedures for the actual Cost Accounting for each program. Historical data and methods need revision for this new contract. The figures provided for the 92/93 fiscal year are being prepared by using our best estimations. For the future years, data will be available for more accurate calculations. Each city will receive their specific numbers in an Attachment for their contract. The information here is just for reference. r = Basic Package Costs 91/92 County Requested 92193 County Requested Atascadero $ 71,000 $ 60,350 Paso Robles 55,000 46,750 Morro Bay 28,000 23,800 San Luis Obispo 71,000 60,350 Arroyo Grande 35,000 29,750 Grover City 38,000 32,300 Pismo Beach 26,000 22,100 Totals: 325,000 275,400 000015 REPORT TO COUNCIL Meeting, ate: 8-24-93 CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda tem: B-5 THROUGH: Andy Takata, City Manager �b VIA: Henry Engen, Director of Community Development "f FROM: Mark Markwort, Chief of Wastewater Operations SUBJECT: Contract Award For Engineering Design Service For Replacement Of Wastewater Pumping Station #l ' RECOMMENDATION: Award Contract to Engineering Development Ass iates (EDA) for engineering design services including generation of plans, specifications, and bid 'documents. BACKGROUND Wastewater Pumping Station 11 was cpnstructed in 1969 and is the city's oldest piece of wastewater handling e" ipmwent that is still in operation. Maintenance required to keep this station operational has steadily increased to the ,point where it has become unreliable. This twenty-four year old station has depreciated to the paint where immediate replacement is necessary. DISCUSSION: Four local engineering firms were sent proposal and qualification requests. All four firms responded with proposals.. City Engineering and Wastewater Operations staff' independently reviewed the submitted proposals and determined that. all submitting firm project teams are qualified to perform the necessary work. The fee which each submitting firm would require for their services are as follows 1. Boyle Engineering Corporation. . . . . . . .$ 22 00.00 2. Penfield & Smith. . .$ 12 00.00 3. John L. Wallace and Associates. . .$ 11 80.00 4. Engineering Development Associates. . .$ 9, 50.`00 With all firms determined to be equally qualified to perform the work, staff is recommending that Council award a contract to EDA, the firm with the lowest fee. 000016 FISCAL IMPACT• $ 9,150.00 An allotment of $100,000.00 for the replacement of Wastewater Pumping Station #1 is part of the Wastewater Divisions FY 92-93. budget (Item , 201 84315 0900) Attachments: A) Request For Qualifications and Proposal for Engineering Services r A set of the submitted proposals is available for Council review at the Council's` reading desks 00001'7 ATTACHMENT "A" c CITY OF ATASCADEIRO WASTEWATER OPERATIONS DIVISION 6500 PALMA AVENUE, ATASCADERO, CA 93422' Ted Wkom(6"4617W7-0 Fay Q"461-7615 July 27, 1993 REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS AND PROPOSAL The City of Atascadero is requesting proposals 'for engineering design services including generation of plans, specifications, and bid documents for replacement of a wastewater pumping station. BACKGROUND: The City of Atascadero's Wastewater Pumping•station A (PS#1) was constructed in 1969 and currently handles inn average flow of approximately 70 gallons per minute . The City wishes to replace this station for improved reliability. A tentative ';design has been formulated, however, it will be the design engineers responsibility to insure the suitability of the final design for existing and expected future conditions. $COP$ OF WOE: • 1) Review and finalization of City's preliminary design concept. a) verification of design's suitability', for existing and future conditions. 3) Generation of Plans; Two sets of initial drawings for City review followed by the submittal of one set of the final design replicated on reproducible mylar. 4) Generation of Specifications and Bid documents; Three "draft" copies of proposed specifications and bid documents will be submitted to the City for review prior to completion of the final project submittal consisting of one unbound copy for City reproduction and distribution. 5) A complete project cost estimate. The final product gill be complete to the point where the city can advertise for bidsp including p lanas generic and technical specifications, and contract documents. The City will provide generic contract documents in Word Perfect 5.1. ENVISIONED PROJECT DESIGN: The pump station design, as envisioned by the City, will include: 1) A new 72" x 15' concrete wet-well 2) Two new 20 HP Vertical Chopper Pumps 3) A new Tesco, Liquitronic III electric pump controller 4) All valves, coatings, covers, connections, etc. necessary to construct a durable and fully operational wastewater pumping station 5) Instructions for proper abandonment of existing pumping station. SCHEDULING: The firm selected will -submit a copy of preliminary plan drawings 14 days after notice to proceed. Draft copies of specifications and contract documents will be submitted 28 days after notice to proceed. Final plans, SPqr and contract _ documents will be due 42 days after noti'be to proceed. SUBMITTAL: The completed proposal should include: 1) The firms qualifications and background in wastewater pumping station design 2) Identity of project manager and resumes of key people that will be involved with the project 3) A fixed fee quotation for the preparation of a full set of plans, specifications and construction documents 4) A fee schedule for extra work, to include, hourly personnel charges, equipment, materials, and travel costs. 5) Six copies of your proposal are to be submitted to the City Public Works Department no later than 5:00 pm, August 13, 1993. The firm chosen to enter into a standard City Consultant Contract will be required to maintain Errors and omissions Insurance in the amount of $Soo,000. • 000019 • SELECTION: A team consisting of City staff members will select the most responsive and qualified firm to perform the work described. Questions regarding this request for proposal may be directed to Mark Markwort, Chief of Wastewater Operations, '1 at (805) 461- 7607. Pertinent materials may be reviewed at the Atascadero Public Works Department, Room 308, at the Atascadero City Administration Building. 000020 REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Item:CITY OF ATASWERQ Agenda B-6 Through': Andy Takata, City Manager Meeting I late: 08124193 File Nun ber: TPM 18-90 From: Henry Engen, Community Development Director AAf SUBJECT: Acceptance of Final Parcel Map #18-90 to establish a Planned Development Overlay zone (PD7) dividing one existing parcel of approximately one-quarter acre into three (3) par els of 3,426, 3,435, and 4,066 square feet for single-family residential use at 7970 Sinaloa Avenue (Russel Best) . RECOMMENDATION Acceptance of Final ,Parcel Map #18-90. BACKGROUND:` g,r, On March 26, 1991, the City Council conducted a public hearing on the above-referenced map. Council concurred with the Planning Commission' s recommendation to approve TPM #18-90 subject to the Findings and the Revised Conditions of Approval. All conditions have been completed by the applicant. HE:ph cc: Paul Metchik Central Coast Engineering Attachment: Zoning Map 000021 OF ATASCADERO COMM DEPARL `✓ ENT low MAZOW Aw !r ���'�1��►�/ 1/!!'+i���� `��' OF �►' �r®l�'� � �X111/1/11! !�,�1i111�,, �r � �� lj,� ■ lid j MINE Elllntl �- 4 • CITY OF ATASCADERO TIBIT A 1 LOCACATION MAP IM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMEvTI' RE: ITEM B-6, 8/24/93 D ER,kRTMENT • REVISED 8/23/93 w E .o% iPIN CO� SONOR 'x a— L S H M8R LLA �- AN r ai ° f L 04 c CL v F� i i a. a i i r 000021111 REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Meeting Date: 8/24199 II CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: B-7 (A-B) Through: Andy Takata, City Manager Via: Henry-Engen, Community Development Director From: Kelly Heffernon, Administrative Analyst SUBJECT: Certification through Resolution to appr ve applications for funding under the Transportation EnhE ncement Activities (TEA) grant program for the acquisitic n of Stadium Park and the landscaping of Highway 101. RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt Resolutions Alo. 101 1-93 and 102-93 approving the application for funds a der the TEA grant program, BACKGROUND: :x. , : On May 25, 1993 your Council gave authorization to submit applications fora hased p program to landscape the Highway 101 corridor and to assist with the acquisition of Stadium Park. The consultant for this project, Dave Morrow, is currently working to finish those applications. In order to complete the application ackages, the City Council must give its endorsement through resolution. The deadline for submitting the applications to SLOCOG staff was extended to August 25th. SLOCOG will then formally review and rank all applications E t their October 6th meeting. DISCUSSION: As you are aware, the TEA Program provides funding on a competitive basis contingent upon a 12% local match.- The attached two resolutions address this non- Federal funding concern as well as the ability to maintain the project. 000 FISCAL IMPACT: 12% Local Match TEA Funds Requested Tota! Project Highway 101 $17,932.70 $131,506.50 $149,439.20 Landscaping: Source: Tree Fund Acquisition of $29,820.00 $218,680 $248,500.00 Stadium Park: Source: General Fund &tor Contributions 000024 RE: ITEM B-7, 8/24/93 REVISED RES. NO. 101-93 (Note amendments to RESOLUTION NO. 101-93 Items 2 & 4) • A RESOLUTION OF THE ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR FUNDS FOR THE TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT ACTIVITIES PROGRAM UNDER THE INTERMODAL SURFACE TRANSPORTATION EFFICIENCY ACT OF 1991 FOR THE FOLLOWING PROJECT: ACQUISITION OF STADIUM PARK WHEREAS, the United States-Congress has enacted the ''Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991, which is to make available over $200 million in federal dollars over a 6 year period as funds to the California Department of Transportation for transportation enhancement activities; and WHEREAS, the Department of Transportation has established the procedures and criteria for reviewing proposals and, along with the Regional Transportation Agencies, will submit to the California Transportation Commission a list of recommended projects from which the recipients will be selected; and WHEREAS, said procedures and criteria established by the California Department of Transportation call for the approval of an application by the applicants governing body before submission of said application to the California Transportation Commission; and WHEREAS, the application contains assurances that the applicant must comply with; and WHEREAS, the applicant, if selected, will enter into an agreement with the State of California to carry out the transportation enhancement activities project; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE City Council of the City of Atascadero: 1 . Approves the filing of an application for the Transportation Enhancement Activities Program for consideration for funding. 2. Will provide $29,820 in non-Federal funds for this project. 3. Certifies that this body will make adequate provisions for operation and maintenance of the project. 4. Appoints City Manager as agent of the City of Atascadero to conduct all negotiations, execute and submit all documents, including but not limited to application,agreements,amendments, payment requests and so on, which may . be necessary for the completion of the aforementioned project. 0000tiv RESOLUTION NO. 101-93 • A RESOLUTION OF THE ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR FUNDS FOR THE TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT ACTIVITIES' PROGRAM UNDER THE INTERMODAL SURFACE TRANSPORTATION EFFICIENCY ACT OF 1991 F() Tt4t FOLLOWING PROJECT: - v ACQUISITION O `STADIUM-PARK ,,.. WHEj AS, the Uniled0States Congress has gi acted the Intermodal Surface Transpo tion Efficien Act of 1991, which is to make available over $200 million in feder 'I dollars r a 6 year period as fuAs to the California Department of Trans rtationtransportation enhancemeint activities; and WV06EAS, the Department of Tansportation has established the procedures and criteria for reviewing proposal and, along with the Regional Transportation Agencies, will submit to the 9alifornia Transportation Commission a list of recommended projects from wh,i6'h the recipients will be selected; and WHEREAS, said prpcedures and criteria established by,#,fie.California Department of Transport*n call for the approval of an appl:1cat on by th 'applicants governing body before s. bmission of said'applicatioro-�tle California T nsportation Commission; and h w Z il WHEREAS,'e application contains"assurances that the plicant must comply with; and ° g, WHEREAS, the app cant, if selected, will en; into an agreement with the State of Califprnia to cpry out the transportatior,�'nhancement activities project; NOW,`. , EFORE, BE IT RESOLVED 'HAT THE City Council of the City of Atascadero: 1 . Approves the filing of an afication for the Transportatior�.,Enancement Activities Program for consioration for funding. 2. Will provide $29,760 it ,r on-Federal funds forwt is project.: 3. Certifies that this body will mak ,,dequate provisions operation and ii maintenance of the;,'project. 4. Appoints Henry Engen agent of the City of A scadero to conduct all negotiations, exec and submit all documents, '. eluding but not limited to application,agreements,amendments, payment r uests and so on,which may • be necessary for the completion of the aforem tioned project. 000025 Resolution No. 101-93 Page 2 On motion by Councilmember ,seconded by Councilmember the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: August 24, 1993 ATTEST: CITY7 OF ATASCADERO By: LEE RABOIN, City Clerk MARTY KUDLAC, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: ARTHER R. MONTANDON, City Attorney 000026 RE: ITEM B-7, 8/24/93 REVISED_ RES. NO. 102-93 (Note-amendment to RESOLUTION NO. 102-93 Item 4) A RESOLUTION OF THE ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR FUNDS FOR THE TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT ACTIVITIES PROGRAM UNDER THE INTERMODAL SURFACE TRANSPORTATION EFFICIENCY ACT OF 1991 FOR THE FOLLOWING PROJECT: HIGHWAY 101 LANDSCAPING WHEREAS, the United States Congress has enacted the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991, which is to make available over $200 million in federal dollars over a 6 year period as funds to the California Department of Transportation for transportation enhancement activities; and WHEREAS, the Department of Transportation has established the procedures and criteria for reviewing proposals and, along with the Regional Transportation Agencies, will submit to the California Transportation Commission a list of recommended projects from which the recipients will be selected; and WHEREAS, said procedures and criteria establishedby the California Department of Transportation call for the approval of an application by the applicants governing body before submission of said application to the California Transportation Commission; and WHEREAS, the application contains assurances that the applicant must comply with; and WHEREAS, the applicant, if selected, will enter into an ',agreement with the State of California to carry out the transportation enhancement'activities project; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE City Council of the City of Atascadero: 1 . Approves the filing of an application for the Transportation Enhancement Activities Program for consideration for funding. 2. Will provide $17,932.70 in non-Federal funds for this project. 3. Certifies that this body will make adequate provisions for operation and maintenance of the project. 4. Appoints City Manager as agent of the City of Atascadero to conduct all negotiations, execute and submit all documents, including but not limited to application,agreements,amendments, payment requests and so on,which may be necessary for the completion of the aforementioned project. 00002'7 RESOLUTION . 102-93 A RESOLUTION OF Thi ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE APPLICAON FOR FUNDS FOR THE TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT ACTIVITIE 'PROGRAM UNDER T11E"��111 TER�'MODAL SURFACE TRANSPORTATION EFFIQ"CY ACT OF 199; 1�R THE F9iLOWING PROJECT: HIGHWAY,46 1 LANDSCAM G WHEF SAS, the U shed States Congress has enacted theIntermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991, which is to make available over $200 million in federaf dollarstiver a 6 year period as funds to the California Department of Trans�rtatiorvfor transportation enhancement activities; and EREAS, the Deparxiiient of Transportation has established the procedures and criteria for reviewirW proposals and, along with the Regional Transportation I., Agencies, will submit;/to the California Transportati '`�omr*nission a list of recommended proiec from which the recipientFi`�be selecte�and WHEREAS, said procedures jand' criteria established by the California Department otTransportation call,fa the approval of arl,,aj plication by the applicants governing bpd"y before submissi'"dn of said-applicatic to the California Transportation Commissi ; and � k WfiEREAS ,tKe application contains assurances that the applicant must comply with; and WHEREAS, the applicant, if selected, will enter into an agreement,wlith the State of California to carry out& transportation enhancernant`46fivities project; NOW, THEREFORE,, E IT RESOLVED THAT THE City Council of thwifoCity of Atascadero: 1 . Approves the" filing of ap tpplication for the Transports ron Enhancement Activities Program for consideration for funding. , ; 2. Will provide $ ,932.70 in non-Federal funds for project. r 3. Certifies that this body will make adequa provisions for operation and maintenance of the project. 4. Appoints Henry Engen as agent of a City of Atascadero to conduct all negotiations, execute and submit a documents, including but not limited to application,agreements,amendm ts, payment requests and so on,which may be necessary for the completion f the aforementioned project. 00002'7 Resolution No. 102-93 Page 2 On motion by Councilmember seconded by Councilmember the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: August 24, 1993 ATTEST: CITY-OF ATASCADERO By: LEE RABOIN, City Clerk MARTY KUDLAC, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: ARTHER R. MONTANDON, City Attorney • 0000028 REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Item No C-1 Through: Andy Takata, City Manager Meeting ate: 08/24/93 From: Henry Engen, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Route 41 Bridge Replacement and Roadway Realignment. RECOMMENDATION: Approval of attached Resolution No. 100-93, reaffirming the City's support for Alternate A-Modified for the realignment of Highway 41. DISCUSSION: At the San Luis Obispo's Council of Governments' August 4, 1993 meeting, this project was pulled from , the list of previously approved projects where it was includedrlas part f the proposed 1993 Federal Transportation Improvement Program for the area. The attached letter from Ruth Brackett, President of the COG, requested that the City hold a formal public hearing on the project prior to their considering the matter at their next meetin on September 8th. At the Council' s meeting of August 10th, A gust 24th was selected for that hearing. The attached background materials summarize the project' s history - beginning in 1967 - of the so-called Alternate "A alignment for the relocation of Highway 41 and a new bridge cross ng the Salinas- River. Also included is the September 1992 letter from the former Caltrans Project Engineer, Kathy DiGraza, summarizing Caltrans' actions in modifying the Draft Environmental Report to incorporate stronger mitigation measures for tree replacement, prevision of a bridge instead of fill at the entrance to Stac ium Park, and formally recommending the preferred Alternate A ddified route. This letter also summarizes the public hearing proe ss involved in project evaluation. In addition, the minutesand staff report of the Council' s 3:2 vote supporting Alternate A-Modif ed at the July 14th 1992 meeting is attached hereto, together w th the City' s response to the Draft EIR, dated May 22, 1992. GENERAL PLAN CONFORMITY The Circulation Element adopted in June 1993 contain3 the following language with respect to the Highway 41 extension: 000029 "6. ARTERIAL ROADWAYS Policies (c) Support the realignment of State Route 41 as a two- lane highway along Mercedes, along;with replacement of its existing bridge across the Salinas River, while minimizing its impacts on the community. " Prgar= 62 "Work with Caltrans to ensure funding and construc- tion by Caltrans of State Route 41 ,improvements'as described for Alternative A-Modified in the DEIR for that project (Caltrans, 1992) ,; including traffic signal improvements on the west end. Realignment of Route 41' will significantly reduce traffic on Curbaril Avenue and. -West MallICap s- trano, avoiding the need for widening these existing residential streets. ; While accelerating the need for improving -the Morro ReadfUS 141 interchange, realignment will postpone the need for reconstruction of the Curbarl and Traffic Way interchanges. " As reflected in the attachments, thentown Master Plan also reflects the Alternate "A" alignment. y. PROJECT STUDY REPORT STATUS The City of Atascadero and SLOCCG. are co-funding a Project Study Report for the short; and long-range improvement of the interchange of Highway 41 and 101. The draft report is on the Council's reading desk and a presentation to the City Council by the consultants and staff has been scheduled for September 14 1993. The proposed improvements anticipate the construction of Alternate A-Modified. HE:ph Enols: Resolution No. 100-93 Letter from SLOG — August 4, 1993 Alternates Map SLOCOG Project History through :March 3, 1993 Letter from Caltrans transmitting preferred alternative recommendation - September 22, 1992 Record of Council Action Supporting Alternate A--Modified - July1992 Letter from City re: Draft EIR - May 22, 1992 S/C,: Final EIR for Bridge Replacement and Realignment on Route 41 in andtnear the City of Atascadero 1992 000030 RESOLUTION NO. 100-93 • RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO ENDORSING ALTERNATE A-MODIFIED REALIGNMENT OF STATE HIGHWAY 41 AND BRIDGE REPLACEMENT ACROSS THE SALINAS RIVER WHEREAS, both County and City General Plans adopted since 1968 have included the Alternate "A" realignment as ' the preferred relocation of Highway 41 in the City; and WHEREAS, numerous private developments have been located and designed in anticipation of this realignment of Highway 41; and WHEREAS, an Environmental Impact Report has been prepared by Caltrans recommending Alternate A-Modified as the preferred realignment for Highway 41 realignment; and WHEREAS, the California Transportation Commission has approved funding for the Alternate A-Modified route; and WHEREAS, Caltrans has commenced engineering design work pre- paratory to going to bid and constructing the improvement; and WHEREAS, the City of Atascadero' s ; 1993 Circulation Element designates Highway 41 realignment and bridge relocation as following the Alternate A-Modified alignment; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City ,Council hereby reaffirms the Alternate A-Modified realignment and bridge for Highway 41 and urges the San Luis Obispo Council of ';Governments to continue its ' support by retaining this project ' in this years Federal Transportation Improvement Program. On Motion by , and seconded by , the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: CITY OF ATASCADERO By. MARTY KUDLAC, Mayor 000031 Resolution No. 100-93 Page 2 ATTEST: LEE RABOIN, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ARTHER MONTANDON, City Attorney APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: HENRY ENGEN Community Development Director • 0O0Q i h9cETi$+hQ/93 AGENDA, DATA ITEM I San. Luis Obispo Coun-CU 0 Arroyyo Grande A ascadero � � Regional TransportationPlannin Agency GroverBeachSay Morro bay Metropolitan Planning Organization Paso Robles Pismo Beach Congestion Management Agency San Luis Obispo San Luis Obispo County August 4, 1993 Robert Nimmo, Counciimember City of Atascadero 6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero, CA 93422 Subject: Route 41 Bridge Replacement and Roadway Realignmqrit Dear Delegate Nimmo, This letter confirms the action taken by the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) at its August 4th meeting excluding ,the Highway 41 Bridge Replacement. and Roadway Realignment Project from its approval of the Federal Transportation Improvement Program(FTIP). .. Approval of the FT1P with this exclusion was done wii `the provision that the Atascadero City _ Council.will hold apubiic hearing on the project before the next SLOCOG meeting on September 8th at which time th ero'ect will be reconsidered for inclusion in the FTiP. p 1 The net effect of removing the project from the F11P is that Caltrans is precluded from seeking federal funding for the project until it is included in that document. Any action you can now take to speed formal action byyourCity Council on the recommended alignment alternative will benefit all involved. SLOCOG delegates have noted that once a:formal public hearing. is held on the project, with a• vote of approval by the Council, that they will feel more comfortable voting to include it in the F1lP. Sincerely, Ruth Brackett, President- Sart Luis Obispo Council of Governments 000033 1007 Montere�r St.. San Luis Obispo, CA 93409; tel. (805)7,31-4-219;f:1 X. (805 '781JG3 Z cr W o O N�n C� $ • dJ N LLQ a�a I--- W o _ U �� LL oN 0 `� o� Q D '_' LLI CL Zt- CC v Qcc: LL Ww .ZW .4 ; W 0 o -) w � i— d UJ Z p: UJ CL • w w w cn � Z Z Z r a W O W F- U1JX Q Q W �g I Q $ iP r / u 4 O L � m db a4 = N � W V 7. Q /•' at 4 0 f3jvw3< u W r. O• <� syNRr '7y Q Z s • / •• V's� °" `OMPANY ppGiFt� CM 5'UTMERN t 3 Vy W W • m N • C Q W Z 7 j W 0 W ( o q V.AY v A. A W J O a W V b � a m JJ OC9 31tMIf311Y�_ •..� „ „� W , 16 -IA Wu QV .s..s` (o�+J��`h 3AY l3eYSA Y1nvs Ln ( r • ai� r ( • W W Q ►� O r' 000034 ROUTE 41 EAST BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND REALIGNMENT HISTORY OF PROJECT APPROVAL ACTIONS AS OF JULY, 1993 1967 ATASCADERO ADVISORY COMMITTEE ASKS BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO REQUEST DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS TO MAKE ROUTE STUDY REPORT. 1968 SLO COUNTY REQUESTS DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS TO STUDY ROUTE ADOPTION. 1969 ATASCADERO CHAMBER OF COMMERCE REQUESTS STATE HIGHWAY COMMISSION TO REALIGN ROUTE 41. - 1970 CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY COMMISSION ADOPTS ROUTE LOCATION FOR ALIGNMENT ALTERNATIVE A. 1971 FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION GRANTS DESIGN' APPROVAL FOR REALIGNMENT. 1971 FROM 1971 THRU 1974 CALTRANS PREPARES DETAILED DESIGN PLANS AND ACQUIRES 73% OF REQUIRED RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR REALIGNMENT. 1974 ADOPTED ALIGNMENT INCLUDED IN THE ORIGINAL SLOCOG REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN (RTP). 1979 CITY OF ATASCADERO INCORPORATED; NEW qp COUNCIL EXPRESSES DESIRE FOR CONSTRUCTION OF REALIGNMENT ON ADOPTED ROUTE.: 1981 CITYOF ATASCADERO REVISES CIRCULATIONELEMENT AND ADOPTS CALTRANS ALIGNMENT ON ADOPTED ROUTE. 1982 FOLLOWING PROPOSAL BY CTC TO RESCIND ROUTE ADOPTION„SLOCOG OPPOSES RECISION AND REQUESTS CTC TO RECONSIDER AND PROGRAM PROJECT ON ADOPTED ROUTE AS INCLUDED IN THE RTP AND SUPPORTED BY CITY OF ATASCADERO IN THEIR ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN. 1983 SLOCOG RECOMMENDS THAT CTC FUND ALTERNATIVE A ALIGNMENT PER THE RTP; CTC DIRECTS CALTRANS TO PREPARE PSR FOR ALTERNATIVE'A. 1984 FOLLOWING COMPLETION OF PSR WHICH INCLUDES ANALYSIS OF SIX ALTERNATIVES,SLOCOG REAFFIRMS SUPPORT FOR ALTERNATIVE A IN RTP UPDATE; CTC DIRECTS CALTRANS TO PROCEED WITH PROJECT DEVELOPMENT FOR REPLACEMENT OF BRIDGE AND REALIGNMENT OF HIGHWAY ON ALTERNATIVE A ALIGNMENT. 1984 CITY OF ATASCADERO ENDORSES REALIGNMENT OF HIGHWAY ON ALTERNATIVE A ALIGNMENT. a .fy 1985 CITY OF ATASCADERO PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF PROPOSED ALIGNMENT ALTERNATIVE A; CITY COUNCIL REAFFIRMS SUPPORT FAR PROPOSED.PROJECT. i1 000035 1985 SLOCOG AGAIN REAFFIRMS SUPPORT FOR ALTERNATIVE A IN REGiONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN (RTP) UPDATE. 1986 SLOCOG REQUESTS CTC TO PROGRAM $7.2 MILLION IN STATE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (STIP) TO REPLACE THE BRIDGE AND CONSTRUCT THE HIGHWAY ON THE ADOPTED, ALTERNATIVE A ALIGNMENT. 1987 CALTRANS PSTIP INCLUDES FULL FUNDING FOR ALTERNATIVE A REALIGNMENT; ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL APPROVES; SLOCOG RECOMMENDS FULL FUNDING IN 1987 STIP; CTC ADOPTS ALIGNMENT A ALTERNATIVE, STAGE 1, IN THE 1987 STIP. 1988 SLOCOG REAFFIRMS SUPPORT FOR REPLACEMENT OF BRIDGE AND CONSTRUCTION OF ALTERNATIVE A ALIGNMENT IN APPROVAL OF RTP UPDATE AND RECOMMENDS FULL FUNDING IN 1988 STIP; CTC APPROVES FULL FUNDING IN STATE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (STIP). 1988 CALTRANS CONDUCTS PUBLIC HEARING ON NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT; ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL REAFFIRMS SUPPORT FOR ALIGNMENT ALTERNATIVE A. SUBJECT TO EIR. f 1989 CALTRANS BEGINS PREPARATION OF DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT(EIR) AS REQUESTED BY CITY OF ATASCADERO. 1990 SLOCOG REAFFIRMS SUPPORT FOR REPLACEMENT OF BRIDGE AND CONSTRUCTION OF ALTERNATIVE A ALIGNMENT IN APPROVAL OF RTP UPDATE. 1990 DURING 1990 AND 1991 CALTRANS STUDIES IMPACTS OF ADDITIONAL ALTERNATIVES; ALTERNATIVE A MODIFIED IS DEVELOPED IN ORDER TO REDUCE IMPACTS ALONG THE ADOPTED ROUTE. 1991 IN MAY,THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION (FHWA)ACCEPTS THE FONSI FOR THE'PROJECT AND FINAL APPROVAL IS OBTAINED. 1992 IN JANUARY, CALTRANS COMPLETES AND RELEASES SUPPLEMENTAL PROJECT REPORT AND DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) FOR PUBLIC CIRCULATION. 1992 IN AUGUST, SLOCOG REAFFIRMS SUPPORT FOR REPLACEMENT OF BRIDGE AND CONSTRUCTION OFALTERNATIVE A ALIGNMENT IN APPROVAL OF RTP UPDATE;AND IN SEPTEMBER THE SLOCOG REAFFIRMS ITS SUPPORT IN ADOPTING THE FEDERAL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (FTIP). 1993 IN MARCH, THE CALIFORNIA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (CTC) ADOPTED FINDINGS FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS IDENTIFIED IN THE EIR FOR THE PROJECT AND APPROVED FUTURE CONSIDERATION OF FUNDING FOR THE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND ROADWAY REALIGNMENT. 1993 IN JUNE, THE ATASACADERO CITY COUNCIL APPROVED FINAL ADOPTION OF ITS UPDATED CIRCULATION ELEMENT, INCLUDING THE ROUTE 41 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND ROADWAY REALIGNMENT. 2 S 000036 Aug 1?, 1993 OS:OSAh1 FROM SLOCOG TO 914610606 P.04 TESTIMONY OF DAN HERRON BEFORE THE CALIFORNIA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION APRIL 1, 1993 REGARDING THE ROUTE 41 EAST BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND REALIGNMENT GOOD MORNING (AFTERNOON), MY NAME IS DAN HERRON AND IAM HERE REPRESENTING THE SAN LUIS OBISPO METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION TO GIVE TESTIMONY IN SUPPORT OF THE ROUTE 41/SALINAS RIVER BRIDGE REPLACEMENTAND REALIGNMENT PROJECT. SINCE ITS INCEPTION,THE PROJECT HAS BEEN SUPPORTED BY THE CIN OF ATASCADERO, THE,COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, AND OUR AGENCY. THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS NECESSARY TO ADDRESS EXISTING AND PROJECTED TRAFFIC SAFETY AND CONGESTION RELATED ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS IN THE CffY OF ATASCADERO. THE EXISTING HIGHWAY ROUTE FOLLOWS A CIRcurrbUS PATE rTHROUGH THE CITY, ALONG TWO LANE , NARROW TW STREETS PASSING UNDER A FUNCTIONALLY INADEQUATE RAILROAD BRIDGE, BEFORE IT REACHES THE SALINAS RIVER BRIDGE. THE ACCIDENT RATE FOR THIS SECTION OF ROUTE 41 EXCEED$ THE STATEWIDE AVERAGE FOR SIMILAR FACILITIES BYABOUT 17%. THE DIFFICULTIES ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ROUTE CAUSE MUCH OF THE TRAFFIC THROUGH THIS AREA TO USE CURBARIL AVENUE, WHICH IS VERY DETRIMENTAL TO ;ITS RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER. IN ADDITION TO REPLACING THE STRUCTURALLY DEFICIENT AND FUNCTIONALLY OBSOLETE EXISTING BRIDGE, CONSTRUCTION''OF THE HIGHWAY ON ALIGNMENT A-MODIFIED WILL HELP TO REDUCE TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS IN THE AREA, AND WILL ELIMINATE MOST OF THE PROBLEMS RELATED TO OUT OF DIRECTION TRAVEL THAT IMPACT THE RESIDENTS OF CURBARIL AVENUE. THE HISTORY OF THIS PROJECT, WHICH BEGAN IN 1967 WHEN 'A LOCAL CITIZENS 00003'7 ADVISORY COMMITTEE ASKED THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO REQUEST THAT THE DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS MAKE A ROUTE STUDY REPORT, IS MARKED REPEATEDLY BY ACTIONS IN SUPPORT OF ALTERNATIVE A. KEY DATES INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING: IN 1970, THE ALTERNATIVE A ALIGNMENT WAS ADOPTED BY THE CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY COMMISSION. IN 1974, THE ADOPTED ALIGNMENT WAS INCLUDED IN THE ORIGINAL SAN LMS OBISPO REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN. IN 1981, AFTER THE CITY OF ATASCADERO WAS INCORPORATED, THE ADOPTED ALIGNMENT WAS INCLUDED IN THEIR GENERAL PLAN. IN 1990, CALTRANS STUDIED THE IMPACTS OF ADDITIONAL ALTERNATIVES,AND ALTERNATIVE A-MODIFIED WAS DEVELOPED IN ORDER TO REDUCE IMPACTS ALONG THE ADOPTED ROUTE. SUBSEQUENTLY, IN AUGUST. 1992,OUR AGENCY AGAIN REAFFIRMED ITS SUPPORT FOR REPLACEMENT OF THE BRIDGE AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE ALTERNATIVE A ALIGNMENT WHEN IT APPROVED THE RTP UPD -rE, AND AGAIN IN SEPTEMBER, 1992, WHEN R APPROVED THE FEDERAL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. WE RECOGNIZE THAT THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS CONTROVERSIAL AND OPPOSED BY SOME IN THE COMMUNITY, HOWEVER, REPLACEMENT OF THE BRIDGE AND REALIGNMENT OF THE HIGHWAY ON ALIGNMENT A-MODIFIED WILL SOLVE MANY SERIOUS EXISTING TRAFFIC SAFETY AND CONGESTION PROBLEMS. THE PROJECT HAS BEEN FULLY REVIEWED AND COMMENTED ON BY THE PUBLIC, AND HAS BEEN CONTINUALLY AND REPEATEDLY SUPPORTED BY THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AND OUR AGENCY. IN CONCLUSION, WE REQUEST THAT YOU ADOPT THE PROJECT FINDINGS AND APPROVE THE ROUTE 41/SALINAS RIVER Y BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION OF FUNDING. THANKYOU. 000038 TOTAL P.05 STATE OF CALIFORNIA—BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY PETE WILSON, Governor DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION P.O. BOX 8114 SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93403-8114 ELEPHONE: (805) 549-3111 -d qWD (805) 549-3259 September 22, 1992 05-SLO-41-15.8/19,7 v � Replace Bridge and Realign Highway Sia 2 E�. 19e � 05-252-309000 05-252-345200 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Mr. Henry Engen Community Development Director City of Atascadero _ 6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero, CA 93422 Dear Mr. Engen: Per our phone conversation today, please find enclosed a copy of the approved Preferred Alternative Recommendation for the Highway 41 Salinas River Bridge replaceifient project. Please forward a copy to Ray Windsor. The Final Environmental Impact Report should be available for public circulation in the first part of the new year. If you have any questions, please give me a call at 549-3459. Sincerely, Kathy iGrazia, Project Engineer Project Management 000039 State of California Business,Transportation and Housing Agency Memorandum To W. H. OJEDA Date September 8, 1992 District Director 0 File No. SLO-41-15.8/19.7 Replace Bridge and Realign Highway ,ka1� Y 05-252-309000 05-252-345200 From DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT M. J. Nicholson Project Management Subject PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION FOR HIGHWAY 41 IN SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY IN AND NEAR ATASCADERO FROM CEMETERY ROAD TO 1.2 MILES EAST OF THE SALINAS RIVER- BRIDGE AND f HIGHWAY 41 IN SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY IN ATASCADERO FROM 0. 1 MILE WEST OF THE HIGHWAY 101/41 INTERCHANGE TO CEMETERY ROAD Submitted By: Reviewed By: XaA KathyC44. DiGrazia f4 V N ch lson Project Engineer Project Manager Approval Recommended: Approval Recommended: tom. C' G. R. Laumer P. M. Connally Deputy District Director Deputy District Direc or Planning and Programming Project Management Approved: `wv �W. H. OJED District Director Date• :�7--/5—9 Z 000040 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this report is to select a Preferred Alternative and to obtain approval for proceeding with the project. The Preferred Alternative for this project is Alternate A-modified. BACKGROUND The project to realign Route 41 was formally initiated in April, 1968 when San Luis Obispo County requested the thein Division of Highways to study a Route Adoption for Route 41. The study was made, a Project Report written, and a Public Hearing held in May, 1970. In November, 1970, The California Highway Commission adopted the route location we now refer to as Alternate A. Work was halted in 1974 due to the oil embargo, : funding shortages and a different philosophy guiding Caltrans. In 1983, the California Transportation Commission directed workto resume. A Project Study Report was prepared in February, '1984, and a Project Report for Stage I (the bridge replacement' on new alignment) and an Initial Study/Environmental Assessment covering the entire project was completed in December, 1987. A Public Hearing was held in October, 1988 which presented 'Alternates A, B, and the No Build. Alternate A was put forth as' the preferred alternate. The accompanying environment4,�,�_ document was a Negative Declaration/ Finding of No Significant Impact • (ND/FONSI) . The Federal Highway Admini„etration (FHWA) accepted the FONSI and final approval was obtained in May, 1991. However, due to public concerns and a request by the City of Atascadero, Caltrans prepared a Draft Environmental Impact Report. As a result of further studies, a new alignment, Alternate A-modified, was developed to minimize some of the impacts to Pine Mountain and reduce the amount of cut and fill. An Informational Meeting was held in March, 1991 to introduce the new alternate (as well as all rejected- alternates) ' to the public and to obtain feedback from the public. A third Public Hearing was held April 23, 1992, presenting Alternates A, A-modified, B, and the No Build. There was no preferred alternative. SELECTION OF THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE The preferred alternative, Alternate A-modified' was chosen after considering public input from the three Public Hearings and the Informational Meeting, the concerns of the city and county staffs and local residents, and the recommendations from the City of Atascadero and the San Luis Obispo Area Coordinating Council. Alternate A-modified addresses both the structural and operational deficiencies of the Salinas River Bridge as well as the operational deficiencies of Highway 41 from west of the 1 000041 Highway 101/41 interchange to 1.2 miles east of the Salinas River Bridge. Alternate A-modified is very similar to Alternate A with a minor shift in the horizontal and vertical alignments along Mercedes Avenue in order to more closely follow the existing. terrain. It also has steeper cuts and fills. Alternate A-modified saves 155 trees (including 130 oak trees) that would have been taken with Alternate A. Alternate A-modified will still remove approximately 265 trees within the city limits of Atascadero (including 210 oak trees) . Alternate B addresses the structural and operational deficiencies of the Salinas River Bridge only. It provides for only a 25 mph design speed across the river, and does not address the operational deficiencies of the rest of the highway within the project limits. The No Build alternate does not address any of the project needs. With this alternate, the Salinas River Bridge would remain in its deteriorating condition. As traffic volumes continue to increase, the ability of the highway to adequately serve the public would diminish, the accident rate at the bridge would continue to increase, and the cost of maintenance would escalate. The existing bridge would continue to be narrow and restricted to legal size loads and one lane for trucks, buses and other large vehicles. The City of Atascadero and the San Luis' Obispo Area Coordinating • Council (currently the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments) have historically been in favor of the Alternate A alignment. The Alternate A alignment has been included in the City General Plan since incorporation in 1979, and development has been planned around the alignment. DKS Associates, the Circulation Element Consultants for the City of Atascadero, have made their recommendations to the City in support of Alternate A or A-modified. Their letter of July 7, 1992 states " . . .the realignment of Highway 41 (Alternate A or A-modified) provides the best long-term engineering solution for traffic circulation for Atascadero. " On July 14, 1992, the City Council of Atascadero voted to accept DKS's July 7th recommendations and reaffirmed its support by a 3 :2 vote for the adopted alignment and expressed its preference for Alternate A-modified. As a result of public and local agency comment, it is recommended that Alternate A-modified now include a bridge over the ravine at the entrance to Stadium Park. The addition of the bridge would maintain the historic access to, and use of, Stadium Park. Additionally, the bridge would help mitigate for concerns regarding deer crossing in the Pine Mountain area and would mitigate for visual impacts associated with the fill option. It 2 0000,17 would also provide for safe access to Stadium Park ,underneath the . highway rather than across the highway for both the public and wildlife. The cost of this structure is approximately $600, 000 to $800, 000 more than the cost of fill; however, due to savings with Alternate A-modified, there is adequate funding to cover the additional bridge. In response to a letter from the Department of Fish and Game, it is recommended that the oak tree mitigation ratio be changed from 5: 1, as proposed in the Draft Environmental Impact 'Report, to one seedling for each inch of tree diameter removed. This will approximately triple the replacement ratio. CURRENT COSTS AND PROGRAMMING 309000 EA I Stage is included in the 1992 HSOPP. ' It includes ( ) the bridge replacement and the new alignment in the county east of the Salinas River. 345200 EA II Stage is included in the 1992 STIP. '' It includes ( ) the realignment in the Cit of Atascadero .west of the Salinas g Y River. The current cost estimate (1992 dollars) for Alternate A-modified is as follows: • Construction Construction Construction Estimate Programmed Programmed (1992 dollars) (1992 dollars) (Const. Year) Stage I (EA 309000) $6, 695, 000 $6, 695, 000 (HSOPP) ' $7,987, 000 (95/96) Stage II (EA 345200) $3,780,000 $3 ,780,000 (STIP) $4,315, 000 (94/95) * Right of Way Right of Way Estimate ** Programmed Escalated Escalated Stage I (EA 309000) $ 351,678 $2, 629, 000 (HSOPP) Stage II (EA 345200) $1,941, 634 $1,730, 000 (STIP) * (See Recommendations) ** Does not include right of way cost for tree mitigation. PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS Since the project was reinitiated in 1983 , two Pubic Hearings (1988 and 1992) and one Informational Meeting (1992) have been held. Additionally, the City of Atascadero held a' Joint City Council/Planning Commission Meeting in 1988 which included a Public Hearing on this project. 3 000043 1988 Public Hearing A Public Hearing was held on October 26, 1988 in the Rotunda of the City of Atascadero Administration Building. The hearing was opened at 7: 03 p.m. and presided over by Muriel Evans with 128 people in attendance. It concluded at 10: 50 p.m. The close of the record was on December 1, 1988. Twenty-two of the people who attended the public hearing signed statements for the record. Eleven supported Alternate A, five opposed Alternate A, and six had other comments and concerns. Of those who spoke for the record at the public hearing, four supported Alternate A, and ten were opposed to it. Included in the Record are written responses from the City of Atascadero, the County of San Luis Obispo, and the San Luis Obispo Area Coordinating Council stating their support for Alternate A. Of the letters received from community organizations and businesses, six letters expressed preferences. Three were in favor of Alternate A, two were iW favor of Alternate B, and one felt the funds could be better used on nearby Highway 46. Thirty-one letters were received from individuals. Of those, ten were in favor of Alternate A, seventeen were opposed to Alternate A, and an additional four wrote to state other concerns to be addressed if Alternate A is approved. Of those opposed to Alternate,,,,_A, six expressed a preference for Alternate B. A petition opposing Alternate A and supporting Alternate B was signed by 219 people. Another 133 people signed a petition opposing Alternate A. Many of those opposed to Alternate A live on or near the proposed alignment. A petition supporting Alternate A was signed by forty-eight people. Many of those supporting Alternate A live on the existing Highway 41 alignment. In total of all preferential responses by local residents during the public comment period, 73 supported Alternate A, and 384 opposed it. 1988 City Council Public Hearing The City Council of Atascadero held a Public Hearing on December 14, 1988 at the National Guard Armory in Atascadero. At this meeting, Mayor Borgeson affirmed the City's approval of Alternate A but requested that an Environmental Impact Report be submitted. Although no official record has been kept as to the number of people attending this meeting, it is estimated there were between 200 and 400 people present. Eighty-one people spoke at this hearing. Forty-two spoke in favor of Alternate A, twenty spoke against Alternate A and in favor of Alternate B, and nineteen expressed other concerns. Those speaking in favor of Alternate A included representatives from the Atascadero Unified School • District, Atascadero Board of Realtors, North County Contractor's 4 000044 Association, Atascadero Chamber of Commerce, Bank 'of America, Atascadero 2000, the PTA, and the Downtown Business Improvement Association. A Sierra Club representative spoke in favor of Alternate B. Of those either in favor of Alternate B or with other concerns, twenty-three people asked for completion of an EIR before a decision was made. The Atascadero City Council voted unanimously to reaffirm the City's position in respect to Alternate A subject 'to an EIR. 1991 Informational Meeting An Informational Meeting/Map Showing was held in an open house format on March 28, 1992 in the Rotunda of the City of Atascadero Administration Building. There were a total of 120 citizens in attendance spread out over the five hour meeting. ,, Approximately 100 comment sheets were turned in. Of these, sixty-six expressed a preference for either Alternate A or A-modified,, eleven expressed a preference for Alternate B, twenty preferred that Highway 41 be redesignated to proceed north on Highway 101 to Highway 46, and eleven others preferred alternates that had been considered but rejected. 1992 Public Hearing A Public Hearing was held on April 23 , 1992 in the pavilion at Atascadero Lake Park. A four hour Informational Meeting/Map Showing was held immediately prior to the: hearing.' The hearing was opened at 7: 00 p.m. and presided ov4r by Judge Robert Neher. • There were approximately 130 people in .dttendance.' It concluded at 10: 30 p.m. The close of the record was on May ';22, 1992. Forty-four of the people who attended the public hearing signed statements for the record. Twenty-one supported Alternate A or A-modified, twelve supported Alternate B, four were totally opposed to the project, and seven had other related comments and concerns. Forty-two people spoke for the record at the public hearing or had their statement read into the record. Of these, eight supported Alternate A or A-modified, sixteen supported Alternate B, nine were totally opposed to the project, and nine had other related comments and concerns. Letters received during the public comment period ',: (April 23rd to May 22nd) are included in the Public Record. There were ninety- one citizens who mailed in written comments during this time. Of those, fifty-eight wrote in favor of Alternate A or A-modified, seventeen wrote in favor of Alternate B, twelve were totally opposed to the project, and four had other related comments and concerns. Additionally, a petition was received containing 1777 signatures in favor of Alternate A or A-modified. ' In total of all preferential responses by local residents due to . this most recent Public Hearing, 1864 supported Alternate A or 5 00.0011 (including 1777 from a petition) and 70 either A-modified (incl g p ) supported Alternate B or opposed the project entirely. On July 14, 1992, the City Council of Atascadero voted 3:2 affirming the City's support of Alternate A-modified. Summary of Major Concerns Some of the major comments received included concerns about the traffic impacts to the El Camino Real/Highway 101/Highway 41 intersections, design speeds, the impacts to Pine Mountain, the loss of trees and the mitigation replacement ratio, spending roughly $10 million during this time of budget crises, and concerns about the fill in the ravine at the entrance to Stadium Park. Additionally, comments were received that suggested designating Curbaril as Highway 41 or designating Highway 101 and Highway 46 as Highway 41 and relinquishing the existing Highway 41 between Atascadero and Cholame. RECOMMENDATIONS ` It is recommended to approve this Preferred Alternative Recommendation for Alternate A-modified, to include the additional bridge over the ravine at the entrance to Stadium Park, and to increase the oak mitigation ratio to a tree per inch. Furthermore, it is recommended th,4 the Stage II portion of the project be programmed in the 1995796 fiscal year to coincide with Stage I for concurrent cojistruction. • 6 000046 COST COMPARISON OF ALTERNATES ALTERNATE A ALTERNATE A-MOD ALTERNATE B PROGRAMMED AMOUNT CONSTRUCTION $1,400,000 Stage 1 $ 6,695,000 $ 6,695,000 $ 6,695,000 (1992 HSOPP) Stage II $ 4,580,000 $ 3,780,000 $ 3.780.000 (1992 STIP) TOTAL $11,275,000 $10,475,000 $1,400,000 1$10,475,000 RIGHT OF WAY $ 590,000 Stage 1 $ 351,678 $ 351,678 $ 2,629,000 (1992 HSOPP) Stage II $ 1,941,634 $ 1.941,634 $ 1,730,000 (1992 STIP) TOTAL $ 2,293,312 $ 2,293,312 $ 590,000 $ 4,359,000 Construction estimates and programmed amounts are in 1992 dollars. Right of Way estimates are escalated to acquisition years. Right of Way estimates do not include cost for tree mitigation requirements. 00004'7 e/ V SCADERO CITY OF ATA 1918 1979 5CAD OFFICE of the CITY CLERK i/ August 21, 1992 Kathy DiGrazia Project Studies Engineer CALTRANS - P.O. Box 8114 - San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8114 Re: Highway 41 Realignment - City of Atascadero Supporting Documents Dear Ms_ DiGrazia, - Enclosed please find a number of items City Manager Ray Windsor asked me to pass along to you. They are a$ follows:- - . �y 1. Certified copy of Minutes from the Special Meeting of the ... . City Council held December 14; 1988 reaffirming the City' s position with respect to "Alternate A" subject to an Environmental Impact Report. . 2_ A certified copy of Chapter Three - Circulation Plan of _ the Atascadero Downtown Master Plan adopted January 8, --- 1991 , --1991 reflecting support for the "Alternate A or "A-- Modified" A=Modified" alignment.- _ 3. A certified copy of Chapter VIII. Circulation of the City of Atascadero's General Plan adopted by the City Council January 14, 1992 'setting forth circulation policies, ! including proposals for the "Alternate A" or "A-Modified alternatives.-=_ 4. Copy of Greg' s Luke' s staff report to Council dated July 9, 1992 and a Supplemental Report of the Atascadero Transportation Study relating to the Route 41 Alignment prepared by DKS Associates indicating a route preference - consistent with both plans mentioned above..- . 5. Certified excerpt from the Minutes of the City Council meeting of July 14, 1992 concurring with recommendations made by the consultants, DRS Associates, and giving formal support for the "A-Modified" alternative.. 6500 PALMA AVENUE • ATASCADERO, CA 93422 • (805) 461-5074 000048 Letter to K. DiGrazi CALTRANS August 21, 1992 Page 2 If there is any additional documentation you are in need of, please feel free to give -me a call. Xcly,N City Clerk Enclosures c: Ray Windsor, City Manager Henry Engen, Community Development ment Director" Ron DeCarli, Executive Director, SLOCOG 000049 �■ ■' ' � CITY OF ATASCADERO Iola 1979 CAD OFFICE of the CITY CLERK Kathy DiGrazia Project Studies Engineer CALTRANS P.O. Box 8114 San Luis Obispo, CA - ' f. . CERTIFICATION I, LEE RABOIN, City Clerk of ,the CitX,gf Atascadero, hereby certify_ that the foregoing- is a true artd correct copy of the official Minutes of the Atascadero City Council Special Meeting of December 14, 1988 regarding the proposed Highway 41 realignment. DATED: LE RABOIN City Clerk City of Atascadero, California. 6500 PALMA AVENUE • ATASCADERO, CA 93422 0 (805) 461-5074 CAT F ��' ITEM I J� l NT C_ f. COUNC {1 ,.!�+_F�NN I riG CGr!ri f SS [GN ,MEET 1t.;1; M F_NUrES - Wednesday . December l4. _`798 T1^A scecial meetine of "the Ar..ascadero City CounciL ';and Planning Co:rmission was coiled to order at 7 p .:n. at the Prat r-!- 61.11 : dL.'19 b.. _Navai Borgeson. 1t was immediately adjourned to '',the Nattorial- Gu_:-d Armory where the meeting reconvened at 7: 15 P.m. followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: = P!-esent: Couoc i l members Dexter , Shiers,. Li l ley, Ma._k=_y and Mayor. _• BQ�a_sQn Commissioner.a Luna, Highland, Lopez 8albantin, Waage, Brasher, Tobey and Chairperson Lochridge Scarf Present: Henry Engen, Community Development Director ; Paul Sensibaugh , Public Works DireCtOt- ; Mike Hicks , Fire Chief; Ray Windsor, City Manaqer ; Mark Joseph , Administrative Serva, 9 DireCtOc" and -a yd Shai•itz•, City Clerk . 'r P+JSLIC HEARING CN THE PROPOSED EXTENSION OF HTGNWA`! 41 Council and Commissioners introduced themselves. Ray Windsor, City Manager, introduced staff and the tat Trans Pen resentative, Jerry Hanto, Deouty District Director , Project Development and Construction. Mayor Horgeson discussed the rules of participation for the evening ' s discussion. Speakers will be limited to three minutes unless they are spokesperson for a group in which case it will be 5 minutes. Henry Engen, Community Development Director, gave the staff report . Mr . Hanto , Cal Trans Representative, reviewed', Cal Trans ' written response to a letter from the City Manager , Ray Windsor, to- Cal Trans. Council and commission comments followed . Commissioner Brasher stated that clarification'' was needed from Mr. Hants regarding input from the public. At the Ncvemeer 29th meeting, Austin Carlton from Cal ', Trans spoke to the issue, he indicated that any input that the public - 000051 :1rA•:'?10¢`•_► u0 }n slid 1'.� lt:l:11 no tt^ l'.i pttJ 1 1- ?'iE'r1r i, tC7:'►!7h v !•,cu1d to a Girt Of trii_' a.-jr-umencattOn. Yet vide-)tly such 15 not the cane. She wantea to know exactl,. what is Ine..►it .vha:l ' he GGe.ak,3 •;f_ C.ZnSiceration. t~ir . ;-ianto responded that he was not present at that hearing sc he could not Sa-y p!'acisely what was ss id . Et him L,ncerstanding that it was understood by at least sorne\ :n_mbers of the audience that Cal Trans would keep the recora. Open until some future date that was unscec if ied . If the !"=card was kept open it would be included in the aocumen t As oast of the document itself. :,:a� :�:• 9c!-genen read a transcript of the hearing of �Io•:emhar ;3111th and Mr . Austin Carlton and he did not .say, the supposzd that the public comm=_ni would be kept open. He definitely stated that we can take written documents bjeyand that date to be included in the final document. He sta`.e•r' that it seemed to him that Cal- Trans can ex tend the t i!ne limit o-i this en% ironmental document. Another Public Hearing was needed and saw no reason why Cal Trans can' t accommodate that. !-e further stated "we car. extend the .. of the document" . Mayor 3orgeson asked if Cal Trans position had chanced on th s . eA�. t11r . Han to stated tha t Cal Trans w i 1 f`- cons i der-.a 1 l; o f_ the. . documentation but only include in their report that receiveC by Decemoer 1st. Further discussiOn by Commission and Council members followed. At this time Mayor Borgeson opened the meeting for public comment . Terry Graham, 6205 Conejo Road, commented that a special election should bd held to decide this matter_ Bob Alison, attorney from Fresno, representing Ed Allred, spoke against Alternate A and in favor of Alternate H. He asked Council to request that Cal Trans prepare an EIR and that council defter any decision aisian until the entire environmental process c_ ss has been completed. Eric is 00 Aquila, spoke in favor of Alternate A. _! i_ Mi_heilssen, 53 g Barbara Schaeneke, 7505 Marchant, stated that there is not enough information for the City Council and the residents of Atascadero to make a proper choice. An EIR should be completed bb-ore a decision is made by the council . `. gill Garcia. 10:55 Atascadera Ave. , spoke in favor of Alternate A• . - • 0000sev "I. :In th a nv A,.-ijj3 creset d a U--I r: L 1 '_7C•. of C.? S•B e d b`, the Unif ied sc 3rd of ` ion in f avc-r .3f A I tE-t-Ozi C-: N i 1 1 1 r e a C-ope I an 1361!: Par tt) I a staled -3 he t ra s. pp-o ted Alternate A. Dcuq heifer , B065 Curbarit. , -.pcka in favor of Alternate A. i n: Cames said he felt Alternate A is +-."e only way to : 90 . Norm Canf;.eld , 10690 San Marcas President of the Atascadero Board of Realtors, reoresen"% i ng i-10 members of the Board of Realtors, spoke in favor of Alternate A. David Baker, Director of the North County Contr-act;3r ' s Assoc. spoke .representing 500 members of the Assoc. and ,,tat*d that: the: were in support of Alternate A. Glen Lewis encourage the Council to act now -- don' t wait at-IV longer _ JohnCatsenmeyer, e705 Casanova Rd. , President of thip Atascade-c Chamber of Commerce. and Vice -Presider*;#&-^Manaqer of Bank of America in Atasca- d7erc He stated that Highway 41 Alterhate .4 make=_ g ad business and and* he - s tra ng l-Y supports Alternate A. Al Gustafson, 9305 Curbaril , spoke regarding the truck traffic an Cu-rbar;-L Ave. and the growing dangers to scnoot children- an tt)eir wav to school . Give the trucks a safe and proper way : to take and wake their livelihood . Gary Haskins, 5140 Mercedes , asked Council to get : more facts before making a decision and wait for a full EIR. Stephen LaSalle, 7505 Marchant, said that inteLligelt decisions can not be made without adequate information. The people of Atascadera deserve an EIR so that an intelligent, informed decision may be made.. Ernie Porter, 9420 Marchant Way, spoke in favor of ':Alternate A but not without question.. He questioned the destruction of the Heil:nann Bridge and asked that it not be destroyed. Alyce Porter- 9420 Marchant Way,- said she was in , support of Alternate A with the reservation that there should be a cloverleaf an the other side of the railroad near the county facility an Sycamore. Daniel Heilmann, 3005 River Rd . , spoke in favor of Alternate -4. 00005 • Harry o itt . of Sar. Migt-el asl-ea t'le Council to u-se Caution to prat:__ !: ail lundinq • s;aslable :(3the City and to implement the general Plan. Carl 'all . /07 M,archant, spoke supporting Alternate A. Hager. reot-.esentac:Iv2 Jr vie Downtown BVsiress Improvement 1=soc . stated that the 6IA .s in suaoorw of Alt_race Y• Jim Harer. 4400 Templeton Rd. . scoke ir. supoor, of Alternate A. .;nre Marie k'tr!ecatrick , 291 Mort;erey Court, spoke represiRr.ting an Ad Hoc Committee which was formed in order to .repose Alternate A. She nresented the Cit.• CounCil with petit•tons. signed opposing Alternate A. She asked Council to withhold making a decision pending an EIR. Tom Collins. 87/3%) Casanova. asked Council to put on hold until an EIR is completed.. Fred Frank . ??55 Graves Creek Rd . , asked 'Council to .��- •aluat� file Alternate A plan and press for an, , EIR befor3 making a - lecisio. +Ar ' =- �:l ank Bush . 4685 Viscano Ave. , ir?—CNlAiro rSOi1tl 2 TriQ4-r3 Club , spoke in support o- Alternate 3 and asked that the Plegative Declaration to appeared because the initial study is inadequate. MOTION: By Councilman neuter, seconded by Councilwoman Mackey to extend the meeting past 11 P .m. Passed unanimously. John @unyea, 4858 Templeton Rd. . spoke in opposition of Alternate a mainly L-ecause of safety. Doug Marter, 10890 Santa Lucia, stated the old bridge is falling down, and the money is available for a new bridge, the route from the new bridge to the other traffic is the cleanest there is. Let ' s qet it over with- and get it over with. Tim McCutcheon. stated we need this project now. He asked the Council to look ahead and get the project started now. Wayne Laorade, 6505 San Gabriel Rd. , stated that he was in favor of Alternate A and EIR' s can be a worthwhile tool , but also they can be a problem. William Collins, 4205 River Road, (Carousel Ranch ) said that when ( You weight the loss of a child 's life, the inconvenience to the general public of the present traffic routes against his personal • loss of a few acres and privacy an his ranch, he said that he was in favor or Alternate A. -6- C � t•:; �.>> 1-rm.s:, r=a.: a . letter on behalf of JO-211I:'k:ae e, ?==85 Old !� I r."n F?i . "as� . 1 --t—'es c L ny the City Cuunc i l membc?i'S t0 be ! t-tu!-`5t :r^d1�i; hav4 th•_ moral integrity to maE,? L!ld.?peTl�iel�� ,!eci•aior•s that will benefit the greatest number of resident.-%. Craig Mono said he felt that the Council did not hay the i:iformation. avai lao!e to them. He supoorted Alter natty 8 and 3�k•_dt!Iat a spe% ial election be held td sol'-,od tills Issue. Mrs - Paul McCi l 1 . 5100 Merc-edes A 9. , orpres=_ea her a-anc_rns regarding the traffic and o_l lution. Peter eocnisar . 5212 E`►agda1ena Ave. , spoke in apposition to Alternate A aid asked Councilto get a complete EI.R. ' Tom Hatchell . 5385 Barrenda, expressed support ofaAlternate A as the most direct. and feasible alternat:•re to the present _a-Id itiavis . ' 8= _ 1 ?iankenship , 6=05 Country Club Or. . stated that he has had hi- house uo for sale for two years. He was in support for A 1 terna to A i f for no o ther reason so that somethingcan be done so that he can pessibly sell his house. T' Darotny McNeil . 6765 Sierra Vista Rd. , stated'=rha•t Cal.-Tr..a*1s motives must be called into question. Their refusal to back their •cwn reoresentative' s assurance that letters and petitions would be included in the document makes their motives seem clear. Cal Trans knows that the guidelines requires an EIR if there is an out pouring of public concern. Cal Trans does not ,want letters and petitions of over 1 ,000 people to reach Sacramento as par- of the document. Neither A nor 8 really appeals to her. She strongl�r urged the Council to call for an EIR so that they can consider this matter with adequate information.. Jerry 3ond , 4940 El Verano, said this is in the General Plan-- let' s follow it. He is in support of Alternate- A. John McNeil . 9765 Sierra Vista, stated that no decision should be made by this Council on this project until they havea competent, thorough traffic analysis. Traffic is THE problem of Atascadero and has been for years. Gary Larson, 49 Quail Ridge, stated that he strongly supports Alternate A as a major funded circulation improvement of great benefit to the community. Celia Mass, 3040 Coromar Rd, asked Council to pay'', attention to t the wishes of the citizens of Atascadero and said that she • =ocoses Alternative A unless an EIR wnich can justify to the Citizens or Atascadero why this project is warranted. -4- aoon 9200 P i..._ $07112 - sp•_L:._ i n r a! ter rid L =,. ror.n r'i. .__ . 3 1 c? ;.�:-:nn l'i ta, asked tt^e Co�::�c_ L to •J,� writ 'i, •,CCd- TC: 0717e -^13 , CT this r. . He- stato1-1 :hat he Is ! el 5`_p00r 3_:f'ret. 4300 Corr i —3 . •-Ixpress2d his C�JnC�'ril5 CT sd`e~'. '�T =_--hca : children and said that alternate A ha=_ been a p:lrt of rhe l.aver-31 Plan for ,:ears and hel :":=s it is tame to get. en with it . - Ned Thompson. 5960 River Rd . , said. he was in favor- of Ai ternate May•ir Sor geson asked for a brief rec��s at 9:5i . Mee tilig reconvened at 10 P .M. Sl-3d, Davis. �54P 7 Fresno , represer t ng ti•e Chambar of Cc::Vnel-ce and 46 ? :o=aL businesses said tile., are fu11y in suppor t _f Alternate 4 and did na t believe an EIR was necessary. Jerry Clay, 7225 Sycamore Rd . , said he encouraged the Council to take aCticn now and get an with Alternate; A. :He believes all 97:P is a stall . Robert Nimmo , -7375 Sella Vista Rd . , said that :Highway-41 . issue is an issue of public safety and responsible and timely planning for proper traffic control . He suoports Alternate A_ Barbara P.eiter, 10150 San Marcos Rd . , stated that. she is not in favor of dither Alternate A or e, but Alternate C as. proposed by Douce !eafis. David Duncan 8885 Marchant , said alternate A is not acceptabLe.. An alternative that was omitted is to turn the present Highway 4L from Atascadero into Shandon over the County- Highway 41 can be routed up 101 to Paso Robles and Highway 46.. He asked the City Council to reject Alternate A and require an _IR.. Chris Jespersen, 6290 Rocky Canyon Rd. , stated that he endorses Alternate A and believes Council should Live with the decision that they made two years ago . Mike Arrambide, 7243 Del Rio , President of Atascadero 2000 spoke for mercers in support of Alternate A. Marti Monn. 5385 Mercedes, stated she was in opposition to Alternate A and would support Alternate S. Gregor`. Mann. 7925 Santa Rosa Rd. , 7925 Santa Rosa Rd . , President of 3a+ita Rosa PTA, stated that he believed that the EIR spoken about tonignt is imoortant and Alternate A presents the best safet, measure for our children and the community. 00055 . P-and Lace I la t te, 325. Magr'c i is S-Oo e _:l vPPO*-3i t ;-on ''of Alterna!•o 3�1j .o0ulti L�, ? 1 to Sd� 3 i� l1 �EIr dare t~efGr P_ 3 declSiarl- Dc,-,a Lewl. _ . satc `1 -anted to address three issues :, 11 se-ran-4 t (Atascaderc C•3me`.ary) 2) *i.;f,'�1 __ sa*.aF+� 3t fores ighS?dnfess. Lorr ensu Pac-e. 5 190 Mercedes . spoke in a?pf�s i t iom sof' Al terna tee- A . 3rtd feels that an =IF, is essential before a decision ' can be made a:1 the issue. _arla Cole who lives on Mercedes Ave. . statE'dshP w3s is accosit.oil o-F Alternate A and requested that; arl EIR be done beiare a eec.is ion is made. ALail Vo ibrech`. who lives; an Hight-jay 41 . approxiitately l.'Z mile east of the e:id of Alternate A said he hoped the City',, Council in them- c-znsideratin of this particular itefn witI show their sup-Port for Alternate A and show the same cors',:stency with ;itercre ation of the General P13f1 that they nave *asked :!e-.:elopment projects zo bring in. i _ l 'Carra 11 5260 Ense,lada Ave. s to ted ;t ,e• su000 r ted A i terna to x �. r Ursula Luna read a prepared statement for Dr _ ~Timcthy C' Keer= s;.atina he was concerned that Cal Trans has failed to''.: complete an adequate EIR anaiysis for the proposed realignment of,' Hwy. 41 . Linda Stewart- 5225 Magdalena Ave. , stated she was'', in favor of A' ' -rrate 3 because of the traffic that would be caused by Alternate A- jay Harris, 5365 Magnolia, said he was in opposition of Alternate A. Mark Goforth, lives an Templeton Rd. , spoke in favor of Alternate B and an EIR study needs to be done before a decision can be made on this project . Doug Filipponi , 5995 River Road , asked council to ', look at the staff recommendations and accept Alternate A. Don Messer. 7555 Cristabol ,. spoke in favor of Alternate A and felt that an EIR was not necessary. Sarah Gronstrand , 7620 Dei Rio Rd. , stated she was in opposition to Alternate A. _7_ � r - i 5463 Honda Gai:j she was against Alternate A. Win•= th:?n re-.1d a prepared stat,_-.-lent r'or ..'Till aul latl. stating t tha -V L an be Prepared for Zh i s Project be-Fare a decision can be inade. Doi- Ai iaire SP(3Ke `in. favor cf Ai te:-nate A. Richard Kirkpatrick , 6291 Mc.iterey Court, spoke in favor a an- . being done. IIs D:ar!a 9cswelL , 5505 6a.isda. stated she was strortgly against Cal ` Trans Proposed plan Alternate A. Roo DeCarli . Program Manager far the SL+3 Area Coordinatinc Council , stated he wants Cal Trans to reopen comments for the documeno t. -He said that a full Erk could be cnducted , but it wc+ald cause a- L year delay that could. jeopardize funding. Lack a r �,l - , , tY �i.pp..: c could .1 i m i na to the project giver+. the 53.5 bil- lion billion CaL Trans funding =_r�ortfaLl'. Donna -arr- is, 5365 Magnolia e Al � 4 Ave. , said she preferred t_rra e 3. i•felani-2 9i l l ig . read a prepared statemen�,,V­ opposing Alternate A and asked that an ESR he completed oefore 'a decipdon is -nade. . Robert �IcNew, 4630 El Verano , spoke in support of Alternate A. Navor 9crgeson read a statement from Herman Plew, 5395 Capistrano Ave. , in suppor c of Alternate A but does not want Magna 1 is 'and !'!agdalena Streets to be connected to the ne-w route because *Iaonali-a is just behind his house and the increased noise from route traffic coming onto Magnolia would be very undesirable. Ursula Luga, 10600 San Marcos Rd. , asked that an EIR be prepared to assure the greatest sensitivity towards the residents, the environment and the character of the City. Raymond Jensen, 6655 Country- Club Dr. , spoke in favor of Alternate 8. Mayor Borgeson read a prepared statement of Mike Kahle which stated a complete EIR is needed before any decision can be made. At this time Mayor Qergesen closed the meeting for public comment and asked if them were any written statements or petitions they should be given to the City Clerk at this time. Council and Commission comments followed. `- t Motion: 9v Councilman _hiers to support a Pull EIR. The motijel _ died =er lack z3f a second . —8- 000058 Mot.an. .9./ i [man De..t-er . se-Zoticed N.1 y f I 'z f reaf-'--in the Cir v ' s AOS itillfl in respect m A i t e,-ri a e -sub.;-c t tQ -an cIP. . MeetLog adjournec- at 12:50 a.m. AP MIMUTgS RECORDED BY: EQYD C. SHAPITZ, CITY CLERK RED By IP. PARIPEZ-" PEPUTY CY CLERk' •.41 , 4.1 44 4D 4j • 41 44 4m 4j Co 0 con t �� �s • �vS'��;•.- +ami' a-. r a 000060 w1 y U 9:",-14 y y U ca y U ° ° .E y � � � � •� y ' ° ° cn c U3 N as 0 O o :d •.. OG " C u1-04 '5 79 Cd 3 v o .coa ' .E � �' 3 C 'r 4020 ° ..r V l •• tm..r s ° •:. x E cs .r .r v u 3 •as .cyQ'+ b as u ° " � O J �crw A, O c o O O O -= � O O V " �C y ,E C b°a ^"' O 'Ur .0 O uV4, 0 w 0 w Cd taw 0 E .E .S � s�.� � co Cd Gn Z Coda 'Or- o u �. cm w ca 3 cc cu c� 3uua�i �' ca4b, .a�its ° ba loco ° c1iC>131 c0res. � 3 c .!P.e -• •c E xC'sc.c o W u 4- 0 3 r y '��' �B'L E° � `. U c Lr a 4r U ° � O O y — .= -" y Ci f". L' f' ° = c "J •��'. y ~ Lr, V .� y N•ba ° ° 'bu '�' qtr- 'o- 0 ° > x .0 �' O Ut ter.. „H� •`T u ,= ti U c ,c V a0 ai G. Q V ~ o3 � c :: b Im 3 �? vu > � oc •c .uc, a' o ° V ao y y c N cd ,� �O E � aaa ou3p°. c .cE3 �' . > '0 •yx � •ov "� 42 co a ca o u 3 2ED u3E � •F 4ruu > c c ° oycyc� � Q'a � � e Intl 0 ca E c > w _ ° c c c c y as c •v c� u ,_ 3 W " _ _ .O b .Ov U c U eu O y O p •E�•y .> 3 o cas .c0ez'c ;E .sa .H o03u0•0c.. 000061 IT . )T pr M IT M IT IT IT M IT IT IT IT IT 11, IT A, IT IT IT M II. [T M l, to, ,a, ,IV �r cd U A U � • , o�soto�tmom / ss < 6Z ly ;> 3 ul � HW < • ONVYIS I¢„0 It mlV s `. W log -.� i II•flll 1 Los: w W 61 r. J ' Vl i IYrt4 1 x J �1Vw U yl ItsIA �. � 430 I < �a¢ Z U ul :o C AVM 7tlllAll W Od z > • 614.5 t • 1 � �W _ W 6 W C 6 V � C 000062 40 u o 0. ..r N w u .N.• 'Q a o c x O c 4 0 'd C •>> C E o o0 -= � � 3: cu to cd cl CL elu a. .a ° 'b 3 aci o c c E o 0 ca > E o u --• -- u c oapv'" = ° o � cc., ° > caw 0. U ° �•• Ca '" u = g t= t w. O ° 'N oq^ .cc oq^ u u � po ° N ° c ,� u C _ u C C a 'a •d 000 0 u R- - O •� � C ° C'sN ° N N O '3 O U p �' O , '; ..a u >. U .c u .0 U y L. c � c C a 03 0 bo ,cz ca,s H $ O Ca N L: c b 3 0 � Us 3 r' N o .� c� U u o � U O at ca Q .: .y . 0. �•i y N .N-r ..y� U Q •.' .� N N •�•�.. r•�r bo ca cis Ca CC$ C>3, � p > o oa, a • Cd L. � C) o CCS ocn Q "cn•a > c .0 S. > ccs ca o � N vUb ° � c � "cow cis 'd a o ouo•° E a. °p cc •� c w o u • ': ° 3 ... 'S 5 0 �... .� ca o .Euc t= :3 ul— c�aoaEoE c.aoU V W a c _ -c�a �-sE3°_3e �_�•o>Oo.•ry"? •O3.tcaco o3° a3c�o scc Q E u3 •b �'�t�. .ca cN bQ a� c. .��s�ca. •�ccr'..s3_ QN 'vCuo> „ o3U MuOua u v '� 3c ,�ccEu°cc C Gb N ,.R••.=.�cctsa`.es}.s U ^o a0 2 c d u C , o - U >% .CS 0� owo— oI. K= u . aV • u x o cd o u cay U _ - 0 43 °= cN p . ccv ca n. cis 0c ea cn o > a•N o o a[ ° N o O ° °Uo oQ Q wo N N 000063 pr 000063 (T IT ,, ,.. ' ..T. . cn c ---- N n. .0 u u y E > 'c E b ,r A ca •� E c o c c u E E ,o a E oR 3 c c o U ._ N '',. •ouv• u 9 -1 V CL): o •yC 'awc? cutr �o a N aU w cis AQ o ; • uaso+ow \ ,,, Av i.-*!! I I cfa 1 Y a_ ♦Jijl� ��-�. "li +Y{yip{ I 7dr7Mr vav"" oi ii' Vii! �lil• Y � i; a +. 000064 go, M 0. r. — — - u u C H - c� U U3 .EH3c E > cto u Q o a. 13 i' > a IE E u o � oA3 a Cd E a o' w .3 •E .� >. G) �. H b GL ca an H O • F+1 0 C 0 C U� •ca U u '«~+ p 4�• pQ -� cao 0 V-4 u c u c a 3 � vE caCdea cit �, . .. 04. u 33 toca0 p (tel epi C cd C C W a •n cis ea b s - .G u 0 O E O C Q C u ..y. Vc H •� a0 h •u O O U 0 .d by 1] U vs H u •� .�+ c u E c "s N u -o cQi s 3 > a• > a a''y E •Cd A b u 'r *u• °= c u a c •b .� 1.0 4ra Q, h .ccE�y >;.� o3E � . o 'tousc ° y `apa p �o ,ca1, �. Eo v v =. ^�-• E0 ca E as C C E c O •0 C w > e... > ' eta =. w '- a Cl p. 0p y O ca •v° •� u '- oc • QowEcaa. a .L' °° � u 'dy u '"' a ° •uoa� c � ca .a ca � � ,[ w b .b n. at .� a 6. -� u `L s c o f �. ea .dip u H E .. cs. o o •� '� u u xd° U Ecauo co -- �acu- ai � r- CC as � c cua••- o EEu cU • ..., � � � v u � omU3un..c � � 3 •, EE .. c •r� .:., > 0a E4 u 'o u ¢ o u a,•� > c > .p cc . oca Unaci 3� c >cu, oCE .dH •U ,�c� uu :c o �. cuo o o ca Xu � EU U �>, E > >. cc 0 0000!313 \J �+ o0 N � Mx X X X X N u s CLI N N N >C >C x x x X >C f N V E ba .ti 0H �••� c E a y 04 E a 0 CIO EE N cE od ? p, as ca cc ca ca ba c r N t 7 dCd W2 V ca C: c u V CG m .E U °� .d cu G. ea C. E ,� C" •2 o w eo •c h u A u cis F oc >+ 0 0 0 5 �+ ... ¢ ao . .� e c c 3 c b QQ 'Coro * 'Cao U 3 •v v L:l V N OG; Q W CQ a. E F C) 000066 CITY OF ATASCADERO,­ GENERAL DEb µ,''� � �•.a�l l' ,,�, l � n � 1179 Y 0 1 � LAND USE ELEMENT i CONSERVATION a OPEN SPACE ELEMENTS I certify"N L.at.this is an N • - ci • • - _•- • .00 ■ ••• -i Vdr 0 •• _ _eal • YW 7 .• fl81s VIII. CIRCULATION This Plan discusses the requirements of all the current �. methods of transportation in Atascadero. Existing *methods are presumed to be practical within the terms'' of this Plan, and circulation improvements are scaled to ' the growth of all types of transportation uses that are assessed. Policies related to transportation planning must relate to feasibility and the estimated cost of improvements to such intangible variables as the costs to motorists, convenience between origins and destinations, and accidents and deaths. The original Atascadero Colony road system was designed for the automobile as the primary mode of transportation. The system was laid out- in the form of a wheel, the hub being the Administration Park and the Central Business District, and the spokes being principal arteries. ".The outer rim of the wheel and several inner concentric ..,,roads were also principal arterials, designed to carry, tfaffic from point to point without entering the downtown area. The original streets were laid out with a 40*"'foot right of way. There are three major factors which have contributed to the present inadequacy of parts of the circulation. system. The first of these is the.,. failure to develop and maintain all roads to their full rAghts of way. Shoulders either have not'-been developed or have- become overgrown with weeds- and eroded by- weathel*. Res•ideats have -built `� ... fences or planted trees and shrubs within the rights of way. In some instances, utility poles have been located too close to the pavement. These occurrences have resulted in some roads being narrower than planned, with few or no facilities for', pedestrians, bicyclists and equestrian traffic. A second: factor is the failure of the Central Business District to develop in the _ areas envisioned in Lewis' plan. Due to laek of planning in the past, the commercial area has grown 1 along the El Camino Real corridors. This strip commercial development has created traffic and parking problems. The third factor was the bisection of the town in 1954 by Freeway -101 . The introduction of the freeway interrupted east -west traffic flow, and too few grade separation crossings ' were added to compensate for the traffic interruption. The 200—mile Colony road system has six components : Freeway and Highways, Arterials Divided, Arterials Undi— vided, Collectors, Local Streets and Paper Streets. Road classifications are indicated on LAND USE AND CIRCULATION MAP. 109 OOOOGS driveway access , be similar to that of surrounding -City streets to minimize any appearance of bisecting the commu- nity . When rerouting of Highway 41 does take place , adequate pedestrian and bicycle pathways shall be provided. Divided Arterials - - The two arterials are E1 Camino Real and Morro Road. They serve as major highways linking Atascadero with other communities, and they channel traffic to different parts of town. Divided arterials shall be developed in two lengths: on E1 Camino Real from Rosario to San Diego Road and on Morro Road from E1 Camino Real to San Gabriel Road. The divided arterials shall also have a -paving width that will accommodate four 'traffic lanes ,;;�arallel parking . strips, bicycle lanes and curbs and sidewalks. Undivided Arterials These roads serve as major access routes between residential areas, shopping centers , employment centers and primary recreation areas. Roads "in thislassification must have shoulders wide enough to accommodate multi-use paths and emergency parking. : There are fourteen segments of undivided arterials: 1 . Atascadero Avenue from Morro Road to Freeway 101 provided major access to Santa Rosa Road Elemen- tary School . It is noted for heavy traffic and lack of shoulders. 2. Traffic Way from El Camino Real to Potrero Road and a future extension of Traffic Way beyond Potrero Road to El Camino Real as a truck route. The portion of Traffic Way between El Camino Real and Olmeda Avenue is also designated to have 40 feet of paving to allow for two eight-foot parking strips on both sides of the arterial. 3• Curbaril Avenue from Morro Road to the Salinas River " crossing is a major local traffic route and is also characterized by lack. of adequate shoulders for non-automobile traffic. 4. Portola Road from Morro Road to Ardilla Road to San Anselmo Road to Freeway 101 . 000069 Circulation Policy Proposals I . Freeways and major highways shAll be effectiv..ely � .. landscaped to screen urban land use's and improve community appearance. Refer to Chapter '%III, COMMUNITY APPEARANCE. 2. Outdoor advertising signs shall be eliminated along= freeways and major highways. - 3• Highway 41 shall be realigned and improved northerly of Freeway 101 along the adopted Mercedes alignment. 4• Design of the roadway along the Mercedes alignment should minimize visual impacts to Pine Mountain and should mitigate concerns associated with bisection of the community. 5• In the rerouting of Highway 41 , a,4equate pedestrian and bicycle paths shall be provided.. 6. Construction of a heavy-duty bridge across Atascadero Creek linking Lewis Avenue with Santa Ysabel 'shall be programmed immediately. 7. Pathways on streets near schools shall' be constructed as soon as practical. ' ' 8. Elevation of U.-S. 101 to p'rermit vehicular traffic on �•> Atascadero Mall from- El Camino Reirr, to: Atas-cad•ero Avenue shall be programmed by CalTrans and the Division of Highways. 9. New street extensions on unimproved rights of way- shall be developed to reasonable improvement standards. 10. Greyhound Bus Lines shall be encouraged to acquire a new permanent terminal site near the Central Business District, close to freeway access. 11 . Plan lines shall be established for all urban arterials and local collectors ' and appropriate setbacks insti- tuted. 12. A more complete and adequate directional signing, program shall be initiated. 13. A high priority shall be given to projects -which are designed to improve the safety of existing transporta- tion orta- tion facilities. 120 0000'70 lYO, CCl lt'f%.A lNAt-I 144-4^ OATEU 4/1 X92- ITEM lE _�­4 MEMORANDUM TO: City Council VIA: Ray Windsor, City Manager FROM: Greg Luke,. Director of Public Works SUBJECT: supplemental Report from DKS Associates DATE: July 9, 1992 The enclosed report has been' prepared by DKS Associates, the City's- consultant preparing the update to the General Plan's Circulation Element. The report which 'addresses the Highway 41 alignment is self-explanatory; staff has no further analysis or comment to add. A technical correction needs to be madam in the second paragraph of under the "Background" discussion. The report states that ,"-. ..no decision has yet been made , either by the City Of Atascadero or Caltrans to select an alternative."' More correctly, no final decision has been made by the City or Caltrans. Previously, the City Council., indicated a preference for the- Alternative A alignment, -reserving a Zfnal decision until the Environmental Impact- Report was complete. - '•The Alternative A specified in the General Plan: `-More recently a alignment is also p "straw vote" taken by the previous Council indicated opposition to the Alternative A alignment. For your information, Mr_ Mike Multari, Consulting Project ` Manager for the preparation of the updated Circulation Element, will be at the meeting available for questions. 0000'71 DKS Associates Atascadero Transportation Study Supplemental Report - Route 41 Alignment Presented to Atascadero City Council By DKS Associates Circulation Element Consultants-- ;# July 7, 1992 The following report was prepared at the request of t& Luke, Public Works Director, and is intended to bring to your attention our need for Council direction or approval of a course of action regarding Route 41 improvements as input to the Circulation Element Update of the Atascadero General Plan. Background ' The project team has completed all of the background research regarding gadding traffic patterns and volumes for the.City. We have conducted two public meetings, the Fust to discuss and solicit inputs on existing transportation issues and needs,and the second to dis'uss future transportation needs and alternatives. We are now at the point where a draft Circulation Element is to be prepared under the terms of our agreement with the City. A key component of the Circulation Element is a Plan which shows the ultimate roadway system to serve the:,City upon buildout. The draft Circulation Element is scheduled for completion by late August. One of the critical issues affecting the Circulation Plan is,the future'loeation of Highway 4L Caltrans has prepared a DEIR addressing alternative Route 41 improvements east of El Camino Real and has held a public hearing but, to our knowledge, no decision has yet been made either by the City of Atascadero or Caltrans to select an alternative. We:: are aware of the local controversy and lack of consensus about the future Highway 41 10c4tion. The issue was a dominant subject at the two workshops held to discuss the Circulation dement. Technical Evaluation. Kay traffic engineering factors affecting the route decision are given below. Please note that Caltrans'DER discusses the environmental impacts of all of the alternative routes; it is not the intention of this report to repeat this information. "1244-d1s 1 0000'72 DKS Associates 1. The existing Highway 41 route (No Build or Alternative B) will not adequately serve the future east-west traffic circulation needs of the city, placing undesirably high traffic volumes on existing streets. 2. Of particular concern is Curbaril Avenue. With the existing route, Caltrans has projected 8,500 vehicles per day(total of both directions)by 2015,or about twice the existing volume, west of the Salinas River_ Our own projections are for 6,600 daily vehicles on Curbaril Avenue west of the bridge, increasing to almost 12,000 dee across the aver. Traffic volumes Real. 'These projections are with or without a newst cut of El Camino low 000 daily vehicles) aro usually in excess of 5,000 daily vehicles (and sometimes as low as 3. unacceptable to people living on the street. The Caltrans and DKS traffic projections well exceed the level of traffic acceptable for a residential collector street. Presence of truck traffic would further impact the residents. . Moreover, the traffic growth would require improving Curbanl Avenue to anarterial to etc. , r lett of two to four lanes with left turn pockets,limited side access,full sized shoulders, the four lane width being needed near El Camino Real. The right-of-way would not only be expensive, but would severely impact or displace existing residences along Curbaril Avenue "These improvement needs are not provided for in the Route 41 improvement plan under Alternative B or No Build and.would , (ore be a local (City) responsibility for funding. • • �_ West 3. Similarly,with the existing alignment of Route 41,additional tr ific is projectedaalonog coed Mall, Capistrano and Sycamore. About 4,600 daily vehicles (two-way total) p j on Capistrano.as compared to 3,600 daily vehicles at present. The projected traffic increase would negatively impact the residents along Capistrano, with traffic levels at or closely approaching the acceptable limits. The schools on West Mail would also be adversely impacted. Although this route is designated as Route 41 and is therefore eligible for State funding,the DEIR points out that it would nt feasible Eor any improvements- 4. this without displacing residences, and therefore does provide 4. Realignment of Highway 41 as described in Alternative A or A Modified would st�Hca We tly reduce future traffic levels on Curbaril Avenue and West MalliCapistranolSyca project that the realignment would reduce traffic on Curbard Avenue by 4,000 daily vehicles. This would result in acceptable traffic volumes on the east end of Curbaril.Avenue and would avoid the aced for upgrading Curbaril to arterial status in the future. Traffic volumes near El Camino Real would stili be higher than desirable for a residential street, but could be accommodated by a two lane road. i 2 P9124"I18 000073 DKS Associates S. Any of the alternative routes for Highway 41 would impose a heavy traffic load on the- Intersection of El Camino Real with Curbaal Avenue. Our analysis indicates that this is the most congcsted interscctioa today. With-the existing Highway 41 alignment maintained, future traffic Is projected to exceed the capacity of the intersection by some 30 percent. It is unlikely that this intersection could be mitigated to as acceptable level of service. Realignment of Highway 41 would reduce traffic at the El Camino Real Intersection. Although still above capacity, resulting traffic levels would be more readily accommodated by feasible intersection improvements. 6. Our analysis indicates that the Morro Road, Curbaril and Traffic Way interchanges with Highway 101 will all ultimately need major improvements if the existing Highway 41 alignment is maintained At the 101 freeway ramp intersections with Curbaril Avenue, tinning lanes are limited and right-of-way is narrow. In addition, CurbanTs intersection with'!El Camino Real and the Curbanl on and off tamps are far enough apart to make combined signal timing difficult. Yet the two intersections are close enough together to interfere with one another. The Traffic Way intersection at both El Camino Real and 101 is highly constrained by many factors, including existing buildings;roadway elc tlonal differences and numerous other . factors. '" 7. With realignment of Highway.41, more of the future traffic will'be concentrated into the Morro Road interchange. This will accelerate the aced for imQroving the Morro Road intcrchan&but should avoid or at least postpone the aced for major improvements at the Carbaril and Traffic Way interchanges, both of which would '!be difficult to fund and construct Caltrans' current proposal is to construct traffic signals at the Highway 101/Morro interchange as a part of realigning Highway 41. While this is only a "band-aid"solution, it docs provide near term relief from additional traffic rnterconnecting the signals with state- of-the-art tinting techniques will minimize the wait time at this intersection- In the longer range future the Public Works Department, ''San Luis Obispo Area Coordinating Council (SLOACC), and Caltrans will need to develop an Improved camp configuration. A Project Study Report is proposed by SLOACC for this fiscal year to study alternative ramp configurations. Our initial review of the area shows that several promising alternatives that may provide a Long-term solution to the problem. Our final report w0I show some of these potential solutions. While no funding for the Morro Road interchange improvements has been identified, being an interchange between two state routes provides better prospects in the future than for the other two interchanges. 'I lot 0000'74 DKS Associates _ Conclusions and Recommendations As stated above, it is not our intention to second-guess ocd uan fluence selection are simply 4 which should consider all the environmental factors to addition assumption ata point where an must be made to complete !work. In the absence of other information, we must use our professional judgement Proceed - the realignment of Highway 41 Based on the traffic engineering factors presented above, solution for traffic des the best long-term engineering fo act A (Alternative A or A Modified) provt erred traffic volumes, the lower cost, lower p circulation for Atascadero. For the Prof directed b staff or Modified alignment would be satisfactory. ''herefore, ° e the draft by Council, it seems prudent to assume this route alternative while developing Plan. In the future, if the final selected alternative turns out to be differs than the one assumed in ation Element, it will be necessary to modify the Circulation Element to preparing the Circul reflect the altered traffic patterns and roadway improvement needs. 0000'75 n� " 1 CITY OF ATASCA�DERO �s a OFFICE of the CITY CLERK Kathy DiGrazia Project Studies Engineer CALTRANS P.O. Box 8114 San Luis Obispo, CA CERTIFICATION I, LEE RABOIN, City Clerk of the City of Atascadero, hereby certify_that the foregoing. is a true and c�oirrect..excerpt,from the official Minutes of the Atascadero City Council meeting of July 14, 1992 regarding the -proposed Highway 41 realignment. DATED: 1&9'RABOlit City Clerk ' City of Atascadero, California 6500 PALMA AVENUE ATASCADERO, CA 93422 (805)4: 61-5074 0000'76 D 3. LETTER FROM JEFF McALISTER REQUESTING RECONSIDERATION OF MANDATORY TRASH PICK-UP j Item continued to July 28, 1992 (see page 7) . 4. CIRCULATION ELEMENT COMPLETION - LETTER FROM CONSULTANT RE: HIGHWAY 41 - Greg Luke provided the staff report. He explained that DKS & Associates was seeking direction for a course of action regarding Route 41 improvements as input to the Circulation Element and noted that DKS was recommending the "Alternate A-Modified" route. The City Manager, responding to inquiry from Councilman Kudlac; remarked that Caltrans has indicated. that it wanted City input by early August and without it would proceed in late August. Councilwoman Borgeson asserted that the Council bbd asked for a full EIR before making a final decision on the , Eealignment and expressed disapproval for being asked to make that kind of decision now, before the EIR has been certified.. Councilman Luna inquired about costs associated with amending the Circulation Element if the alternative is changed. Greg Luke projected a cost of about $10,000 or approximately 10% of the project cost. Councilman Kudlac- voiced support for A-Modified. '~ • Public Comments: Russ Kolemaine, Box 1919 Atascadero, contended that economic impacts have not been adequately addressed by the EIR and indicated that he hoped the Council would direct staff to initiate research on what impact the realignment would have on property values. _ Peter Booni.sar, 5212 Magdelena, urged the Council not to make a decision without a final EIR and public hearing. He criticized the draft EIR, claiming that it was inadequate, and reported that he had filed a complaint with the Grand Jury. He shared concern for traffic problems in the downtown as a result of the project and pondered why DKS & Associates had not considered the option of re- routing traffic up 101 to Paso Robles. In addition, Mr. Boon1sar mentioned that he was wondering whether, if the A-Modified alternative is approved, garbage would be hauled from other areas of the County to the Cold Canyon Landfill. Joan O'Keefe, 9985 Old Morro Road East, asked the Council how the public would know if there was a conflict of interest on the part CC07/14/92 Page 90 _ 0000'77 of any member of the Council. Mayor Nimmo stated that this was not the topic of discussion. Ms. O'Keefe, speaking to the issue, read a prepared statement (Exhibit A) voicing opposition to the Alternatives A or A-Modified and. suPP ort for Alternative B. The City Attorney invited Ms. O'Keefe to speak to him personally if she has questions regarding conflict of interest. Livia Kellerman, 5463 Honda, implored the Council to not make a decision until all consequences of each alternative have been studied and a full public hearing has been held. Dorothy McNeil, 8765 Sierra Vista Road, asked the mayor why the Council was being asked to make a decision before certifying the EIR. Mayor Nimmo clarified the intent of the agenda item. Ms_ McNeil spoke in support of Alternative B. Whitey Thorpe, 8025 Santa Ynez, urged the Council.ta go ahead and approve the alternative the community has supported 'for years. Jan Bewley, 7955 San Gregorio Road, reported that she had helped acquire 1,600 to 1,700 signatures in support of ArModified and remarked that the majority of the citizens of Atascadero favored that alternative. Eric Greening asserted that it was not the responsibility of the taxpayers statewide to address the local-rPt-raffic stivation. In addition, he urged the Council to ask DKS :s& Associates:to* make the { assumption that either alternative could 1be selecte'd--'and, ftiilm-6r, `4 that they wait on a final decision until the Final '; EIR has been approved. Virginia Powers, 7505 Carmelita, read a portion of a letter she was sending to Governor Pete Wilson in support of using the limited funds available to construct Alternative B and repair an unsafe bridge along the route. Her letter also asked that if this alternative was not selected by Caltrans, that the Governor send to Atascadera a representative who could explain the justification for the "monstrous waste of taxpayers' money". Eric Michielssen, 5300 Aguila, remarked that the DKS' study covers many aspects of traffic, not just the Highway 41 issue, and stressed the importance of making a decision and not delaying the Circulation Element. ---End of Public Testimony--- MOTION: By Mayor Nimmo, seconded by Councilman Kudlac that the Council accept the DKS & Associates Supplemental Report dated July 7, 1992 and concur with the conclusions and CC07/14/92 Page 10 0000'78 recommendations of that report. Discussion of the motion: Councilwoman Borgeson stated that it was premature to give direction to DKS. Councilman Luna agreed. Councilman Kudlac asked the Public Works Director to respond to Mr. Boonisar' s comments regarding use of the Chicago Grade Landfill by other parts of the County: Mr. Luke remarked that the matter was complex and would provide Council with a memorandum identifying potential problems regarding the landfill as a result of the realignment. Councilman Kudlac then asked when Caltrans needs a final decision on the proposed project. Mr. Luke stated that Caltrans has indicated it wants a final decision from the City by the end of August (1992) . Councilman Bewley asked if the motion on floor-would represent a formal recommendation to Caltrans. Mr. win tsor emphasized that the Caltrans representative and cooiainator -ofthe project had related that no further public hearings were intended and was looking for a final determination by the City no later than the early part of August. In the absence of that decision by the City, he was told on the phone, Caltrans would go ahead and make its, own decision by the end of August. Councilman Bewley, clarif Ang the intent of the s motion, remarked .that the decision pe'`seatly before Council } was, in essence, giving formal support for,_-the: A-modifj ed tt realignment. Mayor Nimmo agreed. Vote on the motion,: Motion carried 3:2 (Councilmembers Borgeson and Luna voting in opposition) . 5. LETTER FROM DOUG LEWIS REGARDING MISCELLANEOUS TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION ISSUES The City Manager reported that staff was looking for direction and suggested that Council refer the matter back to staff, and possibly to DRS & Associates, to examine concerns addressed. in Mr. Lewis' letter (July 7, 1992) in conjunction with the Circulation Element. Atascadero resident Doug Lewis stated that he felt the issues he was raising should be considered separately from the Circulation Element. By consensus, Council referred the matter back to staff for examination and possible referral to consultants for study. CC07/14/92 Page 11 000079 ' Joan O' Ke e f e V a 02��ti?�/ V jf-e� 9985 Old Morro Rd E. 7-L492 CC7/14/92 EXHIBIT A Fifteen million dollars for a band aid! These are the words the consultants used in their report to 'describe what redirecting traffic off Curbaril to the 41-E1 ',Camino Real intarsection will accomplish. For a few years, at most, Alternate A will pull traffic off Curbaril and down to El Camino and 41. Since when is Caltrans Supposed to be responsible for the cities circulation problems? This isn' t about traffic on the present routing of FWY A l'' through the City. This is about temporarily redirectinQ�ytrlffic £tom one neighborhood to another neighborhood at the cost of 515,0000,000 and causing irreparable damage to 'the environment through extensive movement of the earth and removal of vegetation. Does Caltrans plan to provide this kind of a freebie to other cities t t have avoided planning for the infrastruc} ..ur_ needed to support the.deXelapmen they've approved? There is no overriding health, safety or welfare issue th can justify putting in this road. Neither the accident at rate, traffic flow or air quality will be improved significantly by this project. The state of California is in a financial_ crunch and the majority on this Council are willing to spend 315,0000.000 tor a band aid_ r've heard some of th we should Council Persons say spend the money because its been approved. ' Well a Poultry building has been Poly approved for Cal ? y p and they' re Phasing out their poultry program but the money is there so I suppose they should spend it and they probably will. Building a new bridge and rerouting KH►Y 4 t I nor�h ,moo Kwy 46 will take care of any problems presented by the current route. If this Council is going to be a fiscally, responsible Council that is the recommendationwake "hey will veninq. 000080 �amr., ;gyp CITY OF ATAS CAD. E .RO 110, t 9� CAD OFFICE of the CITY MANAGER May 22, 1992 _ Mr. G.L. Ruggerone, Chief Environmental Planning Branch Department of Transportation State of California P.O. Box 8114 San Luis Obispo, CA 93403 RE: Draft EIR for Bridge Replacement and Realignment on Route 41 in and near the City of Atascadero; February 1992 Dear Mr. Ruggerone, At their May 12, 1992 meeting, tYe Atascadero City Council addressed five substantive issues relative to the Draft EIR for the Highway 41 bridge replacement and realignment project. Of the following issues, the Council was unanimous in their decision on the first three, and voted three to two on issues number 4 and 5 . 1. Stadium Park Bridge (Pages 9. & 36) . The EIR acknowledges that the proposed 45 foot height of fill at the entrance to Stadium Park could be mitigated by construction of a bridge, which is indicated to cost $600, 000 and would be at local expense. The City notes that Alternate A Modified (which was developed in response to earlier City comments to lessen environmental impacts) saves $800, 000 over the original Alternate A project design. That savings should absorb the cost of a Stadium Park Bridge. 2 . Traffic Signals at El Camino Real and Highway 41 and Highway 101 (Page 8) . These improvements, together with additional left turn lanes at this location, are proposed as mitigation for impacts associated with Alternate A or alternate A Modified. These improvements should also be included as mitigation for Alternate B. 3. Population (Page 29) . The Environmental Impact Report quotes County population projections of 47, 423 persons for Atascadero0 6500 PALMA AVENUE • ATASCADERO, CA 93422 (805) 461-5010 000081 :s for the year of 2015 . The EIR should affirm that 'theholding capacity of the City' s most recently adopted General Plan is 31, 150 persons. 4 . Long Range Design of Highway 101/41 Interselotion. The EIR makes no commitment for a long range plan for' the appropriate design of this State Highway Interchange. iThat commitment._ should be a follow-up action to the EIR regardless of which alternative is approved. 5 . Intersection of Highway 41 and Capistrano Ave. The EIR' s discussion of traffic impacts at the intersection of Highway 41 and Capistrano Avenue, for both Alternate '.A and Alternate A Modified, appears to be understated. The traffic impacts of both alternatives at that intersection should be further .evaluated. Thank you for this opportunity to review and comment on the Draft EIR. As you requested, Council will dicus,s the various alternatives presented and select- a preferred "option in the near future. If we can provide further clarification of the issues noted above, ' please don't hesitate to contact us. Sincerely, RXY WINDSOR City Manager cc: City Council Henry Engen Greg Luke 000082 REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Item No: C- Through : Andy Takata, City Manager Meeting Date: 08-24-93 Via : Richard H. McHaleifChief of Police From: Cynthia Reid, Police Sergeant --- SUBJECT: t This ordinance is proposed in response to a request from ,the City Managers office to initiate an amendment to the City Ordinances prohibiting the hunting of deer within city limits . RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council considers for adoption the City Ordinance amendment, to include the additional hunting definition. BACKGROUND: This amendment to the Book of Ordinances of the City Atascadero defines and clarifies hunting and specifically prohibits hunting deer within the city limits. ANALYSIS: Although there is an existing city ordinance prohibiting the use of firearms within the city limits, there is currently no ordinance which specifically prohibits the hunting of deer with other weapons . FISCAL IMPACT: None foreseen. 000083 ORDINANCE NO. 272 AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AMENDING THE ATASCADERO MUNICIPAL ` CODE PROHIBITING THE HUNTING OF DEER WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS (CITY COUNCILINITIATED) WHEREAS, Section 65858 of the Government Code authorizes the adoption by local legislative bodies of interim ordinances as urgency measures to protect the public safety, health and welfare; and WHEREAS, consideration of an urgency measure shall require a,4/5th vote of the legislative body for adoption; and WHEREAS, there is an urgent need, in the interest of public safety, to prohibit hunting within the city limits; and WHEREAS, there is an urgent need, in the interest of the preservation of wildlife to define and Oibhibit hunting; and NOW, THEREFORE, the Atascadero City Council does ordain as follows : Section 1. Article 2, Sec. 4-3 . 201 of the Public Safety Ordinance text are hereby added as shown in the attached Exhibit "A", which is hereby made a part of this ordinance by reference . Section 2. The City Council hereby declares that this is an urgency ordinance necessary to preserve the public peace, health and safety due to the facts set forth above . Section 3'. This ordinance' being an urgency ordinance for the immediate protection of ;public safety, health and general welfare, containing a declaration of the facts constituting` the urgency and passed by a four-fifths ( 4f5ths) vote of, the 'Council shall take 'effect immediately upon its adoption. 0000€ 4 Ordinance No. 272 Page Two Section 4 . Publication. The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published once within fifteen (15) days after its passage in the Atascadero News, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, published and circulated in the City in accordance with Section 36933 of the: Government Code; shall certify the adopting and posting of this ordinance and shall cause this ordinance and certification together with proof of posting to be entered into the Book of Ordinances of the City, ADOPTED: ATTEST: CITY OF ATASCADERO By: LEE RABOIN, City Clerk MARTY KUDLACr Mayor �• =AR D AS TO FORM: . _• ART MONT NDON, City Attorney APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: RICHARD H. McHALE, Chief of Police 000085 ORDINANCE NO. 272 EXHIBIT "A" Article 2 . Hunting Sec. 4-3. 201 . Definition (a) Hunt Defined . Includes pursue, injure, capture, kill or attempt to pursue, injure, capture or kill . Sec. 4-3. 202 . Hunting It is a misdemeanor to hunt deer within thet-city limits . 000086 / 000087 i REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item C-3- CITY OF ATASCADLRO Through: Andy Takata, City Manager Meeting Dat 8/24/93 From: Mark Joseph, Administrative Services Director• SUB«TSCT: First Public Hearing on Technical Assistance Grant Economic Development REC4MMERDATI N: Council to 'receive, publ.ic input. BACKGROUND Council endorsed Staff's efforts to apply for it $30,000 planning grant for economic development. This is the first of two public hearings required. In addition to public comment, staff will make a verbal report, updating Council on the grant's status. ase-dgrant #3A 000088 REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Through: Andy Takata, City Manager Meeting ate: 08124193 File Number: ZC 93002 From: Henry Engen, Community Development Director H- SUBJECT: Adoption of an ordinance amending the Zoning Map to modify the parking requirements within a portion of the Pedest ian Commercial zone. RECOMMENDATION: Approval and adoption of Ordinance No. 271 on seco d reading. BACKGROUND: On August 10, 1993, the City Council conducted a public hearing on the above-referenced subject. The Council concurred with the Planning Commission' s recommendation and approved Ordinance No. 271 on first reading. HE:ph Attachment: Ordinance No. 271 ORDINANCE NO. 271` AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT TO MODIFY THEPARKING REQUIREMENTS OF THE PEDESTRIAN COMMERCIAL ZONE (ZC 93-002; City of Atascadero) WHEREAS, the proposed zoning text amendment is consistent with the General Plan as required by Section 65860 of the California Government Cade; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendment is in conformance with Section 65800 et seq. of the California Government Cade concerning zoning regulations; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendment is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act; and WHEREAS, the Atascadero Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 20, 1993 and has recommended approval of Zone Change 93-402 . NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does ordain as follows: Section 1 . Council Findin_as. 1 . The proposal is compatible with the surrounding land' / use and zoning. _ g 2 . ThepP ro osal is consistent with the `General Plan Land Use Element and other elements contained in: the General Plan, and specifically, policies pertaining to downtown development and revitalization as expressed in the General Plan Downtown Element. 3 The proposal will not result in any significantnificant adverse environmental impacts. The project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act. Section 2 . Zoning` Text. The Zoning Ordinance text is hereby amended by the addition of the following new subsection f. to 9-3.266 (3. ) of the Atas- cadero Municipal Code: "f . In the block bounded by El Camino Real, Palma Ave. , Traffic Way, and Entrada, the parking requirements may be satisfied by entering into reciprocal easement agreements with the City prior to the construction of a public/private parking lot in that block. s' 00 V!J � Ordinance No. 271 Page 2 Parcels with 100% building coverage will also be con- sidered to have satisfied their parking requirements if they: ( 1) are substantially redeveloped subsequent to the construction of such a parking lot, and (2 ) make additional parking spaces available on their site through redevelopment, and (3) enter into reciprocal easement agreements with the City at the time of redevelopment. " Section 3 . Publication. The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published once within fifteen ( 15) days after its passage in the Atascadero News, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, published, and circulated in the City in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code; shall certify the adopting and posting of this ordinance and shall cause this ordinance and this certification together with proof of posting to be entered into the Book of Ordinances of the City. Section 4 . Effective Date. This ordinance shallg o into effect and be in full force and effect at 12 : 01 a.m. on the 31st day after its passage. On motion by and seconded by the foregoing Ordinanceis approved by the following role call vote: AYES : NOES : ABSENT: DATE ADOPTED: By: MARTY KUDLAC, Mayor City of Atascadero, California Ut>0rl� Ordinance No. 271 Page 3 ATTEST: LEE RABOIN, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ART MONTANDON, City Attorney PREPARED BY: HENRY ENGEN Community Development Director it • REPORT To CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCAAERt), Agenda horr. d From: Andrew J. Takata, City Manager i3 tsr: 8/24193 F k j a: Council vacancy R£Cfl1llEN�ATiUN: Should the Council, due to time constraints at the nvwting, deter, int not to address, this issue or should you wish to continue it, staff would racatnim d a be scheduled for Wednesday, September 1, 1933, in order to a low a fer. advertisement. AT::cw