Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 01/26/1981 AGENDA - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting January 26 , 1981 7 :30 p.m. Atascadero Administration Building Call to Order Pledge of Allegiance Invocation Roll Call Public Comment A. CONSENT CALENDAR NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC All matters listed under Item A, Consent Calendar, are considered to be routine and will be enacted by one motion in the form listed below. There will be no separate discussion of these items. if discussion is required, that item will be removed from the Consent Calendar and will be considered separately. Vote may be by roll call . 1. Minutes of the regular meeting of January 12, 1981 (RECOMMEND APPROVAL) 2. Tentative Parcel Map AT 78-98, 5420 Venado, Jack Stinchfield, to allow time extension (RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS) 3 . Waiver of curb, gutter, and sidwalk requirements, 7500 Sinaloa, Ray Bugatti (RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION) B. HEARINGS, APPEARANCES AND REPORTS 1. Report by City Manager on California Parklands Bond Act, Proposition 1 C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1 . Atascadero welcome sign D. NEW BUSINESS 1. Boosters Club billboard sign; "2. Consideration of transfer of funds for Parks and Recreation Advisory Board to attend 1981 California and Pacific Southwest Recreation and Park Conference 3 . Conversion of street lights, central business district 4 . Award of bid for tractor E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION 1. City Council 2. City Attorney 3 . City Manager • ,w A�, ,ca....,,.v✓.aa'...a.i .xsYr �Z in. a 0a.s01" ..2 It .. +..ail A At.. :i... ...I..:Q t i - Fi`e^�%drr '6 �"'✓.r.o was C::'i:ated az rad .Les `?rx It c,' , wa isis in .ti A C:Ys to a.,i.'3 n , skt I�� �Z"); 4i. '�. C. ut«.f�.t��k�'i,la1n o 4<,S Comma=�S..a.;:uY Una '..,°`#�qtid mica.� $zee` ud 'a t.�,.. n, ;. nc L. isd , "fl �ak.ic l M:.,t.,a .:5.''3 b,:Y $ , he ai �d.�y� time .ma.�xFk+y -�• 6 x n o G.i.ao l" ��a�` _ f citizens have buaded t 6 staler in e ca w a' Ci,f�. d 4$. .L• want a$ t. 9a .a 44 fM fir 4rm . .. £ . $ i . 5r l w wood of . /ijcbLD Witt ". x 0 Oing . ✓Aat tat AC alr.ks C,Lr 4s.c"t is t} croute ana arenwrahe be .n u:»f a.a+st ✓e r :. p;a e a. .aro o bu Vh "a�."a�:.Sic v IiItV ,w ryrs a tN • ax iv'4$° i ;�..���.. i • AISZ�..,0 i 4 i. t d.(S. y° r"�,r ,`"�'ac 31 'c+;O ..�r. Ji�..�e:. with X 3 5+>.7.c jr su ,s al.=? �4, >✓ I..' G..� 1 4.4 M ,JW^. ..,. ' � j,r hS, city iia �� C,�a�tl4 k4,. t M.. o `.'p�4 k�wr. .d Il,+""c7 rr s... .. :00 no 1 i ii !us entivety 3— . .xi .wLLI vim, ,. ' 50 o jor a.a Y,'.j .#• .. +...rk .i tie.i .6.J« r k ww.wrrre.wer- STATE OF CALIFORNIA—HEALTH AND WELFARE AGENCY RONALD REAGAN, Governor DEPARTMENT Of BENEFIT PAYMENTS REFER TO: • Postmaster The Department of Benefit Payments has beed_ for the name and street address of the holder of This information is necessary for the proper administration of the Unemployment Insurance Code by the Department of Benefit Payments. The Department is an affiliate of the Bureau of Empl:)yment Security of the United States Department of Labor entitled to indicia mail privileges. NAME: ADDRESS CITY: TELEPHONE Any information obtained will be held strictly confidential as provided under the Unemployment Insurance Code. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. AC 29 (8-74) MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting January 12, 1981 7 : 30 p.m. Atascadero Administration Building The meeting was called to order at 7 : 30 p.m. by Mayor Wilkins with the Pledge of Allegiance. Reverend Dexter of the Methodist Church gave the invocation. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Councilmen Highland, Mackey, Nelson, Stover and Mayor Wilkins ABSENT: None PUBLIC COMMENT None A. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 . Minutes of the special meeting of December 8 , 1980 (RECOMMEND APPROVAL) 2. Minutes of the adjourned regular meeting of December 22, 1980 (RECOMMEND APPROVAL) • 3 . Minutes of the regular meeting of December 22, 1980 (RECOMMEND APPROVAL) 4 . Treasurer' s Report, 12-1-80 to 12-31-80 (RECOMMEND APPROVAL) 5. Resolution No. 1-81 establishing fees for bicycle licenses (RECOMMEND APPROVAL) 6 . Lot line adjustment LA 801113 :1, 8400 San Rafael Road, John and Jackie Hutcherson (RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS) 7 . Parcel map AT 80-57, 9,100 Pino Solo, Loyd Sims (Baumberger) (RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION) 8 . Parcel map AT 800829 :1, 10325 Atascadero Rd. , Fred Hartman (Morgan) (RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION) Councilman Mackey requested that item A-4 , the Treasurer' s Report, be withdrawn from the Consent Calendar as she had some ques- tions. Councilman Nelson asked about the bicycle license fee reso- lution and Mr. Warden explained that the fees set forth in the reso- lution are intended to recover actual costs to the City. The pro- gram is entirely voluntary and designed to help in recovery of stolen bicycles. MOTION: Councilman Mackey moved for the approval of the Consent Calendar with the exception of item A-4 . ', The motion was seconded by Councilman Nelson and unanimously carried by • roll call vote. Councilman Mackey asked about an expenditure for cutting a stencil and for engineering work on the renovation project. The MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting January 12, 1981 Page Two stencil was for use by the Recreation Department authorized by Mr. Ross and the engineering expenditure was necessary to modify renovation plans pursuant to previous Council action approving bids for a phased program. MOTION: Councilman Mackey moved for the approval of the Treasurer's report. The motion was seconded by Councilman Highland and unanimously carried. B. HEARINGS, APPEARANCES AND REPORTS 1 . Appeal of Peter Del Vaglio from Planning Commission decision concerning dance facility and fast food kitchen, Lago Avenue and Hwy. 41 Larry Stevens, Planning Director, advised that this appeal resulted from the Planning Director's original determination that l dance facilities and fast food kitchens were not permitted uses in the L zone. The Planning Commission, upon hearing the matter, concurred with his determination and directed Staff to initiate procedures for a code amendment to consider a Conditional Use Permit process for handling the dance facility and fast food kitchen appli- cation. The Planning Commission found that (1) the dance facility is not a commercial recreational use similar to those listed in the ordinance for an L zone; (2) certain characteristics associated with a dance facility are not necessarily compatible with other uses allowed in an L zone; (3) the purpose and intent of this specialized zone may not be realized if this use is allowed without adequate review procedures; and (4) consideration be given to allowing the dance facility subject to a Conditional Use Permit review and procedures. Mr. Peter Del Vaglio disagreed with the Planning Director 's interpretation of the Planning Commission' s action. He felt that the Planning Commission had determined that a dance facility be included in the list of commercial recreational uses. He noted that, when the project was reviewed by the County before the City' s incorporation, it had been determined that a dance facility would be allowed on the subject property. There were comments from George Molina, Greg Ellison, Edward Fitter, Herb La Prade, and Ted Munson. Council discussed the matter with Mayor Wilkins stating that he felt a dance facility was definitely a recreation use. Councilman Highland did not agree, since dance halls were listed specifically in other zoning designations as a permitted use but were not listed for the L Zone. MOTION: Councilman Nelson moved that Council concur with the • Planning Commission' s recommendations including the findings. The motion was seconded by Councilman Stover and carried on the following roll call vote 9 0 MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting January 12, 1981 Page Three AYES : Councilmen Highland, Mackey, Nelson and Stover NOES: Mayor Wilkins 2. Appearance of Nancy Sherer requesting City assistance in constructing and maintaining two community identifi- cation signs Mr. Warden explained that Mrs. Sherer, as a representative of the Junior Women' s Club, has requested City assistance in constructing and placing welcome signs for Atascadero. Mr. Warden explained the procedure that has to be followed to obtain a sign permit. He stated that Mrs. Sherer has a time constraint because she is hoping to get the High School involved in constructing the signs as a school project. Mr. Warden recommended that the City get involved only to the extent of waiving fees, if approved by the City Attorney, and encourage service club participation in financing the sign. The fees could add up to approximately $500. Mrs. Sherer reviewed her proposal for Council`. There was considerable discussion regarding this matter with an attempt being made to accommodate the request. It was indicated that Council was in favor of the project and waiving the fees. MOTION: Councilman Nelson moved that Council approve the pro- posal and construction of the signs for Atascadero, that the fees be waived, that the service clubs consider maintenance of the signs, that this proposal be given to the City Attorney for approval and that the Staff be encouraged to help as much as possible. The motion was seconded by Councilman Mackey and unanimously carried by roll call vote. Mr. Warden pointed out that the Staff was not opposed to this project, but, since our ordinances provide a process which Staff cannot waive, Mrs. Sherer wanted the Council to..take action. 3 . Appearance of Henry K. Adams regarding traffic situation in front of Post Office Mr. Adams read a statement to Council regarding the illegal parking in front of the Post Office and using a sub-standard site for a Post Office. He felt that the Post Office should not be allowed to expand unless they provided parking. Also, an annex should be built and the Post Office eventually moved to the annex. Council pointed out that the City does not have jurisdiction over the Post Office. Councilman Highland stated that parking is provided by the Post Office at the r of their building. MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting _ January 12, 1981 Page Four There was discussion about this matter with no action taken. 4 . City Attorney's Report .No. 9 Since Mr. Grimes was ill, Mr. Warden briefly reviewed the report. C. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Salary adjustments - Fire Chief and City Attorney Mr. Warden explained that he had previously advised the Council that the Fire Chief would remain at a "Y" rate even through the Council had approved a new salary schedule. Since that meeting, however, Mr. Warden realized that Council probably intended for the Fire Chief to be on parity ,with the Police Chief since comparable fire positions were made equal to police positions. He was, there- fore, recommending Council approval for putting the Fire Chief ' s salary range on an equal status with that of the Police Chief; this will give the Fire Chief an approximately $42.00 per month .raise. The City Attorney had requested the same 7 1/2o increase for his hourly compensation as granted for City management employees. Mr. Warden pointed out that Mr. Grimes ' contract does not have a definite term. He currently receives $30. 00 per hour, with a monthly minimum of $1, 800 per month, for day-to-day work and $50. 00 per hour for Council-authorized court work. Mr. Warden noted that most attorneys in this County receive $70. 00 per hour or more for their work. MOTION: Councilman Highland moved that Council affirm that parity exists between the Police Chief and the Fire Chief. The motion was seconded by Councilman Stover and carried with Councilman Nelson voting no. Councilman Nelson stated that he was voting no because he wanted to be consistent with his negative vote regarding management salaries at the last Council meeting. Mayor Wilkins felt that the City Attorney' s contract should be discussed at budget time; he is not a City employee and an increase for him should not be considered at the same time as other City employees. He thought the City would be setting a precedent if they began considering increases for the City Attorney along with employees. Councilman Mackey did not feel that the City Attorney was any different than other employees and he should be considered along with them. MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting January 12, 1981 Page Five MOTION: Councilman Highland moved that the request for an increase by the City Attorney be denied. The motion was seconded by Councilman Stover and carried on the following roll call vote : AYES : Councilmen Highland, Nelson, Stover and Mayor Wilkins NOES: Councilman Mackey D. NEW BUSINESS 1. Recommendation from Parks and Recreation Advisory Board concerning hiring of a Recreation Director Mr. Warden reviewed the recommendation from the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board to include three members of the Board and Stu Ross to screen the resumes for Recreation Director down to ten and then to have an oral board consisting of parks and recreation professionals and possibly a member of the City Council to screen the number of applicants to three for final Council consideration. . Mr. Warden stated that Ordinance No. 4 , creating the position of City Manager and Ordinance No. 24, the personnel ordinance, specifically makes the City Manager responsible for the hiring of Department Heads with the concurrence and review by the City Council . These ordinances also make the City Manager responsible for the selection process. Mr. Warden stated that he opposed this recommendation for a variety 'of reasons and noted that the Council, if they wished to comply with the Advisory Board's recommendation, would have to amend the current ordinances. There was considerable discussion regarding this matter with Councilman Mackey stating that Mr. Warden could make the Board a part of the process if he wished without changing any ordinances. Councilman Nelson was in favor of the Board's participation. Councilman Highland did not feel that the Board should be a part of the personnel process. Mayor Wilkins pointed out that the City had been previously successful in selecting Department Head personnel and saw no reason why the same process should not be equally successful for selection of a Recreation Director. MOTION: Councilman Stover moved that Council deny the request of the Advisory Board and comply with Ordinance No. 24 . The motion was seconded by Councilman Highland and carried with Councilmen P7ackey and Nelson voting no. 2. Resolution No. 2-81 approving participation in the • National Flood Insurance Program Mr. Warden reviewed the purposes for a flood insurance program and noted that this Resolution enabled the City and the Federal MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting January 12, 1981 Page Six agency to move to the next step towards implementing flood insur- ance availability. MOTION: Councilman Highland moved for the adoption of Resolu- tion No. 2-81. The motion was seconded by Councilman Stover. Mayor Wilkins read Resolution No. 2-81 by title only. The motion was unanimously carried by roll call vote. 3. Resolution No. 3-81 authorizing the adjustment and settlement of claims against the City Mr. Warden reviewed the contents of the proposed resolution and noted that the main reason for the procedure is to expedite settlement of claims. MOTION: Councilman Nelson moved for the approval of Resolution No. 3-81. The motion was seconded by Councilman Highland. Mayor Wilkins read Resolution No. 3-81 by title only. The motion was unanimously carried by roll call vote. 4 . Considerationof Agreement with County Department of Employment and Training Services regarding CETA employees Mr. Warden reviewed the agreement and stated that the City would be applying for a position for the Fire Department to assist in inventorying fire hydrants. Chief Sylvia explained the duties of the position. MOTION: Councilman Nelson moved that Staff be authorized to apply for this position and sign the agreement. The motion was seconded by Councilman Mackey and unanimously carried by roll call vote. 5. Traffic control recommendations Mr. Warden reviewed the three areas being recommended for specific traffic control measures. One provides a no parking zone 20 feet in both directions adjacent to the southerly drive approach to El Camino Real at the Atascadero Federal Credit Union. Another will place a stop sign on Mercedes Avenue at it' s intersection with Cemetery Road. The last will place stop signs on Atascadero Road and Curbaril, making this a 4-way stop intersection. Council discussed these locations and the needs throughout S the rest of the City. Mr. Warden stated that there are controls 0 0 MINUTES - ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL 18 Regular Meeting January 12, 1981 Page Seven needed in other areas, but that these recommendations were the result of specific citizen requests and represented the Public Works Director' s evaluation of need. A survey is being conducted for other areas and a report will be brought to the. Council-with recommendations for various controls along El Camino Real . The Public Works Director, discussed the stop sign at the intersection of Curbaril and Atascadero Avenue and whether or not four-way stops create more problems than they solve. He noted that traffic at this intersection will be monitored to see if the signs are effec- tive or if they are causing more difficulties. If the latter occurs, other action may be 'needed. MOTION: Councilman Nelson moved that Council approve the three traffic controls as recommended. The motion was seconded by Councilman Highland and unanimously carried. E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION 1. City Council (a) Councilman Mackey was concerned about access to the building and the Police Department during the evening hours. She asked if the Police Department would be getting an intercom system soon. Bud McHale stated that there will be an intercom system installed, during the remodeling of the building. Councilman Mackey did not feel that the City should wait that long. (b) Mayor Wilkins asked about the radar gun and Chief McHale stated that the City was conducting a speed survey at the present time and upon completion, the radar device would be in operation within a few weeks. 2. City Attorney None 3. City Manager (a) Mr. Warden advised that copies of the General Plan . were available in the City Offices for $12.50 each. He had received a request from a member of the news media for a free copy of the Plan, however, he planned to charge the media, as well as the public, since the City was only recovering its costs in printing the document. Council agreed. (b) Mr. Warden advised that an employee of the U. S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health • Inspection Service had recently inspected the City's zoo as a result of a complaint. Only two minor deficiencies were noted and the findings by the inspector were generally positive. MINUTES ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting January 12, 1981 Page Eight (c) Mr. Warden advised that the City was advertising for bids for the first phase of the Administration Building remodeling with bids to be opened February 2nd. They will then be presented in February for Council consideration. (d) Ralph Dowell, Finance Director, reported that the City had received $39, 000 in Revenue Sharing funds. (e) Mr. Warden advised Council to keep an eye on the newspaper reports regarding the State budget; it will affect the amount the City receives. At present, the Staff is assuming no increase in revenues for the next fiscal year. The meeting adjourned at 9 : 57 p.m. Recorded by: MURRAY L. WARDEN, City Clrk By: Ardith Davis Deputy City Clerk M E M O R A N D U M : TO: CITY MANAGER January 20, 1981 FROM: PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP AT 78-98 LOCATION: 5420 Venado APPLICANT: Jack Stinchfield REQUEST: To allow time extension to complete requirements set forth in the approval of a tentative parcel map. On January 19, 1981 the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and granted an extension of time until November 26, 1981. The extension was granted subject to Items 1-9 in the attached Staff Report. There was brief discussion of the matter and it wasthe consensus of the Commission that substantial progress had been made on road improvement plans and that any delays had been related to the difficult topography. It was noted that no more extensions could be granted on this map. There was also brief discussion of the street name and the improvement agreement. Jack Stinchfield appeared and concurred with the recommendation. No one else appeared on the matter. LAWRENCE ST ENS Xity RAY ARPEN Planning Di ctor Manager • /Ps M_E_M O_R A N D U M_: TO: PLANNING COMMISSION January 19, 1981 FROM: PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: Parcel Map AT 78-98 On January 5, 1981 the Planning Commission considered the appli- cation for a time extension request. On January 5, 1981, a letter was received from Richard Summers for Jack Stinchfield stating that the applicant would be out of town for the meeting and requested a continuance. Since Mr. Stinchfield was unable to appear, the item was continued to the next Planning Commission meeting. LAWRENCE ST ENS Planning D' ector CITY OF ATASCADERO r4 Planning Department January 5, 1981 1918 , r « 1979 STAFF REPORT SUBJECT: Tentative Parcel Map AT 78-98 LOCATION: 5420 Venado Avenue . (Lot 11, Block LB) APPLICANT: Jack Stinchfield REQUEST: To allow a time extension to complete requirements set forth in the approval of a tentative parcel map. BACKGROUND 1. Existing Zoning: R-A (Suburban District) . 2. General Plan: Low Density Single-Family Residential. 3. Project Description: The approved Tentative Map allows divi- sion of 2. 78 acre site into two parcels at 1. 59 acre and 1.19 acre each. Access to the site is to be provided via a 50 foot offer of dedication for a standard City cul-de-sac, originating at Venado easterly of Lot 13, Block LB and culminating approxi- mately mid-way along the southerly property line of Lot ll, Block LB. A condition of approval of the tentative map required improving 2/3 of an A-5 suburban section for this cul-de-sac. The tentative map for this project was conditionally approved by the County Board of Supervisors on November 27, 1978. A previous time extension has been granted by the Atascadero City Council on December 26 , 1979 . , STAFF COMMENTS On Thursday, December 4 , 1980 the Subdivision Review Board met with the applicant, Jack Stinchfield, and his engineer, Daniel Stewart, to discuss the time extension request. Also attending the meeting were: Lawrence Stevens, Planning Director; Mary E. Beatie, Associ- ate Planner; Larry McPherson, Public Works Director; John Kennaly, Assistant Civil Engineer; Leslie Cannon, Planning Commissioner. The following areas of concern were discussed: 1) Submit drainage plan. • 2) .. Submit road name request. Staff Report: Tentative Parcel Map AT 78-98 (Stinchfield) January 5, 1981 Page Two 3) Enter into agreement and post bond for cul-de-sac improve- ments to be complete within one year of final map approval. 4) Alter distance requirements for sewage disposal systems placed near creeks 5) All other conditions of County Subdivision Review Board approval shall apply. 6) Time extension request good for one more year or until November 26 , 1981 . 7) Access easement to Parcel A shall be minimum 12 feet and shown on final map. 8) Require additional fire hydrants as required by Fire Department. RECOn'LMENDATION The Planning Department recommends the approval of the time extension request subject to the following: 1) That all conditions of approval established by the County of San Luis Obispo shall remain in effect. 2) No sewage disposal system installations are to be placed closer than 100 feet (100 ' ) from the top of the existing creek bank, drainaae swales , or areas subject to inundation. A note so stating shall appear on the final map. 3) Approval shall be obtained for a street name which shall be shown on the Final Map. 4) The applicant shall enter into .an agreement with the Public Works Department to guarantee installation of cul-de-sac improvements within one year of the date of recordation of the Final Map. A Performance bond, certificate of deposit or similar arrangement shall be made in conjunction therewith. 5) Access easement to Parcel A shall be imposed in conjunction with the Building Permit applied for on Parcel A. A note to this effect shall be placed on the Final Map. 6) Applicant to install one fire hydrant in a location and manner acceptable to the Fire Department generally at the northerly corner of Venado and its intersection with the cul-de-sac. Installation of fire hydrant to be included in road improvement • requirements as specified in Conditions 1 and 4 above. 9 0 • Staff Report: Tentative Parcel Map AT 78-98 (Stinchfield) January 5, 1981 Paae Three 7) Effort shall be made to minimize grading that would be dis- ruptive to the natural topography and removal of existing, mature trees. The following shall appear as a note on the Final Map: "No trees shall be removed without compliance with applicable City ordinances . No grading shall commence without an appro- priate permit and compliance with applicable City ordinances. " 8) A Final Parcel Map in compliance with all conditions set forth herein shall be submitted for review and approval in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City Lot Division Ordi- nance prior to recordation. a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners created and a Registered Civil Engineer or licensed land surveyor shall submit a letter certifying that the monuments have been set prior to recordation of the Final Parcel Map. _b. A Final title policy (CTLA or ATLA) shall be submitted for review in conjunction with the processing of the Final • Parcel Map. 9) Approval of this time extension shall expire at 5: 00 P.M. on November 26, 1981. ACTION The Planning Commission should by motion direct Staff as deemed appropriate. TO APPROVE: Motion to adopt findings and set conditions. TO DENY: Motion setting findings for denial. REPORT PREPARED BY: MARY E BEATIE Associ e Planner REPORT APPROVED BY: LAWREN STEVENS Plannii3b, Director /Ps .�/ 0) N �- C� a h ♦ � N ! �`. N O 1 \ NLO A a CV Ile co N Q o ti N i N to ODN N N_ W) • N O N M m �t o to rq �n _ M L o — � co w , a 9� -A � s 0 o a � m ai SR! CL co N z M 1 m CO r W O0 CD Y 3 X m > S1°i� ce co -� °WWW " v. rm 4 z t QF- < °=ro r I K � `� � < w ° u lu j W je Q CY LL V v;,4 °H..n io`� ` �1 r W Z �:N N lfl W v �0 3= ' " - � �}. H UJ � Z 0 O li..< >TzW �Y� a N LLca IH �� N co a O V F- 1!J o f<W 4 m o a. U � w - N N Z 't wlmo*-�� IJ) W� �auw �'<' -� N °� U H . z j�d <� .. z� m Woo, w _ CL. > Q ' Q a ^uotW a � u< Q t- o 3i_LLorom o a'3� Q a a -< v V t!1 Olr m<< Mr n �LL r+oYo O �fl b r ��• 1 � [E c t � '.•W h w O NJA 0�• • �./ Mf V � < w ililil \�I•m �� <W v o � qRNL r � a ,Q t i F N Z i > A , aJ t/ qOJ • / \t m P° I 0 �FSo.A 0 9 fi M E M O R A N D U M TO: CITY MANAGER January 20, 1981 FROM: PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: WAIVER OF CURB, GUTTER., AND SIDEWALK REQUIRFMFNTS LOCATION: 7500 Sinaloa APPLICANT: Ray Bugatti REQUEST: To waive curb, gutter and sidewalks as required by Title 19 On January 19, 1981 the Planning Commission reviewed the subject matter unanimous) do ting Findings 1-2 and denyin the waiver reguest aJS__recommended in tai a tac e Report. The Commis- sion also recommended that a review e made of the curb, gutter and sidewalk ordinance. • In discussion, the Commission did not feel that the required public improvements were reasonably related to the proposed development. However, based on the standards in the ordinance, it was determined that no other decision was possible unless the ordinance was modified. There was discussion :concerning the use of the assessment roll to value improvements in light of Proposition 13 and concerning other similar improvements in the area. No one appeared on this matter. LArv,7RF.NCE QtEVENS M ' RAY WARDEN Planning rector ty anager • /Ps - CITY OF ATASCADERO s a; irk r 0 r.` . . ..., Planning Department January 19 , 1981 1978 \ EBo� STAFF REPORT i SUBJECT: WAIVER OF CURB, GUTTER AND SIDEWALK REQUIREMENTS LOCATION: 7500 Sinaloa APPLICANT: Ray Bugatti REQUEST: To waive curb, gutter, and sidewalk requirements as required by Title 19 . BACKGROUND 1. Zoning: R-3-B-2-D 2. Building Code: Section 19.60 . 020 requires curb, gutter and sidewalk in the R-3 Zone when the proposed construction exceeds 25% of the total value of all improvements as deter- mined by the assessment roll. This requirement may be waived . by the City _Engineer due to incompatible grade or by the Planning Commission if deemed incompatible with ultimate development of the area. The City Engineer may also accept a bond or deposit to defray improvement if those improvements are premature for the area and shall then assume responsibility for the improvements when they are appropriate. 3 . Site Conditions: The subject property is occupied by a three bedroom, 1400 square feet single family residence with an attached 1200 square feet auto repair shop. Portions of the commercial activity use unimproved adjacent property zoned for commercial use and is owned by the applicant. 4. Proposed project: The applicant proposes to construct a 768 square foot garage structure intended for use in conjunction with the residence. 5. Past Actions: A permit application was filed on November 17 , 1980 and the site inspection made on November 20th. The mixed use indicated a possible zoning problem and several efforts were made to contact the applicant' s representative to obtain a floor plan for the existing structure. Contact was finally made on December 3 or 4 and floor plans were submitted a week or so later. The information indicated that the property could be nonconforming necessitating a check of County zoning and • building records to determine past history before the permit • Page Two Staff Report: Waiver of curb, gutter, and sidewalk requirements (Bugatti) January 19, 1981 could be processed further.. A microfilm and dead storage search was made by the County and, upon receipt of the re- quested information, the nonconforming situation was reviewed with the City Attorney. On December 22nd, it was determined that the proposed structure could be allowed provided that it was used solely for the residence. Plans were plan checked on December 24th and a corrections list given to the appli- cant' s representative on December 26th. At that time a copy of the permit indicating the curb, gutter, and sidewalk was also provided. Corrected plans were brought in the following week, were rechecked and ready to issue on December 31st. On that date, the applicant' s representative objected to providing curb, gutter and sidewalk and the range of alternatives was discussed at length. On January 7th, the applicant ' s repre- sentative paid the building fee with the intent of having the permit issued, but shortly thereafter the applicant requested that his check be given back. On January 13th, the letter of appeal was received. STAFF COMMENTS • The only issue with which the Planning Commission 'should be concerned is the curb, gutter, and sidewalk requirement. The Building Code gives the Commission the authority to waive the improvement if a finding is made that the improvements would be incompatible with the ultimate development of the area. In this consideration, it is necessary to point out that recent apartment developments in the immediate vicinity have been required to provide the improve- ments. This indicates that in all situation which fall within the improvement criteria in this area should result in installation for the curb, gutter, and sidewalks. As required by ordinance, the City Engineer reviewed the matter with regard to an incompatible grade and the premature development of the improvements and determined that neither circumstance - applied to this situation. While a bond or cash deposit to defer the improvements for up to a year is possible, both require suf- ficient funds at the time of posting. The point could be raised that the required improvements are ex- cessive in light of the type of project. However, the valuation of the proposed improvements ($7600) is considerably in excess of 250 of the existing improvements according to the assessment rolls (Improvements - $13580) . This is probably due to the underassess- • ment of the improvements, but, nevertheless, that is the criteria specified in the ordinance. Page Three Staff Report: Waiver of curb, gutter, and sidewalk requirements (Bugatti) January 19 , 1981 FINDINGS 1. Curbs, gutters, and sidewalks would not be incompatible with the development of this multiple family residential area. 2. Other projects in the subject area have been required to provide the requested improvements. RECOMMENDATION Staff Recommends that the waiver not be granted. ACTION The Planning Commission should by motion direct Staff as deemed appropriate. TO APPROVE: Adopt findings to support waiver of required improvements. • (TO DENY- Adopt findings recommended by Staff. REPORT PREPARED/APPROVED BY: LAWRENCE TEVENS Plannin irector • /Ps 0 n 70 z of =5 p. 100got Q 1 C Ipp w M z+ p mo N 0 < Q ` 1 O o - W Q C Z 85 ^ .001 ,ser ll. �± V N 160 Q O W p� 175 t 1651 O q0' 0 08 m N N 170 y N O Rq 3. n 1701 1401 0 9 a O N 107 ti N K O Ib0 N O . - .. M Ib!•x2 1651 4 0 155• � O co a O40 1601 N — 159J 1605 191 it O r ® 1551 kn N N 1 4.09 1ss5 N � r o O� M X50=_ — co t- O 2 3 Q r J 1b Z i 151° m w rhos rzz O 3 f Y O_ a ® r 145 M Z §N Cf 5_ Q O Z rr N m m N 1455 O 120! !A W W M °45'N mmJ tocr tae=_ o O N o n � = N O – � WZU A:e Q �./ 141 O Q 1141 NO2 14,0± QJ– o O r G = J a 138.81 _ /361 110 rcr- 2 M 19 O N H1 O N L 73 r V. 134 N - I30r 105* Z. 190 68 M 125- r 1001 U N � O� m 1151 a m 126.61 _ 5 w Od. 1Z0+ 95 c M,4£ o19S v_ N h O //SS io S CN N � Ir�•p7 �� � N 1°° O _ - Z 1 Q rS a d 110' r 114 At 001 v 00 v i p r o ku .0 0 111.16 - -_. 4.�. ff��s5 .. ;:w:' • _ — � �tC� ZL•oHf � � ..7.TC�-� +r / � • � � V K _ �/ r � h 1 /` /• J o � i r_ o � � = ; . / - ; ��� / � / ,ysi /' ..fig----� �/ , - adV K � oa A Y l _� —1 �/ �� < �� .11 / `o r t / , .� � d -, a ,, -; ,; / � � •' �, � � a � � ' b+ M � �� � t� `: � �- a' „wad —,;o.vE �.'.\ (� 1 _ - � J / ,\ j � , ` �. -! S //' � a� � � � � W 2 5 �r+ / H � � ' � -. i \�.+ t �. f' � + k j w•' ���j/��t ��O _ ot43 �. iia d is � J -a __ - _�_.. ... .. ...�...-�... _... Y• '-J • �, � � T II , ` i rz CZ)cc wC4 Ln C4� CIQ i ! i s _ r R AVSD JAN 1 3 1381 ✓i 'T-U �G(1'`rte>feG'�C 3 c > . f cct X• 'S�M .4?SrY,3�a$T Caka�3v" / /[y., /�f y�J' // M aa. .]qtt'- oq- -.«is�.n+:. n yarta. .n_-•=•+w �� 4 /,any�P� �/s"�.`^'"� ,..-wi.,. l� C4Ce ZV °�f'�•C��.Q— 7C^' �.e��� ':�...� LLJ'' .tiU�.�CF��'- = �"L' .�i..� C c..C£,/v ���L v`G -�; � «?. � ++J,oi F t.(g'q"K .� •� .v"u f h N. .k � N � -'tl l 1 z3L�.' . } d Sr-• x.'�'.'�xu fwa"F....n3 s:,e.-.., � G J�/`L'T GL��/mac' ../.�1�"'�f f/✓?� � ��%i4%e— .mr_,. -rl - At -1� .: ... .r•,i i�..�aaw,r:+4....� �.r'kC:93'-.,.1...a:i:..".L�_ "'�'A,m�'iLC'�`�54".u;e�M.,"�,i-+,x«w.a 100 . 010--19 . 60 . 020 19. 60 . 010 Swimming pool fences . �lll :-,wimnling t�oe.t areas shall have at leatit a four-foot fence around them. Gates to the pool. enclosures shall be sel�-closing and self-latching. -- Latching devices must be at . least four Leet high. K The building official may permit other protective devices or structures to be used, provided that the degree of protection is not less than the protection provided by the fence , gate and latches . (Ord. 1509 §2 (part) , 1975) . 19. 60 .020 Curbs , gutters and sidewalks (a) Notwith- standing any other provisions of this title the full front- ,!age ront- age_of `property located within any R3 or R4 commercia r�r__ iclistricts within urban areas , as defined in Title _ 22 , shall have installed upon it c_oncr_ete curbs , gutters_ and sidewalks , ana—s-Ereet improvements to _the_grade and-specifica-� ns required-'cry fie -county engineer where tae value of any building or k3iiilcTin - gs proposed for construction during a period of one year on said property as indicated by all of the building permits taken out during the one-year period, exceed twenty-five percent of the total value of all improve- ments existing on the lots at the time the first of the build- ing permits is applied for, as determined by the assessment roll ; provided, that in industrial districts within urban areas , sidewalks may not be required; provided further, that the installation of concrete curbs , gutters and sidewalks may not be required if : (1) In the opinion of the county engineer so doing at the time of building construction will result in an in- compatible grade situation; or (2) Waived by the planning commission in conjunction with fin- that the required improvements would be incom- patible with the ultimate development of the area; (3) In the opinion of the county engineer, the re- quired improvements would be premature to the development of the area. In such cases , that applicant shall deposit with the county engineer such sum or performance bond sufficient to defray the cost of the improvements , and the county engineer shall assume the responsibility of construct- ing the improvements at such time as they are appropriate. . (b) Provided further, that where concrete curbs , gutters, and sidewalks may not be required along the frontage of the property to be improved, the owner is not relieved from com- pliance- with Chapter 13 .08 of this code governing encroach- ments on county rights-of-way . (c) The developer shall at his own expense perform all necessary grading and placing of base and surfacing required between the lip of the newly installed gutter and the existing pavement as necessary to complete the surfacing of the stteet and to provide a surface at least equal in kind to that Pres- ently in place. The county engineering department shall de- sign and stake the improvement required by this section. (San Luis Obispo County 3/15/76) 9 . 60 . 030--19 . 65 . 010 (d) Any tier:;on nq.t r i evod by tho roqu.i roman t s o t t It i :a !;oct ion shall have the right of appeal to the board of super- visors as provided by Section 19 . 04 . 130. Prior to considera- tion onsiders- ticin o l' t ho a ppe_a l by the board of supervisors , the planning conimi s:. i on shall render a recommendation on the appropriate- ness of the improvements to the ultimate development and character of the area. (Ord. 1520 §1, 1975: Ord. 1509 52 (part) , 1975) . 19. 60 . 030 Encroachment agreement required. All persons required to install such concrete curbs , gutters and side- walks under the provisions of this section, shall execute with the county an agreement to install the curbs , gutters and side- walks in accordance with the provisions of this section and shall post a faithful performance bond in an amount determined by the county engineer, prior to the issuance of the building permit. (Ord. 1509 §2 (part) , 1975) . Chapter 19. 65 TEMPORARY BUILDING HALT WITHIN TERRITORY OF PROPOSED CAbiBRIA ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 2 Sections : 19. 65. 010 Building cessation. 19. 65. 020 Duration. 19. 65 . 010 Building cessation. The planning director shall immediately cease the issuance of any building permit x (San Luis Obispo County 9/15/75) W M E M O R A N D U M — — - — — — — — — — TO: City Council FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: California Parklands Bond Act, Proposition 1 Last year, the voters of the State approved Proposition l which authorized the issuance of parkland bonds to finance parkland acquisitions or contruction. The State rules require that the available funds be distributed on a population basis within each County area with a minimum disbursement of $20 , 000 per agency. The funds available in San Luis Obispo County amount to $530, 695. Using the current census popula- tion figures, Atascadero ' s share would be at least $57 , 580 . However, this amount could increase depending upon final adjustments made because of the $20, 000 per agency qualifying restriction. In a meeting with representatives of the special dis- tricts andcitiesin the County, it was agreed that we would propose for our respective Council ' s approval a distribution formula based upon a per capita, per agency ratio. If special districts did not qualify under the $20, 000 requirement, • then the unallocated funds would be returned to the overall amount and distributed on the basis of the population formula. It should be noted that approval for distribution ratios is determined by agreement of those agencies having over 50% of the total County population. The cities of the County have such a majority. In order to assure that our claim is filed by the deadline of February 2nd, I will write a letter requesting our participation. Your motion endorsing that would be appreciated. We may be required, at a later date, to pass a more formal resolution. In the near future, we should develop a plan for expenditure of these funds, and it is my understanding that the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board is presently undertaking a project to determine potential park acquisitions or developments in the City. This will be . used as a basis upon which to forward our request for specific projects at a future date. MURUY L. WARDEN MLW:ad 1-21-81 • M_E_M 0_R A N_D U_M_ • TO: City Council FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: Atascadero welcome sign At your last meeting, you approved waiving a $500 building fee for the construction of a welcome sign as sponsored by Mrs. Sherer representing the Atascadero Junior Women' s Club. In discussing this with the City Attorney, he does not feel that we can directly waive the fee. We have agreed that your approval and the City' s participation can be expressed by a motion approving our contribution as a co-participant in the sign project, but limiting such involvement to the amount of the permit fee. HURRAY L. WARDEN MLW:ad 1-21-81 � l M _E M O R A N D U M • TO: City Council FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: Boosters Club billboard sign Attached is a copy of a resolution adopted by the Board of Supervisors March 2, 1970, giving permission to the Atascadero Boosters Club to install an activity sign on the mall at the Chamber of Commerce building. This is the only documentation I have been able to find indicating the Boosters Club' s involvement. Although Mrs. McGarvey of the Boosters Club initially had indicated to me that they were granted a ninety-nine year lease, there is no documentation to support this view. We have requested County records concerning the matter, but this resolution is all that exists. Also attached is a letter from the Chamber of Commerce indicating their concerns with the matter. In view of this resolution, I doubt that a ninety-nine year lease had, in fact, been granted. Nevertheless, the Boosters Club has an established interest in the matter. It appears to me that the City may reasonably take any • of the following actions: (1) Assume the ownership, main- tenance and utilization of the sign; (2) formalize the Boosters Club' s exclusive use of the sign subject to a maintenance requirement on the part of their club; (3) do nothing and encourage the Chamber and the Boosters Club. to work out their differences, if any; or (4) execute a lease with th-- Ch-amber of Commerce with a shared use by the Boosters Club and the Chamber. It should be noted that the property has; been trans- ferred by the County to the City in accordance with our incorporation agreement and must be maintained for community uses. No matter how the present issue is resolved, arrange- ments for use should be formalized through a proper lease with the City. I request Council direction in this matter and, regardless of whether you opt for the Boosters Club continued use or for the Chamber' s use, I suggest that you adopt a policy statement directing Staff to properly docu- ment the use of the property and that you encourage the Boosters Club and the Chamber of Commerce representatives to get together to resolve their present differences. You might wish to Staff to acton the City' s behalf in any such endeavor. act • MURRAY L. WARDEN MLW:ad 1-21-81 48 IN THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO,STATE OF CALIFORNIA Mon March 2 70 ---------day-------------------------lg----- PRESENT: Supervisors M. Roland Gates, Elston L. Kidwell; John V. Freeman Lyle F. Carpenter, and Chairman Hans Heilmann r ABSENT: None In the Matter of Request for Permission to Install a High School Activity Sign: Upon motion of Supervisor Kidwell, seconded by Supervisor Carpenter, and unanimously carried, the Request of Atascadero Bocsters y Club for permission to install a High School Activity Sign on the `gall area, Ata'scadero, is hereby approved subject to the conditions that no .— overhead wiring be installed, the plan for the sign to be approved by the Planning Director. cc: Planning (2) • 3-6-70 drm MONS STATE OF CALIFORNIA, County of San Luis Obispo. } ss. RUTH WAR-IN - N --------- Counts-Clerk and ex-officio C.erk ter__ of the Board of Supervisors, in and for the Conntti- of San Luis Obispo, State of Califorr.it do hereby certify the foregoing to be a full, true and correct copy of an order made by the Bard of Supervisors, as the same appears spread upon their minute hook. WITNESS my hand and the seal of said Board of Supervisors,affixed this --6th 70 day of----------March----------------19------ --------RL'TH WARNKEN _ County Clerk and Ex-Officio Clerk of the Board (SEAL) of Supervisors By ------------------------� �. -- - Deputy C.e k. CD 33 M laf7 •�hoU IAC i�1v(t fIlia 0- L.O,AlC d �`t f 1 r ' y 1� 0 y••:�.�� ;l-�f Bose a I I SLO Here IN/Ion' b 1 n i i S ! { i i j s , t � �--+—Jf 1 �.—,.��_. .- � . � ,:� ��••_1; >\\J/_..--•:---� ftOGIC ! I:.a Te♦ i I I i TO BE COMPLETED BY THE APPLIC. NAME: �1FiS_C!< L�.�__ 0,5 �:t._L 6_— --JOB ADDRESS: LOT: __?FZ_ ---TRACT: -�ocr,�:� -��a E/ �aM-.✓o mea� r R= pcc Ys.ln.� of _� s•9 N ea Z o Ile s } i a TO BE COMPLETED BY THE STAFF: REMARKS --------_.__.._.- ----- ---- __ZONE: _._. _ ---- _ _DATE: -- — rf*�y� NO.: BY: n ATASCADS?0 3 December 1980 City Council ( C 0 P Y ) ;. Atascadero City Hall P. 0. Box 747 Atascadero, Ca. 93422 Subject: Billboard Acquisition Gentlemen: . We have attempted to acquire the Billboard, located directly in front of the Chamber ' s office, from the Booster -Club ., - :Mrs . Gia McGarvey, Booster Board member, advises .they have a 99 year lease on the Billb.oard property. Our intent in using the Billboard is to provide the entire community with the opportunity to highlight multiple local events . This mes- sage would be directed to all existing Atascadero associations on an • equal basis at no cost . Our efforts have been curtailed due -to the Booster Club ' s, unreasonable demands . They have dictated the following requirements : .. 1 . The Chamber will become a member of the Booster Club at a ' cost bf $100 per year. 2 . The Booster Club will use the Billboard 12 times a year, 3 or 4 days per, �r 3 Agreement to be renegotiated every 3 or 4 years 4 . The Chamber will repair and maintain the `Billboard. Approximate cost is $1, 200 to $1 ,500, The Chamber has no argument with item number 4, however, we feel the other demands are totally unethical . As you are aware, the Billboard has ,been in a' state of disrepair for over a two year period. Most individuals indentify the Billboard with ,,. the Chamber due to its location. This certainly does not enhance the Chamber ' s image . fieri EL CAMINO PIAL P. (J. BOX 686 AT1 OSRO, 001;= HNIA !W'a = 00Q016 2044 , City Council Page Two Mrs . McGarvey also -advised the Booster Club is considering leasing the Billboard to a San Luis Obispo advertising firm that will charge local businesses for it ' s use . Can this be considered loyalty to one' s home town? Considering our philanthropic gesture towards providing an excel- lent community service, we prevail upon the City Council to support our effort in acquiring said property. Yours very truly, ATA C RO CHAP'IB R OF COMMERCE NDJ/fm CK DE JONG President c/c� Mayor Robert .Wilkins i i i M E M O R A N D U M i II a TO: CITY MANAGER FROM: FINANCE DIRECTOR SUBJECT: TRANSFER OF FUNDS Request Council approve the transfer of $1, 800. 00 from the Contingency Reserve to the Recreation Conference account. The purpose of this request is to provide suf- ficient funds for the attendance of the Recreation Advis- cry Board to the 1981 California and Pacific Southwest Recreation and Park Conference, March 5 - 8 , '1981. All members are scheduled to attend except Mr. Dan Ross. This transfer increases the estimated expenditure within the Recreation Conference account from $1,000.00 to $2 , 800. 00. . Ralph H. Dowell, Jr. Finance Director M E M O R A N D U M TO: City Council FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: Conversion of street lights - 'central business district Attached is a memo from the Public Works Director with a map showing proposed changes to lighting in the downtown area. I concur with the analysis presented by the Public Works Director. The savings to be realized are not that dramatic, but the problems of replacing the old decorative standards and the inadequacy of the light patterns cast would indicate a necessity for modifying the lighting installations. Since this can be done at no cost to the • City, it uld seem a worthwhile project. I have some continuing concerns about paying for rising lighting costs, but that is a problem which we will have to face in the future. In the meantime, I would suggest that if , the Council concurs in this approach, that you indicate your concurrence by motion so we may arrange for P. G. & E. to undertake the work. �3" (,V MURRAY L. WAREN MLW:ad 1-20-81 • M E M O R A N D U M • TO: Murray Warden FROM: Larry McPherson SUBJECT: Conversion of Street Lights - Central Business District Recommendation: It is requested that City Council review the proposed plan to replace the existing decorative cast iron poles and luminaires with new steel poles with mast arms as shown on the enclosed plan. The areas involved in this proposal cover El Camino Real between Rosario and East Mall , Entrada, and portions of East Mall, West Mall, Lewis Avenue, Palma Avenue, and Traffic Way. Background: In reviewing the existing street lighting in the downtown business area, it is apparant that the existing decorative fixtures are not providing aOefficient distribution of roadway lighting. The reason for this is that the lamps used in these fixtures were • designed for horizontal mounting at a much greater height than the present fixtures provide. In addition to this, most of the light is unfocused and scatters ineffectively around the fixture, causing glare. Another problem we have encountered is in the replacement of damaged poles. The decorative cast iron poles are no longer avail- able, so when a pole is damaged it can't be replaced in kind. I hada meeting with Mr. Bob Boyer of PG & E on November 3, 1980 concerning this problem, and the recommendation arrived at was to examine the possibility of a direct replacement of the cast iron poles with new 32. 5 ' high steel poles with mast arms. This replace- ment proposal would allow for the most efficient light distribution of the high pressure sodium luminaire. It was also felt that a considerable upgrading of the downtown lighting level could be accomplished even with fewer street lights. Mr. Boyer indicated in a letter dated November 18 , 1980 , that P.G. & E. would replace the old decorative poles and fixtures with new steel poles at Company expense. He also stated that removal of any other existing poles would be at Company expense while a new pole placement would cost $500 per pole plus the service cost. In the attached proposal seven poles would not be replaced . while one new pole is being added across the street from the Children' s Library entrance on East Mall. The balance of the existing street lights would be replaced with new units. The total • cost for the area under consideration would decrease $25 per month under the present rate structure. Following is a breakdown of those costs : Monthly Street Lighting Charges Central Business District Existing Number Type Rate Monthly Cost 30 70 W. HPS $6,902 $207. 06 21 100 W. HPS 7.834 164 . 51 5 200 W. HPS 10.781 53. 91 56 $425 . 48 Proposed Number Type Rate Monthly Cost 26 70 W. HPS $6. 902 $179.45 24 150 W. HPS 9.211 221. 06 . 50 $400 . 51 In the proposal the existing low mounted decorative 100 watt fixtures on El Camino Real are being replaced with 150 watt fixtures mounted on 32 . 5 ' high poles with 6 ' mast arms. This will dramatically increase the level and quality of safety lighting along this section of roadway where a number of auto-pedestrian accidents have occurred over the past year. Although it is not a guarantee of a reduction of accidents, it will certainly eliminate the speculation that ex- isting lighting levels may have been contributory to this type of accident. In the balance of the business district removal of some poles will be more than offset by the increase in lighting efficiency, bringing an increased quality of safety lighting to all the areas in this proposal. Z,-,LAWRENCE McPHERSON LM:vh 1-7-81 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY , 894 MONTEREY STREET BOX 592, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA 93406 (805) 544-3334 D. L. KENNADY DISTRICT MANAGER November 18, 1980 City of Atascadero P.O. Box 747 Atascadero, CA 93422 Attention: Mr. Larry McPherson Subject: Business District Street Lights Dear Larry: Per our conversation on November 3, 1980, enclosed are copies of our current maps indicating the street lights in Atascadero. • To accommodate a redesign of the Business District lighting, the following will apply: 1. Replacement of the existing post in place with a new steel pole will be at Pacific Gas and Electric Company's expense. 2. Removal of an existing light will be at PGandE expense. 3. Installation of a new steel pole will cost approximately $500.00 per pole. All trenching, conduit and required splice boxes will be the responsibility of the City. If I can be of further assistance or you have any questions, please feel free to call me. Sincerely, �.-�-- BOB BOYER Commercial Representative RIB:mea Encl. 9C I.... to 50 — T48L E 2. EMBEDDED STEEL POLE 0 \\ I cD 1 2 DIMENSIONS CODE A" P&S 014METER B" MOUNT/NG I Sh'AFT AT AT ARM "C" SINGLE DOUBLE H llNrI RISE ARM ARM 3 IGHr LENGTH TOP BOTTOM L ENGT -. 4=0" 1'-6" 35-7231 — 27'-6" Arm Le th -- 32'-6" 3.6"103,8" 8.1"108.4" n9 6'-0" 2'-0" 35-7132 35-7236 297-6 37'-0'3.6"103.8" 87"1o90' 6"-0" 2-0 35-7233 35-7237 32,_ 6" - 2'- "' 35-7234 35-7238 39t-6" 3.3"1039"B.B"lo 95" 6 O" 2'-0" 35 7235 93-7239 6'-0 2'-0'" --35-72401 35=6" j 4J Approved MOnufbcturers:Arneron, Union Me/o/MIp.and I/O/Mo/7r. I 11-15/00n Ou//el,Set Note OO SPECIFICATIONS i@ Cost Iron or Steel Cap : Furnish // will, setscrews. �l Q? Arm: Use ft gouge.(orbe'lter) steel and mole it with a yield tp S/ren9111 0/' 01 least 33,000,osi. Form it so it is cylindrical i Z with'a toper of obc,,t 0.14 inch per foot and so the C.D. at I the small end is 2.37 inchE's. "Ovolize"the large en.-I so ti; ' cross-section becomes oboe) 2%2"i7 the 110rizo17/0/dimension. O c a Simp/ex 41tochmen1s : Mo/re them as described by Sheet 7. ® P01e: Use 11 gouge /or better) Slee/ wilh a yield slrenglh x of at /east 33,000 psi. Form it so it is cylindrical with a toper of about 0.14 inch per foot. Q; QS Handho/e : Moke it 4"X61/p" and weld a reinforcing Piome i� around /t. Furnish a Cover and mounting hordwore. © We/dnut : Weld a '12,square grounding nut oenu/holder i igside the pole, directly opposite the handtla/e. �7 Ground-line Sleeve: Use Itgouge (or better)steel and 1 continuously seal-we/dit(Iop olid botlam)to the pole. "1 ° � Ground ' ® Cob/e Entronce:A,Saheorn/skfl"6"v�180°with/uminairdvpckef.(Se�e.Fgs.1ox11,t). {p Line Bult Plate: Cut it from 0lote or angle steel 1/4"thick and make i1 4°to 6"wide and 12"long. Attach it to the bottom of /he pole m hi I i with continuous seal-welds atboth edges. °'; Festoon Outlet: For Oeeeri79 informofion,see Sheet B. ;w Cob/e 11 Finish: Coot o//par/s entronce b Golvonize the arm/s)per ASTM A1?3 after forming u-d welling. Galvanize all removable ports per ASTM 153. Go/vonize the pole per ASTM A123 otter the holes ore cut in it 2" Wd the sleeve,wvdnu!/ho/derJ arm future(5)and buffp/oty are wp 6f�d foil, 2-No 6A/uminum Conductors CIC Shipping Instruct/ons:Ship the loose parts lvrone pale in one package. 4 IN57ALLAT/ON 12 Boffom ofpole ho/es shall o/woys be well tamped before insta//1V V0k. Judgment,based on experience and local foil conditions,sho4AY&b used to determine if'keying"o&"rocking-in"the steel pole am,regvired. _ /3 For C/C histo//ahb,7s,pull conduits to hondhole. 9 For DB cable inslo6htrons,use sorYogrd lengths of C/C conduits of sullrcrenf f16. I FIG. 1A length toprovio'e cable potedion. CABLE ENTRANCE DETAIL EMBEDDED.,.STEEL POLES AMROV[D w - _.—.------ — No.ieea ti II 4-23-76 RevisedS C. 1 AVP 5 16 .5 New 5hoet. Foeme.- Sh.4 mo e .7. F. a.[.N. cat I cmal DAT[ R mY CJI. I AMD. *" sUPv. 6v F:F.Y. ENGINEERING STANDARD• DsuruD.L.H.a G. On.W F STEEL es[bss � ALUMINUM . AND CONCRETE POLES suew,men by "-- FOR STREET LIGHTING SHEET No.4 SHEETS -� O.K. DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING own PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY 01513 I I I 2-14-47 SAN rRANC cneo. AUIORNUI 35 bllbl hE3 j M_E M O_R A N_D_U_M_ • TO: City Council FROM: City Manager SUBJECT: Bid for 'tractor The Council previously approved requesting bids for purchase of a tractor equipped with a back-hoe, front- end loader and other accessories. The bids came in as follows: Ryan Equipment Co. Case 580C Tractor $35, 828 .00 Lougee-Michael Equipment Co. John Deere 401C Tractor 36. 023 . 84 Net 1% , 30 days Mid-State Bank has indicated that they will carry a three-year lease-purchase agreement at a monthly payment of $1,178 . The money is already in the budget under a rental account which can be used to cover this cost. 'l • It is recommended that Council approve awarding the tractor bid to Ryan Equipment Co. in the amount of $35, 828 for a Case 580C tractor and authorize the City Manager to execute a lease-purchase agreement with Mid-State Bank. MURRAY L. WARDEN MLW:ad 1-20-81 •