Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda Packet 02/13/1996
PUBLIC REVIEW COPY " ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL um REGULAR MEETING FEBRUARY 13, 1996 CITY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 6500 PALMA AVENUE, 4T" FLOOR ROTUNDA R OM` 7:00 P.M. George RaY George Harold David Luna Johnson Highland Carden Bewley 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 way be taken shall include: A referral to staff with specific requests for in ation; continuance; specific direction to staff concerning the policy or mission of th R item; discontinuance of consideration;authorization to enter into negotiations and`execute agreements pertaining 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 participate in a City meeting or other services offered by th City, please contact the City Manager's Office, (805)461-5010, or the City Clerk's Office, (805) 461=5074. Notification at least 48 hours prior to the meeting or time when sarvices are needed will assist the City staff in assuring that reasonable arrang ments can be made to provide accessibility to the meeting or service. CLOSED SESSION - 6:30 P.M. (e Floor Club Rm.): 1. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR: Agency negotiator: City Manager Employee organizations: Management; Mid-Management/Professional; Fire Captains; Firefighters Atascadero Sergeants Service Orgn.; Atas adeno Police Officers Assoc.; Atascadero Public Safety Technicians Orgn.; Se ice Employees Intl. Union REGULAR SESSION - 7:00 P.M.: (Please see Rules of Public Particivaticn, back page) CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL I PRESENTATIONS: Presentation to outgoing Economic Round Table me' ber, Jim Edwards 1 COMMUNITY FORUM: Deputy City Attorney: (1) Status report on the adult book store (verbal) (2) Status report on the Millhollin Mine (verbal) A. CONSENT CALENDAR: All matters listed under Item A, Consent Calendar, are considered to be routine and will be enacted;by one motion in the form listed below. There will be no separate discussion 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 January 9, 1996 (cont'd from 1/23/96), (City Clerk's recommendation: Approve) 2. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES '- January 23, 1996 (City Clerk's recommendation: Approve) 3. RESOLUTION NO. 06-96- Authorizing Cooperative Agreement with SLOCOG for a Pavement Management System (Staff recommendation: Adopt) 4. ACCEPTANCE OF SAN GABRIEL ROAD SEWER IMPROVEMENTS (Staff recommendation. Accept) 5. ACCEPTANCE OF SANTA ROSA ROAD SEWER EXTENSION IMPROVEMENTS (Staff recommendation: Accept) 6. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 95003, 4534 SAN ANSELMO AVE..- Application to divide an existing Colony lot in two (2) separate parcels of 1.5 acres and 2.68 acres for single-family residential (Hull/Daniel J. Stewart & Associates) (Planning Commission recommendation: Approve) 7. RESOLUTION NO. 07-96 - Establishing a no-parking zone on San Andreas at Cristobal (Traffic Committee recommendation: Adopt) 8. RESOLUTION'NO. 08-96-Establishing a no-parking zone at 11153 EI Camino Real (Traffic Committee recommendation: Adopt) 9. RESOLUTION NO. 10-96 -`Authorizing,amendment to agreement with North County Septic Service for septage dewatering service concession operation (Staff recommendation: Adopt) B. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. HIGHWAY 101, CUESTA GRADE IMPROVEMENTS (Staff recommendation: Receive presentation and public comment, recommend preferred alternative) 2 i 2. RESOLUTION NO. 11-96 -Approving the formation of Assessment District No. 9 (San Gabriel Rd. - Cease & Desist Area "G") (Staff recommendation: Adoptl 3. RESOLUTION NO. 12-96 - Approving the formation of Assessment District No. 10 (Santa Rosa Rd. - Portion of Cease & Desist Area "F") (Staff recommendation: Adopt) C. REGULAR BUSINESS: PROPOSAL TO'NAME THE CITY ADMINISTRATIONBUILDING IN MEMORY OF E.G. LEWIS (Staff recommendation: No change to Admin. Bldg.Xame down rown area City facilities & Chamber "E.G. Lewis Civic Center") D. COMMITTEE REPORTS (Tire following represent standing comms tees. Informative status reports will be given, as felt necessary.): 1. S.L.O. Council of Governments/S.L.O. 'Regional Transit Authorit 2. City/School Committee 3. County Water Advisory BoardlNacimiento Water Purveyors Advi ory Group 4. Economic Round Table 5. Finance Committee i 6. Air Pollution Control District 7. North County Council 8. Ad Hoc Regional Water Management Committee 9. Integrated Waste Management Authority E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION: 1. City Council 2. City Attorney 3. City Clerk 4. City Treasurer 5. City Manager .. E I 3 RULES OF PUBLIC<`PARTICIPATION: The City Council welcomes and encourages your ideas and comments as a citizen. To increase the effectiveness of your participation, please familiarize yourself with the following rules of decorum: O Members of the audience may speak on any item on the agenda, in the order the items) are addressed by the Council, as directed by the Mayor. Item not on the agenda should be submitted during the Community Forum period (see below). O Persons wishing to speak'should step to the podium and state their name and address, for the official record. ' O All remarks shall be addressed to Council, as a whole, and not to any individual member thereof. O No person shall be permitted to make slanderous, profane or personal remarks against any elected official, commissions and staff. O A person may speak for five (5) minutes. O No one may speak`for a second time until everyone wishing p to speak has had an opportunity'to do so, and no one may speak more than twice on any item. O Council Members may question any speaker; the speaker may respond but, after the allotted time has expired, may not initiate further discussion. O The floor will` then be closed; to public participation and open for Council discussion. COMMUNITY FORUM: O The Community Forum period is provided to receive comments from the public on matters other than scheduled agenda items. O A maximum of 30 minutes will be allowed for Community Forum, unless Council authorizes an extension. O State law does not allow the Council to take action on issues not on the agenda; staff may be asked to follow up on such items. Agenda Item: A-1 Meeting Date: 01/23/96 ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 9, 1996 MINUTES CLOSED SESSION: The City met in Closed Session at 6:30 p.m. for purposes of discussions pertaining to: 1. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - DISCUSS POSSIBLE INITIATION OF LITIGATION: One (1) potential case 2. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR: Property (3): APN 028-361-005; APN 028-201-005; APN 028-341- 008 Negotiating parties: City of Atascadero/Atascadero Mutual Water Co. Under negotiation: Terms 3. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR: Agency negotiator: City Manager Employee organization: Management Closed Session was adjourned at 7.02 p.m. The City Attorney announced that the Council had discussed the matter of potential litigation and gave direction to the property negotiator. The item regarding labor negotiations was postponed until after the regular meeting adjourns (see page 9). REGULAR SESSION: The Mayor called the meeting to order at 7:06 p.m. Councilperson Bewley led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: Present: Councilmembers Bewley, Carden, Johnson, Luna and Mayor Highland Absent: None Also Present: Rudy Hernandez, City Treasurer and Lee Price, City Clerk Staff Present: Andy Takata, City Manager; Steve Decamp, City Planner; Art Montandon, City Attorney; Brady Cherry, Director of Community Services; Brad Whitty, Finance Director; Lt. Bill i Watton, Police Department and John Neil, Assistant City 1 CC 01/09/96 Page 1 Staff Present: Andy Takata, City Manager; Steve DeCamp, City Planner; Art Montandon, City Attorney; Brady Cherry, Director of Community Services; Brad Whitty, Finance Director; Lt. Bill Watton, Police Department and John Neil, Assistant City Engineer COUNCIL COMMENTS: Steve Devencenzi, San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG), announced that there would be two open forum public hearings regarding the Cuesta Grade Improvement Project on January 17' in San Luis Obispo and on January 20t' in Atascadero. CalTrans will be on hand with displays and public testimony will be taken, he noted. ---end of testimony--- Deputy City Attorney: Status report on the adult book store (verbal) Andy Takata provided the status report on behalf of the Deputy City Attorney. He reported that the permanent ordinance regulating adult businesses is scheduled to go before the Planning Commission for public hearing on February 6' and will be brought before the Council for first reading on February 27,1996. The interim ordinance will, he added, be brought back for extension at the Council meeting of January 23,d. Mr. Takata noted that staff plans to have the permanent ordinance in place by April 11, 1996. A. CONSENT CALENDAR: The Mayor read the Consent Calendar, as follows: 1. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - November 28, 1995 (City Clerk's recommendation: Approve) 2. NORTH COUNTY COUNCIL MINUTES - November 30, 1995 (City Clerk's recommendation: Approve) 3. CITY TREASURER'S REPORT - October, 1995 (City Treasurer's recommendation: Review & accept) 4. CITY TREASURER'S REPORT - November, 1995 (City Treasurer's recommendation: Review & accept) 5. RESOLUTION NO. 03-96 - Awarding the annual street striping contract to Pounds Construction (Staff recommendation: Adopt) CC 01/09/96 i Page 2 6. ACCEPTANCE OF THE AMAPOA/TECORIDA INTERIM • IMPROVEMENTS (Staff recommendation: Accept as complete) Councilmember Bewley noted that he would abstain from the vote to approve Minutes of November 28, 1995 and 30, 1995 due to absence. Mayor Highland mentioned a minor correction to the Minutes of November 28th MOTION: By Councilmember Johnson, seconded by Councilmember Luna to approve the Consent Calendar, Items #A-1 through 6; motion passed unanimously. B. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF C.U.P. 95-008, PROPERTY NEAR INTERSECTION OF TRAFFIC WAY & OLMEDA (Staff/Planning Commission recommendation: Uphold appeal) Mayor Highland reported that the applicant had requested a continuance but because the hearing had been noticed, the matter would be opened before continued until January 23`d. Steve DeCamp provided a brief report. Councilmember Luna requested that staff bring back information regarding how far along staff is with plans for Traffic Way bikeway improvements and how it will affect this application. Public Comments: Applicant, Tom Mora, verbalized his request for continuance. ---end of testimony--- Mayor Highland mentioned that the public hearing would not be closed and testimony would be received at the next meeting. By consensus, the matter was continued until January 23, 1996. 2. CONSIDERATION OF ZONE CHANGE AND VARIANCE APPLICATIONS TO ESTABLISH A RECREATION VEHICLE PARK ON MARCHANT AVE., BETWEEN TECORIDA AND ALCANTARA AVENUES A. Ordinance No. 296 - Amending Planned Development Overlay Zone No. 10 with respect to the master plan of development and allowable uses affecting certain real property located at 5000, 5020, 5040 and 5060 Marchant Avenue (ZC #95012: Gearhart) (Planning Commission recommendation: Deny) (Staff recommendation: Introduce Ordinance No. 296 on first reading by title only) CC 01/09/96 Page 3 B. Variance #95002 (Planning Commission recommendation: Take no action) (Staff recommendation: Approve) Steve DeCamp provided the staff report and recommendation to approve. He commented that there does presently exist standards relative to RV park development standards that are unworkable and will need to be addressed as part of the Zoning Ordinance update. He responded to Council questions regarding park design and recreational vehicle size. Councilmember Luna shared concerns about added traffic at the Highway 101/41 interchange and noise. Councilmember Carden asked if the City would collect any occupancy tax as a result of this project. The City Attorney indicated that it would, at 9%. Public Comments: John Faulkenstein, Cannon Associates, spoke in support of the project. He stated that the project was consistent with what is currently allowed and proposed that the park would bring visitors to the community. He explained that an attempt has been made to address the potential of long-term stay and indicated that the park owners want to provided for an attractive business. Responding to inquiry from . Councilmember Luna, Mr. Faulkenstein reported that the density had been arrived at after the applicant had spent considerable time in consultation with staff. Public Comments: Eric Greening, 7365 Valle, voiced concern about traffic impacts and pedestrian safety. He mentioned that if freeway interchange improvements are made, he hopes there will safe site distance for vehicles making left turns out of the park. Dan Davis, 6755 Alcantara, spoke in opposition to the project sharing his concern for long-term and detrimental affects, especially if the park changes ownership. Lorraine Russell, neighboring property owner, spoke in opposition to the proposed project emphasizing the question of who will regulate and enforce park rules. She added that, if the project is approved, strict rules for operations must be applied. In closing, Mrs. Russell urged the Council to re-zone the property back to multi-family residential zoning. Gary Thompson, 10979 Atascadero Avenue, was also opposed to approval of the project because it encroaches upon residential development. He requested that the property be zoned for residential development. CC 01/09/96 Page 4 Kurt Russell, Carmelita Avenue resident, spoke in opposition and stated that he doubts the business will be a success. ---end of testimony--- Councilmember Johnson asked staff how long-term storage and/or residency will be prevented. Steve DeCamp clarified that the project it is a RV park and not a mobile home park. He noted that if Council desires it can impose time limits in the master development plan. Responding to additional questions from Councilmember Luna, Steve DeCamp explained that the proposed project is an allowable use already and clarified that a hotel or motel could equal or exceed the density proposed in this application. Councilmember Luna inquired whether or not the Council could attach a conditions requiring the installation of a traffic light. Steve DeCamp reported that the intersection already warrants a traffic light, with or without this project. Councilmember Carden commented that, as a former owner of an RV, he felt that most use would be during off-peak hours. MOTION: By Councilmember Carden, seconded by Councilmember Johnson to waive the reading in full and introduce Ordinance No. 296. Discussion on the motion: Councilmember Luna remarked that he would vote in opposition because of the impacts and suggested that the matter be referred back to the Planning Commission. Vote on the Motion: Motion passed 4:1 (Councilmember Luna voting in opposition). MOTION: By Councilmember Carden, seconded by Councilmember Bewley to approve the variance; motion passed 4:1 (Councilmember Luna voting in opposition). C. REGULAR BUSINESS: 1. RESOLUTION NO. 04-96 - Supporting participation in the Regional Network Consortium (Staff recommendation: Adopt, or take no action) Steve Devencenzi, SLOCOG, summarized the efforts of the Regional Network Consortium and described the difference between this consortium and the Consortium for Community Media. He emphasized that the two are parallel efforts coordinated in a cooperative fashion and explained that although it's possible that the two may eventually merge, it is not anticipated that this will happen anytime soon because of the different areas of focus. Responding to inquiry from Councilmember Luna, Mr. i CC 01/09/96 Page 5 Devencenzi reported that there is no budget and work is presently being done by various staff members of the agencies involved. At some point, he added, there may . be some commitment by agencies of funds for a particular project and any potential project funding requests would come back for formal approval. Ellen Sturtz, County Franchise Administrator, provided a status report on Consortium for Community Media. Council discussion followed. Councilmember Carden stated that he has a problem with the concept of two government agencies moving toward the same end and remarked that if eventually the two consortiums will merge why not merge up front and avoid additional bureaucracy. Steve Devencenzi explained that the Consortium for Community Media is funded through cable franchise fees and already has a full plate. Ellen Sturtz stated that in the future the two groups will merge, but clarified that at this point to do it all would be too difficult because cable is a political issue. The Consortium is short-term, she added, and it is her hope that it will be handed off to someone else to implement the plan that is developed. There were no questions from public. Councilmember Luna asked who would represent the City if participation is approved. Andy Takata recommended that because staff is best acquainted with the City's resources, either Brad Whitty or himself would be most qualified to serve. MOTION: By Councilmember Luna, seconded by Councilmember Bewley to adopt Resolution No. 04-96. Discussion on the motion: Councilmember Carden reiterated his concern that what starts as a noble cause soon grows into something multi-faceted and bureaucratic. Councilmember Luna suggested that the City's delegate be sent with instructions to minimize bureaucracy, streamline processes and maximize efficiency. Vote on the motion: Motion passed 4:1 (Carden opposed). 2. RESOLUTION NO. 01-96 - Authorizing allocation of funds for the purchase of Stadium Park (Staff recommendation: Adopt) Brad Whitty provided an overview of the staff report and stated that although the City does not have the funds in the General Fund to purchase the property, the City is legally obligated to purchase it. His recommendation was to adopt Resolution No. 01- 96 authorizing a loan from the Wastewater Treatment Fund to acquire the property. Rudy Hernandez, City Treasurer, commented that while Stadium Park is an excellent project, the City cannot afford it. He advised that in the event the General Fund has CC 01/09/96 Page 6 to pay the funds back, it will require drastic action and recommended that the City Council defer the matter until after the Citizens Task Force for Economic Recovery has completed its study. Brad Whitty clarified that if the City does not move forward with the acquisition by February 23, 1996, it will lose Transportation Enhancement Act (TEA) grant funding. Councilmember Luna asked the City Treasurer if he had taken this fact into account. Mr. Hernandez indicated that he had but still feels that there is considerable risk. Councilmember Carden emphasized that the Council should avoid locking the City into something that may create financial hardships. Councilmember Johnson and Mayor Highland agreed that the Council should look very hard at new projects before encumbering future Councils. Public Comments: Speaking in support of the acquisition and urging approval were citizens Ray Jansen, Lon Allan, Marj Mackey, Geraldine Brasher, Eric Greening, Rick Mathews, and Don Hanauer. ---end of testimony--- MOTION: By Councilmember Luna, seconded by Councilmember Carden to adopt Resolution No. 01-96; motion passed 5.0by roll call vote. 3. PROPOSAL FROM THE ATASCADERO HISTORICAL SOCIETY TO NAME THE CITY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING IN HONOR OF E.G. LEWIS (Staff recommendation: Provide staff direction) Brady Cherry provided the staff report and requested direction. Council discussion followed. Councilmember Luna remarked that he did not support re-naming the building, "E.G. Lewis City Administration Building" because it may create some confusion about what the City's name is. He commented that he prefers Option #3 ("City Hall at the E.G. Lewis Building) outlined in the staff report. Mayor Highland proposed a two line name: "Atascadero City Hall" (first line), "E.G. Lewis Building" (second line). Councilmember Johnson mentioned that he feels it is important to identify the building as a City facility. Andy Takata noted that the City Attorney had suggested that the Council consider naming the area including the administration building, Sunken Gardens and the youth CC 01/09/96 Page 7 center the "E.G. Lewis Civic Center". Each facility would be associated with the "civic center" by being called, for example: "Sunken Gardens at the E.G. Lewis Civic Center". Public Comments: Jerry Clay, 7285 Sycamore Road, urged the Council not to eliminate the use of "Veterans' Memorial Building". He suggested that a statue be constructed and placed in the Sunken Gardens to memorialize E.G. Lewis and to, further, name the gardens the "E.G. Lewis Sunken Gardens". Marj Mackey, 5504 Tunitas, commented that she sees no reason to eliminate the name "Veterans' Memorial Building". She added that she likes the idea of the "E.G. Lewis Civic Center" but mentioned that she does not favor naming the administration building "City Hall". ---end of testimony--- Council discussion ensued. Councilmember Carden spoke in favor of retaining the present names for the administration building. He argued that to make a change now would not be unified and any new name should be one people can rally behind. MOTION: By Councilmember Carden to maintain the status quo. Motion failed for lack of second. MOTION: By Councilmember Carden, seconded by Councilmember Bewley to call [the administration building] "City Hall"; motion failed 1:4 (Councilmembers Bewley, Johnson, Luna and Mayor Highand opposed). Councilmember Johnson suggested that the matter be continued for one month so that other suggestions, like the "civic center" option can be explored. MOTION: By Councilmember Johnson, seconded by Councilmember Luna to re-study the naming of the complex and look at the "civic center" concept; motion carried unanimously. . 4. REQUEST FROM ATASCADERO HIGH SCHOOL TO CLOSE EL CAMINO REAL ON 11/2/96 FOR PARADE & BAND REVIEW (Staff recommendation: Provide staff direction) Brady Cherry provided the staff report and requested direction. Mayor Highland pointed out that the scheduled date is exactly two weeks after the Colony Days Parade. Councilmember Johnson asked if there had been any exploration on sharing costs. Brady Cherry replied that the School is willing to work with the City if the costs can be reduced. CC 01/09/96 Page 8 Public Comments: Jeremy Nelson, Assistant Band Director at Atascadero High School, spoke in favor of the request and indicated that the date selected is tentative. He noted that the School is competing for the event and emphasized that it is anticipated that it would increase revenue not only for the Band, but for the City as well. Mr. Nelson reported that the estimated cost is too prohibitive but noted that the School would be willing to negotiate if the City is able to waive or absorb some of the costs. Responding to Council inquiry, Mr. Nelson reported that 20-25 bands are expected with an average of 100 members each. He explained that the School District is participating by hosting the field show competition. School District staff at the High School and Junior High will be provided, he added. Mayor Highland asked Mr. Nelson if the Band had approached any service clubs for financial assistance. Mr. Nelson indicated that the Band had not and clarified that he is seeking the City's approval before finalizing the event. ---end of testimony--- Brady Cherry reported that CalTrans requires a $600 permit and a million dollars worth of liability insurance. He explained that staff believes it can get the City costs down to $1,000 and suggested that the Chamber of Commerce be approached for assistance. By consensus, the Council agreed to support the event if staff can negotiate costs. The Band was encouraged to seek financial assistance from service groups and Chamber of Commerce. D. COMMITTEE REPORTS (The following represent standing committees. Informative status reports were given,,as follows.): 1. S.L.O. Council of Govern ments/S.L.0. Regional Transit Authority - Councilmember Carden reported that SLOCOG would be meeting the following day. 2. County Water Advisory. Board/Nacimiento Water Purveyors Advisory Group - Mayor Highland reported that both committees would be meeting the following day. 3. Ad Hoc Regional Water Management Committee - Mayor Highland reported on the meeting of January 3, 1996 to establish priorities. The next meeting will be the first week in February. 4. Integrated Waste Management Authority - Councilmember Luna reported that the IWMA would meet on January 17, 1996. i CC 01/09/96 Page 9 E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION: 1. City Council Councilmember Bewley requested that staff make a greater attempt to provide better quality copies of exhibits. Councilmember Carden reported that the Atascadero Community Services Foundation is attempting to bring a wine festival to Atascadero. It is tentatively proposed for June of 1996, he added. Councilmember Luna requested a status report on the Millhollin Mine and pointed out that Council previously gave instructions to staff to bring back regular reports. Art Montandon provided the status report on the legal matter and mentioned that the Millhollins have not yet filed an application for development or a draft development agreement. The City Manager also reported that staff has been attempting to schedule a meeting with the State. Mayor Highland commented that, he too, is attempting to establish a meeting date with Dr. Parrish from the State in Sacramento. 2. City Manager Andy Takata announced that the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments is holding a meeting regarding LafCO on February 3, 1996. He also reported that Planning Commissioner Jim Edwards is no longer able to serve on the Economic Round Table and noted that the City Council would be requested to make a new appointment at the next meeting. At 9:35 p.m., Open Session was adjourned. CLOSED SESSION, CONTINUED: The City Council met in Closed Session to take up Item #3, as deferred. At 9:45 p.m., the City Council adjourned Closed Session. The City Attorney announced that the Council had given further direction to the negotiator. THE NEXT MEETING OF THE ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL WILL BE TUESDAY, JANUARY 23, 1996 AT 7:00 P.M. MINUTES-RECORD D PREPARED BY: LEE PRICE, C.M.C. CITY CLERK CC 01/09/96 Page 10 Agenda Item: A-2 Meeting Date: 02/13/96 ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 23, 1996 MINUTES CLOSED SESSION: The City Council met in Closed Session at 6:30 p.m. for purposes of discussions pertaining to: 1. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR: Agency negotiator: City Manager Employee organizations: Management; Mid-Management/Professional; Fire Captains; Firefighters; Atascadero Sergeants Service Organization.; Atascadero Police Officers Assoc.; Atascadero Public Safety Technicians Organization.; Service Employees Intl. Union 2. PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT Title: Police Officer 3. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION Name of case: Greene, May, Price, Rounds, Smith, Sturtridge, Tray, Wilson, Dougherty & Gutmann v. City of Atascadero Closed Session was adjourned at 7.00 p.m. The City Attorney reported that the Council had given instruction to the City's negotiator relative to Item #1 and made no appointment regarding Item #2. Item #3 was continued until after adjournment of the regular session due to time constraints. REGULAR SESSION: The Mayor called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. Councilperson Bewley led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: Present: Councilmembers Bewley, Carden, Johnson, Luna and Mayor Highland Absent: None Also Present: Rudy Hernandez, City Treasurer and Lee Price, City Clerk CC 01/23/96 Page 1 Staff Present: Andy Takata, City Manager; Steve DeCamp, City Planner; Art Montandon, City Attorney; Roy Hanley, Deputy City Attorney; Brady Cherry, Director of Community Services; Brad Whitty, Finance Director; Lt. John Barlow, Police Department; John Neil, Assistant City Engineer and Kelly Heffernon, Administrative Analyst COMMUNITY FORUM: Eric Greening, 7365 Valle, announced that it is a good time to keep tabs on what's going on in the City of San Luis Obispo as it relates to the Salinas Dam Expansion project. Robert Johnson, Planning Commission representative on the Citizens' Economic Recovery Task Force, read the following recommendation to the City Council: "Due to the severe financial condition of the City, the Economic Recovery Task Force felt it necessary to make a recommendation to the City Council. The Task Force voted on January 22, 1996 that no new capital expenditures would be funded from the General Fund, be authorized by the City Council until the final report of the Economic Recovery Task Force is presented to you. The only exception to this recommendation is for emergency situations. It is the goal of the Task Force to complete their recommendation within two months". Deputy City Attorney: Status report on the adult book store (verbal) Roy Hanley provided a status report on proposed regulation regarding adult businesses and referred to Item #13-2 (see page ). A. CONSENT CALENDAR: The Mayor read the Consent Calendar, as follows: 1. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - December 12, 1995 (City Clerk's recommendation: Approve) 2. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - January 9, 1996 (City Clerk's recommendation: Approve) 3. CITY TREASURER'S REPORT - December, 1995 (City Treasurer's recommendation: Review & accept) 4. APPROVAL OF WARRANTS FOR THE MONTH OF DECEMBER, 1995 (Staff recommendation: Approve) Mayor Highland pulled Item #2 at the request of the City Clerk. The Minutes of January 9, 1996 were continued until the next regular meeting. MOTION: By Councilmember Luna, seconded by Councilmember Carden to approve the Consent Calendar; motion passed 5:0 by roll call vote. CC 01/23/96 S Page 2 B. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF C.U.P. 95-008, PROPERTY NEAR INTERSECTION OF TRAFFIC WAY & OLMEDA (Cont'd from 1/9/96) (Recommendations: Planning Commission - Deny appeal; Staff - Uphold appeal) Steve DeCamp providedthe staff report. Councilmember Carden shared concern that the appeal had not been filed with the City Clerk and that the appeal letter was unsigned when it was received. Steve DeCamp confirmed that the appeal was filed in a timely manner in the office of Community Development, where the staff report is prepared. He also reported that the letter had been dictated to staff but unsigned for approximately three weeks due to the extended illness of appellant, Robert Johnson (Planning Commission Chairman). Councilmember Carden also pointed out that the subdivision ordinance calls for a hearing within thirty days and inquired whether or not the Mayor should have called an emergency meeting in December since the second meeting of the month had been canceled due to the holidays. Art Montandon advised that the ordinance is directory, not mandatory law, and explained that staff is instructed to make their best effort to ensure that the appeal is heard within that time frame. He pointed out that the applicant had requested a continuance on January 9th and added that it was unlikely that a Court would find that the applicant was detrimentally affected by the delay. He advised the City Council to proceed with the hearing. iPublic Comments: Robert Johnson, appellant, confirmed that he had been ill for three weeks and was unable to appear to sign the appeal letter in a timely manner. He spoke in support of his appeal emphasizing that, as a proponent for "Safe Routes to School", he is in favor of requiring that businesses install necessary public improvements. John Belsher, attorney representing the applicant, summarized concerns about technical requirements relating to the appeal process and spoke to the merits of the application. He argued that the number of children at the day care center does not warrant the imposition of curb, gutter and sidewalks. Mr. Belsher noted that the applicant is not making any improvements to the structure and pointed out that there are no other sidewalks in the neighbor. Mayor Highland commented that the owner has operated the business for considerable time without a permit. Mr. Belsher reported that the business was operating without a business license prior to requesting an increase in the number of children and is now applying for a Conditional Use Permit. He added that the applicant is trying to comply and is fully licensed with the State of California. Judy Mora, applicant and owner of Kids Corner, requested that the City Council to waive the condition of curb, gutter and sidewalks primarily because she cannot afford to construct the improvements. She reported that she is only asking to increase the number of children and has adequate parking. In addition, Mrs. Mora clarified that she is not proposing any changes to the structure and mentioned the building is an original Colony home. CC 01/23/96 Page 3 Requesting that the City Council deny the appeal were Planning Commissioners Jim Edwards and Sid Bowen, the Director of Little Lambs Pre-School and residents Jill Terry, Barbara Waheed, Marj Mackey, Robert Bronte, Jana Needham, Rick Holiday, Rush Kolemaine, David Graham, Tom Mora, Kathy Smith and Valeri Guerro. Robert Johnson, speaking for a second time, commented that while the day care center is a valuable business, the Council should give thought to the direction of growth in the City. He remarked that the City cannot afford to construct the needed infrastructure and debated the cost projected by the applicant to construct the improvements. Regina Foster, Paso Robles resident, commented that sidewalks are not necessary. Rick Holiday spoke once more and encouraged the Council not to place this burden on a small business. ---end of testimony--- Staff responded to questions regarding bike lane improvements scheduled for Traffic Way and clarified conditions of approval. Lengthy Council discussion followed. MOTION: By Councilmember Luna, seconded by Councilmember Carden to deny the appeal; motion passed 5:0 by roll call vote. 2. ORDINANCE NO. 297 - Urgency ordinance extending the interim ordinance prohibiting adult businesses in certain places, pending consideration of a permanent ordinance for same (Staff recommendation: Adopt - Requires 4/5 vote) Roy Hanley, Deputy City Attorney provided the staff report and recommendation to approve. He reported that the draft permanent ordinance will be available for public review the following week and explained that the Planning Commission would hear the matter at their meeting of February 6`h. Council questions followed regarding amortization of adult businesses. Public Comments: Tom Austin, 10780 EI Camino Real and representing Citizens Against Pornography, commented that he supports the extension of the urgency ordinance and, further, that he is looking forward to a permanent ordinance that has some teeth in it and will address the secondary affects of such businesses. Dan McPherson, 12500 EI Camino Real, praised the work of the Deputy City Attorney and urged adoption. Regina Foster of Paso Robles asserted that a recently opened pawn shop near property currently proposed for an adult bookstore on EI Camino Real is an undesirable business and wondered if there was any significance to the fact that it went in so close to the proposed bookstore. Mayor Highland pointed out that the CC 01/23/96 Page 4 issue at hand is that of adult businesses and not pawn shops. . M'Lee Zalvidar, Tecorida Avenue resident, spoke in support of extending the urgency ordinance and cautioned that the owner of the proposed adult business downtown should be watched closely to ensure that he is following all requirements for developing the site. ---end of testimony--- MOTION: By Councilmember Luna, seconded by Councilmember Bewley to waive the reading in full and adopt Urgency Ordinance No. 297; motion carried unanimously. 3. SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN A. Resolution No. 02-96 - Approving the Notice of Determination & Negative Declaration for the Siting Element and Summary Plan, as prepared by the San Luis Obispo County Integrated Waste Management Authority (Staff recommendation: Adopt) B. Resolution No. 05-96 - Approving the Siting Element & Summary Plan, as prepared by the San Luis Obispo County Integrated Waste Management Authority (Staff recommendation: Adopt) Kelly Heffernon provided the staff report and recommendation to adopt Resolution Nos. 02-96 and 05-96. Also present was Bill Worrell of the Integrated Waste Management Authority to respond to any questions. There were no questions from Council and no public testimony. MOTION: By Councilmember Luna, seconded by Councilmember Carden to adopt Resolution No. 02-96; motion carried 5.0 by roll call vote. MOTION: By Councilmember Luna, seconded by Councilmember Johnson to adopt Resolution No. 05-96; motion carried 5.0 by roll call vote. 4. 1993 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT, FINAL GRANTEE PERFORMANCE REPORT (Staff recommendation: Accept comments/questions from interested parties) Steve DeCamp introduced Don Dana, Peoples' Self Help Housing, who provided the status report on the North County Womens' Shelter project. Mr. Dana gave special recognition to Henry Engen, Eileen Allan, Pat Wickstrom and contractor, John Edens. Public Comments: • Eileen Allan, Executive Director of the North County Womens Shelter, expressed CC 01/23/96 Page 5 appreciation to the Council, staff and many citizens who participated in the success of the project. ---end of testimony--- The City Council received the report. C. REGULAR BUSINESS: With mutual consent, Mayor Highland moved up Item #C-2. (For Item #C-1, see page 8). 2. PROPOSED POLICY FOR ARTS IN PUBLIC PLACES FOR THE CITY OF ATASCADERO (Parks & Recreation Commission/Staff recommendation: Approve Alt. C & provide staff direction) Richard DeLong of the San Luis Obispo County Arts Council presented a slide show illustrating Arts in Public Places programs and spoke in support of adopting an "arts in public places" policy. Councilmember Luna asked the speaker how the City can avoid controversial art. Mr. DeLong noted that a public hearing at some point is vital and explained that it is incumbent upon the City to establish a streamlined local review process. Resident Susan Beatie, also of the County Arts Council, described County guidelines recently established. Brady Cherry provided background and the staff report. He explained that an ad hoc arts committee formed to make a recommendations relative to an arts in public places policy was not able to reach consensus on a single draft policy. He summarized three draft policies submitted and included in the staff report and noted that the staff's recommendation was Draft Policy "C". He requested direction from the Council and outlined key points for consideration: (1) whether or not the arts policy should cover public and private property, (2) will there be provisions to allow for public input, (3) shall a process for screening and reviewing be included, and (4) does the Council wish to create some type of an arts commission. Council discussion followed. Mayor Highland commented that a policy for arts in public places should deal only with publicly-owned property and asserted that property privately owned should be handled separately. He indicated that he was not in favor of appointing another committee or commission because it takes too much staff time and the City cannot afford it. The Mayor remarked that he would support an advisory ad hoc committee to advise the Parks & Recreation Commission on an as-needed basis as set forth in Draft Policy "C" and stated that any such committee should include members of the arts community and public at- large. He added that he does not feel it is appropriate for this type of committee to be chaired by a member of the Parks & Recreation Commission as is suggested. Councilmember Luna spoke in favor of adopting one policy for public and private property because it will ensure the same rules for everyone. He indicated support for Draft Policy "C" and suggested that a project, once it has been reviewed by an CC 01/23/96 Page 6 ad hoc committee of those knowledgeable in the arts, be set for a public hearing before the Parks & Recreation Commission. The matter, he suggested, could then come to the City Council for final approval on Consent Calendar.' Councilmember Carden mentioned that although he supports Draft Policy "C", he does have a problem with government getting involved with art on private property. Councilmember Johnson shared concern about how the concept of public art murals will be handled and expressed a desire to review what other cities are doing to address this issue. Councilmember.Luna suggested that the City follow similar procedures that the County is already using and spoke in support of adopting standards that will ensure that murals are produced with proper materials to avoid deterioration over time. Public Comments: Doug Lewis, Tunitas Avenue resident, asked how the seven 80-year old statues in Sunken Gardens will be treated in the arts in public places policy and wondered if there was some significant public art in the works. Baxter Boyington, ad hoc arts committee member, spoke in support of Draft Policy „B„ Susan Beatie spoke in support of Draft Policy "C" and encouraged a policy for both public and private art. George Beatie, President of the Parks & Recreation Commission, verbalized support for Draft Policy "C" and clarified that the proposed non-voting member of the Parks & Recreation Commission serving as the chair of an ad hoc arts committee was for administrative purposes. He argued that community input can be afforded without having to establish another legislative body. Barbie Butz, Parks & Recreation Commissioner, also spoke in favor of Draft Policy "C" as written. Joe Ramirez, ad hoc arts committee member and member of the North County Mural Society, noted that he supports a successful mural program and is currently involved with a project proposed for the Wilkins Printery building. He argued that Draft Policy "C" ignores the input of the ad hoc arts committee and urged the City Council to adopt Draft Policy "B". Robert Lilley, ad hoc arts committee member, also spoke in support of Draft B and emphasized the necessity of establishing an arts advisory council. In addition, Mr. Lilley advocated an exemption to the sign ordinance for public view art. Rush Kolemaine, 4850 Potrero Road, stated support for Draft Policy "B" and the creation of an arts commission appointed by the City Council. Lee Swam, 9065 Lakeview Drive, recommended that before any additional art is installed, the City must take care of the ones it already has. He urged the repair of the statues in and around the City Administration Building and challenged the CC 01/23/96 Page 7 North County Mural Society to the task of preserving murals at the Youth Center. He emphasized the need to develop a plan for addressing vandalism and the on- going maintenance of public art. ---end of testimony--- Lengthy Council discussion ensued. There was mutual consent to: 1) Direct staff to bring back a revised Draft Policy "B"for public art on private property to include a provision for public hearing before the City Council, 2) Tentatively approve Draft "C" for public art on public property (prior review of project to be conducted by an ad hoc arts sub-committee selected by the Parks & Recreation Commission), and 3) Direct staff to revise the sign ordinance by establishing an exemption for art murals. It was noted that all three matters would be brought back for final approval. On a related topic, Brady Cherry asked the City Council for clarification about action taken on August 8, 1995 relative to proposed public art at the Lake Park Pavilion (Linda Wargo, Atascadero State Hospital). Mayor Highland stated that the Council had conceptually approved the project proposed for art in the public area of the Pavilion. In addition, he said that the Council had approved Phase I of the project which includes tile work to go across the sidewalk. The development of an arts in public places policy was referred to the Parks & Recreation Commission, he added. Councilmember Luna commented that he understood that the policy was to be put together first. Councilmember Johnson remembered that the proponents of the project were anxious to get conceptual approval before the onset of the school year and explained that he had not approved anything beyond Phase L MOTION: By Councilmember Luna, seconded by Councilmember Bewley to go beyond 11 :00 p.m.; motion carried unanimously. Councilmember Johnson noted that the item had been a presentation, not a business item, and questioned whether or not the Council could have legally acted upon the matter. Art Montandon explained that because of the way the item was noticed, the Council had authority to act, but suggested that the Council clarify by motion the intent. Councilmember Johnson asserted that the item was brought to the City Council in an unacceptable format and without adequate staff input. Discussion ensued. Councilmember Carden indicated that he was not convinced that third-grade art was appropriate for the Pavilion and suggested that staff re- negotiate with Linda Wargo an alternative site for placement of the tile. By mutual consent, staff was directed to re-negotiate with Linda Wargo regarding the proposed project. 1. INITIATION OF CITY COUNCIL-GENERATED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS (Oral) (Staff recommendation: Provide staff direction) Steve DeCamp provided an oral report regarding proposed City Council initiated CC 01/23/96 Page 8 General Plan amendments and estimated costs. Staff recommendations were as follows: 1) Initiate a General Plan Amendment to include within the Urban Services Line two commercially-zoned parcels on the west side of 101 at Del Rio Road (one parcel owned by the City of Atascadero and one parcel commonly known as the Hemingway property), 2) Initiate a General Plan Amendment to modify the zoning on the north east side of Traffic Way at Ferrocarrill Road (also known as the "Rose Lip Quarry) from residential to industrial and 3) Take no action to initiate a General Plan Amendment for the "Davis Family Ranch land". He explained that although staff believes the property would be appropriate for industrial use, the owners do not wish it to be rezoned. Councilmember Luna emphasized that he was not in favor of devoting any staff time to these proposed amendments, especially in light of the Citizens' Task Force for Economic Recovery request to put a moratorium on additional expenditures until they have completed their study. MOTION: By Councilmember Carden seconded by Councilmember Johnson to include the two lots [on west side of 101 at Del Rio Road] within the Urban Services Line as a General Plan Amendment; motion carried 4:1 (Luna). MOTION: By Councilmember Johnson, seconded by Councilmember Bewley to direct staff to initiate the General Plan Amendment rezoning the Rose Lip Quarry area; motion carried 4:1 (Luna). Public Comments: David Zingg, Ferrocarrill Road property owner, asserted that industrial zoning would negatively impact his property value. Rush Kolemaine spoke in support of the Council action. 3. REVIEW STREET LIGHTS IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA AND DISCUSS POTENTIAL POLICY DEVELOPMENT (Staff recommendation: Provide staff direction) Councilmember Carden stepped down due to a potential conflict of interest. Brady Cherry provided the staff report and summarized three types of luminaries which can be installed by PG&E without cost to the City. He noted that Option #2 (Colonial Type Pole) would be easiest to standardize and mentioned that whichever type is chosen, they will be changed over as they need replacement by PG&E. The City Council mutually agreed to direct staff to proceed with Option #2 (Colonial Type Pole). 4. APPOINTMENT OF PLANNING COMMISSIONER TO ECONOMIC ROUND TABLE (Verbal) (Staff recommendation: Appoint one member from Planning Commission) Councilmember Carden returned to the dias. Steve DeCamp reported that is Commissioner Jim Edwards has found it necessary to resign from the Economic Round Table and indicated that Commissioners Jennifer Hageman and William CC 01/23/96 Page 9 Zimmerman were both interested in serving. MOTION: By Councilmember Carden, seconded by Councilmember Bewley to appoint Commissioner Jennifer Hageman to the Economic Round Table; motion carried 5.0 by roll call vote. 5. ORDINANCE NO. 296 - Amending Planned Development Overlay Zone No. 10 with respect to the master plan of development and allowable uses affecting certain real property located at 5000, 5020, 5040 and 5060 Marchant Ave. (ZC #95012: Gearhart) (Staff recommendation: Adopt Ord. No. 296 on second reading by title only) MOTION: By Councilmember Johnson, seconded by Councilmember Carden to adopt Ordinance No. 296 on second reading; motion carried 4:1 (Luna). D. COMMITTEE REPORTS (The following represent standing committees. Informative status reports will be given, as felt necessary.): 1. S.L.O. Council of Governments (COG)/S.L.O. Regional Transit Authority (SLORTA) - Councilmember Carden reported COG and SLORTA staff are negotiating new salary and benefit packages, an item relating to telemarketing item was voted down by COG and that he had been elected Vice President of COG. 2. County Water Advisory Board/Nacimiento Water Purveyors Advisory Group - The Mayor reported that the Nacimiento Water Group meets February 7, 1996. 3. Economic Round Table - Councilmember Johnson reported that the County Economic Vitality Corporation is providing data and assistance with locating new businesses. He mentioned that the corporation's Acting Director has been attending the Round Table meetings and has indicated a willingness to be of additional help. 4. Pollution Control District - Mayor Highland reported that the next meeting would be Wednesday, January 24" at 9:00 a.m. 5. North County Council - Mayor Highland reported that the executive committee meets again on February 151h 6. Ad Hoc Regional Water Management Committee - Mayor Highland announced that the next meeting is February 1St E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION: 1. City Council Mayor Highland reported that the Mayors Group met on January 18th to discuss i CC 01/23/96 Page 10 LafCO and are developing a position paper for purposes of drafting a resolution to the Board of Supervisors. He also mentioned that the next Joint Cities Meeting will be April 11, 1996 in San Luis Obispo and that he will appear on KVEC Radio on February 7". The Mayor also asked that agenda materials for continued items be saved to reduce reproduction costs. 2. City Manager Andy Takata announced that COG was sponsoring a workshop on LafCO issues on Saturday, February 3`d. It was determined that Mayor Highland, Councilmember Carden and the City Manager would attend. The City Manager reminded the Council that a City Volunteer Recognition Evening was planned for Thursday, January 25t' at the Lake Park Pavilion. He also reported that the Council would hold a special meeting on February 215L for purposes of conducting a workshop relating to the Millhollin Mine. He added that representatives from the State Board of Mining and Geology would be present. Regular session adjourned at 11:47 p.m. CLOSED SESSION: The City Council added, by unanimous vote to add an item of potential litigation which arose after the posting of the agenda to the Closed Session The City Council met in Closed Session for purposes of discussing the item added and Item #3 held over. Closed Session adjourned at 11:58 p.m. The City Attorney announced that Council gave him direction regarding items of existing and potential litigation. THE NEXT MEETING OF THE ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL WILL BE TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 1996 AT 7:00 P.M. f MINUTES RECORDED AND P PARED BY: LEE PMtE, C C CITY CLERK CC 01/23/96 Page 11 REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Meeting Date: 02/13/96 CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: n-3 Through: Andrew J Takata, City Manager Via: Steven J Sylvester, City 9 En inee Y From: John B Neil, Assistant City Engineer--� SUBJECT: Cooperative Agreement with the San Luis Obsipo Council of Governments for the implementation of a pavement management program. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. 06-96 authorizing execution of the Cooperative Agreement DISCUSSION: Staff has obtained $17,500 in regional State Highway Account funds from the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) to implement a pavement management program. The funds will provide for computer software and hardware and for the staff time required to perform the.initial inventory and assessment of existing roadway conditions in the City. The funds are held, and disbursed, by SLOCOG. A Cooperative Agreement is required in order for SLOCOG to make disbursements to the City. At a time when funds for street maintenance are scarce, it is increasingly important for the City to know the condition of all 176 miles of City maintained roadway. The implementation of a pavement management program is the crucial first step in developing a comprehensive rehabilitation strategy. The information generated by the roadway inventory and assessment will provide an objective means by which staff can recommend the priority of rehabilitation projects to the Council. FISCAL IMPACT: The Pavement Management Program will be funded by regional State Highway Account funds including the acquisition of the necessary computer hardware and software. It is estimated that approximately 2 hours each week of staff time will be required to maintain the system records once the Pavement Management Program is operational. 000001 RESOLUTION NO. 06-96 A RESOLUTION OF THE ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH THE SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM WHEREAS, the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments approved $17,500 in regional State Highway Account (SHA) funding for the City of Atascadero for an inventory and assessment of the condition of roadways within the City; and WHEREAS, a thorough inventory and assessment of the existing condition of the roadways within the City is a necessary first-step to develop a maintenance and rehabilitation strategy; and WHEREAS, a portion of the total funding available will be used to purchase both the computer hardware and software necessary to perform the inventory and assessment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Atascadero, California: 1. Approves entering into a COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT with the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) for the implementation of a Pavement Management Program. 2. Authorizes signature of the COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT by the Mayor. 3. Authorizes the City Engineer to perform the inventory and assessment of City maintained roadways. 4. Authorizes the City Manager to make minor corrections or modifications to the Cooperative Agreement of a mathematical or clerical nature. 5. Authorizes the City Manager to purchase the computer software required for the roadway inventory and assessment. 6. Authorizes the City Manager to purchase the computer hardware necessary to operate the pavement management software. 7. Authorizes the Finance Director to appropriate funds, if necessary; release and expend funds; and issue warrants to comply with the terms of the . Cooperative Agreement up to the total amount of the Surface Transportation Program funding available for SLOCOG Project No. LR-39(REG-26). 000043 PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Atascadero held on February 13, 1996. On motion by Councilperson , and seconded by Councilperson , the foregoing Resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: ATTEST: CITY OF ATASCADERO By: LEE PRICE, City Clerk GEORGE P. HIGHLAND, Mayor APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: APPROVED AS TO FORM: ANDREW J. TAKATA ARTHER R. MONTANDON City Manager City Attorney O00004 San Luis Obispo Council of Governments Surface Transportation Program (STP) PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Project No. LR-39 (REG-36) COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, ENTERED INTO ON THE DATE BELOW STATED is between the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments, referred to herein as "SLOCOG", and the CITY OF ATASCADERO, a political subdivision of the State of California, referred to herein as the "CITY". RECITALS WHEREAS, SLOCOG and the CITY, pursuant to the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) of 1991 and Senate Bill 1435 (1992) are authorized to enter into a Cooperative Agreement for any street and road purpose within the CITY; and WHEREAS, SLOCOG and the CITY agree to establish a Pavement Management System (PMS), referred to herein as the "PROJECT" which shall include an inventory and assessment of current road conditions, and the purchase of a computerized program (PMSPro); and WHEREAS, SLOCOG has exchanged Surface Transportation Program (STP) funds for State Highway Account (SHA) funds for the PROJECT, therefore eliminating the non-federal match; WHEREAS, all applicable laws, regulations, and policies relating to the use of State Highway Account (SHA) funds for the PROJECT shall apply notwithstanding any other provisions of this Agreement; and - NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the processes and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: (1) The CITY agrees to carry out the PROJECT, within six months from the approval of this agreement by all parties, including: carrying out an inventory & assessment of the pavement condition of all roads within the City according to an accepted methodology; the input of all data into a computer based Pavement Management System (PMS) program, and to provide a copy of all data to SLOCOG. (2) The total funding available to the CITY for the PROJECT is $17,500 in Regional SHA funds, of which $760 shall be expended by SLOCOG to purchase the required software (PMSPro). The remaining $16,740 shall be expended by the CITY for an inventory& assessment of all roads. (3) The CITY agrees to account for all PROJECT costs to be paid for by SLOCOG pursuant to this Agreement, based on the following terms: a. If there is an underrun, the cost savings will roll back into the Regional SHA funding allocated to SLOCOG b. If there is an overrun, the CITY will be solely responsible for providing the PROJECTS's additional costs. (4) The CITY may submit, at a maximum of once a month, invoices identifying the amount Page 1 of 3 000005 expended (including all direct and indirect costs) by the CITY in accordance with the CITY's standard accounting procedures. Invoices shall contain the following information: a. STP Project Number and Name. b. A brief description of work accomplished during the billing period. c. A copy of the consultant's bill to the CITY (if applicable). d. Amount expended by the CITY during the billing period, along with evidence of funds expended. (e.g., a copy of a CITY check to consultant or accounting documentation, etc.) e. Amount requested for reimbursement for the billing period. (5) Within two months after PROJECT completion and all work incidental thereto, the CITY must provide SLOCOG certification of PROJECT completion in accordance with the provisions in this Agreement, and a final invoice containing those items listed above and the unreimbursed PROJECT costs expended by the CITY. (6) The CITY agrees to grant State of California and/or SLOCOG access to the CITY's books and records for the purpose of verifying that SHA funds paid are properly accounted for and the proceeds are expended in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. All documents shall be available for inspection by authorized Caltrans and/or SLOCOG agents at any time during PROJECT development and for a four-year period from date of completion of the PROJECT or for one year after the audit is completed or waived by Caltrans and/or SLOCOG, whichever is later. (7) Upon completion of all work under this Agreement, ownership and title to all materials will automatically be vested in the CITY and no further agreement will be necessary to transfer ownership to the CITY. (8) The CITY shall fully defend, indemnify, and save harmless that SLOCOG, all officers and employees from all claims, suits, or actions of every name, kind, and description brought for or on account of injury 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. (9) SLOCOG agrees to reimburse the CITY within 25 days of receipt of invoice(s), the amount expended by the CITY during the invoices' billing period. (10) Neither SLOCOG nor any officer or employee thereof shall be 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. (11) SLOCOG shall designate a SLOCOG Surface Transportation Program (STP) Project Coordinator and the CITY shall designate a representative through whom all communications between the two agencies shall be channeled. (12) No alteration or variation of the terms of this Agreement shall be valid unless made in writing and signed by the parties thereto, and no oral understanding or agreement not incorporated herein shall be binding on any of the parties thereto. (13) This Agreement may be terminated or provisions contained therein may be altered, changed, or amended by mutual consent, in writing, of the parties hereto. (14) Nothing in the provisions of this Agreement is intended to create duties or obligations to or rights in third parties not parties to this Agreement or affect the legal liability of either party to the Agreement by imposing any standard of care with respect to the maintenance of local roads different from the standard of care imposed by law. Page 2 of 3 000006 CITY OF ATASCADERO SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS By: By: �P I-< :zr-Q,41� Mayor Ronald L. De Carli, Executive Director Date: Date: 1 ATTEST: City Clerk By: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL EFFECT: By: By City Attorney SLOC G Couns I Date: Date: /C) Page 3 of 3 100000'7 REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Meeting Date: 02/13/96 CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: A-4 Through: Andrew J Takata, City Manager Via: Steven J Sylvester, City Engineer From: John B Neil, Assistant City Engineer �s.J SUBJECT: Acceptance of the San Gabriel Road Sewer improvements RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Council accept the subject improvements as complete and requests authorization from Council to release the 10% retention. DISCUSSION: Staff has reviewed the completed San Gabriel Road Sewer Project improvements and has determined that the improvements are in substantial conformance with the project plans and specifications. The sewer main constructed as a result of the San Gabriel Road Sewer Project will serve those properties located in Cease and Desist Area "G". FISCAL IMPACT: City Resolution 69-25 approved a contract with Whitaker Engineering Contractors for construction of the San Gabriel Road Sewer improvements. The total project construction cost was estimated to be $337,848.80 (See Attachment A). Actual project expenditures for construction were $321,780.15. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A - 07/25/95 Staff Report Attachment B - Notice of Completion 000008 , { rDncu REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Meeting Date: 07/25/95 CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: 4- 6 M Through: Andrew J. Takata, City Manager From: Steven J. Sylvester, City Engineer SUBJECT: Bid Award for San Gabriel Road Sewer Project RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Council adopt Resolution 69-95 authorizing the execution of a contract with Whitaker Engineering Contractors, Inc. to construct the San Gabriel Road Sewer Project. The contract amount will be $ 284,408.00. DISCUSSION: Bids were solicited to provide sanitary sewer in Cease and Desist Area "G" as required by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. The project is identified in the City's 1990 Sewer Master Plan and also in the current (June 14, 1994) 5-Year Capital Improvement Plan as Project H-106 "Cease & Desist Area G": The funding source for the project is the City Wastewater Fund, as indicated in the current 5-Year Capital Improvement Plan. The work involves construction of approximately 3,700 lineal feet of gravity sewer main with laterals for each property in Cease and Desist Area "G". The sewer terminates at an existing manhole near the intersection of Highway 41 and San Gabriel Road. The bids have been checked for completeness and accuracy. The City Engineer finds the lowest responsible bidder to be Whitaker Engineering Contractors, Inc. with a bid of $ 284,408.00. The Engineer's Estimate for the project was $337,000.00. The Bid Summary prepared by the City Clerk and the Itemized Bid Summary are included for reference as Attachments A and B. A copy of Sheet 11 of the Capital Improvements Plan entitled "Category H: WASTE WATER PROJECTS" is included as Attachment C. FISCAL IMPACT: The projected fiscal impact is as follows: Construction Bid 284,408.00 Contingencies @ 10% 28.440.80 Subtotal $ 312,848.80 000009 -00001-3- A ,q Report to City Council Meeting Date: 07/25/94 Page 2 Contract Administration, Construction Staking, Soils Testing, Inspection at 8% 25,000.00 Total $ 337,848.80 ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A - Project Bid Summary Attachment B - Itemized Bid Summary Attachment C - Sheet 11 of the current Capital Improvements Plan 9310901.ATA 000010 f RECORDING REQUESTED BY: (and when recorded, mail to:) City Clerk CITY OF ATASCADERO 6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero, CA 93422 NOTICE OF COMPLETION NO TRANSFER OF PROPERTY Notice is hereby given pursuant to Civil Code Section 3093: 1. The undersigned is corporate officer for the City of Atascadero, owner of property hereinafter described. 2. The full name of the owner is the City of Atascadero, 3. The full address of the owner is 6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero, CA 93422 4. The nature of the interest of the owner is in fee. 5. A work of improvement on the property hereinafter described was completed on November 20, 1995. 6. The work done was the construction of a sanitary sewer main, laterals, drainage and street improvements on and along San Gabriel Road northerly of Morro Road (State Highway 41). 7. The name of the contractor who performed such work of improvement was Whitaker Engineering Contractors. The date contract was entered into was August 18, 1995. 8. The property on which said work of improvement was completed was in the City of Atascadero, County of San Luis Obispo, State of California, and is described as follows: San Gabriel Road. 9. The street address of said property is: Varies. Dated: ANDREW J. TAKATA, City Manager City of Atascadero VERIFICATION I, the undersigned, say that I am the City Manager,declarant of the foregoing Notice of Completion; I have read said Notice of Completion and know the contents thereof;the same is true of my own knowledge. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on at the City of Atascadero, California. (date) ANDREW J. TAKATA, City Manager City of Atascadero 000011 REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Meeting Date: 02/13/96 CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: A-5 Through: Andrew J Takata, City Manager Via: Steven J Sylvester, City Engineer From: John B Neil, Assistant City Engineer SUBJECT: Acceptance of the Santa Rosa Road Sewer Extension Project improvements. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council accept the subject improvements as complete and requests authorization from Council to release the 10% retention less $2,000.00 in liquidated damages. DISCUSSION: Staff has reviewed the completed Santa Rosa Road Sewer Extension Project and has determined that the improvements are in substantial conformance with the project plans and specifications. The completed sewer main extension will serve those properties located in Cease and Desist Area "F" (Subarea "F6"). Staff is recommending assessing the contractor $2,000.00 in liquidated damages to cover additional project costs incurred by the City due to the contractor's failure to complete the project within the time limits specified in the contract. FISCAL IMPACT: City Resolution 69-95 approved a contract with Whitaker Engineering Contractors for construction of the sewer improvements. Total project construction costs were estimated to be $54,105.10 (See Attachment A). Actual construction expenditures less the $2,000.00 in liquidated damages were $54,372.64. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A - 07/25/95 Staff Report Attachment B - Notice of Completion 000012 Bid REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Meeting Date: 07/25/95 CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: -� Through: Andrew J. Takata, City Manager From: OSteven J. Sylvester, City Engineer SUBJECT: Bid Award for Santa Rosa Road Sewer Extension Project RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Council adopt Resolution 68-95 authorizing the execution of a contract with Whitaker Engineering Contractors, Inc. for the Base Bid portion of the Santa Rosa Road Sewer Extension Project. The contract amount will be $ 43,916.00. DISCUSSION: Bids were solicited to provide sanitary sewer service to the last three unserved properties within Cease and Desist Area "F" (Subarea "176") as required by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. The Base Bid was identified as "Project A" and Additive No. 1 was identified as "Project B" in a Staff Report prepared.by Mark Markwort, Chief of Wastewater Operations, and presented to the City Council at their July 12, 1994 meeting. The Base Bid involves construction of approximately 520 lineal feet of gravity sewer main. Laterals are provided for the three properties of Subarea 76" and for five additional properties fronting Santa Rosa Road to the South. The funding source for the project is the City Wastewater Fund. Mr. Markwort has determined that Additive No. 1 (Project B) does not have adequate support by the properties which would be served and, therefore, is not recommending award of Additive No. 1. Note that the properties which would be served by construction of Additive No. 1 are not in a cease and desist area. The bids have been checked for completeness and accuracy. The City Engineer finds the lowest responsible bidder for the Base Bid to be Whitaker Engineering Contractors, Inc. with a bid of$43,916.00. The Engineer's Estimate for the base bid was $28,750.00. The Bid Summary prepared by the City Clerk and the Itemized Bid Summary are included for reference as Attachments A and B. 000013 i v . Report to City Council Meeting Date: 07/25/94 Page 2 FISCAL IMPACT: The projected fiscal impact is as follows: Construction Bid (Base Bid) 43,916.45 Contingencies @ 10% 4,391.65 Subtotal $ 48,308.10 Contract Administration, Construction Staking, Soils Testing, Inspection at 12% 5.797.00 Total $ 54,105.10 ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A - Project Bid Summary Attachment B - Itemized Bid Summary 9411201.ATA s 000014 -09 KWg- RECORDING REQUESTED BY: (and when recorded, mail to:) City Clerk CITY OF ATASCADERO 6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero, CA 93422 NOTICE OF COMPLETION NO TRANSFER OF PROPERTY Notice is hereby given pursuant to Civil Code Section 3093: 1. The undersigned is corporate officer for the City of Atascadero, owner of property hereinafter described. 2. The full name of the owner is the City of Atascadero. 3. The full address of the owner is 6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero, CA 93422 4. The nature of the interest of the owner is in fee. 5. A work of improvement on the property hereinafter described was completed on November 20, 1995. 6. The work done was the extension of a sanitary sewer main and construction of sewer laterals in Santa Rosa Road. 7. The name of the contractor who performed such work of improvement was Whitaker Engineering Contractors. The date contract was entered into was August 18, 1995. 8. The property on which said work of improvement was completed was in the City of Atascadero, County of San Luis Obispo, State of California, and is described as follows: Santa Rosa Road. 9. The street address of said property is: Varies. Dated: ANDREW J. TAKATA, City Manager City of Atascadero VERIFICATION 1,the undersigned, say that I am the City Manager,declarant of the foregoing Notice of Completion; I have read said Notice of Completion and know the contents thereof;the same is true of my own knowledge. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on at the City of Atascadero, California. (date) ANDREW J. TAKATA, City Manager City of Atascadero • 000015 REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: A-6 Through: Andrew J. Takata Meeting Date: 02/13/96 City Manager File Number: TPM 95003 Via: Steven L. DeCamp, City Planner From: (5A%TlGary Kaiser, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Consideration of a Tentative Parcel Map application to divide an existing Colony Lot into two (2) separate parcels of 1 .5 acres and 2 . 68 acres for single family residential. Subject site is located at 4530 San Anselmo Avenue. (John Hull) (Daniel J. Stewart & Associates) RECOMMENDATION• Per the Planning Commission' s recommendation, approve Tentative Parcel Map 95003 based on the Findings and Conditions of Approval contained in the attached staff report. BACKGROUND: On January 16, 1996, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the above-referenced map. After discussion (see attached minutes excerpts) , the Planning Commission recommended approval of Tentative Parcel Map 95003 in accordance with staff' s recommendations . /ph Attachments : Planning Commission Staff Report - 01/16/96 Planning Commission Minutes Excerpts - 01/16/96 moolt; CITY OF ATASCADERO Item: B •2 STAFF REPORT FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Date: January 16, 1996 BY: Gary Kaiser, Associate Planner C-74cVi File No: TPM #95003 SUBJECT: Consideration of a tentative parcel map application to divide an existing Colony Lot into two (2) separate parcels of 1.5 acres and 2.68 acres for single family residential use. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the following actions: 1. Find the Negative Declaration prepared for the project adequate under the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) ; 2. Approve Tentative Parcel Map #95003 based on the Findings for Approval contained in Attachment G and the Conditions of Approval contained in Attachment H. A. SITUATION AND FACTS: • 1. Applicant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .John Hull 2. Representative. . . . . . . . . . . . . .Daniel J. Stewart & Assoc. 3. Project Address. . . . . . . . . . . . .4530 San Anselmo Avenue 4. Site Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4. 18 acres 5. General Plan Designation. . . .Suburban Single Family/ Moderate Density Single Family 6. Zoning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .RS/RSF-Y (Residential Suburban/Residential Single Family, 1.5-acre minimum) 7. Existing Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Vacant 8. Environmental Status. . . . . . . .Negative Declaration posted October 17, 1995 t 1 i 00001'7 S. ANALYSIS: The project site is located at the intersection of San Anselmo and Arena Avenues (Attachments A & B) . The applicant wishes to subdivide the site into two (2) lots of 2.58 and 1.5 acres for single family residential use (Attachment C) . As shown on the tentative map, the average slope of the site is approximately 19%, with proposed Parcel 1 being somewhat steeper and proposed Parcel 2 being somewhat flatter. Percolation tests have been provided for each of the proposed lots confirming that each is well-suited for a conventional septic/leachfield system. Preliminary grading plans have also been provided that show that both of the proposed lots have building sites which can be accessed and developed without excessive grading and without the need for any tree removals (see Environmental Review below) . General Plan/zoning During the City-wide General Plan Update of 1992, the Urban Services Line (USL) was changed to include all parcels on the west side of San Anselmo Avenue. Concurrent with this change was a corresponding change in the line which separates designated Suburban Single Family areas from designated Moderate Density Single Family areas. The Suburban Single Family designation is applied to lands suitable for residential use and outside the USL. These areas are zoned RS (Residential Suburban) wherein the minimum lot .size ranges from 2.5 to 10 acres. The Moderate Density Single Family designation is applied to residential properties within the USL where physical access to public sewer may or may not be available. The minimum lot size within this area is either 1 acre or 1.5 acres depending on whether or not sewer is available. In apparent anticipation of this lot split, the City's general policy of not "Split-zoning" individual parcels was broken and the Urban Service/zoning lines were drawn such that the subject Parcel was bisected (see Attachments A & B) . The lowerP ortion of the site near San Anselmo Avenue is now zoned RSF-Y and has a 1.5-acre minimum lot size as sewer remains unavailable. The westerly, upper portion of the site is zoned RS and has a 2.5- acre minimum lot size thanks to a good performance test: Lot Size Factor Distance from Center (0 - 8,000' ) 0.20 Septic Suitability (<20 min./inch: well-suited) 0.50 Average Slope ( 18.82 %) 0.75 Access Condition (City-accepted Roads) 0.40 General Neighborhood Character (<1. 0 ac. * 0.2) 0.20 Minimum Lot Size. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2. 05 acres 2 000018 Each of the proposed parcels comply with their respective minimum lot size requirement. Environmental Review Having completed an Initial Study, staff finds no substantial evidence that project approval could have a significant effect on the environment. A Negative Declaration has therefore been prepared and posted (Attachment F) . Since the grading shown on preliminary plans (Attachment D & E) was included in the environmental review, subsequent environmental review (i.e. , precise plans) should not be required for their construction unless grading substantially changes or new environmental issues are introduced. That is not say, however, that preliminary plans will not have to be refined during building permit review (i.e, the driveway connection for parcel 1 will probably have to be relocated to the west to meet sight distance standards) . Although no trees would have to be removed for the construction of residences, septic systems and driveways, three (3) tree removals (two 18" Oaks and one 12" Oak) would be associated with shoulder work along Arena Avenue which is being recommended by staff to remedy an existing sight distance problem along that street. This grading is thought to be necessary for safety reasons regardless of the driveway location on that parcel. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed tentative parcel map is clearly consistent with the General Plan and satisfies all Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance requirements without exception. Staff has found no substantial evidence that project approval could have significant adverse environmental effects and the project seems consistent with the character of the neighborhood in which it is located. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A -- Location Map (General Plan) Attachment B -- Location Map (zoning) Attachment C -- Tentative Parcel Map Attachment D -- Preliminary Grading, Lot 1 Attachment E -- Preliminary Grading, Lot 2 Attachment F -- Negative Declaration Attachment G -- Findings for Approval Attachment H -- Conditions of Approval c:\maps\tpm95003.sr 3 000019 .�„70'4�°"�� :�R>►'� ', ..., h � � �►� �.j� i!� fel ���]f�)Il�.-a Jjgr! 0�a ♦ ♦ sem, e .JOBMM oda / �1 ■� �. , >�� �����. � ' 111111- •I—"'�•V�' �A �,~ �� '��Y�T A IL4 do ATTACHMENT B CITY OF ATASCADERO LOCATION MAP '(ZON I NGS + TPM #95003 •4:sn+ N In "" COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT raAFFIC o ZONA V L_ STRADA Av cl 1 A N A � Y r �Z Z Op. 6 r AA. ~ AVE w � ! D OALDA Po \ / 1_ -- _ moa (Fs a �o 4b z COLI A -- N UILLA 1 FO ROS/T —Z .W o ! 1 m I • �Z — SILLA ; a > Os CN ' EL CcMINO Eat U 5 Hwy 101 1 I `ROAD - -- t _ 000021 1 ATTACHMENT C CITY OF ATASCADERO TENT • PARCEL' MAP TPM #95003 tore COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT �0 DEPARTMENT ° * \1q awl-t P • yn �" - ��Q � � �� iN� y�iv 17 S t 1z, Zy Ham LAN f h h h a � © `a V - ---- -0 - J o0 ~ 000022 j ATTACHMENT D CITY OF ATASCADERO TPML#95003ADING, LOT 1 "" COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT \_• `� � EJB l.Q �. \ \ � 'a ..'' �.�•1 at— fitzi • \ . \ t:-\• •�'. all Ir ' /Pf!/R CEL 000023 f ATTACHMENT E CITY OF ATASCADERO PRMLIM. GRACING, LOT2 TPM #95003 1 .rr•t. Ma.a . t COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT i DEPARTMENT • 1 \ 1 \ �p`a "'.�'�'. I, _ .. ....ems _ �.». ..._.. .wiM."r""•� .•� '� �-t• \ \ ``� moi..`' ...�'_�; '.;•, -'_��`,,1`•. 7. - •.�•. � . � \\ ��;� ,\ �<. \\ ♦♦ \\ � ♦• \♦ ,,o.-. �� l \ it \. I Q 1 sem• \ � � — � _ 1. I 1 \ l n^ I `l Ion \ of .•\ � � 74 ' I \ oo A'� a 000x24 j ATTACHMENT F CITY OF ATASCADERO NEGATIVE DECLARATION TPM #95003 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF ATASCADERO ENVIRONMENTAL COORDINATOR l NEGATIVE DECLARATION COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 6500 PALMA AVE. ATASCADERO.CA 93422 (805)461-5035 APPLICANT: 36110 4A4X,1� (S Z-7 l$-JArt • �ah� f'i'�NG�sco� � ��t o 7 PROJECT TITLE: r-o l xa -4-`f SoO3 PROJECT LOCATION: 4530 SAaJ AdJSELMoAkJ 0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 5v80t\111DE E�.�STuJC� `f. �� A-c�e SITi= (147b 'CL'o CZ.) QAALr—e%-S d;- Z. G% ArA S Arc E'S f�M2 5 i N Co t.E Fi4d'1l lam`( (Z-ESt�+Ei��l 1 f�c1..• V S�• FINDINGS: 1. The project does not have the potential to degrade the environment. _ 2. The project will not achieve short-term to the disadvantage of long-tens environmental goals. 3. The project does not have Impacts which are individually limited.but comuladvely considerable. 4. The project will not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings either directly or indirectly. DETERBUNATION: Based on the above findings,and the information contained in the initial study(made a part hereof by refer- ence and on file in the Community Development Department).a has been determined that the above project will not have an adverse Impact on the environment. ST�(t�-1 DECM�l Pi G tT`f �'i,Arf'I1Sm Date Posted: oc:TtaM 1'7) 19q s' Date Adopted: 3 � cm ti-eo 1 000025 ATTACHMENT G - Findings for Approval • Tentative Parcel Map #95003 4530 San Anselmo Avenue (Hull/Stewart) January 2, 1996 ENVIRONMENTAL FINDING: The proposed project will not have a significant impact on the environment. The Negative Declaration prepared for the project is adequate. MAP FINDINGS• 1. The proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable General and Specific Plans. 2. The design and/or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable General and Specific Plans. 3. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed. 4. The site is physically suitable for the density of the development proposed. . 5. The design of the subdivision, and/or the proposed improvements, will not cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish and wildlife or their habitat. 6. The design of the subdivision, and the type of the improvements, will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or the use of property within the proposed subdivision; or substantially equivalent alternate easements are provided. 7. The proposed subdivision design, and/or the type of improvements proposed, will not cause serious public health problems. TPM95003.fin ATTACHMENT H -- Conditions of Approval Tentative Parcel Map #95003 • 4530 San Anselmo Avenue (Hull/Stewart) January 2, 1996 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: Planning Division Conditions 1. Tree removals shall be limited to those required by these conditions. Development plans shall include tree protection plans as required by the Tree Ordinance. 2. Grading for buildings and driveways shall incorporate raised floors and/or retaining walls to minimize grading in general and impacts to native trees in particular. 3. The street address and primary access to a future residence on parcel 2 shall be from San Anselmo Avenue. Fire Department Conditions 4. Prior to the recordation of the parcel map, the existing fire hydrant located along Arena Avenue opposite parcel 1 shall be upgraded to the approval of the Fire Marshal. Engineering Division Conditions 5. All public improvements shall be constructed in conformance with the City of Atascadero Engineering Department Standard Specifications and Drawings or as directed by the City Engineer. 6. The applicant shall enter into an Plan Check/Inspection agreement with the City. Prior to recordation of the map, all outstanding plan check/inspection fees shall be paid. 7. An encroachment permit shall be obtained from the City Engineering Department prior to the start of construction. 8. A Preliminary Soils Report shall be prepared for the property to determine the presence of expansive soil or other soil problems and shall make recommendations regarding grading of the proposed site. A final soils report shall be submitted by the soils engineer prior to the final inspection and shall certify that all grading was inspected and approved and that all work done is in accordance with the plans and the preliminary report. (Page 1 of 4) 1 000027 A separate document shall be recorded in conjunction with the parcel map stating that a soils report has been prepared. The document shall state the date of the report along with the name and address of the soils engineer or geologist who prepared the report. The document shall indicate any soils problems which may exist on the newly created lots. 9. All existing and proposed utility, pipeline, open space, scenic or other easements are to be shown on the parcel map. If there- are building or other restrictions related to the easements, they shall be noted on the parcel map. 10. The relocation and/or alteration of existing utilities shall be the responsibility of the developer. 11. The applicant shall install all new utilities (water, gas, electric, cable TV and telephone) underground. 12. Any utility trenching in existing streets shall be overlayed to restore a smooth riding surface as required by the City Engineer. 13. A grading and drainage plan, prepared by a registered civil engineer, shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of building permits. A registered civil engineer shall provide a written statement that all work has been completed and is in full compliance with the approved plans and the Uniform Building Code (UBC) . 14. A black line clear Mylar (0.4 mil) copy and a blue line print of the parcel map shall be provided to the City upon recordation. 15. A parcel map in substantial conformance with the approved tentative map and in compliance with all conditions set forth in the City of Atascadero Subdivision Ordinance and the Subdivision Map Act shall be submitted to the City Engineer for approval. The parcel map shall be signed by the City Engineer prior to it being placed on the agenda for City Council approval. 16. The applicant shall enter into a Drainage Acceptance Agreement with the City for the storm water run-off discharging from San Anselmo Avenue onto Parcel 2 prior to recordation of the parcel map. 17. A six (6) foot public utilities easement (PUE) shall be provided contiguous to all street frontages. (Page 2 of 4 ) 2 000028 18. Road improvement plans prepared by a registered civil engineer shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Engineer prior to recordation of the parcel map. Road improvement plans shall conform to the requirements of the City Standard Specifications, Section 2 - Preparation of Plans. R-value testing shall be done, and the pavement section designed by a registered civil engineer to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Road improvements shall include, but not be limited to the following: a. San Anselmo Avenue shall be improved as required to achieve a full 32' pavement width in conformance with City Standard 403, Type B (Rural Collector) contiguous to the entire property frontage, or as approved by the City Engineer. The improvements may require the overlaying of the existing pavement to remedy an inadequate structural section or to remedy a deteriorated paving surface. Transitions shall be constructed where required to achieve a smooth join with existing improvements. b. A decomposed granite or gravel walkway shall be constructed contiguous to the San Anselmo Avenue property frontage in conformance with City Standard 403, or as approved by the City Engineer. C. An asphalt concrete overside drain in conformance with CalTrans standards shall be constructed at the southeasterly corner of Parcel 2, or as approved by the City Engineer. d. Offers of dedication shall be provided for all proposed and existing public improvements which are constructed outside of the existing right-of-way on both San Anselmo Avenue and Arena Avenue. Offers of dedication shall be recorded prior to, or in conjunction with, the parcel map. e. Slope easements shall be provided as needed to accommodate cut or fill slopes. f. Pavement widening in conformance with City Standard 4.02.F shall be constructed at the existing curve on Arena Avenue located easterly of the boundary between Parcel 1 and Parcel 2, or as approved by the City Engineer. The radius to be used in determining the required widening shall be based on the centerline radius of the existing pavement. (Page 3 of 4 ) 3 000029 g. Arena Avenue shall be improved as required to achieve a full 20' pavement width in conformance with City Standard 402, (Rural Hillside Local) contiguous to the entire property frontage, or as approved by the City Engineer. The improvements may require the overlaying of the existing pavement to remedy an inadequate structural section or to remedy a deteriorated paving surface. Transitions shall be constructed where required to achieve a smooth join with existing improvements. 19. The applicant shall demonstrate that the site distance at all proposed driveways is in conformance to City Standard 414 based on a 20 mph design speed prior to the issuance of building permits. 20. All improvements within the right-of-way shall be covered with a 100% Performance Guarantee and a 50% Labor and Materials Guarantee until the improvements are deemed substantially complete by the City Engineer. Prior to the final inspection of the improvements, and before the other guarantees mentioned in this condition are released, a 10% Maintenance Guarantee shall be posted to cover the improvements for a period of 1 year from the date of the final inspection. The guarantee amounts shall be based on an engineer's estimate submitted by the project engineer and approved by the City Engineer. The estimate shall be based on City standard unit prices. The Guarantees posted for this project shall be approved by the City Attorney. 21. The public improvements required by these conditions of approval shall be substantially complete prior to the issuance of building permits. 22. This tentative map approval shall expire two (2) years from the date of final approval unless an extension of time is granted pursuant to a written request received prior to the expiration date. TPM95003.con (Page 4 of 4) 4 000030 \ PLANNING COMMISSI MINUTES EXCE - 1/ 16/96 CITY OF ATASCADERO PLANNING CONK S 1/16 ION TES SUBJECT: B. H NGS APPEARANCES. R TS 1 . ADULT ENTERTAINMENT ORDINANCE: Consider a recommendation to the City Counc egarding adoption of amendments to the City's Zoning O ance regulating the location and operation of a businesses. (CONTINUED FROM THE MEETING OF JANUARY 2, 1996)/(CONTINUED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF FEBRUARY 6, 1996) . 2. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 195003: Application filed by John Hull (Daniel J. Stewart and Associates) to divide an existing Colony Lot into two (2) separate parcels of 1.5 acres and 2.68 acres for single family residential use. Subject site is located at 4530 San Anselmo Avenue. (CONTINUED FROM THE MEETING OF JANUARY 2, 1996) . STAFF RECOMMENDATION: (Kaiser) Staff recommends the following actions: 1. Find the Negative Declaration prepared for the project adequate under the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) ; 2. Approve Tentative Parcel Map #95003 based on the Findings for Approval contained in Attachment G and the Conditions of Approval contained in Attachment H. TESTIMONY: Norma Scott's letter of January 2, 1996, which supports this project, was read into the record by Mr. Kaiser. Ms. Scott is a neighbor who lives across the street from the subject property. John Hull, the applicant, indicated that he agreed with the staff recommendations and offered to answer any questions the Commission might have. ACTION: The Commission finds the Negative Declaration prepared for the project adequate under the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) . (Page 3 of 5) 000031 Planning Commission Meeting, January 16, 1996 Motion: Edwards Second: Wallace AYES: Edwards, Wallace, Bowen, Hageman, Sauter, Zimmerman, Johnson NOES: None ABSENT: None ACTION: The Commission approves Tentative Parcel Map #95003 based on the Findings for Approval contained in Attachment G and the Conditions of Approval contained in Attachment H. Motion: Edwards Second: Sauter AYES: Edwards, Sauter, Wallace, Bowen, Hageman, Zimmerman, Johnson NOES: None ABSENT: None UBJECT: B. HEARINGS, APPEARANCES, AND REPORTS 3 . TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 95001: Application filed by Roberta Lindsay (Wils Surveys) for the division of two (2) lots of . 0 and 10.42 cres into three (3) parcels of 5.6 , 5.96, and 5.96 ac s for single family residenti use. Subject site is to ted at 11750 San Marco oad. STAFF RECOMMENDATION. (Davidso Staff recommends th Ten tive Parcel Map #95001 be denied based on the Fin Ings for De al con in Attachment G. TESTIMONY: None. ACTION: Con ued, with the applicant's concurre e, tentatively to the February 20, 1996 meeting. age 4 of 5) 000032 REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Meeting Date: 2-13-96 CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: A-7 Through: Andrew J. Takata, City Manager Via: Brady Cherry, Director of Community Services From: Valerie Humphrey, Staff Assistan SUBJECT: Establishment of No Parking zone On San Andres at Cristobal Avenue. RECOMMENDATION: It is the recommendation of the Traffic Committee that Council adopt Resolution No. 07-96 establishing a No Parking zone on San Andres Avenue at Cristobal as illustrated on Exhibit A to the subject resolution. DISCUSSION: San Andres Avenue at this location is only 24' wide which does not allow for on-street parking and two way travel. At the present time when cars are parked at the curb there is only sufficient width for on vehicle on San Andres. This area is zoned multi-family and parking requirements were determined and installed on-site as part of the development. OPTIONS: 1) Adopt Resolution No. 07-96. 2) Deny Resolution No. 07-96. 3) Return item to Traffic Committee for further review FISCAL IMPACT• The cost of these modifications will be approximately $50 for painting to be paid out of currently budgeted funds. Attachments: Resolution No. 07-96 000033 RESOLUTION NO. 07-96 RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO DESIGNATING A NO PARKING ZONE ON SAN ANDRES AVENUE AT CRISTOBAL AVENUE WHEREAS, Section 4-2 . 1101, et. seq. , of the Atascadero Municipal Code allows the City Traffic Engineer to designate "No Parking" areas, and to place and maintain appropriate signs or markings indicating the same; and WHEREAS, the Traffic Committee has determined that establishing a No Parking zone on a portion of San Andres Avenue will provide for increased traffic safety. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Atascadero directs the City Traffic Engineer to place and maintain appropriate signs or markings as indicated in the attached "Exhibit "A" . On motion by Councilmember and seconded by Councilmember the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: ATTEST• CITY OF ATASCADERO By LEE PRICE, City Clerk GEORGE P. HIGHLAND, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: ARTHER R. MONTANDON City Attorney 0000314 • EXHIBIT "A" RESOLUTION NO. 07-96 • S4av 9446 T5� �No P . a- r ua.. 000035 REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Meeting Date: 2-13-96 • CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: A-8 Through: Andrew J. Takata, City Manager Via: Brady Cherry, Director of Community Services From: Valerie Humphrey, Staff Assistant : SUBJECT• Establishment of No Parking zone at 11153 El Camino Real. RECOMMENDATION• It is the recommendation of the Traffic Committee that Council adopt Resolution No. 08-96 establishing a No Parking zone on El Camino Real as illustrated on Exhibit A to the subject resolution. DISCUSSION• On-street parking at this location severely restrict the view on approaching traffic causing a hazard for both the vehicles traveling on El Camino Real and the vehicles exiting this address. This area is high density multi-family and parking requirements were determined and installed on-site as part of the development. OPTIONS• 1) Adopt Resolution No. 08-96. 2) Deny Resolution No. 08-96. 3) Return item to Traffic Committee for further review FISCAL IMPACT• The cost of these modifications will be approximately $50 for painting to be paid out of currently budgeted funds. Attachments: Resolution No. 08-95 00003s RESOLUTION NO. 08-96 RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO • DESIGNATING A NO PARKING ZONE AT 11153 EL CAMINO REAL WHEREAS, Section 4-2. 1101, et. sea. , of the Atascadero Municipal Code allows the City Traffic Engineer to designate "No Parking" areas, and to place and maintain appropriate signs or, :markings indicating the same; and WHEREAS, the Traffic Committee has determined that establishing a No Parking zone on this portion of El Camino Real will improve the sight distance for vehicles existing this address. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Atascadero directs the City Traffic Engineer to place and maintain appropriate signs or markings as indicated in the attached "Exhibit "A" . On motion by Councilmember I and seconded by Councilmember the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: ATTEST• CITY OF ATASCADERO BY LEE PRICE, City Clerk GEORGE P. HIGHLAND, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: ARTHER R. MONTANDON City Attorney 000037 � EXHIBIT "A" RESOLUTION NO. 08-96 � A 04 W y � v LLJ via 000038 ® REPORT TO COUNCIL Meeting Date: 2-13-96 CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: A-9 THROUGH: Andy Takata, City Manager VIA: Brady Cherry, Director of Community Services FROM: Mark Markwort, Chief of Wastewater Operations SUBJECT• Amendment of Contract for Septage Dewatering Concession. RECOMMENDATION• Adopt Resolution No. 10-96 authorizing the amendment to the agreement with North County Septic Service for continued operation of a Septage Dewatering Service Concession at the City's Wastewater Treatment Facility. BACKGROUND• • Resolution No. 79-95 was passed and adopted at a regular City Council Meeting on August 8, 1995. This Resolution stipulated an agreement between the City and North County Septic to establish a Septic Dewatering Service Concession. DISCUSSION• Actual service began on September 1, 1995. During the four months of initial operation, the concession has operated in a reasonable manner and warrants an extension of the contract. FISCAL IMPACT: .Space rental and process water treatment fees are based upon a flat usage fee per tank load and are set at $125. 00 per tank load. During the four months of initial operation, revenue to the City has been approximately $1, 000. 00. • 0000.39 RESOLUTION NO. 10-96 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH NORTH COUNTY SEPTIC SERVICE FOR SEPTAGE DEWATERING SERVICE CONCESSION OPERATION ATASCADERO WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY JANUARY 1, 1996 - DECEMBER 31, 1996 The City Council of the City of Atascadero, California hereby resolves as follows: 1. The Mayor is hereby authorized to execute an amendment to the agreement with North County Septic Service for a septage dewatering service operation at Atascadero's Wastewater Treatment Facility. 2 . ' The City Manager is hereby authorized to make minor corrections or modifications of a mathematical or clerical nature. 3 . The Finance Director in hereby authorized to • receive fees for space rental and wastewater treatment according to the terms of the agreement. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Atascadero held on the 13th of February, 1996. ATTEST: CITY OF ATASCADERO By: LEE PRICE, City Clerk GEORGE P. HIGHLAND, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: ARTHER R. MONTANDON, City Attorney 000040 FIRST AMENDMENT TO AN AGREEMENT • BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AND NORTH COUNTY SEPTIC SERVICE The agreement entered into on August 8 , 1995, titled "Resolution of the City Council of the City of Atascadero, California, authorizing the execution of an agreement with North County Septic Service" , is amended as follows: 1. Exhibit A, attached, relettering sentences for continuity only. 2 . Section 1.03 , is amended as follows: In consideration of this agreement, space rental and process water treatment fees are based upon a flat fee of $125.00 and will be charged on days when septage is dewatered and effluent is discharged to the City's Wastewater Facility. Space rental and discharge fees are included in this flat rate. Payments received from the fifteenth (15th) of each month shall be considered delinquent and assessed a ten percent (10%) penalty. 3 . Section 2 . 10 (b) , paragraph 1, is amended as follows: To notify the City promptly of any damages to the subject premises, including wet-well pumps, resulting from or attributable to the acts or omissions of the Contractor, its invitees or its authorized representatives, and thereafter promptly to repair all such damages at contractor's sole cost . and expense. 4 . Section 4 . 04, is amended as follows: This agreement shall terminate on December 31, 1996, unless extended as set forth in this Section. The City, with the agreement of the contractor, is authorized to extend the term of this Agreement beyond the termination date, as needed, under the same terms and extension shall be in writing and be an amendment to this Agreement. CITY OF ATASCADERO NORTH COUNTY SEPTIC SERVICE By: By: GEORGE P. HIGHLAND, MAYOR WENSTON BULLARD, OWNER ATTEST: Dated: LEE PRICE, CITY CLERK 000041 EXHIBIT A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED BY CONTRACTOR Contractor shall provide professional services to the City and shall utilize said premises for the following purposes: A. Premises shall be used for the purpose of collecting, storing and dewatering domestic septage. B. Furnish and install and maintain at his own expense, all necessary equipment and proper facilities required for proper service to local septage haulers. C. Storage and service thereof shall be in an area approved by the Director of Public Works (or designee) . D. Operate the facility in a business-like manner to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works, and maintain said areas in conformance with the highest standards of health and safety for patrons, surrounding residences and city employees. E. All services provided on premises shall be approved by the Department of Public Works. F. All services provided on premises shall be rendered in conformance to all standards set forth by applicable governmental regulatory agencies. G. Concession shall not cause nuisance complaints, shall not cause the City to violate discharge requirements or disrupt normal treatment facility operations. H. Discharged process water must meet all requirements of Section 7-9 of the City Municipal Code. I. Raw septage may be stored in two 20, 000 gallon watertight tanks for accumulation of septage between dewatering operations. J. Dewatering equipment will be delivered to the premises and dewatering accomplished approximately once per week. R. Immediately following dewatering, Septage Solids shall be promptly removed from the premises and shall be disposed of in conformance to all applicable regulatory standards. L. Contractor agrees to collect discharge water samples and have analyzed by a State Certified Laboratory, at contractors expense, any/all sampling deemed necessary by the Director of Public Works (or designee) . 000042 • REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: B-1 From: Andrew J. Takata, City Nanem Meeting Date: 2/13/96 SUBJECT: Highway 41, Cuesta Grade Improvements RECOMMENDATION: Receive presentation from SLOCOG and CalTrans representatives, take public comment, and recommend a preferred alternative. BACKGROUND: Attached _is the Draft Environmental Impact Report from CalTrans for the Cuesta Grade Improvements Project. A representative from CalTrans and Steve Devencenzi from the SLO Council of Governments will be present at the Council meeting to make a presentation and respond to questions pertaining to this project. AJT:cw • 000043 i CUESTA GRADE LVIPROVEMENTS PROTECT SUMMARY Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) California Department of Transportation, District 5 5-SLO-101 P.N.I. 32.3/35.5 05253 345400 Caltrans, District 5 50 Higuera Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 October 1995 000044 SUMMARY PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION The primary purpose of the proposed action is to alleviate congestion on U.S. Route 101 over the Cuesta Grade north of San Luis Obispo, California. Alleviating congestion will serve the :elated needs of improving traffic safety, facilitating goods movement and improving local access for Grade residents and visitors. Consistent with community and agency concerns and the transportation control measures established in local plans, the project also seeks to address the need of encouraging use of alternative modes as a means of reducing volumes of single- occupancy vehicles. The project limits are from 1.1 miles north of Reservoir Canyon Road (Station 127+00) to the Cuesta Grade Overhead (Station 292+00), a distance of approximately 5.1 kilometers-(3.2 miles). ALTERNATIVES UNDER CONSIDERATION Alternative 1, the No-Build Alternative, provides the basis of comparison for the improvement alternatives. Under this alternative, no improvements will be made to the existing four-lane '.vnt` .1 ate,.,ative 2 vv -1;'! a true: lane and a four-foot-Wide adjacent outside shoulder in the northbound direction along the east side of the roadway. This alternative will minimize cuts and widening and does not adjust the existing horizontal alignment. Alternative 3 proposes to add a truck lane in the northbound direction and provide eight-foot- wide outside shoulders in the north and southbound directions. Acceleration and deceleration I anes and left-turn pockets at intersections will also be provided. A consistent 12-1000t-whiz median will be inciuded. except in those areas With acceleration deceleration or left-earn lanes. There are two variations with this alternative: Variation 1 will widen on the west side of the roadway and repair the existing slide. i Variation 2 will widen on the east side of the alignment and will not repair the slide. Both csiteiTiaiiVe 3 variations allow for file inclusion of a new like path between yid $tape Coach/TV Tower Road and Cuesta Springs Road on the west side of Route 101 and the truck brake inspection area, at the northern end of the project. Alternative 4 will add a truck lane and an eight-foot-wide outside shoulder in both the north and southbound directions, and provide acceleration, deceleration and left-turn lanes at existing intersections. it includes a consistent 12-foot-wide median, except in areas with acceleration, deceleration and left-turn lanes. There are also two variations of this alternative as described under Alternative 3. Both Alternative 4 variations allow for inclusion of a new bike path located AA.)A2R_()111711CT XA-%,TMQV C_1 Rw M1101L1� 000045 along the western side of both Route 101 and the truck brake inspection area at the northern end of the project as described under Alternative 3. A program of transit improvements, Transportation System Management (TSM) and Travel Demand Management (TDM) components were coordinated by Caltrans, San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) and San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority (SLORTA). The components are included in all build alternatives. These components consist of increased express bus service (up to six additional peak period trips), expanded ride sharing through support to the Local Transportation Management Agency and new park-and-ride lot spaces. Additional buses will be added to Transit Route 9 and the route will be modified to serve the park-and-ride lots. ALT ENAmc C'nINcmrun AND W3'?'HDR?,WN Among the alternatives considered and withdrawn from further study were Full Freeway; New Northbound Roadway; New Southbound Roadway; New Roadway for Slow Moving Vehicles; Commuter Rail; Light Rail; Stand-alone Bikeway and Transit/Transportation System Management (TSM)/ Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies, truck restrictions and imposition of tolls. These alternatives and the reasons for their withdrawal are presented in Section 2. AFFEECTED EINY Z v -:iJ NT The immediate envirpnn;Pntai setting• is a portion of unincorporated San Luis Obispo County, just north of the corporate boundaries of the City of San Luis Obispo. The project corridor is located in a north-south pass through the Santa Lucia Mountain range, parallel to the California coastline. The surrounding area is characterized by the northwest-southeast trending set of ranges and valleys. Land use is generaily agricultural, grazing predominant, with some limited rural residenuai and hienwav-related commerciai areas concentrated along Route 101 in the southern portion of the project area. The project area contains a variety of natural vegetative communities. including: Central Coastal Scrub, Serpentine Bunchgrass, Coastal Sage-Chaparral Scrub, Coast Live Oak Woodland, Coast Live Oak Forest, Central Coast Live Oak Riparian Forest, Central Coast Riparian Scrub, Sycamore Alluvial Woodland, and Central Coast Cottonwood-Sycamore Riparian Forest, in addition to areas of Non-native Grassland. Portions of these communities have been extensively modified by human influence. Human activities such as farming and livestock grazing have also modified much of the wildlife habitat within the vicinity of Route 101. Six species of birds, two' of reptiles, three of amphibians, one of invertebrates and 21 of plants were listed by the US Fish and Wildlife Service, California Department of Fish and Game, California Native Plant Society and local experts as Species of Concern in the vicinity of the project. The project study area consists of the corridor between the City of San Luis Obispo and the City _.P Af.. ..A +l+o ..:t:nc• ..F C`....�.. 11.i.. �:�.. ...7 VL L LLJV 1\V VLVu. LILLil.6.+111` tILV \.r LL' VL l LIMJVLLLiVLV LLLl\L L11N 4V1111114LLLlrJ VL �JLL111U LL .n. T .. VVVVu V-vv L..L,W V:�LLYLAR 0-2 Ray. io%l9i93 - 313P111 000046 Templeton. . While 50 percent of the County's jobs have developed in the City of San Luis Obispo (SLO), many workers commute from the large "bedroom communities" in the northern project study area, particularly Atascadero and Paso Robles. Community services in the study t area are provided by the three cities and by San Luis Obispo County. The Los Padres National Forest is located adjacent to the proposed improvements. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Project impacts and proposed mitigations are described below: they are also summarized in Table S-1 for ease of comparison among alternatives. Phvsical Environment Water Quality. Impacts to aquatic lire in San Luis Obispo Creek and the larger side channels will potentially result from sedimentation and road runoff from all build alternatives. These impacts are mitigable. Mitigation will include implementing an approved Erosion Control Plan and Drainage Plan. Culvert inlet extensions will be designed to provide sediment detention to prevent filling. Culvert outlet extensions will be designed to prevent scouring, erosion and sedimentation. Air Quality. San Luis Cbispc Coj1r:_ ._..ir..::? _Lr�:: for a'•1 federal air quality standards therefore, no State Implementation P,an ;SIP) conrormir; is required for the project. The area does exceed California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) for ozone and particulate matter and the project must demoristraw consistency with the 1991 Clean Air Plan (CAP) for San Luis Obispo County. Based on examination of population projections, traffic growth rates, land use planning strategies and Transportation Control Measures (TCMS) used for this study, the Cuesta Grade Project is consistent with the 1991 CAP. The build alternatives will result in carbon monoxide (CO) concentrations 01.1 to 1?.'. ;arts ^er million (ppm) lower than no build conditions. Air quality modeling conducted for the project found no excetderces of the CAAQS for CO in any of the analysis years (1992. 2000, and 2020). Similarly, reactive organic gases (ROG) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) will also be lower under the build alternatives than with the No-Build, although Alternative 4 will result in slightly higher Nox emissions than the other build alternatives because more traffic ,viii be traveling at higher speeds. Major construction air quality impacts include dust and particulate matter and construction equipment exhaust: mitigation includes use of best available control technology. Noise. Four receptor locations will be affected by the build alternatives. Two of the four locations will be proposed to be mitigated with noise barriers which will lower predicted noise levels to acceptable levels (63 to 65 dBA). Noise barriers are not recommended for the other two receptor locations because analysis determined that barriers will not lower predicted noise levels sufficiently to meet Federal Highway Administration and Caltrans criteria. Mitigation measures a *these two •ll ,o- effect: - 3 t '� o .ocat:cns �.v, . � . _ �.,.., c;r .act: a,. 660688-00121\SUMMARY -3 Rev. 10/19196 - 3:23pm 00004'7 111�fAAGT SAY OF Z ACTS AND:FROPOSED 1VIITIGATI0NS CATEGORY: AItetnai ive Alternative 1 Alternative Z Alternahv�3<: Alternative 4 Floodplain No impact No impact No impact No impact 1 Water Quality Minimal impact. Mitigable impact. Mitigable impact. Midgable impact. Lowest increase Implement Erosion Control Implement Erosion Control Implement Erosion Control in runoff. Plan. Design culverts to Plan. Design culverts to Plan. Design culverts to detain sediment and prevent detain sediment and prevent detain sediment and prevent scouring,erosion and scouring,erosion and scouring,erosion and sedimentation. sedimentation. sedimentation. Air'Qusiity No exceedences. No exceedences. All No exceedences. All No exceedences. All Highest CO, concentrations lower than concentrations lower than no- concentrations lower than j! ROG, NOx and no-build. build. no-build. NOx PM,o Best available construction Best available construction concentrations slightly concentrations of techniques will be applied to techniques will be applied to higher than Alternatives 2 the project reduce construction impacts. reduce construction impacts. and 3. i i alternatives. Best available construction No construction techniques will be applied to j �I impacts. reduce construction impacts. i i 1 i :wise Unmitigated Two barriers required: Two barriers reauired: I Two harriers required: I noise levels at mitigation not effective for mitigation not effective for mitigation not effective for i six recentor two receptor locations. two receptor locations. two receptor locations. i j locations range j j from 57 to 74 1 dBA (year { 2020). 4 Vegetation No disturbances Over 18 acres of vegetated 33 to 39 acres of vegetated I 31 to 41 acres of vegetated of vegetated area removed. Mitigable by area removed. Mitigable by area removed. Mitigable by I areas. replanting with native replanting with native species. replanting with native species. All disturbed All disturbed vegetated areas species. All disturbed vegetated areas are within are within existing right-of- vegetated areas are within existing right-of-way. way. existing right-of-way. Jurisdictional. No 1.10 acres of riparian area, 0.11 acre of wetland area, 0.11 acre of wetland area, Waters, encroachments of 0.09 acre of jurisdictional 1.67 to 1.74 acus of riparian 1.57 to 1.78 acres of I Wetlands jurisdictional waters affected. No wetland area, and 0.26 to 0.27 acre of riparian area. and 0.25 to and.Riparian. waters, wetlands encroachments. jurisdictional waters affected. 0.28 acre of jurisdictional !i ztreus I ur riparian areas. i lvlitigadull lllciuties I iviitigadUlf illclnUCJ I waters affected. Mitivatlull II (Section 1601) I ( coordination with USCOE I coordination with USCOE and I includes coordination with 11 j ( and CDi G and vegctation i '-DEG and veguumon I OE and CDFG and leplatrtr^en.. I .�.�IYa..�. `Via. •a.sl.Walt/It 11�..�lYV��I Va. �I S-4 000048 IMPAGTSEfikIlklARY:;OF:IMFAGTS:.AMID;PROPUSEDI::NIITIGATIONS CATEGORY:`. Alternative 1 Alternative:2' .` Alternative.3 Alternative 4 sties No impacts upon Potential impact on coast Potential impact on coast Potential impact on coast 1 of Concern species of range newt habitat. range newt habitat and range newt habitat and concern. Mitigation would include removal of serpentine removal of serpentine erosion and drainage controls manzanita. Mitigation manzanita. Mitigation and replacement of riparian includes erosion and drainage includes erosion and vegetation. controls and replacement of 1 drainage controls and riparian vegetation. I replacement of riparian vegetation. Agricultural No No Farmland of Local Maximum of 0.3 acre of N-4aximum of n._ acre of Lands displacements of Importance and 0.4 acre of Farmland of Local Importance Farmland of Local agricultural grazing land eliminated by and between 0.81 and 0.91 Importance and beEween i lands. new right-of-way. acre of grazing land 1.35 and 1.6� acres of eliminated by new right-of- crazing land eliminated by way. new richt of-way. Iand.Use and.::,::: Not consistent Consistent with County and Consistent with County and Consistent with County and Ptamm�g with County and Planning Area plans. Planning Area plans. Planning Area plans. Planning Area plans. Community No congestion Slight enhancement of access Enhancement of access to ! Enhan='rent of::cess to Facilities relief for access to public facilities. public facilities. puNic aciiit�s. }� to community facilities. blit.. Response times Slight improvement of Improves police, fire and I Improves police, tiro and j ces of police, fire police, fire and emergency emergency services response I etilereency services response and emergency services response times times during peak periods. times during peak periods. services would during peak periods. worsen during j peak periods. i Parks I No major SliLyht enhancement of Enhances roadway access Enhances rtiad-.a_y access i! and chances in access roadway accessi'bil'ity aurins collulilUlls dulill•S pcaA Recreation availability peak periods. periods. Addition of bicvc'.e ! ^eriods. Addie(,In of hicccle {i during peak facilities. ! facilities. periods. i - i Visual No changes in Visual quality reduced from I Visual quality reduced from I Visual quality reduced from Resources visual conditions. moderately high to moderate moderately high to moderate:; ! !roderately high to j level. Negative impact low level. Negative impact I inouerateiv iow ievei. it mitigated throueh sensitive mitigated through sensitive Negative impact mirzated design and replanting. design and replanting. dlrouS_Th sensitive design and i replanting. Cultural No involvements No involvements with No involvements with cultural I No involvements with Resources with cultural cultural resources. resources. I cultural resources. resources. i 1 S-5 000049 1MEACTS2161MARY OF I)vIPAC'£ PROFO�S>rD NIITIATIOIFS CATEGORY: p Alternative 1 Alternahae 2:< Alternative 3 Alternative 4 Transporta- Peak period Improves northbound peak to Improves northbound peak to Improves both northbound tion andcongestion would LOS C (southbound peak LOS C (southbound peak and southbound peak Circulation: continue to would be LOS E)and would be LOS E) and directions to LOS C and worsen. Level of provides northbound capacity provides northbound capacity provides sufficient roadway { Service would be through year 2020. through year 2020. capacity through year 2020. E by year 2000 Improves design speed,sight Improves design speed. and F by year distances and access sight distances and access 2014. conditions. conditions. Energy Least efficient Slightly more efficient than Slightly less efficient than Most efficient. traffic No-Build. Alternative 4. Highest construction use. I . 1 movement. Lowest construction use of Slightly higher construction Maintenance depends on No construction build alternatives. use than Alternative 2. variation; slide area will expenditure. Relatively high maintenance. Maintenance depends on continue to require Relatively high Slide area will continue to variation; slide area will maintenance. maintenance. require maintenance. continue to require maintenance. Hazardous No hazardous Potential involvement with Potential involvement with Potential involvement%vith Waste materials asbestos-bearing serpentinite asbestos-bearing serpentinite asbestos-bearing serpentinire � ± involvements. rock deposits. Mitigation rock deposits. Mitigation rock deposits. Nlitiszation i jwould include a Health and would include a Health and would include a Health and j Safety Plan to address Safety Plan to address Safety Plan to address asbestos hazards during asbestos hazards during asbestos hazards during construction. construction. - construction. Relocation of four pipelines; Relocation of four pipelines: Relocation of four pipelines: mitigation includes mitigation includes mitigation includes implementing contingency implementing contingency implementing contingency t plan. plan. plan. Construction No construction 12-to 18-month construction 29-month construction period. 36-month construction impacts. period. Construction and , Construction and tragic I period. Construction and ' I traffic impacts will be impacts will be minimized traffic impacts will be minimized insofar as insofar as possible. A minimized insofar as l i possible. A minimum of two minimum of two peak possible. A minimum of two peak direction lanes would direction lanes would be kept peak direction lanes would be kept open during peak open during peak periods and be kept open during peak periods and additional bus additional bus service would periods and additional bus j service would be provided be provided during this same service would be provided during this same period. period. Best available control during this same period. , Best available control technology is required by Best available control technology is required by SLOCAPCD and would be technology is required by SLOCAPCD and would be applied. Temporary noise SLOCAPCD and would be applied. Temporary noise barriers would screen applied. Temporary noise barriers would screen receptors from construction barriers would screen receptors from construction noise. Construction receptors from construction noise. Construction equipment would conform to noise. Construction equipment would conform to Caltrans noise specifications. equipment wou!d conform Caltrans noise specifications. to Caltrans noise specifications. 660688-00121\Table.S1 S-6 Rev. 10/19/95 -2:52pm 000050 IMPACT SUMMARY OF IlAPACTS.ANIS PROPOSED MITIGATIONS:.;; CATEGORY Alternative { Alternative i Alternative 2: Alternative:3 Alternative 4` 1 wth No growth Would not induce population Would not induce population Would not induce II Inducement inducing effects. growth or commercial growth or commercial population growth or development beyond planned development beyond planned commercial development levels. levels. beyond planned levels. 660688-00121\Table.Sl S-7 Rev. 10/19/95 -2:52pm 000051 Natural Environment Vegetation. Alternative 2 will remove over 18 acres of vegetated area, including 1.10 acres of riparian vegetation. Variations 1 and 2 of Alternative 3 will remove over 33 and 39 acres, respectively, of vegetated area, including 1.74 and 1.67 respective acres of riparian vegetation. Alternative 4, Variations 1 and 2 will respectively displace 1.78 and 1.77 acres of riparian vegetation out of their total vegetation displacements of 35.66 and 40.95 acres each. The types of vegetative communities affected will be similar for all build alternatives. All of the displaced vegetation is within the existing Caltrans-owned right-of-way for Route 101. Replacement planting of native vegetation will be required in each case. Wetlands. The analysis identified jurisdictional waters (including waters of the United States) and Section 1601 Riparian Areas, as well as jurisdictional wetlands. Alternative 2 will impact 1.10 acre of Section 1601 area, 0.09 acre of jurisdictional waters, and no jurisdictional wetlands. Alternatives 3 and 4 (both variations) will impact 0.11 acre of jurisdictional wetland each. Alternative 3 Variations 1 and 2 will respectively impact 1.74 and 1.67 acres of Section 1601 area in addition to 0.26 and 0.27 acre of jurisdictional waters. Variations 1 and 2 of Alternative 4 will respectively impact 1.78 and 1.77 acres of Section 1601 area and 0.26 and 0.28 acre of jurisdictional waters. Most of the wetland, jurisdictional waters and Section 1601 Riparian Areas affected are within the existing Caltrans right-of-waN . Mitigation for encroachment on wetlands, Section 1601 areas and jurisdictional waters by any of the project alternatives will be established through negotiation with the California Department of Fish and Game and the U.S. Army Cc Ys of ..ng.neers. Project design for all build alternatives includes a retaining wall at the San Luis Obispo Creek crossing to minimize 0 longitudinal encroachment. Culvert extensions will be designed to provide sediment detention. Any riparian vegetation removed will be replaced in ratios to ensure no net loss of habitat value. Soecies of Concern. All of the build alternatives will have potential impacts on the terrestrial and breeding habitat of the coast range newt. a California Species of Concern. The magnitude of effect is proportional to the impact on wetlands. Alternatives 3 and 4 will potentially remove some serpentine manzanita, which is listed by the California Native Plant Society. Potential impacts on newt habitat and the manzanita will be greatest under Alternative 4, Variations 1 and Mitigation will include implementing an approved Erosion Control Plan and Drainage Plan, as well as specially designed culvert extensions to minimize sedimentation of riparian newt habitat. Steepened compacted fill slopes or retaining walls and protective fencing will be utilized to reduce potential impacts on San Luis Obispo Creek. Any riparian vegetation removed will be replaced in ratios to ensure no net loss of habitat value. Mitigation for impacts to habitats of Species of Concern will be in accordance with California Department of Fish and Game requirements. Agricultural Lands. The build alternatives will displace a small quantity of Farmland of Local Potential and grazing land within San Luis Obispo County. The greatest quantity of farmland 1.V✓ acres YY 111 Unde n-AlteCt11 V e .1, Y a11GL1.1V 11 I. A11.V mnat1 Y o J YY 111 u1spla e a 660633-c0U!vjtvjjy _ J-v nCv, iii iyiy-� - ;:_;pm 000052 t maximum of 1.21 acres (Variation 1), while Alternative 2 will displace the least agricultural land, a maximum of 0.4 acre. As stated in the Route 101/Cuesta Grade Farmlands Report ' (August 1993), these acreages assume land within the proposed right-of-way in the Los Padres t National Forest is Grazing Land. This land has not been classified and mapped as part of the • Important Farmland Maps. If Los Padres National Forest land was not included in the right-of- way acreages, Farmland of Local Potential would not change, but Grazing Land acreage which will be eliminated by the proposed right-of-way will be reduced. Socioeconomic Environment Impacts upon the socioeconomic and cultural environments are described as follows: Land Use and Planning. The proposed project is consistent with the San Luis Obispo County 1990 Regional Transportation Plan and the transportation elements of the Salinas River (North County) and San Luis Obispo (South County) area plans. The proposed improvements are compatible with land use objectives in place in the project area. Community Facilities. No public facilities are located within the vicinity of the proposed improvements. Access to public facilities in the Los Padres National Forest adjacent to Route 101 at Cuesta Grade will be enhanced by the improved traffic conditions under the build alternatives. Public Services. Alternative 1 will negatively affect emergency service capabilities during peak periods. The build alternatives will improve response 1knes of emerffency services using Route 101 at Cuesta Grade due to reduced congestion during peak periods and intersection improvements under Alternatives 3 and 4. Access for project area residents to other public services provided by the County will similarly be enhanced by the improved access conditions, chiefly under Alternatives 3 and 4. Parks and Recreation. No parks or recreational facilities �:-ill be adversely of:coed by the build alternatives. Access to recreational facilities via Route 101 during peak periods will be enhanced. Inclusion of bicycle facilities under Alternatives 3 and 4 will en lance recreation opportunities. Visual Resources. Alternative 2 will reduce project area visual quality from a moderately high to a moderate level for post-construction conditions within the first or second year after construction. Impacts from added fill slopes and retaining walls will be minimal. Visual changes anticipated under Alternatives 3 and a will. be greater. Alternative 3 will reduce project area visual quality to a moderately low level as will Alternative 4, but with a slightly lower numerical rating in the latter case due to differences in the lengths and heights of cut and fill slopes and retaining walls. Mitigation measures consist of replanting of displaced trees, shrubs and ground cover with native plant species to blend in with adjacent plant communities and selection of retaining wall types and materials to blend with the natural landscape. It is expected that mitigation will restore area visual quality nearly to pre-project conditions when the replacement plantings are well established. ctn6VJ'opp 0011'1a.7\1.ICTI.A(\'IAT)V c, n Vvvva Vraa.la 4\a V—� LV/L /7 — J.a.J 1!111 000053 Cultural Resources. There are no impacts on properties deemed eligible for the National Register of Historic Places in the project APE. Transportation and Circulation. Existing access and circulation problems will continue to worsen and peak-period traffic level of service to deteriorate under Alternative 1. All build alternatives will improve traffic level of service and safety. Alternatives 2 and 3 will improve northbound access and circulation within the area served by the Cuesta Grade portion of Route 101. Alternatives 2 and 3 will raise the northbound peak direction level of service to C for the years 2000 and 2020; the southbound peak direction level of service will be E. By adding a lane in each direction, Alternative 4 will improve peak period level of service for the years 2000 and 2020 to C for both the northbound and southbound directions. Alternatives 3 and 4 will also improve the horizontal alignment and geometry of the roadway, increasing the design speed, improving sight distances and providing acceleration and deceleration lanes and left-turn pockets at four intersections. This will improve accessibility for Cuesta Grade residents and driving conditions for all roadway users. Improved highway conditions will also benefit corridor goods movement. All build alternatives incorporate the same package of transit, TSM and TDM components, which are designed to induce shifts to alternative modes and reduce peak period demand for the roadway. Eneray. Alternative 4 (both variations) will use the least direct energy of any of the alternatives and will have the highest average direct energy efficiency in comparison to the No-Build (1.8 percent more efficient), because it eliminates congestion by adding both a northbound and a southbound truck lane. Alternatives 2 and 3 will be less efficient because they add a truck lane in only one direction, thereby reducing but not eliminating the congestion that characterizes the No-Build Alternative. The indirect energy, which is the energy required to construct and maintain the roadway and is estimated on the basis of construction costs, is least with Alternative 2 and greatest with Alternative 4, Variations 1 and 2. Mitigation for direct energy use during construction includes having two lanes open on Route 101 for traffic in the peak direction during the peak period. Mitigation for indirect energy use includes regular maintenance of construction equipment and planning and coordination of construction equipment use. Hazardous Waste. Review of historical records and regulatory agency files identified no potentially hazardous materials which would affect the project. Two bodies of chrysotile asbestos-bearing serpentinite rock, a naturally occurring substance, are found in the project area. One of these serpentinite bodies will likely be subjected to excavation under the build alternatives, especially under Alternatives 3 and 4. Residents living near the site of the excavation could potentially be exposed to asbestos hazards from fugitive dust emissions. Mitigation will include adoption of a Health and Safety Plan to address specific asbestos hazards that may be encountered during construction, along with outlining additional measures for the handling, disposal and containment of asbestos-containing materials. These measures will include an air monitoring program to document the presence of asbestos dust particles during cornu�ction conditions. All build alternatives will relocate two oil pipelines and two high pressure natural gas lines. Mitigation includes implementing the supplier's contingency plan in the event of spill. VVUUUU-VV L:.l\J lJlvllvl!'11\C S-10 ndv. A.0119i75 - 3:23pm 000054 I Construction. All build alternatives will result in construction phase noise, air quality, access, traffic disruption and visual impacts in the project area. Impacts of construction activities will be temporary and will cease upon completion of the project. Construction is estimated to require from 12 to 36 months depending on the alternative selected. Construction activities will be scheduled to minimize traffic disruption and with advance notice to residents, commuters and emergency service providers. Two lanes will be maintained open in the peak direction during peak periods and additional bus service will be provided. Earthmoving operations will be conducted in compliance with local and State regulations concerning handling and disposal of debris, erosion control and possible discovery of archaeological resources during construction. GROWTH INDUCEMENT AND CUMULATIVE Ili IPACTS The project alternatives are not expected to be growth inducing. Project analysis corroborated by local experts determined that growth pressures in the City of San Luis Obispo and northern corridor communities are independent of the build alternatives and will occur even under no- build conditions. Improvements of the order of magnitude as those proposed for the Cuesta Grade segment of Route 101 will not have serious potential for inducing population growth or new commercial development. The savings in commute time over Cuesta Grade as a result of the build alternatives will be only one to two minutes compared with no-build conditions by year 2000 and between two to three minutes by year 202-1,0. i h..s.. ime savings will not be sufficient to stimulate or alter growth pressures in the project study corridor. - Cumulative environmental impacts that may occur wide tidier uansportation projects in the County are anticipated to be minimal. COORDINATION Contacts and coordination with the general public, local, regional, State and federal agencies and with interested organizations and arou^s have ,eea ce..ti^nous ,"raughcut th�- project through the Notices of Intent/Preparadon and Scoping Process, the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) newsletter, The Coordinator, and various informational meetings. A list of agencies contacted is provided in Section 5.2. Copies of letters received from regulatory and other agencies are provided in Appendix E. AREAS OF CONTROVERSY Issues of concern raised by the public and government agencies focus on the potential for the build alternatives to stimulate corridor growth and vehicle traffic with attendant negative effects on regional air quality. The project's impacts on the visual quality and natural environment of the Cuesta Grade have also been identified for concern. The provision of bicycle lanes over Cuesta Grade instead of or along with the other roadway improvements has been raised for consideration. 660688-00121\SUMMARY S-11 Rev. 10/19/95 - 3:23pm 000055 PERMITS A nationwide Permit 26 from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) and Section 1601 Agreement with the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) will be required to address impacts to wetlands, jurisdictional waters and riparian areas. The United States Fish and Wildlife Service(USFWS)and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will be involved in the coordination regarding wetlands habitat. The USFWS must approve the Biological Assessment in accordance with Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act while the CDFG will also approve the Biological Assessment in accordance with the California Endangered Species Act. The California Regional Water Quality Control Board will require a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit and the project will require a 401 permit from the COE. Specific permit requirements will be determined during the design phase of the project. 660688-00121\SUMMARY S-12 Rev. 10/19/95 - 3:23pm 0000Jt; S. At r NsMN47— ONTEREY lYe4w/ww� Qr..� � H....wr R w� /Ai0 0 10 b �. SANS - Sam . nofm"y LUIS PROJECT LOCATION s LUIS oefsPo 3 OBISPO ^"'OR MY AMONMOtAMOE M'rwo T�irew� A+4AA SANTA "" •cur— Ate... BARBARA 1To W—k' Of.w f �a swm 'MIA •Amo�Mc S n Lacoow toy 8/fiBARA i i 0 w u sm To wa�� PRA"c== C 4 SAL71Ai roMTE'JeEY •rwoMo �/� am LUG aesPo !q S.WTA SAMMiA (=A OCALES^ ,6EAMAAOa.O A' qEC Figure 1-1 PROJECT VICINITY � y qLv trc ,rJ�/G`�CCJ`TA '*AOgQvC11�ICrTC OOr1 IC!^T 00005'7 SANTA MARGARMA c "C EU STA AIOGE = -o o ado 90, r BOTANICAL AREA La Guests Summit e �•4. Southam °G I SJ$ C rOw J PROJECT A N i LIMITS CAUR POLY. , ST.UNN_ SAN LUIS OBISPO SAN Luis &°'. ` 00iSPO d > Mt T.3a.. i Figure 1-2 PROJECT LOCATION ' 1^41ES T. --.fir I If\P\ \/-.I nv V�c l v u�.V ci n�nr\uc��rtr nti v uvtcw t e r w�c�,t a 0000 58 < < -1 n (n -o -o Z r' _ C7 n D D U CD O _0 c w p w -� c � -t O O =� M. CD ai o 2 cn m a- 'M. a w U)0 =33 n cD cm C w F). Q. % c w ccDn O ° ° Q N D ° cn-* 0 � (n n cn su (D 0 � CD RO m 3 Q sv m m cn m "U C) v n o cn cn 00 ° .� o , 3 a z z 0 zM z o- c v z z z z z z ° X Z z 0 o O o o m m o ° a m O o O O O o 0 p O O mDQ = � Q � pc ° Z m� CD 0U) n `D 3 D cn CD ro �' c 3 w a u' a � m u' ° a 5 0 3 CD a m O 0 3 a a a (D �'- cn a m cn' -� cn h -1 (D cD -�. _ .► 3 ((DD O (D n m 3 c3 n p m (n 0 W `G X 00 0 3 o m g o 3 m o o m -o N o 0 o rn fl cn w (D 0 ° w _ ° c ncl cn°(A -% N �' c3D n M. o o w Mo (D=r m Om mp N Z _ CL (a U)0 . 0 (D 0 0 CD :3 CLn m D � Z w p O 3 0 m nOcr CD a "' (D O O — CL O M. ° Q ca' (D cn 5. O0 m 0 n N (p n a am n O O cn ca c ' N O m: 0 Q- w 0- 0< m O' Q O(D 0 (D (D (D O P '-+ < C (D O 90 O Cl) O N m cn O c' N O CD n• .p p W (� N 3 �• -p -` -" fil -� C7 w w Do 6 'U Z w ci O N � M p Z w C w_ C N _0 w O W _0 n O O 3 m O O O CL (� O 0 -a w _ (D (DCD O M O O N w � O O '�` w a (n, cn (n 0 0 � Q Q (a 0 30 FD F � X m 3 m CD m w R° CD 3 f D ° `- o o m m ° M 0 3 C m m 3 3 O (n * i' W o o v < 3 3 ° : � ' 0 �, r: -• (D 0 m c ° m o a Q o o< n Cl)Ow �' 0 D -• c m m m = p 1 N Q oo w O =- � -h O c 0 (D m - m c n O D co aCA 0 CL CL a CD � -% � �? D m w a' w 0 CL CD ° �' o' ° m CA 3 N n = w -S " a 7 M a- T Q _0 � m (D m a m cn p n m c - 6 o O` w -� m c- -a cc2 c c� cn w o `. rn N O. m 0 A O 0 m ^` (0 m a can �) 'J O < �. m a N f < (D O• cn m n O 3 O O (D -i cD c m (Q 0 — 'J — .p 3 n M -" m (} w a '7 Z w a o w wm o o o Z .0 CO u) a' 3 o a 0 (D ° ° Q c rn o °m 'w o -aa = a W a0 mw m � -a X U) 903 CLU) Q Wcaco 0 0 n m 3° cQ M a n cw o o O n 3 n w(D CD O cn 3 L = o w 0 on 03 -0o Q 3D o N M. o m o 3 mcn ° w p �' m� w - = < w .+ 0QN O wO 3 n OO w O � O DO cn c a -. .3 Q O n CD copo 0 3 cn cmn 0 Ir --I w % a w a (D c 0 0 (D c .p ' m CD m CA a N m cc m Q w Ln c� c°n (D - cr x0 iv O CL C: y a a w o U) U) w m o � :3 o su o y 3 N 00 i 00 N E a) J •� cn N -U a) N U x �$ U O N 4- N C Q E CL � > O In N C -0 >, a) � + N _ O O C C O a) O cn r. p U U N N a 3 O +� x cts .0 co a) *= I Q T3 C a) a^" O O C 0 � O Q a) (n O U N cd co 0) C: N 0) -C CO z a`) CL v Y ca C p L m a) E C cn ° a) U .� -C 0 Q ° zs cd I-- a vi Co a) Q in E a) E > a) cz m d' ti co o v a - C a) dS w co O z3 cn U -0 >. a) C C 4- o m ca) 0 E o cn m a) > ° J a) c° Q o - ° o C � o C . _a) a ° w C C :� U ° E E o v w ° Q to U) .� i v -C �° E cz ° U 3 E °n' C@ c u aEi OCO U U O W C > C ,E T coC C > CO U >O «i a) N C C C C L3 a) O N N- L- U O p a) U ca N Q O O O E > O O p co ';- 's i O i N O E CO N i O L U U ° .0 v C E c' E a) c a) C 0 .a a) E E z p a) E aa) C- ; ca), n v � (n ,� E 0 cn L_ to E 1 T �- E x aCi C a) 0 cd �. o ° CO C a) ° 0 -, cts > 0) v O m O U "= E C a) ,E .0 UO ca to cn ° i] cri +� � .0 C � N 0 O O � x CL C r6 -C — ;= a cts a C O N C + g E z o c0� o w .c M o m � z cL° n aC E � � U F� w � �i v°i n0. � E E -C (n c) � �. c) d- E ti J .0 N E d) v a) cn v) ..0 a) N C a � > � CO N C Q °a) a) � .0 _ N N CL -p -0 c as CL C p N U cts �= U a) Ea) U O 0 coZ3 cd C vi CO O Q >, C � O i + = .� U a) cd C �' Y a) cu �' C C_ � M U- c0i Q- N a o '- 3 co >, zi a) w w a) -0 F... co .- — a) C %• C +. i O (a C as L- O to 0) 0 > O o ° C ° °� FC o _ a) a C C a� ° .. C° C O E ct5 C13 a) ° U L_ o � v aa) oY E °) > 0- 0 C) o c E o- E m .� a) CIJ a) cn E Cc: •C C E ° cti E aa) c a) C 0 .o- a) cu E a) Z a v U a) a) X c U C 0 O) -0 0 v O ° cri C N > C + m > w U COp >1 X ° U O N E C a) N '•' O «s N N ° co = 0 O � , ccii O � a) 0 += cu 0- C -C +- i "O .•-0 0 ctf Q i L C O •C s CL Z 0- N QIn E Z O w N o -s Z a .Q oC E U F�- w E ' m E E N U c0 CO `i 0 p.. p) G d U e U p o cn to N a) u, p �, 3 t O 06 C a) _ > O C O CL C •0 � vi � >, c O 5 a U L. U «S cn C � O N O tTf C cts cq N O' -C a) C C '— C Q Ccis a) N N U C a) ctS N m U N Q "' U U Q U � ctS _0 'i- a) Q U (ll '' E C b U C O — lz U N _ o Q- E W _ E o .� ccl 0 k v C sl °� w ° C6 U a) -0 O U O C O N 4.- c +- a) O .- E o � O ,Q 0 ca C aCi y a) E a) ° 0 L. O cz C o C E O n C U cd E a) m O C V N U ° O > C .«:3 � N � L O E C 0 0 > "O = ) = O O NU O a) o cts a) Q C �_ +' U m m o Q o r i a) '� ° c > Q m E U Z «i C C O "p a) C a) C � E 'r a) 0 a) .� Z N —� C 0- +- ,� C vi ° E c� U O O O O � U a) i C E N cd U cN O U ,, a) a) E ° -o a) a rn - o N cts a) ° > a) >, CO E C U C i a) 0m (n 0 'U U �_ O O 0 = W 0 L- 0 � _� ° C a) o o CO a) 0. U o O 0) o_) o -0 0- N a 00 Z co Z O U) .� N O w Z E curs N U F- (n Cn avi 4 E N C1 Q U Od � a)N C 0 + +• U L_ to O a) co N C 0) o > E a) C a) C a) cn co N o C d N a)O "O U vj -J a) C co C E o m O a) co a) O cz a) U > o C0 C CO C'o m a) o o D vQi 0 Z c a- ° C ' C CIS 0 C a�'i Co Ei a) C� a a E as c aa)) o ca - o E 0. E E o 0 o O o 0 0 0 0 0 O ' C a o a) 0 0 0 0 0 Z Z (r U Z Z Z Z Z Z Q Z 0 Z oC in Z U 3 Z Z �S U) C � co p U U Q N L 0 CL w a '70 v F-- v E cn fi 0f a) Vc 0 0 cci cn ,� R °o -a L- cc p - C v :3 V N Q O wc c o �' ca _0 0 a) crj C� E p N cci cn 0 Q Q U U C'3 = [lCcli Z Q CL U) U F� > > 4 CUESTA GRADE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT Need: Congested conditions exist due to slow moving vehicles mixed with heavy commute traffic and steep grades. Related needs include improving traffic safety and improving local access. Purpose: The primary purpose of the project is to reduce congestion over the Cuesta Grade. A minimum peak period of LOS C through design year 2020 is proposed. Description Pros Cons Alternative 1 • No ground disturbance (cuts or fills) Peak period congestion will get worse No cost Accident frequency rates increase with No change to existing highway. congestion No intersection improvements Substandard lane widths and shoulders Sight and stopping distance deficiencies not improved No supplemental Transit funds No bikeway improvements Emergency evacuation/response time will worsen during peak periods Maintenance cost will continue to increase. • Air quality worsens Alternative 2 • Reduces congestion during the PM peak Does not reduce congestion during AM hour peak • Add a northbound truck lane and a 4' • Provides 4' outside shoulders (still Staging construction activities are difficult wide outside shoulder along the NB substandard) in NB direction for - only 1 lane in the peak direction will be increased recovery area and bicycles possible at times, which will cause side. Sets the stage for a permanent mode congestion and delays during peak hours • Improve Transit/TSM/TDM* shift away from SOV due to Does not address long term increased • increased express bus service Transit/TSM/TDM capacity in the SB direction • expanded Ridesharing • Least ground disturbance of build Inadequate shoulders for disabled program alternatives (cuts or fills) vehicles • Lowest cost of "Build" alternatives Sight and stopping distance deficiencies • additional Park and Ride lots not improved • Cost: $18 million No intersection improvements Increased maintenance cost will occur on the existing SB lanes *TSM = Transportation System Management Some visual impacts (retaining walls and *TDM - Transportation Demand Management noise barriers Alternative 3 . Reduces congestion during the PM peak . Does not reduce congestion during AM hour (NB only) peak (southbound) • Add a northbound truck lane. • Addresses long term increased capacity • Does not address long term increased in the NB direction only capacity in the SB direction • Increase all outside shoulders to 8, Increased inside and outside shoulder • Increased visual impacts (retaining walls wide and all Inside shoulders to 5' widths in the NB & SB direction for and noise barriers) wide. improved safety and recovery areas Increased ground disturbance (cuts and • Improve intersections. • Will improve sight & stopping distance fills) • Straighten curves (alignment) 2nd most expensive alternative • Improve Transit/TSM/TDM* • Improves intersections (turn, acceleration, and deceleration lanes) • increased express bus service Stage construction allows for 2 lanes to • expanded Ridesharing be open in peak direction during commute program hours • additional Park and Ride lots Improved bicycle access on outside • improve bikepath at summit for shoulders and at summit future facility Sets the stage for a permanent mode Cost: $39 million shift away from SOV due to Transit/TSM/TDM • Retaining walls reduce significant amount of cuts and fills Alternative 4 Reduces congestion during the—AM,.and Increased visual impacts (retaining walls PM.peak hour and noise barriers) • Add a northbound and southbound Addresses long term increased capacity Most ground disturbance (cuts and fills) truck lane. in the NB and SB directions Most expensive alternate Increased inside and outside shoulder • . Increase all outside shoulders to 8 widths in the NB & SB direction for wide and all inside shoulders to 5' improved safety and recovery areas wide. Will improve sight & stopping distance • Improve intersections. (alignment) • Straighten curves Improves intersections (turn, acceleration, Improve Transit/TSM/TDM* and deceleration lanes) Stage construction allows for 2 lanes to • increased express bus service be open in peak direction during commute • expanded Ridesharing hours program . Accommodates maximum capacity for • additional Park and Ride lots emergency evacuation • improve bikepath at summit for • Improved bicycle access on outside future facility shoulders and at summit Cost: $47 million • Sets the stage for a permanent mode shift away from SOV due to Transit/TSM/TDM Alt. 4 has greater traffic benefits than Alt. 3 while environmental impacts are very 1 close` • Retaining walls reduce significant amount of cuts and fills REPORT TO COUNCIL Meeting Date: 2-13-96 CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: B-2 THROUGH: Andy Takata,. City Manager VIA: Brady Cherry, Director of Community Services FROM: Mark Markwort, Chief of Wastewater Operations SUBJECT• Public Hearing Sewer Assessment District No. 9 - San Gabriel (west) - Post Construction Cost Equalization RECOMMENDATION: Approve Resolution No. 11-96 establishing the final individual property assessment for Sewer Assessment District No. 9. • BACKGROUND: On July 11, 1995 a Public Hearing concerning the formation of a sewer assessment district for Cease and Desist Area "G" was conducted. At that Hearing, area property owners were allowed to protest their inclusion in the District, the estimated cost of the improvements, the interest rate proposed, the time given for connection or any other aspect of the formation of the District. At the conclusion of the Public Hearing Council authorized the formation of Sewer Assessment District No. 9. Council directed that reimbursement to the City for costs associated with the construction of a municipal sewer to serve this District shall be assessed over a 15 year period at an interest rate of 5%. Council also directed that drainage improvement costs be excluded' from the assessment and that the $850 annexation fee be waived if properties were connected within two years of the completion of construction. Property owners were also advised that upon completion of construction, when all actual costs were known, an equalization hearing would be held at which time a final assessment figure would be set. 000059 DISCUSSION• Letters were sent via certified mail advising all affected property owners of this hearing and explaining the procedures to be followed by Y the City. This Public Hearing is being held to announce the final cost per property and to give affected property owners an opportunity to protest the final cost figure. The Contractor has been paid from Wastewater funds and reimbursement will be accomplished through a lien against each of the 33 benefitting properties and will be collected on the property taxes over a 15 year period at 5% interest. Property owners can elect to pay the entire cost at any time. Project Costs Sewer: Design, Inspection, Administration. . . . . . . $ 73 ,801.70 Construction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 246 ,959. 34 Sub Total $ 320,761. 04 Storm Drain: Design, Inspection, Administration. . . . . . . $ 12 , 065.72 Construction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 40,375. 00 Sub Total . • • . • . • . $ 52, 440.72 Total $ 373 , 201.76 FISCAL IMPACT• Cease and Desist Property Owners: $ 320,761. 04 J 33 Property Owners Reimbursement Cost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 9720. 03 Annexation Fee (Waived if connected within 2 yrs) . $ 000. 00 Connection Fee (Waived in Cease and Desist Areas) . $ 000. 00 Total Assessment $ 9720. 03 All affected property owners will be responsible for any on-site construction required for connection to the sewer lateral provided by this project. In addition, a Septic Tank Abandonment Permit fee of $37 . 11 and a Connection Permit fee of $5. 00 will also be required. Attachments: A) Resolution No. 11-96 000060 RESOLUTION NO. 11-96 A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO APPROVING FORMATION OF ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 9 (San Gabriel Road - Cease and Desist Area "G") WHEREAS, on June 12 , 1981 the Regional Water Quality Control Board issued Cease and Desist Order NO. 81-60 prohibiting the use of septic systems in designated areas of Atascadero, including a portion of the area shown as Assessment District No. 9 on attached Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, on June 8, 1992 the Regional Water Quality Control Board issued Cease and Desist Order No. 92-68 reconfirming their requirement that the remaining areas be provided with sewer service by specific deadlines; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Atascadero held a properly noticed Public Hearing on July 11, 1995 at which .a majority protest was not presented; and WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the City of Atascadero to provide sewer service to the subject properties; and WHEREAS, the extension of utility service to existing private structures are categorically exempt pursuant to he provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (Class 19) . NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Council finds that the territory described in this Resolution will be benefitted by public sewer service, and creation of Assessment District No. 9. Section 2 . An interest rate of 5% shall be charged on the unpaid principal amount of the assessment; Section 3 . The Annexation Fee of $850. 00 will be waived for those properties connected to the sewer system prior to February 13 , 1998. 000061 Resolution No. 11-96 page two 0 Section 4. The properties that are intended to be included in Assessment District #9 are as follows: Assessment District #9 Assessment Roll ASMT. A.P.N. OWNER AMOUNT 1 054-143-008 Lavoux 9720. 03 9455 Carmelita Atascadero, CA 2 054-142-016 Mueller 9720.03 9450 Carmelita Atascadero, CA 3 054-142-015 Burley 9720. 03 7705 San Gabriel Atascadero, CA 4 054-142-017 Amunrud 9720.03 7655 San Gabriel Atascadero, CA . 5 054-142-018 Young 9720. 03 7555 San Gabriel Atascadero, CA 6 054-142-008 Snow 9720. 03 7505 San Gabriel Atascadero, CA 7 054-142-031 Walker 9720. 03 7475 San Gabriel Atascadero, CA 8 054-142-032 Alexander 9720. 03 7465 San Gabriel Atascadero, CA 9 054-142-026 Gruetzmacher 9720. 03 7455 San Gabriel Atascadero, CA 10 054-142-021 Dempsey 9720. 03 7435 San Gabriel Atascadero, CA 000062 Resolution No. 11-96 page three 11 054-142-006 Goebel 9720. 03 7405 San Gabriel Atascadero, CA 12 054-142-028 Bartholomew 9720. 03 P.O. Box 455 Atascadero, CA 13 054-142-027 Geanakos 9720. 03 7355 San Gabriel Atascadero, CA 14 054-142-013 Bunker Trust 9720. 03 7305 San Gabriel Atascadero, CA 15 054-142-004 Hitchock 9720. 03 7295 San Gabriel Atascadero, CA 16 054-142-003 Mikel 9720. 03 7255 San Gabriel Atascadero, CA 17 054-212-027 Ray 9720. 03 7250 San Gabriel Atascadero, CA 18 054-212-028 Ackerman 9720. 03 P.O. Box 2122 Atascadero, CA 19 054-212-023 Renshaw 9720. 03 7340 San Gabriel Atascadero, CA 20 054-212-024 Reif 9720. 03 7360 San Gabriel Atascadero, CA 21 054-212-013 Prince 9720. 03 7400 San Gabriel Atascadero, CA 22 054-212-014 Hudson 9720. 03 7440 San Gabriel Atascadero, CA 000063 Resolution No. 11-96 page four 23 054-212-029 Beck 9720. 03 7500 San Gabriel Atascadero, CA 24 054-212-030 Oaks 9720. 03 7550 San Gabriel Atascadero, CA 25 054-212-026 Silveira 9720. 03 9560 Carmelita Atascadero, CA 26 054-212-025 Baumgardner 9720.03 9550 Carmelita Atascadero, CA 27 054-212-018 Elliott 9720. 03 7600 San Gabriel Atascadero, CA 28 054-212-020 Vandiepen 9720. 03 7650 San Gabriel Atascadero, CA 29 054-212-019 Bird 9720. 03 7700 San Gabriel Atascadero, CA 30 054-221-012 Ferrero 9720. 03 7820 San Gabriel Atascadero, CA 31 054-221-010 Martin 9720. 03 7830 San Gabriel Atascadero, CA 32 054-221-011 Leason 9720. 03 7800 San Gabriel Atascadero, CA 33 054-221-008 Depew 9720. 03 9555 Carmelita Atascadero, CA 000064 Resolution No. 11-96 page five On motion by Councilmember and seconded by Councilmember the foregoing Resolution is adopted in its entirety by the following roll call vote: AYES; NOES: ABSENT: DATE: ATTEST: CITY OF ATASCADERO BY: LEE PRICE, City Clerk GEORGE P. HIGHLAND,Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: ARTHER MONTANDON, City Attorney 000065 REPORT TO COUNCIL Meeting Date: 2-13-96 CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: B-3 THROUGH: Andy Takata, City Manager VIA: Brady Cherry, Director of Community Services FROM: Mark Markwort, Chief of Wastewater Operations SUBJECT• Public Hearing Sewer Assessment District No. 10 - Santa Rosa Road Sewer Extension (west) - Post Construction Cost Equalization RECOMMENDATION• Approve Resolution No. 12-96 establishing the final individual property assessment for Sewer Assessment District No. 10. BACKGROUND• On July 11, 1995 a Public Hearing concerning the formation of a sewer assessment district for Santa Rosa Road (west) was conducted. At that Hearing, area property owners were allowed to protest their inclusion in the District, the estimated cost of the improvements, the interest rate proposed, the time given for connection or any other aspect of the formation of the District. At the conclusion of the Public Hearing Council authorized the formation of Sewer Assessment District No. 10. Council directed that reimbursement to the City for costs associated with the construction of a municipal sewer to serve this District shall be assessed over a 15 year period at an interest rate of 5%. Council also directed that the $850 annexation fee be waived if properties were connected within two years of the completion of construction. Property owners were also advised that upon completion of construction, when all actual costs were known, an equalization hearing would be held at which time a final assessment figure would be set. 000066 DISCUSSION• Letters were sent via certified mail advising all affected property owners of this hearing and explaining the procedures to be followed by the City. This Public Hearing is being held to announce the final cost per property and to give affected property owners an opportunity to protest the final cost figure. The Contractor has been paid from Wastewater funds and reimbursement will be accomplished through a lien against 5 of 8 benefitting properties and will be collected on the property taxes over a 15 year period at 5% interest. Three of the 8 benefitting properties are located in Cease and Desist Area 11F6" and are currently being assessed for a sewer line located in Marchant Way which they have been unable to gain access to. Since these owners are already paying an assessment, the City will pay for three eights (3/8) of the cost of this project and that the five non Cease and Desist properties will pay only their proportionate share. Property owners can elect to pay the entire cost at any time. Project Costs Sewer: Design, Inspection, Administration. . . . . . . $ 17 ,412 .04 Construction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 45, 836.00 Liquidated damages. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ <2 , 000.00> Total. . . . . . . . $ 61, 248. 04 FISCAL IMPACT: $ 61, 248 . 04 / 8 = $ 7656. 01 City: Reimbursement Cost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . $ 22 , 968 . 02 Property Owner• Reimbursement Cost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 7656. 01 Annexation Fee (Waived if connected within 2 yrs) . $ 000.00 Connection Fee. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 578. 00 Total Assessment $ 8234 . 01 All affected property owners will be responsible for any on-site construction required for connection to the sewer lateral provided by this project. In addition, a Septic Tank Abandonment Permit fee of $37 . 11 and a Connection Permit fee of $5. 00 will also be required. Attachments: A) Resolution No. 12-96 000067 RESOLUTION NO. 12-96 A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO APPROVING FORMATION OF ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 10 (Santa Rosa Road - Portion of Cease and Desist Area "F") WHEREAS, on June 12 , 1981 the Regional Water Quality Control Board issued Cease and Desist Order NO. 81-60 prohibiting the use of septic systems in designated areas of Atascadero, including a portion of the area shown as Assessment District No. 9 on attached Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, on June 8, 1992 the Regional Water Quality Control Board issued Cease and Desist Order No. 92-68 reconfirming their requirement that the remaining areas be provided with sewer service by specific deadlines; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Atascadero held a properly noticed Public Hearing on July 11, 1995 at which a majority protest was not presented; and WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the City of Atascadero to provide sewer service to the subject properties; and WHEREAS, the extension of utility service to existing private structures are categorically exempt pursuant to he provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (Class 19) . NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Council finds that the territory described in this Resolution will be benefitted by public sewer service, and creation of Assessment District No. 10. Section 2 . An interest rate of 5% shall be charged on the unpaid principal amount of the assessment; Section 3 . The Annexation Fee of $850. 00 will be waived for those properties connected to the sewer system prior to February 13 , 1998 . 000068 Resolution No. 12-96 page two Section 4 . The properties that are intended to be included in Assessment District #10 are as follows: Assessment District #10 Assessment Roll ASMI. A.P.N. OWNER AMOUNT 1 054-151-043 Camus 7656. 01 7950 Santa Rosa Atascadero, CA 2 054-151-041 Diantha 7656. 01 7960 Santa Rosa Atascadero,CA 3 054-151-049 Peyton 7656. 01 7988 Santa Rosa Atascadero, CA 4 054-151-047 Topham 7656. 01 P.O. Box 1223 Atascadero, CA 5 054-151-048 Weems 7656. 01 7982 Santa Rosa Atascadero, CA On motion by Councilmember and seconded by Councilmember ' the foregoing Resolution is adopted in its entirety by the following roll call vote: AYES; NOES: ABSENT: DATE: 000069 REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM• C-1 CITY OF ATASCADERO DA - - TE. 02 13 96 THROUGH: Andrew J. Takata, City Manager FROM: Brady Cherry, Director Department of Community Services SUBJECT: PROPOSAL TO NAME THE ATASCADERO CITY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING IN MEMORY OF E. G. LEWIS. RECOMMENDATION• It is recommended that the City Council name the area including the City Administration Building, Sunken Gardens, Fire Station#1, Chamber of Commerce and the Youth Center, The "E. G. Lewis Civic Center." It is further recommended that the City Administration/Veterans Memorial Building name remain unchanged. BACKGROUND: On January 9th, 1996, the City Council considered a request by the Atascadero Historical Society to rename the City Administration Building after Colony Founder, E. G. Lewis. After some discussion and consideration of several possible names, a suggestion was made by City Attorney, Art Montandon, that the area around the City Administration Building could be named the "E. G. Lewis Civic Center." The City Council directed that staff meet with representatives of the Historical Society to consider the proposed "Civic Center" concept and other appropriate designations for the City Administration Building and surrounding area. Staff subsequently met with Mr. Bill Smith and Ms. Marjorie Mackey of the Atascadero Historical Society and discussed many alternatives. Ultimately, the name "E.G. Lewis Civic Center" was chosen to recommend to the City Council. The area encompassed by the Civic Center could include the City Administration Building, Sunken Gardens, Chamber of Commerce, Fire Station #1 and the Youth Center. It does not have to include all of these other buildings, however. It was also decided that the City Administration/Veterans's Memorial Building name remain unchanged. Although the name "City Hall" appeared attractive to replace to City "Administration Building" name, it was generally felt that some people will commonly refer to the building as "City Hall", anyway, regardless of whatever else it may be called. However, the building has historically been known as the "Administration Building" for over eighty years, and "City Administration Building" adequately conveys its function. Currently people easily recognize and distinguish the City Administration Building for its purpose, and there are virtually no programs associated with the name. Atascadero will continue to be unique with its special and historically significant City Administration Building, and the official name "City Hall" is simply unnecessary. Similarly, 0000'71 changing the building's designation honoring veterans ("Veterans Memorial Building")is deemed to be undesirable and unnecessary. Therefore, no changes are being recommended for the City Administration Building. FINANCIAL IMPACTS• No existing signage need be changed. Some stationery would be changed to read: "E. G. Lewis Civic Center City Administration Building 6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero, CA 93422" These types of alterations would be made when stationery or signage is replaced. Costs would not be significant. C:CITY COUNTFEB1396APT 0000'72 -7 . ',Atascadero Historical Society � • i Post Office Box 1047 �--~ ----�-� Atascadero, California 93423 Phone (805)466-8341 1 A Non-Profit Corporation �1�'�m l��-." �J��E .....__ ;4°•� �i� I �e!�i 1An�(' r-' am October 6, 1995 - ADMINISTRATION BUILDING CALIFORNIA STATE HISTORICAL LANDMARK NUMBER 958 LISTED IN NATIONAL REGISTRY OF HISTORICAL PLACES Andy Takata, City Manager City of Atascadero 6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero Dear Andy; At the regular meeting of the Board of Directors of the Atas- cadero historical Society this morning, the Board reaffirmed its earlier ex ;ressed desire for the Administration Building to be renamed as the B. G. Lewis Administration B Building. Also, this morning, in a unanimously supported motion, the Board moved to petition the Atascadero City Council to pur- sue 'this action to honor the founder of this community. Although anannouncement by the City Council to adopt this course of action made during the coming Colony Days would be dramatic, the date when it would be implemented could be set a reasonable time in the future in order than an inex- cusable ti:-aste of letterhead or other paper not occur. It is the Board's desire that co-oies of this letter be given each City Council Member..---� � f 4m d K. sen'-,' Jan Corres--ondence Secretary 0()00'73 -00"44 Historical Society Museum 'Q 4401 e;T"" LOWER ROTUNDA. ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 6500 PALMA AVENUE, ATASCADERO