Agenda Packet 2002-09-24
CITY COUNCIL City of
AGENDA }lrroyo qrancfe
Michael A. Lady Mayor
Thomas A. Runels Mayor Pro Tem Steven Adams City Manager
Jim Dickens Council Member
Tony Ferrara Council Member Timothy J, Cannel City Attomey
Sandy Lubin Council Member Kelly Wetmore Director, Administrative Services
NOTICE OF
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING
Tuesdav
September 24. 2002
6:QO~
Arroyo Grande City Council Chambers
215 East Branch Street, Arroyo Grande
AGENDA
1. ROLL CALL
2. PUBLIC COMMENT on Special Meeting Agenda Items.
Members of the public wishing to address the Council on any item described in this Notice
may do so when recognized by the Presiding Officer.
3. CITY COUNCIL CLOSED SESSION:
a. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL -INITIATION OF LITIGATION pursuant
to Government Code Section 54956.9(c) involving one (1) potential case.
b. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR pursuant to Govemment
Code Section 54956.8:
Property: APN 006-153-005; 206 N. Halcyon Road
Agency Negotiator: Steven Adams, City Manager; Timothy J. Carmel, City Attomey
Negotiating Party: International Union of Operating Engineers Local #12
Under Negotiation: Price, Terms and, Conditions of Potential Purchase
4. RECONVENE TO OPEN SESSION:
Announcement of reportable action from closed session, if any.
5. ADJOURNMENT.
c:cIosedsession,agenda.092402.
--- ..--
CITY COUNCIL City of
AGENDA }lrroyo qrancfe
Michael A. Lady Mayor
Thomas A. Runels Mayor Pro Tem Steven Adams City Manager
Jim Dickens Council Member
Tony Ferrara Council Member Timothy J. Carmel City Attomey
Sandy Lubin Council Member Kelly Wetmore Director. Administrative Services
AGENDA SUMMARY
CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 24,2002
7:00 P.M.
Arroyo Grande City Council Chambers
215 East Branch Street, Arroyo Grande
1. CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 P.M.
2. ROLL CALL
3. FLAG SALUTE: BOY SCOUT TROOP 70
4. INVOCATION: PASTOR GEORGE LEPPER, PEACE
LUTHERAN CHURCH, ARROYO GRANDE
5. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS:
None.
6. AGENDA REVIEW:
6.a. Move that all resolutions and ordinances presented tonight be read in title only and
all further readings be waived.
I
i
AGENDA SUMMARY - SEPTEMBER 24, 2002
PAGE 2
7. CITIZENS' INPUT. COMMENTS. AND SUGGESTIONS:
Persons in the audience may discuss business not scheduled on this agenda
regarding any item of interest within the jurisdiction of the Council. The Council will
listen to all communication; however, in compliance with the Brown Act, will not take
any action on items that are not on the agenda.
Upon completing your comments:
. You may be directed to staff for assistance;
. A Council Member may indicate an interest in discussing your issue with
you subsequent to the Council meeting;
. The Council may direct staff to research the issue and subsequently
report back to the Council (generally in the form of a memorandum or staff
report); or
. No action is required or taken.
8. CONSENT AGENDA:
The following routine items listed below are scheduled for consideration as a group.
The recommendations for each item are noted. Any Council Member may request
that any item be withdrawn from the Consent Agenda to permit discussion or change
the recommended course of action. The City Council may approve the remainder of
the Consent Agenda on one motion.
8.a. Cash Disbursement Ratification (SNODGRASS)
Recommended Action: Approve the listings of cash disbursements for the period
September 1, 2002 through September 15, 2002.
8.b. Consideration of Cash Flow Ana'vsislADDroval of Interfund Adyance from the
Water Facllltv Fund (SNODGRASS)
Recommended Action: Receive and file August 2002 cash report and approve the
interfund advance from the Water Facility Fund to cover cash deficits in other funds
at August 31, 2002.
8.c. Consideration of ADDroval of Minutes (WETMORE)
Recommended Action: Approve minutes for the Regular City Council Meeting of
September 10,2002 as submitted.
8.d. Consideration of 2002 Conflict of Interest Code Biennial Notice (WETMORE)
Recommended Action: Receive and file the 2002 Conflict of Interest Code Biennial
Notice.
8.e. Consideration of Authorization to Solicit Bids for a Recreation Administration
Division Vehicle (HERNANDEZ)
Recommended Action: Authorize staff to SDlicit bids for a Y. ton extended cab
pickup truck.
.~. -----
AGENDA SUMMARY - SEPTEMBER 24, 2002
PAGE 3
8. CONSENT AGENDA (continued):
8.1. Consideration of Fee Waiver for DeveloDment Code Amendment 02-003:
Rezonlna 871 East Cherry Avenue from General Aarlculture (AG) to
Aarlcultural Preserve (A1) (STRONG)
Recommended Action: Consider the request from the Gordon F. DixSDn Trust to
waive permit fees for Development Code Amendment 02-003.
8.g. Consideration of Authorization to Solicit Bids for Rodeo Drive Trtfflc Calming
Prolect. PW 2002-07 (SPAGNOLO)
Recommended Action: 1) Authorize staff to solicit public construction bids for the
. Rodeo Drive Traffic Calming Project; 2) Find that the project is categorically exempt
from CEQA pursuant to Section 15301(c); and 3) Direct the Administrative Services
Director to file a Notice of Exemption.
8.h. Consideration of Authorization of Proaress Payment No. 1 for Rancho Grande
Park Proiect. PW ~002-o3 (SPAGNOLO)
Recommended Action: Authorize Progress Payment No. 1 in the amount of
$75,738.70 to Herrera Engineering, Inc. for the Rancho Grande Park Project.
8.1. Consideration of Award of Contract for the Tally Ho Creek Flood Barrier
Prolect. PW-2002-06 (SPAGNOLO)
Recommended Action: 1) Award a construction contract for the Tally Ho Creek
Flood Barrier Project to D-KAL Engineering in the amount of $24,880; 2) Authorize
the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed a contingency of $2,500
for use only if needed for unanticipated costs during the construction phase of the
project; and 3) Direct staff to issue the Notice of Award and Notice to Proceed with
other necessary contract documents.
8.j. Cons'deratlon of ProDOsed Addendum to Previously ADDroved ~IR Consultant
Contract with Denise Duffv and Associates for the Creekside Center Proiect;
415 E. Branch Street: ADDllcant - Richard PtBlauw (STRONG)
Recommended Action: Approve a contract addendum to the scope of work and
budget for the Creekside Center EIR.
9. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
9.a. Consideration of ProDOsed EXDendlture of State Fun". for Citizens ODtlon for
Public Safety (COPS) Program Provld,cl In the FY 2002~~ !ltate Budget
(TerBORCH)
Recommended Action: Approve the expenditure of $100,000 as authorized by the
State for law enforcement services under the Citizens Option for Public Safety
(COPS) Program. In addition, authorize the expenditure of $3,112 carried over from
the City's FY 2001-2002 COPS Program.
------ --..--
AGENDA SUMMARY - SEPTEMBER 24, 2002
PAGE 4
9. PUBLIC HEARINGS: (continued)
9.b. Consideration of Amended Conditional Use Permit Case No. 02-003 and
Variance Case No. 02-004: 1530 E. Grand Avenue: ADDllcant - Larrv Persons
(STRONG)
Recommended Action: The Planning Commission recommends the City Council 1)
Adopt a Resolution approving Amended CUP Case No. 02-003 and 2) Adopt a
Resolution approving Variance Case No. 02-004.
10. CONTINUED BUSINESS:
10.a. Consideration of Deslan Guidelines for Historic Districts Process and
Schedule Revisions (STRONG)
Recommended Action: Give direction to staff regarding the Architectural Review
Committee composition and consent to recommended public hearing schedule for
the consideration of Design Guidelines for Historic Districts.
11. NEW BUSINESS:
11.a. Consideration of Draft Ordinance Amendina e/lunlciDal Code ChaDter 13.24
"Excayation. Gradina. Erosion and SedIment Control"(SPAGNOLO)
Recommended Action: Review draft Ordinance amending Municipal Code
Chapter 13.24 and authorize distribution of the draft Ordinance for a 45-day public
review and comment period.
11.b. Consideration of City Entrv Identification Slans (STRONG)
Recommended Action: Authorize staff to contract for three or four entry
identification signs not to exceed $10,000 and provide direction on initial locations
and proposed design concept.
12. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS:
This item gives the Mayor and Council Members the opportunity to present reports to
the other members regarding committees, commissions, boards, or special projects
on which they may be participating.
(a) MAYOR MICHAEL A. LADY:
(1) South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District (SSLOCSD)
(2) Other
(b) MAYOR PRO TEM THOMAS A. RUNELS:
(1) Zone 3 Water Advisory Board
(2) County Water Resources Advisory Committee (WRAC)
(3) Other
(c) COUNCIL MEMBER JIM DICKENS:
(1) Economic Opportunity Commission (EOC)
(2) South County Youth Coalition
(3) Other
-
AGENDA SUMMARY - SEPTEMBER 24, 2002
PAGE 5
12. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS: (continued)
(d) COUNCIL MEMBER TONY M. FERRARA:
(1) Integrated Waste Management Authority (IWMA)
(2) Air Pollution Control District (APCD)
(3) San Luis Obispo Council of GovemmentslSan Luis Obispo Regional
Transit Authority (SLOCOG/SLORTA)
(4) Other
(8) COUNCIL MEMBER SANDY LUBIN:
(1) South County Area Transit (SCAT)
(2) Economic Vitality Corporation (EVC)
(3) Other
13. CITY COUNCIL MEMBER ITEMS:
The following item(s) are placed on the agenda by the Mayor and/or a Council
Member who would like to receive feedback, direct staff to prepare information,
and/or request a formal agenda report be prepared and the item placed on a future
agenda. No formal action can be taken.
a) Local Groundwater Assistant Fund Application (RUNELS)
14. CITY MANAGER ITEMS:
The following item(s) are placed on the agenda by the City Manager in order to
receive feedback and/or request direction from the Council. No formal action can be
taken.
a) None.
15. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS:
Correspondence/Comments as presented by the City Council.
16. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS:
Correspondence/Comments as presented by the City Manager.
17. ADJOURNMENT
AGENDA SUMMARY - SEPTEMBER 24, 2002
PAGE 6
* * * * . * *
Copies of the staff reports or other written materials relating to each item of business referred
to on this agenda are on file with the Director of Administrative Services and are available for
public inspection and reproduction at cost. If you have questions regarding any agenda item,
please contact the Director of Administrative Services at (805) 473-5414.
* * . * * * *
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to
participate in a City meeting, please contact the Director of Administrative Services at the
number listed above at least 48 hours prior to the meeting to ensure that reaSDnable
arrangements can be made to provide accessibility to the meeting.
* * * * * * *
Note: This agenda is subject to amendment up to 72 hours prior to the date and time set
for the meeting. Please refer to the agenda posted at City Hall for any revisions, or call the
Director of Administrative Services at (805) 473-5414 for more information.
www.arrovoarande.ora
8.a.
MEMORANDUM
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: LYNDA K. SNODGRASS, DIRECTOR OF FINANCIAL SERVICES~
BY: JANET M. HUWALDT, ACCOUNTING SUPERVISORql~
SUBJECT: CASH DISBURSEMENT RA TIFICA TION
DATE: SEPTEMBER 24, 2002
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended the City Council ratify the attached listing of cash disbursements for
the period September 1 - September 15, 2002.
FUNDING:
There is a $463,275.34 fiscal impact.
DISCUSSION:
The attached listing represents the cash disbursements required of normal and usual
operations. It is requested that the City Council approve these payments.
ATTACHMENTS:
ATTACHMENT 1 - Cash Disbursement Listing
ATTACHMENT 2 - September 6,2002 Accounts Payable Check Register
ATTACHMENT 3 - September 6,2002 Payroll Checks and Benefit Checks
ATTACHMENT 4 - September 13, 2002 Accounts Payable Check Register
-
AITACHMENT 1
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
CASH DISBURSEMENTS
For the Period of September 1 Through September 15, 2002
-- ~~~_. ~~.
September 24/ 2002
Presented are the cash disbursements issued by the Deparbnent of Financial Services for
the period September 1 to September 15/ 2002. Shown are cash disbursements by week of
occurrence and type of payment
}"::""""""""":::::}"""""""'}""""'"""",..::,:::,::::::::,:::::,:::::::::::::::::,,::::::'}""":
r1Mfi1iH:rA...l,:[fii~i:IILi,:,,:.,:,i,.:t..i:.::....'.:: ....:.:..:.:..::m.,:..:::,:ti.:m,:.mmi
September 6/ 2002
Accounts Payable Cks 107508-107585 2 $119/678.23
Payroll Checks & Benefit Checks 3 302,018.20
421/6%.43
September 13/ 2002
Accounts Payable Cks 107586-107675 4 41/578.91
Two Week Total $ 463.263~
CI1Y OF ARROYO GRANDE
INDEX FOR BUDGET DEPARTMENTS
EDEN COMPUTER SYSTEM
GENERAL FUND (010) SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
City Government (Fund 010) Park Development Fee Fund (Fund 213)
4001 - City Council 4550 - Park Development Fee
4002 - Administrative Services Traffic Signal Fund (Fund 222)
4003 - City Attorney 4501 - Traffic Fund
4101 - City Manager Transportation Fund (Fund 225)
4102 - Printing/Duplicating 4553 - Public Transit System
4120 - Financial Services Construction Tax Fund (Fund 230)
4121 - Taxes/ Insurance/ Bonds 4556 - Construction Tax
4130 - Community Development Police Grant Funds
4131 - Community Building (CDBG) 4201 - Law Enforcement Equip. (Fd 272)
4140 - Management Information System 4202 - State AB3229 Cops Grant (Fd 271)
4145 - Non Deparbnental 4203 c Federal Universal Hiring (Fd 274)
Public Safety (Fund 010) 4208 - Federal Local Law Enforcmt (FD 279)
4201 - Police . Redevelopment Agency ( Fund 284)
4211 - Fire 4103 - Redevelopment Administration
4212 - Building &: Safety ENTERPRISE FUNDS
Public Works (Fund 010) Sewer Fund (Fund 612)
4301 - Public Works-Admin &: Engineering 4610 - Sewer Maintenance
4303 - Street/Bridge Maintenance Water Fund (Fund 640)
4304 - Street lighting 4710 - Water Administration
4305 - Automotive Shop 4711 - Water Production
Parks & Recreation (Fund 010) 4712 - Water Distribution
4420 - Parks Lopez Administration (Fund 641)
4421 - Recreation 4750 - Lopez Administration
4422 - General Recreation CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS (Fund 350)
4423 - Pre-School Program 5501-5599 - Park Projects
4424 - Recreation-Special Programs 5601-5699 - Streets Projects
4425 - Children in Motion 5701-5799 - Drainage Projects
4426 - Five Cities Youth Basketball 5801-5899 - Water/Sewer/Street Projects
4430 - Soto Sport Complex 5901-5999 - Water Projects
4213 - Government Buildings
4460 - Parkway Maintenance
Dept. Index for Council.xls
-- .~_.._..
AT7ACHMENT 2
VOUCHRE2 CrTY OF ARROYO GRANDE PAGE 1
09/05/02 09:32 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR PERIOD 16
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT
107508 09/06/02 000234 A & R WELDING SUPPLY WELDING TIPS 010.4420.5605 6.33 6.33
107509 09/06/02 103202 A- PED WHOLESALE SUPPLY CENTRIF.PUMP PACKOUT 010.4213.5604 162.86 162.86
107510 09/06/02 100897 AMERICAN TEMPS BRADFORD SVCS-B/24 010.4130.5303 712.80 712.80
107511 09/06/02 004914 APEX SHARPENING WORKS OIL 010.4211.5608 17.05 17.05
107512 09/06/02 102509 API WASTE SERVICES Rio BIN-DUMP/RETURN SVCS. 010.4213.5303 250.00 250.00
107513 09/06/02 103204 APWA-NPDES STORM STORM WATER REGIS-SPAGNOLO 010.4301.5501 30.00 30.00
107514 09/06/02 103062 AQUA-METRIC SALES CO 2" COMPOUND METER CHAMBERS 640.4712.5611 572.45 572.45
107515 09/06/02 101810 BASIC CHEMICAL SOLUTION SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 640.4712.5274 279.10
107515 09/06/02 101810 BASIC CHEMICAL SOLUTION SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 640.4712.5274 300.57
107515 09/06/02 101810 BASIC CHEMICAL SOLUTION SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 640.4712.5274 279.10 858.77
107516 09/06/02 010998 BE'I"I'ER BEEP PAGER SERVICES 010.4425.5255 33.00 33.00
107517 09/06/02 011426 BLUEPRINT EXPRESS 10 SETS R.G.PARK PLANS 350.5512.7301 331.83 331.83
107518 09/06/02 012168 BOXX EXPRESS UPS SHIPPING CHARGES 010.4211.5201 36.66 36.66
107519 09/06/02 013026 BRISCO MILL & LUMBER PAINT/HANDLE 220.4303.5273 23.02
107519 09/06/02 013026 BRISCO MILL & LUMBER FENCE REPAIRS 010.4420.5605 5.90 28.92
107520 09/06/02 013572 BRUMIT DIESEL,INC AIR WIPER C~ 010.4211.5601 79.29
107520 09/06/02 013572 BRUMIT DIESEL,INC AIR COMPRESSOR 010.4211.5601 982.90 1,062.19
107521 09/06/02 015160 CALIFORNIA CONTRACTOR S DISP.WIPES/ULTRAFLEX HOSE 010.4305.5255 152.25 152.25
107522 09/06/02 102250 CENTRAL COAST BEARING BEARING/SCREWS/NUTS 010.4212.5601 85.36 85.36
107523 09/06/02 021918 CENTRAL COAST SUPPLY BLDG MAINT.SUPPLIES 010.4213.5604 259.71 259.71 I
I
107524 09/06/02 102386 CHIEF SUPPLY BATTERY 010.4211.5255 59.17 I
107524 09/06/02 102386 CHIEF SUPPLY 5 GAL SFFF FOAM 010.4211.5255 942.18 1,001.35 I
i
,
107525 09/06/02 023322 CHRISTIANSON CHEVROLET GLASS CLEANER 010.4305.5255 53.80 !
107525 09/06/02 023322 CHRISTIANSON CHEVROLET WHEEL COVER 010.4301. 5601 116.92 !
107525 09/06/02 023322 CHRISTIANSON CHEVROLET REPL.DOOR RANGES/OIL/FILTERS 220.4303.5601 196.29 367.01 i
107526 09/06/02 024492 COLD CANYON LAND FILL GREEN WASTE DUMP 220.4303.5307 12.00 I
107526 09/06/02 024492 COLD CANYON LAND FILL GREEN WASTE DUMP 220.4303.5307 12.00 ,
09/06/02 COLD CANYON LAND FILL GREEN WASTE DUMP 220.4303.5307 12.00 I
107526 024492 I
107526 09/06/02 024492 COLD CANYON LAND FILL GREEN WASTE DUMP 220.4303.5307 12.00
107526 09/06/02 024492 COLD CANYON LAND FILL GREEN WASTE DUMP 220.4303.5307 12.00
107526 09/06/02 024492 COLD CANYON LAND FILL GREEN WASTE DUMP 220.4303.5307 12.00
107526 09/06/02 024492 COLD CANYON lAND FILL GREEN WASTE DUMP 220.4303.5307 26.50
107526 09/06/02 024492 COLD CANYON lAND FILL GREEN WASTE DUMP 220.4303.5307 12.00
-
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE PAGE 2
09/05/02 09:32 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR PERIOD 16
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMODNT AMODNT
107526 09/06/02 024492 COLD CANYON LAND FILL GREEN WASTE DUMP 220.4303.5307 12.00
107526 09/06/02 024492 COLD CANYON LAND FILL GREEN WASTE DUMP 220.4303.5307 12.00
107526 09/06/02 024492 COLD CANYON LAND FILL GREEN WASTE DUMP 220.4303.5307 12.00 146.50
107527 09/06/02 102723 COMMERCIAL MAINTENANCE AGPD CARPET CLEANED 010.4213.5303 100.00
107527 09/06/02 102723 COMMERCIAL MAINTENANCE ELM STREET REC FLOORS 010.4213.5303 360.00
107527 09/06/02 102723 COMMERCIAL MAINTENANCE CITYHALL/ENG CARPETS CLEANED 010.4213.5303 350.00 810.00
107528 09/06/02 024832 COMMUNICATION SOLUTIONS REPL.MOTOR STARTER 640.4712.5303 290.00
107528 09/06/02 024832 COMMUNICATION SOLUTIONS REPL. MOTOR STARTER 640.4712.5610 232.42 522.42
101529 09/06/02 025428 CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL BALLASTS 010.4213.5604 137.92 137.92
107530 09/06/02 028548 DAYSTAR INDUSTRIES SPECIAL SWEEPS 220.4303.5303 150.00 150.00
107531 09/06/02 029250 J.B. DEWAR, INC. FLEET OIL 010.4211.5608 107.68 107.68
107532 09/06/02 029484 DIESELRO INC. SERVICE VACTOR 612.4610.5601 523.13 523.13
107533 09/06/02 029562 DISCOUNT SCHOOL SUPPLY PRESCHOOL SUPPLIES 010.4423.5253 509.75
107533 09/06/02 029562 DISCOUNT SCHOOL SUPPLY PRESCHOOL SUPPLIES 010.4425.5255 623.74
107533 09/06/02 029562 DISCOUNT SCHOOL SUPPLY PRESCHOOL SUPPLIES 010.4424.5252 35.61 1,169.10
107534 09/06/02 102574 EARTHLINK,INC INTERNET SVCS-AUG 21-SEPT 20 010.4201. 5607 45.90
107534 09/06/02 102574 EARTHLINK,INC DIAL UP ACCT FOR WEBSITE 010.4140.5303 23.95 69.85
107535 09/06/02 103140 EDA PROF.SVCS-POPLAR STREET BASIN 010.4130.5303 575.00 575.00
107536 09/06/02 032058 NADINE ELLIOTT REIMB. MILEAGE-ELLIOTT 010.4421.5501 14.78
107536 09/06/02 032058 NADINE ELLIOTT REIMB. PRINTER 010.4421.5201 214.49 229.27
107537 09/06/02 101379 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES, IN METER BOX LIDS 640.4712.5610 603.28
107537 09/06/02 101379 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES, IN METER GASKETS 640.4712.5610 12.55 615.83
107538 09/06/02 034352 FIRST NAT'L BANK CENT.C LEASE PURCHASE-95-091 AF 010.4145.5803 28,837.36 28,837.36 I
107539 09/06/02 037206 GIBBS INTERNATIONAL TRU KIT/SWITCH 010.4211.5601 202.13 I
107539 09/06/02 037206 GIBBS INTERNATIONAL TRU MUD FLAP 220.4303.5601 30.89 233.02
107540 09/06/02 038532 GRAND PERFORMANCE MUSIC MICROPHONE CABLE 010.4002.5201 17.86 17.86
107541 09/06/02 100547 HI-TECH EMERGENCY WINDOW CHANNEL 010.4211.5601 12.81 12.81
107542 09/06/02 103201 BRENDAN HOLGUIN REF. PARK DEP-HOLGUIN 010.0000.4354 26.00 26.00
107543 09/06/02 102701 INDOFF, INC. OFFICE SUPPLIES 010.4211.5201 129.15 129.15
107544 09/06/02 046176 J J'S FOOD COMPANY MEETING SUPPLIES 010.4001.5201 18.09 18.09
107545 09/06/02 046410 J.W.ENTERPRISES TOILET RENTAL 220.4303.5552 91.73 91.73
I
I
I
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE PAGE 3
09/05/02 09:32 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR PERIOD 16
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT
107546 09/06/02 047268 JOHNSON, ROBERTS & ASSOC PHQ REPORTS 010.4201. 5303 27.06 27.06
107547 09/06/02 048360 LINDA KEY REIMB.SUPPLIES-KEY 010.4423.5253 306.68 306.68
107548 09/06/02 050894 LAWSON PRODUCTS, INC. DRAWBR ASSEMBLY 010.4211.5601 387.97 387.97
107549 09/06/02 052338 LINSON SIGNS LETTERING-S-10 PU 010.4201.6301 569.00
107549 09/06/02 052338 LINSON SIGNS CITY DECALS 010.4305.5255 194.39 763.39
107550 09/06/02 102581 AMY LONDON REF.PARK DEP-LONDON 010.0000.4354 26.00 26.00
107551 09/06/02 103203 MAS MODERN MARKETING JR.FF STICKERS 010.4211.5504 314.13 314.13
107552 09/06/02 100968 MAXIMUS PROF SVCS 010.4145.5303 750.00 750.00
107553 09/06/02 057174 MISSION OFFICE PLUS OFFICE SUPPLIES 612.4610.5201 28.80 28.80
107554 09/06/02 061814 NOBLE SAW, INC. HEDGE TRIMMER REPAIR 010.4420.5603 81.24
107554 09/06/02 061814 NOBLE SAW, INC. CHAINS SHARPENED 010.4420.5603 44.00 125.24
107555 09/06/02 101750 OFFICEMAX CREDIT PLAN OFFICE SUPPLIES 010.4120.5201 71.88
107555 09/06/02 101750 OFFICEMAX CREDIT PLAN OFFICE SUPPLIES 010.4211.5201 44.04
107555 09/06/02 101750 OFFICEMAX CREDIT PLAN OFFICE SUPPLIES 010.4211.5201 72.62 188.54
107556 09/06/02 064194 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC ELECTRIC 010.4304.5402 15,033.38
107556 09/06/02 064194 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC ELECTRIC 010.4304.5402 1,894.82
107556 09/06/02 064194 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC ELECTRIC 640.4712.5402 556.49
107556 09/06/02 064194 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC ELECTRIC 640.4711.5402 20,274.45
107556 09/06/02 064194 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC ELECTRIC 612.4610.5402 1,653.88
107556 09/06/02 064194 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC ELECTRIC 010.4145.5401 7,991.59
107556 09/06/02 064194 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC ELECTRIC 217.4460.5355 7.29 47,411.90
107557 09/06/02 065714 PERVO PAINT CO. PAINT/BEADS 220.4303.5613 718.58 718.58
107558 09/06/02 066690 PITNEY BOWES POSTAGE METER RENTAL TO 12/31 010.4101.5602 255.26 255.26
107559 09/06/02 066924 PLAQUE SHAQUB ENGRAVE RADIOS 010.4211.5303 75.08 75.08
107560 09/06/02 067548 POOR RICHARD'S PRESS COLOR PHOTOS-TREES BRANCH MILL 010.4301.5201 19.27 19.27
107561 09/06/02 069108 OUINN COMPANY SWITCH 220.4303.5603 35.60 35.60
107562 09/06/02 069014 R & B AUTO BODY REPL. TAILGATE 612.4610.5601 175.54 175.54
107563 09/06/02 072852 SAFETY KLEEN CORP. PART WASHER MAINT. 010.4305.5303 105.25 105.25
107564 09/06/02 075660 SAN LUIS PAINTS REF. PARK DEP-SAN LUIS PAINTS 010.0000.4354 26.00 26.00
107565 09/06/02 076830 SANTA MARIA TIRE INC. TIRES 010.4211.5603 865.65 865.65
107566 09/06/02 103199 WENDI SCHAEFER REF. PARK DEP-SCHAEFER 010.0000.4354 26.00 26.00
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE PAGE 4
09/05/02 09:32 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR PERIOD 16
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT
107567 09/06/02 017572 SCHOOL SPECIALTY, INC. PRE-SCHOOL SUPPLIES 010.4423.5253 16.22 16.22
107568 09/06/02 078156 SEBASTIAN OIL DISTRIB. GASOLINE/DIESEL 010.4212.5608 88.50
107568 09/06/02 078156 SEBASTIAN OIL DISTRIB. GASOLINE 010.4201.5608 1,182.03 1,270.53
107569 09/06/02 102424 SIRCHIE FINGERPRINT LAB FIBERGLASS FINGERPRINT BRUSHES 010.4201. 5255 17.20 17 .20
107570 09/06/02 103198 SLO.CNTY.PREVENTION ALL REF.C/B.DEP-SLO CNTY ALLIANCE 010.0000.2206 250.00
107570 09/06/02 103198 SLO. CNTY. PREVENTION ALL BLDG. SUPER-SLO CNTY ALLIANCE 010.0000.4355 40.50- 209.50
107571 09/06/02 100304 SMITH PIPE & SUPPLY SPRINKLERS 010.4420.5605 66.33 66.33
107572 09/06/02 103197 GALE SMITH REF.PARK DEP-SMITH 010.0000.4354 26.00 26.00
107573 09/06/02 080886 SOUTHERN AUTO SUPPLY BATTERY CORE RETURN 010.4211.5601 5.36-
107573 09/06/02 080886 SOUTHERN AUTO SUPPLY SUPER SILl 010.4211.5601 25.61
107573 09/06/02 080886 SOUTHERN AUTO SUPPLY PARTS 010.4211.5601 15.17
107573 09/06/02 080886 SOUTHERN AUTO SUPPLY DISCONNECT TOOL 010.4211.5273 14.89
107573 09/06/02 080886 SOUTHERN AUTO SUPPLY JOBBER DRILL 010.4211.5273 8.01
107573 09/06/02 080886 SO~RN AUTO SUPPLY TECHRON 010.4211. 5608 180.05
107573. 09/06/02 080886 SOUTHERN AUTO SUPPLY BEAM LAMP 010.4211.5601 7.49
107573 09/06/02 080886 SOUTHERN AUTO SUPPLY FUEL DIS TOOL 010.4211.5273 7.45
107573 09/06/02 080886 SOUTHERN AUTO SUPPLY NARROW REFILL 010.4211.5601 9.09
107573 09/06/02 080886 SOUI'HERN AUTO SUPPLY PORTABLE AIR TANK PARTS 010.4305.5603 21.11
107573 09/06/02 080886 SOUTHERN AUTO SUPPLY WHEEL SEAL 010.4211.5601 8.49 292.60
107574 09/06/02 082328 STERLING COMMUNICATIONS RADIO CARRY CASE 010.4211.5603 47.94
107574 09/06/02 082328 STERLING COMMUNICATIONS BATTERY ATTACHMENT 010.4211.5603 96.53
107574 09/06/02 082328 STERLING COMMUNICATIONS NlCAD BATTERY 010.4211.5603 206.99 351.46
107575 09/06/02 082836 STREATOR PIPE & SUPPLY BRASS COUPLING 640.4712.5610 2.19 2.19
107576 09/06/02 102244 TITAN INDUSTRIAL GLOVES 010.4201.5272 535.16 535.16
107517 09/06/02 086346 TROESH READY MIX FILL SAND 640.4712.5610 280.95
107517 09/06/02 086346 TROESH READY MIX CONCRETE 220.4303.5613 530.67 811.62
107578 09/06/02 088062 UNION ASPHALT INC CLASS 2 BASE 220.4303.5613 92.17 92.17
107579 09/06/02 087672 UNITED RENTALS CONCRETE SUPPLIES 220.4303.5273 83.13 83.13
107580 09/06/02 089700 VILLAGE ART HONORARY RESOLUTIONS FRAMED 010.4001.5201 201.45
107580 09/06/02 089700 VILLAGE ART HONORARY RESOLUTIONS FRAMED 010.4001.5504 190.00 391.45
107581 09/06/02 090246 JOHN WALLACE & ASSOC. GENERAL CONSULTING SVCS 010.4301.5303 7,151. 69
107581 09/06/02 090246 JOHN WALLACE & ASSOC. RANCHO GRANDE PARK 350.5512.7301 22.50
107581 09/06/02 090246 JOHN WALLACE & ASSOC. CREEKSIDE PATH, PHASE 11 350.5607.7501 1,624.50
107581 09/06/02 090246 JOHN WALLACE & ASSOC. OAK PARK BLVD. WIDENING 350.5609.7301 399.25
107581 09/06/02 090246 JOHN WALLACE & ASSOC. EL CAMPO/RT 101 PSR 350.5616.7301 87.50
107581 09/06/02 090246 JOHN WALLACE & ASSOC. SPRUCE STREET SIDEWALKS 350.5641.7501 1,120.27
107581 09/06/02 090246 JOHN WALLACE & ASSOC. CEDAR STREET SIDEWALKS 350.5646.7501 1,120.27
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE PAGE 5
09/05/02 09:32 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR PERIOD 16
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT
107581 09/06/02 090246 JOHN WALLACE & ASSOC. GRAND AVE, PHASE 111 350.5903.7501 6,878.11
107581 09/06/02 090246 JOHN WALLACE & ASSOC. RESERVOIR NO.1 REPLACEMENT 350.5903.7501 608.42 19,012.51
107582 09/06/02 090480 WAYNE'S TIRE LUBE/OIL/FILTER 010.4301.5601 46.18
107582 09/06/02 090480 WAYNE'S TIRE OIL CHANGE 010.4201. 5601 23.61
107582 09/06/02 090480 WAYNE I S TIRE LUBE/OIL/WIPER 010.4420.5601 42.81
107582 09/06/02 090480 WAYNE: t S TIRE LUBE/OIL/WIPERS/ALIGN 010.4201.5601 82.26
107582 09/06/02 090480 WAYNE'S TIRE LUBE/OIL/WIPERS 010.4420.5601 278.04
107582 09/06/02 090480 WAYNE'S TIRE SERVICE/TIRES 640.4712.5601 245.38 718.28
107583 09/06/02 103200 PATRICIA WHITNEY REF. PARK DEP-WHITNEY 010.0000.4354 26.00 26.00
107584 09/06/02 100431 WILLARD PAPER CO PAPER 010.4102.5255 407.55
107584 09/06/02 100431 WILLARD PAPER CO PAPER 010.4102.5255 638.29
107584 09/06/02 100431 WILLARD PAPER CO PAPER 010.4102.5255 539.52 1,585.36
107585 09/06/02 093912 ZAP MFG, INC SIGN LETTERING 220.4303.5613 1,086.72 1,086.72
TOTAL CHECKS 119,678.23
I.b.
MEMORANDUM
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: LYNDA K. SNODGRASS, DIRECTOR OF FINANCIAL SERVICE~
SUBJECT:
CASH FLOW ANALYSIS/APPROVAL OF INTERFUND ADVANCES
FROM THE WATER FACILITY FUND
DATE: SEPTEMBER 24, 2002
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended the City Council:
. Accept the August 2002 cash report,
. Approve the interfund advance of $47,352 from the Water Facility Fund to
cover cash deficits in other funds as of August 31, 2002.
FUNDING:
No outside funding is required.
Attachment
A - Cash Balancellnterfund Advance Report
'" . ................. ~_._.II1T ~..~-_.._- no< ...
ATTACHMENT A
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
CASH BALANCE / INTERFUND ADVANCE REPORT
At August 31,2002
Balance at Recommended Revised
Fund 08/31/2002 Advances Balance
010 General Fund 1,969,792 1,969,792
210 Fire Protection Impact Fees 143,681 143,681
212 Police Protection Impact Fees 26,624 26,624
213 Park Development 452,843 452,843
214 Park Improvement 62,186 62,186
215 Recreation Community Center 4,785 4,785
217 Landscape Maintenance 30,234 30,234
220 Street (Gas Tax) Fund 94,436 94,436
221 Traffic Congestion Relief 36,638 36,638
222 Traffic Signalization 415,599 415,599
223 Traffic Circulation 477,632 477,632
224 Transportation Facility Impact 1.740,159 1,740,159
225 Transportation (43,004) 43,004 0
226 Water Neutralization Impact 584.369 584,369
230 Construction Tax 248,805 248,805
231 Drainage Facility 18,045 18,045
232 In-Lieu Affordable Housing 734.300 734,300
241 Lopez Facility Fund 964,903 964,903
250 CDBG Fund 165 165
271 State COPS Block Grant Fund 3,112 3,112
272 Calif. Law Enf. Technology Grant 36,016 36,016
279 00-01 Fed Local Law Enforcement Grant 5,240 5.240
284 Redevelopment Agency (4,348) 4,348 0
285 Redevelopment Set Aside 68,014 68,014
350 Capital Projects 253.412 253,412
612 Sewer Fund 8,784 8,784
634 Sewer Facility 160.584 160.584
640 Water Fund 2,720,123 2,720,123
641 Lopez 83,726 83.726
642 Water Facility 1,146.364 (47,352) 1,099,012
751 Downtown Parking 43,782 43,782
760 Sanitation District Fund 196,627 196,627
Total City Wide Cash 12,683,628 0 12,683,628
THE ABOVE LISTING ARE THE CASH BALANCES SHOWN IN THE GENERAL LEDGER
OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE AS OF AUGUST 3 I, 2002.
~.J2 ,.- ,~
Director of Financial Services
----
B.c.
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 10, 2002
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 215 E. BRANCH STREET
ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA
1. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Lady called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 7:03 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL
City Council: Council Members Dickens, Ferrara, Mayor Pro Tem Runels, and
Mayor Lady were present. Council Member Lubin was absent.
City Staff Present: City Manager Adams; City Attorney Carmel; Director of
Administrative Services Wetmore; Director of Community
Development Strong; Assistant City Engineer Linn; and Chief
Building Inspector Schmidt.
3. FLAG SALUTE
Wayne Dempster, representing the Knights of Columbus, led the Flag Salute.
4. INVOCATION
Pastor Robert Underwood, First United Methodist Church, Arroyo Grande, delivered the
invocation.
5. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
5.a. Proclamation - Constitution Week, September 16-22, 2002.
Mayor Lady presented a Proclamation recognizing September 16-22, 2002 as
"Constitution Week ". Patti Reding and government students representing Arroyo Grande
High School accepted the Proclamation.
5.b. Proclamation - Arroyo Grande Creek Celebration and Clean Up, October 12,
2002.
Mayor Lady presented a Proclamation proclaiming October 12, 2002 as "Arroyo Grande
Creek Celebration and Clean Up" Day". Rena Spooner, representing Central Coast
Salmon Enhancement, accepted the Proclamation.
6. AGENDA REVIEW
6.a. Resolutions and Ordinances Read in Title Only
Council Member Ferrara moved, Mayor Pro Tem Runels seconded, and the motion
passed unanimously that all resolutions and ordinances presented at the meeting shall be
read in title only and all further reading be waived.
7. CITIZENS' INPUT, COMMENTS, AND SUGGESTIONS
None.
--------- --..--
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 10, 2002
PAGE 2
8. CONSENT AGENDA
Council Member Dickens noted that amended minutes had been submitted for the
Special Meeting of August 27, 2002 (Item 8.c.), to reflect that he stepped down from
Closed Session Item 3.b.
Mayor Pro Tem Runels moved and Council Member Ferrara seconded the motion to
approve Consent Agenda Items 8.a. through 8.1., with the recommended courses of
action:
8.a. Cash Disbursement Ratification.
Action: Approved the listing of cash disbursements for the period August 16, 2002
through August 31, 2002.
8.b. Statement of Investment Deposits.
Action: Received and filed the report of current investment deposits as of August 31,
2002.
8.c. Consideration of Approval of Minutes.
Action: Approved minutes for the Regular City Council Meeting of August 13, 2002,
and the Regular City Council Meeting of August 27, 2002 as submitted; and approved
the minutes for the Special City Council Meeting of August 27,2002 as amended.
8.d. Consideration of Progress Payment No.1 (Final) - Spring 2001-02 Slurry Seal
Project - PW 2002-01.
Action: 1) Authorized Progress Payment NO.1 in the amount of $122,837.30 to
Intermountain Slurry Seal, Inc. for the Spring 2001/02 Slurry Seal Project; 2) Directed
staff to file a Notice of Completion; and 3) Authorized release of the retention of
$13,653.03, thirty-five (35) days after the Notice of Completion has been recorded, if
no liens have been filed.
8.e. Consideration of Modification to Fire Engineer Position Salary Range.
Action: Modified the Fire Engineer position salary range from Range 35 to 34.
8.1. Consideration of Contract Part-time Planning Positions.
Action: Approved the part-time employment contracts for one Associate Planner and
one Assistant Planner, replacing one full-time Associate.
AYES: Runels, Ferrara, Dickens, Lady
NOES: None
ABSENT: Lubin
There being 4 AYES, 0 NOES, and 1 ABSENT, the motion is hereby declared to be
passed.
9. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
9.a. Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Section 15.04.010 of the Arroyo Grande
Municipal Code Regarding Update of the Uniform Building and Related Codes.
Chief Building Inspector Schmidt presented the staff report and recommended the Council
adopt the Ordinance amending Section 15.04.010 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code.
!
\
-~. --
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 10, 2002
PAGE 3
Mayor Lady opened the public hearing and upon hearing no comments, closed the public
hearing.
Council Member Ferrara moved to adopt the Ordinance amending Section 15.04.010 of
the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code adopting by reference the 2000 Editions of the
"Uniform Administrative Code," "Uniform Building Code," (Volumes 1, 2 And 3) and its
Appendix, "Uniform Mechanical Code," "Uniform Code for Building Conservation,"
"Uniform Plumbing Code," and the 1999 Edition of the "National Electric Code". Mayor
Pro Tem Runels seconded the motion, and on the following roll-call vote, to wit:
AYES: Ferrara, Runels, Dickens, Lady
NOES: None
ABSENT: Lubin
There being 4 AYES, 0 NOES, and 1 ABSENT, the motion is hereby declared to be
passed.
9.b. Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Section 8.04.010 of the Arroyo Grande
Municipal Code Regarding Update of the Uniform Fire Code.
Chief Building Inspector Schmidt presented the staff report and recommended the
Council adopt the Ordinance amending Section 8.04.010 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal
Code.
Mayor Lady opened the public hearing and upon hearing no comments, closed the public
hearing.
Council Member Ferrara moved to adopt the Ordinance amending Section 8.04.010 of the
Arroyo Grande Municipal Code adopting by reference the 2000 Edition of the "Uniform Fire
Code," and its Appendix. Council Member Dickens seconded the motion, and on the
following roll-call vote, to wit:
AYES: Ferrara, Dickens, Runels, Lady
NOES: None
ABSENT: Lubin
There being 4 AYES, 0 NOES, and 1 ABSENT, the motion is hereby declared to be
passed.
9.c. Consideration of the Amended Conditional Use Permit Case No. 02-003 and
Variance Case No. 02-004; 1530 East Grand Avenue.
Mayor Lady announced that this item would be postponed and the Public Hearing
rescheduled for consideration at the next regular City Council meeting of September 24,
2002.
a.d.
MEMORANDUM
TO: CITY COUNCIL ~
FROM: KELLY WETMORE, DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICE
SUBJECT: 2002 CONFliCT OF INTEREST CODE BIENNIAL NOTICE
DATE: SEPTEMBER 24, 2002
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended the City Council receive and file the 2002 Conflict of Interest Code
Biennial Notice.
FUNDING:
There is no fiscal impact.
DISCUSSION:
The Political Reform Act requires every local government agency to review its conflict of
interest code biennially to determine if it is accurate or if the code must be amended.
Once the determination has been made, a notice must be submitted to the code
reviewing body (the Council) no later than October 1 of even-numbered years.
Staff has completed a review of the current conflict of interest code and has determined
that no amendments are necessary. The City's code accurately designates all positions
that make or participate in the making of governmental decisions; the disclosure
categories assigned to those positions accurately require the disclosure of all
investments, business positions, interests in rear property and sources of income which
may foreseeably be affected materially by the decisions made by those designated
positions; and the code includes all other provisions required by Government Code
Section 87302.
No action by the Council is required at this time; therefore, staff recommends the
Council receive this information and consider this memorandum and authorize its filing,
as the official 2002 Conflict of Interest Code Biennial Notice.
__n ~- '-
------
8.e.
MEMORANDUM
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: DANIEL C. HERNANDEZ, DIRECTOR PARKS AND RECREATION -dk
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF AUTHORIZATION TO SOLICIT BIDS
FOR RECREATION ADMINISTRATION DIVISION VEHICLE
DATE: SEPTEMBER 24, 2002
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended the City Council authorize staff to solicit bids for a Yo ton extended
cab pickup truck.
FUNDING:
The City Council authorized $23,000 in the adopted fiscal year 2002-2003 Recreation
Administration Division budget for replacement of tha current 1999 Electric Ford
Ranger, which has to be returned at the end of the three-year lease. The lease expires
in October 2002.
DISCUSSION:
The current vehicle is a 1999 Electric Ford Ranger pickup, which was leased to the City
as part of a California Grant for low emission vehicles. This lease expires on October 8,
2002, at which time the vehicle would be returned to Perry Ford of San Luis Obispo.
AL TERNA TIVES:
The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration:
Approve staff's recommendation;
Modify staff's recommendation;
Do not approve staff's recommendation; or
Provide direction to staff.
Attachments: Bid Notice (Attachment 1)
S:IStaffRptlRFPRecDivVehicleSept02
-----~-~ ---- ---~.__.- -~-
ATTACHMENT 1
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
PARKS, RECREATION AND FACiliTIES DEPARTMENT
SEPTEMBER 24, 2002
BID NOTICE
The City of Arroyo Grande Parks Department is requesting bid proposals for one
new 2002 1/2 ton extended cab pickup truck that meets the following
specifications:
SPECIFICATIONS
1. Fuel injected V-8 engine, gasoline
2. 8600 GVWR minimum
3. 133" ~ 137" wheel base
4. Automatic transmission
5. 8' cargo box
6. Fleetside body
7. Tinted windshield
8. Front bumper with license plate bracket
9. Rear bumper with license plate bracket
10. Power steering
11. Power brakes
12. 40/20/40 bench seat, fabric. with lumbar support
13. Cargo area lamp
14. Interior rearview mirror
15. Air conditioning
16. AM/FM radio
17. Sun visors
18. Volt meter, oil pressure gauge, engine temp gauge, tachometer
19. Spare tire and wheel (steel)
20. Exterior mirrors (driver and passenger side)
21. Intermittent windshield wiper system
22. Mechanical jack and wheel wrench
23. Seat belts for five (5) passengers
24. Truck shall be delivered within thirty (30) days of order date
25. Extended warranty: 6 year/70,000 miles/bumper to bumper/$O.OO
deductible
All proposals shall include all applicable taxes and delivery charges. All
proposals shall be sealed and on company letterhead with the envelope marked
"Pickup Truck".
_u__" u_.____
8.f.
MEMORANDUM
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: ROB STRONG, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
BY: RYAN FOSTER, PLANNING INTERN
SUBJECT: FEE WAIVER FOR DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 02-003;
REZONING 871 EAST CtERRY AVENUE FROM GENSW.
AGRICULTURE (AG) TO AGRICULTURAL PRESERVE (A1).
DATE: SEPTEMBER 24, 2002
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended the City Council consider the request from the Gordon F. Dixson
Trust to waive permit fees for Development Code Amendment 02-003.
FUNDING:
The waiver of the Development Code Amendment Permit fee will result in lost
revenue to the City of $1,220.00.
DISCUSSION:
On August 30, 2002, the applicant submitted an application to rezone the property
located at 871 East Cherry Avenue from General Agriculture (AG) to Agricultural
Preserve (A1). The applicant has also requested that the properties located at 871
East Cherry Avenue and 769 Branch Mill Road be considered for the Farmland
Security Zone Program (SB 649). Both properties are owned by the Gordon F.
Dixson Trust.
The Development Code Amendment is tentatively scheduled to go before the
Planning Commission on October 15, 2002. If the City Council deems that a
permit fee waiver is appropriate, it may do so as a measure to provide incentives
for agricultural land preservation. This would be consistent with the General Plan
policies.
ALTERNATIVES:
- Authorize the requested fee waiver;
- Do not authorize the requested fee waiver;
- Provide direction to staff.
Attachment:
1. Letter from Applicant
-~--~~--- ~--~-
Molly McClanahan
617 West Malvern Avenue RECEIVED
Fullerton, CA 92832
SEP 04 2002
August 30, 2002 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPl
Arroyo Grande Planning Commission
Arroyo Grande City Council
City of Arroyo Grande, CA 93421
ATTN: Rob Strong, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Application for Zone ,Change from AG to AP for
APN 007-711-007 and Farmland Security Zone Program
Application for Gordon F. Dixson Trust A~gicultural
Properties
Please review this application for the rezoning of APN 007-711-007,
871 East Cherry Avenue, Arroyo Grande, CA 93420, from AG to AP,
and schedul~ for public hearings before the Planning Commission
and City;Council.
We are also requesting that the 871 E. Cherry Avenue and the 769
Branch Mill Road (APN 007-711-003) parcels be considered for the
Farmland Security Zone Program (SB 649). The two parcels are
contiguous and are within the City of Arroyo Grande. They are
both owned by the Gordon F. Dixson Trust. Both parcels are covered
by a Deed of Agricultural Conservation Easement, which was recorded
in the office of Clerk/Recorder, San Luis Obispo County on August
3, 2001.
The farm at 769 Branch Mill Road has been under the Williamson Act
since 1976. The 871 E. Cherry Avenue property is not currently
under the Williamson Act. We propose to place both parcels in the
Farmland Security Zone Program (Super Williamson) through an amended
contract.
We also respectfully request by City Council authorization, a waiver
of application fees for necessary rezoning, since this woul~rovide
an important incentive for agricultural preservation.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
~P1~,eo-~~~
Marianna McClanahan, Co-Trustee
Gordon F. Dixson Trust
617 W. MalvernhAvenue
Fullerton,'CA 92832
(714) 526-6559
L__ --
8_g_
MEMORANDUM
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: DON SPAGNOLO, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER~
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF AUTHORIZATION TO SOLICIT BIDS FOR THE
RODEO DRIVE TRAFFIC CALMING PROJECT, PW.2002-07
DATE: SEPTEMBER 24, 2002
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended the Council:
A. authorize the Public Works Department to solicit public construction bids for the Rodeo
Drive Traffic Calming project;
B. find that the project is categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15301(c);
and
C. direct the Director of Administrative Services to file a Notice of Exemption.
FUNDING:
The FY 2002/03 Capital Improvement Program budget includes $45,OQO.00 for the Rodeo
Drive Traffic Calming capital improvement project. Staff estimates that the construction costs
will be $42,000.
DISCUSSION:
On December 12, 2000, City Council accepted the Traffic Commission recommendations to
install eight speed humps along Rodeo Drive between Grace Lane and Mercedes Lane. The
design concept called for the installation of concrete "bulb-outs" and street trees on each side
of the speed humps to aid in slowing vehicular speeds by visually narrowing the roadway.
Staff has coordinated the final design and locations of the speed humps with resident
representatives on Rodeo Drive. The location of utility lines has required modification of the
design to locate the trees at the edge of the sidewalk. The project plans have been completed
and are available for review in the City Engineer's office. The estimated construction cost for
the project is $42,000.
--- ----
CITY COUNCIL
RODEO TRAFFIC CALMING PROJECT
SEPTEMBER 24, 2002
PAGE 2
The project is in conformance with the City's adopted Speed Hump Policy which requires
compliance with eight specific criteria. The criteria include an evaluation of the street type
(street must be a local street generally less than a 6% grade); traffic volume (minimum volume
to be 1,000 trips per day); traffic speed (60% of the vehicles must be exceeding the 25 mph
speed limit); and traffic shift (possible shifts in traffic to other streets). In addition, the
guidelines require that 60% of the affected households sign a petition requesting installation of
the speed humps.
The contract time is estimated at 45 calendar days. Work is expected to begin in December
2002 and finished by the end of January 2003 as shown in the attached project schedule.
Staff has determined that the project is categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section
15301 (c).
AL TERNA TIVES:
The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration:
. Approve staff's recommendations;
. Do not approve staff's recommendations;
. Modify as appropriate and approve staff's recommendations; or
. Provide direction to staff.
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Project Schedule
3. Notice of Exemption
----~, ~,-
_.- l
""
'c I
' ~fl-l
'" ",f;')
ATTACHMENT 1
,
!
"ODED O"IVE
8 =-.....=--
0 ~-
--
~ ~-- ~
-- .___a.uoo...
....--.-
.-.---- -N-
I
,~.' I~~-" .. . .. .. ..
'Ii ._.~-- -- J
---
---- -.-.
---
ATTACHMENT 2
rei/1// of./h/l-<1lC' riiandry
Tentative Project Schedule
For
Rodeo Drive Traffic Calmillg Project
Project No. PW-2002-07
Authorization to Solicit Bids . ..... September 24, 2002
1'1 Notice to Bidders H ,.., October 11,2002
Pre-Bid Conference / Job Walk (City council Chambers) H. HHH' .HHOctober 16,2002
2nd Notice to Bidders. H.' . ...... .... ....... H.H.H.H .'HHHH October 18,2002
Bid Opening (Tuesday, 2:00 p.m, City Council Chambers) ,'HH.'.' ..'.H..HH .H.H'.H.H. October 22,2002
Award of Bid.. . . H.H.H.November 12,2002
Notice of Award H.HNovember 14,2002
Notice to Proceed . .... H December 2, 2002
Contract Completion (.1.\ "alellda, da)s) HH '.....H.January 16,2003
----------- .~-_._------_._--- ----------_._-_._.~~ ------------- _ ------------"
ATTACHMENT 3
Notice of Exemption
To: U Otlif.:C o( Plannmg uud Research From: (Public Agency) City of Arroyo Gnlndc
1440 Tenth Streot, Room 12\ P,O. Box 550
Sacramento, CA 95814 Arroyo Grande, CA 93421
{!] Coullly Clerk
County of Sun Luis Obispo
County Govcnnllcnl Center
San Luis Obispo, CA 93408
Project Title: Rodeo /J,.;w TrafTie Calmim! Prolect
Project Location - Specific: 11/ ,Ill' ('in' o(.lrrovo (;rtlm/e 011 Hoc/eo Drive between Grace {,one and A4ercedes Lane
Project Location - City: Arl'o~'o G/'OI/de Project Location - County: SanTA/is Ohi:mn
Description of Project: Instal/alion (It's/Ned hllll/fJS l1'ilh conot:le bulb-oul.~' (/ml slreelln.!~!j'.
Name of Public Agency Approving Project: ('iii' o(..ln'UHJ (in:mde - Puhlic IForks De/x/rlmenl
Name of Person or Agency Carrying Out Project: TlllJltlas Konmm.P.E.
Exempt Status: (ch('c/.: Olll'i
Mllush.:ni.ll \ SC(tlOl1 IlllXOI h~( I L I 52(,X )~
0 D.'dared Emergen.y is... 2/OXU(b)(J); /5269iuiJ;
0 Emergency Proje.l iSe. 2108U(b)(4); I 5269(b)(.iJ;
[!] Categorical Exemption. Slal~ type and section number: :,!'ectioll J j30! (c)
0 Statutory EX~mpli()ns. Stall: (;oJc l1lunbcr"
Reasons Why Project Is Exempt: Proiect iUl'oh'e5 iuslal/o/iou o(/ramc ca/minI! measures aud doe,'j flor rmmw auv
sce"ic reSOUrce. '-
Lead Agency
Contact Person: Tholllas Konmm. P.I': Area Codcfl'clephOllc/ExtcIISiOlI: (805) 473.5447
If filed by Applicant:
I. ALtach I.Il.':crtilicd dm;umcnt of c;..;cmptioll Iindil1g.
2 I ItJS ,j Nollec or L\Cmpllol1 heen 11kd h~ the puhlit.: agency approving the project? 0 Yes ONo
SLgJlalurc l)a1c: Tille: Associate Civil EI11!ineer
[!J Sigl\l.':u b\' 1,(:<'0 AgclIC\ o D<Il...: received for filing al OP1<:
[J Slgncu h\' Applh:ant
,
.. ----- --_._-------~ ----- ---_...._----~
I.h.
MEMORANDUM
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: DON SPAGNOLO, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEERo86'
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF PROGRESS PAYMENT NO.1 FOR THE RANCHO
GRANDE PARK PROJECT, PW.2002-03
DATE: SEPTEMBER 24, 2002
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended the Council authorize Progress Payment No. 1 in the amount of
$75,738.70 to Herrera Engineering, Inc. for the Rancho Grande Park Project.
FUNDING:
On June 11, 2002, the City Council awarded the Rancho Grande Park Project to Herrera
Engineering Inc. in the amount of $1,082,345.00 and authorized a contingency of
$108,235.00 to be used for unanticipated costs during the construction phase of the project.
The total construction budget is $1,190,580.00.
DISCUSSION:
The City received an application for Progress Payment No. 1 in the amount of $84,154.11
from Herrera Engineering, Inc. for work completed from August 21 through August 30, 2002.
Staff reviewed the application and determined that the amount requested is in accordance
with the quantity of work completed.
The City will withhold 10% of the requested amount ($8,415.41) in retention until the project
is completed in accordance with the plans and specifications.
ALTERNATIVES:
The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration:
. Approve staffs recommendation;
. Do not approve staffs recommendation;
. Modify as appropriate and approve staffs recommendation; or
. Provide direction to staff.
Attachment:
Application for Progress Payment NO.1
reit!!, of
~rl~ PubHc Works DepcUtment
.
Applicatio1l tor Progress Payment
Contract Name: Rancho Grande Park
Contract No: 2002-03
Progress Payment No: 1
City Account No: 350-5512-7001
Payment Date: September 4, 2002
t.:1)II1T~IPllce TOUII4I loCale PmvIOf)~ PaVfMnlS Pay fhl:i Esrrmale
No ~- O. UnilPrice Pric. Po'- , .Pct. , Po,. S
1 fIAobilizalion Allowance 1 I. 60,000.00 60,000.00 90.0% 54.000.00 0,0% 0,00 90.0% 54,000.00
2 Demolihol1 and Eal1hwork 1 I. 83,520.00 83.520,00 36.1% 30.154.11 0.0% 0.00 36.1% 30,154.11
3 Park Entry and Access Rood 1 I. 98,982.00 98,982,00 0.0% 0.00 0,0% 0,00 0,0% 0,00
4 Siltt Ulililitls II, 47,140.00 47,140.00 0.0% 0,00 0.0% 0.00 0.0% 0,00
5 Site Electrical 1 Is 170,682.00 170,662.00 0.0% 0.00 0.0% 0.00 0.0% 0,00
6 Conslruction Improvements & Furnishings 1 Is 170,000.00 170,000,(1) 0.0% 0.00 0,0% 0,00 0.0% 0,00
7 IrrigaliOfl 1 Is 102,587.00 102,587.00 0.0% 0,00 0,0% 0,00 0,0% 0,00
8 Landscaping 1 Is 149,497.00 149,497.00 0.0% 0,00 0,0% 0.00 0.0% 0,00
AI Alternate 1 - Sports Facilities 11, 47,298.00 47.298.00 0,0% 0,00 0,0% 0,00 0.0% 0.00
A2 Alternate 2 . Playground Equipment 11, 77,659.00 77,659,00 O,O%- 0,00 0.0% 0,00 0.0% 0.00
A3 Alternate 3 . Restroom Buildina 1 I. 75 000.00 75,000,00 0,0% 0,00 0.0% 0,00 0.0% 0.00
TOTALS 1,082,345.00 84,154.11 0,00 84,154.11
~ 5l->"t.? 2- . ._~.
Contract Payments
~.te Earned to Date $84,154,11
Retention (10%) $8,415.4'
Previous Payments $0,00
;0 ~J{ff a'C 'THIS PAYMENT $75.738.701
-
Pr Ject Manager Dale
Contract Time
Contract Slart Date: 8121/02
Original Contract Days: 275
Adjusted Contract Days: 0
Pub/<<; Works Director Date Adjusted Contract End Date: 5122/03
CIty Manager Date
Send Pavment to:
Herrer. Engineering, Inc,
200 E. Fesler Street, Suite No. 103
Santa Maria, CA 93454
-~ ----- ----~
IE 1~1~!81 i8)~i~I~I~I~! i~I*I$i~i~i~I~!~!~i$I~I~!~!~I~I~)NJ8 !~J~I~I~I~I~)~I~:~!~I~!;I~~18: 1~~J~)~lg
S 'm~ _o:r--,~<",>'''''''''''';~' Ni....,..,.,~:;g'-I-~....;lg~''''''!.....8.......... '~.o,)M<Ccci~\q....::i<"'>M,,..; '<xol ':?:;,;....;i~N
",I E .'~INI~: . :;:;;.'_I$rgl~.i 1~lijil<!.,;;;I.8i.INI~I~I.[);I~.I;:\'NI._r!:;I:!!INI~11!1 INI;;I" :;;1t;;I.NIMI:;!I_I~I~I:;!liii~.", i.~I-I*'_Ii8' ~
"'I"" jN"MOQ-1 "~i?e'~I<o~: jril~!il(":il~,'-'fl('''i)''''-I~I_ : : I i r I !....-~ ,rfl<'O-c--!,.....-(.fl.....-1 !......M-I I::!"-"".!;i! :~~g-I~.gl ~
::!!: : I Ii,: i i I : I I ' , I :Ni 1 : ! i t i I I i I i { " : I ' i " ,. I' I! f I I' " I I ;.....,-1 ~
~ : -, , I!";': ;; I . i I ::",:: I I' -"':;, _ , , I , , : i I I I
o :,' I ! ' I 'I I ": I ! i ' ! ! !' I: ::' i : ' ! ' : : : ! i ! : : 1 1 I : ! i
f- I I i I . I I " 1 ,I. , , ' :! ."" I " ". I
wi i~__.~__~-L..;.....u__' i " ' :1 : . J i.......Li .':.'; i I; I
U .~,O,~' O'_'N'N'~',M, I~'~I~'~''''':'~I~''''':'~I~'M'NI-.~'~IN;MI~ 101~;~INI~I-'~'~'OI_IN'~'N'~lw; IWI~I~i~'_
:z: t"'!(9),~, O.--"":J<O'~ "'!' !<=>IM.~IMr~.~~ _'~i"", <=>'0:10: O:~C::>'.O O::~""": <'"":.~I----: "": ~ ----::Ol~'.~ 0 O:'.MI-'<;;;> ~'. "": Q> Cl'!1"'1.r-i
::5' C'O!O OO'N -0:'" ~O'O,_o'_ ,::U,,!O!....:O:O:O!O,O!O'O:OI~ ,0 QIOIOIOIClloio:oio O!_,O!O,...,.' I""": -,0 ::i';!2i
~ii ' " , '" :!! ,: ;' , ! ' : i .' ' , " , , , ! ; I ,
..
~ '~lg:8' '~'~lg!8!8~=' '8~~!8!8!8!~!8~8!8i~i8,8:~181$'8i8!8~ :8"8!8!818
'5 ''''I.,SO!I ,<o,r-'o'<:::>'ol~ ,'ol<::>lololoIOlolo:c::.IOIOlo,olololoIOIOI 10 101c::i 101.0'
IE I<D~<=S' lo'~: I' ! ~: ( I. ,!' ;,' i .' ! ' ; ,: i j ! It! 1 !i .
-< ",-",:'''''''1 ......-I~,j; ci.' , "",' ,. " , ' , I I
,....: 1\0 : !Nlc->! " I, I '
I, ", ,I, , ) ! ; ; I
".- -;~:<;:!:m:- ~~~~-'8:818!~; --1818Tg-1S"i818!gI81818i8!81818!.818j818
~ ...0'" ONO'Q:ON 0,0,0,0 0'0101010'0:0,0101010 0:0 o!
c~ . . . "
~.~ I
:8i8: ;8:8181818
. I'<nlo, ,0.<,0101010:
!f ,0'1 ,'('1') ! I<;:!IO>;!I:
..
· 88888
~ ~oooo
E
ffi ..
z
'"
~8 :i!~8i 88888
wffi ~o_ 00000
5..30
_I a..!!lll! I
:i. S;!: _' . I
W '" 8888l
!C N ~ " "" "I
. 0 ~ ... I
;:: ~ ; I
m~ ,
>-.. & c '8'8:8'
" ..
D. c( 0 <;;0 0.0 '"
~ ~ ,,i J , 0
~ ~ ii' I
~ . . .. .
~ '8 '" 8'8'8' '8'8'8'8'8'8"'
Q. Ii ~. ,010:0 0,0,0:;:"0,0,0.
>- Q. 01""
..... ~~ I ,'< , ! , ,
:r ~iI I ~ " ,
!z ..
i . 8~ 8~~~~
I ! 0'0 ocooo
~
~
..
''" IN ~18' '~'WI~;~'-:8'
r:) ~IM.: ICI).CX)~,<.O:,~, .
,~ .~~, 'WI~'~'MX'~
"~ ,~;<O-'~' ,C;_iC"i'_'fB:<9Si~
~.;g ~ ~re'~'~:~
'"
'"
~.
'"
'"
'"
O-I~- i~i~I~: '~I~~~I~'~~
=~ ~IO~i IO!~'~I_IO:_
r,: ~
~ ~I;; I
f Uli ! I
'" '" ~
'" z a
: ffi
ww '"
Oi ~ 1
~~ ~ ~ c 1
~ ~ ~ 'I-Q r I~ ~j 1
~ g '" ~ :g ~ :II!' P 'ii,
u 0 cr I- W "C it '-'- ~ '5,9 '..,1 ':Jil I i
~ ~ ffi ~ to) g' .:!! 0 ~ E ~ ~ "3 01 ~ 8-1 l<n'
.... Z 031 ct <iii OQ _ .., _ _ .
Ir <Cf :I: U c( _ ~ t; (/) s: a:: '" ~ -a. + 3i 'I! ~ U) V) ~cg gys.
~ ~ g ; ~ '3 f VJ ~ .r 1, ~ -!;: IJ .:2 g V) 'J'J iD eoO :-..... s Co ~ !it- .;; 0 '&. 'E
o 0 ~ <1) - i:!' r"; <tI W i: e =-, /jj ~ ~ g> 'I < 1:f i5 1m! ~ I- ! 'RI i! .., iSl 110 It
::j ~ '" ~ ~ i i ~ D ~ tJ 0 ~ <3 a " ~ ':: :': N S 'Ii'''' ~ !''i<' 'j'~' ""~Iil,-,'.,JI,,, :51r:Ht'il'"'. "'~11i . "iJ),,, -
C( ~ 1-1 ~V)~~"Cirj.., * <11,::::5 "'1V)~ Qi: . .1 ~il-I :::s,~ ~1i5I:!iX:'!!.I>i>:1 ~~cc'iC!~cel'" i
gs ~'~ j j,~ L I J J ~ ~ !:~sJ! li~:l1~~'~hj,Ui~ll~!~!~~ll!~!~!I:!I~i~!~:~,d!j J!I~I] ili J!~ j
,....:3 1:3 Cd 51 , :i=;:: _ : ; :, : i : ;: :~iS!i2i~I-'$i:' 8'
u" \ _ _ _ N 0 _ ......, '--" "- ~ ';"0 - rv'~-""'''''''.1>'''''''IO'a,'O._.N'('''''~:''''' '=-'<.D,_'<:Q;'''''O~_''''''''''''''''''''''DI'''';oola, ! I .1" '-; ~
w IX - 11).. "; O'----.-.-:_;_,_,_,(>,j.'........'N......'....., i .""'..........'N''''"'' ....,I<"")J,.."l'"">'...,i")M~ . 0 D.
-. I- W 00,0:.0:. ::::EwUJ.UJUJ,W 'c:!a::'CI:. CI:. Q:: 'Ir 'a:: 'a: 'a: 10::: a:::cria:;!.c::a::)a:::o::, Il!:!loIClICliClICli~:I-;I-'I-:I:-!I-!~i~l:c !~,~ ~i.5!r'''r
o z =:z. :a t:I '-' ~ 0 CI CI 0 0 :. <<'o:t: < <:<.c:<,cc,<<,<,..c:,cc:..c:.:<;< :wlU),V)r<l:itJ):'U)J~i~'~;~i~~;:r(l);(/)1J'J )wlcr1 u:lju:1lcrJl
.If 8 . _ "'.... ' ... ' '....iU):lJ'Jr(/)V)i
~ -------- ---
c ,m(~!~:~i~;gi~:~:~]~i~,~i~(~i~~~:8i~l~j~!~i~)al !~!Sj~~I'~I~II~j~~'~j~!gI8!8j~18; 1:;>;1~~lg~!~I~I~i~i~1
"J 1;~"1'5"I'~'I'.S'.:~'.;;J~ 1.~J..ie.I!!!J'!!!'I,S"I'!;!j.'8'1.\Q!.FJI.~ig1~,II~liB!~I~'I', 1~'I'gl~J~!ij. ~~'Iiii. (!!.I!J!'I'$'I.!iI~I~.!~'ISi'I' I!J.~ iIJ'I'.\Q ~11!i\ ~ 11i11JJ1ii!.1 N
01< ..,.,.... - OQi i~1 :<::>'-1-1-'.... 1- 01 '.... <D ('0'). <::) I""'" ..,.1- -, <:> >.t) M [ii;I 0> 1 ..,t"o.o..... ~ cD - co <C "''''10 0> <<>1 ~
z, ,.....! r-, I 1'......( :-! : ,i -i!:!;;1 ~I I ! - ; I ... '! i ,-I ,5:!/ I I -, ......! I 3i
U::I i! i : ' i i : ' : : ~ : : : : : ~ i ~ : : ~ ~ ' : i ~ i i I I I I I I I I Ii: !: I I I I ~
~ I I ,1.1 ,i ; ! ' I I 1 J ; ~ I , I ' ~ I I I I I' '. ; I I. 1 'I 'I I." " '. . '. ! ' I 1 1 1 I I. 1
..' i.'_,.., ",11" i;,. I,' ,I', 1 I. i..' I I, i I, LL". ii,
~Z;.- ,;.:.::r;..:-I'.:r..;~.fco:~~g.,.''".'~ 'N1;;o:;....!c:i>~~..... :....... '<01<0.1"" :<n. '~.'-. ,-: :__.1"" ,'''':.- '.~I'<O :<.O'I',~. ic:n 1.0.,,,-i"'I.~I'M1N.I'.~ '. -r-,O.I'.~IO l<.n.i.o 1M '.~. 01'<0 I""!
.g>,(") O:....'O,_.O,O">,-,_._.'<t"''=',_:a.,O,M,O <,g'~I(,,);Oi""'" ,'l">:.....~'....,I- 0'0') ......,....,01]0:0 0 0 M,N...., '.... -.~ ......101.... _ Q) <01....1
~ :<.0 O'-'o'O'NIO O:O'Q'O'O'o;o,a 0'0:0'0:0 O!O!~: !o!ol~lo OIOIO.01.OI.-101..ol.o,~IQ~! I...... OI~iOOI~,....;~.O!O'
<('3t" " j I; - Ii; i I,i : I'. ! ,i i!:; II
rrJ ~ , i '! 0, i : i i Ii, , : ! : i i Iii! i i
! :" I;: I I
.c 888'8'8'8'8'8'8'8888'8'818'8'8,818'8,8,81 '818;8;818,8;8!8181818,8;818!818 ,81818188'81881881
6 ,=,,0,0,<=>,0 0,0'0 o,o.o_o,,=,.o,o.O;O~O'O'C)'OIOIO. '01010:0,.0;0100<=:>101.0,0101010;010, 10101<=:>'010''010101010,.
.i ',,' , ',' , , : . ' ; , ! , . ~ ' , , ' : - , ' 1 , , , I ' " 0
: I , ,: : ! : : ! i :' i! ' i I : I ;' ! - .: i',i I!
,,,. "I, , , , ' fk ' ,
, , 'I"""" I : ' , I I, '''' I", I "I I I
''8;8;8-~g:8-'g:g:8:g~g:8-g:g:g'g:'g:8:8:g:8;8:~;8 :SI:g:8i8ia.81a181Ig 818:8 8 $ i81Ig!:8~88Ial~8118 ~ 818!
w 000000 <::) 00 0000 00 00000-0;00 o;o'o,o'o'o:olaooiO'O'QO'OO '0'010'010'0'010010'
~i!; ",' ,. '" . j.: I' I I ' ~ I : I Ii, i i I ii' 1 I ; ! : ' : :.
0::00 ., I ;. " , I -., I ' I .
o;lt . I I I ! ! 1 i! I! : I I ! ! I : ! I I (
~ 1 I , 1 i I I I I 1 1 II!
; 8,~~8~1~8~88~888Ig~~88888'1 18'1~18.8~.,888~8~888811 'I 88~8~~g~88
~ 0000000000000000000000 OOOOOOOQOOOO~OO 0000000000
, I!! I J
I 'I [, I I I
it ! I ! i i I
c 8888~~8888~8888~~88888~ 8~~~8888g88~8~88 S~~g8S8888
,~ o:o,OO!OIO,OQ!OIOO,OIOO;O,OOQOO,OOlo 00000000000000100 00000010000
"'.~, , ,'. ; i;' !:; I' I,' I' I,," I, "'I' I
W I' ,. , . : , , " I ,; ,. 0 I , " " "" I' ' 1 < I I !
. ,. - ' : ' I ' '. ' " .; I ! ! " , I: 1 ,
II! ;; :'!.:'; Iii, ! II : : I!; ! I I I ' 1 I I , , , 1 II ii, r'r~1
~ 8:. 1818:81'.81818i818i,81,8:8181.818:818'1'8"1'8'1'.81'8~.81.S-I.gl'~18Igr81','8~8'18f.8"[8 g 8r~8188I,'8]'81-lggl'S 81'$88888
w- .0:0'0.0,0'0 o!o,o:o,o:o,o,OiO:oo:O 0:0 01010 oojOOOOOOOOOOOO 00 0000000000
~ffil~' - ,: , , i ii' , I i I I I I I '
~<L~ ,,':! i: i I I i I I. I I '
_, I:I..VI,I/t , .. '!' I I! I' I '! i,!, ,
~ ~ i!' = ' i8i8i818i81818i8i8'18i8i8'181818T8i81'8'j!gr8'i~fI8+-~rlI88!si8!818IsI8 818!i8~i8i81!8~J IS 818188 88 8Ig~'
t- ~ '!! !Q.!OI,C O:O:.O'.OIOI..O....O!.O:.O 01. OI.OIOI.cooo!.o.o! 110000001000000000 0000000000
: N ;0 If I "! 'I!;' I' I I I I' I 1 I . I
ti Ii! ;! i I r i i i i i i : I I I ! 1 i 'I' I I I i I I I I ' , I
w ~ ,;" 1 , . , ' Ii' 'I'! I I t I 1 I
: J 1 ,~I~ ~t~:~:~!~'~:~!~I~,~:'~!~i~,~[~i~!~j,~i~,~i~!' ;~I~ :~I~I~!~!~I~ ~i~'~i~I~I~!~~ ,~~~ ~ ~ ~I~ ~ ~ ~ ~
en OJ -- , " I I ' , I ' , I' , 'I" 1 I 0
(IJ c: ....., . '" , I , ; I' I Iii I j) I.' ) I ' I N
~ '2 : ' , : ' : I : Iii 1 i , , ; i :::' i 1 i 1 1 .
~ i 0 [81;8.1'.8:~i818181;8i8[.8[8i.8i.8i.81'8 ,1'8 18 1'8 !'SI'.'8['8i8/i8Ii""I'8 1'8 '~'8I'~I~ 8~ 81'8fgi81~181'.~8-8 8~~1'~ 81'S 8 8 ~ ~
a. II :>>, jc:i 0 O!.CI!..O.OIO.,CI'Cli.O'..CI!O'..O'.O.,'00].0.0,.0 O'CI:.O,O. ,00 Olo,oc:::o 0 CI Clo!;;llo 0 0 CI ~IIO' c::o OCl 00 100000
>- a.. 91~' I, . ,. i ". I I, Ii, i ,I Ii, It: I I 'I i '
~ G:j!iIt ~ ' ; , ! I ! ! 1 1 I !' I I . '. :: ' .
:I: '" ,', ;.!, I',' 'IT" I;' I ~ ~
!Z a.,: :' ",,' ,I' i I : 1 ! ' Ii" 1 I I !
~ filT8[8ISi8i818ISI8!8;.8i.8IS!SI8IstSI8'I'gj8'18181.18n#, 8 8 ~ISI8 8 8 81t 8 8k/$' .' 88 8' ~ g 8" 8" 888
ie IQ CI!OloIClIC:Ololoio:oIQ!OIQio\C>lolo.~ 01010 O! 0 CI 0000,00000 <=> 00 OjolO 0 OCl co <::I 0 0 CI 00
I '" I ' " 1 " 1 ' 'I 1 1 I. I' I
. 'I I!,"! I ~ I " I!, I ! I
.,.. I I I' ! 1 ' , : ; I ; ; I i
,! " I ' .
I
w ~~~~~8~1~1~~~~~~I~~a'~I~I~~~8 ~82~~~~~m$~$881~8 ~~Ia$a~ ~~~
~ ~1~~~~~II~~la~g..la~I~I~ ~.~.~~5a'~~~~..a~~ ~~~g~..I~~
~'..-~'<# I~fl si/...:....--l... !-"/g; l..r <DI ...., te vi..r':!"':": s!o.rit""i~cnJ I;!"J.NS ~or:il::::"" ~'!;j<oc>w:i
01 1 . I , i' "'!' I 1 I ,- I ' I I I I I I 'I 1 ' , - I I
~, ,"," i.".':; i! ::. i,. ii, ! i ! I , I . :, :, :,;"
:or r ", ".,'"""" I 1'11"1" I'" " 1111", '~
S: , , ..::: i: ;'; - : : i: i i i J i '1' ; i Ii i j' " '. ."'! I i
~I~ ... :~'i'; 1:g:R~~'gjI2"&I"';;:;g:;';;;(~I~iislf;iii8!i;;;i"'1-f~[S1~ 'i<<I;::~." i!i1:R'.~~8i.~~~ISiiil-i~Ig;~I""I:eIi8~'IE'I~ i8iiiJl
~i~ :~~o'-'Q'O'~o'c'C!O!o:CI:o:o'oiO'O!Q!O!ClIO!Oi~i !0,Of-o!~j~!:)~!Oj-!o!~!o!-06)ml !~)~,_,ClO:_""olo)o
; II Ii; ~ ~ ~ ~.~ ~ ~ G~ ~'~ ~ G~ ~ ~~U),~IU)I~'~' L :~r~i;1;~I~;r;],';I,:;II'~I!;I!;!~!~rt!;1!~I!;i;I'~I'~I':;;I'ij;I!;I!;'j!
:I: ...... 5ii1<'CI!;!<::'><OC-O"""'OO"-~08-:"""D'<J:).-,-..rI'- .NI-!-j""'...I-r-'O').<D....O'! GI) 0121-- , 1("'0 "-COI5!g ",..n 00 Sii!:,
Q. :it ~ <O.;t;i.,-i')._.........., (")'<.0 ,y,'N' -.- - :. ."; -I: ,......1. ,..-,....:<al-.'NI"" '.' . Im!('oI-",,,,.NIN _ _."'1.
<" (It_ - CQN(")_ ..n'", .' ; ': i ' , ,i~, ; .~ " .1 J '-,;:::. ~_Q_~,~.....,
;.:. '-' :;) Clz;~ .... , I , '; '; I . I IN! I I " 'i~~""<t'>1 I
a: z 01 _ , j . " """ i '! '!' I ('\I('oI! ' , ,
: 0: ~' 'i" i ' ! ' i ' I ; i 1 i I ! I I 1 i : L !
i!::!: ~~. I' I 1 I I I ;: 1 I r ; I
z:z: G =- I I ' , "!, IlAi: ~ :
..< z 1.1,. . .. . ii', '. : I . _ ! Ii, i iii5i..;
"'''' W.. '.' . ", , . . '. 'I'!]' , ,
ClCI " " " ,1,: " 1 " !..', CI,.','
.. z ~'Q),'!5 ."': ':11: " :' : : ; " ., ';' ': f! It I ! :'
~ ~ a: Q Zi ",..Ii,~' ."i. ' . &!, ,oBI, ': ' I ,,' , , ,~'" :511.1,., ,. .
uo ~ ~ LtJ'i=mQ.' 11::5 '1':1iI ",;;.:,' ..: i:liii~i""I];I:!; %
zoo", .. "Jlc " "Ii' .. ,"- ...'.,~ '., "",""" ~
..0: w a: W E 'l\I.u "'.o!: . . "S!!:' ,'. :0:;. ; '15- '~..'c" "r r '! 1 ,iii, 1, ..
'" ~ Xu> }. - - t- ~~. -". . ~ii,.:;",.,;:, . ,>""'",,ll ." 1~:~":;ljll,-. .
(II 'ii.1t! (\I .f- <: 12 ~. - . .. --'0:,,' :.=,': I I . <\I,-a!j' ,~: , . . " 1 . . , : " 'I 1
:!: ~ r ,~!<;O:!r~ 6'" w~~. '" :15.11'.1",.,-:1'. ~'~'~.;o.' :', .'Jil' ,.""l~. >1j':~,;!;,J'~-1~'", ,], SI~lla';!i~I~I~ i!!,J1 E
:IIo.<JJ~d &0. . <JJr,:)&,oaJiI ,.!...... 't!!"6' ,0.,!' : i 'iB.";'! !:t' 10.' I~CD~.J 11.....1 =--;5, 2:-
;,s 1<L?-.l.,i,i1' lU. ,;Bi~.1~i 1 .1'!r,j'WI~' !,.,-I~,.;,-II~Id:,fil.91~I~~, I..,-,'~'~I ,,,,I~_'I~II "11I~1j!1 ~.
o I ED....~~; ,'1;1 ,~ 1-: '.. : '1&':: 'i' 0.!;>1>: ! ' ,- 'ill I . '''''::1 C)i : &, ~ ctl i ...
ir >=.!, ~,.<;t, .w(J . ~(Jiil.",}.J!!;;!,~,~,i,:a:!,:i,"8,~, ;.g;~i"""""':J!SI~ljji;;!,.1, ti;ii:,,,,~I;E1 ~i ~ 1 i'!! III il", i-gJ'8 1'<: , 0
o !:fr~ c9:ED:hN t&, 0. >/) ~'a..1'j t..) ,_I)'U ,:~.=~o..: ~Q.s;M:~!tfi.~~,..:.:~:6't-Id:'V),.::'<-> ,)S !~,~il-llfI'~.'fJ,)US',:z:irA'~' ~
ti 0:::' , ' . .: -' ,... ,,',.. ~.....: ' : ' , : ; , : : I ' , .. 10: I : i i i I I I J 1
U <0[ ::E ,t;,_ NM"",.rI <.0.....<0 g; .'- "",f">""",.rI'DiO.i:B':_'.....:M;~; l<j.....:a.'O;_!NI~:....i<.ni<D.......!coia.' i_'r-. 1~IM:.I~Ii8I'...Ic;r;)I.~I'a:i-I''''1 1
a ~ ~ i ~;o:o;o:a:Q,Q:G.Q:i3:~::'B:{3:a!8,K~:~i~j~:~:*j~, 'l'I!I!~ig;i~!~,iifg;!~!~!~f.$:'~!fl.~!~ r~!~I~I~I~ ~i~!~ ~I~,[?I
cc: 0 .! I: .":,, '.' , "'.':; .1: I , ; I I I I I ' , ! J: 1.1 I I . I ' r I ! ! I
a. 0 CD; , , , ",..: '; ,'!", ; j' '001" L , I , F < . ,
-- ---
~ ;!:8 i~':;SCJ>::g:~18' ;S2!::::!~i~i~::!:8 8i8 m
~
o .... ,- g.....<o,.....,'-.")a:> ,~i~:~'~ ~~_:~_!~, ,~I!! g
:c~ ~!~ ; :~~~:~:~::2J g N
'" - i~ '" M --'-'~- ';::::~i~ <">.....,,[:::: !:!2iJ!? ~
~. '-I ' ' m
~, ,
01
~,
w' i
~I- ;!:!ci;' lmi~T~~IS=I~!n;gI~~i~M!:g'~ I~!~ N
I O'~ IM'O'olo'o.....' ,- M'O 0,0'0....: :..glq:j :;i
~~ ,_ .. ,'i' I ,., ,
~~ I
Iii I
, I
,
$18' ::;;
i OiO! ~
f i i :
f I I
I
;881 Ii!
~I~ !olol .-
<..
~..
~
"
= 8 '8i81818'8' i8ig:gisj8!8i
,e 0 :oIOiO!OIO~ :0!01010!0101
I 1: I
..
'S 8;8; 8
. 00 '"
~
c ,c I i I I
w
z Iii i " i
~ !
_cl 8181 i818181818181 ~ w
~
cO 0:0 0'0'0'0,0,0 .- Q
Wji't- ~
ti ~:~
~I ~ CJ);~ I ffi~
~%: , ,
o~ w>-
u '18' isislslsl8: is,8'S:8i81s ;--181-:'- zc
w iI! i~
... ,f 0 :OiOiO:OiO 'OiOloio,o;o' iOt: w<
<... i I ! i ~
.... , , ! , 0
- .. >-
...... .. , 5
U>_ i
w . I
,.. " 1! S8 8
<co
",,i j 00 '" "
.. co .
m .s M
"'~
8~ 88 8 ..
~'iii ..
" cd '" '"
,..", ~i ~
... Ii ~
:r
... 8:' t
z 181
0 .; 8i 1818i$8i8 i8:8:8i$1818;
..
,_ Oi :O!O,o:o_o :o;o:O!OOO~ IO!
;;.
!#
'~ ~'8 ;S:i:;SiO'>i~,!;;:.8 ~;::::::g\:o::.'~':'8i ISiS; 8
;i =i:;:; ;~:~1~!~:~j~' ;~i~iS ~lzl~j~j Ig!g.i !Ij
> O!. !r--.!~!o' I...-;!.,...,...:, ~
<.O!cri ~~N!...-;'...:!-'i~. i~!;ei N
- _, -_ ' . ,r--, ~
C - ~
w,
~
is i! i i
w
01; ~~c;;. 1~I~i~i~:g:~: 1~!~i~i~j~1:gl~:.l~I~1 ~
en ,. 01<"', iM oioioiol"';i ._.Mlolo,olo,!'--, ,OQ OQ: g
~ _;' ".. i . I ",' , ,
~ ul i : ' ! i ' , : ! I' !', I -
~t --. .i.--i'.--~ .-..-,- --
~ z~ V) .........~....,V) ~~I~;~:i1i:t> '<Ii
~ 8,= ~ V),V)i,~.....
;~ - ,~.~.....,)] - _ _'_ _ _ r-- :-,
W
c:( CJ>'O'>- N
~ '" ::) .ci.n
'" Z '0
< "'
~ w
ww w
cc z
zz G
;U z 1 l..t:i ai' ie' , !,
"'''' W Z .',,8 !i ~'~. , . ; I
00 ~ o :., ''}. i' ,o..I't:;i ,~; ,frl
i3~ ~ " !"~. J'''''. . ... i
za: a: !:!: I.!! S0061 I IlTiV);: :::r '='
~~ W D:' ,.1:: 0Ii - ,w,_!'-- "ioo6. ;:=' ~
'" U 1 '!I.3 : . , '"!!iiMi~'ir~1 : !m, ~
~ .~~ ~ i ~li~lii~i~~i~I~181~lj!~!il~~ < :f
g i
o ~ w I:!!'~~I~'!I-!j'-!j~ 1'~Ia:liI j! E
. ,.1 j I i I I I j"
2S !!! ;;;I~ ~, 0.'>' ,:;:! i~l~i~! i~' i:;:i:!!i 4; ~
~
~ : I~!_ N1Mi.!~' !~!_I",iM!~;~'wf !~!-: ~ ~
" :;;!
u ~ 0 (1)' II:: :::::: ~~!~~:~:~<~'~' !~I~i " ~
w a: ,~
a ~ !:: z ~ ,w,~ ~;j-;j..... 'W~';i'''''' <i!';i'~ ,wl;i .8
z ~ '" cC ~'" '" "'~:
'" 0 .
~ u < < < w
---
8.1.
MEMORANDUM
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: DON SPAGNOLO, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER ~
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR THE TALLY HO
CREEK FLOOD BARRIER, PROJECT NO. PW-2002-G6
DATE: SEPTEMBER 24, 2002
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended the City Council:
A. award a construction contract for the Tally Ho Creek Flood Barrier Project to D-
KAL Engineering in the amount of $24,880;
B. authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed a
contingency of $2,500 for use only if needed for unanticipated costs during the
construction phase of the project (total construction costs = $24,880 + $2,500 =
$27,380); and,
C. direct staff to issue the Notice of Award and Notice to Proceed with other
necessary contract documents,
FUNDING:
The City will utilize securities from the Village Glen project to fund the contract.
DISCUSSION:
On September 9, 2002, staff distributed informal bid requests to eight contractors for the
Tally Ho Creek Flood Barrier Project. On September 12, 2002, two bids were publicly
opened for the project. The apparent low bidder, D-KAL Engineering submitted a bid of
$24,880. The bid has been verified for accuracy and found to be in compliance with the
contract specifications.
The project will provide for the installation of a temporary wooden retaining wall along
the top of the banks of the existing City drainage easement from Tally Ho Road to Tally
Ho Creek.
The drainage ditch that runs along the easement has been inundated with sediment,
which impedes the flow of the storm water runoff and could potentially contribute to
flood problems in the area.
-~._- ____n -'
CITY COUNCIL
TALLY HO CREEK FLOOD BARRIER, PROJECT NO. PW-2002-06
SEPTEMBER 24, 2002
PAGE 2
At the February 26, 2002 meeting, the City Council approved funding for an
environmental consultant to provide on-site monitoring for the red-legged frog, which is
required by the Streambed Alteration Agreement with the California Department of Fish
and Game. Based on an initial survey, the recommendations of the biologist indicated
that while the red-legged frog was found in close proximity to the site, "it should be
possible to complete the installation of the fence without impacting the population
assuming work takes place prior to the onset of the rainy season and under the
supervision of a qualified biologist"
The contract time for this project is estimated to be 14 calendar days. Work is expected
to begin on September 25, 2002 and completed by October 9, 2002 as described in the
attached project schedule.
ALTERNATIVES:
The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration:
. Approve staffs recommendations;
. Do not approve staffs recommendations;
. Modify as appropriate and approve staffs recommendations; or
. Provide direction to staff.
Attachments:
1. Bid Opening Log Sheet
2. Project Schedule
.......~_n.~"'""...
~--._- - -~~- -'"...- -
BID OPENING LOG SHEET
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
BID OPENING: September 12, 2002
Tally Ho Creek and Flood Barrier
BIDDER'S NAME. CITY TOTAL
D-KAL Engineering $24,880.00
Nipomo
Papich Construction $31,000.00
~
' (4J/AAAlJAA-
Kelly et ore,
Administrative Services Director/Deputy City Clerk
c: Director of Public Works
City Manager
I
I
ATTACHMENT 2
YfW:i 0/ ~ !jffnvnde
Project Schedule
For
Tally Ho Creek Flood Barrier
(City Project No. PW~2002-06)
Distribution of bid packages to contractors ,..........................'........................... September 9, 2002
Mandatory pre-bid conference .....'..,......,..,......,................................................ September 102002
(City Council Chambers, 2:00 p,m.)
Bid opening ..............,..,..,........,..,...,..,..,...,..,..,.............................,..,............... September 12,2002
(City Council Chambers, 4:30 p,m.)
Award of bid .'..'....'.....,........,..,."..,..,.........,..,................,............,.....,............... September 24,2002
(at City Council meeting)
Notice of Award/Notice to Proceed...............,.................................................. September 25,2002
Pre-construction meeting and training session with biologist ......,........,.......... September 25, 2002
Start construction ........................,..,.................................................................. September 26, 2002
End construction .......................,..,..........................................................................October 9,2002
--"----- ~-,-- ------- ------
8..1.
MEMORANDUM
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: ROB STRONG, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTO~~
SUBJECT: PROPOSED ADDENDUM TO PREVIOUSLY APPROVED elR
CONSULTANT CONTRACT WITH DENISE DUFFY & ASSOCIATES FOR
THE CREEKSIDE CENTER PROJECT; 415 EAST BRANCH STREET;
APPLICANT - RICHARD DEBLAUW
DATE: SEPTEMBER 24, 2002
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that City Council approve a contract addendum to the scope of work and
budget for the Creekside Center EIR.
BACKGROUND:
On January 22, 2002 the City Council approved contracts with the applicant and EIR
consultant for preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Creekside Center
project. Because additional services outside of scope of the original consultant contract are
required, the EIR consultant (Denise Duffy & Associates) is requesting an add-on budget in
the amount of $17,170. Specifically, additional analysis is necessary to complete the Traffic
and Circulation section of the EIR per the City's Traffic Study Guidelines, unanticipated
hazardous materials analysis is alSD required, and there have been unforeseen additional
tasks assigned to the consultant from the City (e.g. additional status report services).
Attachment 1 is a Memorandum from the consultant to the City dated September 19, 2002
requesting a contract amendment to the scope of work and budget.
FUNDING:
The City's rules and procedures for CEOA process provide that the costs associated with the
preparation, printing and distribution of EIRs for private projects shall be bome by the
applicant. In addition to the contract cost, the applicant is required to pay an administrative
fee of 15% of the total EIR cost to compensate for City staff time spent in EIR completion.
For the proposed out of scope items listed in Attachment 1, the City administration fee would
be limited to the actual cost of the traffic impact analysis, which equates to $1,491 for a total
budget adjustment of $18,661.
The applicant has been advised of this amendment to the scope of work and budget for the
EIR and has consented to the proposed addendum (reference Attachment 2).
ALTERNATIVES:
The following altematives are provided for Council's consideration:
-~._- ----
CITY COUNCIL
SEPTEMBER 24. 2002
CREEKSIDE CENTER EIR CONTRACT ADDENDUM
PAGE 2
1. Modify the proposed addendum;
2. Deny the proposed addendum; or
3. Provide alternative direction to staff.
Attachments:
1. Memorandum from Denise Duffy & Assoc. to the City dated September 19, 2002
2. Authorization to proceed signed by the applicant
~--"--
ATTACHMENT 1
Denise Duffy & Associates, Inc.
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING
MEMORANDUM
Date: September 19, 2002
To: Rob Strong and Kelly Heffemon, Community Development Dept.
City of Arroyo Grande
P.O. Box 550
Arroyo Grande, CA 93421
From: Alison Imamura
Subject: Request for Contract Amendment for Creekside Center EIR
Message: Denise Duffy & Associates (DD&A) is currently under contract with the City to prepare
an EIR for the proposed Creekside Center Project in the City of Arroyo Grande (contract
date: Janullly 25, 2002). This memorandum Serves as a request for amendment to that
scope of work and budget for additional services related to this contract for the areas of
traffic, hazardous materials, and project management.
Traffic Issues: On August 12,2002, DD&A submitted a request for contract amendment
that included the scope and costs for DD&A to have ATE complete a traffic analysis and
for additional progress report services by DD&A. Based on a telephone call ftom Rob
Strong today, the City has conferred with the applicants and have decided to proceed to
initiate the ATE scope of work and budget. Therefore, this revised amendment includes
the ATE traffic analysis contract amendment and DD&A management and administrative
costs for that work and ATE's scope and budget letter dated August 7, 2002 is included
as Attachment 1 to this memorandum.
Hazardous Materials: DD&A understands there are hazardous materials issues on the
site and despite attempts to research site clean-up and closure infonnation, has been
unable to find this infonnation. Based on the City's request, DD&A attempted to
analyze the impacts of the project related to this issue byperfonning outreach to resource ,
agencies as documented in our attached August 1 - September 11, 2002 Progress Report.
This hazardous materials analysis was not anticipated as an issue of concern during the
Te/: (831) 373-4341
Fax: (831) 373-1417
947 Cass street, Suite 5
Monterey, CA 93940
'----
Mr. StronglMs, Heffemon
September 19, 2002
Page 2
scoping process for the EIR, and therefore, no hazardous materials task or budget was
provided. In the table below, the anticipated costs for future work on this issue is
provided. This does not, however, include any work already perfonned based on the
City's requests nor does it include the services of a hazardous materials consultant to
perfonn any additional soil sampling or remediation services. Based on Attachment 2, a
letter from the San Luis Obispo County Health Department, they may request additional
soil sampling at the site at some point. The City has requested that DD&A not contract
with a hazardous materials consultant to address this issue, and therefore, we will
complete this EIR section using existing infonnation and verbal infonnation received
from the City to date regarding the site status. DD&A can develop this language in the
Draft EIR with approval of the budget provided herein.!
Project Management: Reiterating our August 12,2002 memorandum, due to the delays
in receipt of appropriately adequate traffic analyses from the applicant and the other
necessary project infonnation, DD&A has exhausted our Task 2 (Progress Reporting)
budget which was assumed to cost $1,380 (based on the assumption that all project
infonnation would be received by February 1, 2002 and therefore, no more than six
progress reports would be necessary). Therefore, this contract amendment also includes
the same request for add-on budget to continue to provide this service, if desired by the
City (see DD&A Task 2, below). It also includes costs for contract administration and
project management for out-of-scope services and time delays.
Budget: On the following page is a proposed budget for DD&A to perfonn these
additional services (including ATEDs scope of work). The total estimated fixed-fee
budget is $17,170, and will be billed based upon percentage of task complete. Please
review and provide comments to me directly or if you are in agreement with the tenns of
the amendment, please sign the attached authorization to proceed to authorize the
additional work scope.
As always, please call with questions or comments.
I Based on the knowledge obtained to date, it is unknown whether the resource agencies (Le., County Health, Dept.
of Toxic Substances Control, etc.) will consider this latter alternative to result in adequate analysis of impacts and
mitigation for the hazardous materials in the Draft ErR
Mr. StronglMs, Heffernon
September 19,2002
Page 3
ADD-ON BUDGET ESTIMATE
DD&A Out-of-Scope Costs by Task
Project Assistant Clerical Total by
Manager Planner Task
Rate $100 $65 $45 -
Task I: Project Management/Contract Administration 6 8 I $1,165
Task 2: Additional Progress/Status Report services (six 3 10 2 $1,040
additional reports assumed; I or 2 per month)
Task 3: Hazardous materials: ElR section with existing 8 36 2 $3,230
infonnation '
Total Hours by Staff 17 54 5
Cost by Staff $1,700 $3,510 $225 $5,435
Miscellaneous Expenses (mlleage, copying, phone, fax) $300
DD&A SUBTOTAL $5,735
Subconsultant Expenses
Associated Transportation Engineers (see August 12, 2002 memo) $9,943
Hazardous Materials consultant (TBD, if requested by the City) ---
DD&A Administration (15%) $1,491
SubconsuUantSubtotal $11,434
TOTAL $17,170
2 This does not include any work by a hazardous materials consultant, including additional sitc work and soil
testing, nor any additional research by DD&A. See discussion on previous page, also. It is unknown whether
resource agencies will fmd the level of existing infonnation to be provided by DD&A within this budget to be
adequate to identify and mitigate significant hazardous materials impacts per CEQA guidelines,
---"----.., "- ---
Mr. StrongIMs. Heffernon
September 19,2002
Page 4
AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED
ODD
Note: If the scope, fee, terms of payment and conditions described in the Denise Duffy &
Associates, Inc. attached memorandum of proposal are acceptable, please sign and return
a copyof this authorization form for our files. Thank you.
Project Name: CREEKSIDE CENTER ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Accepted by (signature): Dated:
Print Name:
Title:
On Behalf of:
Mailing Address:
FeelScope Confirmation:
c::J AMENDMENT TO JANUARY 25. 2002 CONTRACT FOR ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC ANALYSES,
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS TASKS. AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT SERVICES FOR THE CREEKSIDE
CENTER EIR IN THE AMOUNT OF $17 .170,
Existing Contract Date, if applicable: JANUARY 25. 2002
If Inyoice should be sent to a different person or location, please complete below:
Mailing Address:
Attention:
Return to: Denise Duffy & Associates, Inc.
947 Cass Street, Suite 5
Monterey, CA 93940
'____m__
S"F 17 02 03.07p David Loomis 805-489-7292 p.. 1
COUNtY OF 5.AN LUIS OBISPO
HEALTH AGENCY
Department of Public Health
9191 Jo.'nsonMnue. P.o.1IOIc1489
So'Ilu.s Obispo, <Ali/omia 93406
(805) 549.5S00
Reply to: Division of Environmental Health
549-5544
October. 27, 1986
E.C. Loomis & Sons
Post Office Box 490
Arroyo Grande, CA 93420
Attn: David Loomi s .
Re: rtEMEDIAL ACT10~, 405 E. Branch, Arroyo Grande, California
(locationj
This is in response to yo~r request for a confirmation of the comp1etion of this
remedial action project. ~ith the provision that the results obtained ouring
the site investigation were accurate and representative of existing conditions,
it ~s the position of this office that mitigation of soil contamination has
;)e;on completed.
It'should be pointed out that this Jetter does not re]ieve you of any responsi-
Dj) ities mandated ur.der the Ca J ifornia Health and Safety Code if additiona 1 or
previou~ly unidentified contamination is discovered at the subject site.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact our office at
(aDS) 549-5544.
TH1 MAZZACANO, R.S., Olr'ector
Division of Env;ron~ental Health
cJk~ .r!siujJ.(jJ
GAY GR R
Environmental Health Officer I
TM/ GG: I:s
cc: R.W.Q.e.D. for underground tank removal
,
- -
-. -. - ~---
--~- --
City of Al"l"oyo (;ra.,d..
Fax ATTACHMENT 2
To: Richard DeBlauw; Duane DeBlauw From: Kelly Heffernan, Associate Planner
FIUG 489-1270 p....: 4 (including cover>
Phone: 489-7448 Date: 9120/02
Re: Creekside EIR Contract Addendum cc: Rob Strong, Community DevekJpment Dir.
o Urgent o For Review o P..... Comment )Qal_ Reply 0 PI__
Recycle
Attached is the request from DD&A for an EIR contract amendment. The City
administration fee will be limited to the actual cost of the traffic impact analysis, or
15% of $9,943. Hence, we will be going to Council on 9/24/02 with an addendum to
the contract budget as follows:
$17,170 (DD&A)
$ 1,491 (15% City administration fee)
$18,661 (TOTAL)
Please sign and retum this Memo (fax is ok) as authorization to proceed with the
attached contract addendum. We would appreciate a response no later than noon
today. Thank you.
;fl fJ~ ?~2~-,.?2-
Richard DeBlauw Date
On behalf of DB & M Property, LLC <
--
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE 9.a.
CITY COUNCIL
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a Public Hearing will be held by the City Council of the City of
Arroyo Grande to consider the following item:
APPLICANT: City of Arroyo Grande
LOCATION: Citywide
PROPOSAL: Proposed expenditure of State funds for law enforcement services provided in
the FY 2002-03 State Budget, $100,000 being the City of Arroyo Grande's
approximate allocation.
The FY 2002-03 State Budget continued funding for the Citizens' Option for
Public Safety (COPS) Program. Under this program, $100 million was allocated
to local law enforcement agencies to enhance delivery of services. These funds
must be used to augment local law enforcement services and may not be used
to supplant existing funds.
The law requires that the funds be appropriated pursuant to written requests
from the Chief of Police, Govemor Gray Davis stated in the FY 2002-03 State
Budget that the intended use for COPS funding is the addition of sworn peace
officers. In support of this intent, the State of California will provide the City of
Arroyo Grande $100,000 per year through the COPS program. The Chief of
Police will develop his requests pursuant to these criteria and will be presenting
those requests for consideration.
REPRESENTATIVE: Rick TerBorch, Chief of Police
Any person affected or concerned by the proposal may submit written comments to the Office of
the Chief of Police before the City Council hearing, or appear and be heard in support of or
opposition to the proposal at the time of the hearing.
Any person interested in the proposed expenditures may contact the Office of the Chief of Police at
the Police Department, 200 North Halcyon Road, Arroyo Grande, California, during normal
business hours (8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.).
If you challenge an item in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone
else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to
the City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing.
Failure of any person to receive the notice shall not constitute grounds for any court to invalidate
the action of the legislative body for which the notice was given.
Date and Time of Hearing: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 at 7:00 p.m.
Place of Hearing: Arroyo Grande City Council Chambers
215 E. Branch Street
~~~ttL- Arroyo Grande, Cafifornia 93420
Kelly et re
Director of Administrative Services/Deputy City Clerk Publish 1 time, September 13. 2002
MEMORANDUM
TO: CITY COUNCIL
RICK TerBORCH, CHIEF OF POLIC~
FROM:
SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING CONCERNING USE OF STATE 2002-03 CITIZENS
OPTION FOR PUBLIC SAFETY (COPS) FUNDS
DATE: SEPTEMBER 24, 2002
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended, after conducting a public hearing and making any modifications,
the City Council approve the expenditure of $1 00,000 as authorized by the State for
law enforcement services under the Citizens Option for Public Safety (COPS)
Program. In addition, it is recommended that the City Council authorize the
expenditure of $3,112 carried over from the City's FY 2001-02 COPS Program.
FUNDING:
There is no General Fund impact. This expenditure involves $100,000 received by
the City under the COPS Program in FY 2002-03 and $3,112 carried over from the
FY 2001-02 COPS Program.
DISCUSSION:
The FY 2002-03 State Budget continues funding for the Citizens Option for Public
Safety (COPS) Program. Under this program, funding is allocated to local law
enforcement for the delivery of services. These funds must be used to augment
local law enforcement services and may not be used to supplant existing funding
for such services. As in the past, the declared intent of the Governor and
Legislature is to continue COPS as a multi-year program. However, a new
appropriation to fund the program will be required each succeeding fiscal year.
This year, the State Budget which contained the appropriation did not receive final
approval until September 5, 2002.
The law requires that these funds be appropriated pursuant to written requests from
the Chief of Police. The City Council must consider these requests separate and
apart from the proposed law enforcement allocations from the General Fund.
Additionally, the City must establish a separate interest bearing fund (Fund 271) to
record the receipt and expenditures of monies received pursuant to this program.
The enabling legislation requires that the City conduct a public hearing in
September of each year to consider requests from the Chief of Police. The funds
---------..-- "--- -~--- -------
CITY COUNCIL
PUBLIC HEARING CONCERNING USE OF STATE 2002-03 CITIZENS OPTION
FOR PUBLIC SAFETY (COPS) FUNDS
SEPTEMBER 24, 2002
PAGE 2
are scheduled to be transferred this month from the State to the San Luis Obispo
Cou nty Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund (SLESF), which is
administered by the County of San Luis Obispo. The County SLESF Oversight
Committee is scheduled to meet to review the requests from the cities in the County
on Monday, September 30, 2002. This review, which is required by law, is to
ensure that the use of the COPS funds comply with the requirements and
restrictions set forth in State law. Upon approval of the City's expenditure plan for
this year's COPS funds by the County SLESF Oversight Committee, the County
Auditor-Controller will forward the designated funds to the City. The allocation for
the City of Arroyo Grande is $100,000.
In FY 2000-01, funding for the COPS Program was set at a minimum of $100,000
per law enforcement agency. In doing so, Governor Gray Davis stated that the
intended use of COPS funding was the addition of sworn peace officers. In order to
support the addition of sworn personnel, the FY 2000-01 State Budget contained a
provision declaring its intent to provide each agency with $100,000 per year for
each of the following three (3) years. However, a new appropriation is needed for
each succeeding year and, as mentioned previously, the State's FY 2002-03
Budget provided this appropriation.
At a Public Hearing at its September 26, 2000 meeting, the City Council approved
the Chief of Police's recommendation to utilize the FY 2000-01 COPS funding to
add one (1) additional Police Sergeant, and to upgrade two (2) Police Officer
positions to Senior Police Officer positions. These personnel actions have taken
place and are currently in force. As stated in the report to the City Council on
September 26, 2000, it was the intent of the Chief of Police to utilize the COPS
funds to continue to pay for these personnel actions during each of the three (3)
succeeding years. At the September 26, 2000 meeting, the City Council was in
favor of that proposal. The City Council again approved the expenditure for a
second year on September 25, 2001. Therefore, the Chief of Police recommends
that the FY 2002-03 COPS funding be utilized to continue to fund these personnel
actions. I n adopting the City's FY 2002-03 Budget, the City Council previously gave
tentative approval to this recommendation (the $100,000 COPS allocation is listed
as an anticipated transfer from Fund 271 to the General Fund in the Budget).
However, as stated previously, State law requires that a public hearing be held in
September to give formal approval regarding the use of these funds.
Effective January 1, 2001, State law was amended to require that COPS funds
must be spent within a two year period or returned to the State Controller's Office
(based on the State fiscal year), There is $3,112 left over in the COPS fund from
--..-------- ----
CITY COUNCIL
PUBLIC HEARING CONCERNING USE OF STATE 2002-03 CITIZENS OPTION
FOR PUBLIC SAFETY (COPS) FUNDS
SEPTEMBER 24, 2002
PAGE 3
FY 2001-02. This is primarily due to interest earned by the fund over the past two
years. These funds must be expended by June 30, 2003. In that the State Budget
was not approved until September 5 and the uncertainty of funding during the State
Budget deliberations this year, staff has not developed a specific spending plan for
these funds. Given this situation and the relatively small amount of funds ($3,112),
staff recommends that the monies be designated for use in the Fund's "Special
Department Supplies" line item (271-4202-5255). This will allow staff to purchase
non-capital equipment and supplies not contained in this year's City Budget. The
equipment/supplies would be used to further the Police Department's operations,
including its community services/volunteer programs.
ALTERNATIVES:
The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration:
- Approve the Chief of Police's recommendation to utilize the FY 2002-03
COPS funds to continue to fund the personnel actions originally approved by
the Council under the FY 2000-01 COPS Program and to expend funds
carried over from the FY 2001-02 COPS Program;
- Modify as appropriate and approve the recommendation of the Chief of
Police; or
- Do not approve the Chief of Police's recommendations.
.~
I.b.
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
CITY COUNCIL MEET'NG
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande will hold a Public Hearing
on the following project:
CASE NO. Amended Conditional Use Permit Case No. 02-003 and Variance Case No,
02-004
APPLICANT: Larry Persons
LOCATION: 1530 East Grand Avenue
PROPOSAL: Revisions to previously approved 108-unit senior housing project.
ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMINATION: Mitigated Negative Declaration
REPRESENTATIVE: RRM Design Group
The City Council will consider revisions to a previously approved project to construct a senior apartment
complex. The revisions include combining the six (6) original structures into two (2) structures, decreasing
the number of elevators from five to two and creating a third subterranean floor toward the rear portion of
the property. Also proposed is a Variance to deviate from the retaining wall height, front setback, and
building height.
In compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the Community Development Department
prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration on the above project. The Mitigated Negative Declaration is
available for review at the Community Development Department, City of Arroyo Grande.
Any person affected or concerned by this application may submit written comments to the Community
Development Department at 214 E. Branch Street, Arroyo Grande, Califomia, during normal business
hours (8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M.) before the public hearing, or appear and be heard in support of or
opposition to the project and the environmental impacts at the time of hearing,
IF YOU CHALLENGE AN ITEM IN COURT, YOU MAY BE LIMITED TO RAISING ONLY THOSE ISSUES YOU OR
SOMEONE ELSE RAISED AT THE PUBLIC HEARING DESCRIBED IN THIS NOTICE, OR IN WRITTEN
CORRESPONDENCE DELIVERED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AT, OR PRIOR TO, THE PUBLIC HEARING.
FAILURE OF ANY PERSON TO RECEIVE THE NOTICE SHALL NOT CONSTITUTE GROUNDS FOR ANY COURT
TO INVALIDATE THE ACTION OF THE LEGISLATIVE BODY FOR WHICH THE NOTICE WAS GIVEN,
Time, Date and Place of Hearing:
Tuesday, September 24,2002 at 7:00 p.m.
Arroyo Grande City Council Chambers
215 E. Branch Street
Arroyo Grande, California 93420
o V--
irector of Administrative Servicesl
Deputy City Clerk
Publish 1T, Friday, September 13, 2002
.._w._..._ --~.._--
MEMORANDUM
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: ~ ROB STRONG
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
BY: ~t KELLY HEFFERNON
ASSOCIATE PLANNER
SUBJECT: PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO PREVIOUSLY APPROVED 108-
UNIT SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT; AMENDED CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT CASE NO. 02-003 AND VARIANCE CASE NO. 02-
004; 1530 EAST GRAND AVENUE; APPLICANT. LARRY
PERSONS
DATE: SEPTEMBER 24, 2002
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission recommends the Council:
1. Adopt a Resolution approving Amended Conditional Use Permit Case No. 02-
003; and
2. Adopt a Resolution approving Variance Case No. 02-004.
FUNDING:
There is no financial impact to the City as a result of approving the proposed
amendments.
LOCATION:
f ~'~0
?
i ...~ ..
i!'~ .\1;
CITY COUNCIL
SEPTEMBER 24. 2002
ACUP 02-003; VAR 02-004
PAGE 2
BACKGROUND:
The Planning Commission and City Council approved a mixed-use project for this site
on February 19, 2002 and March 20, 2002, respectively (see Attachments 1-3). This
approval also included City financial assistance through a Disposition and Development
Agreement (DDA) for the senior housing portion of the project. The proposed changes
will not affect the 100% affordability of the project as previously approved; any
modification to the project that modifies the affordability to less than 100% will require
reconsideration by the City Council.
The applicant is retuming with amendments to the senior housing portion of the project
as follows:
1. Combine the six (6) original buildings into two (2) buildings.
2. Decrease the number of elevators from ten (10) to two (2).
3. Eliminate the amount of fill being imported to the site and create a third
subterranean floor on the back portion of the property.
From all exterior perspectives, the project is only two (2) stories. From the interior
courtyard perspective, however. three (3) stories will be visible to the north. The
variance application is to deviate from the retaining wall height, front setback, and
building height. The applicant will bring a three-dimensional model to the meeting to
help illustrate these changes. There are no proposed changes to the approved
Tentative Parcel Map or zoning.
Because the City Council approved the original project due to the DDA, the proposed
amendments must be processed in the same manner. The Planning Commission
reviewed the two applications on August 20, 2002 and recommended the City Council
approve the project with a reduction in the requested height variance from 40 feet to 34 Y.
feet (reference Attachment 4 for draft Planning Commission meeting minutes and
Attachment 5 for Section 16.12.100 of the Development Code conceming
reconsideration).
DISCUSSION
Project Description
The project is to construct two (2) apartment buildings for low and moderate-income
senior housing, including a private senior center. The total number of units proposed
(108) is unchanged, although the bedroom mix would be modified from 32 two-beclroom
and 76 one-bedroom units to 20 two-bedroom and 88 one-bedroom units. The buildings
are "U"-shaped in design, with the senior center located on the SDutheast comer of the
first floor and the recreational facilities located in the center of the development. Both
structures will be two stories tall when viewed from outside the project, but because the
existing terrace or depression located towards the back of the property will not be filled as
previously proposed, the structures will be three stories on the north side when viewed
from within the project courtyard. The amount of fill and overall grading will be minimized
with the revised project, and the grade difference between the residential and commercial
portions of the entire 5-acre site will also be minimized, eliminating the need for retaining
walls and enhancing the handicapped accessibility between the two land uses. The
revised project alSD improves parking availability by providing two additional spaces, and
CITY COUNCIL
SEPTEMBER 24, 2002
ACUP 02-003; VAR 02-004
PAGE 3
increases the amount of landscaping by 8%. The project statistics are summarized in
the table below.
Proiect Summarv
Area (s.f.) #of Max. % % Bldg. Parking Parking
Units Bldg. Coverage Required Provided
Coverage Proposed
Allowed
Senior Housing:
31,253.5 52
Buildinc A:
Senior Housing and
Community Center
31,253.5 56
Buildinc B:
Senior Housing
Total: 62,507 108 60% 44% 170 spaces 132 spaces
(88 one- (Parking
bdrm and Variance No.
20 two- 01-007
bdrms) obtained
3120102)
Variance Findinas
The applicant is seeking deviation from the following three (3) Development Code
requirements:
Development Code Proposed
Requirement
1. Retalnlna Wall Helaht 6' maximum 8'
2. Front Yard Setback 20' minimum 13'
3. Bulldlna Height 30' or 2-stories, whichever is less 38',3-stories
A variance application can be approved only if ALL of the following findings can be made
in an affirmative manner.
1. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified
regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship not
otherwise shared by others within the surrounding area.
2. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions
applicable to the property involved or to the intended use of the property
that do not apply generally to other properties classified in the same
zone.
3. That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified
regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the
owners of other properties classified in the same zone.
4. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special
privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in
the same zone.
CITY COUNCIL
SEPTEMBER 24. 2002
ACUP 02-003: VAR 02-004
PAGE 4
5. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public
health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or
improvements in the vicinity.
6. That the granting of a variance is consistent with the objectives and
policies of the General Plan and the intent of the Development Code.
The applicant has provided an explanation of how each finding can be affirmed (see
Attachment 6). Staff concurs with the applicant's justification and believes that all of the
findings can be made to approve the variance.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
A public notice was sent to all property owners within 300 feet of the proposed project,
and a pUblic notice was placed in the Five Cities Times Press Recorder. Staff has
received one letter of concem regarding the revised project design prior to agenda
report distribution (Attachment 7). The applicant will be present to give a presentation of
the project.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:
Staff has reviewed the revised project in compliance with the Califomia Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA), the CEQA Guidelines and the City of Arroyo Grande Rules and
Procedures for implementation of CEQA. Based on this review, staff has determined that
the proposed project is Categorically Exempt per Section 15305 of the CEQA Guidelines.
ALTERNATIVES:
The following altematives are presented for Council consideration:
1. Approve the Planning Commission's recommendation and adopt the resolutions;
2. Modify the Planning Commission's recommendation and adopt the reSDlutions;
3. Take tentative action to deny the project application and direct staff to prepare
the appropriate resolutions for City Council action; or
4. Provide other direction to staff.
If the Council selects altemative 3, staff will retum with the appropriate resolution at a
later meeting.
Attachments:
Resolution approving Amended Conditional Use Permit Case No. 02-003
Exhibit "A": Conditions of Approval
Exhibits "81 - 88": Project Plans
Resolution approving Variance Case No. 02-004
Exhibit "A": Conditions of Approval
1. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of February 19, 2002
2. City Council Meeting Minutes of March 12,2002
3. City Council Meeting Minutes of March 20, 2002
4. Draft Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of September 3, 2002
5. Section 16.12.100 of the Development Code
6. Variance criteria response from applicant
7. Letter from Lydia and Richard Dell dated August 28, 2002
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING AMENDED
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 02-003, LOCATED
ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF EAST GRAND
AVENUE AND COURTLAND STREET, APPLIED FOR BY
LARRY PERSONS
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande has considered Amended
Conditional Use Permit Case No. 02-003, filed by Larry Persons, to revise the senior
housing portion of a previously approved a mixed use development (CUP 01-014); and
WHEREAS, the City Council has held a public hearing on this application in accordance
with the City Code; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this project is consistent with the General Plan and
the environmental documents associated therewith; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed this project in compliance with the Califomia
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and the Arroyo Grande
Rules and Procedures for Implementation of CEQA and has determined that the
proposed project is Categorically Exempt per Section 15305 of the CEQA Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds, after due study, deliberation and public hearing, the
following circumstances exist:
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL
Conditional Use Permit Findings:
1. The proposed use is permitted within the Senior Housing (SR) District pursuant to
Section 16.16.050 of the Development Code, and complies with all applicable
provisions of the Development Code, the goals and objectives of the Arroyo
Grande General Plan, and the development policies and standards of the City.
2. The proposed use will not impair the integrity and character of the district in which
it is to be established or located because the proposed use is similar to
surrounding uses.
3. The site is suitable for the type and intensity of use or development that is
proposed because all the necessary easements, circulation, parking and setbacks
would be provided.
4. There are adequate provisions for water, sanitation, and public utilities and
services to ensure the public health and safety.
5. The proposed use will not be detrimental to the pUblic health, safety, or welfare, or
materially injurious to properties and improvements in the vicinity because the
proposed project would not create adverse environmental impacts.
I
----- _ _ _______. n_____ _ --- --~... ------------ - ---~_.__..._--------_...- _J
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 2
Architectural Reyiew Findings:
1. The proposal is consistent with the general architectural review guidelines for the
City of Arroyo Grande.
2. The proposal is consistent with the text and maps of the Arroyo Grande General
Plan, and the City of Arroyo Grande Development Code.
3. The proposal will not be detrimental to the health, safety, comfort and general
welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed
project.
4. The general appearance of the proposed building is consistent with the character
of the neighborhood because the size and design are consistent with other
buildings in the vicinity.
5. The proposal is not detrimental to the orderly and harmonious development of the
City.
6. The proposal will not impair the desirability of investment or occupation in the
neighborhood.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Arroyo
Grande hereby approves Amended Conditional Use Permit Case No. 02-003, with the
above findings and subject to the conditions as set forth in Exhibit "A", attached hereto
and incorporated herein by this reference.
On motion by Council Member , seconded by Council Member
, and by the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 24th day of September 2002.
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 3
MICHAEL A. LADY, MAYOR
ATTEST:
KELLY WETMORE, DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES/
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
TIMOTHY J. CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY
-------- I
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 4
EXHIBIT "A"
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
AMENDED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 02-003
Applicant. Larry Persons
Location. Northwest Comer of
East Grand Avenue and Courtland Street
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
GENERAL CONDITIONS
This approval authorizes amendments to a previously approved 108-unit senior housing
project as shown in the attached Exhibits "B1 - B8".
1. The applicant shall ascertain and comply with all Federal, State, County and City
requirements as are applicable to this project.
2. The applicant shall comply with all conditions of approval for Amended Conditional
Use Permit Case No. 02-003.
3. The applicant shall comply with all conditions of approval for Conditional Use
Permit Case No. 01-014 (Exhibit "C").
4. This application shall automatically expire on September 24, 2004 unless a
building permit is issued. Thirty days prior to the expiration of the approval, the
applicant may apply for an extension of one (1) year from the original date of
expiration.
5. Development shall occur in substantial conformance with the plans presented to
the City Council at the meeting of September 24,2002, and marked Exhibits "B1 -
B8".
6. The applicant shall agree to defend at his/her sole expense any action brought
against the City, its present or former agents, officers, or employees because of
the issuance of said approval, or in anyway relating to the implementation thereof,
or in the altemative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the
City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any court costs and attomey's fee's
which the City, its agents, officers or employees may be required by a court to pay
as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its
own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not
relieve applicant of hislher obligations under this condition.
- -------- -------
'~''''''''''''-''''' ..............'.. ......"'" nI.>I.I....'W.........w..'\iI........"'.........,..... ...................,. "",tQ/,tUl.l.o< ! """'~"'''.' ..................,
\\ENGINEERIN(U~R\HP LMerJllt 5SU5SI MX PS
EXHIBIT B1
.
If .
I .
I :
II. f:11 lillil~ ilf 'iI~
I : '},,11I, ,I ~ iw~
I ; f I,{l ',! :1
I ! Ii! · ~ n-.
I n 'I ,
, ~
i ~
i r . r .,
i II II II
, I, II II
I i fi n Q
! 0 ::s
i ~
I ., O\:::s ^
I ~ ~ n ..
! "< :::s ~
I 0
i -. "V
i tj')O... g.
! ,
I Q , C
! ~
I ~ ~
I 1"JIIUUil'." .~:t- ~
I 1 I ilql IL.
I I II {Iff i r If t:, C"I 0 0
i i J If 'II n Q C
, f I ~ _
I g Ii hI II! I! Ii! tn -. en 0 I:
! 1 {~JI c -h
! f I..j I ; II '" Q -. ~ .,
.i " t t f '" .,
! ! I ~ ::i:::Scn
i C' \C -. -+
! ~ -
,
I :::s Q
,
i tn
! ~~t;~~~E ;- ::s
i.. i IJJUII~ ..
~ i!!~:D ~i ~ ~
iif ~; ~ ~ ~!I=i ~ Q.
i e. ~Q ~ !!!< ~II ! ~ ..
f 0 be N ~ I x
i ~ ~'" g m I
i == ~~ N C H ~~
L e 11 ~~
Ii 5'!5' :!I
!~GQ m.
~!~~.Y.~""~!:~!!!:!.~J!""~~!.!.!~_!!!!~___......"....."'.."..,,..."'.._._..""..."...,,_.."'_."'......."'.."""'."""""""
----- -~-----
- - ---
. EXHIBIT B2
h .
I .
j, I:m
it ~-
I .
II'
I .
j; " II ! III " 1~ 11
i ~ II I ,II 'I I~
!
1
i ~
! ~
! ~
! ! ~~
,
,
t I_I..... J
I !
i I, I "I r I -
\ '\' r p: ~
, i I Iii "/- I .,1
! ',", ".. "') r _....-
i . ' ~ ~ \ / ') I'~'----'- ,I "--/
I i m -1 =~~
I ~ ~ :::::
! ~
I ~ ~
,
J
I
I
i
,
!
!
1
(
I
!
i
i
!
i
,
i
,
i
1 ~
I
! -
!
i..
~
FrIJ ~~'
!!ID . J. "( )0'
j E!.n ': ..--j
! 0 g q I e' -,...,,--.-"'-"'~ J /
: .. Q' -------, ,
! =""
iO~ [11
Iw a ~ I
=S!!!' ~-
iuol:l ~I" I"
:=IRI ::J~ II
Ai,~!.:~,y.~m,~.!.~.r.!!!!::.~...~.~!!.!~.!:!~~m...-.m.........-....-____..___._....._.........m..m.......m._m...m_........m'
-"---
EXHIBIT B3 I
. ~ f!J1 ~ I 01 01 @! I
II . &
I . 1 I , \
Ilt~. I , , HIIIIII'
1111111 111111111111111111111111111 11111111 PIII11 IIUIII 111111 111111111 ~
.I : I i:
. .
i iiiI'I!lIIIIiPIIIIIP'IIII'I'I'lf 111111" IHIII I'!I(I 111111 1'1111111 111111"
I I I " I I I
< .\ I
I
I ~
IIIPIII HIIIII"III i
I I I ~
1"'11'1 IIIIIPjllI! ~
t
t
I ~I
i 1
, 1111111111111111
\
! II I ijtl II 'II II H
,
! I
I
I
!
\
!
I
,
q
! i
j
! ~
j
i
,
i ~
I
I
I I
J
;'"
,e,
'"
I:: n
r \I) g
IIID g
, e"O
! 'c
i CI c
i"';:::
I =~ __ t
i C ~ -
! 11 0 '
~ .
i~Ei'~ 'i
!t:1JQ ~
@Jj.~!!:~.~~."~!.~!!!!~.?",~~!!.!~!.~.~"......".."."....."...,,..--...""'."."'''..'''.'''''''.--.''''..''''..'''''.....''''.'''''''''''.'''''
------- -~----- _n__ -
EXHIBIT B4
--- -.....---
.
!I =
Ijr~.
,I :
, "
I .
!
,
f
I
.1
I
!
I ~
I
;
I
,
,
,
I . T
,~ ......j i~\
~ IT I ml'IlIl!1
i~ 1- 1 1111
I~Cl) fi) r' 1IIIillllll
i~ . II"
, n ' II ~ ~ III
I ::I . -
i o'~ I " II
i "'1
i~!;(
, 0 .
: !:
!-Cf.I
ISS'~- .
,~ ~
fm
'~.; ,6.:!.:!9.y.9.,...Q.z.:~~.~..~2....g.:~~}.!.:f.~!P..!,~..",..........................",..................,......................................"'.................m........"'........,"''''........'''''
------
EXHIBIT B5
--- --.....----
.
II .
I .
!'r~.
11' :
I 0
, 0
i . X_...:::::---"____
i
,
,
I
i
! f
, q
i
,
!
i
! 0
i ~
j ~
. .1
i
,
i
j
i
I "1 ...11111
~ J; . Willi
i;: .! .;1'1\1
ii! [/.) . . I I
i ~ \ I
i 1:1
, ~.
! 0 .
i ...
i::t:
iOe:
!~~
If;rn.-<
!;::st= -,:1_
1....!:J CJ~
I;:CJQ :J~
(m,~,!:!~'y'~""Q!:~g~~.?""~,~Ef~!E.-i.~.."."."""""...".,,,,..,,....."".."""".,"',.""'.......,"',,,,.,,,,,,",,,,,,,,,"'"""",,.,,,,."'''"'''''''
-"--..-.
.-~-----
EXHIBIT B6
.
if "
!~ :
'T
i' :.
,. .
j' .
. .
II .
I .
i :
i
!
I
~ [IJ
; t!!J
.
~ ('\
; 0
! ~ ,
,
t
, ~
,
, 0
i 0
! lid
I
1
!
!
;
!
t
,
;
I
l
,
I . . .
i
I
i
!
! . . .
.! .
! I
I ;
~
i
I [IJ
I ooj
I ~
,
; 0
!
j 0
I lid
,
!..
is.
'"
u: ~
i...C'ljn . .
'5 =r
!fD::;:
i E!.~
I Q a
."1-
. CJ
j =-'
; Q a!
I ~ OJ.
j... 0_
ie .~::::
!III o~
i:UO ~q
r~t~!:!'~'y'~""~!:~!!!!~,"""~.~.!!f~!.:~.~~"".,,,,,,,,,,,..,,,,,,,,,..,,..."""'..."...........".."'.."'..."'...."..."'.,,",,."'.....,,"
I
_.- -~
EXHIBIT B7
. .
" .
!I :
hr.
" -
I! .
. .
I .
I) . ~
' .
! ~
j
;
;
j I
I ~
I
~ ~ ~
,
,
,
i
i
!
i ~
I ~ IDJ
i
~
,
,
, IDJ IDJ
!
,
,
,
,
;
I
!
I
,
,
i
i
,
,
(
!
;
~
! S
,
; Q
I ~
;
,~
!.!-
I~
F'[I}~
!I~ s;
i a.i
' 0
1..-
, '"
\ =~'
i 0 OJ.
'~! 0_
i! .:3~
!~IIQ i!''i
=... ::::J
001.~~.Y.:~._~!.~!!!!~-1..-!:~-!!!!?~~~-..-.....----...--_.."...--.....----.....-.....-.....----.---.....-..---.----..--.....--..-.----..
__.__._n___.___...
N~t\t401038~aubmltt8l\ReeldenIlalEleV8t1on3.dwg,07J2UlOO211:36:33/'H..FWWII\CoJOn,
\\ENGlNEfRING_SR\HP a....-.s.t 5SWSI we PS
EXHIBIT B8
i
.
II '"
. 1 .
In. . ,
,
II :
, d
, .
!
!
!
!
~
!
!
i
, ~ ~
I " "
I c: c:
.. ..
.. ..
-< -
i " "
! .. "
! 0- 0.
m
I m -
- ..
! .. <
~ < "
" ..
..
, -. -.
"
" "
j "
~
I ~ m
tJ\ "
" co
i c: ..
, ..
i ::J' m
i m -
, ..
! - <
..
1 < "
" ..
-.
; .. "
1 -. "
0
" ~
} ~
,
!
;
i
I
I
I ~ ~
, ~ ~
i
,
,
;
,
,
!
!
!
,
!
!
!
!
! ~.
'..
!! ~~::D
f rIJ ~~ ~ m
;i! Ii · ~
I. Q U" -
i Q 08 <
i == ! N ~
II~ ~m ,
Ii .
!=QQ ~
l!:._. -
\ ?:; I ~O.Y-~ G~n':!~,._<<2~.~~.!!?!'.!.~~....."....._............."......_..."""-................"..-.,,.""-............""....."""..
_______u______
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 5
EXHIBIT "C"
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 01-014
Applicant. Larry Persons
Location. Northwest Comer of
East Grand Avenue and Courtland Street
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
GENERAL CONDITIONS
This approval authorizes construction of a mixed-use development, including 108 senior
apartment units and three commercial structures totaling 18,879 square feet as shown in
the attached Exhibits "D1 - D13".
1. The applicant shall ascertain and comply with all Federal, State, County and City
requirements as are applicable to this project.
2. The applicant shall comply with all conditions of approval for Conditional Use
Permit Case No. 01-014.
3. This application shall automatically expire on February 19, 2004 unless a building
permit is issued. Thirty days prior to the expiration of the approval, the applicant
may apply for an extension of one (1) year from the original date of expiration.
4. Development shall occur in substantial conformance with the plans presented to
the Planning Commission at the meeting of February 19, 2002, and marked
Exhibits "D1 - D13".
5. The applicant shall agree to defend at his/her SDle expense any action brought
against the City, its present or former agents, officers, or employees because of
the issuance of said approval, or in anyway relating to the implementation thereof,
or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the
City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any court costs and attomey's fee's
which the City, its agents, officers or employees may be required by a court to pay
as a result of such action. The City may, at its SDle discretion, participate at its
own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not
relieve applicant of his/her obligations under this condition.
DEVELOPMENT CODE
6. Development shall conform to the General Commercial (GC) and Senior Housing
(SR) zoning requirements except as otherwise approved.
7. Signage shall be subject to the requirements of Development Code Chapter 16.60.
-..-
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 6
8. Setbacks shall be as shown on the development plans except as specifically
modified by these conditions.
9. All parking spaces adjacent to a wall, fence, or property line shall have a minimum
width of 11 feet.
NOISE
10. Construction shall be limited to between the hours of 8 a.m. and 6 p.m. Monday
through Friday and between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. on Saturday or Sunday.
LIGHTING
11. All lighting for the site shall be downward directed and shall not create spill or glare
to adjacent properties.
WATER
12. All new construction shall utilize fixtures and designs that minimize water usage.
Such fixtures shall include, but are not limited to, low flow showerheads, water
saving toilets, instant water heaters and hot water recirculating systems. Water
conserving designs and fixtures shall be installed prior to final occupancy.
SOLID WASTE
13. Solid waste pick-up location as identified is acceptable.
14. Trash enclosures shall be reserved exclusively for dumpster and recycling
container storage. Miscellaneous tires, auto parts, boxes, bins, racks, etc., will
not be allowed within the enclosure.
SPECIAL CONDITIONS
15. The development shall be restricted to senior citizens (ages 55 and older).
16. One-hundred percent (100%) of the apartment units shall be reserved for low and
moderate-income seniors through a 3D-year deed restriction recorded on the
property, or equivalent restrictive covenant. Annual reports shall be submitted to
the City from an independent agency (such as the San Luis Housing Authority)
verifying compliance to this restriction.
PRIOR TO ISSUING A BUILDING PERMIT:
17. A landscaping and irrigation plan shall be prepared by a licensed landscape
architect subject to review and approval by the Community Development
Department and Parks and Recreation Department. The landscaping plan shall
include the following:
.- ________n__
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 7
a. Tree staking, soil preparation and planting detail;
b. The use of landscaping to screen ground-mounted utility and mechanical
equipment;
c. The required landscaping and improvements. This includes:
1. Deep root planters shall be included in areas where trees are within five
feet (5') of asphalt or concrete surfaces and curbs;
2. Water conservation practices including the use of low flow heads, drip
irrigation, mulch, gravel, drought tolerant plants and mulches shall be
incorporated into the landscaping plan; and
3. An automated irrigation system.
18. All walls, including screening and retaining walls, shall be compatible with the
approved architecture and Development Code Standards, subject to the review
and approval of the Community Development Director.
PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY:
19. Development shall comply with Development Code Sections 16.48.070, "Fences,
Walls and Hedges"; 16.48.090, "Lighting"; 16.48.120, "Performance Standards";
and 16.48.130 "Screening Requirements".
20. Prior to paint or stucco color coat being applied to any of the bUildings, the
applicant shall paint a test patch on the building including all colors. The
remainder of the building may not be painted until inspected by the Community
Development Department or Building and Fire Department to verify that colors are
consistent with the approved color board. A 48-hour notice is required for this
inspection.
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
21. Prior to Issuance of building permit, the applicant shall submit a color and
materials board for ARC review and approval.
22. All ducts, meters, air conditioning equipment, and other mechanical equipment,
whether on the ground, on the structure or elsewhere, shall be screened from
public view with materials architecturally compatible with the main structure.
23. All electrical panel boxes shall be installed inside the building.
PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT COND'TIONS
24. On the final Landscape Plan, the Bottle Brush trees shall be replaced with a tree
selected from the approved City street tree list. All trees shall be 15-gallon or
larger.
25. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Ordinance 521 C.S., the
Community Tree Ordinance.
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 8
26. Linear root barriers shall be used at the front of the project to protect the
sidewalks.
27. All street front trees shall be 24-inch box and shall be located a minimum of one
(1) tree for every seventy-five feet (75') of street frontage.
28. Any trees removed shall be replaced on site.
POLICE DEPARTMENT
PRIOR TO ISSUING A BUILDING PERMIT:
29. The applicant shall submit an exterior lighting plan for Police Department approval.
PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY:
30. The applicant shall install a burglary alarm system per Police Department
guidelines, and pay the Police Department alarm permit application fee.
31. The applicant shall post handicapped parking, per Police Department
requirements.
BUILDING AND FIRE DEPARTMENT
32. The project shall comply with the most recent editions of the Califomia State Fire
and Building Codes and the Uniform Building and Fire Codes as adopted by the
City of Arroyo Grande.
33. All fire lanes must be posted and enforced, per Police Department and Fire
Department guidelines, and have a 35-foot minimum inside radius.
34. The project shall have a fire flow that complies with the Unified Fire Code
requirements.
35. The entire site shall be ADA accessible.
36. Note that some fee credits are due from previously issued demolition permit.
PRIOR TO ISSUING A BUILDING PERMIT:
37. The applicant shall show proof of properly abandoning all non-conforming items
such as septic tanks, wells, underground piping and other undesirable conditions.
38. County Health Department approval is required for food service occupancies.
-~--
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 9
PRIOR TO BRINGING COMUSTABLES ON SITE:
39. Fire hydrants shall be installed, per Fire Department and Public Works Department
standards.
PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY:
40. The applicant shall post designated fire lanes, per Section 22500.1 of the
Califomia Vehicle Code.
41. The applicant must provide an approved "security key vault" per Building and Fire
Department guidelines.
42. All buildings must be fully sprinklered per Building and Fire guidelines.
43. The applicant shall install opticom traffic signal pre-emption devices at the Oak
ParklEI Camino and Oak Park/West Branch Street intersections, per the approval
of the Fire Chief.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
GENERAL IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENTS
44. Fees - The applicant shall pay all applicable City fees at the time they are due.
(For your information, the "Procedure for Protesting Fees, Dedications,
ReselVations or Exactions" is provided be/ow).
PROCEDURE FOR PROTESTING FEES, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS OR
EXACTIONS:
(A) Any party may protest the imposition of any fees, dedications, reservations, or
other exactions imposed on a development project, for the purpose of defraying
all or a portion of the cost of pUblic facilities related to the development project by
meeting both of the following requirements:
(1 ) Tendering any required payment in full or providing satisfactory evidence of
arrangements to pay the fee when due or ensure performance of the
conditions necessary to meet the requirements of the imposition.
(2) Serving written notice on the City Council, which notice shall contain all of
the following information:
(a) A statement that the required payment is tendered or will be
tendered when due, or that any conditions which have been imposed
are provided for or satisfied, under protest.
(b) A statement informing the City Council of the factual elements of
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 10
the dispute and the legal theory forming the basis for the protest.
(B) A protest filed pursuant to subdivision (A) shall be filed at the time of the
approval or conditional approval of the development or within 90 days after the
date of the imposition of the fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions to
be imposed on a development project.
(C) Any party who files a protest pursuant to subdivision (A) may file an action to
attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the imposition of the fees, dedications
reservations, or other exactions imposed on a development project by a local
agency within 180 days after the delivery of the notice.
(D) Approval or conditional approval of a development occurs, for the purposes of
this section, when the tentative map, tentative parcel map, or parcel map is
approved or conditionally approved or when the parcel map is recorded if a
tentative map or tentative parcel map is not required.
(E) The imposition of fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions occurs, for
the purposes of this section, when they are imposed or levied on a specific
development.
45. Site maintenance - The developer shall be responsible during construction for
cleaning city streets, curbs, gutters and sidewalks of dirt tracked from the project
site. The flushing of dirt or debris to storm drain or sanitary sewer facilities shall
not be permitted. The cleaning shall be done after each day's work or as
directed by the Director of Public Works.
46. Encroachment Permit - The applicant shall be responsible for obtaining an
encroachment permit for all work within a public right of way.
47. Grading - All grading shall be done in accordance with the City Grading
Ordinance.
48. Courtland Street - The west side of Courtland Street shall be overlayed to the
centerline along the length of the subject property.
PRIOR TO ISSUING A BUILDING PERMIT:
49. No building permit shall be issued until the Final Parcel Map (TPM 01-004) has
been recorded.
50. Prior to acceptance of the improvements, the applicant shall provide reproducible
mylars, 2 sets of prints of the approved record drawings (as builts) and electronic
(e.g. Autocad) files where available.
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 11
PRIOR TO ISSUING A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY:
51. All project improvements shall be constructed prior to occupancy, except for
nonessential improvements, which may be guaranteed by an agreement and
financial securities as provided for in Section 16.68.070 of the Development
Code.
52. All public utilities shall be operational.
MITIGATION MEASURES
A negative declaration with mitigation measures has been adopted for this project. The
following mitigation measures shall be implemented as conditions of approval and shall
be monitored by the appropriate City department or responsible agency. The applicant
shall be responsible for verification In writing by the monitoring department or
agency that the mitigation measures have been Implemented.
Mitigation Measures:
1. The project shall be subject to the City's Grading Ordinance (303 C.S.) and other
regulations and policies regarding grading and erosion.
Monitoring: Review of grading plan
Responsible Depts: Parks, Recreation and Facilities; Public Works
Timeframe: Prior to and during construction
2. The applicant shall complete measures to neutralize the estimated increase in
water demand created by the project by either:
Implementing an individual water program that utilizes fixtures and
designs that minimize water usage. The calculations shall be
submitted to the Director of Public Works for review and approval.
The proposed individual water program shall be submitted to the
City for approval prior to implementation, or, paying an in lieu fee.
Monitoring: Review of individual water program or payment of
the in lieu fee
Responsible Dept: Public Works
Timeframe: Prior to issuance of building permit
3. All new construction shall utilize fixtures and designs that minimize water usage.
Such fixtures shall include, but are not limited to, water saving toilets, instant water
heaters and hot water recirculating systems. Water conserving designs and
fixtures shall be installed prior to final occupancy.
Monitoring: Review of building plans
Responsible Dept: Building & Fire
Timeframe: Prior to issuance of building permit
--.--
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 12
4. All landscaping shall be consistent with water conservation practices including the
use of drought tolerant landscaping, drip irrigation, and mulch. To the greatest
extent possible, lawn areas and areas requiring spray irrigation shall be minimized.
Monitoring: Review of landscaping and irrigation plans
Responsible Dept: Parks, Recreation & Facilities
Timeframe: Prior to issuance of building permit
5. The applicant shall provide detailed drainage calculations indicating that increased
run-off can be accommodated by existing facilities and/or provide on-site retention
basins to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works.
Monitoring: Review of grading plans
Responsible Dept: Public Works
Timeframe: Prior to issuance of a grading permit
6. All runoff water from impervious areas shall be conveyed through impervious
conduits to existing storm drain facilities. A drainage plan, which incorporates the
above, shall be submitted to the City prior to the issuance of any permits.
Monitoring: Review of drainage/grading plans
Responsible Dept: Public Works
Timeframe: Prior to issuance of grading permit
7. Provide one bicycle parking space for every ten commercial car parking spaces.
With 82 parking spaces proposed, eight (8) bicycle parking spaces are required.
Monitoring: Review of improvement plans
Responsible Depts: Public Works and Community Development
Timeframe: Prior to issuance of building permit
8. During construction, water trucks or sprinkler systems shall be used to keep all
areas of vehicle movement damp enough to prevent dust from leaving the site. At
a minimum, this would include wetting down such areas in the later moming and
after work is completed for the day and whenever wind exceeds 15 miles per hour.
Reclaimed (non-potable) water should be used whenever possible.
9. Soil stockpiled for more than two days shall be covered, kept moist, or treated with
soil binders to prevent dust generation.
10. Permanent dust control measures shall be identified in the revegetation and
landscape plans and should be implemented as soon as possible following
completion of any soil disturbing activities.
11. Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one
month after initial grading should be sown with fast-germinating native grass seed
and watered until vegetation is established.
-----~
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 13
12. All vehicles hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or
should maintain at least two feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between
top of load and top of trailer) in accordance with CVC Section 23114.
13. All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved should be completed as soon
as possible. In addition, building pads should be laid as soon as possible after
grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.
14. Vehicle speed for all construction vehicles shall not exceed 15 mph on any
unpaved surface at the construction site.
15. Sweep streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent
paved roads.
For Measures 8-15:
Monitoring: Review of grading plan and site inspections
Responsible Depts: Public Works and Building & Fire shall inspect plans
and spot check in the field
Timeframe: Prior to issuance of grading permit and during
construction
16. The applicant shall pay the Traffic Signalization Impact fee.
17. The applicant shall pay the City's Transportation Facilities Impact fee.
For Measures 16-17:
Monitoring: The applicant shall pay the fees
Responsible Dept: Building & Fire
Timeframe: Prior to issuance of building permit
18. The applicant shall interconnect the existing signals at the Oak Park
intersections with West Branch Street and EI Camino Real.
Monitoring: The applicant shall coordinate the
existing signals
Responsible Dept: Public Works Department
Timeframe: Prior to occupancy
19. The project shall continue to provide a separate southbound left/through lane
and right turn lane on Courtland Street at East Grand Avenue. This will require
continued parking prohibition using regulatory signs and/or red curb painting
from East Grand Avenue to the project southerly driveway along the west side
of Courtland Street.
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 14
Monitoring: The applicant shall install the
improvements
Responsible Dept: Public Works Department
Timeframe: Prior to recording the map
20. The project shall provide the addition of right turn overlap phases on the
southbound and westbound approaches to the Oak Park/EI Camino Real
intersection.
Monitoring: The applicant shall install the
improvements
Responsible Department: Public Works Department
Timeframe: Prior to occupancy
21. The developer shall plant four (4) 48" box Coast Live Oak trees on the project
site as mitigation for removing the existing 24" diameter Coast Live Oak tree.
Monitoring: Field inspection
Responsible Dept: Parks & Recreation, Community Development
Timeframe: Prior to issuing a certificate of occupancy
22. All construction equipment shall be provided with well-maintained, functional
mufflers to limit noise.
23. All construction activities shall comply with the time limits specified by the Arroyo
Grande Municipal Code.
24. To the greatest extent possible, grading and/or excavation should occur during the
middle of the day to minimize the potential for disturbance of neighboring noise
sensitive uses.
For Measures 21-24:
Monitoring: Notes shall be placed on the construction plans
referencing the above measures.
Responsible Dept: Public Works
Timeframe: During construction
25. The applicant shall pay the project's proportional share of the sewer impact fees.
Monitoring: Pay required fee.
Responsible Dept: Public Works
Timeframe: Prior to issuance of building permit
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 15
26. Consistent with the recommendations found in the Phase 1 cultural resources
surface survey, a Phase 2 sub-surface testing must be performed in the areas
of concern.
Monitoring: The applicant shall submit results of a Phase 2 sub-
surface analysis.
Responsible Depts: Public Works and Community Development
Timeframe: Prior to issuance of grading permit
27. The following note shall be placed on the grading and improvement plans for
the project:
"In the event that during grading, construction or development of
the project, and archeological resources are uncovered, all work
shall be halted until the City has reviewed the resources for their
significance. If human remains (burials) are encountered, the
County Coroner (781-4513) shall be contacted immediately. The
applicant may be required to provide archaeological studies and/or
mitigation measures."
Monitoring: Construction plans shall be reviewed.
Responsible Dept: Public Works
Timeframe: Prior to issuance of grading permit
28. The applicant shall pay all applicable Park Development and Community Center
Impact fees.
Monitoring: The applicant shall pay the fees to the City.
Responsible Dept: Parks & Recreation
Timeframe: Prior to issuance of building permit
--..--.- ---_._~
~ \;\\~l" \i\'l t!'il E){1'I1811' 0 1
g
\\ i\,\\1 'l~t \\\1-
e.. y\,\I" t, _ \\ C'\
, ~r\
~~ 0
'"
.. \
~o.. 0 \
" " \
C'\~ ..
II'
\\ \\ t
c;.C 1\
:.3- \\ U \. Ci\
n
0_
~.~ -S
og.. ('\f)
i ~
, 0:S
i ,. :s
t" ~ C\ g..
-+ ~ ('t
~~ 0"0
~~ ~ .... Qo
...
a I:> c::
- ~ :s
~'" 0. P C'\
-" \'II _
\ I' \\\\\1 \1
\ .....\ \ ...\ \\ t1\ \\ -0 n 0
i \ 1 n ..
\ !IIII\'\ 1"\<\ Ih\\'\ 0 I:>
" ~o c:
\ \UiU \ \\\ \l ~!H~I \\ " ~ ('t -s
..
\ ! \ \ ., \ \i \J\ :s
il t i J \t "- -. '" -to
\ "1111"\ ill" \ III 3 I:> _0
3 \Q--
" i 0
t ... - . .. :Sf)
i \ ·
, .. ...."...;'- \.
s; ,
~FI t :s
- ~ 1
-
g..
\J\
~\\~\t\~~~t~ :$'
'"
\\\\\\\\\\\\ "
.. ..
\1'\; ...
\\\r. UU\\\ \\\ '"
tif ': Go
.,' Q "
'i x
i"t'" Um \~
dO
\ \~\t~
t'\ ~
t \t'f\.ES~
'0
-----------.
-
-----.
--
EXHiBiT 0 Z -
\~ \\
~ .- ~
-:.... \
O'
,,'
~ ~
~ \
~ ~ V
I
~
) 0. \
if> f.
;~ ~ .'"
;'0-
I'>
-('\
nO .. ~
~c: i
:.:.:\.
0-
~.~
Po.
~
5
<" qH~
.-.. ~t\~ \
.. c: ! \
\e. I
;.0
~<"
..'"
-.
:s
~\ If
~ ,
~ ': ~
~ .
~ , ~
~
I' 0
" ~ " '
If
us~
\"\....
'" \~ 0
I I.t~
" \~'~
r 1\ 0
- h. \ . '--
.,
.
1\
G R ,,\0(1) "vt:N\Jt:
__t atr.J. /...~.
-----/
EXHIB1TD3 ~ ~ I ~ I ~ I 0 I 0 @ I I
. . I I i i !
.1 I I .
1111"1111/111/111111111111/111111 11111111 1'/1" i 1111111 1/1111 1I1/111p. IIIIIPI' ~
1i'1,1I II', I'flll ! (lIIIIIJ!,HllllIJiI II/Pili IIUII 'lfll/ 'IIPII I'J'I/III '",'1"'1 I
> en " 'I I I I I" J I ,,,, !,' I
,
~ a ~ I -I
o &. i
~ g 1111'/11 llillllplll
~Q.
!" ~ I'!JIIII fIllIPIIIJ!
00 I"
~c
-. .,
~~ ml
-. :I I
o ~ HIIIIIIIIIII/lI
~ 1/1 I jil' 1111 1111
~ I
-+
:;< c
... Q
f-
q
;.;0
e ~
= en
-. .
..
:s '
~ I
f ~
0: :
~ ~
'1
II, .
IIf .
1'!jJg
" f" lID
~ il~~_
~ lilla
; ru.
!;; Iln
..
CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN____ J
____-.-- .,0'''''' o' "I lit
~ --'('
\ '14-
~~ ,__- ' I'
) . ~.------=.~ .~.----='
.. ~ ,,,,,';:C _, """-, . ..' .~..- l ,
_ " _____. j 1\
\ ,\
/' f l "
I " "
" ' ' l ,0
, ~ "
i~ ,;'1" \ I,
~ .. .
; G'I \, ~ I~fj, M'I'W' . ' l ~
." -,'" ' ,
^ 6~' I " ' " l '
, ~ .1" I," "" <-''' ' "
. ~ \, .: !III d! q< ,,,) '" ' '~~ l
~ \." ;I,!', "'" ,\t~I~" 'I' \
, ~ ..' "" ", " ..'
)00" ~' !I'\ ,I ~ II
; '" ; ill"" .1 \ ~ \ ' , 1'\
,.. I ' " ,. ~ ' ~
~ _ ' i " ,n ",' \
'" \I \,,:1' .h " ' ",,"
. ("\ , , ," , I' ~ 1\
nO '!I\II" . ,- ,.,-) J,,' '.1\
c;. c:: ~". "i\, i , .\11 ~L_ .. 0 '
_. .., ,'t' I', 1 i.n
-0. ..... 'to I: \ r'"
. - .' I ' ' , , ' ",~ I . ..
; e t\ Iii ~ :t--f' It l,
_~ ' ' [11,,\1 I ,Ir.,
. C. .' e '-:P--' ,.1 0.
_ ~ I I" \"\' ~t--" ~~\ '\' \ ~~\\' '
b" ",,, ' ,," ,. ' ' ~
_ ,\~' ~h ,~I\\ ,\~ ~ ',~
~ " '" ", '
r> _,' . -",'!' >> ,~I,llt ,-, ,~,~
'" '"'.. .,,' W' c, ~iIl1\ ," iY.
. .." " we...." · I, ·
.. . _ ,'" " .,,=- ._, """ ~ l ~ "
1: c: ~.. .. ' ~'f i7i1!l;;; [;:\{: ~ ,
~ e.. \\' i\ ~, ;\--DW~\ \i:1--WI~ \yJ:;j/ril~:~~~ I-D<' \
% C1 ." .'" ' , M-' I \I \I W... \ ," I,
" '" \' " .' iIJII'~;- ,.'
... ",.-r ~., \~ ,L
_. . " .r/
, ' n-" ,~ r'"
::s '\__ __ ~\ \ IY:'-'.""-'- '1 ,"1"'1" :f~rx"N N.J1 ~, \' ,~/'I
71'" ' __ "'7 r:-,'.
. " <7' II · '
. ~ \ 'II!': , ..,...,- \ \ " ... 'K! / '-ih, ~ " '
'\" . ' ' ," 1\ \'
......\\i'\ . K" ~ ",..J.<'
~ "qH\\\\\ " \ -~, ",,"" I\. ~ J ~ y
!'. '.',"\\ . ,,"" ,,- _ _"..!X ':> ,. L \
; ... \\1\ ' ./0; 7 C>1'I1--V
~ \h 1.;:\ j~\ vri. ' ;\,~\L.l [y--
~ . r.I. """" ~ ' .' Me
~ YL i'r ~ /' '-I' \ 4\' \ / \
_ /" \I W - ,,-, -c ' ,.
., \~ / r-- ",,,'1' M I
~,% \'\'\ \\ I ~\!\ ,~! "" 'J / I' '. l
~\~. }\, . <C ' ~ ,,;./ ---:!:....."'-"'" " , 12t1 ~
. "'t' "I\.. . . ""'~ -n-"'" ... ~ ~
,. ",., ", ~ 1 ;0--'/"":::>'----- ,,-, - "<C'o.Y ~
, '1" - - ~ . ~~..u n ·
.1 T l -~.., J-
\ '" ",'"
,.-
.' ~. ~. ~ ~~ .'~ ~ ~b}---'~ .---
,,-\
%'!..
,::.~~
. ._ N:I A1.N"C:;E PV.N~----------------/ .
--------------/
~ -----.... -- EXHtBlT D 5
\ '
0'-\ --- ,.~I"
i:11.~'---=- .~~ ,- -.---
4 · - '0 ~ .'
~,. OM _. ....... ~ ._,,-' l' r
.;:fi- ... =" ......V, IT'"
f -L _,.1 · ,',
'! ';6 ' "
\i I;~ ~' ~. ~.~
'I ."".~, .....'~~' , . ' ~
'9;' ..-,.' "'~' ,
~ C! 1\' illlllii ~ 11 )\; \\P"> ' 1 ~ c; ~ ,
\
:s \'f ". ' .",..' ""~
o g. .. _ "'i" .. " l,1 ~' · \"
~ .'" . ,"
:s . ..' 1.\ . , \\l\\
o g. · ."",' ~ " '
~ ' ., " ." ",
. \ ,..!I, ,,' . " ~ =' /,\"", ·
. 0 ' ", ' '\'" ' ';' ,
. . .' ' .
~ 0 i'" III", 1\ \.1 ,'" ~"
~ '" I' HI ' ~ ';';; d'. ,I
:.; '1. .t'/.' I" - ""'" I-- \' ... ~
o _ ' I " ."
; ~ \\ II" ;i; LlJ \~ I ~1' ~
_' '- .. '1\,(' '
. g. ':: \ ,\ ,~, . !.\ n I'
o _ \ ~ U " ~ ~ 1 .. /WI . I,'
o _ ~ ,.4' .~ Jh .. -
_ ,," ~".,"' , i! .. " ' '0; "
~ " ~ ' -cc-' . .~~" ,..,.I~' ~ k'
'':::'' -:r cq"t 1-:' f-- ' \
.. ~ ' ~II'-" ,C ... ' ," · ~
'j .. '~ '. 'I
. i:!' ; ~ E'-cQ:\JTIIT\\11 IT.\], ,\\In,Cfn~,, "-'f: ~
Ie. ~".. .. 0 '7 ~ ,<'
" CI ~. L', I'\'t.' ",\ -,-,-,-,. rn I , I 1 '~..\ \ ~ Ll{ ,I'
i .. v'",," '7 L.//"7 0 v \
. ~ ' .~,\ 1,),11'" ,''''WI'.'~' ,'- \
CT" 'j .1 II
:s 1 ,,', ., _i I' h,
,C ' ~ ' ,,,,, .....-c'"
.. .. 1'1",\T' ~ , ,.-~ '
,j . ' ,.,..... II
, . ' "-"" - :
,- , _ _ ,\ ~ I I IT(\ 'IIIV'! ,1 .. J" h'/'
~ \ I ./' ./ ~
. '- ," .. .. ..V
~ III I~, 1\ '\I' I."m.' I?" · --H · L
. "" ~"~ "7" "r' \"
1\ 1\'\111 ,*1' ~,I ~ ~~. d ' · '
. ""- V .." '-
. .,\\.\1, 'f,) f II . ~'I! ~I II :1,
II, . \ II , ~.." l/ I ,'-
~I~ . .~t "_ _ ",-.. ,-. J.'.\i'II' f<' L
~ "lie ,"'" i',OO"'/-f'i' --.' rr''''''~'~ '~
"r . ,,-,,' ""
," ~1 ,.
.. r \~ '.J .
" II' . ". .--'" I
. ,,0 ' .,-~
1 ~~~~~-~-----~--
-------- ........~~ '-" . ~ ' .
~._,_...-.-' .p, --
, \~~~. \~ ~
\ .~h '
-~ ~
"1 I'~
s ~
-" &'-.'
~._--- ~
~)l~"" .. -
-II
rt
~
S
0-
~ ~
;.
.0- m
~~ -
'"
-< ."
" ; c:. c:> Ii' '"
_.~ .... ., ..
-' -' " ,:-
.... 0 ,. -'
0_ '" 0. ,
~.~ ~
>
<- -
"0- j" 0
....
~ en
- m
I' -
~ <- I'
" <.
Ct .... c:>
....
-'
... .. 0
..C: .. ,
\e..
~C1
~\1
-'
:s C'>
0
'"
.,
....
-
'"
"
e-
m
-
'"
-<
"
....
~ -.
0
o. '"
f ..
~ ~ ..
g
-
~
\'If
\~ 0
'r
\h ~.
\\~ 0
\,~t"
i HI 0
~ \\\tl
~ \
'0
CO"."..E~ e.E" ^~ot-lS
--..------------ --------
>(1')
., ""S EXHIBIT D 7
~O
o :::s
a..
<i'
'7 0
" :::s
~a..
'"
. ~
("10
~C ("I ("I UI ("I
:;:\. 0 0 n 0
0_ 3 3 ::r '"
;: 0 3 3 '" .,
. 3 ...
_. :::s '" '" -
"c.. ~ ~ .. ..
-. -. ... :s i
... ... -. I
~ -< -< n Q. I
v:> v:> m m \
0 - - - -
Q Q. Q. ",. to
'!" '!" < <
" " \
r r ...
:E z ... -. t
-.
~. 0 0 0
.... :1 ,
::s ::s I
~C ... ::r
m m
fe.. - -
'"
~ <
::.0 " I
~ " ...
-. \
:;: ~ 0
-. ::s
:::s , , \
i i
('\
0
~ 3
'" 3
~ '"
:s ~
.'<> -'
...
~ -<
0:> ~ ~
.- i ~
"-
'!"
..,
-
"
:s
hit:
I',
.$ tI
'i1r
"'-., ~ ~r
'!' ~
I' .
tillS
'" H, Q
7
. II!f~ .
~ ~
~ I't c:
N .
i:o
RESIDENTIAL ELEVATIONS
...,.+ ~ I~ [I
('j a r
I ia ~ I
EXHIBIT D 8 g I : !Jl~}l -
.. ... I J f ti' ·
.. CJ.: ~ I
:I ( II: "II dJtU
" II' "'I'
. - ". J
z.. 0 t I- !.,
;:~:Z'till :;.=1:11 ~!'
.. .....II.II'i.:~ ;; hi hall i
..
:I " .... cqd "'fir II!!
.. i >.. :E !i Ii : .. II h. I
..
i z ~<c '" :I I ti.sl..,
~ : ..J I' ".1 !
. .. . " "" .~. w-w- WI:" I I .
5 ~iII 5 5 S S 'i.~ < .. .
\ I ".-JlQ""(II ~4111.""""'''AJtN.ua_ () I ~
- !t-m.. ...:.~._.-~ ~ 111'I!r
~-..&'_._ _ ,_om,"..- '.----7-: . II. i ~h!i!i
- - '~--1- -=?"'---'f7~=""7-
.-",- /- /__ / I
~ I ----1m' / '-- - i
.-/ // I _ / It.
~ ~::""i./1>~,'''vr _Ni- ~ !
1i:rl --~ ,--51- 0.01-_/..., nl il ~
. :-O~~, :~-.~L~L~L'ift-~! leul-uM
_~_ .~ ~_~_~_,)i '. . ojl I dmlnm
I 0..1.--. -< i-.:..- . _.Q..1i Ji'
. -_- -I--A T -- -
t -- --1.- I "1'\1
_- L-.-- --_/ ,
. ...- _--. __-a -_! I I
aIZ'I-.__L-.-;:;(o!'lr.--l--.-......~~_. I I I
-- _ ..'m_.cJiI.....- I'" ,
\ - -~ ,,- I ....~ I I
. .... /",,, Ii II
\ /" " ,,~I i
___ """_9": ~ II I
----fI""~n-- \ re:=o-
\ ~'f.YI WIMM't' 'tttORW/ __ =: \ lit
"'" WAD'(JI' .~..JhJ"..~'I.~ --.;...t.oo 1-'
-...:: /....... (II,lJt1~ ""I'm ........ ' \1\ :t 1111
i/ I' ",,"ill " ~
,ill ) \11//" : GaG
Iii / 11,/11'/1 .. iii
\I\W__ / 'l1'11'l11'"
.. II \ - / I IIU,II - .. III a
.. ,," -~, Mil" '" (I'!
I till _ It II '1'1 I "," ~~~~
n\I\\lV Ld f 11111/11 " g!" nUl.nl. ~~~~
I /1\\\\1 (,) V II/pi I "'I lIIi r"lli .R~.
1 'llil\ a:; M;I,lli'/,~11 ~ manu II I~i=
~')\\ c( ! Ii 11/111 i
. 1 1/1/1)\11\ 0. Ii \/~11,'I1I/111 f
,(,( k\\\ 'l/,I,~/I/I( ~ '
" t~\~~\~ H/'I'):,/ql, ~ I "1 ' " ,
'/ ~~~'k.~~~~~.!!!.~~J'~fJ;1IJ.M1. I; I I" n'iiii
t- ~~,-~==:'"":k-_"",,-~$=';==~Y4-/~/f4-f~' ~ if II ,
~~~ =: == = = ==-~:?-~..::=--=-~~y...l;#? f ·
""\..?'"==:::...~-=-=~--=--=~-=-=x~6/ If'" .."'''''''....:'''.!!
......-- ----.::iH;;----::--a
'''' ~W€i :::-"': ~
, ~ . .~ ,
.1 ) / -- ~,
f- .., \
on .
t:, '"
u I
'tl 0 -1'1-
~
'" .
j!: .
/I'i~ Q. ~ i~ I
.
. ~~
- f
. inN!..."'f NOJ.HD.!JI1 j
, j
!
-----
EXHIBIT D 9
~
i
~
;-~
~Q
o ::s
C.
Ii\
.,. Q
'" ::s
~c.
..
'n
00
~c
:;4
0_
.,. Q ~
'" - -
-. ~ ~
"'C. ~
n q <
o
::s
n
ft
-+
i [ I
~ CI ~
s ft ~
~ en
-.
::s I
I
~ I I
~ t
.. ~ '
! j I
~ I
8 f I
- I
i
hlj: ~ I
!If : f
1"(" .
I" . r
<n ill ;;. f f
r '"t" ~
~ Ii' ~ l ~
p plio .
~ .Ii e ~
o. q
BUILl)ING A
-----------
...'II i
EXHIBIT D 10 ~
~
~
z
~~
o c
o&.
~
-. C
'" :s
;'0..
..
. ('\
00
~C
_. ~
....-+
0_ I
; c
_. :s ~
"'a.. .
~ ~
:s
n
~
-+ I
'" C
8- C
f-
~C7 ~
~ ~ ~
; en.
-.
:s
i i
.. ~
f I
-
!"
.. I
~
j!IJ~ I
.
!~! 0 f
liT I
Ii:;. if I
( li:(
iii · i: ~
HJf~ .
>-
J,. ~
" ,
BIJIU):INE; B I
.----- -
EXHIBIT D 11
;!I
~ <
i
~
z
>(i")
-. "'3
~ Q ,
o :s
0-
(i"I
-. Q
" ::s
~O-
'"
. C'\
1"10
~C
_. "'3
-....
o_ r
;: Q
_. :s ~
"0- .
C'\ ~
0
::s
n
~
.... J
:;0 C
<TQ
f-
i
;:.0
9 ~ ~
~U)
-. z
::s
I? J
~
.. ~
l I =
~
-
....
N f
~
! ..
hit: ..
""111.111
I ...".
!r 0
'T I
.. !I!;. f r
f 'Irtll: i ~
" HI 1;1
'" Illf~ .
.:. ~
1::> .Ii ~
BUILDING C
--
,
EXHIBIT D 12 ,~
..
~
~
z
>Q')
:; .,
o C
o :5
0..
(1\
., C
Q :5
~o..
'"
'0
00
~C
-. .,
~..... J.
I> _ -., r--
~ C ' ,
-. :s ~
<>0.. .
~
~
~
ft-
..... !
~ c
ie..
~ i
.
;,0
e ft ~
= en
-.
:s
~ J
~
f J
~
1>-
~ f
.
hIt; f
!II " .
li1r
(if :. r I
i ,I' "
htt" i ~
1'1 "
Ihf~ .
> ~
.;.
<> .Ii ;
BUILDING D
.---
EXH\6\i D 13
...
;
~
~
:~
~ Q
~~
~
;~
~ '
p"D-
'"
-("\
00
~c:
~~ \
0_
~.~ ~
'I
Po. .
~
("\
~
~
--+ 1
&~
~o ~
%~ ~
~ '"
-.
:::s
~
~.
j
?-
~
iI'i~ \
\\\ ~
\\W \
l' :. ,
'f \\\-;. ,
Uit i ~
~ I' 0
" w. .
~ \,\i~ i,
o ..
~~E
-------- ------------ .
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
CITY COUNCIL APPROVING VARIANCE CASE NO. 02-004
TO DEVIATE FROM DEVELOPMENT CODE
REQUIREMENTS FOR WALL HEIGHT, FRONT YARD
SETBACK AND BUILDING HEIGHT. LOCATED ON THE
NORTHWEST CORNER OF EAST GRAND AVENUE AND
. COURTLAND STREET, APPLIED FOR BY LARRY
PERSONS
WHEREAS, the applicant has filed for a Variance Case No. 02-004 to deviate from
Development Code standards for wall height, street side setback and building height for a
proposed mixed-use development located on the northwest comer of East Grand Avenue
and Courtland Street; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande has held a public hearing on
Variance Case No. 02-004 in accordance with City Code; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this project is consistent with the City's General
Plan and Development Code; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the following Variance findings can be
made in an affirmative manner.
1. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would
result in practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship not otherwise shared by others
within the surrounding area because of the terraced topography of the project site,
and the requirement that elevators be provided for adequate handicapped
accessibility.
2. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the
property involved or to the intended use of the property that do not apply generally to
other properties classified in the same zone because the types of restrictions (e.g.
handicapped accessibility for senior housing) would not normally apply to other multi-
family residential developments in the vicinity.
3. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would
deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties classified
in the same zone because the topography of the site necessitates retaining wall
height, the provision of handicapped access requires encroachment in the front yard
setback, and the natural grade of the site as previously modified.
4. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege
inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same zone
because of the unique character of the project and site topography.
------
I
I
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 2
5. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or
welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity because
the overall project will be a benefit to the public welfare by facilitating the development
of a housing project that meets the special needs of a particular group.
6. That the granting of a variance is consistent with the objectives and policies of the
General Plan and the intent of the Development Code, particularty because of the
provision of affordable senior housing required as part of the Housing Element.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Arroyo
Grande hereby approves Variance Case No. 02-004 with the above findings and subject
to the conditions as set forth in Exhibit "An, attached hereto and incorporated herein by
this reference.
On motion by Council Member , seconded by Council Member
, and by the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 24th day of September 2002.
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 3
MICHAEL A. LADY, MAYOR
ATTEST:
KELLY WETMORE, DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES/
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
TIMOTHY J. CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY
I
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 4
EXHIBIT "A"
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
VARIANCE CASE NO. 02-004
Applicant - Lany Persons
Location - Northwest Comer of
East Grand Avenue and Courtland Street
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
THIS APPROVAL AUTHORIZES:
A. A deviation from Section 16.48.060 of the Development Code to allow an increase
in retaining wall height up to eight feet (8') on the west side of the senior housing
portion of the proposed development;
B. A deviation from Section 16.32.050 of the Development Code to allow the front
yard setback to deviate from 20' to 13'; and
C. A deviation from Section 16.32.050 of the Development Code to allow a maximum
building height of 34-% feet with 3-stories.
GENERAL CONDITIONS
1. The applicant shall ascertain and comply with all Federal, State, County and City
requirements as are applicable to this project.
3. Development shall occur in substantial conformance with the plans presented to
the City Council at the meeting of September 24, 2002 and marked Exhibits "B1" -
"B8" in the ReSDlution approving Amended Conditional Use Permit 02-003.
5. The applicant shall agree to defend at his/her SDle expense any action brought
against the City, its present or former agents, officers, or employees because of
the issuance of said approval, or in anyway relating to the implementation thereof,
or in the altemative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the
City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any court costs and attorney's fee's
which the City, its agents, officers or employees may be required by a court to pay
as a result of such action. The City may, at its SDle discretion, participate at its
own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not
relieve applicant of his/her obligations under this condition.
Development Code
6. Development shall conform to the Senior Housing (SR) zoning requirements I
except as otherwise approved.
I
ATTACHMENT 1
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 19. 2002
CALL TO ORDER
The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with Chair Costello
presiding. Present were Commissioners Brown, Fowler, Guthrie, and Keen. Also in
attendance were Community Development Director Rob Strong, Associate Planner Kelly
Heffernon, Associate Planner Teresa McClish, and Public Works Engineering Assistant
Rodger Olds.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of February 5, 2002 were approved as written on a motion by
Commissioner Brown, seconded by Commissioner Keen and unanimously carried with a !
5/0 voice vote.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - A letter from Susan Clark, Assistant Community
Development Director, Grover Beach, referencing Conditional Use Permit Case No. 01-
014, 1524 & 1542 East Grand Avenue, and referencing the traffic analysis for this
project.
PUBLIC HEARING - Conditional Use Permit Case No. 01-007; Applicant - Sprint PCS;
Location - 200 Hillcrest Drive (City Reservoir No.2) - Continued from January 15,
2002 meeting. Staff Report by Kelly Heffernon.
Per the applicant's request, this project was continued to a date uncertain.
PUBLIC HEARING - Conditional Use Permit Case No. 01-014, Development Code
Amendment Case No. 01-004. Vesting Tentative Parcel Map Case No. 01-004, and
Variance Case No. 01-007; Applicant - Larry Persons; Location - 1524 and 1542
East Grand Avenue. Staff Report by Kelly Heffernon.
Ms. Heffernon described the project to the Planning Commission highlighting the pertinent
information. She said the proposed mixed-use development consists of three commercial
buildings along East Grand Avenue, and 108 senior apartment units in five two-story
buildings in the back of the property. The residential development would also include a
private senior center, a swimming pool and a spa. I
i
The proposed Development Code Amendment is to change the back three acres from
General Commercial to Senior Housing - which is consistent with the Mixed-Use
designation of the General Plan - and to increase the density from a maximum of 25 to 34
dwelling units per acre. Because the applicant proposes that all of the units be available
for low and moderate-income seniors, and because roughly 70% of the units would be
one-bedroom, staff supports the increased density.
The proposed Tentative Parcel Map would subdivide the property into four parcels
consistent with the mixed-use development and zoning designations, and complies with
all relevant Development Code requirements for subdivisions. Because a reciprocal
- -..--
MINUTES Page 2
PLANNING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 19, 2002
access easement exists on the adjacent Rite Aid property and the subject site, the two
properties share a common entry at the second parking area. All other access points to
the project are from the three driveways on Courtland Street.
The proposed Variance request is to deviate from the Development Code requirements
for parking, wall height and building height. The height deviations are minor in nature
and explained in the staff report. The request to allow 48 fewerless parking spaces for
the residential portion is subject to the Commission's ability to make all of the seven
variance findings. Staff supports the requested parking variance, which equates to
about 1.2 parking spaces per unit instead of 1.6 spaces that the Development Code
requires
The applicant proposes to retain the existing oak tree, and shows bulb outs located
next to the two commercial driveways on the project plans to accommodate the tree.
Public Works has conditioned the project to widen the road to its full width, and
therefore remove the tree.
Rodger Olds, Public Works-
- A tree removal company had been contacted and said they have a 98% success
rate in removing and replanting oak trees of this size.
- The City of Grover Beach is going to widen their section of Courtland Street and
they have asked if Arroyo Grande is going to widen their section of the road to
create continuity.
- Excavation and large branch removal for the sidewalk would have to take place
within the dripline and this would probably damage the tree.
- Undergrounding would also have to take place, further impacting the tree.
Rob Strong spoke saying Community Development believes that with careful trimming
it would be possible to leave the tree in place. If the tree died there should be
replacement planting and reconstruction of the street up to performance standards.
Public Comment
Eric Justesen, applicant's representative from RRM Design Group, described the
proposed project and gave a brief background. With the use of an overhead projector
and display boards he described in further detail how each one of the buildings on the
frontage has a different architectural style and is interlaced with plaza space and
seating areas to provide a four sided architecture. Storefronts could face onto the
plaza area or alleyways connecting to the parking lot in the rear. Behind this area are a
couple of tiers of parking where the property goes up to about 30 feet to the rear
property line. The large flat area is for the seniors and would provide ADA
accessibility. The landscape treatment shows high dedication to tree planting to create
an urban environment on the street frontage, screening for the edge of the property
and allow some shade for parked cars.
---
MINUTES Page 3
PLANNING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 19, 2002
In reference to moving an oak tree of this size it is very expensive, very challenging,
and is a very long process. He said they would be willing to move the tree, but
because this is a multi trunk tree he believed they would be better off to prune the tree
in place and look for more creative solutions to save the tree. With input from Public
Works, they would be willing to look at different ways to configure the sidewalk and
curb-line and leave the oak tree in place. He agreed the branches would need to be
pruned and the underground lines would have to be carefully hand dug through the
areas under the dripline, which is not uncommon when development occurs around oak
trees.
Referencing the Vesting Tentative Parcel Map Resolution:
- It would not be possible to fulfil Condition No. 22, page 6, which asks for the
project parking lot entrance to align with the existing shopping center plaza parking
lot entrance across Courtland Street, given the existing design of the project and
some severe grading requirements.
- Conditions No. 30, 31, and 34, Page 7; When speaking to the City Engineer they
thought that all these conditions would be taken care of as part of the City's
Capitol Improvement Program. They would need clarification from City Staff.
- Condition No. 44, Page 8, referencing undergrounding of overhead utilities which
are on site and along the frontage of the property, they would need clarification
from City staff so as to keep the undergounding to the frontage.
Commissioner Guthrie asked for some clarification on the property grading, particularly
from the ingresses and egresses from Courtland and the connection over to Rite Aid.
Mr. Justesen described the grading and the access from the senior center to the
commercial center where they had designed an ADA compliant ramp system all the I
way out to the sidewalk. I
I
Commissioner Keen spoke saying he had concerns with- I
,
Parking for the senior center. ,
- I
- The street was closer than the parking lot and this would encourage parking in the
street.
- The distance between the trash enclosure and all the buildings.
Mr. Justesen said they had a gate and a location right out to the sidewalk for parallel
parking. This pathway is at grade level without any steps or ramping. The project will
most likely have assigned spaces for the interior units. In addition, there would be a
number of facilities within the senior complex for trash disposal and the maintenance
staff would take it out to the dumpsters.
Commissioner Fowler had a concern on the location of the trash enclosures for the
commercial buildings.
MINUTES Page 4
PLANNING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 19, 2002
Mr. Justesen said the location of the trash enclosure has been positioned so that the
trash truck can have easy access and this is a four-sided project so the exact location
has not been definitely decided.
Commissioner Fowler thought the pool and spa in the senior center was an
unnecessary liability on the project and that it is underparked.
Mr. Justesen replied that Larry Persons, the applicant, believes that these types of
amenities are attractive to the residents and are common practice in this type of
facility. He also stated the parking ratio has proven adequate in many other facilities.
Commissioner Brown had a concern with the street width. He asked if the street is to
go to standard size what would it do to the grade and entrance from Courtland into the
project.
Mr. Justesen said the percentage of the slope might go up based on the shortening of
this road segment, but it could be accommodated and would not effect it much.
Commissioner Brown asked for an approximate cost of removing the tree and if the
tree is relocated and dies, would the applicant be amiable to changing the replacement
number.
Mr. Justesen said to relocate a tree of this size could cost between $10,000 -
$20,000. They would not like to pay for the cost of the relocation, then have the tree
die and have to put in another tree. They would like to keep the tree, but if there is a
chance we would lose it then it would be better to take it out and replace it with a
greater number of oak trees.
Larry Persons, Pacific Harbor Homes, confirmed that it can take as much as a year to
move a tree of this size. He further stated that before removal the top is trimmed to
the same size as the bottom and you are left with a shadow of the original tree and
could not guarantee that it would live.
Commission Brown said if it is found that this project is underparked where will cars
park?
Mr. Justesen said that they had talked a lot with the traffic engineer as to a realistic
expectation for this project and are pretty confident that this is the right number of
parking spaces for this type of an elderly population. He then talked in more detail
about mixed-use developments and how innovative parking solutions drive the ability to
have the kind of mixed uses that are being sought to enable a project like this.
Larry Persons said the goal is to try to spread the fixed costs over as many units as
possible to be able to have affordable rents. He said this site has many close proximity
uses and we believe that 1.2 parking spaces are more than sufficient.
Commissioner Costello had a concern that there were no elevators.
._-
MINUTES Page 5
PLANNING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 19, 2002
Larry Persons said this project is for independent seniors, but there are handicap
provisions on the first floor.
End Public Comment
Commissioner Guthrie:
- The density is appropriate.
- The parking is sufficient and maybe the nNo Parkingn on Courtland should be left in
place for the time being.
- He liked the bulbout, but thought it was rather large. He had a concern about the
radius of the right turn exit onto Courtland Street.
- He would like to save the oak tree and maybe make a second bulbout.
- Capital Project Funding with regard to water and sewer should be clarified.
- He thought undergrounding would be necessary.
Rob Strong spoke further on the East Grand Avenue Enhancement Plan and City Capital
Project Funding and said that coordination is the important issue.
Rodger Olds, Public Works, said the project had been conditioned this way in case the
funding droped out and the undergrounding project does not happen.
Commissioner Keen:
- The prime driveways in and out of the project will have a site distance problem if
the tree is not removed.
- The undergrounding of utilities on Courtland needs to be done.
- What is happening with the drainage?
Rodger Olds said the drainage requirements were taken care of about 8-10 years ago
by the Yon's project.
Commissioner Keen further stated that he was opposed to City economic development
in the project without assurance of local resident benefit or tax increment.
Commissioner Fowler had concerns with:
- The trash situation.
- The project may be underparked even though seniors have fewer cars. This could
have an effect on the commercial parking which would be even more of a concern.
- In place of the pool she would rather see some shade trees.
- Due to water concerns, she believed the project was over-landscaped.
- The oak tree should be removed so the street can be widened.
Commissioner Fowler further stated that there were many positives about this project
and she liked the commercial on the front of the project, although she felt it could be
set back further. She also said the project worked well with the senior housing.
!
MINUTES Page 6
PLANNING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 19, 2002
Commissioner Brown had concerns:
- That the oak tree would create a safety problem and for safety reasons the street
should be widened. Relocation of the tree would be very expensive and the tree
may not survive.
- Condition No. 22 on the Vesting Tentative Parcel Map should be stricken if it
cannot be met.
- Condition Nos. 30, 31 and 34 should be included for safeguard in case funding
does dry up.
- Condition No. 44 regarding undergrounding of overhead utilities should stand.
Commissioner Brown said this Mixed-Use project has been laid out exactly as he had
envisioned it and would meet a need in the community that is long overdue.
Chair Costello-
- Undergrounding should be completed along Courtland Street, but conditioned to
require the removal of the last pole along East Grand, and removed at the expense
of the applicant with reimbursement when funding for the undergrounding comes
through.
- The language for mitigation measures 30, 31 and 34 is acceptable.
- Courtland Street should be widened and the oak tree removed and replaced with
48" box trees and included in the landscaping already planned.
- The traffic study appears to be accurate.
- He would like to see one or two elevators in the senior building.
Commissioner Keen asked if the curb return radius from Courtland to Grand was to I
standard. I
I
Rodger Olds said it was his understanding that it was to standard, but not the I
I
wheelchair ramp. I
I
I
I
The following motions were adopted: I
I
Commissioner Guthrie made a motion. seconded by Commissioner Brown, to
recommend approval to City Council that the oak tree on Courtland Street be removed
and mitigated with four (4), 48" box specimen oak trees on the site. and that Courtland
Street be widened to the full width of forty (40) feet. The motion was unanimously
approved with a 5/0 vote.
Commissioner Guthrie made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Fowler, to approve
Vesting Tentative Parcel Map Case No. 01-004. Including Exhibit 'A' with deletion of
Condition of Approval No. 22 and amendment of Condition No. 44, as discussed and
adopt:
MINUTES Page 7
PLANNING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 19, 2002
RESOLUTION NO. 02-1821
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL
MAP CASE NO. 01-004, LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER
OF EAST GRAND AVENUE AND COURTLAND STREET, APPLIED
FOR BY LARRY PERSONS
AYES: Commissioner's Brown, Fowler. Guthrie and Chair Costello.
NOES: Commissioner Keen
ABSENT: None
The foregoing resolution was adopted this 19th day of February. 2002.
Commissioner Guthrie made a motion. seconded by Commissioner Brown that the
Planning Commission recommend the City Council amend the zoning map of the City of
Arroyo Grande and section 16.32.020 of the Development Code in Development Code
Amendment Case No. 01-004 and with a change of language in the second paragraph
to Indicate that .... when a minimum ef 100% of the total units are reserved for low
and moderate income residents...". and adopt:
RESOLUTION NO. 02-1822
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL
AMEND THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
AND SECTION 16.32.020 OF THE DEVELOPMENT CODE IN
DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT CASE NO. 01-004. APPLIED
FOR BY LARRY PERSONS
AYES: Commissioner's Brown, Fowler, Guthrie and Chair Costello.
NOES: Commissioner Keen
ABSENT: None
The foregoing resolution was adopted this 19th day of February, 2002.
Commissioner Brown made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Guthrie, approving
Variance Case No. 01-007 to deviate from Development Code requirements for
parking, wall height and building height. Including Exhibit 'A' and adopt:
RESOLUTION NO. 02-1823
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING
COMMISSION APPROVING VARIANCE CASE NO. 01-007 TO
DEVIATE FROM DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIREMENTS FOR
PARKING. WALL HEIGHT AND BUILDING HEIGHT. LOCATED ON
---------"------
MINUTES Page 8
PLANNING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 19, 2002
THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF EAST GRAND AVENUE AND
COURTLAND STREET, APPLIED FOR BY LARRY PERSONS
AYES: Commissioner's Brown, Fowler, Guthrie and Chair Costello.
NOES: Commissioner Keen
ABSENT: None
The foregoing resolution was adopted this 19th day of February. 2002.
Commissioner Guthrie made a motion. seconded by Commissioner Brown. adopting a
Mitigated Negative Declaration, and approving Conditional Use Permit Case No. 01-
014. with the addition of the following conditions and mitigation measure:
1. Residents in the development shall be restricted to 55 years and over;
2. One hundred percent (100%) of the units shall be reserved for low and
moderate-income residents;
3. The oak tree on Courtland Street shall be removed and replaced with four (4),
48R box specimen trees on the project site, adopting:
RESOLUTION NO. 02-1824
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION. INSTRUCTING THE COMMISSION SECRETARY TO
FILE A NOTICE OF DETERMINATION AND APPROVING
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO, 01-014. LOCATED ON THE
NORTHWEST CORNER OF EAST GRAND AVENUE AND
COURTLAND STREET, APPLIED FOR BY LARRY PERSONS
AYES: Commissioner's Brown. Fowler, Guthrie and Chair Costello.
NOES: Commissioner Keen
ABSENT: None
The foregoing resolution was adopted this 19th day of February, 2002. I
I
PUBLIC HEARING - Conditional Use Permit Case No. 02-004; Applicant - Transitions.
Mental Health Association; Location - 202 Vernon Street. Staff Report by Teresa
McClish.
Ms. McClish said the applicant is requesting approval of the conditional use permit to
allow an adult day care to provide social rehabilitation services to disabled mentally ill
adults in a residential neighborhood. The applicant proposes to serve nine clients on
Mondays, Tuesdays, Thursdays and Fridays and has amended the application to have a
maximum of 14, not 17 clients, on Wednesday evenings from 4:00 - 8:00 p.m.
Transitions has operated in Arroyo Grande for over 1 5 years on both LePoint Street and
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES ATTACHMENT 2
MARCH 12,2002
PAGE 2
without merit and should be dismissed. He further emphasized the need for new
housing units within the City.
Ross Kongable, 255 Rodeo Drive, responded to Mr. Bauer's comments regarding
pending legal action against the City.
Bruce Vanderveen, 1273 Branch Mill Road, spoke in favor of the decision made by the
majority of the Council with regard to the development of his parcel.
8. CONSENT AGENDA
Council Member Lubin moved and Council Member Ferrara seconded the motion to
approve Consent Agenda Items 8.a. through 8.d., with the recommended courses of
action:
8.a. Cash Disbursement Ratification.
Action: Approved the listing of cash disbursements for the period February 16,
2002 through February 28, 2002.
8.b. Statement of Investment Deposits.
Action: Received and filed the report of current investment deposits as of
February 28, 2002.
8.c. Consideration of Cash Flow Analysis/Approval of Interfund Adyance from
the Water Facility Fund. I
Action: Received and filed January 2002 Cash Report and approved the I
interfund advance from the Water Facility Fund to cover cash deficit in other
funds at January 31, 2002.
8.d. Consideration of Approval of Minutes.
Action: Approved minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings of
February 26, 2002 as submitted. i
i
AYES: Lubin, Ferrara, Runels, Dickens, Lady
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
There being 5 AYES and 0 NOES, the motion is hereby declared to be passed.
9. PUBLIC HEARING
9.a. Proposed 'Ordlnance Amending the Zoning Map of Arroyo Grande from
General Commercial (GC) to Senior Housing (SR) and Section 16.32.020 of
the Deyelopment Code to allow an Increase In density; Deye'opment Code
Amendment Case No. 01-004 and Presentation on Terms of the Proposed
Disposition and Development Agreement.
Community Development Director Strong presented the staff report and responded to
questions from Council. Staff recommended the Council introduce for first reading by
.
-~._-
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
MARCH 12,2002
PAGE 3
title only an Ordinance amending the Zoning Map from GC to SR for a 3.23-acre portion
of a 5.01-acre site and amending Development Code Section 16.32.030 to allow a
higher density.
Eric Justesen, RRM Design, representing applicant Larry Persons, .gave an overview of
the project including conceptual design renderings and a conceptual landscape plan.
He explained issues with regard to parking requirements and the need for removal of an
existing oak tree located on the property.
City Manager Adams presented a brief summary of the financial terms for the project
which would include funding assistance from the City's Redevelopment Agency. He
introduced Mr. Tim Mulrenan, the City's Redevelopment Agency consultant from the
firm of Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc., who reviewed the financing structure and
provisions of the proposed Disposition and Development Agreement for the project,
which would allow the developer to finance the residential portion of the project through
a combination of assistance from the Agency and Federal and State Low Income
Housing Tax Credits.
Mayor Lady opened the Public Hearing and stated all members of the public were
invited to come forward and speak on the matter.
George Moylan, Housing Authority of the City of San Luis Obispo, spoke in support of the
program and gave a brief history of their agency's first tax credit development project. In
response to questions posed by Council, Mr. Moylan stated that the project could have a
residency requirement; however, there could be no specific duration of residency required.
He commented that the developer would want to be able to market the units and pointed
out that City residents may have elderly parents who would relocate from areas outside
the City into such a development. He also stated that his organization would be able to
bring Section 8 subsidy to this development and favored the proposed phased
development approach.
Charles Finney, 150 Via Bandelero, said he felt this was an appropriate place for this
proposed project. He inquired about parking and other amenities, specifically with regard
to whether or not there would be handicapped elevator access to the second floor and
whether there was convenient access to public transportation.
Chuck Fellows, 507 Le Point, expressed concerns regarding the removal of the oak tree
on the site. He suggested boxing it and replanting it elsewhere on the site.
George Moylan, Housing Authority of the City of San Luis Obispo, invited the Council to
visit similar developments in ,San Luis Obispo. He also addressed concerns expressed
by Mr. Finney regarding elevators and stated that although elevators are very expensive
to install, he generally supported the installation of elevators in a proposed development
of this size.
~- ----.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
MARCH 12.2002
PAGE 4
Hearing no further public comments, Mayor Lady closed the Public Hearing.
Council Member Lubin inquired as to the timing of construction for the commercial
portion of the project.
Larry Persons, Pacific Harbor Homes, explained that although his firm specializes in
residential development, they plan to develop the commercial buildings and have no
plans to sell that portion of the project. He spoke of a potential bank tenant; however,
. due to the focus on processing the tax credit application for the residential portion of the
project, no specific timeframes had been determined for the development of the
commercial portion of the project.
Council Member Lubin asked if a market analysis had been prepared for the 108 units.
Mr. Persons replied that preliminary information gathered indicated there would be no
problem with occupying all of the units.
Mayor Pro Tem Runels asked about the timing for Phase 2 of the senior housing
project. Mr. Persons replied that the tax credit rules require that each phase be
completed and occupied before funding is granted for the next phase.
Council Member Ferrara asked if it were possible to construct the commercial buildings
prior to securing tenants. Mr. Persons responded they were not likely to construct the
commercial buildings unless the tenants were known because it would be difficult to
build it to specifications.
There was significant discussion regarding the proposed removal of the oak tree.
Director Strong explained that the Planning Commission deliberated altematives at
length and based on costs and potential impacts related to relocating the tree on the
site, the Commission opted to mitigate the removal of the tree by requiring the
installation of four new trees of substantial size.
City Attomey Carmel noted for the record that supplemental information had been
distributed to the Council that the Ordinance had been modified on page 2 as follows:
"The maximum allowable density for independent living developments shall be eleven
dwelling units per gross acre, unless between twenty-five (25) oorcent and one hundred
(100) percent of the total units are to be reserved for low and moderate income
residents. .
Council Member Ferrara moved to introduce for first reading by title only an Ordinance
amending the Zoning Map of Arroyo Grande and Section 16.32.020 of the Municipal
Code; Development Code Amendment 01-004, Applied for by Larry Persons, as
amended. Council Member Dickens seconded the motion, and on the following roll-call
vote, to wit:
--. ~------ -
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
MARCH 12,2002
PAGE 5
AYES: Ferrara, Dickens, Runels, Lubin, Lady
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
There being 5 AYES and 0 NOES, the motion is hereby declared to be passed.
10. CONTINUED BUSINESS
10.a. Consideration of Modifications to the Leyel of Service (LOS) and Traffic
Impact Study Policy.
Director of Public Works Spagnolo presented the staff report and responded to
questions from Council. Staff - recommended the Council review and approve
recommended modifications to the Level of Service (LOS) and Traffic Impact Study
Policy. '
Council Member Ferrara acknowledged that most of his comments he submitted on the
document had been addressed. He referred to page 4, Project Trip Generation and
Design Hour Volumes with regard to the definition of peak hour period and
recommended that the weekday period be expanded in order to include traffic studies
on weekends.
Mayor Lady invited comments from those in the audience who wished to be heard on
the matter. Hearing none, Mayor Lady brought the item back to Council for
consideration.
Council Member Lubin moved to approve the recommended modifications to the Level
of Service (LOS) and Traffic Impact Study Policy. Council Member Ferrara seconded
the motion, and on the following roll-call vote, to wit:
AYES: Lubin, Ferrara, Runels, Dickens, Lady
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
There being 5 AYES and 0 NOES, the motion is hereby declared to be passed.
10.b. Public Input Process for Design Guidelines for Historic Districts.
Community Development Director Strong presented the staff report. Staff
recommended the Council consider the proposed structure and schedule of initial
Design Guideline workshops and advise staff of any concerns or changes desired.
There were no changes to the proposed schedule of workshops. Council received and
filed the report.
-~.__.__.-
ATTACHMENT 3
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
TUESDAY, MARCH 20, 2002
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 215 E. BRANCH STREET
ARROYO GRANDE,CALIFORNIA
1. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor/Chair Lady called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 8:10 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL
City Council: Co.unci! Members Dickens, Ferrara, Lubin, Mayor Pro Tem Runels
and Mayor Lady were present.
RDA: Board Members Dickens, Ferrara, Lubin, Vice-Chair Runels, and
Chair Lady were present.
City Staff Present: City Manager/RDA Executive Director Adams; City Attomey/RDA
General Counsel Carmel; Director of Administrative ServiceslRDA
Secretary Wetmore; Director of Financial Services/RDA Finance
Officer Snodgrass; and Associate Planner Heffernon.
3. PUBj.IC COMMENT
None.
4. PUBLIC HEARING
a. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT.
City Manager/RDA Executive Director Adams gave a brief introduction of the item and
stated that staff recommended the Council conduct the required public hearing, and
approve the Disposition and Development/Affordable Housing Agreement by and
between the Arroyo Grande Redevelopment Agency and Courtland-Arroyo Grande,
L.P., for a 108-unit senior affordable housing project located at the northwest comer of
Courtland Street and E. Grand Avenue, and appropriate $10,000 from the Affordable
Housing "In Lieu" Fee for professional services directly related to the proposed project.
City Manager Adams introduced Mark Huebsch, Redevelopment Agency Legal
Counsel, and Consultant Tim Mulrenan from Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc.
Consultant Mulrenan gave a presentation of the proposed project; reviewed income and
rent targets for potential tenants; explained that the developer projected that all units
would be considered affordable housing; reported that total Agency assistance would be
$800,000; explained that financial assistance from the Agency would be secured by a
Trust Deed recorded against the property; reviewed total project cost of $14.4 million;
reviewed terms of Agency assistance; reviewed financial assistance with Low Income
-_._~~..-
CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
MARCH 20, 2002
PAGE 2
Housing Tax Credits; reviewed sources of funds in the first p!:1ase; reviewed the
competitive process for tax credit allocations; explained that increased local assistance
would aid in the competition for funds; explained that the tax credit process was
expensive; and reviewed changes from the first draft of the Disposition and
Development Agreement.
Consultant Mulrenan and Special Counsel Huebsch responded to questions from
Council/Board Members relating to the total cost of the project and regarding the tax
credit allocation process and due diligence task required for the project.
Mayor/Chair Lady opened the Public Hearing and stated all members of the public were
invited to come forward to speak on the matter.
Hal. Rosen, Affordable Homes, spoke in support of affordable housing; however, he
expressed concerns with regard to the financing mechanisms related to the project.
Hearing no further public comments, Mayor/Chair Lady closed the Public Hearing.
Council/Board Members Ferrara and Dickens made comments supporting the
Disposition and Development Agreement. Council/Board Member Lubin stated he
favored the project; however, he expressed concerns about the potential tax
implications and potential liability to the Agency and the City as a result of the proposed
transaction. He requested a legal . opinion from a tax attorney or certified public
accountant addressing this issue as part of the City's due diligence investigation.
CouncillBoard Member Runels stated he had no problem with the proposed project;
however, he had concerns with the proposed financing. He felt the City would not have
the finances to cover the project over a 20-year period.
Following further discussion, Board Member Ferrara moved to adopt a Resolution
approving the proposed Disposition and Development Agreement with Courtland-Arroyo
Grande, L.P. and appropriate $10,000 from the Affordable Housing "In Lieu" Fee Fund
for professional services directly related to the proposed affordable senior housing
project, subject to, and conditioned upon the inclusion of elevators to service all second
story units within the project. The Resolution reads as follows:
Resolution of the Arroyo Grande Redevelopment Agency approving a
Disposition and Development/Affordable Housing Agreement Between the
Agency and Courtland - Arroyo Grande, L.P.
He further moved that the due diligence effort be expanded to ensure that no tax
implications are involved for the City and that the disposition on this be conditioned as a
requirement for closing.
.
------
CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
MARCH 20, 2002
PAGE 3
RDA Special Counsel Mark Huebsch asked for clarification the tax implications referred
to income tax and not property tax. He explained that an affordable housing I>roject is
almost assuredly going to qualify for a property tax exemption.
Council/Board Members Ferrara and Lubin clarified that was correct. .
City Attomey Carmel asked for further modification of the language in the motion to
change the words "tax implications" to "tax liabilities". The maker of the motion agreed
to the modification.
Board Member Lubin seconded the motion as amended, and on the following roll-call
vote, to wit:
AYES: Ferrara, Lubin, Dickens, Lady
NOES: Runels
ABSENT: None
There being 4 AYES and 1 NO, the motion is hereby declared to be passed.
Council Member Ferrara moved to adopt a Resolution approving the proposed
Disposition and Development Agreement with Courtland-Arroyo Grande, L.P. and
appropriate $10,000 from the Affordable Housing "In Lieu" Fee Fund for professional
services directly related to the proposed affordable senior housing project, subject to,
and conditioned upon the inclusion of elevators to service all second story units within
the project. The Resolution was read as follows:
Resolution of the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande Consenting
Arroyo Grande Redevelopment Agency approving a Disposition and
DevelopmenUAffordable Housing Agreement Between the Agency and
Courtland - Arroyo Grande, L.P.
He further moved that the area of due diligence be expanded to ensure that tax liability
is adequately addressed prior to the close of escrow under the Agreement.
Council Member Lubin seconded the motion, and on the following roll-call vote, to wit:
AYES: Ferrara, Lubin, Dickens, Lady
NOES: Runels
ABSENT: None
There being 4 A YES and 1 NO, the motion is hereby declared to be passed.
----.--.-
MINUTES DRAFT PAGE 3
PLANNING COMMISSION
SEPTEMBER 3, 2002
ATTACHMENT 4
PUBLIC HEARING - AMENDED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 02-003 &
VARIANCE CASE NO. 02-004; APPLICANT - LARRY PERSONS; LOCATION -
1530 EAST GRAND AVENUE. Staff report prepared and presented by Kelly
Heffernon, Associate Planner.
Ms. Heffernon introduced the project and gave the Commission an update on this
previously approved project to construct a 108-unit low and moderate income
senior apartment complex and stated that the applicant resubmitted their
application to the state for a 9% low income tax credit.
Ms. Heffernon further stated that the proposed amendments for Commission
consideration are that the six original buildings have been combined into two
buildings, there will be no fill imported to the site, a subterranean third floor is to be
created on the north section. of the project, the 32 two-bedroom and 76 one-
bedroom units have been changed to 20 two-bedroom and 88 one-bedroom units.
The requested Variance is to deviate from Development Code standards for wall
height, building height and front setback. The proposed amendments are intended
to improve the usefulness of the courtyard, to provide better connection between
the buildings for the residents, to minimize the grade difference between the
commercial and residential uses and to improve the aesthetics by moving the stairs
internally, decreasing the overall building coverage by 8% and increasing the
landscaping by 8 % . The parking will also be increased by two additional spaces.
She then described the layout of the project.
Commissioner Brown:
. Would approval of the amendments set a new precedence for 40-foot high,
3-story buildings?
. Re a letter received from citizens regarding evacuation of the building, are
there enough ways of getting persons out of the second floor?
Rob Strong stated under certain circumstances it could be a beneficial precedent to
build up under planned circumstances than to have increased coverage.
Ms. Heffernon stated the buildings would be fully sprinkled.
Commissioner Fowler:
. The plans show heights of 33 feet, so why is the applicant asking for 40
feet?
Ms. Heffernon stated the applicant wanted design flexibility based on preliminary
plans and that is why they are asking for 40 feet.
Commissioner Keen:
MINUTES DRAFT PAGE 4
PLANNING COMMISSION
SEPTEMBER 3, 2002
. He would prefer that the variance requests not all be lumped together as he
may not agree with some individual ones.
. He questioned why this project was being called an uamendment" as it had
been substantially changed?
Rob Strong:
. Alterations have been done to the building without specific changes to the
site plan and architecture.
. The amended application is treated the same as a new project for a
Conditional Use Permit.
. The development agreement considered by Council still applies.
. The intent of the applicant is still the same.
. The location and composition of the project is very similar.
THE PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
Larry Persons, Pacific Harbor Homes, stated that the primary reasons for the
redesign were that City Council conditioned the project to have elevators for 100%
of the units above the first floor. The original design had garden apartments with
walkways up each side of the units and there was no connection from one side to
the other and it would have required 12 elevators to service the units. He then
displayed a 3-dimensional model of the revised project, explaining in detail the
grading and how residents would access the building using 2 elevators and internal
stairs.
Commissioner Brown asked for more explanation on the building height as
mentioned previously by Commissioner's Fowler and Keen, with respect to the 33
feet versus 40 feet.
Larry Persons replied that when they had completed the preliminary elevations they
came out to 33 feet and they would like a couple of feet leeway. On the
application they had originally requested 40 feet which is not necessary, but they
would like a couple of feet extra.
In reply to a questions from Commissioner Fowler regarding the distance between
parking and the units, Mr. Persons explained that the units in the 3-story building
bottom floor have a raised foundation behind them and each have one door and
windows on their front side. If a resident did not wish to walk up any stairs when
entering the building they could park and take elevators.
John Knight, RRM, explained the reasons for each of the requested variances.
!
io;
-.
MINUTES DRAFT PAGE 5
PLANNING COMMISSION
SEPTEMBER 3. 2002
Commissioner Fowler asked for clarification on how much linear distance of the
retaining wall would be the height of 8 feet. In addition she suggested that some
stakes be put up to show the height of the commercial buildings so potential
Grover Beach residents and Arroyo Grande neighbors would be aware of this. She
said she had no problem with the front setback because she thought it would look
better than a blank wall and she had no problem with the 35-foot building height
but did not think it should be 40-feet.
Mr. Knight said the majority of the wall is 7-feet and there is approximately 6-8
linear feet that will be 8-feet.
Commissioner Keen
. The new project design was far superior to the original.
. He asked for clarification on the setbacks.
Mr. Persons stated the measurements were figured from the property line.
Commissioner Keen said then he had no problem with this. He further stated that
the explanation from Mr. Knight on the other variances had answered his concerns.
Chair Costello asked for clarification on the amount of bicycle parking spaces.
Staff said the spaces were assigned for both commercial and residential.
PUBLIC COMMENT CLOSED
Commissioner Brown said he had no problem with the amendments except he
would like the building height to be kept at no more than requested (33 or 34 feet).
Commissioner Fowler said she had no further comments or concerns.
Commissioner Keen commented he would like to see the building height more
precisely specified. He further stated that he now found all the variances
acceptable, but he did not agree with the criteria for the findings as stated by the
applicant. He thought the findings for the variances could stand-alone.
Commissioner Guthrie said he believed the building height concern had been
addressed and he had no problem with allowing the 35-feet as long as it is internal
to the site. He commented that the amendments made the project superior to the
original.
MINUTES DRAFT PAGE 6
PLANNING COMMISSION
SEPTEMBER 3, 2002
The Commissioners then discussed the building height. Chair Costello reminded
the Commissioners that if we grant an exception above the 30 feet for the two-
story building a precedent if being established.
The Commissioner's then made the following two motions:
Commissioner Brown made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Keen, to
recommend City Council approve Amended Conditional Use permit Case No. 02-
003 including Exhibit' A' with a condition that the building height be 34 Yo -feet and
that all language in the findings for the conditions for approval consistently state
that 100% of the units be for affordable housing and adopt:
RESOLUTION 02-1849 i
I
i
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF I
ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVE AMENDED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 02-003,
LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF EAST GRAND AVENUE
AND COURTLAND STREET, APPLIED FOR BY LARRY PERSONS
Commission Discussion:
Commissioner Keen asked the applicant if bicycle parking was normally requested
for senior residential projects.
Mr. Persons said it was not, but that the bicycle parking was for the commercial as
well as residential part of the project.
Commissioner Guthrie stated he believed a building height exception of 35-feet
should be allowed because it was internal. Commissioner Fowler agreed with
Commissioner Guthrie. Commissioner Keen did not agree because allowing the 35-
feet height would be setting a precedent for future projects and Commissioner
Brown agreed with him.
The motion was approved with the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioner's Brown, Keen, Fowler and Chair Costello
NOES: Commissioner Guthrie
ABSENT: None
The foregoing resolution was adopted this 3rd day of September 2002. I
Commissioner Brown made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Keen, that the
Planning Commission recommend to City Council approval of Variance Case No.
_.._-_....~-----
MINUTES DRAFT PAGE 7
PLANNING COMMISSION
SEPTEMBER 3. 2002
02-004 to deviate from Development Code Requirements for wall height, front yard
setback and building height, with amendment to Exhibit' A' Condition 'C' that the
building height be 34- Yo feet, and that all language in the findings for the conditions
for approval reflect that 100% of the units be affordable housing and adopt:
RESOLUTION 02-1850
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING
COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE
VARIANCE CASE NO. 02-004 TO DEVIATE FROM DEVELOPMENT
CODE REQUIREMENTS FOR WALL HEIGHT. FRONT YARD SETBACK
AND BUILDING HEIGHT. LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER
OF EAST GRAND AVENUE AND COURTLAND STREET, APPLIED FOR
BY LARRY PERSONS
The motion was approved with the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioner's Brown. Keen, Fowler, Guthrie and Chair Costello
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
The foregoing resolution was adopted this 3rd day of September 2002.
I
,
I
ATTACHMENT 5
16.12.080
16.12.080 TIme limit for approving 16.12.110 DeniB1s.
applications. In the event that information needed for the' f'
Action on projects that require the reasons shown below is not provided by the
preparation and certification of an applicant within the time limits specified by
Environmental Impact Report, that are exempt this chapter, the city may. deny a pennit, license
from the provisions of the California or entitlement for a development project.
Environmental Quality Act or that require the Information whose absence would constitute a
,adoption of a negative declaration shall be. reason for such a denial are:
taken within the time limits set forth in state A. Information that is to be supplied by the
law. applicant and is necessary to prepare a ~ega1ly .
An extension of the time limit for action on adequate environmental document (Section
an application may be granted pursuant to 15109 of the State CEQA Guidelines);
applicable provisions of state law. (Prior code fi B. Information necessary to clarify,
9'()2.080) amplify. correct, or otherwise supplement the
information required for the application; or
16.12.090 Effective date of decision. C. Information without which the city's
A decision that is subject to appeal shall not decision to approve a project. would neit be
become effective for ten (10) consecutive supported by substantial evidence.
calendar days following the action by the Denial for the above reasons may be deemed
appropriate decision-making body in order to by the city to be a denial without prejudice to
allow time for the filing of an appeal. (Prior the applicant's right to reapply for the same
code fi 9'()2.090) pennit. (Prior code fi 9'()2.110)
. 16.12.100 Reconsideration. 16.12.120 New applications following
Any application or conditions of approval denial.
that are approved by the planning conunission Following the denial of an application, no
or city council may be reconsidered by the application for the same or substantially the
approving body only if agreed to by a majority sane use on the same site shall be filed within
of the approving body. Following such one year from the effective date of the denial
consensus, the matter shall be set for review or unless denied without prejudice. (Prior code fi
public hearing in the same manner in which the 9'()2.120)
original notice was given. The planning 16.12.130 Approval to extend with land
conunission or city council may review and
take action on all determination, or applicant.
interpretations, decisions, judgments, or simi1ar Unless otherwise specified, all pennits,
actions taken on the application or project, and licenses and approvals granted pursuant to this
are not limited to the original reason stated for title shall run with the land and shall continue
reconsideration. (Prior code fi 9-02.100) to be valid upon a change of ownership of the
site or structure to which it applies, with the
l
421
I
~ Kelly Heffernon - Courtland Narrative Page 11
From: "Larry Persons" <Iarry.persons@pacharbor.com> ATTACHMENT 6
To: "Kelly Heffernon" <KHeffernon@arroyogrande.org>
Date: 9/16/021:36PM
Subject: Courtland Narrative
Pursuant to our discussions and those at the Planning commission, the
reasons for the variances are not that it is an affordable project, rather
that it is a senior citizen project which was conditioned to include
elevators, and we came up with a more efficient design utilizing the natural
terrain of the site to accomplish the goals set out by the Council.
See the marked up changes to the original narrative I have attached, for
your review.
Take a look at these and if you have any questions, give me a call.
CC: "John Knighf' <jrknight@rrm-design.com>
I
i
i
I
I
t
I
i
I
I
t
,
I
i
,
I
,
------------
GRAND & COURTLAND DEVELOPMENT PLAN
VARIANCE CRITERIA RESPONSE
Revised 9/16/02
The application includes a request for a variance ftom three (3) City Code standards. These
include (1) an increase in the maximum retaining wall height ftom 6' to 8', (2) a reduction in the
minimum street setback ftom 20' to 13', and (3) an increase in the height ftom 2 stories/30' to 3
stories/38 40'. I
1. RETAINING WALL HEIGHT VARIANCE
The application includes a request for a retaining wall height variance on the proposed project.
Per City Code, the maximum allowable wall height is six feet. The current proposal seeks a
retaining wall height variance to increase the maximum allowable wall height ftom six to eight
feet in specific areas.
The following six statements respond to the City's criteria for variance justification:
Variance Criteria #1: That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified
regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship not otherwise shared by
others within the surrounding area.
Response: Strict or literal interpretation of the regulation results in a practical difficulty in the
construction of the retaining wall for the senior housing facility on the west edge of the site. The
request for variance to the retaining wall height applies to only a relatively short span of the
retaining wall that will exceed the maximum allowable height. The variance will circumvent the
need for two staggered retaining walls that would far exceed the proposed height variance if
added together.
Variance Criteria #2: That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions
applicable to the property involved or to the intended use of the property that do not apply
generally to other properties classified in the same zone.
Response: The intended use of the property creates extraordinary circumstances that would not
typically apply to multi-family projects. The proposed use will be restricted to Senior only,;mG I
1 QO%' ef the lIaiis ,,,,ill be reselyeE! for Ie\',' aRE! meGeraie iRG9me seaiofS. These types of
restrictions would not nonnally apply to other properties in the same zoning district.
Variance Criteria #3: That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified
regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges erifoyed by the owners of other properties
classified in the same zone.
----- --------
GRAND & COURTLAND DEVELOPMENT PLAN
VARIANCE CRITERIA RESPONSE
Revised September 16, 2002
Response: Strict or literal interpretation of the retaining wall height would require the property
be developed with two staggered retaining walls with an overall height that would far exceed the
proposed height variance. The strict interpretation would result in the provision of additional
retaining wall height and a corresponding reduction in overall aesthetic appeal.
Variance Criteria #4: That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special
privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same zone.
Response: Due to the relatively short span of the retaining wall that will exceed the maximum
allowable height, the requested variance would not constitute a grant of special privileges.
Variance Criteria #5: That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public
health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity.
Response: The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or
welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The overall project
will actually be a benefit to the public welfare by facilitating the development of a housing
project that meets the special needs of a particular group.
Variance Criteria #6: That the granting of a variance is consistent with the objectives and
policies of the General Plan and the intent of this title.
Response: See responses on General Plan policies below.
2. SETBACK VARIANCE
The application includes a request for a front setback variance from 20' to 13'. The main wall of
the building is setback at 20', however, there are columns that project into the setback by 7'.
The columns support a walkway for the upper stories and are needed due to the dramatic grade
. change on the site.
The following six statements respond to the City's criteria for variance justification:
Variance Criteria #1: That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified
regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship not otherwise shared by
others within the surrounding area.
Response: Strict or literal interpretation of the regulation results in a practical difficulty in the
construction of an affer4abl8 senior housing facility. The request for variance to the setback I
allows for greater flexibility in dealing with the grade and higher density on the site making for a
more afferaabl8 feasible project. I
GRAND & COURTLAND DEVELOPMENT PLAN
VARIANCE CRITERIA RESPONSE
Revised September 16, 2002
Variance Criteria #2: That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions
applicable to the property involved or to the intended use of the property that do not apply
generally to other properties classified in the same zone.
Response: The intended use of the property creates extraordinary circumstances that would not
typically apply to multi-family projects. The proposed use will be restricted to Senior only-aHd I
100% sf fue llnitS will Be reservea fer lEn' ami mSGilFate iBcelBe sl!BieF8. These types of
restrictions would not normally apply to other properties in the same zoning district.
Variance Criteria #3: That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified
regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties
classified in the same zone.
Response: Strict or literal interpretation of the setback would require the property to be
developed with a greater building coverage. The setback variance allows for a larger courtyard
and greater recreational opportunities.
Variance Criteria #4: That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special
privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same zone.
Response: Since the face of the building wall is still set back a distance of20' (only the columns
extend into the setback), the buildings will be similar in appearance and design to traditional
multi-family buildings with a 20' setback.
Variance Criteria #5: That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public I
health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. I
Response: The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or I
welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The overall project
will actually be a benefit to the public welfare by facilitating the development of a housing
project that meets the special needs of a particular group.
Variance Criteria #6: That the granting of a variance is consistent with the objectives and
policies of the General Plan and the intent of this title.
Response: See responses on General Plan policies below. I
I
3. HEIGHT VARIANCE
The application includes a request for a height variance on the proposed project. Per City Code,
the maximum allowable height is thirty (30) feet. The current proposal seeks a height variance I
i
,,-..--
GRAND & COURTLAND DEVELOPMENT PLAN
VARIANCE CRITERIA RESPONSE
Revised September 16, 2002
to increase the maximum allowable height ITom thirty (30) to thirty eight feFIy (4G 38} feet and I
allow for three (3) stories.
The following six statements respond to the City's criteria for variance justification:
Variance Criteria #1: That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified
regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship not otherwise shared by
others within the surrounding area.
Response: Strict or litera! interpretation of the regulation results in a practical difficulty in the
construction of an affor-dable senior housing facility. The request for variance to the height I
allows for a more affonlabJe efficient construction and makes it more practical to add elevators.
Variance Criteria #2: That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions
applicable to the property involved or to the intended use of the property that do not apply
generally to other properties classified in the same zone.
Response: The intended use of the property creates extraordinary circumstances that would not
typically apply to multi-family projects. The proposed use will be restricted to Senior oniy-aad I
J 09% sf the anits will be reseryes for Iowans IHssl!fate iasolHe sllHieF&. These types of
restrictions would not nonnally apply to other properties in the same zoning district.
Variance Criteria #3: That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified
regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties
classified in the same zone.
Response: Strict or literal interpretation of the height would require the property to be I
developed with a greater bnilding coverage. The addition of the three (3) story building allows I
for a larger courtyard and greater recreational opportunities.
Variance Criteria #4: That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special
privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same zone.
Response: Due to the way the buildings are stepped, it will be similar in appearance and design
to a traditional multi-family building.
Variance Criteria #5: That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public
health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity.
I
Response: The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or I
welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The overall project I
I
I
GRAND & COURTLAND DEVELOPMENT PLAN
VARIANCE CRITERIA RESPONSE
Revised September 16,2002
will actually be a benefit to the public welfare by facilitating the development of a housing
project that meets the special needs of a particular group.
Variance Criteria #6: That the granting of a variance is consistent with the objectives and
policies of the General Plan and the intent of this title.
Response: See General Plan policies below.
General Plan Consistency Statement
LUS-12 Mixed-Use developments in current The project proposes
VC, HC, GC, or I zones - Any residential uses next to
combination of mixed uses, or any previously approved
project proposing a residential commercial uses m the
component in a commercial or Mixed-Use designation of
industrial district shall be considered the Updated General Plan.
pursuant to Conditional Use Pennit The residential aspect of the
approval (Development Code Section project proposes a lOS-unit
9-03.050) or Planned Unit affordable semor housing
Development Permit approval facility, for the special needs
(Development Code Section 9- population.
03.160). In addition, where affordable
housing is proposed in a Mixed-Use
designation, density incentives
exceeding 25% may be considered.
LU3-S Provide adequate housing for senior See LU5-12
citizens, low and moderate-income I
households and other populations with I
,
special needs. I
LU3-6 Encourage the development of special The mixed-use aspect of the ,
I
needs housing in locations with good project provides affordable i
access to public transit and shopping senior housing for the special
facilities. needs population that IS
located adjacent to public
transit facilities, and existing
commercial retail.
LU3-7 Require that special needs housing The affordable senior
projects include appropriate leisure housing facility proposes the
and/or recreational amenities for its addition of a Community
residents. Building, pool and spa for
use by its residents. I
I
-- - ---------------------- J
GRAND & COURTLAND DEVELOPMENT PLAN
VARIANCE CRITERIA RESPONSE
Revised September 16,2002
LU5-8 Provide for different combinations, The proposed project seeks
configurations and mixtures of to provide high density
commercial, office and high-density residential uses within the
residential uses designating the East Mixed-Use corridor of East
Grand Avenue, El Camino Real and Grand Avenue.
Traffic Way corridors as Mixed-Use
(MU).
LU5-8.2 Enable Mixed-Uses and development The proposed project seeks
intensities to be increased in the to promote pedestrian
Mixed-Use corridors to promote activity by providing direct
pedestrian activity, provide better pedestrian access to
shopping opportunities and discourage shopping to the south of the
incompatible commercial service uses site.
in areas adjoining residential uses or
classifications.
LU5-10.1 Promote development of a high See LU5-8.2. I
intensity, mixed-use, pedestrian
activity node centered on the I
Courtland Street/East Grand Avenue
,
intersection as a priority example of
revitalization of this corridor segment
known as Gateway.
\\Plan-sr\Planniml\2002\1402514 Courtland Sr. Housimz;\Product\Aoolication\Narrative Updated 9-16-02.doc
--~_.~
,
RECEIVED ATTACHMENT 7
AUg.U4 t 28, 2002
AUG 2 8 2002 586 mLLe4 Oak Lane
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE Ni.pomo CA93444 ' .-
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPI ~.
Ci.tV Counci.L and PLanni.ng. Commi.44i.on
Ci.tV 01 Annovo ynande
c/o Communi.tv. beveLopment bept.
2/4 t. Bnanch St
Annovo ynande CA 93420
yentLemen: 'i?e: Amended Condi.ti.onaL 04e ?enmi.t 02-003
and Vani.anceCa4e 02-004
We ane ownen4 01 the pnopentv at 308 CountLand, a pni.vate
ne4i.dence kocated di.ag.onaLLv acn044 Inom thepnop04ed 4eni.on
compLex.
When we li.n4t necei.ved noti.ce 01 a 4eni.on hOU4i.n! pnj1ect, we
wene pLea4ed, bei.ng. 4eni.on4 oun4eLve4. The 4i.x ui.L i.ng.4
4eemed appnop'ni.ate. Now, wi.th the pnop04ed nevi.4i.on4, we
object Ion the 10LLowi.ng. nea40n4:
/. Two Lang.e apantment bui.Ldi.ng.4 wouLd centai.nLv chang.e the
chanacten 01 the nei.g.hbonhood. Thi.4 4i.~e pnoject i.4 not
appnopni.ate Ion a nei.g.hbon o( pni.vate ome4 and 4maLL
apantmentcompLexe4.
2. The apantment4 wi.LL not nemai.n a 4eni.on hou4i.ng. co~Lex
Ion Long., a4 4eni.on4 wouLd not Ii.nd i.t conveni.ent on
thei.n need4j Can VOU i.mag.i.ne evacuati.n~ /40 4Low-movi.n~
4eni.on4 (/08 uni.t4 mi.nu4 th04eon the {i.n4t ILoon! wi.th .
two eLevaton4 i.n an emeng.encv? Who wouLd be ne4pon4i.bLe?
3. The vani.ance4 pnop04ed wouLd Li.mi.t the vi.ew 01 th04e on
the nonth, cut Land4capi.ng. anea, and above aLL, 4et a
new pnecedent --- hi.g.hen, bi.g.g.en, cheapen.
What wa4 wnong. wi.th the i.ni.ti.aL pLan? We can onLv.a44ume i.t
" i.4 monev. Two Lang.e buUdi.ng.4 c04t Le44 than 4i.x4maLLen one.$',
The conponate li.nanci.aL 4candaL4 now nocki.n9- the countnv'4
confi.dence i.n the bU4i.ne44 communi.t~ 4tanted 40mewhene 4maLL -
a chang.e hene, a Vani.ance ne~ue4t t ene. Hope(uLLv, the
7'Lanni.n~ Commi.44i.on and Ci.tV CouncU wUL keep thi.4 i.n mi.nd
when ma i.ng. i.t4 deci.4i.on, and do what i.4 ni.g.ht and (ai.n.
II not, what pnecedence ane VOU 4etti.ng.j what ne~ue4t wi.LL be next?
$U4t a cL04i.ng. thoug.ht - penhap4 the deveLopen pLanned the4e
two buUdi.n~4 .i.n the beg.i.nni.ng., counti.ng. on Annovo ynande'4 need
Ion 4eni.on hou4i.ng. a4 Levenag.e to pU4h an acceptance vote.
Thank VOU Ion voun con4i.denati.on 01 oun opi.ni.on on thi.4 matten.
5 i.nceneLv,
;4~a M- 'i?i.chand beLL
&~ IOu(
J
10.8.
MEMORANDUM
TO: CITY COUNCIL
ROB STRONG, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR~
FROM:
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR HISTORIC DISTRICTS
PROCESS AND SCHEDULE REVISIONS
DATE: SEPTEMBER 24, 2002
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the following approach to Design Guideline and Overlay District
Amendments:
1) Provide City Council direction to staff regarding ARC composition.
2) Direct staff to prepare a revised third draft, redistribute to the Village
Improvement Association (VIA), Chamber of Commerce, Architectural Review
Committee (ARC), Planning Commission, and Council prior to noticed public
hearings for further discussion. Schedule ARC hearing in October or November,
Planning Commission in January, and Council in February, concurrent with Village
Commercial Development Code Update hearings.
I
3) Include more photos of desired diversity of appropriate eras and styles, I
architectural elements, examples of furniture and fixtures, signs and public art I
preferred in the Village Downtown and Transitional districts. Provide additional I
guidelines for mixed-use Transitional areas, as well as Downtown and Residential i
I
districts. I
I
4) Advertise and notice all proposed affected areas and adjoining owners, residents I
,
and businesses of coordinated public hearings to be conducted in October, I
November, January, and February 2003, to consider Development Code Update, I
Overlay Districts and Design Guideline Revisions. Include brief discussion of
related project processing (e.g. Creekside Center, East Village Plaza PUD,
streets cape, and creekside enhancement and Village parking study).
FUNDING:
No fiscal impact.
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION FOR HISTORIC DISTRICTS PROCESS AND SCHEDULE REVISIONS
SEPTEMBER 24, 2002
PAGE 2
DISCUSSION:
Backaround
Responding to the August 9, 2002 letter and three page attachment from the Chamber
of Commerce and VIA regarding their comments on the Design Guidelines for Historic
Districts, staff has been deferring return of revisions to ARC and Planning Commission
since April and May workshops in anticipation of this organizational input. . The
workshops were conducted at Chamber of Commerce and VIA suggestion and with
their assistance to assure citizen, resident, business and property owner input prior to
City Council consideration of revised guideline adoption.
The workshops revealed divergent opinions, some in support of stronaer guidelines and
more specific requirements and others suggesting weaker language and fewer specifics.
Staff considers a compromise or combination to be the most probable solution. Because
the guidelines are administered by staff, but interpreted by the ARC and Planning
Commission on project review cases, we believe that revisions and requested
refinements should be reconsidered by ARC and Planning Commission before being
presented to City Council.
Another reason for delayed reconsideration of guideline revisions is to coordinate with
the pending Development Code Update of the Village Commercial zoning and property
development standards, also requiring public hearing, mailed and published notice to all
property owners in the affected areas. Rather than several separate public hearings
during the year-end holiday season, staff recommends that the Planning Commission
and City Council hold hearings in January and February 2003, after ARC review in
October and November 2002.
If this deferred reconsideration is acceptable to the ARC, Planning Commission, and City
Council, staff would have the opportunity to redistribute a third draft of the Design
Guidelines and meet with VIA and Chamber representatives prior to ARC public hearing
in October.
Basic Issues. Recommendations and Alternatives: I
Based on the input received from the Chamber of Commerce, VIA and public
workshops, staff has begun to identify general issues and approaches to address them.
It would be helpful to obtain initial direction from City Council at this time before
proceeding. These general issues are outlined below:
I
, I
-.."-
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION FOR HISTORIC DISTRICTS PROCESS AND SCHEDULE REVISIONS
SEPTEMBER 24, 2002
PAGE 3
1) ARC Composition
If the City Council agrees with the "priority" request of the Chamber of
Commerce and VIA, it would divide the development review process into two
geographic areas, rather than utilize the existing ARC as a citywide advisory body
for design recommendations. A new Village Historic Character Overlay District
ARC would assist applicants and review projects in the Village Design Overlay
Districts while the established ARC would similarly consider all other areas and
projects.
A compromise or alternative approach would be to increase the membership of
the existing ARC from five to seven members and have two business owners or I
two residential property owners sit as additional committee members when
projects in the Village Mixed-Use or Residential area are being considered. Several
alternate members could be available to fill in if a conflict of interest prevents the
prime representatives from participation. This structure could be tested and if
workable, utilized to supplement the ARC in other special geographic areas such
as East Grand Avenue and Traffic Way when similar design guidelines are
adopted for these proposed mixed-use districts.
2) "Shalls or Shoulds"
Staff concurs with the Chamber of Commerce and VIA statement of intent that
the Design Guidelines for the Historic Character Overlay Districts should be a
preferred policy guide and reference document for building alterations and new
construction in the Village areas. Staff will edit the prior draft to reword as many
mandatory statements as possible into more advisory guidance and propose
specific requirements as Development Code standards during review and adoption
hearings. The ARC, Planning Commission or Council can further revise or refine I
the third draft to achieve the desired balance of "user friendly" and adequate
"protection" of valuable community characteristics.
3) Wider Varietv and More Recent Architectural Stvles
The Chamber of Commerce and VIA comments suggest that the current and prior
revision draft Guidelines "limit" or "mandate" the range of architectural design
elements to the time period from 1870 to 1939, rather than encouraging
integration of more recent buildings from 1950s, 1960s and 1970s. They
recommend greater use of pictures and graphic examples to illustrate desirable
designs for each era or decade of development. Others, however, have called
some of the more recent complexes or buildings "out of character." Staff will
attempt to add illustrations of elements and styles that reflect a broader range of
diversity, including different colors and materials depending on the building era
,
----.---
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION FOR HISTORIC DISTRICTS PROCESS AND SCHEDULE REVISIONS
SEPTEMBER 24, 2002
PAGE 4
and setting. Specifically, staff will propose that the Village Commercial District
be reconsidered as two zoning districts, Downtown and Transitional, to better
reflect combinations of residential and commercial uses surrounding the historic
two or three block Village Core. The Village Commercial Transitional District
would include more recent architectural styles.
4) MaD of Overlav District EXDansions
While the proposed Historic Character Overlay District was expanded to include
possible areas west, east and south of the existing Design Overlay District, there
was mixed opinion expressed at the workshop. A majority of participating
residents supported inclusion of Crown Hill and several more block fronts to the
south, but conversely many residents west and further southeast questioned why
and how the guidelines would be interpreted in their more diverse developing
areas.
Staff will identify several "optional" extensions which may be considered by ARC,
Planning Commission or Council, but property owners must be notified of the
required public hearings if the City intends to consider such expansions. Some
areas may be deleted or reduced as a result of public hearing testimony.
5) Benches. Street Furniture. Sians and Public Art
VIA and Chamber comments support well maintained, pedestrian street furniture,
"small town, historic" character signage and possible public art considered on an
individual basis. Several pending projects may clarify consistent design criteria or
apparent preferences for styles, materials and colors considered compatible with I
"small town", "historic" qualities of the Village area.
I
I
ALTERNATIVES: I
I
The following alternatives are presented for Council consideration: I
Approve revised schedule and direct staff to continue forward with proposed I
- ,
,
modifications to the new Guidelines including modifications to the ARC;
- Keep the current Guidelines as they are and not revise them;
- Provide direction to staff.
I
I
I
,
I
,
-------
89(28/2882 15,35 8857727713 ocu: IoERZO-I & KIRSCH PAGE 81
, 1"\ -s.. l ev-'!-'i>,,\
-
.- .' ".
.
Arroyo Grande Chan:tber of C9mmerce
&
Arroyo Grande .
Villa~e ImprovementAssociation
August 8. 2002
n
c -
N ~.
Mayor and City Council :> ..
5 ....::;0
City of Arroyo Grande I >TPI
CD .""'0
Arroyo. Grande, Ca 93420 ~~-
0-
~ -<<
:JI: 0""
Dear Mayor Lady and Councilmen: n"
C;!} ;;,
- >
;;c
. 0\ "'"
On behalf of the Arroyo Grande Chamber of Commerce and the Arroyo Grande Villlfge
Improvement Association, representing over 500 businesses..we are submitting the
following document for your consideration.
Thank you for this opportunity to work cooperatively with the City of Arroyo Grande to
meet the common goal of mamrnining the unique qualities of our historic village.
~
Bob Lund Heather Jensen
Arroyo Grande Arroyo Grande
Village Improvement Association Chaniber of Commerce
.
. e: Ci ~ CoI.U\U I
Ci-kj f.{t<.., 'tf)cr
. Ci~ Aifnm::J
Co~.betJ.Di~daT
. tls"p'Y'
09/20/2002.15:35 8057727713 OGLE /.ER2GI & KIRSCH PAGE 62
-
Arroyo Grande Chamber of C~mmerce
&
Arroyo 'Grande
. . .
Village Improvement Association
Design Guidelines for Historic Districts,
Comments, Review & RecommendatioDS
During the lengthy review process for the Design Guide~es for.the Historic District,
there has been the opportunity to compare the ClUTcnt version and the proposed revised
version of the document. During this comparison several issues have been identified and .
we would like to submit comments concerning those topics, as follows:
The intent of the, Design Guidelines for the Historic District should continue as a guide
and reference for those planni,ng'building renovation or new construction in the historic.
district. Its' intent should be to encourage'ilpplicants to'seek advisory assistance and
direction from the city staff in a cooperative partnership to achieve common goals by
enhancing the historic element of Arroyo Grande.
#1 Priority: I
The number one priority is to immediately begin the process to establish a Village'
Historic District Architectural Review Committee.1;ms official body would have
jurisdiction over the Village Historic District in lieu of the dtywide Architectural
Review Committee.
The Village Historic District Architectural Review Committee, as adopted by the City
Council, would be a five member Advisory Committee, consisting of 3 (three) Village
Historic District businesses owners and 2 (two).Village Historic District residential
owners. The selection process would use the current commissioner application form, to
be submitted to the Village Improvement Association for review, with recommendations
sent to the City Council for appointments. The Village Historic District A.R.C. would be
there'to assist the applicant, in the review of projects and submittal of comments
regarding the aesthetics, site planning and architectural design of the development and,
or, renov!ition project in the Village Historic District. RecommendatiotlS would be sent to
the Planning Commission and the City Council. ' -. .
139/213/213132 15:35 81357727713 OGLE MER2CJ.1 & KIRSCH
PAGE: 133
-
'. " , ..
-1-
.
Throughout the proposed revised version of the Design Guidelines for the Historic District,
. there are many uses of the word "shall". .We feel that this document, as a guide, should
reflect a softer, encouraging and more friendly tone, (i.e. advise, suggest, assist)and utilize
strong~r terms (re. shall, must, will) in the Development Code, where enforcement is more
clearly defmed.
There needs to be an effort to retain the Design Guidelines as user friendly to the businesses
and the many property and homeowners affected. Not doing so could result in negative
consequences such as non-use of the guidelines or a conscious choice to not make
improvements at all.
,
We feel there is merit to enhance the architectual integrity of each historically significant
building in the designated district. The village area is known for its variety of architectural
designs, ranging from the turn of the century Victorian theme, Western and Early California
Mission style, along with many of the buildings that were built in the 1950's, 60's and 70's.
The reference in the revised .Guidelines to limit the architecture design elements to the time
frame of 1870 thrc)ltgh 1939 simply does not make sense in the Arroyo GrandeVillage
Historic District. Each architectural style has it's own cha.rm. and that particular design
should be elaborated upon, rather than attempt to make a building something that it never
was intended to be. That mandate would ultimately, take away from much of the village
character, which has thrived and grown over the past 100 + years. The unique qualities, and
individuality, is what make the village what it is today. The allure and success of the .village
area is the result oftbe decades of business and homeowners taking pride in their distinctive
property. The Design Guidelines should encourage continuation of that pride in ownership
along witl} the added knowledge that having property in the village area does carry
additional responsibility.
We do feel it would be beneficial to an applicant to have a greater use of pictorial examples
that would provide a broader idea base and will better reflect the architectural options
available throughout a specific defined historic period. Photo's of desirable architectural
desigris for each era would be helpful, i.e., 1890, 1900's, 1910, 1920, 1930,1940,1950, 1960,
and 1970.
-
11.8.
MEMORANDUM
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: DON SPAGNOLO, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER 1ft
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION AND PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION OF DRAFT ORDINANCE
AMENDING MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 13.24 ENTITLED:
"EXCAVATION, GRADING, EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL"
DATE: SEPTEMBER 24, 2002
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended the City Council direct staff to distribute a proposed ordinance
amending Municipal Code Chapter 13.24 entitled: "Excavation, Grading, Erosion and
Sedimentation Control" for public comment, and retum to Council in approximately 45 days
with a summary of public comments and any modification deemed necessary or
appropriate.
FUNDING:
There are no funding impacts.
DISCUSSION:
Municipal Code Chapter 13.24 provides standards for grading, excavation, and erosion
control for construction projects within the City. Although based on the California Building
Code, Chapter 13.24 is tailored to address specific City requirements such as site
investigations, inspection criteria and nonconcompliance procedures.
The proposed ordinance will update Municipal Code Chapter 13.24 to incorporate erosion
and sedimentation control for new development sites and to comply with the current
version of the California Building Code. In developing the proposed code revisions, staff
reviewed a number of grading ordinances from cities throughout California. Staff
considered and, where possible, resolved previously stated questions and concerns raised
by contractors, developers and the public. Staff will also revise existing standards
accordingly to reference the best management practices and/or develop new standards as
required.
CITY COUNCIL
MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 13.24
SEPTEMBER 24, 2002
PAGE 2
The key changes for the Ordinance include:
. Addition of references to the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) requirements for stormwater control incorporating Best Management
Practices,
. requirements for Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for construction
projects, and
. changes to the grading permit fee schedule to coincide with the latest version ofthe
California Building Code Appendix Chapter 33 entitled "Excavation and Grading",
which was recently adopted by the Council.
The City will be required to obtain a Phase II National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Quality Control Board by March 2003. In
order to obtain a permit, the City will be required to develop a stormwater prevention plan,
The plan will list best management practices to control construction site stormwater runoff
and post construction stormwater management in new development projects.
It is recommended that the Council direct staff to distribute the ordinance to local agencies
to facilitate public comment, including the Chamber of Commerce, County Library and the
Home Builders Association. The draft ordinance will also be posted on the City website.
ALTERNATIVES:
The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration:
. Approve staff's recommendation;
. Do not approve staff's recommendation;
. Modify as appropriate and approve staff's recommendation; or
. Provide direction to staff.
Attachment:
1, Draft Ordinance
DRAFT
ORDINANCE NO.
A ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO
GRANDE AMENDING ARROYO GRANDE MUNICIPAL CODE
CHAPTER 13.24 REGARDING GRADING, EXCAVATION AND
EROSION CONTROL
WHEREAS, the City of Arroyo Grande desires to update the Arroyo Grande Municipal
Code to comply with the current version of the California Building Code Appendix
Chapter 33 entitled "Excavation and Grading" and with the National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) requirements for stormwater control incorporating best
management practices,
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: Sections 13.24 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code is hereby amended
in its entirety, as shown in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated by this reference
as though set forth in full.
SECTION 2: If any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or
phrase of this Ordinance or any part thereof is for any reason held to be unlawful, such
decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Ordinance or any
part thereof. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed each section,
subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase thereof, irrespective of
the fact that anyone or more section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence,
clause or phrase be declared unlawful.
SECTION 3: A summary of this Ordinance shall be published in a newspaper published
and circulated in the City of Arroyo Grande at least five (5) days prior to the City Council
meeting at which the proposed Ordinance is to be adopted. A certified copy of the full
text of the proposed Ordinance shall be posted in the office of the Director of
Administrative Services/Deputy City Clerk. Within fifteen (15) days after adoption of the
Ordinance, the summary with the names of those City Council members voting for and
against the Ordinance shall be published again, and the Director of Administrative
Services/Deputy City Clerk shall post a certified copy of the full text of such adopted
Ordinance. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force and effect thirty (30)
days after its passage.
ORDINANCE NO.
PAGE TWO
On motion of Council Member , seconded by Council Member ,
and on the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing Ordinance was passed and adopted this day of ,
2002.
ORDINANCE NO.
PAGE THREE
MICHAEL A. LADY, MAYOR
ATTEST:
KELLY WETMORE, DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES/
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
TIMOTHY J. CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY
DRAFT
Chapter 13.24 EXCAVATION, GRADING, EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL
13.24.010 Purpose.
The purpose of this chapter is to safeguard life, limb and property, water quality,
safety and the public welfare by regulating and controlling grading, clearing and erosion
on private property, (Prior code 9 7-1.01)
13.24.020 Scope.
This chapter sets forth rules, regulations and minimum standards to control
excavation, grading, erosion and sediment; requires control of all existing and potential
conditions of accelerated erosion; establishes administrative procedures for issuance of
permits; and provides for approval of plans and inspections during construction and
maintenance. All activities subject to subdivision map requirements and/or building
permits shall meet these standards. (Prior code 97-1.02)
13.24.030 Permits required.
No person shall do any land disturbance work without first obtaining a permit
from the building official except as follows:
A. Isolated area: grading in an isolated, self-contained area if there is no danger
to private or public property;
B. Emergency work: work necessary to preserve life or property; provided,
however, that when emergency work is performed under this section, the
person performing it shall report the pertinent facts relating to the work to the
building official within fifteen (15) days after commencement of the work and
shall thereafter obtain a permit pursuant to Section 13.24.060 and perform
such work as may be determined by the building official to be reasonably
necessary to correct any erosion or conditions with a potential to cause
erosion as a result of the emergency work;
C. Excavation: an excavation which does not exceed one hundred (100) cubic
yards and is less than two feet in depth, does not create a cut slope higher
than five feet and steeper than two to one (2:1) (see Figure 2 in Section
13.24.110);
D. Fill: a fill containing only permitted materials less than one-foot deep, placed
on natural terrain slope flatter than five to one (5:1), does nor exceed fifty (50)
cubic yards on anyone site, including stockpiles, does not alter or obstruct a
drainage course, will not be used for structural support or roadways and the
area graded or filled does not exceed eleven thousand (11,000) square feet
(one-quarter acre), This exemption shall not apply to a fill within a riparian
zone;
E. Basements and footings: an excavation below finished grade for basements
and footings of a building, retaining wall or other structure authorized by a
valid building permit. This shall not exempt any fill except as provided under
subsection D of this section, made with the material from such excavation or
exempt any excavation having an unsupported height greater than five feet
after the completion of such structures;
F. Cemeteries: cemetery graves;
G, Refuse disposal: refuse, individual and/or community sewage disposal sites
controlled pursuant to other regulations;
H, Wells Walls and utilities: excavations for wells, tunnels or utilities; I
L Exploratory investigations: excavations under the direction of a soils engineer
or engineering geologist where such excavation is to be returned to the
original condition within forty-five (45) days after the start of work;
J. Clearing an area of one thousand (1,000) square feet (one-quarter acre) or
less on five percent slopes or less;
K. Agricultural: normal routine farming activities necessary to manage land,
crops and/or animals for food production;
L, Mining, quarrying, excavating: processing, stockpiling of rock, sand, gravel,
aggregate or clay where established and provided for by law, provided such
operations are conditioned by other permits to preclude discharge of
sediments offsite and provided such operations do not affect the lateral
support or increase the stresses or pressure upon any adjacent or contiguous
property. (Prior code ~ 7-1.03)
13.24.040 Hazards.
A. General. No person shall cause or allow the persistence of a condition on any
site that could cause accelerated erosion. Accelerated erosion shall be
controlled and/or prevented by the responsible person or the property owner
by using practices outlined hereinafter as applicable. Additional measures
may be necessary, and may be specifically required by the building official
when work is on geological unstable areas, thirty (30) percent or steeper
slopes, and/or on soils with a severe erosion hazard rating by a USDA Soil
Survey. Soil sterilants that last longer than four weeks shall not be used on
soils or slopes which may subsequently need vegetation for erosion and
sediment control.
B. Where feasible, erosion hazard problems shall be controlled no later than the
beginning of the next winter or adverse season. Hazardous Conditions.
Whenever the building official determines that any existing excavation or
embankment or cut or fill on private property has become a hazard to life and
limb, or endangers property, or adversely affects the safety, use or stability of
a public way, drainage channel or causes significant impact on the natural
resources of the area, the owner of the property upon which the excavation,
cut or fill is located, or other person or agent in control of the property, upon
receipt of notice in writing from the building official shall, within the period
specified therein, repair or eliminate such hazard and conform with the
requirements of this chapter.
No permits of any kind shall be issued if the building official determines that
proposed construction work is hazardous to the extent described above, or
the work is subject to a major flood hazard dangerous to life or property, and
which hazard cannot be eliminated, prevented, or corrected. (Prior code 9 7-
1.04)
13.24.050 Definitions.
When used in this chapter, the definitions listed hereunder shall have the
meanings as specified in this section:
"Accelerated erosion" means rapid erosion caused by human-induced alteration
of the vegetation, land surface topography or runoff patterns. Evidence of accelerated
erosion is indicated by exposed soils, active gullies, tills, sediment deposits, or slope
failures caused by human activities, including grazing promoted by human activities.
"Access and building envelope" means a delineated area within which all land
disturbances for construction of access and/or building will be confined.
"Applicant" means any person, corporation, partnership, association of any type,
public agency or any other legal entity who submits an application to the building official
for a permit pursuant to this chapter.
"Approval" means a written engineering or geological opinion concerning the
progress and completion of the work.
"As-grade" is the surface conditions extent on completion of grading.
"Bedrock" means in-place, solid rock.
"Bench" means a relatively level step excavated into earth material on which fill
is to be placed.
I
"Best Manaoement Practices (BMPs)" are practices, means, methods,
measures, devices, structures, veoetative plantinqs and/or a combination thereof
desioned to safely control erosion and sediment so that construction wastes or
contaminants from construction materials, tools and equipment are prevented from
enterino the storm drain system.
"Building official" means the officer or other designated authority charged with
the administration and enforcement of this code, or a duly authorized representative.
For purposes of this section, the building official shall be the director of public works.
"Borrow" means earth material acquired from an off-site or other on-site location
for use in grading on a site.
"Clearing" means the removal or vegetation and debris down to bare soil by any
method.
"Civil engineer" means a professional engineer licensed registered in the State of I
California state-to practice in the field of civil works.
"Civil engineering" means the application of the knowledge of the forces of
nature, principles of mechanics and the properties of materials to the evaluation, design
and construction of civil works,
"Compaction" means the densification of earth and solids or a fill by mechanical
means.
"Development permit" means a permit issued for new land use activities,
building, grading, land clearing, subdivision, planned unit development, and major plan
development.
"Drainage course" mean a well defined, natural or man-made channel which
conveys storm water runoff either year-round or intermittently.
"Earth material" means any rock, natural soil or fill and/or any combination
thereof.
"Engineering geologist" means a geologist experienced and knowledgeable in
engineering geology and licensed rogistered with the State of California state to I
practice engineering geology.
"Engineering geology" means the application of geologic knowledge and
principles in the investigation and evaluation of naturally occurring rock and soil for use
in the design of civil works.
"10-year storm" means a storm with such intensity and duration that its
magnitude would only be exceeded on the average once every ten years.
"Terrace" means a relatively level step constructed in the face of a graded slope
surface for drainage and maintenance purposes.
"Topsoil" means loose, pliable, organic and fertile earth materials on top of a soil
profile, usually the "A" horizons.
"Unstable soil" means soil which in the opinion of the building official, or the civil
engineer, or the soils engineer or the geologist, is not competent to support other soil or
fill, to support structures, or to satisfactorily perform the other functioning for which the
soil is intended. (Prior code 9 7-1.05)
13.24.060 Permit application, plans, specifications and reports required.
Except as exempted in Section 13.24.030 of this chapter, no person shall do,
cause, permit, aid, abet, suffer or furnish equipment or labor for any clearing, grading,
erosion or sediment control work until a permit has been obtained from the building
official by the owner(s) of the property or his or her agent. To obtain a permit, the
applicant shall first file an application therefore in writing on a form furnished by the
code enforcement agency for that purpose.
A. Application. The application for a permit must include all of the following items:
1. Application form;
2. Two sets of the site map and grading plans;
3. Two sets of the erosion and sediment control plan, where required;
4. Two sets of the soil engineering report, where required;
5. Two sets of the engineering geology report, where required;
6. Two sets of the work schedule;
7. Two sets of a vicinity map showing the location of the site in relationship to the
surrounding area's water courses, water bodies and other significant geographic
features, and roads and other significant structures;
8. Application fees as stipulated in the current issue of the Uniform Building
Code;
9. Performance bond or other acceptable security, when required.
10. Two sets of any supplementary material required by the building official.
B. Application Form. The following information is required on the application
form:
1. Name, address and telephone number of the applicant with date of
application;
2. Names, addresses and telephone numbers of any and all contractors.
subcontractors or persons actually doing the land disturbing and land filling
activities and their respective tasks;
3. Name(s), address(s) and telephone number(s) of the person(s) responsible for
the preparation of the site map and grading plan, erosion and sediment control
plan, soil engineering and engineering geology reports;
4. Signature(s) of the owner(s) of the site or of an authorized representative.
C. Permit Issuance. The building official may require that operations and project
designs be modified if delays occur which incur weather generated problems not
considered at the time the permit was issued.
1. A separate permit shall be required for each site and cover both excav,ations
and fills, clearing, grading and erosion control work.
2. Approval of a permit shall require the abatement of any existing human
induced or accelerated erosion problems on the property. The building official
may seek abatement recommendation from local conservation districts,
agencies, organizations and/or associations when available.
3, A permit shall authorize only that work which is described or illustrated on the
approved site plans and specifications.
D. Site Map and Grading Plan. Two sets of the site map and grading plan shall
be required and shall contain all of the following information:
1. Existing and proposed topography of the site taken at a contour interval
insufficiently detailed to define the topography over the entire site;
2. Two contour intervals that extend a minimum of one hundred (100) feet off-
site, or sufficient to show on- and off-site drainage;
3. Site's property lines shown in true location with respect to the plan's
topographic information;
4. Location and graphic representation of all existing and proposed natural and
man-made drainage facilities;
5. Detailed plans of all surface and sub-surface drainage devices, walls, cribbing,
dams and other protective devices to be constructed with or as a part of the
proposed work, together with a map showing the drainage area and calculations
justifying the estimated runoff of the area served by any drain;
6. Location and graphic representation of proposed excavations and fills, of on-
site storage of soil and other earth material, and of on-site disposal;
7. Location of existing vegetation types and the location and type of vegetation to
be left undisturbed;
8. Location of proposed final surface runoff, erosion and sediment control
practices;
9. Estimated quantity of soil or earth material in cubic yards to be excavated,
filled, stored or otherwise utilized on-site;
10. Outline of the methods to be used in clearing vegetation, and in storing and
disposing of the cleared vegetative matter;
11. Proposed sequence and schedule of excavations filling and other land
disturbing and filling activities, and soil or earth material storage and disposal;
12. Location of any buildings or structures, including wells and sewage disposal
facilities on the property where the work is to be performed, and the location of
any buildings or structures on land of adjacent owners which are within four
-
hundred (400) feet of the property or which may be affected by the proposed
grading operations;
13. North arrow, written and graphic scales. Specifications shall contain
information covering construction and material requirements.
E. Grading Requirements. All grading in excess of five thousand (5,000) cubic
yards shall be performed in accordance with the approved grading plan prepared
by a civil engineer, and shall be designated as "engineered grading." Grading
involving less than five thousand (5,000) cubic yards shall be designated "regular
grading" unless the permittee, with the approval of the building official, chooses
to have the grading performed as "engineered grading."
1. Engineering Grading. A civil engineer authorized by state law shall prepare
and sign the reports, plans and specifications required in subsections D and F of
this section.
2. Regular Grading. The building official may require inspection and testing by an
approved testing agency. The testing agency's responsibility shall include, but
need not be limited to, approval concerning the inspection of cleared areas and
benches to receive fill, and the compaction of fills.
When the building official has cause to believe that geologic hazards may be
involved, the regular grading operation shall be required to conform to
engineered grading requirements.
F. Preliminary Reports. When required by the building official, each application
for a permit shall be accompanied by two sets of supporting data consisting of a
soil engineering report, engineering geology report, erosion and sediment control
report, and/or any other reports necessary. During grading, all necessary reports,
compaction data, soil engineering, engineering geology and erosion and
sediment control recommendations, in accordance with best manaoement I
practices, shall be submitted to the civil engineer and the building official by the
soil engineer, the engineering geologist, and the erosion control specialist.
1. The civil engineering report when required, shall include, but not be limited to:
a. Hydrological calculations of runoff for ten (10) year and one hundred (100)
year storm frequencies and comparison of runoff without and with project;
b. Inspection and approval as to establishment of lines and grades, design
criteria for corrective measures, including the existing and/or required safe storm
drainage capacity outlet of channels both on and off-site; and
c. Opinions and recommendations covering adequacy of site to be developed by
the proposed grading,
2. The soil engineering report, when required, shall contain, but need not be
limited to, all the following information:
a. Data regarding the nature, distribution, strength and erodibility of existing soils;
b. Data regarding the nature, distribution, strength and erodibility of soil to be
placed on the site, if any;
c. Conclusions and recommendations for grading procedures;
d. Conclusions and recommended designs for interim soil stabilization devices
and measures and for permanent soil stabilization after construction is
completed;
e, Design criteria for corrective measures when necessary;
f. Opinions and recommendations covering adequacy of sites to be developed by
the proposed grading,
3. The engineering geology report when required, shall contain, but need not be
limited to, the following information:
a. An adequate description of the geology of the site;
b. Conclusions and recommendations regarding the effect of geologic conditions
on the proposed development;
c. Opinions and recommendations covering the adequacy of sites to be
developed by the proposed grading;
d. Need for subdrains or other underground drainage devices.
4. A stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPP) Tl:1e erosion aRE! sediment
control plan, when required, shall incorporate the best manaQement Quidelines or
requirements for stormwater manaQement that have been defined or adopted by
any federal. state. reqional. county and/orcity aqency. The plan shall contain,
but need not be limited to, the following information:
a. A delineation and brief description of the practices to retain sediment on the
site, including sediment basins and traps, and a schedule for their maintenance
and upkeep;
b. A delineation and brief description of the best manaqement practices for I
surface runoff and erosion control practices to be implemented, including types
and methods of applying mulches, and a schedule for their maintenance and
upkeep;
c, A delineation and brief description of the vegetative practices to be used,
including types of seeds and fertilizer and their application rates, the type,
location and extent of pre-existing and undisturbed vegetation types, and a
schedule for maintenance and upkeep;
d. The location of all the practices listed above shall be depicted on the grading
plan, or on a separate plan at the discretion of the building official;
e. An estimate of the cost of implementing and maintaining all erosion and
sediment control practices.
5. Work Schedule. The applicant must submit a master work schedule showing
the following information:
a, Proposed grading schedule;
b. Proposed schedule for installation of all best manaqement practices for interim I
and permanent erosion and sediment control practices;
c. Schedule for construction of final improvements, if any.
responsibility under this chapter, the civil engineer, the soil engineer, the
engineering geologist, the erosion control specialist, or the testing agency find
that the work is not being done in conformance with this chapter or the approved
grading plans, the discrepancies shall be reported immediately in writing to the
person in charge of the grading work and to G. Engineered Grading. It shall be
the responsibility of the civil engineer who prepares the approved grading plan to
incorporate all recommendations from the soil engineering and engineering
geology, and erosion and sediment control reports into the grading plan after
approval by the building official.
H. Notification Noncompliance. If, in the course of fulfilling their the building
official. Recommendations for corrective measures, if necessary, shall be
submitted.
I. Transfer of Responsibility for Approval. If the civil engineer, the soils engineer,
the engineering geologist, the erosion control specialist, or the testing agency of
record is changed during the course of the work, the work shall be stopped until
the replacement has agreed to accept the responsibility within the area of his or
her technical competence for approval upon completion of the work.
J. Final Reports. Upon completion of the rough grading work and at the final
completion of the work, the building official may require the following reports and
drawings and supplements thereto:
1. An as-built grading plan prepared by the civil engineer, including original
ground surface elevations, as-graded ground surface elevation, lot drainage
patterns and locations and elevations of all surface and sub-surface drainage
facilities, and providing approval that the work was done in accordance with the
final approved grading plan;
2. A soil grading report prepared by the soil engineer, including locations and
elevations of field density tests, summaries of field and laboratory tests and other
substantiating data and comments on any changes made during grading and
their effect on the recommendations made in the soil engineering investigation
report, and providing approval as to the adequacy of the site for the intended
use;
3. A geologic grading report prepared by the engineering geologist, including a
final description of the geology of the site including any new information
disclosed during the grading and the effect of same on recommendations
incorporated in the approved grading plan, and providing approval as to the
adequacy of the site for the intended use as affected by geologic factors;
4. A stormwater prevention pollution report includes An erosien and seEliRlent
control report I'Ir-epared by the erosion and seEliment cOAtrol specialist, iA€luding
a fiAaI description of the erosion, sediment and runoff control practices applied
on the site, including any new information disclosed during site development and
the effect of same on recommendations incorporated in the approved grading
plan, noting any changes required, and providing approval as to the adequacy of
erosion and sediment controls.
K. Final approval shall not be given until all work, including installation of all
drainage facilities and protective devices, all erosion and sediment control, and
vegetative measures, has been completed in accordance with the approved
plans and the required reports have been submitted.
L. Executed contract(s) or deed restrictions requiring maintenance and upkeep of
final plan runoff and erosion control practices for as long as the building official
determines necessary and as approved in the erosion and sediment control plan.
M. Variances. A request for variance from the provisions of this chapter, the
permit conditions, or the plan specifications may be approved, conditionally
-
approved, or denied by the building official. A request for a variance must state
in writing the provision to be varied, the proposed substitute provision, when it
would apply and its advantages.
N. Work Time Limits. The permittee shall fully perform and complete all the work
required to be done within the time limits specified. If the permittee is unable to
complete the work within the specified time prior to the expiration of the permit, a
request shall be presented in writing for an extension of time, setting forth the
reasons for the requested extension. If, in the opinion of the building official, an
extension is warranted, additional time may be granted for the completion of the
work. (Prior code 9 7-1,06)
13.24.070 Fees.
A. Plan-Checking Fee, For excavation and fill on the same site, the fee shall be
based on the volume of the excavation or fill, whichever is greater. Before accepting a
set of plans and specifications for checking, the building official shall collect a plan-
checking fee. Separate permits and fees shall apply to retaining walls or major drainage
structures as indicated elsewhere in this code. There shall be no separate charge for
standard terrace drains, erosion and sediment controls and similar facilities. The
amount of the plan-checking fee for grading plans shall be as set forth in the latest
version of the California BuildinQ Code Appendix Chapter 33 entitled "Excavation and
Gradinq". Table No. 70
The plan-checking fee for a grading permit authorizing additional work to that
under a valid permit shall be the difference between such fee paid for the original permit
and the fee shown for the entire project.
B. Grading Permit Fees. A fee for each grading permit shall be paid to the
building official as set forth in the latest version of the California Buildinq Code I
Appendix Chapter 33 entitled "Excavation and Gradinq". Tal:lle No. 70 B. The
fee for a grading permit authorizing additional work to that under a valid permit
shall be the difference between the fee paid for the original permit and the fee
shown for the entire project.
T!\.8lE NO. 70 A Plan Cl:lecking fees I
50 cul:lic yards orNo Fee I
less
51 to 100 cubic$10.00 I
yaffis
101 to 1,000 cubic$1a.QO I
yaffis
1,000 to 10,000$20.00
\
(Prior code ~ 7 1,07)
13.24.080 Bonds and securities.
The building official may require bonds in such form and amounts as may be
deemed necessary to assure that the work, if not completed in accordance with the
approved plans and specifications, will be corrected to eliminate hazardous conditions.
In lieu of a surety bond the applicant may file a cash bond or instrument of credit with
the building official in an amount equal to that which would be required in the surety
bond.
The surety bond, or in lieu thereof, less the costs of remedial work, if any, shall
be released when the building official determines that the best manaQement practices I
for erosion and sediment control practices have permanently stabilized the site, but not
later than eighteen (18) months after installation of all permanent erosion control
practices. (Prior code 9 7-1.08)
13.24.090 Design standards for cuts and excavations.
Unless otherwise recommended in the soil engineering and/or engineering
geology reports approved by the building official, cuts and, excavations shall conform to
the provisions of this section,
A. The slope of cut surface shall be no steeper than is safe for the intended use.
Cut slopes shall be no steeper than two to one (2: 1), horizontal to vertical. Due
to individual site soils and geology, flatter and shorter slope lengths may be
required, or steeper and longer slope lengths may be allowed upon review by the
building official when he is presented with evidence that this is consistent with
the building and safety. Cut slopes shall be rounded off so as to blend in with
natural terrain.
B. Stockpiles. Stockpile material for trenches and pits will be not adjacent to the
excavation to be promptly backfilled and compacted into trenches and pits.
Excavated material not needed at the site will be required or disposed of as
approved by the building official.
C. Vegetative Protection. All earth cuts shall be planted with temporary and
permanent vegetation or otherwise protected from the storm runoff erosion within
thirty (30) days of the completion of final erosion control and grading work.
Planting shall be watered or irrigated to establish a root system before the rainy
season, if determined necessary by the building official. (Prior code 9 7-1.09)
13.24.100 Fills.
Unless otherwise recommended in the soil engineering and/or engineering
geology reports approved by the building official, fill shall conform to the provisions of
this section. In the absence of an approved soil engineering report, these provisions
may be waived for minor fills not intended to support structures.
A. Fill Location. Fill shall not be constructed on natural slopes steeper than two
to one (2: 1). The area beyond the toe of the fill shall be sloped for sheet overflow
or a protected drain shall be provided.
B. Fill Slopes. The slope of fill surfaces can be no steeper than is safe for the
intended use. Fill slopes shall be no steeper than two to one (2: 1). Due to
individual soil properties, shorter and flatter slopes may be required or steeper
and longer slopes may be allowed upon review by the building official if he or she
is presented with evidence that the deviations are consistent with stability and
safety. Fill slopes shall be rounded off so as to blend with the natural terrain.
C. Ground Preparation. Natural ground surface over which fills are planned shall
first be cleaned of all trash, vegetation, stumps, debris, noncomplying fill, and
other unsuitable materials and shall be scarified prior to the placement of the fill.
Topsoil shall be removed and stockpiled for use in final grading. Where slopes
are five to one (5: 1) or steeper and height is greater than five feet, a bench ten
(10) feet wide minimum, as determined by the soils engineer, shall be dug into
undisturbed, solid competent soil or bedrock beneath the toe of the proposed fill.
The bench must be inspected and approved by the soils engineer and/or
engineering geologist as a suitable foundation before placing fill. The area
beyond the toe of fill shall be sloped for sheet overflow or a paved drain shall be
provided,
D. Materials Permitted. Only permitted material free from tree stumps,
detrimental amounts of organic matter, trash, garbage, sod, peat and/or similar
materials shall be used. Rocks larger than twelve (12) inches in greatest
dimension shall not be used unless the method of placement is properly devised,
continuously inspected and approved by the building official. Rock disposal
areas shall be delineated on the grading plan.
The following shall also apply;
1. Rock sizes greater than twelve (12) inches in maximum dimension shall be ten
(10) feet or more below grade, measured vertically.
2. Rocks shall be placed so as to assure filling of all voids with fines.
Topsoil is to be used in the top twelve (12) inch surface layer to aid in planting
and landscaping.
E. Compaction of Fill. All fills shall be compacted to a minimum relative dry
density of ninety (90) percent as determined by ASTM D-1557-78 or use
Standard No. 70-1. Field density verification shall be determined in accordance
with UBC Standard No, 70-2 or by an approved equivalent. A higher relative dry
density and/or additional compaction tests may be required at any time by the
building official.
F. Vegetative Protection. All earth fills shall be planted with temporary and
permanent vegetation or otherwise protected from the effects of storm runoff
erosion within thirty (30) days of the completion of final grading, and planting
shall be watered or irrigated to establish a root system, if determined necessary
by the building official. (Prior code ~ 7-1.10)
13.24.110 Design standards for cut and fill setbacks.
The setbacks and other restrictions specified by this section are minimum and
may be increased by the building official or by the recommendation of the civil engineer,
soils engineer or engineering geologist, if necessary for safety and stability or to
prevent damage of adjacent properties from deposition or erosion, or to provide access
for slope maintenance and drainage. Retaining walls may be used to reduce the
required setbacks when approved by the building official.
A. Setbacks From Property Lines. The tops of cuts and toes of fill slopes shall be
set back from the outer boundaries of the permit area, including slope-right areas
and easements, in accordance with Figure No.1 and Table No. 70-C.
B.Design Standards for Setbacks. Setbacks between graded slopes (cut or fill)
and structures shall be provided in accordance with Figure No.2.
*/IIustrations will be added when complete
FIGURE NO.1
TABLE NO. 70-C
REQUIRED SETBACKS FROM PERMIT AREA BOUNDARY (IN FEET)
SETBACKS
H a b'
Under 5 0 1
5 - 30 H/2 H/5
Over 30 15 6
'Additional width may be required for interceptor drain.
FIGURE NO.2
C. Stream and Riparian Setback. Tops and toes of cut and/or filled slopes shall
be set back far enough to prevent encroachment upon streams, flood plains, or
channels, or body of standing water to provide and maintain an undisturbed
protective strip between the grading and the riparian corridor. This strip shall
have sufficient filter capacity to prevent degradation of water quality, as
determined by the erosion and sediment control specialist and approved by the
building official. If it is determined that the filter capacity of the protective strip is
insufficient, or development activity will encroach upon riparian zones, additional
setback distance and/or erosion control practices may be required.
D. Retaining Walls. Retaining walls, when keyed into stable foundations and
capable of sustaining the design loads, may be used to reduce the required cut
and fill setbacks when recommended by the civil or soils engineer, or
engineering geologist and approved by the building official.
E. Other Restrictions and/or Minimums. Other requirements may also be
increased or relaxed upon review by the building official if he or she finds the
deviations consistent with safety and stability and to provide access for slope
maintenance and drainage. (Prior code 9 7-1.11)
13.24.120 Design standards for drainage and terraces.
Drainage facilities and terraces shall conform to the provisions of this section
unless otherwise indicated on the approved permit and plans. To the greatest extent
possible, peak storm drainage runoff and sediment rates may not exceed pre-
development rates. If rates are substantially greater than pre-development rates, off-
site erosion, sediment and flood control improvements to the principal drainage way
may be required to handle the runoff increase or peak discharges.
.
A. Runoff Calculations. The approved plans shall show by table and/or
calculations the peak rate of storm runoff both before and after development. To
reduce runoff and sediment, a combination of storage and controlled release of
storm water runoff may be required. Calculations may be required to assure the
building official that the cumulative effects of retarding tributary flows will not
have an adverse affect upon ultimate peak discharge through a channel due to
modifications to the overall hydrograph for the channel resulting from the
retarding.
B. Drainage Facilities.
1. Disturbance of natural drainage ways shall be kept to a minimum and existing
drainage courses shall not be obstructed or obliterated without mitigating
measures installed that have been approved by the building official. Grading
equipment shall not disturb or cross flowing streams unless absolutely necessary
and only with prior approval from the building official. It is the responsibility of the
permittee to secure any additional permits from agencies exercising jurisdiction
over the stream.
2. Whenever a grading operation obstructs or impairs the flow of runoff in an
existing drainage course, a culvert, bridge or other suitable drainage facility
designed and acceptable to the building official shall be installed to convey the
flow past the point of impairment. No construction materials or construction by-
products shall be discarded in any drainage way or riparian zone.
3. Drainage facilities, including paved, rock or vegetative channels, culverts or
pipe drains, shall be designed to safely carry existing and potential off-site runoff
from a fully developed area upstream, as well as local on-site surface and
subsurface waters to the nearest adequate drainage course designated for such
purposes by the building official and/or other appropriate jurisdiction as a safe
place to discharge such waters. Properly designed energy dissipators may be
required at the point of discharge.
4. Culvert size and materials shall be determined by the civil engineer in
accordance with standard design criteria and as approved by the building official.
Minimum diameter shall be eighteen (18) inches.
5. Cuts, fills and retaining walls shall have subsurface drainage facilities as
necessary for stability.
6. Berms, ditches, interceptor drains, or swales shall be constructed at the top of
cut and filled slopes for protection against water runoff. Paved interceptor drains
shall be installed along the top of all cut slopes where the tributary drainage area
above slopes towards the cut and has a drainage path greater than forty (40)
feet measured horizontally. Interceptor drains shall be paved with a minimum of
three inches of concrete or gunite and reinforced. They shall have a minimum
depth of twelve (12) inches and a minimum paved width of thirty (30) inches
measured horizontally across the drain. The slope of drain shall be approved by
the building official. Energy dissipators may be required by the building official.
7. A minimum five percent grade between approved storm drainage facilities and
all building pads, yards, roof drains and driveways is recommended. Building
pads shall have a drainage gradient of two percent toward approved drainage
facilities, unless waived by the building official.
Exception: The gradient from the building pad may be one percent if all of the following
conditions exist throughout the pennit area:
a. No proposed fills are greater than ten (10) feet in maximum depth.
b. No proposed finish cut or fill slope faces have a vertical height in excess of ten
(10) feet.
c. No existing slope faces, which have a slope face steeper than ten to one
(10:1), horizontally to vertically, have a vertical height in excess of ten (10) feet.
C. Terraces. Terraces at least six feet in width shall be established at not more
than thirty (30) foot vertical intervals on all cut or fill slopes to control surface
drainage and debris except that where only one terrace is required, it shall be at
mid-height. For cut or fill slopes greater than sixty (60) feet and up to one
hundred twenty (120) feet in vertical height, one terrace at approximately mid-
height shall be twelve (12) feet in width. Terrace widths and spacing for cut and
fill,slopes greater than one hundred twenty (120) feet in height shall be designed
by the civil engineer and approved by the building official. Suitable access shall
be provided to permit proper cleaning and maintenance.
Swales or ditches on terraces shall have a minimum gradient of five percent and
must be paved with reinforced concrete not less than three inches in thickness or
an approved equal paving. They shall have a minimum depth at the deepest
point of one fOQt and a minimum paved width of five feet. A single run of swale or
ditch shall not collect runoff from a tributary area exceeding thirteen thousand
(13,000) square feet (projected) without discharging into a down drain. (Prior
code 9 7-1.12)
13.24.130 Design standards for erosion and sediment control.
During site planning, access and building envelopes should be arranged so as to
minimize disturbance of particularly erodible areas. These plans should reflect the
arrangement and specifically stipulate areas to remain undisturbed.
All streams, flood plains, channels, bodies of standing water, or other riparian
areas shall be identified and delineated on the development plans. If it is determined
that certain development activities in or near the riparian zones would be detrimental,
those activities may be prohibited.
Exposed soil and slopes shall be protected from erosion by temporary and/or
permanent measures.
As soon as possible and feasible following completion of each stage of grading
and/or construction, all sites will be permanently stabilized by installing all required
erosion and sediment control practices to insure protection before the normal beginning
date of winter or adverse season.
A. Structures on existing slopes exceeding thirty (30) percent shall utilize pole,
step or other such foundation that does not require mayor land disturbances.
B. Runoff Control. Where concentrated runoff will occur, it shall be carried in pipe
or culvert conduits or over a nonerodible surface (paved, rocked or vegetated) to
stable discharge points dearly shown on the development plans. All conduits
must have proper energy dissipators at the point of discharge when necessary to
prevent erosion.
C. Building Site Runoff. Runoff from buildings, roads, driveways and the total site
area shall be controlled by berms, swales, ditches, structures, vegetative filter
stops and/or catch basins to prevent the escape of sediment from the site.
D. Vegetative Removal. Development plans shall indicate the areas where
vegetation is to be removed and replaced within the building and access
envelopes. Vegetation removal shall be limited to that amount necessary and as
indicated on the approved development plan. The method and time shall be such
that the erosive effects are minimized.
E. Vegetative Disposal. Vegetation removed during clearing operations shall be
disposed of in a manner approved by the building official. Burning shall comply
with local air quality standards and no long branches or charred pieces shall be
permitted to remain.
F. Topsoil. To promote regrowth of vegetation, topsoil graded from cuts and fills
and/or secured from other sources shall be stockpiled and/or reapplied upon
completion of grading on slopes steeper than four to one (4:1). Soil stockpiles
shall be protected from erosion at all times.
----
G. Vegetative Protection. When needed and planned, all bare slopes and/or
disturbed areas will be planted to both temporary and permanent vegetation as
each stage of grading is completed. Sufficient temporary, rapid growing
vegetation to stabilize the soil will be used until the permanent vegetative cover
grows or matures enough to provide permanent stability.
H. Winter and/or Adverse Season Operations.
1. Land disturbance or development operations may be restricted or temporarily
halted during the normal winter or rainy season, and/or other times whenever the
building official determines that the weather, soil, slope and general site
conditions may cause serious accelerated erosion or sediment damage, either
on-site or downstream. Existing ground cover shall not be cleared, destroyed,
burned or disturbed more than fifteen (15)days prior to grading or construction
work, unless approved in advance by the building official.
2. Plans for temporary and/or permanent erosion and sediment control shall be
approved by submitteg to the building official forty-five (45) days prior to October
15th tho normal start of the wintor and/or adverse season and all approved
erosion and sediment control best manaQement practices shall be installed by
October 15th tho end of tAe forty fivo (45) day period.
3, When land development work is allowed between October 15th and March 15th
during the normal, wintor or rainy adverse soason, the appropriate best
manaqement practices adoquate er-osion am! sogimont Gontr-ol moasuros must
be in place during any land disturbance, and tomporary or-osion contr-ol
moasures must bo applied to all soils bared at the end of each working day.
Sufficient erosion control materials shall be kept on the site at all times to be
installed immediately by the permittee upon advent of any rainfall, winds, or other
storm event that may be expected to cause accelerated erosion.
4. All cut and fill slopes, except sand slopes or dunes, without satisfactory
vegetative cover between growing seasons shall be mulched with a minimum of
four thousand (4,000) pounds of straw or equivalent per acre of slope surface.
Mulch will be anchored to the slope by punching or tacking into the soil or with
netting installed over the mulch. Additional mulching and/or other anchoring
methods as recommended by the erosion control specialist may be required by
the building official.
5. Within ten (10) working days after seeding, fertilizing and/or mulching, when
required by the building official due to climate or drought conditions, the
permittee will commence irrigation or watering of the seeded areas or slopes and
shall continue until the rains come and/or a vegetative ground cover is
permanently established. All other erosion and sediment control practices shall
be installed prior to seeding and mulching.
6, All best manaqement practices for erosion and sediment control practices I
shall be closely monitored throughout the winter and/or rainy season and
problems corrected promptly. All erosion and/or slippage of cut and fill banks
shall be repaired by the permittee at his or her expense.
---- ----
,~
I. Dust from grading operations must be controlled. The permittee may be
required to keep adequate equipment on the grading site to prevent dust
problems.
J, Erosion Control Coordination with Project Installation.
1. All vegetative and/or structural measures required to safely discharge any
accelerated runoff generated by the project should be scheduled for installation
during the first or initial construction phase of the project.
2. Land shall be developed in units of workable size which can be completed in a
single construction season. Best manaQement practices for erosion Er.osion and I
sediment control measures shall be coordinated with a sequence of grading
operations and all appropriate best manaQement practices er.gsion contr.gl I
measures shall be put in effect prior to the commencement of the next work unit
and/or winter or normal rainy season. Prior to completion and final acceptance of
the project, all erosion control measures must be in place and all exposed bare
soil shall be mulched, fertilized and planted to a permanent vegetative cover.
Native or naturalized vegetation should be used. Upon recommendation by the
erosion control specialist, the building official may require watering of planted
areas to initiate and assure growth.
K. Livestock. Where necessary to assure that water quality is not affected by the
keeping of livestock, vegetative buffer and/or filter strip shall be established on all
downhill sides of areas where livestock is kept. The width of the buffer strip shall
be determined by the erosion control specialist. Also, additional erosion and
sediment control practices may be required by the building official to control
runoff and pollution from the areas where livestock has destroyed and torn up
the protective vegetation.
L Maintenance. All on-site erosion control facilities shall be properly maintained
by the owners for the life of the project so that they do not become nuisances
with stagnant water, heavy algae growth, insect breeding, odors, discarded
debris, and/or safety hazards. Vegetative maintenance required may include
mowing, fertilization, irrigation and/or reseeding. (Prior code 9 7-1.13)
13.24.140 Inspections and compliance.
Excavation, grading, filling, clearing and erosion control work for which a
permit is required shall be subject to inspection by the building official. The
building official may require supervision, regular inspection, and special testing be
performed and certified by the civil engineer (or other professional) who prepared
the approved plan; and the civil engineer shall also be responsible for the
processional inspection and approval of work within his or her area of technical
specialty. This responsibility shall include, but need not be limited to, inspection
and approval as to the establishment of line, grade and drainage of the
development area.
.
The building official may also require special supervision, inspection and
testing be done by an independent, approved testing agency to ensure
compliance with this chapter, the permittee's permit concerns, and/or in
accordance with the provisions of Sections 306 of the UBC and Section
13,24.060 of this chapter.
The building official shall inspect or provide for adequate inspection of the
project by appropriate professionals at the various states of the work requiring
approval, and at any more frequent intervals necessary to determine that
adequate control is being exercised by the professional consultants.
A. Inspections Required. The following inspections shall be required, but
not limited to:
1. Pre-site inspection to determine the suitability of the proposed project
and the existing and potential erosion and sediment hazards;
2. Periodic ongoing project operations progress, including compaction and
special testing as may be required by the approved plan;
3. Final inspection determining compliance with terms and conditions of
this chapter and permit. Final approval shall not be given until all work,
including installation of all drainage facilities and their protective devices
and all erosion control measures, has been completed in accordance with
the final approved plan and the required reports have been submitted.
B. Notification. The permittee shall notify the building official two working
days prior to the beginning of the operation authorized by the permit, two
working days before the project is ready for final inspection, and one
complete working day prior to any other inspection or testing requested by
the permittee.
C. Right of Entry. Filing for a permit under this chapter constitutes a. grant
of permission for the city to enter the permit area for the purpose of
administering this chapter from the date of the application to the
termination of the erosion control maintenance period. If necessary, the
building official shall be supplied with a key or lock combination, or
permitted to install a city lock.
D. Notice of Violation Recordation. Whenever the building official
determines that work has not been completed in accordance with a permit
or the plans and specifications relating thereto, or whenever the building
official determines that work has been done without the required permit,
the building official may record a notice of violation. The owner(s) of the
property, as revealed by the assessment roll on which the violation is
situated, and any other person responsible for the violation shall be notified
of the recordation, if their address is available.
----------.----.-
If the responsible party fails to act in response to written notification of the
building official, an erosion problem may be declared a public nuisance and
may be abated according to procedures in the city code. Where there is an
emergency condition of erosion or sediment damaging a waterway, marsh,
other body of water, or private or public property, the building official may
have the necessary corrective work done and then bill the responsible
party or place a lien against the offending property.
E. Additional Procedures to Remedy Unauthorized Grading Without a
Permit--Finding and Declaration. The city council finds and declares that
unauthorized grading without a permit often results in soil erosion,
drainage, visual and other destructive long-term impacts which are not
satisfactorily alleviated or corrected by the usual enforcement procedures,
such as criminal violations or judicial proceedings concerning public
nuisances. Further, such grading often causes harm unique to the graded
parcel and the properties surrounding it, and the long-term correction
measures for each such unauthorized grading requires detailed
consideration and formulation, usually after formal public hearings.
1, Upon discovery of unauthorized grading without a permit, the building
official shall, where feasible, contact the owner of the property upon which
the grading occurred, and the person who did the grading. If the building
official and the owner and contractor can agree within thirty (30) days upon
a remedial program which can be accomplished in no more than ninety
(90) days, no further city action shall be required at that time. The building
official shall obtain a cash bond from the owner or contractor, payable upon
request, and a right-of-entry form signed by the owner to guarantee the
city's right to do the remedial program as agreed if not done by the owner
or contractor within the agreed time period.
2. If the building official cannot reach such a satisfactory agreement, he
shall, within thirty (30) days, submit a detailed report and recommendations
to the city manager and city council requesting the initiation of formal
council proceedings under the city's nuisance abatement ordinance to
abate the public nuisance created on the premises by the unauthorized
grading. The object of such proceedings shall be the ordering of corrective
measures, subject to the city's power to correct the problem and place a
lien upon the real property for all costs of correction. For purposes of the
nuisance abatement proceedings, the council declares that unauthorized
grading without a permit is a public nuisance, per se. (Prior code 9 7-1.14)
11.b.
MEMORANDUM
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: ROB STRONG, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTO~
SUBJECT: CITY ENTRY IDENTIFICATION S'GNS
DATE: SEPTEMBER 24, 2002
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended the City Council authorize staff to contract for three or four City entry
identification signs not to exceed a combined total cost of $10,000.00 and provide direction
on locations and proposed design concepts.
FUNDING:
Three to four initial signs are proposed. The estimated cost of each sign is $2,500. The first
proposed to be located at Halcyon and The Pike, will be paid from remaining funds from The
Pike Resurfacing Project. The second proposed location is at the Oak Park Median at the
entrance to the City north of Farroll. This sign will be paid from available revenues from the
existing landscaping district. The third sign will be an entrance sign at the East Grand
Avenue Gateway, which will be paid by the streetscape grant funding approved for that
project. The fourth proposed sign location is at Elm near The Pike, which may also be paid
from funds remaining from The Pike Rehabilitation Project.
DISCUSSION:
Background
Staff proposed a preliminary design concept for City entry identification monument signs as
part of the East Grand Avenue Enhancement Plan. Design refinement and a cost estimate
was obtained in consultation with a local sign company and a quantity price of less than
$2,000 per location has been confirmed for approximately 4' x 8' stone base and side pillars
with tile or wood logo and text such as "Welcome to the City of Arroyo Grande" (See
Attachment 1 for design concept drawing.)
We have explored up to 18 potential collector or arterial street entrances and freeway off-
ramp locations where we believe entry identification signs would be most effective and
beneficial to the City's image enhancement (see Attachment 2 for potential locations). Three
or four locations where the City is completing or has pending street and landscape
improvement projects deserve possible "demonstration signage" consideration. Before
requesting Chamber of Commerce, ARC or Planning Commission recommendations
CITY COUNCIL
CITY ENTRY IDENTIFICATION SIGNS
SEPTEMBER 24, 2002
PAGE 2
regarding location and design concepts, staff is asking for City Council direction on this
optional enhancement program.
Public Works, Community Development and Administration believe that approved project
funding can be utilized for entry identification signs at the following locations:
1) Northbound on Halcyon Road and The Pike,
2) Northbound on Oak Park Boulevard near Farroll Avenue,
3) Eastbound on East Grand Avenue near Courtland Street, and
4) Northbound on South Elm Street near The Pike.
If the Council authorizes these locations or possible altematives that may be recommended
by the Chamber of Commerce, ARC or Planning Commission, we will pursue design
refinement at the preferred locations. Some incidental landscape, lighting or related
installation costs may be required, but we believe that four signs can be completed for less
than $10,000.
The most immediate need for direction is with regard to the proposed signs at Elm and
Halcyon at The Pike. The Pike Rehabilitation Project is nearing completion and staff will
need to proceed with a change order if we desire to add this improvement to the project. 1f
not. the remainina fundina will be returned to SLOCOG.
ALTERNATIVES:
- The Council can defer any action on these or altemative locations for entry
identification signage or refer the concept to Chamber of Commerce, ARC and
Planning Commission for recommendations prior to any action;
- The Council can provide direction to staff regarding design or location preferences
or priorities, and decide case by case on potential future project proposals. (Only
the East Grand Avenue Enhancement Project specifically included an entry
identification monument sign);
- The Council can provide staff direction to proceed only with the entrance markers
associated with The Pike Rehabilitation Project in order to utilize that funding. Any
modifications to the design could be made at a later time;
- Provide other review and comment or table for future consideration.
Attachments:
1. Entry signage design concept.
2. Map of possible entry sign locations.
________ _u___
~~~~ '"
00
'~;~~L... _ ~ 1tl00
r ~~~t_~---3> .. ",,'"
- ...-~ . ~ ()d,M
#/{\ 00'"
... ~~N""~
-~~ t:',lr"'" ""~,
ZC"''''
I- ~ _'-0'<1'
Z "'00'<1'
W ~ O"'~M
2 -.-- -- ............. ~(.)N())
- ----_.~.- ~ 0<(
:J: ~"""N()
- .- .. 0_. I Om .
0 , ~~-5
ct
l- I ~ 2"'C,:B
l- I ~o\O~aJ
ct . co
~ 1-0,,- ~
I ~ :z:~.~
~ .!!o"-
i '" ..."
'"
I ~ 00
It?
I .~.~
. ....
I ~ '~
'SI~
, :. 1<1
I \
.~~
;~t\1
,.~
::s i Iv) ~ .
~ I ~~~
~ ..-...
I I {
I ~~ ~
I ~ ~
1tI\)~
I'::::! Ii)
j,
. '!Q. ~
! \J
...... ;.s ~'"
, 5;' I.< .;::
'~ ~
, ," ~ "-
, ~ \J "
~ "
i. ~ ~
i @ V)~"
-....,.--- 1::5'~~
~;"j1't
I' ~
"-
,.:t ~ ~
. -.... ~
I ~ \TI
. ~ ~t
~ I'~
~ , VI ~ ~
1\
~ i ~ ~ ~
~ ..._-.
.. ~ I~
-. ---_.
I.Ij ~? ~ ~
~~ :z~. ,
~ ---.------- I ~ ~~
~.I.!J<r.: ------ I
V) VIlI- ---i<;:::;; "':-.
~~~
N
I-
Z
w
:!:
J:
(,)
e:(
l-
I-
e:(
,
,~----_.-