The URL can be used to link to this page

Agenda Packet 1999-07-13 CITY COUNCIL ~"11 0/ AGENDA ~ [ff1lande Michael A. Lady Mayor Robert L. Hunt City ~anager Tony M. Ferrara Mayor Pro Tem Timothy J. Carmel City Attorney Thomas A. Runels Council Member Kelly Wetmore Director. Administrative Services Steve Tolley Council Member Jim Dickens Council rJIember AGENDA SUMMARY CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY, JULY 13, 1999 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: ARROYO GRANDE POLICE DEPARTMENT EXPLORER POST NO. 542 4. INVOCATION: PASTOR PAUL JONES, RETIRED 5. SPECIAL PRESENT A TIONS: a. Proclamation - Welcoming the 561 st Air Force Band of the California Air National Guard 6. AGENDA REVIEW: 6A. Move that all resolutions and ordinances presented tonight be read in title only and all further readings be waived. ----.- AGENDA SUMMARY - JULY 13, 1999 PAGE 2 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: a. Conditional Use Permit 98-572 - Russ Sheppel. 880 Oak Park Boulevard (ENGEN) (Action Required: Approve Planning Commission Recommendations) b. Conditional Use Permit 98-573 - Kevin Kennedy. Oak Park Boulevard and James Way (ENGEN) (Action Required: Approve Planning Commission Recommendations) 8. CITIZENS' INPUT, COMMENTS, AND SUGGESTIONS: Persons in the audience may discuss business not sched.uled on this agenda regarding any item of interest within the jurisdiction of the Council. The Council will listen to all communication but, 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. 9. CONSENT AGENDA: The following routine items listed below are scheduled for consideration as a group. The recommendations for each item are noted in parentheses. Any Council Member may request that any item be withdrawn from the Consent Agenda to permit discussion or change the recommended course of action.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. a. Cash Disbursement Ratification (SNODGRASS) (Action Required: Approval) b. Statement of Investment Deposits (SNODGRASS) (Action Required: Approval) c. Cash Flow Analysis/Approval of Interfund Advance from the Sewer .EwK1 (SNODGRASS) (Action Required: Approval) AGENDA SUMMARY -JULY 13,1999 PAGE 3 9. CONSENT AGENDA: (continued) d. Minutes of City Council Meeting of June 22. 1999 (WETMORE) (Action Required: Approval) e. Rejection of Claim - Mike Adams (WETMORE) (Action Required: Reject Claim) f. Award of Contract to DMG-Maximus for Mandated Cost Recovery (SNODGRASS) (Action Required: Approval) g. Authorization to Solicit Bids - Replacement of Two Police Department Vehicles (TERBORCH) (Action Required: Approval) h. Authorization to Solicit Bids - Replacement of Main Parking Lot Gate Controller (TERBORCH) (Action Required: Approval) i. Authorization to Solicit Bids - Public Works Vehicle (SPAGNOLO) (Action Required: Approval) j. Authorization to Solicit Bids - Fair Oaks Water Line. Project No. 60-98-5 (SPAGNOLO) (Action Required: Approve Staff Recommendations) k. Authorization to Solicit Bids - Public Parking Lot Behind City Council Chambers. Project No. 80-99-1 (SPAGNOLO) (Action Required: Approve Staff Recommendations) I. Certificate of Acceptance - Bikeway Proiect One - Paulding Middle School Bikelanes - Project No. 90-98-1 (SPAGNOLO) (Action Required: Approve Staff Recommendations) m. Award of Contract for Soils Testing on Grand Avenue. Elm Street to Halcyon Road. Project No. 60-70-90-98-6 (SPAGNOLO) (Action Required: Approve Staff Recommendations) n. Award of Bid - Montego Street Sidewalks. Phase 1 (South Side). Project No. 90-98-7 (SPAGNOLO) (Action Required: Approve Staff Recommendations) o. Award of Bid - Optical Detection Devices at East Branch Street/Mason Street. Project No. 90-99-2 (SPAGNOLO) (Action Required: Approve Staff Recommendations) AGENDA SUMMARY - JULY 13,1999 PAGE 4 9. CONSENT AGENDA: (continued) p. Disa9vantaged Business Enterprise Program Plan for FY 1998/99 and FY 1999/00 (SPAGNOLO) (Action Required: Approve Staff Recommendations) q. Authorization for Payment of Emergency Expenditures to Repair Fire Engine (FIBICH) (Action Required: Approval) r. Authorization to Solicit Bids for Parks Division Vehicle (HERNANDEZ) (Action Required: Approval) s. Award of Bid for Electric Vehicle (HERNANDEZ) (Action Required: ApprQval) t. Authorization to Close City Streets and Use City Property for Summer Events (ENGEN) (Action Required: Adopt Resolution) u. Acceptance of Improvements - Morning Rise II (SPAGNOLO) (Action Required: Approval) 10. CONTINUED BUSINESS: a. Consideration of Historical Society's Proposal for City-owned Property at 134 Mason Street (HERNANDEZ) (Action Required: Provide Direction to Staff) b. Proposed Ordinance Limiting Non-Taxable Sales in Retail Stores Exceeding 90.000 Square Feet (ENGEN) (Action Required: Adopt Ordinance) c. Water Master Plan (SPAGNOLO) (Action Required: Approval) 11. NEW BUSINESS: None AGENDA SUMMARY -JULY 13, 1999 PAGE 5 12. COUNCIUAGENCY COMMUNICATIONS: Correspondence/Comments as presented by the City Council 13. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS: Correspondence/Information for the City Council presented by the City Manager 14. ADJOURNMENT "._-_._----~-"'. ---- ~-,~---- AGENDA SUMMARY - JULY 13, 1999 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 reasonable 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.arroyogrande.org ~~._- CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE - ABBREVIATIONS revised 05127/99 A Agricultural Preserve AB Assembly Bill JPA Joint Powers Authority ADA Americans with Disabilities Act LAFCO Local Agency Formation Commission AG General Agriculture LOCC League of California Cities AGMC Arroyo Grande Municipal Code LLA Lot Line Adjusbnent AGPOA Arroyo Grande Police Officers' Association LUE Land Use Element APN Assessor's Parcel Number MER Lot Merger APCB Air Pollution Control Board MF CondominiumITownhouse APCD Air Pollution Control District MFA Apartments ARC Architectural Review Committee MHP Mobile Home Parks ASCE American Society Civil Engineers 0 Office Professional ASD Administrative Services Department OCSD Oceano Community Services District AWWA American Water Works Association OSCE Open Space and Conservation Element BD Building Division PC Planning Commission CA City Attorney PD Police Department CC City Council PF Public/Quasi Public CCC California Conservation Corps PPR Plot Plan Review CCCSIF Central Coast Cities Self-Insurance Fund PRD Parks & Recreation Department CD Community Development PRE-APP Pre-application CDBG Community Development Block Grant PSHHC Peoples' Self-Help Housing Corp. CE Circulation Element PSP Planned Sign Program CEC Califomia Energy Commission PUD Planned Unit Development CEQA California Environmental Quality Act PW Public Works Department CIP Capital Improvement Program RE Residential Estate CIWMP California Integrated Waste Management Plan RFP Request for Proposals CM City Manager's Office RFQ Request for Qualifications CMC California Men's Colony RH Hillside Residential CMP Congestion Management Plan RHNP Regional Housing Needs Plan cae Certificate of Compliance RR Rural Residential CPI Consumer Price Index RS Suburban Residential CUP Conditional Use Permit RTA Reversion to Acreage DARE Drug Abuse Resistance Education RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board DC Development Code SAC Staff Advisory Committee CEA Drug Enforcement Administration SB Senate Bill E.C. Election Code SCAT South County Area Transit EDU Equivalent Dwelling Unit SEIU Service Employees International Union EIR Environmental Impact Report SF Single Family EIS Environmental Impact Statement SLO San Luis Obispo EVC Economic Vitality Corporation SLOCOG San Luis Obispo Council of Governments FAU Federal Aid Urban SLOHA San Luis Obispo Housing Authority FD Fire Division SLONTF San Luis Obispo Narcotics Task Force FDAA Federal Disaster Assistance Administration SLORT A San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency SLOWRAC San Luis Obispo County Water Resources Advisory FID Financial Services Department Committee FPPC Fair Political Practices Commission SR Senior Housing FTA Federal Transit Administration SSLOCOWA South San Luis Obispo County Water Association FY Fiscal Year SSLOCSD South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District G.C. Government Code SRRE Source Reduction & Recycling Element GC General Commercial SWRCD State Water Resources Control Board GF General Fund TPM Tentative Parcel Map GP General Plan TT Tentative Tract Map GPA General Plan Amendment TTAC Transportation Technical Advisory Committee HCD Califomia Department of Housing and Community TUP Temporary Use Permit Development UBC Uniform Building Code HOP Home Occupancy Permit UFC Uniform Fire Code HUD Housing and Urban Development Dept. USA Underground Service Alert I Industrial and Business Park VAR Variance ISTEA Intermodal Surface Transportation VC Village Commercial VSR View Shed Review ZONE 3 San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District - Zone 3 (Lopez Project) --,~" _.-,-_._-"" CITY COUNCIL ~ity 0/ AGENDA ~ [ff~ Michael A. Lady Mayor Robert L. Hunt City ~anager Tony M. Ferrara Mayor Pro Tem Timothy J. Carmel City Attorney Thomas A. Runels Council Member Kelly Wetmore Director, Administrative Services Steve Tolley Council Member Jim Dickens Council ""ember AGENDA SUMMARY CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY, JULY 13, 1999 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: ARROYO GRANDE POLICE DEPARTMENT EXPLORER POST NO. 542 4. INVOCATION: PASTOR PAUL JONES, RETIRED 5. SPECIAL PRESENT A TIONS: a. Proclamation - Welcoming the 561 st Air Force Band of the California Air National Guard 6. AGENDA REVIEW: 6A. Move that all resolutions and ordinances presented tonight be read in title only and all further readings be waived. AGENDA SUMMARY - JUL Y 13, 1999 PAGE 2 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: a. Conditional Use Permit 98-572 - Russ Sheppel. 880 Oak Park Boulevard (ENGEN) (Action Required: Approve Planning Commission Recommendations) b. Conditional Use Permit 98-573 - Kevin Kennedy. Oak Park Boulevard and James Way (ENGEN) (Action Required: Approve Planning Commission Recommendations) 8. CITIZENS' INPUT. COMMENTS. AND SUGGESTIONS: Persons in the audience may discuss business not sched.uled on this agenda regarding any item of interest within the jurisdiction of the Council. The Council will listen to all communication but, 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. 9. CONSENT AGENDA: The following routine items listed below are scheduled for consideration as a group. The recommendations for each item are noted in parentheses. 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. a. Cash Disbursement Ratification (SNODGRASS) (Action Required: Approval) b. Statement of Investment Deposits (SNODGRASS) (Action Required: Approval) c. Cash Flow Analysis/Approval of Interfund Advance from the Sewer E1Allil (SNODGRASS) (Action Required: Approval) -,-.---. .~--- AGENDA SUMMARY - JULY 13, 1999 PAGE 3 9. CONSENT AGENDA: (continued) d. Minutes of City Council Meeting of June 22. 1999 (WETMORE) (Action Required: Approval) e. Rejection of Claim - Mike Adams (WETMORE) (Action Required: Reject Claim) f. Award of Contract to DMG-Maximus for Mandated Cost Recovery (SNODGRASS) (Action Required: Approval) g. Authorization to Solicit Bids - Replacement of Two Police Department Vehicles (TERBORCH) (Action Required: Approval) h. Authorization to Solicit Bids - Replacement of Main Parking Lot Gate Controller (TERBORCH) (Action Required: Approval) i. Authorization to Solicit Bids - Public Works Vehicle (SPAGNOLO) (Action Required: Approval) j. Authorization to Solicit Bids - Fair Oaks Water Line. Project No. 60-98-5 (SPAGNOLO) (Action Required: Approve Staff Recommendations) k. Authorization to Solicit Bids - Public Parking Lot Behind City Council Chambers. Proiect No. 80-99-1 (SPAGNOLO) (Action Required: Approve Staff Recommendations) I. Certificate of Acceptance - Bikeway Project One - Paulding Middle School Bikelanes - Project No. 90-98-1 (SPAGNOLO) (Action Required: Approve Staff Recommendations) m. Award of Contract for Soils Testing on Grand Avenue. Elm Street to Halcyon Road. Project No. 60-70-90-98-6 (SPAGNOLO) (Action Required: Approve Staff Recommendations) n. Award of Bid - Montego Street Sidewalks. Phase 1 (South Side). Project No. 90-98-7 (SPAGNOLO) (Action Required: Approve Staff Recommendations) o. Award of Bid - Optical Detection Devices at Ea~t Branch Street/Mason Street. Project No. 90-99-2 (SPAGNOLO) (Action Required: Approve Staff Recommendations) AGENDA SUMMARY - JULY 13, 1999 PAGE 4 9. CONSENT AGENDA: (continued) p. Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Program Plan for FY 1998/99 and FY 1999/00 (SPAGNOLO) (Action Required: Approve Staff Recommendations) q. Authorization for Payment of Emergency Expenditures to Repair Fire Engine (FIBICH) (Action Required: Approval) r. Authorization to Solicit Bids for Parks Division Vehicle (HERNANDEZ) (Action Required: Approval) s. Award of Bid for Electric Vehicle (HERNANDEZ) (Action Required: ApprQval) t. Authorization to Close City Streets and Use City Property for Summer Events (ENGEN) (Action Required: Adopt Resolution) u. Acceptance of Improvements - Morning Rise II (SPAGNOLO) (Action Required: Approval) 10. CONTINUED BUSINESS: a. Consideration of Historical Society's Proposal for City-owned Property at 134 Mason Street (HERNANDEZ) (Action Required: Provide Direction to Staff) b. Proposed Ordinance Limiting Non-Taxable Sales in Retail Stores Exceeding 90.000 Square Feet (ENGEN) (Action Required: Adopt Ordinance) c. Water Master Plan (SPAGNOLO) (Action Required: Approval) 11. NEW BUSINESS: None AGENDA SUMMARY - JUL Y 13, 1999 PAGE 5 12. COUNCIUAGENCY COMMUNICATIONS: Correspondence/Comments as presented by the City Council 13. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS: Correspondence/Information for the City Council presented by the City Manager 14. ADJOURNMENT AGENDA SUMMARY - JUL Y 13, 1999 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 reasonable 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.arroyogrande.org ~---- CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE - ABBREVIATIONS revised 05127/99 A Agricultural Preserve AB Assembly Bill JPA Joint Powers Authority ADA Americans with Disabilities Act LAFCO Local Agency Formation Commission AG General Agriculture LOCC League of Califomia Cities AGMC Arroyo Grande Municipal Code LLA Lot Line Adjustment AGPOA Arroyo Grande Police Officers' Association LUE Land Use Element APN Assessor's Parcel Number MER Lot Merger APCB Air Pollution Control Board MF Condominium/Townhouse APCD Air Pollution Control District MFA Apartments ARC Architectural Review Committee MHP Mobile Home Parks ASCE American Society Civil Engineers 0 Office Professional ASD Administrative Services Department OCSD Oceano Community Services District AWWA American Water Works Association OSCE Open Space and Conservation Element BD Building Division PC Planning Commission CA City Attomey PD Police Department CC City Council PF Public/Quasi Public CCC Califomia Conservation Corps PPR Plot Plan Review CCCSIF Central Coast Cities Self-Insurance Fund PRD Parks & Recreation Department CD Community Development PRE-APP Pre-application CDBG Community Development Block Grant PSHHC Peoples' Self-Help Housing Corp. CE Circulation Element PSP Planned Sign Program CEC Califomia Energy Commission PUD Planned Unit Development CEQA California Environmental Quality Act PW Public Works Department CIP Capital Improvement Program RE Residential Estate CIWMP California Integrated Waste Management Plan RFP Request for Proposals CM City Manager's Office RFQ Request for Qualifications CMC Califomia Men's Colony RH Hillside Residential CMP Congestion Management Plan RHNP Regional Housing Needs Plan COC Certificate of Compliance RR Rural Residential CPI Consumer Price Index RS Suburban Residential CUP Conditional Use Permit RTA Reversion to Acreage DARE Drug Abuse Resistance Education RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board DC Development Code SAC Staff Advisory Committee CEA Drug Enforcement Administration SB Senate Bill E.C. Election Code SCAT South County Area Transit EDU Equivalent Dwelling Unit SEIU Service Employees Intemational Union EIR Environmental Impact Report SF Single Family EIS Environmental Impact Statement SLO San Luis Obispo EVC Economic Vitality Corporation SLOCOG San Luis Obispo Council of Govemments FAU Federal Aid Urban SLOHA San Luis Obispo Housing Authority FD Fire Division SLONTF San Luis Obispo Narcotics Task Force FDAA Federal Disaster Assistance Administration SLORTA San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency SLOWRAC San Luis Obispo County Water Resources Advisory FID Financial Services Department Committee FPPC Fair Political Practices Commission SR Senior Housing FTA Federal Transit Administration SSLOCOWA South San Luis Obispo County Water Association FY Fiscal Year SSLOCSD South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District G.C. Govemment Code SRRE Source Reduction & Recyding Element GC General Commercial SWRCD State Water Resources Control Board GF General Fund TPM Tentative Parcel Map GP General Plan TT Tentative Tract Map GPA General Plan Amendment TTAC Transportation Technical Advisory Committee HCD Califomia Department of Housing and Community TUP Temporary Use Permit Development UBC Uniform Building Code HOP Home Occupancy Permit UFC Uniform Fire Code HUD Housing and Urban Development Dept. USA Underground Service Alert I Industrial and Business Park VAR Variance ISTEA Intermodal Surface Transportation VC Village Commercial VSR View Shed Review ZONE 3 San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District - Zone 3 (Lopez Project) ~-~--~---,-_.- -~"---~'- 5~.. . Honorary Proclamation .... .... ... ... . . . . "WELCOMING THE 561ST AIR FORCE BAND OF THE CALIFORNIA AIR NATIONAL GUARD" WHEREAS, the thirty-five (35) piece, 5618t Air Force Band of the California Air National Guard, stationed at Moffett Field, California will be conducting a performance, at no charge, on Thursday, July 15, 1999; and, WHEREAS, the performance will be held on the lawn area at Nelson and Short Streets in the Village of Arroyo Grande at 6:00 p.m. the evening of the 15th; and, I WHEREAS, the Air Force Band has performed throughout the United States I and abroad since its inception in 1948, where performances included a wide I variety of music, from patriotic selections to the classics, and the band is staffed I by some of Northem California's finest musicians, many of whom are graduates of outstanding universities and schools of music; and, WHEREAS, this event will be a vastly entertaining cultural event for the City and the Historic Village of Arroyo Grande. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that I, Michael A. Lady, Mayor of I the City of Arroyo Grande, on behalf of the City Council, do hereby proclaim July 15, 1999 as a day of recognition for the "561st Air Force Band of the California Air National Guard Day" and, further, hereby commend and acknowledge the hard work of the event organizers in bringing this special event to the community. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal of the City of Arroyo Grande to be affIXed this 13th day of July, 1999. MICHAEL A. LADY, MAYOR ---p--- - .~_.~.._-"-_.~_._.. ,-,,,-,-"--'-~---'- Unit History . On July 8th, 1942 the Air Force band became an Historical Data offidal military unit. It was activated at Columbia &fure we wen' the J 6 ht Army Air Base, Columbia, South Carolina, and was At Band, CA ANG... assigned to the 3rd Air Force. Since that time the band has reorganized as follows: o redesignated the 61st Army Air Force Band, Columbia Army Air Base, Columbia, S.C. on 11 August 1942 o redesignated as the 561st Army Band and was reorganized on 27 December 1943 o redesignated as the 561st Army Air Forces Band, and all personnel were Air Corps o moved from Columbia AAB, Columbia, S.c. to HRPE, Va.-readiness date 1 February 1945 o 561st AAF Band was assigned upon arrival at Cairo, Egypt to the CG North Mrican Div. ATC on 26 March 1945 o inactivaed by the CG, Air Transport Command effective 10 April 1946 at Cairo, Egypt o allotted to the National Guard on 24 May 1946 o 561st Army Air Forces Band was redesignated as 561st Air Force Band on 26 September 1947 o allotted to the State of California Air National Guard with strength of 29 in 1948 o 561st AF Band was authorized to reorganize at National Guard Center, Alameda, California o attached to 144 Fighter Wing effective 1 November 1950 o station changed from Alameda ANG Base, Alameda California to Hayward ANG Base, Hayward Municipal Airport on 15 February 1953 The 561st Air Force Band of the California Air 561 st AF Band, CA National Guard has performed throughout the ANG Unit History United States, and abroad, since its inception in 1948. The band is commanded/conducted by Major Gary 1. Wulbern, the third officer to hold this position. In 1948 the band was commanded by CWO-4 John D. Schary. During this time they had the honor of performing for President Eisenhower's inauguration, as well as successfully completing good wiIl tours throughout Europe. In 1976, upon Mr. Schary's retirement, lLT Michael Garda commanded the band. In 1978 Major Gary L. Wulbern took command of what is known today as the Air Force Band of the Pacific Coast. Page 1 of 2 j Unit History Performances The band has distinguished itself, the Air Force, and the Air National Guard on goodwill tours of Denmark, Great Britain, Puerto Rico, Greece, Jamaica, and throughout the United States. The 561st has presented numerous special performances, from Eisenhower's inauguration in 1953, to a 1989 joint performance with the San Francisco Symphony Orchestra to open the annual Pops Concert Series. Musk Band performances include a wide variety of music, from patriotic selections to the classics, and from the music of the Big Band Era to the latest in Jazz. The band is staffed by some of Northern California's finest musicians, many of whom are graduates of outstanding universities and schools of ~ music. The band's 35 musicians perform in: ~ Concert Band ~ Jazz Band ~ Joint Chiefs ofJazz ~ Brass Quintet ~ Woodwind Trio ~ Marching Band . Page 2 of 2 ~.-....- --. ._~_..._------ ---..-----..--..--- . Sponsor Information Guide Introduction In the future the 561st Air Force Band, California Air National Guard will perform in your community. We know you would like as many people as possible to enjoy this event. As sponsor, your important job will be to: J obtain the best possible concert site J inform the dtizens in your area of the Band's appearance Jencourage them to attend Jmaintain control of the free admission tickets, if necessary. There are many ways to accomplish this and undoubtedly you have already thought of some of them. This guide is designed to bring your ideas and ours together. After all, our success will be your success. Contact If you have any further questions after reading the Sponsor Information Guide, please feel free to contact: Director of Operations Technical Sergeant Gary Lipe (209) 521-4239 '. Public Service These concerts are presented as a public "iLNice to Concerts the community and must be free of chatge and open to the general public, regardless of t~ce, color, or national origin. Air force Policy Under the policy now in effect, the United States Air Force defrays all expenses .incurred in travel, on Expences such as transportation, housing and meals. There is no fee, as such, for the 561st Air Force Band. Any other costs, such as auditorium rental, lighting; heating, printing of programs, janitorial fees, cost of hiring union labor when required, etc. are the responsibility of the local authorities or sponsor(s). These cannot be paid for by the United States Government. Page 1 of 7 --~.._-_..._----,- , ~ ~~o% ~~ en~-t 2>2>~ ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... .... "'<I\OJ 2>.... ,.,-:s: :Z:Z<l\ :S:""2> :z:z: "" 2>"'~- ""-",, 00,., ""r-:z '0'" 2> ~~i! <<it"" ~ ." 01 ""0"" U\ ~ '" '" ~ 0 r-p:o ~~ ,., ~~ t"02> 0-<1\ 2> ~~""O '" 2>... _ ,.,:z ,.,<", 2 0 2> 2> 0 -Ut ,.,- ... <1\ q~'O ...i='" X :% N ,., :z "'O~ ""0 '0 0 G\ :s: ~... ~ '0 N 0 0 <I\:ZO 0... ,., 2>0:S: ~~S <1\ ... .... :s: "" "'<1\ ~~ ij ~~I~ ig' O:Z~ ... 0 0 0 z ,., 2"'''' ::.:z~ ... ... <1\- ~~!" 2> .,.. :s: 2> en ",0::' -'" ::'Ci\ ~ ~~ ~en'O 0 "0 "' :z OJ :z." ... ic: ~ :!:s: 00- "'0::' :II: .,.. ~ o:t 2> 2>...2> 00 0 ~o~ '" 2> N:S::Z "":II:'" ,... 2> <1\ ~ ~~ 01 ~~SAn ...2> 2>'0- :II: en::. U\ ~ 0 OJ :z N"'O '" ~<I\ :z~~ <1\,.,01 2> .,.. 2> '0 . 0 m ~'" ""0 r-'O:t:g ,., ""g'" x :z -t~_ -OJ ~p: O-c: 2> ,., ,... q '" ",OJOo ...r-_ O:z<l\ 0 ~ '0 :S:<I\:Z :Z8 ~ X~!€'" :z:r-<I\ ""0 2> "'<1\0 ~ ~~~~ I~ ,.,...:S:: :s:.o 0 :s:: 8 N OI-r- 0 00'" <1\<1\.,.. 0 N 2>0C: ""0 ; 0'" c:...;! :z<l\'O ~~ I="'~OJ c:c:'O :z ~ ,... '0;.'" ",022> :zOO en"'- ~o'" "" q g<l\ :% <1\'" :s:<I\;:;: m 2> ':z2> en ~CD2>:Z "':s: 00"" "'~CD :z Z ~ ~'O~ _"0 .,.. "'''''0 <'" c:.,..r- ?!':S:2> <1\ '0 "".,..- :Z"' 0 .,.,-~ ~CA ... 0;'" "':z ; m ,.,'0 -'" ,., P:g2> 2>~ ..."'... 2>0 :z 0 ::'0"' '00 -< 02><1\ :s::z:S: ~o 11 <1\ 0 c:::.< ~,., .. g enr-6 r-~ "'::."' t"0 "' "' 3 ~...2> . ::. :z~ g~ C:2>~ O~ OJ 3 3 O:s::~ "' ... N~:Z :z",- 01 -"'"' 0 -:II:'" -.,.. ... OJ 2>3'" ... g "'2>0 ~n ... - 2 c::. ~c:-< 'O,.,~ ""0,., :s:: "' en 2> ~O "0<1\0 ,., 2> .,.'00 e~ 0,.,... 0 :< ~~~ U\"'- .,. 3 "'-.,.. ~~ ,.,03 c: ...2>0 02> ~ 2>"':Z ;< ""Oc: 2>",'" 0"'<1\ 02>:S:: ! ... or 2> ...2> "'...- g :s::~... "',.,r- 3:s::0 "' :s:: <I\_~ ~~ -"';, ... . ... <..."' ~ ~2> O~ ~ OJ ,., ... z~~ 0-< -0 :s:: :z~ en::. "' en "' ~ 2>0 c: ",:!!<I\ "0- -<.,.. OJ "0 :e,.,'" I C:2> <1\""0 2>2> :z ",<1\- "':z 2>'" :Z... =i :s:"'~ ~'O 3~ 0'" "" in g 0'" me 0 ~ 0"' U\ ~ <1\ ,.,~ :z<l\ ,.,... 2>- ... <1\ 0 ...<1\ ...0 2> ... s:> :s:(5 ~ - :z 0 <1\ !" CD U\ CI\ -t r;3 oU\~U\ cra-t :.U\CI\-t,-,-t,,-t ~u: ~-t~U\~3 ;::~~~ "'u\ IG\oen ~U\ SiU\"'U\:IOU\!U\ ~~~f~U\ i... ~"... ;;ten -ti; ~~ _ en ~ en ~ en en i1~ ..... o ... i1'" ~ ... ~ ... ;;"'i"';::~ io_OJ ~'" ...20,., i1r- "'OJ"'2~q-", ~3 ~t"i~'~ :s:: ,., ~ t P ~ ~2> ~~~OOO~2> ~ 2> '" 2> "'- I~ "',., ~ ~ ! ~ :.r-",:z "'''' ~:S::~,., '" <1\ ~3 ~~ ~ ,., :s:: < ~-< ... 2> 1IC "' ... "" 2>:":z0", 1'Im ~~!~ ~~;:;"'~~<I\ ~~~3~~ ~ m ~ ~ CI\~ 1'1~ 1'10 ~:s:"':z ..."' "'.,.. ~ ~~~~ o~~ CD!:: 1'1 "0 ~ 2> '" _ 1'1 ,., R<I\ o ~ - ~3 ~~ CI\",~~!"'" ~O "';c ~"' :z ~ ~ ~m H"'~o ~~s ~:D~-~O ...:11: ~ <1\ "'~I":Z -~o ~,., 2> :z ~ :s:: ::t30 ~O craO i-< ... <1\ ~ <1\ r; :z ~ ~ ~ ,-,0 c:~o '" x ~ :z CI\ ~ Iii ~ ~ <1\ ~ '0 :z ... ~ ~ 0 ~"'~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ :z 00 ~ '" ",,::IO~ .... ~G)~ ~~"' a~e (lJr-O ~~:'3~U\ ~U\a'U\ ~U\~3 ~~t'~W~t'~ ~-tCl\U\r-tCl\3> bEi ~nSi~~f ~~~~ CI\;~~ !;U\~'" ~~- Cl\C:~ i1 en ~ en n ... ~ en ien",3>C'\ 20 i1 .... i1 ... (Ii ... ~... ... ... !r'" ~ m '" ... CZJr- ~ 0 '" ... ... 0 "'~q ~OJ... ~~ i"Ci\ ~-t 0...'" '" ~ ~ 3> iOf",qa~'\1io ~ 3~:s:: iG\:"", ~"' 2 "'i ~ i= ~2>i~ 8 = :10 ; -<~01'l0~0 -2>a~ ~:.'" ~ :10 r- - i< :z ~~~:s:: CI\~~I= ~,.,~~~~o~ CI\~ ~~~~t~ -:." ~"' "' ~'O~ -< j;I==~~ a:z :ZgO "' Pl::!~"' ~r-~-< ...~ r-~:Z ~~~"O lIt"<~~,,,Q~~ :Z...<I\ _'" ~ CI\ '" ~,., ~ 0 ~ ~ ~! ~ n :'"':"'O~-:"en :a:U\~",:.""O 00 ~;::::!o "' 2> .~-~...;: ~ <1\ ~ g "'0'" ",., " ~ < ~ ~ ~ ~ 1ft ...<1\ o o lit 2> ",NlICO ~;:: "'~~0i"0 ""OCl\ ~"'R'" '" -< !II !II 3 Ot~~-... ~,., i:z ...:z CD <1\ ~ :!I '" 2> ~ ~ '02> ~ ~ 0 ... i ~ ! ... ~ '0... :!I ~ .. ~:II:'O '" :% ~ 8 f It; ~ ~ ~ i ~ a ~ !) ~ ~-- "--._-~._------_..- --"-~_.__.,~.- "-" , 7... , CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE CITY COUNCIL MEETING NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING AND ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a Public Hearing will be held by the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande on the following project: CASE NO. Conditional Use Permit 98-572 APPLICANT: Russ Sheppel LOCATION: 880 Oak Park Blvd. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Mitigated Negative Declaration per CEOA Guidelines REPRESENTATIVE: Kim Hatch, Pults and Associates PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The City Council will consider a Conditional Use Permit for construction of an 11, 335 square foot office building with 30 parking spaces, with other common parking facilities, and a revision of the Master Plan for circulation, parking and drainage. In compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the Planning Commission has recommended approval of the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration on the above project. Any person affected or concerned by this application may submit written comments to the Administrative Services Department before the City Council hearing, or appear and be heard in support of or opposition to the project and the environmental impacts at the time of hearing. Any person interested in the proposals can contact the Administrative Services Department at 214 E. Branch Street, 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, July 13, 1999 at 7:00 P.M. Place of Hearing: Arroyo Grande City Council Chambers 215 E. Branch Street Arroyo Grande, California 93420 dministrativeServices Director! Deputy City Clerk MEMORANDUM TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: HENRY ENGEN, INTERIM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTO~ SUBJECT: SHEPPEL OFFICE BUILDING PROJECT; CUP 98-572 DATE: JULY 13, 1999 RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends the City Council: (1) adopt the attached Resolution approving Conditional Use Permit No. 98-572, subject to the Conditions of Approval, and (2) approve the Negative Declaration completed with regard to the project. FISCAL: There is no direct fiscal impact to the City should the Council adopt the attached resolution approving the project DISCUSSION: This project is within the Oak Park Acres Planned Development area and all such projects require final approval by the City Council. Related Droiects: The proposed project is an 11,335 square foot professional office building located in the Oak Park Health Plaza (the "Plaza"). The Plaza is a 3.74-acre site. As part of the previous approval, a conceptual master site plan (the "master site plan") was developed, which provided standards for parking, circulation, and drainage easements, as well as the proposed square footage for the build-out of each of the six parcels on the Plaza site. Pursuant to the master site plan approved as part of the original project in 1988, and revised by the Planning Commission in 1996 (Attachment H), the applicant and Kevin Kennedy entered into an agreement for reciprocal parking, access, and drainage easements. Consistent with the master site plan, the applicant constructed an office building at the corner of Oak Park Boulevard and James Way following the project approval in Case No. CUP 88-435. CITY COUNCIL JULY 13, 1999 PAGE 2 Kevin Kennedy has also applied for a conditional use permit (CUP 98-573) to construct a 18,925 square foot health club facility in the Plaza. Master Plan: The Plaza has been the subject of master site planning. The Plaza does not have direct access to Oak Park Boulevard; therefore, access is taken from James Way. The master site plan is an effort to assure that adequate access, circulation, parking, and drainage exist on the site. The master site plan as revised and approved by the Planning Commission and City Council in 1 996 designates the individual parcels of the Plaza, proposed square footages of the buildings, and the number of parking spaces required. The various parcels in the Plaza are identified as follows: Reference in this Leaal DescriDtion Owner staff reDort Size Parcel 2, AG 92-027 Kennedy Kennedy Site 0.934 AC (site of CUP 98-572) Parcel 1, AG 95-108 Sheppel Sheppel No. 1 (existing office building) 0.42 AC Parcel 2, AG 95-108 Sheppel Sheppel No. 2 (site for proposed 0.54 AC building) Parcel 3, AG 95-108 Sheppel Sheppel No.3 0.592 AC Parcel 3, AG 82-035 Lehrack Parcel 5 0.509 AC Parcel A, AG 79-838 Oak Park Parcel 6 0.711 AC Partnership 3.74 AC The Planning Commission, as part of its recommendation for approval, has recommended that changes in the master site plan be approved by the City Council. These changes include (1) revising the square footage to reflect the actual square footage of the existing office building, and the square footage for the projects now being considered, (2) revising the Plaza site plan to reflect the parking areas and number of spaces now existing and as approved, and (3) revising the areas of the Plaza subject to the reciprocal parking and access easements. The proposed revised master site plan is attached as Attachment G. CITY COUNCIL JULY 13, 1999 PAGE 3 A portion of the Plaza is now subject to a reciprocal easement agreement. Upon project approval, the three parcels currently owned by Russ Sheppel (Sheppel Nos. 1, 2, and 3), and the parcel owned by Kevin Kennedy, would each be made subject to the reciprocal easement agreement. Issues: Access: The Oak Park Health Plaza site has a single entry/exit on James Way. Two adjacent parcels in the Plaza, Parcels 5 and 6, may be developed in the future, and may provide a second entry/exit, but there is no indication that plans exist to develop either of those parcels. The Planning Commission, therefore, reviewed the conceptual Plaza master site plan circulation to make sure that the access and circulation worked based on current development proposals. The Planning Commission was satisfied that the revised master site plan (Attachment G) will provide adequate parking, circulation, and access. The project is conditioned on a reconstruction of the driveway to the project to provide curb returns, concrete cross gutter and spandrels. In addition, if Public Works deems it necessary, the applicants will be required to move the existing fire hydrant. The existing driveway entrance is the sole point of ingress and egress. The Planning Commission concluded that the existing driveway was not of sufficient width, or adequate design, to safely allow vehicles to enter and exit at the same time. Parking: A traffic and parking analysis was conducted by Penfield & Smith. The study concluded that parking at the site is adequate, based on the reciprocal easements establishing common parking facilities. The common parking facilities are adequate based on the standards of the Development Code. In the event Sheppel No.3, on which some parking will be constructed as part of this project, is later developed with an office building, the applicant would be required to comply with the parking regulations then in effect. Traffic: The traffic study concluded that the project would have no significant impact on local intersections. The applicant will contribute to the cost of installing an Opticom device at the Oak Park/James Way intersection. The project is consistent with the General Plan and zoning designations for the site. The project has received favorable review by the SAC, ARC, and Planning Commission. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: A Mitigated Negative Declaration was completed for the project, and circulated for public comment. The comment period ended on June 28, 1999. No comments were received. The document is attached as Attachment F. CITY COUNCIL JULY 13, 1999 PAGE 4 Alternatives The following alternatives are presented for Council consideration: 1 . Adopt the Planning Commission's recommendation and approve the Resolution. 2. Modify the Planning Commission's recommendation and approve the Resolution. 3. Deny the project application and direct staff to prepare the appropriate resolution for City Council action. 4. Provide direction to staff. If the Council selects alternative 3, staff will return with the appropriate resolution/or resolutions at a later meeting. Attachments: Resolution of Approval Exhibit II A ": Conditions of Approval Exhibit liB": Overall Site Plan, Grading Plan, Elevations, and Landscape Concept Plan, June 14, 1999 A. Staff Report 6-29-99 Planning Commission B. Traffic & Parking Study C. Minutes of Planning Commission meeting 6-29-99 D. Minutes of SAC 1-12-99 E. Minutes of ARC 3-22-99 F. Final Negative Declaration G. Revised Oak Park Health Plaza Master Plan H. Oak Park Health Plaza Master Plan 1 996 . RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ADOPTING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION, INSTRUCTING THE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR TO FILE A NOTICE OF DETERMINATION, AND APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 98-572, APPLIED FOR BY RUSS SHEPPEL, LOCATED AT OAK PARK BOULEVARD AND JAMES WAY WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Arroyo Grande has approved PC Resolution No. 99-1699 recommending that the City Council adopt the Negative Declaration prepared for this project and approve Conditional Use Permit 98-572; and WHEREA.S, the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande has considered Conditional Use Permit 98-572, filed by Russ Sheppel, to construct an 11,335 square foot office building at the southeast corner of Oak Park Boulevard and James Way in the Oak Park Health Plaza; and WHEREAS, the City Council has held a public hearing on this application in accordance with City Code; and WHEREAS, the City Council has found this project to be consistent with the General Plan and the environmental documents associated therewith; and - WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the Final Negative Declaration under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and the Arroyo Grande Rules and Procedures for Implementation to CEQA; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds after due study, deliberation and public hearing, the following circumstances exist: Conditional Use Permit Findings: 1. The proposed use is p~rmitted within the subject district pursuant to the provisions of Section 9-03.050 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. 3. The site is suitable for the type and intensity of use or development that is proposed. 4. There are adequate provisions for water, sanitation, and public utilities and . RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 2 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. 6. The revised master plan is a conceptual planning tool and is not an entitlement for future development. Future proposed buildings on Parcel 3, Arroyo Grande 95-108, Parcel 3 Arroyo Grande 82-035, or Parcel A Arroyo Grande 79-038 must receive required review and approval and must satisfy parking and other Development Code requirements. California Environmental Quality Act and Department of Fish and Game Required Findings of Exemption: 1. The City of Arroyo Grande has prepared an initial study pursuant to Section 1 5,063 of the Guidelines of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), for Conditional Use Permit Case No. 98-567. 2. Based on the initial study, a negative declaration was drafted for public review. The City Council has considered the Negative Declaration together with any comments received and considered during the public review process. The Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment of the City Council. 3. The City Council finds that through feasible conditions placed upon this project, the significant impacts on the environment have been eliminated or substantially mitigated to a level of insignificance. 4. The dO(fuments and other materials which constitute the records of proceedings upon which this decision is based are in the custody of the Secretary of the City of Arroyo Grande City Council, City Hall, 214 E. Branch St., Arroyo Grande, California. 5. Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 requires the City to adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes to the project it has adopted or made a condition of approval in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects of the approval, and such changes, with their corresponding permit monitoring requirements, are hereby adopted as the monitoring program for the project. The monitoring program is designed to ensure compliance during project implementation. 6. After holding a public hearing pursuant to State and City Codes, and considering the record as a whole the City Council considered the Negative Declaration and found that there is no substantial evidence of any significant adverse environmental effect, either individually or cumulatively on wildlife resources as defined by Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code or on the habitat upon which the wildlife depends as a result of development of this . RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 3 habitat upon which the wildlife depends as a result of development of this project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande hereby adopts a Negative Declaration, instructs the Secretary to file a Notice of Determination, approves Conditional Use Permit 98-572, 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 13th day of July 1 999. - ---------- . RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 4 MICHAEL A. LADY, MAYOR ATTEST: KELL Y WETMORE, ADMINISTRA TIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR/ DEPUTY CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: ROBERT L. HUNT, CITY MANAGER - APPROVED AS TO FORM: TIMOTHY J. CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY -------.--..---..--- RESOLUTION NO. EXHIBIT A PAGE 5 EXHIBIT II A" CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL SHEPPEL OFFICE BUILDING; CUP 98-572 Corner of Oak Park Boulevard and James Way COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT GENERAL CONDITIONS This approval authorizes the construction of a 11 ,335 square foot office building, with approved landscaping and 30 parking spaces, and subject to the follo~ing conditions of approval: 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 Case No. CUP- 572, and the site shall be developed as depicted in the revised Master Plan for the Oak Park Health Plaza date-d June 25, 1999. 3. This application shall automatically expire on July 13, 2001 unless a building permit is issued. Thirty (30) 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. Two years after the issuance of building permits, the Conditional Use Permit shall be reviewed by the Community Development Director for determination of whether adequate parking has been provided pursuant to the Master Plan for the Oak Park Health Plaza. A public hearing and review by the Planning Commission may, at the discretion of the Community Development Director, be required to review potential concerns. In such event, the applicant shall submit funds to cover the cost of the public hearing and a current mailing list of property owners (and occupants) within 300 feet of the project. 5. Development shall occur in substantial conformance with the plans presented marked Exhibit "B", approved July 13, 1999. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, applicant shall file Reciprocal Easements for access parking and drainage acceptable to the Community Development Director. 6. The applicant shall. agree to defend at his/her sole expense any action brought . RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 6 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 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 sole 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. 7. Development shall conform to PD 1.1 (Oak Park Acres Planned Development) zoning requirements except as otherwise approved. CONDITIONS IN ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT 8. D~st generated by the development activities shall be kept to a minimum with a goal of retaining dust on the site. Applicant shall follow the dust control measures listed below: a. During clearing, grading, earth moving, excavation, or transportation of cut or fill materials, water trucks or sprinkler systems are to be used to prevent dust from leaving the site and to create a crust after each day's activities cease. b. During construction, water trucks or sprinkler systems sh,al! be used to . keep all areas of vehicle movement damp enough to prevent dust from leaving the site. At a minimum, this shall include wetting down such areas in the later morning and after work is completed for the day, and whenever winds exceed 1 5 miles per hour. c. Soil stockpiled for more than two days shall be covered, kept moist, or treated with soil binders to prevent dust generation. 9. The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the dust control program and order increased watering as necessary to prevent transport of dust off-site. Their duties shall include holiday and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. 10. In the event archaeological or cultural resources are discovered during the construction process, all work on the site shall cease. A monitor with knowledge of archaeological resources shall be contacted, and shall view and assess the materials discovered. A written mitigation plan shall be prepared and approved by the City. All costs associated with the employment of a qualified archaeologist shall be paid by the applicant. The following note shall be placed on the grading and improvement plans for the project: D/n the event that during grading, construction or development of the project, archeological resources are uncovered, all work shal/ be halted until the significance of the resources are determined. If human remains __...n._____ . RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 7 (burials) are encountered, the County Coroner (781-4513) sha/I be contacted immediately. The applicant may be required to providE! archaeological studies and/or additional mitigation measures as required by the California Environmental Quality Act if archaeological resources are found on the site. " 11. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit an updated soils report addressing any changes in the condition of the parcel which may have occurred since the date of the Soils Report, March, 1 988, and identifying measures to responds to such changes, if identified. In the alternative, applicant may submit a new soils report which adequately addresses the issues raised in the Soils Report. 12. Structures shall be designed to earthquake standards of the Uniform Building Code Zone 4. Prior to plan check, the applicant shall submit building plans inq;cating standards to the satisfaction of Building and Safety. 13. Construction operations, especially grading operations, shall be confined as much as possible to the dry season, in order to avoid erosion of disturbed soils. 14. All graded areas, including road subgrades and building pads which are rough graded areas but not constructed until subsequent construction phases shall be revegetated. This vegetation shall be irrigated and maintained on a regular basis. _ This vegetation shall be removed as necessary in later phases when finish grading, paving and building construction occurs. 15. Project landscaping plans shall incorporate the use of fast growing ground covers to stabilize soils soon after construction is completed. 16. Demolition or construction activities, including truck traffic coming to and from the site for any purpose, shall be limited to daytime, (non-holiday) hours (7:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.) Mondays through Saturdays. 17. 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. 18. . All new construction shall utilize fixtures and designs that minimize water usage. Such fixtures shall include, but are not limited to, low flow shower heads, water saving toilets, instant water heaters and hot water recirculating systems. Water conserving designs and fixtures shall be installed prior to final occupancy. ---...,--- . RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 8 LIGHTING 19. All lighting for the site shall be downward directed and shall not create spill or glare to adjacent properties. DEVELOPMENT CODE 20. Development shall conform with the H-S subzone zoning requirements except as otherwise approved. 21. Signage shall be subject to the requirements of Development Code Chapter 9 - 13. 22. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, all ducts, meters, air conditioning equipment and all other mechanical equipment, whether on the grQund, on the structure or elsewhere, shall be screened from public view with materials architecturally compatible with the main structure. It is especially important that gas and electric meters, electric transformers, and large water piping systems be completely screened from public view. All roof-mounted equipm~nt which generates noise, solid particles, odors, et cetera, shall cause the objectionable material to be directed away from residential properties. 23. Prior to issuance of a building permit, 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. 24. All parking spaces adjacent to a wall, fence, or property line shall have a minimum width of 11 feet. This does not apply to garage or carport spaces which shall each have a minimum clear dimension of 1 0 feet wide by 20 feet deep. 25. The developer shall comply with Development Code Chapter 9-14, "Dedications, Fees and Reservations." 26. Prior to issuance of occupancy permits, the developer shall comply with Development Code Chapter 9-15, "Improvements". All above ground utilities shall be undergrounded. 27. Prior to paint or stucco color coat being applied to the building, 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. ._---. . RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 9 SOLID WASTE 28. Solid waste pick-up location as identified is acceptable. 29. In such cases where trash bin enclosures are to be installed abutting structures, the common wall shall be of a noncombustible masonry type material with no openings for vents or windows. 30. Trash enclosures shall be reserved exclusively for dumpster storage. Miscellaneous boxes, bins, racks, etc., will not be allowed within the enclosure. 31. To reduce the possibility of the gates damaging vehicles parked next to the enclosures, an overhead type door is strongly encouraged. (See City Standard Detail.) 32. Inferior vehicle travel ways shall be designed to be capable of withstanding loads imposed by trash trucks. POLICE DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS 33. Prior to issuance of building permit, applicant to submit exterior lighting plan for Police Department approval. . 34. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall post handicapped parking, per Police Department requirements. 35. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall install a burglary [or robbery] alarm system per Police Department guidelines, and pay the Police Department alarm permit application fee of ($30.00). BUILDING AND FIRE DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS UBC/UFC 36. The project shall comply with the most recent editions of the California State Fire and Building Codes and the Uniform Building and Fire Codes as adopted by the City of Arroyo Grande. The applicant shall include, to the approval of the Fire Department, occupancy classifications and required separations. FIRE LANES 37. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall post designated fire lanes, per Section 22500.1 of the California Vehicle Code. -~------_._- . RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 10 38. All fire lanes must be posted and enforced, per Police Department and Fire Department guidelines. 39. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant'shall submit a site survey regarding the presence of archaeological resources on the site. The survey shall be performed by a qualified archaeologist. FIRE FLOW/FIRE HYDRANTS 40. Project shall have a fire flow of one thousand five hundred gallons (1,500) per minute for a duration of three (3) hours. 41. Prior to bringing combustible materials on site, fire hydrants shall be installed, per Fire Department and Public Works Department standards. SECURITY KEY BOX 42. Prior to occupancy, applicant must provide an approved "security key vault," per Building and Fire Department guidelines. FIRE SPRINKLER 43. Prior to occupancy, all buildings must be fully sprinklered per Building and Fire Department guidelines. OPTICOM DEVICE 44. The applicant shall participate in cooperation with the applicant in Case No. CUP 98-573 (Kevin Kennedy) to install an opticom traffic signal pre-emption device at the James Way-Oak Park Blvd. intersection, that meets Building and Fire Department requirements, per the approval of the Fire Chief. ABANDONMENT INON-CONFORMING 45. Prior to issuance of a grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs first, applicant shall show proof of properly abandoning all non-conforming items such as septic tanks, wells, underground piping and other undesirable conditions. OTHER PERMITS 46. The applicant shall pay any review costs generated by outside consultants. . RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 11 PUBLIC' WORKS DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS All Public Works Department conditions of approval as listed below are to b~ complied with prior to recording the map or finalizing the permit, unless specifically noted otherwise. GENERAL IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENTS 47. All project improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the City of Arroyo Grande Standard Drawings and Specifications. 48. The driveway entrance shall be constructed with curb returns, cross-concrete and spandrels. The existing fire hydrant shall be relocated if necessary. 49. All project improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City standards and specifications. Plans within the right-of-way shall include profile drawings. Improvement plans (including the following) shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Public Works Department: a. Grading, drainage and erosion control. b. Street paving, curb, gutter and sidewalk. c. Striping and signage plan. d. Public utilities. e. Water and sewer. 50. Parking lot spaces shall be delineated with double striping. 51. Upon approval of the improvement plans, the applicant shall provide a reproducible mylar set and 3 sets of prints of the improvements for inspection purposes. Prior to acceptance of the improvements, the applicant shall provide reproducible mylars, and 2 sets of prints o'f the approved record drawings (as builts) . 52. 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 or the Community Development Director. 53. Prior to approval of an improvement plan the applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City for inspection of the required improvements. 54. The applicant shall be responsible for obtaining an encroachment permit for all work within a public right-of-way. RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 1 2 UNDERGROUND UTILITIES/EASEMENTS 55. The developer shall comply with Development Code Chapter 9-15.050. All existing above ground utilities shall be relocated underground. 56. A Public Utility Easement (PUE) shall be dedicated a minimum 6 feet wide adjacent to all street right of ways. The PUE shall be wider where necessary for the installation or maintenance of the public utility vaults, pads, or similar facilities. 57. Private easements shall be recorded for all reciprocal easements as depicted in the revised Master Plan for the Oak Park health Plaza as approved by the City Council on . GRADING AND DRAINAGE . 58. All-grading shall be done in accordance with the City Grading Ordinance. 59. The Department of Public Works may' require further reports on the soils. All earthwork design and grading shall be performed in accordance with the approved soils report. 60. The applicant shall submit an engineering study regarding flooding related to the project site. The study shall be prepared for the approval by the Director of Public Works. Any portions of the site subject to flooding from a 100 year storm shall be shown on the recorded map or other recorded document, and shall be noted as a building restriction. 61. The on-site water system, which supplies water to fire hydrants, shall be a public facility. This will require public improvement plans and dedication of a 1 5 foot wide easement. WASTEWATER 62. All sewer mains or laterals crossing or parallel to public water facilities shall be constructed in accordance with California State Health Agency standards. PUBLIC UTILITIES 63. All new public utilities shall be installed as underground facilities. 64. Prior to approving any building permit within the project for occupancy, all public utilities shall be operational. 65. All improvement plans shall be submitted to the public utility companies for and comment. Utility comments shall be forwarded to the Director of Public Works for approval. RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 13 FEES AND BONDS FOR ALL CITY DEPARTMENTS The applicant shall pay all applicable City fees, including the following: 66. FEES TO BE PAID PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT a. Water Mitigation fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance, involving water connection or enlargement of an existing connection. b. Water Distribution fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance, in accordance with Municipal Code 6- 7.22. c. Water Service charge, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance, in accordance with Municipal Code 6- 7.22. d. Water Supply charge, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance, in accordance with Municipal Code 6- 7.22. e. Traffic Impact fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance, in accordance with Ord. 461 C.S., Res. 3021. f. . Traffic Signalization fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance, in accordance with Ord. 346 C.S., Res. 1955. g. Sewer Permit fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance, in accordance with Municipal Code 6-6.405. h. Drainage fee, as required by the area drainage plan for the area being developed. i. Park Development fee, the developer shall pay the current parks development fee for each unit approved. for construction (credit shall be provided for existing houses), to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance in accordance with Ord. 313 C.S. j~ Street Tree Planting fee, the developer shall pay the current street tree planting fee/deposit. One 1 5 gallon size or larger street tree is required for every fifty feet (50') of project frontage. Prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy, the developer, with the approval of the Park and Recreation Director, may install all 15 gallon trees and receive a refund of deposit. To be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance, in accordance with Ord. 431 C.S. k. Construction Tax, the applicant shall pay a construction tax pursuant to Section 3-3.501 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code. I. Alarm Fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 14 development in accordance with Ord. 435 C.S. m. Strong Motion Instrumentation Program (SMIP) Fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of development in accordance with State mandate. n. Building Permit Fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of development in accordance with Title 8 of the Municipal Code. ,. - . ----.- ATTACHMENT A Agenda Item No. 1.A Hearing date: June 29, 1999 PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING TO BE HELD IN THE CITY COUNCil CHAMBERS 215 EAST BRANCH STREET APPLICANT: Russ Sheppel FllE/INDEX: CUP 98-572 PROPOSAL: Construction of 11,335 square foot office building lOCATION: Southeast corner of James Way and Oak Park Boulevard REPRESENTATIVE: Kim Hatch, Pults & Associates Hearing Notices sent on 6/18/99. Staff Report Prepared by Tom Buford. Site Inspection by Tom Buford on June 22, 1999 Parcel Size: 24,982 square feet Terrain: Level: Has been graded for development Vegetation: Site has been cleared for development Existing land Use: Vacant General Plan Designation: Oak Park Acres P.O. #140 C.S. Zoning Designation: PO 1. 1-Planned Development (H-S) subzone Surrounding land UselZoninglGeneral Plan Designation: North: James Way, Four Square Church/PD Planned Development/ Neighborhood Commercial East: Vacant/PD Planned Development/Highway Commercial South: Casa Grande Motel/PO Planned Development/ Highway Commercial West: Oak Park Boulevard Related Proiects: The project site is located in the Oak Park Health Plaza (the Plaza). The Plaza is a 3.74-acre site. As part of the previous approval, a Master Plan was developed, which provided standards for parking, circulation, and drainage easements, as well as proposed the square footage for the build-out of each of the six parcels on the Plaza site. Pursuant to the Master Plan, (refer to Attachment 2 of CUP 98-573 Staff Report) the applicant and Kevin Kennedy entered into an agreement for reciprocal parking, access, and drainage easements. Planning Commission CUP 98-572 Oak Park Health Plaza: Sheppel June 29, 1999 Page 2 The existing office building was approved in Case No. CUP 88-435. Kevin Kennedy has also applied for a conditional use permit (CUP 98-573) to construct a 18,925 square health club building in the Plaza. A history of the site is set forth below: RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council adopt the attached Resolution approving Conditional Use Permit No. 98-572, subject to the Conditions of Approval, and approve the Draft Negative Declaration completed with regard to the project. BACKGROUND: This project is within the Oak Park Acres Planned Development (PD 1 .1) which has specific development standards separate from the Development Code. All projects within an approved Planned Development require approval of the City Council. Hence, the Planning Commission must make a recommendation to the Council regarding this project. The Oak Park Health Plaza is a 3.74-acre site located at the southeast corner of Oak Park Boulevard and James Way. When development was originally proposed on the site, the applicant and Kevin Kennedy were the common owners. When ownership was later divided, a parcel map was recorded. A later subdivision has occurred. The applicant owns three parcels, and Kevin Kennedy now owns one parcel. The various parcels in the Plaza can be identified as follows (refer to Attachment 2 of CUP 98-573 Staff Report): Reference in Legal Description Owner this Staff Report Size Parcel 2, AG 92-027 Kennedy Kennedy Site 0.934 AC Parcel 1, AG 95-108 Sheppel Sheppel No.1 0.42 AC (existing office building) Parcel 2, AG 95-108 Sheppel Sheppel No.2 0.574 AC (Site for proposed building) Parcel 3, AG 95-108 Sheppel Sheppel No. 3 0.592 AC Parcel 3, AG 82-035 Lehrack Parcel 5 0.509 AC Oak Park Parcel A, AG 79-838 Partnership Parcel 6 0.711 AC 9.74 AC Planning Commission CUP 98-572 Oak Park Health Plaza: Sheppel June 29, 1999 Page 3 Parcels 5 and 6 are located to the south of the Kennedy and Sheppel sites. The owners of these parcels are not a party to the current proposals, and have not participated in planning for access, drainage, and parking. The parcels are vacant, and the City is not aware of any plans to develop these sites. The Kennedy Site has an easement for courtyard purposes over a portion of Sheppel No.1. This courtyard is designed in the Kennedy project. The entire Kennedy site, the entire Sheppel No.1, and a portion of Sheppel No.2 and Sheppel No.3 are subject to reciprocal easements for access, parking, and drainage. These easements were required in connection with the approval of the existing building on Sheppel No.1. The staff report for the original CUP 88-435 noted: As requested by the City, the applicants have worked out a master plan for this area with the adjoining property owners. The Staff Advisory Committee consisting of representatives from the Public Works, Planning and Bui/ding, Parks and Recreation, Fire, and Police departments, has reviewed the master plan and finds it acceptable and superior to the previous proposal. The proposed master plan answers the concerns expressed by the City regarding access and circulation, emergency access to the Casa Grande Motel, and coordination of easements throughout the properties. The aoo/icants have indicated that the other orooertv owners are in aareement with the orooosal and willdeve/oo their orooerties in substantia/ conformance with this olano (emphasis supplied) The Master Plan was revised in August, 1996. The revision occurred in connection with the application by Sheppel for approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 96-530 to subdivide a 1.59 acre parcel into three lots [resulting in Sheppel Nos. 1, 2, and 3], and to approve a variance to reduce the minimum lot width for one lot from 100 to 70 feet on Sheppel No.1, and to amend CUP 88-435 to modify the master plan to change the location of previously approved buildings. The applications were approved by the City Council on September 10, 1996. The staff report in connection with the 1996 applications noted: The proposed Conditional Use Permit Amendment revises only those portions of the master plan owned by Dr. Sheppel. Other portions of the project are unaffected by the revisions except for minor drafting revisions and modifications to the previously approved parking spaces to bring them into compliance with current standards. Planning Commission CUP 98-572 Oak Park Health Plaza: Sheppel June 29, 1999 Page 4 HThe revised master plan (or CUP) is required because the proposed land division set forth in Tentative Parcel Map Case No. 96-530. The proposed changes do not affect the floor area of the previously approved buildings. The location of buildings on proposed Parcel 2 and Parcel 3 has been modified because the property line bisected the buildings in their original location. The original master plan showed two buildings, sharing a common courtyard, situated in the center of the property currently identified as proposed Parcels 2 and 3... (Staff Report to Planning Commission, August 20, 1996, page 2) The current application proposes construction on the Kennedy site. The Kennedy site would not provide sufficient parking to meet City standards, and additional parking would be provided on Sheppel No.3, with a reciprocal easement between the parties. DISCUSSION: Master Plan-Parkina: As noted above, the Master Plan for the Plaza was last revised in August, 1996. At that time the Master Plan provided for the following building sizes and parking on the site: Standard Compact Handicap Total Parcel Office Scace Scaces Scaces Scaces Scace Kennedy 16,008 SF 79 0 3 82 Sheppel No. 1 7,560 SF (combined with Kennedy site) Sheppel No. 2 7,200 SF 37 0 2 39 Sheppel No. 3 7,200 SF 36 0 2 38 Parcel 5 6,600 SF 34 0 1 35 Parcel 6 10.600 SF 54 0 2 56 Total 55,168 SF 240 0 10 250 The total number of parking spaces required for Kennedy and the three Sheppel sites under the above Master Plan is 159. The building constructed on Sheppel No. 1 included 8,721 square feet. The building proposed for Sheppel No.2 is larger than the building provided for in the Master Plan. The building proposed by Kennedy is also larger than the building provided for in the -~-_..._.._.._---~-- Planning Commission CUP 98-572 Oak Park Health Plaza: Sheppel June 29, 1999 Page 5 Master Plan. Staff has no information regarding plans for construction on Parcels 5 or 6. The 1996 staff report indicated, with regard to parking: The revised master plan increases the overall parking for the project. The original master plan utilized 10' x 20' standard spaces and 9' x 18' compact spaces. The revised master plan includes the current 9' x 18' standard spaces. This results in a better utilization of available area and an overall increase in the number of parking spaces. The revised master plan increases the total parking from 238 to 250 spaces and increases the availab/e handicapped parking from 8 to 10 spaces. In accordance with Development Code standards, the required parking for the project is 221 spaces, 5 of which are required to be designated for handicapped parking. (Staff Report to Planning Commission, August 20, 1996, page 2) The current Sheppel project proposes an office building with 11,335 square feet. 30 parking spaces would be provided. This is not sufficient to meet the requirements of the Development Code, which requires 45 spaces at a ratio of 1 space: 250 square feet. The applicant proposes to continue the common parking on the Plaza site, and to provide the required parking on Sheppel No.3. Kennedy has proposed a health club facility with 18,925 square feet. The project is required to meet the requirements of the Development Code, Chapter 9-1 2 "Parking and Loading Requirements." The zoning ordinance has no specific standard for health clubs. Parking requirements for health clubs were discussed at length in the staff report for the original CUP 88-435. The applicants at that time had proposed a ratio of one space per each 300 square feet of floor area, with a reduction for common parking facilities. The maximum allowable reduction at that time was 12%, and is now 30%. The staff report indicated the Planning Commission accepted the applicant's proposed ratio. The applicant later postponed the project. A ratio of 1 space per 300 square feet would result in a requirement of 63 spaces. The Institute of Traffic Engineers (lTE) has suggested that a ratio of 4.37 spaces per 1,000 square feet be used for health clubs. This would result in a requirement of 83 spaces. Section 9-12.050 of the Development Code provides that common parking facilities may be provided in lieu of individual requirements if the total number of parking spaces equals the requirements for individual users, as long as the parking facilities are located within 200 feet of the associated use. Section 9-12.050.1 allows for a reduction of up to 30% in parking requirements for common parking facilities provided Planning Commission CUP 98-572 Oak Park Health Plaza: Sheppel June 29, 1999 Page 6 that a parking study, prepared by a licensed engineer or architect, confirms that the shared uses have different hours of operation that do not conflict. Any such reduction must be reflected in a conditional use permit. In addition, any agreement between the parties regarding the use of common facilities must be supported by evidence of such an agreementt to be filed with the Planning and Building departments, and recorded with the San Luis Obispo County Recorder. Using a ratio of 1/300, a parking requirement of 63 spaces would be imposed on the project. The applicant proposes to provide 58 spaces, in addition to parking for bicycles and motorcycles. The applicant proposes to provide parking to meet anticipated demand through a reciprocal easement for parking on other parcels within the Plaza. Parking would be provided as follows: Parking Parking Parcel Reauired Provided On-Site Net Kennedy 63 56 (7) Sheppel No.1 35 22 (13) Sheppel No. 2 45 30 .l1Ql 143 108 (35) This leaves a deficit of 35 spaces. This shortfall would be met through the construction of 48 spaces on Sheppel No.3. With the construction of these spaces, the Oak Park Health Plaza would have an excess of 1 3 spaces over the minimum required, assuming the ratio of space: 300 square feet for the Kennedy project is applied. A traffic and parking study was performed by Penfield & Smith, dated June 2, 1999. The study utilized standards from the Institute of Traffic Engineers and the Urban Land Institute to estimate parking needs at the Plaza. The Study assumed that 155 spaces would be provided on site for the benefit of the proposed uses (page 1). The traffic study projected that the office component of the existing and proposed uses would require a total of 57 parking spaces at the peak of office parking demand at 10-11 a.m. The health club parking demand generally peaks at 6-7 p.m., with a projected space requirement of 83 spaces. The combined parking requirements for the two uses could be as high as 140 spaces, but the two uses do not peak at the same time. The traffic study concluded that the office parking demand at 6-7 p.m. would be approximately 23% of the peak, or 13 spaces. During this peak at the health club, a total site parking demand of 96 spaces would exist. At the office peak of 10-11 a.m., the health club parking demand would be negligible. At mid-day, the office parking Planning Commission CUP 98-572 Oak Park Health Plaza: Sheppel June 29, 1999 Page 7 demand would be approximately 51 spaces, based on the Urban land Institute parking demand data. Assuming that the mid-day health club demand could be 50% of the evening peak, the health club parking demand could be 42 spaces, for a total site parking demand of 93 spaces. The traffic study concluded that the amount of parking provided by the two projects, which would include approximately 48 spaces on Sheppel No.3, would satisfy on-site parking demands for these projects. The Development Code provides that the total parking requirement for common parking facilities may be reduced to 70% of the required standard if a parking study, prepared by a licensed engineer or architect, can clearly show that the shared uses have different hours of operation and would not conflict in their time of use. The applicants have not proposed such a reduction, and instead have provided on-site parking that meets the standards of the Development Code without such a reduction. The Traffic Study conducted in connection with this project, and previous parking studies conducted in connection with the project proposed in 1988, have supported a finding that the peak hours for the health club and the office building uses are in fact different. Staff believes that the analysis set forth in the traffic study is sound, and that the proposal to provide additional parking spaces on Sheppel No. 3 would provide sufficient parking. No proposal for development of Sheppel No. 3 with a building is proposed at this time. If the Master Plan provision for this site were not changed, and a 7,200 square foot office building were constructed, the Development Code would impose a requirement of 28 parking spaces. Of the 48 spaces provided onSheppel No. 3 as proposed, 35 would be required to meet parking requirements elsewhere in the Plaza. Given the findings of the Traffic Study, it appears likely that that the applicant for any development proposal for Sheppel No. 3 would seek a reduction in parking requirements based on the differences in peak hours. The Planning Commission could review such a request at that time, with the experience of the existing buildings and parking facilities to review. Staff does not, therefore, recommend a change in the Master Plan for the building size proposed for Sheppel No.3. Access Issue: Parcel 6 has access to James Way, and previous planning for the Plaza has assumed that the access from Parcel 6 would serve as an exit, while the existing access on James Way would serve as the entrance to the Plaza. This approach was feasible as long as the only development on the site was the building on Sheppel No.1. Access and circulation issues were minimized as long as only one parcel was developed. With the development of three parcels in the Plaza, staff recommends that the Planning Planning Commission CUP 98-572 Oak Park Health Plaza: Sheppel June 29, 1999 Page 8 Commission review circulation on the site, without assuming that Parcel 6 would eventually provide an exit to James Way. Ingress and egress, parking, and circulation in the Plaza should be designed assuming that no further development in the Plaza will occur. If Parcels 5 or 6 are later developed, the design of the Plaza can be reviewed. Setbacks: A front setback of 3 feet is required. The applicant revised the plans originally submitted to satisfy this requirement. Heiaht Limitation: The maximum height permitted in the H-S District is 35 feet. The applicant indicates the maximum height of the proposed structure is 35 feet. Minimum Lot Size: The minimum lot size for general offices and professional offices is 10,000 square feet. The parcel exceeds the minimum lot size. The parcel exceeds the minimum lot width of 100 feet. Maximum lot coverage is 50%, and the proposed project would result in approximately 25% coverage. General Plan Consistency: The project is located in the Oak Park Acres Planned Development. The General Plan provides for commercial uses on the site, and the project is consistent with the General Plan. Because it is in a PD district, final approval of the project is required by the City Council. Staff Advisorv Committee: The SAC reviewed the project on January 12, 1999. The minutes are attached as Attachment 4. Architectural Review Committee: The Architectural Review Committee reviewed the project plans on March 1, 1999. The ARC approved the project as proposed. The Minutes are attached as Attachment 5. The ARC commented on the landscaping plans as they related to the proposal by Russ Sheppel, CUP 98-572, at the same location. Because the landscaping plans were prepared by the same company, the ARC suggested that a closer integration of landscaping between the two projects might be achieved. The ARC reviewed the signs proposed by the applicant. The ARC indicated that it approved the signs to the extent required by the Community Development Department, and the signs did not require further review by the ARC. Master Plan Revision: Staff recommends that the Master Plan be revised as follows: 1 . The square footage for Sheppel No. 2 should be consistent with the action taken by the Planning Commission in Case No. CUP 98-573. Planning Commission CUP 98-572 Oak Park Health Plaza: Sheppel June 29, 1999 Page 9 2. Parking requirements should be revised as noted above. 3. Building footprints for Sheppel No.2 and 3 should be revised for consistency with project approvals, and grading completed at the site pursuant to the City's grading permit. Approval of this use permit, in effect, serves to modify the prior overall master plan approval. Therefore, an updated Master Plan for the Oak Park Health Plaza has been prepared and is included as Attachment 9 of the CUP 98-573 Staff Report. Environmental Assessment: Staff has conducted an initial study for the project, and has determined that no significant environmental impacts would be created by the project. The Draft Negative declaration, circulated for public review, has been provided to the Planning Commission. The comment period closed on June 17, 1999. Two comments have been received concerning the proposed projects at the site. On January 14, 1999, staff received a telephone call from the office of Beth Hutton, D.D.S., a tenant in the office building constructed on Sheppel No.1. Staff was advised that parking at the site was sometimes a problem. Afternoon parking was identified as a problem, and the caller indicated that some patients find it necessary to park in fire lanes. On June 21, 1999, staff received a telephone call from Mrs. Schoeffler, the operator of the Casa Grande Motel. Ms. Shepler indicated that her concern was the traffic that would be generated by the health club facility. She was especially concerned regarding users who might enter the facilities via the Oak Park Boulevard entrance to the Cas a Grande Motel. She indicated that health club facilities tend to be under- parked, and wished to express her concern that the project be properly planned so that the Casa Grande Motel would not be impacted. Staff does not believe changes are required in the Draft Negative Declaration based on these comments. The mitigation measures included in the Negative Declaration are part of the project conditions, attached as Exhibit A of the Resolution. 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 Times Press Recorder. With the exception of the comments set forth above, no comments have been received as of the date of this staff report. Planning Commission CUP 98-572 Oak Park Health Plaza: Sheppel June 29, 1999 Page 10 * achments: esolution of Approval Ex . 't" A": Conditions of Approval ": Overall Site Plan, Grading Plan, Elevations and Lands an, June 14, 1999 2. Traffic and Park. Study, Penfield & Smith, June 2, 199 3. Minutes of SAC, Jan y 12, 1999 4. Minutes of ARC, March , 999 5. Minutes of Planning Commiss vember 1 7, 1 998 (Pre-Application Screening) 6. Draft Negative Declaration 7. Update letter regarding the S SeDarate Cover Oak Park Health Pia aster Plan, revision approved August Attachment 2 Kennedy staff report). Oak Park th Plaza Master Plan Revision, June 25, 9 wit ennedy Staff Report) Color boards (will be presented at hearing). *WITHOUT A TT ACHMENTS DRAFT ATTACHMENT C ARROYO GRANDE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES June 29, 1999 The Arroyo Grande Planning Commission met in regular session with Chair Greene presiding. Present were Commissioners Costello, Keen, London and Parker. Also in attendance are Interim Community Development Director Henry Engen, Contract Planner Tom Buford and Senior Consultant Engineer Craig Campbell. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of May 18, 1999 were unanimously approved as written with Chair Greene stepping down for the vote. He was not present at the May 18, 1999 meeting. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS -None WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS 1. Memorandum from Kathleen Fryer: Planning Commission Summer Vacation Schedule 2. Letter dated June 21, 1 999 from William Schoeffler, owner of the Casa Grande Inn, regarding the proposed Kennedy Health and Fitness Club. Henry Engen, Interim Community Development Director, introduced Kim Romano, Associate Engineer from Public Works. PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 98-572 APPROVAL TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF AN 11,335 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE BUILDING LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF JAMES WAY AND OAK PARK BOULEVARD. RUSSELL SHEPPEL, APPLICANT. Contract Planner Tom Buford reviewed the staff report dated June 29, 1 999. He reviewed the history of the project and prior reviews before the Commission. He noted that the Planning Commission has two projects before them concerning the development of the Oak Park Health Plaza. The first is the item introduced which is the office building proposal by Russell Sheppel, and the second is the next item on the June 29, 1 999 agenda, which is a project proposed by Kevin Kennedy, Conditional Use Permit 98-573 to construct an 18,925 square foot Health and Fitness Club. He explained that Mr. Kennedy and Mr. Sheppel have been associated on this project site since the 1980's. There has been recognition in the past by the Planning Commission that planning for the entire site made sense in terms of access, drainage, parking and circulation easements. This came about because there had been an initial indication from the applicants that they wanted to have the access for the project from Oak Park Blvd. When it was determined this was not feasible and they would have to have access from James Way, it was decided to adopt a Master Plan for the entire site. The last revision of the Master Plan was in 1996. Mr. Buford summarized the staff report with special attention given to the issues of traffic and parking. He further stated that Mr. Sheppel's and Mr. Kennedy's cases are separate issues and joint action does not need to be taken on both cases. However, many of the aspects in terms of site planning, involve both projects. ~-----~--~- Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Minutes DRAFT June 29, 1999 Page 2 Commissioner London's first concern was that in the staff report it stated that staff recommends that the Planning Commission act on the Use permits without assuming that Parcel 6 would eventually provide an exit onto James Way. In looking at the site map, there is only one way in and he was concerned about people stacking up as they are trying to get in and out of the one driveway. Mr. Buford replied that Staff felt having one ingress and egress would work for the following reasons: 1. The Fire and Police Departments had both taken a look at the project and they were satisfied with the safety requirements on site. 2. Staff had an update of the Traffic Study done to make sure someone from the outside had looked at the project and determined its safety. 3. From a design standpoint, there are design standards for parking lots and parking spaces and these have been satisfied. Commission London asked if it was the guess of staff that the circulation and parking would work for the project? Mr. Buford replied that it was more than a guess. Staff has a lot of respect for Penfield and Smith who did the traffic study as well as Public Works who had looked at the project. Commissioner London asked if a portion of lot 6 could be obtained for a parking easement? Mr. Buford replied that the City did not have the authority to condition a project on an easement over property that is not under control of the applicant. If the applicant proposed this they would be required to show that they had the owner's consent. Commissioner London asked if there had been any discussion between the applicants and the owner of lot 6? Mr. Buford answered that he was not aware of any discussion. Commissioner Parker stated that she assumed that since the owners of the adjacent parcels were not present at the meeting that they had not entered into the agreement of the reciprocal parking? Mr. Buford replied that as far as he knew they had not and that there was no agreement. It had been contemplated that if there was no agreement at the time of approval the City could make that a condition with the applicants. The owners of parcels 5 and 6 would not be a part of any agreement. Mrs. Parker wanted to make sure that she was clear on the existing Master Plan. She stated that she understood that the Master Plan had already been approved Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Minutes DRAFT June 29, 1 999 Page 3 several years ago. So, was she understanding it correctly that the footprint of the proposed building is being increased at this time? Mr. Buford replied that that was correct. Mrs. Parker then asked if the Master Plan were to come back at a later date and another applicant asked for an increase to the footprint of the buildings on the remaining parcels from another Commission could they grant that? Or, once the Master Plan has been approved are changes allowed? Would they be entitled to a 7,200 square foot building whether it complied with the City's established codes or not? Mr. Buford replied that it was clear from the previous Planning Commission minutes and resolutions that this Master Plan was viewed as a planning tool for the site. It did not indicate that there was any entitlement granted with this Master Plan. As the different owners came forward with their projects, they would make their application for the appropriate permits and satisfy the Development Code requirements at the time they make the application. He went on to say that this was not stated specifically on the Master Plan. However, because this is not a Planned Development Permit, which does designate specifics and is a permit, there is no indication that this Master Plan was anything other than a planning tool. To be very clear, Mrs. Parker asked if, at a later date, the size remaining buildings could be changed to meet Development Code standards? Mr. Buford replied that that was true. Commissioner Costello had questions about the parking. He stated that the original staff report from 1 966 stated that the standard parking spaces were 10 feet by 20 feet with compact spaces being 9 feet by 1 8 feet. The revised Master Plan includes spaces that are 9 feet by 1 8 feet. Have the standards for spaces gotten smaller? Craig Campbell, Contract Engineer, replied that they are 9 feet by 18 feet. He has never seen 10 feet by 20 feet spaces allowed since he has been here. Mr. Costello asked if the parking agreements that had been proposed were revocable? Mr. Buford answered that it would be subject to the approval of the Planning staff and this issue had never come up. Staff would intend that these agreements would be irrevocable. Mr. Costello asked what would happen if three years from now someone else bought the property and did not want to be part of the agreement any more? How binding would the agreements be? Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Minutes DRAFT June 29, 1999 Page 4 Mr. Buford replied that it was not intended to be irrevocable. The question that has come up is that, the developer of parcel number 6 would have a parcel that is shown on the Master Plan as having 7,200 square feet of building space and has forty-five parking spaces and this may not be correct. He believes that with this Master Plan that is before the Commission tonight would be a relevant concern. Chair Greene asked if City Staff was aware of any complaint by the Sheffler's, the owner's of the Casa Grande Inn, of any unauthorized use of their parking lot as access to James Way? Mr. Campbell was not aware of any. Chair Greene had some questions about the Resolutions that had been submitted for the Commission's approval. On page one, under Conditional Use Findings, Finding 2 refers to Village Commercial District, is this correct? Mr. 'Buford replied that it was supposed to be Highway Commercial. Mr. Greene asked about Page 6 of Exhibit A, Condition 11 that refers to a soil report. He asked if the soils report that was submitted in the packet was the soils report the Commission should be referring to, or would the applicant have to do another one? Mr. Campbell answered that there was a letter in the Commission packet that updates the soils report and this was adequate to satisfy that Condition. He asked if in the Sheppel Conditions, number 50 and 57 were being deleted? Mr. Buford stated that was correct. Mr. Greene then asked about Condition 58, on page 12 of the Conditions. This was the Condition that talked about reciprocal easements. This Condition stated that the project was to be approved by the City Council on July 13, 1999. He wondered if this date should be left open? Mr. Buford answered that that date should be removed. Mr. Campbell wanted to add that the reciprocal easements applied to drainage, utilities, and so forth. Mr. Greene asked about the Master Plan and stated that there is language on the revised Master Plan showing the changes from the original Master Plan. With respect to the Parcel that Dr. Sheppel wants to develop, this is Parcel 2, AG 95- 108, which Mr. Buford has been referring to as Sheppel 2? The original Master Plan showed a building of 7,200 square feet and now the applicant is proposing to build a building of approximately 11,300 square feet. Then, looking at Parcel 2 AG AI 92-027 that would be the Kennedy Parcel? Again, the original Master Plan Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Minutes DRAFT June 29, 1999 Page 5 designated 16,000 square feet and the new proposal is almost 19,000? If or when the property owner for Sheppel 3 makes an application to develop that parcel, is that person required to go through the Planning Commission and the City Council for approval? Mr. Buford replied that any further development would be required to go through the application process. Mr. Greene asked how the Commission could be assured that any decision tonight by the Commission to approve the Sheppel and Kennedy projects is not some de facto approval of that 7,200 square foot building on Sheppel No.3. Mr. Buford replied that having this stated in the minutes and findings would help. However, the best way is to have this in the Conditions of Approval or as a deed restriction, which is recorded, or, assuming that the Commission asked the applicants and they agreed that this was not an entitlement for Parcel No.3, notice on the Master Plan would be appropriate. Chair Greene opened the Public Hearing. Kim Hatch, Pults and Associates, the representative for Mr. Sheppel spoke to the Commission. He stated that he hopes the Commission would approve the project and recommends approval to the City Council. He felt all the topics that needed to be discussed had been. He stated that the Master Plan was probably the most controversial aspect of this hearing. In answer to one of Commissioner London's questions, the topography of this project make it difficult to plan where the parking and the exits should go. The site access and egress is located to the furthermost point east of the site, so if it is the furthermost it can be located from the corner of James Way and Oak Park. Given the constraints of the site, they have done the best they can do without interfering with someone else's site. He stated that the Traffic Report was favorable to this as well as the levels of service. He explained that the Parcels five 5 and 6 were not being changed at all. The three sites that are the subject of this discussion have not been revised to any extent. He discussed why the applicants had designed the parking as they had. He stated that the new parking plan: gives landscaping that was not part of the original plan; handicapped parking; allows for the topography of the site; and allows better access to the building. The parking is acceptable to the Fire and Public Works departments, as is the drainage. Mr. Hatch finished by saying that he was in agreement with the Staff Report. He had a change in the Staff Report on page two; the acreage should read 3.74 versus 9.74. He would like the words "James Way and Oak Park intersection " added to Condition No. 45. It was his understanding that they were required to contribute to this intersection only. --~---- Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Minutes DRAFT June 29, 1 999 Page 6 Commissioner Costello stated that his only concern was the parking agreement and his desire to make sure it was not revocable. He understood that the Commission had had a recent bad experience with this kind of easement agreement. Mr. Campbell answered that the City has done Grant Deeds for easements. He felt there should not be a problem if the Deeds are written carefully and then reviewed by the City Attorney. Commissioner Keen stated that the City Council had made a' determination that there would be no compact parking spaces allowed in the City. Therefore, the parking spaces shown are for any vehicle. Commissioner London asked if anyone had had any contact with the owner of Lot No.6? Mr. Hatch replied that they had not had any contact with the owner. Commissioner London then asked if there was a change of grade between the parcel that Mr. Kennedy was building on the Lot No.6? Mr. Hatch answered that he was not sure what the difference of grade was. However, with the grading that will be done it will bring the two lots closer in grade. Commissioner London asked why no contact had been made with the property owner? Mr. Hatch replied that they did not see it necessary for the development of their site to contact the owner. They did not feel they had made major revisions to the Master Plan beyond increasing the size of the buildings. Furthermore, the owners have been notified through the public hearing noticing process. They have not come forward to ask the applicant or the City any questions. Chair Greene stated that the colors for the new building were a little different than the existing, building. He asked Mr. Hatch why those colors had been chosen? He also asked if the buildings were architecturally similar? Mr. Hatch explained that the colors were a little darker. He said that the colors were a little light, they were dated and showed dirt easier. The buildings were similar by volumes, by the actual shapes and location in the site. This buildi~g is a little more refined. Mr. Greene asked if Mr. Sheppel, the applicant, and also the owner of the adjacent Parcel No.3, had any development plans for that parcel? Mr. Hatch explained that Mr. Sheppel was aware of the "risk" and problems with Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Minutes DRAFT June 29, 1999 Page 7 the square footage of that site. He has no plans in the immediate future for development. Carol Florence, Oasis Landscaping, landscape architect for the projects, spoke to the Commission and explained the landscape design to them. She told the Commission that she had designed the projects to go together. Commissioner London asked if the vegetation on Parcel No.3 would stay green after it was planted? Was there going to be an irrigation system of that Parcel? Chair Greene asked if language could be added to Condition No. 14 that would require an irrigation system be installed? Chair Greene closed the Public Hearing. Commissioner Keene was concerned about the entrance off James Way. He felt it was too difficult to get in and out of and presented a hazard. The driving lane east bound on James Way is right against the curb, and if someone is driving out of the driveway it is impossible to turn into it. The fire hydrant is too close. He proposed the following: 1. Move the fire hydrant. 3. Install a radius curb. The driveway has to be modified to make the ingress and egress work. He had spoken to the Fire Chief and he was told it would not be a problem to move the fire hydrant. Mr. Keene questioned the Conditions Nos. 1 6 and 20. The language was contradictory about the times construction was allowed. He was concerned about the times because of the motel in such close proximity and the church if construction was allowed on Sunday. He proposed eliminating one of the conditions. He had a concern with the parking issue and the fact that the applicant had not asked for a 30% reduction in parking because of different times and types of use. His concern was that when the next applicant came in they would ask for the 30% reduction. Finally, Mr. Keene suggested that if the motel has a problem with people driving through the easement to their motel, which is there for a fire access, he suggested they put in a "break down" fire barrier. Addressing what Mr. Keene had suggested concerning Conditions 16 and 20, Mr. Buford said Condition No. 20 should be deleted. The time in Condition No. 16 will be changed to 7:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. The words "Noise generating" will be eliminated from the Condition. Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Minutes DRAFT June 29, 1999 Page 8 Commissioner Parker had a question concerning the EIR. She asked if Page 8, No. e) had to be marked? Mr. Buford replied that it should be marked and it will be changed. Mrs. Parker stated that she was concerned about the combined parking easements that were proposed. She stated that in the Development Code standards for Common Parking Facilities, page 359, Section 9-12.050 it stated "Common parking facilities may be provided in lieu of individual requirements if the total number of parking spaces is the sum of the requirements for individual uses and the parking facilities are located within 200 ft. of the associated use." It was her understanding that since the buildings do not themselves provide the required spaces, the Commission may consider this section. This would mean that the Kennedy facility combined with the three (3) Sheppel facilities would require a total shared parking lot of 172 spaces. The four (4) facilities are offering is a combined total of 140 spaces, which means they are 32 spaces short.. The Development Code also says: "The total parking requirement may be reduced to 70% of the required standard, if a parking study, prepared by a licensed engineer or architect, can clearly show that the shared uses have different hours of operation and would not conflict in their time of use." The draft Negative Declaration uses a duration of peak hours for Kennedy Nautilus Center as from 6 p.m. to 7 p.m. However, at the November 17, 1998 Planning Commission meeting, Mr. Hamrick, representing Kevin Kennedy, stated that the peak hours for use of the club were from 4:30 p.m. to 7 p.m. Since offices usually close around 6 p.m., this leaves a cross over time of about 2 to 2 /12 hours. Since our Development Code specifically requires that to earn the 30% reduction in shared parking, "it must clearly show that the shared uses have different hours of operation and would not conflict in their time of use." This development does not conform. She further stated that the Negative Declaration would need to be redrafted to conform to the accurate information. As for the peak time of use for the Kennedy Health Club, the Negative Declaration cites the Urban land Institute parking demand data. According to this data, at non- peak hours, the office parking demand would be approximately 51 spaces or 81 % of its peak, dropping off to 23% of office peak, to 13, but only after 6 p.m. This would mean that during the hours of 4:30 and 6:00 p.m., the center would need a combined total of 166 spaces. This covers all three (3) buildings including the future building of 7,200 square feet. The Development Codes calls for a combined shared total of 172 parking spaces, even taking into consideration peak and off-peak shared spaces, 166 parking spaces are required according to the data provided by the Urban Land Institute. This development offers 140, not nearly enough for the four (4) buildings to share. Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Minutes DRAFT June 29, 1 999 Page 9 According to a letter from the current tenant in Sheppel Building 1, there is already inadequate parking for afternoon hours, forcing patients to park in the fire lane. Commissioner Parker stated that to approve a further deficiency in parking would be unsafe and not competent. The only way she can see that this would work with the shortfall of 26 to 32 spaces, is to bring the Sheppel No. 3 building project in with less square footage. She further stated that she could not find it possible to approve the sharing of parking sites on Development Sites five (5) ,and six (6) which are owned by another part. Mrs. Parker stated that it was difficult to make decisions based on what might happen instead of based on current studies. It seems to her, that in the future if a study was made and then building 3 was brought before the Commission, the applicant could use the study between the times of actual use and what the third building would require. Mrs. Parker stated she was concerned with leaving the Parcel 3 building at 7,200 square feet. She had worked out the numbers and said that considering each space to be 9 feet by 1 8 feet with 24 feet between each, two spaces would work out to be 540 square feet. For each 1,000 square feet taken off the building footprint, four less spaces are needed and four spaces are also gained by the available square feet. This means that the future building could be 5,200 square feet. She would like to propose language to state that the building size, shown on the Master Plan as 7,200 square feet, is limited to 5,200 square feet. Commissioner Costello's question was, after reading Condition No.4, and finding that parking is inadequate, what recourse does the City have? Mr. Buford stated that it would not be in the applicant's best interest to build a project that doesn't work. He feels that the applicants are honest people and the intention of both parties has been to fully park the site. In fact, they are fully parked with regard to the Development Code. The Commissions best protection is to determine that the project is adequately parked. Mr. Buford explained to the Commission that Mr. Kennedy has a great deal of experience in running Health Clubs. In 1988 he had a project approved by the Planning Commission. At that time a Traffic Study was done by Garing, Taylor and Associates and he gave very concrete data to them at that time. Penfield and Smith updated the study just recently and staff is confident that the numbers are correct. . Commissioner London asked if the double striping could be a Condition as well as making sure that Parcel No.3 had an irrigation system? Craig Campbell stated that both things could be written into the Conditions of Approval. Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Minutes DRAFT June 29, 1999 Page 1 0 Chair Greene stated that the Architecture Review Committee had reviewed the designs and approved them. He felt the new design was very good and that the building would be an asset to the Community. His concerns were related to the driveway. He asked if language could be added to the Conditions of Approval that would address Mr. Keen's concern with the driveway. Mr. Campbell suggested the following language be added to the Conditions of Approval: "The driveway entrance should be constructed with curb returns, concrete cross gutter and spandrels. The existing fire hydrant shall be relocated. " Chair Greene also had a concern about parking. He would like some language added to the Master Plan and the Conditions of Approval to make sure that the Commission was not approving the 7,200 square foot building on Parcel No.3. Mr. Buford stated that the Master Plan should be revised to reflect the changes the Commission wanted. The notes on the Master Plan should include a provision that reads: "The revised Master Plan is a planning tool and is not an entitlement for future development. Future proposed buildings on Parcel 3 AG 95-108 and Parcel A, AG 79--38 must receive required review and approvals and must satisfy parking and other Development Code requirements then in effect. Chair Greene suggested that this be added to the Conditional Use Permit findings as Finding No.6. Commissioner Parker had a comment on the Negative Declaration that was to be approved. . She stated that on page 15 the information was incorrect. Or, the Planning Commission minutes of November 1 7, 1 998 were incorrect because the times of peak hours at the Health Club from the two documents do not coincide. Mr. Buford explained that the hours of use for Kennedy Health Club start to build up at 4:30 p.m. and actually peak at 6:00 p.m. Therefore the highest use at the Health Club is 6:00 p.m. when the parking for the office building is lower. The language in the Negative Declaration was changed to read: "Health Club parking requirements begin increasing significantly at 4:30 p.m. and peak between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m." Commissioner Keene moved that the Planning Commission approve Resolution No. 99-1699 of the Planning Commission of the City of Arroyo Grande recommending that the City Council adopt a Negative Declaration and approve Conditional Use Permit Case No. 98-572, applied for by Russell Sheppel located at Oak Park Boulevard and James Way including Attachment A and the following changes of the Planning Commission: 1. Condition of Approval #58 - omit date of July 13, 1999 2. Add the following language as No. 6 in the Conditions of Approval findings: "The revised Master Plan is a planning tool and is not an ~__m Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Minutes DRAFT June 29, 1999 Page 11 entitlement for future development. Future proposed buildings on Parcel 3 AG 95-108 and Parcel A, AG 79--38 must receive required review and approvals and must satisfy parking and other Development Code requirements then in effect. " 3. Delete Conditions of Approval Nos. 50 and 57 4. Add James Way and Oak Park intersection to Condition of Approval No. 45 5. Master Plan to be revised to reflect the language from Conditions of Approval findings: "The revised Master Plan is a planning tool and is not an entitlement for future development. Future proposed buildings on Parcel 3 AG 95-108 and Parcel A, AG 79--38 must receive required review and approvals and must satisfy parking and other Development Code requirements then in effect. " 6. Condition of Approval No. 14 to include the following language: "This vegetation shall be irrigated and maintained on a regular basis." 7. A new Condition of Approval shall be added that states: "The driveway entrance should be constructed with curb returns, concrete cross gutter and spandrels. The existing fire hydrant shall be relocated if the Public Works Department deems it necessary." 8. Condition of Approval No. 16 to be modified with the words "Noise generative" removed and the time changed to 7:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m." 9. The Negative Declaration was modified on Page 14 to read: " Health Club parking requirements begin increasing significantly at 4:30 p.m. and peaks between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m." 10. Check box 7.e, on Page 8 of the Negative Declaration shall be checked. 11. A new Condition shall be added to the Conditions of approval that will state that "Double striping would be required between parking spaces. " Commissioner London seconded the motion. There being no further comments, the following action was taken: RESOLUTION NO. 99-1699 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 98-572, APPLIED FOR BY RUSSELL SHEPPEL, AT OAK PARK BOULEVARD AND JAMES WAY. AYES: Commissioners Costello, Keen, London, Parker and Chair Greene NOES: None ABSENT: None Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Minutes DRAFT June 29, 1999 Page 1 2 The foregoing resolution was adopted this 29th day of June, 1998. Chair Greene called for a 10 minute recess. PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 98-573 APPROVAL TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF AN 18,925 SQUARE FOOT HEALTH CLUB FACILITY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF JAMES WAY AND OAK PARK BOULEVARD. KEVIN KENNEDY, APPLICANT. Contract Planner, Tom Buford, presented the Staff Report for the project. He explained that 'the planning for this project, although separate from the Sheppel Conditional Use Permit 98-572, was done in tandem with that project. Mr. Buford explained that the Conditions for the Kennedy CUP 98-573 were not exactly the same as the Sheppel CUP 98-572, however they are very similar. Based on the Commissions discussion and subsequent changes to the Sheppel Conditions of Approval, Mr. Buford had the following changes that should be made to the Conditions of Approval for the Kennedy CUP 98-573: 1 . Delete Conditions of Approval 51 and 58. 2. Change Condition of Approval No. 45 to indicate that the Opticom device the applicant needs to pay for is at the Oak Park Boulevard and James Way intersection. 3. Include the language on the Master Plan. 4. Add a finding on the Resolution regarding the same. 5. Add to Condition of Approval # 1 4 the language for irrigation and landscaping. 6. Add the Condition for curb and moving hydrant. 7. Delete Condition of Approval No. 20 and change Condition No. 16 by eliminating the words IINoise generating. II 8. Check box 7.e on Page 8 of the Mitigated Negative Declaration. 9. Change the Mitigated Negative Declaration on page 1 5 to include the following language: "Health Club parking requirements begin increasing significantly at 4:30 p.m. and peaks between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. II 10. Add a Condition to the Conditions of Approval to require double striped parking in the parking lots. Chair Greene opened the Public Hearing. Warren Hamrick, Hamrick Associates, representing Kevin Kennedy, addressed the Commission. Mr. Hamrick stated that he had read the Staff Report and had some questions for Staff. He asked if, in Condition No. 45, they were responsible for one intersection or two? It wasn't clear from the wording in the Condition. Mr. Campbell replied that he would have to look at the SAC minutes to determine Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Minutes DRAFT June 29, 1999 Page 1 3 exactly what was intended. Mr. Hamrick asked if the changes made to Condition No. 14, the irrigation and landscaping on the adjacent undeveloped parcel, applied to the Kennedy project as well? Mr. Buford replied that it would be best to refer that question to the Planning Commission for their decision. Mr. Campbell told the applicant that the SAC minutes stated the Opticom device was for the intersection of Oak Park Boulevard and James Way only. Mr. Hamrick questioned Condition No. 50 and asked if the landscaping needed to be done by a registered Engineer. He also questioned Condition No. 57 concerning the public utilities easement. He wondered if that was in addition to the six-foot easement that was already there? In Condition No. 69, talking about the fees for all City departments, under Item J, street tree planting fees, will they be charged for those? He also wondered, in connection to Condition No. 69, Item M, what Strong Motion Instrumentation was? Mr. Campbell stated that the landscaping does not need to be done by a registered engineer; the six foot easement was the one shown on the map; they would not be charged a fee for trees that were already there; and Strong Motion Instrumentation was a building code that deals with earthquakes. Commissioner London asked what the anticipated number of members would be at the Health Club? Mr. Hamrick stated that he would let Mr. Kennedy answer that question. Also, to address Mr. London's question about the owner of the neighboring parcel, the owner has been contacted and they were not interested in taking part in this project at all. Commissioner Keen commented that since Mr. Kennedy was sharing the Sheppel parking, he felt Mr. Kennedy should not worry about sharing the planting, maintenance and irrigation of the neighboring parcel. Chair Greene asked what the screening between the parking lot and the pool was made out of? Mr. Hamrick stated that it will be a retaining wall about two feet above the pool deck and then an open ornamental iron work above the retaining wall covered with landscaping material. Kevin Kennedy, Kennedy Health Club, told the Commission that his history with this property went back about 1 3 years when he first purchased the property. Atone time they had the property approved and the permits pulled, however because of a moratorium on building in this area because of the Oak Park overpass, they did not ~._--~----~.. Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Minutes DRAFT June 29, 1999 Page 1 4 build at that time. He explained that it had been a long and frustrating battle to get this project up and going. He told the Commission that he was concerned about having to move the fire hydrant. Commissioner Parker again expressed her concern about the parking issue stating that she hoped this did not give the applicant's a false sense of security by having the parking easements and hoped they did not have a problem with this. She felt that she had a good understanding concerning the peak time of operation hours. Commissioner Costello asked if Mr. Kennedy would be interested in expanding his business on to Lot 6? Mr. Kennedy replied that he was interested in that and had contacted the owners of the other properties. Chair Greene asked Mr. Campbell to comment on Mr. Kennedy's comment concerning moving the fire hydrant. Just because it was made a Condition, did it mean that it has to be moved? Or, could the Public Works use their discretion and delete this Condition if they found out it did not have to be moved? Mr. Campbell replied that if Public Works found the hydrant did not have to be moved they would delete this as a Condition. Chair Greene explained to the applicant that easier access to their project would benefit them in the long run. Mr. Hatch spoke to the Commission again and .asked if the driveway and fire hydrant issues would be reviewed by Public Works and they would make the determination if these things needed to be addressed? Mr. Campbell replied that the Condition is directed towards using corporate turns to the driveway entrance as opposed to a driveway apron. He stated that he supports this change which does take some added width. He is not sure if the fire hydrant needs to be moved. If it did not need to be removed, would it be determined that the applicants had met that Condition. Commissioner Keen spoke again to the problem of the entry to the driveway and stated that he felt very strongly that it needed to be changed. Chair Greene closed the Public Hearing. Commissioner London stated that he likes the project and felt that it would look good in this area. He was concerned about the cars stacking up at the entry and wanted to see the changes made to the driveway. Commissioner Costello stated simply that he echoed Mr. London's comments. Arroyo Grande Planning Commission Minutes DRAFT June 29, 1999 Page 1 5 Commissioner Keen wanted it put in the minutes that the access to the motel was their problem to resolve. He also felt this was a very good project. Commissioner Parker stated that she was in favor of the project. She was very glad to see a pool going into the area. Chair Greene stated that Mr. Hamrick questioned the language in Condition No. 50 concerning the landscaping and irrigation language. He asked if that could be deleted? Mr. Buford replied that it would be deleted. Chair Greene stated that with regard to the fire hydrant, he feels that by enhancing the entrance and making it user friendly, it will be a benefit to all owners and tenants. Commissioner Keen moved to adopt the following Resolution with Attachment A and modifications: RESOLUTION NO. 99-1700 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 98-573, APPLIED FOR BY KEVIN KENNEDY, AT OAK PARK BOULEVARD AND JAMES WAY. Seconded by Commissioner Costello and with the following roll call to wit: AYES: Commissioners Costello, Keen, London, Parker and Chair Greene NOES: None ABSENT: None The foregoing resolution was adopted this 29TH day of June 1998. -~- "'.,---..---------- ATTACHMENT D ST AFF ADVISORY COMMITTEE - CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE Meeting Notes of January 1 2, 1 999 STAFF ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERS Community Development Department - Jim Hamilton and Tom Buford Fire Department - Absent Chief Building Official - Larry Schmidt Police Department - Dan Wolfing Public Works Department - Craig Campbell Parks and Recreation Department - Dan Hernandez I. Oral Communications - None. II. Projects A. 1. Applicant: Russell Sheppel 2. Representative: Pults and Associates 3. Case Number: Conditional Use Permit 98-573 4. Proposal: The Applicant IS proposing construction of an 11,335 sq. ft. office building at the corner of Oak Park BI.vd and James Way. 5. Location: Oak Park Blvd. and James Way Contract Planner Tom Buford gave a brief history of the project site. Craig Campbell, Public Works, asked if there would be parking on Parcel 3 of the Master Plan to meet the parking requirements? Mr. Hatch stated that the project would use Parcel 3 for parking. He also explained that there has been some grading done on the 2nd site and there is a five-foot drop off to that site. Jim Hamilton, Community Development, suggested that a deed restriction be placed on parcel 3 for the floor area, with the optimum goal being that for the three (3) developed parcels there would be adequate parking developed on site at the time they opened. Mr. Campbell stated that each application needed to show the total parking for the development existing, plus the total being developed. He would like to know what the total building is and see in writing what the parking actually is. The Committee and Mr. Hatch discussed the different issues concerning the numb~r of parking spaces that would potentially be needed when all parcels are built out. It was decided that the remaining parcels would be "encumbered" accordingly so there would not be a problem in the future. ~-------- SAC Meeting Notes DRAFT January 12, 1999, 1999 Page 2 of 6 Mr. Hamilton asked what numbers Mr. Hatch used for Parcel B when figuring the parking? Mr. Hatch replied that it was 1 to 300. Mr. Hamilton stated that consideration was being taken of the other two parcels by requiring the future access to the parcels. The parcels cannot be completely "divorced" from each other. Mr. Buford suggested that a restriction on lot number 3 to clearly indicate to any further property owners that parking on that site has been allocated and there is a limit on the number of square feet that can be built on that parcel. It was discussed that the Kennedy project was underparked on their project without the use of shared parking. Community Development sees the following as issues: 1. Traffic generation from the site 2. Access 3. Circulation on site 4. Parking Mr. Buford asked if a new traffic study needed to be done to an.swer the questions on the preceding issues, and if so, how much of a study is needed? Mr. Hamilton stated that the Community Development Department would issue an RFP for the traffic study. Warren Hamrick, representative for Kevin Kennedy, joined the meeting. Mr. Campbell asked for an application for the preliminary grading and a title report. He also asked that the plans show the existing easements, existing and proposed utilities, including the common fire lines. Larry Schmidt reminded the applicants that they would need an archeological report before they could get their building permits. He also asked that they show the location of the fire hydrant. Mr. Buford asked where the drainage would be? Mr. Hatch explained the drainage would be down the driveway into the creek. B. 1. Applicant: Kevin Kennedy 2. Representative: Warren Hamrick, Hamrick Associates 3. Case Number: Conditional Use Permit No. 98-573 4. Proposal: Construction of an 18,925-sq. ft. health club and fitness center 5. Location: Oak Park Blvd. and James Way SAC Meeting Notes DRAFT January 12, 1999, 1999 Page 3 of 6 Mr. Buford explained that the some of the same issues that existed for the Sheppel project existed for this one: 1. Access 2. Traffic generation 3. Circulation He explained to Mr. Hamrick that the Committee had discussed planning the site as a whole for parking and circulation. He told Mr. Hamrick that they had discussed possibly limiting through deed restriction Parcel 3, either in terms of square footage or terms of notice that there is parking committed on site to other parcels. Mr. Buford further explained that the Kennedy project does not have adequate parking on their site. If a parking reduction is asked for, Mr. Hamrick will have to have documentation to show that they do have adequate parking when the project goes to . the Planning Commission. Mr. Hamilton explained the parking requirements to Mr. Hamrick and the need to update the Traffic Study. Mr. Hamrick stated that, based on direction from the Planning Commission, he had added more landscaping. Because of this he had reduced the parking by 2 spaces. He stated that 61 spaces are provided within the boundaries of his site. With regards to the Traffic Study, Mr. Hamrick stated that, since one had already been done, would it be possible just to update it? The developers discussed splitting the cost of the study SO/50. Mr. Campbell asked Mr. Hamrick to provide: 1. A Preliminary Grading and Drainage Plan 2. A Title Report 3. Existing and proposed utilities including common fire lines on the Plans Mr. Campbell asked how much traffic there was at the Health Club on Sunday morning? There was discussion about lining up the driveway with the driveway of the church across James Way. Larry Schmidt, Building and Fire had the following issues: 1. All buildings must be sprinkled and have alarm systems. 2. County Health Department approval is required for Swimming Pool. 3. Include occupancy classifications of rooms and provide separations. 4. Provide archeological report with building permit submittal. 5. There should be a mutual agreement with Sheppel for an opticom device at Oak Park and James way. Dan Wolfing, Police Department, asked what the hours of operation would be and if members would have access after hours? His concerns were: SAC Meeting Notes DRAFT January 12, 1999, 1999 Page 4 of 6 1. Adequate lighting around the entire building. 2. Recommends an alarm system. --- . . . Architectural Review Committee Notes ATTACHMENT E ~ March 1, 1999 Page 4 of 5 ""'.'1-'\' . C. 1. Applicant: Kevin Kennedy 2. Representative: Warren Hamrick 3. Case Number: Conditional Use Permit 98-573 4. Proposal: The Applicant is proposing construction of an 18,925-sq. ft. health club and fitness center and related signs. 5. Location: Oak Park Blvd. and James Way Community Development Director reminded the Committee that when this project came before them as a Pre-Application there were several issues they had been concerned with at the time. This issues were: 1. Bulk and scale of the building. 2. Addition of some landscaping to separate building from parking lot and the blank wall along James Way. 3. Use of different of color to enhance the articulation of the building. 4. Use of detailing around the base of the building. After the last meeting Mr. Hamrick has the project site surveyed and was able to put in more landscaping by removing two parking spaces. The reason he did this was because he did have the parking spaces needed for the project. Mr. Hoag asked if the Pine trees were to be taken out and more Palm trees will be put in? Mr. Hamrick said that the Pine trees would be replaced. With regard to signage, Mr. Hamrick stated that the only signage would be on the building. There will be two signs that will be in a "back-lit" box. The north elevation (James Way elevation) of the building will be broken up with trellis and plants until the landscaping is mature. There will be three (3) ornamental pear trees along that wall. Mr. Hamrick explained to the Committee that the actual colors might vary from the ones shown on the color board. He told them that when he builds a building he will paint a large area to make sure the color is correct. Chair Hoag told Mr. Hamrick that the Committee has asked builders to do that before and then the Committee can go to the site and inspect it to see if the color "works". The Committee liked the colors that were shown, but wanted to make sure they blended in with the other buildings neighboring it. Mr. Smith asked what kind of metal was being used for the sunshade. Mr. Hamrick said it was galvanized and will be colored a grayish blue. Chair Hoag liked the colors that have been used. J 4 Architectural Review Committee Notes DRAFT March 1, 1999 Page 5 of 5 Mr. Smith asked how the mechanical equipment on the roof would be screened. Mr. Hamrick replied that they would use parapets to do this. Because there was some comment from the residents living at the nearby Condo tract Mr. Hamrick had gone there, both during the day and night, to see if the project could be seen from the Condos. He said that at nighttime the lights from the project could be seen through the trees but during the day he did not feel it would be a real impact on them. The Committee did not feel that this project would impact people at the tract. Further the Committee stated that they liked the project and appreciated that the applicant had made the changes the ARC had suggested at the pre-application hearing. Mr. Ohler moved that the Committee recommend the project be accepted as presented. Mr. Smith seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously. The Committee briefly discussed the Planned Sign Program for this project. Mr. Hamilton explained that this might only need to be an Administrative Sign Permit because of the size of the signs they were proposing. The Committee agreed that if the signs remained the way they were presented at today's meeting, they (the signs) were acceptable and they Committee would not need to see them again. Mr. Hamilton asked the Committee if they would be willing to meet a second time in March. There are 4 projects that need to come before the ARC, including one involving the Quarterdeck Restaurant which Mr. Smith will have to step down for. The Committee agreed to meet on March 22, 1999. The meeting was adjourned at 4:00 p.m. . ATTACHMENT F CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE INITIAL STUDY AND DRAFT NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROJECT TITLE: Sheppel Office Building Project, Case No. CUP 98-572 LEAD AGENCY NAME & ADDRESS: City of Arroyo Grande Community Development Department 214 E. Branch Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: Tom Buford, Contract Planner (805) 786-4500 PROJECT LOCATION: Southeast comer of Oak Park Boulevard and James Way 880 Oak Park Boulevard PROJECT SPONSOR & ADDRESS: Russ Sheppel 930 Camille Lane Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Planned Development (PD) ZONING: Planned Development (PD) PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Proposed construction of a 11,335 square foot professional office building, with 45 parking spaces PERMIT APPLICATION AND ANY OTHER PERMITS: Conditional Use Permit ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS SHEPPEL OFFICE BUILDING PROJECT CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING: The project site is located in the Oak Park Health Plaza, a 3.74 acre site located at the southeast corner of James Way and Oak Park Boulevard in Arroyo Grande. The Plaza is currently improved with one office building and a parking lot. A portion of the site has been graded for future improvements. The project site is approximately 24,982 square feet and is undeveloped. The site has previously been graded and relatively flat. The site does not contain any substantial vegetation. The proposed project is not located in an area or near an identified cultural resource site. The project site has been graded and leveled, and it is likely that any cultural resources present on the site have been covered or destroyed. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposed project would construct an office building on a parcel located at the southeast corner of Oak Park Boulevard and James Way in the City of Arroyo Grande. The project parcel comprises 24,982 square feet. The office building would have a total of 11,335 square feet. The project would provide 45 parking spaces, some of which would be located on a separate parcel under common ownership, using a reciprocal parking easement. Primary access would be via the parking lot located on the east side of the building. Access would also be available from the sidewalk on Oak Park Boulevard. No vehicle access would be available on Oak Park Boulevard. The only vehicular access would be via the existing driveway on James Way. Landscaping would be installed as part of the project. The applicant would install 45 parking spaces, including two handicapped spaces. A planned sign program would be implemented at the site upon project completion. The project parcel is subject to reciprocal access, drainage and parking easements with other parcels on the southeast corner of James Way and Oak Park Boulevard (Kennedy Club Fitness). CHECKLIST AND ANALYSIS Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant, No Impact Incorooration Impact Impact I. AESTHETICS - Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 0 0 ~ 0 Environmental Checklist 2 City of Arroyo Grande Sheppel Office Building; Case No. CUP 98-572 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, historic buildings and scenic corridors? D D l8I D c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? D D l8I D d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect clay or nighttime views in the area? D D l8I D DISCUSSION: The proposed facility would occupy a parcel that is currently vacant, and graded for development. Zoning for the parcel is consistent with the proposed use, with the approval of a conditional use permit. Design and materials have been reviewed by the City's Architectural Review Committee, which has approved the design and recommended the project for approval. Design of the structure would be compatible with the existing office building on an adjacent parcel under common ownership, and a proposed health club on a parcel with frontage on James Way (Kennedy Club Fitness). Landscaping for the project would be coordinated with landscaping existing on site, and landscaping proposed for the health club. The proposed building would be located within a line of sight from condominiums to the south of the project site. An existing office building immediately adjacent to the site for the proposed facility occupies a portion of the field of view from the condominium development, and the addition of the proposed building would not create a significant impact. II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? D D D l8I b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? D D D l8I c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? D D D l8I DISCUSSION: The project site is zoned for commercial use, and has been graded for building pads. No agricultural activity occurs on the project site, not would any agricultural activity be affected by the project. Environmental Checklist 3 City of Arroyo Grande Sheppel Office Building; Case No. CUP 98-572 - - -- ------ ENVIRONMENTALCHECKL~T m. AIR QUALITY: Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? D D ~ D b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air q~lity violation? D ~ D D c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? D D ~ D d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? D D D ~ e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? D D D D DISCUSSION: Construction activities would generate dust, which could cause potentially significant environmental impacts. Operation of the project would generate vehicle trips, and this is an additional environmental concern. In San Luis Obispo County, ozone and PMlO are the pollutants of primary concern, since exceedances of state health-based standards for those are experienced in portions the county in most years. For this reason San Luis Obispo county is considered to be in non-attainment of the state standards for both ozone and PMlO. In 1998 the state ozone standard was exceeded on 25 days in Paso Robles and on two days in Atascadero. The federal eight-hour standard for ozone was exceeded on 16 days at Paso Robles and one day at Atascadero. No other part of the county experienced ozone exceedances. Countywide exceedances of the state PMlO standard of 50 ug/m 3 occurred on 15 out of 60 different sample days in 1998, down from 17 different violation days in 1997. Paso Robles recorded one day ofPMlO exceedance in 1998. All other PMlO exceedances occurred near the coast on the Nipomo Mesa. There were no exceedances ofthe national air quality standard for PM 10 in the county in 1998. PMlO is also of continuing concern due to its presence in levels exceeding the state standards on a regular basis. The major sources of PMlO include mineral quarries, grading, demolition, agricultural tilling, road dust and vehicle exhaust. Grading and construction of the project would occur over a period of months. Short-term impacts related to dust generation from site preparation and grading could result in dust generation that could affect adjacent properties. Conditions placed on the project would reduce short-term dust generation during construction of the project to less than significant levels. See Mitigation Measures 1 and 2. A traffic study was conducted in connection with the project, and the proposed construction of an office building on an adjacent parcel. The project is expected to generate 124 daily trips. Air quality impacts Environmental Checklist 4 City of Arroyo Grande Sheppel Office Building; Case No. CUP 98-572 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST from the project operation would not exceed the applicable thresholds, and no significant air quality impact would be present. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special- status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? D D D ~ b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? D D D ~ c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defmed by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? D D D ~ d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? D D D ~ e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? D D D ~ f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? D D D ~ DISCUSSION: The project is proposed within an urbanized area, where fonner biotic habitat and natural vegetation has been replaced with wildlife that have adapted to the urban setting and with ornamental, non-native vegetation. Therefore, the project would not result in significant impacts to biotic resources. Because of the existing uses on the site and its history of development, no unique, rare or endangered species are expected to be present. Therefore, the project would not result in significant impacts to biotic resources. Environmental Checklist 5 City of Arroyo Grande Sheppel Office Building; Case No. CUP 98-572 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST V. CULTURAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in ~ l5064.5? D D D ~ b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a unique archaeological resource pursuant to ~ l5064.5? D ~ D D c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of fonnal cemeteries? D D D ~ DISCUSSION: The proposed project is not located in an area that has been identified as a known site for cultural resources. The project site has been graded and leveled for development, and it is likely that any cultural resources present on the site have been covered or destroyed. The Arroyo Grande area was occupied for the previous 9,000 years by indigenous peoples, however, and the possibility exists that cultural resources may be encountered during the construction process. If that occurs, development activities at the site should cease until a qualified archaeologist has been employed to view and assess the discover, and prepare a mitigation plan. See Mitigation Measure 3. VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS -- Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk ofloss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. D ~ D D ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? D ~ D D iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? D D ~ D iv) Landslides? D D D ~ b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? D ~ D D c) Be located on geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? D D D ~ Environmental Checklist 6 City of Arroyo Grande Sheppel Office Building; Case No. CUP 98-572 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B ofthe Unifonn Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? D D D ~ DISCUSSION: Other than standard construction grading and necessary design-specified soil compaction, the proposed project would not involve any substantial topographical changes. Project-related construction activities would not result in major soil displacement, compaction, or overcovering. Impacts with regard to geologic hazards are considered potentially significant if the proposed development activity, including any proposed mitigation measures, could result in substantially increased erosion, landslides, soil creep, mudslides or unstable slopes. In addition, impacts are considered significant when people or structures would be exposed to major geologic hazards upon implementation of the project. Impacts related to geology have the potential to be significant if the proposed project involves any of the following characteristics: (1) Allor any part of the project site is located on land having substantial geologic constraints, including parcels located near active faults or underlain by rock types associated with compressible/collapsible soils or susceptible to landslides or severe erosion (2) The project results in potentially hazardous geologic conditions, e.g., construction of cut slopes exceeding a grade of 1.5 horizontal to 1 vertical. (3) The project proposed construction of a cut slope over 15 feet in height measured ITom the lowest finished grade. (4) The project is located on slopes exceeding 20% grade. The project site has been the subject of previous grading activities, and a soils report has been submitted for adjacent properties. Mitigation Measure 4 would require the preparation of a soils report discussing existing site conditions, and would reduce the impact of soils-related impacts to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measure 5 would require that any structure be designed to the earthquake standards of the Uniform Building Code Seismic Zone 4. Impacts ITom geologic conditions would be reduced to less than significant levels. See Mitigation Measures 4 and 5. Standard erosion control measures would address on-site construction period erosion by wind or water. Long-term erosion potential would be addressed through installation of landscaping 'and stonn drainage facilities, both of which would be designed to meet applicable regulations. The mitigation measures set forth below would, in addition, minimize the possibility that rainwater or other run-off ITom the project site would impact local drainages, or create significant impacts ITom erosion of the site. See Mitigation Measures 6, 7, and 8. With implementation of the listed mitigation measures, impacts in the area of geology and soils would be less than significant. Environmental Checklist 7 City of A"oyo Grande Sheppel Office Building; Case No. CUP 98-572 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST VB. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS -- Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? D D D ~ b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? D D D ~ c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? D D D ~ d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? D D D ~ e) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? D D D ~ f) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? D D D ~ DISCUSSION: The project would be located in an urban area, on a graded pad, and would not present an increased fire hazard. The building would be fully sprinklered in compliance with Fire Department regulations. Impacts from hazards would be less than significant. vm. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY - Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? D D D ~ b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer Environmental Checklist 8 City of Arroyo Grande Sheppel Office Building; Case No. CUP 98-572 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? D D D ~ c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion of siltation on- or off-site? D D ~ D d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off- site? D D ~ D e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? D D ~ D f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? D D D ~ g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? D D D ~ h) Place within a lOO-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? D D D ~ i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? D D D ~ DISCUSSION: The elevation of the site is approximately 90 feet above mean sea level. Based upon soil investigations in the vicinity of the project site, groundwater at the project site is expected to be approximately 30 feet below ground surface and flow to the west and southwest. Construction and development of the site would not impact the groundwater quality or supply. The project site is located in the Meadowcreek Watershed. Drainage from this area generally flows to the south. Currently, the site is not covered with impervious surfaces. The development of the proposed project would likely decrease the area of pervious surfaces on the site. Drainage from the site would be to existing Environmental Checklist 9 City of Arroyo Grande Sheppel Office Building; Case No. CUP 98-572 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST drainage facilities. These are located south of the improved area of the parcel. The drainage facilities are adequate to accept the runoff from the site. The project site is located in Zone C, as shown on the Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Insurance Rate Map. This zone is defined as a minimal potential risk for flooding. Therefore, the project would not expose people or property in the project vicinity to water related hazards. IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING -- Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? 0 0 0 ~ b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? 0 0 0 ~ c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? 0 0 0 ~ DISCUSSION: The project would construct a professional office building in a Planned Development zone. The parcel is subject to the site development standards for the Highway Services (H-S) subzone of the Oak Park Acres Planned Development, and other ordinances of the City of Arroyo Grande. Construction of an office building in the Highway Service district requires a conditional use permit. The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan and zoning for the site, and no impacts in land use and planning would result. XI. NOISE - Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? 0 ~ 0 0 b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundbome vibration or groundbome noise levels? 0 0 0 ~ c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? 0 0 ~ 0 d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? 0 ~ 0 0 Environmental Checklist 10 City of Arroyo Grande Sheppel Office Building; Case No. CUP 98-572 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST DISCUSSION: The project would construct a professional office building. The primary sources of noise would be from automobiles arriving and departing, and the conversation of individuals as they moved between the building and automobiles. This type and level of noise is consistent with existing uses on the site, and with the zoning of the project site. The operation of the proposed project would not significantly increase ambient noise levels. Construction activities would generate noise levels that would temporarily create noise impacts. It is anticipated that noise levels could reach between 70 and 88 decibels. Limiting the hours of construction would reduce this short-tenn impact to less than significant level. See Mitigation Measure 9. XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING -- Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? D D D ~ b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? D D D ~ c) Displace substantial numbers of people necessitating the construction of replacement D D D ~ housing elsewhere? DISCUSSION: The project would provide professional office facilities. No new housing would be associated with the proposed project, and no significant increase in demand for housing would be created by the project. XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES -- a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other perfonnance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? D D ~ D Police protection? D D ~ D Schools? D D ~ D Environmental Check/ist 11 City of Arroyo Grande Sheppel Office Building; Case No. CUP 98-572 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Parks? D D 181 D Other public facilities? D D ~ D DISCUSSION: The proposed facility is consistent with the General Plan designation and zoning for the site. Adequate fire and police services exist in the community to serve the project, and the development would generate tax. revenues to contribute to the cost of ongoing public services. No housing is associated with the project, and no impact on schools would be generated by the project. XIV. RECREATION -- a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be D D ~ accelerated? D b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? D D D ~ DISCUSSION: The project would construct a professional office building. This use would not increase the demand for public recreational facilities, and any impact on recreational facilities would be less than significant. XV. TRANSPORTATION / TRAFFIC -- Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume-to-capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at D D ~ D intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated D D ~ D roads or highways? c) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., fann equipment)? D D ~ D d) Result in inadequate emergency access? D D ~ D e) Result in inadequate parking capacity? D D ~ D Environmental Checklist 12 City of Arroyo Grande Sheppel Office Building; Case No. CUP 98-572 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? D D ~ D DISCUSSION: A traffic study was conducted for the project by Penfield & Smith. The Traffic Study also analyzed a proposed project on an adjacent parcel for a health club facility consisting of 18,925 square feet, including an indoor lap pool. An existing office building, consisting of7,560 square feet, is located on an adjacent parcel. The project site, the adjacent parcels referred to in the above paragraph, and three other adjacent parcels have been the subject of cooperative site planning in the past. Reciprocal easements for access, parking, and drainage exist with regard to a portion of these parcels, and additional easements would be created as part of the project. The intention of the applicants is that persons employed in and visiting the professional offices would have access to all parking areas on the larger site. The traffic study included consideration of these arrangements. The traffic study evaluated the impact of project traffic on nearby roadways and intersections, both for current volumes of traffic, and those expected to be generated by build-out of proposed and approved project in the City. The project is expected to generate 124 daily trips, with 18 trips during the morning peak hours (7-9 a.m.) and 17 trips during the evening peak hours (4-6 p.m.). The traffic study reviewed the impact of the proposed health club facility project for the adjacent parcel, and indicated that project was expected to generate 452 daily trips, with 25 a.m. peak-hour and 28 p.m. peak-hour trips. The traffic study noted that some of the persons employed at the office building could be expected to use the health club facilities. This would tend to reduce the number of trips generated by either of the projects. The traffic study did not include consideration of this possibility in the analysis, and the traffic study therefore analyzed a worst-case scenario. The traffic study assigned the trips generated by the project to project-area roadways based on the consultant's knowledge of travel patterns and previous traffic studies. The trips were assigned as follows: Kennedy Health Club Sheppel Office Building North on Oak Park Boulevard 5% 5% on U.S. Highway 101 35% 30% South on U.S. Highway 101 25% 25% on Oak Park Boulevard 10% 10% East on James Way 5% 10% on W. Branch Street 20% 20% Total 100% 100% Environmental Checklist 13 City of Arroyo Grande Sheppel Office Building; Case No. CUP 98-572 ~"--_._~~~------~-- ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST The traffic study then analyzed the perfonnance of study area intersections to determine whether the project traffic would result in significant impacts. Significant impacts would occur if project traffic resulted in a decrease in intersection perfonnance to a level of service less than LOS C. The intersections analyzed by the traffic study were Oak Park at James Way and Oak Park at W. Branch Street. Project traffic was analyzed both with regard to existing conditions, and the "baseline" conditions that would exist when full build-out was achieved. The traffic study concluded that the level of service for the study area intersections would not decrease below LOS C with the construction ofthe Kennedy Health Club project and the Sheppel Office Building project. The following table illustrates the results of the traffic study with regard to the existing and baseline conditions: Location Type of Existing + Baseline Baseline + Baseline + Baseline + Control project Health Club Office both Oak Park Traffic LOSB LOSC LOSC LOSC LOSC Blvd.lJames Signal Way Oak Park Traffic LOSB LOSB LOSB LOSB LOSB Blvd.tw. Signal Branch St. The level of service does not decrease below LOS C for any of the scenarios. Traffic impacts of the project on the intersections studied would not create significant impacts. The traffic study also analyzed frontage improvements along Oak Park Boulevard and James Way. Because the intersections were projected to operate at satisfactory levels of service, no frontage improvements were recommended by the traffic study. The traffic study concluded that the site access on James Way was located an adequate distance from the James Way/Oak Park Boulevard intersection. The driveway to the Foursquare Church is located across James Way near the existing access to the project site. The traffic study concluded that access would be adequate given the different peaking characteristics of the two sites. The traffic study recommended that if the adjacent site to the east of the project site develops, a single driveway for the project site should be combined with the access for that site, and aligned with the church site across James Way. The traffic study also analyzed parking for the site. Utilizing data from the Institute of Traffic Engineers and the Urban Land Institute, the traffic study projected that the office component of the existing and proposed uses would require a total of 57 parking spaces at the peak of office parking demand at 10-11 a.m. The health club parking requirement generally begans increasing significantly at 4:30 p.m. and peaks at 6-7 p.m., with a projected space requirement of 83 spaces. The combined parking requirements for the two uses could be as high as 140 spaces, but the two uses do not peak at the same time. The traffic study concluded that the office parking demand at 6-7 p.m. would be approximately 23% of the peak, or 13 spaces. During this peak at the health club, a total site parking demand of 96 spaces would exist. At the office peak of 10-11 a.m., the health club parking demand would be negligible. At mid-day, the office parking demand would be approximately 51 spaces, based on the Urban Land Institute parking demand data. Assuming that the mid-day health club demand could be 50% of the evening peak, the health club parking demand could be 42 spaces, for a total site parking demand of 93 spaces. The traffic study concluded that the amount of parking provided by the two projects, which would include Environmental Checklist 14 City of A"oyo Grande Sheppel Office Building; Case No. CUP 98-572 --- ------------- ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST approximately 45 spaces on a third parcel owned by Sheppel, would satisfy site parking demands for these projects. A reciprocal parking agreement would also be present with regard to the existing office building on site. This office provides parking in excess of the parking requirements that now exist, and would not affect the conclusion of the traffic study. Based on the above analysis, transportation/traffic impacts from the proposed project would less than significant. XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS -- Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? 0 0 0 ~ b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? 0 0 0 ~ c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? 0 0 0 ~ d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? 0 ~ 0 0 e) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? 0 0 ~ 0 DISCUSSION: The project is located on a site zoned for commercial use, and the use proposed is consistent with the General Plan. The City's water usage has been forecast, and the City has adequate water resources for the uses proposed in the general Plan. Development of the proposed project would require water for both domestic use and landscape irrigation. The water consumption by this project would further reduce the City's supply of available water. This impact could be mitigated through conservation and the development and implementation of an individual water neutralization program. The mitigation measure listed below would minimize water use for irrigation on site, and require installation of fixtures that would minimize water usage in the facility, and would reduce water resources impacts to a less than significant level. See Mitigation Measures 10 and 11. Environmental Checklist 15 City of Arroyo Grande Sheppel Office Building; Case No. CUP 98-572 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST The proposed project would incrementally increase demand for and use of utilities on the site but not in excess of amounts expected and provided for in the project area, and would not be expected to have any measurable impact on utilities. The proposed facility would be served by existing utilities in the community, and no extension of utility service would be required. The facility would not include kitchen or food service facilities, and would not generate a significant amount of solid waste for disposal. Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No lmoact lncorooration lmoact lmoact xvn. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? D D D ~ b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulative considerable? ("Cumulative considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? D D ~ D c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? D D ~ D RECOMMENDATION BY STAFF On the basis of the Initial Study, staff finds that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures incorporated into the revised project description would successfully mitigate the potentially significant impacts. Staff recommends the preparation of an Negative Declaration. PROJECT EVALUATOR: TOM BUFORD INITIAL STUDY DATE: June 7, 1999 SIGNATURE: Tom Buford Environmental Checklist 16 City of Arroyo Grande Sheppel Office Building; Case No. CUP 98-572 ---------------- ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST MITIGATION MEASURES 1. Mitigation Measure 1: Dust generated by the development activities shall be kept to a minimum with a goal of retaining dust on the site. Applicant shall follow the dust control measures listed below: a. During clearing, grading, earth moving, excavation, or transportation of cut or fill materials, water trucks or sprinkler systems are to be used to prevent dust from leaving the site and to create a crust after each day's activities cease. b. 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 shall include wetting down such areas in the later morning and after work is completed for the day, and whenever winds exceed 15 miles per hour. c. Soil stockpiled for more than two days shall be covered, kept moist, or treated with soil binders to prevent dust generation. 2. Mitigation Measure 2: The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the dust control program and order increased watering as necessary to prevent transport of dust off-site. Their duties shall include holiday and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. 3. Mitigation Measure 3: In the event archaeological or cultural resources are discovered during the construction process, all work on the site shall cease. A monitor with knowledge of archaeological resources shall be contacted, and shall view and assess the materials discovered. A written mitigation plan shall be prepared and approved by the City. All costs associated with the employment of a qualified archaeologist shall be paid by the applicant. 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, archeological resources are uncovered, all work shall be halted until the significance of the resources are determined. 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 additional mitigation measures as required by the California Environmental Quality Act if archaeological resources are found on the site. " 4. Mitigation Measure 4: Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit an updated soils report addressing any changes in the condition of the parcel which may have occurred since the date of the Soils Report, March, 1988, and identifying measures to responds to such changes, if identified. In the alternative, applicant may submit a new soils report which adequately addresses the issues raised in the Soils Report. Environmental Checklist 17 City of Arroyo Grande Sheppel Office Building; Case No. CUP 98-572 ~ -"....----.-----.---....- ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 5. Mitigation Measure 5: Structures shall be designed to earthquake standards of the Uniform Building Code Seismic Zone 4. Prior to plan check, the applicant shall submit building plans indicating standards to the satisfaction of Building and Safety. 6. Mitigation Measure 6: Construction operations, especially grading operations, shall be confined as much as possible to the dry season, in order to avoid erosion of disturbed soils. 7. Mitigation Measure 7: All graded areas, including road sub grades and building pads which are rough graded areas but not constructed until subsequent construction phases shall be revegetated. This vegetation shall be removed as necessary in later phases when finish grading, paving and building construction occurs. 8. Mitigation Measure 8: Project landscaping plans shall incorporate the use of fast growing ground covers to stabilize soils soon after construction is completed. 9. Mitigation Measure 9: Demolition or construction activities, including truck traffic coming to and from the site for any purpose, shall be limited to daytime, (non-holiday) hours (7:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.) Mondays through Saturdays. 10. Mitigation Measure 10: 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. 11. Mitigation Measure : All new construction shall utilize fixtures and designs that minimize water usage. Such fixtures shall include, but are not limited to, low flow shower heads, water saving toilets, instant water heaters and hot water recirculating systems. Water conserving designs and fixtures shall be installed prior to final occupancy. Environmental Checklist 18 City of Arroyo Grande Sheppel Office Building; Case No. CUP 98-572 -----,..~,~-- ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST SOURCE LIST: 1. City of Arroyo Grande General Plan 2. City of Aroyo Grande General Plan Land Use Map 3. City of Arroyo Grande Development Code 4. City of Arroyo Grande Zoning Map 5. City of Arroyo Grande Existing Setting and Community Issues Report 6. City of Arroyo Grande General Plan EIR 7. San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District Clean Air Plan 8. FEMA: Flood Insurance Rate Map 9. Project Description 10. Project Plans 11. Site Inspection 12. Ordinance 431 C.S. 13. Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) TriD Generation Manual 14. Penfield & Smith, Traffic Study 15. Buena Engineers, Inc., Soil Engineering Report for the Proposed Oak Park Health Plaza, March, 1998 16. Earth Systems Consultants, Final Certification for Grading, December 8, 1998 Environmental Checklist 19 City of Arroyo Grande Sheppel Office Building; Case No. CUP 98-572 7.b. CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE CITY COUNCIL MEETING NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING AND ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a Public Hearing will be held by the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande on the following project: CASE NO. Conditional Use Permit 98-573 APPLICANT: Kevin Kennedy LOCATION: Oak Park Blvd. and James Way ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Mitigated Negative Declaration per CEQA Guidelines REPRESENT A TIVE: Warren Hamrick, Hamrick Associates PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The City Council will consider a Conditional Use Permit for construction of an 18, 925 square foot health club with 56 parking spaces, with other common parking facilities, and a revision of the Master Plan for circulation, parking and drainage. In compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the Planning Commission has recommended approval of the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration on the above project. Any person affected or concerned by this application may submit written comments to the Administrative Services Department before the City Council hearing, or appear and be heard in support of or opposition to the project and the environmental impacts at the time of hearing. Any person interested in the proposals can contact the Administrative Services Department at 214 E. Branch Street, 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, July 13, 1999 at 7:00 P.M. Place of Hearing: Arroyo Grande City Council Chambers 215 E. Branch Street Arroyo Grande, California 93420 dministrative Services Director/ Deputy City Clerk __......'___..n MEMORANDUM TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: HENRY ENGEN, INTERIM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR\\0 SUBJECT: KENNEDY HEAL TH CENTER PROJECT; CUP 98-573 DATE: JULY 13, 1999 RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends the City Council: (1) adopt the attached Resolution approving Conditional Use Permit No. 98-573, subject to the Conditions of Approval, and (2) approve the Negative Declaration completed with regard to the project. FISCAL: There is no direct fiscal impact to the City should the Council adopt the attached resolution approving the project. DISCUSSION: This project is within the Oak Park Acres Planned Development area and all such projects require final approval by the City Council. Related Droiects: The proposed project is an 18,925 square foot health club facility located in the Oak Park Health Plaza (the "Plaza"). The Plaza is a 3.74-acre site. As part of the previous approval, a conceptual master site plan (the "master site plan") was developed, which provided standards for parking, circulation, and drainage easements, as well as the proposed square footage for the build-out of each of the six parcels on the Plaza site. Pursuant to the master site plan approved as part of the original project in 1988, and revised by the Planning Commission in 1996 (Attachment H), the applicant and Russ Sheppel entered into an agreement for reciprocal parking, access, and drainage easements. Consistent with the master site plan, an office building was constructed at the corner of Oak Park Boulevard and James Way following project approval in Case No. CUP 88-435. Russ Sheppel has also applied for a conditional use permit (CUP 98-572) to construct a 11,335 square foot professional office building in the Plaza. ~-- CITY COUNCIL JULY 13, 1999 PAGE 2 Master Plan: The Plaza has been the subject of master site planning. The Plaza does not have direct access to Oak Park Boulevard; therefore, access is taken from James Way. The master site plan is an effort to assure that adequate access, circulation, parking, and drainage exist on the site. The master site plan as revised and approved by the Planning Commission and City Council in 1 996 designates the individual parcels of the Plaza, proposed square footages of the buildings, and the number of parking spaces required. The various parcels in the Plaza are identified as follows: Reference in this Leoal Descriction Owner staff recort Size Parcel 2, AG 92-027 Kennedy Kennedy Site 0.934 AC (this application) Parcel 1, AG 95-108 Sheppel Sheppel No.1 (existing office building) 0.42 AC Parcel 2, AG 95-108 Sheppel Sheppel No.2 (site for proposed 0.54 AC building in CUP 98-572) Parcel 3, AG 95-108 Sheppel Sheppel No.3 0.592 AC Parcel 3, AG 82-035 Lehrack Parcel 5 0.509 AC Oak Park Parcel A, AG 79-838 Partnership Parcel 6 0.711 AC 3.74 AC The Planning Commission, as part of its recommendation for approval, has recommended that changes in the master site plan be approved by the City Council. These changes include (1) revising the proposed square footage to reflect the actual square footage of the existing office building, and the square footage for the projects now being considered, (2) revising the Plaza site plan to reflect the parking areas and number of spaces now existing and as approved, and (3) revising the areas of the Plaza subject to the reciprocal parking and access easements. The proposed revised master site plan is attached as Attachment G. --.--- .------.- CITY COUNCIL JULY 13, 1999 PAGE 3 A portion of the Plaza is now subject to a reciprocal easem'ent agreement. Upon project approval, the three parcels currently owned by Russ Sheppel (Sheppel Nos. 1, 2, and 3), and the parcel owned by Kevin Kennedy, would each be made subject to the reciprocal easement agreement. Issues: Access: The Oak Park Health Plaza site has a single entry/exit on James Way. Two adjacent parcels in the Plaza, Parcels 5 and 6, may be developed in the future, and may provide a second entry/exit, but there is no indication that plans exist to develop either of those parcels. The Planning Commission reviewed the Plaza master site plan circulation to make sure that the access and circulation worked based on current development proposals. The Planning Commission was satisfied that the revised master site plan (Attachment G) will provide adequate parking, circulation, and access. The project is conditioned on a reconstruction of the driveway to the project to provide curb returns, concrete cross gutters and spandrels. In addition, if the Public Works Department deems it necessary, the applicant will be required to move the existing fire hydrant. The existing driveway entrance is the sole point of ingress and egress. The Planning Commission concluded that the driveway was not of sufficient width, or adequate design, to safely allow vehicles to enter and exit at the same time. Parking: A traffic and parking analysis was conducted by Penfield & Smith. The study concluded that parking at the site is adequate, based on the reciprocal easements establishing common parking facilities. The common parking facilities are adequate based on the standards of the Development Code. In the event Sheppel No.3, on which some parking will be constructed as part of this project, is later developed with an office building, the applicant would be required to comply with the parking regulations then in effect. Traffic: The traffic study concluded that the project would have no significant impact on local intersections. The applicant will contribute to the cost of installing an Opticom device at the Oak Park/James Way intersection. The project is consistent with the General Plan and zoning designations for the site. The project has received favorable review by the SAC, ARC, and Planning Commission. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: A Mitigated Negative Declaration was completed for the project, and circulated for public comment. The comment period ended on June 28, 1999. No comments were received. The document is included as Attachment F. -_._----~ CITY COUNCIL JULY 13, 1999 PAGE 4 Alternatives: The following alternatives are presented for Council consideration: 1. Adopt the Planning Commission's recommendation and approve the Resolution. 2. Modify the Planning Commission's recommendation and approve the Resolution. 3. Deny the project application and direct staff to prepare the appropriate resolution for City Council action. 4. Provide direction to staff. If the Council selects alternative 3, staff will return with the appropriate resolution/or resolutions at a later meeting. Attachments: Resolution of Approval Exhibit "A": Conditions of Approval Exhibit "B": Site/Grading Plan and Elevations, June 23, 1999 A. Staff Report 6-29-99 Planning Commission (Please see Attachment A/Sheppel Staff Report) B. Traffic & Parking Study (Please see Attachment B/ Sheppel Staff Report) C. Minutes of Planning Commission meeting 6-29-99 (Please see Attachment C/ Sheppel Staff Report) D. Minutes of SAC 1-12-99 (Please see Attachment D/Sheppel Staff Report) E. Minutes of ARC 3-22-99 (Please see Attachment E/Sheppel Staff Report) F. Final Negative Declaration G. Revised Oak Park Health Plaza Master Plan (Please see Attachment G/Sheppel Staff Report) H. Oak Park Health Plaza Master Plan 1996 (Please see Attachment H/ Sheppel Staff Report) . RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ADOPTING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION, INSTRUCTING THE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR TO FILE A NOTICE OF DETERMINATION, AND APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 98-573, APPLIED FOR BY KEVIN KENNEDY, LOCATED AT OAK PARK BOULEVARD AND JAMES WAY WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Arroyo Grande has approved PC. Resolution No. 99-1700 recommending that the City Council adopt the Negative Declaration prepared for this project and approve Conditional Use Permit 98-573; and WHERE~S, the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande has considered Conditional Use Permit 98-573, filed by Kevin Kennedy, to construct an 18,925 square foot health club facility at the soutl1east corner of Oak Park Boulevard and James Way in the Oak Park Health Plaza; and WHEREAS, the City Council has held a public hearing on this application in accordance with City Code; and WHEREAS, the City Council has found this project to be consistent with the General Plan and the environmental documents associated therewith; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the Final Negative Declaration under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and the Arroyo Grande Rules and Procedures for Implementation to CEQA; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds after due study, deliberation and public hearing, the following circumstances exist: Conditional Use Permit Findings: 1. The proposed use is permitted within the subject district pursuant to the provisions of Section 9-03.050 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. 3. The site is. suitable for the type and intensity of use or development that is proposed. 4. There are adequate provisions for water, sanitation, and public utilities and -------------- RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 2 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. 6. The revised master plan is a conceptual planning tool and is not an entitlement for future development. Future proposed buildings on Parcel 3, Arroyo Grande-95-108, Parcel 3, Arroyo Grande 82-035, or Parcel A, Arroyo Grande 79-038 must receive required review and approval and must satisfy parking and other Development Code requirements. California Environmental Quality Act and Department of fish and Game Required findings of Exemption: 1. Tbe City of Arroyo Grande has prepared an initial study pursuant to Section 15063 of the Guidelines of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), for Conditional Use Permit Case No. 98-567. 2. Based on the initial study, a negative declaration was drafted for public review. The City Council has considered the Negative Declaration together with any comments received and considered during the public review process. The Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment of the City Council. 3. The City Council finds that through feasible conditions placed upon this project, the significant impacts on the environment have been eliminated or substantially mitigated to a level of insignificance. 4. The documents and other materials which constitute the records of proceedings upon which this decision is based are in the custody of the Secretary of the City of Arroyo Grande City Council, City Hall, 214 E. Branch St., Arroyo Grande, California. 5. Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 requires the City to adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes to the project it has adopted or made a condition of approval in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects of the approval, and such changes, with their corresponding permit monitoring requirements, are hereby adopted as the monitoring program for the project. The monitoring program is designed to ensure compliance during project implementation. 6. After holding a public hear,ng pursuant to State and City Codes, and considering the record as a whole the City Council considered the Negative Declaration and found that there is no substantial evidence of any significant adverse environmental effect, either individually or cumulatively on wildlife resources as defined by Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code or. on the -----_.__._~-,.~_._,._._.~ RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 3 resources as defined by Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code or on the habitat upon which the wildlife depends as a result of development of this project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande hereby adopts a Negative Declaration, instructs the Administrative Services Director to file a Notice of Determination, approves Conditional Use Permit 98-573, 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 13th day of July 1999. - ._-.--~._~- RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 4 MICHAEL A. LADY, MAYOR ATTEST: KELL Y WETMORE, ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTORI DEPUTY CITY CLERK '" APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: ROBERT L. HUNT, CITY MANAGER - APPROVED AS TO FORM: TIMOTHY J. CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY RESOLUTION NO. EXHIBIT A . PAGE 5 EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL KENNEDY CLUB FITNESS; CUP 98-573 Corner of Oak Park Boulevard and James Way COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT GENERAL CONDITIONS This approval authorizes construction of 18,925 square foot health club facility. 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 Case No. CUP- 573, and the site shall be developed as depicted in the revised Master Plan for the Oak Park Health Plaza, dated June 25, 1999. 3. This application shall automatically expire on July 13, 2001 unless a building permit is issued. Thirty (30) 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. Two years after the issuance of bUilding permits, the Conditional Use Permit shall be reviewed by the Community development Director for determination of whether adequate parking has been provided pursuant to the Master Plan for the Oak Park Health Plaza. A public hearing and review by the Planning Commission may, at the discretion of the Community Development Director, be required to review potential concerns. In such event, the applicant shall submit funds to cover the cost of the public hearing, and a current mailing list of property owners (and occupants) within 300 feet of the project. 5. Development shall occur in substantial conformance with the plans presented and marked Exhibit "B", approved July 13, 1999. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall file Reciprocal Easements for access, parking and drainage acceptable to the Community Development Director. 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 alternative, 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 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 6 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 his/her obligations under this condition. 7. Development shall conform to P-D-1. 1 (Oak Park Acres Planned Development) zoning requirements except as otherwise approved. CONDITIONS IN ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT 8. Dust generated by the development activities shall be kept to a minimum with a goal of retaining dust on the site. Applicant shall follow the dust control measures listed below: a. During clearing, grading, earth moving, excavation, or transportation of cut or fill materials, water trucks or sprinkler systems are to be used to prevent dust from leaving the site and to create a crust after each day's activities cease. b. 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 shall include wetting down such areas in the later. morning and after work is completed for the day, and whenever winds exceed 1 5 miles per hour. c. Soil stockpiled for more than two days shall be covered, kept moist, or treated with soil binders to prevent dust gener!=ltion. 9. The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the dust control program and order increased watering as necessary to prevent transport of dust off-site. Their duties shall include holiday and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. 10. In the event archaeological or cultural resources are discovered during the construction process, all work on the site shall cease. A monitor with knowledge of archaeological resources shall be contacted, and shall. view and assess the materials discovered. A written mitigation plan shall be prepared and approved by the City. All costs associated with the employment of a qualified archaeologist shall be paid by the applicant. 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, archeologica/ resources are uncovered, all work shall be halted until the significance of the resources are determined. If human remains (burials) are encountered, the County Coroner (781-4513) shal/ be contacted immediately. The applicant may be required to provide archaeologica/ studies and/or additional mitigation measures as required by the California Environmental Qua/ity Act if archaeological resources are found on the site. H -~--~--- RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 7 11. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit an updated soils report addressing any changes in the condition of the parcel which may have occurred since the date of the Soils Report, March, 1988, and identifying measures to responds to such changes, if identified. In the alternative, applicant may submit a new soils report which adequately addresses the issues raised in the Soils Report. 12. Structures shall be designed to earthquake standards of the Uniform Building Code Seismic Zone 4. Prior to plan check, the applicant shall submit building plans indicating standards to the satisfaction of Building and Safety. 13. Construction operations, especially grading operations, shall be confined as' much as possible to the dry season, in order to avoid erosion of disturbed soils. ,. 14. All graded areas, including road subgrades and building. pads which are rough graded areas but not constructed until subsequent construction phases shall be revegetated. This vegetation shall be irrigated and maintained on a regular basis. This vegetation shall be removed as necessary in later phases when finish grading, paving and building construction occurs. 15. Project landscaping plans shall incorporate the use of fast growing ground covers to stabilize soils soon after construction is completed. - 16. Demolition or construction activities, including truck traffic coming to and from the site for any purpose, shall be limited to daytime, (non-holiday) hours (7:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.) Mondays through Saturdays. 17. 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 are~s and areas requiring' spray irrigation shall be minimized. 18. All new construction shall utilize fixtures and designs that minimize water usage. Such fixtures shall include, but are not limited to, low flow shower heads, water saving toilets, instant water heaters and hot water recirculating systems. Water conserving designs and fixtures shall be installed prior to final occupancy. LIGHTING 19. All lighting for the site shall be downward directed and shall not create spill or glare to adjacent properties. -~.,..,_._-_." RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 8 DEVELOPMENT CODE 20. Development shall conform with the H-S subzone zoning requirements except as otherwise approved. 21. Signage shall be subject to the requirements of Development Code Chapter 9 - 13. 22. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, all ducts, meters, air conditioning equipment and all 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. It is especially important that gas and electric meters, electric transformers, and large water piping systems be completely screened from public view. All roof-mounted equipment which generates noise, solid particles, odors, et cetera, shall cause th~ objectionable material to be directed away from residential properties. 23. Prior to issuance of a building permit, 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. 24. All parking spaces adjacent to a wall, fence, or property line shall have a minimum width of 11 feet. This does not apply to garage or carport spaces which shall each have a minjmum clear dimension of 1 0 feet wide by 20 feet deep. 25. The developer shall comply with Development Code Chapter 9-14, "Dedications, Fees and Reservations." 26. Prior to issuance of occupancy permits, the developer shall comply with Development Code Chapter 9-15, "Improyements". All above ground utilities shall be undergrounded. 27. Prior to paint or stucco color coat being applied to the building, 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. SOLID WASTE 28. Solid waste pick-up location as identified is acceptable. 29. In such cases where trash bin enclosures are to be installed abutting structures, the common wall shall be of a noncombustible masonry type _._~-- . RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 9 material with no openings for vents or windows. 30. Trash enclosures shall be reserved exclusively for dumpster storage. Miscellaneous boxes, bins, racks, etc., will not be allowed within the enclosure. 31. To reduce the possibility of the gates damaging vehicles parked next to the enclosures, an overhead type door is strongly encouraged. (See City Standard Detail.) 32. Interior vehicle travelways shall be designed to be capable of withstanding loads imposed by trash trucks. POLICE DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS 33. Pr!or to issuance of building permit, applicant to submit exterior lighting plan for Police Department approval. 34. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall post handicapped parking, per Police Department requirements. 35. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall install a burglary [or robbery] alarm system per Police Department guidelines, and pay the Police Department alarm permit application fee of ($30.00). . BUILDING AND FIRE DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS UBC/UFC 36. The project shall comply with the most recent editions of the California State Fire and Building Codes and the Uniform Building and Fire Codes as adopted by the City of Arroyo Grande. The applicant shall include, to the approval of the Fire Department, occupancy classifications and required separations. FIRE LANES 37. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall post designated fire lanes, per Section. 22500.1 of the California Vehicle Code. 38. All fire lanes must be posted and enforced, per Police Department and Fire Department guidelines. 39. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit a site survey regarding the presence of archaeological resources on the site. The survey shall be performed by a qualified archaeologist. -----~_._.__..._.- . RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 10 FIRE FLOW/FIRE HYDRANTS 40. Project shall have a fire flow of one thousand five hundred gallons (1,500) per minute for a duration of three (3) hours. 41. Prior to bringing combustible materials on site, fire hydrants shall be installed, per Fire Department and Public Works Department standards. SECURITY KEY BOX 42. Prior to occupancy, applicant must provide an approved "security key vault," per Building and Fire Department guidelines. FIRE SPRINKLER 43. Prior to occupancy, all buildings must be fully sprinklered per Building and Fire Department guidelines. OPTICOM DEVICE 44. The applicant shall participate in cooperation with the applicant in Case No. CUP 98-572 (Russ Sheppel) to install an Opticom traffic signal pre-emption device at the James Way - Oak Park Blvd intersection, that meets Building and Fire Department requirements, per the approval of the Fire Chief. ABANDONMENT INON-CONFORMING 45. Prior to issuance of a grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs first, applicant shall show proof of properly abandoning all non-conforming items such as septic tanks, wells, underground piping and other undesirable conditions. OTHER PERMITS 46. Prior to issuance of a building permit, County Health Department approval is required for the swimming pool. 47. Any review costs generated by outside consultants, shall be paid by the applicant. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS All Public Works Department conditions of approval as listed below are to be complied with prior to recording the map or finalizing the permit, unless specifically noted otherwise. . RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 11 GENERAL IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENTS 48. All project improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the City of Arroyo Grande Standard Drawings and Specifications. 49. The driveway entrance shall be constructed with curb returns, concrete cross- gutter and spandrels. The existing fire hydrant shall be relocated, if necessary. 50. All project improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City standards and specifications. Plans within the right-of-way shall include profile drawings. Improvement plans (including the following) shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the Public Works Department: a. Grading, drainage and erosion control. b. Street paving, curb, gutter and sidewalk. c. Striping and signage plan. d. . Public utilities. e. Water and sewer. 51. Parking lot spaces shall be delineated with double striping. 52. Upon approval of the improvement plans, the applicant shall provide a reproducible mylar set and 3 sets of prints of the improvements for inspection purposes. Prior to acceptance of the improvements, the applicant shall provide reproducible mylars, and 2 sets of prints of the approved record drawings (as - builts). 53. 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 or the Community Development Director. 54. Prior to approval of an improvement plan the applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City for inspection of the required improvements. 55. The applicant shall be responsible for obtaining an encroachment permit for all work within a public right of way (City or Caltrans). UNDERGROUND UTILITIES/EASEMENTS 56. The developer shall comply with Development Code Chapter 9-15.050. All existing above ground utilities shall be relocated underground. 57. A Public Utility Easement (PUE) shall be dedicated a minimum 6 feet wide adjacent to all street right-of-way. The PUE shall be wider where necessary for the installation or maintenance of the public utility vaults, pads, or similar --_._,--~---_._- . RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 1 2 facilities. 58. Private easements shall be recorded for all reciprocal easements as depicted in the revised Master Plan for the Oak Park Health Plaza as approved by the City Council. GRADING AND DRAINAGE 59. All grading shall be done in accordance with the City Grading Ordinance. 60. All drainage facilities shall be designed to accommodate a 1 DO-year storm flow. 61. The Department of Public Works may require further reports on the soils. All earthwork design and grading shall be performed in accordance with the approved soils report. 62. The applicant shall submit an engineering study regarding flooding related to the project site. The study shall be prepared for the approval by the Director of Public Works. Any portions of the site subject to flooding from a 1 DO-year storm shall be shown on the recorded map or other recorded document, and shall be noted as a building restriction. 63. The on-site water system, which supplies water to fire hydrants, shall be a - public facility. This will require public improvement plans and dedication of a 1 5-foot wide easement. WASTEWATER 64. All sewer mains or laterals crossing or parallel to public water facilities shall be constructed in accordance with California State Health Agency standards. PUBLIC UTILITIES 65. All new public utilities shall be installed as underground facilities. 66. Prior to approving any building permit within the project for occupancy, all public utilities shall be operational. 67. All improvement plans shall be submitted to the public utility companies for comment. Utility comments shall be forwarded to the Director of Public Works for approval. FEES AND BONDS FOR ALL CITY DEPARTMENTS The applicant shall pay all applicable City fees, including the following: RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 1 3 68. FEES TO BE PAID PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT a. Water Mitigation fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance, involving water connection or enlargement of an existing connection. b. Water Distribution fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance, in accordance with Municipal Code 6- 7.22. c. Water Service charge to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance, in accordance with Municipal Code 6- 7.22. d. Water Supply charge, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance, in accordance with Municipal Code 6- 7.22. e. Traffic Impact fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance, in accordance with Ordinance 461 C.S., Res. 3021. f. Traffic Signalization fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance, in accordance with Ordinance 346 C.S., Res. 1955. g. Sewer Permit fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance, in accordance with Municipal Code 6-6.405. h. Drainage fee, as required by the area drainage plan for the area being developed. i. Park Development fee, the developer shall pay the current parks development fee for each unit approved for construction (credit shall be provided for existing houses), to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance in accordance with Ordinance 313 C.S. j. Street Tree Planting fee, the developer shall pay the current street tree planting fee/deposit. One 1 5-gallon size or larger street tree is required for every fifty feet (50') of project frontage. Prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy, the developer; with the approval of the Park and Recreation Director, may install all 1 5-gallon trees and receive a .refund of deposit. To be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance, in accordance with Ordinance 431 C.S. k. Construction Tax, the applicant shall pay a construction tax pursuant to Section 3-3.501 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code. I. Alarm Fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of development in accordance with Ordinance 435 C.S. m. Strong Motion Instrumentation Program (SMIP) Fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of development in. accordance with State mandate. n. Building Permit Fee, to be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of development in accordance with Title 8 of the Municipal Code. "~----- ATTACHMENT F CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE INITIAL STUDY AND DRAFr NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROJECT TITLE: Kennedy Club Fitness Center; Project No. CUP 98-573 LEAD AGENCY NAME & ADDRESS: City of Arroyo Grande Connnunity Development Department 214 E. Branch Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 CONTACT PERSON & PHONE #: Tom Buford, Contract Planner (805) 786-4500 PROJECT LOCATION: Southeast comer of the intersection of James Way and Oak Park Boulevard. APN 070-771-060 PROJECT SPONSOR & ADDRESS: Kevin Kennedy 3534 El Camino Real Atascadero, CA 93422 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Planned Development (PD) ZONING: Planned Development (PD) PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Proposed construction of a 18,925 square foot, three level building to be used as a membership fitness center. PERMIT APPLICATION AND ANY OTHER PERMITS: Conditional Use Permit ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS KENNEDY CLUB FITNESS PROJECT CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING: The project site is located in the Oak Park Health Plaza, a 3.74 acre site located at the southeast comer of James Way and Oak Park Boulevard in Arroyo Grande. The Plaza is currently improved with one office building and a parking lot. A portion of the site has been graded for future improvements. The project site is approximately 40,700 square feet and is undeveloped. The site has previously been graded and relatively flat. The site does not contain any substantial vegetation. The proposed project is not located in an area or near an identified cultural resource site. The project site has been graded and leveled, and it is likely that any cultural resources present on the site have been covered or destroyed. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposed project would construct a health and fitness club on a vacant, graded pad at the southeast comer of James Way and Oak Park Boulevard. The club would be operated on a membership basis. The project parcel comprises 40,670 square feet. The facility would include 18,925 square feet of interior space, including a lower floor with 5,270 square feet, main floor with 6,830 square feet, and upper floor with 6,825 square feet. The building would have a maximum height of 33 feet. The lower floor would include an exercise room and basketball court, and a pool equipment storage room. The main floor would include the entrance to the facility, lobby area, offices for staff, childcare area, pro shop, locker rooms for men and women, lap pool and spa. The upper floor would include multi-purpose and aerobics rooms. The main entrance would be located on the south side of the building. A courtyard and additional exit would be located on the west side. Landscaping would be installed as part of the project. The applicant would install 58 parking spaces, including two handicapped spaces. Two wall signs would be installed, each 4' x 20' in size, with the name of the facility in fluorescent letters, on the north and east facades of the building. The project parcel is subject to reciprocal access, drainage and parking easements with other parcels on the southeast comer of James Way and Oak Park Boulevard (Sheppel Office Building). Environmental Checklist 2 City of A"oyo Grande Kennedy Club Fitness; Case No. 98-573 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST CHECKLIST AND ANALYSIS Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Imoact Incorooration Imoact Imoact I. AESTHETICS - Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 0 0 ~ 0 b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, historic buildings and scenic corridors? 0 0 ~ 0 c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? 0 0 ~ 0 d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? 0 0 ~ 00 DISCUSSION: The proposed facility would occupy a parcel that is currently vacant, and graded for development. Zoning for the parcel is consistent with the proposed use, with the approval of a conditional use permit. Design and materials have been reviewed by the City's Architectural Review Committee, which has approved the design and recommended the project for approval. Design of the structure would be compatible with the existing office building on an adjacent parcel, and a proposed second office building on another adjacent parcel. Landscaping for the project would be coordinated with landscaping existing on site, and landscaping proposed for the new office building. The proposed building would be located within a line of sight trom condominiums to the south of the project site. An existing office building immediately adjacent to the site for the proposed facility occupies a portion of the field of view trom the condominium development, and the addition of the proposed building would not create a significant impact. II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? 0 0 0 ~. Environmental Checklist 3 City of Arroyo Grande Kennedy Club Fitness; Case No. 98-573 .~_. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST b) Conflict with existing zoning for agriculttn'al use, or a Williamson Act contract? 0 0 0 ~ c) Involve other changes in the existing enviromnent which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion ofFannland, to non-agriculttn'al use? 0 D 0 ~ DISCUSSION: The project site is zoned for commercial use, and has been graded for building pads. No agricultural activity occurs on the project site, not would any agricultural activity be affected by the project. m. AIR QUALITY: Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? 0 D ~ D b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? 0 ~ 0 0 c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? 0 D ~ D d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? 0 D 0 ~ e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? 0 D 0 0 DISCUSSION: Construction activities would generate dust, which could cause potentially significant enviromnental impacts. Operation of the project would generate vehicle trips, and this is an additional enviromnental concern. In San Luis Obispo County, ozone and PMI0 are the pollutants of primary concern, since exceedances of state health-based standards for those are experienced in portions the county in most years. For this reason San Luis Obispo county is considered to be in non-attainment of the state standards for both ozone and PMI0. In 1998 the state ozone standard was exceeded on 25 days in Paso Robles and on two days in Atascadero. The federal eight-hour standard for ozone was exceeded on 16 days at Paso Robles and one day at Atascadero. No other part of the county experienced ozone exceedances. Countywide exceedances of the state PMI0 standard of 50 ug/m 3 OCCtnTed on 15 out of 60 different sample days in 1998, down from 17 different violation days in 1997. Paso Robles recorded one day ofPMI0 exceedance in 1998. An other PMI0 exceedances occtnTed near the coast on the Niporno Mesa. There were no exceedances of the national air quality standard for PMI0 in the county in 1998. Environmental Checklist 4 City of Arroyo Grande Kennedy Club Fitness; Case No. 98-573 E~ONMENTALCHECKLffiT PMlO is also of continuing concern due to its presence in levels exceeding the state standards on a regular basis. The major sources of PMIO include mineral quarries, grading, demolition, agricultural tilling, road dust and vehicle exhaust. Grading and construction of the project would occur over a period of months. Short-tenn impacts related to dust generation :trom site preparation and grading could result in dust generation that could affect adjacent properties. Conditions placed on the project would reduce short-tenn dust generation during construction of the project to less than significant levels. See Mitigation Measures 1 and 2. A traffic study was conducted in connection with the project, and the proposed construction of an office building on an adjacent parcel. The project is expected to generate 452 daily trips. Air quality impacts :trom the project operation would not exceed the applicable thresholds, and no significant air quality impact would be present. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special- status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? 0 0 0 ~ b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of 0 0 ~ Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? 0 c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? 0 0 0 ~ d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? 0 0 0 ~ e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree 0 0 0 ~. preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Environmental CheclcJist 5 City of Arroyo Grande Kennedy Club Fitness; Case No. 98-573 j E~ONMENTALCHECKLffiT Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? 0 0 0 ~ DISCUSSION: The project is proposed within an mbanized area, where former biotic habitat and natural vegetation has been replaced with wildlife that have adapted to the mban setting and with ornamental, non-native vegetation. Therefore, the project would not result in significant impacts to biotic resources. Because of the existing uses on the site and its history of development, no unique, rare or endangered species are expected to be present. Therefore, the project would not result in significant impacts to biotic resomces. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resomce as defmed in ~15064.5? 0 0 0 ~ b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a Wlique archaeological resomce pursuant to ~ 15064.5? 0 ~ 0 0 c) Disturb any human remains, including those inteITed outside of formal cemeteries? 0 0 0 ~ DISCUSSION: The proposed project is not located in an area that has been identified as a known site for cultural resomces. The project site has been graded and leveled for development, and it is likely that any cultural resources present on the site have been covered or destroyed. The Arroyo Grande area was occupied for the previous 9,000 years by indigenous peoples, however, and the possibility exists that cultural resources may be encoWltered during the construction process. If that occurs, development activities at the site should cease Wltil a qualified archaeologist has been employed to view and assess the discover, and prepare a mitigation plan. See Mitigation Measure 3. VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS - Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk ofloss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. 0 ~ 0 0 Environmental Checklist 6 City of Arroyo Grande Kennedy Club Fitness; Case No. 98-573 --_....-~- ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? 0 ~ 0 0 iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? 0 0 ~ 0 iv) Landslides? 0 0 0 ~ b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? 0 ~ 0 0 c) Be located on geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? 0 0 0 ~ d) Be located on expansive soil, as defmed in Table 18-1-B of the Unifonn Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? 0 0 0 ~ DISCUSSION: Other than standard construction grading and necessary design-specified soil compaction, the proposed project would not involve any substantial topographical changes. Project-related construction activities would not result in major soil displacement, compaction, or overcovering. Impacts with regard to geologic hazards are considered potentially significant if the proposed development activity, including any proposed mitigation measures, could result in substantially increased erosion, landslides, soil creep, mudslides or unstable slopes. In addition, impacts are considered significant when people or structures would be exposed to major geologic hazards upon implementation of the project. Impacts related to geology have the potential to be significant if the proposed project involves any of the following characteristics: (1) Allor any part of the project site is located on land having substantial geologic constraints, including parcels located near active faults or underlain by rock types associated with compressible/collapsible soils or susceptible to landslides or severe erosion (2) The project results in potentially hazardous geologic conditions, e.g., construction of cut slopes exceeding a grade of 1.5 horizontal to 1 vertical. (3) The project proposed construction of a cut slope over 15 feet in height measured from the lowest finished grade. (4) The project is located on slopes exceeding 20% grade. The project site has been the subject of previous grading activities, and a soils report has been submitted for adjacent properties. Mitigation Measure 4 would require the preparation of a soils report discussing existing site conditions, and would reduce the impact of soils-related impacts to a less ,than significant level. Mitigation Measure 5 would require that any structure be designed to the earthquake standards of the Unifonn Building Code Seismic Zone 4. Impacts &om geologic conditions would be reduced to less than significant levels. See Mitigation Measures 4 and 5. Environmental Checklist 7 City of Arroyo Grande Kennedy Club Fitness; Case No. 98-573 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Standard erosion control measures would address on-site construction period erosion by wind or water. Long-term erosion potential would be addressed through installation of landscaping and stonn drainage facilities, both of which would be designed to meet applicable regulations. The mitigation measures set forth below would, in addition, minimize the possibility that rainwater or other nm-off from the project site would impact local drainages, or create significant impacts from erosion of the site. See Mitigation Measures 6, 7, and 8. With implementation of the listed mitigation measures, impacts in the area of geology and soils would be less than significant. VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS - Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? 0 0 0 ~ b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of 0 hazardous materials into the environment? 0 0 ~ c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed 0 school? 0 0 ~ d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? 0 0 0 ~ e) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or 0 emergency evacuation plan? 0 0 ~ f) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? 0 0 0 ~ DISCUSSION: The project would be located in an urban area, on a graded pad, and would not present an increased fire hazard. The building would be fully sprinklered in compliance with Fire Department regulations. Small amounts of chemicals for cleaning, and in connection with the lap pool, would be kept on site, and would qe subject to ongoing regulation by the Fire Department. Impacts from hazards would be less than significant. Environmental Check/ist 8 City of Arroyo Grande Kennedy Club Fitness; Case No. 98-573 ---------_._-~ ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY - Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? 0 0 0 181 b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which pennits have been granted)? 0 0 0 181 c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the comse of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion of siltation on- or off-site? 0 0 181 0 d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off- site? 0 0 181 0 e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? 0 0 181 0 f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? 0 0 0 181 g) Place housing within a IOO-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? 0 0 0 181 h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? 0 0 0 181 i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? 0 0 0 181. Environmental Checklist 9 City of Arroyo Grande Kennedy Club Fitness; Case No. 98-573 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST DISCUSSION: The elevation of the site is approximately 90 feet above mean sea level. Based upon soil investigations in the vicinity of the project site, groundwater at the project site is expected to be approximately 30 feet below ground surface and flow to the west and southwest. Construction and development of the site would not impact the groundwater quality or supply. The project site is located in the Meadowcreek Watershed. Drainage from this area generally flows to the south. CUlTently, the site is not covered with impervious surfaces. The development of the proposed project would likely decrease the area of pervious surfaces on the site. Drainage from the site would be to existing drainage facilities. These are located south of the improved area of the parcel. The drainage facilities are adequate to accept the runofffrom the site. The project site is located in Zone C, as shown on the Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Insurance Rate Map. This zone is defmed as a minimal potential risk for flooding.. Therefore, the project would not expose people or property in the project vicinity to water related hazards. IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? 0 0 0 ~ b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project adopted for the purpose of avoiding or 0 D D ~ mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation 0 D ~ plan or natural community conservation plan? 0 DISCUSSION: The project would construct a membership health club facility in a Planned Development zone. The parcel is subject to the site development standards for the Highway Services (H-S) subzone of the Oak Park Acres Planned Development, and other ordinances of the City of Arroyo Grande. Public and private recreation centers are pennitted in the Highway Service district subject to obtaining a conditional use permit. The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan and zoning for the site, and no impacts in land use and planning would result. XI. NOISE - Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable 0 ~ 0 0 standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or ground borne noise 0 0 0 ~ levels? Environmental Checklist 10 City of Arroyo Grande Kennedy Club Fitness; Case No. 98-573 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST C) A substantial pennanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? 0 0 ~ 0 d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? 0 ~ 0 0 DISCUSSION: Most of the activities at the proposed facility would occur indoors. A small outdoor courtyard would be located on the west side of the building. The primary source of noise would be from automobiles arriving and departing, and the conversation of members of the facility as they moved between the building and automobiles. This type and level of noise is consistent with existing uses on the site, and with the zoning of the project site. The operation of the proposed project would not significantly increase ambient noise levels. Construction activities would generate noise levels that would temporarily create noise impacts. It is anticipated that noise levels could reach between 70 and 88 decibels. Limiting the. hours of construction would reduce this short-tenn impact to less than significant level. See Mitigation Measure 9. XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING - Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? 0 0 0 ~ b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? 0 0 0 ~ c) Displace substantial numbers of people necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? 0 0 0 ~ DISCUSSION: The project would provide health and recreational facilities on a membership basis. No new housing would be associated with the proposed project, and no significant increase in demand for housing would be created by the project. Environmental Checklist 11 City of Arroyo Grande Kennedy Club Fitness; Case No. 98-573 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES - a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other perfonnance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? D D 181 D Police protection? D D 181 D Schools? D D 181 D Parks? D D 181 D Other public facilities? D D 181 D DISCUSSION: The proposed facility is consistent with the General Plan designation and zoning for the site. Adequate fire and police services exist in the community to serve the project, and the development would generate tax revenues to contribute to the cost of ongoing public services. No housing is associated with the project, and no impact on schools would be generated by the project. XIV. RECREATION - a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? D D D 181 b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? D D D 181 DISCUSSION: The project would construct a health club facility that would be operated on a membership basis. The commercial facility would not increase the demand for public recreational facilities, and would have a beneficial impact on existing recreational oppornmities. Environmental Checklist 12 City of Arroyo Grande Kennedy Club Fitness; Case No. 98-573 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST XV. TRANSPORTATION I TRAFFIC - Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume-to-capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? 0 0 IZI 0 b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated 0 roads or highways? 0 IZI 0 c) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., fann equipment)? 0 0 IZI 0 d) Result in inadequate emergency access? 0 0 IZI 0 e) Result in inadequate parking capacity? 0 0 IZI 0 f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? 0 0 IZI 0 DISCUSSION: A traffic study was conducted for the project by Penfield & Smith. The Traffic Study also analyzed a proposed project on an adjacent parcel for a professional office building consisting of 11,335 square feet. An existing office building, consisting of 7,560 square feet. is located on an adjacent parcel. The project site, the adjacent parcels referred to in the above paragraph, and three other adjacent parcels have been the subject of cooperative site planning in the past. Reciprocal easements for access, parking, and drainage exist with regard to a portion of these parcels, and additional easements would be created as part of the project. The intention of the applicants is that persons utilizing the health club facilities would have access to all parking areas on the larger site. The traffic study included consideration of these arrangements. The traffic study evaluated the impact of project traffic on nearby roadways and intersections, both for current volumes of traffic, and those expected to be generated by build-out of proposed and approved project in the City. The project is expected to generate 452 daily trips, with 25 trips during the morning peak hours (7-9 a.m.) and 28 trips during the evening peak hours (4-6 p.m.). The traffic study reviewed the impact of the proposed project for the adjacent parcel, and indicated that project was expected to generate 124 daily trips, with 18 a.m. peak-hour and 17 p.m. peak-hour trips. The traffic study noted that some of the persons employed at the office building could be expected to use the health club facilities. This would tend to reduce the number of trips generated by either of the projects. Environmental Checlclist 13 City of Arroyo Grande Kennedy Club Fitness; Case No. 98-573 ------------..----- ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST The traffic study did not include consideration of this possibility in the analysis, and the traffic study therefore analyzed a worst-case scenario. The traffic study assigned the trips generated by the project to project-area roadways based on the consultant's knowledge of travel patterns and previous traffic studies. The trips were assigned as follows: Kennedy Health Club Sheppel Office Building North on Oak Park Boulevard 5% 5% on U.S. Highway 101 35% 30% South on U.S. Highway 101 25% 25% on Oak Park Boulevard 10% 10% East on James Way 5% 10% on W. Branch Street 20% 20% Total 100% 100% The traffic study then analyzed the perfonnance of study area intersections to determine whether the project traffic would result in significant impacts. Significant impacts would occur if project traffic resulted in a decrease in intersection perfonnance to a level of service less than LOS C. The intersections analyzed by the traffic study were Oak Park at James Way and Oak Park at W. Branch Street. Project traffic was analyzed both with regard to existing conditions, and the ''baseline'' conditions that would exist when full build-out was achieved. The traffic study concluded that the level of service for the study area intersections would not decrease below LOS C with the construction of the Kennedy Health Club project and the Sheppel Office Building project. The following table illustrates the results of the traffic study with regard to the existing and baseline conditions: Location Type of Existing + Baseline Baseline + Baseline + Baseline + Control Droiect Health Club Office both Oak Park Traffic LOSB LOSC LOSC LOSC LOSe Blvd.lJames Signal Way Oak Park Traffic LOSa LOSa LOSB LOSa LOSa Blvd./W . Signal Branch St. The level of service does not decrease below LOS e for any of the scenarios. Traffic impacts of the project on the intersections studied would not create significant impacts. The traffic study also analyzed frontage improvements along Oak Park Boulevard and James Way. Because the intersections were projected to operate at satisfactory levels of service, no frontage improvements were recommended by the traffic study. Environmental Checklist 14 City of Arroyo Grande Kennedy Club Fitness; Case No. 98-573 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST The traffic study concluded that the site access on James Way was located an adequate distance from the James Way/Oak Park Boulevard intersection. The driveway to the Foursquare Church is located across James Way near the existing access to the project site. The traffic study concluded that access would be adequate given the different peaking characteristics of the two sites. The traffic study recommended that if the adjacent site to the east of the project site develops, a single driveway for the project site should be combined with the access for that site, and aligned with the church site across James Way. The traffic study also analyzed parking for the site. Utilizing data from the Institute of Traffic Engineers and the Urban Land Institute, the traffic study projected that the office component of the existing and proposed uses would require a total of 57 parking spaces at the peak of office parking demand at 10-11 a.m. The health club parking requirement generally begins increasing significantly at 4:30 p.m. and peaks between the hours of 6-7 p.m., with a projected space requirement of 83 spaces. The combined parking requirements for the two uses could be as high as 140 spaces, but the two uses do not peak at the same time. The traffic study concluded that the office parking demand at 6-7 p.m. would be approximately 23% of the peak, or 13 spaces. During this peak at the health club, a total site parking demand of 96 spaces would exist. At the office peak of 10-11 a.m., the health club parking demand would be negligible. At mid-day, the office parking demand would be approximately 51 spaces, based on the Urban Land Institute parking demand data. Assuming that the mid-day health club demand could be 50% of the evening peak, the health club parking demand could be 42 spaces, for a total site parking demand of 93 spaces. The traffic study concluded that the amount of parking provided by the two projects, which would include approximately 45 spaces on a third parcel owned by Sheppel, would satisfy site parking demands for these projects. A reciprocal parking agreement would also be present with regard to the existing office building on site. This office provides parking in excess of the parking requirements that now exist, and would not affect the conclusion of the traffic study. Based on the above analysis, transportation/traffic impacts from the proposed project would less than significant. XVI. UTll.JTIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS - Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? D D D ~ b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? D D D ~ c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effectS1 D D D 181 d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and Environmental Checklist 15 City of Arroyo Grande Kennedy Club Fitness; Case No. 98-573 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? 0 ~ 0 0 e) Be served by a landfill with sufficient pennitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? 0 0 ~ 0 DISCUSSION: The project is located on a site zoned for commercial use, and the use proposed is consistent with the General Plan. The City's water usage has been forecast, and the City has adequate water resources for the uses proposed in the general Plan. Development of the proposed project would require water for both domestic use and landscape irrigation. The water consumption by this project would further reduce the City's supply of available water. This impact could be mitigated through conservation and the development and implementation of an individual water neutralization program. The mitigation measure listed below would minimize water use for irrigation on site, and require installation of fixtures that would minimize water usage in the facility, and would reduce water resources impacts to a less than significant level. See Mitigation Measures 10 and 11. The proposed project would incrementally increase demand for and use of utilities on the site but not in excess of amounts expected and provided for in the project area, and would not be expected to have any measurable impact on utilities. The proposed facility would be served by existing utilities in the community, and no extension of utility service would be required. The facility would not include kitchen or food service. facilities, and would not generate a significant amount of solid waste for disposal. Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No ImlJact lncorooration ImlJact ~ xvn. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? 0 0 0 ~ b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulative considerable? ("Cumulative considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past Environmental Checklist 16 City of Arroyo Grande Kennedy Club Fitness; Case No. 98-573 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? 0 0 ~ 0 c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? 0 0 ~ 0 RECOMMENDATION BY STAFF On the basis of the Initial Study, staff finds that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures incorporated into the revised project description would successfully mitigate the potentially significant impacts. Staff recommends the preparation of an Negative Declaration. The Negative Declaration finding is based on the assumption that mitigation measures will be acceptable to the applicant; ifnot acceptable a revised Initial Study finding for the preparation of an EIR may result. PROJECT EVALUATOR: TOM BUFORD INITIAL STUDY DATE: June 7, 1999 SIGNATURE: Tom Buford Environmental Checklist 17 City of Arroyo Grande Kennedy Club Fitness; Case No. 98-573 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST MITIGATION MEASURES 1. Mitigation Measure 1: Dust generated by the development activities shall be kept to a minimum with a goal of retaining dust on the site. Applicant shall follow the dust control measures listed below: a. During clearing, grading, earth moving, excavation, or transportation of cut or fill materials, water trucks or sprinkler systems are to be used to prevent dust from leaving the site and to create a crust after each day's activities cease. b. 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 shall include wetting down such areas in the later morning and after work is completed for the day, and whenever winds exceed 15 miles per hour. c. Soil stockpiled for more than two days shall be covered, kept moist, or treated with soil binders to prevent dust generation. 2. Mitigation Measure 2: The contractor or builder shall designate a person or persons to monitor the dust control program and order increased watering as necessary to prevent transport of dust off-site. Their duties shall include holiday and weekend periods when work may not be in progress. 3. Mitigation Measure 3: In the event archaeological or cultural resources are discovered during the construction process, all worlc on the site shall cease. A monitor with knowledge of archaeological resources shall be contacted, and shall view and assess the materials discovered. A written mitigation plan shall be prepared and approved by the City. All costs associated with the employment of a qualified archaeologist shall be paid by the applicant. 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, archeological resources are uncovered, all work shall be halted until the significance of the resources are determined. Ifhuman remains (burials) are encountered, the County Coroner (781-4513) shall be contacted immediately. The applicant may be required to provide archaeological studies and/or additional mitigation measures as required by the California Environmental Quality Act if archaeological resources are found on the site. 11 4. Mitigation Measure 4: Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit an updated soils report addressing any changes in the condition of the parcel which may have occUITed since the date of the Soils Report, March, 1988, and identifying measures to responds to such changes, if identified. In the alternative, applicant may submit a new soils report which adequately addresses the issues raised in the Soils Report. Environmental Checklist 18 City of Arroyo Grande Kennedy Club Fitness; Case No. 98-573 ---~--" ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 5. Mitigation Measure 5: Structures shall be designed to earthquake standards of the Unifonn Building Code Seismic Zone 4. Prior to plan check, the applicant shall submit building plans indicating standards to the satisfaction of Building and Safety. 6. Mitigation Measure 6: Construction operations, especially grading operations, shall be confined as much as possible to the dry season, in order to avoid erosion of disturbed soils. 7. Mitigation Measure 7: All graded areas, including road subgrades and building pads which are rough graded areas but not constructed until subsequent construction phases shall be revegetated. This vegetation shall be removed as necessary in later phases when finish grading, paving and building construction occurs. 8. Mitigation Measure 8: Project landscaping plans shall incorporate the use of fast growing ground covers to stabilize soils soon after construction is completed. 9. Mitigation Measure 9: Demolition or construction activities, including truck traffic coming to and from the site for any purpose, shall be limited to daytime, (non-holiday) hours (7:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.) Mondays through Saturdays. 10. Mitigation Measure 10: 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. 11. Mitigation Measure : All new construction shall utilize fixtures and designs that minimize water usage. Such fixtures shall include, but are not limited to, low flow shower heads, water saving toilets, instant water heaters and hot water recirculating systems. Water conserving designs and fixtures shall be installed prior to final occupancy. Environmental Checklist 19 City of Arroyo Grande Kennedy Club Fitness; Case No. 98-573 ~._- ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST SOURCE LIST: 1. City of Arroyo Grande General Plan 2. City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Land Use Map 3. City of Arroyo Grande Development Code 4. City of Arroyo Grande Zoning Map 5. City of Arroyo Grande Existing Setting and Community Issues Report 6. City of Arroyo Grande General Plan EIR 7. San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District Clean Air Plan 8. FEMA: Flood Insurance Rate Map 9. Project Description 10. Project Plans 11. Site Inspection 12. Ordinance 431 C.S. 13. Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) TriD Generation Manual 14. Penfield & Smith, Traffic Study 15. Buena Engineers, Inc., Soil Engineering Report for the Proposed Oak Park Health Plaza, March, 1998 Environmental Checklist 20 City of Arroyo Grande Kennedy Club Fitness; Case No. 98-573 9.a. MEMORANDUM TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: LYNDA K. SNODGRASS, DIRECTOR OF FINANCIAL SERVICES 7 SUBJECT: CASH DISBURSEMENT RA TIFICA TION DATE: JULY 13,1999 RECOMMENDA TION: It is recommended the City Council ratify the attached listing of cash disbursements for the period June 16 - June 30, 1999. FUNDING: There is a $486,505.22 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 A - Cash Disbursement Listing ATTACHMENT B - June 18,1999 Accounts Payable Check Register ATTACHMENT C - June 18,1999 Payroll Checks and Payroll Benefit Checks ATTACHMENT D - June 25,1999 Accounts Payable Check Register ATTACHMENT E - June 25, 1999 Payroll Check -Mc Mahon Final ~~_..- CITY 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 - City Clerk 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 Constntction Tax Fund (Fund 230) 4121 - Taxes/ Insurance/ Bonds 4556 - Construction Tax 4130 - Community Development Police Grant Fund (Fund 271) 4131 - Community Building (CDBG) 4202 - State AB3229 Cops Grant 4140 - Management Information System 4203 - Federal COPS Hiring Grant 4145 - Non Departmental 4204 - Federal Local Law Enforcement . Public Safety (Fund 010) 4201 - Police ENTERPRISE FUNDS 4211 - Fire SewerFund(Fund61~ 4212 - Building & Safety 4610 - Sewer Maintenance 4213 - Government Buildings Water Fund (Fund 640) Public Works (Fund 010) 4710 - Water Administration 4301 - Public Works-Admin & Engineering 4711 - Water Production 4303 - Street/Bridge Maintenance 4712 - Water Distribution 4304 - Street Lighting Lopez Administration (Fund 641) 4305 - Automotive Shop 4750 - Lopez Administration Parks & Recreation (Fund 010) 4420 - Parks CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS 4421 - Recreation 5501-5599 - Park Projects 4422 - General Recreation 5601-5699 - Streets Projects 4423 - Pre-School Program 5701-5799 - Drainage Projects 4424 - Recreation-Special Programs 5801-5899 - Water/Sewer/Street Projects 4425 - Children in Motion 5901-5999 - Water Projects 4430 - Soto Sport Complex 4460 - Parkway Maintenance Dept. Index for CounciLxJs --~- ATTACHMENT A CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE CASH DISBURSEMENTS ";tn tk PeWut 06- peuee 16 7~ peuee 30, 1999 ^ ^^ ^ ... ^.....", '" .~". ^ w .... ".~.'., July 13, 1999 Presented are the cash disbursements issued by the Department of Financial Services for the period June 16 to June 30, 1999. Shown are cash disbursements by week of occurrence and type of payment. WEEK TYPEOFPAYMENT SCHEDULE AMOUNT June 18, 1999 Accounts Payable Cks # 90817-90883 B 125,546.07 Payroll Checks and Payroll Benefit Checks C 217,267.25 342,813.32 June 25, 1999 Accounts Payable Cks #90903-90998 D 296,152.13 Payroll Check - Mc Mahon Final E 6,086.71 Less Ck P124 Payroll Transfer included in (158,546.94) Attachment C 143,691.90 Two Week Total $ 486,505.22 ~---- ATTACHHENT B VOUCHRE2 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE PAGE 1 06/16/99 08:50 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR PERIOD 12 VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT 90817 06/18/99 000468 A T & T-L/DIST SVC. DATA LINE 473-0379 010.4140.5303 196.64 196.64 90818 06/18/99 068127 AG PRINT N COPY OVERHEAD TRANSPARENCIES 010.4421.5255 24.13 24.13 90819 06/18/99 003822 AMERICAN RED CROSS FIRST-AID CERT 010.4424.5251 112.00 90819 06/18/99 003822 AMERICAN RED CROSS FIRST-AID CERT 220.4303.5501 77 .00 189.00 90820 06/18/99 100492 JENNIFER ANDERSON REF.SECURITY DEP/USER FEES 010.0000.4354 62.50 62.50 90821 06/18/99 101179 AGUSTIN AVILA REF. PARK DEPOSIT-AVILA 010.0000.4354 25.00 25.00 90822 06/18/99 009438 BARKLOW'S FIRE TRUCK PA VALVES/SCREWS/SEALS 010.4211. 5601 234.26 234.26 90823 06/18/99 009750 BRENDA BARROW REIMB.SNACK SUPPLIES-BARROW 010.4425.5259 253.41 253.41 90824 06/18/99 012168 BOXX EXPRESS SHIPPING-MAY 99 220.4303.5255 10.03 10.03 90825 06/18/99 013026 BRISCO MILL & LUMBER TAPE/DOOR MENDER/DRILL BIT 010.4213.5273 58.28 90825 06/18/99 013026 BRISCO MILL & LUMBER BULBS/BATTERIES 010.4213.5604 90.54 90825 06/18/99 013026 BRISCO MILL & LUMBER DRILL/HOLE SAW 010.4213.5273 22.50- 90825 06/18/99 013026 BRISCO MILL & LUMBER PAINT/PAINT THINNER/SANDPAPER 010.4213.5604 168.28 90825 06/18/99 013026 BRISCO MILL & LUMBER COVERALLS 010.4213.5604 19.27 90825 06/18/99 013026 BRISCO MILL & LUMBER CREDIT OVERALLS 010.4213.5604 1. 88- 90825 06/18/99 013026 BRISCO MILL & LUMBER NUTS/PICTURE HANGING SUPPLIES 010.4213.5604 16.46 90825 06/18/99 013026 BRISCO MILL & LUMBER GUTTER PARTS 010.4213.5604 54.29 382.74 90826 06/18/99 101007 PHIL BULLARD AFTER SCHOOL PROG-BULLARD 010.4424.5351 48.75 48.75 90827 06/18/99 101183 LES BUSICK REF. TIME EXTENSION-BUSICK 010.0000.4510 150.00 150.00 90828 06/18/99 021684 C.COAST MEDICAL SUPPLY OXYGEN FILL 010.4211.5206 12.00 12.00 90829 06/18/99 023322 CHRISTIANSON CHEVROLET SWITCH 010.4213.5601 16.89 16.89 90830 06/18/99 024832 COMMUNICATION SOLUTIONS PROGRAM 2 PLOTERS 640.4712.5303 212.50 90830 06/18/99 024832 COMMUNICATION SOLUTIONS REPR.RUN PROBLEM SCADA SYS 640.4712.5303 105.00 317.50 90831 06/18/99 101180 JULIE CRAIG REF. PARK DEPOSIT-CRAIG 010.0000.4354 25.00 25.00 90832 06/18/99 026286 CREEK ENVIRONMENTAL LAB WATER SAMPLES 640.4710.5310 70.00 70.00 90833 06/18/99 100355 DAVID CROCKETT CROCKETT SVCS-6/4 010.4130.5303 1,600.00 1,600.00 90834 06/18/99 026832 CUESTA EQUIPMENT CO LUTE HEADS 220.4303.5613 60.92 60.92 90835 06/18/99 027534 D.G.REPAIR REPR.COOLANT/BRAKE LEAKS 220.4303.5601 176.28 176.28 90836 06/18/99 100896 LISA DEL VAGLIO REIMB.MILEAGE-DEL VAGLIO 010.4425.5255 53.01 53.01 90837 06/18/99 074840 DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFF VEHICLE FORFEITURE#VF99-0002 010.0000.2217 100.00 100.00 ------. VOUCHRE2 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE PAGE 2 06/16/99 08:50 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR PERIOD 12 VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT 90838 06/18/99 030966 EAGLE-CAM PIPELINE VIDE INSPECT-W.BRANCH SEWER MAIN 612.4610.5610 300.00 300.00 90839 06/18/99 031044 EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTAN COMPACTION TESTING/GAUGE TEST 350.5401. 7401 483.00 483.00 90840 06/18/99 100544 ECONOMIC VITALITY CORP 99/20 ANNUAL SPONSORSHIP 284.4103.5309 5,000.00 5,000.00 90841 06/18/99 031942 ELECTRONIC PARTS SUPERM MISC. TooLS-VEH. REPAIRS 010.4211.5601 13.03 13.03 90842 06/18/99 032838 FAMILIAN PIPE & SUPPLY REPAIR CLAMP 640.4711.5603 193.05 193.05 90843 06/18/99 100691 FIVE CITIES-TIMES LEGAL 52727 010.4002.5301 79.50 90843 06/18/99 100691 FIVE CITIES-TIMES LEGAL 54101 010.4002.5301 206.25 285.75 90844 06/18/99 101187 RON FRYER REF.L/SCAPE BOND-400 LAS AGUIL 010.0000.2210 1,200.00 1,200.00 90845 06/18/99 036972 GATOR CRUSHING & RECYCL A/C REMOVAL 220.4303.5307 99.50 90845 06/18/99 036972 GATOR CRUSHING & RECYCL A/C REMOVAL 220.4303.5307 46.80 90845 06/18/99 036972 GATOR CRUSHING & RECYCL A/C REMOVAL 220.4303.5307 51.30 90845 06/18/99 036972 GATOR CRUSHING & RECYCL A/C REMOVAL 220.4303.5307 103.20 300.80 90846 06/18/99 038454 GRAND OFFICE SUPPLY OFFICE SUPPLIES 010.4212.5201 16.00 90846 06/18/99 038454 GRAND OFFICE SUPPLY OFFICE SUPPLIES 010.4130.5201 7.50 90846 06/18/99 038454 GRAND OFFICE SUPPLY OFFICE SUPPLIES 010.4301. 5255 29.90 90846 06/18/99 038454 GRAND OFFICE SUPPLY OFFICE SUPPLIES 010.4101. 5201 32.30 90846 06/18/99 038454 GRAND OFFICE SUPPLY OFFICE SUPPLIES 220.4303.5201 48.31 90846 06/18/99 038454 GRAND OFFICE SUPPLY OFFICE SUPPLIES 010.4120.5201 32.15 90846 06/18/99 038454 GRAND OFFICE SUPPLY OFFICE SUPPLIES 010.4130.5201 13.92 90846 06/18/99 038454 GRAND OFFICE SUPPLY OFFICE SUPPLIES 220.4303.5201 12.33 90846 06/18/99 038454 GRAND OFFICE SUPPLY OFFICE SUPPLIES 010.4101.5201 77 .01 269.42 90847 06/18/99 036426 GTE WIRELESS CELL PHONE-CONST.INSPECT 350.5617.7301 69.40 90847 06/18/99 036426 GTE WIRELESS CELL PHONE-STREET SUPER 220.4303.5403 49.62 119.02 90848 06/18/99 101088 HANSON AGGREGATES ASPHALT 220.4303.5613 180.74 180.74 90849 06/18/99 044304 IMPULSE MFG. REPR.VALVE TURNING TOOL 640.4712.5610 28.00 28.00 90850 06/18/99 045162 INTL CONF OF BUILDING 0 97 MAPS-FAULT ZONES 010.4212.5501 55.76 55.76 90851 06/18/99 046176 J J'S FOOD COMPANY CMC CREW SUPPLIES 220.4303.5613 49.55 90851 06/18/99 046176 J J'S FOOD COMPANY BLOOD DRIVE SUPPLIES 010.4211. 5255 64.52 114.07 90852 06/18/99 046410 J.W.ENTERPRISES TOILET RENTAL 220.4303.5552 91.73 91.73 90853 06/18/99 101177 DEBBIE JOHNSON REF. PARK DEPOSIT-JOHNSON 010.0000.4354 50.00 50.00 90854 06/18/99 100952 L & B INDUSTRIAL WADERS 220.4303.5255 251.16 251.16 90855 06/18/99 101178 FRANCISCO LOPEZ . REF.PARK DEPOSIT-LOPEZ 010.0000.4354 25.00 25.00 90856 06/18/99 101184 SERENA LOPEZ REF. PARK DEPOSIT-LOPEZ 010.0000.4354 25.00 25.00 --~-.__._--- VOUCHRE2 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE PAGE 3 06/16/99 08:50 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR PERIOD 12 VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT 90857 06/18/99 101022 BURTON LUND LUND SVCS-6/9 010.4212.5303 540.00 90857 06/18/99 101022 BURTON LUND LUND SVCS-6/14 010.4212.5303 160.00 700.00 90858 06/18/99 101188 CHRISTOPHER MARR REF.L/SCAPE BOND-176 PINE 010.0000.2210 1,200.00 1,200.00 90859 06/18/99 056394 MIDAS MUFFLER & BRAKE REPR.U-JOINT 220.4303.5601 226.05 90859 06/18/99 056394 MIDAS MUFFLER & BRAKE TAX ON PARTS 220.4303.5601 4.35 230.40 90860 06/18/99 057096 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE SCREWS 010.4211. 5601 9.13 90860 06/18/99 057096 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE POWER CENTER/ELECT. SUPPLIES 010.4213.5604 45.06 90860 06/18/99 057096 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE BATTERIES/BOX COVER 010.4213.5604 15.10 90860 06/18/99 057096 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE LIGHT BULBS 010.4213.5604 26.08 90860 06/18/99 057096 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE PLEDGE 010.4213.5604 6.96 90860 06/18/99 057096 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE BULB 010.4213.5604 9.64 90860 06/18/99 057096 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE LEATHERMAN POCKET TOOL 612.4610.5273 53.61 90860 06/18/99 057096 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE BATTERIES/GROMMET KITS 010.4211.5603 44.14 90860 06/18/99 057096 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE PLIER/ADJ.WRENCH 640.4712.5273 42.13 90860 06/18/99 057096 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE WEED N FEED 010.4430.5274 25.72 90860 06/18/99 057096 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE FLAG SET/POLE 010.4430.5605 14.97 90860 06/18/99 057096 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE MORTAR MIX 612.4610.5610 12.83 305.37 90861 06/18/99 057252 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICE UNIFORMS/MATS/TOWELS 220.4303.5143 71.00 90861 06/18/99 057252 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICE UNIFORMS/MATS/TOWELS 220.4303.5255 33.60 90861 06/18/99 057252 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICE UNIFORMS/MATS/TOWELS 640.4711.5143 65.00 90861 06/18/99 057252 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICE UNIFORMS/MATS/TOWELS 612.4610.5143 26.00 195.60 90862 06/18/99 060684 NAT'L PUB.SAFETY INFO.B FIRE CHIEF DIRECTORY 010.4211. 5503 90.00 90.00 90863 06/18/99 061814 NOBLE SAW, INC. WEEDLINE 220.4303.5603 71. 64 71.64 90864 06/18/99 064194 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC ELECTRIC 010.4304.5402 13,159.33 90864 06/18/99 064194 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC ELECTRIC 010.4304.5402 44.70 13,204.03 90865 06/18/99 065050 PEOPLE PROFESSIONALS TE STEARS SVCS-5/27 220.4303.5303 416.64 416.64 90866 06/18/99 068000 PRESSURE VESSEL SERVICE SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE 640.4712.5274 489.80 489.80 90867 06/18/99 101181 RADWORKS HIP POCKET ACTIVITES 010.4422.5256 53.55 53.55 90868 06/18/99 101185 JAMIE SANBONMATSU REF. SECURITY DEPOSIT-SANBONMA 010.0000.4354 25.00 25.00 90869 06/18/99 078156 SEBASTIAN OIL DISTRIB. OIL/FILTERS 010.4211.5601 166.14 90869 06/18/99 078156 SEBASTIAN OIL DISTRIB. DIESEL/GASOLINE 010.4211.5608 244.86 411.00 90870 06/18/99 101186 SIERRA DIGITAL,INC. RECWARE SOFTWARE 010.4140.6101 5,341. 06 90870 06/18/99 101186 SIERRA DIGITAL, INC. INSTL RECWARE 010.4140.6101 2,000.00 7,341.06 90871 06/18/99 101176 SKILLPATH SEMINARS REGIS-CONF.WOMEN-WIEGAND 010.4212.5501 149.00 149.00 90872 06/18/99 074100 SLO CNTY AUDITOR-CONTRO VEHICLE FORFEITURE #990453 010.0000.2217 935.50 935.50 -.----.-- VOUCHRE2 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE PAGE 4 06/16/99 08:50 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR PERIOD 12 VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT 90873 06/18/99 080808 SOUTH SLO COUNTY SANIT SEWER SVC COLL-5/99 760.0000.2304 37,830.61 90873 06/18/99 080808 SOUTH SLO COUNTY SANIT SEWER HOOKUPS-5/99 760.0000.2305 50,400.00 90873 06/18/99 080808 SOUTH SLO COUNTY SANIT 5-1 SAN.DIST-214 E.BRANCH 010.4145.5401 19.63 90873 06/18/99 080808 SOUTH SLO COUNTY SANIT 5-1 SAN.DIST-215 E.BRANCH 010.4145.5401 13 .47 90873 06/18/99 080808 SOUTH SLO COUNTY SANIT 5-1 SAN.DIST-208 E.BRANCH 010.4145.5401 13.47 90873 06/18/99 080808 SOUTH SLO COUNTY SANIT 5-1 SAN.DIST-211 VERNON 010.4145.5401 13.47 90873 06/18/99 080808 SOUTH SLO COUNTY SANIT 5-1 SAN.DIST-140 TRAF.WAY 010.4145.5401 13 .47 90873 06/18/99 080808 SOUTH SLO COUNTY SANIT 5-1 SAN.DIST-STROTHER R/R 010.4145.5401 13 .47 90873 06/18/99 080808 SOUTH SLO COUNTY SANIT 7/98-5/99 HANDLING-ACCOUNTS 010.0000.4753 3,879.12- 90873 06/18/99 080808 SOUTH SLO COUNTY SANIT 7/98-5/99 HANDLING-HOOKUPS 010.0000.4753 267.00- 84,171.47 90874 06/18/99 080886 SOUTHERN AUTO SUPPLY BLACK SPLIT LOOM 010.4211.5603 24.67 24.67 90875 06/18/99 080964 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS GAS SERVICES 010.4145.5401 83.58 90875 06/18/99 080964 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS GAS SERVICES 010.4145.5401 50.13 90875 06/18/99 080964 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS GAS SERVICES 010.4145.5401 46.84 90875 06/18/99 080964 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS GAS SERVICES 010.4145.5401 30.24 90875 06/18/99 080964 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS GAS SERVICES 010.4145.5401 44.18 254.97 90876 06/18/99 082486 STEWARD CO PLASTIC BINDING 010.4102.5255 89.49 89.49 90877 06/18/99 085644 TOSTE GRADING & PAVING TACK OIL 220.4303.5613 125.00 125.00 90878 06/18/99 101009 UNISOURCE MAINT SUPPLY CREDIT CLEANING SUPPLIES 010.4213.5604 106.69- 90878 06/18/99 101009 UNISOURCE MAINT SUPPLY CREDIT CLEANING SUPPLIES 010.4213.5604 53.34- 90878 06/18/99 101009 UNISOURCE MAINT SUPPLY CLEANER/P.TOWELS/T.PAPER 010.4213.5604 266.79 90878 06/18/99 101009 UNISOURCE MAINT SUPPLY CLEANER 010.4213.5604 52.55 90878 06/18/99 101009 UNISOURCE MAINT SUPPLY P.TOWELS/CLEANING SUPPLIES 010.4213.5604 210.83 370.14 90879 06/18/99 087672 UNITED RENTALS RENTAL-TRASH PUMP 220.4303.5552 75.62 75.62 90880 06/18/99 088424 URBAN FUTURES INC. PROF.RDA SVCS-5/99 284.4103.5303 434.72 434.72 90881 06/18/99 088842 VALLEY AUTO SERVICE REPR.TIRE 010.4211.5601 12.00 12.00 90882 06/18/99 090480 WAYNE'S TIRE REPR.TIRE/TUBE 010.4305.5601 64.66 90882 06/18/99 090480 WAYNE'S TIRE TIRES/BALANCE/ALIGNMENT 640.4712.5601 417.69 90882 06/18/99 090480 WAYNE'S TIRE LUBE/OIL/SAFETY INSPECT/FILTER 220.4303.5601 76.16 90882 06/18/99 090480 WAYNE'S TIRE LUBE/OIL/FILTER/SAFETY INSP 010.4420.5601 10.65 90882 06/18/99 090480 WAYNE'S TIRE LUBE/OIL/FILTER/SAFETY INSP 220.4303.5601 10.65 90882 06/18/99 090480 WAYNE'S TIRE LUBE/OIL/FILTER/SAFETY INSP 640.4712.5601 10.65 90882 06/18/99 090480 WAYNE'S TIRE LUBE/OIL/FILTER/SAFETY INSP 612.4610.5601 10.65 90882 06/18/99 090480 WAYNE'S TIRE OIL/FILTER/WIPERS/SAFETY INSP 220.4303.5601 102.40 703.51 90883 06/18/99 100431 WILLARD PAPER CO PAPER 010.4102.5255 111.24 90883 06/18/99 100431 WILLARD PAPER CO NCR/PAPER 010.4102.5255 361. 06 472.30 TOTAL CHECKS 125,546.07 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE PAGE 5 06/16/99 08:50 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR PERIOD 12 FUND TITLE AMOUNT 010 GENERAL FUND 26,769.85 220 STREETS FUND 2,521.58 284 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FUND 5,434.72 350 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND 552.40 612 SEWER FUND 403.09 640 WATER FUND 1,633.82 760 SANITATION DISTRIBUTION FUND 88,230.61 TOTAL 125,546.07 -~._---- - ATTACHMENT C CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE DEPARTMENTAL LABOR DISTRIBUTION PAY PERIOD 5/28/99 TO 6/10/99 6/18/99 FUND 010 194,756.35 Salaries Full time 118,503.94 FUND 220 8,672.22 Salaries Part-Time 20,624.14 FUND 284 - Salaries Over-Time 10,956.46 FUND 612 3,541.68 Holiday Pay 480.69 FUND 640 10,297.00 Sick Pay 3,745.18 217,267.25 Annual Leave Pay - Vacation Buy Back - Vacation Pay 5,244.95 Comp Pay 3,736.18 Annual Leave Pay 2,901.37 PERS Retirement 15,161.39 Social Security 11,822.71 PARS Retirement 221.93 State Disability Ins. 60.76 Health Insurance 18,088.82 Dental Insurance 3,457.59 Vision Insurance 630.11 Life Insurance 495.20 Long Term Disability 686.31 Uniform Allowance - Car Allowance 300.00 Council Expense - Employee Assistance 149.52 Total: 217,267.25 ,,-- -~. .-~--"""-.-"",-",'- ATTACHMENT D VOUCHRE2 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE PAGE 1 06/22/99 15:23 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR PERIOD 12 VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT 122 06/16/99 016380 CA. NARCOTIC OFFICERS AS REGIS-HENDRICKS CNOA REGION 010.4201. 5501 40.00 40.00 123 06/16/99 041808 CRAIG HENDRICKS CNOA REGION VI-HENDRICKS 010.4201. 5501 147.00 147.00 124 06/17/99 005616 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE G.A.REIMB 6-10-99 PR 011.0000.1015 158,546.94 158,546.94 90903 06/25/99 000234 A & R WELDING SUPPLY OXYGEN/ACETYLENE CYLINDERS 010.4305.5303 13.00 13.00 90904 06/25/99 100584 AIR LIQUIDE AMERICA COR OXYGEN/ACETYLENE 640.4712.5255 63.90 63.90 90905 06/25/99 003120 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SUP RHUEL GEL-TUBE 010.4420.5255 48.91 48.91 90906 06/25/99 004252 CAROL ANDERSON OFFICE SUPPLIES 010.4130.5201 22.43 90906 06/25/99 004252 CAROL ANDERSON PHOTO PROCESSING 010.4130.5201 21. 26 90906 06/25/99 004252 CAROL ANDERSON KITCHEN SUPPLIES 010.4101.5201 10.14 90906 06/25/99 004252 CAROL ANDERSON KITCHEN SUPPLIES 010.4001.5201 17.06 90906 06/25/99 004252 CAROL ANDERSON MEETING SUPPLIES 010.4001. 5201 37.50 90906 06/25/99 004252 CAROL ANDERSON CSMFO MEETING 010.4120.5501 23.27 90906 06/25/99 004252 -CAROL ANDERSON KEYBOARD ADAPTER 284.4103.5201 5.90 90906 06/25/99 004252 CAROL ANDERSON MEETING SUPPLIES 010.4001. 5504 19.00 90906 06/25/99 004252 CAROL ANDERSON W/SHOP SUPPLIES 010.4101.5501 61. 06 90906 06/25/99 004252 CAROL ANDERSON GASOLINE 010.4301. 5608 20.00 90906 06/25/99 004252 CAROL ANDERSON PHOTO PROCESSING 010.4130.5201 21. 12 90906 06/25/99 004252 CAROL ANDERSON REF. PC TAPE COPY 010.0000.4804 10.00 90906 06/25/99 004252 CAROL ANDERSON MAIL-PLANS & SPECS 010.4301. 5201 3.58 90906 06/25/99 004252 CAROL ANDERSON POSTAGE 010.4211.5201 2.97 90906 06/25/99 004252 CAROL ANDERSON POSTAGE/REG. MAIL 010.4145.5201 20.05 90906 06/25/99 004252 CAROL ANDERSON KITCHEN SUPPLIES 010.4101.5201 18.46 90906 06/25/99 004252 CAROL ANDERSON PHOTO PROCESSING 010.4130.5201 10.18 90906 06/25/99 004252 CAROL ANDERSON CAMERA BATTERIES 010.4101. 5201 13.89 90906 06/25/99 004252 CAROL ANDERSON DMV PHYS-SOARES 010.4421.5255 5.00 90906 06/25/99 004252 CAROL ANDERSON TRAF.COMMISH MILEAGE 010.4301. 5608 5.89 348.76 90907 06/25/99 005070 APPLIED DEVELOP.ECONOMI MAY 99 APPLIED DEV.SVCS 010.4130.5392 4,249.38 4,249.38 90908 06/25/99 101194 ROBERTA AYRES REF.PARK DEPOSIT-AYRES 010.0000.4354 25.00 25.00 90909 06/25/99 101195 JINNY BARNETT REF.C/B DEPOSIT-BARNETT 010.0000.2206 250.00 90909 06/25/99 101195 JINNY BARNETT BLDG. SUPER-BARNETT 010.0000.4355 137.25- 112.75 90910 06/25/99 009750 BRENDA BARROW REIMB.SUPPLIES-BARROW 010.4425.5255 4.78 90910 06/25/99 009750 BRENDA BARROW REIMB. PLAY GROUND-BARROW 010.4425.5255 33.37 90910 06/25/99 009750 BRENDA BARROW REIMB.SUPPLIES-BARROW 010.4424.5251 23.53 90910 06/25/99 009750 BRENDA BARROW REIMB.SUPPLIES-BARROW 010.4425.5259 145.41 207.09 90911 06/25/99 010374 BEAR CAT MFG. INC. RADIATOR HOSES/SCREEN 220.4303.5603 227.63 90911 06/25/99 010374 BEAR CAT MFG. INC. REPL.PUMP/SEAL KITS 220.4303.5603 987.30 1,214.93 90912 06/25/99 100618 BERCHTOLD EQUIPMENT CO WATER PIPES/THERMOSTAT 010.4420.5603 66.87 66.87 90913 06/25/99 012168 BOXX EXPRESS MAY UPS SHIPPING 010.4201. 5201 54.26 54.26 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE PAGE 2 06/22/99 15:23 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR PERIOD 12 VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT 90914 06/25/99 101198 CHRISTINE BRATTON REF. PARK DEPOSIT-BRATTON 010.0000.4354 25.00 25.00 90915 06/25/99 013884 KEVIN BURT S/BALL UMPIRE-BURT 010.4424.5352 28.00 28.00 90916 06/25/99 018876 CA. ST. DEPT. TRANS PORTAT I SIGNAL MAINT/POWER 010.4304.5303 869.92 90916 06/25/99 018876 CA. ST. DEPT.TRANSPORTATI SIGNAL MAINT/POWER 010.4304.5402 181.77 90916 06/25/99 018876 CA. ST. DEPT. TRANSPORTATI SIGNAL MAINT/POWER 010.4304.5303 410.45 90916 06/25/99 018876 CA. ST. DEPT. TRANSPORTATI SIGNAL MAINT/POWER 010.4304.5402 873.80 90916 06/25/99 018876 CA.ST.DEPT.TRANSPORTATI SIGNAL MAINT/POWER 010.4304.5303 301.31 90916 06/25/99 018876 CA. ST. DEPT. TRANSPORTATI SIGNAL MAINT/POWER 010.4304.5402 207.64 2,844.89 90917 06/25/99 016302 CALIFORNIA MENS COLONY CMC-MAY 99 220.4303.5303 3,408.21 3,408.21 90918 06/25/99 101069 CDW GOVERNMENT, INC. HPLJ4000 PRINTER/THINK PAD 640.4712.6201 2,932.94 2,932.94 90919 06/25/99 023010 RICHARD CHECANSKY REIMB.TUITION & BOOKS-CHCEANSK 010.4201. 5502 1,055.01 1,055.01 90920 06/25/99 023946 CLINICAL LAB.OF SAN BER WATER SAMPLES 640.4710.5310 914.00 914.00 90921 06/25/99 024870 COMPUSERVE INC. USER FEES THROUGH 5/29 010.4140.5607 71.11 71.11 90922 06/25/99 026286 CREEK ENVIRONMENTAL LAB WATER SAMPLES 640.4710.5310 15.00 15.00 90923 06/25/99 100355 DAVID CROCKETT CROCKETT SVCS-6/19 010.4130.5303 1,600.00 1,600.00 90924 06/25/99 026754 CRYSTAL SPRINGS WATER C BOTTLED WATER 010.4212.5201 15.00 90924 06/25/99 026754 CRYSTAL SPRINGS WATER C BOTTLED WATER 010.4130.5201 21. 67 90924 06/25/99 026754 CRYSTAL SPRINGS WATER C BOTTLED WATER 010.4101.5201 21. 67 90924 06/25/99 026754 CRYSTAL SPRINGS WATER C BOTTLED WATER 010.4120.5201 21. 66 90924 06/25/99 026754 CRYSTAL SPRINGS WATER C BOTTLED WATER 010.4421.5201 35.00 90924 06/25/99 026754 CRYSTAL SPRINGS WATER C BOTTLED WATER 010.4301. 5201 20.00 135.00 90925 06/25/99 027534 D.G.REPAIR REPL.STARTER 010.4420.5601 88.14 88.14 90926 06/25/99 100896 LISA DEL VAGLIO REIMB.AM/PM SUPPLIES-DEL VAGLI 010.4425.5255 9.79 9.79 90927 06/25/99 029484 DIESELRO INC. SERVICE/SAFETY INSPECT 220.4303.5601 372.93 90927 06/25/99 029484 DIESELRO INC. FUEL PUMP 220.4303.5601 222.62 90927 06/25/99 029484 DIESELRO INC. LUBE/OIL/FILTER 010.4420.5601 332.94 928.49 90928 06/25/99 100956 DOKKEN ENGINEERING DOKKEN SVCS TO 5/31/99 350.5616.7701 1,030.00 90928 06/25/99 100956 DOKKEN ENGINEERING DOKKEN SVCS TO 5/31 350.5615.7701 850.00 1,880.00 90929 06/25/99 101203 DAVID EKBOM REF . ADULT S/BALL LGE-EKBOM 010.4424.5352 449.00 449.00 90930 06/25/99 101030 HENRY ENGEN ENGEN SVCS TO 6/18 010.4130.5303 2,947.50 2,947.50 90931 06/25/99 101199 EQUAL SINGLES 60+ REF. PARK DEPOSIT-EQUAL 010.0000.4354 25.00 25.00 90932 06/25/99 033072 FARM SUPPLY CO. BUCKNER DIAPHRAM/SOLENIOD 010.4430.5605 384.73 384.73 VOUCHRE2 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE PAGE 3 06/22/99 15:23 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR PERIOD 12 VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT 90933 06/25/99 101202 NANCY FERRARI REF. GREEN WASTE-128 S.RENA 761.0000.2007 157.50 157.50 90934 06/25/99 100691 FIVE CITIES-TIMES LEGAL 52725 010.4130.5301 30.00 90934 06/25/99 100691 FIVE CITIES-TIMES LEGAL 54125 010.4002.5301 140.25 170.25 90935 06/25/99 036972 GATOR CRUSHING & RECYCL A/ C REMOVAL 220.4303.5307 97.86 90935 06/25/99 036972 GATOR CRUSHING & RECYCL CLASS #2 BASE 220.4303.5613 96.63 194.49 90936 06/25/99 100225 GEMMA SYSTEMS CABLING TO FIRE/SERVER/HUB 010.4211.6001 3,965.03 90936 06/25/99 100225 GEMMA SYSTEMS SERVER UPGRADE 010.4140.5303 1,520.00 90936 06/25/99 100225 GEMMA SYSTEMS TRAVEL EXPENSES-GEMMA 010.4140.5303 256.70 5,741. 73 90937 06/25/99 038454 GRAND OFFICE SUPPLY OFFICE SUPPLIES 010.4120.5201 60.35 90937 06/25/99 038454 GRAND OFFICE SUPPLY OFFICE SUPPLIES 010.4101.5201 9.53 90937 06/25/99 038454 GRAND OFFICE SUPPLY OFFICE SUPPLIES 010.4301. 5255 40.96 90937 06/25/99 038454 GRAND OFFICE SUPPLY CR:OFFICE SUPPLIES 010.4301. 5255 1.49- 90937 06/25/99 038454 GRAND OFFICE SUPPLY OFFICE SUPPLIES 010.4130.5201 18.20 90937 06/25/99 038454 GRAND OFFICE SUPPLY CR:OFFICE SUPPLIES 220.4303.5201 12.33- 90937 06/25/99 038454 GRAND OFFICE SUPPLY OFFICE SUPPLIES 220.4303.5201 31. 56 90937 06/25/99 038454 GRAND OFFICE SUPPLY OFFICE SUPPLIES 010.4301. 5255 4.50 90937 06/25/99 038454 GRAND OFFICE SUPPLY OFFICE SUPPLIES 010.4301. 5255 8.45 90937 06/25/99 038454 GRAND OFFICE SUPPLY OFFICE SUPPLIES 010.4130.5201 17.70 90937 06/25/99 038454 GRAND OFFICE SUPPLY OFFICE SUPPLIES 010.4120.5201 8.57 90937 06/25/99 038454 GRAND OFFICE SUPPLY OFFICE SUPPLIES 612.4610.5601 4.24 190.24 90938 06/25/99 039312 CITY OF GROVER BEACH DOG OBEDIENCE-GROVER 010.4424.5351 167.20 167.20 90939 06/25/99 036426 GTE WIRELESS CELL PHONE-AUTO 010.4305.5403 21. 77 90939 06/25/99 036426 GTE WIRELESS CELL PHONE-WATER SUPER 640.4710.5403 79.02 100.79 90940 06/25/99 101196 GUADALUPE UNION SCHOOL REF. PARK DEPOSIT-GUADALUPE 010.0000.4354 25.00 25.00 90941 06/25/99 101088 HANSON AGGREGATES ASPHALT 220.4303.5613 359.84 90941 06/25/99 101088 HANSON AGGREGATES ASPHALT 220.4303.5613 151.81 511.65 90942 06/25/99 041830 DEBRA HENTGES HAND TINTING CLASS-HENTGES 010.4424.5351 42.00 42.00 90943 06/25/99 039584 HPC/EAGLE ENERGY MOBIL THERM HYDRO OIL 220.4303.5603 68.91 68.91 90944 06/25/99 101197 MICHAEL HUMERIAN REF. PARK DEPOSIT-HUMERIAN 010.0000.4354 25.00 25.00 90945 06/25/99 044496 INFORMATION SERVICES DP ON LINE TRANS-MAY 99 010.4201. 5606 38.02 38.02 90946 06/25/99 101190 WILLIAM KAPP REF. PARKING CITE-D7142 010.0000.4203 60.00 60.00 90947 06/25/99 047814 KAUTZ TOWING TOWING-P31 010.4420.5601 50.00 50.00 90948 06/25/99 048516 KEYLOCK SECURITY SPECIA R&R IGNITION LOCK.REKEY 010.4305.5601 50.63 50.63 90949 06/25/99 101193 MEGAN KLEIN REF. PARKING CITE-D7271 010.0000.4203 30.00 30.00 ----------..- - ~--~------ VOUCHRE2 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE PAGE 4 06/22/99 15:23 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR PERIOD 12 VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT 90950 06/25/99 100985 DOUG LINTNER S/BALL UMP-LINTNER 010.4424.5352 90.00 90.00 90951 06/25/99 054522 CYNDI MALMEN CHILDREN'S DANCE CLASSES 010.4424.5351 40.00 40.00 90952 06/25/99 101192 CLAIR MARTIN REF. FEES GPA-3000 JATTA 010.0000.4501 712.00 90952 06/25/99 101192 CLAIR MARTIN REF. FEES TPM-3000 JATTA RD 010.0000.4501 568.00 1,280.00 90953 06/25/99 101191 TERRY MCADAMS WATER DEPOSIT-803 VALLEY ROAD 640.0000.2302 76.87 90953 06/25/99 101191 TERRY MCADAMS CLOSING BILL-803 VALLEY RD 640.0000.4751 13.73- 63.14 90954 06/25/99 056706 MID STATE CONCRETE PROD CONCRETE SPLYS/FRAMES/WINDOW 612.4610.5610 792.58 792.58 90955 06/25/99 056394 MIDAS MUFFLER & BRAKE LUBE/OIL/FILTER-P23 010.4420.5601 63.35 63.35 90956 06/25/99 101064 MIKE'S MAINTENANCE CLEAN/RECOAT FLOOR 010.4213.5604 75.00 75.00 90957 06/25/99 057096 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE JAR 640.4712.5255 9.96 90957 06/25/99 057096 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE HEX KEY T HANDLES/COMBO WRENCH 220.4303.5273 148.55 90957 06/25/99 057096 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE WOOD GLUE/MISC BLDG. MATERIALS 640.4712.5604 38.72 90957 06/25/99 057096 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE FOGGERS 010.4424.5251 8.03 90957 06/25/99 057096 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE WELDING GOGGLES 640.4712.5273 18.22 90957 06/25/99 057096 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE ELBOW/NIPPLE-WELL#9 640.4711.5603 3.73 90957 06/25/99 057096 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE NOZZLE-WELL#9 640.4711.5603 .74 227.95 90958 06/25/99 057252 MISSION UNIFORM SERVICE UNIFORMS/MATS/TOWELS 010.4420.5143 78.70 78.70 90959 06/25/99 057272 MIKE MITCHELL S/BALL UMPIRE-MITCHELL 010.4424.5352 60.00 60.00 90960 06/25/99 058072 CITY OF MORROR BAY MIS TECH SVCS-2/6-6/11/99 010.4140.5303 6,157.98 6,157,98 90961 06/25/99 100392 STEVE MOSLEY ADULT S/BALL UMPIRE-MOSLEY 010.4424.5352 120.00 120.00 90962 06/25/99 058890 RICHARD MUNOZ ADULT S/BALL UMPIRE-MUNOZ 010.4424.5352 30.00 30.00 90963 06/25/99 060642 NAT'L NOTARY ASSOC. NAT'L NOTARY RENEWAL-FRYER 010.4130.5503 34.00 34.00 90964 06/25/99 061814 NOBLE SAW, INC. HEDGE TRIMMER 010.4420.5273 343.16 90964 06/25/99 061814 NOBLE SAW, INC. LABOR CHECK SHAFT TRIMMER 010.4420.5603 5.00 90964 06/25/99 061814 NOBLE SAW,INC. 20 INCH BAR AND CHAIN 010.4420.5603 80.49 90964 06/25/99 061814 NOBLE SAW,INC. 2.5 GAS/OIL MIX 010.4420.5603 64.35 493.00 90965 06/25/99 100984 SCOIT O'CONNELL S/BALL SCORER-O'CONNELL 010.4424.5352 49.00 49.00 90966 06/25/99 062712 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE RACHET 640.4712.5273 39.67 90966 06/25/99 062712 ORCHARD SUPPLY HARDWARE SIGNS 220.4303.5613 54.96 94.63 90967 06/25/99 063960 PACIFIC BELL RADIO 451-0183 010.4145.5403 183.63 90967 06/25/99 063960 PACIFIC BELL ALARM 473-1935 640.4710.5403 38.44 90967 06/25/99 063960 PACIFIC BELL ALARM 473-2041 010.4145.5403 19.08 90967 06/25/99 063960 PACIFIC BELL FAX 473-2198 010.4145.5403 22.92 90967 06/25/99 063960 PACIFIC BELL ALARM 841-3953 010.4211.5403' 31.46 ------.--.-.-.-.-.-..- VOUCHRE2 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE PAGE 5 06/22/99 15:23 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR PERIOD 12 VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT 90967 06/25/99 063960 PACIFIC BELL ALARM 841-3956 220.4303.5403 31. 46 90967 06/25/99 063960 PACIFIC BELL ALARM 841-3959 640.4710.5403 31.46 90967 06/25/99 063960 PACIFIC BELL ALARM 841-3960 010.4211. 5403 31.46 90967 06/25/99 063960 PACIFIC BELL CENTREX PHONE-5400 010.4145.5403 1,432.92 90967 06/25/99 063960 PACIFIC BELL SLO COMPUTER 271-6566 010.4145.5403 47.71 90967 06/25/99 063960 PACIFIC BELL ALARM 271-7480 010.4201. 5403 63.86 90967 06/25/99 063960 PACIFIC BELL PAY PHONE 489-9816 010.4145.5403 41. 66 1,976.06 90968 06/25/99 064194 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC ELECTRIC 010.4304.5402 191.73 191.73 90969 06/25/99 065714 PERVO PAINT CO. PAVEMENT PAINT 220.4303.5613 10,380.19 90969 06/25/99 065714 PERVO PAINT CO. CURB PAINT 220.4303.5613 1,355.64 11,735.83 90970 06/25/99 066320 PIONEER EQUIPMENT CO. REPL.HYDRO HOSES 220.4303.5603 1,091.62 90970 06/25/99 066320 PIONEER EQUIPMENT CO. AIR FILTER/REPL.BOOT 640.4712.5603 387.35 1,478.97 90971 06/25/99 101201 PIZZA HUT #103143 REF. CLOSING BILL-1126 GRAND 640.0000.4751 94.67 94.67 90972 06/25/99 067782 DENNIS PORTE PUppy PLAY SCHOOL-PORTE 010.4424.5351 320.25 320.25 90973 06/25/99 069420 R & T SPECIALTY, INC. DARE CALCULATOR/STICKERS/VIDEO 277.4206.5504 163.04 90973 06/25/99 069420 R & T SPECIALTY, INC. DARE NORTHRIDGE/CALCULATOR 277.4206.5504 26.70 189.74 90974 06/25/99 070590 RICHETTI WATER CONDITIO MAY/JUNE RENT-WATER COND 010.4201. 5604 30.00 30.00 90975 06/25/99 101095 ROBERT ROSARI S/BALL SCORER-ROSARI 010.4424.5352 35.00 35.00 90976 06/25/99 075130 SAN LUIS OBISPO CNTY.NE SUMMER ACTIVITY GUIDES 010.4421. 5504 1,066.64 90976 06/25/99 075130 SAN LUIS OBISPO CNTY.NE CHILD CARE CLASS.ADS 010.4421.5201 226.61 1,293.25 90977 06/25/99 077024 ANN SARMIENTO S/BALL SCORER-SARMIENTO 010.4424.5352 112.00 112.00 90978 06/25/99 078702 DEE DEE SEVERANCE S/BALL SCORER-SEVERANCE 010.4424.5352 14.00 14.00 90979 06/25/99 075348 SLO CNTY SHERIFF BOOKING FEES 1-1-99/3-31-99 010.4201. 5323 6,012.50 6,012.50 90980 06/25/99 080964 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS GAS SERVICES 010.4145.5401 52.80 90980 06/25/99 080964 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS GAS SERVICES 010.4145.5401 45.34 90980 06/25/99 080964 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS GAS SERVICES 010.4145.5401 14.79 90980 06/25/99 080964 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS GAS SERVICES 010.4145.5401 107.83 90980 06/25/99 080964 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS GAS SERVICES 010.4145.5401 53.80 274.56 90981 06/25/99 081432 BOB SPEAR ADULT S/BALL UMPIRE-SPEAR 010.4424.5352 30.00 30.00 90982 06/25/99 099146 ST. BARNABAS PARISH REF. PARK DEP-ST.BARNANBAS 010.0000.4354 25.00 25.00 90983 06/25/99 085664 TOM TOTH ADULT S/BALL UMPIRE-TOTH 010.4424.5352 75.00 75.00 90984 06/25/99 086346 TROESH READY MIX CONCRETE 350.5611.7002 246.86 90984 06/25/99 086346 TROESH READY MIX CONCRETE 350.5611.7002 379.35 90984 06/25/99 086346 TROESH READY MIX CONCRETE-VALVE BOXES 220.4303.5613 328.84 955.05 ---" VOUCHRE2 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE PAGE 6 06/22/99 15:23 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR PERIOD 12 VOUCHER/ CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT ITEM CHECK NUMBER DATE NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER AMOUNT AMOUNT 90985 06/25/99 086736 DOTTIE TRULOCK DOG OBEDIENCE CLASSES 010.4424.5351 985.80 985.80 90986 06/25/99 087672 UNITED RENTALS RENTAL-SKIPLOADER 010.4430.5552 173.22 173.22 90987 06/25/99 088826 PEGGY VALKO ART CLASSES 010.4424.5351 8.40 8.40 90988 06/25/99 089270 JOSHUA VASQUEZ S/BALL UMPIRE-VASQUEZ 010.4424.5352 105.00 105.00 90989 06/25/99 101200 RAUL VASQUEZ REF. PARK DEPOSIT-VASQUEZ 010.0000.4354 25.00 25.00 90990 06/25/99 100960 VECTOR PDTS, INC SUN SCREEN 010.4201. 5272 278.85 90990 06/25/99 100960 VECTOR PDTS,INC CPR/MEDICAL SUPPLIES 010.4201.5272 170.80 90990 06/25/99 100960 VECTOR PDTS,INC BATTERIES 010.4201. 5255 18.02 467.67 90992 06/25/99 090246 JOHN WALLACE & ASSOC. UG STORAGE TANK REPLACEMENT 350.5401. 7301 2,361. 07 90992 06/25/99 090246 JOHN WALLACE & ASSOC. DON ROBERTS FIELD 350.5501.7301 75.00 90992 06/25/99 090246 JOHN WALLACE & ASSOC. GRAND AVE CORRIDOR STUDY 350.5603.7301 114.26 90992 06/25/99 090246 JOHN WALLACE & ASSOC. OPTICOM DEVICES 350.5604.7501 396.75 90992 06/25/99 090246 JOHN WALLACE & ASSOC. BIKEWAY PROJECT ONE 350.5606.7301 2,486.42 90992 06/25/99 090246 JOHN WALLACE & ASSOC. CREEKSIDE PATH 350.5607.7301 1,745.30 90992 06/25/99 090246 JOHN WALLACE & ASSOC. BRIDGE STREET BRIDGE DECK REHA 350.5608.7301 82.50 90992 06/25/99 090246 JOHN WALLACE & ASSOC. PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM 350.5613.7701 112.50 90992 06/25/99 090246 JOHN WALLACE & ASSOC. BRISCO/101 INTERCHANGE ALTS 350.5615.7301 258.00 90992 06/25/99 090246 JOHN WALLACE & ASSOC. EL CAMPO/101 INTERCHANGE ALTS 350.5616.7301 352.63 90992 06/25/99 090246 JOHN WALLACE & ASSOC. CENTRAL COAST TOWN CENTER 350.5617.7301 2,542.00 90992 06/25/99 090246 JOHN WALLACE & ASSOC. PARKING LOT BEHIND CITY HALL 350.5623.7501 157.20 90992 06/25/99 090246 JOHN WALLACE & ASSOC. DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN/FINANCE 350.5752.7701 37.50 90992 06/25/99 090246 JOHN WALLACE & ASSOC. DISASTER SERVICES 1998 (DR-120 350.5755.7501 1,144.70 90992 06/25/99 090246 JOHN WALLACE & ASSOC. SEWER AND WATER RATE STUDY 350.5805.7301 51. 50 90992 06/25/99 090246 JOHN WALLACE & ASSOC. GRAND AVE.ELM TO HALCYON 350.5806.7501 31,657.71 90992 06/25/99 090246 JOHN WALLACE & ASSOC. BEDLOE LANE MAINTENANCE PROJEC 350.5808.7301 301.25 90992 06/25/99 090246 JOHN WALLACE & ASSOC. RESERVOIR NO.1 DESIGN 350.5903.7501 7,477.48 90992 06/25/99 090246 JOHN WALLACE & ASSOC. WATER MASTER PLAN 350.5904.7701 1,296.00 90992 06/25/99 090246 JOHN WALLACE & ASSOC. GENERAL CONSULTING SERVICES 010.4301. 5303 12,558.43 65,208.20 90993 06/25/99 090480 WAYNE'S TIRE LUBE/OIL/FILTERS/WIPERS 010.4201.5601 58.22 90993 06/25/99 090480 WAYNE'S TIRE LUBE/OIL/FILTERS/WIPERS 010.4201.5601 58.:22 116.44 90994 06/25/99 101189 WESTERN EXTERMINATOR CO TERMITE FUMIGATION-PUMP BLDG 640.4712.5604 309.00 90994 06/25/99 101189 WESTERN EXTERMINATOR CO TERMITE FUMIGATION-ORO BOOSTER 640.4712.5604 309.00 90994 06/25/99 101189 WESTERN EXTERMINATOR CO TERMITE FUMIGATION-R.G.PUMP 640.4712.5604 309.00 927.00 90995 06/25/99 092508 NANCY WILLIAMS REIMB.SUPPLIES-WILLIAMS 010.4424.5251 32.00 32.00 90996 06/25/99 092586 LEE WILSON ELECTRIC COM MAY SIGN MAINT 010.4304.5303 834.75 834.75 90997 06/25/99 094146 ZUMAR INDUSTRIES STREET SIGN NUMBERS 220.4303.5613 14.20 14.20 90998 06/25/99 101204 PEARL ZWILLING REF. GREEN WASTE-132 S.RENA 761. 0000.2007 157.50 157.50 ~._~ VOUCHRE2 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE PAGE 7 06/22/99 15:23 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER FOR PERIOD 12 FUND TITLE AMOUNT 010 GENERAL FUND 56,065.36 011 PAYROLL CLEARING FUND 158,546.94 220 STREETS FUND 19,418.43 277 98-99 FED LOCAL LAW ENF BL GRT 189.74 284 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FUND 5.90 350 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND 55,155.98 612 SEWER FUND 796.82 640 WATER FUND 5,657.96 761 RUBBISH COLLECTION FUND 315.00 TOTAL 296,152.13 ATTACHHENT E CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE DEPARTMENTAL LABOR DISTRIBUTION Prepaid Check for Mc Mahon 6/25/99 FUND 010 6,086.71 Salaries Full-time 1,172.68 Sick Pay 61.94 Vacation Pay 2,090.30 Camp Pay 2,252.93 PERS Retirement 82.15 Social Security 426.71 6,086.71 Total 6,086.71 ---_.~ 9.b. MEMORANDUM TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: LYNDA K. SNODGRASS, DIRECTOR OF FINANCIAL SERVICES ~ SUBJECT: STATEMENT OF INVESTMENT DEPOSITS DATE: JULY 13, 1999 Attached please find a report listing the current investment deposits of the City of Arroyo Grande, as of June 30, 1999, as required by Government Code Section 53646 (b). ---~"--- --~._.- ---------- CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE MONTHLY INVESTMENT REPORT ,44 06- ~ 30. 1999 "'"'"' , , July 13, 1999 This report presents the City's investments as of June 30, 1999. It includes all investments managed by the City, the investment institution, type of investment, maturity date, and rate of interest. As of June 30, 1999, the investment portfolio was in compliance with all State laws and the City's investment policy. Current Investments: The City is currently investing all short-term excess cash in the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) administered by the State Treasurer. This is a very high quality investment in terms of safety, liquidity, and yield. The City may readily transfer the LAIF funds to the City's checking account when funds are needed. At this time, the City does not hold any other investments. The following is a comparison of investments based on book values as of June 30, 1999 compared with the prior month and the prior year. LAIF INVESTMENT CURRENT Date: June 1999 May 1999 June 1998 Amount: $9,210,000 9,460,000 7,060,000 Interest Rate: 5.09% 5.12% 5.67% ---.--..-- 9.c. MEMORANDUM TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: LYNDA K. SNODGRASS, DIRECTOR OF FINANCIAL SERVICES ~ SUBJECT: CASH FLOW ANAL YSIS/APPROVAL OF INTERFUND ADVANCE FROM THE SEWER FACILITY FUND DATE: JULY 13,1999 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the City Council: . Accept the May 1999 cash report, . Approve the interfund advance of $940,845 from the Sewer Facility Fund to cover cash deficits in other funds as of May 31, 1999. FUNDING: No outside funding is required. --- ATTACHMENT A CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE CASH BALANCE / INTERFUND ADVANCE REPORT At May 31, 1999 Balance at Recommended Revised Fund 5/31/99 Advances Balance 010 General Fund 1,596,686 1,596,686 213 Park Development 237,963 237,963 217 Landscape Maintenance 20,440 20,440 220 Street (Gas Tax) Fund 71,192 71,192 222 Traffic Signalization 418,444 418,444 223 Traffic Circulation 369,822 369,822 224 Transportation Facility Impact 1,426,871 1,426,871 225 Transportation 80,134 80,134 226 Water Neutralization Impact 2,162 2,162 230 Construction Tax 241,733 241,733 231 Drainage Facility 20,112 20,112 271 State COPS Block Grant Fund 3,656 3,656 274 Federal Universal Hiring Grant 7,590 7,590 275 96-97 Fed Local Law Enforcement Grant 0 0 276 97-98 Fed Local Law Enforcement Grant 88 88 277 98-99 Fed Local Law Enforcement Grant 6,709 6,709 284 Redevelopment Agency (226,132) 226,132 0 285 Redevelopment Set Aside 1,303 1,303 350 Capital Projects (685,853) 685,853 0 466 Canyon Way Bond Fund 11,317 11,317 612 Sewer Fund (28,860) 28,860 0 634 Sewer Facility 1,277,565 (940,845) 336,720 640 Water Fund 2,105,129 2,105,129 641 Lopez 1,368,033 1,368,033 642 Water Facility 1,105,963 1,105,963 751 Downtown Parking 54,414 54,414 760 Sanitation District Fund 80,135 80,135 761 Rubbish Collection Fund 5,527 5,527 Total City Wide Cash 9,572,143 0 9,572,143 THE ABOVE LISTING ARE THE CASH BALANCES SHOWN IN THE GENERAL LEDGER OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE AS OF MAY 31, 1999. ~",,----.~ ~ ,/~.---, 'LL;.. to. . '1;r4'~ ynda K. sno~s ;f Director of Financial Services ..... MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, JUNE 22,1999 COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 215 EAST BRANCH STREET ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING Mayor Lady called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. Mayor Pro Tern Ferrara, Council Members Runels, Tolley, Dickens, City Manager Hunt, and City Attorney Carmel were present. 1. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. 2. CLOSED SESSION: Mayor Lady announced that the Council was going to meet in closed session to discuss the following matters: CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6: Agency Negotiator: Robert L. Hunt, City Manager Unrepresented EmployeesNolunteers: Management, Part-time, and Fire Volunteers 3. CLOSED SESSION ANNOUNCEMENTS: There was no reportable action from the closed session. 4. ADJOURNMENT TO REGULAR CITY COUNGIL MEETING: The meeting was adjourned at 7:47 P.M. to the regular City Council meeting of June 22, 1999. MICHAEL A. LADY, MAYOR ATTEST: KELLY WETMORE, ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR! DEPUTY CITY CLERK ~---- ~- CITY COUNCIL MINUTES TUESDAY, JUNE 22, 1999 CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 215 EAST BRANCH STREET, ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA 1. CALL TO ORDER The Honorable City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande met in regular session at 7:50 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL City Council: X Council Member Runels X Council Member Tolley II Council Member Dickens X Mayor Pro Tem Ferrara X Mayor Lady ST AFF PRESENT lCity Manager ...x...City Attorney ...x...Director of Administrative Services ...x...Chief of Police lDirector of Building and Fire llnterim Director of Community Development lDirector of Public Works lDirector of Parks and Recreation _Director of Financial Services 3. FLAG SALUTE Mark Farias, Fire Division Chief, Arroyo Grande Fire Department, led the Pledge of Allegiance. 4. INVOCATION Pastor Randy Ouimette, St. John's Lutheran Church, delivered the invocation. 5. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS a. Donation from American Youth Soccer Organization (AYSO). Joe Steed, A YSO Five Cities Region 83, presented a donation of $2,000 to the Arroyo Grande Parks and Recreation Department on behalf of the A YSO Board. Mr. Steed gave an overview of the A YSO soccer league, handed out A YSO Handbooks to the Council, and thanked the City for its support. b. Mayor Lady introduced Mark Farias as the new Fire Division Chief and welcomed him to the City of Arroyo Grande. ____ .._~_.__n____.__ CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 22, 1999 6. AGENDA REVIEW City Manager Hunt stated that there was a typographical correction to the Exhibit attached to the Resolution on Item 9.c. 6.A. RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES READ IN TITLE ONL Y Mayor Pro Tem Ferrara moved, Council Member 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.A. PUBLIC HEARING - UPDATE OF THE CITY'S BUILDING CODES BY ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE REVISING TITLE 8 OF THE ARROYO GRANDE MUNICIPAL CODE Building and Fire Director Fibich highlighted the Staff Report and stated that staff recommended the Council conduct the required public hearing and then adopt the Ordinance amending Chapter 1 of Title 8 of the Municipal Code. After being assured that the Public Hearing had been duly published and all legal requirements met, Mayor Lady opened the Public Hearing. Hearing no comments from the public, the Mayor closed the hearing to the floor. Council Member Tolley moved to approve the Ordinance adopting by reference the 1997 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 1996 Edition of the "National Electric Code". Council Member Runels seconded the motion. _Voice Vote LRolI Call Vote ~Lady ~Ferrara An-Runels AyjLTolley An-Dickens There being 5 A YES and 0 NOES, the motion is hereby declared to be passed. 8. CITIZENS' INPUT, COMMENTS. AND SUGGESTIONS John Clark, 224 McKinley, spoke about the need for a pathway system on the south side of the creek through the Village. He said that the Scenic Creekside Walk project to be approved tonight would not be ready for this summer for the tourists. He suggested a temporary pathway be constructed and a split rail fencing be put in place for safety. Glen Martin, 855 Olive, spoke about an upcoming girls softball league tournament. He said City staff would be preparing the fields for use in the 2 ~",~",-~~....",-",,<>.,"- CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 22, 1999 morning; however, after that there was no water availability throughout the day to maintain dust. He said volunteers from the League were available and willing to help prepare and maintain the fields for use throughout the weekend tournament. He requested the volunteers have access to water resources for this purpose. 9. CONSENT AGENDA Council Member Runels moved and Council Member Dickens seconded the motion to approve Consent Agenda Items 9a. through 91. with the recommended courses of action. a. Cash Disbursement Ratification. Approved. b. Minutes of City Council Meetings of June 8, 1999 and June 10, 1999. Approved. c. Consideration of Salary Adjustments for Part-Time Employees. Resolution 3372 adopted. d. Proposed Increase in Fire Fighters Rates of Pay. Resolution No. 3373 adopted. e. Authorizing the Temporary Closure of Virginia Drive Between 826 Virginia Drive and 856 Virginia Drive on July 4, 1999 for a Block Party. Resolution No. 3374 adopted. f. Authorization to Apply for Federal 1999 Local Law Enforcement Block Grant Funds. Approved. g. Progress Payment - City Corporation Yard Fuel Facility Replacement Plan, Project No. 80-98-1. Approved. h. Award of Bid - Spring 1998/99 Slurry Project. Approved. i. Award of Bid - J.C. Landscaping for City Parkways and Medians. Approved. j. Authorization to Solicit Bids - Electric Vehicle. Approved. k. Award of Bid - Scenic Creekside Walk Phase 1A, Project No. 90-97-2. Approved. I. SHAlSTP Cooperative Agreements. Resolution No. 3375 adopted. _Voice Vote LRolI Call Vote AyLLady AyLFerrara AxLRunels AyLTolley ~Dickens There being 5 A YES and 0 NOES, the motion is hereby declared to be passed. 1 O.a. CONTINUED BUSINESS - DIXSON RANCH APPLICATION FOR A STATE AGRICULTURAL LAND STEWARDSHIP PROGRAM (ALSP) GRANT Council Member Dickens announced that due to a potential conflict of interest on this item he would step down from the dais. 3 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 22,1999 Interim Community Development Director Engen highlighted the Staff Report. He said that staff recommended the City Council adopt a resolution supporting the application of the Dixson Ranch Agricultural Preserve for a State grant to acquire development rights through a conservation easement. Interim Director Engen stated that a representative from American Farmland Trust was in the audience and could answer questions. Mayor Lady opened up the discussion for public comment. Greg Kirkpatrick, American Farmland Trust, explained that he had attended a workshop in Arroyo Grande earlier this year on farmland protection. He said he had been working with the applicant and the Resource Conservation District on developing this application. He stated that the resolution before the Council was an essential first step in the easement process. He explained that the funding grant from the State of California's Agricultural Land Stewardship Program is dependent on support from the City for the grant to be awarded. He spoke in favor of the Council approving the resolution. Sara Dickens, property owner of 769 Branch Mill Road, submitted a letter for the record urging the Council's affirmative vote of a resolution approving the Dixson Ranch application for a State Agricultural Land Stewardship Program (ALSP) Grant. Hearing no further comments, Mayor Lady closed the public discussion. Council questions and discussion included what the policies are on the use of pesticides; affects on adjacent property values; buffer zones; if there is any financial benefit to the City; the City's Right to Farm Ordinance; General Plan Land Use policies and objectives; and farmland preservation. Mayor Pro Tem Ferrara said that Mr. Kirkpatrick had clarified that American Farmland Trust did not want to move ahead with the application if it was inconsistent with City policy. He said farmland preservation is seen in the City's current General Plan, is emerging in the update of the new Land Use Element of the General Plan, and is in line with the City's philosophy to protect agriculture. He spoke in support of adopting the resolution. Mayor Lady commented and clarified that if the Council moved forward and adopted the resolution, it only allowed the applicant to move forward with the State grant application and does not guarantee that the State will approve it. Interim Director Engen clarified that the adoption of a supporting resolution by the local agency was a prerequisite for the State application. 4 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 22, 1999 Council Member Tolley moved to adopt a resolution supporting the submittal of an application for grant funds from the California Department of Conservation IS Agricultural Land Stewardship Program for the Dixson Ranch Agricultural Preserve. Mayor Pro Tem Ferrara seconded the motion. _Voice Vote LRolI Call Vote Aye Lady Aye Ferrara No Runels Aye Tolley Absent Dickens There being 3 AYES, 1 NO, and 1 ABSENT, the motion is hereby declared to be passed. Council Member Dickens returned to the dais. 10.b. PROPOSED ORDINANCE LIMITING NON-TAXABLE SALES IN RETAIL STORES EXCEEDING 90.000 SQUARE FEET Interim Community Development Director Henry Engen highlighted the Staff Report. He stated that staff recommended the Council: 1. find that the proposed ordinance limiting the amount of non-taxable sales for retail stores exceeding 90,000 square feet is consistent with the General Plan; 2. introduce for first reading by title only the attached draft ordinance amending the text of the Development Code to add a section under Chapter 9-11 Specific Use Development Standards entitled: Limitations on Retail Stores in Excess of 90,000 Square Feet; and 3. direct the Administrative Services Director to file a Notice of Exemption with the County Recorder. Council Member Tolley asked if this could be accomplished through the Conditions of Approval for an individual project. Interim Director Engen responded yes; however, it is better to call out it out specifically in the General Plan or by ordinance. Mayor Lady opened up the discussion for public comment. Tim Brown, 125 Allen, stated his concern that big box stores would violate the ordinance since the proposed fine of $500 could be considered the cost of doing business. He said the fine may not be enough of a deterrent. He suggested a fine that would be more punitive if the ordinance was violated. Gail Lightfoot, 849 Mesa Drive, spoke in opposition to the proposed ordinance and urged the Council to take a more flexible approach. 5 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 22,1999 Chris Ivey, 2244 Rancho Lomas Way, stated he was encouraged by the changes that were made to the ordinance. He said that this ordinance provides more protection to the City. He passed out literature to the Council explaining the "Multiplier Effect" which represents the number of times sales tax is generated from a locally owned business sale and is re-circulated throughout a community. He spoke in favor of adopting the proposed ordinance. Glen Martin, 855 Olive, stated his concern that the City was legislating for or against a specific industry. He noted that the report indicated that Arroyo Grande's existing stores are not in violation of the proposed ordinance. He stated that he was not convinced that the ordinance would resolve the issue, and he agreed with Council Member Tolley about conditioning projects on a case by case basis. Hearing no further comments, Mayor Lady closed the public discussion. Mayor Pro Tem Ferrara stated that the City needs to protect its sales tax base and shield the small businesses. He recommended changing the amount of $500 for liquidated damages per day for each day a violation occurs back to $1,000. He said he was in favor of the proposed ordinance. Council Member Dickens spoke about redevelopment efforts and the future of the Grand Avenue corridor. He stated the City needs to protect what it has. He spoke in favor of the ordinance and stated it will offer protection to the City. Mayor Lady spoke in favor of the proposed ordinance and said it would protect the heritage of the community. He also agreed that the liquidated damages for a violation of the ordinance should be raised to $1,000 per day. Mayor Pro Tem Ferrara moved to approve the proposed adoption of an ordinance limiting non-taxable sales in retail stores exceeding 90,000 square feet (Development Code Amendment 99-001). He further moved ~o amend the ordinance on page 3, section E.1., to change the amount for liquidated damages from $500 per day for each day a violation occurs to $1,000 per day for each day a violation occurs, as proposed in the original draft. Mayor Pro Tem Ferrara introduced the Ordinance by title only for first reading. Council Member Dickens seconded the motion. - _Voice Vote LRolI Call Vote ~Lady ~Ferrara &LRunels H2-Tolley ~Dickens 6 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 22,1999 There being 4 A YES and 1 NO, the motion is hereby declared to be passed. Mayor Pro Tem Ferrara moved to make the finding that the proposed ordinance limiting the amount of non-taxable sales for retail stores exceeding 90,000 square feet is consistent with the General Plan. Council Member Dickens seconded the motion. _Voice Vote LRolI Call Vote ~Lady ~Ferrara ~Runels ~Tolley ~Dickens There being 4 A YES and 1 NO, the motion is hereby declared to be passed. 10.c. AWARD OF BID - GRAND AVENUE. ELM . STREET TO HALCYON ROAD, PROJECT NO. 60-70-90-98-6 Director of Public Works Spagnolo highlighted the Staff Report. He stated that staff recommended the City Council: 1. Award the contract to Whitaker Contractors, Inc. in the amount of $1,707,525; 2. Authorize a contingency of $170,750 for use only if needed for unanticipated costs during the construction phase of the project. 3. Approve funding alternative 1; and 4. Direct staff to issue the Notice of Award and Notice to Proceed Council questions and discussion included the use of fund savings from the slurry seal project as contingency funds for the Grand Avenue project. Director Spagnolo explained the funding proposed in Alternative 1 which would use the cost savings from the Spring 1998/99 Slurry Seal project and a portion of the Grand Avenue (Phase III) 1998 STIP Augmentation funds. City Manager Hunt clarified that all of the capital improvement projects in the Fiscal Year 1998/99 Slurry Seal project were accomplished and funds remaining could be used for contingencies. Mayor Lady opened the discussion for public comment. Hearing no comments, he closed the public discussion to the floor. Council Member Runels moved to approve staffs recommendations. Mayor Pro Tem Ferrara seconded the motion. 7 . ~__m________ CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 22, 1999 _Voice Vote LRolI Call Vote An. Lady An. Ferrara An. Runels An. Tolley Ayj! Dickens There being 5 A YES and 0 NOES, the motion is hereby declared to be passed. 11.a. NEW BUSINESS: FEE WAIVER REQUEST - SPECIAL OLYMPICS Parks and Recreation Director Hernandez highlighted the Staff Report. He explained that the applicant had met four out of five criteria for a fee waiver. He stated that staff recommended the Council provide direction on the request for a fee waiver for the use of the City of Arroyo Grande and Woman's Club Community Center on Friday, July 9, 1999. Mayor Lady opened up the discussion for public comment. Tim Brown, 125 Allen, stated that he has an eight-year-old son who participates in Special Olympics. He spoke in favor of granting the waiver or reducing the fee. Dick Blankenburg, founder of Special Olympics, stated that Special Olympics was celebrating its 30th Anniversary and was holding events all over the County. He said he thought the Council had already approved this fee request. He stated that the event would be a dance for Special Olympians primarily from the South County. Hearing no further comments, Mayor Lady closed the public discussion to the floor. There was consensus from the Council that the event was a worthy cause and serves many South County residents. Council Member Dickens suggested bringing the issue of fee waivers back to the Council for establishing guidelines with an option to reduce fees instead of granting waivers of the full amount. Council Member Tolley moved to approve the fee waiver request from Special Olympics of San Luis Obispo County for use of the City of Arroyo Grande and Woman's Club Community Center on Friday, July 9, 1999 from 5:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. Council Member Dickens seconded the motion. 8 "'~"""""'--""""'~- CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 22, 1999 - Voice Vote LRolI Call Vote An- Lady AyJL Ferrara AyJL Runels AyJL Tolley AyJL Dickens There being 5 A YES and 0 NOES, the motion is hereby declared to be passed. 11.b. PROPOSED GUIDELINE CHANGES FOR THE SENIOR TAXI PROGRAM Parks and Recreation Director Hernandez highlighted the Staff Report. He stated that the Senior Advisory Commission recommended the Council forward proposed Senior Taxi Program guideline changes to the SCAT Board for its consideration. Council questions and discussion included the Senior Taxi Program's fee structure, age limit, hours of operation, apparent abuses of the program, and City subsidizing of regional transit programs. Council Member Dickens commented that he had a concern with placing values on where a person can and cannot go. He said the program was developed for people who are unable to manage other public transportation options. Mayor Lady clarified that any proposed changes to the program would be recommended to the SCAT Board for their consideration. Council Member Runels moved to approve the Senior Advisory Commission's recommendation to forward proposed Senior Taxi Program guideline changes to the SCAT Board for its consideration. Council Member Tolley seconded the motion. Voice Vote LRolI Call Vote AyJL Lady ~ Ferrara AyJL Runels AyJL Tolley ~ Dickens There being 3 A YES and 2 NOES, the motion is hereby declared to be passed. 9 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 22, 1999 11.c. PARTICIPATION IN THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROGRAM THROUGH THE COUNTY CONSORTIUM Interim Community Development Director Engen highlighted the Staff Report. He stated that there was a typographical error in the title of the Cooperation Agreement. The term of the Agreement would be through the year 2002, not 2003. He said that staff recommended the Council approve the Cooperation Agreement with San Luis Obispo County for the next three years. Mayor Lady opened up the discussion for public comment. Hearing no comments, he closed the public discussion to the floor. Council Member Tolley moved to approve the Cooperation Agreement with San Luis Obispo County for the next three years. Council Member Runels seconded the motion. Voice Vote LRolI Call Vote An- Lady An- Ferrara An- Runels An- Tolley A:J1L Dickens There being 5 A YES and 0 NOES, the motion is hereby declared to be passed. 11.d. DRAFT DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN Public Works Director Spagnolo highlighted the Staff Report. He stated that staff recommended the Council authorize the distribution of the Draft Drainage Master Plan, and direct staff to return in approximately 45 days with a summary of public comments, make any modifications deemed necessary or appropriate, and approve the Drainage Master Plan. Mayor Lady opened up the discussion for public comment. J. Johnson, 1208 Huasna Road, stated he did not own any property in the drainage areas; however, he had spoken to staff over the past year about the Newsom Springs drainage area. He gave a history on water drainage into town before going into the Newsom Springs Creek. He encouraged the Council to go out to the site before approving the drainage plan, look at how it turns the water into town, and then ask staff to fix it right the first time. He said the water should be going from the mountains directly into the creek, not from the mountains, into town, and then into the creek. Gail Lightfoot, 849 Mesa Drive, asked if this item would come back as a public hearing item. She said that in glancing at the draft drainage plan, it struck her that there were more creeks that were coming down into one drain, which seemed 10 ---. _._----~-_._--- CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 22,1999 like a poor plan. She also commented that she would like to see Los Berros Creek restored. Tim Brown, 125 Allen, asked for clarification about how much time the public would have to review the document before Council approves it. City Manager Hunt explained that the document will be distributed to the Chamber of Commerce, the South County Library, and the Building Industry Association for a 45-day public review and comment period. L.E. Vandeveer, 756 Myrtle, stated that he supported J. Johnson's comments about Newsom Springs. Hearing no further public comments, Mayor Lady closed the discussion to the floor. Council Member Dickens requested two minor corrections in the document: .. On page 5, second paragraph, first line, change "through" to "thorough". .. Throughout the document it references "Dixon Street Basin"; change spelling of "Dixon" to "Dixson". Council Member Dickens stated that there is reference made through the document to two different types of basins. He recommended adding to the document the definitions of infiltration (retention) and retarding (detention) basins. He further stated that the document references "suitable soil types" for infiltration basins, and he asked what soil types are suitable. He said this would be helpful to know when considering future development. Lastly, he said that the list in Figure 2 identifying the existing infiltration and retarding basins is not 1 00% complete due to new development. He referred to the Ellsworth development adjacent to his property, which is not noted in the document. City Manager Hunt recommended the Council extend the public review period to 60 days in order to allow more time for staff to incorporate changes to the document that Council requested. Council Member Dickens stated that he would be able to participate in discussions about the Draft Drainage Master Plan document; however, he would not be able to make specific comments relating to Newsom Springs due to a potential conflict of interest. Mayor Pro Tem Ferrara moved to authorize the distribution of the Draft Drainage Master Plan, and direct staff to return in approximately 60 days with a summary of public comments, make any modifications deemed necessary or appropriate, and approve the Drainage Master Plan. Council Member Runels seconded the motion. 11 --_._~---- CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 22,1999 Voice Vote LRolI Call Vote A'J1L Lady A'JJ;i.. Ferrara A'J1L Runels AyjL Tolley AyjL Dickens There being 5 A YES and 0 NOES, the motion is hereby declared to be passed. 12. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS: a. MAYOR MICHAEL LADY (1) South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District. Mayor Lady reported that the last meeting was held at the plant. Reviewed Preliminary Budget for 1999-2000 (2) Other. Mayor Lady reported that he and members of the Chamber of Commerce and Community Development Department visited three businesses in the City. He said several Grand Avenue businesses expressed concern about the upcoming capital improvement project. b. MAYOR PRO TEM TONY M. FERRARA (1) Integrated Waste Management Authority Board. No report. (2) Economic Vitality Corporation. No report. (3) Air Pollution Control District (APCD). No report. (4) Economic Development Task Force Kick-off meeting was held with a good turnout. During the meeting, the purpose of the Task Force was determined and materials distributed. Next meeting will be July 1st. c. COUNCIL MEMBER THOMAS A. RUNELS (1) Zone 3 Advisory Board. Council Member Runels reported that the City of Pismo Beach had voted not to place the remaining debt on the tax roll. He also reported that the Zone 3 water line has had some problems. (2) County Water Resources Advisory Committee (WRAC). No report. d. COUNCIL MEMBER STEVE TOLLEY (1) Long-Range Planning Committee. Next meeting is scheduled for July 22,1999 at 7:00 p.m. (2) South County Youth Coalition. Held workshop on the Youth Master Plan. (3) San Luis Obispo Council of GovernmentslSan Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority (SLOCOG/SLORTA). No report. e. COUNCIL MEMBER JIM DICKENS (1) South County Area Transit. Presentation by Cal Poly interns on proposed route changes to be held June 23,1999 at 3:00 p.m. 12 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 22,1999 e. COUNCIL MEMBER JIM DICKENS (continued) (2) Economic Development CommitteelChamber of Commerce. No report. (3) Other. Community Recreation Center Subcommittee. No report. Next meeting to be held on June 24th at 6:30 p.m. 13. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS None. 14. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS None. 15. ADJOURNMENT Council Member Runels moved, Council Member Tolley seconded, and the motion passed unanimously to adjourn the meeting. Time: 10:07 p.m. MICHAEL A LADY, MAYOR ATTEST: KELLY WETMORE, ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR! DEPUTY CITY CLERK 13 -..---...--.-..-- 9.e. MEMORANDUM TO: CITY COUNCIL Jl;J FROM: KELLY WETMORE, DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES SUBJECT: REJECTION OF CLAIM AGAINST CITY DATE: JULY 13, 1999 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the City Council reject the attached Claim for Damages against the City filed by Mike Adams, c/o Fisher and Carrascao, 1119 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo. FUNDING: None. DISCUSSION: The City's insurance adjusters have reviewed the claim of Mr. Adams and recommended it be rejected. . '" --' 1 MIKE ADAMS, In Pro Per 433 BEECH STREET <( 2 ARROYO GRANDE, CA 93420 Z 3 - In Propria Persona (!) 4 - 0::: 5 0 6 7 CLAIM FOR DAMAGES 8 9 10 11 MIKE ADAMS ) ) 12 Claimant, ) ) 13 vs. ) ) 14 ) CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE, ARROYO ) 15 GRANDE POLICE DEPARTMENT,) OFFICER DOES 1 through 50, Inclusive ) 16 ) Respondent. ) 17 ) 18 19 1. Name of Claimants: MIKE ADAMS 20 2. Address of Claimants: 433 BEECH STREET, ARROYO GRANDE, 21 CALIFORNIA 93420 22 3. Address for Notices to Be Sent: FISHER & CARRASCO, 1119 PALM 23 STREET, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401 24 4. Date, Time and Place ofIncident: JANUARY 2,1999, CITY OF ARROYO 25 GRANDE, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA 26 5. Circumstances ofthe Incident: On or about January 2, 1999, Claimant who was in his 27 own residence in the City of Arroyo Grande, California, when co-habitant, Shannon Woods, arrived 28 at the residence. --..--......--------- - 1 Shannon Woods is known to the Arroyo Grande Police Department as having a history of 2 being violent and making false statements to the police officers regarding several incidences wherein 3 she falsely claimed to have been assaulted. She has been a patient of San Luis Obispo County 4 Mental Health having, on two separate occasions, been taken into custody by the Arroyo Grande 5 Police Department on a 5150 and placed under hold of 72 hours and 24 hours. 6 On the date in question Shannon Woods, who was living at the home of Mike Adams, was 7 agitated, argumentative and violent and acting out of control. She was threatening Mr. Adams' 8 personal safety, the personal property as well as her own personal safety. 9 Mr. Adams requested that she leave the property and not return. While attempting to 10 telephone the police Mr. Adams observed Shannon inflicting injury to herself by grabbing her neck 11 and banging her fist and head on the floor. 12 Witnessing this bizarre behavior and fearing his personal safety, Mr. Adams did the only 13 thing he was able to do, and, that was to remove himself from the situation. 14 Mr. Adams left his residence in his vehicle. As he was driving away from the property he 15 saw a Arroyo Grande Police Department patrol vehicle heading towards the property. When the 16 officer saw Mr. Adams he turned around. Seeing that the officer had turned in the direction of Mr. 17 Adams vehicle he stopped his vehicle, waited for the officer and they thereafter discussed Shannon's 18 behavior of that evening. The officer advised Mr. Adams that another officer was on his way to the 19 residence to interview Ms. Woods. The officer that interviewed Ms. Woods thereinafter joined Mr. 20 Adams and the other officer at the location where Mr. Adams had pulled over and stopped. Mr. 21 Adams informed this officer of his observations regarding Ms. Woods conduct, to which the officer 22 replied that it was consistent with Ms. Woods statement. The officers then placed Mr. Adams under 23 arrest. Mr. Adams informed the officers that he recently had been diagnosed with for 24 which he was currently taking medication and he could not have his hands restrained behind him nor 25 could he sit in the back seat of the vehicle in that position without aggravating his back injury. 26 Notwithstanding that Mr. Adams should not have been arrested, he was nonetheless arrested 27 booked and released on bail. The district attorney, however did not file a complaint. 28 III -2- 1 6. Persons causing Claimant's damages: 2 City of Arroyo Grande, Arroyo Grande Police Department and various officer of the 3 Arroyo Grande Police Department; Investigations are continuing as far as any other persons involved 4 in causing Claimant's injuries. 5 7. Causes of Action involved herein: 6 The particular causes of action arising from the above actions include, but are not 7 limited to, false arrest, false imprisonment, battery, intentional and negligent infliction of emotional 8 distress, excessive force, negligence and violations of Claimant's civil rights pursuant to the Civil 9 Rights Act 42 U.S.C 1983, the 4th, 8th and 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution 10 prohibiting unlawful seizures and use of excessive force of citizens of the United States of America. 11 8. Amount of Claim: 12 A maximum of $1 ,000,000 for general, special, and punitive damages according to proof. 13 14 DATED: ~-7- ft[ BY:~/~~ 15 16 MI ADAMS In Propria Persona 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -3- 1 PROOF OF SERVICE BY MAIL 2 3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO 4 I am a resident of the County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen (18) years and not a party 5 to the within entitled action; my business address is 1119 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, 93401. 6 On June 7, 1999, I served the within CLAIM FOR DAMAGES, on the interested parties in said action, by placing a true copy thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope with postage thereon fully 7 prepaid, in the United States mail at San Luis Obispo, California, addressed as follows: 8 Mary Bassett 9 CITY CLERK 214 Branch Street 10 Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 11 12 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is 13 true and correct. 14 Executed on June 7, 1999, at San Luis Obispo, Califo 15 16 - 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -4- 'f!~ 0/ P.O.Box5S8 . '.~..~. 214 i:.t Brane" street . / Arroyo,GIUde, cA 93421 . PhOne: (805)473-5414 'ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES FAX: (805) 47Q3M . ~MaD: -ac:lty~uroY~""" July 14,1999 Mike Adams c/o Fisher and Carra~cao 1119 Palm Street San Luis Obispo CA 93401 REJECTION OF CLAIM PRESENTED WITHIN SIX MONTHS Dear Mr. Adams: Notice is herebygiven that the claim you presented to the Cityc;ouncil ofthe City. of Arroyo Grande on June 9, 1999 was rejected on July 13,1999. ' WARNING Subject to. certain exceptions, you have only six (6) months from the date this notice was personally delivered or deposited in the United States mail to file. a Court Action ina Municipal or a Superior Court of the State of California on this . claim (See Government Code Section 945.6). You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with 'this . matter. If you desire to consult an attorney, you should do sq immediately. ", Kelly Wetmore, Direc~or of Administrative Servic:es . . T'-;,' c: ' City Mari'ager City Attorney . Chief of Police . . ' CarlWaITen '&Co. " 9.1. MEMORANDUM TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: LYNDA K. SNODGRASS, DIRECTOR OF FINANCIAL SERVICE~ SUBJECT: AWARD OF CONTRACT TO DMG-MAXIMUS FOR MANDATED COST RECOVERY DATE: JULY 13, 1999 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a contract with DMG-MAXIMUS for mandated cost recovery services. FUNDING: Funding of a maximum of $5,050 for mandated cost recovery will be made from the Non-departmental budget for contract services and from recovered costs. DISCUSSION: When the State of California mandates certain actions and procedures of local government agencies, they are required to reimburse for costs incurred by the local agencies to comply with these mandates. The firm of DMG-MAXIMUS specializes in compiling the costs to carry out State mandates, completing required forms and documentation, and filing the actual claims on behalf of local agencies. The City of Arroyo Grande has contracted with DMG-MAXIMUS for mandated cost recovery services during the last three years. During this three-year period the City has received approximately $71,000 from the State of California for mandated cost while paying DMG-MAXIMUS approximately $9,400, thus receiving a net benefit of approximately $61,600. The following table reports the revenue and expenses by fiscal year. Fiscal State Consultant Net Year Payments Fee Benefit 1996-97 $ 24,690.00 $2,700.00 $ 21,990.00 1997 -98 30,904.00 3,322.00 27,582.00 1998-99 15,442.00 3,371.00 12,071.00 Total $ 71,036.00 $9,393.00 $ 61,643.00 MANDATED COST RECOVERY JULY 13,1999 PAGE 2 The contract is divided into two categories. The first category is called "Annual Fall Claims" which includes business tax reporting, open meeting law claims, and investment reporting claims. The cost to file these claims on behalf of the City will be a fixed fee of $2,550. The second claim category is "New Claims", which will include claims for new mandates approved by the State and claims previously funded but unpaid by the State. The cost for new claim reporting will be on a contingent basis of 30% of recovered cost with a minimum fee of $500 and a maximum fee of $2,500. In Fiscal Year 1998-99 the contingent fee paid to DMG-MAXIMUS was $721 for $2,703 received on missing person claims. For Fiscal Year 1999-00 the City can expect to pay between the $3,050 minimum ($2,550 plus $500) and the $5,050 maximum ($2,550 plus $2,500). The City has gained over $61,600 from previous contracts with DMG-MAXIMUS. At worst, the minimum cost without matching revenues for the 1999-00 contract could be $3,050 if the State denied all claims. However, it is likely that the City would receive approximately $10,000 for open meeting law claims and business tax reporting claims. The net profit of $6,950 ($10,000 less minimum $3,050) is worth the time invested by City staff. Therefore, it is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Manager to contract with DMG-MAXIMUS for continued mandated cost recovery services. --- --- . RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE AUTHORIZING A CONTRACT WITH DMG-MAXIMUS FOR MANDATED COST RECOVERY SERVICES WHEREAS, City of Arroyo Grande ("City") is a duly authorized municipal corporation existing under the laws of the State of California; and WHEREAS, City has entered or will enter into agreements for the development, submission, and negotiation of cost claims pertaining to state mandated programs; and WHEREAS, DMG-MAXIMUS ("Corporation") has the resources, skill, and expertise to provide City with mandated cost recovery services of the highest level. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande that the City Manager is hereby authorized in the name and on behalf of City to enter into binding agreements with the Corporation for mandated cost recovery services, upon such terms as may seem advisable to said officer(s) and to execute, as agent for the City, all necessary agreements. The authority given hereunder shall be deemed retroactive and any and all acts authorized hereunder performed prior to the passage of this Resolution are hereby ratified and affirmed. On motion of Council Member , seconded by Council Member . ,and on the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this day of ,1999. . RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 2 MICHAEL A. LADY, MAYOR ATTEST: KELLY WETMORE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR! DEPUTY CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: Rlli:n- L . ~~ ROBERT L. HUNT, CITY MANAGER APPROVED AS TO FORM: - TIMOTHY J. CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY AXIMUS Helping Government Serve The People June I, 1999 Ms. L'Inda Snodgrass Finance Director Cit'l of Arro'lo Grande 21l. E. Branch Street Arro'lo Grande, CA 93l.21 Subject: Sta.te Ma.nda.ted Cost Cla.iming Services Dear Ms. Snodgrass: D MG-MAXIMUS is pleased to submit this proposal to renew its agreement with the Cit'l of Arro'lo Grande to provide comprehensive State Mandated Cost Claiming Services for the 1999-2000 fiscal 'ear. We propose to prepare all state mandated cost claims based on claiming instructions issued b'l the State Controller during the fiscal 'ear. For the 1999-2000 fiscal 'lear, DMG-MAXIMUS will provide all necessar'l services to prepare and file the following state mandated cost claims: ~ Annual Claims due JanUar'l15, 2000 ~ All Other Eligible New Claims . New mandate claims approved b'l the Commission on State Mandates . New claims the Commission is expected to approve in FY 1999-2000 . All other claims for which claiming instructions are issued in FY 1999-2000 The 1999-2000 fiscal 'ear will be another bus'l claiming 'ear. Four new claims have been added to the 13 annual fall claims and there will be from five to ten new first-time claiming opportunities. Most of the new claiming opportunities will include new claims covering multiple fiscal 'ears. A discussion of each claiming opportunit'l is presented below. ". 4320 Auburn Boulevard, Suite 2000 · Sacramento, CA 95841 · 916.485.8102 · FAX 916.485.0111 ---- City of Arroyo Grande Annual Claims Annual claims are those claims which are fu.nded in the State Budget and must be tiled by the statutory deadline of January 15, 2000. These include actual cost reimbursement claims for fiscal year 1998-99 and estimated reimbursement claims for the 1999-2000 fiscal year. The regular annual claiming cycle should consist of all claims included in last 'lear's claiming instructions, as well as the Regional Housing, Domestic Violence Arrest Policies, Domestic Violence Incident Reporting, Two-way Traffic Signals, and Airport Land Use claims. The 17 possible claims include the following: ~ Absentee Ballots - election costs associated with issuing and processing absentee ballots. ~ Business Tax Reporting Requirements - tracking and transmitting FTB- required data for all new and renewal businesses within the city. ~ Open Meetings Act - agenda preparation, review and posting costs required by the Ralph M. Brown Act. ~ Mandate Reimbursement Process - costs of participating in the SB 90 process: DMG's fees and local agency staff time. ~ Firefighters' Cancer Presumption - worker's compensation, benefits, administrative and legal costs in firefighter cancer cases. ~ Peace Officers' Cancer Presumption - worker's compensation, benefits, administrative and legal costs in peace officer cancer cases. ~ Brendon McGuire Act - election costs incurred by an agency in the event that an elected candidate dies before taking office. ~ Stolen Vehicle Notification - notifying vehicle owners or operators regarding the location of their stolen vehicle. ~ Rape Victim Counseling Center Notices - providing rape victims information regarding counseling and treatment services. ~ Misdemeanors: Booking & Fingerprinting - time to provide misdemeanant verification that they wf!re booked and fingerprinted. ~ Investment Reports - rendering Quarterly Investment Reports to the local governing body. ~ Threats Against Peace Officers - requires local entities to pay moving expenses if there are credible threats against the safety of either the peace officer or immediate family members. ~ Regional Housing Needs Assessment - specifies detailed requirements for the housing element of a local agency's general plan. IAXlMUS 2 June I, 1999 -_...._~._"- City of Arroyo Grande >- Domestic Violence Arrest Policies - requires the development, adoption, and implementation of arrest policies for domestic violence offenders, as well as requiring peace officers to make reasonable efforts to identify the primary aggressor. >- Domestic Violence Incident Reporting - requires certain policy and procedure updates associated with domestic violence incident reporting. >- Two-way Traffic Signal Communication Controller - requires local agencies to purchase traffic signals that comply with new state requirements when replacing two-way traffic signals. >- Airport Land Use Planning - this requirement would only apply in cases where a city participates in an Airport Land Use Commission. New Claims Approved Bv The Commission On State Mandates These are claims where the Commission has already determined that reimbursable state mandated costs exist. In most cases, the cost components have been developed and only await some fine-tuning before they are sent to the Controller for the preparation of Claiming Instructions. The Controller has 60 days from the date the Commission adopts the cost components (parameters and guidelines) to issue claiming instructions. The City has 120 days to file the claims. The claims approved by the Commission are: >- SIDS Training for Firefighters - cost of providing mandatory training to fire fighters when responding to a sudden infant death call. >- Domestic Violence Arrest & Training Policies - Certain policy and procedure updates associated with domestic violence arrest and training policies. >- Very High Fire Hazard - the cost of developing an ordinance and procedures to comply with the new State program requiring additional actions by all owners that have property in these extra hazardous fire areas. New Claims Which Appear Likelv For Approval Bv The State In addition to the claims already approved, there are also other claims that are pending before the Commission, which may be approved in the 1999-2000 fiscal year. In some cases, the only question is the scope of the mandate and not whether a reimbursable mandate exists. The claims in this category include the following: >- Peace Officers' Procedural Bill of Rights - procedure for addressing disciplinary and other personnel matters with peace officers that exceeds standards for civil service employees. IAXlMUS 3 June I, 1999 Citl/ of Arrol/o Grande );> Standardized Emergencl/ Management SI/stem - requires local agencies to develop a statewide emergency management plan to complv with new State requirements. );> Sex Offenders: Disclosure of Law Enforcement Officers (Megan's Law) - requires law enforcement agencies to provide a public access sl/stem containing video photographs of sex offenders. );> Sexual Harassment Training in the Law Enforcement Workplace - mandated training for peace officers in sexual harassment. );> Photographic Record of Evidence - rather than admitting hazardous or dangerous evidence, particularly drugs, in court, same is admitted by photographs. );> Law Enforcement: Elder Abuse Training - mandatory training of peace officers in elder abuse. );> Animal Adoption - extensive changes in length of time stray animals must be kept before adoption as well as increased record keeping requirements. );> Health Benefits for Survivors of Peace Officers & Firefighters - allows survivors and dependents of peace officers and firefighters who die in service to be afforded free health insurance. );> Law Enforcement Racial and Cultural Diversity Training - requires peace officers to have mandatory training in racial and cultural diversity. Other New Claims For Which Claiming Instructions Are Issued In addition to the above claiming opportunities, it is possible that the Commission on State Mandates or the Legislature will approve other claims before the end of the fiscal year. If the State Controller issues claiming instructions in the 1999-2000 fiscal year, DMG-MAXIMUS will prepare those claims under the provisions of this proposal and the enclosed contract. COST DMG-MAXIMUS is proposing the same payment process that you selected last year. . Annual Fall Claims: Fixed Fee We propose to complete all annual fall state mandated cost reimbursement claims for the City for a fixed fee of two thousand five hundred fiftl/ dollars ($2,550). This fee will be billed after the claims have been tiled with the State on or before January IS, 2000 and is due upon receipt of the invoice. IAXlMUS t. June I, 1999 City of Arroyo Grande . All Other New Claims: Contingent Fee We propose to complete all new or first-time state mandated cost reimbursement claims for the City for a fee equal to 30% of the amount claimed and paid to a maximum of two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500). Payment shall be made from monies actually received from the State and is due upon receipt of the invoice. It is the City's responsibility to inform the consultant of payments made for any claims tiled by the consultant. In the event that the amount paid by the State is less than $1,667 (one thousand six hundred sixty-seven dollars), the City shall pay the consultant a fixed fee of $500 (five hundred dollars) due upon receipt of the invoice. If your agenev prefers to structure this agreement differently, we are pleased to discuss it with you. DMG is very flexible and will gladly tailor a payment approach to meet your City's preferences. We are excited about the State mandated claiming opportunities available to your City this year. If you have any questions, please contact Allan Burdick or me at (916) 485- 8102. Thank you for considering our proposal. We look forward to working with you and your staff again. Enclosures IAXIMUS 5 June I, 1999 Contract Number: 99F-233. Agreement to Provide Mandated Cost Claiming Services THIS AGREEMENT, entered into this day of , 1999 and effective immediately by and between DMG-MAXlMUS (hereinafter "Consultant") and the City of Arroyo Grande (hereinafter "City"), WHEREAS, Article XIIIB of the California State Constitution provides that cities may recover costs associated with carrying out programs mandated by the State of California, WHEREAS, the City desires to obtain maximum reimbursement for costs incurred in carrying out State mandated programs, and has determined that engaging the Consultant to assist in the mandated cost claim preparation process is the most economical and cost effective means for preparing the City's state mandated cost claims; and WHEREAS, the Consultant is staffed with personnel knowledgeable and experienced in determining the costs of governmental programs and in the submission of cost claims to the State of California, and WHEREAS, the City desires to engage the Consultant to assist in developing, submitting, and negotiating cost claims pertaining to state mandated programs. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto mutually agree as follows: - 1. Scope of Services The Consultant shall prepare claims for reimbursable state mandated costs as provided herein. A. Annual State Mandated Cost Reimbursement Claims The Consultant shall prepare and file applicable actual annual state mandated cost reimbursement claims for the 1998-1999 fiscal year and estimated claim(s) for the 1999- 2000 fiscal year. The fiscal year 1998-1999 actual claims to be filed are Claims that are included in the State Controller's Claiming Instructions that provide for timely filed claims to be submitted by January 15,2000. B. All Other Claims for Which Claiming Instructions Are Issued in FY 1999- 2000 With the exception of the claims in Scope of Services 1.A. above, the Consultant shall prepare, submit and file on the City's behalf, all other eligible actual and estimated state mandated cost reimbursement claims for which State Controller Claiming Instructions are issued in the 1999-2000 fiscal year. City of Arroyo Grande - 1 - June 1, 1999 Contract Number: 99F-233 2. Consultant Claim Filine: Requirements The Consultant shall file these claims to the extent that appropriate documentation is available and verifiable and that claim amounts exceed $200 per claim. 3. Costs and Method of Compensation A. Scope of Services LA. - Annual State Mandated Cost Reimbursement Claims For the services provided pursuant to Scope of Services 1.A., the City agrees to pay the Consultant upon submission of the claims to the State Controller, a fixed fee of two thousand five hundred fifty dollars ($ 2,550). The fixed fee shall be due upon receipt of Consultant's invoice following submission of such claim(s). B. Scope of Services LB. - All Other New Claims for Which Claiming Instructions are Issued in FY 1999-2000 F or the services provided pursuant to Scope of Services 1.B, the City agrees to pay the Consultant a contingent fee of 30% of the amount claimed and paid, to a maximum of two thousand five hundred dollars ($ 2,500). Payment shall be made from monies actually received from the State resulting from the Consultant's efforts. Monies received shall be defined as payments resulting from the Consultant's filing of cost claims listed in Scope of Service~ 1.B. - In the event that the total amount of claims paid by the State is less than one thousand six hundred sixty-seven dollars ($1,667), the City shall pay the Consultant a fixed fee of five hundred dollars ($500). The fee, which in no case shall exceed the maximum amount, is due within four weeks of City receipt of reimbursement from the State. 4. Services and Materials to be Furnished bv the City The Consultant shall provide guidance to the City in determining the data required for claims submission. Thy Consultant shall assume all data so provided to be correct. The City further agrees to provide all specifically requested data, documentation and information to the Consultant in a timely manner. Consultant shall make its best effort to file claims in a timely manner pursuant to Scope of Services. Consultant shall not be liable for claims that cannot be filed as a result of inadequate data or data provided in an untimely manner. For purposes of this Agreement, data that is requested by the Consultant must be provided within three weeks of the request, or three weeks prior to the filing deadline, whichever would come first, to be deemed to have been received in a timely manner. It is the City of Arroyo Grande - 2- June 1, 1999 Contract Number: 99F-233 responsibility of the City to provide the Consultant with payment information upon receipt of disbursements from the State for any and all claims filed pursuant to this agreement. 5. Not Oblie:ated to Third Parties The City shall not be obligated or liable hereunder to any party other than the Consultant. 6. Consultant Liability if Audited The Consultant will assume all financial and statistical information provided to the Consultant by City employees or representatives is accurate and complete. Any subsequent disallowance of funds paid to the City under the claims for whatever reason is the sole responsibility of the CitY. 7. Indirect Costs The cost claims to be submitted by the Consultant may consist of both direct and indirect costs. The Consultant may either utilize the ten percent (10%) indirect cost rate allowed by the State Controller or calculate a higher rate if City records support such a calculation. The Consultant by this Agreement is not required to prepare a central service cost allocation plan Or departmental indirect cost rate proposals for the City. 8. Consultant Assistance if Audited - If audited, the Consultant shall make workpapers and other records available to the State auditors. If requested by the City, the Consultant shall provide assistance to the City in defending claims at the desk audit level if an audit results in a disallowance of at least twenty percent (20%) or seven hundred fifty dollars ($750), whichever is greater. Reductions of less than twenty percent (20%) or seven hundred fifty dollars ($750) shall not be contested by the Consultant. Nothing in this section or any part of this Agreement shall be construed to include Incorrect Reduction Claims preparation. 9. Insurance Consultant shall acquire and maintain appropriate general liability insurance, workers' compensation insurance, automobile insurance, and professional liability insurance. 10. Chane:es The City may, from time to time, require changes in the scope of services of the Consultant to be performed hereunder. Such changes, which are mutually agreed upon by and between the City and the Consultant, shall be incorporated in written amendment to this agreement. . City of Arroyo Grande - 3 - June 1, 1999 Contract Number: 99F-233 11. Termination of Ae:reement If, through any cause, the Consultant shall fail to fulfill in a timely and proper manner its obligation under this agreement, the City shall thereupon have the right to terminate this agreement by giving written notice to the Consultant of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof, at least five (5) days before the effective date of such termination. 12. City Contact Person The City designates the following individual as contact person for this contract: Name: Telephone: Title: Fax: Address: OFFER IS MADE BY CONSULTANT OFFER IS ACCEPTED BY CITY ~t By: City Official DMG-MAXIMUS Date: June 1. 1999 Date: City of Arroyo Grande - 4- June 1, 1999 -<~-~_.., ._"~--._--" .... ".,.~~,..~~~..,. ..,. ,.'--.---... 9.g. MEMORANDUM TO: CITY COUNCIL RICK TerBORCH, CHIEF OF POLICEd FROM: SUBJECT: AUTHORIZATION TO SOLICIT BIDS - REPLACEMENT OF TWO POLICE DEPARTMENT VEHICLES DATE: JULY 13, 1999 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council authorize staff to solicit bids to replace two (2) Police Department vehicles. FUNDING: The FY 1999-00 Police Department Budget includes $46,000 for the replacement of two (2) vehicles. DISCUSSION: The City Council authorized an appropriation in the FY 1999-00 Budget for the replacement of two (2) vehicles assigned to the Police Department: the School Resource Officer unit and the vehicle assigned to the Support Services Commander. Under City Administrative Policy C-006 (copy attached) the criteria for replacement of non-patrol vehicles is five (5) years and/or 80,000 miles. The current School Resource Officer vehicle is a 1992 Chevrolet Lumina with approximately 126,100 miles. The vehicle contains all equipment normally carried by a standard patrol vehicle except an emergency light bar. The vehicle requires replacement of the transmission as well as suspension repair. In that the vehicle is used for urgent/emergency response situations as well as prisoner transportation, it will be replaced with a standard police sedan (estimated at $25,000). The vehicle assigned to the Support Services Commander is a 1 993 Ford Crown Victoria with approximately 123,500 miles, and is experiencing increased maintenance problems. While the vehicle carries emergency response equipment, it is not normally used for regular patrol operations. The vehicle is used for general transportation, including attendance at local and regional meetings, along with occasional needs for emergency responses and tactical operations. Therefore, it is proposed that this vehicle be replaced with a more cost effective and fuel efficient mid-sized sedan (estimated at $21,000). Alternatives The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration: - Approve staff's recommendation; or - Do not approve staff's recommendation. Attachment 1999-2000 POLICE OPERATING EQUIPMENT .6301 VEHICLES $46,000 REPLACEMENT VEHICLE, SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER $25,000 There is a need to replace the marked police vehicle assigned to the School Resource Officer Program. City Administrative Policy C-006 criteria for replacement of non-patrol vehicles is five (5) years and/or 80,000 miles. The current School Resource Officer vehicle is a 1992 Chevrolet Lumina with 124,416 miles. The vehicle contains all equipment normally carried by a standard patrol vehicle except an emergency light bar. The current vehicle requires replacement of the transmission as well as suspension repair. In that the vehicle is used for urgent/emergency response situations as well as prisoner transportation, it will be replaced with a standard police sedan. REPLACEMENT VEHICLE, SUPPORT SERVICES COMMANDER $21 ,000 There is a need to replace the vehicle which is currently assigned to the Support Services Commander. City Administrative Policy C-006 criteria for replacement on non-patrol vehicles is five (5) years and/or 80,000 miles. The vehicle is a 1993 For.d Crown Victoria with 122,353 miles, and is beginning to experi~nce increased maintenance problems. While the vehicle carries emergency response equipment, it is not normally used for regular patrol operations. The vehicle is used for general transportation, including attendance at local and regional meetings, along with occasional needs for emergency responses and tactical operations. Therefore, it is proposed that the vehicle be replaced with a more cost effective and fuel efficient mid-sized sedan. OPERATING EQUIPMENT GRAND TOTAL $ 58,400 010-4201 H-12 ATTACHMENT CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY AND PROCEDURES POLICY #: C-006 SUBJECT: EV ALUA TION CRITERIA FOR REPLACEMENT OF STANDARD ISSUED: 04/01/99 EQUIPMENT EFFECTIVE: 04/01/99 CANCELLATION DATE: N/A SUPERSEDES: 09/01/97 POLICY: Equipment is currently capitalized if the value of the item at the time of purchase exceeds $500. Replacement of capital equipment must be authorized by the City Council. Criteria for evaluating when replacement should occur is listed below. The recommendation for replacement should be a composite evaluation utilizing the criteria listed coupled with the actual condition of the equipment. PROCEDURE: CRITERIA FOR A REPLACEMENT OF EQUIPMENT A. General criteria: The following criteria will be used when requesting replacement of capital equipment or other designated equipment. 1. Condition of the equipment 2. Age of equipment 3. Maintenance history of the equipment B. Specific criteria: 1. Age - Standardized estimated useful life. which may vary depending on quality and usage. a. Personal Computers - five years b. Calculators - five years c. Typewriters - eight years d. Chairs - five years e. Desks - fifteen years f. Fax Machines - five years g. Copiers - five years Revised: Apri/1, 1999 POLICY #: C-006 PAGE 2 h. Tables - fifteen years i. Files Cabinets - fifteen years j. Autos-Light Trucks - five years and/or 80,000 miles k. Police Emergency (Patrol) Vehicles - three years and/or 100,000 miles 2. Maintenance History a. Recommendation by maintenance personnel that equipment is not economically repairable or able to be updated (as in computers ). 3. _eondition a. Hazardous or dangerous for the employee to use b. Broken parts that are not adequately repairable c. Chipped, marked, or damaged veneers, laminates, or exterior that is not repairable d. No longer able to function in accord with its intended use due to damage, age, or altered requirements ktaTL. fb~ ROBERT L. HUNT CITY MANAGER ---.------------...----------------- 9.h. MEMORANDUM TO: CITY COUNCIL ~ FROM: RICK TerBORCH, CHIEF OF POLICE SUBJECT: AUTHORIZATION TO SOLICIT BIDS - REPLACEMENT OF MAIN PARKING LOT GATE CONTROLLER DATE: JULY 13, 1999 RECOMMENDA TION: It is recommended that the City Council authorize staff to solicit bids to replace the main parking lot gate controller. FUNDING: The FY 1999-00 Police Department Budget includes $4,400 for the replacement of the main parking lot gate controller. DISCUSSION: The City Council authorized an appropriation in the FY 1 999-00 Budget to replace the electric controller for the vehicle access gate to the Police Department secured parking lot. The gate will be ten years old in March, 2000. The gate is activated numerous times each day. The controller activating the gate is beginning to fail on a regular basis. Until recently, the City mechanic had been able to perform most repairs. However, due to the fact that the actuator is wearing out, an outside maintenance firm is now. required. During FY 1998-99 costs to repair the gate to date were approximately $1,400. This is more than double the amount normally budgeted to maintain the gate. Additionally, the frequent failures result in delays in vehicles leaving the station under urgent circumstances. Alternatives The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration: - Approve staff's recommendation; or - Do not approve staff's recommendation. ---"'--."-..---- ---~........_- 9J. MEMORANDUM TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: DON SPAGNOLO, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER ~ SUBJECT: AUTHORIZATION TO SOLICIT BIDS FOR THE PURCHASE OF A VEHICLE DATE: JULY 13, 1999 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Council authorize staff to solicit bids for the purchase of a vehicle for the Public Works Department. FUNDING: Funding for this vehicle is included in the FY 1999-00 Public Works Budget. A total of $9,000 is provided in Administration/Engineering and $21,000 in Water Administration. DISCUSSION: City Administrative Policy C-006 provides criteria for replacement of autos-light trucks of five (5) years and/or 80,000 miles. City vehicle PW-883, which is scheduled for replacement, is a 1988 Chevrolet Caprice with 156,000 miles. The proposed replacement vehicle will be specified as a utility vehicle capable of carrying four passengers as well as space for tools and equipment to more adequately provide for the needs of the Department. Bids for this vehicle will be solicited from dealers that are able to meet the City's specifications including dealers located in the City. 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. Attachments: Vehicle Specifications Policy #: C-006 .. .,. .". -~"..~--,_."..,-- CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT JULY 14, 1999 BID NOTICE The City of Arroyo Grande Public Works Department is requesting bid proposals for one new 1999 4 x 2 Utility Vehicle which meets the following specifications: SPECIFICATIONS . 1. White (exterior), Grey (interior) 2. 4 Door 3. 4 Passenger 4. 4 x 2 Drive 5. Alloy Wheels 6. Keyless Entry 7. Fuel Injection V-6 or V-8 8. Auto Transmission 9. Fog Lamps 10. Ride Suspension Package 11. A/C with Rear A/C 12. Power Mirrors 13. Factory Equipment Group 14. Cloth Seats 15. Tinted Windshield All proposals shall include all applicable taxes and delivery charges. All proposals shall be sealed and on company letterhead with the envelope marked "Public Works Utility Vehicle". Please submit your sealed bid to: City of Arroyo Grande Attn: Kelly Wetmore, Administrative Services Director P. O. Box 550 Arroyo Grande, CA 93421 Bid proposals must be received by 2:00 p.m. on Friday July 23,1999. Bids will be opened at that time at the Office of the Administrative Services Director located at 214 E. Branch Street, Arroyo Grande, California. The City of Arroyo Grande reserves the right to accept or reject any or all bids upon recommendation of the City Manager. If you have any questions or concerns, please contact Don Spagnolo, Director of Public Works, at (805) 473-5440. solicitbidsvehicle. wpd CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY AND. PROCEDURES POLICY #: C-006 SUBJECT: EV ALUA TION CRITERIA FOR REPLACEMENT OF STANDARD ISSUED: 04/01/99 EQUIPMENT EFFECTIVE: 04/01/99 CANCELLATION DATE: N/A SUPERSEDES: 09/01/97 POLICY: Equipment is currently capitalized if the value of the item at the time of purchase exceeds $500. Replacement of capital equipment must be authorized by the City Council. Criteria for evaluating when replacement should occur is listed below.' The recommendation for replacement should be a composite evaluation utilizing the criteria listed coupled with the actual condition of the equipment. PROCEDURE: CRITERIA FOR A REPLACEMENT OF EQUIPMENT - A. General criteria: The following criteria will be used when requesting replacement of capital equipment or other designated equipment. 1. Condition of the equipment 2. Age of equipment 3. Maintenance history of the equipment B. Specific criteria: 1. Age - Standardized estimated useful life. which may vary depending on quality and usage. a. Personal Computers - five years b. Calculators - five years c. Typewriters - eight years d. Chairs - five years e. Desks - fifteen years f. Fax Machines - five years g. Copiers - five years Revised: Apri/1, 1999 --_.. j POLICY #: C-006 PAGE 2 h. Tables - fifteen years i. Files Cabinets - fifteen years j. Autos-Light Trucks - five years and/or 80,000 miles k. Police Emergency (Patrol) Vehicles - three years and/or 100,000 miles 2. Maintenance History . a. Recommendation by maintenance personnel that equipment is not economically repairable or able to be updated (as in computers ). 3. Condition a. Hazardous or dangerous for the employee to use b. Broken parts that are not adequately repairable c. Chipped, marked, or damaged veneers, laminates, or exterior that is not repairable d. No longer able to function in accord with its intended use due to damage, age, or altered requirements - . KDl:aJ L. ~'---I ROBERT L. HUNT CITY MANAGER n" ___ ~---_.-. 9.j. MEMORANDUM TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: DON SPAGNOLO, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKSICITY ENGINEER ~ SUBJECT: AUTHORIZATION TO SOLICIT BIDS - FAIR OAKS WATER LINE, PROJECT NO. 60-98-5 DATE: JULY 13, 1999 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council: A. find that the Fair Oaks Water Line capital improvement project is categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15301 and direct the Director of Administrative Services to file a Notice of Exemption; B. transfer $47,900 of Water Fund revenue from the Reservoir NO.1 Replacement capital improvement project to the Fair Oaks Water Line capital improvement project; and, C. authorize the advertisement of construction bids for the project. FUNDING: The City successfully secured $108,750 of Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) funds for the construction of the Fair Oaks Water Line capital improvement project. In addition, $15,500 of City Water Fund was allocated to the project in FY 1998/99 for design and contract administration (these costs are not reimbursable by FEMA). Upon completion of final design, a revised cost estimate was prepared for the project. The following budget is recommended: Proposed Proposed Existing Existing Transfer Total Water FEMA from Res. #1 Project Funds Funds Project Cost Design, Survey, ROW, and Contract Administration $ 15,500 $ 0 $ 11,000 $ 26,500 Construction 0 108,750 23,650 * 132,400 Construction Contingencies 0 0 13.250 * 13.250 Totals $ 15,500 $ 108,750 $ 47,900 $ 172,150 * Construction costs above the original $108,750 estimate may be reimbursed by FEMA after the final reimbursement billing has been submitted by the City. - ..... --------_._,-- DISCUSSION: During the storms of FY 1997/98, discharge water from Lopez reservoir and storm water runoff down Arroyo Grande Creek eroded the stream bed and banks exposing a buried 8- inch steel waterline crossing the creek. The floodwater also caused a large eucalyptus tree and a portion of the bank to fall onto the exposed pipe thereby moving the pipe and causing it to break. Because of potential concerns of endangered species and environmental issues that could cause work delays and higher costs, the City requested an improved project that consisted of moving the water line south 0.2 miles and using the existing Fair Oaks Avenue bridge as a support to cross the creek. By using the bridge, the water line would no longer be located in the creek which would eliminate potential damage during future storms. The project would also connect two 12-inch water lines which are currently dead ends about 1 ,250-feet apart to provide a looped connection in the system which will facilitate better water service to the area. The alignment of the new pipe will start at Woodland Drive and proceed under the bridge and generally travel east outside the right of way along the back of the south curb. This alignment will eliminate the need to trench the existing streets and reduce the overall cost of the project. FEMA approved the project proposed by the City, authorized $108,750 in construction funds, and stated that this action qualifies as a categorical exclusion under 44 CFR Part 10. Upon completion of the project, the City will request additional funds to cover the difference between the $108,750 appropriation and the final construction costs. Staff is currently in the design stage of the Reservoir No.1 Replacement project. Based on the present design, a $49,700 cost savings is available from the $1.98 million project budget that can be applied to this project. This project is consistent with the City's proposed Water Master Plan and is identified as a recommended project in the Report's Water Distribution and Capital Improvements sections. Staff is currently in the process of obtaining the required grant easement deeds and will present them to the Council for acceptance when the contract for the project is awarded. The contract time for this project is 60 calendar days. Work is expected to begin in mid- September 1999 and be completed in November 1999 as shown in the attached project schedule. Alternatives The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration: - Approve staffs recommendations; - Do not approve staff's recommendations; - Modify as appropriate and approve staffs recommendations; or - Provide direction to staff. -_.__..._...~- y &' - ~ <. \,/" c ~ "b ~W\' 'I \/0 ~ .~p. ',j ., ~'" ? 'I S 'S. ! 'I ~.. ~ \.; ,.'.... .~. ~ '\:' a. I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ij ~ '/ ~ 7od. a./ tDW I I ~ .. ~ - ~ <L <::> - (i.\) ~ ..... (.i \ -.ip.\..'-- ., ;.t " \ \ \ \ LaJ I ~q1< ~ 1 Z 1-"'9 J. 'I - ex> r. '1 po ~I: ....J Q)'. H 0:: a. --==- ,I I 'o..! 1 <C ~ ~ · II ~c--~ 3: . 01 :5C1> O.~ a. en Z U; , '0 'a' x \ ... ~ W -CI> -' t- ~ , ije; ~ ~ I E:t \ 0 8 {)-({)<t<t~ ~ ." . I ~ ~ j ~ /" ~, ~ c: :::; 0 j I I -, II ---. ____"'- .~a.. ~-_r- ~-- ,~ [J1~ t. ~ - "".' <: --- ~ w --A , ~ ~ ~ ~~.. ~ _ ,_(/ '-' -, ~ ~ ' ~ '-.J ~ I--- - . ~~ ~~- ~ .<" :::; ~ _ ~\.-i").~" ~- ~ ~ ~ 1\, \' ... ~ - - :> . ~ t:) pO".,. ~ sf - ~ -~ f-- L 71$ i"" ~- .~!! 0b- ~ ~ "",..j l.j a h(;3 .~ 4. \' ~ I. I. is 3Nl 7\ H (I (j ~ ~ - , ",.~.. ... .' r.; ~ I "1""'''' ." .. ~., --....J \... - __ ''j 'I< i(l S ,.---. iL ~ - L ____ ""'.. ~;=- ?~ ..........AIif'~ \ ~ ~ ~ I I I) ___ I- .:.::....Ily './" _ L.-- -- ~ - . '" n... -N7 UO"I ---; "----- f...J ..,.. "--- /' ~ . r- e"- 'S t V3. '1 !Dc · ;~ 'r - . ~!~ I '" f--- - -\ ~~~\ \\11: ~~ DO". ~:cl-=--J I .. J1 .~ - ~ 1 ~y ~ ~ ~ \: ];~ \ - i ~~"" - -.J ~ ----' v. , · oUi \ .\ v I- - <{ ~.~ e:i H ~~\ \'\: ~ 4. \ ~. - ~ - ~ _ ~ ~~! ;~; ! : ~ ~ li \ ~('-~\.\ 1~ 1 \-,,~ . ~ s I., ~V . . "'.", ~ .pY.II, ,cD.' cw,..", I 1410" :: : :tDW.I::: I.QY.IiI, 1':.11: II I I DIe' I I J7t1H'-I;i~ 'NU "r;'O'1- iNil J7t1H) L ~ 01>1 L NDJ.J7t1H HinDS _ ~~ If:=.-- ~ ~ I- ~ _ i ~ ~; IT. -~ I-- _ r-~ ~ ~ /, II ~ ~ ~ " ~ <:J.-.t... frn~1'I ~ - f ~L: -......L co. 1 f-- r----,,- W III '. ~ , - I~I - :>: t' '---... ~ '/ I I ~ f---- ~ I-- t ~I"- ,--- ~'- ." D 'J. i:. ~ ' --:- ' H ~ 1----0 r----- . .. ~ M "------; I ~~~~~~. I. I I .. =r 'is ~ ...", . . . . <J30.7t1 '=~ Notice of Exemption To: 0 Office of Planning and Research From: (Public Agency) City of Arrovo Grande 1400 Tenth Street. Room 121 P.O. Box 550 Sacramento, CA 95814 Arrovo Grande. CA 93421 [!] County Clerk County of San Luis Obisoo County Government Center San Luis Obisoo. CA 93408 Project Title: Fair Oaks Water Line. Project No. 60-98-5 Project Location - Specific: In the City of Arrovo Grande alonf! Fair Oaks Avenue from Woodland Drive to west ofVallev Road Project Location - City: Arrovo Grande Project Location - County: San Luis ObislJO Description of Project: Constructio.n of reolacement water main 0.2 mile south of existinf! to reolace the water main line broken durinf! the FY 1997/98 storms. fFEMA has stated that this oroject Qualifies as a catef!orical exclusion under 44 CFR Part 10.) Name of Public Agency Approving Project: City of Arrovo Grande - Public Works Department Name of Person or Agency Carrying Project Out Project: City of Arrovo Grande - Public Works Department Exempt Status: (check one) 0 Ministerial (Section 12080(bXI); 15268); 0 Declared Emergency (Sec. 21080(bX3); I 5269(a)); 0 Emergency Project (Sec. 21 080(b X 4); I 5269(b Xc)); [!] Categorical Exemption. State type and section number: Section 15301 0 Statutory Exemptions. State code number: Reasons Why Project Is Exempt: Project consists of minor alteration of existinf! public facilities. involvinv nefllif!ible or no exoansion of use beyond that oreviouslv existinf!. Lead Agency Contact Person: Don Soo'ZTIolo. Director of Public Works Area Codeff elephone/Extension: (805) 473-5440 If tiled by Applicant: 1. Attach a certified document of exemption finding. 2. Has a Notice of Exemption been filed by the public agency approving the project? 0 Yes ONo s;g"._~ Date, ?-/3 -if Title: Director of Public Works [!] Signed by Lead Agency 0 Date received for filing at OPR: o Signed by Applicant Revised October 1998 --..-"-----.---- CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE TENTATIVE PROJECT SCHEDULE for FAIR OAKS WATER LINE (CITY PROJECT NO: 60-98-5) Council Approval to Solicit Bids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . July 13, 1999 1 st Notice to Bidders .............................................. July 16, 1999 2nd Notice to Bidders (min 5 days between publications) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . July 23, 1999 Pre-Bid Conference (Thursday, 2:00 p.m. at City Council Chambers) ... . . . . . . . . . . . . July 29, 1999 Receive Bids (Tuesday, 3:00 p.m.) ................................... August 10, 1999 Award of Bid (at City Council Meeting) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. August 24, 1999 Notice of Award (within period specified in notice to bidders) .................. August 26, 1999 Notice to Proceed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. September 9, 1999 Start Work ................................................ September 13, 1999 Completion (60 Calendar Days) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . November 11, 1999 -".........,...-.-..-. 9.k. MEMORANDUM TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: DON SPAGNOLO, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKSICITY ENGINEER rJ!YJ SUBJECT: AUTHORIZATION TO SOLICIT BIDS - PUBLIC PARKING LOT BEHIND CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, PROJECT NO. 80-99-1 DATE: JULY 13,1999 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council: A. find that the Public Parking Lot Behind City Council Chambers capital improvement project is categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15304 (project consists of minor public alterations in the condition of land which does not involve removal of mature, scenic trees) and direct the Director of Administrative Services to file a Notice of Exemption; and, B. authorize the advertisement of construction bids for the project. FUNDING: The FY 1999/00 capital improvement program budget includes a construction budget of $78,600 for the Public Parking Lot Behind City Council Chambers project. DISCUSSION: This project will construct a public parking lot behind the City Council Chambers with access from Le Point Street. The project consists of site grading, paving, retaining walls, and the installation of conduit for future landscaping. This parking lot will provide 23 public parking spaces. The project is proposed to be constructed in accordance with the attached schedule. Alternatives 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: Notice of Exemption Schedule Public Parking Lot Behind City Council Chambers capital improvement project budget Notice of Exemption . . To: 0 Officc of Planning and Research From: (public Agency) City of Arrovo Grande 1440 Tenth Street. Room 121 P.O. Box 550 Sacramento, CA 95814 Arrovo Grande. CA 93421 [!] County Clerk County of San Luis ObisDO County Government Center San Luis ObisDO. CA 93408 Project Title: Public Parkin'Z Lot Behind City Council Chambers. Project No. 80-99-1 Project Location - Specific: In the City of Arrovo Grande at Le Pointe Street and Mason Street Project Location - City: Arrow Grande Project Location - County: San Luis Obisoo Description of Project: Construction of a 23-sDace Dublic Darkin'Z lot behind the Arrovo Grande City Council Chambers Name of Public Agency Approving Project: City of Arrovo Grande - Public Works DeDartment Name of Person or Agency Carrying Project Out Project: City of Arrovo Grande Exempt Status: (check one) 0 Ministerial (Section 12080(bXl); 15268); 0 Declared Emergency (Sec. 21080(bX3); 15269(a)); 0 Emergency Project (Sec. 21080(b X 4); 15269(b Xc)); [!] Categorical Exemption. State type and section number: Section 15304 0 Statutory Exemptions. State code number: - Reasons Why Project Is Exempt: Proiect consists of minor public alterations in the condition of/and which does not involve removal of mature. scenic trees. Lead Agency Contact Person: Don SDarmolo. Director of Public Works Area Codeff elephonelExtcnsion: (805) 473-5440 If filed by Applicant: 1. Attach a certified document of exemption finding. 2. Has a Notice of Exemption been filed by the public agency approving the project? 0 Yes ONo Sptu..,~ I-. 1-7-LJi Title: Director of Public Works [!] S;gn<d by Lead Age Y . 0 Date n=ived "" films.t OPR o Signed by Applicant RwiudMay1999 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE TENTATIVE PROJECT SCHEDULE for PUBLIC PARKING LOT BEHIND CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS (PROJECT NO. 80-99-1) Council Approval to Solicit Bids ........................ . . . . . . ., July 13, 1999 1 st Notice to Bidders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. July 16, 1999 2nd Notice to Bidders (min 5 days between publications) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. July 23, 1999 Pre-Bid Conference (Tuesday. 3:00 p.m. at City Council Chambers) ......... July 27, "1999 Receive Bids (Tuesday, 2:00 p.m.) .............................. August 10, 1999 Award of Bid (at City Council meeting) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. August 24, 1999 Notice of Award .......................................... August 27, 1999 Notice to Proceed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. September 10, 1999 Start Work ........................................... September 13, 1999 Contract Completion (60 calendar days) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. November 11, 1999 it,~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~'-O ~~ \2 ~~ \2 Ir:I ~ iih .... ~ "i 6 ~ ~ =Z ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ C'I l' '0 Q.. tt -:a q q o . r-~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ ~ ~ u ~ t ~ ~ ~ ! t'I .... ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ bO ~ ~ ~ ~~ lO ~~ \2 rt:J t t-- l t ..... (IS '0 ~~ ~ ~ Co ~~ ~ ~ \ ~ c:. ~~ lO $:6 ~~ \2 $:6 rt:J ..... c:. .....; .... :;) ?;.~ 'G: ?;.~ . ~ t:~ ~... 1O 85 ~ 60 c:. .g '& ~ ~ '& ~ ~ t .a ~ ~ ~ E ~ ~ ~ 'B ... (IS ... (IS ~-d 8 ~-d '&,.9 , '&,.9 ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ 1~ ~~~ ~ '" ~ 1~ ~~~ ~ \ 'bc-d ~tp; ~ 'bc-d 'c ~ 'C :;) .! 'G: o~ o~ U "'CS \ c:. ~ ~~ g ~ ~ to ~ -d -=6 .b ... :3 ~ ~ (1$ '" \ Z~ p... .~ ~ ~'S tIO ~ ~ c:. ~ 'B ~ .= 9. '& 8 t ~ &~ 8 0 t1 ?:- 0 r- r- Q.. % ... 1/1 t.n,s ~ ~ ~ .Ill .... ~ ~ i=o t.o Co ~ Ii:! ... Q,/ g~ 8 -00< ~;j) ~ ~ %~ - ~ "t~ ~ t--t-- t-- Q.. ----- 9.1. MEMORANDUM TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: DON SPAGNOLO, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER rRo SUBJECT: CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE FOR DRAINAGE EASEMENT, BIKEWAY PROJECT ONE - PAULDING MIDDLE SCHOOL BIKELANES, PROJECT NO. 90-98-1 DATE: JULY 13,1999 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council accept, on behalf of the public, the attached offer of dedication for a drainage easement and authorize the Mayor to sign a Certificate of Acceptance. FUNDING: There is no fiscal impact. DISCUSSION: On May 25, 1999, Maino Construction Company was awarded the contract to construct improvements for the Bikeway One - Paulding Middle School Bikelane Project. Preliminary construction was started at the end of June 1999. A portion of the project includes the construction of a concrete storm drain headwall within a temporary construction easement offered by the property owner of the affected property. In order to continue to maintain the storm drain headwall, the City will need to secure an easement for the continued maintenance and replacement, if necessary, of the headwall since it is located outside of the City's right-of-way. The property owners on Huasna Road, Anthony Azevedo and Betty Azevedo, have offered the attached easement for the construction and continued maintenance of the storm drain headwall. 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. Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Bikeway Project One Vicinity Map Drainage Easement Offer C:\My DocumentsIProjects\5606 Bikeway One\easmtaccepl.doc ~ ~~ , / /I / ....""''- ' ~ > ' ,d.}.", ~ :v , . ./ - ,~ ' .. - ~ : ?V~-~V ,. ' ' ~}~/A," " ~ , ~~J~ ~ T ~ ~ ~H ~ ~ ~ g 't, uJ ,> ~ 'IJ:I " '" "<. Z -<- ~ ' \ '6, " 0 , '<> ~ fr~r:: ,'uJ E-< ~ L "::. ~ ;6J ~ " - ill L.....: \g \jtF :J: : Z ~ ',~ ~ ~ - ~O~. ~ /' ',_ ,U ~'-Ik- "^'./ - ::::-v-= · 't\ >- ol~ ' - .' .' .~ ~.' :: :---~1:::.' ~ ~' ~ ~ ~? ~ Z 0::..... '0 /" . , ' 0 ~ c-. ,..*' - .' ~ _ r ' 0: (t\. rn e ~ ~~! \\ - ...V'~\ ~' ,~\A E-<~ ~ "v, ~ \ :o;~'- Y. ""~' U ~ ~ ~ ,i 'io1 , ~" ~ V~~ . ~. ~ r_., ~\- · A~I~'{'$6-~ ~,~~~ 4: ~~ ~~~ _ "-:'~ /). \...-' ,):%: ~ ~ ~,,-,?,/'- :J: "I · 0 ~ \ i? ,'5-?~!lLI 2:3'""./ ~?-~~~ Q.' " .-\ fi ~ 't , ,~V A ~,~., ~ '/ - ~A gx;i ~ ~ 'Y ::?'\~A' AY'~" · ./1~Uj .... ~--" _.~?OI f :;;:::i~"%\~ ~ . 1:<~~J/ t-I-t '\R ~~~ ~ ~~~~J ~~~'t- ~ ~ ~ tx: ~ .....' /).. >,~,\,Y, ,,~~' . ' ~ :J: ~ B (/' "" - \1.>'0-' '. ........ \ ~' ~~~~~.. ~ ~ . f~ ~ I ':J: v\~\a' ~~~' - ~ ~- 0: ~ _ \A ~' ~~' y ~ < ~ 1 ~J ~ ..J VA .' ,/I ' '(/'\ 'f': """ lOa ~!"~' Y I ~ZV '(::1!-. ~ ", ~v it & (j '\.\ ! ~" ' '(0'" . ~ ",-""" <I ' ..... .. ~ ,..~. ' .-=--"..... __ '!O.. RECORDING REQUESTED BY CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE WHEN RECORDED, RETURN TO: City Clerk's Office P.O. Box 550 Arroyo Grande, California 93420 APN(s): 007-522-045 PROJECT NO: - FILE NO: - DRAINAGE EASEMENT THIS EASEMENT, made this I ~ 1""' day of J ~(\~ 19~; by ANTHONY 1. AZEVEDO, trustee of the Azevedo Children's Trust 1 dated November 29, 1988; and ANTHONY 1. AZEVEDO and BETIY L. AZEVEDO of the City of Arroyo Grande, County of San Luis Obispo, State of California, hereinafter tenned Offeror: WHEREAS, said Offeror desires to make an offer of a Drainage Easement NOW, THEREFORE, said Offeror covenants and promises as follows: 1. That said offeror is the owner of the following interest described below: Those Portions of Lots 17 and 18 of the Resubdivision of a part of the Ranchos Corral de Piedra, Pismo and Bolsa de Chemisal, in the City of Arroyo Grande, County of San Luis Obispo, State of California described in Parcels 1 and 2 of the document recorded on May 10, 1993 as Document No 1993-025929 in the County Recorders Office of said County. 2. That said Offeror does hereby offer to the City of Arroyo Grande a Drainage Easement for construction, operation, access, maintenence, and incidental uses upon the following described property: See attached Exhibit "A" 3. The said Offeror agrees that the Drainage Easement are and shall be binding on their heirs, legatees, successors and assignees. 4. The City of Arroyo Grande shall have the right to install any and all appliances or devices necessary for the proper page 1 -..----...--'"-- repair, maintenance, operation, replacement and improvement of said easements, and the right to clear the easements and keep the same tree of brush, tree or root growth and any other obstruction as may be necessary for the installation, construction, repair, maintenance, operation, replacement and improvement of said easements. Except for the appliances, devices and other appurtenances related to. said easements, no buildings, structures or other improvements shall be located within the easement. 5. IN WTINESS WHEREOF, this Offer is hereby executed by the said Offeror on the day and year first above written. ~ Offeror Anthony J. Azevedo, trustee (1- f: Offeror Anthony . Azevedo L'J~g.~~ Offeror B tty L. evedo - GAR:D:IAGlbike-lllegauldraingranL wpd page 2 ._.._.'m______~__ Exhibit" A" Drainage Easement File No. 232.9697 May 21,1999 Legal Description Portions of Lots 17 and 18 of the Resubdivision of a part of the Ranchos Corral de Piedra, Pismo and Bolsa de Chemisal, surveyed by RR Harris in November, 1885, in the City of Arroyo Grande, County of San Luis Obispo, State of California, according to the Map filed for record November 24, 1886 in Book A of Maps at Page 63 in the Office of the County Recorder of said County described as follows: Commencing at the s(Juthwest corner of Parcel A of the land described in Document number 1999-020118 recorded in Official Records in said County Recorder's Office; Thence along the southerly line of said Parcel A, north 81000'00" east 133.15 feet to the True Point of Beginning; Thence continuing along said southerly line, north 81000'00" east 48.00 feet; Thence south 9000'00" east 10.00 feet; Thence south 81000'00" west 48.00 feet; Thence north 9000'00" west 10.00 feet to the True Point of Beginning. The above described parcel of land is graphically shown on Exhibit "B" attached hereto and made a part hereof ~ .!?~ Joseph T. Morris L.S. 6192 Exp313012002 --...---.-- EASEMENT SKETCH Exhibit -B- I Tract 1009 (11 /MB/99) 0 629/0R/317 ('.J Parcel 2 Doc. # 1992-077670 I 25' 25' 30.2' I 59'00'00"E 1 0,00' w 0 0 I 0 N81.00'00"E 48.00' 0 ..- OJ ~581 .OO'OO"W 48.00' z " o~ ~ '-N9'00'00"W 10.00' &I I ~ <<. as ~. 6 I: IICI oA6'O~~ ." &I :I I ... ~ :I: ... 0 N Lf) ccC? ,.- n -en n Glen ,.- I een as'" L:eI: . U (f 0 a I o. I <(. Clarence St. ~ -------- JL . "WA. John L. WaIlace & AsSOCIates FILE : 232.9697 Civil Engineering. Surveying. Planning DRAWING : Bike1 topo.dwg 4115 So. Broad 51 B5 San Luis Obispo, Co SCALE : 1 "=40' (805)544-4011 FAX 544-4294 DATE: 5-21-99 ~------- ..111. MEMORANDUM TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: DON SPAGNOLO, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER of! SUBJECT: AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR SOILS TESTING ON GRAND AVENUE, ELM STREET TO HALCYON ROAD, CITY PROJECT NO. 60-70-90-98-6 DATE: JULY 13, 1999 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council: A. award a consultant's services agreement to Earth Systems Consultants based upon its proposal dated June 10, 1999, in an amount not to exceed $7,482 for the Grand Avenue, Elm Street to Halcyon Road, capital improvement project; B. authorize the Mayor to sign a consultant services agreement with Earth Systems Consultants in the form approved by the City Attorney; and, C. authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency of $1,100 only if needed for unanticipated costs (i.e., additional testing services needed due to unanticipated soil conditions) during the construction phase of the project (total soils testing costs = $7,482 + $1,110 = $8,582). FUNDING: The FY 1999/00 Grand Avenue, Elm Street to Halcyon Road, project budget includes $156,200 for Administration of which $23,400 was budgeted for soils testing. DISCUSSION: During construction of the Grand Avenue project, testing will be necessary to verify compliance with the project specifications. On June 10, 1999, the following proposals were received for construction observation and soils testing services for the Grand Avenue, Elm Street to Halcyon Road, capital improvement project: . Earth Systems Consultants, San Luis Obispo $ 7,482 . GeoSource, Inc., San Luis Obispo $ 9,625 . GeoSolutions, Inc., San Luis Obispo $26,569 Earth Systems Consultants submitted the lowest cost proposal and is qualified to perform the necessary work. Earth Systems Consultants has performed worked previously for the City with favorable results. 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: Consultant's Services Agreement Earth Systems Consultants proposal Grand Ave Reconstruction, Elm to Halcyon capital improvement project budget dw:232.5608\Soil. Staff.Report.wpd --.....-...------- ----------- CONSULTANT'S SERVICES AGREEMENT TIllS AGREEMENT, made this day of , 19-, by and between the CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE, California (hereinafter referred to as "CITY"), and EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS-NORTHERN CALIFORNIA, (hereinafter referred to as "CONSULTANT"). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, CITY desires to retain a qualified individual, firm or business entity to provide Construction Observation and Testing Services; and WHEREAS, CITY desires to engage CONSULTANT to provide services by reason of its qualificati<,ms and experience for performing such services, and CONSULTANT has offered to provide the required services on the terms and in the manner set forth herein. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual covenants, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. CONTRACT COORDINATION a. CITY. The City Engineer shall be the representative of CITY for all purposes under this Agreement. The City Engineer or his designated representative, hereby is designated as the Contract Manager for the CITY. He shall supervise the progress and execution of this Agreement. b. CONSULTANT. CONSULTANT shall assign a single Contract Manager to have overall responsibility for the progress'and execution of this Agreement for CONSULTANT. Margaret McQuade is hereby designated as the Contract Manager for CONSULTANT. Should circumstances or conditions subsequent to the execution of this Agreement require a substitute Contract Manager for any reason, the Contract Manager designee shall be subject to the prior written acceptance and approval of the CITY's Contract Manager. CONSULTANT's Contract Team is further described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. The individuals identified and the positions held as described in Exhibit "A" shall not be changed except by prior approval of CITY. 2. DUTIES OF CONSULTANT a. Services to be furnished. CONSULTANT shall provide all specified services as set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. -"---'-'-"-----"'--'- b. Laws to be obseryed. CONSULTANT shall: (1) Procure all perrilits and licenses, pay all charges and fees, and give all notices which may be necessary and incidental to the due and lawful prosecution of the services to be performed by CONSULTANT under this Agreement~ (2) Keep itself fully informed of all existing and proposed federal, state and local laws, ordinances, regulations, orders, and decrees which may affect those engaged or employed under this Agreement, any materials used in CONSULTANT'sperformance under this Agreement, or the conduct of the services under this Agreement~ (3) At all times observe and comply with, and cause all of its employees to observe and comply with professional standards regarding laws, ordinances, regulations, orders, and decre~s mentioned above. (4) Immediately report to the CITY's Contract Manager in writing any discrepancy or inconsistency it discovers in said laws, ordinances, regulations, orders, and decrees mentioned above in relation to any plans, drawings, specifications, or provisions of this Agreement. c. Release of reports and information. Any video tape, reports, information, data, or other material given to, or prepared or assembled by, CONSULTANT under this Agreement shall be the property of CITY and shall not be made available to any individual or organization by CONSULTANT without the prior written approval of the CITY's Contract Manager. d. Copies of video tapes. reports and information. If CITY requests additional copies of videotapes, reports, drawings, specifications, or any other material in addition to what the CONSULTANT is required to furnish in limited quantities as part of the services under this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall provide such additional copies as are requested, and CITY shall compensate CONSULTANT for the costs of duplicating of such copies at CONSULTANT's direct expense. e. Qualifications of CONSULTANT. CONSULTANT represents that it is qualified to furnish the services described under this Agreement. 3. DUTIES OF CITY CITY agrees to cooperate with CONSULTANT and to perform that work described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated by this reference. 2 4. COMPENSA TION The CONSULTANT will perform the work in phases as described in Exhibit "An. If separate phases are not indicated on said exhibit, then all work to be performed by CONSULTANT shall be considered to be included in a single phase. CONSULTANT will bill CITY on a time and material basis as set forth in Exhibit "A" CITY will pay this bill(s) within 30 days of receipt. The CONSULTANT may not charge more than the amount shown in Exhibit "A" without prior approval of the CITY's Contract Manager. 5. TIME FOR COMPLETION OF THE WORK Program scheduling shall be as described in Exhibit "A" unless revisions to the exhjbit are approved by the CITY's Contract Manager and CONSULTANT's Contract Manager. Time extensions may be allowed for delays caused by CITY, other governmental agencies, or factors not directly brought about by the negligence or lack of due care on the part of the CONSULTANT. 6. TEMPORARY SUSPENSION The CITY's Contract Manager shall have the authority to suspend this Agreement wholly or in part, for such period as he deems necessary due to unfavorable conditions or to the failure on the part of the CONSULTANT to perform any provision of this Agreement. CONSULTANT will be paid the compensation due and payable to the date of temporary suspension. 7. SUSPENSION: TERMINATION a. Right to suspend or terminate. The CITY retains the right to terminate this Agreement for any reason by notifying CONSULTANT in writing seven (7) days prior to termination and by paying the compensation due and payable to the date of termination; provided, however, if this Agreement is terminated for fault of CONSULTANT, CITY shall be obligated to compensate CONSULTANT only for that portion of CONSULTANT services which are of benefit to CITY. Said compensation is to be arrived at by mutual Agreement of the CITY and CONSULTANT and should they fail to agree, then an independent arbitrator is to be appointed and his decision shall be binding upon the parties. b. Return of materials. 'Upon such termination, CONSULTANT shall turn over to the CITY immediately any and all copies of videotapes, studies,sketches, drawings, computations, and other data, whether or not completed, prepared by CONSULTANT, and for 3 ~...-- which CONSULTANT has received reasonable compensation, or given to CONSULTANT in connection with this Agreement. Such materials shall become the permanent property of CITY. CONSULTANT, however, shall not be liable for CITY's use of incomplete materials or for CITY's use of complete documents if used for other than the project or scope of services contemplated by this Agreement. 8. INSPECTION CONSULTANT shall furnish CITY with every reasonable opportunity for CITY to ascertain that the services of CONSULTANT are being performed in accordance with the requirements and intentions of this Agreement. All work done and all materials furnished, if any, shall be subject to the CITY's Contract Manager's inspection and approval. The inspection of such work shall not relieve CONSULTANT of any of its obligations to fulfill its Agreement as prescribed. 9. OWNERSHIP OF MATERIALS All original drawings, videotapes and other materials prepared by or in possession of CONSULTANT pursuant to this Agreement shall become the pennanent property of the CITY, and shall be delivered to the CITY upon demand. 10. ASSIGNMENT: SUBCONTRACTORS: EMPLOYEES - This Agreement is for the perfonnance of construction observation and testing services of the CONSULTANT and is not assignable by the CONSULTANT without prior consent of the CITY in writing. The CONSULTANT may employ other specialists to perform services as required with prior approval by the CITY. 11. NOTICES All notices hereunder shall be given in writing and mailed, postage prepaid, by Certified Mail, addresses as follows: CITY : CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ATTENTION: CITY ENGINEER 214 EAST BRANCH STREET P.O. BOX 550 ARROYO GRANDE CA 93421 CONSULTANT: EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS NORTHERN CALIFORNIA 4378 SANTA FE ROAD SAN LUIS OBISPO CA 93401 4 ~- . 12. INTEREST OF CONSULTANT CONSULTANT covenants that it presently has no interest, and shall not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, financial or otherwise, which would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of the services hereunder. CONSULTANT further covenants that, in the performance of this Agreement, no subcontractor or person having such an interest shall be employed. CONSULTANT certifies that no one who has or will have any financial interest under this Agreement is an officer or employee of CITY. It is expressly agreed that, in the performance of the services hereunder, CONSULTANT shall at all times be deemed an independent contractor and not an agent or employee of CITY. 13. INDEMNITY CONSULTANT hereby agrees to indemnify and save harmless CITY, its officers, agents and employees of and from: a. Any and all claims and demands which may be made against CITY, its officers, . agents, or employees by reason of any injury to or death of or damage to any person or corporation to the extent caused by an negligent act or omission of CONSULTANT under this Agreement or of CONSULTANT's employees or agents; - b. Any and all damage to or destruction of the property of CITY, its officers, agents, or employees occupied or used by or in the care, custody, or control of CONSULTANT, or in proximity to the site of CONSULTANT's work, to the extent caused by any negligent act or omission of CONSULTANT under this Agreement or of CONSULTANT's employees or agents; c. Any and all claims and demands which may be made against CITY, its officers, agents, or employees by reason of any injury to or death of or damage suffered or sustained by any employee or agent of CONSULTANT under this Agreement, however caused, excepting, however, any such claims and demands which are the result of the sole negligence or willful misconduct of CITY, its officers, agents, or employees; d. Any and all claims and demands which may be made against CITY, its officers, agents, or employees by reason of any infringement or alleged infringement of any patent rights or copyrights or claims caused by the use of any apparatus, appliance, or materials produced or furnished by CONSULTANT under this Agreement; and 5 ---------_._......_._-~--~ . - ~_. e. Any and all penalties imposed or damages sought on account of the violation of any law or regulation or of any term or condition of any permit, to the extent said violation of any law or regulation or any term or condition of any permit is due to negligence on the part of the CONSULTANT. f. CONSULTANT, at its own cost, expense, and risk, shall defend CITY from any and all claims, demands, suits, actions, or other legal proceedings, including those to enforce any penalty that may be brought against CITY, its officers, agents or employees, and pay and satisfy any judgment or decree that may be rendered against CITY, its officers, agents, or employees in any such suit, action or other legal proceeding, to the extent same were due to negligence of the CONSULTANT. 14. WORKERS' COMPENSATION CONSULTANT certifies that it is aware of the provisions of the Labor Code of the State of California, which require every employer to be insured against liabiilty for workers' compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that code, and it certifies that it will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this Agreement. 15. INSURANCE a. At the request of the CITY, CONSULTANT shall provide proof of comprehensive or commercial general liability insurance in the amount of $1,000,000 (including automobile) satisfactory to the CITY. b. CONSULTANT shall provide proof of special insurance of the types (such as "errors and omissions" or professional liability) and in the amounts as may be set forth on Exhibit "A. " 16. AGREEMENT BINDING The terms, covenants, and conditions of this Agreement sha.1l apply to, and shall bind, the heirs, successors, executors, administrators, assigns, and subcontractors of both parties. 17. WAIVERS The waiver by either party of any breach or violation of any term, covenant, or condition of this Agreement or of any provision, ordinan~e, or law shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any subsequent breach or violation of the same or of any other term, covenant, condition, 6 --^_.--_._-- -_..-- ordinance, or law. The subsequent acceptance by either party of any fee or other money which may become due hereunder shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any preceding breach or violation by the other party of any term, covenant, or condition of this Agreement or of any applicable law or ordinance. 18. COSTS AND ATTORNEY'S FEES The prevailing party in any action between the parties to this Agreement brought to enforce the terms of this Agreement or arising out of this Agreement may recover its reasonable costs and attorney's fees expended in connection with such an action from the other party. 19. DISCRIMINA TION No discrimination shall be made in the employment of persons under this Agreement because Qfthe race, color, national origin, ancestry, religion or sex of such person. If CONSULTANT is found in violation of the nondiscrimination provisions of the State of California Fair Employment Practices Act or similar provisions of federal law or executive order in the performance of this Agreement, it shall the~eby be found in material breach of this Agreement. Thereupon, CITY shall have the power to cancel or suspend this Agreement, in whole or in part, or to deduct from the amount payable to CONSULTANT the sum of Twenty-five Dollars ($25) for each person for each calendar day during which such person was discriminated against, as damages for said breach of contract, or both. Only a finding of the State of California Fair Employment Practices Commission or the equivalent federal agency or officer shall constitute evidence of a violation of contract under this paragraph. If CONSULTANT is found in violation of the nondiscrimination provisions of this Agreement or the applicable affirmative action guidelines pertaining to this Agreement, CONSU- LTANT shall be found in material breach of the Agreement. Thereupon, CITY shall have the power to cancel or suspend this Agreement, in whole or in part, or to deduct from the amount payable to CONSULTANT the sum of Two Hundred Fifty Dollars ($250) for each calendar day during which CONSULTANT is found to have been in such noncompliance as damages for said breach of contract, or both. 20. AGREEMENT CONTAINS ALL UNDERSTANDINGS This document (including all exhibits referred to above and attached hereto) represents the entire and integrated Agreement between CITY and CONSULTANT and supersedes all prior 7 _ ._~.__.m negotiations, representations, or Agreements, either written or oral. This document may be amended only by written instrument, signed by both CITY and CONSULTANT. All provisions of this Agreement are expressly made conditions. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, CITY and CONSULTANT have executed this Agreement the day and year first above written. EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS- NORTHERN CALIFORNIA By: CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE By: ATTEST: Director of Administrative Services jep:232.S806\SUBTER-l. WPD 8 . EXnmIT "A" 1. CONSULTANT's Contract Team: a. Margaret McQuade, Vice Pre~ident 2. CONSULTANT's Services or Duties: - see attached proposal for scheduling of the following items (in an amount not to exceed $7,482.00): a. Utility Trench Backfill Testing and Observation b. Pavement SubgradelAggregate Base Testing and Observation c. Report Preparation, Project Supervision 3. Payment Schedule: Monthly progress billings, payable net 30 days. 4. Other Provisions: a. Errors and Omissions insurance in the amount of$l,OOO,OOO. b. General liability ($1,000,000 minimum)/workers' compensation insurance (statutory limits) Attachments: Earth Systems Consultants-Northern California Proposal dated June 10, 1999 9 .( o Earth Systems Consultants 4378 Santa Fe Road San Luis Obispo. CA 93401-8116 ~ Northem California (805) 544-3276 · FAX (805) 544-1786 E-mail: esc@earthsys.com June 10, 1999 Mr. Roberto Sanchez City of Atroyo Grande - ..- P.O. Box 550 -- . - 208 East Branch Street Atroyo Grande, CA 93421 PROJECf: GRAND AVENUE RECONSTRUCflON ElM STREET TO HALCYON ROAD CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA SUBJECf: Proposal for Construction Observation and Testing Services Dear Mr. Sanchez: Earth Systems Consultants Northern California is pleased to present this proposal to provide construction observation and testing services for the reconstIUCtion of Grande A venue in Atroyo Grande, California. We understand that the project will consist of improvements to the existing water, sewer, and storm drain systems as well as reconstruction of the pavement from Elm Street to Halcyon Road. Our scope of wode will consist of providing compaction testing and observations as required by the project plans and specifications, including periodic site reviews by a Registered Geotechnical Engineer to review the site conditions and the progress of the wode. This estimate assumes that lengthy portions of Grande Avenue will be ~Iosed to tmffic during the constnJction period to allow for long stretches of utility installation and pavement constnJction. The eshm~ further assumes that the street sections will be as shown on the project plans and specifications, and that no additional R-value tests will be necessary. L Uti1ity Trench Backfill Testing and ObservatiOIL. This estimate is based upon testing and observation of mains and laterals for the sewcrline, watatine, and the storm drain and culvert. The wode will be conducted at night. at the intersections of Elm Street and Halcyon Road. Field technician 40 hrs. @ $52.00Ihr. $ 2,080.00 Field technician, overtime 18 hrs. @ $78.00Ihr. $ 1,404.00 Nuclear density tests 115 no charge Maximum density/optimum moisture tests 2 @ $135.00 ea. 270.00 ;.... Subtota1, Utility Trench Backfill $3,754.00 .' 0 Mr. Roberto Sanchez 2 June 10, 1999 n. Pavement Subgradel Aggregate Base Testing and Observation.. This estimate is based upon testing and observation of subgrade and aggregate base sections under pavement areas, --spandrels, cross gutters. and curblgutter.-- The work- will be conducted at night at the intersections of Elm Street and Halcyon Road. Field technician 16 hrs. @ $52.001hr. $ 832.00 Field technician, overtime 18 hrs. @ $78.00Ihr. $ 1,404.00 Nuclear density tests 100 no charge Maximum density/optimum moisture test 4 @ $135.00 ea. 540.00 Subtotal, Pavement Subgrade and Aggregate Base $2,776.00 VI. Report Preparation, Project Supervision. This estimate includes a maximum of 2 .visits to the site by a Registered Geotechnical Engineer to observe the progress of the work and provide routine project supervision. Senior Engineer 4 hr. @ $95.00Ihr. $380.00 Staff Engineer 2 hr. @ $78.00Ihr. 156.00 Technician 4 hrs. @ $ 52.00Ihr. 208.00 Drafter 4 hrs. @ $52.00Ihr. 208.00 Subtotal, Report PrepJProject Supervision $ 952.00 Estimated Total $7,482.00 STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS The Earth Systems Companies have been operating since 1969 and have a geographic distribution that spans the State of California. This stnJCtu1'e allows us to intcp8te the advantages of local knowledge of geotechnical conditions, with the broad base of professional and technical personnel available through a large consulting organization. As The Earth Systems Companies include affiliated divisions of similar st:nJctIJm and expertise, the needs of a particular project can be fully addtased from project inceptioB tbreJugh completion of constmction. ~gardless of its location. Each investigation is conducted under the diR:ct supervision of a ~gistered engineer or geologist. This degree of involvement . allows us to thoroughly address the aspects of a project at the early critical stages. Assessment of the potential for hazardous substances can be combined with evaluations of geotechnical aspects, thus providing a complete evaluation of the site. ~ ') 0 Mr. Roberto Sanchez 3 June 10, 1999 In Northern and Central California, we have offices in Santa Maria, San Luis Obispo, Paso Robles, Fremont, and Hollister. We have affiliated offices in Ventura, Palmdale, Van Nuys, - --- --_. . and Bermuda Dunes. We maintain- the largest most-comprehensive soilsancLmaterials ----.- testing laboratory in the Central Coast region, encompassing 3,500 square feet and having the capacity to perform hundreds of tests upon soils, concrete, asphalt, steel, masonry, and other building materials. Tests are conducted by trained technicians in accordance with ASTM, Caltrans, and other appropriate laboratory standards. We maintain our own R-value (resistance to deformation under repeated loading) test equipment. We have mobile laboratory equipment for fill control services and for concrete sampling, curing, comp~ion testing, and asphalt concrete testing. Our laboratory has been certified by the Army Corps of Engineers (Sacramento District), Office of the State Architect and Concrete and Cement Reference Laboratory. Our laboratory is inspected annually, and the calibrations are traceable to the National Bureau of Standards. Our testing and inspection staff is certified by ICBO, NICET, ACI and AWS for soil, conctete, asphalt, D18SOD1J', and steel. Experienced in all phases of constIUction tesling, from grading operations to on-site materials inspections, our technical staff provides prompt and thorough testing and inspection services for a variety of projects. We were selected by the State of California Department of Transportation as their District 5 (San Luis Obispo, San Benito, Santa Barbara, Monterey, and Kern Counties) geotechnical and materials testing consultant. The California Office of Project DevekJpnent and Management also selectal us as their geotechnical consultant for the Central ec.t maion. Both of these contracts were renewed due to these agencies' high level of sarisfction with our services. We were also selected by the State of California to perform geoIoJic studies . and pmliminary enviromnental site assessments for the State Water Project. Our firm offers full service environmental consulting services specializing in detection, assessment and remediation of hazardous materials. Our team includes civil engineers, geologists, engineering geologists, environmental assessors, and management pJ.mas. By combining technical expertise, extensive knowledge of environmental JegUIaIionsand attentiveness to our clieats' needs, we provide a balanced and innovative approach to solving environmental compliance issues. Earth Systems Consultants has consistently provided quality geotechnical, geological and environmental services for projects such as dams, highways, bridges, airports, hospitals, educational facilities, military installations, and single and multi-family residential -developments throughout California. I (" 0 Mr. Roberto Sanchez 4 lune 10, 1999 QUALIFICATIONS OF THE PROFESSIONAL STAFF Dennis Shallenberger will be the project manager. A Registered Civil and Geotechnical --_.. -- - - Engineer;--he -is the head of the geotechnical engineering department and -supervises-til of the --. --- -.- ------ soils engineering investigations. His education consists of a Bachelor's degree in Geology from the University of Montana at Missoula and a Master of Science degree in Civil Engineering, California State University, Long Beach, California. Mr. Shallenberger currently teaches senior level courses in engineering mechanics, soil mechanics and foundation design at California Polytechnic State University in San Luis Obispo, California. He is a member of the American Society of Civil Engineers and a fellow of the Institute for Advancement of Engineering. David Bums has been employed with this firm since 1989 and has performed inspections for such projects as the Cal-Poly RecreationlSportslPhysical Events Center and the San Luis Obispo Downtown Centre. He is certified by the ICBO for special inspection of reinforced concrete and stIUctural masonry, and received his Engineer-in-Training (EIT) certificate. Chris Starke has been a technician for 15 years and is certified by the ICBO for special inspection of reinforced concrete and stIUctural masonry, a NICET Level m Geotechnical engineering Technician and a Grade I ACI Concrete Field Testing Technician. Doug Walters has been a technician/inspector for 15 years. He is a certified DSA inspector, a certified ICBO Inspector for reinforced concrete and stnlctural masomy, a NICET Level m Geotechnical Engineering Technician and a Grade I ACI Concrete Field Testing Technician. Robert Down, staff engineer, has performed field engineering observation and testing services since 1995. His project experience includes single family residences. subdivisions, with reinforced earth slopes and slide repairs, colDIDClCial developments such as warehouses and malls, and municipal projects such as sound waDs and bridges. He specializes in cement and lime treated soils. Mr. down received his B.s. degree in Civil Engineering from California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, California. His is an Engineer-in Training and a Licensed Nuclear Gauge Operator. CONDITIONS The fees and conditions of this proposal will remain in effect for a period of 90 days. Our technicians will attempt, wherever possible, to combine observation and testing during site visits, in order to keep the final bill as low as possible. However, as the presence of our personnel at the site will depend upon the contractor's schedule and the progress of the work, the fees presented above are to be considered as estimates only, and shall not be constIUed as I 0 Mr. Roberto Sanchez 5 June 10, 1999 guaranteed maximum fees. The invoices will reflect the time spent and service performed, and may be greater or less than the estimate amounts. - -- - - -------Routine project supervision by a Registered Geotechnical Engineer and a .staff engineeLbas... been included in the above quotation. However, please note that the above quotation does not include charges for meetings, plan reviews, site visits to address unforeseen problem areas, or other such services. Fees for such services will be charged at the Fee Schedule rates in effect at the time of the services request. The client or client's agent is to supply latest plans and specifications, and notify us of any changes pertinent to the performance of testing and observations. The client or client's agent is responsible for contacting this firm when services 8Ie required. Charges for retests due to failing results, or when testing is requested but the contractor is not ready and does not cancel scheduled testing are also not included in the .estimate and will be billed at the hourly rates listed previously. This firm shall not be responsible for back charging contractors for retests. H the client finds the proposed scope of work, Terms for SeMces (Doc.No.:9902-162.TS attached), and fees satisfactory, the return of the attached Work Order, signed and dated by the party responsible for payment, will constitute authorization for work on the project to begin. This agreement can be terminated by either party upon notification in writing. Earth Systems Consultants Northern California's responsibility for the project will end upon completion of the services described herein or termination of the agreement, unless authorization to perform additional work and agreement for payment th~f is provided by the client. Thank you for your consideration of our firm for this project. H you have any questions or require additional information, please contact the undersigned at your convenience. Sincerely, Earth Systems Consultants Northern California S#{'7:1~ .Margaret M uade, Vice .President Doc.No.:9906-132.PRPIls Attachments: Terms for Services (Doc.No.: 9902-162.TS) Work 0rdCI' c C Earth Systems Consultants 4378 Santa Fe Road San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-8116 ~ Northem CalHornia (805) 544-3276. FAX (805) 544-1786 E-mail: esc@earthsys.com WORK ORDER EARTH SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS NORTHERN CALIFORNIA, a California Corporation, and Client agree to a work assignment for Earth Systems Consultants Northern California as follows: Date: June 10, 1999 Doc. Number: 9906-132.PRP Name or-project: GRANDE AVENUE-RECONSTRUCTION .'. -- -.-.. '.- ElM STREET TO HALCYON Order Received by: Margaret McQuade Client Name: City of Arroyo Grande, Attn: Mr. Roberto Sanchez CUeot Address: P.O. Box 550,208 East Branch Street, Arroyo Grande, CA 93421 Location of Job: Arroyo Grande, California Scope of Services: Construction Observation and Testing Services, per proposal dated June 10, 1999 Fees to be Charged: Estimate: $7,482.00, per proposal dated June 10,1999 CONDmONS: The Terms for Services (Doc.No.: 9902-162.TS attached) are iDcorporatcd in full as part of this agreement. Invoices win be submitted upon completion of work. or at two-week intervals, and are due and payable upon presentation. A late Payment Service Charge computed at Ibc periodic rate of 1.5 percent per moncb will be appUed to any unpaid balance commencing thirty days after Ibc date of invoice. Submittals to aowrnnw&al agencies are the responsibility of the Qient Cancellation of this contract by Client must be in writing. Client agrees to pay for aU services and materials provided up to Ibc time of termination. Earth Systems Consultants AGREED TO AND ACCEPrED: Northern California (By party responsible for payment) ~~, Cient Name (please print) Margaret M , Vice President Date ~~Aj Signature and Tide Date Please return a signed copy to Earth Systems Phone Fax Consultants Northern California - _......-,,_.... _.',-_..---,.__._,~ - ~ \0 8 .9 2 ~~~~~ ~ .9 ~ ~~ 8 c (f') co N bOQ) N It') f1 c::- ~~~~~ to-:' -"6.. ~..... r-:- :a E ~ ~ E 0\ .....r-..~.....(f') .....~ 00 N c:: 0 ..... ..... ..... fI7 &u 8 ~ ~ ~ Ii:: ~ t &j ~ ~ ~ M e '[ :€ ~ ~ Q., Q., ~ ) .~ ~ E .. ; (f') Q) ~ ~~ ~l ~ ~ - &, 8.. ~ ~ bOfI) I :E bb 8 ..... fI) c:: 8 .~ 1 N N ~ u ].1: ..... ~ ~ 0:: ~ .!!i ~ N ~O:: .. ~~~~~ ~ ~~ 8 '1;j.J >." ~ ~ N .c: ~ 0\ "'~t.OlO r-:- ~~ r-:- ~ a . ~~O\Nr-.. ~ 0\ Q) g) .....r-..~.....(f') ~~ 00 c:: Q) :::: ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ... boO-_ g) ~ s )( '(ij ;::I ~ c:: ~ bO .B .. bO ~ '1;j'1;jC:: ~:a ~ ~ ~ bO ;::I c:: 0 :::: !;o ..... c:: ..... c:: I!! fI) .. ~& ~& .2i .- Q) Q) S '1;j e !!j S ~~~~~ ~ ~~ ~ - tIS ~ ~"6.. >... ~~~~~ to-:' >. .. ~..... r-:- EQ),2 .. Q) .. Q) 1a > 0\ d 0 .....~ ~ .....r-..~.....(f') 00 , 0:: .E uO ..... ..... ..... .a ~ .g Ec::: ~ ~~~ ~ ~ '1;j ~ ~ 5! .- ;::I c::'1;j Ii:: -'(ij c:: ,2 2 o\'to-:'to-:' It) ,2 c:: It) iO ~ (;j .. 8 .- 1\1 ~(f')(f') N .- tLI N N !!j '1;j ~ '1;j'1;j ..... '1;j ~ ..... ..... c:: 0 c:: 1\1 ~ ..!!!E'1;j ~- ~ Q) 0...9- )( )( >- oS ~fI)) tLI tLI ! E' !!j ~ ~~~~~ 8 ~~~ 8 Ei:i NI\1- ~Qi N (;j - N J ....."6... ~ N 0 It) 1/")' N c:: Q) ~~' ~ N ofi~1!! 'bi;) "0 .....~ffi~~ S 'bi;) ~ s .- .2i .- ;::I .- ;::I ..........K ~ ~ . fo ate N o te ..... N ~ r----l ;s .to c:: 23 II> '(ij 0 J E ~ ~ c:: 0 2 .9 b '1;j :::: c:: 1\1 0 ~ 1\1 '1;j ~ u c:: 0 b:z:l Z ~ -i ~ 1\1;::1 E fI) U oo:c: ~ 1.<.1.<. Q) 'i:: ;::I ~ O~2~ ~""<o ) &=0.- b ) ;:: -'1;jI\1(;j .~ Q) Q) :r: .~ e ~ E ;::I :-:::~lU~'1;j t:: ~ = ~ JS :5~3: ~ ~ 8"0 0 0 0 ;&,):2 <u l- t) ~ fI) en (/) i'- '1;j ~ 1,1;1. .. ~ -! Q fI) 0 .a .- !!j .. QJ E:: tJ S 1\1 ~ ... :s c: ~ c: t ~!!j"6..6'o c c - 1\1 Q) QJ ;::I Q,I ;::I ~ O"6..O::~ ;;. @ ..........ON~ Q. @ ~~~ e 1:11: Q) _' .. Q,I ~~~~~ ~ Q" IIoo~Qo8 ~ < ~~~ < i -" 9.n. MEMORANDUM TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: DON SPAGNOLO, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEERvt- SUBJECT: AWARD OF BID, MONTEGO STREET SIDEWALKS, PHASE I (SOUTH SIDE), PROJECT NO. 90-98-7 DATE: JULY 13, 1999 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council: A. award the Montego Street Sidewalks, Phase I (South Side) construction contract to SJ Souza Construction Company in the amount of $25,557.01 and authorize the Mayor to sign the contract; and, B. direct staff to issue the Notice of Award and Notice to Proceed in accordance with the Contract Documents; and, C. authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency of $2,600 only if needed for unanticipated costs (Le., changes in field conditions) during the construction phase of the project (total project construction cost = $25,557.01 + $2,600 = $28,157.01). FUNDING: The FY 1999/00 Capital Improvement Program budget includes $73,400 for construction of Montego Street Sidewalks, Phase I and II. If the contract is awarded, approximately $45,000 will be available for Phase II (to be constructed in the Spring of FY 1999/00). DISCUSSION: On July 1, 1999, two bids were publicly opened for the Montego Street Sidewalks, Phase I (South Side) capital improvement project. The attached bid results indicate SJ Souza Construction Company as the apparent low bidder with a total bid amount of $25,557.01. The bid for SJ Souza Construction Company has been reviewed and found to be in compliance with the project specifications. This project will install sidewalks on Montego Street near Ocean View Elementary School. The project will consist of the installation of sidewalks on the south side of Montego Street in front of lots located at 1215, 1211, 1207, and 1203 Montego Street. The contract time for this project is 30 calendar days. Work is expected to begin at the -.. ..-.-. end of July 1999 and be completed in August 1999 as shown in the attached project schedule. Alternatives 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: Bid Opening Log Sheet Tentative Project Schedule Montego Street Sidewalks, Phase I (South Side) capital improvement project budget ..--,,- BID OPENING LOG SHEET CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE BID OPENING: July 1,1999 Montego Street Sidewalk and Driveway Improvements Engineer's Estimate = $25,000.00 BIDDER'S NAME. CITY TOTAL Brinar Construction, $32,360.00 San Luis Obispo S.J. Souza Construction, $25,557.01 Pismo Beach ~L0- III kctlltlJlLc-- Kelly ~etrvore, Administrative Services Director c: Public Works Director City Manager . ---------- CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE TENTATIVE PROJECT SCHEDULE for MONTEGO STREET SIDEWALKS (SOUTH SIDE) (CITY PROJECT NO: 90-98-7) Plans & Specifications Completed and ROW/Easements Secured .. . . . April 23, 1999 Council Approval to Solicit Bids. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. April 27, 1999 1 st Notice to Bidders ......:................................. April 30, 1999 2nd Notice to Bidders (min 5 days between publications) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. May 5, 1999 Pre-Bid Conference (Thursday. 2:00 p.m. at Montego cul-de-sac) ........... May 13, 1999 Receive Bids (Thursday. 2:00 p.m.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. July 1, 1999 Award of Bid (at City Council Meeting) .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. July 13, 1999 Notice of Award ............................................ July 15, 1999 Notice to Proceed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. July 28, 1999 Completion - 30 calendar days .............................. Augu~26, 1999 ~ N ~ ~ ~~~ ~ N ('I') \C B 2 B~ It) ~ g \CS',...;-..-) g bOQI "- fh c::- ~ g QI :e 6 "'0 c:: 0 '> &u u e .... p. ~ ~ 8 - - Ii:: 'i s; s; ~ t .... bO ('I') ('I') ~ ~ c:: 8 8 2 '0' :e N N t:I., .. c:: Q., ..2 ] 8 ~ ........ q q ~ ~ ~ ~~ '0 ai ...."'0 .-..-1 flI ... ... flI ~ S ~~ , i 8 8 :::: c:: ... QI N N ~.fi ~c:: ........0 ..... s ~] ~ ~ .....'iU ~~ N ......, ... QI flI 8 ~~~ 8 8'0 ~ 8 '<t' '<t' c:: g ~~~ g j~ ~ "- Q.,- .] ..... ..... - ~ 8 ... ~ c:: ~ ~ c:: ~ Q\ ~~ ~:e \CS' ~:e ~' ~ i'] '<t' ..... c:: ..... c:: c:: .!!J ~& ~& QI ~ j 8 ~ ~~~ ~ ., UJ 0 >... ..-) >... -.D"";--.D ..-) ~~ .. QI .. QI 80 ('I') 80 N ('I') ~J ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ Soj ::I QI ..-) ::I QI \D' N Il'i ..-) ~ ~ .... - .... - ... ca ..... ... ca ..... "'0"'0 "'0"'0 N QlVJ ~B c:: 0 ~ c:: 0 8,- .... bO ..... ~~ )( )( UJ UJ 3! 8 ~~~ 8 r-___ n J! VJ 0 SHI." A!I~ Q" o ~ . 1Qi '<t' 1Qi '<t' , bO..... 0 ~ N-.D'<i ..-) ~ 2 0 ~ '6'0 "'0 '6'0 "'0 ..... "- 0\ I c:: QI E- ... ::I ... ::I ---.. j 0:2 ~ ace ace ~ flI c::.fi..c:: VI o ::I Q., c:: - ]~'O 0 ~ :0 c:: 'iU QI c:: ca 0 ~.fi~ .. ... VI ~ fij u ~ Z QI c:: U ~ '2 ::I O~o.E ~ Eb... b ] ~ --]~ ~ .- 6 ~ ~~18 0 ~"'Oo ~ U <u eJ ... ~ ] II) CI) s "a; ~ loLl ~ '0 Eb ~ c ~ c:: ... ::I .... !:: tJ '0' ~ ~ ~ .... c: "tS t UJ s.,,lI! QI c:: c:: ~ O'flI].fi~ ::I QJ @ ('I') 1:1. ..........8 2 ~~ QJ ~ )( ~o t:I., Q., .5 .E ~ < '<t' ~ "-~K ----..,.- 9.0. MEMORANDUM TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: DON SPAGNOLO, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER ~ SUBJECT: AWARD OF BID, OPTICAL DETECTION DEVICES AT EAST BRANCH STREETIMASON STREET, PROJECT NO. 90-99-2 DATE: JULY 13, 1999 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council: A. award the Optical Detection Devices construction contract to Lee Wilson Electric Company in the amount of $9,873 and authorize the Mayor to sign the contract; and, B. authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency of $1,000 only if needed for unanticipated costs (Le., changes in field conditions) during the construction phase of the project; and, C. authorize $500 for inspection by the State of California (total project construction cost = $9,873 + $1,000 + $500 = $11,373); and, D. authorize an appropriation of $1,373 from the Traffic Signal Fund (Fund 222) to the project; and, E. direct staff to issue the Notice of Award and Notice to Proceed in accordance with the Contract Documents. FUNDING: The FY 1999/00 Capital Improvement Program budget includes $10,000 for construction (including contingencies) for the Optical Detection Devices capital improvement project. An appropriation of $1,373 will result in an estimated ending fund balance of $235,531 as of June 30, 2000, for the Traffic Signal Fund. DISCUSSION: On June 24, 1999, one bid was publicly opened for the Optical Detection Devices capital improvement project. The bid for Lee Wilson Electric Company has been reviewed and found to be in compliance with the project specifications. Optical detection devices allow emergency vehicles (such as fire trucks and ambulances) --.-., ~~.,~ to preempt a traffic signal during emergencies. During an emergency, the emitter assembly on the City's fire trucks and other emergency vehicles is activated. The emitter assembly projects a light sequence that is read by a detector atop the existing traffic signal which gives the emergency vehicle a green light and all other intersection approaches a red light. Work on this project is within Caltrans right-of-way and will require an encroachment permit and State inspection. The City is exempt from the encroachment permit fee but will be required to reimburse the State for its inspection services. The cost of the inspection services is estimated at $500. Staff has identified the following funding alternative in an effort to fully fund this project: Current Hazard Elimination Proposed Safety Fund 222 (HES) Grant Transfer Total Construction $ 9,873 $ 0 $ 9,873 Construction Contingency 0 1,000 1,000 State Inspection 127 373 500 $ 10,000 $ 1,373 $11,373 The contract time for this project is 30 calendar days. Work is expected to be completed during the month of August 1999 as shown in the attached project schedule. Alternatives 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: Bid Opening Log Sheet Tentative Project Schedule Optical Detection Devices capital improvement project budget dw:1999\citycouncil~uly\Award.bid.opticom.wpd BID OPENING LOG SHEET CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE BID OPENING: JUNE 24, 1999 Installation of Optical Detection Devices on East Branch Street (Hwy 227) at Mason Street (Project No. 90-99-2) BIDDER'S NAME. CITY BID TOTAL Lee Wilson Electric Co., $9,873.00 Arroyo Grande re, Administrative Services Director c: Public Works Director City Manager -"-.-._-",---- CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE TENTATIVE PROJECT SCHEDULE for INSTALLATION OF OPTICAL DETECTION DEVICES ON EAST BRANCH STREET (ROUTE 227) AT MASON STREET (PROJECT NO. 90-99-2) Council Approval to Solicit Bids ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. May 25, 1999 1 st Notice to Bidders ........................................ May 28, 1999 2nd Notice to Bidders (min 5 days between publications) ............. June 4, 1999 Pre-Bid Conference (Thursday, 2:00 p.m. at Arroyo Grande Fire Station) June 10, 1999 Receive Bids (Thursday, 2:00 p.m.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . June 24, 1999 Award of Bid (at City Council Meeting) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. July 13, 1999 Notice of Award ............................................ July 15, 1999 Notice to Proceed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. July 28, 1999 Start Work ............................................... August 2, 1999 Contract Completion - 30 Calendar Days. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. August 31, 1999 ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ,..,\0 ~ ~ ....~ ~ \l"} ..;: 9,9i. (i) ~ ~ .. .;s I) ~ q ~ =Z ~"G ~ 8 ~ ~ '0 C'I C'I "" Q.. p.. "S "'" "'" {:. ~ ~ t? t? ~ ~ \ 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ..... ~ <II ....~ ~ ~ ~ "(U t t ~ '0 ~ c: ~ ~ ~ t:. Bg ~~ ~:B ~:B ..... ~ .....~ %~ t:,p. t:,p. ~.. ~ ~~ ~~ ~ 9 ~ :>-"" ....~ ~ l~ ~"" ~ "" ~ a~ aO ~~ 0 ~ "" ~~ '& ~ '& ~~ ~~ E ~ "..) E ~ ~.... ~1 ..... lIS :B~ ~-o ~ S\J} ~9 ~9 ~~ \ &'1 &'1 ~ -a" ~~~ ~~ -a" ~ ~ ..;: t:. ~ ~~~ ~ ''bo -0 '&.5 ''bo -0 ..... ..... ? ..... ? O~ -U" O~ ~ tII ~~ g '" ~'t t:. ~ .~ g, .~ ~." ~ 0 io6 ~':S ~ 1: Z % ~ i ,tj "S .~ o ~:tj ~ ..... 6 ~ ....~8' &~ (3 0 Ci t.~'& r' %~-O <II ~..... ~ t t ~..... "" ~ .s p>p... ~.. ~ ~ .... t6~ i=- ~ ~ "G ~ ~ ~ Q,I '6~p... Q,I g~ 8 ... .. B ~ ~ ~ ~ 8'2- ~ ~ ~ t--t-- t-- Q.. CIo< r' 9.p. MEMORANDUM TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: DON SPAGNOLO, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER& SUBJECT: DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE PROGRAM PLAN FOR FY 1998/99 AND FY 1999/00 DATE: JULY 13, 1999 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council: A. direct the Director of Administrative Services to publish a public notice in the local media in accordance with Article IV-Public Notification of the Plan; and, B. approve the submittal of the FY 1999/00 Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Program Plan and proof of publication to Caltrans; and, C. approve the submittal of the Report of Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Contract Awards for FY 1998/99 to Caltrans. FUNDING: The following Federal-aid grant projects are programmed for the City of Arroyo Grande which will be subject to the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Program: . $375,000 of High Priority Projects Program funds for the Grand Avenue, Elm Street to Halcyon Road, reconstruction project. . $14,000 of Hazard Elimination Safety funds for upgrading the traffic signal at the East Branch Street (Route 227)/Mason Street intersection with Optical Detection Devices. . $29,952 (or 80% of $37,440) of Federal Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation (HBRR) funds for preliminary engineering and field review of the Bridge Street Bridge Rehabilitation Project. DISCUSSION: Each year the City is required to adopt a Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Program that applies to projects utilizing Federal funds. Local agencies applying for federal funds must comply with all the elements of Title 49, Part 23 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) entitled "Participation by Minority Business Enterprise in Department of Transportation Programs." These provisions require local agencies to maximize the use of minority and women owned businesses on local federal-aid construction contracts. The attached FY 1999/00 Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Program Plan establishes compliance with federal regulations and allows the City to apply/utilize federal grant funds (e.g., HBRR or Transportation Enhancement Activities funds). The FY 1998/99 DBE Program Plan adopted by the City Council on July 14, 1998, states the City's DBE Liaison Officer will prepare and submit an annual report to the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) or Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) showing DBE participation on projects assisted with federal funds. Attached is an annual report letter to Caltrans stating the City's contracts awarded for its federal-aid projects during FY 1998/99. Alternatives 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: FY 1999/00 Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Program Plan Report of Disadvantaged Business Enterprises Contract Awards for FY 1998/99 dw: 1999\citycouncil~uly\DBE.Staff.Report.9900. wpd . CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE PUBLIC NOTICE IT IS THE POLICY of the City of Arroyo Grande to assure that all Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBEs), which include minority and women entrepreneurs who may wish to conduct business with the City on Federally funded projects, an equal opportunity to compete for such services. The City extends to DBEs the maximum opportunity to participate in contracts funded in whole, or in part, with Federal Highway Administration or Federal Transit Administration funds. The City of Arroyo Grande has copies of the DBE Program Plan available to the public. The City and the US Department of Transportation will accept comments from the public regarding the program goals for a 45-day period. Comments received from interested parties are for informational purposes only. ROBERT L. HUNT, CITY MANAGER DATE , FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT: DON SPAGNOLO, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER (805) 473-5440 ~z,~' _/ P.O. Box 558 rpt_, ..", 208 East Branch Street . ~ ()f;J ArroyoGr....,CA;3421 . .... '. .~~Phone:(805)473-s.t40" E....neerl~:,. '. FAX: (805) 473-5443 '., '" PUBUC W()RKS ,1375A.iaStreet July 14 1999 Phone: (805) 473-54A ,Corp.~arcf. , FAX: (80S) 473-~2 " ,E-MaI.: agclty@ilrr~Yoarande.Ora Mr. John Smida, Local Assistance Engineer Caltrans District 5 Local Assistance , 50 Higuera Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Subject: City of Arroyo Grande FY 1999/00 DisadvantagedB,usine$sEnterprise (DBE) Program Plan . . . , Dear Mr. Smida: The City of Arroyo Grande requests approval ofthe enclosed DBEprogram Plan. The City,. requests approval of an annual DBEgoal of 10% for Fiscal Year' 1999/00, beginning on . July 1, 1999, and ending on June 30, 1998. .' , It is anticipated that the following Federal-aid projects will be advertised during FY1999/00 with preliminary DBE participation levels established as shown. Estimated Federal Contract DBE _ Project No. Cost Participation Type of Work Optical Detection Devices STPLHG-5199(008) $ 9,873 $ 1,795 Construction Contract Bridge Street Bridge BHLO-5199(005) $ 35,500 $ 3,550 'Design.. BHLO-5199(005) $ 1,800 $ 180' Soils Testing , BHLO-5199(005) $ 421,280 $ 42,130 C6nstructionContract DBE 10% (X) This goal meets the 10% minimum Federal requirement. , . () Since this goal does not meet minimum 10% Federal requirement, an e)(emption'in accordance with Section 5 is requested. (Justification forapproval,is ~n~losed.) Don Spagnolo, P.E. Date Director of Public Works/City Engineer DBE Liaison Officer Enclosures: DBE Program Plan adopted by Arroyo Grande City Council on July 13, 1999 Affidavit of Publication for DBE Program Plan' . ~., . - --,._---_._,._---~-- . DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE PROGRAM PLAN FOR FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION AND FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION PROGRAMS July 1999 City of Arroyo Grande 214 East Branch Street Post Office Box 550 Arroyo Grande, California 93421 805-473-5400 ARTICLE I POLICY STATEMENT DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISES (DBE) The policy of the City of Arroyo Grande, hereinafter referred to as the "City," is to purchase the highest quality of goods and services at the lowest possible price. The established policy and procedure which follows will assure that purchase of goods and services made by the City and any contract or subcontracts entered into will be administered without discrimination on the basis of race, color, sex, religion or national origin. This policy is intended to assure all Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBE), which shall include minority and women entrepreneurs, who may wish to conduct business with the City, an equal opportunity to compete for such services and extends to DBEs the maximum opportunITY to participate in contracts funded in whole, or in part, with federal funds. The intent of this policy is to be consistent with laws and regulations regarding DBE participation on federally funded projects. The City may adopt changes to this policy from time to time in order to remain consistent with any changed laws or regulations. A DBE is synonymous with a Minority Business Enterprise (MBE) as defined in Title 49, Part 23.5 of the code of Federal Regulations. It is the intent of the City, in compliance with federal rules and regulations, to develop and implement a DBE Program pursuant to 49 CRF Part 23, and circular UMTA C4716.1A, "Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Requirements of Recipients and Transit Vehicle Manufacturers" for all federal funded programs. The City will seek out, and establish communication with the minority business community. The City will utilize DBE in all aspects of contracting to the maximum extent feasible for projects funded by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). To ensure adherence to this policy, the Director of Public Works has been designated the DBE Liaison Officer. This policy statement is limited to federally funded programs, and will be circulated throughout the City and the community in general. Copies of this policy statement will be sent to known minority and women business organizations and associations. Michael A. Lady Mayor Date 1 . ARTICLE II DBE LIAISON OFFICER AND DUTIES Section 1. DBE Liaison Officer: The Director of Public Works is the designated DBE Liaison Officer for the City of Arroyo Grande. The DBE Liaison Officer shall be responsible for managerial activities and for dissemination of information on available contracting opportunities to minority businesses on federally funded programs. The DBE Liaison Officer shall coordinate with subrecipients on compliance with DBE requirements. Section 2. DBE Liaison Officer's Duties and Responsibilities: The duties and responsibilities of the DBE Liaison Officer on federally funded projects are to: a. Implement and manage the officially adopted DBE Programs on a day-to-day basis including revision of the Plan as required. b. Analyze contracting opportunities and project priority areas for DBE efforts based on approved budgets. c. Utilize a listing of DBE's certified by Caltrans. Addresses of these firms are to be listed in a registry and distributed to all bidders on federally funded projects. Registry shall include the following information: name, address, telephone number, ethnicity, sexual ownership, and type of work performed by firm. d. Develop and implement a certification process to ensure that the DBE Program benefits only bona fide DBEs which are owned and controlled by one or more minorities or women. The City may, at its discretion, accept the certifications prepared by other agencies. e. Publicize City business opportunities, arrange time for presentation of bids, facilitate the participation of DBEs. f. Review bids and proposals for DBE compliance. g. Maintain records demonstrating DBE efforts and accomplishments. h. Monitor DBE commitment compliance during the life of the contract. i. Prepare and submit an annual report to the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) or Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) showing DBE participation on projects assisted with federal funds. j. The DBE Liaison Officer shall report to the City Manager. 2 --~-,---~..__._.__.,._.- ARTICLE III ESTABLISHMENT OF OVERALL DBE GOAL The City will establish an overall goal for its use of DBE's. This goal will be updated annually as of July 1 of each year. A 10% DBE goal is set for the period beginning July 1, 1999. The goal is not a quota but shall conclusively establish that the City has made a good faith effort to secure DBE participation in its federally funded projects. ARTICLE IV PUBLIC NOTIFICATION ,- At the time of submittal of this program to the U.S. Department of Transportation, the City will publish a notice in local media. Said publication shall: . Announce the DBE's overall goals. . Inform the public that the goals and description of how they were set, are available for public inspection for a period of thirty (30) days. . Inform the public that both U.S. DOT and City of Arroyo Grande will accept comments on the goals for 45 days from the date of the notice. . The notice shall advise interested parties that comments are for u,formational purposes only. In addition to the foregoing, interested minority and majority contractor organizations will receive direct mailings of this complete program with a request that they provide written comments to City of Arroyo Grande in this program. ARTICLE V CONTRACT PROCEDURE This Plan shall be implemented through the utilization of a contract special provision. These procedures require bidders to submit the names of MBE and DBE subcontractors and suppliers, a description of the work each is to perform or material to be furnished, and the dollar values of each MBE and WBE subcontract. 3 . ARTICLE VI DBE NOTIFICATION Projects will be advertised in local newspapers and minority focus newspapers when possible. These ads will include reference to DBE requirements and will indicate MBE and WBE goals set by the City. Assistance Centers will receive notification of projects scheduled to be advertised. Assistance Centers, Minority Business Development Centers, and Program Management Centers will receive complimentary plans and specifications for projects within their geographical area of responsibility. ARTICLE VII SELECTION CRITERIA FOR CONTRACTS WITH DBE GOALS ,. Every contract containing DBE goals shall be evaluated by the DBE Liaison Officer or his/her designatee to ascertain bidding contractor's efforts to attain the DBE goals. The award of any project with DBE goals must be reviewed by the DBE Liaison Officer or hislher designatee before said contract may be awarded. Should there be disagreement between the City's functional units concerning contractors' efforts to attain contract goals for DBE participation, the matter shall be referred to the City Manager for final determination. Competitors that fail to demonstrate sufficient reasonable -. efforts to obtain DBE participation shall not be eligible to be awarded to the contract. Competitors that do demonstrate sufficient reasonable efforts to obtain DBE participation will be eligible for competitive bid contracts. Any contracts that contain DBE goals, pursuant to this policy, will be monitored on an on- going basis by project personnel during the course of construction. The DBE Liaison Officer is to be immediately advised of any circumstances wherein contractor compliance with the DBE provision is questionable. The contractor shall submit a final report for each project with DBE goals which includes total payments to the prime contractor as well as payments the prime contractor has made to DBE subcontractors, vendors and suppliers. If the report indicates the prime contractor has not achieved the project goals, project personnel shall attach an evaluation, in narrative form, of the reasons for failure to attain the goals and any corrective action that was taken. Prime contractors will be required to notify City personnel of any situation in which regularly scheduled progress payments are not made to DBE subcontractors, vendors, or suppliers. 4 ARTICLE VIII COUNTING DBE PARTICIPANTS The City, its contractors, and subcontractors shall count DBE participation in accordance with the provisions of Section 23.47, Title 49, of the Code of Federal Regulations. ARTICLE IX RECORDS AND REPORTS The DBE Liaison Officer shall maintain such records and provide such reports, as are necessary to ensure full compliance with this Plan. Such records and reports shall include, as a minimum, the following information: . Procedures which has been adopted to comply with this DBE Plan. . Awards to DBEs. . Awards to majority contractors. . Final project reports concerning DBE utilization. . Such other data as is needed to fully evaluate City compliance with this Plan. The DBE Liaison Officer shall submit reports to Caltrans and to U.S. DOT elements as required. These reports will include: . Number and dollar value of contracts awarded. . Number and dollar value of contracts and subcontracts awarded to DBEs. . Description of general categories of contracts awarded during the quarter which were awarded to DBEs. . Indication as to the extent of which the percentage met or exceeded the MBE and WBE goals. . Report breakdown of ethnic grouping and sex. ARTICLE X DBE LISTING The City will keep on file a listing of firms certified by Caltrans to be Disadvantaged Businesses in accordance with the DOT order. This listing will be developed and maintained in accordance with Sections 23. 53, 23.53, 23.55 and 23.87 of 49 CFR. This listing shall be made available to prospective contractors at no charge. Contractors will be permitted to rely upon the authenticity of firms listed in this Directory. A contractor desiring to use a DBE not included in the Caltrans certified listing will be allowed to do so but will be required to provide the appropriate certification from the DBE before such participation is counted towards award of the project. 5 ARTICLE XI COMPLAINTS Any complaints received by the City concerning this program will be investigated by the OBE Liaison Officer. He/she will endeavor to resolve said complaints within 90 days of receipt. The appropriate DOT element and Caltrans will be furnished a copy of the complaint and may be invited to participate in the investigation/resolution. The DOT element and Caltrans will receive a complete investigative report on the complaint and may be requested to concur in the proposed disposition of said complaint. Contractors will be directed to notify the OBE Liaison Officer of any complaints they may receive concerning this program. O' - jep:232.9899(19)\DBE.Plan.9900.wpd 6 "-" ---~-~--~_..__.- .~e7 0/ P.O. Box 550 208 Eat Branch Street ~ ~~ Arroyo Grande, CA '3411 Phone: (805) 473-5440 Engineering FAx: (805) 473-5443 ' PUBLIC WORKS 1375 Ash Street Phone: (805) 473-~ . Corp. Yard FAX: (805) 473-54'1 . E-M",: agelty@arroy.ande.ora . July 14, 1999 Mr. John Smida, Local Assistance Engineer. Caltrans DistrictS Local Assistance 50 Higuera Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Subject: . City of Arroyo Grande Report of Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DB E) Contract Awards for FY 1998/99 Dear Mr. Smida: Article II, Section 2, Item i. of the City of Arroyo Grande July 1998 DBE Program Plan states the DBE Liaison Officer shall: "Prepare and submitan.annual report to the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) or Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) showing DBE. participation on projects assisted with federal funds." This annual report is being submitted to you in accordance with this requirement. Staff is requesting that you share a copy of this annual report with your FTA and FHWA contacts. , - The City of Arroyo Grande awarded the following contract(s)in FY 1998/99 for the City's . Federal-aid project: Federal Project No.: HP21 L-0500(001) Caltrans District 5 No.: EA 05-927023 Contract Amount: $ 1,707,535 DBE Participation $ 171,220 Type of Work: Construction contract for the Grand Avenue, Elrn ... Street to Halcyon Road, capital improvement project Sincerely, Don Spagnolo, P.E. Director of Public WorkslCity Engineer DBE Liaison Officer Enclosure: Annual Report of DBE Awards for 1998/99.. jep:232.9899(19)\DBE.Annual.Report.ltr.wpd . " - -..-.--....--.--..-.--.--- . Annual Report ofDBE Awards for FY 1998/99 Grand A venue, Elm Street to Halcyon Road Locode: Agency: City of Arroyo Grande District: 05-927023 Fed. Project No.: HP21L-0550(001) DBE Project Goal: 10% Total Contract Bid: $1,707,535 Reimburement Ratio: 80% Federal Share: $375,000 Award Date: 06/22/99 Prime (P) contracts and Subcontracts (S) Awarded: MBE Awards (locI. Other) MWBE Awards WWBEAwards No. Total Fed Share No. Total Fed Share No. Total Fed Share P 0 $0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 $0.00 0 $0.00 $0.00 S 1 $71,670 $15,740 0 $0.00 $0.00 2 $99,550 $21,863 '" Combined MBEIWBE Percent of Federal Share for this Project: 10% MBElDBE Prime and Subcontractors Award by Ethnic, Woman, or DB Groups Asian- Asian- Black Hispanic Native Indian Pacific Others Total - No. 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 Total $ $0 $71,670 $0 $0 $0 $99,550 $171,220 Fed $ $0 $15,740 $0 $0 $0 $21,863 $37,602 Professional and Consultant Services MBE (& Others) MWBE WWBE 1. Engineering nla $0 $0 $0 2. Architectural nla $0 $0 $0 3. Right of Way nla $0 $0 $0 4. Landscape Plan nla $0 $0 $0 Construction 1. Grading/Drainage nla $0 $0 $0 2. Paving nla $0 $0 $0 3. StructureslBuildings nla $0 $0 $0 4. Materials nla $0 $0 $0 5. Equipment nla $0 $0 $0 6. Trucking X $0 $0 $91,050 7. Traffic X $8,500 $0 $0 8. Landscaping nla $0 $0 $0 9. Other X $71,670 $0 $0 Totals: $80,170 $0 $91,050 jep:232.9899(19)\dbe.lDllual.rcport.9899 ,- -,--,_.<-- ,,---,,~ 9.q. MEMORANDUM TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: TERRY FIBICH, DIRECTOR OF BUILDING AND FIRE @ SUBJECT: AUTHORIZATION FOR PAYMENT OF EMERGENCY EXPENDITURES TO REPAIR FIRE ENGINE DATE: JULY 13,1999 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve the actions taken pursuant to Resolution 3279 and approve payment to Brumit Diesel, Inc., in the amount of $10,023.77 for emergency repairs. FUNDING: This payment will be accommodated as a carryover of FY 1998-99 funds from the Division of Fire and Emergency Services budget. DISCUSSION: On May 9, 1999, Arroyo Grande Fire Department Engine One suffered a catastrophic failure of its automatic transmission. The failure of the transmission required the apparatus to be towed to Brumit Diesel, Inc. in Santa Maria, the only shop in this area that is properly qualified to work on this type of equipment. Upon opening the transmission it was determined that the entire transmission required rebuilding. The Engine was placed back in service on June 4, 1999. The cost of this repair work is $10,023.77. The emergency repair work was authorized pursuant to Resolution 3279, which authorizes the City Manager to take immediate action required by an emergency within the City, and procure the necessary equipment, services, and supplies for those purposes. Such action requires subsequent ratification by the Council. Additionally, this repair was done without competitive bidding due to the emergency nature of the repairs and the sole source nature of the qualifications and skills of this particular vendor. 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; - Provide direction to staff. Attachment: Resolution 3279 ---------- ---------~_.._--~----- . . . BRUMIT DIESEL, INC. WORK ~ 1631 Carlotti Dr. C)RDER .5/28/99 331217 Py.. 1 Santa Maria, CA 93454-1503 (805)928-3806 Fax(805)922-7908 a TERMS: NET 30 DAYS "-- ~----- Past due work orders subject to 1 ~% per 24 Hr. Emergency Service Available DETROIT DIESEL month service charges. PERKINS Sold To 489-3214 @ Unit Inforlatil1'n RRROYO GRRNDE CITY ALLISON Make........CYLONE P.O. BOX 550 ~ Model/Year..FIRE T~CK 1990 ~RO~DE, CR. 93421-0550 Unit/VIN....E-1 /46JDBAR81L1003224 ;1 Mileage ... 48110 ~ r: ~ :1'"'//C/Jc/,; Phone...... Pro.ised. .. ] Ter.s.[CHGJ Written by.CJH ] P.O I. [ ] Date Opened... [05/14/99J . P R R T S I] URN TIT I . RLL 29532370 SERL GRSKET SET 1.00 0.00 1.00 407.43 407.43 RLL 23046658 STEEL GRSKET 1.00 0.00 1.00 42.80 42.80 RLL 23048511 CLUTCH PLRTE 1.00 0.00 1.00 141.83 141.83 RCL ~~~~r~~7 ~EY 2.00 0.00 2.00 1~.91 25.82 R L EARING 1.00 0.00 1.00 3 .55 36.55 ALL 6837976 ROLLER 10.00 0.00 10.00 1.82 18.20 ALL 23018535 . SPRING 10.00 0.00 10.00 1.22 12.20 ALL 6831704 SNAP RING 2.00 0.00 2.00 1.05 2.10 ALL 6834679 STEEL PLATE 5.00 0.00 5.00 8.60 43.00 ALL 29529492 CLUTCH PLATE 10.00 0.00 10.00 11.43 114. 30 ALL 6834488 STEEL PLATE 5.00 0.00 5.00 16.35 81.75 ALL 29506041 BUSHING 1.00 0.00 1.00 ~ 7.05 7.05 RLL 23041146 BEARING 1.00 0.00 1.00 116.77 116. 77 ALL 6771144 OUTPUT LOCKNUT 1.00 0.00 1.00 24.78 24.78 ALL 23016017 SLINGER 1.00 0.00 1.00 .5.55 5.55 ALL 6885570 GOVERNOR 1.00 0.00 1.00 95.12 95.12 RLL 6881638 WASHER 1.00 0.00 1.00 14.10 14.10 ALL 6838520 SPRING 1.00 0.00 1.00 3.10 3.10 DDP 29536712 PUMP 1.00 0.00 1.00 1366.92 1366.92 F~T l~~ijW~Y INBOUND FREIGHT ~:il i:ii ~:ii gf:!~ 1~~:~~ A L BR . KIT ALL 6881352 WASHER 1.00 0.00 1.00 15.60 15.60 ALL 6883492 .. WASHER 1.00 0.00 1.00 5.96 5.96 ALL ~~~~,~! B~ARING 1.00 1:11 I: II i~:~Y 24.0Y ALL A E 1.00 12.9 ALL 9432125 RACE 1.00 0.00 1.00 21.33 21. 33 ALL 9441863 BRG. ASSM. 1.00 0.00 1.00 13.57 13.57 ALL 23041786 PLATES 18.00 0.00 18.00 "12.03 1296.54 ALL 23047771 " PLATES 7.00 0.00 7.00 \ 6. 37 114. 59 ALL 6758779 RING I; 00 0.00 1.00 ~ 1. 27 1.27 ALL 6769252 SPRING 1.00 0.00 1.00 2.55 2.55 ALL 6434488 PLATES 6.00 0.00 6.00 15.87 95.22 ALL 6834679 STEEL PLATE 5.00 0.00 5.00 8.60 43.00 ALL 6835321 WRSHER 1.00 0.00 1.00 2.18 2.18 RLL 6839209 SPRING 1.00 0.00 1.00 11.49 11.49 ALL 6839819 KITS 2.00 0.00 2.00 42.84 85.68 ALL 6839820 KITS 2.00 0.00 2.00 14.51 29.02 FRT INBOUND INBOUND FREIGHT 1.00 0.00 1.00 15.00 15.00 RLL 6772293 GEAR RACE 1.00 0.00 1.00 229.39 229.39 FRT INBOUND - INBOUND FREIGHT 1.00 0.00 1:00 3.00 3.00 KRY 1601 . BLACK PAl NT 1.00 0.00 1.00 4.93 4.93 KRY 1401 SILVER PAINT 2.00 0.00 2.00 4.93 9.86 OIL 2413 SPRAY CLEANER 1.00 0.00 1.00 3.19 3.19 WIL 117830 TRANS. AIR MODULATOR 1.00 0.00 1.00 48.72 48.72 RECeiVED "N OF ARROYO GRANL : ,. .., , JUN 11 1999 # cg@~W . ACCTS. PAYABLE .. ~ ..-. - ., CUSTOMER WORK ORDER BILL BRUMIT DIESEL, INC. e W 0 R-K -ORDER ~ - I .....~ 1631 Carlotti Dr. 5/28/99 3307 P~. 2 Santa Maria. CA 93454-1503 .. (805) 928-3806 Fax (805) 922-7908 0 TERMS: NET 30 DAYS --' Past due work orders subjeclto 1 ~% per 24 Hr. Emergency Service Available DETROIT OIESEL month service charges. PERKINS Sold To @ Unit Infor.ation ALLISON Make........CYLONE ~ 11"AI~N~r::i~~f0T~j~B~flI003224 Phone. . . . .. . {'-,RE. Pro.ised... ] a e . . . PARTS -.-.- QUA N TIT I E S .p R ICE S L/C..Part Nu.ber............Descri tion......Ordered.....B/O.Shi ped..Unitprice....A.ount LBF LFH-4223 TRANSMISSION FILTER 1.00 0.00 1.00 .17.91 17.91 DEL 9633-3 .170 X 14 ZIPTIE 12.00 0.00 12.00 0.20 2.40 MIS SHOP SUPPLI ES 1.00 0.00 1.00 20.00 20.00 HAZ ENVIROMENTAL FEE 1.00 0.00 1.00 "12.00 12.00 OIL 2413 SPRAY CLEANER 1.00 0.00 1.00 3.19 3.19 PAR 68TF-2-2 BRASS FITTING 1.00 0.00 1.00 .. 1.35 1.35 ALL 6834888 SHAFT 1.00 0.00 1.00 .. 7.96 7.96 ALL 6834976 GEAR 1.00 0.00 1.00 .48.57 148.57 FRT INBOUND INBOUND FREIGHT 1.00 0.00 1.00 . 11. 00 11. 00 MIS 700134-1 SHAFT 1.00 0.00 1.00 80.54 80.54 MIS 700130-1 SEAL KIT 1.00 0.00 1.00 16.36 16.36 FRT INBOUND INBOUND FREIGHT 1.00 0.00 1.00 17.00 17.00 MIS 130700-1 SKINNER VLV. 1.00 0.00 1.00 2 3.00 233.00 MIS 130705-1 SKINNER VLV. 1.00 0.00 1.00 362.76 362.76 FRT INBOUND INBOUND FREIGHT 1.00 0.00 1.00 21.25 21.25 DEL 73984 RELAY 12V 1.00 0.00 1.00 5.10 5.10 OIL 015 QUART-TRANS. FLUID 48.00 0.00 48.00 1.90 91.20 MIS SHOP SUPPLI ES 1.00 0.00 1.00 50.00 50.00 PAR 48F-4-2 BRASS FITTING 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.41 0.41 [... WORK REQ~ESTED... 1 CONTINUED TRANS BAD. RECE\\JED AANl [ ... WORK COMPLETED... J .'N Of ARROYO G -.. JUN 11 1999 " CHECK OUT TRANS AND FOUND CLUTCH MATERIAL IN PAN. REMOVE TRANS~CiS PAYABLE VERY HARD TO PULL) DISASSEMBLE, CLEAN, INSPECT FOR DANEAGEtREPLA . PART AS NEEDED TO BRING TRANS UP TO SPEC. ALSO CHANGE BO H SKINNER VALVE. ROAD TEST AND PUMP TEST. 53.54 3212.40 [....... SUBLET ....... J TOW VEHICLE TO SHO cg@ ~W' tt Sales Tax.... 450.00 456.68 , Other........ 0.00 Subl.t....... 450.00 AUTHORIZED BY ,'" .., Eabts. .. .. · .. 3~Y~:~0 it Dr........ TOTAL.......r 10023.77J HHffff SUtK ADJUSTERS . 19.95 HlfHHHf HlIfIf fU RITO SUtK ADJUSTERS . 69.95 HfHHIHI I hereby .uth rizl thl MIri to be doni along with the nec.ss.rt lahrials. An ex~ss led1anic's Un is h.reby aclcnawltdgtd on the said engine or truck to secure the alount thereof. I agree hat you shall not e responsible for loss or dillgl to lour engine or truck In C'SI of fire or theft or any other cause beyorid your control. If necessary to institute ll~l aCtion I en fire. collection If the alount due on this invoicl, buyer agrees to pay all neclssary costs and attornlY's fees. '--- CUSTOMER WORK ORDER BILL RESOLUTION NO. 3279 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE AUTHORIZING THE IMMEDIATE EXPENDITURE- . OF PUBLIC MONEY TO SAFEGUARD LIFE, HEALTH, AND PROPERTY AS PROVIDED FOR IN PUBLIC CONTRACT CODE SECTION 20168 AND DELEGATING TO THE CITY MANAGER THE AUTHORITY TO TAKE EMERGENCY ACTION PURSUANT TO PUBLIC CONTRACT CODE SECTION 22050 WHEREAS, the City of Arroyo Grande owns and maintains a street system which includes Colina Street; and WHEREAS, on or about March 24, 1998, Colina Street collapsed due primarily to undermining of the existing pavement caused by excessive rain; and WHEREAS, additional portions of Colina Street and adjacent improvements are in imminent danger of collapsing; and WHEREAS, Colina Street has been closed and all vehicular access, including emergency vehicle access, has been prohibited; and WHEREAS, weather forecasts, including forecasts issued by the National Weather Service on March 18, 1998, indicate that above normal precipitation will continue through the end of April, 1998; and WHEREAS, it is necessary to immediately proceed to stabilize the area around Colina Street, repair Colina Street, and restore access to the residents of Colina Street; and WHEREAS, the cost of such repair work will likely exceed the sum of Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000); and WHEREAS, the circumstances described above fall within the provisions of Public Contract Code Section 20168. NOW~ THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande that the public interest and necessity demand the immediate expenditure of public money to repair Colina Street in order. to safeguard life, health and property. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that henceforth, pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 22050, in the case of an emergency within the City of Arroyo Grande, the City Manager may cause the repair or replacement of a public facility, take any directly related and immediate action required by that emergency and procure the necessary equipment, services, and supplies for those purposes, without giving notice for bids to let contracts. '. RESOLUTION NO. 3279 On motion of Council Member Lady " seconded by Council Member Tolley and on the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Council Member Lady, Tolley, Fuller, and Mayor Dougall NOES: None ABSENT: Council Member Runels the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this , 1998. ATTEST: 71~a.~ Nancy A. D is, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: LYON & CARMEL , tL-tlI L, Hui;1 ! Robert L. Hunt, Chy Manager I, NANCY A. DAVIS, City Clerk of the City of Arroyo Grande, County of San Luis Obispo, State of California, do hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing Resolution No. 3279 is a true, full and correct copy of said Resolution passed and adopted at a regular meeting of said Council on the 27th day of March , 1998. WITNESS my hand and the Seal of the City of Arroyo Grande affixed this 27th day of March , 1998. 1l~ a. ~ Nancy A. Da 5, City Clerk' 9.r. MEMORANDUM TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: DANIEL C. HERNANDEZ, DIRECTOR PARKS AND RECREATION'MI- SUBJECT: AUTHORIZATION TO SOLICIT BIDS - PARKS DIVISION VEHICLE DATE: JULY 13,1999 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the City Council authorize staff to solicit bids for a ~ ton regular cab pickup truck. FUNDING: The City Council authorized $25,000 in the adopted Fiscal Year 1999-2000 Parks Division budget for replacement of an irrigation repair vehicle (identified as P-13). DISCUSSION: The current vehicle is a 1984 Ford ~ ton pick-up currently valued at $3,800 with repair expenditures in FY 1998-99 exceeding $2,000. Replacement of the current vehicle is in compliance with City Equipment Replacement Policy C-006 (Attachment 1). The specifications for the requested vehicle are provided for Council reference (Attachment 2). Alternatives The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration: - Approve staffs recommendation; - Modify staffs recommendation; - Reject staffs recommendation; or - Provide direction to staff. Attachments: Policy #C-006 (Attachment 1) Bid Notice (Attachment 2) ATTAOMNT 1 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY AND PROCEDURES POLICY #: C-006 SUBJECT: EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR REPLACEMENT OF STANDARD ISSUED: 04/01/99 EQUIPMENT EFFECTIVE: 04/01/99 CANCELLATION DATE: N/A SUPERSEDES: 09/01/97 POLICY: Equipment is currently capitalized if the value of the item at the time of purchase exceeds $500. Replacement of capital equipment must be authorized by the City Council. Criteria for evaluating when replacement should occur is listed below. The recommendation for replacement should be a composite evaluation utilizing the criteria listed coupled with the actual condition of the equipment. PROCEDURE: CRITERIA FOR A REPLACEMENT OF EQUIPMENT - A. General criteria: The following criteria will be used when requesting replacement of capital equipment or other designated equipment. . 1. Condition of the equipment 2. Age of equipment 3. Maintenance history of the equipment B. Specific criteria: 1. Age - Standardized estimated useful life. which may vary depending on Quality and usage. a. Personal Computers - five years b. Calculators - five years c. Typewriters - eight years d. Chairs - five years e. Desks - fifteen years f. Fax Machines - five years g. Copiers - five years Revised: Apri/1, 1999 POLICY #: C-006 PAGE 2 h. Tables - fifteen years i. Files Cabinets - fifteen years j. Autos-Light Trucks - five years and/or 80,000 miles k. Police Emergency (Patrol) Vehicles - three years and/or 100,000 miles 2. Maintenance History a. Recommendation by maintenance personnel that equipment is not economically repairable or able to be updated (as in computers ). 3. Condition a. Hazardous or dangerous for the employee to use b. Broken parts that are not adequately repairable c. Chipped, marked, or damaged veneers, laminates, or exterior that is not repairable d. No longer able to function in accord with its intended use due to damage, age, or altered requirements . kl:m- L. ftlfu'-l' ROBERT L. HUNT CITY MANAGER " ~._._-~._.._.__.._~_..- ATTACl-MNT 2 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT July 14, 1999 BID NOTICE The City of Arroyo Grande Parks Department is requesting bid proposals for one new 1999 % ton regular cab pickup truck which 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. AMIFM 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. Paint color: white 24. Seat belts for three (3) passengers 25. Truck shall be delivered within sixty (60) days of order date 26. Extended warranty: 6 year170,OOO 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". Please submit your sealed bid to: City of Arroyo Grande Attn: Kelly Wetmore, Administrative Services Director P.O. Box 550 Arroyo Grande,. CA 93421 Bid proposals must be received by 2:00 p.m. on Friday, August 6, 1999. Bids will be opened at that time at the Office of the Administrative Services Director located at 214 E. Branch Street, Arroyo Grande, California. The City of Arroyo Grande reserves the right to accept or reject any or all bids upon recommendation of the City Manager. If you have any questions or concerns, please contact Daniel Hernandez, Director of Parks and Recreation, at (805) 473-5474. S:\RFP\ParksDivVehicleJuly14.99 _._---~ -."---...-- - --- 9.s. MEMORANDUM TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: DANIEL C. HERNANDEZ, DIRECTOR PARKS AND RECREATION ~ SUBJECT: AWARD OF BID - ELECTRIC VEHICLE DATE: JULY 13,1999 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the City Council accept the bid of $14,582 for the 3-year lease of the 1999 Ford Ranger EV. FUNDING: In the Fiscal Year 1999-00 Parks and Recreation Budget, $5,000 was allocated for the 1st year lease payment. In addition, the City has been awarded a $5,000 grant from the San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District towards the lease of an electric vehicle (Attachment 1). With the addition of the $5,000 grant, it reduces the 3-year lease to a 2- year lease with the final payment being in FY 2000-2001. DISCUSSION: This vehicle will replace the 1988 Isuzu Pickup Truck currently used by the Parks and Recreation Director as per City Replacement Policy C-006 (Attachment 2). The 2 vehicles currently available in our area are the Ford Ranger and the Toyota Rav4. Both of these vehicles are available through a 3-year lease program. The vehicle is returned to the dealer at the end of the lease term since it is a research vehicle. The manufacturer literally dismantles the vehicle to ascertain means of improving the technology. The bids submitted for the Ford Ranger EV was $5,201 for annual payments or $14,582 for a one-time payment and the Rav4 was $16,000 for one time payment or $457.00 monthly ($16,452 over length of lease). These are the only payment options for the Ranger EV and no other payment options are available on the Rav4. There is a cost savings to the City of $1,021.00 should the Council decide to make the one time lease payment for the Ranger. However, since the City must return the vehicle, staff recommends the City retain its funds and make the second and final payment in FY 2000-2001. The Ranger includes unlimited mileage, bumper-ta-bumper warranty and Roadside Assistance. A six-week delivery timeline is anticipated for this vehicle. _._~- ----~._~_." AWARD OF BID - ELECTRIC VEHICLE JULY 13,1999 PAGE 2 Alternatives The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration: - Approve staffs recommendation; - Authorize an appropriation of $4,582 from the General Fund Unreserved Fund Balance and submit one-time payment for the vehicle; - Modify staffs recommendation; - Reject staffs recommendation; - Provide direction to staff. Attachments: Policy # C-006 (Attachment 1) Bid notice (Attachment 2) . AIR POLLUTION ATTACt-HNT 1 CONTROL DISTRICT COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO May 25, 1999 Daniel Hernandez Parks & Rec Department City Of Arroyo Grande 1221 Ash St. Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 Dear Mr. Hernandez: Congratulations! At its May 19, 1999 meeting, the Air Pollution Control Board approved the staff recommendation to award you a $5000 "buydown" incentive for the purchase or lease of a qualifying electric vehicle. At this time, you should contact the manufacturer/dealer and begin the transaction process. You have until July 9, 1999 to provide this office with proof that a lease/purchase is in process. Once that proof is received, the $5000 buydown will be provided directly to the vehicle manufacturer. This letter is your official notice of award and should be used as documentation of such when working with the manufacturer/dealer on your lease. If you, or the manufacturer you contact, have any questions, please contact Jacquie Bean at, (805) 781-5912. Sincerely, , ViM {1€MJ JIm Pickens Air Quality Planner 3433 Roberto Court · San Luis Obispo, CA 9340 I · 805-781-59/2 . FAX: 805-781- : 002 cleanair@sloapcd.dst.ca.us .:. WvVW.sloap'cd.dst.ca.us pnnted on recycfed paper ---..----.-.- ATTNJM:NT 2 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY AND PROCEDURES POLICY #: C-006 SUBJECT: EV ALUA TION CRITERIA FOR REPLACEMENT OF STANDARD ISSUED: 04/01/99 EQUIPMENT EFFECTIVE: 04/01/99 CANCELLATION DATE: N/A SUPERSEDES: 09/01/97 POLICY: Equipment is currently capitalized if the value of the item at the time of purchase exceeds $500. Replacement. of capital equipment must be authorized by the City Council. Criteria for evaluating when replacement should occur is listed below. The recommendation for replacement should be a composite evaluation utilizing the criteria listed coupled with the actual condition of the equipment. PROCEDURE: CRITERIA FOR A REPLACEMENT OF EQUIPMENT - A. General criteria: The following criteria will be used when requesting replacement of capital equipment or other designated equipment. 1. Condition of the equipment 2. Age of equipment 3. Maintenance history of the equipment B. Specific criteria: 1. Age - Standardized estimated useful life. which may vary depending on Quality and usage. a. Personal Computers - five years b. Calculators - five years c. Typewriters - eight years d. Chairs - five years e. Desks - fifteen years f. Fax Machines - five years g. Copiers - five years Revised: April 1, 1999 ---..--,--.,--,..-- POLICY #: C-006 PAGE 2 h. Tables - fifteen years i. Files Cabinets - fifteen years j. Autos-Light Trucks - five years and/or 80,000 miles k. Police Emergency (Patrol) Vehicles - three years and/or 100,000 miles 2. Maintenance History a. Recommendation by maintenance personnel that equipment is not economically repai(able or able to be updated (as in computers ). 3. Condition a. Hazardous or dangerous for the employee to use b. Broken parts that are not adequately repairable c. Chipped, marked, or damaged veneers, laminates, or exterior that is not repairable d. No longer able to function in accord with its intended use due to damage, age, or altered requirements - KDI:trr- L. Ifllli~ ROBERT L. HUNT CITY MANAGER _ ___.._._._~___m___".~_ I 1999 RANGER EV - Nickel Metal Hydride California State Lease Customers $14,582 ONE-TIME LEASE PAYMENT -OR- $5,201 THREE ANNUAL PAYMENTS -OR- $454/month LEASE . 36 month, closed..end lease . Unlimited Mileage . . Bumper-to-Bumper Warranty . 100 Mile Roadside Assistance I . Includes Power Control Station Features .. 90 horsepower; 140 ft.Jlbs. torque; 3-phase AC electric motor/single speed transaxle . Range: 65-85 miles . 25 NiMH 12-volt modules; 300 volt system . Payload: 1,250 lbs. (GVW: 5300) . Energy Capacity Rating (FUDS): 28 KWH (25 KVVH at 90% discharge) Cali your authorized Ford EV Dealer or 1-800 AL T FUEL for details 200' 391::!d NOSNHor N3SAH wo~~ 813: t t 66. 82 Nnr 1999 RAV4EV Standard Features Front Wheel Drive, 5 passenger, 4 doors 50 KW, 67 HP Permanent Magnet Motor Dual Air Bags Single, Speed Front Wheel Drive Transaxal Power Windows, Door Locks and Mirrors 24 Sealed Nickel - Metal Hydride Batteries Air Conditioning Speed Sensing Electro - Hydraulic Power Steering AM/FM Stereo with -Cassette Power Assisted Front Disc/Rear Drum Brakes Front Heated Seats and Windshield Heavy Duty Heat Pump Control Panel with Timer and Cabin Temperature Control ABS/Regenerative Braking Concealed Spare Tire Alloy Wheels Performance City/Highway/Combined Range 126 miles Top Speed: 78 MPH - Electronically limited Optional Equipment Cold Kit: Rear Seat Heaters, Traction Control, Heavy Duty Wiper Motor Colors Wh ite - 056 Green Pearl - 6P3 Interior - Shadow Gray Cloth Silver Metallic - 199 Sapphire Blue - 8L5 Red Pearl- 3M8 Pricing Lease Program: 36 Month Term - Closed End . $457/Month or Lump Sum of $16,000* . $599/Month or Lump Sum of $21 ,000** * With California State AQMD Incentive ** Without California Incentive Warranty Coverage Basic Coverage: Three Years/36,000 Miles; Bumper to Bumper Battery Coverage: Three Years/36,000 Miles; No Proration Powertrain: Five Years/GO,OOO Miles Corrosion/Perforation: Five Years/Unlimited Miles Maintenance Program Lease Program: No Charge for lease term Coverage includes: Safety Items, Suspension and Brake System, Tires, and Select Traction Motor System Components and all Battery Components. InformationSheetRAV4EV 10.98 9.1. MEMORANDUM TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: HENRY ENGEN ~ INTERIM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR SUBJECT: REQUEST OF THE ARROYO GRANDE VILLAGE IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION FOR AUTHORIZATION TO CLOSE CITY STREETS AND USE CITY PROPERTY FOR THE FOLLOWING EVENTS: . 35-PIECE AIR FORCE BAND, THURSDAY, JULY 15, 1999; . THEOPHILUS BRASS QUINTET, FRIDAY, AUGUST 6, 1999; . 35-PIECE COUNTY BAND, SUNDAY, AUGUST 22, 1999 DATE: JULY 13, 1999 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached Resolution authorizing the closure of Short Street and the use of City property for the above-referenced events. FUNDING: Any City costs, at this time undetermined, will be reimbursed by the Village I mprovement Association. DISCUSSION: On June 21, 1999 the Arroyo Grande Village Improvement Association submitted a letter (reference attachment) to use the gazebo and other City property for the three events listed above. The descriptions of the areas to be used and road closures are as follows: 35-Piece Air Force Band (Thursday, July 15,1999) 1. Closure of Short Street from the Gazebo to Branch Street from 4:00 - 7:00 p.m. 2. Use of the Gazebo. 3. Use of the grass area from Short to Mason Streets on Nelson Street from 3:00 - 8:00 p.m. 4. Use of the City's house at 134 Mason Street from 3:00 - 4:00 p.m. and from 7:00 - 8:00 p.m. (for changing of uniform purposes). Theophilus Brass Quintet (Friday, August 6, 1999) 1. Closure of Short Street from the Gazebo to Branch Street from 5:00 - 8:00 p.m. 2. Use of the Gazebo. - 35-Piece County Band (Sunday. August 22. 1999) 1. Closure of Short Street from the Gazebo to Branch Street from 11 :00 a.m. - 3:00 p.m. 2. Use of the Gazebo. Upon City Council authorization to close City streets and use City property. staff will issue a Temporary Use Permit for the event. Attachments: Resolution for Approval Letter of Request from AGVIA -. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE REQUESTING AUTHORIZATION TO CLOSE CITY STREETS AND USE CITY PROPERTY FOR EVENTS TAKING PLACE ON JULY 15, 1999, AUGUST 6,1999 AND AUGUST 22, 1999 WHEREAS, the Arroyo Grande Village Improvement Association (AGVIA), has requested closure of certain City streets and the use of City property as outlined below, for the purpose of musical entertainment; and WHEREAS, members of the Village Improvement Association will be responsible for traffic control, cleanup, and all City costs related thereto. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: 1. That the Village Improvement Association is hereby granted the use of certain City streets and property as listed below: 35-Piece Air Force Band (Thursday, July 15,1999) a. Closure of Short Street from the Gazebo to Branch Street from 4:00 - 7:00 p.m. b. Use of the Gazebo. c. Use of the grass area from Short to Mason Streets on Nelson Street from 3:00 - 8:00 p.m. d. Use of the City's house at 134 Mason Street from 3:00 - 4:00 p.m. and from 7:00 - 8:00 p.m. Theophilus Brass Quintet (Friday, August 6, 1999) a. Closure of Short Street from the Gazebo to Branch Street from 5:00 - 8:00 p.m. b. Use of the Gazebo. 35-Piece County Band (Sunday, August 22, 1999) a. Closure of Short Street from the Gazebo to Branch Street from 11 :00 a.m. - 3:00 p.m. b. Use of the Gazebo. 2. That the AGVIA will adhere to all requirements and conditions of a Temporary Use Permit to be issued by the City. . 3. That all City costs will be reimbursed by the AGVIA. On motion of Council Member , seconded by Council Member ,. and on the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 13th day of July 1999. - -~---_._._.__.__.,------ . MICHAEL A. LADY, MAYOR ATTEST: KELLY WETMORE, ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR/ DEPUTY CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: ROBERT L. HUNT, CITY MANAGER APPROVED AS TO FORM: . TIMOTHY J. CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY ~ ..._._._.__...._~.._-._-~._.._-- COYO OnI,..;'vmage Improwment Assodatlon ARROYO GRANDE VILLAGE IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION -~ P.O. Box 1526 · Arroyo Grande, CA 93421 Phone: (805) 473-2250 · Fax: (805) 473-0345 '~J -- \..r) --1 \.D --< '- c.:) '--- --"1 June 21, 1999 :;~ ::::D ;:-:,. n~, f'.) ;!] ,:-) - ;'~)P"1 Bob Hunt, City Manager -0 ~~~ City of Arroyo Grande -"'- '-~C:J :'~ ,.','"") Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 ,-' ...'" ~- - . ,-> Dear Bob: The following are street closures that will be needed for a new project that the Village Association is starting for the summer. We already have Council's approval for the Fourth of July, which is the fITst of four concerts that we propose to do at the Gazebo in July and August. On Thursday, July 15, we will need Short Street closed from the Gazebo to Branch Street from 4:00 - 7:00 p.m. for a concert by the 35-piece Air Force Band from Moffitt Field, California. On Friday, August 6, in conjunction with the Mozart Festival, and sponsored by the City and our Association, the Theophilus Brass Quintet will perfonn, and we will need Short street closed from the Gazebo to Branch St. from 5:00 to 8:00 p.m. On Sunday, August 22, there will be a concert by the 35-piece County Band. We will need Short Street closed from the Gazebo to Branch St. from 11:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. Bob, I would like to get these on the agenda for the Council to approve before we go too far into advertising these events. YOU CAN FIND IT IN THE VILLAGE! ~-~-_.~- ..u. MEMORANDUM TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: DON SPAGNOLO, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER ~ SUBJECT: ACCEPTANCE OF IMPROVEMENTS FOR PARCEL MAP AGAL 97-116; MORNING RISE PHASE II DATE: JULY 13, 1999 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Council approve the attached Resolution accepting the offers of dedication and accepting the maintenance of the public improvements constructed as conditions to Parcel Map AGAL97-116. FUNDING: There is no immediate fiscal impact. Maintenance of these facilities will be funded from Public Works funds in future years. DISCUSSION: Parcel Map AGAL 97-116 (Morning Rise II) is located on the south side of FaITolI Avenue between Morning Rise Lane and Victorian Court, as shown in Exhibit A. The parcel map was approved by the City Council and subsequently recorded on May 20, 1998. All tract improvements which will be maintained by the City have been installed. Landscaping within the Farroll Avenue right of way will be maintained by the adjacent homeowners and will be installed as part of the overall residence landscaping. A maintenance bond will be held for one year to guarantee the installation of landscaping and the performance of the improvements. Attachments: Resolution Exhibit A ---.-- .------.-"-.""--..- RESOLUTION NO. - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACCEPTING IMPROVEMENTS, AND OFFERS OF DEDICATIONS AND EASEMENTS WITHIN PARCEL MAP 97-116 WHEREAS, the City Council approved the final map for Parcel Map AGAL 97-116 on May 12, 1998, and the map was subsequently recorded on May 20, 1998; and, WHEREAS, offers to dedicate right of way and easements to the public were provided on the final map for Parcel Map AGAL 97-116; and, WHEREAS, the developer has constructed the improvements required by the Tract conditions of approval. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande does hereby accept the public improvements constructed for Parcel Map AGAL 97-116, and the following offers of dedication and public easements, as shown on the final map for Parcel Map AG 97-116, recorded May 20, 1998 in book 53 of maps, at page 23 in the office of the recorder of the County of San Luis Obispo, State of Califor':lia: 1. -Starlight Lane; 2. Storm drain easements; and, 3. Street tree easements. On motion of Council Member , seconded by Council Member , and by the following rollcall vote, to wit: . AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this _ day of RESOLUTION NO. - PAGE 2 MICHAEL A. LADY, MAYOR ATTEST: KELLY WETMORE, DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICESI DEPUTY CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: 1JkLTL.~ ROBERT L. HUNT, CITY MANAGER - APPROVED AS TO FORM: TIMOTHY J. CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY '---.! j Jtj~ ~Ci~ 1 CiI~ .;~N V- tj_O ) r-- ~ \ \ \ \ \ )/ ~ to) ~ ~ I \ ) \. \ \ r~ r -~~~ ~ \\~ J- 3d \ i'-- 'I' CJ ~ :D-- ~ \ 7 "\- oc--- ri~ . \N",I~oI~I/I \ . '-) ~w ~~ ............................\\.... ........ .....\\\\\\\.\\ \'~ il ........,..,.. .............. ..,............~. ..v - v\.........\\........\\.....,.~.......................\\........\<\81 I \/ C)W' ~ ~ i:(cJ) . . . . 'NP .......... f/~ ll'!~) 0.. . . . . . . . . '. . '. . .......\\....'......\....... ........... ........ .......:.......\..........\ \ ....\ ...........\...\ ". \:.... '.. .......... ". \...... ..... ." .... \'. .... ". .... '" .. '. ~fi ~ 4<.!) -J ~z Q. \ tJNlt1 ,3$Jt \'JNrN~DN" ~~ ldz <tiCt r ,1 ~ <(0 o..~ \ A \1)'\ -/ \. I. ^" ""- .----- \/ -' ~ -J ~ 1iC' "-' ;CJ - 6 L--- I--.., - ~ >- ;; ,c,. \ Q:: ? """"'. I '" W ~ L Q:: ~ ~ ~ ~ <t. ':: I 4: Lt.. \ \::- ~ '\.' ~, \' ~ I- \ '-= ~ \ ~ ~\ CI( UJ ----.--------- 10... MEMORANDUM TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: DANIEL C. HERNANDEZ, DIRECTOR PARKS AND RECREATION ~ SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF HISTORICAL SOCIETY'S PROPOSAL FOR CITY-OWNED PROPERTY AT 134 MASON STREET DATE: JULY 13,1999 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the City Council provide direction as to the proposal from the South County Historical Society for the lease of the property located at 134 Mason Street. FUNDING: As a rental, this property generated $8,400 annually to the General Fund. Should this property be leased to the Historical Society as per their proposal, there would be a loss of $168,000 to the General Fund over the initial proposed length of the Lease Agreement (20 year minimum). There is no reimbursement to the City based on the Historical Society's proposal (Attachment 1). DISCUSSION: The South County Historical Society approached the City regarding this property shortly after the tenant moved out in February (Attachment 2). The Society intends to use the structure for office and storage space exclusively for their organization and related functions. In addition, they wish to include turf maintenance for the rear of the structure only as a responsibility of the Parks and Recreation Department. The impact of this proposal is minimal as long as the turf is integrated into the existing grounds adjacent to the house. Annual additional cost to the City would be approximately $142 based on approximately 9 hours annually at $15.80 per hour. It will be the responsibility of the Society to install the additional turf and compensate the City for any associated cost for needed adjustments to the irrigation system. The remainder of the grounds, including ongoing maintenance of all hedges and planted landscape, will be the responsibility of the Historical Society. Should the Historical Society request any other landscape work done by City staff, they will be required to fully compensate the City based on direct and indirect costs. Currently, the City has leased the Heritage House Parcel and the rear adjacent parcel for the Santa Manuela School to the Society. The Society proposes to attach this structure to the same Lease Agreement that currently exists for the Heritage House, located at 126 Mason Street. ,.'" _c.,__,__<.._.......<._.~_ STAFF REPORT: CONSIDERATION OF HISTORICAL SOCIETY'S PROPOSAL FOR CITY-OWNED PROPERTY AT 134 MASON STREET JULY 13,1999 PAGE 2 The proposal submitted also addressed questions regarding the zoning of the parcel. After research, staff has determined that the zoning for this area is "Public Facility". The proposed uses for the house are consistent with the zoning. No change in zoning would be required. Should the Council adopt the Society's proposal, the next step would be to direct the City Attorney to modify the existing lease for signature by both parties. Other options available to the City Council include not leasing to the Hi~torical Society and repairing the structure (estimated at $3000) and maintaining as a rental, or solicit Request for Proposals to determine if other agencies may be interested in leasing the building. Alternatives The following alternatives are provided for the Council's consideration: - Accept proposal from the South County Historical Society as submitted; - Modify proposal from the South County Historical Society; - Do not accept proposal from the South County Historical Society; or - Provide direction to staff. Attachments: Proposal from South County Historical Society (Attachment 1) February 12, 1999 Memo (Attachment 2) S:\StaffRpt\134MasonStJuly13.99 ATTACHMENT 1 &uJh~ dfJ~~ f/)6d O/Iiu ~ 633 ~ f}..nuuh, @ell 93421 May 26, 1999 TO: Dan Herndandez, Recreation Director Arroyo Grande, California FROM: The Executive Committee & Board of Directors, South County Historical Society PROPOSAL: THAT THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE LEASE TO SOUTH COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY THE PROPERTY AT 134 S. MASON STREET ADJACENT TO HERITAGE HOUSE MUSEUM. This historic City property has now remained vacant and unattended for several months subject to all the vagaries and mishaps of any unattended house on a busy street. At the same time, the South County Historical Society needs office and storage space, preparation and restroom space and an area where its curators and property managers may work. As well as having space available for special catered events in the Heritage House gardens and museum. Our leasing and immediate use of this property requires the following considerations: 1. The south side of the property to be cleaned up with some grass being planted in any bare spots so that the lawn area of 134 S. Mason (Ruby's house) is contiguous with the lawn of the park area to the south. This would facilitate the mowing and watering of the lawn at Ruby's by city park maintenance crews. 2. With reference to the existing lease with City of Arroyo Grande dated June 1, 1997; the 134 and 126 S. Mason Street properties meld together in the same lease (now waiting to be amended as to the 20 year term method) as previously agreed upon by the City of Arroyo Grande and the South County Historical Society. 3. As these properties are both managed by the Parks and Recreation Department and as the Society's use of Ruby's house would of a similar nature to the Heritage House, we feel that all would be best served by the zoning of Ruby's house being consistent with that of the Heritage House with a variance allowing use of Ruby's as it stands. The Arroyo Grande Valley Kiwanis Club has agreed to assist the Historical Society with this project. Together, we plan to clean, repair, paint and refurbish the interior. The exterior was painted last year by a volunteer as a gift to Ruby. &a1h~ df)~~ 'J)tJd 0/I1ft ~ 633 obwnp, l}.nuuh, fl.of 9342 t The South County Historical Society will continue to serve as the responsible organization in it's association with the City of Arroyo Grande. We thank you for your consideration in this matter and for your interest in preserving the historic nature of our City. ~tI}!~~~ 7J. Do~e Loren Nicholson Larry Turner Immediate Past President Property Management Ways & Means Chainnan Committee --'", ATT~ 2 MEMORANDUM TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: DANIEL C. HERNANDEZ, DIRECTOR PARKS AND RECREATION "iJI'.. SUBJECT: STATUS OF HOUSE AT 134 MASON STREET DATE: FEBRUARY 23, 1999 RECOMMENDATION: It. is recommended the City Council direct staff regarding the disposition of the vacant house at 134 Mason Street adjacent to the South County Historical Society building. FUNDING: Approximately $3,000 would be needed from the General Fund to install new carpet, paint the interior and exterior of the house, and upgrade electrical service to Uniform Building Code standards. An appropriation of $3,000 would result in an approximate ending fund balance (June 30, 1999) of $468,573 in the General Fund DISCUSSION: The parcel on which the house sits and an additional parcel was originally purchased in 1985. A total of five (5) parcels was purchased from the Mallory Trust. Since that time, six (6) ather houses that were located on those parcels were razed as they became vacant. With the exception of the structure leased to the South County Historical Society located at 126 Mason Street and the parcel recently leased for the Santa Manuela School, the 134 Mason Street property has the last remaining structure. Based on a site inspection by the City's Building Inspector, it would cost approximately $3,000 to bring the structure up to Building Code standards in order to continue using it as a rental property. This would include replacing the electrical service, painting, and new carpet. Staff believes this structure could be rented for $700 per month, which is fair market value, as compared to the previous monthly rental of $375. The house was rented for the last 10+ years and was just recently vacated by the tenant. If the structure was removed, a total of 1.5 acres would be available for a civic center or park. If the City chose to construct a civic center at some time in the future, the largest structure would be approximately 30,000 square feet for a single story building. This would consolidate City Hall, Public Works-Engineering, Building and Life Safety, Parks and Recreation, the Council Chambers, and extra conference/meeting rooms. These figures assume the existing house would be razed/removed. Should the house remain on the property, the size of the parcel would be reduced by 6,500 square feet. Due to required parking, the overall civic center structure would be MEMORANDUM: CITY COUNCIL 134 MASON STREET - HOUSE STATUS FEBRUARY 23, 1999 PAGE 2 reduced to a total of approximately 27,000 square feet (as per Building Code estimates of 40% lot coverage). In the minutes of the City Council meeting of August 27, 1985, the City Council voted to approach the property owners of these parcels to purchase their properties for possible future development as the new Civic Center site. This motion passed on a 3-2 vote, (Attachment 1). The resolutions pertaining to this matter 'Here adopted at the September 10," 1985 meeting (Attachment 2). The majority of the site is currently used by the City as an open space park that hosts such events as the Parks and Recreation Department's Hallo'Heen Carnival and Haunted Maze. No amenities are currently located on the site. If this site remains an open space park, staff would recommend the Parks and Recreation Commission review, for recommendation to the City Council, the possible addition of picnic tables and barbecue grills for small g"atherings due to its scenic location adjacent to the Village and Swinging Bridge. Estimated cost for these amenities would be approximately $2,000. The South County Historical Society has been notified this item has been scheduled for Council consideration. Alternatives: The following alternatives are provided for the Council's ronsideration: - Raze the structure, grade the site, and incorporate it into existing open space; - Invest $3,000 to bring the structure to Code and continue to use it as a rental; - Sell the property and permit the house to remain on site; - Sell the property with the condition that the structure would be removed from the site; or - Provide direction to staff. c:\StaffRpt\134MasonStHouseFeb23.S9 I CITY COUNCIL AUGUST 27. 1985 ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA PAGE TEN AGRICULTURE SOILS AND CURRENT-ZONING REPORT Continued On motion of Council Member Gallagher, seconded by Council Member Moots, and on the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: Council Members Gallagher, Johnson, Moots, Porter and Mayor Smith NOES: None ABSENT: None the foregoing Resolution of Intention was passed and adopted on the 27th day of August, 1985. .... SOUTH BANK SITE ACQUISITION DECISION Mr. Mack said that the question on this matter is shall the City purchase properties with the intention, at some later date, of development by the City. He showed an aerial photograph of said property bounded by Mason, Nelson and Short Streets. He described the numbered lots on the photograph as I. a lot owned by the City of Arroyo Grande, 2. a lot owned by the Carpentiers, 3. a lot owned by the Mallory Trust, 4. a lot owned by Zimmerman, 5. a lot owned by Lockhart, and 6. a lot owned by the Mallory Trust. He said there are 79,400 square feet of basically flat property to build on, and referring to his report entitled "South Bank Acqulsition:'sald the City has option agreements for the Zimmerman property for $85,000 and for the Lockhart property for $92,000. These options are in effect until October 18, 1985, he said. He requested the Council to authorize him to offer to purchase the Mallory properties for an amount not to exceed $360,000, the Carpentier property for an amount not to exceed $87,000, the Zimmerman property for an amount not to exceed $85,000, and the Lockhart property for an amount not to exceed $92,000. Council Members discussed the issue, and Council Member Porter expressed concern about the City incurring large expenses involved with relocating renters living in the houses on said properties. City Attorney Art Shaw said that where the City is not in a hurry, the City is not going to be hurt much by relocation costs. HARlE CATTOIR, 195 Orchid Lane, asked why there was a variation in the various land values. Mr. Mack answered that there are different improvements on the properties. . DICK FRANKS, 879 Fair Oaks Avenue, said that purchasing the property would be a good investment even if the City doesn't build the Civic Center there. However, he said, the new Civic Center should be on that property. On motion of Council Member Moots, seconded by Council Member Gallagher, to Authorize the City Manager to approach the property owners to purchase their properties, and in the case of the Mallory Trust the amount should not 'exceed $360,000, in the case of the Carpentier property the amount should not exceed $87,000. and to exercise the options on the Zimmerman and Lockhart properties for a future City complex, on the following roll call vote; to wit: AYES: Council Members Gallagher and Moots and Mayor Smith NOES: Council Members Johnson and Porter ABSENT: None EAST BRANCH STREET CURB, GUTTER AND SIDEWALK DESIGN AND SPECifiCATIONS After Council discussion, on motion of Council Member Gallagher, ~econded by Council Member Moots, Council Members voted to authorize the design of Curb. Gutter, and Sidewalks for East Branch Street on the downhill side between Garden S-treet and Stanley Avenue for the amount of not more than $5,200.00. CALifORNIA MEN'S COLONY AGREEMENT Mr. Karp said that other agencies in the County have entered into agreements with the Men's Colony to receive manpower at a extremely low rate for projects found to be extremely labor intensive. He said unskilled labor could be provided to the City under the agreement at a rate of $1.50 per day per crew inmate, and $2.00 per day for an inmate leadman. . , Hr. Gallagher expressed concern about the use of prison labor, and said' the Jobs should be given to law-abiding citizens. '- I CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 10, 1985 ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA PAGE NINE ....RESOLUTIONS ACCEPTING REAL PROPERTY'FOR'CIVIC CENTER Continued Mr. Mack read the title of the Resolution. On motion of Council Member Ga1lagher, seconded by Council Member Moots, and unanimously carried, to dispense with further reading of the Resolution. RESOLUTION NO. 1892 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACCEPTING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY DEEDED BY THE ESTATE OF MARIE MALLORY AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE A CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE (GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 27281) On motion of Council Member Gallagher, seconded by Council Member Moots, and on the following roll call vote, to wi t: AYES: Council Members Gallagher and Moots and Mayor Smith NOES: Council Members Johnson and Porter ABSENT: None the foregoing Resolution was passed.and_a.d~pted on the 10th day of Sept_~~ber, 1985. PACIFIC COAST RAILWAY PLACE DISCUSSION Mr. Karp described the road situation on Railway Place between Cherry and Allen Streets. He referred to a map and showed the City's right of way and existing improvements. He indicated that it was the Ci ty'sintent to redevelop the al ignment concurrent with development. The City Council directed Mr. Karp to contact Robert Baldwin, property owner, to inquire if he would be interested in remapping his property. The Council also directed Mr. Karp to contact Mr. Baldwin and Hansel Burns to request that they install curbs, gutters and sidewalks in exchange for the City paving the street and abandoning excess right of'way. LOPEZ SCHOOL/SOTO SPORTS COMPLEX JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT Mr. Mack said that the City has worked out with the Lucia Mar Unified School District an agreement whereby the school district leases the pad, parking lot and access at Elm Street Park for Lopez Continuation School. He said the lease would ~e set up for five years, and the City would be getting the use of the school restrooms and classroom facilities if there is no confl ict wi th school activi ties. After Council discussion, Council Members decided to renew the lease for five years but to ask the School District to' do some long-range planning concerning another site for Lopez School in five yea rs. The Council said it would like to use the property as part of a parks complex. Council Members amended the agreement to: 1. Delete Item 2 on Page 1 2 Change the second sentence of Item 5 to read, "All other improvements, I.ncluding, but not I imi ted to foundations, bui Idings, fences, roads, parking lots and walkways, shall be removed by the District within six months after termination of the lease, and the site restored to original condition and graded to conform with adjoining non-leased City property." 3. Change the first sentence on Page 2 to read, "The replacement road improvements shall become the responsibility of the District, and both parties shall enjoy the right of use." On motion of Council Member Porter, seconded by Council Member Gallagher, and unanimously carried, to approve the agreement as amended. 1985/86 GENERAL REVENUE SHARING/SPAY NEUTER CONTRACT Mr. Mack explained that the County of San Luis Obispo does not want to conduct a spay/neuter program if they have to hold the City harmless. The hold harmless provision was written by the City Attorney two years ago and is contained in every Ci ty General Revenue Shul"ing ugreelllcnt, he said. He recom- mended that the Council avoid the Animal Regulation.Department and AFAR politic~ and the City contract directly with local veterinarians for services for a one-day spay/neuter clinic not to exceed $500.00. On motion of Counci I Member Porter, seconded by Counci I Member Moots, and' unanimously carried, to authorize Mr. Mack not to negotiate an agreement with the County with regard to spay/neuter services. ______~ __M~...___._____~_ w ~ 'W .z 0 ~ ~ -- 10.b. MEMORANDUM TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: HENRY ENGEN, INTERIM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR ~ SUBJECT: PROPOSED ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE LIMITING NON- TAXABLE SALES IN RETAIL STORES EXCEEDING 90,000 SQUARE FEET (DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 99-001) DATE: JULY 13, 1999 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the City Council: . adopt the attached ordinance amending the text of the Development Code to add a section to Chapter 9-11, Specific Use Development Standards, entitled: "Limitations on Retail Stores in Excess of 90,000 Square Feet"; and, . direct the Administrative Services Director to file a Notice of Exemption with the County Recorder. FUNDING: No direct fiscal impact. The City receives sales tax revenue from existing retail sales within the City. Adoption of the ordinance would support existing retail stores and therefore support continued sales tax revenues. It is problematic whether the limitations on non-taxable floor space would deter any new large- scale retail store from developing. DISCUSSION: The City Council, at its meeting of June 22nd, introduced the attached ordinance for first reading with one modification. The modification was to Section 1, Item E.1. The modification is as follows: E. Enforcement 1. The applicant, owner and tenant shall be jointly and severally liable to the City and all other affected government agencies for all sales taxes lost as a result of a violation. In addition, they shall be liable for liquidated damages of $eGG CITY COUNCIL JULY 13, 1999 PAGE 2 $1,000 per day for each day a violation occurs, which reflects the City's estimate of its likely damages in addition to lost taxes. Alternatives The following alternatives are presented for Council consideration: 1. Adopt the attached Ordinance; 2. Modify as appropriate and introduce the modified Ordinance for first reading; 3. Reject the Ordinance; 4. Provide direction to staff. ORDINANCE NO. 506 C.S. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE, AMENDING TITLE 9 OF THE ARROYO GRANDE MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING THERETO SECTION 9-11.210 ENTITLED "LIMITATIONS ON RETAIL STORES IN EXCESS OF 90,000 SQUARE FEET" WHEREAS, the City of Arroyo Grande has conducted an environmental review for adoption of an ordinance establishing procedures to provide for the limitation of development of retail stores in the City of Arroyo Grande, and has found that it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed ordinance will have an effect on the environment and therefore is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Section 21000, et seq.; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted the City of Arroyo Grande Development Code, which became effective June 13, 1991, and indicated that modifications to the Development Code may occur to refine the document; and WHEREAS, the City of Arroyo Grande has a responsibility to assure adherence to the General Plan in meeting the needs and desires of the residents and the community; and WHEREAS, the Land Use Element of the General Plan of the City of Arroyo Grande adopted on May 22, 1990, identifies as an objective the maintenance of the existing rural, small town character of the City, and to maintain existing land use patterns in support thereof; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Arroyo Grande considered this proposed amendment to the Development Code at a duly noticed meeting on May 4, 1999 and recommends the City Council adopt the requested amendment; and WHEREAS, the City Council has properly considered and made findings which are described in the ordinance in support of adoption of the ordinance; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and considered the information in the staff report, as well as public testimony presented at the hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: Arroyo Grande Municipal Code, Title 9, Chapter 11, is hereby amended to add the following: ORDINANCE NO. 506 C.S. PAGE 2 Section 9-11.210 Limitations on Retail Stores in Excess of 90,000 Square Feet A. Purpose To limit the development of large retail stores by restricting their ability to sell non- taxable items to such an extent that they negatively impact the rural, small town character of the City and change existing land use patterns. B. Findings 1. The City of Arroyo Grande, through its General Plan, has identified protection of its rural, small town character and existing land use patterns as a primary goal. 2. Large retail stores that sell non-taxable items compete with existing retail centers in a manner that may have potential adverse impacts on the rural, small town character of the City of Arroyo Grande. 3. Such large retail stores would also negatively impact existing smaller stores and their workforces making the existing rural, small town shopping centers less viable; thus degrading the continued existence of existing retail stores and existing land use patterns. 4. The burdens on the public of large new stores can only be ameliorated by . ensuring that they provide sufficient sales tax revenue to the City. C. Applicability No new store may be constructed in excess of 90,000 square feet, nor an existing store expanded, if the resulting total square footage will exceed 90,000 square feet, unless it meets the standards for the sale of non-taxable merchandise set forth below. D. Limits on Non-Taxable Sales 1. If total square footage for sales is to exceed 250,000 square feet, no more than one percent (1%) of total square footage may be devoted to non- taxable merchandise. 2. If total square footage for sales is to exceed 140,000 square feet, no more than two percent (2%) of total square footage may be devoted to non- taxable merchandise. --._-_. ORDINANCE NO. 506 C.S. PAGE 3 3. If total square footage for sales is to exceed 90,000 square feet, no more than three percent (3%) of total square footage may be devoted to non- taxable merchandise. For purposes of the above calculations, only enclosed sales area will be considered. "Enclosed sales area" does not include restrooms, office space, breakrooms, - backrooms, storage space, open-air garden sales space, etc. Conversions of such space to enclosed retail sales space shall bring the project under the restrictions of the above-described limits. The total square footage and percentage for non-taxable sales shall include subleased and subcontracted departments. E. Enforcement 1. ' The applicant, owner and t~nant shall be jointly and severally liable to the City and all other affected government agencies for all sales taxes lost as a result of a violation. In addition, they shall be liable for liquidated damages of $1,000 per day for each day a violation occurs, which reflects the City's estimate of its likely damages in addition to lost taxes. 2. In addition to subparagraph 1, the City Attorney may seek injunctive relief to stop the continued violation of this ordinance. 3. The City may recover its full costs, including-attorney fees, in any actioQ to enforce the provisions of this ordinance. 4. Any taxpayer or resident of the City shall have standing to enforce the provisions of this ordinance including recovery of all costs and reasonable attorney fees. SECTION 2: The City Council hereby directs the Director of Administrative Services to file a "Notice of Exemption" with the County Recorder. SECTION 3: 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 phrases be declared unlawful. SECTION 4: 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 '. __._...~_w..___._____._.____._.. _. . ORDINANCE NO. 506 C.S. PAGE 4 text of the proposed Ordinance shall be posted in the office of the Director of Administrative Services. 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 shall post a certified copy of the full text of such adopted Ordinance. 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 adopted this day of , 1999. - --------------------..----.-- . ORDINANCE NO. 506 C.S. PAGE 5 MICHAEL A. LADY, MAYOR ATTEST: KELLY WETMORE, DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICESI DEPUTY CITY CLERK ,- APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: ~LcL,L. ~~ ROBERT L. HUNT, CITY MANAGER APPROVED AS TO FORM: - TIMOTHY J. CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY _.-._~---- (/) .", <;; !S !p. Ij '6 .. 'U <;; "5 Ii ~ "5 ~ ..; ~ IS 1iI .. .. "" I <U C>I . ,; " t: oS 0'", 8:a" ~~ oS ~ 0 ;,."". ~ :I. e .;; ",:0 .,,~ ~ e.'.. "~..."...",,, ~-" ,,~ ..-"'" -,.,~ " '" .. '" 110 1$ iii _ Q'" iii 0 Iii ~ .$ \'J'" ~.:\ ~ ~ ~". .)\.. · ,., .""'~"'~~ Q " ';<lJ! -"''''' ~~... ."'. p '" ,.. '21;\.$~; Iii .;~ ~ &.; ~ ~;;:;;~ .~ ~ ~ ~f~ '-"" -~ - - -.. ~ ~ ~ ~ . " , _ ..... {J '6 -" ~ ;\.a ~ ~.J! 1\ ~ .{~ ..; \!! .2 j! 8 <;; Iii ~ ." ~ <:':S ~ .-"Q"~'" a" 18",,~Q~'-oS"-' ... ~ ._ __. ~... .., :-t / I" .~~ oS \~ ~ .~ :::2 ,..U s ~ g h ~ .~ H ~ , _ 1.'1.1 . _"'s _~ ... '" ~ -" "'1\ ~ 0'" - 6." ", _ .. . ~ ;-U 'a ~ 5~ j!'~ j!'g n %:::: ~ ~~;I ~ ~ ~ 'i~" ~ ~ ~ ~ ,,; ~ ~ _ _ '\i ~'s" "~~,, - Qo~' ..".. i'. .., .. '" ~.$ ~ .. 11! '2 {J;; ~ II ! .. .: ... -.a l ~ II ij':o1 :i! ~ a ~ ,., ." ~ ... II ~ " Ii -a j!....1I .. 0 It.. "'! {I fI ~ e .. ~ _ ~~ ~ ~:P'i~~~ iM~~~V1i"5ii.s\0 n~ . ~ j!' I!.'" > j ."" I!. -6 e.... .. ..Ii ~ jJ ~ ';' ~ ~: ~ i~\i\ii~~Ii\;'il!t!\iii~ 11\. I ~ '6 g ~ .....~.a 1 I. . IS ,Ii \~ ,-= it ~.a~ i:tQ S ) ..:"JII!' ~ ...~g. II' 1';\" ","';I ~i.l t... r;" .~ \100 '% ~ '"~ 'i'6 ! 1:" ,. y.,.. e U 1111....\ ! ~ ot ~ .."... ~ .;11 ~ 'Ii"" ... i ~ !! J! 1,\ ,,.f'!J,",, - 0 '" ." . (1) i .. .a .. 5 '6 'Ii:'S .".. ... ~ ~ 1!..a.".!I "5'i" ,. U ,... ~ ..' i, !:i;~~,' ;- .~.~~. l.i . .,1. .0" ". % ii'" Q r #'\ . >>~ ." ". 8.~ 'II .S .!! .,.. -. c" \ .~. ~ ~ ~ on . . s JlS' ,a ~<)~ ~:! ,~ ' ' " I 'j \' !1' .--~_.s-o .~ ~ .,..' ~ .... diI." ~ .; .. '" ... ... u " ""....... ~ . ,.,' ., ... >..' ...~"" ~-.a " t1 iU'~ ~1~ ~H~1.Uin11~i~1-~~.~ ". ..~~ "5 ~~h ~~-5 ~~-gu \-~~~; It; i.H~~'~ .' '-' ~ 11 u;!! '" ~ ~:I '1! I!"" I!: ~,c'" ;!., ~ g.i! S II u. ,,~> Q ~"s"3 ~.. r - "'1'11'11 )'''' 11"- ~ . \oiiI' 'U.:\u ~ g. !lHU:21 .!I.1,;a i \"5~! ii . 0 ~~!~~! ts~.\utt~1 ~1 h\41~-\~\-\t> ,....... "::..",, Ii ~"'.iI" I ~ "...!t~'\o ~--- \~~ ~~ ~ tIS 0 Q)'6O >' - .... ~ Q 'O.1~;! . - II"' ......" · ." ,," . 05:: II I!. ~ II " a"'~ ... -" A > ~ J ~... ..i a'l!. '" ~ a ~ . ... oo! ..'11>. . ......' .,.," '7 OJ) II g I~" :Jn~h111:S1l\i! .~\ ,d\~1~':! ~ ,%~:'~!'H ~~ ,g.:\ h".8' 1U:%!' ~!.~. ~ . "c. .~ :i.i1 Ui i'S4s~f {~ ;ti13~~i . I \' =0 ~15 ~U 'i-ht~1 U ~.flr ,'II\~:..i,~ " ." Q i I ,,111''' Q" I"'" "'. .1$...-.a · -! \.,-0 aU UI!~\).g~li';:'h~>n'U% I. '.' .s.a....a.... ",% II!. '1S.1I lh'l ~t.i a g: t ' _. . . ~ '" ~1 8 i II. t! 1 :; d ~ u '" . \ \1 . .!I at 3;1 , IJI \ lit . . ~ II "..-6. a-"J~s; fI~. \11 ~",..:a'll1 ., I 'U rJ'J., .~Is 1j~ ~!1iS.! .\Q~iH "'~1~t'! I B ~ h Ii ~" It '1\ sl" %,,,.=..1 JI-3 ~ -3 sa!:~ :: ''& ~ ~l~ 1~~ ~lih'U~1:;J'h'U-i\.s ;. ..~. 8,~ .~1 ,~'!iSg!lS"5..."Sih.i.h.3"" ~ ..e ~. \~t ~.a"5U..; n'~3 i 8 ~ \8 n.~ %.~ ~'! l~ :it ,e'~ ~'" ~8iP~iu\::IIIi=', UII~UI!.!J t'. 0 >' '1 's tiO Q ~ 0 e 1 ,0:9 i ! ff ~,~ ~ <I! ~ ~~. 0 1 ~ i '6""'....~". -II ..1!" ,,"...s~'6a~. ~.. ~ u-l! i "'~l!!~;;;'" ~~ i," s :1l!!'~-.a ~.!!: .," ". :31 h'3 It-.!i.s d~.J.~1I~ 1110 ~ lid fit ." -=- """'" 5 1I"j g ';\.. ~.. -lo '6 'II ~ \I II .j! .~ &:s := - - ..__""_."~.m~ 'to.C. MEMORANDUM TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: DON SPAGNOLO, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER#6 SUBJECT: WATER MASTER PLAN DATE: JULY 13, 1999 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Council approve and adopt the 1999 Water Master Plan. FUNDING: The FY 1998/99 Project Budget to complete the City's Water Master Plan is $18,900. Year-to-date expenditures are $15,700. The Plan will be completed under budget. DISCUSSION: The Water Master Plan has been prepared to provide the City with a review and recommendations regarding the adequacy of its water supplies and i~frastructure. Major components of the Plan include the following: 1. Water supplies and present and future demands. 2. Water storage facilities. 3. Water distribution systems. 4. Water quality. 5. Recommended Capital Improvement. The Report provides conclusions as to the adequacy of the City's water system for current and buildout (General Plan) conditions. A capital improvement program is recommended which provides for the facilities identified in the Master Plan. The City Council on January 12, 1999 authorized distribution of the draft Water Master Plan. The draft plan was made available for review at City Hall, distributed to the County Library, the Business Improvement Association, and the Chamber of Commerce. In addition, the public was notified via the City's web site and through an advertised public notice. The public comment period for the Water Master Plan ended on March 15, 1999. . Two residents commented on the plan. Staff has reviewed the comments from these individuals and has modified the Report where necessary or appropriate. The public comments and staff responses are attached to this report. ,"=."".-. Two of the comments which were notable included concern over the water supply for the City at buildout, and the amount of water storage recommended. The Report concludes that the City has an adequate supply of water to meet its buildout under the General Plan. In part, this is based on published estimates of the safe yield of Lopez Reservoir and groundwater supplies. Currently, updated studies are under way to review the supply available from both of these water sources. Staff recommends that the City continue to monitor these studies and to report to the Council of any new information which reflects on the City's water supply. The Water Master Plan includes recommendations to upgrade the amount of water stored in tanks to meet current standards. The Report uses a conservative approach regarding the amount of storage recommended for the Oro-Rancho Grande water pressure zones. The Water Master Plan includes a recommendation to connect these zones (which are at compatible pressures), and also to independently upgrade their storage and pumping systems. Staff believes that the storage should be conservatively sized considering the need for system redundancy to allow for maintenance, and the fact that the service areas are geographically remote and bounded by open space (fires could occur in both locations ). Currently, the Rancho Grande water tank has a capacity of1.2 million gallons (mg), and the Oro water tank is 0.25 mg. These are both undersized for current needs. To meet existing demands, the Rancho Grande tank should be a minimum of 1.1 mg, and the Oro tank should be a minimum of 0.48 mg. Staff is recommending that the zones be connected and that the Oro tank capacity be increased to 1.0 mg. These storage and connection recommendations will allow either tank to be placed out of service for repainting or other maintenance, and still provide both pressure zones with acceptable water storage. The Water Master Plan is meant to be a flexible document in that it should be periodically reviewed and updated as new information becomes available. Important issues that are currently unresolved include the Department of Water Resources' groundwater study, the Santa Maria groundwater lawsuit, and the Lopez safe yield study. Nevertheless it is important to adopt a plan as a base of information. When new information becomes available it will be incorporated into the base document. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the Report, recognizing that it will be updated when necessary. 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: -Citizens' Comments July 6, 1999 Water Master Plan Comments Page 1 of 5 Comments from Mr. Nooker: Comment 1 : The 17 Residential Estate lots within the City should not be excluded from future water demand calculations, even though these lots are currently on private wells. City water supplies should be available to serve the lots if the wells become inoperable. Response: The demand calculations were modified to reflect the additional lots. In addition, the demand factor for the RR, RH, and RE grouping was modified from 700 gpd/lot to 675 gpd/lot. The revised estimate is still above the. historical demand of 632 gpd/lot. The resulting change in the overall demand estimate was negligible. Comments from Ms. Ferrara: Comment 2: Water supplies appear overstated in terms of both Lopez and groundwater supply. Response: The recommendations in the Water Master Plan are based on currently available studies and information. Based on currently available information, the conclusions stated in the report for both Lopez and groundwater supplies are valid, as discussed below. However, these conclusions should be reviewed each time a related study or report is publicized. Lopez Water Supply The Lopez entitlement indicated in the report was based on a safe yield study of the Lopez reservoir dated March, 1984 by Montgomery Engineers, Inc. This study, which concluded that all Lopez entitlements can be accommodated within the safe yield, is currently being updated through the SLO County Engineering Department. Staff recently consulted with Mr. Tony Boyd, Hydraulic Operations Supervisor, regarding the preliminary results of the new study. Though Mr. Boyd was not able to release a draft report, he indicated that the updated analysis would report the same conclusions as the 1984 study. Namely, that current water entitlements can be accommodated within the safe yield of the Lopez reservoir. Staff has requested that County Engineering provide a draft as soon as one becomes available. -,._.~ ---------_.~ ~..~ July 6, 1999 Water Master Plan Comments Page 2 of 5 Groundwater Supply The Gentleman's Agreement was formulated in January, 1983 by a technical advisory committee comprised of members from the Cities of Arroyo Grande, Grover City, and Pismo Beach, the Oceano Community Services District, the County of San Luis Obispo, and the Farm Bureau. Annual basin withdrawals for each urban entity were established with basin safe yield information derived from a California Department of Water Resources Study dated June 1979 and entitled Groundwater in the Arroyo Grande Area. The groundwater extractions referenced in the WMP were therefore based on the 1979 DWR safe yield estimates for the Tri-Cities Basin. DWR has been in the process of updating the 1979 study for several years, and staff has reviewed a preliminary draft of the update. However, staff took exception to a number of issues in the draft, and therefore the results are inconclusive at this time. An updated version of the report has not been developed at this time. Staff will report to the Council when one becomes available. Comment 3: Table 5-1 appears to equate well capacity with safe yield, and more supporting data is needed to explain how "capacity" was determined. Response: Language was added to clarify the table. Staff concurs that the safe yield of the basin is separate from well pump capacity. Comment 4: How significant were the staff-proposed changes to the LUE? How did the water demand estimated for the Five Cities Center compare with the General Commercial estimate? Response: The land use used as the basis of the water master plan included changes to the LUE which are primarily General Plan, Amendments requesting zoning changes, and density modifications. During the land use portion of the study, the City provided John L. Wallace and Associates a map of currently proposed GPA applications and other pertinent zoning information. In general, the scope of the land use changes had a small impact on the overall water demand. The demand for the Five Cities Center was estimated at 1 ,000 gpd/acre, compared to a GC value of 1 ,400 gpd/acre. These values were also clarified in the report. Comment 5: The report refers to the impact of conservation measures in several locations, describe the conservation measures that have been implemented in the City. __ __..__.__..___n__.__ July 6, 1999 Water Master Plan Comments Page 3 of 5 Response: Since 1990 staff has required mandatory fixture retrofit programs as a discretionary condition of approval for development projects. This requirement is applied on a case by case basis by staff. A recent example is the Five Cities Center, which was required to offset its full estimated water use through an extensive retrofit effort. Though such efforts do help to reduce overall water use, the Master Plan does not include their direct effect in the demand calculations. For instance, even though the water demand of the Five Cities Center is theoretically "offset" by the retrofit effort, it is still assumed in the demand calculations that the Five Cities Center will use the full amount estimated. Comment 6: The use of different peaking factors is confusing. Response: Page 4-4 was modified to make the use of different peaking factors more clear. The historical maximum day demand (MDD) factor was examined for the last 10 years, and staff believes that the City-wide factor of 1.7 is accurate. However, historical daily production information was not available for the smaller service area of the higher pressure zones, and therefore a typical MDD value of 2.0 was used when calculating storage for Reservoirs No.3 and 5. Comment 7: The method of supply redundancy shown on page 5-5 should be linked with the operational constraints identified in Chapter 8. Response: Chapter 8 (pg. 8-1) was clarified to address this issue. Comment 8: The booster pumps should be discussed in additional detail. Response: Additional information was added regarding the booster pumps (pg. 7-1). Comment 9: The storage indicated for the low pressure zone is over stated. Response: Staff concurs that the calculation for emergency storage was conservative. The report was modified to reflect the suggested change in the emergency storage requirements. Two additional factors contributed to the final low pressure storage volume as follows: 1. The City periodically takes individual water tanks out of service for recoating or other maintenance. Most recently, Reservoir 2 was taken out of service for recoating. This operation is typically performed in off-peak months when substantially less operational storage is needed in the system. Considering that the City's largest reservoir (2.0 MG) is an above ground steel tank that will eventually require recoating, staff recommends a minimum revised storage at the -~,.._- "''''-<-'--''",~<-- July 6, 1999 Water Master Plan Comments Page 4 of 5 Reservoir 1 site of 2.0 MG to provide redundancy within the system. 2. In accordance with the Master Plan calculations, the replacement of Reservoir No. 1 is the final low pressure storage project recommended prior to build-out, with no future alternative tank sites identified. Using the revised emergency.storage requirements, the final minimum Reservoir No. 1 volume is 1.72 MG. However, it is recommended that the City take advantage of the low incremental cost associated with an additional 0.28 MG of storage to provide redundancy with Reservoir No.4. Regarding the operational storage volume calculations, staff believes that the main zone operational volume indicated in the report accurately reflects the system requirements. Given that the high pressure booster pumps feed diredly from the low pressure tanks, the volume pumped can be considered as a demand on the main zone, and therefore could be conservatively included in an operational storage calculation. Comment 10: The future Reservoir No.3 and Oro Booster projects may not be necessary if the pressure zones are connected. Response: With regard to the sizing of Reservoir No.3, staff believes that future additional redundancy is critical within the high pressure zone. Reservoir No.5 is 1.2 MG and will need to be removed from service for recoating or other maintenance. As a result, a redundant storage facility at the Reservoir 3 site will provide an important benefit to the system. The City will also be taking advantage of a reduced incremental cost since Reservoir 3 requires additional storage even with existing demands. Concerning the replacement of the Oro Booster Station, staff was faced with a similar decision in 1996 when the Hillcrest Booster Station was eliminated with a similar pressure zone connection project. Operations personnel have since indicated a need for future redundancy within the high pressure zone. This need is further substantiated by the geographical separation between the Res. No. 5 and Res. No. 3 service areas. As indicated in the Report, the connecting main between the service areas would be nearly one mile long and would be subject to periodic maintenance and repair. Comment 11: Indicate the hydraulic planning criteria used in the preparation of the model runs. Do the future model runs assume blanket replacement of lines? Response: The hydraulic planning criteria were clarified in the report (page 7-2). The capital improvement projects were modeled individually to assess the impact and effectiveness of the recommended improvements. July 6, 1999 Water Master Plan Comments Page 5 of 5 Comment 12: Will the fire flow requirements change for build-out, and was the 4,000 gpm Five Cities Center fire flow modeled? Response: Fire flow requirements are not anticipated to change at build-out. The existing and future distribution systems were modeled at 4,000 gpm for the Five Cities Center and no deficiencies were noted. Comment 13: Chapter 8 should address customer complaints, particularly with regard to hardness. Are water softeners an issue for the waste stream? Response: Chapter 8 was modified to include a discussion about hardness. Water softeners are not currently a major issue in the waste stream. The South San Luis Obispo Sanitation District Wastewater Treatment Facility has an ocean outfall and effluent sodium chloride levels are not regulated. SSLOCSD staff realize that future reclamation projects will include a reverse osmosis component to reduce total dissolved solids from the current level of 1,200 mg/I. Comment 14: Supply associated with the Soto Sports Complex should not be included unless the demand for the complex is included in the demand calculations. Response: Irrigation demand is included in the public facility category. The 100 acre- ft associated with the Soto Sport Complex Reclamation Project is also deleted at the end of Table 3-1, where only Lopez entitlement and groundwater are used. Comment 15: Pressures in Ruth Ann Way and vicinity should be examined further if the City system pressure drops below 30 psi. Response: Based on various domestic demand scenarios examined for this area, the pressure in the City system is not expected to drop below 30 psi. Staff appreciates the comments provided by Mr. Nooker and Ms. Ferrara. In addition to the final modified report, a strike-out version was produced so the changes could be readily reviewed.