Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/04/1988, 1 - CONFIRMATION OF COSTS FOR SIDEWALK REPAIRS CONDUCTED UNDER THE 1911 ACT 4��inI�N��lylllll��l II� MEETr ��� City 0f IUSan IS OBISpO October 1988 COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT �"' NUMB FROM: David F. Romero Dennis Coxr".— Prepared by: Tony Heller Public Works Dir. Streets Manager SUBJECT: Confirmation of costs for sidewalk repairs conducted under the 1911 Act CAO RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution confirming costs BACKGROUND: Staff has continued its ongoing program of posting defective sidewalks in the downtown area, requesting property owners to make repairs and hiring contractors to conduct the work where property owners have failed to make the repairs as required. All work follows provisions of the 1911 Act, Streets and Highways Code of California. Exhibit A (attached) reflects work conducted by City-hired contrac- tors on various streets throughout the City. The areas where work has been completed encompasses Palm Street, Mill Street, Monterey Street and Marsh Street. Alternatives 1. Council may adopt the resolution confirming costs, thereby permitting the City to collect funds advanced for sidewalk repairs which are the responsibility of the adjacent property owner. 2. Council may fail to adopt the resolution, thereby stopping the collection procedure with the ultimate loss of approximately $5,369.78. Fiscal Impact Possible loss of $5,369.78 of funds advanced to pay contractors to conduct this work which is the responsibility of the property owners. Property owners whose costs were over *19000.00 were notified of a three-year option plan to pay back the City at 7% interest rate on the unpaid balance. Those property owners who have requested the three-year financing are shown on Exhibit B. Recommendation ✓ Staff revommends that Council , after hearing public testimony, make whatever adjustments it feels are appropriate in the cost for each individual property and, subsequently, adopt the resolution confirming costs and permitting unpaid costs to be turned over to the 1111►1III1110111 city of San tins OBISpo NNA COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Sidewalk Repairs Page 2 Recommendation (cont. ) City Tax Collector to be placed as a lien against the property and collected with the City taxes. Attachments: - Resolution APPROVED: CA I City Ad ' nistrativ Officer City At ney Fina ce Director Project Manager dh b/cox/agd-sidewalk Ir � RESOLUTION NO. ( 1988- SERIES) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO CONFIRMING COSTS OF SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE 1911 ACT, CHAPTER 27, STREETS AND HIGHWAY CODE, ET SEQ. WHEREAS, pursuant to public hearings duly held, the Council hereby determines that there are no objections or protests to the costs of construction submitted by the Superintendent of Streets and hereby confirm said costs as submitted and as set forth hereafter; and, WHEREAS, the hereinafter listed construction costs shall be paid within thirty-one (31 ) days after the date hereof and any such costs remaining unpaid thereafter shall be turned over to the City Tax Collector to be placed as a lien against the property and collected with the city taxes, and subject to the same penalties and costs if not paid on the first installment. The property owners, addresses and construction costs are shown on Exhibit "A" ; and, WHEREAS, at the request of the property owners and in accordance with Chapter 12. 12 of the Municipal Code, the Council hereby determines that the assessments set forth over a thousand dollors ($1 ,000.00) may be paid in three (3) annual installments, including interest at the rate of seven (7) percent per annum on the unpaid balance, said interest to run from the first day of the month following passage of this Resolution to the time payment is made in full of the principal amount, provided that failure to pay any installment and interest when due shall make the remaining principal balance and interest payable in full and subject to additional penalties and interest as provided for city taxes and subject to the /r.,3 Resolution No. ( 1988 Series) Page Two same procedure for foreclosure and said. Those property owners with costs over one thousand dollars ($1 ,000.00) who have opted for the three (3) year plan are shown on Exhibit "B" . On motion of seconded by , and of the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: The foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this day of 1988. MAYOR RON DUNIN ATTEST: • CITY CLERK PAM VOGES y Resolution No. ( 1988 Series) Page 3 APPROVED: ty A strative Officer City Vorney �d Fi c '�frecto Public Works Director �7��f� 'G7yl//lam s Project Manager b/heller/resolution Exhibit A Owner Location Amount 1 . W. Burt Polin 1236 Palm Street $ 245 .44 2 . Bank of America 1252 Monterey Street 929 .75 3 . R. G. & M. Rademacher, 539 Marsh Street 532.95 et al . 4. J. D. Chedda 1213 Nipomo Street 1 , 177 . 88 5. Lloyd P. Villa, Tr. 1023 Mill Street 1 ,035 .00 6. County of San Luis Obispo 1051 Mill Street 724.38 Obispo 7 . Jules E. Rogoff 857 Santa Rosa Street 724 .38 (Mill Street side) Exhibit. _B- E 1 MEMORANDUMS �'�°�Stressan�uSs °Bn Luis�sp.0 934038100 TO City Council FROM Pam Voge ity Clerk SUBJECT Council Agenda Item No. 2 - 10/4/88 DATE 10/4/88 Attached is a backup report concerning the ARC appeal by Douglas Michie dated April 4, 1988. As this item was continued by ARC on two occasions, Vice-Mayor Rappa suggested you have their report for review tonight. Attachment: ARC staff report c: J. Dunn M. Multari File r J � I� ����I��,lq'u11111111IIlIlI' City O f San IIAIS OBISpO nIVE OPMENT DARING AGENDA j ocr 4 es ITEM # STAFF REPORT j2Z FOR Architectural Review Commission MEETING DATE April 4, 1988 BY Glen MattesonGAs ociate Planner ITEM We 6 PROJECT ADDRESS 1275 Murray Street FILE NO, ARC 87-219 SUBJECT: Add three apartments to a site with an existing house, on the south side of Murray Street near Hathway. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION Grant final approval with staff to approve any of the suggested building design revisions which the commission supports and with staff to approve details of fencing and screening, landscaping, trash enclosure, and lighting. BACKGROUND Situation The applicant originally submitted somewhat different plans for this site, requesting "minor/incidental".staff review. Staff determined that the project would more appropriately be reviewed by the ARC. Staff also suggested reducing the apparent height and mass of the bulding, making the addition more compatible with the existing house, modifying several features to meet code requirements, and presenting more complete plans. After one revision and more discussion with staff, the applicant submitted the enclosed set of plans, which respond to several staff suggestions, requesting final approval. Data Summary Applicant/owner: Douglas Michie Designer: George F. Garcia Zoning: R-3 Land Use Element map: medium-high-density residential Environmental status: Categorically exempt as a small structure ARC action deadline: Not established until plans for final approval certified complete SiLt Description The nearly level, 6,250-square-foot site is occupied by an existing single-story, wood-frame house with detached garage. Several mature trees grow on the site (shown on plans). The neighborhood includes apartments (generally to the north), houses where , apartment additions have been approved (lot to the east), and individual houses (to the south). The apartments include a wide range of scales and architectural styles. Proiect Description The existing garage and three trees would be removed. The roof of the existing house would be rebuilt to match the desired lines for the roof of the new apartments, to be attached to the rear of the house. The apartments, with horizontal siding and composition shingle roof, would be built over parking spaces. One parking space would be added at the front of the house. Proposed colors are light blue siding, white trim, and medium gray roof. Replacement trees would be planted. ,nap ARC 87-219 Page 2 Evaluation A. Existing Building Staff believes the existing garage is not architecturally, historically, or culturally significant, and may be demolished. Likewise, the significanse of the existing house and neighborhood do not warrant referral of the project to the Cultural Heritage Commission. B. Site Plan/Building Form The general plan supports development of higher-density housing at this location, within walking distance of Cal Poly. Staff's primary concerns are compatibility with neighboring low-density development (appearance and overlook) and preservation of the residential street character fostered by the remaining houses on this block. In staff's view, density allowed by zoning, lot size and shape, and desire to retain the existing house enable few basic design alternatives. The project meets basic zoning standards of density, height, coverage, setbacks, and parking. The absense of windows on the south elevation minimizes overlook concerns. However, staff thinks the project's visual impact could be further reduced by one or more of these: 1. Reducing the pitch of the roof. 2. Using a simple hip roof rather than the proposed "Dutch gable.' 3. Deleting the study rooms, thereby shortening the building. (The southern parking space would then be outside the building.) This approach would also eliminate the awkward appearing "dog-leg" support at the southwest corner of the building. C. Details 1. The landscape plan does not indicate type or size of new trees. Staff suggests tall, columnar trees which would provide seasonal color, with species and size to be approved by staff when construction plans are prepared. 2. Ivy may be a maintenance problem if it climbs the building wall. Staff,suggests a non-climbing, low-profile, low-maintenance .groundcover for the unused and rarely seen side and rear setback.areas (such as bark or gravel mulch with swordfern or Pachysandra terminalis). 3. Shrubs in front of the parking screen wall would be desirable. 4. Outdoor lighting details are not shown. Staff suggests low-intensity, low-profile light stands in front and "soffit" or ceiling lights for the rear parking area. . 5. Screen fence details are not shown. Staff•suggests•siding and\trim to match the building.' ARC 87-219 Page 3 6. There is no ideal place for the trash enclosure. Staff would prefer use of "green wheelers" in a project of this size, stored in the side yard or in the stairway/storage area, to avoid the noise and driveway wear that will result from a dumpster and the intrusion of a large trash enclosure next to the house. ALTERNATIVES The ARC may grant schematic approval, indicating that site plan and building form are acceptable, but details must return before final approval. The commission may grant final approval. Final approval may include revisions to details to be approved by staff. The commission may deny the application upon finding that it does not comply with architectural guidelines. The commission may continue action, with direction to applicant and staff. PREVIOUS REVIEW The commission has not previously considered this application. In February, the commission approved a duplex apartment addition for the neighboring lot to the east. That project included a two-story, stucco building separated from the existing house by three parking spaces, with a separate driveway on Hathway Avenue. The building appeared more compact and vertical than the project under consideration, but its maximum height was two feet lower. OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS Public Works There is a recognized water resource deficiency which is being addressed by the City Council. At the present, construction projects are being processed in a normal manner. However, restrictions on building permits may be imposed at any time. These restrictions may delay or preclude the approval of projects for construction and/or the issuance of building permits in the future. am Access and hydrant locations are adequate, but fire-flow Is deficient for a building of this type and size (1,085 gallons per minute available vs. 2,500 gpm required). This deficiency may be mitigated by installing an approved, automatic fire sprinkler system (per NFPA 13) or, if a two-hour fire wall (per UBC) is provided, by installing a residential-type sprinkler system (per NFPA 13-D). RECOMMENDATION Determine that the existing garage to be demolished is not architeclturally, culturally, or historically significant. Grant final approval with staff to approve: 1. Any of the suggested building design revisions (lower roof, hip roof, shorter building) which the commission supports. i- ARC 87-219 Page 4 2. Details of: A. Property-line fencing and screen wall for front-yard parking space; B. Planting plan, including alternate groundcover, specific trees, and shrub planting in front of the screen wall; C. Trash enclosure design or alternate location; D. Outdoor lighting Enclosed: plans Available at meeting: color board gm2/arc87219