The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About01/02/1990, 5 - SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS CONSIDERATION OF APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS. - MEETING DATE: city of San lues OBISPO Januarg 2 1990 COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM NUMBER: O David Romero, Public Works Director ,�— SUBJECT: SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Consideration of approving plans and specifications CAO RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution approving plans and specifications, authorize staff to advertize for bid, and authorize City Administrative Officer to award contract if bids are below engineer's estimate BACKGROUND: At its meeting of November 1, 1988, the City Council directed staff to proceed to have curb, .gutter and sidewalk installed at 24 locations throughout the city where these improvements would complete curb, gutter and sidewalks in blocks already more than 50% improved. The City proceeded under the provisions of the 1911 Act, Streets and Highway Code. Properties were notified in accordance with provisions of the Code, and all but 2 installed the improvements under private contract or had them installed by the City under minor City contract. The two properties, the McCarthy Tank and Steel property on South Street (Exhibit A) and the Cote property at the corner of Meadow and Funston (Exhibit B) are of such magnitude that the work cannot be done under minor contract, thus requiring City Council approval of plans and specifications. DISCUSSION: McCarthy: The McCarthy building was constructed in 1961 and was given conditional approval for an exception to sidewalk, curb and gutter requirements (Resolution 63-61 - Exhibit C) . Note that the exception applied only to that building permit and was not a permanent exception. Mr. McCarthy objects to the installation of the improvements primarily on the basis that his parking, which is now at right angle to the street, will be affected. Staff prepared an alternative parking layout for the property after standard improvements were installed, however, Mr. McCarthy was not satisfied. He and his attorney appealed to the City Attorney and subsequently to the City Administrative Officer, both of whom agreed with staff that the improvements should be installed (Exhibit D) . 1 II��vNNIIVNIIIII�pNi��l city of san tins oBispo 1ffml�d COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Sidewalk Page Two Improvements to be made include relocation of a chain link fence to the property line, grading, installation of curb, gutter and sidewalk and driveways, and conform paving on the private property. All of this work is at the property owner's expense. The City will pay for the paveout on South Street and relocation of a City sign and City water meter box. Cote: The Cote property contains several trees located near the street property lines. In order to preserve these trees, it will be necessary to construct a low block wall (1 - 2 1/2 feet) along most of the street frontage of the property. This adds substantially to the cost, necessitating the formal plans and specifications. Improvements to be made include grading low block walls, curb, gutter, sidewalk and driveway, driveway and private walkway conform and relocation of a mailbox, all at the property owner's expense. City expense will involve installation of a partial cross. gutter, construction of a handicapped ramp and street paveout. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve plans and specifications as submitted (staff recommendation) . Advantages: This is a necessary step toward completion of sidewalks on South Street, Meadow and Funston Street, thus providing safer passage and encouraging pedestrians. Elimination of right angle parking at McCarthy's will provide safer passage for both pedestrians and motorists. Disadvantages: City will have to advance money for the improvements and collect over a 3 year period. Property owners will be unhappy with the expense and McCarthy will be unhappy with change in parking. 2 . Modify plans in an attempt to satisfy concerns of the owners. Advantages: Owners may be pacified. Disadvantages: Depending on nature of changes, safety of motorists or pedestrians may be compromised. I V�a� �I�� ►illllllllP� q�Ill city of san-Luis OBlspo = COUNCIL AGENOA DEPORT Sidewalk Page Three 3. Fail to approve plans and specifications. Advantages: Property owners will be pacified. Disadvantages: Failure to approve plans and specifications would, in effect, undo action the Council took over a year ago in directing staff to proceed with completion of sidewalks at 24 locations throughout the community. More importantly, the entire program of completing sidewalks in blocks which are more than 50% completed, would be in jeopardy. This action would be contrary to the City' s goal of encouraging pedestrians. CONCERNS OF OTHER DEPARTMENT: Environmental status - categorically exempt. The Community Development Department is concerned at the McCarthy site that parking lost by the installation of the public improvements be replaced and that the operations yard be properly screened. These items will be achieved through zoning enforcement. FISCAL IMPACT: i Engineer's Estimate: South Street $19 , 000 Funston & Meadow 19 ,500 38, 500 contingency 3 ,800 $42 , 300 Final cost allocation estimate: McCarthy $15, 200 Cote 15, 300 City 11,800 $42, 300 Funds for this program are included within the Streets/General Program (page D-40) of the 1989-90 budget. I city of San 1UGS OBISpo _ COUNCIL AGENOA REPORT Sidewalk Page Four RECOMMENDATION: Staff feels that continuation of this sidewalk program is vital in providing safe and convenient passage for pedestrians. Staff feels the plans submitted represent the best solution to provision of safe sidewalks and recommends Council approval of plans and specifications as submitted. Attachments: Resolution Exhibits Plans and specifications will be available for review in the Council office. I, sidewalk/dfr#19 I v �� RESOLUTION NO. (1990 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ,SAN LUIS OBISPO APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, AUTHORIZING STAFF TO ADVERTISE FOR BIDS, AND AUTHORIZING CAO TO AWARD CONTRACT TO SUCCESSFUL BIDDER WHEREAS, funds for the installation of curb, gutter and sidewalk are included in the 1989-90 Budget, and WHEREAS, the project is categorically exempt from an EIR, and is not of sensitive or exceptional community interest; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby approves the Plans and Specifications for City Plan No. P-07B, "South Street Widening, " and "Street Widening Project -- Meadow Street - Funston Ave. "; directs staff to advertise for bids; and authorizes the CAO to award the contract to the low bidder if bids are below the Engineer's Estimate. On motion of , seconded by and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this day of , 1990. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK Resolution No. (1990 Series) Page Two. of APPROVED: City dministrative Officer t At rn Fin nce Director blic Works Director / Cit Engineer p/po7b-award by 1 3AI80 NOIJISdX3 .s •bz� a o n i I� gACO y ; cc � ; c0 ¢ t - ----- ----- -- I S £Et soy Ds' �c Esc q,►a, A-44 ul 33 z I'. � h '1 A '{{ 8 Y f 1 . 4' -s x c T W f o _ V I . I } :.!6AC. D.78 AC. 0 4 I 1 h •'} ♦ h v a J.15 AC. 't 25 m a �?4 a�.sr C` pM.tl-92 6_. TR. „_ Bs R A-123 h I B � PAR. B rz � ' X I P7N (CO n Oy 3f Ptn� 4 1PAR. A 3 1 I b co1 I = L i P.M.3.0-44 rs ty � I � Ld O ; PTN. I ' PTN, 2 Co t. 1 is ; h 154 r h l 60''�' R.M•A-123 N'T r: P. M. 30-44 stI98 f BEEBEE STRE T SOUTH S � .... h 140 0 14.0 N 160 N n 274iW r 1Q � a r '^ 3 i 4 6 2 s 7 3 s ` � ►'= NORTON'S 9 1 loo• 10 7 CNURGt4 t OF VILLA �NaIsT rr 12 f I 14 13 -- --- 140 20 140 FUNSTON AVE.. 84 : COTE 14 20 140 2 5� e 1 i O 3 4 �l /l "' 51DEWALK f 1:1 6 3 5 ,s Q Q 783 a 10 ADDITION TRACT I � 26 / N Q � ' 14 l 10 13 0 } 140 20 140 60 Wld RIDGE v? 1 201 30 0 50-� 60 EI 1 4 ^gT 1.20 19 18j 1 16 a R f•-- - - Cn O 1 N 'S 15 � 5 9? tV �/-••• �"' 3 c /00 TA 687 0 50 15 159.50 (� .. o �. RESOIJJTJ.CN NO. 63-61 TIto. comiTTUtd L APP$UVAL OF AN 1KkCEF7'10[4 / FROM' SIDEWALK, CURB AND GUTTER =ULWIENTS. The Flaming Commission of the City of San Luis Obispo does resolve as follows: t1F R::AS, Rcbert E. ReCarbbr has requested an exception in the sidewr , curb and gutter reouirements in accordance with Section 7330.8(A) of the Municipal. Cede o4 the City of SAn Luis Obispo; and. WHMAS, the said applicant has submitted certain information to the attention of the said Planning Commission in support of this reouest; NOU; 1 RE, BE IT P.ESOLVED that the Planning Commission does hereby condi- tionally grant the exception in sidewalk, curb and Satter requirements for the full 250 foot frontage of the property described as a portion of Lot 16, Beebee and Phillips Addition, Assessor's No. 4411--04, located in an "M" land use district. Said exception is to be considered only to the requirements of Buil`dding Pernit No. 3b76,..znd in no way preclude` the requirements for curb, gutter and sidewalk under any future building permit that may be issued. BE IT FURTHER RLSOLVID, that the City Planning Commission recomends that the � �.1ty Council accept the deed to a strip of property 26 fee's in width and - 250 feel; ir_ length; running parallel and adjacent to South Street; said pro- perty being offered to the City by Nor. ttobert E. McCarthy, Senior, for street widening purposes, and further reco=ends that the street paving on bothsides of South Street be extended in width at this tims and a plant mix rolled berm � be installed along the frontage of Mr. McCarbby's property. Regularly passed and adopted by the Planning Comi.ssion of the City of San Luis Obispo, State of California, on the 2nd day Of—AU., 1961Q by the fallowing vote: AYES. sionera Lax, Lenger, Cole, Carpenter, Johnson & Schwartz, JWES: None ABSAM: Ca=issioner Scort. ATTEST: .-.y'US .a �, W. Abraham I . Director of Pl.awfLng & Building 4W. W. 6341 CUPlEs: City Council, City Engineer, Applicant, Building Dept., Resolution File. n �IIIpNIIII�I�IIINNII��IIIhI�IIICIp �I - IIII cityo san lues oBispo 990 Palm Street/Post Office Box 8100 • San Luis Obispo, CA 93403-8100 August 15, 1989 Mr. Roy J. Gargano Borton, Petrini & Conron P.O. Box 2026 Bakersfield, CA 93303 RE: McCarthy Tank & Steel Dear Mr. Gargano: This letter is a follow-up to our meeting of July 29 " 1989_ r Have spoken with John Dunn, City Administrative Officer regarding your client's request for a partial exception to curb, gutter and sidewalk requirements which would permit an extended driveway along his property on South Street. This exception would allow several vehicles to park along side each other in. such a manner as to require that they back out onto South Street for street access. This plan was rejected by the City Administrative Officer, who agrees with Mr. Romero's stated position that the City can presently require that your client install standard curb, gutter and sidewalk pursuant to Section 5815 of the Streets and Highways Code. Further, the parking configuration suggested by your client would result in cars having to exit his property in an unsafe manner which is prohibited by City Parking and Driveway Standards. If your client wishes to submit a new proposal for consideration please have him do so no later than September 30, 1989. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. Very truly yours, Vicki J. inucane .Acting City Attorney VJF/sw