Loading...
11/14/19741 1 MINUTES ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 14, 1974 - 12 NOON CITY HALL Roll Call PRESENT: John C. Brown, Myron Graham, T. Keith Gurnee, Jesse Norris and Mayor Kenneth E. Schwartz ABSENT: None City Staff PRESENT: J.H. Fitzpatrick, City Clerk; R.D. Miller, Administrative _ Officer; A.J. Shaw, City Attorney; John Quirk, Assistant Water Director; Jim Stockton, Assistant Director of Parks and Recreation; Paul E. Landell, Engineering Department; Wayne Peterson, Assistant City Engineer; D.F. Romero, City Engineer; L.M. Schlobohm, Fire Chief; Don Silvia, Fire Department; Dan Smith, Planning Associate; Don Englert, Police Captain; David Williamson, Assistant Administrative Officer 1. The City Council continued their discussion of proposed Ordinance No. 604 and the criteria, standards and policies to .implement said ordinance. A.J. Shaw, City Attorney, reviewed for the City Council his memorandum of November 7, 1974, dealing with the proposal to define the criteria, standards and policies for Ordinance No. 604. He stated the purpose was to summarize and comment upon the possible establishment of two different sets of criteria, standards, and policies in connection with the administration of proposed Facilities Ordinance No. 604. It was suggested that lesser standards designated as "life and safety standards" should be applied in the older built -up portions of the City whichdid not.fully..satisfy the City's "ideal design standards" for facilities now required by the City as a condition of new development. It would appear that the proposal for two (or more) sets of criteria, standards, and policies arises from a belief that Ordinance 604 somehow required that no new construction or development could occur in the previously developed areas of the City unless the facilities in said areas fully complied.with the facilities required by the City as a condition of develop- ment in new areas. He.could f.ind•no wording, and no intent, in proposed Ordinance 604 which would be interpreted to.require such a result. Ordinance 604 was in addition to all other City ordinances and did not supersede, add to, detract from, or in any other way affect the applicability or effect of said other ordinances. Essentially, Ordinance 604 provided.that no permit shall be issued for a proposed development until the Cit.y.certified that City faci.lit.ies.were available to serve said development adequately, i.e._; without overloading said facilities. It was an ordinance for the protection of the health, safety and welfare of the residents, owners., and users of said development. In reference to "Level 1" facilities, he found it difficult to see how the "overloading" of said facilities in one area of the City could be defined in different terms..than.in another area of the City... The term "overloaded facilities" should mean the same-thing throughout the City... Owners, . residents and users of property in any one area of the City should be as able to rely upon protection from the immediate dangers arising from overloaded Level 1 facilities as in any other area of the City. City Council Minutes November 14, 1974 Page 2 However, he continued there was nothing in Ordinance 604 which said that the City's "Level 1" facilities serving a development must be of a given size. As a non - engineer, he viewed the ordinance as merely requiring a capability to provide adequate service to a site at a maximum demand rate for an agreed upon calculated risk. For instance: Water Supply: Gallons per person or usage for a given number of years into the future. Water Availability for Fire Suppression: Thousands of gallons per minute sustained for a given number of hours. Sewer Collection: Gallons per person or usage for a given number of years 'into the future, including infiltration. Sewage Treatment: Gallons per person or usage for a given number of years into the future, including' infiltration. Flood Control: 5, 10, 25, 50 or 100 year storm drainage capability. The City Council discussed with the City Attorney the implications of establish- ing two levels for facilities. David Williamson, Assistant Administrative Officer, presented the City Council the recommendations of the City staff for revisions to the wording of Ordinance 604. He stated that at the City Council meeting held on November 4, 1974, the Council considered several points raised by staff concerning the proposed wording of Ordinance 604 (City Attorney draft). The principal point made by staff was that the City should employ two different sets of standards relative to resource management:- One set, referred to as Design Criteria, should be applicable to all new construction and should be based upon appropriate recognized professional standards. As a rule, these standards were periodically modified to reflect latest research findings; the result was that previous standards and systems. designed to those standards become outmoded.. A second set of criteria, which the staff had referred to as Life $ Safety Standards, attempt to define the point at which resources and /or level of service becomes minimal and critical. A recommended set of Life & Safety Standards is listed below: WATER SUPPLY When consumption for all customers served by the City water utility within a previous twelve -month period of time equals 6,500 acre feet of water from combined supply resources, water supply should be con - sidered critical. WATER DISTRIBUTION In case water for domestic use was inadequate in any portion of the distribution-system according to State standards,.the Utility Engineer should determine whether or not a public hearing should be held in accordance with Level 1 reporting_ procedures. WATER TREATMENT The critical water treatment level was when treated water volumes exceed eight million gallons per day at treatment plant no. 2 fora three -day period more than twice a year. 1 City Council Minutes November 14, 1974 Page 3 SEWER COLLECTION Existing sewer mains should be considered at maximum capacity when flowing full without surcharge. Certain exceptions to this policy might be made if a transmission or trunk line has no lateral con - nected to-it, a surcharge orpressure condition might be allowed if there was no possibility of interrupted service to customers or ' property damage. SEWER TREATMENT The sewer treatment plant should be considered to be operating at full capacity when the average daily flows exceed five million gallons per day or when the City no longer meets effluent discharge quality requirements'as established by the State Water Quality Control Board. SEWER LIFT STATIONS Sewer lift stations should be designed to handle all sewage and infiltration from the entire area of contribution, considering ultimate development according to.the latest general plan. Flow calculations should be based on the latest adopted design standards. FLOOD CONTROL Staff strongly recommended that flood control considerations be deleted from Ordinance 604. If the recommendation was unacceptable, then a first alternate was recommended as follows: Flood control considerations should include local drainage facilities under City control to the point�of drainage jurisdiction by the Zone 9 Flood:Control District.. Existing channel and flood plains in built -up areas should be considered to be i.n.a safe, adequate condition to allow development upstream if the water surface would be at least six inches below the lowest clear opening or floor in the flood plain considering complete upstream development according to the latest general plan and the run off from a 100 -year storm. If the first alternate was unacceptable, then the following alternate was recommended: Existing channel and flood plains i to be in a safe, adequate - condition the water surface would be at least opening or floor in the flood plain development according to the latest a 100 -year storm. FIRE SUPPRESSION built -up areas should be considered to allow development upstream if six inches below the lowest clear considering complete upstream general plan and the run off from Fire suppression facilities should be considered critical when avail- able water flow at the project site was less than 1,000 gallons per minute for parks, open-space, and residential development having a maximum average development density of six dwelling units per acre computed according-to Zoning Code criteria. Fire suppression should be considered critical when available water flow at the project site was less than 1,500 gallons per minute for ' residential development averaging ten dwelling units per acre. Fire suppression should be considered critical when water flow at the project site was less than 2,000 gallons per minute for residential development averaging twenty dwelling units per acre. Fire suppression should be considered critical when water flow was less than 2,750 gallons per minute for schools and civic buildings. City Council Minutes November 14, 1974 Page 4 Fire suppression should be considered critical when'.water flow at the project site was less than 3,000 gallons per minute for com- mercial and industrial development.- When ' response- time to a proposed project exceeds four minutes, an additional amount of response time might-be acceptable'if fire protection features were incorporated into.s'project so as to effectively meet the four - minute response time standard. POLICE SERVICE Present Police Department staffing was designed to serve the existing incorporated-area of the City. 'An additional beat would-probably be necessary when City population increased thirty percent (30 %) above the present figure of 32,950 persons or the incorporated area of the City totals 12 square miles. PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION No recommended standard. VEHICULAR CIRCULATION; The following standard was applicable to the City's local street system to the nearest point of safe access onto an arterial roadway: A street should be considered overburdened when the traffic in the 30th greatest peak hour in'any year exceeds the theoretical capacity as determined using charts and factors from the Institute of Traffic and Transportation Engineers Manual, "Fundamentals of Traffic Engineer - ing. State highways'and-arterial streets were exempt from this'standard. The exempted streets should include those shown as major streets'on the-latest adopted'Street and Highway Plan,Map of the City of San Luis Obispo as amended through January, 1971 by City Planning Commis- sion Resolution No: 2140. Any future project generating less than 100 average trips per day would be exempt from Ordinance 604 procedures. SOCIAL FACILITIES No recommended standard. LIBRARY FACILITIES No recommended standard. SCHOOLS The availability of school facilities should be considered critical when a proposed project was more'than one'mile from an elementary school when measured in a straight line. An exception to this standard would be in the event the School District advised the City that overburdening would result if additional projects were developed. JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL No recommended standard. SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL No recommended standard-. 1 I 1 1 City Council Minutes November 14, 1974 Page 5 PARKS AND OPEN SPACE Any proposed development project should be within a half mile radius of an acceptable recreation facility, either City, School or joint facility, capable of providing a full scope neighborhood recreational opportunity for physical, mental and social welfare of City residents. LAND USE BY CATEGORY No development proposal.should be approved unless it was consistent with the land use and density designation of the General Plan and the zoning category currently in effect, whichever was more restrictive. Where the General Plan and zoning were determined to be inconsistent, any development proposal shall only be considered subsequent to General Plan revision or rezoning hearing procedures to resolve inconsistencies. David Williamson concluded that it was the staff's recommendation that the City Council adopt the standards as presented and that the wording for Ordinance 604 be revised as necessary. The City Council discussed with staff each of the proposed criteria and standards in detail with the appropriate staff member submitting additional background on each item. Mayor Schwartz stated after the presentation by staff that the City Council was now getting a look at the City's resources that had never been seen before, a detailed and comprehensive picture of the City's facilities and their potential and capability. He concluded by stating that the discussion of criteria and standards was what was needed to put Ordinance 604 in perspective. Mayor Schwartz asked the City staff to refine each standard for consideration by the City Council at the November 18, 1974 Council meeting. Councilman Norris asked that the refined standards be submitted with the regular Council agenda, so that the Council would have some time prior to the November 18 meeting for study and review. On motion of Councilman Brown, seconded by Councilman Gurnee the meeting adjourned. APPROVED: December 16, 1974 /�Jrick, City Clerk