HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/14/19741
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