HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 9150 N.C.S. 05/04/1981-y
,,, - ~ ~
PL K:ad 5-4-~1
Resolution No. 91'5o N. C. S.
~ of the City of Petaluma, Galifornia
A RESOLUTION AMEN'DIN'G RESO:LUTION N0, 8700 N~:'G.S: TO INCREASE
INTERIM'SCHOOL FA'CILITIES CNAR~ES.
WHEREAS, Resoluti;on No:`8700 N.G.S.~-adopted interim School Facilities
charges in; certain ov,ercrowded atten;dance a re'as in the Old Adobe Union School
Di.stri ct,~ and . ' , . . ,' . ' -.
WHEREAS; costs of providing~'inte`rim school'facilities have increased
since the passage of sai°d'Resolut'ion No. '8700 on October 15, 1979;
NOW, THERE•FORE, BE IT RES~LVED that Inte:rim $chool Facilities charges
for the Bernard Eldri>dge and O1d Adobe School~s attendance areas are hereby
increased from $909 per dwellina`unit to $1175 per dwellin.g unt, which charges
are hereby found to be the reasonable proportionate cos~t of aroviding said
i~nterim school faci l i ti es , an.d ~
BE IT FURTHER P.ESOLVED that the dedication charges established t~y
s;aid Resolution No. 8700 N.C.S. and by Resolution No. 8712 N.C.S. are to re-
main unchanged.
.
~ Under "the power and authoriry conferred ppon tfiis ;Council by the Charter of said City.
I hereby certify the foregoing, Resolution was iritroduced and adopted. by the
Council of the Gity of Petaluma at a(.Regular),,.(~(~~~~Q~~~, .meeang P roved as to
~ om Che --••--•-~•~•~•••••--• day of .............••~Q~/.... ...:.... ..--.._..._, 19_.c2~.,'by the rm
,
' following vote: ..........-•-••. ........-•-•-••••••....
City Attorney
AYES: Counci lmen Perry, Bond, Balshaw, Cqvanagh, ~lavor Mattei
rroES: None
~,ssENT: B a ' a~ H a rb ~ n -~ ,. , ~ ~
. ; ~. ~~~ ,~
. .--- ,..,., .. .....
A'I"PEST: _..--- ~ - ---. ..... .......... - _• - •• ------~---~--~----~--------•---•-•-•--- ~--- -... .... ---. . ..
' City Clerk ~ Mayor .
~ COUNCIL FILE .
F.ORM' CA 2 `1/80~ Res.'Nb. ' ~
By - J'o e _ Mye,rS
2 / 1" 1 /'81
. ,-,
~.
~ . MITIGATION FEE SCHEDIJLE. ANALYSIS
(Per Portable Classroom)
5-Year End.of
Purchase Lease Lease
Plan Plan Purchase.
l.. Pl ann.i ag
1.1 Architect Fees
1.2 Plan Check Fees
1.3 State Building Lease
~
2. Constr`uction .
2.1 lJtility Hook-Up
2.2 Fortable, Delivery, Site
Preparation Installation
If Over 3% Grade
2.3. Materials Testing
2.4 I~nterest
,
2.5 Air Conditioning
2.6 Carpet
~
2.7 Extra Door '
i
2.8 E'xtra Window
2.9 Sink and Base
2.10 Cabinets
2.11 Ramp, Rail, Deck
I .
3. Inspecltion
4. Furnis,hings/Fire Alarm/
Commun'.ication System
5. Utilities Per Year
6. Toilet Facilities
(add. ~unit - 20' x 30')
(200 p:upils and staff)
Loadin:g per portable classroom = 28
Total Planning
Total Construction
Total Inspection
Pupil generation factor K-6 = .5
Purchase: ~Needed' re"venue per permit: ~~2824 x.5 = 1;259
Lease: Needed revenue per permit:~ 652852 x.5 = 1,1'75
$ 1,515 $ 1,515
200 200
-0- -0-
1,7T7 1,715
1,250* 1,250*
33,752 29,080 11,264
545 545
400 400
.. -0- -0-
865 865
1,190 1,190
650 650
432 432
65~0 650
2,275 2,275
1 ,6'25 1 ,625
43,634 38,962 11,264
400 400
4,350 4,350
1,0,625 10,625
9,800 9,800
70,524 65,852 11,264
*~1,250 is the average pr.ice for installat~on per six units ($3,350 for first unit plus
$830 each for other units installed at the same time.) ~ ~
NOTE: Not included is any cost for acquisition of an approVed site(s),
. REQUEST T0; 7NE PETALUPIA CITY COU[~CIL FOR IMPLEME~JTATIO~J OF MITIGA7ION ORDINANCE AND
1~'~?L~~1E-NTA~~;ION 13U1LDTNG PERMIT FEE SCHEDULE
- ~.
Due to an anticiPated influx of school children from present and anticipated new housi.ng,
a sta:te of overcrowding exis'ts for both 8ernard El:d'redge and Old Adobe Elementary Schools:
17.28-070 A.
~g
I
~,
~
i
i
~~-
I
OVERCROWDING ~ ~
Enrollmen t as of ~
Ma rch 2, 1981
Total overall unused space
among al] seven levels per
school:
REASONABLE MITI;GATION DONE:
~
Bernard Eldredge Old Adobe
K 50 29
1 52 27
2 56 29
3 59 30
4 64 31
5 64 30
6 61 32
406 208
28 seats 9 seats
For elementary schools proposed„ all site.s,pace, usable for classroom
instruction, are presently being so occuPied to meet the curriculum and
pupil services required by the District. Closets and storerooms in
several cases.a;re also being used for small group instruction and
special pupil se'rvices.
It is the direction of the School Board that there is currently no known
way to reduce this condition of overc,rowding.
17.28080 ~
~
IA. See above
B. See attached eharts -
1) Survey of actual pupil increase res;ulti.:ng from nearby new housing
developments.
2) Antic`ipated pupil increase for current proposed new housing.
C. The resident'ial, development caus~ing the, cla~ssroom overcrowding includes
both single family residenees and multi-fam'ily residences. (Identifies
on enclosed charts,) All of these exPected developments have received
city approval for development.