Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 02/09/1999 *PUBLIC REVIEW COPY f lease do not remove AGENDA kmcounter ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL MFTING TUESDAY, February 9,1999 City of Ataseadero 6500 Palma Avenue,4`h floor Atascadero,California REGULAR SESSION, 7:00 P.M.: PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Council Member Clay ROLL CALL: Mayor Johnson Mayor Pro Tem Arrambide Council Member Clay Council Member Lerno Council Member Luna APPROVAL OFAGENDA: Roll Call PRESENTATION 1. Proclamatio : Proclaiming February 23, 1999 "Spay Day USA" 2. Recognition of Former Parks and Recreation Commissioners, Jerrie Dahlen, Dan Davis and Joanne f leters. 3. Recognition of Former Planning Commissioner Michael Sauter. COMMUNITY FORUM: (This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wanting to address the Council on any matter not on this agenda and over which the Council has jurisdiction. Speakers are limited to five minutes. Ple se state your name and address for the record before making your presentation. The Council may take action to direct the staff to place a matter of business on a future agenda.) COUNCIL ANNO CEMENTS AND REPORTS: (On their own initi Live, Council Members may make a brief announcement or a brief report on their own activities. Council Members may ask a question for clarification, make a referral to staff or take action to have staff place a matter of business on a future agenda. No formal action by the Council will e taken unless an'item is identified on the Agenda) A. CONSENT CALENDAR: Roll Call (All items on the consent calendar are considered to be routine and non-controversial by City staff and will be approved by one motion if no member of the Council or public wishes to comment or ask questions. If comment or discussion is desired by anyone, the item will be removed from the consent calendar and will be considered in the listed sequence with an opportunity for any member of the public to address the Council concerning the item before action is taken) 1. City Council Minutes - January 12, 1999 - (City Clerk recommendation: Approve the City Council minutes of January 12, 1999) [Marcia McClure Torgerson] 2. Before and After School Child Care - Memorandum of Understanding with the Atascadero Unified School District Fiscal Impact: None (Staff recommendation: Council authorize the Mayor to execute an agreement with the Atascadero Unified School District for the purpose of providing consultation services the School District Child Care Program) [Brady Cherry] B. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. The Lakes - Amendments to the General Plan Land Use and Zoning Maps and zoning text, plus subdivision map to allow development of a 142 acre site with 122 homes, 2 large lakes,and related amenities (Davis Ranch, 3900 Traffic Way: Midland Pacific) - Fiscal Impact $40,000 over 10 years, to pay for itself after about 20 years - (Staff recommendation: 1) Council adopt Resolution No: 1999-0I1, certifying the Environmental Impact Report (EIR); and 2) Council adopt Resolution No. 1999-012, approving General Plan Amendment 97001, changing the land use designation of the site from Suburban Single Family to Moderate Density Single Family, and extending the Urban Services Line (USL) to include the site; and 3) Council adopt Ordinance No. 357, on first reading by title only, approving Zone Change 97002, changing the zoning of the site from Residential Suburban (RS) to Residential Single Family (RSF-19, and adopting Planning Development Overlay Zone No. 14; and 4) Council adopt Resolution No. 1999- 013, approving Vesting Tentative Tract Map 97003 based on findings and subject to conditions) [Paul Saldana] C. MANAGEMENT REPORTS: 1. Mid-Year Budget Review Fiscal Impact: The proposed adjustments increase General Fund Revenues by$378,370 and appropriations by$193,375. Revenues for other funds are to be increased by $1,713,475 and appropriations by $2035,846 (Staff recommendation: Council adopt Resolution No. 1999-014 amending the 1998-99 Budget (Resolution No. 1998-030)) [Rachelle Rickard] 2. City Council 1999 Meeting Schedule - Fiscal Impact: None (Staff recommendation.- Council ecommendation.Council approve City Council meeting schedule for 1999) [Wade McKinney] 3. Traffic Committee 'Review - Fiscal Impact: None (Staff recommendation: Council disband the Traffic Committee) [Wade McKinney] 2 4. Information Bulletin D. COMMITTEE REPORTS (The following represent standing committees. Informative status reports will be given, as felt necessary): 1. S.L.O. Counc'1 of Governments/S.L.O. Regional Transit Authority 2. Finance Com nittee 3. Water Comm tees A. SLO ounty Flood Control & Water Conservation District Water Resources Advis' ry Committee B. Naci iento Water Purveyors' Contract Technical Advisory Committee C. North County Water Task Force 4. Integrated Waste Management Authority 5. North Count Council 6. Air Pollution Control District 7. County May is Round Table 4. Economic Vitality Corporation, Board of Directors 5. City/ Schools Committee 10. Economic Or portunity Commission E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION: 1. City Council 2. City Attorne 3. City Clerk 4. City Treasurer F. ADJOURNMENT: THE COUNCIL WILL ADJOURN TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY- MEETING IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING THIS MEETING. Please note: Shou d anyone challenge any proposed development entitlement listed on this Agenda in court, that person may be limited to raising those issues addressed at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at or prior to this public h oaring. 3 City of Atascadero WELCOME TO THE ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL MEETING GENERAL INFORMATION N The City Council meets in regular session on the second and fourth Tuesday of each month at 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chamber of City Hall. 'Matters are considered by the Council in the order of the printed Agenda. Copies of the staff reports or other documentation relating to each item of business referred to on the Agenda are on file in the office of the City Clerk(Room 208),and in the Information Office(Room 103), available for public inspection during City Hall business hours. An agenda packet is also available for public review at the Atascadero Library,6850 Morro Road. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act,if you need special assistance to participate in a City meeting or other services offered by this City,please contact the City Manager's Office,(805) 461-5010,or the City Clerk's Office,(805)461-5074. Notification at least 48 hours prior to the meeting or time when services are needed will assist the City staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility to the meeting or service. TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEMS Members of the audience may speak on any item on the agenda. The Mayor will identify the subject, staff will give their report, and the Council will ask questions of staff. The Mayor will announce when the public comment period is open and will request anyone interested to address the Council regarding the matter being considered to step up to the podium. If you wish to speak for,against or comment in any way: • You must approach the podium and be recognized by the Mayor • Give your name and address • Make your statement • All comments should be made to the Mayor and Council • All comments limited to 5 minutes(unless changed by the Council) • No one may speak for a second time until everyone wishing to speak has had an opportunity to do so,and no one may speak more than twice on any item. The Mayor will announce when the public comment period is closed, and thereafter,no further public comments will be heard by the Council. TO SPEAK ON SUBJECTS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA Under Agenda item,"COMMUNITY FORUM",the Mayor will call for anyone from the audience having business with the Council to: • Please approach the podium and be recognized • Give your name and address • State the nature of your business This is the time items not on the Agenda may brought to the Council's attention. A maximum of 30 minutes will be allowed for Community Forum(unless changed by the Council). TO HAVE ITEMS PLACED ON AGENDA All business matters to appear on the Agenda must be in the Office of the City Manager ten days preceding the Council meeting. Should you have a matter you wish to bring before the Council,please mail or bring a written communication to the City Manager's office in City Hall prior to the deadline. - S "SPA YDAY USA'; Febr' 23, 1999 WHEREAS-Dogs;and cats give companionship to and share the ho es of over 50,000,000 individuals in the United States;and = WHE Two unaltered cats and'their kittens can produce-426:0 0 6 more cats in seven years, and two until red dogs and their.puppies can produce 0,000 more dogs an siz years and WHEREAS, Humane societies,and shelters.''euthanize 8 to 10 million dogs and.,cats each year, although man 'of them are healthy and adoptable, simply because there ari not enough good homes;and - WHEREA The problem o com anion animal over o ulation costs the,tax ers o this P f. P P P Pal'. f country millions o dollars annually through,,animal control programs aimed'at'coping with the millions of ujjwantet 1,dogs and cats;and TMEMS, Spaying and neutering dogs and cats has been shown to drastically reduce dog and cat over popul ion;and . WHEREAS', Veterinarians, humane societies and national and local animal,protection organizations worked together to ensure the spaying or neutering of more than 108,000 companion animals through "S ay Day'USA"in 1998; WHEREAS,. Veterinarians, humane societies and :national local animal protection organizations have joined together again to, advocate the spaying and neutering of companion animals during."Sp' Day USA 1999 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Atascadero City Council, that,February 23, 1999 is designated "Spay USA" The Mayor`' is authorized- ,and.requested_:fo issue a proclamation callin upon the people of Atascadero to observe the month by having their own dogs or cats spayed or neutered or by sponsoring the spaying or ,neuter a ' er p rson',s dog or cat . w Ra Joh so��dr46-�tasC `:',Dated•-February 9, 999 o00o01 ITEM NUMBER: A - 1 DATE: 02/09/99 MINUTES ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY,JANUARY 12, 1999 PLANNING COMMISSION INTERVIEWS, 5:15 P.M. The City Council interviewed seven of the eight candidates on the interview schedule. William Bright had pulled h s application from the recruitment. All Council Members were present. Kimberly Jcanes was appointed to complete the term vacated by Mike Arrambide when he was elected to the City Council. This term expires February 2001. Royce Eddi gs and Hal Carden were appointed to new terms of four years, expiring in February 20 3. REGULAR SESSION, 7:00 P.M.: Mayor Johnson call,-d the Regular Session to order at 7:00 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: Present: Council Members Arrambide, Clay, Lerno, Luna and Mayor Johnson Absent: None Others Present: City Clerk Marcia Torgerson and City Treasurer David G. Graham Staff Present: City Manager Wade McKinney, Police Chief Dennis Hegwood, Fire Chief Mike McCain, Community Services Director Brady Cherry, Administrative Services Director Rachelle Rickard, Community and Economic Development Director Paul Saldana and City Attorney Roy Hanley. APPROVAL OF A ENDA: MOTION: By Council Member Luna and seconded by Council Member Clay to approve the agenda. Motion passed S.0 by a roll-call vote. Mayor Johnson asked the City Clerk to read the results of the Planning Commission interviews. CC 01./12/99 00002 Page 1 of 10 ITEM NUMBER:—A - 1 DATE: 02/09/99 City Clerk Marcia McClure Torgerson announced that Kimberly Jeanes was appointed to complete the term vacated by Mike Arrambide when he was elected to the City Council. This term expires February 2001. Ms. Torgerson also announced that Royce Eddings and Hal Carden were appointed to new terms of four years, expiring in February 2003. COMMUNITY FORUM: Judy Murphy, 9320 Santa Clara Road, expressed her concerns for not being noticed when the Eagle Creek project was proposed. She stated that the lights impact many neighbors including those across the freeway from the project. She read a prepared statement expressing her concerns. (see Attachment A) Eric Greening, 6600 Lewis Ave., stated that for those who want to design lighting that does not impact others,they,should contact The International Dark Sky Association which is supported by both professional and amateur astronomers. He also stated that Graves Creek Road shows us that when we resurface a road we should also target that road for speed control. William Bright, 11875 Santa Lucia Road, stated that he doesn't want to see the Council fight for the next 2 years over who is right about what is good for'Atascadero. He asked the Council to work together and inform the public and educate them on the issues before them. (see Attachment B) Mike Murphy, 9320 Santa Clara Road, stated that he is being physically impacted by the lights from Eagle Creek. He asked about the engineer's report on the mitigation of the lights. Mr. Murphy expressed his view that the City is stalling and avoiding compliance with City ordinances and CEQA. Tina Salter, 4080 San Antonio Road, spoke in opposition of the lights of Eagle Creek. She stated that the lights are better than they were last summer,but still not acceptable. She read a prepared statement expressing her concerns. (see Attachment C) William Bowman, 13105 Atascadero Road, stated that he lives next to the driving range at Eagle Creek Golf Course. He explained that golf balls are constantly invading his property. He said that he returned 1,000 golf balls to the driving range today. Mayor Johnson interrupted Mr. Bowman to state that this item is on the agenda and he should speak at that time. Mayor Johnson closed the Community Forum period. COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REPORTS: Council Member Luna asked for staff to give the Council an update on the lighting issue of Eagle Creek. Community and Economic Development Director Paul Saldana stated that the City has had a difficult time finding a lighting expert that would be able to evaluate the lighting at the golf course. He said that he has requested a lighting analysis and expects the results by the end of this 000003 CC 01/12/99 Page 2 of 10 ITEM NUMBER: A - 1 DATE: 02/09/99 week. There was disc ssion about what the City's standards are for lighting and what the analysis will tell us. Council Member Lun shared with the Council that Governor Davis' budget includes the COPS program which is $10 million per year to law enforcement. Mr. Davis' proposal is that this money would be divic ed among the cities on a per capita basis. He explained that the counties are against this proposal. Council Member Luna suggested that the League of California Cities and Atascadero should lobby for it. Council Member Luna stated that Governor Davis is talking about restoring the ERAF monies. It is estimated that the discussions on this issue will take 3 years. Council Member Luna said that Governor Davis stated in his fiscal plan that State and local officials should study whether the State's system of distributing sales tax based on where it is generated, rather than by population, hampers sound land use planning. Council Member Luna stated that he agrees with this opinion. Council Member Luna said that there will be billions of dollars coming from the Federal government to buy parks and open space under the heading of Smart Growth. He stated that he feels it is important fo' Atascadero to get in on this quickly. He said that the City of San Luis Obispo is 8 years ahead of us on this issue. City Manager Wade McKinney stated that Mr. Saldana is attending the Smart Growth Summit in Sacramento. Also, the San Luis Obispo City Manager has offered the assistance of their Natural Resource Specialist to help Atascadero with grants for open space. Mayor Johnson sugge 3ted that Atascadero stay on top of the COPS issue by sending a letter. He asked staff to write th letter for his signature. Council Member Clay stated that on January 31'there will be a Super Bowl Blowout and he invited everyone to chaperone for this program. A. CONSENT CALENDAR: Roll Call 1. Cily Council Minutes—November 24, 1998 - (City Clerk recommendation: Approve) [Marcia McClure Torgerson] 2. Citv Council Minutes—December 8, 1998 - (City Clerk recommendation: Approve) [Marcia McClure Torgerson] 3. September 1998 Accounts Pa able & Pa roll—Fiscal Impact: $1,045,125.17 (Staff recomm'ndation: Review and approve) 4. October 1998 Accounts Pa able & Pa roll—Fiscal Impact: $1,026,507.82 (Staff recommendation: Review and approve) 000004 CC 01/12/99 Page 3 of 10 ITEM NUMBER: A — 1 DATE: 02/09/99 5. Establishment of 2-Hour Parking Zone on a portion of Traffic Way—Fiscal Impact: $400 (Traffic Committee recommendation: Council adopt Resolution No. 1999-005 designating a portion of Traffic Way as a 2-hour Parking Zone) [Brady Cherry] 6. Authorization to Purchase Transit Vehicle—From State Department of General Services —Fiscal Impact: $45,879.00 (80%will be funded through an Urban Mass Transit Assistance Grant and 20% through the local Transportation Development Act funds) (Staff recommendation: Council adopt Resolution No. 1999-009, authorizing the State Department of General Services to purchase a 22 passenger accessible bus for the City of Atascadero) [Brady Cherry] 7. Unreinforced Masonry Building Ordinance -Amendment of Time Limits for Compliance —Fiscal Impact: None (Staff recommendation: Council adopt Ordinance No. 356 on second reading by title only, extending the time limits for compliance with the Unreinforced Masonry Building regulations) [Paul Saldana] 8. Acceptance of Final Parcel Map#98011 —Divide two (2) existing lots into a total of three (3)new parcels (11750 San Marcos Road/Lindsey) - Fiscal Impact: None (Staff recommendation: Council accept the Final Map) [Paul Saldana] Council Member Luna pulled Item#A-7 and Rush Kolemaine pulled Item#A-6 MOTION: By Council Member Clay and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Arrambide to approve Items #A-1,2,3, 4, 5 and 8. Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. RE: Item A-6: Rush Kolemaine, P.O. Box 1990, stated he had concerns about what type of bus the City was going to purchase. Mr. Cherry responded that the vehicle is a V-10. He stated that the V-10 gets as good of mileage as the V-8 vehicles we already have in service. Council Member Clay asked for clarification of the signage on the buses and benches. Community Services Director Brady Cherry explained that we will probably go out to bid and come back to the Council with policy recommendations and the bid package. MOTION: By Council Member Luna and seconded by Council Member Clay to approve Item#A-6. Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. RE: Item A-7: Council Member Luna asked if there are any businesses in the City that are compliant or are they waiting for the City to come into compliance. City Attorney Roy Hanley responded that Diamond's Adult World is the only building in town that is in compliance. Council Member Clay asked if when someone sells their commercial building,they are required to bring the building up to the standard. Mr. Saldana responded that it depends on if they have CC 01/12/99 000005 Page 4 of 10 ITEM NUMBER: A — 1 DATE: 02/09/99 done the initial engineering work which needs to be submitted with their building permit application for review MOTION: By Council Member Luna and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Arrambide to approve Item#A-7. Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. B. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. Conditional Use Permit#98013 — 13000 Atascadero Road/Gearhart—Appeal of Planning Commission d' cision—Fiscal Impact: Negligible (Staff recommendation: Council adopt Resolution No. 1999-008, approving the appeal and Conditional Use Permit #98013 subjecr to certain conditions) [Rachelle Rickard] Mayor Johnson announced that Council Member Clay will be stepping down on this item as a result of a new ruling of a potential conflict because of the real estate agency he works for. Mayor Johnson also ai inounced that Council Member Lerno will be stepping down on this item due to a potential financial conflict. Community and Econ mic Development Director Paul Saldana gave the staff report and answered questions of Council. Council Member Luna asked what is proposed if this doesn't work. Mr. Saldana responded that the City would re-eva uate the conditional use permit. Mayor Johnson asked if this extension will be engineered to stand wind force. Mr. Saldana stated that the action requested tonight is simply the variance to allow for the extension. We still have the issue of the building permit and whether or not the building official would actually approve the extensionbased on the structure that is proposed. Mayor Pro Tem Arrar ibide asked if the extension does not remedy the problem, will the City have the authority to rescind the permit. Mr. Saldana responded, yes the Council can review and revoke the Condition se Permit. Council Member Luna asked if netting could be put over the top of the driving range. Mr. Saldana responded, yes that would be a possibility. PUBLIC COMMENT John Falkenstein, C on Associates, stated that he represents Mr. Gearhart concerning this issue and is available to answer questions. William Bowman, 13105 Atascadero Road, stated he lives next door to the golf course. He is severely impacted by golf balls daily on his property including damage to vehicles. He expressed concern for his family's safety and the liability issue if someone is injured. CC 01/12/99 000006 Page 5 of 10 ITEM NUMBER: A - 1 DATE: 02/09/99 Mike Murphy, 9320 Santa Clara Road, stated that this is a health and safety issue that needs to be addressed. He said that there are alternatives to solve this problem that the Council needs to consider. Mr. Murphy read a prepared statement expressing his concerns. (see Attachment D) Jennifer Hageman, 8005 Santa Lucia Road, stated that she would like to see a non-netting solution to this problem. Judy Murphy, 9320 Santa Clara Road, stated that if this matter had been reviewed by the Council, it wouldn't be an issue now. Ms. Murphy read a prepared statement expressing her concerns. (see Attachment E) Mayor Johnson closed the Public Comment period. Council Member Luna stated that he agreed that this is a health and safety issue. He also asked if the existing banner is in violation of the sign ordinance. Mr. Saldana responded yes. Council Member Luna stated that he could support putting netting across the top of the driving range. He made a motion to deny the Conditional Use Permit for extending the poles and approving the covering of the driving range with netting instead. The motion died for lack of a second. Mayor Johnson stated that he supports solving this problem. He felt that 70 foot poles and netting might be the solution. If not,the Applicant will have to come up with a solution. Mayor Pro Tem Arrambide said that the banner is in violation along with many others in Atascadero. He went on to say that if the City is going to enforce the sign ordinance in this instance,then we need to enforce it everywhere. MOTION: By Mayor Pro Tem Arrambide and seconded by Mayor Johnson to adopt Resolution No. 1999-008, approving the appeal and Conditional Use Permit#98013 subject to certain conditions. Motion passed 2:1 bya roll-call vote. (Luna opposed, Clay& Lerno abstained) C. MANAGEMENT REPORTS: 1. 1998 Audit Report— (Staff recommendation: Council review and accept the audit report for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1998) [Rachelle Rickard] Administrative Services Director Rachelle Rickard gave the staff report and answered questions of Council. There was no Public Comment. CC 01/12/99 000007 Page 6 of 10 ITEM NUMBER: A - 1 DATE: 02/09/99 MOTION: By Council Member Luna and seconded by Council Member Clay to accept the audit report for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1998. Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. 2. Purchase of Fi' ancial System and Parcel Management Software-Fiscal Impact: $260,145.00 taff recommendation: Council adopt Resolution No. 1999-010 authorizing th City Manager to negotiate and the Mayor to execute a contract with Eden Systems for Fi' ancial Systems and Parcel management/Permitting software) [Rachelle Rickard] Ms. Rickard gave the staff report and answered questions of Council and the City Treasurer. There was no Public Comment. MOTION: By Council Member Lerno and seconded by Council Member Clay to adopt Resolution No. 1999-010 authorizing the City Manager to negotiate and the Mayor to execute a contract with Eden Systems for Financial Systems and Parcel management/Permitting software. Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. 3. Planning Commission Questionnaires— (Staff recommendation: Review questionnaires and take action as appropriate) [Wade McKinney] Mayor Johnson stated that Council requested that staff send out a questionnaire to the Planning Commissioners undei his signature which was done and responded to. There was no Public Comment. Council Member Lu stated that he feels that the Council and Commission need to meet on a regular basis to let the Commission know the Council's preferences. Mayor Johnson agreed that regular meetings with the Commission are critical. Council Member Le o made a motion to replace Commissioner Hageman with one of the candidates interviewed earlier tonight. There was no second. Mayor Johnson stated that the Council had agreed to review the Planning Commissioner's questionnaires and ei her affirm or not affirm each member. He recommended that the Council do that first to see where each Council Member stands on the issue. Mayor Johnson handed out a Planning Commissioner Review sheet to each Council Member and asked that they check off their preferences, sign the sheet, and he will have the City Clerk read the results. Council Member C1a asked the City Attorney if the Council is proceeding appropriately. Mr. Hanley responded that the Planning Commissioners do serve at the pleasure of the City Council. CC 01/12/99 000008 Page 7 of 10 ITEM NUMBER: A — 1 DATE: 02/09/99 The City Clerk announced the results of the Planning Commissioner review: Alfred Clark— Affirmed by all Council Members Royce Eddings— Affirmed by all Council Members Roberta Fonzi— Affirmed by all Council Members Jennifer Hageman— Affirmed by Council Members Clay and Luna, Not affirmed by Council Members Arrambide, Johnson and Lemo Michael Sauter- Affirmed by all Council Members Bill Zimmerman - Affirmed by Council Members Clay, Johnson, Lerno and Luna Not affirmed by Council Member Arrambide MOTION: By Council Member Lerno and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Arrambide to remove Jennifer Hageman from the Planning Commission. Motion passed 3:2 by a roll-call vote. (Clay& Luna opposed) Mayor Johnson suggested that the Council fill the new vacancy on the Planning Commission by voting for one of the remaining candidates from the Planning Commission Interviews earlier this evening. There was Council consensus to fill this vacancy by voting for one of the remaining Planning Commission candidates. David Bentz was appointed to fill the vacancy created by the removal of Jennifer Hageman. This term expires February 2000. 4. Fire Department Fee Schedule—Fiscal Impact: None (Staff recommendation: Council rescind Resolution No. 84-92, amend Resolution No. 90-92, Section 6.2 and update the Fire Department Fee Schedule by adopting Resolution No. 1999-006) [Mike McCain] Fire Chief Mike McCain gave the staff report and answered questions of Council. There was no Public Comment. MOTION: By Council Member Luna and seconded by Council Member Clay to rescind Resolution No. 84-92, amend Resolution No. 90-92, Section 6.2 and update the Fire Department Fee Schedule by adopting Resolution No. 1999-006. Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. 5. Information Bulletin City Manager Wade McKinney explained the Santa Barbara County orderly growth proposal. He also expressed his concern with the progress of the Transit Consolidation Study through SLOCOG. CC 01/12/99 000009 Page 8 of 10 ITEM NUMBER: A - 1 DATE: 02/09/99_ D. COMMITTE REPORTS Mayor Johnson handed out to the Council his appointments ointments to the committees. He stated that y some of the committees need to be reviewed and the Council needs to decide if all are still needed. S.L.O. Council of Governments/S.L.O. Rej4ional Transit Authorit Mayor Johnson said that their last meeting was an orientation meeting. Water Committees Council Member Clay stated that the Water Company has the clout, not the City. Integrated Waste Management Authorit Council Member Luna said that they meet tomorrow. North Counly Council Mayor Johnson said that they meet on an ad hoc basis. He stated that he feels the homeless issue is going to become a r orth county issue that we will have to address. The County program up .until now was to trans' ort the homeless to the shelter in San Luis Obispo. The cold weather this year has brought overcrowding to that shelter and brought up the need for a north county shelter. Air Pollution Control District Council Member Lemo said that they discussed their budget at the last meeting. County Mayor's Rou 'd Table Mayor Johnson said tl at they will meet at the end of the month. Economic Vitality Co oration Board of Directors Mayor Johnson stated that they are discussing working with local businesses. E. INDIVIDUAI, DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION: City Council Council Member Luna asked about the update of the delinquent sewer fees. He asked for a report on how the deli iquent fees were taken care of and how much money we gained or lost. City Attorney Mr. Hanley reminded the Council that Dave Fleishmann is working with him regularly. He also asked the Mayor to appoint a representative from the Council to the Risk Management Committee. Mayor Johnson responded that the Finance Committee representative is also the Risk Management Committee representative. City Clerk Ms. Torgerson offered clarification concerning the Clerk Index that Council Member Luna brought up earlier int the meeting. She explained that the Clerk Index is currently on her computer only. However, it is to be upgraded soon and will then be on the City's server and all CC 01/12/99 000010 Page 9 of 10 ITEM NUMBER: A - 1 DATE: 02/09/99 employees will have access. It will also later be available on the web site. Mayor Johnson asked about the status of the upcoming vacancies on the Parks and Recreation Commission. Ms. Torgerson responded that she is advertising now for the four vacancies and will be setting up the interviews with the Council on January 26, 1999. City Treasurer Mr. Graham announced that there will be a Finance Committee meeting within the next 2 weeks. F. ADJOURNMENT: Mayor Johnson adjourned the Regular Session to the Redevelopment Agency Meeting at 9:55 p.m. and the Council will reconvene immediately following the Redevelopment Agency Meeting for Closed Session. CLOSED SESSION: 1) Conference with negotiator over real property. (Govt. Code 54956.8) Negotiator: City Manager Wade McKinney Property: Mr. & Mrs. Hensley, 9085 Morro Road 2) Conference with negotiator over real property. (Govt. Code 54956.8) Negotiator: City Manager Wade McKinney Property: 6500 Palma Ave. Mayor Johnson adjourned the Closed Session at 10:20 p.m. to the next Regular Session of the City Council scheduled on January 26, 1999. City Attorney Roy Hanley announced that there was no action taken. MEETING RECORDED AND MINUTES PREPARED BY: Marcia McClure Torgerson, City Clerk Attachments: Prepared statement by Judith Murphy, dated January 12, 1999 Prepared statement by William Bright, dated January 12, 1999 Prepared statement by Tina Salter, dated January 12, 1999 Prepared statement by Michael Murphy, dated January 12, 1999 Prepared statement by Judith Murphy, dated January 12, 1999 CC 01/12/99 000011 Page 10 of 10 Attachment: A Atascadero City Council Meeting Date: 1/12/99 Staff and City Council January 12, 1999 On August 25th the City Council discussed the driving range lights in their meeting. During the public comment a lady stated that the responsibility was on the residents that were affected by the lights,we could have reviewed the plans during the permit phase of the project. I found this statement interesting—how can you review projects without notice. Until July 31, when the lights first came on we did not know that the driving range would be lighted. There are not any other lighted driving ranges in the county. Even if the driving range were lighted surely there are city codes that would protect surrounding citizens. We live over '/z mile away from the driving range! In the future, I arantee that I will be in the building department demanding information if I see so much as an overturned stone within one mile of my home. At that same meeting 'everal councilmen stated that the problem was in fact a small one and could be easily correctd. It's been 5 months, if it was so easy to correct why haven't we seen any real improvement! After months of trying to get information ourselves, it has taken our lawyer over 2 months just to get a chronology of ev nts. Under state law this should have been provided to us within 10 days after our first request as made. No one can state that flie lighting ordinance is being met. The lights are not supposed to leave the property. The dri 'ng range lights are invading the Bowmans residence, the Kerschens residence, and the field in front of our property and our home. The lights also spill on to the properties along San 0.ntonio Road.. Santa Clara Road and San Antonio Road are still not safe, drivers cannot see peo le walking along the road when the driving range lights come into view. The light source is supposed to be shielded from view. I don't believe anyone can honestly state that this has been accomplished. You can see the actual light bulbs (there are 9 of them) from all the properties previously mentioned. I don't know if these ordinances can be met. After looking at the Bowman residence the other night, I have my doubts. I have always wanted a house in the country. When we purchased our property Michael and I made sure that we were in the interior of an established neighborhood so we would not be drastically affected by eventual changes that would undoubtedly occur. We have spent many hours improving our F roperty along with help from our parents, my late uncle and other friends and family members. We planned to spend the rest of our lives here. Up until the last few months it has truly be n a labor of love. Recently however it has become increasingly difficult, it is hard to work on it There have been times when we have wondered if we will be able to spend the rest of our lives here. The constant bombardment of the intense lights combined with the lack of response o city officials has started to drastically affect the health of both Michael and myself. We no longer have the use of our porch at night and we have to constantly deal with the lights bouncing o the walls throughout the interior of our home. 000012 It has also affected our daughter who cannot understand why a situation like this can exist without the city inforcing their ordinances. It's hard to teach a 1"grader to love, respect and have faith in their community and government when you have lost faith in the governing bodies yourself. I have often wondered whether the city would take so long enforcing their lighting ordinances if the neighbors were shining lights at people using the driving range or at the patrons of the bar. I would like to make it perfectly clear to Mr. Gerhard that we are not"picking on him". Our comments are directed toward you. It is your job and duty to enforce and uphold your lighting codes and to follow CEQA guidelines. So far we have no evidence of this occurring. In closing, since many of you have stated that you are of the Christian faith, I thought I would share averse Bridget has been learning..."Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself". In other words you should follow the golden rule to"do unto others as you would have them do unto you. How would you want governing officials to handle the situation if you found yourself in our shoes? You never know,we never thought we would be in this situation ourselves. Think about it 000013 Attachment: B Atascadero City Council Meeting Date: 1/12/99 January 12, 1999 After attending the fust Planning Commission and especially the first City Council meeting after the election, I got to thinking.. I enjoy attending these meetings and learning how our city government works , but I don't want to spend the next couple of years listening to the two sides of the city bicker about every little thing that you try to do. I keep hearing that the City Council must have this big secret agenda that they want to grease through. Before I go any fluther, I'd like to admit that I didn't vote for either of the two new council members. Its not that I don't think you have the best interests of Atascadero in mind, its just that I'm not comfortable with what I think you want to do. I strongly considered voting for Mike but in the end I didn't really know enough about how he would serve. And that is the is gue. Mike and I talkedat length before the election about Dove Creek. He explained some of his rational for supporting the project and most of what he said gave me food for thought. Where before I didn't support it,now I'm not sure. Which brings me to my point. You all obviously have a definite plan for Atascadero for the next couple of years. You c either ram it through or try and convince those who aren't now convinced that the plan makes sense. From what I have heard it seems that the council is considering tailoring the planning commission to better follow your lead. 's coupled with a planning department that is responsive to your requests will definitely make it easer to get those projects that you consider important approved. But if you do it that way I would be willing to bet that 48%of the city will fight you every step of the way and never give you credit for anything good that gets done. If you don't care then I guess that's OK. I think there is a better approach, abet, a harder one for you. That is to give everyone- all the rationale and all the facts for these projects. Mike did that a little in our conversation and it changed my way of thinking. When I say give me the facts, I don't mean the kind of crap that was floating around during the election. On one side we eard, "Dove creek will generate millions of dollars in revenue for the city, solve all our problems, and will make Atascadero the jewel of the central coast". On the other side we heard, "Dove creek will end life as we know it on the entire planet." By facts I mean both good and bad. Each project is going to have a benefit and a cost. Large projects could cost the city some up-front investment and take a while to pay back those c Dsts. Be up front about the hard things and prove your assumptions. I know that you will never convince all the people, but if your plan is really a good one you should be able to convince most of us, and if you're up fron with everything, no one is going to be able to accuse you of trying to sneak anything through. Give us all cre 't for wanting to make Atascadero better also. 000014 Information for everyone is the key. For instance, I think that if the planning commission had been given presentations on redevelopment over the last six months they would have been much more likely to have approved the preliminary report the first time it came to them. I didn't see anyone on the commission really against it,just a lot of folks who didn't know what they were voting for and were.a little afraid to approve something that was going to last for 40 years without knowing all the facts. One way to start the information approach might be to do a column in the paper. Again, no campaigning,just the facts. Another way might be to have presentations by the staff. You could also hold long range planning sessions. I don't mean infomercials like we had last Thursday. According to the speaker, there will be no bad effects on any business in Atascadero as a result of Dove Creek. Anyone can figure out that if a Home Depot opens up in Dove Creek that it will take sales from all the hardware, lumber, tool, plant nursery, plumbing and electrical supply stores for miles around. Home Depot also sells floor and window coverings and provides incentives to contractors. And they can sell it for less than existing stores. So, rather than say it not going to happen, give the real answer, which is what Mike pointed out to me, and that is yes, it is going to happen, but its going to happen no matter where in the north county the Home Depot is located and we might as well keep those sales in Atascadero and keep the sales tax revenues plus draw in sales from Paso, Santa Margarita, Templeton, and maybe even San Luis. Lets talk about these projects and get all the available facts out there for all to see. If they are going to benefit Atascadero, most of us will support them and you. 000015 i __-- __ _ . _ -_Attachment: C -------------"- / Atascadero City Council_ _.. Meeting Date: 1/12/99 f G bt �- _ e/---- V146 J - - - / - - - - - 0000143 --- Attachment: D Atascadero City Council Meeting Date: 1/12/99 January 12, 1999 Atascadero City Council Dear Sirs, Tonight you are reviewing the conditional use permit to allow raising the netting at the Eagle Creek Diving Range. On November 3, 1998 all sitting planning commission members testified that the netting is not only a substantial demonstrable negative esthetic impact on the environment(unsightly), but also doesn't keep the golf balls in the driving range. As I understand the plan is to raise the netting another twenty feet. However, the owner of the driving range has testified to the planning commission he does not know if raising the netting another twenty feet will solve the stray golf ball problem or not.Furthermore, it is my understanding that councilman Clay or one of his associates has told the golf course neighbors that he does not believe raising the netting will solve the problem either. The problem of stray golf balls has knowingly existed to the city since September of last year and the owner of the driving range has had months to research a sound solution to this problem. California law requires the City of Atascadero mitigate the esthetic impact of the netting. However,they have chosen to ignore their responsibilities and not look for a better solution to the netting problem. The bottom line is that no environmental or engineering review has ever been performed on the driving range part of the Eagle Creek development. As councilmen you have sworn an oath to uphold the laws of the land and therefore it is your sworn duty to see that this project complies with all federal, state, and local laws including the California Environmental Quality Act. It is you sworn duty to shut down the driving range part of the Eagle Creek Project until state and local laws can be met. By allowing the driving range to operate and raise their netting you are breaking your oath of office and your own sworn word. Sincerely` Michael S. Murphy 9320 Santa Clara Road Atascadero, Ca 93422 000017 Attachment: E Atascadero City Council Meeting Date: 1/12/99 JANUARY 12, 1999 ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL Dear.Sirs, . I honestly don't know how you can make a decision tonight on the driving range netting without an engineering report. By allowing the engineering report to be done afterward you are basically making a decision with out any facts. No one knows for certain if raising the nets twenty feet will even solve the pro ble No one knows if any structural changes are needed to make the project structurally safe. You,do not have a good track record at this point in time. Maybe if more time had been taken on the front end we would not befacing this problem at this time. In the planning comm ssion meeting held on November 3, 1998 there was a consensus of the commission that the les and netting are ugly. Commissioner Clark stated that"the existing fifty feet of netting was unsightly, and twenty feet would mean that it remains unsightly." .C.E.Q.A. guidelines state that if a project causes a"substantial demonstrative negative esthetic impact"it must be mitigated. Since the original project did not include a driving range no environmental review was ever done on the driving range.If proper analysis was done on the front end instead of fast tracking we woul' not be faced with this problem now. If we had engineering reports on hand stating that this was in fact going to solve the problem and that the finished proje t would be structurally sound I might very well support this item The Bowmans do need.re ief from the deluge of golf balls. The correct thing to do would be to shut the driving range down until the problem could be corrected. If a restaurant has serious problems with rats or cockroaches or if there have been substantial cases of food poisoning the health department shuts them down until the problems are corrected. I know you won't do this, and you will continue to empl y your policy of fast tracking projects while giving lip service to the problems afterwards. I know thecontractois like this policy but I would like to point out that if proper reviews were performed on the fro t end along with public input,the project would have been done correctly the first time which would have been cheaper for everyone involved. erel , J dith K. Rogalld-Mu rOy 320 Santa Clara Roe d. Atascadero, Ca 9342 0000-18 ITEM NUMBER: A - 2 DATE: 02/09/99 • a aia a�® iaia ® i9 e CAD.F,�j City Mana er's Agenda Report Wade G. McKinney Before and After School Child Care - Memorandum of Understanding with the Atascadero Unified School District RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the Mayor to execute an agreement with the Atascadero Unified School District for the purpose of providing Consultation Services to the School District Child-Care Program. i DISCUSSION: The Atascadero Unifie I School District(AUSD)has approached the City of Atascadero Community Services Department to provide consultation services for the purposes of enhancing the AUSD Before andAfter School Programs. Services to be.provided by Community Services to the School District ill include and be limited to staff development training for AUSD Child Care employees, progrun evaluations and recommendation, and curriculum development and design. The City of Atascadero Community Services Department previously provided the Before and After School Programs at five of the Elementary Schools in the Atascadero Unified School District, ending this arrangement in 1997 upon mutual agreement. The transition of the program to the School District has provided gradual improvement to the Before and After School Program,which the School District is seeking to further enhance through this partnership. The School District wishes to utilize the experience and expertise of the Community Services Department, and in p icular Recreation Coordinator Susan Crouch,to assist with program development. The arrangement will benefit the City of Atascadero by covering half of the salary for Susan Crouch, who currently''operates the R.E.C. program, a successful teen After School Program conducted on the camr us of Atascadero Junior High School. Approximately half of Susan Crouch's time will be devoted to the fulfillment of this agreement. The Atascadero Unified School District will pay the City of Atascadero $11,000.00 for the City services. 000019 ITEM NUMBER: A - 2 DATE: 02/09/99 FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of the proposed Memorandum of Understanding will not require any financial support from the City. A ten percent administrative overhead fee has been included in the agreement. ALTERNATIVES: No alternative proposed. RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT: Community Services Department ATTACHMENTS: Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Atascadero and the Atascadero Unified School District 000020 Atascadero Unified School District 5601 WEST MALL • ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA 93422 DISTRICT OFFICE (805)462-4200 FAX (805)466-2941 Dan R.Dodds,Ph.D., Superintendent RECEIVED January 14, 1999 TO: Wade McKinney, City,Manager of Atascadero ATASCADERO CITY MANAGER s FROM: Denis' Tate,Assistant S'' er' tee ent,Personnel RE: Befort &After School Child Care A Mez aorandurn of Understanding Between Atascadero Unified School District and the City o LF Atascadero The Before and After School Child Care Memorandum of Understanding will be considered by the Board of Trustees at is regularly scheduled meeting on Tuesday, January 19, 1999. Included for your information is a opy of the Agenda Item Backup and the proposed agreement between the City and the school distri t. It is my understanding that the City Council will consider the proposed agreement at its mee 'ng on Tuesday, January 26, 1999. If you need additional information regarding the proposal or the backup material,please contact me by telephoning 462-4221 or 462-4215. I look forward to an a mnative response from both the Board of Trustees and members of the City Council DT:pc Attachments: Agenda Item Backup Memorandum of Understanding Carrisa Plains Elementa' • Creston Elementary • Monterey Road Elementary San Benito Road Elementary San Gabriel Road Elementary 4 Santa Margarita Elementary • Santa Rosa Academic Academy • Atascadero Junior High School Atascadero H gh School • Atascadero Adult School • Oak Hills Continuation High School West Mall Alternative School • Westside Continuation High School 000.021 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE ATASCADERO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT AND THE CITY OF ATASCADERO This Agreement is made and entered into this date January 4, 1999, by and between the City of Atascadero, and the Atascadero Unified School District,for the purpose of the City of Atascadero providing services to the District's before and after school child care program. 1. PARTIES 1.1.1 The City of Atascadero,Atascadero, California, whose mailing address for notice under the terms of this Agreement is as follows: City of Atascadero Attn: Director of Community Services 6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero, California 93422 1.2 School District 1.2.1 The School District is whose mailing address for notice under the terms of this Agreement is as follows: Atascadero Unified School District Attn: Assistant Superintendent of Business Services 5601 West Mall Atascadero, California 93422 2. CONDITIONS 2.1 Compensation The annual District contribution for City services for the Child Care Program will be $22,000. The contribution for the period between January 1999 thru June 1999 will be$11,000. An assessment of the effectiveness of services provided by the City will occur.during June 1999. Mutual consent by both parties will result in renewable option. 2.2 Services The services noted as follows will be provided to the District by the City utilizing resources currently available to the City and District: A. Staff Development Training-A minimum of one(1)training session per month will be provided with additional training sessions provided on an as needed basis. Topics will include,but not limited to 1. Child Development 2. Health 3. Safety 4. Interpersonal Skills 0+00022 B. I luman Resources Development as needed. C. Frogram Evaluation A minimum of one (1) written assessment each month ill be submitted to the Assistant Superintendent, Educational Services. ontributions to the employee assessment will be provided to the Assistant Superintendent on an ongoing basis,but no less than twice each year. D rogram Design-Existing programs will be expanded to include: 1. Homework Lab 2. Computer Lab 3. Arts/Crafts 4. Organized recreational activities 2.3 Person el Should a change in the personnel providing services to the District occur,the District and the City will collab 3rate in the selection of subsequent personnel to provide the services outlined in2.2A-D. IN WITNESS WHEIREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the date set forth opposite their respective names. CITY OF ATASCADERO Attest: MARCIA M. TORGE SON, City Clerk DATE RAY JOHNSON, Mayor DATE ATASCADERO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT Attest: DAN DODDS, Secretary to the Board of Trustees DATE STEVEN ARNOLD, President to the Board of Trustees DATE PARLESIPERSONELIPEGGAC LDCARWGREEMM.CTY 000023 Agenda Topic: Before&After School Child Care- A Memorandum of Understanding Between Atascadero Unified School District and the City of Atascadero Executive Summary: The school district and the City are forming a partnership which will promote an expanded and improved before and after school child care program for students in grades K-6 while maintaining the high level of services currently available to Atascadero Junior High School students. Through the partnership,the District's Educational Services division and the City's Recreation division will increase the opportunities currently available to K-6 students and their parents. Services to be provided cooperatively between Educational Services and the City include ongoing staff development training for child care providers and services such as homework lab,math and reading tutorials, computer lab, arts and crafts, and organized recreation activities. Ongoing program and employee evaluation will also be a component. An additional partnership benefit will be the opportunity to consider competitive before and after school grants that are available to cities and school districts that have a partnership in place. The current district child care program generates sufficient revenue to support the district's fiscal contribution to this joint partnership. Possible Motion: I move that the Board of Trustees enter into a partnership with the City of Atascadero to provide services which support and enhance the existing district child care program. Board of Trustees Meeting of January 19, 1999 P:\FILES\PERSONEL\PEGGI\BOARDPRE\CHLDCARE.AI9 000024 ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 02/09/99 1918$ City Manager's Agenda Report Wade G. McKinney The Lakes General Plan Amendment 97001, Zoning Change 97002, Tentative Tract Map 97003 (Davis Ranch, 3900 Traffic Way: Midland Pacific) RECOMMENDATION: Planning Commission Recommendation: The Planning Commission recommended certification of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) on a 4-0 vote, and split 2-2 on a motion to approve the general plan and zoning changes and the • subdivision map,thereby making no recommendation to the City Council on these requests. Staff Recommendation: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 1999-011, certifying the Environmental Impact Report (EIR); and 2. Adopt Resolution No. 1999-012, approving General Plan Amendment 97001, changing the land use designation of the site from Suburban Single Family to Moderate Density Single Family, and extending the Urban Services Line (USL)to include the site; and 3. Adopt Ordinance No. 357, on first reading by title only, approving Zone Change 97002, changing the zoning of the site from Residential.Suburban (RS)to Residential Single Family, (RSF-Y), and adopting Planned Development overlay zone no. 14; and 4. Adopt Resolution No. 1999-013, approving Vesting Tentative Tract Map 97003 based on findings and subject to conditions. REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The project involves general plan and zoning amendments to allow a higher density development than would now be allowed, and extension of the urban services line to allow sewer service. The proposal is to develop 122 home sites on lots smaller than the one-acre minimum required by the 00002.5 ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 02/09/99 underlying zone and to provide 50 acres of open space and recreational land, along with bicycle and pedestrian paths throughout the development. The developer is proposing a gated community, because the roads and other infrastructure are to be owned and maintained by the residents. Significant issues include 1) the implications of extending sewer service, 2) compatibility of a gated community with the larger community, 3) the determination of whether the project provides public benefits, and 4) access to the site. According to the EIR, there will be significant unavoidable impacts on air quality and agricultural resources, requiring the Council to adopt a statement of"overriding considerations"to approve the project. 1) It is feasible to extend sewer service, at the developer's cost. Such extension meets criteria in the Land Use Element for extension, as it would not significantly affect the capacity of the sewage treatment plant nor the ability of other properties to hook up to sewer. Because septic systems on this site have the potential to affect groundwater, the water company's wells on adjacent property, and the quality of water in the Salinas River, staff supports connection to the sewer system. 2) The developer has chosen to create a gated community to protect resident-owned infrastructure and recreational improvements. All of these improvements would be owned and maintained by the residents of the project and therefore would not add to the City's costs. Provision of the amenities planned would not be possible without the accompanying private ownership; as the City is not in the financial position to take on the additional maintenance costs of two new large lakes, playing courts, and other recreational facilities. The new neighborhood thus created would be necessarily exclusive, but would meet the needs and desires of some segments of the Atascadero community. As it provides housing options not otherwise available in the city, and reduces costs to the City, staff supports the gated concept. 3) Certain findings must be made to approve a "Planned Development" overlay zone. One of those findings is that "proposed plans, if any, offer certain redeeming features to compensate for requested modifications". Consistent with recent approvals of other smaller-lot subdivisions, the project offers the "redeeming feature of providing a type of housing that meets the needs of certain members of the community, of providing"increased housing opportunities"for moderate- income buyers. The project also offers additional benefits to those residents and the benefit to the City of reduced infrastructure costs. The project is consistent with previously-approved planned developments in meeting this"public benefit"criterion. 4) Two access scenarios are discussed. One would provide access both from the north and from the south, but the southerly access would require changes to the character and classification of Hidalgo Avenue, a local street with low traffic that serves the River Gardens neighborhood. The second alternative would provide primary access from Chico Road and emergency access only from Hidalgo. From an engineering standpoint, both access plans are acceptable. However, because of concerns about the additional traffic and significant changes affecting the River Gardens neighborhood, staff supports the Chico Road alternative, with provisions of emergency traffic only through Hidalgo, and with a requirement that improvements necessary to provide that 000026 ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 02/09/99 emergency connectionbe the minimum required by emergency services. This alternative should result in little change'to the outward appearance of Hidalgo as well as to the residential lot needed to provide a co ection to the site. The project would be compatible with surrounding development and may have a beneficial effect on neighboring property values. It will provide housing opportunities otherwise not offered in the city. The increased de isity is appropriate for the site and will result in fewer and shorter vehicle trips than if such additional development were instead accommodated in rural areas outside the city limits. Finally, the project will cost the City less than a standard subdivision under the existing zoning. Staff' therefore supports approval of the requested amendments and of the subdivision map. DISCUSSION: Site description: The site is a ranch and industrial property bounded by the Salinas River, the River Gardens development, the railroad tracks, and Chico Road, and contains about 140 acres. The ranch land is nearly flat, contains clusters of oaks primarily in the center of the site, and is developed with a few farm buildings. Some industrial buildings are concentrated on a parcel on Chico Road. The site is adjacent to moderate-density residential land to the southeast (River Gardens) and to rural residential prope y on the southwest. Residential land south of the site is a mix of rural and higher-density lots, with the larger lots toward the southwest. Project description: The applicant wants to divide the site into 131 lots: 122 residential lots ranging in size from 0.5 acres to 1.55 acres; eight open space parcels having a combined area of fifty acres, and a larger residential lot of 2.9 acres, to be left vacant for the present. Plans include development of two large lakes and additional open space and recreational areas for the exclusive use of residents. Background: The applicant submitted applications for the general plan and zoning amendments on April 1, 1997, but the applications were not determined complete until May 29, 1998, when the tentative map and use permit applications were filed as well. During this review pe iod, members of the public began to hold neighborhood meetings on the project. The applican and staff attended one of these meetings to describe. the project and discover the major concerns of River Gardens residents. The primary concern raised at that time, which is still a large concern for these residents, was a proposal to provide access through the River Gardens neigh orhood (requiring improvements to and a short extension of Hidalgo Avenue). The applicant has since agreed to an alternative: provide access at the northerly end of the site only, and using Hidalgo Avenue access for emergency access only. This alternative, too, has met with resistanc by some residents of this neighborhood. 000027 ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 02/09/99 A secondary concern was that an extension of the sewer to the site would make sewer connections in River Gardens mandatory. Because the sewer connection is to be pressurized if a route through the River Gardens area is used, it would not be available for hookups by River Gardens residents. Planning Commission review: The Planning Commission has held public hearings three times on the environmental impact report: on June 2, 1998 to gather public comments on the adequacy of the draft; on August 4, 1998 to review a revised draft; and finally, on January 19, .1999, to consider the final EIR. The Commission was scheduled to hear the project and consider the final EIR at a meeting on September 29, 1998, but the applicant requested and was granted a continuance to allow further exploration of issues raised in the planning report. At the January 19 meeting, the Planning Commission finally reviewed the amendment and map requests and voted on the project. At the January 19 meeting, the Commission focused on access, sewer, and planned development issues. Access: Some members of the public expressed concerns about the use of Hidalgo for emergency purposes only, because of the effects it might have on the appearance of the street, the unwanted access it could provide to pedestrians and bicyclists through the River Gardens neighborhood, and the detrimental effects on traffic that could be caused by an emergency evacuation through this route. Citizens were also concerned that the primary access-on Chico Road could be closed by the railroad for track maintenance, and that in that event residents of the development would be required to use the emergency route. The Commission determined that there are no alternative routes available and that a project of this size with only one exit is not good planning from an emergency response standpoint. Sewer: The Commission wanted information on the draft sewer master plan, developed by the Wastewater Treatment Operations department and under review by the City Manager's office. The Commission expressed some confusion about what is in this plan and if it has implications for this site and its sewering capability. Members of the public were concerned that the extension of sewer service to this development could have negative impacts on the extension of such service to other areas of the city, where it is more urgently needed. Planned Development Findings: The Commission discussed the required findings for the adoption of a planned development overlay zone. Some Commissioners did not believe that the required findings could be made for this development. Other issues raised at this hearing were the concept of gated communities, the need for sports playing fields throughout the community, the design and maintenance of the proposed lakes, and the cost to the City of this development. 000028 ITEM NUMBER:___B - 1 DATE: 02/09/99 Summary: To create this development, • the Land Use Element (LUE) and Zoning maps must be changed to allow higher-density development, at an overall density of one residence per acre, and extending the Urban Services Line to in lude the property and thereby allow extend service to it; • the zoning map and text must be amended to include a Planned Development overlay zone, allowing clustering of smaller lots (1/2 acre average) and the creation of large open space parcels, to be owned in common by the residents; • a tentative subdivi ion map must be approved, creating the smaller lots for the residences and larger lots for recreational and open space purposes. Analysis: Environmental Review: 1. The Environmental Impact Report is ready for certification. An Environmental Impact Report was prepared, focusing on impacts considered in the initial study to be potentially significant. Comments received during the 45 day public review period led to substantial revisions to the EIR and subsequently another 45 day review period. The final EIR has now been completed and is ready for certification. To determine if the EIR is "adequate", according to CEQA Guidelines, it should be prepared: "...with a sufficient degree of analysis to provide decision-makers with information which with the to make a decision which intelligently takes account of environmental consequences. An evaluation of the environmental effects of a proposed project need not be exhaustive, but the sufficiency of an EIR is to be reviewed in light of what is reasonably feasible. Disagreement among experts does not make an EIR inadequate, but the EIR should summarize the ma'n points of disagreement among the experts. The courts have looked not for perfection butfior adequacy, completeness, and a good faith effort at full disclosure". There has been n "disagreement among experts" in this case. The final EIR contains all comments and res onses to those comments, and therefore represents a good faith effort at full disclosure and is adequate. At its January 19'meeting, the Planning Commission unanimously (4-0, 2 absences, one vacancy) voted to ecommend certification of the EIR. 2. There are significant impacts. The EIR concludes that there are some significant and unavoidable impacts on air quality and agricultural resources. To approve the project will require that the Ci y Council adopt a "Statement of Overriding Considerations", stating why the benefits of the project outweigh these significant effects. The EIR further concludes that the project would have impacts on traffic, public services, noise, biological resources, and 000029 ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 02/09/99 cultural resources, all of which can be reduced to less than significant levels by incorporation of mitigation measures in the project. 3. Overriding considerations. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) says that an . agency may approve a project that would have significant, unavoidable environmental impacts if"specifically identified expected benefits from the project outweigh the policy of reducing or avoiding significant environmental impacts of the project." The project would have significant but unavoidable impacts on agricultural resources and air quality. Agricultural resources: Although the project site is located within the urban limits of Atascadero and has been designated for either industrial or residential use for many years, it .has been used for farming purposes and was designated prime agricultural land. Development of the site for any purpose other than agricultural will result in the loss of this resource. Removal of valuable farmland from agricultural use by means of development cannot be adequately mitigated, because new agricultural land cannot be created without the unlikely event of transforming developed land into agricultural. A speaker at the January 19 Planning Commission meeting suggested acquisition of existing farmland elsewhere, and preservation of that land in an agricultural trust, as a means of mitigating this loss. While such a move is desirable from a long-range planning standpoint, it would not physically increase the amount of farmland currently existing, and the development of this property would still mean the elimination of valuable farmland from agricultural use. The securing of farmland elsewhere, as suggested by the speaker, would assure its preservation for at least a specified number of years, if not indefinitely. If the City Council would like to impose such mitigation upon the developer of this site, it may choose to do so. Such an action should be specific: including an indication of the size and nature of the property to be preserved in trust, the length of time of that trust agreement, and any other significant features. The Council should weigh the benefits of such a requirement, also, against the inevitable cost to the developer and ultimately to the buyers of the new homes to be developed here. If the Council is interested in pursuing this option, staff suggests that the project be continued so that its implications can be evaluated further. Even with such mitigation, the loss of farmland would be an unavoidable significant impact, requiring that the Council specify project benefits that outweigh the loss. Air quality: The development of the site with 122 homes exceeds thresholds of significance set by the Air Pollution Control District (APCD) in its Air Quality Handbook (1995). All of the recommended mitigation for this impact can be incorporated into the project, but the effects of that mitigation are unknown. The EIR concludes that air quality impacts will be significant and unavoidable. 000030 ITEM NUMBER:-B - 1 DATE: 02/09/99 The APCD supp rts the increased density proposed, as opposed to channeling that development pote tial outside the city limits in lower-density areas, where more and longer trips would be generated by the same number of dwellings. Overriding considerations can include social, economic, or other factors.In the present case, the project will provide housing opportunities different from that offered elsewhere in the community: reasonably-sized lots that require less maintenance than the one-acre minimum otherwise required; open space and recreational amenities that will encourage the development of a neighborhood spirit, and moderate housing that should appeal to young families and "emty-nesters". The project also offers a benefit to the City in that its infrastructure is t be privately owned and maintained, and therefore will provide needed housing at a lower cost to the City than would otherwise be the case. The higher density proposed is appropriate for the flat topography, and is compatible with surrounding development, much of which is developed at a higher density than that proposed. It is therefore a suitabl infill project that should serve some members of the community well. Staff has drafted a statement of overriding considerations as part of the resolution approving the subdivision, citing these benefits. 4. Mitigation. The EIR includes 17 mitigation measures, many of which are incorporated into the design of the ' roject already. Several others are changes to streets and use of specific construction tech iques that will not significantly change the subdivision design. The attached staff report, prepared for the Planning Commission's review of the EIR, summarizes the significant impacts and proposed mitigation. Since that review, a phase 11 archaeological study (subsurfacestudy) has been completed, which provides additional information. 5. There is new information on cultural resources. Significant cultural resources have been found at the site. The initial "phase 1 study" (surface survey) revealed four prehistoric archaeological sites requiring further analysis, plus a historical barn and associated structures. The archaeological sites provide information about the developing social evolution of the Chumash, and are considered rare and significant. Information from the surface survey was not sufficient to define the nature and depth of these four sites, and what the appropriate mitigation would be for each. A phase 2 study (subsurface survey) was therefore conducted subsequent to the completion of the EIR. The most valuable site is that which has been given the official number SLO-1877, shown as site L-1 in the EIR. This site is to remain in recreational open space, and may be developed with game courts or parking areas. According to the archaeologist, impacts can be readily mitigated through. its preservation in the open space area and through review and modifications, if necessary, of grading plans. Because the artifacts are not distributed as widely as they 'ght have been, mitigation for the other three sites includes review of grading plans (to assure proper placement of utility lines as well as review of the depths of cuts and fills) and data collection, plus on-site monitoring by a qualified professional during construction. According to the archaeologist, significant impacts can be mitigated to a level below significant and the subdivision design is not expected to change noticeably through this review and modification process, technically called a Cultural Resource Treatment Plan. ®00031 ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 02/09/99 The barn buildings on site are representative of 1930s agricultural activity on the coast. g g Y Photographic documentation and a historical survey by a historical archaeologist is recommended and will mitigate impacts to the historical value of these structures. General plan amendment: 6. The map amendment is consistent with policies. The amendment requested is a change to the Land Use Element map, from Suburban Single Family to Moderate Density Single Family. A general plan amendment is, by its definition, a change to the General Plan and therefore inherently inconsistent with the present plan. To approve a map change, the City Council should find that the proposed change is consistent with General Plan policies and that it furthers General Plan goals. It appears that the project can be found to be consistent with general plan policies. The General Plan, as defined by State law, must contain seven "elements" (land use, circulation, housing, conservation, open space, noise and safety). Atascadero has also adopted optional elements (Parks & Recreation, Fiscal, Economic Development and Downtown Master Plan). All elements are of equal importance in the determination of the future of the community and in the analysis of any project for consistency with the General Plan. The project appears to further a number of general plan policies related to land use, open space, conservation, housing, circulation and fiscal implications. 7. Land Use Element: The site does not appear to share the physical characteristics of other property having the Suburban Single Family designation on the Land Use Element (LUE) map. The minimum lot size required under this land use designation varies from 2 '/2 to 10 acres. The determination of appropriate lot size, according to the LUE, is dependent on such factors as slope, existence of a natural building site, availability of services, response time for emergency services, distance from the center of the community, general character of the neighboring lands, percolation capability of the site, adequacy of access and adequacy of building sites (LUE section II-10). The site does not face any of the physical development constraints that face property with sloping terrain, significant creeks, or large numbers of trees, typical constraints on property with the Suburban Single Family designation. The project site is close to the core of the community and to essential services and is adjacent to development with densities similar to those proposed: The River Gardens area to the south contains lots that average 0.43 acres; the Ferrocarril Road development to the north contains lots averaging one acre (not including the 6.33-acre parcel on the end of the street). The site therefore seems physically and geographically suitable for the increased density. It is also consistent with the following"basic community goal" (p. II-1, Section IIA): 000032 ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 02/09/99 Protect an preserve the rural atmosphere of the community by assuring "elbow room"for esidents by means of maintenance of large lot sizes which increase in proportion 'o distance beyond the urban core. " The project does of appear to be inconsistent with other basic community goals in this section. Although the proposal does not provide the density required for the keeping of domestic animals such as horses and goats, it does provide "elbow room" for its residents, by providing lots ranging in size from one-half to one acre.and approximately 50 acres of open space. The proposed amendment meets the basic goals of the land use element by providing increased lots sizes beyond the urban core, it provides a sound economic base through the creation of privately owned and maintained streets and infrastructure, and provides open space. The Land Use Element also defines the Urban Services Line (USL) as defining "the maximum area that may be served by the sewerage system". Provision of service to new areas is determined on the basis of the following priorities (Section II.C.5(b), p. II-21): 1. Cease and desist areas and other septic problem areas within the Urban Service Line. 2. Other areas within the Urban Service Line. 3. Cease and desist areas beyond the Urban Service Line. Any extension of the USL requires an amendment of the General Plan. The following findings must be made to approve such an amendment: (a) Extension of sewer service to the area will not overburden the City's sewer plant or collection syste . (b) Extension of sewer service to the area will not affect service to priority areas I through 3. The LUE also encourages the "coordination of the extension of public services with the land use plan to ensure n orderly pattern of growth". According to the Environmental Impact Report, this project, as proposed and with mitigation, will not overburden the city's sewer plant or collection system, nor will it have a significant effect on the first tt ree priorities. The Final EIR says that the project will "utilize a small percentage of the remaining capacity of the lift stations and sewer treatment plant" (IV-C2). Based on an average yearly increase in flow citywide o 40,000 gallons per day (gpd), the treatment facility is anticipated to reach its current capacityin 6.75 years. The residential wastewater flows from the project would be approximately 29,000 gallons per day (gpd) at buildout. Because the project is planned in phases, it is antici' ated that the annual increased wastewater flows will be approximately 7,000 gpd, or abou' 7,000/40,000 = about 18% of the citywide increase expected in one year. the new residences will increase the dry weather flow at pump station 6 by about 20 gallons per day, or less tha 13%0. The increase in wet weather flow is expected to be about 1%. 000033 ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 02/09/99 Pump station #5 already experiences excessive wet weather flows. The project's effluent would cause more frequent spills to the emergency basin, and the spills will be larger. A variety of mitigation measures are included in the EIR to ensure that the collection system is upgraded to handle the additional flows. Additionally, the developer would be required to pay connection fees to the sewer system, fees which may be used only to provide improvements to increase capacity at the treatment facility. The sewer master plan, expected to be complete this year, will provide a logical infrastructure management program to increase capacity to the plant's ultimate permissible capacity of 4.0 mgd. The project is consistent with the provisions of the Land Use Element. The sewer master plan is discussed further below, under"the sewer situation". 8. Housing Element: The City's current Housing Element was adopted in 1994. Housing goals, consistent with state law, include the overriding goal of facilitating development of housing to meet the needs of all economic segments of the community. The state requires the local Council of Governments to develop goals for new housing development in the region, and to assign portions of those needed units to each community in the region. Atascadero was required by the Regional Housing Needs Plan to encourage the creation of 1,673 housing units in the city from January 1991 to July 1997, affordable to four different income levels. The following chart shows the City's regional share and actual development activity. The unmet housing needs are also represented. Income bracket Goals Built Deficit Proposal Very low 620 -0- <620> Low 348 -0- <348> Moderate 397 136 <261> 122 Above Moderate 308 543 +235 To meet these goals, the element policies encourage use of innovative techniques, such as planned development zoning and the use of density bonuses, to allow development that might not otherwise be feasible. According to the above chart, the City has not met its regional housing needs. The proposed project would further the City's housing goals for moderate income households as indicated. 9. Open Space Element:. The Open Space element (included with the Land Use Element) says that "scenic and open space easements, parklands and open space dedications shall be obtained through the subdivision and development review process, including but not limited to:.floodplains, creek reservations, wooded areas, scenic backdrops, sensitive areas, historic sites and similar suitable areas." While open space areas are to be preserved in this development, the land will be for the exclusive use of residents, and will not be available to the general public. The element does 000034 ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 02/09/99 not specify that such preservation is inconsistent with the goals of the general plan. Much of the open space that is valued in Atascadero is within single-family lots, which are not available for use by the generalpublic. It may be determined that the open space amenities associated with this development benefit a larger number of persons than might otherwise be the case, if the property were to be split into 56 large lots, in accordance with existing zoning. Zoning consistency 10. The request is to change the zoning from Residential Suburban (RS) to Residential Single Family with a minimum lot size of one acre (where sewer is available) (RSF-Y). If the general plan amendments are approved, then the appropriate zoning district would be Residential Single Family. The request for this designation is therefore consistent with the general plan and zoning. 11. A Planned Development overlay.zone. The applicants have also requested approval of a Planned Development overlay zone, to allow a "cluster" development: creation of lots smaller than the n inimum lot size of 1.0 acres along with larger parcels to be used for recreation and ope space. The overall density of one acre per residence, allowed by the underlying RSF-Y oning requested, would be maintained by this plan. The Zoning Regul ions say that the purpose of the PD (Planned Development) overlay zone is to identify areas "where development standards or processing procedures different from those established y the underlying zoning district...are deemed necessary to promote orderly and harmonious development and to enhance the opportunity to best utilize special characteristics of a area." Standards of the underlying zoning district will apply to a planned development zone, except where specifically modified by the overlay zone. The overlay zone may be used to modify physical standards: setbacks, heights, parking and loading requirements, landscaping, screening, signs, ',streets and frontage improvements requirements, as well as other development and special use standards. It can also be used to "establish other development standards or processing requirements" (see section 9.3.64 of the Zoning Regulations). Planned Development zoning is not used to increase allowable density. 12. The planned development findings can be made. To approve a planned development overlay zone, the following findings must be made: (a) Modification o development standards or processing requirements is warranted to promote orderlv and harmonious development. Comment: The modification requested is a reduction in parcel size for the residential lots, and provision of large commonly-owned open space parcels. The proposal is well-design,-d and provides significant amenities for residents. Provision of these amenities Inay not be possible without reduction of lot sizes and consequent creation of large open space parcels. 000035 ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 02/09/99 (b) Modification of development standards or processing requirements will enhance the opportunity to best utilize special characteristics of an area and will have .a beneficial effect on the area. Comment: The modification of lot sizes will allow clustering to avoid significant archaeological impacts and will allow creation of recreational amenities to serve the residents. The special characteristics of this site include the presence of a significant spring and some large native oaks, which can be preserved and used effectively in the development of lakes and other recreational areas within the development. (c) Benefits derived from the overlay zone cannot be reasonably achieved through existing development standards or processing requirements. Comment: It appears that it would be possible to achieve some of these benefits through existing development standards, without the use of the Planned Development overlay. Use of the existing standards would allow for creation of fewer lots and still allow room for the open space lands. If 50 acres were allocated for open space and recreational purposes, the remainder would be approximately 140 - 50 = 90 acres. Because the minimum lot size includes street rights-of-way (according to the Land Use Element), 90 lots could be created with a minimum size of one acre gross, or approximately 0.73 acres net. (The present design results in creation of 130 lots, with an average size of 90/130 = 0.69 acres gross, or 0.5 acres net.) From a design standpoint, then, the creation of smaller lots is not absolutely necessary for the development of open space amenities. However, financial feasibility of the project as well as ultimate affordability of the homes may weigh heavily on the need to create a larger number of lots here, to support and maintain the open space lands and the private infrastructure. It appears that this finding can be made. (d) Proposed plans, if any, offer certain redeeming features to compensate for requested modifications. Comment: The project offers smaller lots, open space and recreational amenities, and preservation of significant archaeological resources. The project also includes private roads and utilities, thereby reducing costs to the city. The development as a whole is a different type of housing than is normally found in the city, a housing option that is expected to appeal to families and empty-nesters. The smaller individual lots require less maintenance than one-acre parcels would require, while the larger open space and recreational areas would be maintained by a homeowners' association. These elements are expected to appeal to active families and older individuals and couples, persons whose active lifestyle does not allow much time for yard maintenance but who will appreciate the provision of-bicycle and pedestrian pathways offered here. These features constitute redeeming features. 000036 ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 02/09/99 It appears that the planned development findings can be made. 13. Public benefits? At the January 19 Planning Commission meeting, some Commissioners and members of the public expressed some concern that the project would not provide any "community benefits". The last finding, (d), above, has been read as meaning that the project must offerredeeming features to the general public. The redeeming fe tures offered by this development are the provision of a type of housing that meets the needs of certain members of the community, the protection of valuable cultural resources, amenities that will allow residents to stay close to home to. satisfy recreational desires (and an incremental decrease in demand on public recreational facilities), and a design that fosters a sense of neighborhood. The design also provides a cost savings to the city because infra tructure is owned and maintained by the residents. The benefit to the s public, then, is an increase in available housing options at a reduced cost to the city as a whole. Several planned d'velopment overlay zones have been approved in the last several years. Most have been s' all-lot developments in higher-density zones. In three of these recent rezonings (9244-9248 San Rafael, 7406 Santa Ysabel, and 7970 Sinaloa - files chosen at random), the public benefit cited has been solely "increased housing opportunities": the creation of very small lots (generally between 4,000 and 5,000 square feet), allowing ownership opportu' ities for moderate-income buyers without the burden of a condominium association. To facilitate creation of such opportunities,the City Council adopted a special PD overlay zone, D 7, in 1991. The PD 7 overlay contains standards for landscaping, lot coverage, and other development characteristics that exceed the standards of the underlying zone and that ens e that creation of smaller lots does not lead to overbuilding and lack of adequate private open space. The present case also offers increased housing opportunities for moderate-income buyers, along with other atures. With the adoption of a new PD 14 zone, development will be similarly restrained by special standards. It is therefore consistent with past actions on planned development overlays elsewhere in the city. Subdivision Design 14. The subdivision is well designed and will be gated. The subdivision design preserves most of the existing large oaks on the property and makes use of an existing significant spring. It also preserves an archaeological site and provides amenities that should meet most of the recreational needs of its residents. The clustering of smaller lots allows the creation of two large lakes, game' courts, and a pedestrian trail allowing pedestrian or bicycle access throughout the sub livision. The project is a "gated community", only the second to be created in this city. It is intended to serve moderate'income residents, who will be part of a homeowners association. The 0000;3'7 ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 02/09/99 association will be responsible for maintenance of all facilities, including streets and utilities, within the subdivision. Some concerns have been expressed about the compatibility of a gated subdivision with the larger community. Such a subdivision is inherently exclusionary and therefore its amenities will not be available to the larger community as a whole, nor will it normally be possible for non-residents to drive through it. The City has no regulations against this type of ownership subdivision. The Land Use Element has no policies that argue against the private ownership of streets and infrastructure. On a smaller scale, such exclusivity is actually fairly common within the city limits: many large residential parcels contain only private drives, which are protected by gates. The large- lot nature of the residential zones in this city has led to creation of many private streets and exclusive access. The gates serve to protect the investment of the residents. If the subdivision were to be open to the public, the few members of the homeowners association would be saddled with maintaining roads, infrastructure, and recreational facilities for the many. Such an arrangement would not be financially feasible. If the residents are to own the infrastructure and amenities, then they have the right to exclude others from the use of them. On the other hand, if the special recreational features were to be offered to the City, it is unlikely that the City would be financially able to accept them. Maintenance of play areas and lakes can be a considerable burden, especially if use is unrestricted or needs to be moderated. Therefore, if the development were to be changed to one that is not gated, it would also have to be changed to a standard subdivision with limited or no special amenities. In other words, no gates=no lakes. 15. Access is a question. The project involves a change to the zoning and creation of smaller lots than are currently allowed in this location, and therefore a higher density development. Effects of this density mean greater impacts. One of those impacts is on traffic in the area. The project was originally submitted with a proposal to provide access from the southerly and the northerly ends of the site. One access would be from Chico Road, off Traffic Way next to Ferrocaril, and the other would involve cutting through the River Gardens area to use Hidalgo Avenue and other local streets to arrive at El Camino Real or Curbaril. Residents in the River Gardens and adjoining areas objected to the use of Hidalgo for access, during review of the EIR and at the January 19 Planning Commission meeting. This street enjoys a very low level of traffic presently, and therefore any increase is likely to be noticeable and objectionable to residents. The potential increase from 100 vehicles a day to 770 vehicles a day was viewed as significant to these residents, although the street could easily be modified to accommodate the additional flow from a technical standpoint. 000038 ITEM NUMBER:---B - 1 DATE: 02/09/99 Because of the objections, the EIR also analyzed an alternative: use of Chico Road for the primary access, wi h Hidalgo to be improved for emergency vehicle access only. The two alternatives each resent advantages and disadvantages. Under both alternatives, some improvements to he streets involved will be necessary. As these are improvements associated with project development and not with ongoing use of the area, they have not been included in the alternatives discussion below: Alternative A: Use of both Chico and Hidalgo for access to the subdivision. Advantages: This option provides two routes for residents and therefore lessens impacts on either route. Italso allows residents to choose the quickest route for their purposes, thereby generat ng fewer overall miles on the road than one access point would generate. Disadvantages: The use of Hidalgo would change the classification of Hidalgo from 'a low- intensity local street to that of a rural collector. Circulation element policies call for the directing of traffic from new developments to existing collectors, rather than to local streets. The use of this 'street for additional project traffic would also not be offset by the use of local streets within the subdivision for River Gardens residents, because the new development is to be gated and would not allow such access. (Initially, the developer offered such access to the River Gardens neighborhood, in spite of the private streets, but members of the neighborhood rejected the offer.) The Fire Department notes that the River Gardens neighborhood has been evacuated three times because of flooding. This condition is exacerbated by a bottleneck created at the intersection of Sycamore and Capistrano, where vehicles have to enter a railroad underpass by th' Atascadero River. The addition of vehicles from the project site to these roads only worsens the situation. Alternative B: Use of Chico Road for primary access, with Hidalgo for emergency vehicle access only. Advantages: This o tion would have no effects on traffic levels on Hidalgo, and therefore the character of the street and neighborhood would remain unchanged. Vehicles exiting from the River Gardens area in an emergency would be able to remove barriers and ext through the project site (as well as by way of Sycamore), an option possibly not available if the access is gated instead. This option can be achieved with little visible change to Hidalgo Avenue, thereby maintaining the present character of the street. Disadvantages: Th' direction of all traffic to Chico would increase stacking at the railroad crossing on Chico,thereby requiring longer vehicle storage lanes on Traffic Way and on Chico Road. It is estimated in the EIR that one train may pass here during peak hours, 0000:39 ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 02/09/99 and stacking would increase from the Alternative A scenario of five vehicles to the Alternative B case of about nine. Emergency vehicles entering the site from the south would experience slightly longer delays because of the need to remove barriers, if barriers are necessary. Access through Chico Road would force residents of the project to drive longer distances if they are driving to or from areas south of the site, thereby incrementally increasing air pollution impacts. Emergency vehicles using the Chico Road access would also take longer to get to the southerly end of the project site. Recommendation: From an environmental and traffic safety standpoint, the alternatives have similar impacts and a clear and obvious choice is not available. The Planning Commission weighed these alternatives and members of that Commission who expressed a preference recommended alternative B, with emergency access only on Hidalgo. Those Commissioners also supported a condition that would require that the lot used for access be maintained in essentially its present condition, with the addition of eco-block or similar material to provide an acceptable driving surface for emergency vehicles. The Fire Chief, who spoke at the January 19 Planning Commission meeting, suggested this .condition and said that it is acceptable from an emergency access standpoint. Staff therefore supports Alternative B, with a condition requiring minimal street improvements. The Council may note, however, that engineering conditions are written to accommodate either alternative. 16. The sewer situation. The applicants want the project to be connected to the city sewer. The proponents propose to install a pressurized force main in Hidalgo to send sewage to an existing pump station at Traffic Way and Buena Avenue (pump station 6). From there, effluent would be pumped to another pump station behind the Traffic Way baseball fields (pump station 5), which then would pump it to the wastewater treatment plant. However, other options, including connecting to the sewer in Traffic Way, would be considered. The discussion above, under General Plan consistency, determines if the project meets the criteria for sewer service. It appears to do so. The Chief of Wastewater Operations finds no physical constraints to extending sewer to the project site, as long as the project developers pay all costs of this extension along with appropriate connection fees. Therefore, the remaining issues are whether sewer service will have unacceptable impacts on existing pump stations or plant capacity and whether provision of sewer to this development has implications for other property in the vicinity. Existing pump stations: Pump station 5 has an existing problem that would be worsened by the development. Excessive wet weather flows into the pump sometimes exceed the plant's pumping abilities and overflow into an emergency basin. The emergency basin is unlined. Therefore, excess flows may contaminate the soil. The preferred resolution of this problem is to require the applicant to upgrade pump station 5 so that it can 000040 ITEM NUMBER:--B - 1 DATE: 02/09/99 accommodate t oth the existing wet weather flows and increased flows resulting from the project. This ry itigation measure, as well as all others recommended by the EIR, has been incorporated in o the recommended conditions to resolve this problem. Implications for other property: Residents of the River Gardens community have expressed concerns that extension of service to the project site, through their neighborhood, would result in River Gardens residents being required to hook up to the sewer. The provision of sewer service to the Lakes project would not automatically give rise to any requirement to do so. The use of a pressurized force main also precludes connection from those residences. The additional improvements to pump station 5 will allow residences to hook into the sewer if they choose, but they will not be required to do so until the Water Quality Control Board determines that impacts from existing septic systems are contaminating the groundwater or having other adverse impacts. The sewer master plan: Because of the topography and other unique features, sewer collection in this city is unusually challenging. The City is therefore developing a draft sewer master plan for the collection system. The plan's scope of work includes the development o criteria, based on engineering considerations, for sewer connection, and maps property that is expected to meet those criteria. The scope does not involve the wastewater treatment plant or any analysis of its capacity. In a previous r port to the Planning Commission (which was not discussed in hearing because the al iplicant requested a continuance and it was granted), planning staff recommended t at action not be taken on the subdivision or on the extension of sewer to the site until t master plan is completed, reviewed, and adopted by the City Council. This recommendation was based on the size of the property and the possibility that it may not be included in those properties that meet the criteria in the master plan for sewer extension. This approachis reasonable and conservative, as the master plan would offer an additional tool'' with which to analyze the current development. However, the City Council has n t enacted a moratorium on sewer service extensions, and in fact has considered a variety of projects requiring sewer extension. Recent studies have shown that the city has adequate sewer capacity and as developers provide for the entire cost of improvements and connection fees there have been no adverse impacts. Since the preparation of that planning recommendation, planning staff became aware of concerns, by the Atascadero Mutual Water Company and other stakeholders in the Atascadero Sal nas River watershed; that septic systems on this site could contaminate groundwater, which in turn could affect the quality of the water company's wells on adjacent property, as well as the quality of water in the Salinas River. The Lower Salinas Watershed Sanitary Survey, a survey mandated by the California Department of Health Services, concludes (in part): 0000' 1 ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 02/09/99 ...In addition, most of the developed areas adjacent to the river are served by septic tanks and leach fields and are not sewered. Malfunctioning leach fields, particularly adjacent to the AMWC well field, represent a potential impact to the water supply. ... (Lower Salinas Watershed Sanitary Survey; Conclusions and Recommendations, report issued December 1998). The water company,therefore, supports the extension of sewer service to this property. This survey report recommends education of local and regional agency staff and decision makers "on the importance of protecting drinking water, and the most effective strategies to accomplish this goal," and on the need to incorporate "a special watershed designation into general plans and design review that will encourage the protection of water.quality". The Chief of Wastewater Treatment Operations says that it is "unlikely" that, with proper design, septic systems on the site would contribute to contamination of the city's wells. However, he acknowledges that in cases like this it is advisable to take a conservative approach. It is feasible to extend service to the site. It will not affect the ability of other properties .currently within the urban services line to connect to the system. And extension of service will be at the developer's cost. A side benefit will be that the developer would, as a part of this project, improve pump station no. 5 so that it will handle all existing overflows as well as those that would be contributed by this development. While the non-project overflow improvements will be paid for by the City, the work will be done by the developer and should be completed sooner than it otherwise would be. On balance, then, staff recommends extension of sewer service to the site, prior to adoption of the sewer master plan. 17. It's a vesting map. The applicants have submitted a "vesting" tentative map. The state defined "vesting" maps and allowed for their processing starting in 1986. A vesting map locks in place the ordinances, policies, and standards in effect at the time the map is determined complete. In other words, this type map, once approved, gives the subdivider greater protection from changes to the law (including rezonings and general plan changes) that take place after that map was submitted and deemed complete. 18. A reduced-scale project. The EIR identifies two possible reduced-scale alternatives: one that would require elimination of 29 lots and a reconfiguration of the layout, but still require the general plan and zoning map change, and one that would involve development under existing zoning. The EIR discusses these alternatives on pages V-3 through V-5. The reduced-scale projects would incrementally reduce impacts, especially noise and cultural resources (although the archaeologist, after completing the phase 2 study, is comfortable with the present lot configuration, feels that significant impacts can be avoided in any case). A lower-density development could be served by septic systems, not requiring sewer, but the nearness of the site to Atascadero Mutual Water Company wells near the river means that septic system use could have an adverse impact on groundwater quality. 000042 ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 02/09/99 If the Council pre rs a lower-scale development on the site, it may choose to either deny all requests, thereby advising the applicant to return with a plan that works within present zoning, or it may approve the general plan and zoning amendments but deny the tract map. Conclusion: The prc posed map and text amendments (including the Planned, Development overlay) may be foun consistent with general plan policies. The tentative map is well designed and should be an attractive addition to the area. Amenities of the project should foster a sense of neighborhood within t e project site. Two environmental impacts - air quality and loss of agricultural land - are significant and unavoidable. The state requires that the City Council adopt a statement of overriding consideration to allow such impacts to take place. Development of the site with the currently- allowed 56 homes w uld have an equal impact on agricultural land and a reduced but still significant impact on air quality, and therefore staff believes the statement can and should be made. Other significant impacts can be mitigated to a level below significant, and project mitigation and conditions will assure that they are. Therefore, staff supports the project design, with mitigation and conditions to address concerns. FISCAL IMPAC Housing development generally are a drain on the city's reserves. However, the city has an obligation to accommodate its fair share of residential development and to seek to provide housing opportunities for all segments of the community. Therefore, it is reasonable to approve new housing but to look for ways to mitigate the expenses of such development. In the present case, 11 common utilities and roads are to be owned and maintained by a homeowners' association. Therefore, costs to the city for these services are nil. On the plus side, connection of the project to the city's sewer system will generate revenue above what it costs. A fiscal impact analysis was completed for the project to determine approximately what the costs and revenues will be t the city. Over a ten-year period, the project is expected to provide $789,413 to the city in "recurring" (as opposed to "one-time' revenue, such as building permit fees) revenues. During this same time period the project is expected to cost the city $829,564 in general, special, capital projects, and debt service funds. The net cost to the city, then, over ten years, is projected to be $40,151. Over a twenty-year period, the fiscal analysis concludes that the project may actually produce more revenue than it costs, ultimately paying for itself. Costs would be higher if the streets and utilities were publicly owned md maintained. In addition, the City will receive about $577,000 in one- time revenues in the form of development and building review fees. 000043 ITEM NUMBER: B - 1 DATE: 02/09/99 The developer has offered a contribution of$250,000 to the City to help fund playing fields for the city's youth. This offer has not been included in the fiscal impact analysis, nor has it been made a condition of approval of this development. (The offer is considered a part of the project description. There does not appear to be a logical "nexus" between approval of this project and a requirement for a contribution of this size, and therefore no logical. reason to make the contribution a condition of approval.) A copy of the fiscal analysis is available in the Community Development Department for review, and will be distributed to City Council members along with this report. Some members of the public have objected to the development on the basis of the cost to the City. By comparison, the project will cost the City less than a project developed under the present zoning, with public streets. Property taxes from a lower-density development would net the City less revenue, incremental sales taxes from fewer people would also be lower, and costs to the City would be higher. A detailed analysis of this alternative has not been conducted, but general conclusions can be drawn. ALTERNATIVES: 1. The City Council may approve the general plan and zoning map amendments, but not the planned development overlay zoning amendment or the subdivision map. This action would change the land use designations of the site to moderate-density residential,but would require the submittal of another subdivision map. 2. The City Council may deny amendments and the subdivision map. The parcel would remain designated for residential suburban uses. 3. The City Council may continue action if additional information is needed. Direction on specific information should be given to staff or the applicant. RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT: Community Development Department ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A-- Location Map (General Plan) Attachment B -- Location Map (zoning) Attachment C— Site plan Attachment D -- June 2, 1998 Planning Commission staff report Attachment E -- August 4, 1998 Planning Commission staff report Attachment F -- Planning Commission resolution finding EIR adequate Attachment G-- Resolution certifying EIR Attachment H -- Resolution approving General Plan changes 000044 ITEM NUMBER: B 1 DATE: 02/09/99 Attachment I -- Ordinance adopting zoning map change Attachment J -- Resolution approving Tentative map Attachment K-- Resolution denying all requests Attachment L -- Minutes of January 19 Planning Commission meeting Distributed to City Council: Subdivision plans Fiscal Impact Analysis Planning Consultants, August 1998 Previously distributed: Final Environmental Impact Report, Firma, September 1998 000045 City of Atascadero Staff Report r i Location i Plan) Al ENE m OIL, -4 �^ � I�.'' +1•ax ." e! t � as�avi �91� '9�i$le �.. � _ - _ IN RIK v 't, , �'Sj:.:!•'�' I't�t„e.�.��'�1�a%- � �� � _gym, ------=-' 4lie �, �, ♦ „�'�• 1 �.�� � �,�,��"yea � �'�'°,:,:���4 I MIR kA%o Lit At � � ♦ ,,_� t1'♦� Ams � ,ems r�, sir-' ft i- O,��� �11�i + !� I � '�13�61 a 1<saaeaa e A � �. �i �,t� • �(� � \ 11��r�� °'� = "$ *� !$as ♦ Sos �� ° ��.:pi♦/!.1♦�11� ���;IJ.� •iiJ� e" �:_ �a:.11 . 1 ��ii'1L �� 1 r41iE>, Isc.j=d7d'iNit:7��1 ���1/ nii nmir '�We 3►u(.:��� '�� �'� -�'— -- i'a',-,■114P,/111 will it / _ 111 lip FAWN fan - Owmem► ��� ,, <r WOO Ash, r 11 ,�E, ,� lrk l 'ldl ICity of Atascadero Staff Report Attachment till WE lag r • 1' ��t ���,. ..,� 111 ,:.; . .a•• .f►�., ��� � ` '�� i,fes_ .��•� � ,� �! . , , tt•► 11 111 �/1: �� � ������� ,, - ' City of Atascadero Staff Report Attachment C—Site Plan � _r —,�,raacut•o.1.rYre _ �a rgWqb wr nlu.rroltnwurerq un.roq.uc[w wn.Wq '` .y�i .. I .i •.t ISI 1 •'i•}t •i i .:i .,t t 'ii ,� \� •. •.� Ili � 1 et 1 i� /h..��` � • / ��\ -ih. ,;t •.} t , .Ja .r.a. .%: •..moi „...yii'' !'��`� �!•f,f �� '� n tq�• .tit ,�.�.t !t i. ,i t11 tl /'-1 -�. ••�.y�v'. ii ..,.mrw� �` ! .�1� 1 �_ 1 ` _. \t �/-r.wv-.ictal.v.« 4\'\� �1;t i •'tt. t t- t-Jam`- 1a.lna .� t - _ /�-. T' f i � �'� � •�1. iei,, ttt. �1 \ ,�,, ,. :( t i!t. t j � � _ ttl• tj t rt r 't �.. SOURCE: APPLICANT 0.00048 ATTACHMENT D 6/2/98 STAFF REPORT THE LAKES PROJECT 7 v� Planning C mmission Staff Report Draft Environmental Impact Report for The Lakes Project (Davis Ranch/Midland Pacific Building Corporation) SUBJECT: Public review of the Draft Environmental Impact Report(EIR)prepared for The Lakes Project. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that he Commission hear public testimony, and provide any input they may have, with respect to the adequacy of the Draft EIR. SITUATION AND FA' TS: 1. Applicant: Midland Pacific Building Corporation 2. Representative: Dennis Moresco, President 3. Project Address: 3900 Traffic Way 4. General PlanDesignation: Suburban Single Family 5. Zoning Distri t: Residential Suburban(RS) 6. Site Area: 142 acres 7. Existing Use(s): Residence and several farm structures 8. Environment Status: Draft EIR undergoing public review DISCUSSION: Project Description: • The project site is approximately 142 acres located between the Union Pacific Railroad tracks, the Salinas River, Chico Road and the River Gardens neighborhood (Attachments A & B). Until recently, the site was used primarily for agricultural purposes and is referred to as the Davis Ranch. r 000040 i ITEM NUMBER: B.1 DATE:-- JUNE 2, 1998 Improvements on the property include a residence, several farm structures and industrial buildings (near Chico Road). The applicant proposes to demolish all of the existing improvements and subdivide the site into a total of 131 lots: 122 residential lots ranging in size from 0.5 acres to 1.55 acres; a commercial lot of 2.9 acres; and eight(8) open space parcels having a combined area of fifty (50) acres. As shown by the project site plan (Attachment C), much of the open space would be provided in the center of the site where two (2) man-made lakes and pedestrian walkways would be constructed. Residential lots would then be clustered to the north and south of this common open space. Another open space area is proposed in the southwest portion of the site. The open space is intended for more active uses such as basketball and tennis. The commercial lot would be located near Chico Road, where the industrial buildings now exist. The project is proposed to remain private, meaning that internal streets and open space would be gated and maintained privately by a homeowners association. Conditions, covenants and restrictions (CC&Rs) would also be established to regulate land use and ensure individual residential lots are being properly maintained. Applications Filed The current General Plan designation and zoning of the site would not permit the proposed density nor would it permit the commercial uses proposed. To allow for project approval, therefore, four(4) distinct yet interrelated applications have been filed: General Plan Amendment #97001-- A proposal to (1) extend the Urban Services Line (USL) to include the subject property, thereby making it possible for the new lots to be connected to public sewer, and (2) change the land use designation of the site from Suburban Single Family to Moderate Density Single Family and Neighborhood Commercial. Zone Change #97002 -- A proposal to change the zoning of the site from Residential Suburban (RS) to Residential Single Family (RSF-Y), wherein the minimum lot size is one-acre with sewer or 1.5 acres without sewer, and Commercial Neighborhood (CN). In addition, a Planned Development Overlay Zone would be applied to the site and allow some of the residential lots to be smaller than one acre provided the overall density does not exceed one house per acre. Vesting Tentative Tract Map #97003 -- A proposal to subdivide the site into 122 residential lots ranging in size from 0.5 acres to 1.55 acres, one (1) commercial lot of 2.9 acres and eight (8) open space parcels totaling fifty (50) acres. Because a "vesting" tentative map has been filed, approval would convey a vested right not only to record a final map but to develop each of the new parcels in accordance with development standards currently in place. Conditional Use Permit#98004 -- The applicants are proposing to create a 2.9-acre parcel near Chico Road and have that parcel zoned Commercial Neighborhood (CN). In the CN zone, commercial uses exceeding 3,000 square feet require conditional use permit approval. Since the two (2) commercial buildings proposed would total 11,800 square feet, an approved conditional use permit is required. 000050 ITEM NUMBER: B.1 DATE:- ,JUNE 20 lgg8 Anal Following an Initial Stu y, it was determined that the project could have a significant effect on the environment and that in Environmental Impact Report (EIR) would therefore be required pursuant to the Califor ''a Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Based on the Initial Study and comments received duri g circulation of a Notice of Preparation, a Draft EIR has been prepared which focuses on impac s considered*to be potentially significant. These impacts have to do with agricultural resources, rainage and water quality, sewer service, traffic, noise, public services, biological resources, air quality and cultural resources. In addition, the Draft EIR includes an analysis of project alternatives and the cumulative/growth-inducing effects of project approval. In the Draft EIR, each of the potentially significant environmental effects of the project are discussed by (1) defining the environmental issue; (2) describing the environmental setting; (3) disclosing the environmental impacts; and (4) identifying the mitigation measures available to eliminate the impacts or reduce them to acceptable levels. A summary of environmental impacts and available mitigation is contained in Table S of the Draft EIR (Page I-3) and the Initial Study and Notice of Preparatic n materials are contained in Appendix A. Following is a brief description of the project's potenti ly significant environmental effects and the Draft EIR's findings as to the significance of those im 'acts after mitigation. Agricultural Resource -- The project site has been in agricultural use since some time prior to the Davis family's purchase of the property in 1947. The Initial Study notes that the site is the only site within Atascad ro city limits that has been designated as Prime Farmland by the State of California and that its conversion to residential use could therefore be considered a significant impact. The Draft EIR points out that the site has been zoned, and therefore committed, for uses other than agriculture for d ades. The density allowed under the current zoning would allow residential lots of only 2.5 acres. In addition, the City of Atascadero and County of San Luis Obispo both have General Plan policies that prefer the conversion of agricultural.land within existing community bout daries over conversion in unincorporated areas. The project proposes to intensify a non-agricultu al use that is already allowable. Therefore, the project would not impact the amount of agricultural land planned for conversion. Drainage and Water uality -- Water flows onto the site from upstream properties. Unless grading and other site improvements are designed to accept this water and convey it safely to the Salinas River, a signific'trit impact could result in the form of local flooding. Likewise, if the proposed lakes are not properly aerated, they could produce a foul odor and attract mosquitoes and other pests that constitute a public nuisance. According to the Draft EIR, potential impacts related to drainage and water quality would be reduced to a level of ins gnificance if(1) all drainage facilities are engineered in accordance with City Standards; (2) the axisting ponding problem at the intersection of Traffic Way and Chico Road is corrected; and 3) the lakes are designed in a manner that ensures adequate depth and aeration to preclude excessive reed and algae growth that could deprive the lakes of oxygen. 000051 ITEM NUMBER: B. 1 DATE:-JUNE 2, 1998 Sewer Service — All of the proposed lots would have sewer lines which gravity flow into a new pump station to be constructed at a low point within the project. This sewage would then be pumped via a pressurized force main to an existing City pump station at Traffic Way and Buena Avenue (Pump Station #6). From there, the effluent is pumped to another pump station behind the Traffic Way baseball fields (Pump: Station #5), which then pumps the effluent to the City's wastewater treatment plant. It is estimated that the new homes and commercial units would consume approximately 12% of the remaining treatment plant capacity. Pump Station #5 has an existing problem that would be exacerbated by the project. Excessive wet weather flows into the plant sometimes exceed the plant's pumping abilities and overflow into an emergency basin. Because the emergency basin is unlined, the excess flows may be contaminating the soil. The Draft EIR identifies several options for mitigating this impact, but the preferred option is to require the applicant to upgrade Pump Station #5 so that it can accommodate both the existing wet weather flows and increased flows resulting from the project. After mitigation, impacts on the sewer system would be insignificant from an environmental standpoint. Traffic -- During the Initial Study process, neighborhood meetings were held to discuss the project. The applicant and staff attended one of meetings and discovered a common, and perhaps the biggest, concern among River Gardens residents was that increased traffic through their neighborhood would affect their safety and quality of life in general. Because of this meeting with affected residents, and with the applicant's concurrence, staff directed Draft EIR consultants to study two project alternatives. Scenario A assumes the project will be approved with two access points, one through River Gardens and the other at Chico Road. Scenario B assumes the connection to River Gardens will be designed for emergency use only and that all daily traffic associated with the project would use Chico Road only. Under either Scenario, it would be necessary to realign and widen Traffic Way to accommodate an exclusive northbound right turn lane (the length of that turn lane would vary depending on which Scenario is approved). In addition, City Standards would require that Chico Road be improved to Rural Collector Standards from the project connection to Traffic Way. If Scenario A is approved, it would also be necessary to improve Hidalgo Avenue to Rural Collector Standards and eliminate the offset between the new street into the project and existing Hidalgo Avenue. This would require acquisition of an existing, improved residential lot. .In addition, it would be necessary to install stop signs at the new intersection and realign the south leg of Hidalgo Avenue to intersect Sycamore Road at right angles and install stop signs there and at the Sycamore/Miramon intersection. With these mitigation measures, the environmental effects of increased traffic caused by the project would be less than significant. Quality of life issues associated with increased traffic are not addressed in the Draft EIR because they cannot be effectively quantified and/or measured against an established standard or threshold. These issues will therefore be discussed later in the planning process. Noise -- The City has an adopted Noise Element as part of its General Plan. The Noise Element establishes thresholds for determining a significant impact. For single family residential uses, this threshold is 60 dBA Ldn for exterior areas and 45 dBA Ldn for interior areas. If, based on noise contour maps contained in the Noise Element, noise levels are not expected to exceed these thresholds, no mitigation is required. If noise levels are expected to exceed these levels but not IN 000052 ITEM NUMBER: B.1 DATE:- JUNE 2. 1998 more than 10 dBA Ldn, the project is considered conditionally acceptable. In these cases' a noise analysis is required and feasible noise mitigation must be incorporated into the project. If noise levels are expected to exceed the thresholds by more than 10 dBA Ldn, the project is usually not considered acceptable. The increased traffic resulting from the project will increase noise levels along Traffic Way and, if Scenario A (see traffic section above) is approved, along Hidalgo Avenue. However, even with the increased noise levels caused by the project along these streets, the noise levels would still be less than 60 dBA Ldn. Therefore, there is no mitigation recommended for that impact. In the future, it is expected th ambient noise levels on proposed lots 33 through 51 will exceed 60 dBA Ldn, and that interior noise levels on proposed lots 40 through 50 could exceed 45 dBA Lan, but not by more than 10 dBA Ldn. Even though none of the proposed lots would be affected by such noise levels given the 'limited amount of railroad traffic today, the Draft EIR recommends mitigation for the noise levels reasonably foreseeable as the future "worst case" scenario. This mitigation would requir' a wide and dense landscape buffer between the railroad tracks and the new street that parallels the tracks and that certain acoustical design features be incorporated into new homes on proposed lots 40 through 50. Public Services -- This ection of the Draft EIR examines the project's effects on schools and fire protection. The schools affected by the project include San Benito Elementary and the Atascadero Junior and Senior High Schools. Based on the School District's student generation rates, the project would add 60 elementary students, 12 junior high students and 18 high school students. Because the 'project is proposed to be constructed in four (4) phases, these added students are expected to come in four(4) waves. With respect to fire protection, the project was analyzed to ensure adequate fire flows, emergency access/egress and response time. Under either traffic Scenario (see traffic section above), the project will have adequate fire flows, ingress/egress and respo se time. Therefore, no mitigation other than the payment of mandatory development impact fees, is necessary for fire protection. The District has indicated that school fees will only cover about 30% of the actual cost of providing school facilities for the additional students and therefore requesting that full mitigation be required (see Appendix B of the Draft EIR). The Draft EIR ntes that the School District has not increased school fees to the amount allowed by state law and that it does not appear that other mechanisms are in place that would allow the city to require full mitigation of school impacts. To require full mitigation, the District must have completed a fee justification report pursuant to AB 1600 and the City must have a clear policy in the General P n on school service levels and impacts. Absent these mechanisms, it appears that mitigation for school impacts above and beyond the collection of school fees presently in place would have to come from a legal authority other that CEQA. Biological Resources --''Most of the property has recently been farmed and the biological survey was conducted in winter when the presence of most plant species could not be determined. Therefore, the Draft EIR,examines the potential for certain plants to occur based on site habitat, a review of the Natural Diversity Data Base and published/unpublished reports that identify known and potential occurrences of special status species. 0'0'0'053 -3_ ITEM NUMBER: B•1 DATE:-- JUNE 2, 1998 No plant species of special concern would be impacted by the project� but it may be necessary to secure permits from the US Army Corps of Engineers to discharge fill into a small (approximately 20 square feet) wetland area on the northern edge of the site. With respect to animal life, the project would result in a loss of habitat for the Prairie Falcon and Mountain Lion, and nesting birds may be disturbed during construction. These impacts are less than significant, but the Draft EIR indicates that limiting access to the Salinas River would be a feasible mitigation measure to protect plant and animal species occurring in that region. Air Quality -- San Luis Obispo County is considered a non-attainment area, which means that the concentration of air pollutants exceeds state standards. Because this project proposes a higher density of development than currently planned for, and because the project is capable of generating air pollution emissions which exceed regionally established criteria regardless of what the current zoning would permit, air quality impacts are considered significant. Mitigation measures identified in the Draft EIR would reduce NO. emissions anywhere from 20 to 40 percent and PM10 emissions by about 50 percent. Nevertheless, it is expected that emissions will still exceed established thresholds. Impacts after mitigation would therefore still be considered significant and unavoidable. Cultural Resources -- All areas along the Salinas River are considered sensitive with respect to archaeological resources because of the numerous village and camp sites discovered along the River over the past 30 years. Because of this, a Phase One surface survey was conducted by an archaeologist and geomorphologist. During the Phase One surface survey,the archaeologist and geomorphologist zigzagged back and forth over the site and flagged any signs of historic or prehistoric cultural materials. The location of archaeological materials was then surveyed by project engineers and plotted onto project maps. As a result of the Phase One surface survey, four(4) new archaeological sites have been recorded with the Archaeological Inventory center at UC Santa Barbara. These sites contain shell fragments, burnt rock used for cooking, and stones shaped to be useful as hunting or cooking tools. In addition to those recorded sites, isolated artifacts were found. It is impossible to determine the extent and nature of these isolated findings until subsurface testing is completed. It is staff's understanding that such subsurface testing is being done now. In addition to these prehistoric findings, the Phase One survey resulted in the existing three-story barn being recorded with the Office of Historic Preservation as historically significant. According to the Draft EIR, the four (4) recorded sites should be considered potentially significant cultural resources. As such, they should be protected through avoidance, redesigning the project to minimize adverse impacts and/or data recovery. As the'project is currently designed, only one(1) of the four (4) recorded sites would be located in open space and therefore avoided. The other three (3) recorded sites, plus all four of the isolated areas, would be impacted by houses, utilities, roads and man-made lakes. In addition, the planned demolition of the historic loading structure and barns would also be considered a significant impact. s In order to protect (i.e., mitigate) potentially significant prehistoric cultural resources, a comprehensive cultural management program should be developed and implemented. This would include subsurface testing of all of the isolated areas and one of the recorded sites and then, using the information obtained through surface and subsurface testing, attempt to redesign the project 000054 ITEM NUMBER: B.1 DATE:- JUNE 2, 1998 to minimize impacts to the extent possible. If it is determined infeasible to avoid all significant sites, a mitigation program should be developed which would probably consist of Data Recovery. Data Recovery is the pr' cess of obtaining a representative sample of the various areas within each site. Avoidance, however, is preferred. In addition, all contractors involved in grading and construction of the pr `ect should be required to attend a detailed archaeological workshop to define the nature of resources in the tract and ensure a good understanding of the monitoring procedures that must be followed between them and Native American representatives during construction. In order to mitigate the loss of historic resources (i.e., the 1927 dairy loading structure and other agricultural structures f that era), it would be necessary to conduct an architectural and historic photo documentation o the structures pursuant to standards of the Historic American Buildings Survey and the Historic American Engineering Record. Alternatives -- In the lternatives section of the Draft EIR, all of the information gleaned from the environmental analysis of the project is used in an attempt to identify alternatives to the proposed project which would eliminate significant impacts or reduce them to levels of insignificance. Upon consideration of the "no project" alternative, the possibility of the project being located on an alternate site and a reduced-scale project, this section identifies an "environmentally superior" alternative. The environmentally superior project is the no project alternative because it avoids all of the project's impacts. Ho ever, when the no project alternative is identified as the environmentally superior alternative, CEQA requires that a second best alternative be identified. The reduced scale project would be superior to the proposed project because a reduction in the number of new residen ial lots would make it possible to avoid impacts related to noise and cultural resources, and incrementally reduce all other impacts. In addition, it would be possible for a reduced scale pro ect to avoid the need for sewer service if density is limited to one (1) residential lot for every .5 acres: 142 _ 1.15 = 94 lots without the commercial lot, and 139 _ 1.5 = 92 lots with the commercial lot. Table AP of the Draft E (Page V-5)provides a convenient comparison of project alternatives. Conclusion: The Draft EIR expands n the Initial Study, responds to comments received during the Notice of Preparation process and identifies the environmental impacts potentially associated with project approval. As required by CEQA, all written comments received by the end of the public review period (June 19, 1998 will appear in a Final EIR along with responses to each of those comments. 000055 ITEM NUMBER: B.I DATE.— JUNE 2- 198_ At a future Public Hearing (probably in July of this year), the Commission will consider making recommendations to the City Council with respect to the adequacy of that Final EIR and approval, conditional approval or denial of the project. At that time, the Commission will have to consider the environmental effects of the project along with the project's.economic and social effects. The Final EIR will:enable the Planning Commission and public to be informed about the project's environmental effects and possible ways to reduce them;a fiscal analysis will be available to disclose how the project will or will not effect City finances; and, presumably, there will be public testimony and discussion with respect to other"nonenvironmental" issues. No action is recommended at the current Hearing and discussion should be limited to matters pertaining to the completeness and adequacy of the Draft.EIR. PREPARED BY: Gary Kaiser, Associate Planner ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A--Location Map (General Plan) Attachment B --Location Map (zoning) Attachment C --Project Site Plan SEPARATE COVER: The Lakes General Plan Amendment and Tract 2271 Draft Environmental Impact Report, firma, March 1998. c:\data\wp\eir\deir2pc.doc 000056 ATTACHMENT E 8/4/98 STAFF REPORT --THE LAKES PROJECT •--�iiia ; � �!Q iy { Planning Commission Staff Report Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report Prepared for the Lakes Project (Davis Ranch/Midland Pacific Building Corporation) SUBJECT: Public review of the Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report (Revised DEIR) prepared for The Lakes Project. RE,COMMENDATIO : Staff recommends that the Commission hear public testimony concerning the adequacy of the Revised DEIR but that no action be taken. DISCUSSION: Background The public review period for the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) prepared for the Lakes Project was initially scheduled to run from April 22, 1998 to June 19, 1998. Although not required by CEQA, it is the practice of the City of Atascadero to hold a public hearing within the publ c review period. The hearing serves as a means of disseminating the information contained it the DEIR and is intended to foster more informed, and therefore more effective, public comments as to whether or not the DEIR prepared for the project is adequate. To be adequate, an EIR must contain the information required by CEQA and there must be an objective, good-faith effort at full disclosure. The Planning Commission's hearing during the public review period for the first DEIR prepared for the Lakes project was held on June 2, 1998. Typically, all of the comments submitted in writing to theCommunity Development Department prior to the close of the public review period would be included in a'-Final EIR along with responses to each of the comments. In this case, however, staff determined that the DEIR lacked information and that the information lacking was substantial enough to warrant recirculation of another DEIR. +00005' ITEM NUMBER: B. 1 DATE:- AUGUST 4 1`g98_ A Revised DEIR has been prepared and is undergoing public review. The Revised DEIR provides additional information and/or additional discussion on the subjects of water supply,. sewerage, agricultural resources, traffic, noise, and wildlife. The Revised DEIR also includes an additional project alternative, development of the property under the density allowed under current zoning. The changes reflected in the Revised DEIR were made in large part because of the comments received during public review of the first Draft EIR, but the comments are not included nor responded to individually in the Revised DEIR. The Final EIR will include all comments received during the first public review period as well as those received during-the current review period and responses to each of those comments will be provided at that time. The public review period for the Revised DEIR ends at 5:00 pm on August 27, 1998; all comments on the Revised DEIR must be filed with the Community Development Department by that time. Anclysis The Revised DEIR provides additional information supporting and/or clarifying the findings and conclusions of the first DEIR. The new information that pertains to agricultural resources and project alternatives, however, has resulted in findings and conclusions which differ from.those of the first DEIR. The staff report prepared for the Planning Commission's June 2, 1998 hearing is still accurate in descibing the proposed project and, with the exception of agricultural resources and project alternatives, is still accurate in summarizing most findings and conclusions with respect to the project's potential effects on the environment and the significance of those effects after mitigation (Attachment A). The following summarizes the new findings and conclusions of the Revised DEIR related to agricultural resources and project alternatives: Agricultural Resources -- The first DEIR considered the conversion of agricultural resources in this case to be a foregone conclusion because the property is already zoned for uses other than agriculture and has been for decades. The 1968 Atascadero Area General Plan designated almost half the site for industrial use and the remainder of the site was designated for residential development at a density that would allow lots between one-half('/z) acre and one (1) acre. That zoning remained until the 1980 Atascadero General Plan was adopted, at which time only a small portion of the site near Chico Road remained designated for industrial use and the remainder of the site was re-designated for single family use at a density similar to that allowable today. As evidenced by the letter received from the County Agricultural Commissioner's Office (Attachment B), one could reasonably argue that the impact on agricultural resources occurs when use of the site actually changes, regardless of what the historic zoning patterns might have been. In the Revised DEIR,the subject is approached from that standpoint. In 1997, the State Office of Land Conservation developed the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA) model to guide local agencies in determining the significance of converting agricultural land to other uses. The LESA model uses several factors including soil quality, parcel size, water availability and surrounding agricultural use status to assign a rating to a particular site. When the LESA model is applied to the subject site, a rating from 78 to 80 is assigned. This rating indicates that conversion of the subject site to a use other than agriculture would indeed be significant. According to the LESA model, only nineteen (19) acres of the subject site could be converted without there being a significant effect on agricultural resources. 000:058 ITEM NUMBER: R i DATE:-- AUGUST .4, 1998 Because no feasible mitigation is available to reduce impacts n p iso agricultural resources to a less than significant level, tile impact on agricultural resources would be considered significant and unavoidable. Project Alternatives The Revised DEIR includes an additional project alternative called "development under ex sting zoning," or existing density. Under this alternative, the possibility that the site could be s bdivided into 56 residential lots, each of 2.5 acres, is evaluated. Also evaluated is the possibil ty the site could be subdivided into 56 smaller lots clustered such that the remainder of the site(over half the site) is left for agricultural use. Although this density (56 lots) would be allowable under existing zoning, a zone change would be necessary to allow'_for the creation of lots less than 2.5 acres (i.e., a PD Overlay Zone would have to be established). The "no project" altern tive remains the environmentally superior project. Second to that, the clustered 56-lot projec is considered the environmentally superior project because it avoids significant impacts on ultural resources and noise and lessens impacts on all other resources compared to the other p eject alternatives. Conclusion: Public participation is an integral part of any successful planning process. When planning projects are subject to the req irements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the opportunity for public involvement is formalized by statute to occur at certain stages in a prescribed environmental review process. Pursuant to CEQA, the public must be notified of the availability of a DEIR and provided the opportunity to comment. All comments received in writing within the public review period must then be included in a Final EIR along with responses to those comments. This ensures that all public comments receive the attention they deserve and that they are given due consideration in the.decision-making process. PREPARED BY: Gary Kaiser, Associate Planner ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A-- June 2, 1998 staff report Attachment B -- Comments from Public Agencies during circulation of the DEIR' SEPARATE COVER: Revised Draft -- The Lakes General Plan Amendment and Tract 2271 Draft Environmental Im act Re ortprepared by firma, July 1998. The Planning Commissi n has already received the comments submitted by the general public during the public review period for the first DEIR. 000059 ATTACHMENT F RESOLUTION NO. PC 1999-001 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFY THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT PREPARED FOR THE LAKES PROJECT (Midland Pacific Building Corporation @ 3900 Traffic Way/Davis Ranch) WHEREAS, a Draft EIR was prepared for the project and made available for public review in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and WHEREAS, based on the comments received during the public review period for the Draft EIR, it was determined that substantial new information would have to be added in order to achieve adequacy; and WHEREAS, A Revised Draft EIR was therefore prepared and made available for public review in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and WHEREAS,the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero held public hearings during the review periods for both the Draft EIR and the Revised Draft EIR to consider their adequacy; and WHEREAS, a Final EIR has now been prepared which contains copies of all written comments received during the public review periods for both the Draft EIR and the Revised Draft EIR along with responses to each comment; and WHEREAS, a copy of the Final EIR has been presented to each public agency which commented on the Draft and/or Revised Draft EIR pursuant to Public Resources Code Section ,21092.5; NOW, THEREFORE,the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero, at a public hearing held on Tuesday, January 19, 1999,hereby resolves to recommend that the City Council certify the subject Final EIR based on the following Findings: T 000060 Resolution No. PC 19 9-001 Page 2 of 3 (a) The Final EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA; and (b) The Final EIR as presented to the Planning Commission,and the information contained therein was considered by the Planning Commission,prior to recommending action on the project for which the Final EIR was prepared; and (c) The Final EIR ill be presented to the City Council, and the information therein contained will be considered by the City Council, prior to taking final action on the project for which the Final EIR was prepared. - BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this Resolution be delivered forthwith by the Planning Commission ecretary to the City Council of the City of Atascadero. PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS 19' DAY OF JANURARY 1999. On motion by Commissioner , and seconded by Commissioner the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commi sioners: NOES: Commi 'sioners: ABSENT: Commi 'sioners: ADOPTED: CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA William Zimmerman, Chairman Attest: Paul M. Saldana 000061 ATTACHMENT G RESOLUTION NO. 1999-011 A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE LAKES PROJECT (Midland Pacific Building Corporation @ 3900 Traffic Way/Davis Ranch) WHEREAS, a Draft Environmental Impact Report(EIR)was prepared for the project and made available for public review in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA); and WHEREAS,based on the comments received during the public review period for the Draft EIR, it was determined that substantial new information would have to be added in order to achieve adequacy; and WHEREAS,A Revised Draft EIR was therefore prepared and made available for public review in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and WHEREAS the Planni ng Commission held public hearings during the review periods for both the Draft EIR and the Revised Draft EIR to consider their adequacy; and WHEREAS, a Final EIR has now been prepared which contains copies of all written comments received during the public review periods for both the Draft EIR and the Revised Draft EIR along with responses to each comment; and WHEREAS, a copy of the Final EIR has been presented to each public agency which commented on the Draft and/or Revised Draft EIR pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21092.5; and WHEREAS,the Planning Commission recommended certification of the Final EIR on January 19, 1999; NOW, THEREFORE,the City Council, at a public hearing held on Tuesday, February 9, 1999,hereby resolves to certify the Final EIR based on the following findings: (a) The Final EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA; and (b) The Final EIR was presented to the Planning Commission, and the information contained therein was considered by the Planning Commission,prior to recommending action on the project for which the Final EIR was prepared; and 000062 Resolution No.1999-0 1 Page 2 of 2 (c) The Final EIR as considered by the City Council,prior to taking final action on the project for which the Final EIR was prepared. On motion by , and seconded by the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA Ray Johnson, Mayor Attest: Marcia M. Torgerson, City Clerk Approved as to form: Roy A. Hanley, City Attorney 000063 ATTACHMENT H RESOLUTION NO. 1999-012 A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT#97001,THEREBY CHANGING THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP FROM"SUBURBAN SINGLE FAMILY" TO "MODERATE DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY" FOR PROPERTY AT 3900 TRAFFIC WAY (The Lakes Project: Midland Pacific Building Corporation/Davis Ranch) WHEREAS,the Planning Commission, at a Public Hearing held on January 19, 1999, studied and considered General Plan Amendment#97001, after first studying and considering the Final EIR prepared for the project, and WHEREAS,the Planning Commission made no recommendation on the general plan map amendment request; and WHEREAS,the laws and regulations relating to the preparation and public notice of environmental documents, as set forth in the State and local guidelines for implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)have been adhered to; and WHEREAS, a timely and properly noticed Public Hearing upon the General Plan Amendment applications was held by the City Council at which hearing evidence, oral and • documentary, was admitted on behalf of said General Plan amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council, in a regular session assembled on February 9, 1999, approves General Plan Amendment#97001 amending the Land Use Map as shown on Exhibit A. On motion by , and seconded by the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: i 000064 Resolution 1999-012 Page 2 of 2 ADOPTED: CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA Ray Johnson,Mayor Attest: Marcia M. Torgerson, City Clerk Approved as to form: Roy A. Hanley, City Attorney 000065 Q *al \`�----- ra antaajdi sjl9ii j1J •�• Y� ��g� E 1 aasza• ��'A AR 1 - �� .� � �` s���j���� f1v'�� /!a0�ty;•�', 1. A • ., rl � � '�•' C!""�°!l ," �t �SB�°s$ �teMFO �yvgj� AMR t � �\�,��"•®"s�'g�+�q\°v3� ''fir ���� ���i � �� �....� ` 1363b38S 081!511.•e 9.a, 'a0 e6�s®' ''�'*♦ lmwillt lilt! 11 \� �; " ►�� s!'��o �daa .,*�eraai ! i�� �i�� (Q.© _r moll ••3 X `i�� A A 3°ill� A\� �• um,.naw �� 41 _ • `'0!=� 3 JJ J J.i•�•lIJI l '��� �_:Ij,•,�.0 gll'll�l 3 lI=i ` �l •�1L �� l�•iai m,w +�s Wa ►'ui��� s/ � .",`• � rgwj�l Egg ^✓ ``` , � !lam '�{%` �'��►� WA ii1 . ORDINANCE NO. 357 ATTACHMENT AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO APPROVING ZONE CHANGE#97002 THEREBY AMENDING THE ZONING MAP FROM RESIDENTIAL SUBURBAN(RS) TO RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY (RSF-Y) AND ADOPTING PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY ZONE NO. 14 FOR PROPERTY AT 3900 TRAFFIC WAY (The Lake 'Project: Midland Pacific Building Corporation/Davis Ranch) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a Public Hearing held on January 19, 1999, studied and considered Zone Change#97002, after first studying and considering the Final EIR prepared for the project, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission made no recommendation on the zone change; and WHEREAS,the laws and regulations relating to the preparation and public notice of environmental documents, as set forth in the State and local guidelines for implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)have been adhered to; and • WHEREAS, a timely and properly noticed Public Hearing upon the Zone Change application was held b the City Council, at which hearing evidence, oral and documentary,was admitted on behalf of said Zoning amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council does ordain as follows: Section 1. Findings. 1. The zone change is consistent with General Plan policies and all other applicable ordinances and policies of the City. 2. The zone change will not, m itself,result in significant environmental impacts. The Environmental Impact Report prepared for the zone change and for the project has been certif. d as adequate, in accordance with California environmental laws. Section 2. Zoning m!qp change. The Official Z ning Map of the City of Atascadero on file in the Community Development Department is hereby amended as shown on the attached Exhibit A,which is made part of this ordinance by reference. 0000,6'7 Ordinance no. 357 Page 2 of 2 Section 3. Zoning text change. The Zoning Ordinance, Title 9 of the Municipal Code, is hereby amended by the addition of Planned Development overlay zone no 14, as shown on Exhibit B,made a part of this ordinance by reference. Section 4. Publication. A summary of this ordinance,approved by the City Attorney,together with the ayes and noes, shall be published at least five days prior to its final passage in the Atascadero News, a newspaper published and circulated in said City, and the same shall go into effect at the expiration of thirty (30) days after its said final passage. A copy of the full text of this ordinance shall be on file in the City Clerk's Office on and after the date following introduction and passage to print and shall be available to any interested member of the public. Section 5. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be effective at 12:01 a.m. on the 31"day after its final passage. On motion by Commissioner , and seconded by Commissioner the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety by the following roll call vote: 0 AYES: Commissioners: NOES: Commissioners: ABSENT: Commissioners: DATE ADOPTED: By: Ray Johnson, Mayor Attest: Marcia M. Torgerson, City Clerk Approved as to form: Roy A. Hanley, City Attorney 000068 • • � 11 i ....N,/ lilt 1111 ► ♦'� � ► ♦ �����I�ii�11�; 111; =.. tAVw pop ��� ���,, ..,� . 111 ,:: • . : • .f►�.. pplvilw ��, �,►, , ♦ � s� �• �� "��� �■:ate � '••-,: • •• • •,. ►�♦r � ' A ■ r MAP � � , � tilt. •�� � ��jr��� ■ 11 tttttt 1111 . • ORDINANCE 357 EXHIBIT -B 9-3.658 Establishment of Planned Development Overlay Zone No. 14 (PD 14). Planned Development Overlay Zone No. 14 is established as shown on the official zoning maps (Section 9-1.102). The following development standards and conditions applicable therein are also established: (a) The maximum density shall not exceed one dwelling unit for each acre of land although individual lots may be smaller provided that the overall project density conforms to the specified maximum density. (b) Individual lot sizes shall be established in conjunction with the Tentative Tract Map and shall not be required to comply with minimum lot size criteria for the Residential Single Family (RSF-Y) (1 acre minimum with sewer, 1.5 acre minimum without) provided that the overall density conforms to the specified maximum density. (c) Design of the subdivision and construction of the project shall incorporate mitigation measures set forth in the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR)prepared by Firma September 1998. (d) A Tentative Tract Map showing the proposed division of land for the entire site shall be submitted and approved prior to any site development. The Tentative Tract Map may propose a phasing plan for improvements and future land divisions. (e) Individual lots created by the Tract Map approved for the entire site shall not be permitted to be reduced in size by subsequent land division. 0000"70 ATTACHMENT J RESOLUTION NO. 1999-013 A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP#97003 (Tract 2271) SUBDIVIDING RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY AT 3900 TRAFFIC WAY (TTM#97003;Midland Pacific Corporation) WHEREAS, Midland Pacific Corporation requested approval of a Vesting Tentative Tract map to subdi 'ide a 142 acre site located at 3900 Traffic Way into 122 single family residential lots, one O remaining residential lot and eight(8) open space lots; and WHEREAS, the site is to be rezoned to Residential Single Family (RSF-Y) wherein the zoning of the site allows for the uses and densities proposed; WHEREAS, the proposed project is in conformance with the Land Use Element of the General Plan and all xher applicable General Plan policies; and WHEREAS, the proposed project, as conditioned, and subject to said rezoning is consistent with the Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance and all other applicable codes, ordinances and standards; and WHEREAS, he Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the tentative tract map application on J;nuary 19, 1999 and made no recommendation on the tentative map; and WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on the tentative tract map application on February 9, 1999 and accepted testimony, both written and oral, on the merits of the subdivision proposal. NOW, THEREFORE,the City Council finds that: 1. The proposed subdivision, as conditioned, is consistent with the General Plan and applicable zoning requirements. 2. The design and improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the General Plan and applicable zoning requirements. 3. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of development proposed. 4. The design and improvement of the proposed subdivision will not cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish and 0000' 1 Resolution 1999-013 Page 2 of 2 wildlife or their habitat. 5. The design of the subdivision will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through, or the use of property within, the proposed subdivision; or substantially equivalent alternative easements are provided. 6. The proposed subdivision design and type of improvements proposed will not cause serious public health problems. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council does hereby approveTentative Tract Map #97003 for the division of a 142 acre site located at 3900 Traffic Way into one hundred twenty two (122) single family residential lots, one (1) remaining residential lot and eight (8) open space lots as shown on Exhibit A subject to the Conditions of Approval shown in Exhibit B. On motion by and seconded by ,the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: i ABSENT: ADOPTED: CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA Ray Johnson,Mayor ATTEST: Marcia M. Torgerson, City Clerk Approved as to form: Roy A. Hanley, City Attorney 0000'72 • t91$ 1979 — EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION 1999-013 TENTATIVETRACTMAP 97003 t M(R •, \ •I .:I .:I •11 ::1 , i. I, •1 i •1, .l' •:./ .t i , " .1S i ,,i ,.� /"-� _ _i i .- _ C _ 1 i 'i 'i •., \ snrls n.rtn .' '__�. !/i i .•! I �I( i 1 i i� i i� -i - lig���� � ��� - .`- ��/! - i. i •.1 fel a� i „, ..� i .:i .,i .:i 'i/ ��;� � ' ,� �`` .•`i ! --,i- i 1,' �1 ,t .1, .:� 1 � � � � { I -J, ti��a:+.,�.7711” :� � 7-7 ri it rafir � zz� e SOURCE: APPLICANT 000073 Resolution no. 1999-013 Exhibit B Tentative Tract Map#97003 3900 Traffic Way (Tract 2271 Conditions Enizineeriniz Division Conditions 1. All public improvements, drainage improvements, on-site road improvements and sewer improvements shall be constructed in conformance with the City of Atascadero Engineering Department Standard Specifications and Drawings or as directed by the City Engineer. 2. The applicant shall enter into a Plan Check/Inspection agreement with the City. Prior to recordation of the final map, all outstanding plan check/inspection fees shall be paid. 3. The applicant shall obtain an encroachment prior to commencing work within existing rights-of-way. 4. The applicant shall submit a preliminary soils report for the property to determine the presence of expansive soil or other soil problems. The report shall make recommendations regarding grading of the proposed site. A final soils report shall be submitted by the soils engineer prior to the final inspection. The report shall certify that all grading was inspected and approved and that all work done is in conformance with the plans and the preliminary report. 5. A statement shall be placed on the final map that notes that a soils report has been prepared for the subdivision. The statement shall provide the date the report was prepared along with the name and address of the soils engineer or geologist who prepared the report. 6. All public improvements or improvements in the public right-of-way shall be secured with a 100%performance guarantee and a 50%labor and materials guarantee until the improvements`are accepted as substantially complete by the City Engineer. Prior to the final inspection of the improvements, and before the other guarantees mentioned in this condition are released, a 10% maintenance guarantee shall be posted to cover the improvements for a period of 1 year from the date of the final inspection. The guarantee amounts shall be based on an engineer's estimate submitted by the project engineer and approved by the City Engineer. The estimate shall be based on City standard unit prices. The guarantees posted for this project shall be approved by the City Attorney. 7. The applicant shall monument all property corners for construction control and shall promptly replace them if disturbed. The applicant shall install all final property 0000'74 TTM 97003 Conditions Page 2 of 7 corners and 'street monuments, or bond for them, prior to acceptance of the improvements. 8. The applicani shall submit a written statement from a registered civil engineer certifying that all work shown on the plans has been-completed and is in full compliance with the plans accepted by the City and the Uniform Building Code (UBC)prior to the final inspection. 9. The applicant shall submit written certification that all survey monuments have been set as shown on the final map prior to the final inspection. 10. All existing and proposed utility, pipeline, open space, or other easements are to be shown on the final map. If there are building or other restrictions related to the, easements, th 'y shall be noted on the final map. 11. A final map drawn in substantial conformance with the approved tentative map and in compliance with these conditions of approval shall be submitted for review and approval in c nformance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City's Subdivision Ordinance prior to recordation. The map shall be signed by the City Engineer prior to it being placed on the agenda for City Council acceptance. 12. Monuments s all be set at all new property corners. A registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor shall indicate, by certificate on the final map, that corners have been set or wi 1 be set by a date specific and that such monuments will be sufficient to enable the sur ey to be retraced. 13. The applican shall submit a preliminary subdivision guarantee for review in conjunction with the processing of the final map. 14. A black line clear Mylar (0.4 mil) copy and a blue line print of the tract map shall be provided to the City upon recordation. 15. A Mylar copy and a blue line print of as-built improvement plans, signed by the registered engineer who prepared the plans shall be provided to the City Engineer prior to the final inspection. 16. The applicant shall have the tentative map reviewed by all applicable public and private utility companies (cable, telephone, gas, electric, Atascadero Mutual Water Company). The applicant shall obtain a letter from each utility company which indicates their review of the tentative map. The letter shall identify any new easements which may by required by the utility company. New easements shall be shown on the final map. The letters from the utility companies shall be submitted to the City prior to recordation of the final map. 00©075 TTM 97003 Conditions Page 3 of 7 17. The applicant shall be responsible for the relocation and/or alteration of existing utilities. 18. The applicant shall install all new utilities (water, gas, electric, cable TV and telephone) underground. Utilities shall be extended to the property line frontage of each lot or its public utility easement. 19. The applicant shall submit a composite utility plan signed by a representative of each public utility and the Atascadero Mutual Water Company. The composite utility plan shall also be signed by the City Chief of Wastewater Operations. 20. The applicant shall pay all sewer annexation fees prior to recordation of the final map. 21. The applicant shall design and construct upgrades to Pump Station #5 required to accommodate existing wet weather flows plus the increased flow generated by the subdivision. The upgrades shall be constructed prior to recordation of the final map. The applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City to fund a pro rata share of the improvements to Pump Station#5 prior to recordation of the final map. The form and content of the agreement shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney and the City Engineer. The applicant's pro rata share shall be based on the anticipated average daily dry weather flow generated by the subdivision divided by the existing average daily dry weather flow to Pump Station#5. 22. The minimum size of the sewer gravity mains shall be eight inches or as directed by the City Engineer. The wet well for the sewer lift station and the force main required to serve the subdivision shall be designed to handle a one hundred gallon per minute flow or as directed by the City Engineer. The sewer lift station, force main and other sewer facilities within the subdivision shall be privately owned and maintained. Grading and Drainage Improvements 23. Drainage shall cross lot lines only where drainage easements have been provided. Drainage from off-site areas shall be conveyed across the project site in drainage easements. 24. The applicant shall limit storm water discharge from the developed site to the design capacity of the downstream drainage improvements. The applicant shall demonstrate that the design capacity of the downstream drainage improvements, or natural watercourses, can adequately convey the total flow of storm water from the fully developed watershed plus the developed project site without adversely affecting other properties. 25. The applicant shall submit a grading and drainage plan, prepared by a registered civil engineer, for review and approval by the City Engineer prior to recordation of the final map. 0 0000'76 TTM 97003 Conditions Page 4 of 7 26. The applicant shall show both the pre-developed and post-developed 100-year limits of inundationon the grading and drainage plan. Drainage calculations in conformancewith Section 5 of the City Standards shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Engineer prior to recordation of the final map. Road ImDrovernents 27. The project E describes two access scenarios for the subdivision. Scenario A offsite improvements will be required if the subdivision is approved with two points of access. Scenario B offsite improvements will be required if the subdivision is approved with a single point of access at the northerly end of the subdivision. 28. The applicant shall submit road improvement plans prepared by a registered civil engineer for re' iew and approval by the City Engineer prior to recordation of the final map. Road improvement plans shall conform to the requirements of the City Standard Specifications, Section 2 - Preparation of Plans. R-value testing shall be done, and the pavement section designed by a registered civil engineer to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Scenario A offsite improvements shall be required if the subdiv sion is approved with two points of access. Scenario B offsite improvements shall be required if the subdivision is approved with a single point of access at the northerly end of the subdivision. Road improvements shall include, but not be limited to the following: A. A northbound right-turn lane with a storage length of at least seventy-five feet (Scenario A) or one hundred twenty five feet (Scenario B) shall be constructed on Traffic Way at its intersection with Chi co Road or as directed by the City Engineer. B. A southbound left-turn lane with a storage length of at least seventy five feet shall be constructed on Traffic Way at its intersection with Chico Road or as directed by the City Engineer(Scenario A or B). C. Drainage improvements shall be constructed to eliminate the existing localized flooding which occurs on Traffic Way at its intersection with Chico Road. D. Chico Road shall be fully improved from the subdivision's northerly access to Traffic Way in conformance with City Standard Drawing No. 403 (Rural Collector), or as directed by the City Engineer (Scenario A or B). E. Hidalgo Avenue south of Soledad Avenue shall be improved in conformance with City Standard Drawing No. 403 (Rural Co lector), or as directed by the City Engineer. The southerly project 0000'77 TTM 97003 Conditions Page 5 of 7 access shall align with Hildago Avenue and intersect Soledad Avenue within ten degrees of perpendicular(Scenario A). F. Stop signs" shall be installed on Sycamore Road at its intersection with Hidalgo Avenue. Sycamore Road shall be realigned to intersect Hidalgo Avenue within ten degrees of perpendicular (Scenario A). G. Stop signs shall be installed on Sycamore Avenue at its intersection with Miramon Avenue(Scenario A). H. Stop signs shall be installed on Soledad Avenue at its intersection with Hildago Avenue. Traffic on Hildago Avenue and the project access road will not be required to stop (Scenario A). I. Private on-site streets shall be constructed in conformance with City Standard Drawing No. 403 (Rural Collector) or as directed by the City Engineer. Fifty-foot wide road easements shall be provided for all on-site streets. J. Private on-site cul-de-sacs shall be constructed in conformance with City Standard Drawing No. 415 (Typical cul-de-sac, Urban) or as directed by the City Engineer. Road easements in conformance with City Standard Drawing No. 415 shall be provided for all cul-de-sacs. K. The applicant shall provide private slope easements as needed to accommodate cut or fill slopes for the private, on-site roads. The applicant shall provide public slope easements as needed to accommodate cut or fill slopes for the public improvements required by these conditions of approval. L. The applicant may be required to overlay existing pavement in order to remedy an inadequate structural section or to remedy a deteriorated paving surface. Transitions shall be constructed where required to achieve a smooth join with existing improvements. M. The applicant shall install all street name, traffic signs, traffic striping and pavement marking as directed by the City Engineer. N. The applicant shall install streetlights at the intersection of the project access with Soledad Avenue and Chico Road (Scenario A). The applicant shall install a streetlight at the intersection of the project access with Chico Road(Scenario B). 0000'78 TTM 97003 Conditions Page 6 of 7 29. The at-grade railroad crossing on Chico Road shall be improved to conform with the improvement c f Chico Road to City Standard Drawing No. 403 (Rural Collector) or as directed by the City Engineer. The railroad crossing improvements shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) and Union Pacific Railroad (UPRPQ. The applicant shall submit evidence that the PUC and UPRR have reviewed and approved the improvements to the existing at-grade railroad crossing (Scenario A or B). 30. The applicant shall acquire title or interest in any offsite land that may be required to allow access to the subdivision and construction of the offsite improvements required by these conditions of approval. The applicant shall bear all costs associated with the acquisitions. The applicant shall gain concurrence from all adjacent property owners whose ingress or egress is affected by construction of the improvements required by these conditions of approval (Scenario A or B). Phasine. Maintenance Agreements, Revised Tentative Ma 31. The applicant shall submit a revised phasing plan for review and approval by the Community D velopment Director and the City Engineer prior to recordation of the final map. T ie applicant shall construct all improvements necessary to serve each phase of the subdivision as determined by the City Engineer and the Community Development irector. 32. The applicant shall construct a temporary turn-around at the terminus of all streets which are conE tructed in phases and exceed one hundred and fifty feet in length. The turn-arounds s all be constructed in conformance with City Standard Drawing No. 430 (Fire Access Standards). The turn-arounds shall have an all-weather surfacing. 33. The applicant shall submit agreements for the maintenance of all private roads, sewer facilities, drainage facilities and other common-use facilities. The agreements shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer and the City Attorney. Recorded copies of the agreements shall be submitted to the City prior to recordation of the final map. 34. The applicantshall submit a revised tentative map which correctly indicates the subdivision boundary and includes the legal description of all property within the subdivision. Community Development Department 35. The final map shall be in conformance with the conditions of Planned Development Overlay Zone No. 14 and access shall be designed in accordance with "scenario B", discussed above under condition no. 27. 0000,79 TTM 97003 Conditions Page 7 of 7 36. Construction activities on-site shall be in conformance with the mitigation measures contained in the Final EIR related to air quality and noise. 37.A reflectorized house number master sign system shall be installed at all street intersections and an individualized reflectorized address sign shall be placed on the right hand side of each residence. 38. Water supply mains and fire hydrants shall be designed, installed and tested and approved by the Water Company and the Fire Department. 39. Exterior fencing shall be consistent throughout the project. Design and appearance of fences or walls shall be compatible with the design of the dwellings. Fencing of the individual parcels shall not extend into the front setback beyond the front of the individual residence. 40. Tree protection/mitigation plans shall be reviewed and approved prior to the issuance of permits. Final utility plans shall eliminate trenching within the dripline of native trees by locating all utility lines away from such trees and driplines. 41. Open spaces and common areas shall be planted with drought tolerant landscaping and shall include the planting of native trees, as defined in the City's Native Tree Ordinance. 42. A landscaping plan shall be submitted and approved by the Community Development Department for all-open space and common areas. 43. General Plan Amendment 97001 and Zone Change 97002 shall be approved and effective prior to the recordation of the map. 44. This tentative map approval shall expire two (2) years from the date of final approval unless an extension of time is granted pursuant to a written request received proper to the expiration date. 45. The project design and construction activities shall incorporate the findings and recommendations of the Phase 2 Archeology report dated September 1998. 46. All construction activity shall be in conformance with the building standards and regulations (Uniform Building Code) in effect at the time plans are reviewed and approved. 47. Improvements to Hidalgo Avenue and adjacent property, for the purposes of establishing an emergency access to the property, shall be the minimum required for adequate emergency access, to the approval of the Fire Department. The improvements shall be designed to change the appearance of the road and residential property as little as possible. 000080 ATTACHMENT K RESOLUTION NO. 1999-011 A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO DENYING A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND ZONE CHANGE,AND DENYING A TENTATIVE MAP THAT WOULD HAVE CREATED 122 HOME SITES AIN D RELATED AMENITIES AT 3900 TRAFFIC WAY ( PA 97001,ZC 97002,TTM 97003; Midland Pacific) WHEREAS, Midland Pacific Building Corporation requested a general plan amendment, a zoning change, and a tentative tract map to divide an approximately-140-acre site into 131 lots, 122 for home sites and the remainder for associated amenities; and WHEREAS, e site is located in the Residential Suburban (RS) zoning district which would be changed to he Residential Single Family(RSF-Y)zone, which would allow the type and density of develo ment proposed; WHEREAS; he City Council conducted a public hearing on the proposed map amendments and tent' tive map on February 9, 1999, and considered testimony and reports from staff, the applicants, and the public; NOW, THEREFORE,the City Council takes the following actions: SECTION 1. Findings. The City Council makes the following finding: 1. The applications are not consistent with the General Plan, specifically (CITY COUNCIL FILL IN) SECTION 2. ,Denial. The City Council does hereby deny the general plan and zoning map and text amendments and the tentative map. On motion by and seconded by ,the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: 00008 Resolution 1999-011 3900 Traffic Way Page 2 ADOPTED: CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA . Ray Johnson, Mayor ATTEST: Marcia M. Torgerson, City Clerk Approved as to form: Roy A. Hanley, City Attorney 000082 ATTACHMENT L PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION MINUTES City Administration Building January 19, 1999 7:00 P.M. COMMISSIONERS RESENT: Fonzi, Clark,Zimmerman COMMISSIONERS SENT: Sauter,Eddings STAFF PRESENT: Paul Saldana,Director; Judith Lautner,Associate .Planner; John Neil,Assistant City Engineer; David Foote, Consultant; Patricia Hicks,Administrative Secretary AT THIS TIME, MA CIA TORGERSON, CITY CLERK, CONDUCTED THE SWEARING IN CEREMONY OF J VEW PLANNING COMMISSIONER DAVID BENTZ. PUBLIC COMMENT: None SUBJECT: A: CONSENT CALENDAR - None SUBJECT: B. HEARINGS APPEARANCES AND REPORTS 1. The Lakes Pr 'ect—Tract 2271 —3900 Traffic Way (Davis Ranch/Midland Pacific Building Corporation) Consider app r val of request to amend the General Plan designation and zoning of the 143-acre site, allow connection to public sewer and allow for its subdivision into 122 single family residential lots, eight (8) open space parcels totaling approximately 50 acres, and one (1)remaining lot. ,(Staff Recommendation: (1)Adopt Resolution 1999-001 thereby recom ending that the City Council certify that the Final EIR prepared for the project has been completed and reviewed in compliance with CEQA and state and local guidelines ad pted for the implementation of CEQA; (2) Adopt Resolution 1999-002, thereby recommending that the City Council approve GPA #97001 and ZC #97002 by changing the and use designation and zoning of the subject site from Suburban Single Family to Moderate Density Single Family and extending of the Urban Services Line to provide access to the public sewer system; (3) Adopt Resolution PC 1999-003, thereby recommending that the City Council approve Tentative Tract Map #97003 based on • certain Findings and subject to certain Conditions of Approval. 000083 Planning Commission Meeting—January 19, 1999 Page Two of Nine Chairman Zimmerman asked newly appointed Commissioner Bentz if he felt fully informed on the background that has been provided to the long-term Commissioners. Commissioner Bentz said he has read the EIR three (3) times, has been out to the site and has discussed some of his concerns with the Planning staff. Judy Lautner provided the staff report and offered to answer questions from the Commissioners. Commissioner Fonzi— asked the status of the commercial development that had been previously requested. Judy informed her that the applicant had withdrawn that request. Commissioner Clark — wondered why the secondary access off of Traffic Way wasn't being considered. John Neil said that particular access had not been evaluated by the EIR because these type of"at-grade" crossings are being prohibited by the Public Utility Commission for the "E" Line which is the line that runs from here to San Francisco. Commissioner Clark acknowledged that getting permission from the PUC might be difficult but asked if staff or the applicant had pushed for this or researched it at all. John stated that he didn't know about the applicant but City staff had not investigated it. PUBLIC COMMENT: Dennis Moresco, applicant—said this was a unique subdivision; explaining how they had arrived at the number of 122 lots and the rational for the lakes and the gated community concept. He informed the Commission that the trend is changing in that"empty nesters"want to downsize the land amount but upsize their homes. In order for this project to be "cost neutral" for the City, Mr. Moresco stated that a Homeowner's Association would be created to maintain the roads and the lakes. The most controversial issue related to this project is the traffic, and specifically the traffic on Hidalgo. The applicants support Alternative B — a single access on Chico Road — in fairness to the River Gardens' residents and to the project. Mr. Moresco asked for clarification of Condition No. 21 of the Tentative Map. John Neil said that Pump Station No. 5 needs to be upgraded now; with the additional flow from this project the deficiencies will become worse. There are City funds budgeted to perform the upgrade; the City is looking for the applicant to construct the upgrade and the City will pay its proportionate share. Dennis confirmed that he could agree with that. He said he had a problem with the last sentence of Condition No. 5 on Page 7, which requires the installation of fencing along the railroad to buffer the noise from the railroad. If a solid fence for a certain section is required he would have no problem with that; however,he wouldn't want a solid fence along the whole railroad track the length of the property because it would take away the visual amenity that they have worked so hard to provide for viewing the lakes and the openspace. Alice Rew, 4500 Hidalgo Avenue—read a prepared statement, attach hereto as Exhibit"A". 000084 Planning Commissio Meeting—January 19, 19.99 Page Three of Nine F. J. Bailey, 5065 Sycamore Road — is not opposed to the project but very concerned with the traffic that will be gen' rated by this project. He opposes Hidalgo and Sycamore being used for access. If Hidalgo is used as an emergency access only, he would like the gate to be a solid knockdown barrier and he wondered who would be responsible to replace/repair the emergency barrier. Gary Graton, 4465 Sycamore Road—read a prepared statement attached hereto as Exhibit"B". Eric Greening, 6600 Lewis Avenue — spoke in opposition of the project saying the EIR fails to mitigate the conversion of 122 acres of agriculture land and fails to address the amount and nature of future railroa i traffic at the"at-grade" crossing at Chico. Jim Blaes, 4480 Sycamore Road — suggested that the developer look into the Water Company Road as an alternative access. Mr. Blaes made personal remarks against the developer. Chairman Zimmerman asked that future speakers refrain from personal remarks against individuals. Diane Graton, 4465 Sycamore Road—read a prepared statement attached hereto as Exhibit"C". John Heatherington, 790 Yesal Avenue — opposes the project because of traffic, sewage overload, and a gated community, in general. He feels that this property should be open space as a historic site. Dorothy McNeil, 8765 Sierra Vista Road—spoke in opposition of the project and wondered why staff was recommending approval without a completed Sewer Master Plan. Jennifer Hageman, 8 05 Santa Lucia Road — provided an overhead from the "Economic Analysis" that was done for this project attached hereto as Exhibit "D" and read a prepared statement attached hereto as Exhibit"E". David Mulvey, 5020 Sycamore Road — opposes the project. He feels that a gated community changes the character f the City. He said that the developer talks about amenities that will only be available to people that live in the gated community; he also wondered what the cities cost will be for the upgrade of the pump station. Paul and Sheree Ricketts, 4475 Sycamore Road — Jennifer Hageman read a statement from the Ricketts attached hereto as Exhibit"F". . . . .The Chairman ca led for a break at 8:43 p.m. —the meeting was reconvened at 8:54 p.m. . . Donna Porter, 5095 Sycamore Road—opposes any access through River Gardens. 000085 Planning Commission Meeting—January 19, 1999 Page Four of Nine Maureen Luebbers, 2865 Ferro Carril Road— said that 40 to 50 homes were under construction on Ferro Carril that will also use Chico Road as an access but agrees that Hidalgo is not a good access. Louis F. Coppo III, 7050 Tecorida — asked that this development and future developments be looked at for play areas for the children of Atascadero. Mike Jackson, 5502 Ensenada Avenue — feels that the EIR is flawed; and stated that Via was completely omitted from the Traffic Study. He said that this project only takes from the City, giving nothing back in return and is opposed to Homeowner Associations. Mike urged the Planning Commission to continue this item to another meeting because of the missing and new Commissioners. Laree Kellerman, 5463 Honda — would like the Commission to respect the General Plan — it's inclusive — and this project is exclusive. There have been a lot of intelligent, conscientious comments tonight, which shows the "holes" that this plan has. The sad thing about tonight is that many of the people here, feel that you are not going to listen to them. Stan Juarez, 4635 Hidalgo Avenue —main concerns are traffic and established utilities. He said it would be expensive for the individual property owners if the utilities were to be undergrounded. He feels that there are a lot of unanswered questions. Jack Delano, 4768 Hidalgo Avenue— opposed to the taking of prime farmland for housing. He said that the project land has water problems. He's concerned with traffic that will be generated. John Goers, 5200 Dolores Avenue — said he has heard no positive comments except from the developer. The Commission should ask, "what are the benefits to the community". He asked that smaller lots not be allowed. Dennis L. Heaton, 4565 Hidalgo Avenue— said he has had to wait many times when the access has been blocked by a train. He wondered what the definition was for "moderate housing", and stated that the project does not follow the General Plan. Rush Kolmaine, P.O. Box 1990 — commented that this particular piece of property used to be . considered the most viable Industrially zoned land in the City and the railroad which constitutes a barrier to this property also serves as a main transportation link for industrial products. Dennis Moresco, applicant—was asked to return to answer questions from the Commission. Commissioner Bentz — asked Mr. Moresco to comment on the road south of Chico and why it was not considered as an access. John Falkenstien, Cannon Associates, explained that it is a railroad right-of-way,which is private property owned by the railroad. It is a private crossing for 000086 Planning Commissio Meeting—January 19, 1999 Page Five of Nine the Davis Ranch; the Davis family has an agreement with the railroad for access for ranch .purposes. The railroa is very particular about their easement rights and you can't change the character of an easement. They can't go to the railroad and ask to change the character of that easement or to increase traffic on that easement or use it for another purpose. Commissioner Fonzi asked about the Water Company access. John Falkenstien said that is also a private access aid their access isn't available for public use. Dennis Moresco said that if Hidalgo is an emergency exit only, the road goes both ways. The residents of River Gardens would have access thr' ugh the lakes property in case of emergency. He wanted to remind the Commission that the -grade railroad crossing is the same railroad that goes through downtown Paso Robles, goes through Curbaril in Atascadero, Highway 58 in Santa Margarita and crosses Foothill Blvd. in San Luis Obispo. Commissioner Fonzi asked if there would be walk-through gates for bikes and pedestrian traffic. Dennis said there would be no public access; this is a gated community. The Commission had uestions about a reduced scale project, access, Homeowner's Association, playing fields for the youth of Atascadero, care of the lakes in a drought situation and about sewer instead of septi Mr. Moresco said he 'wasn't interested in a reduced scale project. He said he favored access at Chico Road with Hidalgo used only as an emergency access. He explained that the lakes would be designed to keep movement and provide oxygen so there shouldn't be a problem in drought situations; he was oposed to playing fields in the vicinity of the gated community but was willing to contribute $250,000 for playing fields in another area. Regarding the question of sewer versus septic, be stated that this project needs to be sewered .because there is a concern about having that may septic systems so close to the Water Company's wells. Mr. Moresco explained that he was 't particularly fond of Homeowner's Associations but felt it was the only way to go in order fc r the project to be "cost neutral" for the City. He estimated that the dues would run around $1 0.00/month. Dennis said that based on the way they're proposing this project, there aren't another 122 homes in the community of Atascadero today that will cost the City less than these 12 2 homes. Commissioner Bentz wondered how long from start to finish for this project. Dennis thought worse case scenario—'5 years—best case scenario—3 years -. . . . . . . closed to public testimony. . . . . Chairman Zimmerman— asked staff to explain the differences between the recommendations of the September 29, 1998 staff report and the current staff report with regards to the PD Overlay, and the sewer study. Paul answered that staff's recommendation for approval with respect to the General Plan Amendraent has not changed. The only difference in the General Plan Amendment recommendation was with respect to the Urban Services Line for the provision of sewer. On 000087 Planning Commission Meeting—January 19, 1999 Page Six of Nine December 2°d, staff attended a workshop regarding the Lower Salinas Watershed Sanitary Survey and the conclusions of that Sanitary Survey were: In addition, most of the developed areas adjacent to the River are served by septic tanks and leach fields and are not sewered. Malfunctioning leach fields, particularly adjacent to the Atascadero Mutual Water Company well field, represent a potential impact to the water supply." Paul said that the report outlines recommendations to jurisdictions that review development proposals along the lower Salinas watershed which should be taken into consideration. One of those is the protection of drinking water, and design control that will encourage the protection of water quality is the most effective strategy to accomplish that goal. That new significant information, caused staff to revisit the issue of sewer service relative to the potential impacts on the water quality in the community. Paul explained that in addition to that new information, the Phase II Archaeology Study was received, which further looked into the significant cultural resources that were identified on the site. It outlined specific proposals to mitigate those—which Judy outlined in the staff report — and are found in the Conditions of Approval. The original staff recommendation of denial of the tentative map was a result of the unknown impacts on those cultural resources. Staff did not have, at the time the September 29th staff report was prepared, the benefit of any information on the archaeological resources other than the Phase I information in the EIR. In the significant areas where there were cultural resources, we found that they were protected by virtue of the open space or other adequate mitigation measures. The tract as designed will not have the previously presumed impacts; however, we didn't know that on September 29th Judy Lautner said that the zoning regulations do set out four (4) Findings that need to made to approve a planned development overlay. Staff feels that those Findings can be made; it's certainly up to the Commission and the Council to determine whether they agree with staff's recommendation on these items. The Findings are intentionally broad, in general, so they can cover a wide range of situations and can be read in different ways. Commissioner Clark—commented that the most difficult part of the project for him is the access. He wondered if there could be just one access and no emergency access on Hidalgo through River Gardens. Fire Chief Mike McCain said that the Uniform Fire Code requires two ways to enter and two ways to exit. One can be a primary access and one can be an emergency access. He explained that the emergency exit through Hidalgo could be decomposed granite with grass over it to look like and open field. The Chief said that the Fire Department would be responsible for repair and/or replacement of the emergency gate. Commissioner Clark said he would like to amend some of the Conditions as a recommendation to the City Council. 000088 Planning Commissio i Meeting—January 19, 1999 Page Seven of Nine At this time, the Chairman read a portion of a letter from the Mayor, Ray Johnson, regarding the Commission's role as one of a technical reviewer and an advisor. Commissioner Fonzi feels that this project is out of character with Atascadero; it enjoys all the amenities of the rural community but wants to be gated so other residents of the community cannot enjoy the lakes or paths, etc. .She said that having only an emergency access through River Gardens is a taking and she also has problems with the sewer impacts. ACTION: Adopt Resolution No. PC 1999-001, recommending that the City Council Certify the Final Environmental Impact Report(EIR). Motion: Fonzi Second: Clark AYES: Fonzi, Clark,Bentz, Zimmerman NOES: None ABSENT: Sauter, Eddings MOTION PASSED: 4:0. Discussion: Commissioner Clark tated that he wanted to emphasize to the Commissioners that they have an opportunity, at this ti e, to make conditions on this project to ensure that the issues that are a concern will be handled in a way that is fair to the residents of River Gardens. He said that if the vote ends up as a tie, the Commission will lose the opportunity and the residents of River Gardens will end up ith no compromise. ACTION: Adopt' Resolution No. PC 1999-002, recommending that the City Council approve General Plan Amendment 97001 and Zone Change 97002, changing the land use designation and zoning of the site from Suburban Single Family (Residential Suburban zoning) to Moderate Density Single Family (Residential Single Family,zoning), extending the Urban Services Line (USL) to include the site, and adopting Planned Development Overlay Zone No. 14. Motion: Bentz Second: Clark 000089 Planning Commission Meeting—January 19, 1999 Page Eight of Nine AYES: Bentz, Clark NOES: Fonzi,Zimmerman ABSENT: Sauter, Eddings NO ACTION ACTION: Adopt Resolution No. PC 1999-003, recommending the City Council approve Vesting Tentative Tract Map 97003 based on findings and subject to conditions, with direction to the Council that the access site be "Alternative B" with the modification that the access on the River Gardens side remain in its' natural state. Motion: Bentz Second: Clark AYES: Bentz, Clark NOES: Fonzi, Zimmerman ABSENT: Sauter, Eddings NO ACTION C. STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS & REPORTS 1: Redevelopment Project Update—None 2. Director's Report Paul announced that he would be circulating information on a seminar that's being held by UC Davis on the "Role of the Commissioner", scheduled for February 27th. He asked that any Commissioner's that wish to attend let him know; that there was money in the budget for Planning Commissioner training. D. COMMISSIONER ANNOUNCEMENTS & REPORTS Chairman Zimmerman welcomed Commissioner Bentz to the Commission. He announced that there would be an election of the Chair and Vice-Chair at the February 2nd meeting. The Chairman feels that the Chair should rotate and said he plans to nominate Commissioner Fonzi 000090 Planning Commissio'a Meeting—January 19, 1999 Page Nine of Nine for Chair and Conirnissioner Clark for Vice-Chair. He then thanked everyone for their cooperation during this year: Commissioner Fonzi asked Paul to thank the Cal Poly students for their presentation. Paul said that the students would be preparing a final report when they've completed the project at the end of the semester. E. ADJOURNMENT—11:08 P.M. Minutes Prepared By: Patricia Hicks Administrative Secretary 000091 EXHIBIT W 1/19/99 The Lakes development proposal was withdrawn at the 11th hour in September in the face of a denial recommendation by planning staff. The developer cited a city sewer system study that may have an effect on their project. Has the sewer system study been completed?Was it announced in the Atascadero News and made available at the public library? What changes have been made to the project to now call it acceptable?Is the change only in the personnel of the planning department,the planning commission, and the city council? The final EIR did not address all the concerns that were raised but that apparently does not matter. What does matter is that a development of this size will do far more harm than good. It would surprise me greatly if Hidalgo Ave.has sufficient right-of-way to allow for a street of proper width with adequate shoulders. No one has ever answered my question regarding the residential lot that will need to be acquired for access. A zone change will be necessary for this lot but I can find no map in the EIR that includes this lot. Please consider the dangerous railroad underpass and the approximately 700%increase in River Gardens traffic as you consider this plan. Please vote no on this gigantic project and suggest the developer submit something far more modest. 000092 x EXHIBIT °B ' Hello, My name is Gary Graton. I live at 4465 Sycamore Road. 5 minutes hardly seems enough 'ime. I will restrain my remarks for this meeting only to the. impacts that are directly adverse to my family and our home. We are under attack by TRAFFIC —this development means to change the quality of life for the residents of River Garden's under.Traffic Scenario A, by adding traffic through a quiet neighborhood. Traffic Scenario A is a shame. Under political ressures, traffic Scenario B was developed to smooth over the concerns of the residents of River Gardens. Traffic Scenario B is a SHAM. Yes, I call is a sham, for several very good reasons. #1 —as a citizen, Scenario B betrays my trust in this city, and planning and zoning laws, by permitting an (unseemly) alley way to be constructed on the original colony lot adjacent to my original colony ot. Through technical and legal hocus- pocus, that lot will become part of the greater whole known as The Lakes. An unseemly alley will be created and ar the guise of an "Emergency Access". This alley will degrade the privacy my family enjoys, by exposing the full length of my property to a public right of ay that never before existed. This condition is likely to create at least a nuisance for me—devalue my property—and create a liability for this city. This location has been problematic for occurrences that are usually associated with alley-ways anyway. (Scenario B will promote that activity.) #2 This alley way is being pr posed to be used as an alternate entrance for 165 homes, in the event of the ne d to close the Chico Road entrance for road maintenance. Maintenance o roads or rails is not an emergency. IT IS INEVITABLE. Referring to thE south link as an emergency exit is perpetuating the SHAM. Can you imagine an 18-foot wide alleyway supporting two-way traffic for 165 homes? Imagine it next to your house— at your driveway— next to your bedroom —on your quiet setting. Once again, this plan seems to create liabilities for the city— not deter them. #3 Allowing the design of the Alternate Exit in a substandard intersection co 'figuration as suggested by the EIR under Scenario B, is not only BAD planning but is simply failing to plan. The purpose of planning at this point is to assure tha standards are met, and as much future potential is built into a project as possble. Scenario B incorporates many inherent liabilities contrary to the Fire Depart nent report. Two ways in and two ways out that are unencumberedare definitely better than seldom-used "Emergency Exit" alleyways. Afte r talking with several local Experts County and City Planners, and Fireman from o her city's and this county, I find that Emergency exits have several shortco ings. They usually fall to disrepair soon after construction. Municipalities a d Homeowners Associations as well, view them as low priority with precious maintenance dollars. They are considered seldom if ever used and not squeaky wheels. Until a catastrophe—then what? LIABILITY. People forget where they are, a catastrophe happens, then they loose precious time trying to find them. LIABILITY. The people that DIED in the Oakland Hills Fire, died because they had ONE WAY IN AND OUT. It became overburdened with traffic when people tri d to evacuate in haste. A traffic accident occurred in that . intersection, ar d blocked the rest of the evacuee's flight. Several people burned to death. LIABI'LITYIII Emergency Exits are normally allowed when associated 000093 with apartment complexes and condominium units. Not 140 acre tract developments. If you intend to increase the allowed density of this parcel by 2 times it's current zoning, then you need to increase the supporting infrastructure, not decrease it. To do so—would be totally incompetent of this city— if not politically or criminally negligent. Traffic Scenario A is sound in planning and engineering. Requiring Hidalgo Road to be upgraded and a standard intersection to be created is good— prudent planning. As has been exhibited though — it is going to be bad politics. That is a decision that should only be made by our council, our decision makers-to whom we may hold accountable. My suggestion to you —and my firm belief, after month's of exhausting research —is that the only way Scenario 6 should be acceptable to you, as planners, is to make the developer adhere to the same standards as with Scenario A. Acquisition of the proper property now, at the cost of the developer. Street upgrades now, at the cost of the developer. A perpendicular intersection - now- at the cost of the developer. A barrier across a standard design roadway will stop the unwanted flow of traffic through River Gardens-still facilitate Emergency Services better than previously proposed —and will provide a much better alternative for traffic circulation in the event of road closures at Chico Road. If you choose not to make the developer bear these costs now—then you knowingly divert these costs to city residents later, when liability will surely occur, and litigation will surely follow. If that point is reached, the remedy will be to demolish my home and build a standard intersection anyway and pay settlements to parties that are damaged through poor planning and not adhering to standards. Do your appointed duty. Require that this developer adhere to the highest possible design standards now. If this project can't be built with the best access and the best supporting infrastructure, then don't allow it to be built. Protect us, the city, from future liability. Protect us, the city, from future litigation. Make Atascadero develop the right way—don't lower our standards— PIAN —do your job. Thank You. 00009,1 EXHIBIT 'C ' This has been a "learning experience" for me. From the on-set of this project's "jumping through hoops" routine, 1 have found myself in a "learning curve" that continues on and on. The final EIR has proven to be yet another"eye opener" and add to that the original staff report and the'i the amended staff report—WOW!!! That doesn't seem appropriate but who am 1 to question the wisdom or authority behind that? I firmly believe the decisions of this planning commission and most likely, the city council have all been made. So, why am 1 here, you may ask. I still disagree with he conclusions and assumptions of the Final EIR. While it may be a good faith effort at isclosure and is technically adequate, and no"experts" have contested the contusions- it is misleading in its assumptions and conclusions. At best it is a half-hearted attempt at compliance. The final makes misinterpretations of the questions that were asked and just plain ignored some questions. I still disagree with he staffs idea of a "well designed "from the beginning" view of the project. I am no ey pert, however, substandard intersections and non-compliance with existing standards or developments does not make for a "well designed" project. No— I am not an "expert". I do have a "voice" in this matter. I do have the right to speak out, to contest, to disag ee, to "voice" my concerns. Which I have done and will continue to do. Especially, when I feel threatened. I thought about wh t to say tonight, debated approaches, mulled over ideas to make my voice heard. The ottom line, regardless of what decisions are made regarding this project— my life ha been impacted. My family's life has been impacted. We have been on an emotional roller coaster ride since learning of this project. We have gone through a variety o emotions and feelings over the development and the process involved. We havE been upset, angry, frightened, reflective, saddened, mystified, exasperated, enlig tened, numb, encouraged and discouraged. Our lives have been changed —from now on, we will wonder if our hard earned dollars have been thrown away on the home we purchased. We did not buy a corner lot, did not buy a home with a street down the side it. Not a street, an alley, or an entrance or exit. This was done on purpose and with much consideration. This project changes my home. This has been going on long enough at this point that I am almost ready to say I don't care what happens to the Davis Ranch, to Ag Land, to the historical interests it may contain, to the costs the city may have to bear . . . EXCEPT for that_residential lot next to my home. The changes proposed to Lot 21 Block H of the Atascadero Colony, that lot next to my home—will set a precedence. The changes, depending upon the foresight and consideration taken regarding that lot, may well prove to be a nightmare for the entire city. Maybe not n year, but 5 or 10 years down the road —when a forgotten emergency exit causes delay to emergency services, or an evacuation goes ary or during normal maintenance an accident at an unsafe, overburdened alternate exit, with a substandard intersection, is the scape goat for someone's death! Whose nightmare does it become thE n -•ours, the city's whether you live next door or across town — litigation against our city because of unsafe roads would be a nightmare for all. I will continue to speak out, to use my "voice" against being trampled by development or wronged by the sy tem. A system that changes to suit development, instead of, development changing to conform to the system. I ask you tonight to hear my "voice", but not just hear it, but to listen to it. Do not approve the Lakes project with its disguised traffic nightmares! Slow down the roller coaster ride, r we will all be fastening our seat belts. It could well be a bumpy ride. Diane Graton, 4465 Sycamore Rd., Atascadero, Ca. 93422 000095 EXHIBIT 'D ' n co otN O co LO }O (M L N O O � � ca «0 (p� pMp ; O � to co ~ 69 a) 9 N N �69 69 4w { T O ^ Cn O i t+ c7 N N ccs N (7 ^ M O N V •I\- rl- i469 69 r (Dd oc C' - - - LO AdOh. m N Ar { .. } 6% CD RS } co N � ^ 69 m L co O N � 69 69 6 469 �- tq Cl) .t Ch r 6 co °' m (oco cu cf) t� p in j Q1 ) n N r- ( EA r m �p �-, C'rj U1 69 v `�' 6v 6R? } 69 [n co v. } O �s. k 0 � co co to i W cu ~CD CV N (D N 49 69 } CD Oj (Dn co N N N co tD N to OO CD to (p r cD } co 441) w r cc >- FR QqH L 'fid' CM to (D ►n pp t._pp� MQ LQ a0 �t O _ n - l0 CD of rn l (p" V7p .m CM 69 C969 tCnD } 49 } } LO Nr 'It r F•, ('d cD co U) p 0) T (p r 69 64 }LO 69 6% } 6 c6 `- 00 i rr Co co Oi 8 CM � � v � M CV O Nrn o (o NLO _ NN t0 (n in 't ` (O N a) T- T- UJ 6v4 (A } NM U) }Cl) 169 'd- (CS -- a (D � 6aa CD N J 0) � } L=L -00 V) L U CCq (SS o cl: LL C •� ,m N C f-I 8 Z Y ci D a)3 RS Cn > Z OW m 4 CD > J 0 2 m a (au Q Q 0) p � 0 Z3.; H UJ W OC C7 U) U D U C ¢7 W c; . >- U J _ W w j U - 42 000096 i EXHIBIT ' E '. - (f'" Jennifer Hageman 8005 Santa Lucia Project does not provide a sound economic base as stated in the staff report-from the first year the project is completec -approximately year 5 to year 19-the project is a financial loss to the city= this means the taxp'yens will subsidize the project from the time of complete buildout for the next 15 years. At the end of 20 years the project will net just over$20,000. U, Accordingto the st ff report the project provides open space-too bad it is behind locked gates. Hardly a community goal. Any extension of st wer service requires that certain findings be made-the need for this information was i ortant enough in Sept.that the staff recommended that no major expansions of the USL shoAld be ade until that plan is complete. Now the staff is saying that the master plan will provide a logic il infrastructure management program to increase capacity to the plant's ultimate permittabl' capacity°. In a few short months the purpose of the sewer study has been changed from one tD check on the plant's ability to serve to a management program to increase capacity. X- There are two findings that must be made to approve a planned development overlay-neither of them are impossibl with the development of the property under the current zoning. The statement is made that the all wed lower density may not allow for the significant amenities of the higher density. I do not believe that modification of the City's development standards so that a few residents can have i tennis court nearby is sound public policy. The report states tt tat open space and recreational amenities and preservation of archeological resources benefit the community. The community will not benefit from the recreational amenities. The open space ani I preservation of the archeological resources would still be present with the allowed density. The report states tl at the project included private roads and utilities which reduce costs to City. This is ignoring th fact that the project will still be a burden for City taxpayers until the 19d'year it is in existence. I'am not sure what the private utilities are-the sewer will be going to the City treatment plant an the water will be supplied by the AMWC. So where is the cost savings? As stated by the C ty and proved by the economic analysis,USL extensions cost all taxpayers. It costs more to prov de the services than the City gains in development fees and property taxes. What City servic will be cut so that we can subsidize this development? There are no advantages to the City for increasing the density of this development. The justifications in th staff report for increasing density can all be met with the existing zoning and land use- th tennis cour#s. To approve this one ch e is�no mg the financial status of e City-we have better ways to spend our precious doll,, igno g the imminent problem with our sewe�,j�,plant. We have been promised 1500 new jos in two years we need to em N capacity for commercial development and not use it on ill advised residential'developments. 00009'7 e ,{JCA d The land is currently zoned for residentiaij development. The housing,and Ose and open space elements were based in part on tha ,4 current zoning allows for all of the community's goals to be met. There is no good reason for the taxpayers to subsidize more homes. 000098 EXHIBIT 'F' Paul & Sheree Ricketts 4475 Sycamore RD. Atascadero, CA 93422 January 17,1999 Re: The Lakes Development Staff Report Dated Jan 19th 1999. Dear Planning Commissioners and Chairman, We will try to keep this brief as we are sure you have probably read documents until you are exhausted. In advance...Thank You for your time, it is appreciated. The staff recommendation for the commission to adopt all three resolutions on the books for the Lakes Development is an obscene recommendation in our view. First of all it is a total contradiction to the Staff Report dated Sept. 29, 1998 (see attached). The Sept. 29th recommendation was made with 12 months worth of work and a full gatheringof information from every possible source to understand all angles of the Lakes projec for both its possible positives and negatives to include the findings of the Final EIR anc the concerns of the citizens of Atascadero. Second: Judith La tner who is most likely very intelligent ve e gent and competent in her field, is completely unqualified to make a planning recommendation on this project. She is a temporarily contracted individual who apparently made her recommendations based on her interpretatior of the EIR and nothing more. (I say this because she made the same print errors a d typos in her report as were in the EIR). Third: What changes were submitted in the proposal of the Lakes project to even warrant a new staff ecommendation.? The last thing those of us in River Gardens heard was at the S pt. 29,1998 meeting where Dennis Moresco pulled out "temporarily" and put the project on "hold" pending a sewer master plan study. Where is that study and why wasn't it included in this report since the reason for the postponement was based on it's findings? Since there are new members on the commission who may no be fully briefed this report is necessary in our view. Forth: Has Dennis Moresco submitted additional plans for the proposal that include upgrading the existing sewer pump stations (#5#6) which has been suggested by the Chief of Waste water Operations is a necessary requirement for the project to continue as originally proposed. WE haven't seen one. That still leaves us with the problem of winter time overflow to an unlined emergency basin. The new Redevelopment agency plans to borrow set aside money from the sewer fund to get that project moving, so where is the money going to come from for the present sewer expansion that has already been approved. Is there a going to be a little creative bookkeeping again? That is not recommended. rte.: J 000099 Fifth: Has any portion of the Lakes project plan been changed and resubmitted that would show a benefit to the community? The answer is no, and according to the Final EIR there is no benefit which leaves us only with the liabilities if the proposed Resolutions are adopted. Sixth: We would like to see an Alternative C added to the proposal for access to the project. This alternative would include the consideration of the main entrance to the project as it is currently proposed at Chico Road and Traffic Way. The difference would be the secondary or emergency exit if the project requires one. I propose the secondary access point to be the Private Crossing south of Chico Road that Dennis Moresco plans to permanently close. In conclusion.... as a resident of River Gardens I am asking that if you decide to accept this proposal in spite of the missquotes and obvious faults and adopt the Resolutions recommended, at the very least do not allow the project to have any access at the Sycamore/Hidalgo intersection or any where else in River Gardens. If the applicants want a gated community they can have two access points from Traffic Way, one at Chico Road and one emergency access point at the Private Crossing a little further south. I am also formally requesting that a decision on the Lakes Development be postponed to a future Planning Commission Meeting to allow those of us in River Gardens the same consideration that was given Midland Pacific Building Corp_ (aka Dennis Moresco) at the last minute on September 29,1998. Many of us are not able to attend this meeting due to the late notice and the Martin Luther King holiday. Again, thank you for your time. Sincerely, P,.�,� Paul & Sheree Ricketts 466-4619 cc: all planning commissioners 000100 ITEM NUMBER: B, 1 DATE: SEPT- 24^_1 998 ■ s • Planning Commission Staff Report The Lakes Project—Tract 2271 General Plan Amendment#97001; Zone Change#97002; Tentative Tract Map #97003 and Conditional Use Permit#98004 (Davis Ranch @ 3900 Traffic Way/Midland Pacific Building Corporation) SUBJECT: Consider certificati n of Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and approval, conditional approval or denial o the land use applications filed. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission: 1. Adopt Resolution No. PC 1998-027, thereby recommending that the City Council certify that the Find Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for the project has been completed and reviewed in compliance with California's Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and state and local guidelines adopted for the implementation of the Act; and 2. Adopt Resol ation No.PC 1998-028,thereby recommending that the City Council approve General PI Amendment #97001 and Zone Change #97002 by changing the land use designation d zoning of the subject site from Suburban Single Family to Moderate Density Single Family,without changing the Urban Services Line(USL); and 3. Adopt Resolution' No. PC 1998-029, thereby recommending that the City Council deny Tentative Tract Map#97003 based on certain Findings; and 4. Adopt Resolution No. PC 1998-030, thereby recommending that the City Council deny Conditional Use Permit#98004 based on certain Findings. SITUATION AND FACTS: 1. Applicant. Midland Pacific Building Corporation 2 Representative: Dennis Moresco,President 3. Project dress: 3900 Traffic Way OOOl01L ITEM NUMBER: C - 1 DATE: 02/09/99 n i9is ® 1e7e City Mint ger s. Agenda Report Wade G. McK'nney Mid Year Budget Review RECOMMEND TION: Staff recommends a opting Resolution 1999-014 Amending the 1998-99 Budget(Resolution 1998-030) REPORT IN BRIEF: Financial Status: General Fund revenues are up approximately $289,000 from the same time last year. This 8% increase is due in large part to increased building activity. Building permits and fees are up over$110,000 from the previous year and with projects such as Albertsons still to come,this revenue is. expected to go even higher. (Remember that this revenue source is restricted to building activities). Most other general fund revenues are up slightly over the previous year and are expected to meet budget. Because of changes to the budget structure, it is difficult to compare general fund expenditures to the previous year, however expenditures for the most part seem to be on par with the prior year. Most departments expect to come in right on budget with only a few minor changes noted below at mid-year. With the increased building activity, other City funds also appear to be doing well. Most impact fees funds are expected to or have already exceeded budgeted revenues for the year. General Fund: We are proposing a $378,370 increase in budgeted General Fund Revenues primarily due to a $ 30,000 increase in projected permit income. Building activity has doubled over the previous year with some large projects such as Albertsons still expected to come in during the second half of the year. Other proposed increases include $40,750 in restricted grants and donations, and$57,580 in unbudgeted help from other government agencies. Of the $193,375 in proposed general fund expenditure increases, $37,100 is for salary increases negotiated as part of the interest based bargaining process. $5,980 of the increase is proposed for emergency park repairs such as repairing a waterline rupture, replacing a broken backflow preventer, and some minor playground equipment repairs. There is also a proposed $40,750 adjustment to spend the restricted grants and donations we are expected to receive. The largest 000102 ITEM NUMBER: C - 1 DATE: 02/09/99 portion of adjustments to general fund expenditures ($106,205) arises out of adjustments made to the Building Maintenance Fund and the Technology.Fund. Other Funds: The Building Maintenance Fund includes $52,230 in proposed adjustments.`'This includes the modernization of the Administration Building elevator($40,000),the replacement of the boiler for Cityhall ($11,500), and several other minor repairs. These costs are offset by a reduction in building maintenance labor due to a correction in the allocation of employee time. The Technology Fund includes $58,235 in proposed adjustments. These adjustments include reclassifying the Technology Director position from a part-time position to a full time position. It also includes some money for part-time help to assist employees with software problems and to maintain the Web Site. An additional$9,700 was added to the technology operations budget in order to purchase software upgrades so that there is consistency throughout the City, to upgrade memory in existing older computers, to.purchase dial-in hardware and hardware needed for the web-site. $25,955 was added to capital outlay in order to purchase software phone line cables for a telephone system upgrade, to purchase 3 computers and a laser printer for Community Development(replacing 286s and 386s), and to purchase CAD software. Other major changes include changes made to the capital projects schedule. $219,300 was added to the Portola Rd Project for STP/STIP monies that the City is expected to receive, while the _ Suggested Routes to School Project is expected to receive an additional $136,900. A bikeway master plan and the Traffic Way/101 Interchange PSR Project have been added to the schedule, along with the purchase of property along Morro Rd. In addition to these major changes, several minor adjustments have been made to projects including Montecito Avenue Improvements and the Atascadero Bridge Slope Stabilization Project. Adjustments of$1,590,000 and $1,844,851 were made to the Camino Real Improvement Fund revenues and appropriations respectively. These adjustment were made to properly reflect the refinancing of the Camino Real Improvement Bonds approved by the City Council on January 26, 1999. FISCAL IMPACT: The proposed adjustments increase General Fund Revenues by $378,370 and appropriations by $193,375. Revenues for other funds are to be increased by $1,713,475 and appropriations by $2,035,846 ALTERNATIVES: Council has the option to add or delete any budget item. This will decrease or increase the remaining reserve balance at June 30, 1999 by the amount adjusted. 000103 ITEM NUMBER: C - 1 DATE: 02/09/99 RESPONSIBLEDEPARTMENT: Administrative Services ATTACHMENT Resolution 1999.-014 Mid Year Budget Adjustments Revenue and Expense Summary- December 31, 1998 000104 RESOLUTION NO. 1999 - 014 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA AMENDING 1998-1999 YEAR BUDGET RESOLUTION 1998-030 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED,by the City Council of the City of Atascadero that the Fiscal Year 1998-99 Budget is amended as follows: SECTION 1. The revenue and appropriation amounts for each fund are adjusted by the amounts shown in Mid Year Budget Review Schedules made a part of this resolution. SECTION 2. These changes are effective immediately upon adoption of this resolution. On motion by Councilperson , and seconded by Councilperson the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll-call vote: CITY OF ATASCADERO By: RAY JOHNSON, Mayor ATTEST: MARCIA M. TORGERSON, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ROY A. HANLEY, City Attorney 000105 w O r V A • 000106 ItT-- CM0 O 0tt' NM (oNCU00N00 NI'- M00M (DoMOI ' LO NT- .t LO qlt LO O CO CA C00 r- 0 [l- CA 00 LO M rI,- MMql* Cf) T- [,- OON It o) NLf) CACO CAMqt CIF) OOM 'tCAI- co qt LOOI'll 01- 1�(oLOOD M0 Lfi r, Ln N U) LO M B OO CAT (O OO C T 6 ( N I� I� a C\ O N CA NccT_ OM I� TN � oND NMv00 NM coO LN � T_ tZ d co) T" d `. `. Ld cc N � L 0 0 0 0 0 LO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O r O O ' 0 ' 0 0 0 r Co N T 0) Co P- O I- I- CO O O D CO T O CO O 0 It 0 m 00 0 co It r- 0 CA d OMIArM 11, 0I- NN000T- nOOI­ M 00NP- 0 " co It 1,- 0 co 6 c NLn -le le 'qrO19tTLcjtfjNlir OLOtO Ovi 0p It (O N M eh 00 T- CO T M 0 N O Il� M -'f� T T M OCO M —M v r �0 N .a C 't' Co 'd' C) N "t IN CO h r `-' r CO `-"-' Ct `�T �O � r a) 00__N CV mCL X T W EA EF? (DIt7- Cf) O It 0 't coMCoN0000000 M N I,- rC)OLnLOCCooM0) i O Co fA CC) Ce) LOItO MOCl) NCA0N00r0000 CO T r (OCC) LO 00000Il- It' T- O M d NIttt00LO Oo I- I- OO COMOOI-NrIt N It 1� N001'- T•- I- 0p (orT0 CV C) LnOOp�M CA �CACA�t000LOOLnCV t� rCA00r CVrC7 CO CO 3 M LO 00 M 0 T M Co LO I- LO It N N LO It 0 CY) LO Co It ce) cr) — I- N M O mt o CA CoLO 'tM It N TI- NrNNT It rNN N v T N Q CD ~ r N LO N cc V to 0LO0N0 LO 00000000000 O OOLnOCOO ' CO ' rN0 d' co l- Co r- 0 r- 0 0 0 LO 0 0 0 co 0 0 0 0 't t- m - Co N CO co O LO w r i O ti N LO LO N (w O O 00 LO N N LO N 00 co m 0 M Co N N O co to Co O O OLO 06 (6& C LO d Iii 6 C C N N L6 � d' T-00 1:e O CA M CO 00 rNNr0 co coItN1l- co 0) LO CA Corr 0 N N 0 co CO Co tt co co N r- M It r 0o T r r 0 R 00 T- r T- CO LL W > T O 69 Ef3 CO CO 0) ' m ' Nt00MCoN0o0N00 T- Nf� COOCOtOLOd' MOCA ' N C) N LO CD CO LO M N It o N o m m ww M r N Op M W It M 0 N 1-t co V C) NCOTCO O 000nCO00OOOONd OCO Coco 000ONr-ONN T c r O r CV r CA CA CO Ln O LO I,C7 N CO CO CA T-PI: �(O T �' LO d' cF NNrCM I` T- MOI- ItNmmco O It I_ N "N "CD LOM O T M TCO r N T (0 T `-'N r 't r r N � LO m T LO 06 a M � � o U_ U_ 0) � +- a U) ai (1) o m � � : LL LL m cn Cl) A2 LL A a� V U c ca .. U LL c0 LL Q" = °' aa)) Mtet' LON0oM v c°'i �, CD CL Ew E LL r- c Ec n c Cl) .-. «. +. +. a) c � c CD a) oc c � (n o a) 0U) UUUUUt� c0 � E co co ++ o U_ a) U �. U +-' (LS LL P a) Cl) a) C c0 a) N N r-+ U U +. 0 0 U- N > (0 SZ U a) U N N Mn fA Mn (A + cu - Q 't3 � LL c � � � � n � � m � li � � Q � O � � o o00 a=) o ZC i a) Q i- i LL U 'U +. (S5 ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ Q LL U_ ? m � rnE a) Hm cF- � � o Q � � .� � � � c c c c c c c o f- 4) a) 0 a) a) a) 0) Q- Z °' � _ cc�n � � Q � � � °� � a�ia) Y ��- � E (amu � oC\l 00 iaia 000) aa)) Co Co cz '5 N oC N E %) p N co cz o .� o (5 %) N pOj cz w vi Ui vi vi cA vi N LL ml- > 0 < CO -i a- Ua. LLo cn0T- UaaaaaaaM 000107 N 107 m o'', - o ai O C p m W m•v n m � c cr) ca � 1�L a.3 m m CL v E E ca cLi �I'/� CO CD l m - O m ` m O m U N io to V/ _ D. O N d CL m v �. Z C L F O .0 O y m 7 Q C C f6 C ._ LL v m E o w 0 Q Q ami mv � ca 3 Y N mN o Z v w jQo o iC c pn Q d � •m � n m N � v _� c C) d NCD Em � N r m o m � ca � LU 0 t o o r aa)i m 3 , o o r y m In CO m cis N C a3 c ,7p O f` O r y , c C _ m 'C7 �, m y p D N U m > ca — �'a ami > o c_ ca m N p m v c y "0 c r- E dv Q Cn 0 E = m E m CD -6 m � LL CL v m9 Z 0a) c m v m `a CO c o co m o m U a) CA U O 4= CL � N m m � O m N U mQ UC _ c LO000'0000 00 LO 00000000 O o co c WF N ct0000000 Of011- 0) N 't 000 ItLO0 CO CO 4! co000'LO0 ' d0 OO LO rr1nCo00LO 0 o ��rj N C7 NONO'MCO N OON LOMMao000M Lo 3. 65. C;) O 0d' COLO 'tq N OCOO I,- Lo Lo 0 r-- 't CD a It N r t T It O r r r r N N It co a Q m NN 00 w 0 m m � L m r C U O ^ Q C O0 LO 00 0 0 O CN aNci COE Or O LO M c� r N M x cmn N v M m o p co m m `gypm Q c C 3 h c0 0 m � U m c Z c O O O w a. = a O ' c a m m V vi p C) 7 U * N ^ CO co C� V CISd Z Lu ' �t O LO O CO � m Z d 2 m m WF- LO CY) CO Ott U T 0 0n m LL m w O Q EF} ca •. o co m U > C C O L00000000 00 to 00000000 0 of m r v p N 0000000 0 C N000 'tLO0 O L c m Co H LU co 000'CO0 '' co 000 rd r000ti00 00 is m m 0 N O N O M CO N O O Ln O M Cfl P�: cO r O t\ 0 w m E m 00 p 0 ct coct'd' 't N OOM ItNO0rCOROOA M m e G It NT- ctr N Orr rrNN CO N E m Q mN N M m i c° �O O m y EC L ca N E y o v x (DN 0 .>_ M w co~' N NE .07 Q m aa�i X N N i co 0 0 C m L c w Z N a) CD cn Co a) > U r0_+ co > ai }co 0 .mN o co LL. t0 F— u J X U- O � c E E o E c X 0A N fLS a N �' •- �L CD 7 V 7 r W-4 c) CE _ (� 0 0 H ami c N 0 o c N n �'c a� ami H cmc n4) ec LUa) c 0n .- O C 3 ( CA c m N O CO N � - = p� 0 - ca a) 0 � y 0 L c o o f W Z XacnmaLLm0 E — Mo0 � cnaoCN (L a) > D y W W ~d o U E 0 O rn ¢ v 000108 N ` H mOD . - � � � W v, m N U R Cl) Q 0 ` > a 'a vl- ami v Qza v> Eas v LL Q 2 1 2 2 2 .0 - H W d O. a a a o « a CIS xV) w d 0 Lu o0 0 0 E o �1 U U U U n g U CO cl$ al ca a co 0 Ul U) CO � y w W a) 0) m0) � � m ;n L U1 0 V! N W d d d N '� V C co d m co C N � � C C C Q N V. 0 0 0 0 0 0 t` Lo Lo 0 Ln O O O co Ln LO LO Ln LO W W r" O O N O m w It O I,- m d O I- co O co M O c0 CA c0 CO CO O T CO LO CO LO '- Ch r 0 CO N S co O O N C7 rn O cf)- 4 coc0 M N It U) 0 CV r co- r�: d d= N O 'Zi O p LO N O r O LO 00 Id' CO LO O LO M LO CD M co 09 co 0 p T 'd' Ln I- N LO I' r N Cl) 0r T CO t T Q m N '- C>D H z 1 r a) a) CO r M � n Ln C+7 CO C'7 C~J7 N N zCO) cc o OOLO 0oO ,0o0 0o O Ln Ln CL O z N CO r N O Cf) LO T T O ct N r O It F. W c0 LO O It OD It CO I- LO LO T N I- ON Cn O T N CC) r T 00 00 � N -0 1 COLO COO T- N O LO z W ' O 00 CO O Ln COO co N m d CO) v LL. O O 000 O O N O LO O O O O O 00 LO LO LO O 1 p H LO 00 0) N N00 CO 00 LO Itr .L.n 00 T N co c0 co O W W T CO CO C'U Ln r N 'I CO T ct CO t, N N N It M CO d LO O CY) 'fit C'0 00 O N I,- Cf) O LO Il_ Il- I,- CO d r CO O Dd• N O O 0) ch N0 d LO W I� r LO co M h 00 p p r "t It t- N LO I- T r CO CO r CO T r N Q m N *' 00 O N d fSS p p L V E CD -W Q co Z cn o m 06 >v o LL L a m ) a W U cf) CU (z .2' 2 • c Q p CCR N Z, ZW U a. — W co c: LU c hd cw `. o aw c o o o o Z W VL) 0UvUa_ auUwUmaci —iNa: a w 000109 H - F E E D '7 ms a � d Q Z € O m'o m'o LU C; z E E Q r r ca ca IL CL CL m X v O v LU a a Q N C co > w o Yo N C U C N N A C C C i 000 0 O LO LO O 00 0 LO D 000 D O Il- I,- CD M0 N I W W O O O O I` [I- C) \ 0 cA0 O r N O r o � r O 00 dCh d N 'F 0 D r r N r CNO 'd c r Q m y� fA i A O 0O O v m _ rn Z Cc7 M d: rn M a w C9 C r r C7 H N D Q 6c� 000 0 O LO LO O 00 O LO 000 0 O M (h co 00 00 W LU 0 0 0 q O q-P -,t 0 0 LO r I- o O r O _ r P� LO OD N to t6 --; IL T- o 0 r N r CNO r r O D a 0° to ns •� 3 0 U N N d 0 O c N LL d tU Z i CID c co d_ CD D ty c c c CL E m tU Q K O co LL LO co I, I,� w E rtN+ tll a co i ++ Q X W 000.0 }, o O 00 U) c += O d Q � NNN ',N N . ~ W a) too Ul CO ~ Z E— Z c c c c E ,00 Z o CD � in w o 0 0 o N N w a a W (D0I .0 > IL CL C'3 accncncncn — wwU) 000110 H Z C C Y W E E 2 o Cl) c U) ca Q Z L L O w //�L O - _LLI > N. VQ N c L 0 Q r 0) IL J n d o ami m W a 0 c M L c 61. O c p to a`1 CL W C y U cis 15 to w CO COCL d N V CL C >1 Q 7 E ` V N C_ p E O G O L O A C v Co co a o a U) 'O td N 'm0 co d m m m m N O O V U O C Y C C Y Q 0000 O 00 O O O NO N O O 00 O OO O O N It O 0 Co LO O r LO r- r O LO O LO P� LO W W O N O O N C'7 r O LO N LO 0) LO C+q LO to N ocCO O M O It CO r 00 C9 N Co CV M CO 00 CO r C) to 0 It It N C0 P- r O Co 00 r O T co q' N co C+7 N 0 = Ch ct V LO M co N LO O 0) r Q m r r N N T 64 69 Efl E{} N V1 0 0 0 co O O O °� Z N N N O co co co co coo c a W CO CO Co NK r O O F- N co m c Q to EA Ef? E{} 0000 O 00 O O N O N O O co O O O N 't 0 co Co O O Co I- "t r N t- O LO qt N W W O N O O N Ch O O N LO O LO C7 114 O N O LO F O CO m Nt CO r r co t0 N CO CO t0 m 00 C0 m IL It It N Co fl r O Co 11, T O r O C) O OD O 0o O M d LO CO 00 N LO O O 0 Qm r r N C\ r ER E9 Ef} 4A I c/ rte+ Z " a' N N y COU. co N N d = d d D Z N C N = CO O W a) ca CD LL a) D I— co ancn i Q a x 0 pC t—' ai m Q K cn 0 Z � oC � " oC � W = w � � w C6 M R co E C. LL to (D cn o cn cn c o d Q co o o cn CO c o m E-. w o0 o LO 1— W a� H z W ° F- W a� H z T W N Z C ct CO � Z >+ a) Z ai Z >+ a) N �.. Z w O N 0 Q w O U � Cl) W 0 � w o o a cn Z x w COD 15- LZ X E � � 'Q w � ai X E m C'a 'o W F— cccn ¢ ¢ 0 wwco v 3 acvoc wwcn 00 000111 o c c co '� E 0 LD g - O C O O - m (lQ i O.- y Vl 1 O m ,� V/ V O7. m E m m D LO 8 ca G y 0 � m o m m � � z m ,_.. N H m m. m m �.-G ..N - - O r m E m E c d w m a o O a m _ 73 ,- ,_ 8 co X EIr a = s me p c C~ c Q m m m E m g � w a O .1 o IL m E a °o m E y m i a W 69 0 a m o w m E CD - Y '—FL Za E m m r(f! C 69 m N m Cm fC c o U > E o y O E LT N _ a _ m a _ CL ca cu m 2_ > E p c c fl _ 5 m mra v U H C 5 � H O 0 Y7 CL O m j C U mU m o m -a m E E m (D Le rt C L m U 'p m L U V f� m ` 3 7 m O O 00 O O O LO LO O O LQ O LA O p O O CD O O CD 't 0 O LO N 1- O W W LO LO CO `t T C7 r I� f� I- CO CA m 1- O C6 C7 Ln P- r d CA Ln Ln Q> O Ch O et O O O 1- co CO Co Ch LO CV 1- CO r 1- p C9 Cl) r CV N CV CV d T 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LO Ln o o Ln o LO m ~ Cn 0) O M O M CD CV) Ch V) O Ln LO CV) ro z ^ Ln CO r CV LO N CV Ce) 1- Cn 1,- CV a Ll.l T r O r r CV O co CD CO CA Ln C H co CD r CO LA LA LO CV N LO N Q 3 (all Ei} Efl O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O r r CO 1- 0 co co 'V' 'q 1- O o 1- ep 0 W W r- r% Co 1- 0 r Ln Ln LO co r O O LO O H r r CO Ln O CV CA 1- Il- CO r 00 r CO O O p N N r r CV CV z r T M r N O Cr Q m to to W V J cn a w z p m z z LL � a W w W z N CDrn d Q d d p5: d m p z rn cc N w w rn (D d w ai m d U) Z m C a x 0 N C.) ami x 0 Q m S w c ani m U w c U) �a 00) -0 a 0 � cc ani ca cn a CO c `—.-e o J cn " o cn cn `—�� o d Z ? t- (CD 1) co O �-- z 0 = W F- N o 0 � H z w p Z m o C.)CD is = zLLJ ap z o is z � w � Ea) ca w wt xE C. � X000112 m acv w U) U F- o� U w w 0 c) cc N H Z W D ❑ F- O ❑ Z m J m m x � w W 0 0 0 0 0 w W o o cn o m co M m w a 00 Z a w f- a � � WW o 0 a C7M M M M U) on am O Z Z LL D LL W I- z w CD w w ui a > a E J a cc w 0 W � >, �, Q CCcn `� o m cc J D w ~ N 0 ~ Z W V Wt, wco � Z > ccc0 wca 0 000113 H W - T(n D a F-- Z LU o 0 a � a m J a W w 00 c 00 O O 00 c Or- r r` O O r r r H Nt U) O r� � RO O C\ C\ C\ Mr LO NNNfn N N lO N "It r N N M M M Q m Efl ffl E03 fA W , cC a N Qcfs 6s 6s 00 c 00 o 0 0 O o o 0 00 O r r rl- o o ti r r- W r- ",Zt LQ a,, O r- r- CO O O N N N F- C9 r L61.6 O L C5 O 4dt V o 0 r n N N N N M M C09 D O ... Q m Z cn LL w w Z U. U. cn U V w a V w LL Oa) y d d dLL K O 0 a Cr_:ani K O a w V oC w cn crj Co LU co w N E W Cl) »� N O d ~ cn L w O (n w O d Q 0 w — c w � a) i-- z a w L- c E- w a) F- z (1)I— a n � CD U.) 0 v, O n (1) (1) N cn Z zCL oui Cof Z n' w 0 E c co w = CD CD000114 a OaC w > X co w " > x — U G oC05 wU0 a m0 c w0 FN- ZO_ W0) O N > t co O co O N` N > 1:1--: CD N V a N O ca C O Q C No, E O a >, 0 O rn CD � a � T a or-) a �v a� F' a 0) o ZN `� > .S�WRR O. . .� c ~ `�.~ - ''p. 4 VN - LC � O � ❑ Z N co .O=.I �' cts d C O O J ` m co V LLL O LL M p. a o- co w a X E co a Q W do. o o U W c a " T m a :3o Qm � 0CL a� ❑ 0 m > af a oLo o Q . CL o p Cp 0 ap LL m d a m c c LL w cc U 7 U J O U N N > co(D O a m >O d> . Q C N O 000 O O O O O 00 O ' O O O p LO 0 0 LO M O Cr) OD O O O 0 O O w C10 O O 00 N C\!OC9 Ln O LO O O Ln W ^� L CO N LO M 1- d' r (- r N M LO LO r ..I p T c T O LO C\I 00 co T T 69 6c, 69 ffl ' 0) O 0)r 000 cc w Ce) O M CY) O 0 L [L r �}' LO LO LO LO r r N .NC\I CQ . T T— CO CA Q 69 69 69 69 000 O O O O 0 0 O 00 O O L000 LO It It Q) 00 O 00 O O W LU 0 O O a0 CO CO Ci LO O LO 00 O LO �-- LU to N Ln co LO LO r r N C6 Ln p LO r 0 r T CO co LO (n co co r LO T M0 Q Q m Z 64 69 69 CF3 ll M Z LL 0 W Z LU ❑ Z U LL Cl) a u, m z cif) _ =3 W v aNi ayi °' Q CA m °' 0 n a = � cc: m m ❑ � a, > x o IL o a>i x o I. m N i � W 0 Z a M ui C E ttS N 0) co -W d 0 Nm - O cn 0 d � CO) O O NA NFLU w F- UJ c N Z W e W Z D xf W m co O <n -i � � — cn O U) G. w Z � E Za = a w ~ a LU Q > � Cl) ai CL V > v m a � � V I= U) cr- E w0 o of wJ Lu00 000115 H z m w o N N C C � V a °_ v z. a UO w 0 -a O-X = o Q M a o m IL y m X o v w 0 � v � my L LL C y C 0)U c N a E o a> F- 0 o ' O 'O ' O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O O O O O WJ-u N N O O 00 N N O O 00 ca0, M M M N N v a 0° isP 0 0 cm �z 00 O o cu a ML6 L6 m coM ' O O O ' w N 'NO N NNO0 W O 00 a u, M N N r 00 O � co Q m Ef} Efl Ef} Efl Efl ER EfJ N ~+ V Q U W U. d d O z d d d _ LLL0 LU _ .3 LL d K O Z d K O Z =3 W O � O W c Y V1 c v O Cl) co O O a N V O N O d a ? Y c I- N 0 � F- z a m e 1- cn O H z IL � w � � w :� ? I w � w � Q p > (L)" a •Q D > �, x .� V c'n o v w00- awc = w0 000115 C N CO > O __ . O > O A � C1 f0_ LU (a 0 c c� gvr .Nmmb� o CO a Cl) 0.5 ca c o0 CC d m o ca m a U '=0 to d 3 m O N C7 C 0 0) O1 C w Q - X00 O O La co 0 001M ca " 1- ZN m N- 7 a- l` co--a0 O Q ui 0 LL /R ay bg - G1 N LL Efl U1 0 ca C a3 ^V0^ a o .0 a0LL IM CD O as �t ` �O 0 >CO Cl) M a m r > co W OC � , ��>C S W cX a M � CMO 0a ui cj Cl) (6 co o f- E � o. N CO 0 wo CO r� 0 0 Ll c O cco m V ti 0 0 �' � EES m EMa 0 o c 4) C N ca ¢ n a a > 2 H 'D Ma ooh Z3U)- 0 � ca Q o Cl) Cd m 4) (D 2 , c ami Co � VEu- o N 0 0 C C '0 O N C C N a N C t m � `,�° � cco ca .- r i 0 rn a N O. 0.Lo O C m 0 Ln `) O N d C EA Q S m m � �0 Q a 6H C > C 00 O O O O O O O O O O O O O LO 0 LO O CO O r Or-_ It T r r O WW r- LA O T T CO O CO O f- r- i- O N N CO CC) 4 r N CO V N O O N O c O CA r T co coOcoNco M co CO) 0 0 _0 C:) 0 0 0 0 W�D a 00 Z LO LO LO CO O CO CO c0 ODD 0n 00 ovo v r cOo � Cf) [L co cn O O o o o o 0 0 o O O o 0 0 LO Ln OO O r 0 d- v It v o W F r V LO M T CO T 00 O O O O O H W N N Ln 00 O7 r N Ch O Ln C C6 N a0 = O CA d CA N 'OV Cn0 co a 0° W W LL U IL 2 U Z F— O Z m N LL CO w w Q m ai m N Lu c aNi CO) d 0 � c c c V L c c U °' LU m ai x o co c �ui m x 0 p„ or LL c ar � w p (n 0 w CFJ Cca LL >Q a w ca — O cn } 0 O mcc n. a c 1- W - I--h- Z J W c a) o O W 3 I-O Z F— E a� cno a2i a Co a) ~ cn0 a WEE Z CD f= Z " � � Z � Y � N W rn W Q Y a� a 'a-a a �` o. f1 a w a > Xca (D a way .. � xca V a ora = w 0 0 U aracn � wv 00011'7 W � § h Cy r N T Q8 H N1 � VI 41 h F g N N N H sego s N H H o � § § § 8 14 "s H � r O F H w � H 00 2 , n � rr wn F E+ y a V h v01 �v g O n 8 pp ~ e�.f `b0 V N ti N O g W O u � H m o 0 o ae [[rr g 8g 88 .eH� Q y ^ � N i0 H h oa. a F �c v c 4 a y Zt[ :Q ur a a s Oay 004 m 9 o C V O aai aO o o Orr e n a oC v O m c O u 3 m m 0. c .] U A �Uy V'3 y p kF7 > t 'a O F U F a •u cui o0c� Ao"a H �vt` c� a :3 ae ow, w 000118 Cl) W F- N D O a Z a o a J m X1 it w a W G C) O O O o o O o o O O O O O O 00 O Ln d0 Cl) 1- wW tl0 co 00 00 ' O 00 OO CO f- O 0 T T T T t T Ln Cl) Cl) a 00 M w a Q tf? 0. Ei? Efl CD O O O 00 o a o o O O O O o O O O LA CO CO I*l w w 0 0Oo O Oo 00 Q: r. o wH LO o w Ln LO LO o, r Ln LO w y. Q T T T T T Ln COM T o m aIM Z D D LL Z W44) 0 d LLL 44) m d 7 N 93 3 to a W � Cl) W w 0) > 0. E W > C. E F- .�. a LL- W = F C4 i W = LLcoa U W .ia N +O+ ++ V LL W i4 cn CU +O+ ++ c W O_ c I- W H Z d W 0 H w �'� H Z cn LV (Wj z E Z can' z E Z s can' > � an CD cc > m � a °' ° 000119 O wo > xCD w � > O a ora wo ti ¢ � E woo N cnH a Z 0 W F o 0 o o m M ¢ Q A m x cd c W J J a m W w > m 0 0 CD 0 `O O O y m U O O H U U O O O O O 0000 O ' 00 O O O O p O CO (0 O Cfl00MCV) 0 00 O O O 0 W N N T- 0> 00 0 r- N CA r- LO Co O O LLJ u, r 00 n - r- O rl M CO fl: N N 'd' O O to = p NCOT NqTN OV d ct M a m r O O O , , O ' , O O O m Z T T T T O O O WC T T T T O O O d rcz Q O O O O O O O O 0 ' O O O ' ' O ONCO O COII- McM O 00 O O LULU Z N T T r- 00 Cn r,- N r- r Cn Co Co NLO NN LL Nco � rn 'tnrnO �t p T ti' r N It Q m a Ef3 ff3 49. 69 clYLL O U m cr Z cn w o 0 d Z m O p w V) w c c c Z Q rn cn m > cn 0) w CL E cn > c. -a -a m -a 70 -a x o m x 0 OR � LLLL �a LLU- LLLL W cn cn W m w _ Ca NC'3C3' (3' O U) C'3 C'3 U' O d a N cW o Ul c d W Zcmimoo t- Zmo0UU i-- z w z E E z0 E- z W »- M _ wcncor aILOcor- co m > (D a`�i a 'O+ wrnrnrn X0) 050) 0) P ui wU 00� 0 U M T T.T W T T T T 1/20 H -- w D d z O C'f a o z m x m w 4 W D 00 0 0 LO LO 0 0 Ln Nt 19t W W (00 (D (00 'It co CD N N_ 'Nd_ nQd _ Q m Z w a H It Q EA � EA EA w F- Gt0 lc tl0 tl0 ' Z Cl0 C^0 N N_ jR T T T T LL C0 co t- r T Oo co CD CD CD Q m Z 40. W 6% toll _O in P - N - W a cn a z D ¢ w Z M m m LL w LL N 4) m p O m 0 aNi a W c cd a) c = d V W v uNi d K 0 C w cc W CD W LL' R W couNi �a �11 WEy�'� (no c o cn o d W w Q o cn C.) o a _/ i ~z CD W H Z cn F- W = F W � H Z m U W n W U W � W W 00 > a a -0 aNi > X aM °-' WC CO w0 r ¢ � w0 C 000121 lA __ H N n G W a CD Z E E CD m m d o 0 X n. a w E E LU ccoC c c E E U U CVC C m D a cc 0 0 0 D O r T r CC) Co O O CO p M O O '47 LO CA O r r 00 CO CO wW f� O O o) c0 fl, O N N CO CO LO II d O CO � r O Cfl Cfl L L p Jp NTS 000 O N A m T T N Q VI z 0 co0000 owo a o 6 v If ---i � 000 co N T T r Q �} to O 0 ' O O ' O O CO 0 O O CO CD O 0 d It Cn T T 00 00 C7 W LU F 1- O _ Cn CA 0 p N N 0 0 LO CL (� Z O r CTV 000 000 M Z Co CO U') LO O U. N N T T � aM N w O m w F— N Z F. w m cn j G O Z m H a � V `—' U. CO Vl N 0) N d U w a� -6 _ = m m CD 0 _ d OC ai x 0 4 )x 0 O w ix c Z Cf) W Z vi E aei w w � waoiotn0 o0 ALU w " � z Q = ca � � H Z '� E- z � Zca z °�' m v w ca � Wcn w a� Cl) > a n O °ter' oWc � � o wo Cl) � � wo 000122 N H -- W H D Q Z o � a o a m x x � w Q W D CoD CO O OO OOCOO r- r- M M O It wW O O T T O C70 cl c cc O � C3 O O CO N N CD r T T Q m Z � w a O Q Eta ER � Et3 GOO COD GOO COOO r- r- M M •Wd' H Z ( CO (3� cr� Cfl Z O CT C6 C70 C\ O = O O O O = N CV T o = W r r w Q m W w _U Eta EA U ff3 Eta > > W w N cn m m W W cn D Z F— 1— M U_ U U. � rn aNi ami m � w ami m � V E > c. E E 2 CD x o 2 d x o � z Q)() - W v z W v Z c Z rn c LU � w ¢ o cn 0 o C � cnQ o co v o d cn a F- w '� t- z � w H w y F- z Cl) Zc coCD cozy Z °' m W W Co W co W W �o W to W > X CL n N > X a � 0 a � � wo a cc wO 000123 U) H N a Z O w a o a m X � W W p r T O O T N N O O N w f- LO r n rn W N N r T r m m r r r n p a 00 vycoz W a N 69.1 6%1 V911 T- T- 0 0 r N N O_ O_ N W W p ip � d' � r p Cmc Cm0 � r G a v Z N N T T T = Co m T T T p oLL LL W Qm W V V <f3 ? > Ef3 Efl W fA cn �.. m W W p V) p o o CA r LL V � _V w to d d EE C) d m Q U N p � > Q. � p N� > Q. E Z c C Z Cn W (q co C v p d m (1) Q p (A v p d CO W a F- F- Z _ c F- F- Z p a a� N Ca W Z (A W U) m cn W � W N W cn > X .a > x a � O a o Cl) c w o 000124 rr W W N Q W � to x � W Q M W � Q > > W LL W C/) o D W H CO) • 000125 W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a W M 00 T O M M w it O 00 00 0 CO CO CO M N F t- OV: NCn '1t00 ttO r0p1, CMNTNh Ct Z CfltnNMNC (0 cocoLO CO CO OOU) Nq}' CD r U LOMMrC0 'ctM CO Cl) M W 'CtC0ItNT Nt W a T O O O CO O T O Co co 00 t- N 't O LO CD Co m N W 0 0 M r I- m 0 co LO CO "I W M T CO N h Z J h M O Ln O r O CO Co CO N 00 N O O CO r O O Wa M Ni r O N Ln r- W O N O D M 00 -: M O CA 00 CO W OCOTLO0 cFfl- M '�tO1- Ot� W MLA N QV Cl) Cl) rd r M O T- N r r N N T N Co O } a N N r M ifJ ER w 1* M0 W CO o0WC0 COCOTOTrCO 'It O ~ r V It N N T O CO LO d' LO r w ct W T to O r o) a .J co O co O O w co r O CO O 'It O n r LO Co O O ❑ Q Ni d' N N O W T T O Co � CO r '- N M r r V O m CON � CO Cfl 1` N co Cfl M LO O r O Cl) M CO r ❑ Q Q LO T M LU �} } W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ O H Mwr0000O MNN M Ww (0000N1\ W r000O000 OtnO CoTr-: r000NM M CO Z 00 U) 00 Cn t- CV CV O 1- CM CV r- 00 LO CV In r d' q '- CA V LO M CO T LO C) W Iq M. It It W Cl) Nr � Cn Ln It r O 00) Zr d r LU ci) a> Q cr LO000OOo 00LO oOOOOOOO 0 a LLE ❑ 04000000 0t- O NOOO � w0co w 0 ❑ o W W M O O W O 'It CO O O W r t} r In CO O O W O Oa CD CA � (� NONCo000N OON CA COM00OOOM 0 O It 00 "t 'q W N O w O 1` W W O 1\ d' CO r r �.. Lys ❑ OO O ❑ I-T N r ;T r 't Orr r r N N CO U C) ❑ m N N 00 Wr Q b9 �? W w 00 W O CO Co 0 0 N o r CO M W CO O Co N t- Lp ~ M M t- M r- " '4t W Co CO LO Co Cfl LO O w CO O 00 0 a _1 W O T M q M r N0 co CO CO O r CO 'V' 1` W CO CA ❑ Q CO NO CO � Co N W O N Ni � M Ni O 1` O Ch C6 V0 M M 000 CO CO w 't N O0 CO 00 1,- 00 O O M N M 00 co ❑ Q Q LU cr r M W b9 } C C O A E d to J C U co O C X CDCU 0 = N i� d 0 X 0) U � co O ? N co N 41 Z N u' D X lL 0) -- N C '!_ 7 X N N m .a a p " L. LL O C Ri J CD O N !- U C N OCO > O C N (� C _ O O �-- Q O CU 03 .N 0 O �. .. R3 N O (0 C • tq i (0 CU i 7 .'C O Cls .0 W Xac� mlLmO E � � C�3O � WMWNa aa) Z a U 'u. 00 0 ui 000126 LU 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q o l4t r N o 0 't 00 N CO 0 d LO r 0 0 00 CO r �L 0 � F r Nr CO rtC� 0000 � I� OC7oIlCnCOr• o O M . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Z r r M CO LO r Co M 00 CO 00 o r 00 M LO CO CO 00 O CO U M M d' CO M N 0) Ict I 04 Iq It It LO �i M I Or W IL rqNr OCOLOrLOCOCnOMr00Cl) rMLO ' 0) r tt N N N CM CO CY) No) r- r i- r M0) r r O 00 LO CO CO CO O Z J � d' ',f' M r O M CO Cl,! CO Cl!d' M � CO CO � CO O T T LO V W Q CO r- CO r, 00 C) N p COU) It CO 4 N r ce) CO N (0 CO N CO O M LO 0) LO r 00 r 00 it o) M O Cfl r O M T T N O r Q V N C9 N CM CM N CO LO r M M T CO N r r 0) r }W. Q N r Efl b9 W ,qCO ";TLOOOMr• NqorrNLOLO0000 ' � LO ~ N CO W r o) LO M 0 LO CO r d It CA CO I- to CO O O 0o t` a J CO Ch V h LO O Vt I\ � 00 00 et 00 M O M M M r st o CA Q O r r 11 r r rM It I�t Q) CO CA LO CO LO CO LO 1100 M +� ON co000r w V, wrLOLO "ILOr. U) co n I• N T T CO N T T T LO w Q r Ch } 2 W o 0 0 0 0 0 D o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D o 0 0 o o w Pf w CO � � o7 LO CO M co m m A LO to � O r r � D N 00 N M r• O Ln Ln O fll� 114: N CD Cfl 00 I\ O 00 00 D.W U It q gTMN � "ItLItM � LLOCo9 0CD It � T acnescc W SWM a a� aIL Lc F- X 4) a a W m 0 0 0 0 0 0 I*l LO Ln o LO 0 0 0 00 LO LO LO LO LO r. 000nNorn ort00r` coV, 0) r. o00 00 Cf) co 0)azd O W W Cn "CL (OM O T CO LOMLO � MTOC'7N d' 00 O o) � Q 00) Cj U 0) OMIqM00 MNvLn0N � Cflr of �tN O d' LO N 0) r O LO 00 NT CO LO O LO M LO CD M Co M Co HW04 0 r NtLO rNLOI- -r- NCOMrM rr- It T U :) a0) p M N T= oo W r Q 89 EA W cr FW- r rctr• oCO ' ' r- rOLOrCOChrT00 ' ' N 'ct r O Co M r• Co CO o) N O M CO co N LO It CT r t\ QJ r CO COC'iOCO LOL'I R C11 LOM � LI! N CO r o O M r T C> I- C)r CO q CO Lo Ln Cf) Co LO LO N O 0 m r• It w r CO I,- M LO 00 rn r 'ct CO 00 00 co M T t- M r T r r UJ UJ M a r M LU (U C N v 0 & CL O a) a) Q N U C -a Vit 0 D U0) c Cd > � � U Q- E Z m a) x o _ � a � > (DE c 0 Cl) c � c � W e Urn rn a LT >, ca c = c LL i a c O � 0 0 N co co '� a) N ca !i C !- Z ,a0Ui- io � _ � � � � EoE2cn cn W C �_ Z'� N o o o . CD � 0 c 0 0 co ca 0 � aa)) � W QUUUJUQcCZaaILUWUCCaJNMCCF- 0 w 0001zrJ W o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00-0- V- 0 Q r r- O M It CA CO O O O) N O S Co CO O -r- CR CO 00 O CO cf N CO CA O O r Cn O r CO O CO Z rCOM T 0004V Iq 004r004 NNO 00 U d n N Nt 'it Nt r- It CO LC) Co CO w4t M W CL O CO Co CA M 11, r O CA t- Ln r CO O CO M t- co ce) O CA N r N Co O O N CA 00 Lf) CA N 00 LO I1' 00 Iq Z J CO C9 00 00 00 c' t, r CO CA T d 'I*: T h 00 N 00 N O W Q O CM It' 00 h CA CO 00 N CO it T LO CO r r O Ln V- T N O CO LO r- et M LA 'it M It It 00 ee H LO LO N N T Ct co It CO M 0) LU Q to 64 64 69 W CO Co O Cn r q LO T 00 N Ln r- It r O ' O CO ~ t- O O h LO CO oo N Ln 0) N O N Co T 00 LO Q J Nt W Ln It r O T N N ' N ti ' V CO Ln C7 Cl� � Q MNN 00 c) 0) It ItNNO NCO O CA r' O = T T O T T T T N M 'it 'Ct U I-- E.. N N r T r NLU cc r r r r oQQ w 69 to Vy 64 Q to o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Ca0 0 01 0 0 0 0 wor 00 moo co ocoo0 rnoCo Iq T Ln OCC) O 1t O r CA Ln O ' t Lq CO Ln t� � cn oo Z Ln � 00 LO CO N O O O CSI - r CO O Cn CO r W N It 't LO LO N CO N "q* It CO _ W CA U ' O NWcr+) a Q a L Lc QCL wm 00LO LO o00 o Ln 000 O o00 0 0 E O O t. h CA M0 N 'Ct o COO CO CO LQ O r LQ LL 0w W 0 0 h CA O O CA T ONO N M r 0 to N Z CD CY)Q) N t` r C) 00 0) M CA M V d'LO O CCO r 00 ch NCO CD (� co N CA CO M ti CO t- r O CO 00 C) d ct UW r Qm EA ll t%llW W r Lf 00 It N W r. co O CO Trl- CO r CO r O ~ CO zt T O LO r C4 CO Co r tit CA "' coI Co N oJ O N r- LO O 00 00 co ' LO 't w LO N CA O N � CA im Q O 00 00 N r- C; r N (5 C6 LA Ln Co t` CO N O N O N cf) O N O CO r n V oaQ } all 69 69 L LL L (D N CD Q = 0 dco CO C V 7 C C U C Z CL E -a `� Z C'3 °- d � `—�� x o XX � a v0 w = °° ac rri � � � w Q i Q 0 o O F- co " � Fes- 'v a a H Z a��i ~ Q C'�3 � h Xw � U Q� ®ZI r- U) _ 0w0U C� w F- ¢ w 000128 w o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q (D '41 N �(D N co 1- Z LO Cn M r- (4 C) 00 (A U Cl) r M It M 00 M W CL 0 I` r M (O (O (Y) 00Nt 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 ZJ l 0) VO_ O CNO N r M L eo W = r � r � � L6C �t (fl to T- pL Q V 'Md'! N � MINT CO f W Q T T T W1 1 1 1 1 1 I I Q J LO ti coNco O 0) L r r, CO N LO LO T r 0 LO CO V oaQ w cr W w 0-o � � 0� � 0� 801 � 0-01 a� � 0� 0 ON f- rNNd' OCO 00 � OOf*l 00 M _ O 00 Cn �t N Ln CA O 00 00 Q) M (n LO W N 00 Z O CA (A O O LO Iq r- CA Cl) Cl) r r 'CT r Owaci U W �t M r M co LO LON It cl) W co aCL N Fa- x `m QwNO N 0000 O 00 O 1 0 000 O O a t- "t r (7) LO 00 LO f, LO O O w O O (O LL d w W u) Q) LO M LO co N co Cf) LO LO 00 qt T CO T r Q 4)O ) cn 0 N M (O C (O r O CO O M M L6 ^ r I-i cr T O T 00 'd' N M Co N O O r r- fl- CO CO W 0) = LO M 00 N LO O a) r co co r N V C)Z Q m T r N N r w Ef3 K? EfJ w W CO 00 r Cl) (O CO CO 0 r LO O LO m w It CA CO ~ "tr CO 000OM co co LO f- N � N d' f- CD J M f� 't 00 N O w N 00 O 0 00 O (7�1 Q (p r f- N o r 00 r (fl O O N 0 LO f% M *- I0 1D1_____ LO LO 0 � r r N0 O N N M CO r r I.- r rl, T (3 T N T LO 19t T T r I= 0 z C 0 w g Ln V w N d aNi a- = w Q CD � a un E >ani o. E z > ani �ca c. E 1w- o 0 CD 0 (D caw 0 g o � iii �CD � � w v 0) 0LIJ d rn p O U fA C d Z d p .+�_' cc o U RS p d CU L-0 ~ cEwww ~ Z = tea' ~ = EZD ~ Z Q > Ut]C Qwcno0 = > U _ MW CO oc w in cc w 0001;x9 0 LU O 0 0 O O ' Q F- Z 00 O W U W IL Z -i O W O O co W = rn rn rn T T T r w J CD 0 F- W V o < w a O 0 o O O O O O O 0 OM N co co O O � O O O N Il Uf 0 0 I� O O O � � Go V N N � N00 r- O O O r o) O '�►U Z T a `n U) LLI co rn as QWm Ln un 00LO0 LO O o 0 0 0 o a E p- r- O OCAN i� O O O O O O o z d 0 W W n n 00 C7> M t- O Z U oA N C4 Lr) W O O co O -, O Cn 0� �t tet' ui M M W N f- CO r r, M M Cl) M LU O m N N N It r Wr a Efl 69 ffl ui cc W w O r r 00 N CA F` 0) 0 JQ w N � � I- LO N T' cli N: O V L W LO N W CN9 N04 W cr. V J owa a w o z LL a � cn z w W C.) g w > aui rn w N U U ! v> > m � >' Q. E 4. v> > >' a -a = a d `� x o O o a: � � � = N w = w o ¢ d � w = J La� rnOm �. O O ,+��+ O U i6 0 m w d 0) `� ,+=�+ co `q d Z = Co F�- -a Q- a ai h� Z V 7 � F0- a, F0- Z w my0. wc°n' v � w � vCD v F- Cr w > LC w 000130 W 0 • Q F- Z W V W a z J Qo Z Q w � Q U r wQ w I- f� Q J r p V caQ w aC Q W � � � � � � LU � , o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Owr*_ 00 N co 0 Cn co P- 0) P� O O 0� O LO r- N O r Cq 00 C9 O O O Ch co Z r 0 Cl) O N0 LO 0) r O CO O O '- W O) W OO C7 0) r N r CD co O 0 r vIW " W cf) CD Q n. L. � F- X CD n Qw 0 o 0 0 00000 o O o o 0 0 0 LLp m wF- 00 0 00N00r� 1l- r- O o r� �t LO O O O ClCO I� Ii OCLO O N N N O Q 0 0) v~i � Cl) .= �t C) LA CO Co Ln O Ln C) O NT �t d' F- W p Op d aD r C� h N N N N M M M U Z Q m W t- b4 fA Efl Ef3 W w f� r CO N 00 ' V CD Co w I- CO co O O f� O~ CO LO r CA N CD 14,' i,- I}' I- CO r I- I� LO J w 11q O LO CA N rl N p O LO CO N N Cfl UO MO cq N tO rN N T Z co M N N 0c0 W V M co co N r Q W LL f- U N N Q wa a) a) w o N LL L.a) O a) ca a- a C Z5 ` ca Ca CD Q C C C IL > fn CC O 0 ca U C. E V > U Q. E a) c O CIN •c6 YO w 0 w C � iri O w 0 W LL i Q c6 c i, i = LL i i m C fn r. is 7 C C 49 Q O U Q 0 O a) 0 a) � .. ? = gym F' ra) � c � � ~ Z a c � � ~ � � z a '+ M Uca ) > Ec a Q CD> Ec CL o ¢ w Q ¢ w 000131 W a z W U W a Z J Z Q CA W � � H W Q T } 0 � 0D uj U F- F- U 0 Q a W } cc W \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ C7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -.-0 10-0 0 -010 10-0 1.-0 1.-0 10-0 -0-0 0 -t0 cY r 00 crM �tMNT- x' 00 LD LO CO O O O D CC D CA O r M O r Co Cfl OR O r 0 m M LD LD O O z 0 01l- N W rNrNMi- CON O 0 00Nt CM O O r W Cl) V O N LO 00 r r 1. Nt MU-) d r LLJ o) cc O N w r 'Z r d H X d Qw 000 O 0000000000 O O o0 O O O O a LDOO W 'd' OrOONCOOOO M co 00 O O O O LL D N M W W 00 O O c0 M O O O O 00 Co O O O N M LD O LD O O LD Q CD CONLO CO OMOCID rCl) 1- LOCod' r 1- rN CO LA LO r I- W "M [] 1*- CA r m CO 0 '' N 00 N N M r O � 00 00 r r 0 V W T- Q m EA FR lf! W W Co ' r- co co LD O r� O 'ti' 1, Lo 1, ' O Co O Co ' ' Co O~ 1- LO M 1', 1- M M Nt 0Mr0 LO r LO 0) �t It J LO co O � wr- wmw WON N co NO co co Q 1` M O r M r r CO LD LD '�' O C r LL) O 0 V � H W h r (A co r N N co co CO U o } aLL to t IL LL Cl) a) � Q -Wa U) a °' o � � 0) o ° N y - o L � t_ o0) ca w E oca - U o n"N am0) f co m c O cu a L ID = c ca c c CU Q- 0 CO O m Cc > Co � C9 a � CD ca Q 4) d Q CC w m 'Z ¢ -ma o '� o ° o w 0 Q c CCC 0 o w 0 LL a) U ° ns CO -J 0 � CC Utz CDL c pC ca d �- c ca a) 0) o ca a) co • nz � U cn o d d —0 F- a, o 4. = cn o � w a- a> a) = � c�aornv � c�a � w ~ z Q = o (D ~ c F- z DCaC QC'3c� wC'3cno ¢ HQF- CCU w j cc w 000132 W 0 Z W ccU W CL co z � J W Q W Q r � W J O = U F- 1- U � Q Q W } a � co w 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 IX _ 9 � � O O C07 c(0 IC!LO C! O W N 00 W � O o N N O 0 T Q N rcc CO Cf) (9 QW i d rn QlIL nc� 1 O 0 o O o 0 0 0 O O u LL E o 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 W W N N O O CO N N O O co OQ d Cl) M C9 co N T E- W Q CO 0 U Z Q m W W w co co co co CO Q J , N CV) , OT r � (D co LO co co , 1 c0 c = T r T o ¢ a w o 611>1 6s � L E W 'a Z 3 V LD J -i >aE �- > ca aE Z Y Y cdt5cow z ¢ 5w mO eo a3i Fes- c a F Z d c H _ - Fo- Z > � c 0. 0 W > aU cc w Fes - cc w to 00013.3 W O - a z W U W a � J rn LU 0) w Q W F- J O = V oaa w } a Q o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 co 1- 00 LO O 0o O 00 M O M M O M Fa M On N O O It Go 0o Ln LA C7 M _ Who) W SCO ^ NO r co � M N N T W M U Ln *- O w N r WSo z :- O Qa a rn 0) 0. F- X m a Q w E o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 o 0 0 0 Ln O Ln O O Co r O 1- �t T T r 0 V- 0 0 CA w W T .;r LA O T T co OGD O 1� 1- 1� O O Q O (� N N CD 00 I�t T NCD d N O O N = 0 CA O N 'd' 1- 00 co N r r T T r O CD M M M V Z T Q T T T `w w w,. Cn co 1- NN LO N r Cn O T Ch n O GD r- 0o co 0) T 11, 0) r O 1� 1- N 0 J co O co LO LA P- N co N LO 't It It CA CA = r N M N N O M O O Gfl O 't .1 Lp O () 1— F— fn I\ I\ 1` `t T M ov M M T V oaa w H 619. V a cn a o co z z � O ami w cn CD a co C 0) CLLL W m - N O d x O : � Q � O " � � � mow = w ca N 1 j 0 OC � ( ca vi = cc C a ca N i O i 0 O d1 oZS E + .a «� J vi � F- ffiF- z ca CCD C ca a, ca = cc Q � dcn sF- 9L IL w v oe w 000131, W C3 a z W U W a Z J Wa av LU w � aJ o oQa w > Q W o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Og Q 0) Z o� O o \ \ \ \ \ N 00 i� 00 LO Cc00 00 O O V: (R r 0 0 O (n M z r r O O '- O W G01 U Or Or 0 � COO O T Qcor W < a. a Q w � o 0 0 0 00 O 00 O o a LL a 0 O O O O 00 O LD 00 co I� O Zd C) W W O O 00 O O Cn O CC) Il O Q d � (S LO Ln LO Ln O r r Ln LO CC) Q C& m T T T T I�r T Lo Cl) M T U rn DMI w rnto rn M o^ CD c00oco F LO Obi J Of� O O Cn co 0 CA co co CD co Cc,= co Cp V H H co co co v oQa yW cn N Wcn F- U- _ C C W 0 c c Qcri aD v K O f- ami v K O CL a x '� w 0 U jr rn w e Cc a) � L a LG g cc Z F0 'a a� i�— Z a oc w u. m w 000135 W 0 F Z W ccU W IL J o Wa a LLIa tial o U oQ a LU W o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -o,- 0 O d M N O r- it CO N 00 f- Cn O O = Ea O O Cn � CO O W MLqCO N �t O r CC IA Z O CA O) r O O 00 O r O O N r O r W VJ M - V T T T N N T LC) LO U) O y Tcc - r NW co) o FQ- 0.X ® CD co Q W E o 0 0 0 O O O o 0 0 O o 0 O O M M O O O o n ❑ N CO T CO I- O O LL WF- NTrM aoOhN ' rtA CO Co O Z C) N � r 00 r r O CO M CO f- N N � d' >. Q 0) _ ❑ N CO T N " N It r N It F- W � " W T a °° to �} ffl toll W Z ' O O O 00 ' O M O 00 O O I- I- LO 00 00 O LJO N O 00 LO N O 00 CO O Co t" r" � 00 00 a J Q Ln Cr) O 00 LO CM O 00 O M M Co CO Co Cfl O ,�R C6 L6 T M � C4 C6 L6 T M � C p T T N T T T V v ~ v Z oQa v U. w m V H I � W cn � p O m Z J N 7 W N 3 W d � CD d N d d p LLLLLLLL > LLLLLLLL mmC� m Kow m 0 CD 4) vi �—. K o cr = w Uoc w cn O CiC U U U U U U U G F 0 �. : 0 d rnrnrnrn ~ = rnrnrnrn ~ Z W N = 0. Co F- Z rnrnrnrn dMOMO cr dQ c OU T T T T CL T T T r ' Q. 01 w cn cc w OUO- :it; ITEM NUMBER: C - 2 DATE: 02/09/99 1918 ® 1919 9 City Man ger's Agenda Report ' Wade G. McKinney City Council 1909 Meeting Schedule RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Council approve City Council meeting schedule for 1999. DISCUSSION: The City Council, prsuant to Chapter 2, Section 1.01 of the Atascadero Municipal Code, meets • the second and fouith Tuesday of each month. Upon occasion, the Council will hold special study sessions and/or joint meetings with the Planning Commission on a fifth Tuesday. The Council has requested that regular joint meetings with the Planning Commission be scheduled and holidays be avoided. Staff has prepared the attached schedule for the year 1999 to help in the coordination of these meetings with personal schedules. FISCAL IMPA T: None RESPONSIBLF DEPARTMENT: City Manager's Office ATTACHMENTS: City Council 1999 Meeting Schedule 000137 CLTY -OFWhk- SCADERO 181 R 9 9 - - - - CITY COUNCIL Atascadero City Council 1999 Meeting Schedule 4 January 12 Regular January 26 Regular February;9 Regular February 23 Regular March 9 Regular March 23 Regular March 30 Joint.City Council/Planning Commission April 13 Regular l27 Regular • April g - May 11 Regular May 25 Regular June 8 Regular June 22 Regular July 13 Regular August 10 Regular September 14 Regular September 28 Regular October 12 Regular October 26 Regular November 9 Regular November. 30 Joint City Council/Planning Commission,., Decemb-14 Regular- 0001;38 6500 PALMA AVENUE '• ATASCADERO,CALIFORNIA 93422 (805)461-5086 • ,FAX(805)461-0606 ITEM NUMBER: C - 3 DATE: 02/09/99 '■ as a ® n 1918 ® 19 9 City Manager's Agenda Report Wade G. McKinney Traffic Committee Review RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Council disband the Traffic Committee. DISCUSSION: Background: The ity Council established the Traffic Committee in 1985 with the adoption of Ordinance No. 112. According to this Ordinance, the purpose of the Traffic Committee was, "to recommend to Council or to the City Manager a means for improving traffic or safety conditions through appropriate signing,pavement marking,parking changes or other related methods. The Committee shall study related matters as requested by Council and suggest the most practicable means for coordina ing the activities of all officers and agencies of this City having authority . with respect to the administration and enforcement of traffic regulations." Summary: The Cit' 's management team has been working hard to make their departments more "citizen-friendly." They are also coordinating their compliance efforts to better serve the community concerr ing code violations and safety issues. As a result,the Traffic Committee seems to overlap w th their efforts. If you choose to disband the Traffic Committee,there is no need to amend or rc peal the existing Ordinance as the Ordinance states that, "The City Council may.establish an ac visory Traffic Committee...". Also, if in the future the Council feels the need to resume the rraffic Committee,.you are able to do so without amending the existing Ordinance. FISCAL IMPACT: None ALTERNATA IVES: The Council could leave the Traffic Committee in force. 000IL 39 ITEM NUMBER:-C - 3 DATE: 02/09/99 RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT: City Manager's Office ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance No. 112 000IL40 ORDINANCE NO. 112 Ali ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AMENDING CHAPTER 3 OF TITLE 4 OF THE ATASCADERO MUNICIPAL CODE ESTABLISHING AN ADVISORY TRAFFIC COMMITTEE The Council of the City of Atascadero ordains as follows : Section 1 . Chapter 3 of Title 4 of the Atascadero Municipal Code is amen' ed to read as follows , commencing with Section 4 - 3. 209: TITLE 4 4 - 3. 209. Traffic Committee. The City Council may establish an advisory Traffic Committee to serve without compensation, consisting of the Director of Public Works , who shall be the chairman, the Chief of Police, the Planning Director, one councilperson, and two (2) citizens that reside within the City limits . �. 4 3 . 210. Term. (a The two (2) citizens shall be appointed by council to a term of two 2) years , except for the initial year in which there will b one two-year term appointment, and one one-year appointment. Each succeeding year one new member shall be appointed by Council to a two- year term to replace the member whose term has expired. No citizen shal serve two consecutive two-year terms . (b The councilperson shall be designated by Council to a one-year terra. A councilperson may serve as many consecutive terms as Council desires but shall be designated on an annual basis . (c) The terms of the Director of Public :corks , the Police Chief, and the Planning Director shall be for the duration of, and concurrent with, their respective service in office. 4 - 3 . 211. Duties and Rules . (a It shall be the duty of the Traffic Committee to recommen( to Council o to the City 'Manager a means for improving traffic or safety condi ions through appropriate signing, pavement markin , parking changes or other related methods . The committee shall study related matters as requested by Council and suggest the most practicable means for coordinating the activities of all officers and agencies of this City having authority with respect to the administration and enforcement of traffic regulations . (b) The committee shall meet as necessary at a convenient time and pla e designated by the committee. 000141 (c) The Chairman shall appoint one member to serve as secretary to record all official actions or recommendations . (d) Patters shall be decided by a majority vote of those members present. Four members shall constitute a 'quorum. (e) The committee shall not attempt to ursurp the powers of elected or appointed officials designated by ordinance to protect the health, safety and welfare of the general public. Section 2. Publication. The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published twice within thirty (30) days after its passage in the Atascadero News , a newspaper of general circulation, printed, published and circulated in this City in accordance with Government Code Section 36933; shall certify the adoption of this ordinance; and shall cause this ordinance and certification to be entered in the Book of Ordinances of this City. Section 3. Effective Date. This ordinance shall go into effect and a in tull torce and a ect at 12: 01 a.m. on October 10th , 1955 . The foregoing ordinance was introduced on August 26, 1955 , and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on September 1985 . On motion by Councilman Hands y , and seconded by Council_ woman M v , the foregoing ordinance is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following role call vote: AYES : Councilmembers Handshy, Mackey, Molina & Norris and Mayor *Nelson NOES : NONE ABSENT: NONE ADOPTED: 9/9/85 ATTEST: CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA: •.,--_ /4 ROBERT M. JONES , City Clerk ROLFE NELSON, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: h r, 000142 ITEM NUMBER: C - 4 DATE: 02/09/99 n - Iola ® 57-9 . CAD�p City Man ger's Agenda Report Wade G. McKinney Information Bulletin A. Employee date Leah Goldman P/Time Recr. Leader Resigned 1/25/99 Jeanne Lauffer P/Time Recr. Leader Resigned 1/25/99 Mike Anderson P/Time Service Worker Hired 1/29/99 Jennifer Adge P/Time Intern Hired 1/29/99 Wynee Au P/Time Intern Hired 1/29/99 C. Greg Greeson Temp. Ass't City Manager Hired 2/1/99 Tiffany Ayles Police Officer Hired 2/1/99 • 000143