Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda Packet 11/23/1999
*PUBLIC REVIEW COPY Please do not remove from counter min 101 AGENDA 1918 p 1979 ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 23, 1999 7:00 P.M. City of Atascadero 6500 Palma Avenue, 4t" 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 Luna Council Member Scalise APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Roll Call 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. Please 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 ANNOUNCEMENT AND REPORTS: (On their own initiative, 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. The Council may take action on items listed 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—October 26, 1999 ■ City Clerk recommendation: Council approve the City Council minutes of October 26, 1999 [Marcia McClure Torgerson] 2. City Council Minutes—November 09, 1999 ■ City Clerk recommendation: Council approve the City Council minutes of November 09, 1999 [Marcia McClure Torgerson] 3. Acceptance of Final Parcel Map #99012—AT 99-164 (905 El Camino Real) (Greenberg 40 Farrow/ Gearhart/ Kregger) ■ Fiscal Impact: None ■ Staff recommendation: Council: 1. Accept the Final Map 499012; and 2. Reject the offer of dedication for the El Camino Real right-of-way north of the San Ramon Road intersection [Community Development Department] 4. Davis Property: Zone Change 498004—Establishment of Planned Development 15 Overlay District- (3900 Traffic Way/ Shores) ■ Fiscal Impact: None ■ Staff recommends: Council introduce for second reading by title only Ordinance No. 367, adding a Planned Development Overlay District-15 (PD-I5) to the City Zoning Ordinance. [Community Development Department] 5. Davis Property: Zone Change #98004 -Mixed Use Cluster Residential Subdivision— (3900 Traffic Way/ Shores) ■ Fiscal Impact: None ■ Staff recommendation: Council introduce for second reading by title only Ordinance No. 368, rezoning the project site from RS(Residential Suburban) to RSF X(PD-15), L (PD-15) (Recreation), and I(Industrial) [Community Development Department] 2 6. Atascadero Mall Overlay Project(#99-01)—Accept completed public improvements ■ Fiscal Impact: $11,563.62 in Urban State Highway Account and Sidewalk Trust Funds (Fund 500) ■ Staff recommendation: Council accept public improvements as complete and authorize release of the project retention in the amount of$11,563.62 to A.J. Diani Construction Company[Community Services Department] 7. Garcia Road Storm Damage Repairs—Bid No. 99-03 ■ Fiscal Impact: S39,882 ■ Staff recommendation: Council authorize the Mayor to execute an agreement with Whitaker Engineering Contractors, Inc. [Community Services Department] 8. San Benito Elementary School Road Improvements—Bid No. 99-07 ■ Fiscal Impact: S26,517.96 ■ Staff recommendation: Council authorize the Mayor to execute an agreement with Souza Engineering Contracting, Inc. to construct the route to school improvements at the San Benito School. [Community Services Department] 9. Garcia Road Bridge Replacement Project ■ Fiscal Impact: 512,450 ($9,960 HBRR, S2,490 Fund 705) ■ Staff recommendation: Council authorize the Mayor to execute a Consultant Services Agreement with Tarvin &Associates for the services required to prepare appraisals and right-of-way maps for the acquisition of slope easements and rights-of-entry required to replace the Garcia Road bridge. [Community Services Department] 10. Request to Serve Alcohol at a Private Function in the City Administration Building ■ Fiscal Impact: $200.00 in rental income ■ Staff recommendation: Council approve the request to serve alcohol at a private function in the City Administration Building. [Community Services Department] 11. Lighting Plan for Atascadero Lake Park—Request by the Atascadero Rotary Club to modify plan ■ Fiscal Impact: None ■ Staff recommendation: Council approve a request by the Atascadero Rotary Club to modem the Lighting Plan for Atascadero Lake Park by installing one additional decorative lamppost in the approximate location of a recently removed PG&E power- pole with a streetlight fixture. [Community Services Department] 12. Annual Investment Policy Review—Finance Committee review of Investment Policy with recommended changes and additions. ■ Fiscal Impact: None ■ City Treasurer recommendation: Council approve the attached revised Investment Policy with the changes and additions as recommended by the City Finance Committee. [City Treasurer] i B. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. Atascadero State Hospital / Chalk Mountain Golf Course Annexation—Conducting Authority Hearing of Annexation. ■ Fiscal Impact: Positive ■ Staff recommends Council, acting as the Conducting Authority: 1. Summaries the LAFCo resolution of determination on the reorganization. 2. Open the Public Hearing and allow anyone wishing to protest the annexation to make statements and submit or withdraw written protests to the Clerk. 3. Close the Public Hearing and recess the meeting to allow the Clerk to determine the value of written protests filed and not withdrawn. 4. Reconvene the meeting and have the Clerk report the value of the written protests that have been filed. 5. Adoption of Resolution 1999-068 making a finding regarding the value of the written protests filed. [Community Development Department] C. MANAGEMENT REPORTS: 1. General Plan Update Strategy ■ Fiscal Impact: S60,000 increased appropriations for FY 1999-2000 ■ Staff recommendation: Council approve strategy for General Plan update, authorize the City Manager to enter into contract with Crawford Multari Clark& Mohr for consulting services, and appropriate 2. Information Bulletin D. COMMITTEE REPORTS: (The following represent standing committees. Informative status reports will be given, as felt necessary): 1. S.L.O. Council of Governments/S.L.O. Regional Transit Authority 2. Finance Committee 3. Water Committees: a. SLO County Flood Control & Water Conservation District Water Resources Advisory Committee b. Nacimiento Water Purveyors' contract Technical Advisory Committee C. North County Water forum 4. Integrated Waste Management Authority 5. North County Council 6. Air Pollution Control District 7. County Mayor's Round Table 8. Economic Vitality Corporation, Board of Directors 9. City/ Schools Committee 10. Economic Opportunity Commission 4 E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION: 1. City Council 2. City Attorney 3. City Clerk 4. City Treasurer F. ADJOURNMENT: THE NEXT CITY COUNCIL REGULAR SESSION IS SCHEDULED ON DECEMBER 14, 1999,AT 7:00 P.M. Please note: Should 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 hearing. 5 City of Atascadero WELCOME TO THE A TA SCADER 0 CITY COUNCIL MEETING GENERAL INFORMATION • 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 be 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. ITEM NUMBER: A-1 DATE: 11/23/99 -' ® A N MINUTES 1918 p 1 1979 ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, OCTOBER 26, 1999 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, 6:30 P.M. Mayor Johnson announced that the Council is going to discuss 93 of the Closed Session items at this time and then continue the Closed Session to the end of the City Council meeting and discuss items 41 & #2 at that time. CLOSED SESSION: (Immediately following Redevelopment Agency Meeting) • 1. Conference with legal counsel [Govt. Code §54956.9] Existing litigation: Atascadero Unified School District v City of Atascadero 2. Conference with legal counsel [Govt. Code §54956.9] Potential litigation: Plaintiff. City of Atascadero Real party in interest: Dan Mackey Threatened litigation: Pacas v City of Atascadero 3. Performance Review: City Manager (Govt. Code § 54957.6) Mayor Johnson announced there was no action taken in Closed Session. REGULAR SESSION, 7:00 P.M.: Mayor Johnson called the meeting to order at 7:06 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance. CC 10/26/99 Page 1 ()()0001 ITEM NUMBER: A— 1 DATE: 11/23/99 ROLL CALL: Present: Council Members Arrambide, Clay, Luna and Mayor Johnson • Absent: [Vacancy] Others Present: City Clerk Marcia McClure Torgerson and City Treasurer David 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 AGENDA: MOTION: By Council Member Luna and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Arrambide to approve the agenda. Motion passed 4:0 by a roll-call vote. ADMINISTRATION OF OATH OF OFFICE: • City Clerk Marcia McClure Torgerson administered the Oath of Office to new Council Member Wendy Scalise. Mayor Johnson called a two-minute break. Mayor Johnson called the meeting back to order. PRESENTATIONS: 1. Proclamation declaring October 24-31, 1999, "Pornography Awareness Week." Mayor Johnson presented the proclamation to Rusty Risch, president of the Coalition for Decency. Mr. Risch thanked the Mayor and Council for their support. COMMUNITY FORUM: Eric Greening, 6600 Lewis Ave., welcomed Council Member Scalise. He gave the Council an update on the Salinas Dam expansion, commenting that he feels the North County has a strong hold on the issue. He asked if the $50,000 spent on this project went to the California Sport Fish Protective Association. Mayor Johnson stated that arrangements have not been made. Mr. CC 10/26/99 000002 Page 2 ITEM NUMBER: A—1 DATE: 11/23/99 Greening requested that, if a check is cut, it be given to the California Sport Fish Protective Association. Katie Gosney, 5600 Venado Road, representative of the Youth Task Force. She stated that a survey was conducted among freshmen and sophomore students at the High School concerning the possibility of building a Youth Center in our community. Michelle Kim, High School Student, reported that of the students surveyed, 76% are in favor of a Youth Center, 54% stated that they would use the facilities, 34%would encourage friends to go, 67% were interested in holding dances at a Youth Center, and 48% would participate in after- school activities at a Youth Center. Council Member Clay asked how many students participated in the survey. Miss Kim replied that approximately 450 to 500 students. Mayor Johnson asked Miss Gosney and Miss Kim to turn in the survey results to the Community Services Department and thanked them for their efforts. Sandra Mathias, 4516 Yerba, representative of the Youth Task Force, thanked the City Council for considering a Youth Center. Mayor Johnson closed the Community Foram period. COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENT AND REPORTS: Council Member Clay reported that recently he heard Mayor Settle state that the North County contributed to the water problem of San Luis Obispo through 20,000 daytime visitor/workers. Council Member Clay expressed displeasure in Mayor Settle's comments. Mayor Pro Tem Arrambide asked if the no parking signs approved for El Camino Real near San Anselmo were ever placed. Community Services Director Brady Cherry stated that they were. A. CONSENT CALENDAR: Roll Call 1. City Council Minutes— September 28, 1999 ■ City Clerk recommendation: Council approve the City Council minutes of September 28, 1999 [Marcia McClure Torgerson] 2. City Council Minutes—October 12, 1999 ■ City Clerk recommendation: Council approve the City Council minutes of October 12, 1999 [Marcia McClure Torgerson] I El Centro Oaks—Zone Change 97005 (8605 El Centro Road—Andrew Charnley/Frank Henderson) ■ Fiscal Impact: None ■ Staff recommendation: Council introduce for second reading by title only Ordinance No. 366, approving Zone Change 97005, changing the zoning of the site from RSF-X to RMF-16 (PD-7) [Community Development Department] CC 10/26/99 000003 Page 3 ITEM NUMBER: A—1 DATE: 11/23/99 4. No Parking Zone on Larga Avenue ■ Fiscal Impact: Approximately$1,000.00 from Street Division funds. ■ Staff recommendation: Council approve Resolution No. 1999-064, establishing a No 40 Park Zone on Larga Avenue. [Community Services Department] 5. 3-way Stop Intersection at Traffic Way, Carrizo and Santa Cruz Road ■ Fiscal Impact: $400.00 from Street Division funds ■ Staff recommendation: Council adopt Resolution No. 1999-063, establishing a three- way stop at the intersection of Traffic Way, Carrizo Road and Santa Cruz Road. [Community Services Department] Council Member Luna pulled Item #A-3. Mayor Johnson pulled Item#-4. MOTION: By Council Member Clay and seconded by Council Member Luna to approve Items 4A-1,A-2 and A-5. Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. (Council Member Scalise abstained from Item #A-1 and A-2 as she was not present at the meetings) RE: Item #A-3: Rush Kolemaine, P.O. Box 1990, expressed appreciation to Mr. Charnley and Mr. Henderson for his efforts and willingness to work with the City. MOTION: By Council Member Clay and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Arrambide to approve Item #A-3. Motion passed 4:1 by a roll-call vote. (Luna opposed) RE: Item #A-4: Community Services Director Brady Cherry gave the staff report, suggesting that amendments be made to the Resolution to establish the no parking zone on both sides of the street, a time-limited parking zone or specify parking hours. PUBLIC COMMENT Bill Smith, 7540 San Marcos Ave., stated that he is against a No Parking Zone on Larga. Bernadette Haskell, 8132 El Descanso, stated that the parked cars are not always completely off the road which causes a dangerous situation for those trying to drive through the area. Also, the students leave their trash. Nancy Tweedie, 8165 Larga, stated the students sit in the street and feels the parking situation is a nuisance. Elaine Zoft, corner of Larga and El Descanso, stated she is concerned as her home has been hit by fruit because her dog barks at the kids who try to smoke in her backyard. Mary Jazwiecki, 8110 Larga, showed pictures to express the problem as she see it. She stated that she did not feel a three-hour limit would be sufficient (see Attachment A). Mayor Johnson closed the Public Comment period. CC 10/26/99 000004 Page 4 ITEM NUMBER: A—1 DATE: 11/23/99 Mayor Johnson asked Police Chief Hegwood to have our School Resource Officer look into some of the neighbors concerns about student behavior on their lunch break. Council Member Luna asked staff about the wording of the Resolution. Mr. Cherry responded that the wording would have to be amended. Mayor Pro Tem Arrambide asked if the staff would still recommend limited parking as opposed to no parking. Mr. Cherry stated that staff would recommend no parking between a set number of hours (i.e., 8a.m. to 1p.m.). Bill Smith, 7540 San Marcos, stated he is opposed to a No Parking Zone when it is just a few students abusing the parking situation in his neighborhood. Council Member Scalise recommended that the restricted time begin at 7:00 a.m. Mayor Johnson stated that he can only support a restriction that restricts the student and not necessarily visitors of the private property owners. Council Member Clay stated he could support a two-hour restrictive parking from 7:00 a.m. until 1:00 p.m. or a no parking from 7:00 a.m. until 12:00 p.m. Mayor Pro Tem Arrambide expressed support for the two-hour restrictive parking. MOTION: By Mayor Pro Tem Arrambide and seconded by Council Member Clay to approve Item 9A-4 with amendments to Resolution No. 1999-064 as follows: 1) Paragraph one: Replacing "Section 4-2.1101" with "Section 4-2.1301" and replacing the words "'No Parking"' with "Restricted Parking." 2) Paragraph two: Replacing "'No Parking"' with "Restricted Parking," and changing the last sentence to read "...improve the situation,which will go from Navarette to El Descanso and the "Restricted Parking" is time-limited to two hours between 7:00 a.m. and 1:00 p.m." Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. B. PUBLIC HEARINGS: None C. MANAGEMENT REPORTS: 1. State Hospital Expansion—Consideration of reviewing options ■ Fiscal Impact: None. Future studies would identify both costs and benefits to the community. ■ Staff recommendation: Council request the State to consider expansion of the Atascadero State Hospital. [City Manager's Office] City Manager Wade McKinney gave the staff report and answered questions of Council. CC 10/26/99 Page 5 O000(X) ITEM NUMBER: A— I DATE: 11/23/99 Council Member Luna asked that the entire Council sign the request letter. 0 Mel Hunter, Department of Mental Health, answered questions of Council. He explained the State is considering two other sites; adjacent to Pleasant Valley State Prison in Fresno County and adjacent to Centinella State Prison in Imperial County. Council Member Clay asked what happens when inmates are paroled. Mr. Hunter explained that when paroled the inmates are released in the county that they were committed. He stated that the State is looking at other sites for their expansion and an EIR will probably determine the best site. PUBLIC COMMENT Ariette Madison, employee of the State Hospital, stated she is speaking as a citizen. She stated that these inmates are sexually violent predators. She said she feels the public should be the one to decide this issue, not a few. Ms. Lynn Strahl, works at the State Hospital, stated she does not speak for the Hospital. She asked who should be contacted to stop the expansion. Mayor Johnson replied that they are exploring the possibility and not making any concrete decision. Ran Jennings, 3795 Amagon, works at the State Hospital, but is speaking as a citizen. He stated that currently the majority of patients are mentally ill while any new patients for this particular expansion are correctional inmates. i Eric Greening, 6600 Lewis Ave., asked if the inmates will be of a different category, would the employees also be of a different category. He suggested that if the project is going to go forward, Atascadero would like to have full noticing and participation in the environmental process. Mayor Johnson closed the Public Comment period. Mr. Hunter explained that the expansion would also benefit the current needs of the Hospital. MOTION: By Council Member Luna and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Arrambide to request staff to write a letter to the State asking to be considered for the expansion of the Atascadero State Hospital, have each Council Member who is in favor sign it. Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. 2. Community Survey—Second phase /random sample survey ■ Fiscal Impact: S16,765.00, included in City budget ■ Staff recommendation: Council authorize the City Manager to enter a contract with Godbe Communications to perform a Community Survey [City Manager's Office] staff report and answered questions of the Council. City Manager Wade McKinney gave the sta p CC 10/26/99 000006 Page 6 ITEM NUMBER: A— 1 DATE: 11/23/99 PUBLIC COMMENT Rush Kolemaine, P.O. Box 1990, thanked the City Manager for the information and expressed that he would like to see the Council move forward on this item. Bill Bright, 11875 Santa Lucia, suggested to the Council that the Survey Committee should choose the questions that will be placed on the survey. Bill Smith, 7540 San Marcos Avenue, asked how they would perform their survey. Mayor Johnson stated that it would be a telephone survey. Mayor Johnson closed the Public Comment period. Council Member Clay stated that he would like to see the consultant choose the questions and not involve the committee. Council Member Luna stated he agreed with Council Member Clay's suggestion. Mayor Pro Tem Arrambide stated that he believed that there was balance in the previous study group and he would like to see the document passed by them. City Manager McKinney stated he would like the consultant to review the initial survey prior to the study. MOTION: By Council Member Luna and seconded by Council Member Clay to authorize the City Manager to enter a contract with Godbe Communications to perform a Community Survey. Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. 3. Local Option Sales Tax Program—Appointment to Regional Steering Committee ■ Fiscal Impact: Staff and Council time. ■ Staff recommendation: Council appoint member to Regional Steering Committee. [City Manager's Office] Steve Devencenzi, SLOCOG, explained that the committee will be comprised of Council Members from throughout the County. Mayor Johnson clarified that only if the vote of the people moves forward, then the committee will move forward. He asked Council Member Scalise if she would be willing to serve if necessary. Council Member Scalise replied that she would, however, she stated at this time she is not in favor of an added tax. PUBLIC COMMENT Eric Greening, 6600 Lewis Ave., asked when the survey would be complete. He stated he supports a sales tax if it goes towards long-term maintenance. He commented that he would prefer to see it as a gas tax. Mayor Johnson stated that he was not sure of the exact date when the survey would be complete. CC 10/26/99 �U0007 Page 7 ITEM NUMBER: A— 1 DATE: 11/23/99 Mayor Johnson closed the Public Comment period. Mayor Johnson appointed Council Member Scalise to the Regional Steering Committee. Is 4. Atascadaero State Hospital/Chalk Mountain Golf Course San Luis Obispo County Annexation Agreement (ANX 99001) ■ Fiscal Impact: Positive ■ Staff recommendation: Council approve the annexation, sharing agreement and consent to annex property agreement with San Luis Obispo County. [Community Development Department] City Manager Wade McKinney gave the staff report. PUBLIC COMMENT Eric Greening, 6600 Lewis Ave., how many permanent residents are there at the State Hospital and will there need to be an election. Mr. McKinney replied that the apartments are not primary residents. He stated that if there are more than twelve votes then it is an inhabited annexation. Mr. McKinney also stated that there will be a protest hearing, and if enough people protest there would be a vote. Mayor Johnson closed the Public Comment period. MOTION: By Mayor Pro Tem Arrambide and seconded by Council Member Scalise to approve the annexation, sharing agreement and consent to annex property agreement with San Luis Obispo County. Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. 5. Information Bulletin City Manager Wade McKinney presented the Information Bulletin. He requested a study session on roads the evening of the Planning Commission/ City Council Joint Meeting on November 30t". There was a Council consensus to have a Joint Study Session of the roads with the Planning Commission on November 30, 1999. D. COMMITTEE REPORTS: Air Pollution Control District Mayor Pro Tem Arrambide stated that they are working on the backyard burning issue and encouraged public involvement. CC 10/26/99 0000C)s Page 8 ITEM NUMBER: A—1 DATE: 11/23/99 County Mayor's Round Table Mayor Johnson reported that the median issue was discussed again, and they received confirmation from Cal Trans that they will communicate with the community before they take any action. He also suggested we talk with Paso Robles about moving the telephone poles out of the right-of-ways. E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION: City Council Mayor Johnson stated that the Council has evaluated the City Manager's performance in Closed Session. The Council must discuss the possibility of a bonus in public session. Council Member Arrambide expressed appreciation for the leadership we currently have and would support a bonus. Council Member Clay commended Mr. McKinney on his efforts and achievements. He appreciates Mr. McKinney's "user friendliness." Council Member Scalise stated that she attended a Department Head meeting yesterday and was impressed with the communication level between the department heads. She also stated that she believes Mr. McKinney has great talent and supports providing him with a bonus. Mayor Johnson stated that he seconds the comments of the previous speakers. He commended Mr. McKinney on all of his vast achievements. Council Member Clay stated that he would like to see Mr. McKinney receive $5,000. MOTION: By Mayor Pro Tem Arrambide and seconded by Mayor Johnson to authorize a bonus of$4,000 to the City Manager. Motion passed 4:1 by a roll-call vote. (Lama opposed) City Treasurer City Treasurer David Graham reported that he just returned from a conference. He also announced that on November 2, 1999, there will be a Finance Committee meeting. F. ADJOURNMENT: Mayor Johnson adjourned the meeting at 8:55 p.m. to the Closed Session and announced the next Regular Session will be on November 9, 1999 at 7:00 p.m. CC 10/26/99 000009 Page 9 ITEM NUMBER: A—I DATE: 11/23/99 MEETING RECORDED AND PREPARED BY: Marcia McClure Torgerson, City Clerk Melanie Whaley, Deputy City Clerk ATTACHMENTS: A- Photographs taken by Mary Jazwiecki on October 25, 1999 of the parking problem on Larga Avenue. • 000610 CC 10/26/99 Page 10 Attachment: A Atas.cadero City Council Meeting Date: 1 • •• �y -2 r � � • wL tr�T t - :z. • •1► II rZTTE 000011 ITEM NUMBER: A-2 DATE: 11/23/99 y� MINUTES Isis 0 iais ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 09, 1999 7:00 P.M. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, 6:30 P.M. CLOSED SESSION: (Immediately following Redevelopment Agency Meeting) 1. Conference with legal counsel [Govt. Code §54956.9] Existing litigation: Atascadero Unified School District v City of Atascadero • 2. Performance Review: City Manager(Govt. Code § 54957.6) City Attorney Roy Hanley announced there were no reportable actions taken in Closed Session. REGULAR SESSION, 7:00 P.M.: Mayor Johnson called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. and Mayor Pro Tem Arrambide led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: Present: Council Members Arrambide, Clay, Luna, Scalise and Mayor Johnson Absent: None Others Present: City Clerk Marcia Torgerson and City Treasurer David Graham Staff Present: City Manager Wade McKinney, Fire Chief Mike McCain, Community Services Director Brady Cherry, Community and Economic Development Director Paul Saldana, Police Lieutenant Bill Watton, Finance Technician Liz Carlock, Principal Planner Warren Frace, and City Attorney Roy Hanley. 000012 APPROVAL OF AGENDA: MOTION: By Council Member Luna and seconded by Council Member Clay to • approve the agenda. Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. COMMUNITY FORUM: Ann Ketcherside, stated she was speaking for the Adobe Plaza business owners and they expressed concern that their businesses will suffer as a result of the construction of the new on and off-ramps at the Highway 41/Highway 101 interchange. She requested the Council and Planning Commission to consider the Adobe Plaza businesses when they review possible plans. She also expressed concern for the median on El Camino Real near the State Hospital and stated that she would like to have it removed. Mayor Johnson closed the Public Comment period COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENT AND REPORTS: 1. General Plan Amendment No. 98003 —The Mackey Project—Consideration by City Council of options concerning status of General Plan Amendment passed August 10, 1999. ■ Available actions include rescission, review or no action. [City Attorney] • City Attorney Roy Hanley gave the staff report. He explained in detail the options available to the Council. Mayor Johnson asked the City Clerk to read into the record a letter received from an attorney representing former Council Member Ken Lerno. Derek Westen, 1800 Belinda Drive, Santa Barbara, stated in a prepared statement, read into the record by City Clerk Marcia McClure Torgerson, that previous Council Member Ken Lerno was unaware, on August 10, 1999, that Kelly Gearhart had purchased property close to the Mackey project. Mr. Westen also stated that Mr. Lerno had obtained a letter of opinion from the most experienced law firm in California prior to his vote, using information Mr. Lerno believed to be true, and the letter stated that legally Mr. Lerno could vote on the issue (see Attachment A). PUBLIC COMMENT John Falkenstien, Cannon Associates, representing Mr. Mackey, stated he feels they complied with all City requirements. Speaking for Mr. Mackey, he said that he waives all rights to have the City Council consider this item. Mr. Mackey would be willing to have the Planning Commission reconsider the item. Mary Pellett, stated that it was reported that Mr. Mackey had been working on the project since i 1998, however, Mr. Mackey did not purchase the property until April 29, 1999. CC 11/09/99 003013 Page 2 Mayor Johnson closed the Public Comment period Mayor Pro Tem Arrambide made a motion to rescind, thereby denying the Council action known as General Plan Amendment 498003, past August 10, 1999. This motion was seconded by Council Member Luna. City Attorney Roy Hanley stated, before the vote, that he has a draft Resolution for the Council to review as they might want to include it in their motion. Citizen Mary Pellett asked to speak. He stated that it was reported that Mr. Mackey had been working'on the project since 1998, however, Mr. Mackey did not purchase the property until April 29, 1999. Mayor Johnson asked for audience cooperation to speak during the Public Comment periods only. Mr. Hanley explained that the Resolution he handed out as drafted is pretty close to the Council's motion. He commented that both the motion and the Resolution do not include any direction that the project be revisited. Mayor Pro Tem Arrambide responded saying that Mr. Hanley's comment was correct. Council Member Luna stated that the motion made is equivalent of the last statement made on the draft resolution presented by Mr. Hanley. MOTION: By Mayor Pro Tem Arrambide and seconded by Council Member Luna to adopt Draft Resolution 1999-x (next in order, Resolution No. 1999-069), rescinding approval of General Plan Amendment 98003 (see Attachment B). Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. 2. Atascadero State Hospital Expansion—Consideration of reviewing options. At the October 26, 1999 City Council meeting, the Council voted to have staff write a letter from the Council to the State Department of Mental Health expressing interest in consideration for expansion of the Hospital. The Council Members in favor would then sign the letter. Following independent evaluation, individual Council Members elected not to sign the letter of interest to the State. There were no questions of staff from the Council. Mel Hunter, California Department of Mental Health, stated that the Department is considering several sites for a facility. He asked the Council to reconsider being included in the study for potential sites. Council Member Luna stated that he did not sign the letter because of the amount of public comment he received concerning the facts of the project, and feels the Council should have been educated on the details of this issue before being asked to decide if they want Atascadero to be included in the study. He asked Mr. Hunter to educate the Council. 000014 CC 11/09/99 Page 3 Mr. Hunter explained that the Atascadero State Hospital (ASH) originally opened in 1954 and specialized in the treatment of sexual offenders. He reported that on January of 1996, the State passed a law which designated ASH as the treatment facility for repeat sexual offenders, and since that time AHS has treated, and is still treating, 270 patients. Mr. Hunter estimated that approximately six new patients are received per month and they are anticipating a need for additional beds. He informed the Council that patients are post-sentence inmates. Mr. Hunter stressed the fact that when inmates are released, they are released to the County in which they were committed. He stated that in the three and one-half years that the program has been in progress, only two families have followed their family member to Atascadero. Council Member Clay asked if the patients are directly paroled from ASH or if they go back to corrections. Mr. Hunter answered that the patients that have completed their correction time are released. He commented that none of the patients have yet completed the program. Mr. Hunter continued, saying that the program is not a time-based program, but an achievement program in which the courts must first be convinced that the patient will not be a threat to a community. Council Member Clay asked about the parole procedure. Mr. Hunter stated that parole can be renewed indefinitely. Council Member Clay asked if they can apply for a waiver that would allow the patient to be released in our community. Mr. Hunter replied that with this program, the patient would be returned to the county of commitment. Council Member Clay asked how many former patients live in San Luis Obispo County. Mr. Hunter responded saying there were none. Council Member Clay asked how the pay rate compares with other correctional facilities. Mr. Hunter stated that it is quite similar. Council Member Clay asked about the psychiatric technician positions at ASH. Mr. Hunter stated that there is a certification program at Cuesta College. Council Member Clay asked where the expansion would occur. Mr. Hunter replied that it would not be visible from El Camino Real and a possible direction of expansion is north of the existing facility. Council Member Clay asked if they would be willing to conduct an independent survey among the citizens to determine if a facility expansion is wanted, and he asked for clarification on the necessity of the State gaining the approval of the Council for this project. Mr. Hunter replied that he did not know if it would be possible for the State to build without community and Council approval. He stated that the City of Soledad voted not to participate and today they are not participating. He requested that a decision not be made until the community and Council has been better informed. He stated that he was unsure if the State would be able to conduct a community survey. Council Member Luna asked if the treatment population was different from that of the past. Mr. Hunter responded saying that from 1954 to 1982 ASH treated mentally disordered sexual offenders. He stated that the law was changed in 1982, requiring mentally disordered sexual offenders to be sentenced to prison, rather than being given the option of treatment. Council Member Luna asked what the re-offense number is for SVPs. Mr. Hunter replied that for AHS it is zero because no patients have yet been released. Council Member Luna asked for a clarification on the types of release used at ASH. Mr. Hunter stated that the judge may find the patient unqualified for commitment and release the individual to parole, unless they have completed parole, in which case they would be released to the community. Council Member Luna asked if it was possible for a patient, released in another county, to return to Atascadero. Mr. Hunter replied that it is possible. Mayor Johnson asked if a patient is released but under the conditions of the program, the individual would be breaking the conditions of the program by leaving the community in which he was released. Mr. Hunter confirmed the statement to be true, adding that if the individual did fail to meet the conditions, he would be returned to ASH for further treatment. cc 11/09/99 000015 Page 4 Council Member Luna asked if the current program is temporary until a facility can be built. Mr. Hunter stated that the facility is the only one in the state and would probably be considered permanent for now. Council Member Luna responded with a quote from the State's website which stated that ASH is to be used to house sexually violent predators "only until the permanent housing and treatment facility is made available." Council Member Clay received confirmation from Mr. Hunter that these patients have more conditions placed on them than that of regular parolees. He also asked Police Lieutenant, Bill Watton, for the number of sexual predators currently living in Atascadero. Mr. Watton stated the numbers obtained from the Megan's Law list include predators who are living in correction or treatment facilities, however, we have approximately 1.5 predators per 1,000 citizens. Council Member Scalise asked if with the expansion of the facility, would maximum security be all-encompassing. Mr. Hunter replied that regardless of the expansion the security of the facility will be upgraded. Council Member Clay asked if pre-training could be given to citizens of Atascadero interested in employment at the new facility. Mr. Hunter stated that they can do some testing on-site and views the training as a great opportunity. PUBLIC COMMENT Virginia Powers, 7505 Carmelita, stated that she was pleased to hear Council Member Luna's and Council Member Clay's questions. She read a prepared statement expressing her opposition to the expansion of the Atascadero State Hospital._Ms. Powers stated that there was little, if any, public information provided by the supervisors from ASH. Joseph Curtis, 5170 Fresno Ave., stated he worked at the Atascadero State Hospital from 1970 to 1972. He suggested that the Hospital be replaced by a park or college. Mr. Curtis stated he is opposed to expanding the Hospital as he feels it is a very dangerous facility. Jerry Long,Portola Road, stated the he believes the State Hospital is a clean, environmentally friendly employer and urged the Council to consider adopting the expansion. Ann Ketcherside, thanked KSBY for informing the community that this item is on the agenda. She stated she is opposed to the expansion of the State Hospital. Ms. Ketcherside stated various incidences and examples to support her belief. Bob Powers, 7505 Carmelita, stated he is concerned what effect this expansion would have on the image of Atascadero. He expressed concern that it would have a negative impact on businesses. Ann Harrington, 6 Quail Ridge Drive, stated she is opposed to expanding the State Hospital. She asked Mr. Hunter why the law was done away with in 1982. Ms. Harrington stated that she believed it was because sexual predators cannot be cured. Fred Frank, 3615 Ardilla, urged the Council to oppose the consideration of being included in this study. He stated that the benefits do not outweigh the negative points. Mr. Frank expressed concern for the effect on our water supply, traffic, and safety. CC 11/09/99 000016 Page 5 Morro Bay resident, teaches at Cuesta College. She stated to even include Atascadero in the study for this expansion, means there will be inherent risks. Elaine McKellents, 10205 El Camino Real, stated she is opposed to the expansion. She reported to have found that three out of four sexual offenders re-offend. Linda Mello, 9980 Santa Clara, said that she is opposed to the expansion of the Hospital. She expressed concern for the homes surrounding the facility. Al Veraguter, 6650 San Anselmo, worked for the Department of Mental Health at its inception. He worked for the Hospital for many years and is proud of his work there. But, he stated he is opposed to the expansion of the Hospital as the expansion would allow for extremely dangerous patients. Dorothy McNeil, 8765 Sierra Vista, in a prepared statement she commented that the Paso Robles City Council turned down a proposal for a private prison because of community opposition. She urged the Council to listen to the community and oppose this request for expansion of the Hospital. Ms. McNeil expressed concern for the safety of the children in our community (see Attachment Q. Daphne Fashing, 5105 Llano Road, stated that the Council has heard from the community tonight. She urged the Council to say thanks, but no thanks. Ms. Fashing stated that she was amazed that the Council would even consider it. Raymond Jansen, 6655 County Club Drive, urged the Council, in a prepared statement read by City Clerk Marcia McClure Torgerson, to determine to build quality in our personal lives and in our community by not allowing the Hospital to expand (see Attachment D). City Clerk Marcia McClure Torgerson reported to the Council that she received twenty-five phone calls from citizens who opposed the expansion. Mayor Johnson closed the Public Comment period Mayor Johnson stated that the rumor regarding the possibility of the new 1,500 patients replacing the current patients needs to be addressed. He commented that he was appalled to see letters from citizens of our community who trashed the ASH employees. Council Member Scalise thanked the citizens present for attending tonight. She commented that several times this evening she heard "we know nothing," and she added that the statement is true. She stated for the record that"if I heard Mr. Hunter correctly, the allowance for the Atascadero residents and residents of San Luis Obispo County would have an opportunity to highly scrutinize anything that is proposed for this town." Council Member Scalise stated that she understands that nobody would like to have the facility in their backyard, however, we do have a responsibility of being part of the solution and not part of the problem because "these" people do need to be kept incarcerated. She also stated that the current security level will be upgraded, which is needed. She went on to say that she feels we need to be informed before we make a decision. Council Member Scalise stated, for the record: "I believe that the Hospital we have currently has been a good community member and participant, and I would be interested in getting a little further information and letting all of the citizens of Atascadero look at this and participate. We've had a good show tonight, but it certainly is a small minority compared to the CC 11/09/99 000017 Page 6 entire city. So, I would like to see us be in the informational loop and also be a very highly scrutinized group to look at the project when the information comes forth." Mayor Pro Tem Arrambide thanked the community for coming to this meeting. He stated that he has received many calls in opposition to this issue. He reported that he received a call from Ann Bergstresser, whose husband was killed by a patient at the Hospital, in which she asked him to have an open mind and allow the process of consideration. Mayor Pro Tem Arrambide expressed concern for the number of citizens who do not even wish to hear the information because they have made their decision. He stated that it is his obligation to hear the information before he makes a decision. He wanted to go on record for"being for openness and information." He stated that as of tonight, he has not yet joined the opposition, he may at the end, but first he would like to go through the process. Council Member Luna presented some information he obtained from the Department of Mental Health's website. He stated that he will keep an open mind, but he wants more information without asking to be included in the process. He also stated that he would like to see how open the department will be before he asks to be included in the process. Mayor Johnson stated he is not sure whether he will be in favor of this expansion. He stated he would like to have more information first. Mayor Johnson expressed concern for the fact that there is misinformation or wrong information being given. He stated, "Let's hear the information," and urged the State to get broad community input. City Manager Wade McKinney stated that the letter could be modified to read, "Request the California Department of Mental Health to provide the Community and City Council relative to the programs intended to be housed, the physical design of the property, and other information germane to such a decision. That the City Council refrains from at this point of taking any position relative to the Hospital, but feels the Community should be adequately informed." Council Member Clay stated he would not mind if this issue ended tonight. He expressed concern for the word "request," and the possibility of the department running an EIR without educating the public and hearing from the public. He stated that he would like to see a survey. Council Member Clay reported that the calls he received were split on the issue. Mayor Johnson stated that this issue came up when a request was received asking if we would be willing to consider the information. He also stated that the project was not generated by the City staff or Council. MOTION: By Mayor Pro Tem Arrambide and seconded by Council Member Scalise to ask the State of California to consider Atascadero as a site for the expansion of this treatment facility, that the process be for information gathering and environmental determination, and that this decision, a community decision, be reserved for the end of the process. Motion passed 3:2 by a roll-call vote. (Clay & Luna opposed) Mayor Johnson stressed that the Council is not advocating the project, rather inviting information. CC 11/09/99 00008 Page 7 Council Member Luna asked how this motion differs from the first letter. Mayor Pro Tem Arrambide replied that he does not believe it is different, only that now the Council is not looking for unanimity. Mayor Johnson asked Council Member Luna how he would word it. Council Member Luna stated he liked what the City Manager said about specifically requesting information and encouraging the State Hospital-to convince the citizens. Mayor Pro Tem Arrambide responded saying that he was aware of the comments and made his motion having understood what had been said. Council Member Clay asked if the entire Council would sign the letter again. Mayor Pro Tem Arrambide stated that he would not suggest that they all sign the letter if the Council does not agree with it. Council Member Clay asked if the Mayor would sign the letter. Mayor Johnson replied that either the City Manager or the Mayor would. Mayor Johnson commented that it would be fine of the City Manager to sign the letter. He stressed that this vote is not a commitment. Mayor Johnson called a ten minute recess at 8:55 p.m.. Mayor Johnson called the meeting to order at 9:05 p.m. A. CONSENT CALENDAR: Roll Call 1. City Council Minutes—October 13, 1999 • City Clerk recommendation: Council approve the City Council minutes of October 13, 1999 [Marcia McClure Torgerson] 2. City Council Minutes—October 26, 1999 ■ City Clerk recommendation: Council approve the City Council minutes of October 26, 1999 [Marcia McClure Torgerson] 3. Business Licensing Software—Agreement with Progressive Solutions ■ Fiscal Impact: S10,500 currently budgeted ■ Staff recommendation: Council authorize the Mayor to execute an agreement with Progressive Solutions for providing Business Licensing Software [Administrative Services Department] 4. Acceptance of Final Lot Line Adjustment Map 499004—ATAL 99-042, 6250 San Gabriel Road (Harry B. Larsen Family Trust/ Wilson Land Surveys) ■ Fiscal Impact: None ■ Staff recommendations: Council: 1. Accept the Final Lot Line Adjustment Map #99004. 2. Reject without prejudice, the offer of road dedication. 3. Accept a 6-foot wide Public Utility Easement along the frontage of the new San Gabriel Road right-of-way. [Community Development Department] 5. Deferred Improvement Agreeme nt—United Methodist Church of Atascadero ■ Fiscal Impact: None cc 11/09/99 000019 Page 8 ■ Staff recommendation: Council authorize the Mayor to execute an agreement with The United Methodist Church of Atascadero to defer construction of the public improvements required by the conditions of approval for Conditional Use Permit No. 98014 [Community Services Department] 6. Bicycle Transportation Plan—Agreement with RRM Design Group ■ Fiscal Impact: $15,000 ($5,000 Urban State Highway Account Funds, $10,000 Regional State Highway Account Funds) ■ Staff recommendation: Council authorize the Mayor to execute an agreement with RRM Design Group to prepare a city-wide Bicycle Transportation Plan [Community Services Department] 7. Census Complete Count Program ■ Fiscal Impact: $7,900 ■ Staff recommendation: Council participate in the Census Complete Count Program and appropriate $7,900 for City's commitment from reserves. [City Manager's Office] City Clerk Marcia McClure Torgerson pulled Item #A-2 for corrections and stated she would bring it back to the Council at their next meeting. MOTION: By Council Member Luna and seconded by Council Member Clay to approve Items #A-1,3, 4, 5, 6, and 7. Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. B. PUBLIC 1. Davis Property: General Plan Amendment 998002, Zone Change 998004 Tentative Tract Map #98013 - Mixed Use Cluster Residential Subdivision—(3900 Traffic Way / Shores) ■ Fiscal Impact: Increase to City revenues would be nominal ■ Planning Commission recommendations: Council: L Adopt Resolution No. 1999-065, certifying the Mitigated Negative Declaration. 2. Adopt Resolution No. 1999-066, approving General Plan Amendment 98002. 3. Introduce for first reading by title only Ordinance No. 367, adding a Planned Development Overlay District-15 (PD-15) to the City Zoning Ordinance. 4. Introduce for first reading by title only Ordinance No. 368, rezoning the project site from RS (Residential Suburban) to RSF-X(PD-15), L (PD-15) (Recreation), and I(Industrial). 5. Adopt Resolution No. 1999-067, approving Tentative Tract Map 98013 as amended and subject to the Conditions of Approval. [Community Development Department] Community and Economic Development Director Paul Saldana gave the staff report and answered questions of Council. Council Member Clay asked for the vote of the Planning Commission. Mr. Saldana replied that the vote was unanimous. Council Member Clay asked about the sewer flow. Mr. Cherry stated that the gravity flow there will probably enable the City to eliminate a pump station. Council Member Clay suggested that the road expansion be done on the west side, if possible. He also CC 11/09/99 00(%0 0 Page 9 expressed that he would like to see the improvement of the road from Dolores to San Benito and tree mitigation. Mayor Johnson asked for staff comment on the road improvement. Principal Planner Warren Frace explained that this project will be responsible for the dedication and widening of Traffic Way along the project area. Mayor Pro Tem Arrambide asked if there were vertical sight distance issues that would not be addressed by the widening of the road. Mr. McKinney stated that Assistant City Engineer John Neil reported that the only issues would be horizontal and those would be addressed. He also stated that the dedication is for sixty feet and it may be possible to crowd the road to one side. depending on tree impacts. Council Member Luna asked what the City would have to do with the archeology property that is in the Recreation Dedication. Mr. Saldana responded that a phase two archeology study, which would require boring and mitigation, would be necessary give the recommendations. Council Member Luna asked that if the site was determined to be sensitive would it become open space. Mr. Saldana affirmed that it may. Council Member Luna asked about the Industrial area. Mr. Saldana stated that it is available for development and mitigation would be necessary for development. Council Member Luna stated that with projects such at this and the Lakes, negative declarations are being given, and in this case, mitigated negative declarations. He asked if there is a traffic study for this project. Mr. Saldana responded saying that they estimated the number of trips in the area and found that the number would not warrant any additional traffic analysis. Council Member Luna commented that the Lakes project will also be going in, and asked if an accumulated traffic study would need to be done. Principal Planner Warren Frace stated that a formal traffic study was not conducted. He reported that the General Plan accounts for twelve to thirteen units on this parcel which would account for approximately 120 or 130 trips per day. He stated that with this project, there would be the equivalent of 36 units, or 360 trips per day, which did not warrant any changes other than those previously discussed. In reference to the Lakes project, Mr. Frace reported that an EIR had been conducted for that project and mitigation measures had been proscribed. Council Member Luna asked if there was a specific price value for these homes. Mr. Saldana replied that there is nothing specific proposed. Council Member Luna asked if any thought had been given to a density bonus, for affordable housing. Mr. Saldana stated that it was not pursued, nor did the applicant propose it. Council Member Scalise asked for a confirmation that traffic would not be backing out onto Traffic Way. Mr. Saldana confirmed that there would not be traffic backing out onto Traffic Way. Council Member Scalise also asked if the traffic circulation count included the industrial zone. Mr. Saldana reported that the count had included the industrial area and that Mr. Neil had found the number of trips to be below what was analyzed for that area. PUBLIC COMMENT Jim Shores, 5420 Allemonde, representative of the applicant group. Mr. Shores explained the proposed project in detail. He reported that he has met with some of the concerned neighbors and they feel they can support the project. Gaylene Tupen, 1422 Monterey Street, Suite C200, San Luis Obispo, biologist, explained the area of wetlands in this project and how it affects the lots proposed. She stated that the boundaries are preliminary and in order to get precise boundaries, a formal delineation is required, which Mr. Shores has scheduled. She reported that a soil study will also need to be CC 11/09/99 000021 Page 10 done. She recommended that the studies be reviewed prior to the elimination of any lots to find the actual development constraints in the area. Council Member Luna asked if there was any condition of approval that would address the "wetlands" issue. Mr. Frace replied that there were a couple of conditions that came out of the recommendations of the initial study for mitigation of the project. He stated that the first would be to eliminate the three lots affected by the wetlands; secondly, the wetland delineation would be approved by the Corps. of Engineers, which would set the exact perimeters. Mayor Johnson asked if they would be able to add any lots back into the project if it was found in the final study that the lots were not impacted. Mr. Frace replied that tonight a master plan development would determine the number of lots that would be allowed, and if the study proved otherwise, the project could be brought back for amendments. He explained that it would be possible to continue to show the second lot on the tentative map, and depending on the wetlands delineation, adjust the final map which may result in the elimination of a lot. Council Member Clay asked if it would be possible to increase the number of lots from 36 (staff recommendation) to 39 (proposed, three lots possibly being in the "wetlands" area) and later possibly eliminate the three if necessary after the final study. Mr. Frace responded saying that the Council could made that motion, however, it is staff s recommendation that the two lower lots not be added back onto the tentative map. Council Member Clay asked if there are lots in Atascadero that have individual sewer pump stations. Mr. Neil state that there are, but it is not the preferred option. Jim Shores asked the Council to consider including the three lots until the soils study which might eliminate them from the project. He requested a phase final on the industrial buildings. He stated that the park will be for public use and not just for softball. He addressed some safety concerns he had. He urged the Council to keep the three lots, three, four, and five in the project, at least until the soil and wetlands study is complete. Council Member Clay asked if Mr. Shores would be willing to improve the road on the west side rather than both sides. Mr. Shores responded saying it would be possible. Council Member Clay asked if the applicant would be responsible for maintaining the sewer line. Community Services Director Brady Cherry stated that the applicant would not be responsible. Council Member Clay asked if the two lower lots were included, how would sewage be handled. Mr. Shores replied that they would probably pump them up to the cul-de-sac. Ed Farrell, supported this project in a prepared statement read by Linda Buss, 8025 Carmelita. He stated that Atascadero is in need of sport fields with the growth of the programs at the High School, Recreation Division, and with ASA leagues. Bob & Veronica Borba, expressed support for this project in a prepared statement read by Linda Buss, 8025 Carmelita. They stated that there is a shortage on fields and that this project would benefit our youth and our future. Atascadero Girls Softball Association, expressed their support for this project in a prepared statement read by Linda Buss, 8025 Carmelita. The Association stated that they believed the City would greatly benefit from this project. Judy Tarr, partner in this project, stated she feels this is a good project as it includes open space, a park, and industrial area. She also asked the Council to allow them to begin the industrial buildings now. She thanked the Council for their consideration. CC 1.1/09/99 000021AZI Page 11 John Goers, 5200 Dolores, stated he feels this project should not be as down-zoned or split as it is. He suggested that the number of lots be 12-13 as they were originally. Lon Allan, 6850 Santa Lucia, President of Atascadero Historical Society, asked if the Estrada Adobe is going to be protected. Mayor Johnson stated the adobe is in the portion of the project that is not being developed. Council Member Clay suggested there should be a monument placed there. Richard Shannon, 5070 San Benito Road, stated that he is a neighbor of this project. He is also a realtor. Mr. Shannon reassured the Council that Mr. Shores and the Tarr's are reputable people and will do an excellent job of developing this site. He stated that Mr. Tarr's has had several successful projects in the north county. Mayor Johnson closed the Public Comment period. Council Member Luna asked about the phasing of the industrial project. Mr. Saldana stated that modifications have been made to allow for a phased final map. Council Member Luna asked if it would be possible to write the condition so that staff would recommend the one lot. Mr. Saldana replied that Condition 20 [on tape of meeting Condition 19 was referred to in error] could be modified to provide for"lot 3." He stated that deletion of the reference to "lot 3" in the paragraph which mentions "...lots 3, 4, 5... "and add"lot 3" to the last portion of Condition 20. Council Member Luna stated that he could support it. Mayor Johnson stated that he could also support it. Council Member Clay expressed that he would like to see all three lots built on, if possible. Mayor Johnson suggested that the road policy be looked at in the near future, outside of the project. Mayor Pro Tem Arrambide stated that logically, the acceptance of the roads would follow the acceptance of the sewer. Mr. McKinney stated that currently that is not the City's policy. He also stated that some of these issues will be addressed at the Roads meeting on November 30, 1999. Mayor Johnson clarified that the industrial phase is included in the proposal tonight. Council Member Clay asked to specify that the road be improved on the west side of the road. Mr. McKinney replied that they would attempt to kept it to the west side and maintain the horizontal sight distances. Council Member Clay asked if it would need to be in the condition. Mr. McKinney stated that if would probably not be necessary. Council Member Scalise asked about some of the traffic issues presented by Mr. Shores. Mayor Johnson stated that those issues could probably be addressed in the future. Council Member Clay expressed support for building on all three lots, if possible. Mayor Pro Tem Arrambide commended the applicant's efforts for this project. CC 11/09/99 0000 ; Page 12 MOTION: By Mayor Pro Tem Arrambide and seconded by Council Member Clay to adopt Resolution No. 1999-065, certifying the Mitigated Negative Declaration. Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. MOTION: By Mayor Pro Tem Arrambide and seconded by Council Member Clay to adopt Resolution No. 1999-066, approving General Plan Amendment 98002. Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. MOTION: By Mayor Pro Tem Arrambide and seconded by Council Member Clay to introduce on first reading by title only Ordinance No. 367, adding a Planned Development Overlay District-15 (PD-15) to the City Zoning Ordinance. Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. MOTION: By Mayor Pro Tem Arrambide and seconded by Council Member Clay to introduce on first reading by title only Ordinance No. 368, rezoning the project site from RS (Residential Suburban) to RSF-X (PD-15), L (PD-15) (Recreation), and I (Industrial). Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. MOTION: By Mayor Pro Tem Arrambide and seconded by Council Member Luna to adopt Resolution No. 199-067, approving Tentative Tract Map 98013 as amended and subject to the Conditions of Approval, as amended: Condition 20, page 166 of agenda, deleting "3" to read "...lots 4 and 5..." and adding "lot 3" on the proposed Tentative Tract Map. Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. Mayor Johnson noted for the record, "This is the first developer in my time on the City Council that got a 5:0 vote." C. MANAGEMENT REPORTS: 1. General Plan Amendment Request—Traffic Way (Between San Benito Road and San Anselmo Road) ■ Fiscal Impact: None ■ Planning Commission recommendation: Council accept the neighborhood petition as an application for a General Plan Amendment and authorize staff to process the application as an exception to the General Plan Moratorium [Community Development Department] Community and Economic Development Director Paul Saldana gave the staff report and answered questions of Council. Council Member Luna asked the City Attorney if the fact that the Planning Commission took action on an item that was not listed on their agenda has any effect on the Planning Commission's recommendation. City Attorney Roy Hanley clarified for Council Member Luna CC 11/09/99 0000241 Page 13 that any potential defect in the Planning Commission's recommendation, should not have an effect on the action of the Council. Mayor Johnson asked if this would have an impact on the update of the General Plan. Mr. Saldafia stated that this would be included in the process. PUBLIC COMMENT Robert Lilley, representing neighbors involved in this issue. Mr. Lilley explained why he feels his clients have a reasonable request as they were misled by staff and missed the deadline. He submitted a petition from his clients asking to be included in the next available General Plan Amendment cycle (see Attachment E). City Manager Wade McKinney explained to the Council that there are many potential applicants who were planning on submitting requests before the October deadline before the Council voted on the moratorium. They all have been offered to be included as exceptions to the General Plan Moratorium process. Council Member Luna asked when these citizens offered to pay part of the General Plan fees for the Shore's project. Mr. McKinney stated that he is unsure whether an offer has been made, although implications have been made. MOTION: By Council Member Luna and seconded by Council Member Clay to continue the meeting past 11:00 p.m. Motion passed 5:0 by a voice vote. Mr. Lilley stated that the petition was signed and no application was filed on the advice of Planning staff. Mike Wasley, 3000 and 306 Traffic Way, stated the neighbors submitted a petition and not an application as a response to advice from staff. He also stated that he was not informed that they were not included at the meeting on October 19, 1999. Henry Skibo, 3650 Traffic Way, agreed with Mr. Wasley that they were misled by staff as to what was required of them to be considered for the General Plan Amendment process. He expressed concern for the number of cars and homes that are in the area. Marvin Pellett, 4320 Del Rio Road, stated he is opposed to granting this request as it will be creating `/z acre lots between 1+ acre lots. He urged the Council not to vote on something they do not frilly understand. Gerald Johnson, 3300 Traffic Way, stated that he would like to be included in this process as `/2 acre lots are plenty big. Henry Skibo, 3650 Traffic Way, stated that Mr. Pellett has quite a bit of property in the area and . has even built a house recently on less than one acre. Marvin Pellett, 4320 Del Rio Road, stated that the house he built is on 2.88 acres. cc 11/09/99 00002-5 Page 14 Mayor Johnson closed the Public Comment period. Mayor Johnson asked the City Attorney for his opinion. Mr. Hanley stated that he does not feel the City has an application for a General Plan Amendment. He also stated that if they had filed an application it would have been after the April 1 t deadline and would therefore have been cycled over to the October deadline. Mr. Hanley expressed that in his opinion the City is not liable for the misunderstanding. Mayor Johnson asked for a clarification that if the petition had been submitted on April 25, 1999, it would have been rolled over to the October update because of the timing. Mr. Hanley affirmed the Mayor's statement. He also informed the Council of the direction they could take. Mayor Johnson asked what the timing difference was. Mr. McKinney stated that from a staff perspective, it would be the same, approximately ten months. MOTION: By Council Member Luna and seconded by Council Member Clay to accept the neighborhood petition as an application for a General Plan Amendment and authorize staff to process the application as an exception to the General Plan Moratorium. Motion passed 5:0 by a roll-call vote. 2. Information Bulletin D. ATTORNEY REPORTS: 1. City Manager's Evaluation ■ Fiscal Impact: The amount of any raise or bonus approved, together with the marginally increased employer contributions required by law. ■ City Attorney recommendation: There is no recommended action from the City Attorney. This report is for informational purposes only. Mayor Pro Tem Arrambide stated that he had requested that rather than a bonus, the money be an adjustment to salary. He reported that as the second largest city in the County however, Mr. McKinney's salary is only the third highest. PUBLIC COMMENT John McGoff, 9192 Maple St., asked for clarification of the City Manager's contract with the City. Mayor Pro Tem Arrambide stated that it did not need to be amended because it allowed for a bonus and/or merit increase. Mayor Johnson closed the Public Comment period MOTION: By Mayor Pro Tem Arrambide and seconded by Council Member Clay to move from a $4,000 bonus to a merit increase, as part of salary. Motion passed 9:1 by a roll.-call vote. (Luna opposed) CC 11/09/99 0000 Page 15 Council Member Clay asked if there are merit increases for other City staff also. Mr. McKinney replied that there are. E. COMMITTEE REPORTS: S.L.O. Council of Governments/S.L.O. Regional Transit Authority Mayor Johnson announced that they met last week and are starting a new round of funding of which we hope to receive allocated monies being one of two who do receive allocations. Finance Committee Council Member Luna reported that the Committee met last week to review the Investment Policy and take suggestions from the City Treasurer. The Investment Policy will come back to the Council on November 23, 1999. Water Committees Council Member Clay announced that the North County Water Group gave a show at the last meeting on the water quality and lower Salinas sediment problems. Integrated Waste Management Authority Council Member Luna stated that they will meet on Wednesday. Air Pollution Control District Mayor Pro Tem Arrambide stated that he would be meeting with the CEO of the District this week to talk about back-yard burning. Economic Vitality Corporation, Board of Directors Mayor Johnson announced that they would met next week. City/ Schools Committee Mayor Pro Tem Arrambide reported that he attended a three-day meeting put on by the School District for strategic planning. F. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION Citv Council Mayor Johnson stated that he was pleased with last night's meeting (Main Street Program). G. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Johnson adjourned the meeting at 11:38 p.m. to the next regular session scheduled on November 23, 1999, at 7:00 p.m. CC 11/09/99 0000ti�I Page 16 MEETING RECORDED AND PREPARED BY: Marcia McClure Torgerson, City Clerk Melanie Whaley, Deputy City Clerk ATTACHMENTS: A- Prepared statement written by Derek Westen on behalf of Ken Lerno, November 9, 1999. B- Draft Resolution No. 1999-x C- Prepared statement written by Dorothy McNeil, November 9, 1999. D- Prepared statement written by Raymond Jansen, November S, 1999. E- Petition by property owners of north Traffic Way, Atascadero, for the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change, November 4, 1999. CC 11/09/99 000028 Page 17 Derek A.Westen,Esq 3r 805-963-7131 ttViIJ9/99 156:02 PM XZ3 Attachment: A Atascadero City Council DEREK A . W E S T E N Meeting Date: 11-09-99 AT 0,;ELI Y AT LAW 180oJEUNOAORIVE � FACSIMILE'_(805)963-7131 SANTA BARBARA,CALIFORNIA 83108 TELEPHONE: (805)983-7130 November 9, 1999 By Hand Delivery of Facsimile: Hoaorable Mayor mid Nletttl:ers�tt'Che Cit`•Council Ci ty of Atascadero 0500 Palma A tascadero,CA93422 Re: General Plaut Atnenduteut No. 98003; Mackey Proiect Dear .Mayor:utd Mcntbers of the Ci ty Council: This letter is written on behalf of Ken Lerno,former City Council Member,whom I represent. I received today, attd htav; reviewed, the City Attorney Report dated November 9, 1909, regarding(lie captioned matter. It appears to me that the factual matters recited therein are accurate. Based upon the information in the report, we concur that the vote cast by Council Member Ken Lerno on August 10, 1999, was—unbeknownst to him—subject to a disqualif ring conflict of interest. We concur that the vote should be set aside. Council Member Lerno categorically denies that on Auust 10, 1999, he had AU knowledQe whatsoever that Kelly Gearhart had purchased propertyclose to the Mackey project. Prior to the August 10, 1999 hearing before the Atascadero City Council, Ken Lerno contacted me to ask whether California's conflict of interesr rules precluded him from participating in consideration of the Mackey project. He told me that as an elected Council Member he felt he had an obligation to cast a vote with respect ro any project as to which he did not have a conflict ofinterest,and that he had a comparable obligation to abstain if he did have a conflict. I advised Mr. Lerno that I am not att expert in that very technical aspect of California law, and that for an authoritative opinion on which he could rely, he should consult Pillsbury, Madison Stttro in Sacramento, one of the leading law firms in California. I advised him that it was his responsibiiity as a Council :Member, and that he personally would need to incur the expense of obtaining authoritative advice. I assisted Council Member Lerno in summarizing the facts and coordinating with Pillsbury, Madison Sutro. Based upon the facts we provided,on Pillsbury, Madison & Surro provided a formal,written opinion to Council Member Lerno advising him that under clear California law, he did not have a conflict of interest which would preclude him from voting. I 000029 Derek A.V4sten,Esq. V 805-963-7131 MCI 1119/99 C 6:04 PM 7213 DEREK A . WEST'EN ATTORNEY AT LAW Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council -2- November 9, 1999 attach a copy of that letter. That opinion letter was the basis of the decision by Council Member Lerno that lie had an obligation to vote, and he did so. Based upon the information available to Council Member Lerno,the vote was appropriate and necessary. Subsequent to that date, Council Member Lerno has learned that Mr. Gearhart did purchase property close to the Mackey project. That purchase renders Mr. Lerno's further participation inappropriate. He correctly withdrew his vote on the second reading. The information which rendered his vote inappropriate was unknown to him on August 10, 1999. Fonner Cotuicil Mcniber Ken Lerno has lived in Atascadero almost all his life. He felt honored to be elected to the City Council. He cares deeply for the City and its residents. "I'hat is why he ran for Ci ty Council. In fact, he thought—and thinks today--that the Mackey project was good for the City of Atascadero. He believed that he had an obligation to vote if it was appropriate, just as he felt he should not vote if it was Inappropriate. Afirer consultation with me,he expended over$5,000 of his own money to obtain an authoritative written opinion from the most experienced law firm in California so that he could do what was right and best for the City of Atascadero and its residents. Although subsequent information has shown that the facts before him,which were the basis for his decision,apparently were not correct, his conduct was honorable,appropriate,and necessary. Council :Member Lerno belieties he fulfilled his highest obligations to the City of Atascadero and its residents and is proud of his set-vice to the City. Sincerely, Derek A. Westen Attorney at Law c�. Ken Lerno 000030 11-09-1999 6: 17PM FROM DEREK'. A WESTEN ESO 805 963 7131 P. 1 FROM Wks ( ED) B. 4' 99 t5:t'/S T. 15:0' 4862583129 P 2 Pillsbury ATIOLWYS AT LAW 400 CAPrPCQ UMI,SU1Tb 1700 sACRANCEMO. ALIFORMA 9584 4419 TE1,FpwN6o(916)129-4700 FAX:(916)441-3163 lwrtnut:piiLbrry9m+.m� Madison dr 3utm LLP Wfitces aifaas dial aUWtWr<mail: (916)329.4719 =Aas bw@pilWbUrYt&W.M" August 4,1999 VIA FACSR4 LE Mr.Ken Lerno 7340 Morro Road Atascadero,CA 93422 Re: Conflict of Interest Issues Dear Mr.Lemo: As we discussed,this letter addresses whether or not you may participate in a pending decision of the City Council in the City of Atascadero(currently scheduled for August 10, 1999) concerning a development on the so-called"Mackey property'and whether there are any restrictions on your ability to participate in or attempt to influence City decisions about development of the so-called"Rochelle property," I. Factual Situation. you are currently a member of the City Council of the City of Atascadero(the"City'. Presently scheduled to come before the City Council on August 10, 1999 is a reoommendatian of the City's Planning Con=ission for approval of development of approximately 30 low to moderately priced homes on a five acre parcel,the so-called"Mackey property:' Approval of the Mackey property project would result in extension of the sewer line along Traffic Way in the City to the Mackey property. On April 1, 1998,Mr.Kelly Gearhart submitted an application with the City for development of the Mackey property for a bus barn for the local school district. After filing,Mr. Gearhart determined that he would not be able to obtain the requisite govemmcntal approvals and did not pursue the application,although technically it remained pending. Mr.Gearhart then suggested to his friend,Mr.Dan Mackey,that he might wish to develop this parcel for a residential project. Iti11.Mackey hired Cannon Associates to represent him and Purchased the land from Won Pacific Railroad on April 29, 1999. To avoid delay arising from general plan atntndment"windows,"wbieh would have resulted from filing a new application,Mr.Mackey TOM*WRAMU,M LCSAW,FZM NEW YMK N(YXrNER.yVLP0M A ORANcECOUNTY SANDMW SAMyXAI,1= SaXa4VALLEY wASHNaTONDC 1074V t 000031 1 '-09-1999 6: 18PM FROM DEREK A WESTEJ ESQ 805 963 7131 P. 2 t FROW POS ;WED) 8. 4' 99 15:11/ST. 15:05ANO, 4862588129 P August 4, 1999 Page 2 amended the Gearhart application by substituting his own application for a housing project. Although personally supportive of Mr.Mackey's plans,Mr.Gearhart has no financial relationship whatsoever Kith Mr.Mackey or his plans for development of the parcel in question. Moreover,Mr.Gearhart has no ownership or profit interest and will not be building the Mackey project,if approved Mr.Gearhart and Mr.Mackey have both specifically confirmed these facts to you. Mr.Gearhart,you and your sister are each one-third co-owners of a parcel of property known as the"Rochelle property." The Rochelle property is located approximately 8,000 feet north of the Mackey property,also on Traffic lay. The Rochelle property is approximately 80 acres in size,although the owners arc in escrow to sell a 27 acre piece of the parcel to the Westar Associates,Inc.which intends to develop the site for commercial purposes,including location of a shopping center anchored by a Home Depot store. The owners of the Rochelle property have previously obtained all of the approvals necessary for the proposed commercial project. However,as a condition for those approvals,a public sewer line must be extended from the current system boundary to serve the Rochelle property. As I understand it,the approval of the actual route of the sewer line,of which thcrc are at least two alternatives,is a decision that will be made by City staff without ratification by the City Council. Mr.Gearhart also owns a 2-acre parcel,also along Traffic Way,which he is currently in the process of developing as residential property for a single family home. This parcel is adjacent to the Rochelle property,but some 7,000 feet from the Mackey property. One of the proposed sewer routes fvr the Rochelle property would run through Mr. Gearhart's residential lot under development. Although the route could be argued to be beneficial to the City's long term dcvOcipme nt interests.Mr. Gearhart has declared that he will not allow his residential property to be modified to accommodate a sewer connection to the Rochelle property.' It is not presently foreseeable that the City would cxcmise rights of endnent domain to compel acquisition of Mr. Gearhart's residential property to provide for a sewer route to connect to the Rochclla property. Mr.Gearhart has asserted that there would be no incroasc or decrease in the value of his residential lot if the Mackey property is developed. Moreover,it is your belief that development of the Mackey property would not have any financial effect an the value of either the Rochelle property or the small residential property owned by Mr.Gearhart. r The proposed sewer connection along Traffic Way adjacent to the Rochelle property is estimated at a cost of$800,000 to$1 million,according to an engineering firm study. One of the alternative sewer routes to connect the City grid to the Rochelle property would proceed along Ll Camino and would cost approximately 5280,000. S074vt 000032 11-29-1999 6: 19PM FROM DEREK A WESTEEN ESQ SOS 963 7131 P. 3 yflCU P 1 5 VED) S. 4' 99 15:12/ST. 15:051N0. 48052588129 P 4 August 4, 1999 Page 3 H. Legal Analysis. A. Mackey property. You have asked us to address whether or not you may participate in the decision concerning approval of the Mackey property at the forthcoming August 10, 1999 Atascadero City Council meeting. The conflict of interest provisions of the Political Reform Act of 1974,as amended(tho "Act")help to ensure that public officials perfonrn their duties impartially,free from bias attributable to their own financial interests or those of persons who have supported them.Sea Gov't Code§ Section 81001(b). Specifically,Section 87100 prohibits any public official firm making,participating in making,or otherwise using his or her official position to influence a governmental decision in which the official has a financial interest. A public official has a "financial interest"in a governmental decision,within the meaning of the Act,if it is zeasonably foreseeable that the decLsion will have a material financial effect on one or more of the public official's economic interests. Gov't Code §87103;2 Cal.Code R.egs. § 18700(a);see also Downey Advice Letter,No.A-99-069. Recently,the Fair Political Practices Commission(the"FPPC")has revised its conflict of interest regulations in order to simplify the analysis required to datermine whether a disqualifying conflict of interest is present. The first step is to determine whether you are a "public official." As an Atascadero City Councilmember,you are a public offieisl under the Act. Gov't Code§ 82048. The second step in the analysis is determine whether you will be participating in a governmental decision. The pending vote on the Mackey property constitutes such participation. See 2 Cal.Code Regs. §§ 18702.1, 18702.2,and 18702.3. The third step in the analysis is to evaluate whether your economic interests could result in a conflict of interest. The FPPC bas broken these down into six categories: • A public official has an economic interest in a business entity in which he or she has a direct or indirect investment of S 1,000 or more. Gov't Code§Section 87103(x); 2 CaLCode Regs. § 18703.1(a); • A public official has an economic interest in a business entity in which he or she is a director,officer,partner,trustee,employee,or holds any position of management. Gov't Code §Section 87103(d);2 Cal.Code Regs. § 18703.1(b)); • A public official has an economic interest in real property in which he or she has a direct or indirect interest of$1,000 or more. Gov't Code§Section 87103(b);2 Cal.Code Regs. § 18703.2; 1074V 000033 1 —C9-1499 6:20PM FROM? DEREK A WESTEN ESO 605 963 7131 P. G (WID) 8. 4' 99 15:12/ST. 15�05,/N0. 4862588129 F 5 August 4, 1999 Page 4 • An official has an economic interest in any source of income,including promised income, totaling$250 or more'within 12 months prior to the decision. Gov't Code§ Section 87103(c);2 Cal.Code Regs. § 18703.3; • A public official has an cccwmic interest in any source of gifts to him or her if the gifts total Voo or more within 12 months prior to the decision. Gov't Code§Section 87103(e);2 Cal.Code Regs. § 18703.4; • A public official has an economic interest in his or her personal cxprnses,income,assets,or liabilities,as well as those of his or her immediate family--this is known as the"personal financial effects"rule. Gov't Code§Section 87103;2 Cal.Code Rags. § 18']03.5. Due to your co-oavership of the Rochelle property,you have an economic interest in real property under the Act. Moreover,it is likely that the FPPC would consider your co-ownership of the prupwty with Mr.Gearhart and your sister to be a partnership,and therefore a`business entity"within the meaning of the Act. See Gov't Code§ 82005;Sawyer Advice Letter,No. 1-99- 085,If Mr. Gearhart's ownership interest in the Rochelle property were 50%or more, you also would have an economic interest in Mr.Gearhart. Inc re Nord,8 FPPC Ops. 6, 13,fn. 16(1983); Sawor Advice Letter,supra. Since Mr.Gearhart's ownership interest is less than 50P/a,you have no"economic interest'in Mr. Cimhart. Thus,the conflict of interest analysis is limited to the foreseeable effects on the Rochelle property and/or the`partnership"that owns that property. It is not necessary to consider whether there would be any financial effects on Mr.Gearhait's residential property,or whether his public expression of support for the development of the Mackey property would creat�a conflict of interest.Z The fourth step in the analysis is to determine whether your economic interests are directly or indirectly involved in the governmental decision concerning the Mackey property. Real property is du-cctly involved in a decision if the decision concerns,among other things,altering the use of the property. Such decisions would include rezoning,annexing,selling, purchasing,leasing,assessing,redeveloping or authorizing a specific use of the property. See generally 2 CaLCode Regs. § 18704.2. If real property is not directly involved in a decision.it is indirectly involved for purposes of applying the materiality regulations. 2 Cal.Code Regs. § 18704.2(b). Since the governmental decisions concerning the Mackey property would not alter the specific use of the Rochelle property,the Rochelle property is not directly involved in decisions concerning the Mackey property.; Therefore,the Rochelle property is considered 2 The FPPC has advised that public support for a governmental decision by a source of income to a public official is not,by itself,a disqualifying interest. Lucas Advice Letter,No,A- 96-248. 3 Although Mr.Gearhart technically"initiated"the proceeding concerning the Mackey property,this fact does not affect the analysis since Mr. Gearhart's one-third interest in the Rochelle property is insufficient to make him a source of income to you. ,See In re Nord,supra. tmavt 000034 1 '-29-1999 6:22PM FROM DEREK A IWESTEN ESO 805 963 7131 P. 5 c aOv FUS ('N?D; 8. 4' 99 15:13%ST. 15:051N'0. 4862588129 P 6 August 4, 1999 Page 5 indirectly involved in the decisions concerning the Mackey property. Step five of the analysis concerns whether itis reasonably foreseeable that the decision will have the required material financial effect on your financial interests. In this case,any effects on tlse "parlucrship"and the Rochelle property are indistinguishable since the only asset oftne"partnership"is the Rochellc property. N�rjth respect to the Rochelle properly,since it is more than 2,500 feet from the Mackey property,the"reasonably foreseeable effect of a decision is not material"unless: e There sre specific circumstances regarding*l a decision,its effect,and the nature of the rear property in which the official has an interest,which makes it reasonably foreseeable that tbo fair market value of the property v411 be affected by$10,000 or more(or the rental value by $1,000 or more per 12 month period);or • The effect w ill not be substantially the sante as the effect upon at least 25%of the all the properties within a 2,500 foot radius of the official's property or there are not at least 10 properties under sepanta ownership within a 2,500 foot radius of the official's property. 2 Cal.Code Rags. § 18705-2(b)(2)(A)and(B). 'You have indicated that development of the Mackey property will have no financial effect on the Rochelle property. Although extension of the sewer line is necessary for development of both the Mackey property and the Rochelle property,the facts provided indicate that the decisions concerning sewer service to t'_zc two propc.-tics are not interrelated. This means that,consistent with the test in the FPPC regulation outlined above,there are no specific circwatstanees about the decision,its effect,and the nature of the Rochelle property which make it reasonably foreseeables that the requisite financial effect is present. Moreover,it also appears that the effect on nearby properties will be the same as that of the Rochelle property and that there are at least 10 properties within a 2,500 radius under separate ownership. Accordingly,the firancial effect on the Rochelle property is not material tu►der the Act or FPPC rcgulations.'- Since under the analysis approved by the FPPC,the forthcoming decision concerning the Mackey property will not have a material financial effect on your economic interests,then you may participate in the decision concerning devi�lopmmt of the Mackey property. a -Reasonably foreseeable"is defined as being"substantially likely." 2 Cal.Code Rcgs. § 18706. s Although we believe it is not necessary to separately analyze whether there will be a material financial effect on the"partnership"that owns the Rochelle property,we also would conclude that there is no material financial effect on the"partnership." The materiality thresholds are set forth in 2 Cal.Code Regs. § 15705.1 C'o)(7),and, for the same reason that there is no material financial effect on the Rochelle property,there would be no material financial effect on the partnership. 1074 V 00004; 11 -09-1999 6.23PM FROM DEREK A WESTEN ESO 805 963 7131 P, 6 ;'ROM Fmks (WED) 6. 4' 99 15:13,/57. 15:05,N0. 4852583129 P 7 August 4, 1999 Page 6 B. Sewer connection to the Rochelle property. As we discussed on the telephone,any future decision concerning a sewer connection to the Rochelle property must be analyzed separately from your participation in the decisions concerning the Mackey property, In short,as a Rochelle property co-owner,participating in a decision concerning sewer connections to that property will be dcamod material to your financial interests. See 2 Cal.Code Regs. § 18705.20Xl)(B), Accordingly,you must recuse yourself from any such decisions that may come before you while you retain your interest in the Rochelle property. For example,you may not participate in any way in the public meetings of the City Council or Planning Commission during consideration of sewer service for the Rochelle property. In addition,you must not meet with or otherwise attempt to influence the decisions of City staff with respect to the development of the Rochelle property. III. Conclusion. Based on the facts as summarized above,you may participate hi the forthcoming decision concerning the Mackey property. However,you must recuse yourself from any decisions concerning the Rochelle property while you retain your ownership interest.6 Should you have any questions concerning the foregoing,please do not hesitate to contact me. V truly ours _ an W.Maas CC: Derek A. Westin,Esq. Ms.K.E.Donovan 6 If you sell your interest in the Rochelle property,the new ovmcr will be a source of income to you for at least one year and disqualification may continue to be necessary for a longer period if the new owner owes you money from the purchase. See 2 Cal.Code Regs. § 18703.3(a). 10701 0000 31 E, Attachment: B Atascadero City Council Meeting Date: 11-09-99 DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. 1999-x A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO RESCINDING APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 98003 (3055 TRAFFIC WAY: Mackey) WHEREAS, Dan Mackey, 188 Cedar Street, Ventura, CA 93001 (Applicant)requested a general plan amendment, a zoning change, and a tentative tract map to divide an approximately 4.47-acre site into 29 residential lots; and , WHEREAS, the site is located in the Suburban Single Family(SSF) land use designation of the General Plan which would be changed to High Density Multi-Family,which would allow the type and density of development proposed; and, WHEREAS, the site is located in the Residential Suburban (RS) zoning district which would be changed to the Low Density Multi Family zone with a Planned Development overlay (RMF-10 (PD7)), which would allow the type and density of development proposed; and, WHEREAS; the City Council conducted a public hearing on the proposed General Plan and Zoning Map amendments and tentative map on August 10, 1999, and considered testimony and reports from staff, the applicants, and the public, following which the project was approved; and, WHEREAS; the City Council failed to pass the rezoning ordinance at the second reading on September 14, 1999; and, WHEREAS; the City Council determined on November 9, 1999 that a deciding vote for approval of the General Plan Amendment was likely conflicted; and, NOW,THEREFORE,be it resolved that the City Council does hereby rescind approval of Resolution 1999-037 thereby causing denial of GPA 98003. 0000 "I Resolution 1999-x Page 2 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 000038 Attachment: C Atascadero City Council November 9, 1999 Meeting Date: 11-09-99 To Atascadero City Council From Dorothy F. McNeil Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers: Recently an outcry from citizens of Paso Robles caused the City Council to turn down the proposal for a privately-run prison. We sincerely hope this Council will reject this far more serious proposal to build a maximum security facility for 1 ,500 sexually violent predators at the Atascadero State Hospital. The hospital is now under the Department of Mental Health and is considered a maximum security place for Patients , not Inmates which the 1 ,500 would be. These are criminals with multi-ole offenses of the worst kind who prey largely on children. When they have served their time , the state may judge them too dangerous to release and can hold them for an additional two years . Our Hospital now has about 200 of these predators on hold. Technically they are not considered mentally ill . They may be a local store manager, your Uncle Sid or some other respected citizen. The SVP cannot be rehabilitated. No one knows how many SVP' s remain in the community where they have been incarcerated. The state has never tracked them after they are released. The only responsibility the State Hospital has is to get them a bus ticket to the county where they were arrested and sen- tanced. If they wish to return here they can buy a return ticket an�rtime and join the family or girlfriend who understandably may have moved here during their incarceration. Currently the decision as to whether the state can hold them after expiration of their sentence is in the hands of the courts because some of them have sued to be released. If we reject this 1 ,500 inmate expansion, rumor has it that the state may send our SOO vatients elsewhere and send us only SVP inmates. How the state expects to staff such a facility raises a Serious question. The Hospital is now down over 100 level of care staff, and many psychiatrists have left as a result of having to deal with the current 200 SVV s. Such a decision by the state would be highly irresponsible . Certainly no community want sto .be saddled with these predators . Our county has more than its snare of prisoners with California Men' s Colony, our Hospital and the Paso Robles Boys ' School . We offer enough of "good-paying jobs" with these facilities . That argument is a poor one for taking such a risk. Additionally, I wonder how this project would affect tourism we so often seek. Who wants to vacation in an area which may not be safe for children? I would not want to be one of you who votes "yes" if any child here became another Polly Klass or had her arms and legs cut off after being molested. It would be too heavy a burden to carry. -- �-. 8765 Sierra Vista Rd. 'Atascadero, CA 93422 000039 November 9, 1999 To Atascadero City Council From Dorothy F. McNeil . Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers : Recently an outcry from citizens of Paso Robles caused the City Council to turn down the proposal for a privately-run prison. We sincerely hope this Council will reject this far more serious proposal to build a maximum security facility for 1 ,500 sexually violent predators at the xtascadero State Hospital . The Hospital is now under the Department of Mental Health and is considered a maximum security place for Patients , not Inmates which the 1 , 500 would be. These are criminals with multiple offenses of the worst kind who prey largely on children. When they have served their time , the state may judge them too dangerous to release and can hold them for an additional two years . Our Hospital now has about 200 of these predators on hold. Technically they are not considered mentally ill . They may be a local store manager, your Uncle Sid or some other respected citizen. The SVP cannot be rehabilitated. No one knows how many SVP' s remain in the community where they have been incarcerated. The state has never tracked them after they are released. The only responsibility the State Hospital has is to get them a bus ticket to the county ::mere they were arrested and sen- tanced. If they wish to return here they can buy a return ticket anytime and join the family or girlfriend who understandably may have r,;oved 'Here during their incarceration. Currently the decision as to whether the state can hold them after expiration of their sentence is in the hands of the courts because some of them have sued to be released. �f we reject this 1 ,500 inmate expansion, rumor has it that the state may send our 500 patients elsewhere and send us only SVP ir,:cates. How the state expects to staff such a facility raises a serious question. The Hospital is now down over 100 level of care staff, and many psychiatrists have left as a result of having to deal with the current 200 SVP11-S . Such a decision by the state would be highly irresponsible . Certainly no community wants to be saddled with these predators . Our county has more than its snare of prisoners aith California Men' s Colony, our Hospital and the Paso Robles Boys ' School . We offer enough. of "good-paying jobs" with these facilities . That argument is a poor one for taking such a risk. Additionally, I wonder how this project would affect tourism we so often seek. Who wants to vacation in an area which may not be safe for children? I would not want to be one of you who votes "yes" if any child here became another Polly Klass or had her arms and legs cut off after being molested. It would be too heavy a burden to carry. x765 Sierra Vista Rd. �� `" tascadero CA 93422 ���� ® O ;:Attachment ID Atascadexo Crtjt'G`6`uncil" �Meetiug Datee 1999 1 — V CITY OF ATASCAMRO- CITY CLERK'S OFFICE t ol �L 00004-1 Attachment: E Atascadero City Council Meeting Date: 11-09-99 To : The Atascadero City Council From : Property Owners of North Traffic Way, Atascadero Subject : General Plan Amendment and Zone Change Date : 11/04/99 Per recommendation of the Atascadero Planning Commission on the 19th of October 1999, We, the undersigned property owners,herby request approval by the City Council of Atascadero for a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change from RS (residential suburban) to RSF-X (residential single family). We ask this be considered during the next available General Plan amendment cycle. We have been working with the Planning Staff since April of this year, attempting to have our neighborhood included in the process with the adjoining developments in the immediate area and thereby should not be impacted by the recently adopted moratorium: SIGNATURE NAME PRINTED_ ADDRESS ASSESSOR PARCEL # C�\rL�,'f� QS�a ���l� TuJ O 6e-' kALJ R .JnLison3Zoo IPAEEcOA04� jo-11 , 01 'z— - W 33o0 i FP` c- 4 b11, oc z El,•i oa rpt W'R Dy D1(, o z M ra R V i N Iq 330v-rrA�Jf*,(! Ljy D -1t, o f -2— k p0(9 Llc- zo 4A- 31 3p -CL'-A 0(4� oll 10( -1 -o v �O SttGYl�S/� b`-/9 0311 oos l� &A i'o 5 0547 aft , oos oos —�V��Vo W�511 o3i, ooh so 3 10 TbLH F 0-1 0( Z� copies: Ray Johnson,Mayor Wade McKinney, City Manager Mike Arrambide,Mayor Pro Tem Paul Saldano, Community Development Director woff �♦ � � •.•: .� X11/ ♦ ♦on �. �`,:�.����� • .%ice��■�� �`� �� �� Aim Owm 1. ��: • �`• • '''•'��'.' `�:-�•,`�!!!►1!!�" 1111 �� \ � ♦��• ><; ; na�1��•,11111l111�111�� 00 0 In 4 IN �►� Iii / � 40 � PEI �. 1 ITEM NUMBER: A-4 DATE: 11/23/99 lsii 107-9 Atascadero City Council Staff Report - Community Development Department Zone Change 99004 Establishment of Planned Development 15 Overlay District (3900 Traffic Way I Shores) Ordinance No. 367 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Council introduce, for second reading by title only, Ordinance No. 367, amending the Zoning Ordinance to include a Planned Development 15 Overlay District. • DISCUSSION: On November 9, 1999, the City Council conducted a Public Hearing to consider adoption of amendments to the Zoning Ordinance to include a Planned Development 15 Overlay District. Following the close of the Public Hearing, the City Council introduced the Ordinance for its first reading. There were no changes made by the City Council to the Ordinance during its first reading and it is ready for final adoption as attached. FISCAL IMPACT: None ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance No. 367 • 000044 Ordinance 367 ORDINANCE NO. 367 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF ATASCADERO AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO INCLUDE A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 15 OVERLAY DISTRICT WHEREAS, an application has been received from Mildred Shores (PO Box 216, Atascadero, CA 93423) Applicant, and Richard Davis (3900 Traffic Way, Atascadero, CA 93422) Property Owner to consider Zone Change 98004 to create a Planned Development Overlay District 15 to allow for clustered residential lots of 1/4 acre in size; and, WHEREAS, a timely and properly noticed Public Hearing upon the subject Zone Change application was held by the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero on October 19, 1999 at which hearing evidence, oral and documentary,was admitted on behalf of said Zoning amendments; and, WHEREAS, on October 19, 1999, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Zoning Code Amendment; 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 subject Zone Change application was held by the City Council of Atascadero on November 9, 1999 at which hearing evidence, oral and documentary, was admitted on behalf of said Zoning amendments, and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the City to amendment the Zoning Ordinance to protect the health, safety and welfare of its citizens by applying orderly development of the City; and, NOW,THEREFORE,the City Council does ordain as follows: Section 1. Findings for approval of zoning code change. 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, in itself, result in significant environmental impacts. The Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the zone change and for the project has been certified as adequate, in accordance with California environmental laws. Section 2. Zone text change. 0000 ; Ordinance 367 The Zoning Ordinance of the City of Atascadero Municipal Code, Title 9, Chapter 3, Article 28 is hereby amended as shown on the attached Exhibit A, which is made part of this ordinance by reference. Section 3. Publication. A summary of the ordinance, approved by the City attorney, together with 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 Office on and after the date following introduction and passage to print a shall be available to any interested member of the public. Section 4. Publication. A summary of the ordinance, approved by the City attorney, together with 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 Office on and after the date following introduction and passage to print a shall be available to any interested member of the public. Section 5. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be effective a 12:01 a.m. on the 31St day after its final passage. 000046 Ordinance 367 On motion by Council Member , and seconded by Council Member the foregoing ordinance is hereby introduced in its entirety for first reading by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ADOPTED: By: Ray Johnson, Mayor Attest: Marcia M. Torgerson, City Clerk Approved as to form: Roy A. Hanley, City Attorney 000047 Ordinance 367 Exhibit A: Planned Development 15 Zoning District Ordinance Text Ordinance 367 Establishment of Planned Development Overlay Zone Number 15 (PD 15) Planned Development Overlay Zone No. 15 is established as shown on the official zoning map (Section 9-1.102). All development within the district shall be in conformance with the development standards and established herein: Purpose: The purpose of the district is to allow the creative clustering of residential parcels to preserve sensitive environmental features and provide common open space by allowing lot size smaller than the underlying zone's minimum. Development Standards: A. The maximum density shall not exceed (2)two-dwelling units for each gross acre of land. Individual lot sizes may be smaller provided the overall project density conforms to the specified maximum density. B. Individual lot sizes shall be established in conjunction with a Tentative Tract Map and shall not be required to comply with the minimum lot size criteria for the Residential Single Family %2 Acre Minimum District (RSF-X),provided the overall density conforms to the specified maximum density. C. City sewer service and water service from the Atascadero Mutual Water Company shall be provided to all residential lots. D. In no case shall a residential lot size be less than %4 acre, nor exceed a 3:1 depth to width ratio. E. A Master Plan of Development shall be approved in conjunction with any Tentative Tract Map application. All subdivision improvements and subsequent development shall be consistent with the Master Plan of Development. The Master Plan of Development shall contain the following: 1. A site plan indicating land use, common open space, circulation, lot sizes, slopes, native trees and common landscape features. 2. A statistical summary of the projects land uses and densities. 3. A statement of project features that will provide a public benefit. 4. Any special development standards that will be required of future development. 5. Individual building plans and elevations are not required. 000:048 ITEM NUMBER: A-3 DATE: 11/23/99 1918' ' ® 1979 ,A�SCAnE�i)% Atascadero City Council Staff Report— Community Development Department Acceptance of Final Parcel Map # 99012 / AT 99-164 905 El Camino Real (Greenberg Farrow / Gearhart/ Kregger) RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Council: 1. Accept the Final Map #99012; and 2. Reject the offer of dedication for the El Camino Real right-of-way north of the San Ramon Road intersection • DISCUSSION: Tentative Parcel Map #99012 was approved by the Planning Commission on August 3, 1999, in conjunction with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit for the Home Depot commercial project. The approved map allowed for the creation of a 13-lot commercial subdivision that implements the approved Master Plan of Development for PD-9. Pursuant to California Government Code Section 66440 each approving legislative body must approve the Final Map and accept, accept subject to improvement or reject, on behalf of the public, any real property offered for dedication for public use in conformity with the terms of the offer of dedication. The project includes an extension of El Camino Real north of San Ramon Road. Although El Camino Real is the City's primary commercial arterial street, the proposed segment's only purpose is that of providing access to the commercial project. Since there is no plans to extend El Camino Real as an arterial to the north, staff considers the proposed dedication as a part of the commercial project and not as a segment of arterial street. Staff is recommending that the offer of dedication be rejected. All other Conditions of Approval imposed by the Planning Commission have now been satisfied. The original project approval included a number of on-site and off-site public improvements. These improvements were made as conditions of approval to the Master Plan of Development rather than the Parcel Map. Therefore, all of the required 0000,19 ITEM NUMBER: A-3 DATE: 11/23/99 improvements shall be designed and bonded for prior to issuance of building permits but not prior to map recording. FISCAL IMPACT: None ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A --Approved Tentative Parcel Map • 000050 d Attachment A: Tentative Parcel Map 99012 August 3, 1999 —= Planning Commission Resolution 1999-035 ' _s -� LU v o q y wxwZD R 11 �S C��� Y U Y O N ,• II,•/i / .� : `cJ,F^ -�<. w a z � /',; i i i' i./%'•:ice ����^:----•� "C`?7r' U a a o 'i i �" •- - l ' y 1! •Vi !•j I i• �• +w/ f Q i#� ',' � 1 %lO�I7 jIl it l 40 Uj g r /, 1 j• 1 T, ? 1 •�-� V \\ �,\\ �E •j'i•h//' ;.c � `'� •fi'`'n "'- C\ xi Z eq d 7 ii' 8 000053 r' OOp l 03 ITEM NUMBER: A-5 DATE: 11/23/99 iaia °e p 1 8 Atascadero City Council Staff Report - Community Development Department Zone Change 99004 Davis Property: Mixed Use Cluster Residential Subdivision (3900 Traffic Way / Shores) Ordinance No. 368 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Council introduce, for second reading by title only, Ordinance No. 368, amending the Zoning Map District of APN 049-031-003 from Residential Suburban to High Density Single Family (RSF-X/PD-15), Recreation (L/PD-15) and Industrial (I) and the adoption • of a Master Plan of Development for PD-15-1. DISCUSSION: On November 9, 1999, the City Council conducted a Public Hearing to consider adoption of amendments to the Zoning Map District of APN 049-031-003 from Residential Suburban to High Density Single Family (RSF-X/PD-15), Recreation (L/PD-15) and Industrial (1) and the adoption of a Master Plan of Development for PD-15-1. Following the close of the Public Hearing, the City Council introduced the Ordinance for its first reading. There were no changes made by the City Council to the Ordinance during its first reading and it is ready for final adoption as attached. FISCAL IMPACT: None ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance No. 368 f. 000052 ORDINANCE NO. 368 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF ATASCADERO AMENDING THE • THE ZONING MAP DISTRICT OF APN 049-031-003 FROM RESIDENTIAL SUBURBAN TO HIGH DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY(RSF-X/PD-15),RECREATION (L/PD-15)AND INDUSTRIAL (I) AND THE ADOPTION OF A MASTER PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT FOR PD-15-1. (3900 Traffic Way/ Shores) WHEREAS, an application has been,received from Mildred Shores (PO Box 216, Atascadero, CA 93423) Applicant, and Richard Davis (3900 Traffic Way, Atascadero, CA 93422) Property Owner to consider Zone Change 98004 to change the zoning from RS (Residential Suburban) to RSF-X (Residential Single-Family 1/2-acre minimum with sewer), L (Recreation), and I (Industrial), consistent with the General Plan Amendment with a Planned Development Overlay District; and, WHEREAS, a timely and properly noticed Public Hearing upon the subject Zone Map Change application was held by the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero on October 19, 1999 at which hearing evidence, oral and documentary, was admitted on behalf of said Zoning amendments; and, WHEREAS, on October 19, 1999, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Zoning Map Amendment; 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 subject Zone Map Change application was held by the City Council of Atascadero on November 9, 1999 at which hearing evidence, oral and documentary, was admitted on behalf of said Zoning amendments, and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the City to amendment the Zoning Ordinance to protect the health, safety and welfare of its citizens by applying orderly development of the City; and, NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council does ordain as follows: Section 1. Findings for approval of zoning map change. 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, in itself, result in significant environmental impacts. The Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the zone change and for the project has been certified as adequate, in accordance with California environmental laws. • Section 2. Zone map change. 000033 Ordinance 368 The Official Zoning 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. Section 3. Findings for Planned Development approval. 1. Modification of development standards or processing requirements is warranted to promote orderly and harmonious development. 2. 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. 3. Benefits derived from the overlay zone cannot be reasonably achieved through existing development standards. 4. Proposed plans offer certain redeeming features to compensate for requested modifications. Section 4. Master Plan of Development Planned Development 15-1 is hereby adopted for the subject site as shown on Exhibit B and Exhibit C made part of this ordinance by reference. Section 5. Publication. A summary of the ordinance, approved by the City attorney, together with 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 Office on and after the date following introduction and passage to print a shall be available to any interested member of the public. Section 6. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be effective a 12:01 a.m. on the 31St day after its final passage. 000054 Ordinance 368 On motion by Council Member , and seconded by Council Member i the foregoing ordinance is hereby introduced in its entirety for first reading by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ADOPTED: By: Ray Johnson, Mayor Attest: Marcia M. Torgerson, City Clerk Approved as to form: Roy A. Hanley, City Attorney 000055 eon ♦ •• \\\\\� • �ioioi ��'' •� � Vie♦ o♦fit �/ � ► • o♦i ♦ooi •� � �� doOVA e♦e♦e♦e� � P eoo♦ a, ►t,,�oe��ee� J M® U) O F F O Z IL I z z o wLO J 0 w � � Q > C (L 0 IL z LLILLJ z _ a z OLLJ � rV LLI LL O 0 z w d a � C/) w LL, CL X oa a.. U d U Exhibit B: Master Plan of Development �UL��� Ordinance 368 ' Exhibit B: Master Plan of Development Ordinance 368 - €. LAJ _ U) r LA- < z f < 51 I ' b I I� ly 1•, \�y t1 6 ' S _ e 11 Pi, o 1 � lilll 1 a w i fit1 � � Ordinance 368 Exhibit C: Master Plan of Development Standards Ordinance 368 Master Plan of Development PD 15-1 Land Use Statistics Land Use Zoning Acreage Dwelling Density High Density Single Family RSF-X(2 du's/ac max) 19.0 acres 36 du's 1.89 du's/ac Park(Public) Recreation 6.4 acres 0 du's Open Space Recreation 4.9 acres 0 du's Streets 6.9 acres Total 37.2 acres 36 du's 0.97 du's/ac Master Plan of Development PD 15-1 Development Standards 1. A decorative wood rail fence shall be provided along the Traffic Way frontage of lots 18, 19, 20, 26, and 27. 2. No solid fencing taller than 3-feet in height shall be constructed within 25 feet of any street frontage. 3. The habitat area shall be fenced with a suitable barb-less wire fence mounted on wood posts. Weed abatement and required maintenance of the area shall be the responsibility of the subdivision maintenance organization. The habitat area shall be preserved in perpetuity and shall not be used in any other way including livestock grazing. 4. All lots with frontage on Traffic Way shall have a single shared access point consistent with the Tract Map. Each driveway shall include a 3-point turn around to prevent vehicles from backing onto Traffic Way. 5. All residential dwellings shall be designed and sited to minimize impacts to existing native trees. Any impacted trees shall be mitigated consistent with the requirements of the Native Tree Ordinance. 6. The park site shall be dedicated to the City of Atascadero. Prior to any development of the park site the City shall conduct a Phase II Archaeological Survey. Significant archaeological features should be incorporated into the design of the park to the extent possible. The City of Atascadero shall prepare a Park Master Plan prior to improvement. Additional environmental review will be required of lighting and parking facilities for active sports features. 000059 ITEM NUMBER: A-6 DATE: 11/23/99 1979 Atascadero City Council Staff Report - Community Services Department Atascadero Mall Overlay Project Project No. 99-01 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Council accept the Atascadero Mall Overlay Project as complete and authorize the Finance Director to release the project retention in the amount of$11,563.62. • DISCUSSION: On May 11, 1999, Council approved the execution of an agreement with A.J. Diani Construction Company to construct road overlay improvements at a maximum cost of$134,196 including contingencies, construction engineering and other support services. The City Engineer has reviewed the completed improvements and has found them to be in substantial conformance with the project plans and specifications. FISCAL IMPACT: CONSTRUCTION EXPENDITURES Construction $118,199.44 Construction Engineering (Contract Administration, Inspection, Soils Testing $13,267.75 and Survey) TOTAL CONSTRUCTION EXPENDITURES $131,467.19 • ATTACHMENTS: Notice of Completion 000060 RECORDING REQUESTED BY: (and when recorded, mail to:) City Clerk CITY OF ATASCADERO 6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero, CA 93422 NOTICE OF COMPLETION NO TRANSFER OF PROPERTY Notice is hereby given pursuant to Civil Code Section 3093: 1. The undersigned is corporate officer for the City of Atascadero, owner of property hereinafter described. 2. The full name of the owner is the City of Atascadero. 3. The full address of the owner is: 6500 Palma Avenue,Atascadero, CA 93422 4. The nature of the interest of the owner is in fee. 5. A work of improvement on the property hereinafter described was completed on September 28, 1999. 6. The work done was the Atascadero Mail Overlay Project(City Bid No.99-01). 7. The name of the contractor who performed such work of improvement was A.J. Diani Construction Company. Dated: • Wade G.McKinney,City Manager City of Atascadero VERIFICATION I, the undersigned, say that I am the City Manager, declarant of the foregoing Notice of Completion; I have read said Notice of Completion and know the contents thereof;the same is true of my own knowledge. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on at the City of Atascadero, California. Wade G.McKinney,City Manager City of Atascadero 000061 I:\98766\D0CUMENT\Notice of Completion.wpd ITEM NUMBER: A-7 DATE: 11/23/99 isle Atascadero City Council Staff Report - Community Services Department Garcia Road Storm Damage Repairs — Bid No. 99-03 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Council authorize the Mayor to execute an agreement with Whitaker Engineering Contractors, Inc. to construct the Garcia Road Storm Damage Repairs and the Balboa Road Storm Drain Repairs at a maximum cost of$39,882 including contingencies and construction engineering and make the necessary appropriations. • DISCUSSION: Design of the Garcia Road Storm Damage Repairs improvements have been completed . Informal bids were requested for the project in consistant with City procurment policies. Bids were received and publicly opened on October 21, 1999. Consistent with City procurement policies, the award of the contract requires Council approval. A bid summary prepared by the City Clerk and an itemized bid summary are included in this report for reference. The low bid was submitted by Whitaker Engineering Contractors, Inc. in the amount of$33,235.00. The bids have been checked for completeness and accuracy. Staff finds Whitaker Engineering Contractors, Inc. to be the lowest responsible bidder. • 000062 ITEM NUMBER: A-7 DATE: 11/23/99 FISCAL IMPACT: PROJECT EXPENDITURES Construction $33,235 Contingencies @ 10% $3,323 Construction Engineering(Inspection, Contract Administration, Survey, Soils $3,324 Testing) @ 10% TOTAL PROJECT EXPENDITURES $39,882 ALTERNATIVES: 1. Award contract and utilize the presently available FEMA funds. 2. Do not Award Contract - improvements will not be constructed. The FEMA funds will not be available for the project if contracted after December 31, 1999. It is unlikely that the project could be rebid and awarded by December 31, 1999. The roadway damage will • increase with exposure to the weather and more extensive rehabilitation will be required in the future. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A - Bid Summaries • 000063 ATTACHMENT A Bid Summary CI*tY oAtascadero Office of the City Clerk BID SUAINIARY TO: Brady Cherry,Community Services Director 1 FROM: Marcia McClure Torgerson, City Clerk BID NO.: 99-03 OPENED : 10/21/99 2:00 p.m PROJECT: Garcia Road Storm Damage Repairs (3)bids were received and opened today, as follows: Bidder Base Bid Additive Number 1 TOTAL Whitaker Contractors, Inc. $18,010.00 $15,225.00 $33,235.00 P.O. Box 910 Santa Margarita, CA 93453 Michael Frederick Paving Corp. $19,886.30 $18,683.15 $38,569.45 P.O. Box 573 Atascadero, CA 93423 Souza Construction, Inc. $27,437.00 $24,805.00 $52,242.00 P.O. Box 3903 San Luis Obispo, CA 93403 Attachments: 3 bids a ;00006'1 O M M N M 0 O c)) d W Q O O Z O m m 0, W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O o N 0 0 0 to r` 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lo (O N Q a O O co V O V r` Cl) V O V O (O 00 (O N O- V U M T O M V 00 co r V O "t (q M (° N T N (C) O N O C) N M 00 N r •- N N N u Cl) N M ~ 4H C O M CSM O0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C W O O (A (O O O O O O O M O M O O N LU 0 .N -aU 0 0 (n 0o V O (O 0 00 o n to M O O (O Nm J 0. O 00 CO N M � O N - '� co co :3 O a Z (O (O N U) a- U W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O (O O O O O (n (f'I o (naoo (n (n9M 0oovn0oo0T v V N M O (f) V O (O LO to M V 00 v (O 00 V M M CL M 00 M 00 ((1 v M co V a0 O O M M V 00 00 to rn o v- Cl) T Cl) v- 00 r-- co v- T v_ v_ r (0 (O -14 04 0 .� V M O N T M N (D N N T T 00 Cl) Z N V Cl) � M C7 tri W o (n (O (O Moo O (O0 (OMoov LL o (0 M M t` 10 o o M (O iq V T o 0 00 Z }. 0 'p U V O (O V V O to N M N (n (t) W O N d M 00 V T V M V N O (O M M - W (4 m v M M v- � v_ v_ WT Q v O N � 04 Z z � d Q Z W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 o 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 W = o 0 0 0 0 oO o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0000 0000ui0 000ui (ri O Q a O O O O (O 0 0 O O O O N O (n (O O N M O (O M N7 N CV O (f) O N V 00 (O 00 r' T N N Q Q U UQ r` N M Cl) T a0 v M N N to M O "t p M r- U in o M 2 o �- rn Urn O W 0000 000 0000000oo 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CL N p oo00 of o0 0000MTo0 .= Z N m N n• o (r) v N v (0r)- o to 00 LO W "" = Z n V r s0 C) 3acn QQ QQ QQ LL O J !- H U J W W � Q W J � N O N V NO M Z T O (O r T .- O N V r` O .- O O av > a j LO 00v v Cl) 04 co Oa Q U w E o U ¢ a. m O O U 00 00 C7Uco < o o J 0 0 p O O m N U J m N U F- Z Z Nn y x Q a) (n a) o a (n (D T LD v, a) N > r a) N W D - d 3 -- as (C i U L U (� U M O U Z O C 00 C C N H Z ap ,� 1 y10 UidpQ W M V (DU a p a) p O W W L L N O L N m ~ L O L N L O y N Q oNr aMa CL (D Or aCLtMOL -0 a) LL mwQ ¢ E Qz Qw g ¢ QQ -°i =0io w W r N t0 < N a) . - N M ? - N n N - r H O m 00(:065 ITEM NUMBER: A-8 DATE: 11/23/99 Iola - 8 5 9 Atascadero City Council Staff Report - Community Services Department San Benito Road Elementary School Road Improvements Bid No. 99-07 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Council authorize the Mayor to execute an agreement Souza Engineering Contracting, Inc. to construct San Benito Road Elementary School Road Improvements at a maximum cost of$26,517.96 including contingencies and construction engineering and make the necessary appropriations. • DISCUSSION: Design of the San Benito Road Elementary School Road Improvements have been completed. Bids were received and publicly opened on October 21, 1999. Consistent with City procurement policies, the award of the contract requires Council approval. A bid summary prepared by the City Clerk and an itemized bid summary are included in this report for reference. The low bid was submitted by Souza Engineering Contracting, Inc. in the amount of$22,098.30. The bids have been checked for completeness and accuracy. Staff finds Souza Engineering Contracting, Inc. to be the lowest responsible bidder. 000066 ITEM NUMBER: A-8 DATE: 11/23/99 FISCAL IMPACT: PROJECT EXPENDITURES Construction $22,098.30 Contingencies @ 10% $2,209.83 Construction Engineering (Inspection, Contract Administration, Survey, Soils $2,209.83 Testing) @ 10% TOTAL PROJECT EXPENDITURES $26,517.96 ALTERNATIVES: 1. Award contract 2. Do not Award Contract—This portion of the Suggested Routes to School Program improvements will not be constructed. • ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A - Bid Summaries 0000 ; ATTACHMENT A Bid Summary i Cit Of tasca d Office of the CitClerk Y BID SUMMARY TO: Brady Cherry,Community Services Director John Neil,Engineer ^n FROM: Marcia McClure Torgerson,City Clerk BID NO.: 99-07 OPENED: 10/21/99 3:00 pm. PROJECT: San Benito Elementary School Route to School Improvements (3)Bids were received and opened today,as follows: Bidder Base Bid R.Burke Corporation $31,561.50 P.O.Box 957 San Luis Obispo,CA 93406 Michael Frederick $29,026.50 P.O.Box 573 Atascadero,CA 93423 Souza Construction $22,098.30 P.O.Box 3903 San Luis Obispo,CA 93403 Attachments:3 bids 0000k;s W O U O O � C IL J W F Q 0 W U i a z D ti 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lo Wo It ocor- N LO ci x0000 Q O a (`ten OctN °r v r: M O M co')_ rn 6M1Vi () CD :� V• LO N N N N 0 0� F r M CD C:La OF O a) Ot7 !J � C� M0 W OOO00000000 x N v 0 0 0 (n0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D Z m aMi D m m Q c Z m 00 W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1-4 U (n to 0 0 (n 0 0 0 0 (O Di M n (n ai ([i n r; o v w a v rn C+) (CD r' (Mn (on rn On (o) M U) Y N Q ([) (O N N M N d It Z W� MUaa) 0 u � Lo o rnLn000000000 W LL W O to (C') O O O O O O N M Z 0 X N } O O a. 0 ccoo v o r' v N o. r 0 W Q' N m U a M n ZQ v0 :4 M "' a p Z 2 O w 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 010, W D 2 U o 0 o 10 o o m o 0 0 o o00Moo_ r- oov (ri N N N V a V• to to n N N V• O N to V• (C) N M w � V• C'' N Q Q O c MF V' Vr r- N K) L O O mui N � N O _ D o O 0)C') O00000000000 C W OO O O n (D 0 (D O O n (C) 0 J W O j c O CCD (Co M N - M v Q) O N Z O C9 CEJ a r V• M _ 3 O Z N t(7 N cn n.. U) LL Z Z LL Q LL Z 0 f0 LL LL Q J H F J W J F-- J J J w Hz 04 y W N F WH O OD M Ln U) C', O CV J O Q � O � V' M M CO - O m Q U F- H o Z m W m 0 a 0 zo U) m tl c J L o m 0 a l- tan U ('nn Q 0� Q U m O ti o c� o 0 U p 0 m N ti E r- 0 ZZ7 O C d H N N U (V Q E ~ U -a cS c ) �? rn °? m Z (0 `1 H Q- N 0 E 0 Y d w c a (a U c m U rn (° orn n� Z a O Q 0 a) (n Co "I c O � m � U mY (aCQp? y .E oi ITEM NUMBER: A-9 DATE: 11/23/99 r. I ilia 1 = p 1s Atascadero City Council Staff Report - Community Services Department Garcia Road Bridge Replacement Project RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Council authorize the Mayor to execute a Consultant Services Agreement with Tarvin& Associates for the services required to prepare appraisals and right-of-way maps for the acquisition of slope easements and rights-of-entry required to replace the Garcia Road bridge. • DISCUSSION: The design for the replacement of the Garcia Road bridge will require that the new bridge be constructed approximately four feet higher than the present structure. The new bridge will need to be constructed at the higher elevation to improve sight distance, reduce the possibility of flooding and to conform to the minimum acceptable standards for the vertical geometry of the roadway. The raising of the new bridge and bridge approaches will require the need for slope easements and rights-of-entry on two adjoining residential properties. The construction of the new bridge will also require temporary rights-of-entry to the same properties. Staff contact with the property owners has established that compensation will be necessary to acquire these rights. Staff is not qualified to perform the appraisal functions under the requirements of the Highway Bridge Replacement and Reconstruction(HBRR) funding program. A qualified appraisal firm must be engaged to perform the work according to Federal Highway Administration guidelines. CalTrans, who administers the HBRR program, has agreed to increase the funding obligation to cover 80% of the appraisal cost. Staff has solicited proposals from four local qualified appraisal firms. The proposal submitted by Tarvin & Associates shows them to qualified by CalTrans to perform the appraisal services. The not-to-exceed fee for the appraisal and mapping services is $12,450. This fee is an eligible expenditure under the project's present Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation (HBRR) funding. The City will be reimbursed up to 80% of the total fee. 000070 ITEM NUMBER: A-9 DATE: 11/23/99 FISCAL IMPACT: EXPENDITURES Appraisal Services $12,450 TOTAL EXPENDITURE $12,450 REVENUES Fund 705 —HBRR Funds $ 9,960 Fund 705 Streets and Bridges Fees $ 2,490 TOTAL REVENUES $12,450 ALTERNATIVES: 1. Authorize agreement • 2. Do not authorize agreement—bridge replacement would be designed but could not be constructed under the HBRR program, resulting in the possible loss of construction funds. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A—Consulting Services Agreement • 0000-1 CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR THE - CITY OF ATASCADERO THIS AGREEMENT, made this day of , 19 , by and between the CITY OF ATASCADERO, hereinafter referred to as "City", and Tarvin & Associates, hereinafter referred to as "Consultant". Witnesseth that for and in consideration of the mutual covenants herein contained, the parties hereto agree as follows: Article 1 - Authorization A. Consultant will perform the services under this Agreement upon receipt of the Notice to Proceed issued by the City Manager. B. The following exhibits are attached hereto, and incorporated herein, by reference as though here fully set forth. 1. Exhibit A. Scope of Work and Fee 2. Exhibit B, Request for Proposal dated October 9, 1999 Article 2 - Responsibilities of Consultant A. Consultant will provide appraisal services for slope easements and rights-of-entry for the City of Atascadero as described herein and as outlined in Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "B" for the City of Atascadero. All work performed shall be done to the satisfaction of the California Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Authority. B. In the performance of Consultant's service under this Agreement, Consultant agrees that he will maintain such coordination with City and State officials as may be requested and desirable, including primary coordination with the Project Coordinator, herein designated as the City Engineer. C. Insofar as they may be applicable to the project contemplated by this Agreement, Consultant shall render the services per Exhibit "A and Exhibit "B", commencing with receipt of a written Notice to Proceed signed by the Project Coordinator and by the City Manager. Article 3 - Responsibilities of City City shall cooperate with Consultant on all phases of the services covered by this Agreement and will make available to him, as his needs indicate, all existing maps, an electronic base map, preliminary title reports and other similar data in possession of City covering the bridge site and the properties to be appraised. CITY OF ATASCADERO 000072 CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT Page 1 of 6-Pages Article 4 - Fee and Provision for Payment City will pay Consultant a not to exceed fee of $12,450.00 for the services contracted - under this Agreement. Consultant shall submit monthly progress reports to City indicating the state-of-completion of each task specified in Exhibit "A". Consultant shall be paid no later than thirty (30) days following receipt by City of Consultant's progress report and invoice. Any additional applicable hourly rate billings as authorized in Article 5 shall be based on the Billing Rates shown in the Proposed Hours and Rate Schedule contained in Exhibit "B". Article 5 - Payment for Extra Services or Changes Any other claim for payment for extra services or changes in the services will be paid by City only upon certification by the City Manager that the claimed extra service or change was authorized in advance by the Project Coordinator and the City Manager, and that the service has been satisfactorily completed. Invoices for extra services which are approved by the Project Coordinator and City Manager must be submitted by Consultant within thirty (30) days of completion of such services and must be accompanied by a statement of itemized costs covering said services. Article 6 - Suspension or Termination of Agreement A. If Consultant fails to comply with the conditions of the Agreement, City may, by written notice of the Project Coordinator and the City Manager, suspend the Agreement and withhold further payments pending corrective action by Consultant or a decision to terminate the Agreement. After receipt of notice of suspension, Consultant may not incur additional obligations of Agreement funds during the suspension unless specifically authorized by the Project Coordinator and the City Manager. B. Either party hereto shall have the right to terminate this Agreement upon giving ten (10) days written notice of such termination of this project in its entirety, notwithstanding any other fee provisions of this Agreement, based upon services accomplished by Consultant prior to notice of such termination. Consultant shall be entitled to the reasonable value of his services involved in the termination, as determined by City, upon a finding which shall be final and conclusive as to the amount of fee due and owing. Article 7 - Time of Completion Consultant agrees to diligently pursue the services under this Agreement and to complete the services as described in Exhibit "A" within 100 WORKING DAYS from the receipt of the written Notice to Proceed signed by the City Manager and the Project Coordinator. Consultant shall not be responsible for any delay which is caused by City review, action or inaction of City and/or any state or federal agency, or acts of God, but shall be responsible for his own fault or negligence or that of any of his subcontractors. CITY OF ATASCADERO 0000`V3 CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT Page 2 of 6-Pages Article 8 - Conflicts of Interest No member, officer, or employee of City, during his or her tenure, or for one (1) year thereafter, shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in this Agreement or the proceeds thereof. Article 9 - Ownership of Data The ownership of all data collected for use by Consultant under this Agreement, together with working papers, drawings, and other materials necessary for a complete understanding of the appraisals and necessary for the practical use of the appraisals shall be vested in City. Ownership of original drawings and documents shall be vested in City. Consultant may retain a copy of all work for his own use. Article 10 - Covenant Against Contingent Fees Consultant warrants that he has not employed or retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for him, to solicit or secure this Agreement, and that he has not paid or agreed to pay any company or person, other than bona fide employee working solely for him, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift, or any other consideration contingent on or resulting from the award or making of this Agreement. For breach or violation of this warranty, City shall have the right to annul this Agreement without liability or, in its discretion, to deduct from the contract price or consideration or otherwise recover, the full amount of such fee, commission, percentage fee, gift, or contingency. Article 11 - Contract Personnel The services to be done pursuant to this Agreement shall be done by Tarvin & Associates and such other personnel in the employ or under the supervision of Consultant who shall be approved by City. The City official who shall be vested with the right of approval of such additional personnel or outside contracting parties shall be the City Manager. City reserves the right to reject any of Consultant's personnel or proposed outside consultants, and City reserves the right to request that acceptable replacement personnel be assigned to the project. Article 12 - Indemnity Clause Consultant shall defend, indemnify, and save harmless the City of Atascadero, its officers, agents, and employees, from any and all claims, demands, damages, costs, expenses, and liabilities arising out of this Agreement or occasioned by the negligent performance or attempted negligent performance of the provisions hereof, including, but not limited to, any negligent act or omission to act on the part of Consultant or his agents or employees or independent contractors directly responsible to him, except that the above shall not apply to the sole negligence or willful misconduct of City or City's agents, servants, or • independent contractors who are directly responsible to City. This indemnification provision shall apply even if there is concurrent or joint negligence of indemnitor and 0000,74 CITY OF ATASCADERO CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT Page 3 of 6-Pages indemnitee, and even if there is active or passive negligence by either or both parties. Article 13 - Insurance A. Automobile and Public Liability Insurance. Consultant shall also maintain in full force and effect for the duration of this Agreement, automobile insurance and public liability insurance with an insurance carrier satisfactory to City, which insurance shall include protection against claims arising from personal injury, including death resulting therefrom, and damage to property resulting from any actual occurrence arising out of the performance of this Agreement. The amounts of insurance shall be not less than the following: 1. Single limit coverage applying to bodily and personal injury, including death resulting therefrom, and property damage or a combination thereof in an amount not less than $500,000. The following endorsements must be attached to the policy or policies: 1. If the insurance policy covers on an "accident" basis, it must be changed to "occurrence". 2. The policy must cover personal injury as well as bodily injury. 3. Broad form property damage liability must be afforded. 4. The City of Atascadero, its officers, employees, and agents, shall be named as insured under the policy, and the policy shall stipulate that the insurance will operate as primary insurance and that no other insurance effected by City will be called upon to contribute to a loss hereunder. 5. The policy shall contain contractual liability, either on a blanket basis or by identifying this Agreement within a contractual liability endorsement. 6. The policy shall contain "cross-liability" such that each insured is covered as if separate policies had been issued to each insured. 7. City shall be given thirty (30) days notice prior to cancellation or reduction in coverage of the insurance. B. Workers Compensation Insurance. In accordance with the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code, Consultant shall be insured against liability for workers compensation or undertake self-insurance. Consultant agrees to comply with such provisions before commencing performance of any services under this Agreement. C. Certificates of Insurance. Consultant shall submit to the City Manager all certificates of insurance evidencing that Consultant has the insurance required by this Agreement within ten (00) days after receipt of Notice of Award. Said certificates shall state the project number and that the policy shall not be assigned, cancelled, or reduced in coverage without thirty (30) days written notice to City, and that such insurance not relieve or decrease the extent to which Consultant may be held responsible for payment of damages resulting from any service or operation performed pursuant to this Agreement. Consultant shall not perform any services under this Agreement until the required insurance certificates have been submitted to City and approved by these provisions, or fails or refuses to furnish City required proof that insurance has been 0000 CITY OF ATASCADERO CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT Page 4 of 6-Pages procured and is in force and paid for, City shall have the right, at its discretion, to forthwith terminate this Agreement. Article 14 - Status Consultant shall, during the entire term of this Agreement, be construed to be an independent contractor, and in no event shall any of his personnel or subcontractors be construed to be employees of City. Article 15 - Non-Discrimination Consultant shall comply with the provisions of Presidential Executive Order No. 11246 of September 24, 1965, and all other orders, regulations, and laws governing non- discrimination in employment, including in particular, Section 122(a) of the State and Local Fiscal Assistance Act of 1972. Article 16 - Modification of Agreement This Agreement may be further modified only by a written amendment signed by both parties hereto. Article 17 - Law Governing This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. Article 18 - Communications Communications between the parties to this Agreement maybe sent to the following address: City: CITY OF ATASCADERO 6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero, CA 93422 Attn: Steven J. Sylvester, City Engineer Consultant: Tarvin & Associates 229 Miller Way Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 Attn: R. H. Tarvin 00004, CITY OF ATASCADERO CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT Page 5 of 6-Pages ACCEPTED AND AGREED this the day of g_ . CITY: CONSULTANT: CITY OF ATASCADERO, TARVIN & ASSOCIATES a municipal corporation By: by Wade G. McKinney, R. H. Tarvin City Manager ATTEST: Marcia M. Torgerson, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: Steven J. Sylvester, City Engineer 0000'7'7 CITY OF ATASCADERO CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT Page 6 of 6 Pages EXHIBIT A Tarvin & Associates - Real Estate Appraisal and Acquisition Services October 19, 1999 John B. Neil CITY Assistant City Engineer City of Atascadero Community Service Department 6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero, CA 93422 Subject: Right of Way Services - Garcia Road Bridge, City of Atascadero Dear Mr. Neil: Thank you for the opportunity to provide a proposal for right of way related activities required in connection with the above referenced project. PROPOSED SCOPE OF SERVICE/WORK and 1 r1Nrn A* A ppg0 A!'SII Task 1 - Right of Way Project Management and �«r�inatiP�P� g �Ont1n11M1c Provide project oversight and continuity between the various phases of right of way activities. Liaison with Agency and Caltrans Local Assistance representatives and attend status/progress meetings as necessary. Task IT- Right of Way Mapping Prepare appraisal map(s)using the Caltrans format, modified to identify the City of Atascadero as the owner. The maps will include all existing easements per a current title report. These maps will be prepared, maintained and modified as found necessary during the design process. Prepare deeds, legal descriptions and sketches for each required parcel. These documents will be updated as found necessary during the design process. Maintain oral and written contact with the design engineer and the appraiser to assure their needs are met. Task III-Appraisal Activity Approach-Employ Valuation techniques that comply with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice and State and Federal Guidelines. Consider as required, the partial taking nature(permanent and temporary easements) of the proposed 00®0'78 229 Miller Way,Arroyo Grande, CA 93420, (805)489-0147, (805)489-9480 FAX 'i ruin&As3ociates-Real Estate AppraLM 1 and Acqn1q1tlon 5C*.a a, Proposed Hours and Rate chedule - Garcia Road Bridge Project (Revised 11-2-99) Right of Way Activities, Tasks -All Hr/Task Bill Rate Multi Actual Rate Total Right of Way Liaison 26.50hrs. $105/hr 1.0 $105/hr $2,650 Right of Way Mapping Billed as follows: Principal Surveyor- 32 hours @ $110/hr $3,520 Senior CADD - 24 hours @ 70/hr $1X 680 Clerical 6 hours @ $35/hr $ 210 Reimbursed expenses $ 190 Total RW Mapping Prep/Maint. $5,600 Project Appraiser 40hrs. $105/hr 1.0 $105/hr $4,200 Condemn. Activity Total Not to Exceed $12,450 Not included in the above is any.quotation pertaining to litigation (condemnation). All such activity, if necessary, will be performed, upon request, as follows: Appraisal activities - $125/hr. It may be necessary to amended this proposal to reflect requirements associated with a change or increase in project scope. Therefore, Tarvin & Associates should be notified of any changes that would substantially alter or amend the project scope. Right of Way and mapping will be done by Martin, Northart & Spencer(NINS) Engineering Inc. Tarvin & Associates has teamed with MNS on many central coast public works project. MNS is familiar with the state and federal requirements pertaining to such projects. The performance of this task is based upon the following assumptions: 1) MNS will be provided with an electronic base map including topography, property and r/w boundaries, and the areas which the designer will need for temporary and permanent easements. 2) MNS will be provided with preliminary title reports and backup documents for each affected parcel. 3) There will be approximately 2 temporary and 2 permanent easements to .describe. In addition to the above the agency will need to provide the following: Project design/construction plans, i.e. layouts, cross sectioning, profiles, etc. Property preliminary title reports Project right of way taking determinations The above quotation shall remain firm for a period of sixty days from the proposal submission date of October 21, 1999. 00009 Tar-Yin&Amoclates-Real Estate eDp,gt—t 1 Ond AcgUb1L1Qn ry1 " Tarvin & Associates- Firm IntroductionBackground R.H. (Bob) Tarvin SR/WA -Is the owner of Tarvin& Associates, a right of way consulting firm. Prior to forming his own company, Bob was employed by the California Department of Transportation for over 25 years. Bob credits Caltrans with providing him with the opportunity to gain invaluable experience in the right of way field. While at Caltrans he served as the Local Programs Manager in District 5 (San Luis Obispo) providing right of way oversight and assistance in connection with highway projects located throughout the state. Bob has working contacts within Caltrans's agencies throughout the State. His current business activities also include providing right of way consultation to the California Department of Water Resources in connection with a 120-mile state water pipeline project located on the central coast of California and various other local public agency projects. Bob also served as the President of the International Right of Way Association during 1991-92. He currently represents the International Right of Way Association as their appointed trustee to the Appraisal Foundation. Mr. Tarvin is an experienced real estate appraiser and right of way manager with a strong background in the valuation and acquisition of lands required for Caltrans highway projects. He has provided right of way management and oversight in connection with public works projects throughout the state. In addition to being a State Certified appraiser he also possesses two appraisal designations from two highly respected and recognized professional appraisal organizations. He is very familiar with the Caltrans Right of Way Procedural and Project Development Manual and the FHA Real Estate Acquisition Guide for Local Public Agencies. Recent Projects Undertaken by Taryin & Associates partial List • SRI 35, Storm Drain Project, City of Santa Maria, Appraisal and Acquisition • 101/Main Street Interchange Project - Santa Maria, SBCAG, Right of Way Management/Appraisal/Acquisition • Piney Creek Bridge Replacement, County of Monterey, Appraisal and Acquisition • San Juan Grade Rd Widening- County of Monterey Appraisal and Acquisition 0 King City Bike Path, County of Monterey- Appraisal and Acquisition • Bridge Seismic Retrofit, Monterey County- Appraisal and Acquisition • South Susanville/Richmond Rd By-Pass, Lassen County-Project Study Reports • Skyline Road Extension, Lassen County, Project Study Report • Arcade Water District Well Site Acquisition- Sacramento County, Appraisal • San Benito Street Extension- San Benito County(SBCOG), Right of Way Project Management, Appraisal and Acquisition Hall Road Realignment -Monterey County, Rights of Way Acquisition • Westside Blvd./Union Road Alignment - San Benito County, Right of Way Project Management, Appraisal and Acquisition • Rte. 101/Union Valley Parkway- Santa Maria,Project Study Report • Rte. 135/Hummel Dr. - Santa Maria,Project Study Report • Rte. 101/Los Cameros Rd. Interch., Santa Barbara Co., Project Study Report • Rte 135/13etteravia Rd. Santa Maria, Project Study Report • Rte. 101/154 Interchange Project, Santa Barbara Co., Project Study Report 229 Miller Way,Arroyo Grande, CA 93420, (805)489-0147, (805)489-9480 FAX o Tarvin_&A_`sodates-Real Estate ApprW—N 1 and AcQWslt<on&rvtces • Rte. 101/156 Realignment Project, Monterey County, Project Study Report • Rte. 101 Milpas Street Roundabout, Santa Barbara Co. Project Study Report - 0 Grover Beach MultiModal Transit Facility, Amtrak Station- Appraisal • Highway 001 Widening Project- CALTRANS, San Luis Obispo County- Appraisal • Elk Lane Bridge Replacement, City of San Luis Obispo -Project Appraiser • Coastal Aqueduct Project, San Luis Obispo County, Appraisal and Acquisition Professional References: Steven B. Kahn . P.E,. L.S. Project Engineer Public Works Department City of Santa Maria 110 S. Pine, Suite 221 Santa Maria, CA 93454-5190 805 925-0951 Ext. 225 Don Irelan Sr. Real Property Agent City of Santa Barbara Public Works Department P.O. Box 33 Santa Barbara, CA 93102 805 564-5384 John Maddux Chief Right of Way Agent Caltrans 3220 Higuera Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 805 549-3352 Gerald C. Comati, PE. Project Manager COM3 222 East Anapamu Street Santa Barbara, CA 93101 805 568-3297 i 000081 229 Miller Way,Arroyo Grande, CA 93420, (805)489-0147, (805)489-9480 FAX Tary n&Assochkies-Real Fjtate ARvrahal and Acquisition Services ** PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS R H. Tarvin, SRWA, WAS Right of Way Project Manager and Real Estate Appraiser PROFESSIONAL.AFFILIATIONS • Past President International Right of Way Association • Registered SRWA Member, International Right of Way Association • Appraisal Foundation Member Representative • Past Director- Council of Appraisers and Property Professional Society. • Chairman- Appraisal Foundation Advisory Council • State Certified General Real Estate Appraiser- State of Calif. #AG016894 • Appraisal Foundation- Trustee • California Real Estate Brokers Licensee- #01196512 • Designated Member (IFAS)National Association of Independent Fee Estate Appraisers EDUCATION AND PROFFS4TONAT DEVELOPMENT OPMENT California State University at Sacramento, Bachelor of Science Degree-Business Administration PROFESSIONAL COURSES (partial listing) FHWA Appraisals Under Eminent Domain Appraisal and Appraisal Review for Federal-Aid Highway Programs Adventures in Appraising Real Property- SREA Industrial Valuation- AIREA Right of Way Academy(Department of Transportation) Case Studies in Real Estate Valuation- AIREA Valuation Standards and Report Writing-AIREA Litigation Valuation- AIREA Standards of Expert Testimony Appraisal Principals Courses- Cuesta College Principles of Ethics -IRWA Appraisal of Partial Acquisitions- IRWA CO TRT EXPERIENCE Qualified as Expert Witness in Monterey, San Luis Obispo, and Santa Barbara County. i i 000082 229 Miller Way,Arroyo Grande, CA 93420, (805)489-0147, (805)489-9480 FAX Taryin&Associates-Real F-Rtate Apprakal and A quiitioS2rvices _ PROFESSIONAL.EXPERIENCE January 1994 to Present- Tarvin and Associates -Real Estate Appraisal and Acquisition Services. October 1969 to January 1994- Department of Transportation Right of Way Staff Appraiser,Acquisition Agent and Local Agency Program Manager Also performed contract assignments for: City of Arroyo Grande City of Santa Barbara City of Santa Maria City of San Luis Obispo County of San Luis Obispo City of Pismo Beach Santa Barbara County Association City of Lompoc of Government County of San Benito California Department of Water City of Oxnard Resources Buellton Union School District County of San Benito County of Monterey Council of Governments Boyle Engineering Corporation PSOMAS Engineering Inc. Mark Thomas Engineering Inc. Martin and Kane Inc. Dokken Engineering Inc. Quincy Engineering Inc. PARSONS Transportation Group JANMAC Inc. City of Atascadero City of Seaside North Coast Engineering Robert Bein, William Frost Carollo Engineers & Associates County of Santa Barbara County of Lassen Advanced Engineering Inc. County of Santa Barbara City of Calabasas Flood Control Appraisal and acquisition experience includes residential, agricultural, commercial and special purpose properties. Experience includes appraising and negotiating for rights of way in Monterey, San Benito County, Santa Barbara County and San Luis Obispo County, Ventura County, Kern County i.e. (State Highways 183, 001,129, 101, Santa Barbara Cross Town Freeway etc.,Milpas Street Roundabout). These activities included highway and street rights of way, sound walls, material acquisition and disposal sites, utility easements, pipeline rights of way and involved both lessee and lessor interest. INSTRUCTOR Certified appraisal course instructor for the International Right of Way Association. 000083 229 Miller Way,Arroyo Grande, CA 93420, (805)489-0147, (805)489-9480 FAX PLEASE READ YOUR POLICY POLICY NUMBER This declarations Page/Amended Declaration page with the policy CA o-77-93-870-3 P 9 p cY jacket identified by the form and edition date indicated completes the above numbered policy. Previous policy no. Form 1050 Ed. 1194 ' DECLARATIONS BOB TARVIN PAGE 1 OF 3 AMED INSURED TARVI N & ASSOCIATES 229 MILLER WAY ARROYO GRANDE CA 93420 Policy period 12:01 A.M.STANDARD TIME AT THE ADDRESS OF THE NAMED INSURED AS STATED HEREIN A CALIFORNIA MERIDIAN 'PROM OCT 28, 1999 TO OCT 28, 2000 E 5806 TRAFFIC WAY N ATASCADERO CA 93422 T 27 M98 EWYE8 PROGRESSIVE CASUALTY INS. CO. COMMERCIAL WEHI 114SSYRANCE P.O. BOX 94739, CLEVELAND, OHIO 44101 1-800-444-4487 The insurance afforded is only with respect to such and so many of the following coverages as are indicated with respect to each described vehicle.The limit of the company's liability against each such coverage shall be as stated herein,subject to all the terms of this policy having reference thereto. SCHEDULE OF COVERAGES AND LIMITS OF LIABILITY COVERAGES FULL TERM PREMIUM CHARGES A SINGLE LIMIT BODILY INJURY AND PROPERTY DAMAGE LIABILITY $1 ,000,000 EACH ACC $426 C MEDICAL PAYMENTS $ 5,000 EACH ACCIDENT9 D COMP OR FTCAC STATED AMT SEE SCHEDULE OF COVERED VEH FOR DED 2$ E COLLISION OR UPSET-STD AMT SEE SCHEDULE OF COVERED VEH FOR DED 1�32, I UM/UNDERINSURED MOTORIST $ 30,000 /PERS. $ 60,000 /ACC. FILING FEES $50.00 TOTAL POLICY PREMIUM $658.00 ATTACHMENT IDENTIFIED BY FORM NUMBER 1197 (08-93) 1198 (08-93) 8470 .02-86) 6211 (12-95) 6212 (05-97) ,DRIVERS PAGE 2 COVERED VEH PAGE 3 ICC-N MCS90-N PUC-N 0TH-N Any loss under Part I I I is payable as interest may appear to named insured and above loss payee: Prog Premium Budget: C 1 Fin.Resp.Filed: For Whom: Case No: R/R0599%Factor Used: G2 BGo 99285 XXXX 8.0 CAICSIIC F/R 071997 Ountersigned: I i J1113 (12-92) INSURED'S COPY CVWE0716981217L111301 0000511 J PLEASE READ YOUR POLICY POLICY NUMBER CA 0-77—q3-870-3 This declarations Page/Amended Declaration page with the policy jacket identified by the form and edition date indicated completes the above numbered policy. Previous policy no. Form 1050 Ed. 1 194 DECLARATIONS BOB TARVIN PAGE 3 OF 3 NAMED INSURED TARV I N & ASSOCIATES 229 MILLER WAY ARROYO GRANDE CA 93420 Policy period 12:01 A.M.STANDARD TIME AT THE ADDRESS OF THE NAMED INSURED AS STATED HEREIN A CALIFORNIA MERIDIAN FROM OCT 28, 1999 TO OCT 28, 2000 E 5806 TRAFFIC WAY N ATASCADERO CA 93422 T MOMEll YTO PROGRESSIVE CASUALTY INS. CO. co"ZERcl"va"IctE Imsu" cE P.O. BOX 94739, CLEVELAND, OHIO 44101 1-800-444-4487 The insurance afforded is only with respect to such and so many of the following coverages as are indicated with respect to each described vehicle.The limit of the company's liability against each such coverage shall be as stated herein.subject to all the terms of this policy having reference thereto. SCHEDULE OF COVERED VEHICLES VEH DR TRADE BODY VEH TER RAD DSC DSC NO NO YR NAME TYPE SERIAL NO CLS NO ZIP IUS COD PCT 1-01 1 90 GMC PICKUP 1GTOC14X7LZ539287 S05 71 93420 50 987 41 LIABILITY PREMIUM BY VEHICLE VEH MED NO LIAB PAY UM/UIM BI UM/PD 1 $426 $19 $43 PHYSICAL DAMAGE PREMIUM BY VEHICLE ` VEH COMP OR FT/CAC COLLISION ON—HOOK VEH NO TYPE DED PREM DED PREM LIMIT DED PREM TOTAL 1 COMP S500 $28 $500 S92 $608 Any loss under Part I I I is payable as interest may appear to named insured and above loss payee: Prog Premium Budget: C 1 Fin.Resp.Filed: For Whom: Case No: R/R0599%Factor Used: G2 BGO 99285 XXXX 8.0 CAICSIIC FIR071997 Countersigned: 1 1113(12-92) INSURED'S COPY CVWE0127981217011303 - 000055 i Date Issued C �-^�_ontract No. Previous No. 12/23/98 STM0009339 STM0007373 - T REAL LIABILITY THIS DECLARATION PAGE ESTATE SATTACHED TTO,ISERS AND FORMS POA OF THE MEMORANDUM OF INSURANCE Item NAME OF INSURER COVERAGE IS PROVIDED ON A CLAIMS MADE BASIS. 1 STAR INSURANCE COMPANY PLEASE READ CAREFULLY 26600 Telegraph Road Southfield, MI 48034 Customer ID: 125489 NAMED MEMBER: TARVIN&.ASSOCIATES 2 Robert Howard Tarvin 229 Miller Way Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 Memorandum of Insurance Period 3 From: 01/01/99 To: 01/01/00 12:01 A.M. Standard Time at the Address Stated in Item 2 DEDUCTIBLE OR RETENTION: RETROACTIVE DATE: 4 . Each Claim $1,000.00 01/01/94 LIMIT OF LIABILITY: 5 The Limit of Liability for each claim and in the aggregate is $1,000,000.00 Each Claim reduced by claims expense as defined in the Memorandum of $1,000,000.00 Aggregate Insurance. MAIL NOTICE OF LOSS TO AGENT 6 LIABILITY INSURANCE ADMINISTRATORS 1600 Anacapa Street Santa Barbara, California 93101 (805) 963-6624 Fax: (805) 962-0652 ANNUAL PREMIUM: $921.00 7 NUMBER OF APPRAISERS: 1 FORMS ATTACHED AT ISSUE: 0490PL0394 0491 PLO394 1019PLO394 8 0239PL(7/95) ? By Authorized Signature 0128 PL 09 97 000056 13 This Spectrum Policy consists of the Declarations, Coverage Forms,Common Policy Conditions and any 17 other Forms and Endorsements issued to be a part of the Policy.This insurance is provided by the insurance LG company of The Hartford Insurance Group shown below. SBA INSURER: HARTFORD FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY HARTFORD PLAZA, HARTFORD, CONNECTICUT 06115 COMPANY CODE: 1 Policy Number: 57 SBA LG1713 SPECTRUM POLICY DECLARATIONS ORIGINAL THE HARTFORD 0 Named Insured and Mailing Address: BOB TARVIN (No.,Street,Town,State,Zip Code) Y-1 229 MILLER WAY 0 0 ARROYO GRANDE CA 93420 Policy Period: From 11/14/99 To 11/14/00 1 YEAR 12:01 a.m.,Standard time at your mailing address shown above. Exception: 12 noon in Maine, Michigan, New Hampshire, � North Carolina. Ln N C> Name of Agent/Broker: NETWORKED INSURANCE AGENT/SCIC Code: 122494 Previous Policy Number: 57 SBA LG1713 Named Insured is: INDIVIDUAL O S Audit Period: NON-AUDITABLE Type of Property Coverage: SPECIAL Insurance Provided: In return for the payment of the premium and subject to all of the terms of this policy,we agree with you to provide insurance as stated in this policy. TOTAL ANNUAL PREMIUM IS: $500 MP i s� -•= Countersigned by Q p�/Lt.aoJ 0 9/10/9 90 Authorized Representative Date 00008'7 Form SS 00 02 11 93 T Printed in U.S.A. (NS) Page 001 (CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE) Process Date: 0 9/10/9 9 Policy Expiration Date: 11/14/00 INSURED COPY SPECTRUM POLICY DECLARATIONS (Continued) POLICY NUMBER: 57 SBA LG1713 Location(s), Building(s), Business of Named Insured and Schedule of Coverages for Premises as designated by Number below. Location: 001 Building: 001 PROPERTY OPTIONAL COVERAGES APPLICABLE LIMITS OF INSURANCE TO THIS LOCATION STRETCH COVERAGES: FORM SS 04 08 THIS FORM INCLUDES MANY ADDITIONAL COVERAGES AND EXTENSIONS OF COVERAGE. SOME o OF THE MAJOR COVERAGES ARE: o ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE $ 25, 000 VALUABLE PAPERS AND RECORDS $ 25, 000 EMPLOYEE DISHONESTY $ 10, 000 a COMPUTERS AND MEDIA $ 10,000 PERSONAL PROPERTY OF OTHERS $ 10, 000 C14 PROPERTY OFF PREMISES $ 15, 000 TEMPERATURE CHANGE $ 10,000 FORGERY OR ALTERATION $ 10,000 MONEY ORDERS AND COUNTERFEIT $ 10, 000 PAPER CURRENCY BACK-IIP OF SEWERS AND DRAINS $ 25, 000 000085 J Form SS 00 02 11 93 T Printed in U.S.A. (NS) Page 003 (CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE) Process Date: 0 9/10/9 9 Policy Expiration Date; 1-1/14/00 SPECTRUM POLICY DECLARATIONS (Continued) POLICY NUMBER: 57 SBA LG1713 BUSINESS LIABILITY LIMITS OF INSURANCE LIABILITY AND MEDICAL EXPENSES $1, 000,000 MEDICAL EXPENSES-ANY ONE PERSON $ 10, 000 PERSONAL AND ADVERTISING INJURY $1, 000,000 N rh O FIRE LEGAL LIABILITY-FIRE, $ 300, 000 LIGHTNING,OR EXPLOSION AGGREGATE LIMITS M PRODUCTS-COMPLETED OPERATIONS $2,000, 000 CD GENERAL AGGREGATE $2, 000,000 Ln N O O 00000 ri l'1 Form SS 00 02 11 93 T Printed in U.S.A.(NS) Page 005 (CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE) Process Date: 0 9/10/9 9 Policy Expiration Date: 11/14/00 Tarvin&Associates-Real Estate AApraLmd and AcQyivitinn Sett+--- acquisition, including affected improvements and address before and after taking concerns (severance damages, cost to cure, etc.)including the following: • Review Right of Way Maps, Title Reports, Deed descriptions • Prepare and Mail "Notice of Decision to Appraise" to affected property owners as required • Meet with property owners and tenants as required • Perform market survey and analysis • Prepare Valuation Studies/Reports for project parcels • Field review appraisals with Agency staff if required • Provide Agency with copies of all appraisal reports • Liaison with project engineers and Agency staff as necessary Phase IV-Right of Way Project Certification In addition to the above Scope of Service, Tarvin & Associates will also assist Agency with the preparation of a Project Right of Way Certification. Key Project Personnel Project Manager and Appraiser- R. H. Tarvin SR/WA, IFAS, State Certified General Real Estate Appraiser and Right of Way Agent. -Mr. Tarvin is an experienced Right of Way Project Manager, real estate appraiser with a strong background in the valuation and acquisition of lands required for State and County roads and other public works projects. See Resume attached. Project Scheduling Tarvin& Associates is experienced with projects possessing minimal lead time. Utmost attention will be given to achieving important milestone dates. Areas of critical concern will be highlighted and monitored regularly to insure that schedules are met. Complex parcels will be identified and work will commence on these acquisitions as early as possible. It estimated that it will take four to six month to complete the above tasks depending upon the current level of project readiness. T&A is prepared to start work immediately upon receiving a"Notice to Proceed". Insurance Requirements See attached Thank you for the opportunity to be of service. Since, , c AR & ASSOCIATES R.H. Tarvin SR/WA, IFAS Right of Way Project Manager and Certified General Real Estate Appraiser 000090 229 Miller Way,Arroyo Grande, CA 93420, (805)489-0147, (805)489-9480 FAX EXHIBIT B CITY OF ATASCADERO , COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT t97s 6500 PALMA AVENUE,ATASCADERO,CA 93422 Telephone:(805)461-5020 . Fax:(805)461-7615 October 9, 1999 SUBJECT: Request for Proposal - Garcia Road Bridge Dear Consultant: The City of Atascadero is requesting proposals for the real estate appraisal services required for the acquisition of slope easements and other rights-of-entry. The slope easements and construction easement are required to allow for the replacement of an existing one-lane wooden bridge with a two-lane concrete slab bridge. There are two properties which will be affected by the bridge construction. Access to the properties will be affected by the bridge construction. Driveways to the properties will require reconstruction. The project is funded by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) under the Highway Bridge Reconstruction and Replacement (HBRR) program. The project will be administered by the California Department of Transportation (CalTrans). The bridge is not on the National Highway System (NHS). Acquisitions are not a part of the requested work. The real estate appraisals prepared by the consultand shall meet all requirements of CalTrans and the FHWA. anticipate that the wor i Proposals shall k will consist of, but not be limited to the following five task sections. Task#1 Meet with the City and the design gn engineer as necessary to define the property limits for easements and rights-of-entry. Task#2 Prepare the necessary appraisal maps for all parcels, including maintaining and modifying the appraisal maps as found necessary during the appraisal process. Task#3 Prepare and present written notifications to the affectedro ert owners. p p Y Task#4 Complete the appraisals and present them to the City, Appraisals shall include any additional diagrams and maps necessary to describe the property valuations. Task#5 Presentation to the City of a draft agency Project Certification together with written assurance to the City that the appraisal processes have adhered to all FHWA standards. Throughout the appraisal process, consultant shall maintain such oral and written contact with 000091 the CalTrans District 5 Local Assistance Engineer and the CalTrans Right-of-Way Local Assistance Coordinator as necessary to insure compliance with all FHWA standards. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS The City requires that the consultant have errors and omissions insurance in the amount of $500,000.00 and general liability insurance in the amount of$1,000,000.00. Proof of insurance shall be submitted with the proposal. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS When you submit a proposal for this project, please provide three copies including the following information: 1. A detailed statement of the scope of work, based on the above requirements. 2. A estimated fee for the scope of work described. 3. A statement that the proposal shall remain firm for 60 days following the submission due date. 4. A schedule of hourly fees. 5. Proof of required insurance coverages. 6. A statement of qualifications to undertake an appraisal project of this magnitude. 7. References for not more than five FHWA funded projects. Include current telephone numbers for reference contact persons. 9. An estimate of the total time required to complete the project, with intermediate milestone tasks. CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT , The successful bidder will be required to sign a contract with the City. A copy of the City's standard Consultant Services Agreement is attached. The agreement contains specific requirements for insurance coverages and other legal responsibilities. Submittal of a proposal will indicate consultant's acceptance of the agreement conditions. A copy of the City's standard agreement is attached. PROPOSAL DUE DATE Proposals shall be sumitted by 5:00 p.m. on October 21, 1999 to the City IClerk at her office in the City Administration Building Room 208, 6500 Palma Avenue, Atascadero. No telephone or FAXed proposals will be accepted. Sincerely, John B. Neil Assistant City Engineer Enc 1:\9410TDOCUMENT\appraiser RFP.wpd 00©092 Mail to: Dennis E. Greene, Inc. 605 15th Street Paso Robles, CA 93446 Malone Anderson & Associates 145 South Halcyon Road Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 Schenberger Taylor McCormick Decker 1411 Marsh San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Tavin & Associates 229 Miller Way Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 1A9410ADOCUMENIIappraiser RFP.wpd 000093 ITEM NUMBER: A- 10 _ DATE: 11/23/99 isi 5540 Hertnosilla Avenue Jay Von B►arwen AtW42A�rC. (805)461-34951 jvb@theodnet October 26, 1999 Mr. Geoff English City of Atascadero 6500 Palma Avenue, Room#106 Adascadero,CA 93422 Dear Sir, Attached you will find the Application for Indoor Facility Reservation Form which you provided me with. I am planning to have a graduation celebration for my fiancee,Michele Dalton,on Saturday, December 11, 1999 from approximately 4:30 pm until 9:00 pm. I have requested the room for an hour on either side of that time window in order for us to decorate and clean up. We are planning to serve wine and beer to the adults present and request your permission to do so. We have arranged for a box that wlH contain the beer keg to prevent ice leakage onto the floor, and win be pouring local wines from the bottle. Of course, we will have non-alcoholic beverages available for the children and thosv adutts who prefer them. Should you have any further questions, please feel free to contact me at(805)461-3495 or Michele's mother, Susan Maka, at(800)538-7973 ext. 186. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Jay Von Bargen 000095 i CITY>OF.ATASCADERO ._._ 6500 Palma Avenue-Rm #106 n "" "" _r Atascadero, CA 93422 805 461 5000 Y APPLICATION FOR INDOOR FACILITY RESERVATION Name: ! 1 A (ication Date Last First pp ' Address. tCity' tC Crt"i( r� -t :state - Zrp - . � 3 _ Phone. (work) r lc ' 5s� r'i (ext.) �. Phone: (home) i f%l.- e Chit ('LEASE CHECK ONE. Individual , Q Organization ❑ $u5ine55 El Non-Profit IF REPRESENTING AN ORGANIZATION, COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING: . . .. Name of Organization or Ouieness Purpose: Address i � Phone Number. Applicant's relationship to Entity: ,IRS N0. (if:non=profit) EVENT DESCRIPTION:'�T(,(,iet i.t':. i011 �'{ �= L EVENT DATE: 1 i+ t �,�1E,f��� MONTH . DAY , :.., .' .YEAR _ ROOM(5) TIME TIME. TOTAL_ RATE AMOUNT. Room 102 IN OUT HOURS DUE .14 (Conference 24/ Aeoembly49) �TUN3� `J-00P ID:` Rotunda - • .. . (Conference 120/ A55embly 250) CLEANING FEE:(NON-REFUNDABLE)` Club Room . • (Conference 49 / Aooembly 49) SECURITY DEP051T: (REFUNDABLE) _ SUB-TOTAL: Kitchen_ , RE5ERVATION DEP051T Z : ElYouth Center AMOUNT DUE MAKE PAYABLE T0:CITY OF ATASCADERO' Expected attendance Number of AduIto., -Number of Youth: 10 Total Attendance Number: Will there be an Entrarfce fee. Yee ' . No Amount. $ 'Wi(I Alcoholic beverages be sold: ❑ Yes No If yes, Requires Alcoholic BeverageS.License Wilt Alcoholic beverages be'served. Yes ❑ No Name of Security Company: Will food be sold:` Yes No If yes,_Requires County Hea lth Permit Will food be Served by a Caterer: ❑Yes No Caterer's Name: Willa live band f D:J Perform,:.. ❑ Yes ; ., No Hours: From: AM/PM,'.To ?, AM/PM Will there be vending Qperation:. ❑ Yes No. ff yes,add1tional information required Will there be videatap� - 'ffilmin3: Q Yes` t�[o lfyes,permitrec�uired Commercial use only EQUIPMENT NEEpED: RECTANGULAR TABLES;# _CHAIRS:# ` ❑ TVNCR. [IF", 1 ODIUM OVERHEAD PROJECTOR/5CREEN5 Q'5LJDE PROJECTOR . ; ❑ P/A SYSTEM ❑ OTHER ' a Alcoholic.Beverag:e5`approved by Gity Council ONLY I understand that this Is an application for space &dates-ONLY_&that this is not:a confirmation,- Signature. -- Date: ` f i� - White Fil - IlowrOrigi prig`' ept f Staff Pink :Staff -.:_Goldenrod:.Ap�li ant ITEM NUMBER: A- 11 DATE: 11/23/99 1918 i a 1978 Atascadero City Council Staff Report - Community Services Department Request by the Atascadero Rotary Club to modify the Lighting Plan for Atascadero Lake Park RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Council approve a request by the Atascadero Rotary Club to modify the Lighting Plan for Atascadero Lake Park by installing one additional decorative lamppost in the approximate location of a recently removed PG&E power-pole with a streetlight fixture. DISCUSSION: The Atascadero Rotary Club has approached City staff, requesting to locate one additional decorative lamppost in Atascadero Lake Park. Previously, on Tuesday, September 13, 1999, the City Council approved a plan by the Rotary Club of Atascadero to install thirteen(13) new lights in Atascadero Lake Park. Approval for the approximate locations for these thirteen additional lights was based on an analysis of the existing park lighting. An inventory of the existing lights included a PG&E power-pole, with a standard streetlight fixture that was located near the entrance of the Charles Paddock Zoo. Staff recommended that this light be retained as it provided some lighting for the entrance of the Zoo and for the Morro Road Parking Lot. When PG&E recently completed the Morro Road power- line underground project, this power-pole and light fixture was removed and not replaced. Staff recommends that the City Council Rotary Club be allowed to place a decorative lamppost in this approximate location. Staff feels that light in this location is necessary and would be consistent with staff s lighting evaluation and would be consistent with potential modifications to the park lay-out resulting from a future Master Plan. This decorative lamppost would be identical to the previously approved lights and be fitted with high-pressure sodium (HPS) light bulb with the turquoise color lampposts of the existing decorative lampposts. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this request will have no fiscal impact on the City of Atascadero 000097 ITEM NUMBER: A- 11 DATE: 11/23/99 ALTERNATIVES: No alternative recommended. • ATTACHMENTS: Map indicating the location of the proposed location of the additional decorative lamppost • 000098 IL Lij Iij o 0000000000 cn \`��.' v . (� W - a O ) U) . SL E au r x c A C-6 0000.3 ITEM NUMBER: A-12— DATE: —12DATE: 11/23/99 i9is A i9�» Atascadero City Council City Treasurer's Report Annual Review and Adoption of Investment Policy RECOMMENDATION: City Treasurer recommends the City Council approve the attached revised Investment Policy with the changes and additions as recommended by the City Finance Committee. DISCUSSION: The City Investment Policy requires that, "The Statement of Investment Policy shall be submitted annually to the council for adoption." The primary reasons for the changes in the policy are: • Clarification of existing policy. 0 Further delineation of responsibility and authority. • Delineating due diligence requirements for safekeeping and custodial agents. • Further defining of potential conflicts that interfere with due diligence responsibilities. Additions to the policy are underlined and deletions are slasbed. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. FINANCE COMMITTEE MEMBERS: George Luna - Council Member Wendy Scalise - Council Member David Graham - City Treasurer Wade McKinney - City Manager Rachelle Rickard - Director of Administrative Services 000100 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. OVERVIEW................................................................................ 1 Introduction Scope General Objectives Standards of Care II. INVESTMENT AUTHORITY AND RESPONSIBILITIES .. ..................... 4 Authorized Investment Officers Investment Procedures Internal Control Conflicts of Interest III. ELIGIBLE FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS............................................ 6 Selection of Eligible Financial Institutions Safekeeping and Custody IV. AUTHORIZED INVESTMENTS................................................. ..... 8 Investment Types Due Diligence Requirement Prohibited Investments Legislative Changes V. INVESTMENT PARAMETERS........................................................ 11 Diversification Maximum Maturities VI. CASH MANAGEMENT................................................................. 12 VII. EVALUATION OF INVESTMENT PERFORMANCE............................ 13 Benchmark Comparison VIII. INVESTMENT REPORTING.......................................................... 14 IX. INVESTMENT POLICY REVIEW AND ADOPTION............................. 15 X. APPENDICES Appendix l: Glossary... . ....................................................... 16 Appendix 2: Related Government Codes..................................... 24 000102 1. OVERVIEW INTRODUCTION The purpose of this document is to provide guidelines for the prudent investment of the City's temporarily idle cash and outline policies for maximizing the efficiency of the City's cash management system. The ultimate goal is to enhance the economic status of the City while protecting its pooled cash. SCOPE Included in the scope of the City's investment policy are the following major guidelines and practices which are to be used in achieving the City's primary investment objectives: Investment Authority and Responsibilities Eligible Financial Institutions Authorized Investments Investment Parameters Cash Management Evaluation of Investment Performance Investment Reporting Investment Policy Review and Adoption It is intended that this policy cover all funds and investment activities under the direct authority of the City. These fiends are accounted for in the Annual Financial Report and include the general fund, special revenue funds, debt service funds, capital project funds, enterprise funds, internal service funds and agency funds, including any Redevelopment Agency funds in the Cities pooled cash funds. Subject to the prior written consent and approval of the City Treasurer and City Manager, J financial assets held and invested by trustees or fiscal agents are excluded from this policy. However, such assets are nevertheless subject to the regulations established by the State of California pertaining to investments by local agencies as well as the related bond indentures. 1 000103 1. OVERVIEW (continued) GENERAL OBJECTIVES The primary objectives, in priority order, of investment activities shall be safety, liquidity, and yield: 1. Safety Safety of principal is the foremost objective of the investment program. Investments shall be undertaken in a manner that seeks to ensure the preservation of capital in the overall portfolio. The objective will be to mitigate credit risk and interest rate risk. a. Credit Risk The City will minimize credit risk, the risk of loss due to the failure of the security issuer or backer,by: • Limiting investments to the safest types of securities • Pre-qualifying the financial institutions, broker/dealers, intermediaries, and advisers with which the City will do business • Diversifying the investment portfolio so that potential losses on individual securities will be minimized. b. Interest Rate Risk The City will minimize the risk that the market value of securities in the portfolio will fall due to changes in general interest rates,by: • Structuring the investment portfolio so that securities mature to meet cash requirements for ongoing operations, thereby avoiding the need to sell securities on the open market prior to maturity • Investing operating funds primarily in shorter-term securities, money market mutual funds, or similar investment pools 2. Liquidity The investment portfolio shall remain sufficiently liquid to meet all operating requirements that may be reasonably anticipated. This is accomplished by structuring the portfolio so that securities mature concurrent with cash needs to meet anticipated demands (static liquidity). Furthermore, since all possible cash demands cannot be anticipated, the portfolio should consist largely of securities with active secondary or resale markets (dynamic liquidity). A portion of the portfolio also will be placed in money market mutual funds or local government investment pools which offer same-day liquidity for short term funds. 2 0001011 1. OVERVIEW (continued) GENERAL OBJECTIVES (continued) 3. Yield The investment portfolio shall be designed with the objective of attaining a market rate of return throughout budgetary and economic cycles,taking into account the investment risk constraints and liquidity needs. Return on investment is of secondary importance compared to the safety and liquidity objectives described above. The core of investments are limited to relatively low risk securities in anticipation of earning a fair return relative to the risk being assumed. For purposes of comparing alternative investments all yields should be converted to a "money market" equivalent yield. Securities shall not be sold prior to maturity with the following exceptions: a. A security with declining credit may be sold early to minimize loss of principal. b. A security swap would improve the quality,yield, or target duration in the portfolio. c. Liquidity needs of the portfolio require that the security be sold. STANDARDS OF CARE The City operates its pooled idle cash investments under the "Prudent Person Rule" which obligates a fiduciary to ensure that: "...investment shall be made with the exercise of that degree of judgment and care, under circumstances then prevailing, which persons of prudence, discretion and intelligence exercise in the management of their own affairs, not for speculation but for investment considering the probable safety of their capital as well as the probable income to be derived." Investment officers acting in accordance with written procedures and this investment policy and exercising due diligence shall be relieved of personal responsibility for an individual security's credit risk or market price changes, provided deviations from expectations are reported in a timely fashion and the liquidity and the sale of securities are carried out in accordance with the terms of this policy. 3 000105 II. INVESTMENT AUTHORITY AND RESPONSIBILITIES AUTHORIZED INVESTMENT OFFICERS Idle cash management and investment transactions are the responsibility of the City Treasurer or designee. The City Council has authorized the following officials to undertake investment transactions on behalf of the City: City Treasurer City Manager Director of Administrative Services The Finance Review Committee, consisting of the City Treasurer, City Manager, Director of Administrative Services and two (2) members of the City Council, shall meet at least semi- annually to discuss the status of current investments, strategies for future investment, and other investment matters deemed relevant, and shall report to the City Council as necessary. The City Attorney shall, as required by Government Code section 36518, review the bonding requirement for the City Treasurer on an annual basis. INVESTMENT PROCEDURES The authorized investment officers as stated above, in accordance with the City of Atascadero Investment Policy, are responsible for administering an investment program which: • Adheres to the Statement of Investment Policy • Prioritizes safety and liquidity • Determines risk and optimizes return • Provides for a system of due diligence in making investment decisions. INTERNAL CONTROL The Director of Administrative Services is responsible for establishing and maintaining an internal control structure designed to ensure that the assets of the City are protected from loss, theft or misuse. The internal control structure shall be designed to provide reasonable assurance that these objectives are met. The concept of reasonable assurance recognizes that (1) the cost of a control should not exceed the benefits likely to be derived and (2) the valuation of costs and benefits requires estimates and judgments by management. 4 000106 II. INVESTMENT AUTHORITY AND RESPONSIBILITIES (continued) INTERNAL CONTROL (continued) Accordingly, the Director of Administrative Services shall establish a process for an annual independent review by an external auditor to assure compliance with policies and procedures. The internal controls shall address the following points: • Control of collusion • Separation of transaction authority from accounting and record keeping • Custodial safekeeping • Avoidance of physical delivery securities • Clear delegation of authority to subordinate staff members • Written confirmation of transactions for investments and wire transfers • Development of a wire transfer agreement with the lead bank and third party custodian CONFLICTS OF INTEREST The City adopts the following policy concerning conflicts of interest: 1. Officers and employees involved in the investment process shall refrain from personal business activity that could conflict with proper execution of the investment program or which could impair their ability to make impartial investment decisions. 2. Officers and employees involved in the investment process shall disclose to the City Clerk any material financial interest in financial institutions that conduct business with the City of Atascadero and they shall further disclose any large personal financial/investment positions that could be related to the performance of the City's portfolio. 3. Officers shall refrain from undertaking personal investment transactions with the same individual with whom business is conducted on behalf of the City. 4. In making investment decisions the City Treasurer shall be guided by the recommendations of the finance committee and avoid the undue influence of individual City officers and officials. 5 000107 III. ELIGIBLE FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS SELECTION OF ELIGIBLE FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS All financial institutions and broker/dealers and safekeeping/custodial agents who desire to become qualified for investment transactions must supply the following as apprep provide the following documents (as appropriate) for annual review by the City Treasurer : • Audited financial statements • Proof of National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD) certification • Proof of state registration • Completed broker/dealer questionnaire • Certification of having read and understood and agreeing to comply with the City's investment policy. In selecting financial institutions for deposit or investment of funds, the authorized Investment Officers shall consider the credit-worthiness of the institution. 1. Deposits The City will only deposit funds with an institution that has a rating of at least"A" as assigned by an established rating service based on quarterly financial information provided by the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Home Loan Bank Board (i.e., The Financial Directory). Ratings will be monitored on a quarterly basis and any downgrade in rating below "A" will be reported to the Finance Review Committee together with a recommendation for possible action. 2. Brokers/Dealer Investments must be purchased directly from the issuer, from an institution licensed by the state as a broker-dealer, from a member of a federally regulated securities exchange, or from a brokerage firm designated as a primary government dealer by the Federal Reserve Bank. Broker/dealers shall be selected by creditworthiness (e.g., a minimum capital requirement of$10,000,000 and at least five years of operation). 3. Safekeeping and Custodial Institutions Safekeeping and custodial institutions shall be selected on the basis of credit worthiness with a minimum of capitalization of$100,000,000 and at least 5 years of operation. Safekeeping and custodial institutions must be fiduciaries of the City and independent of any broker/dealers. All safekeeping and custodial arrangements shall require written agreements. All safekeeping and custodial agreements shall be reviewed by the City Treasurer and Director of Administrative Services and approved by the City Attorney prior to conducting any investment activities. From time to time, the investment officer may choose to invest in instruments offered by minority and community financial institutions. In such situations, a waiver to the above criteria may be granted. All terms and relationships will be fully disclosed prior to purchase and will be reported to the appropriate entity on a consistent basis and should be consistent with state or local law. These types of investment purchases should be approved by City Council in advance. 6 000108 III. ELIGIBLE FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS (continued) The authorized Investment Officers will maintain a file of the broker/dealers and authorized safekeeping/custodial institutions with which it is currently doing business which will include the firm name, contact person, telephone number, and current audited financial statements. SAFEKEEPING AND CUSTODY All trades where applicable will be executed by delivery vs. payment (DVP) to ensure that securities are deposited in an eligible financial institution prior to the release of funds. Securities will be held by a third-party custodian as evidenced by safekeeping receipts. i 000109 IV. AUTHORIZED INVESTMENTS INVESTMENT TYPES Investment of City funds is governed by the California Government Code Sections 16429.1 and 53601. Investments may not have a term or maturity at the time of investment of longer than that authorized by Section 53601 or five years unless the City Council has granted prior express authority. It should be noted that while the Government Code specifies the maximum percentage of the portfolio which may be held in each type of investment at any one time, fluctuations in the portfolio balance will prevent strict adherence to such restrictions. Therefore, percentage limitations shall apply to investments at the time of purchase. Consistent with the GFOA Policy Statement on State and Local Laws Concerning Investment Practices, the following investments will be permitted by this policy and are those defined by state and local law where applicable: 1. State Treasurer's Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) Government Code Section 16429.1: The City may invest a maximum of $20 million pursuant to LAIF policy (effective 9/11/94). LAIF is a diversified investment pool administered by the California State Treasurer. Monies invested with LAIF are pooled with State monies in order to earn the maximum rate of return consistent with safe and prudent treasury management. The LAIF handbook including LAIF policies and restrictions shall be available in the City's Administrative Services Department. A thorough investigation of the pool is required on a continual basis. (See Due Diligence Requirement on page 10.) 2. U.S. Government Issues Government Code Sections 53601 (b) and (e): A maximum forty percent (40%) of the City's portfolio may be invested in U.S. government obligations, U.S. government agency obligations, and U.S. government instrumentality obligations, which have a liquid market with a readily determinable market value. 3. Bankers Acceptances Government Code Section 53601 (f): Up to thirty percent (30%) of the City's portfolio may be invested in Bankers Acceptances which are defined as bills of exchange or time drafts, drawn on and accepted by a commercial bank, which are eligible for purchase by the Federal Reserve System, although no more than 15% of the portfolio may be invested in Bankers Acceptances with any one commercial bank. Additionally, the maturity periods cannot exceed 270 days; however, Bankers Acceptances are seldom marketed with maturities in excess of 180 days. Is 8 000110 IV. AUTHORIZED INVESTMENTS (continued) INVESTMENT TYPES (continued) 4. Commercial Paper Government Code Section 53601 (g): A maximum of twenty percent (20%) of the City's portfolio may be invested in highest tier(e.g. A-1, P-1, F-1 or D-1 or higher) commercial paper as rated by Moody's or Standard and Poor's rating service. Issuing corporations must be organized and operating in the United States, have $500 million total assets, and have at least an "A" rating (by Moody's or Standard and Poor's) on debt other than commercial paper. The maturity period cannot exceed 1 year. The 20% of portfolio limitation may be increased to 30% if the dollar-weighted average maturity of the entire amount does not exceed 31 days. "Dollar-weighted average maturity" means the sum of the amount of each outstanding commercial paper investment multiplied by the number of days to maturity, divided by the total amount of outstanding commercial paper. 5. Certificates of Deposit and Passbook Savings Accounts Government Code Section 53601: There is no limit as to the amount of the investment portfolio that may be deposited in certificates of deposit or passbook savings account. The minimum requirements for Certificate of Deposit investments shall be: • Investments and accrued interest shall never exceed the FDIC insurance limit in , any one institution. • Qualified institutions must have a minimum equity ratio of 6% and a minimum capitalization of $10,000,000. California law requires that public funds be collateralized. The depository must secure its public fund accounts by maintaining with the agent of the depository government 0 securities having a market value of at least one hundred ten percent (110%) of the value of the public find accounts. If a depository uses mortgage-backed securities (i.e., promissory notes secured by first mortgages or first deeds of trust) as collateral for public deposits, the market value of the mortgage-backed securities must be at least one hundred fifty percent (150%) of the value of the public fund accounts. The collateralization requirement may be waived to the extent that funds are federally insured (currently up to $100,000 per institution). For deposits equivalent to the maximum insured amount, security may also be waived for interest accrued on the deposit provided the interest is computed by the depository on the average daily balance of the deposits, paid monthly and computed on a 360-day basis. 6. Money Market Mutual Funds Government Code Section 53601 (k): Shares of beneficial interest issued by diversified management companies that are money market funds registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. Sec 80a-1 et seq.) 9 000111 V. AUTHORIZED INVESTMENTS (continued) DUE DILIGENCE REQUIREMENT As stated, a thorough investigation of an investment pool or mutual fund is required prior to investing and on a continual basis. At a minimum, the following information shall be on file, reviewed annually for each pool and/or mutual fund: 1. A description of eligible investment securities, and a written statement of investment policy and objectives. 2. A description of interest calculations, how interest is distributed, and how gains and losses are treated. 3. A description of how these securities are safeguarded (including the settlement process), and how often these securities are priced and the program audited. 4. A description of who may invest in the program, how often, and the size of deposits and withdrawals. 5. A schedule for receiving statements and portfolio listings. 6. Whether reserves, retained earnings, etc. are utilized by the pool/fund. 7. A fee schedule, and when and how fees are assessed. 8. Whether the pool/fiend is eligible for bond proceeds and/or will it accept such proceeds. PROHIBITED INVESTMENTS The City of Atascadero shall not invest in any investment instrument/pool/fund unless specifically allowed under the "Investment Types" section of this policy. The City of Atascadero shall comply with Government Code Section 53631.5 which states "A local agency shall not invest any funds pursuant to this article in inverse floaters, range notes, or interest-only strips that are derived from a pool of mortgages" and that "A local agency shall not invest any funds pursuant to this article in any security that could result in zero interest accrual if held to maturity." LEGISLATIVE CHANGES Any State of California legislative action that further restricts allowable maturities, investment types or percentage allocations will be incorporated into the City of Atascadero Investment Policy and supersede any and all previous applicable language. If the City is holding an investment that is subsequently prohibited by a legislative change, the City may hold that investment, if it is deemed prudent by the Finance Review Committee, until the maturity date to avoid an unnecessary loss. 10 000112 V. INVESTMENT PARAMETERS DIVERSIFICATION The investments shall be diversified by: • Limiting investments to avoid overconcentration in securities from a specific issuer or business sector (excluding Local Agency Investment Fund and U.S. Treasury securities), • Limiting investment in securities that have higher credit risks, • Investing in securities with varying maturities, and • Continuously investing a portion of the portfolio in readily available funds such as local government investment pools (LAIF), or money market funds to ensure that appropriate liquidity is maintained in order to meet ongoing obligations. MAXIMUN MATURITIES In order to minimize the impact of market risk, it is intended that all investments will be held to maturity. To the extent possible, the City shall attempt to match its investments with anticipated cash flow requirements. Unless matched to a specific cash flow, the City will not directly invest in securities maturing more than five (5) years from the date of purchase or in accordance with state and local statutes and ordinances. The City shall adopt weighted average maturity limitations (which often range from 90 days to 3 years), consistent with the investment objectives. Investments may be sold prior to maturity for cash flow, appreciation purposes or in order to limit losses, however, no investment shall be made based solely on earnings anticipated from capital gains. Because of inherent difficulties in accurately forecasting cash flow requirements, a portion of the portfolio should be continuously invested in readily available funds. ii 000113 VI. CASH MANAGEMENT In order to obtain a reasonable return on public funds, the following cash management practice will be followed: 1. Maintain maximum investment of all City funds not required to meet immediate cash flow needs. 2. Except for cash in certain restricted and special funds, the City will consolidate cash balances from all fiords to maximize investment earnings. Investment income will be allocated to the various funds based on their respective participation and in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. 3. Maximize the City's cash flow through immediate deposit of all receipts,use of direct deposit when available, and appropriate timing of payment to venders. 4. Maximize cash flow information available through the use of only one operating bank account. 5. Daily cash flow management shall be the responsibility of the Director of Administrative Services in conjunction with the City Treasurer. 12 000314 II. EVALUATION OF INVESTMENT PERFORMANCE The investment portfolio will be designed to obtain a market average rate of return during budgetary and economic cycles, taking into account the City's investment risk constraints and cash flow needs. BENCHMARK COMPARISON The investment portfolio shall be structured to optimize the return given the risk constraints and cash flow needs. Investment performance shall be continually monitored and evaluated by the Finance Review Committee. Investment performance statistics and activity reports shall be generated on a monthly basis for presentation to the City Council. In evaluating the performance of the City's portfolio in complying with this policy, it is expected that yields on City investments will regularly meet or exceed the average return on a two-year U.S. Treasury Note. However, a variance of .5% positive or negative from the benchmark is considered reasonable by the Finance Review Committee for evaluation purposes. 13 000115 VIII. INVESTMENT REPORTING The City Treasurer shall prepare and submit a monthly investment report to the City Council. This report will include the following elements relative to the investments held at month-end. 1. Face value. 2. Security description. 3. Coupon rate. 4. Maturity date. 5. Investment rating. 6. Investment type. 7. Purchase date. 8. Cost of security. 9. Purchase yield. 10. Estimated market value. 11. Amortized premium/discount. 12. Listing of investment by maturity. 13. Statement relating the report to the Statement of Investment Policy. 14. Statement that there are sufficient funds to meet the next six months' obligations. i 14 00011f3 IX. INVESTMENT POLICY REVIEW AND ADOPTION The Statement of Investment Policy shall be submitted annually to the City Council for adoption. The policy shall be reviewed at least annually to ensure its consistency with the overall objectives of the City and its relevance to current law and financial and economic trends. Any modifications made thereto must be approved by the City Council. 15 000117 ITEM NUMBER: B—1 e a' ! � w � DATE: 11/23/99 ��ASSCA,n�o/% Atascadero City Council Staff Report— Community Development Department Atascadero State Hospital / Chalk Mountain Golf Course Annexation Annexation Hearing ANX 99001 RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends the Council, acting as the Conducting Authority: 1. Summaries the LAFCo resolution of determination on the reorganization. 2. Open the Public Hearing and allow anyone wishing to protest the annexation to make statements and submit or withdraw written protests to the Clerk. 3. Close the Public Hearing and recess the meeting to allow the Clerk to determine the value of written protests filed and not withdrawn. 4. Reconvene the meeting and have the Clerk report the value of the written protests that have been filed. 5. Adoption of Resolution 1999-068 making a finding regarding the value of the written protests filed. DISCUSSION: Background: The City Council adopted Resolution 1999-056 on September 28, 1999 to initiate an application to LAFCo for annexation of 884± acres of territory comprising the State Hospital and Chalk Mountain Golf Course. LAFCo will hold a hearing on November 18, 1999 to consider the annexation request. Since there are more than 12 registered voters within the territory, LAFCo is required to refer the matter back to the City to determine if the voters residing within the territory oppose the annexation. This so called protest hearing must be conducted by the City Council which acts as the "conducting authority" for the proceedings. 000118 ITEM NUMBER: B—I DATE: 11/23/99 Summary: In accordance with the Cortese-Knox Local Government Reorganization Act, the City Clerk has provided notice to all registered voters and landowners within the territory. The purpose of this hearing is to determine the number of protests that exist within the territory. Depending on the number of protests, the Council will adopt a resolution with one the three following findings that will be returned to LAFCo. (1) Terminate proceedings if a majority protest exists. (2) Order the change of organization or reorganization subject to confirmation by the registered voters residing within the affected territory if written protests have been filed and not withdrawn by either of the following: (A)At least 25 percent,but less than 50 percent,of the registered voters residing in the affected territory. (B)At least 25 percent of the number of owners of land who also own at least 25 percent of the assessed value of land within the affected territory. (3) Order the change of organization or reorganization without an election if written protests have been filed and not withdrawn by less than 25 percent of the registered voters or less than 25 percent of the number of owners of land owning less than 25 percent of the assessed value of land within the affected territory. Under recommendations, staff has identified the meeting process that is required for a protest hearing. The Council must first summarize LAFCo's determination for the annexation. The next step is to open the public hearing and allow anyone who wishes to either submit or withdraw written protest to do so. State law is very specific about the content of a valid protest. A valid protest shall have a date, name, signature and address as it appears on the affidavit of registration. Once the public hearing is closed the value of the protests must be determined by the City Clerk. Staff is recommending that the meeting be recessed to allow the Clerk time to review the protests received. Once the Clerk has completed this review, the meeting should be reconvened and the Clerk should report the value of the protests received. Depending on the number of protests received the Council will adopt the appropriate findings. Unlike most items the Council reviews during a public hearing, this item is ministerial in nature and there is no discretion for Council action. In other words, the Council must a adopt a resolution to be forwarded to LAFCo regardless of the outcome. There is no ability for the Council to change the annexation project or affect the results of the protest. Conclusion: • The protest hearing is a ministerial action to determine the number of protests that exist within the territory and report the finding to LAFCo. • The attached resolution needs to be adopted consistent with the Clerk's determination regarding the value of protests received. FISCAL IMPACT: Annexation of the territory would add the population of the State Hospital to the City for purposes of establishing population, and per capita subvention monies from the State. With the Hospital's current population, the City could expect to receive an additional State allocation of 000119 ITEM NUMBER: B-1 DATE: 11/23/99 approximately $60,000. The City would also receive a minor amount of money from the sales tax revenues of the golf course. This revenue would help the City off set some the existing impacts these facilities create on City streets and services. ALTERNATIVES: 1. If the Clerk and/or Council is unable to determine the value of the protests received the Council may continue the protest hearing to a date not to exceed 60-days. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Attachment 1: Annexation Diagram 2. Attachment 2: Draft Resolution of Conducting Authority 000 20 ITEM NUMBER: DATE: 11/23/99 Attachment 1: Annexation Diagram ANX 99001 Atascadero State Hospital/Chalk Mountain Golf Course Annexation Ci he Riv Annexation Area #5 +/- 884 otal acres Chalk Mountain Ata5cadero Golf Course 5tate Ho5vltal t� He,..lmann Park DELL BMW t*•ccr �9 l Pa' m reek r Park J a a Po QyI`-0 ATASCADERO STATE HOSPITAL/ CHALK MOUNTAIN GOLF COURSE ANNEXATION ARE. #5 ANNEXATION BOUNDARY NOT TO SCALE CITY OF ATASGAOERO -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 000121 Draft Council Resolution 1999-068 Attachment 2: Draft Resolution of Conducting Authority ANX 99001 Atascadero State Hospital/Chalk Mountain Golf Course Annexation DRAFT COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 1999-068 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO ACTING AS THE CONDUCTING AUTHORITY TO DETERMINE THE VALUE OF WRITTEN PROTEST FILED AGAINST ANNEXATION NO. 5 TO THE CITY OF ATASCADERO (STATE HOSPITAL AND OTHER PUBLIC LANDS) (ANX 99001) WHEREAS, the City of Atascadero initiated proceedings pursuant to the Cortese-Knox Local Government Reorganization Act of 1995 commencing with Section 56000 of the California Government Code, for reorganization which would annex territory to the City of Atascadero that is currently unincorporated territory of San Luis Obispo County; and, WHEREAS, the territory proposed to be reorganized is inhabited, and a map of the boundaries of the territory are attached hereto as Exhibits A and by this reference incorporated herein; and, WHEREAS, the LAFCo conducted a public hearing to consider the reorganization on November 18, 1999, following which the Commission adopted a resolution approving the reorganization and referring the item back to City of Atascadero to conduct a protest hearing; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of Atascadero, acting as the Conducting Authority held a duly noticed public hearing to determine the value of written protests within the territory; and, NOW, THEREFORE,the City Council hereby takes the following actions: SECTION 1. Finding. The Council finds the following (adopt one the of following): (1) The written protests that have been filed and not withdrawn are less than 25 percent of the registered voters or less than 25 percent of the number of owners of land owning less than 25 percent of the assessed value of land within the affected territory. (2) The written protests have been filed and not withdrawn are either of the following: (A) At least 25 percent, but less than 50 percent, of the registered voters residing in the affected territory. (B)At least 25 percent of the number of owners of land who also own at least 25 percent of the assessed value of land within the affected territory. 000122 Draft Council Resolution 1999-068 (3) The written protests have been filed and not withdrawn are 50 percent or more of the voting power of the voters residing within the territory. SECTION 2. Determination. The City Council hereby makes the following determination regarding the annexation of the territory as shown on Exhibit A and B (adopt on the of following):. (1) The change of reorganization is ordered without an election. (2) The change of reorganization is ordered subject to confirmation by the registered voters residing within the affected territory. (3) The termination of proceedings for reorganization is ordered.. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ADOPTED: By: Ray Johnson, Mayor Attest: Marcia M. Torgerson, City Clerk Approved as to form: Roy A. Hanley, City Attorney 00012.3 Draft Council Resolution 1999-068 Exhibit A: Annexation Map Draft Resolution 1999-056 ANX 990011 ZC 99009 Atascadero State Hospital/Chalk Mountain Golf Course Annexation d/ i °'Pdc�hc R °ds ever i Annexation Area #5 +/- 884 otal acres Daik Mountain Atascadero r� Golf Course 5tate Ho5p tal 'q < Heilmann Park (� .Wry RANCHO �t ,f DEL BORM STRcr �9l j Park O _ ATASCADERO STATE HOSPITAL l CHALK MOUNTAIN GOLF COURSE ANNEXATION AREA #5 ANNEXATION BOUNDARY NOT TO SCALE CITY OF ATASCADERO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 0001211 ITEM NUMBER: C— I '71&A. 11:11 DATE: 11/23/99 1918q 1978 Atascadero City Council Staff Report - Community Development Department General Plan Update Strategy RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends City Council approve strategy for General Plan update, authorize City Manager to enter into contract with Crawford Multari Clark & Mohr for consulting services, and appropriate $60,000 from unallocated reserves for the update process. DISCUSSION: • Background: On September 14, 1999, the City Council directed staff to implement a comprehensive update of the General Plan. The Council also directed staff to prepare a strategy that would describe how the update would be completed and the associated costs. Staff requested Requests for Qualifications from ten firms in California experienced in general plan updates, and received four responses from firms interested in performing the work. These proposals were used in the previous staff report discussing potential costs of the update. Likewise, staff has contacted a number of cities to determine the more recent trends cities are using in updating general plans. Staff also reviewed guidelines for preparation of general plans published by the Office of Planning and Research. There are a variety of approaches a city can undertake in the update process. Some cities have chosen to completely revise their plans, starting with a community wide goal setting and building the general plan from a new foundation. This is probably the most time consuming and costly of the approaches used. State law does not dictate the format nor process for the update of the general plan, therefore, local jurisdictions may create a process and approach that is best suited for their community. In reviewing the guidelines and approaches other cities have taken, staff has developed the strategy outlined in this report. Staff worked with the firm Crawford, Multari Clark& Mohr, in developing a refined update strategy. Crawford did a variety of work on the last general plan update , including the 1992 EIR for the Land Use Element, 1990 Fiscal Impact Analysis and 1993 Fiscal Element, and has prepared the draft 1999 Safety Element (in conjunction with the County). Staff used the work program, developed in 1987, for the update of the 1980 General Plan as a model for this work program. The 1987 work plan was • designed as a "comprehensive rewrite of the general plan" and was developed as a multi year project. 000125 ITEM NUMBER: C-1 DATE: 11/23/99 THE PRODUCT Consolidated General Plan: Staff is recommending a consolidated general plan whereby all elements are combined into one document. The advantage to this format is that redundancy is minimized; internal consistency is easier to maintain; functionally related goals, objectives, and policies can be grouped together for easier reference, and the general plan "text" can be held to a reasonable size, making the plan easier to understand and to implement. Streamlining to minimize duplication and overlap would be a primary focus. For example, state law requires flooding to be addressed in the land use, open space, conservation and safety elements. In a consolidated plan, it might have a section called "environmental hazards element" which contains a single set of goals and policies addressing issues such as flood control and hazards. Each section of the General Plan would contain a uniform, consistent format and terminology. For example, each section could contain: • Statutory Requirements as defined by State Law • Opportunities and Constraints(Issues) • Goals, Objectives, Policies and Implementation Programs • Glossary(definitions) • Diagrams, pictures and other graphics THE WORK PROGRAM The proposed strategy is designed to meet the following objectives: 1. Consolidation the existing general plan elements into one document and "cleaning up" policy inconsistencies. 2. Update the Housing Element 3. Update Land Use Element and Policies. 4. Conduct environmental review for general plan changes and land use amendments. The proposed strategy is divided into a number of tasks that would be completed during the next 10 to 12 months. Task 1: Existing Context & Identification of Issues and Options: The first task is to consolidate the elements and eliminate any inconstancies that may exist in the various elements. A working paper will be developed that will set out existing policies and implementation in a table format with suggestions for refinement, clarification or further discussion. From the working paper, an Issues and Options Report will be prepared. The report would analyze constraints and opportunities for programmatic changes to existing policies. The report will be taken out to the community, in neighborhood meetings, forums, and other venues to solicit the broadest range of community input regarding the issues and options. Following receipt of public input, an updated report will be prepared for review by the Planning Commission and City Council to finalize direction on policy issues. Task 2: Preparation of Housing Element Update: The land use survey conducted this year will be updated as well as gathering of other base information necessary to conducting a housing assessment. The policy consistency review will be conducted as part of Task 1 and any changes to the housing policies will be in conjunction with Task 1. Staff has learned that the State granted an • extension to 2003 for the County and its jurisdictions to complete the Regional Housinor g Needs 000126 ITEM NUMBER: C- 1 DATE: 11/23/99 Analysis. The Regional Housing Needs Analysis determines each jurisdictions share of affordable housing requirements and is the baseline information for the Housing Element. Staff believes that updating the Housing Element prior to the Regional Housing Needs Analysis will allow the City to have more influence on the future allocation of affordable units to the City by providing realistic data on the inventory and capacity of land for housing. Staff believes that it is necessary to be proactive in the determination of our capacity to achieve regional housing needs, than to react to a mandated housing allocation plan from the State and County. Since the Housing Element is intertwined with the Land Use Element at many levels it is important to update both elements simultaneously. This approach would allow for the refinement of housing policy and the designation of adequate affordable land use areas in conjunction with the land use element and diagram update. If the housing element is not updated in 2000, then the City would have to undertake a comprehensive update in 2003 that could potentially conflict or undermine the land use goals and policies of the 2000 update. While the HCD certification of Housing Element is desirable, it may not be realistic based on the City's current regional needs housing allocation. The primary goal of the update will be to properly position the City to demonstrate a realistic ability to provide affordable housing in 2003. Staff is concerned that the City will be assigned a large housing allocation in 2003 due to the City's statistics, which indicate the second largest population and largest geographically area for a City in the County. The Housing Element update is intended to demonstrate that despite the City's large area, available site for housing of all types is very limited. Task 3: Land Use Diagram Amendments: The Land Use Diagram identifies the highest and best use of lands within the City. In order to provide for the logical and orderly growth of the community over the next 20 years, the Land Use Diagram needs to be updated to identify the proper sites to accommodate this future growth. The growth goals and options of the City will be identified in Task 1 and Task 2. This task will translate the Issues and Option Report and the_Affordable Housing needs into a revised land use plan for the City. The land use element update will include consideration of environmental constraints including slopes, sensitive habitats, flood hazard and infrastructure availability. In addition, several General Plan land use amendment applications have been submitted and not yet processed. These proposed amendments would be concurrently reviewed and analyzed as part of the overall update. Prior to inclusion in the update, the applications will be presented to the Commission and Council for a determination of whether the amendment should be incorporated into the overall land use plan update. The development of the land use alternatives will include a number of workshops and meetings that will allow public input and discussion. New land use policies that support the revised land use diagram will be developed simultaneously with the land use diagrams. It is likely that separate land use diagram and policy alternatives will be produced during this task. These alternatives would be analyzed through the environmental review process (Task 4)to determine the environmental superior alternative. Task 4: Environmental Review. An environmental review will be conducted on three areas, impacts resulting from policy changes, potential changes that may result from new or revised housing objectives, and impacts that may result from the land use amendments. It is assumed that an Environmental Impact Report(EIR) will be required. The exact scope and cost of the Environmental Review will be dependent on the outcome of tasks 1, 2, and 3. The goal of the Environmental Review process will be to prepare an Environmental Document to analyzes the cumulative environmental impacts of all future projects and identifies mitigations or overriding considerations for these impacts. Future development projects that are consistent with the assumptions of the land use element will be limited to environmental review of impacts that are specific to the project. While subsequent project level environmental review will still be required, the scope of this review will be reduced by tiering off of the General Plan EIR. ®0032"1 ITEM NUMBER: C—1 DATE: 11/23/99 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Public participation is a key component of the update process. The process will include numerous "neighborhood" meetings, , town hall meetings, regular updates via newsletter, the City's web site, planning commission and city council hearings. The intent of the public participation process would be to take various work products to the community and ask for input, incorporate the input into policy recommendations and have the recommendations reviewed by the Planning Commission and Council. The various work products would be taken back to the community to see that the desired intent is achieved through the policy documents. TIMING The consultant and staff have developed a schedule that would have tasks 1 and 2 completed by May of next year. Task 3 would begin in April with environmental work being completed within 6 months. It is anticipated that the final update would be completed by the end of 2000. STAFFING & BUDGET Part of the background work leading to the update of the general plan has been completed or is in progress. For example, the base information about existing land uses was compiled during the summer as part of the GIS system setup as well as during CalPoly's project. Interns have compiled data regarding economics and development activity for the past 10 years. The safety element was scheduled to be completed this year in conjunction with the County Safety element, and a draft has been prepared. The remaining information required in the first phase can be developed in house. Additionally, staff has compiled a digest of all current general plan policies into one document that can be easily referenced during the update process. The remaining phases will necessitate contracting with outside consultants, particularly in the analysis tasks relating to circulation, environmental review, etc. Some of the consultant work would be part of existing projects the City is undertaking. For example, the Main Street program will result in recommendations for land use and other modifications to the Downtown Master Plan; the employment survey scheduled for this fall will assist in establishing the need for employment land uses; the sewer master plan and parks and recreation master plan would be programmed as concurrent projects; the update of the zoning ordinance, appearance review guidelines and establishment of a hillside development ordinance and open space ordinance will be developed by staff. Staff is proposing a budget of$120,000 for the entire update process. Tasks 1 and 2 are estimated to cost $60,000 and are proposed to be added to this years budget. The remaining costs would be incorporated into the budget process next fiscal year. It is staffs intent to directly manage the update process to keep the outside costs to a minimum. Staff is recommending that the cost of the General Plan Update and EIR be funded initially by the City and then recouped as a development fee in the future. The exact mechanism for assessing and collecting a fee for the update will be addressed during the process. FISCAL IMPACT: Increase appropriations for FY 1999-2000 by$60,000 • 000128 ITEM NUMBER: C-2 DATE: 11/23/99 Alin Mi 1918 i CAD / Atascadero City Council City Manager's Office Information Bulletin A. Employee Update Nicholas Kennedy Police Officer Hired 11/2/99 Peggy Edwards Temp. Clerical Asst. Hired 11/4/99 0001 9