The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAgenda Packet 11/26/1991 PUBLIC REVIEW COPY PLPASE D4 NOT REMOVE FROM COUNTER AGEND-A ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING ATASCADERO ADMINISTRATION BUILDING ; 6500 PALMA FOURTH FLOOR, ROTUNDA ROOM NOVEMBER 26, 1991 7 :00 P.M. This agenda is prepared and posted pursuant to the require- ments of Government Code Section 54954.2. By listing a topic on this agenda, the City Council has expressed its intent to discuss and act on each item. In addition to any action identified in the brief general description of each item, the action that may be tak- en shall include: A referral to staff with specific requests for information; continuance; specific direction to staff concerning the policy or mission of the item; discontinuance of consideration; authorization to enter into negotiations and execute agreements pertaining to the item•, adoption or approval; and,; disapproval. 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, available for public inspection during I, City Hall business hours. The City Clerk will answerr any questions regarding the agenda. RULES OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: * e 'term on the agenda. Members of audience may speak an an i Y P Y * A person may speak for five (5) minutes. * No one may speak for a second time until everyone wishing to speak has had an opportunity to do so. * No one may speak more, than twice on any item.; * Council Members may question any speaker; thespeaker may respond but, after the allotted time has expired, may not initiate further discussion. * The floor will then be closed to public participation and open for Council discussion. Call to Order Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call City Council Comments 1 COMMUNITY FORUM: The Cit Council values and encourages exchange of ideas and Y 9 9 comments from you, the citizen. The Community Forum period is provided to receive comments from the public on matters other than scheduled agenda items. To increase the effectiveness of Community Forum, the following rules will be enforced: * A maximum of 30 minutes will be allowed for Community Forum, ' unless Council authorizes an extension. * All remarks shall be addressed to Council, as a whole, and not to any individual member thereof. * No person shall be permitted to make slanderous, profane or personal remarks against any Council Member, commissions and staff. A. COMMITTEE REPORTS (The following represent ad hoc or standing committees. Informative status reports will be given, as felt necessary.) : 1 S.L.O. Area Coordinating Council/North Coastal Transit 2. Solid/Hazardous Waste Management Committee 3. Recycling Committee 4. Economic Opportunity Commission 5. City/School Committee 6. Traffic Committee 7. Downtown Interim Sign Committee—(Request to disband com- mittee) 8. County Water Advisory Board 9. Economic Round Table 10. B.I.A. 11. Colony Roads Committee B. CONSENT CALENDAR: All matters listed under Item B, Consent Calendar, are consid- ered to be routine, and will be enacted by one motion in the form listed below. There will be no separate, discussion on these items. A member of the Council or public may, by request, have any item removed from the Consent Calendar, which shall then be reviewed and acted upon separately after the adoption of the Consent Calendar: 1. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - 'OCTOBER 22, 1991 2 CONSOLIDATED TREASURER'S REPORT OCTOBER, 1991 3. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 17-89, 7550 CORTEZ ROAD - Request for time extension on subvidision of 6.25 acres into four lots (Barrett) 2 I 4. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-87, 9505 EL CAMINO REAL - Request for time extension on subdivision of 5.5 acres into eight lots, of which two will be further subdivided into commercial condomin- ium units (Hendrix/Westland Engineering) 5. DIRECT CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE BOARD OF APPEALS VACANCIES (2)` 6. RESOLUTION: NO. 106-91 AUTHORIZING ACCESS TO; SALES AND USE TAX RECORDS PURSUANT TO REVENUE AND TAXATION CODE SECTION 7056 7. RESOLUTION: 108-91 - AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL OF A FUEL EFFICIENT TRAFFIC SIGNAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (FETSM) GRANT APPLICATION C. HEARINGSIAPPEARANCES• 1. LOCAL UNMET TRANSIT AND BIKEWAY NEEDS HEARING , D. REGULAR BUSINESS: ' I. ORDINANCE NO. 235 AMENDING TITLE 6, CHAPTER .6 OF THE ATAS- CADERO MUNICIPAL CODE REGULATING SMOKING IN CITY FACILITIES (Recommend motion to waive reading in full and approve on first reading by title only) 2. ORDINANCE NO. 236 - ADDING CHAPTER 8, "WATERWAY INTRUSIONS", TO TITLE 7 OF THE ATASCADERO MUNICIPAL CODS (Prohibiting certain specified uses in creekways) (Recommend motion to waive reading .in full 'and approve on first reading by title only) 3. ORDINANCE NO. 234 - AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE ;TEXT TO ALLOW AWNINGS AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO CONVENTIONAL SIGNS IN THE DOWNTOWN ZONES (Zone Change 10-91) (Recommend motion to waive reading in full and approve on second reading by title only) 4. LETTER FROM COUNTY CAO REQUESTING JOINT BOARD OF SUPERVISORS/ CITY COUNCILS MEETING E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION: 1., City Council 2. City Attorney 3. City Clerk 4. City Treasurer 5. City Manager • 3 • Item #8-1 Meeting Date: 11/26/91 ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 22, 1991 Mayor Shiers called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilman Lilley. ROLL CALL: Present: Councilmembers Lilley, Borgeson, Nimmo and Mayor Shiers Absent: Councilman Dexter Also Present: Muriel "Micki" Korba, City Treasurer and Lee Raboin, City Clerk Staff Present: Ray Windsor, City Manager; Henry Engen, Community Development Director; Art Montandon, • City Attorney; Andy Takata, Director of Community Services ; Mark Joseph , Administrative Services Director; Bud McHale, Police Chief; Mike McCain, Acting Fire Chief and Robert Malone, Assistant Planner COUNCIL COMMENTS: Mayor Shiers mentioned that the downtown was looking much improved. He reported that Wil-Mar Disposal, American Classic Cars and Wilkins Printing had each installed new, green awnings as part of the signing concept being implemented. The mayor also praised the Atascadero News offices, which have recently been remodeled. Mayor Shiers also reported that he had attended a wine dedication ceremony for the City of Atascadero at April's Flowers on Wednesday,. October 16, 1991. Councilman Lilley indicated that he, while attending the League of California Cities' Annual Conference, had collected information regarding various programs in other cities. He also noted that he had learned of some available funding the City may qualify for in areas of downtown revitalization, safe paths to school and solid waste management. He reported that he would give the packet of CC10/22/91 Page 1 information to the City Manager to disseminate at his discretion. Councilwoman Borgeson reported that she had also attended the Annual Conference and had brought back pamphlets prepared for the public by the City of San Diego outlining various processes and requirements. In addition, she stated that she had requested copies of creek management materials to be forwarded to the City Manager' s office. PROCLAMATION• Mayor Shiers read the proclamation for "Hospice Month", November 1991. COMMUNITY FORUM• Whitey Thorpe, 8025 Santa Ynez, thanked the City for putting back into working order the street light at West Mall and Lewis Avenue. A. COMMITTEE REPORTS (The following represent ad hoc or standing committees. Informative status reports were given, as follows. ) : 1. Recycling Committee - Mayor Shiers reported that the committee would soon be looking for more members and announced that the next meeting would be on Thursday, October 24, 1991 at 4:30 p.m. in Room 102, City Hall. • 2. City/School Committee - Councilman Nimmo reported that the next meeting would be Thursday, October 21, 1991 at 1:30 p.m. 3. Downtown Interim Sign Committee - Councilman Lilley indicated that this committee report would be covered under Regular Business Item #D-5. 4. Economic Round Table - Councilman Lilley reported that the roundtable had met on October 17, 1991 and certain members had accepted assignments to prepare written reports of ideas and concepts proposed during the presentation to Council on September 24, 1991. B. CONSENT CALENDAR: Mayor Shiers read the Consent Calendar, as follows: 1. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 24, 1991 2. SELECTION OF TRAFFIC CIRCULATION STUDY CONSULTANT CC10/22/91 Page 2 • 3. AWARD CONTRACT FOR WASTEWATER PUMPING STATION #5 UPGRADE STUDY 4. AWARD OF BID #15-91 FOR PAVEMENT STRIPING OF VARIOUS CITY STREETS 5. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 12-89, 10785 EL CAMINO REAL - Request for a time extension on subdivision of 10.0 acres into four lots (Colombo/North Coast Engineering) 6. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 23-87, 11605 SAN MARCOS ROAD - Request for a time extension on subdivision of 10.55 acres into two lots containing approximately 5.2 acres each (Vaughan/Vaughan Surveys) 7 . BOARD OF APPEALS VACANCIES--DIRECT CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE 8. UNDERGROUND UTILITIES PROJECT--MORRO ROAD The City Clerk asked that item #1 be continued. Continuance granted by consensus. Councilman Lilley asked that item #7 be pulled for further direction. MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo, seconded by Councilwoman Borgeson to approve the Consent Calendar with the exceptions of items #1 and #7. Re: Item #B-7. BOARD OF APPEALS VACANCIES--DIRECT CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE Councilman Lilley suggested that rather than recruit for two vacancies on the five-member board, that Council consider reducing the board to three members. The City Attorney pointed out that the board is created by provisions set forth in the Uniform Building Code, which specifies certain membership. He noted that reducing the membership may not be possible, but indicated that staff would research the matter. Henry Engen reported that the vacancies occurred because two members, John Grummitt and ,Tim Rogers, objected to the reporting requirements for economic conflict of interest. He explained that Ordinance No. 44 specifies that the board be comprised of one member from the public, two general contractors, one architect or structural engineer and one specialty contractor. He proposed that if it was Council's desire to amend the ordinance, it could be done during revisions to the building code; a matter pending in the work program. CC10/22/91 Page 3 Mayor Shiers indicated that he had no problem with reducing the . membership. By consensus, the matter was continued so that staff could look into the matter of reducing the membership. C. HEARINGSIAPPEARANCES: 1. ORDINANCE 233 - ADDING CHAPTER 5 TO TITLE 4 OF THE ATASCADERO MUNICIPAL CODE REQUIRING THE DISPLAY OF STREET ADDRESS NUMBERS (Recommend motion to waive reading in full and approve on first reading by title only) Chief McCain provided the staff report and recommendation to approve. Mayor Shiers proposed the following additional language to be inserted in Section 5-1. 108 of the ordinance following the word "misdemeanor" : "or infraction, as determined by the City Attorney" . Councilman Nimmo voiced hope that good judgment and understanding on the part of the City would be used in applying rules regarding type, color and size of numbers. Chief McCain advised that the Fire Department would be flexible as long as the numbers are visible. Public Comment• Bill Mazzacane, Chamber of Commerce Director, spoke in support of • the ordinance emphasizing that currently many visitors find it difficult to locate merchants and businesses in the commercial sector. MOTION: By Councilman Lilley, seconded by Councilman Nimmo to adopt Ordinance No. 233 as amended with regard to 5- 1. 108; motion carried unanimously 4:0. D. REGULAR BUSINESS• 1. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 07-91 - AGREEMENT (Plotkin) (Cont'd from 10/8/91) Art Montandon, City Attorney, reported that he had met with the appellant, Mr. Plotkin who was present, and discussed the matter with the City Engineer. He indicated that there had been agreement on two additional conditions of approval on the tentative parcel map, specifically as follows: ( 1) Developer shall remove, or otherwise make legal, the barn located on the property within two years of the approval of the tentative map or the recordation of the final map, whichever is later. (2) Developer shall install or bond for a sidewalk or bike path to be located on one side of CC10/22/91 Page 4 Atascadero Avenue, as determined by the City Engineer. He • explained that whenever the final map is applied for, the City Engineer will determine if it is appropriate at that time that the applicant install the improvement or bond for it. Continuing, the City Attorney reported that if the City has not yet decided upon which type of improvement it will require, the owner will be obligated to provide a bond in an amount of the estimated cost. MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo, seconded by Councilman Lilley to approve Tentative Parcel Map 07-91 as amended; motion carried 4: 0. 2. RESOLUTION NO. 101-91 - REVISING & ESTABLISHING WRITTEN POL- ICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR USAGE OF PARRS, RECREATION & ZOO FACILITIES, AND REVISING AND ESTABLISHING FEES FOR THEIR USE Andy Takata reported that, following discussions with the City Attorney, staff was proposing that the Council adopt, by resolution, only the recommended fees. Mr. Takata explained that there were some items the City Attorney wanted to review and rewrite and invited Council comments. He stated staff would come back at a future date with revised procedures and policies for adoption. Councilwoman Borgeson asked for clarification about zoo fees. She suggested that the $1.00 charge for children ages 6 through 12 may be too high for needy families and proposed that it be reduced by . 25 or 50 cents. Councilman Nimmo suggested that an easy-to-read publication or handout be prepared outlining the fee structure. Mr. Takata responded to additional questions relating to fees for use of the Pavilion and recommended that these fees be reviewed in six months. Councilwoman Borgeson suggested that language regarding ceremonial occassions be amended. Specific reference to "Christmas" and "Easter", she noted, should be eliminated in an effort to recognize religions other than Christian. The City Attorney agreed, noting this was one of the areas in which he had some concerns. He advised that the City must stay neutral; it cannot promote or discriminate against any religion. Councilman Lilley indicated that he had some concerns with language relating to the distribution of pamphlets and other materials. The City Attorney indicated that he would review this item as well. There were no public comments. CC10/22/91 Page 5 MOTION: By Councilman Lilley, seconded by Councilwoman Borgeson to adopt Resolution No. 101-91 as to fees only, on the • contingency that staff bring back to Council six months from the date of adoption an evaluation of the effect of fees on usage and cost for further consideration; motion unanimously carried. 3. VISITORS & CONFERENCE BUREAU ANNUAL BANQUET REQUEST Mark Joseph reported that there were two issues to address. The first, he explained, was a specific request from the San Luis Obispo County Visitors & Conference Bureau to make an exception to its policy of no alcohol in the fourth floor Rotunda. The second issue, he continued, was should Council reevaluate its "no alcohol" policy. Public Comments: Jonni Eylar, Director, explained that the Visitors & Conference Bureau held a banquet each year in a different community and indicated a desire to have this year' s dinner in Atascadero. She indicated that area wines would be served and requested that Council consider waiving the alcohol restriction for this one event Bill Mazzacane, Director of the Chamber of Commerce, gave verbal support for the request emphasizing that the banquet would be a good way of referring visitors to Atascadero. • Whitey Thorpe opposed the request and urged Council to not give up standards set by City. ----End of Public Testimony---- Individual Council comments followed. Councilman Nimmo indicated that he did not want to permanently lift the restriction, but would be willing to make an exception for this special request and other requests on a case-by-case basis. Councilman Lilley agreed. Councilwoman Borgeson commented that while she was a strong supporter of the Visitors & Conference Bureau, she was opposed to waiving the "no alcohol" policy. Mayor Shiers remarked that he, also, would be willing to make allowances for this and other special occasions on a case-by-case basis. MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo, seconded by Councilman Lilley to make an exception to the policy of no alcohol on the fourth floor Rotunda and allow the Visitors & Conference CC10/22/91 Page 6 r. Bureau to hold its ' banquet; and further that by Council action agree to approve or disapprove future requests on a case-by-case basis; motion carried 3: 1 with Councilwoman Borgeson in opposition. 4. NATIVE TREE ASSOCIATION STEERING COMMITTEE Greg Luke reported that staff was seeking direction from Council as to forming a seven-member steering committee to establish the Native Tree Association. Councilwoman Borgeson asked when a full time Natural Resource Specialist would be hired. The City Manager reported that the position had not been included in this year' s budget and explained that the position of Administrative Analyst was being held by Kelly Heffernon. He added that while Ms. Heffernon did not have the specialized training required of a Natural Resource Specialist, she was providing a wider range of services to the City than the former City Arborist. There were no public comments. Councilman Nimmo suggested that the steering committee consist of five rather than seven individuals. Brief discussion followed regarding the process of choice for selecting members. It was agreed that each councilmember would submit one or two names to the mayor and individuals would be appointed at the next regular meeting. Referencing possible receiver sites for trees, Councilwoman Borgeson indicated that she held in higher priority Highway 101. The Public Works Director reported that Paloma Creek Park can be planted now and advised that it takes some time to work out the necessary details with Caltrans. He assured her that staff did indeed hold that area high on their list. S. DOWNTOWN STREET IDENTIFICATION SIGNS AND SUPPORT POLES (Cont'd from 10/8/91) Councilman Lilley, as a member of the Downtown Sign Committee, introduced the item reporting that the committee was seeking approval for the purchase and installation of traditionally designed street identification signs and poles in the downtown. In addition, he explained, that the committee was proposing the construction of a prototype intersection at Entrada and Palma. Bob Malone, Assistant Planner, provided an overview of the conceptual design of new street identification signs and estimated costs to install 12 new signs and poles. He explained how he CC10/22/91 Page 7 arrived at the potential cost but emphasized that he had not been authorized to go out for specific bids. Greg Luke explained certain road improvements in the downtown area had been approved as part of the annual budget. He suggested that Council might want to go one step further and enhance the downtown area as well as meet other goals in the downtown master plan. He stated that no formal details had been worked on for the proposed prototype intersection. Bob Malone then presented overhead transparencies illustrating the design concept of the prototype intersection. He explained that an entire intersection was envisioned with street sign poles, lights, benches and waste containers. The sidewalks, he continued, would be widened and restructured. Public Comments Eric Greening commented on landscape materials used for street medians. Whitey Thorpe asserted that the proposed sign looks like it was pulled out of the landfill and urged the use of a sign that can be seen. ----End of Public Comments---- Brief discussion followed. • MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo, seconded by Councilwoman Borgeson, to approve going out for RFPs (Request for Proposals) for twenty-one pole sign-lights as indicated in the analysis and also give staff direction to come back with additional proposals with respect to a demonstration intersection; motion carried 4:0. Mayor Shiers called a recess at 8:47 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 9:08 p.m. 6. NO SMOKING ORDINANCE CONSIDERATION The City Manager reported that he was seeking direction from the Council on the level of formal smoking prohibition in public areas. He indicated that he had issued an administrative directive prohibiting smoking in City Hall offices in November of 1989 after receiving a petition from employees. Mr. Windsor noted that Councilman Dexter was absent and indicated that he had an interest in this matter. He then responded to brief questions concerning City employees and smoking practices. CC10/22/91 Page 8 Councilwoman Borgeson asserted that there was no statistical • information in the agenda packet regarding detrimental affects of smoking and secondhand smoke. The Police Chief indicated that the information was available and offered to assemble the data. Public Comments: Eric Greening asked that consideration be given to individuals who are chemically sensitive or allergic to cigarette smoke. Larry Willis, 4255 E1 Camino Real, shared concern for regulation of private businesses. He indicated that he did not disagree with prohibiting it in City buildings but did not favor the idea of a city-wide ban. Whitey Thorpe recognized the factor of addiction and asked the Council to consider the rights of those who are still addicted to the habit of smoking. Marie Lueck, 5005 San Jacinto, stated that most smokers are considerate and businesses should be given the choice of whether they want to allow smoking or not. Eric Greening noted that it was "Red Ribbon Week" and stated that he was concerned about the mixed messages that are being sent out to the young people. He asked how many other addictive habits . would be allowed in City Hall. Marty Kudlac, 4740 Del Rio Road, asserted that there was no medical documentation that proves secondhand smoke is detrimental and stated that if the City were to ban anything, it should ban alcohol. He asked that consideration be given to the impacts a smoking ban would have on local businesses and asked that they be given the opportunity to make their own decision on the matter. ----End of Public Testimony---- Councilman Nimmo indicated that he had no quarrel with a smoking ban in City Hall but was not prepared to go with any further prohibition. Councilman Lilley proposed that Council adopt an ordinance formalizing the administrative directive of "no smoking" in City facilities. Mayor Shiers indicated support. Councilwoman Borgeson commented that she would be willing to consider a ban in some restaurants, adding that she hoped restaurants would conform voluntarily. She proclaimed that the Council has the responsibility to protect the citizenry and reiterated the need for more documentation. Councilman Nimmo stated that there was consensus that smoking is CC10/22/91 Page 9 unhealthy and remarked that he was not in favor of putting staff to a great deal of research. Councilwoman Borgeson debated that if it • has been proven that secondhand smoke is harmful, the Council must address the issue of protecting public health. Chief McHale reiterated that he could provide the Council with documentation. MOTION: By Councilman Lilley, seconded by Mayor Shiers that staff bring back to the Council for adoption an ordinance on the part of the City of Atascadero prohibiting smoking inside public buildings owned and operated by the City of Atascadero. Discussion of the motion: Councilwoman Borgeson pointed out that staff had also requested direction concerning prohibition in other public areas and asserted that a full hearing would be in order. She added that it would be appropriate to have a full council present. Councilman Lilley clarified that his motion was intended to provide that an ordinance prohibiting smoking in facilities owned by the City be adopted without undue delay. He explained further that the motion was without prejudice to any direction on the part of staff to come back with additional information for consideration of a smoking ban exceeding the bounds of his motion. Mayor Shiers indicated that he understood the intent of the motion and agreed with the necessity of an additional hearing. Vote on the motion: Motion unanimously carried 4: 0. 7. ORDINANCE NO. 232 - Amending the Official Zoning Ordinance • relative to the allowed height of fences, hedges and walls located within required front yard setback areas and side yard setback areas where the side yard lies adjacent to a street (Recommend motion to waive reading in full and approve on second reading by title only) The mayor reported that this ordinance was back for second reading. There were no questions or comments. MOTION: By Councilman Nimmo, seconded by Councilwoman Borgeson to approve and adopt Ordinance No. 232 on second reading; motion unanimously passed. E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION: 1. City Attorney Art Montandon requested a leave of absence for one month and reported that the Assistant City Attorney, Mary Redus Gayle, had agreed to step in. He reported that she would be available daily by telephone and would personally be in the office on Mondays of CC10/22/91 Page 10 each week. 16 2. City Clerk Lee Raboin reported that she had attended a records management seminar in Sacramento on October 29th & 30th and mentioned preliminary plans for a records retention policy. 3. City Manager Ray Windsor extended an invitation to members of the Council and others to take a tour of the Lake Park Pavilion. He indicated that the Public Works Director would make the arrangements. MOTION: By Councilwoman Borgeson, seconded by Councilman Nimmo to adjourn the meeting; unanimously carried. THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 9:55 P.M. THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING OF THE ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL WILL BE NOVEMBER 12, 1991 AT 7:00 P.M. MINUTES RECORDED AND PREPARED BY: LEE RABOIN, City/ Clerk CC10/22/91 Page 11 MEETING AGENDA DATE 1 1 / h/91 ITEM/ _R (n M m Or► ... ,., O 3r0 z 1 � ✓. C � t� �• � � H i b � \ m4n (D M (D f0 UCl `� .� Q. Y 1 Or7 0791)Im 1 f7 1 � f) 'C " (A C+ B a a 5 � 1 1 _ I 1 � C7 > > 0) :1 a f�D v 5' (D n co a 'T1 O 1 ►+� Y'OU n r• C z a C O fo� , b tpn �• y ~' p O m �, y 1 c�D Sb O ,8 d ov 1 O CA CL (A O r+ �+ `- G + m 0 � 3 (yD t9D C6 II U �.• ,..t O (D r+ , r+ rt ONJ CL•C t7 03 11 O (A %0Uri 0 ••. $ rA O O II N 1 Co w WPW 1 y 0 f+ w �-' � II 1 O J to P. I I fb y .. '-' �G 11 — 1 O 0% w I.- I I C7 r+ O (A to C+11 U I O0, J N 1 I n 1 1 C B M• �. p (D Vpl 1 I r rt 1 (D CT O r• (D O Uhf CZ Q7 Z Z\\ 1 0�0• a I '� (A a a a a 1 (D ib 1 CA� O > 1 r► I . • � b (D O O �. O 1 �O C�1 C r* ti •., 1 I y H -- o O o '0 2 0 (D O fD0 7; 7 7 Z I pOo G l V�1 (o em+ I aaaa 1 �• 1 i 1 1 ,y UF, P 1 70 r* 1 \ OOp -,)tcFc,� 1 SPF+ ►i 1 Y a8 3 08 1 V�1 1 I � 1 i i 1 1 II I I �••� IICA i U W 1 Vl V1 1 11 -i i LWi P. If a� i a :-' bio 1 II P 1 ;, Z, 1 d N 1 11 1>1 1 P. •P it IyNw ►. i ('D • 11 ( \ t) w -JPh > I 1 - 001L y c acn � cn CA CA N o In yy N C7 O 11 N 1 �-• 11 I cc..�� II 00 ( 11 to H 11 coi I 0 I>y II .0 1 9 -01 ii tJ o tJ o 0 It p i o N C Y 'd _, p p En .r a € a :; a •� stn •�r� 0yN (") � � tn> w 7 t a q H o .� cn o 1711 7 M � W�Dn H M C- C) f� 1 cn • Ct77y**iiff � 1 �O 1 O u�i r+ N 7M7 11 O � 1") �] A 1 tl i [� II �� 1 th J ►-' w N p � II tVJi 1 O N O J it I 11 cn O N II . I 11 O 1 4�- A W II 1 �o I Iy I p � II 1 11 O 1 '0 11 L7 1 0 11 CO I w cit 11 1 D N II h 1 .C• . 11 IJ 1 G7 Vt ►- II tJ p 0 tj - - - 002 CONSOLIDATED TREASURER'S REPORT FOR THE PERIOD ENDING • OCTOBER 31, 1991 PREPARED: 11/19/91 I. SCHEDULE OF CURRENT MONTH ACTIVITY AND PRIOR YEAR VARIANCES OCTOBER CURRENT PRIOR DESCRIPTION 1991 YR-TO-DATE YR-TO-DATE VAR. REVENUE ------------------------------------ Property Taxes 89,764 129,216 108.217 19.40 Sales Tax 121,600 504.275 534,124 -5.6% Bed Tax 31,850 31.S50 34.274 -7. 10/ol Prop. Transfer Tax 3,473 7.922 9,665 -18.0% Franchise Fees 5.391 16,303 16.013 4.90 Special Assessments (259) 11515 1,280 100.0% Business Licenses 1,763 16,064 16,923 -5.1010, Building Permits 16,943 107,313 133.031 -19.3% Motor Vehicle Tax 68.201 232.343 276,753 2.0'0 Cigarette Tax 1,306 6,S76 14,528 -52.7% Other State In-Lieu 0 213 225 -5.3( Gas Tax Receipts 74, 120 156,705 77,701 101.7o TDA Receipts 0 0 100.596 -100.0% Other Intergov'al 43,842 110,348 104.296 5.8% Recreation Fees 28.298 119.535 124,625 -4.10 Zoo Admissions 4,588 28,806 25.284 13.9% Planning Fees 8,602 49,623 56.2',4 -11.8% Wastewater Fees 11.707 211054 70.292 -70.0010 Development Fees 20,515 167,568 200,673 -16.So Dial-A-Fide Fares 2,960 9.582 11111" -13.So Police Services 640 2,202 2,114 4.20 Weed Abatement 1 ,537 1,537 0 100.00 Other Fees/Charges 451 1.263 567 1_2.8% Fines & Forfeits 5,966 12.809 16,954 -24.4% Interest Earnings 19,627 25.1"3 257,497 -90.2% Rentals 54 228 139 64.00 Proceeds from Sales 0 500 117. 187 -99.60 ,isce11aneous 4, 193 25,518 1S.471 38.20 ----------------------------------------------- TOTALS 567, 140 1,836.841 2,32S,823 -21. 10 LXTENDITL'RES General Gov't 39.812 99,924 72,523 37.8o Police 158,111 669,2229 633,786 5.6% Fire 93,957 384.676 344,545 11.6%. Public Works/Eng. 49,866 137,358 97,762 40.5% Wastewater -1, 186 1S71519 167,547 11.90 _ Dial-A-Ride 20,034 51,950 5S,089 -10.60 Community Dev'ment 68,483 261.410 236,257 10.6% Recreation 50,991 241,592 205,613 17.5% Parks d Bldg. Maint 58,835 217, 133 163,012 33.2% Zoo 17,929 68,185 65, 136 4.7% • Streets - 37,961 152,046 170,412 -10.8% Admin. Services 38,779 326,552 413, 149 -21.0% Non-Departmental 72.913 196,920 348,785 -43.5% Major Capital 247,S51 549,749 - 354.S87 54.90 Debt Service/Trust 27,742 129,933 100.774 29.01,l*o ----------------------------------------------- TOTALS 1.054,500 3,674,226 3,432,307 7.0% '003 y nn3 CONSOLIDATED TREASURER'S REPORT FOR THE PERIOD ENDING • OCTOBER 31, 1991 PREPARED: 11/19/91 II. BUDGET-TO-ACTUAL REPORT CURRENT CURRENT COLLECTED PRIOR PRIOR COLL/ DESCRIPTION BUDGET YR-TO-DATE /SPENT BUDGET YR-TO-DATE SPENT REVENUES Property Taxes 2,326,500 129,216 5.6% 2,050,000 108,217 5.3% Sales Tax 1,900,000 504,275 26.5% 1,850,000 534,124 28.9% Bed Tax 105,000 31,850 30.3% 110,000 34,274 31.2% Prop. Transfer Tax 50,000 7,922 15.8% 60,000 9,665 16.1% Franchise Fees 360,000 16,803 4.7% 330,000 16,013 4.9% Special Assessments 151,753 1,515 1.0% 151,753 1,280 0.8% Business Licenses 110.000 16,064 14.6% 105,010 16,923 16.1% Building Permits 362,050 107,313 29.6% 381,515 133,031 34.9% Motor Vehicle Tax 875,000 282,343 32.3% 860,000 276,753 32. Cigarette Tax 42,300 6,876 16.3% 35,000 14,528 41.50 Other State In-Lieu 60,900 213 0.3% 60,900 225 0.4% Gas Tax Receipts 416,162 156,705 37.7% 393,100 77,701 19.8% TDA Receipts 482,957 0 0.0100, 402,521 100,596 25.0% Other Intergov'al 403,400 110,345 27.4% 455,700 104,296 22.9% Recreation Fees 342,550 119,535 34.9% 310,850 124,628 40.1% Zoo Admissions 72,500 28,806 39.7% 711000 25,284 35.6% Planning Fees 236.723 49.623 17.3% 192,612 56.274 29.2% Wastewater Fees 690,200 21,054 3.1% 660,200 70,292 10.6% Development Fees 717,000 167,568 23.4% 562,600 200,673 35.7% Dial-A-Ride Fares 36,000 9.582 26.6% 34,000 11,11? 32.7% Police Services 6,100 2,202 36.1% 4.800 21114 44.0% Weed Abatement 40,000 1,537 3.8% 30,000 0 0.0o Other Fees/Charges 57.650 1,263 2.2% 3.000 567 1S.91,"o Fines & Forfeits 52,050 12,809 15.6% 81,550 16,954 20.80,o' Interest Earnings 452,920 25,173 5.6% 389,150 257,497 66.20 Rentals 21000 228 11.4% 14,200 139 1.0% Proceeds from Sales 90,000 500 0.6% 68,500 11'".187 171.1% Miscellaneous 50,000 25,518 51.0% 19,430 18,471 95.1% ----------------------------------------------------------- -- TOTALS 10,571,715 1,836,841 17.4% 9,687,451 2,328,823 24.0% E QDEND I TURES General Gov't 318.085 99,924 31.4% 305,225 72. 523 23.30 Police 2,0841000 669,229 32.1% 2,053,318 633,786 30.9% Fire 1,106,300 384,676 34.8% 1,164,492 344,545 29.6% Public Works/Eng. 346,905 137,358 39.6% 389,010 97,762 25.10 Wastewater 808,960 187,519 23.ro 801,585 167,547 20.97o Dial-A-Ride 299,245 51,950 17.40 388,393 58,089 15.0% Community Dev'ment 785,617 261,410 33.3% 1195,689 236,237 29.7% Recreation 514,298 241,592 47.0% 553,529 205,613 37.1% Parks & Bldg. Maint 537,680 217,133 40.40 521,530 163,012 31.3% Zoo 221,275 68,185 30.8% 222,500 65,136 29.3% Streets 635,425 152,046 23.9% 606,565 170,412 28.1% Admin. Services 666,335 326,552 49.0% 726,075 413,149 56.9% Non-Departmental 531,120 196,920 37.1% 733,893 348,1S5 47.5% • Major Capital 4,846,000 549,749 _ 11.3% 2,692,453 354,887 13.2% Debt Service/Trust 216,692 129,983 60.0% 741,316 100,774 13.6% -------------------------------------------------------------- TOTALS 13,917,937 3,674,226 26.4% 12,695,573 3,432,307 27.07. - 004 CONSOLIDATED TREASURER'S REPORT FOR 'LIM PERIOD ENDING •, OCTOBER 31, 1991 PREPARED: 11/19/91 I 'Mark Joseph, do hereby certify that the above information is accurate and reflects the City's financial conditions for the periods specified. However. the information in these reports is unaudited, and matt• therefore be subject to fu qDre-ctor sions. Mark Joseph. Fi n • • r REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO ITEM- Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 11/26/91 By: Henry Engen, Comm. Devel. Director PJ File No: TPM 17-89 SUBJECT: Request for a time extension for Tentative Parcel Map 17-89 (request to subdivide 6. 25 acres into four lots) at 7550 Cortez Road - Nathan Barrett RECOMMENDATION: Per the Planning Commission' s recommendation, approval of a time extension to October 30, 1992 for TPM 17-89 based on the revised Conditions of Approval contained in the staff report. BACKGROUND: ® On November 5, 1991, the Planning Commission considered the above referenced subject on its Consent Calendar and, on a 5: 0:2 vote, approved a one year time extension as reflected in the staff report. There was no public testimony. HE:ps Attachments: Staff Report - November 5, 1991 cc: Nathan Barrett `" -- 000; ITEM:-A. 3 MEMORANDUM • DATE: NOVEMBER 5 , 1991 TO: Planning Commission FROM:1P P ' Doug Davidson, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Extension Request -- Tentative Parcel Map 17-89 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of a one-year time extension for Tentative Parcel Map 17-89, subject to the revised Conditions of Approval contained in Attachment A. ANALYSIS: Tentative Parcel Map 17-89 was approved by the Planning Commission on October 3, 1989 and the City Council on October 30, 1989. On September 20, 1991, prior to the October 30, 1991 expiration date, an extension request was received, indicating that an additional year would be necessary to complete required road improvements and meet all other applicable conditions of approval. Since the approval of Tentative Parcel Map 17-89, two relevant subdivision approvals have occurred in this area. Tentative Parcel Map 27-90, including a Planned Development Overlay, was approved on the easterly side of Pine Mountain Park. This Tentative Parcel Map was required to place all individual utility connections underground. Placing new utility connections underground is a common and increasingly popular practice because of the aesthetic benefits that can be derived without significantly increasing development costs. Since the approval of TPM 17-89, staff has routinely recommended that the Planning Commission, where appropriate, impose conditions of approval on tentative maps, CUP's, etc. , requiring that utilities be placed underground. Secondly, a time extension was recently granted (August 6, 1991) for Tentative Parcel Map 04-89, the adjacent subdivision of Frederick Larson. This time extension was also conditioned to provide the individual utility connections underground. Thus, to maintain consistency, this extension request is the proper time to revise the Conditions of Approval to include a similar condition for undergrounding individual utility connections. Condition #2 has been revised accordingly. Attachments: Attachment A -- Revised Conditions of Approval Attachment B Extension Request Attachment C -- October 30, 1989 staff report - - - nn7 ATTACHMENT C - Revised Conditions of Approval Tentative Parcel Map 17-89 7550 Cortez Ave. (Barrett) Time Extension - November 5, 1991 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water Company. Water service shall be stubbed to a meter vault at the right of way line of each lot. 2. All available utilities, including electric, gas, telephone and cable television services shall be stubbed to the right- of-way line of each lot prior to the recording of the final map. Individual utility extensions serving each lot shall be placed underground. 3. All existing and proposed utility, pipeline, open space, or other easements are to be shown on the final map. If there are building or other restrictions related to the easements, they shall be noted on the final map. 4. All relocation and/or alteration of existing utilities shall be the responsibility of the developer. 5a. Grading, drainage, and erosion control plans for the entire subdivision, including driveways, prepared by a registered civil engineer, shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval by the Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to recordation of the final map. b. A drainage plan shall be prepared, and an easement shall be offered to the City to handle runoff from Curbaril from current and future development. C. Drainage facilities shall be constructed to City of Atascadero standards. All work shall be completed or bonded prior to the recording of the final map. d. The grading and drainage plan shall include the elevation of proposed structures and pads. If the site is to be filled above the base flood, the final pad elevation shall be certified by a registered engineer or surveyor and submitted to the City Engineer prior to transmittal to the Floodplain Administrator. Final pad elevations shall appear as a note on the final map. 6. Road improvement plans prepared by a registered civil engineer shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval by the Community Development and Public 008 Works Departments, prior to the construction of improvements. Said plans shall include, but not be limited to: • Cortez Avenue: a. Design shall conform to design of Cortez Avenue being prepared in connection with proposed development at 7445 Cortez as per AT89-013 being prepared by Cuesta Engineering. Plans shall include a minimum paved section of 20 feet with 4 foot based shoulders, berms and drainage facilities as required by the City Engineer. The intersection at Curbaril shall be reconstructed to include a 30 foot radius curve return at the edge of pavement on each side. A temporary turn-around constructed to fire department standards, may be required at the end of the Cortez Avenue extension. Design shall include measures to save and preserve trees within the right-of-way, as approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. Curbaril Avenue: b. Pavement shall be widened to 20 feet from centerline with a taper installed to match the railroad crossing. A four foot based shoulder shall be installed along the edge of roadway along with any berms or drainage facilities required by the City Engineer. Design shall include measures to preserve trees within the right-of-way, as approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. 7. Construction of the public road improvements shall be completed prior to the recording of the final map. 8. Subdivider shall obtain an encroachment permit from the Public Works Department prior to the installation of improvements, including drainage facilities and all road construction. .Subdivider shall also sign an inspection agreement guaranteeing that the work will be done in conformance with approved plans and inspection fees paid. All work required by the encroachment permit shall be completed prior to the recordation of the final map. 9. The subdivider shall install all street signs, traffic delineation devices, warning and regulatory signs, barricades, and other similar devices where required by the Director of Public Works. Signs shall be in conformance with the Department of Public Works standards and the current State of California uniform sign chart. Installation of traffic devices shall be subject to review and modifications after construction. - - -009 • 10. All public improvements shall be covered with a 100% Performance Bond until construction is accepted and by a 10% Maintenance Bond until one year after construction approval. 11. Offers of dedication to the City of Atascadero for the following street rights-of-way are required: Street Name: Curbaril Avenue Limits: 25 feet from centerline to right of way limits and corner radius. Street Name: Cortez Avenue Limits: 20 foot (min. ) from centerline to right of way. Additional right-of-way shall be required to provide a minimum of 10 feet of right-of- way adjacent to the edge of the pavement. 20 foot radius at the north corner of Curbaril and Cortez Avenues. 12. An offer of dedication to the Public for a Public Utilities Easement at the following location: a. A 6 foot public utilities easement along all street • frontages. 13. Offers of dedication shall be completed and recorded prior to or simultaneously with the recordation of the final map. 14. Parcel 1 shall have no direct access to Curbaril Avenue. Access shall be by way of Cortez Avenue only. Relinquishment of access rights shall be delineated on the final map. 15. The fire hydrants located at the intersection of Cortez Avenue and Curbaril Avenue and Cortez and Maleza Avenue shall be upgraded to City standards. All fire hydrant installation and upgrade shall be completed prior to recordation of the final map. 16. A landscaping plan for noise attenuation, including number, location and species of trees and other plants, and irrigation plans, shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval prior to the recordation of the final map. Installation of the required landscaping and irrigation system may be bonded for a period not to exceed one ( 1) year form the date of final approval of the map. 17. A final map drawn in substantial conformance with the approved tentative map and in compliance with all conditions set forth herein shall be submitted for review and approval in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City' s Subdivision Ordinance prior to recordation. -0110 a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners • created and a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor shall indicate, by certificate on the final map, that corners have been set or shall be set by a date specific and that they will be sufficient to enable the survey to be retraced. b. A recently updated preliminary title report shall be submitted for review in conjunction with the processing of the final map. c. A preliminary subdivision guarantee shall be submitted for review in conjunction with the processing of the final map. 18. Approval of this tentative map shall expire two years from the date of final approval unless an extension of time is granted pursuant to a written request prior to the expiration date. ., - n11 • SEP 2 o 1331 20 SC 00 1 . A-Z n s c d,�-�-z �. c' �JZbM, �a q/ao�4r 32,6 e2 "" `012 • REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: A-4 Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 10/30/89 File Number: TPM 17-89 From: Henry Engen, Community Development Director 4q, SUBJECT: Subdivision of one parcel containing 6 . 25 acres into four (4 ) lots. Two lots will contain 1 . 5 acres, one lot will contain 1 . 58 acres and one lot will contain 1 .66 acres at 7550 Cortez Road (Nathan Barrett/Twin Cities Engineering) . RECOMMENDATION: Approval in accordance with Planning Commission recommendation , based on the Findings contained in the staff report dated October 3, 1989, and the attached revised Conditions of Approval . BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the above- referenced map on October 3, 1989 and - on a 5 : 2 vote - recom- mended approval of Tentative Parcel Map 17-89 subject to the Findings and Conditions of Approval with the addition of Condition ##19 to read: 1119 . A one hundred ( 100) foot non-buildable easement parallel to Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way shall be shown on the final map. " HE:ph Attachment: Planning Commission - Revised Conditions of Approval Planning Commission Staff Report - Oct. 3, 1989 Planning Commission Minutes Excerpts - Oct. 3 , 1989 cc: Nathan Barrett Twin Cities Engineering -013 PLANNING COMMISSION - REVISED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Tentative Parcel Map 17-89 7550 Cortez Ave. (Barrett) October 3, 1989 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1 . Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water Company. Water service shall be stubbed to a meter vault at the right of way line of each lot. 2 . Electric power, gas, telephone and cable television services shall be stubbed to the right-of-way line of each lot and all facilities to distribute such services shall be provided according to the requirements of the responsible utility companies. 3. All existing and proposed utility, pipeline, open space, or other easements are to be shown on the final map. If there are building or other restrictions related to the easements, they shall be •noted on the final map. 4 . All relocation and/or alteration of existing utilities shall • be the responsibility of the developer. 5a. Grading, drainage, and erosion control plans for the entire subdivision, including driveways, prepared by a registered civil engineer, shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval by the Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to recordation of the final map, b. A drainage plan shall be prepared, and an easement shall be offered to the City to handle runoff from Curbaril from current and future development. c. Drainage facilities shall be constructed to City of Atascadero standards. All work shall be completed or bonded prior to the recording of the final map. d. The grading and drainage plan shall include the elevation of proposed structures and pads. If the site is to be filled above the base flood, the final pad elevation shall be certified by a registered engineer or surveyor and submitted to the City Engineer prior to transmittal to the Floodplain Administrator. Final pad elevations shall appear as a note on the final map. 6. Road improvement plans prepared by a registered civil engineer shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval by the Community Uv-014 Development and Public Works Departments, prior to the construction of improvements. Said plans shall include, but • not be limited to: Cortez Avenue: a. Design shall conform to design of Cortez Avenue being prepared in connection with proposed development at 7445 Cortez as per AT89-013 being prepared by Cuesta Engineering. Plans shall include a minimum paved section of 20 feet with 4 foot based shoulders, berms and drainage facilities as required by the City Engineer. The intersection at Curbaril shall be reconstructed to include a 30 foot radius curve return at the edge of pavement on each side. A temporary turn-around constructed to fire department standards, may be required at the end of the Cortez Avenue extension. Design shall include measures to save and preserve trees within the right-of-way, as approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. Curbaril Avenue: b. Pavement shall be widened to 20 feet from centerline with a taper installed to match the railroad crossing. A four foot based shoulder shall be installed along the • edge of roadway along with any berms or drainage facilities required by the City Engineer. Design shall include measures to preserve trees within the right-of- way, as approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. 7 . Construction of the public road improvements shall be completed prior to the recording of the final map. 8 . Subdivider shall obtain an encroachment permit from the Public Works Department prior to the installation of improvements, including drainage facilities and all road construction. Subdivider shall also sign an inspection agreement guaranteeing that the work will be done in conformance with approved plans and inspection fees paid. All work required by the encroachment permit shall be completed prior to the recordation of the final map. 9. The subdivider shall install all street signs, traffic delineation devices, warning and regulatory signs, barricades, and other similar devices where required by the Director of Public Works. Signs shall be in conformance with the Department of Public Works standards and the current State of California uniform sign chart. Installation of traffic devices shall be subject to review • and modifications after construction. 00-015 • 10 . All public improvements shall be covered with a 100% Performance Bond until construction is accepted and by a 10% Maintenance Bond until one year after construction approval. 11 . Offers of dedication to the City of Atascadero for the following street rights-of-way are required: Street Name: Curbaril Avenue Limits: 25 feet from centerline to right of way limits and corner radius. Street Name: Cortez Avenue Limits: 20 foot (min. ) from centerline to right of way. Additional right-of-way shall be required to provide a minimum of 10 feet of right-of-way adjacent to the edge of the pavement. 20 foot radius at the north corner of Curbaril and Cortez Avenues. 12 . An offer of dedication to the Public for a Public Utilities Easement at the following location: • a. A 6 foot public utilities easement along all street frontages. 13. Offers of dedication shall be completed and recorded prior to or simultaneously with the recordation of the final map. 14 . Parcel 1 shall have no direct access to Curbaril Avenue. Access shall be by way of Cortez Avenue only. Relinquishment of access rights shall be delineated on the final map. 15 . The fire hydrants located at the intersection of Cortez Avenue and Curbaril Avenue and Cortez and Maleza Avenue shall be upgraded to City standards. All fire hydrant installation and upgrade shall be completed prior to recordation of the final map. 16. A landscaping plan for noise attenuation, including number, location and species of trees and other plants, and irrigation plans, shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval prior to the recordation of the final map. Installation of the required landscaping and irrigation system may be bonded for a period not to exceed one (1) year form the date of final approval of the map. • 17 . A final map drawn in substantial conformance with the approved tentative map and in compliance with all conditions 00 01 set forth herein shall be submitted for review and approval in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City' s • Subdivision Ordinance prior to recordation. a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners created and a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor shall indicate, by certificate on the final map, that corners have been set or shall be set by a date specific and that they will be sufficient to enable the survey to be retraced. b. A recently updated preliminary title report shall be submitted for review in conjunction with the processing of the final map. C. A preliminary subdivision guarantee shall be submitted for review in conjunction with the processing of the final map. 18 . Approval of this tentative map shall expire two years from the date of final approval unless an extension of time is granted pursuant to a written request prior to the expiration date. 19. A one hundred (100) foot non-buildable easement parallel to the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way shall be shown on the final map. • • 00-017 CITY OF ATASCADERO Item: B- 1 • STAFF REPORT FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Date: October 3, 1989 BY: Karl Schoettler, Assistant Planner File No: TPM 17-89 SUBJECT: Subdivision of one (1) parcel containing approximately 6.25 acres into four (4) lots. Two lots will contain 1 .5 acres. One lot will contain 1 .58 acres and one lot will contain 1 . 66 acres. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of TPM 17-89 based on the Findings for Approval in Exhibit E and subject to the Conditions of Approval in Exhibit F. SITUATION AND FACTS: 1 . Applicant .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Nathan Barrett • 2 . Representative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Twin Cities Engineering 3. Project Address. . . . . . . . . . . . .7550 Cortez Ave. 4 . General Plan Designation. . . . .Moderate Density Single Family 5. ' Zoning District . . . . . . . . . . .RSF-Y (1 .0 ac w/sewer; 1.5 ac. w/o sewer min. lot size) 6. Site Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.25 acres 7 . Existing Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Vacant 8. Environmental Status. . . . . . . . .Negative Declaration posted September 19, 1989 ANALYSIS: The application before the Commission proposes to subdivide one (1) existing parcel which contains approximately 6.25 acres into four (4) lots. Two of the new lots will contain 1 .5 acres each. One lot will contain 1 .58 acres and one lot will contain 1 . 66 acres. The General Plan designates this property for Moderate Density Single Family development. The property is located within the Urban Services Line and is within the RSF-Y zone 00 - 018 district. The minimum lot sizes in this zone are one (1 .0) acre where sanitary sewer service is available and 1 .5 acres where • there is no sewer service. There is no sewer service to this site; therefore, the minimum allowable lot size is 1.5 acres. A part of this proposal involves the extension of Cortez Avenue north to a subdivision previously approved by the Commission (TPM 04-89) . At present, the paved section of Cortez terminates at the intersection with Maleza Avenue. The applicant for the subdivision to the north is being required to extend and pave Cortez from Maleza north to its proposed terminus. This will include construction of a city-standard cul-de-sac. However, this subdivision has not been submitted for final approval. In the event that that map is not approved, or tentative approval expires, the required street improvements would not be constructed. Therefore, the subdivision presently being considered has been conditioned to construct a temporary turn- around, built to fire department standards, at the end of the existing Cortez Avenue right-of-way. There are two important concerns relative to this site being developed for residential use. The Southern Pacific Railroad runs along the east side of the site, producing significantly increased noise levels when trains are passing by. The City' s General Plan Noise Element indicates that a passing train generates 70 dB (A) when measured at 50 feet. This level is above the 45 dB (A) considered maximum for rural single family areas during the day. This maximum drops to 35 dB (A) during the • night. The subdivision approved to the north of this site has been required to establish a 100 foot setback with the installation of screening plantings along the railroad to help reduce noise problems. These steps, along with soundproofing construction incorporated into future buildings, should work to reduce interior noise levels to acceptable levels. The second area of concern involves the inclusion of this area within the 500 year flood hazard boundary of the Salinas River as determined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) . The FEMA map is attached to this report as Exhibit D. The FIRM (Flood Insurance Rate Map) includes this area in Zone B. Zone B is defined as: "Areas between limits of the 100-year flood and 500-year flood; or certain areas subject to 100-year flooding with average depths less than one (1) foot or where the contributing drainage area is less than one square mile; or areas protected by levees from the base flood. " This site is generally lower than surrounding ground (the railroad, Curbaril Avenue, Cortez Avenue, and Pine Mountain to the north) and can be expected to experience some minor flooding problems as a result. However, the property could be developed for residential use by incorporating flood control measures, and if necessary, elevating building pads above flood levels. The 00"M9 • subdivision should be conditioned to insure conformance with the City' s Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance (Ordinance 193) . Conditioned as such, the subdivision should not contribute to downstream flooding problems or expose future residents to unreasonable flood related damage or hazards. This project has been reviewed by the City' s Fire Department and the Engineering Division of the Public Works Department. Both Departments have provided recommended conditions of approval which are included in Exhibit F. With these conditions, neither Department has any objection to the approval of the proposed subdivision. CONCLUSIONS: The design of the proposed subdivision is in conformance with the City' s General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. The proposed home sites can be developed without adverse impacts on surrounding areas. The recommended Conditions of Approval will insure that the potential effects of noise and flooding on future residents are mitigated to acceptable levels. The proposed use, and the size of the proposed lots is consistent with existing development in the vicinity of the subdivision. Staff believes that each of the Findings required by the Subdivision Map Act can be made relative to this proposal. KCS/kcs ATTACHMENTS : Exhibit A - Location and Zoning Map Exhibit B - General Plan Map Exhibit C - Tentative Parcel Map Exhibit D - FEMA Map Exhibit E - Findings for Approval Exhibit F - Conditions of Approval 00-020 EXHIBIT A LOCATION & ZONING /.. ,,... . CITY OF ATASCADERO c'��• •e - . left TPM 17-89COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT • DEPARTMENT ' 1 C4 Vol* A � ( � LS L a. SITE 7550 Cortez Ave. P _ f � Zone: RSF-Y dr tQ R F—Y ALLA r ;; r RMF�4 — (FH) (;, MF-4 6) 00 - 021 EXHIBIT B CITY OF ATASCADERO S GENERAL PLAN MAP 7-lots tj_C0can— •� COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT � TPM 17-89 DEPARTMENT J INDUSTRIA / PARK N _ o a • •� - f "PuaLW.,- - G � • / E�°y`Q� 0 SPE IA s,— i' • • RECR EATIO • _ `� • Via. � SITE \ ,� ' 0 REC 7550 Cortez Ave. Mod. Density Single �.�, 'rr� i • � • FamilyPUE � ? •. — MOD. 16 DEN. RECREAT ` S1TY s� I0 ./ . �`\t \ ave � v►LE ivE , \`\ ,, � \`� u.tE P7 - �: % IGHEN MFS q 1 - •• E •• •• RE - -�-- LOW `•• DENSITY OMM R,'CIAIfA, MULTI-FAMILY E DJau �� •rx `-: c ;� � \\ 11 :M `.• - \ ��' �L:L�� H1 ENSI ., 1 'FA ILYIuoFF M0 '#3ATE ,_ S •• '2" ' � _ J+tr moi; r 7, 0ENSITY COMMER.Sir CiQL E"` i 00`n�2 EXHIBIT C 1 CITY OF ATASCADERO TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 14 al COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TPM 17-89 DEPARTMENT W7 W � t . _ J -- = : .. Al i z 00- 0?3 • EXHIBIT D FEMA Map N# CITY OF ATASCADERO TPM 17-89 ' COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT RM2 t, , te C., ScvmPA _SATE Loop EouNp4R I / 1 / 024 EXHIBIT E - Findings for Approval Tentative Parcel Map 17-89 7550 Cortez Ave. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDING: The proposed project will not have a significant impact on the environment. The Negative Declaration prepared for the project is adequate. MAP FINDINGS: 1 . The proposed map is consistent with the applicable General or Specific Plan. 2 The design and/or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the applicable General or Specific Plan. 3. The site is physically suitable for the proposed type of development. 4 . The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. 5. The design of the subdivision, and/or the proposed improvements, will not cause substantial environmental • damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish and wildlife or their habitat. 6. The design of the subdivision, and the type of improvements, will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision; or substantially equivalent alternate easements are provided. 7 . The design of the subdivision and/or the type of proposed improvements will not cause serious public health problems. EXHIBIT F - Conditions of Approval Tentative Parcel Map 17-89 7550 Cortez Ave. (Barrett) October 3, 1989 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1 . Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water Company. Water service shall be stubbed to a meter vault at the right of way line of each lot. 2 . Electric power, gas, telephone and cable television services shall be stubbed to the right-of-way line of each lot and all facilities to distribute such services shall be provided according to the requirements of the responsible utility companies. 3. All existing and proposed utility, pipeline, open space, or other easements are to be shown on the final map. If there are building or other restrictions related to the easements, they shall be noted on the final map. 4 . All relocation and/or alteration of existing utilities shall be the responsibility of the developer. 5a. Grading, drainage, and erosion control plans for the entire subdivision, including driveways, prepared by a registered civil engineer, shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval by the Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to recordation of the final map. b. A drainage plan shall be prepared, and an easement shall be offered to the City to handle runoff from Curbaril from current and future development . C. Drainage facilities shall be constructed to City of Atascadero standards . All work shall be completed or bonded prior to the recording of the final map. d. The grading and drainage plan shall include the elevation of proposed structures and pads . If the site is to be filled above the base flood, the final pad elevation shall be certified by a registered engineer or surveyor -and submitted to the City Engineer prior to transmittal to the Floodplain Administrator. Final pad elevations shall appear as a note on the final map. 6. Road improvement plans prepared by a registered civil engineer shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval by the Community X26 Development and Public Works Departments, prior to the construction of improvements. Said plans shall include, but t not be limited to: Cortez Avenue: a. Design shall conform to design of Cortez Avenue being prepared in connection with proposed development at 7445 Cortez as per AT89-013 being prepared by Cuesta Engineering. Plans shall include a minimum paved section of 20 feet with 4 foot based shoulders, berms and drainage facilities as required by the City Engineer. The intersection at Curbaril shall be reconstructed to include a 30 foot radius curve return at the edge of pavement on each side. A temporary turn-around constructed to fire department standards, may be required at the end of the Cortez Avenue extension. Design shall include measures to save and preserve trees within the right-of-way, as approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. Curbaril Avenue: b. Pavement shall be widened to 20 feet from centerline with a taper installed to match the railroad crossing. A four foot based shoulder shall be installed along the edge of roadway along with any berms or drainage facilities required by the City Engineer. Design shall include measures to preserve trees within the right-of- way, as approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. 7 . Construction of the public road improvements shall be completed prior to the recording of the final map. 8 . Subdivider shall obtain an encroachment permit from the Public Works Department prior to the installation of improvements, including drainage facilities and all road construction. Subdivider shall also sign an inspection agreement guaranteeing that the work will be done in conformance with approved plans and inspection fees paid. All work required by the encroachment permit shall be completed prior to the recordation of the final map. 9. The subdivider shall install all street signs, traffic delineation devices, warning and regulatory signs, barricades, and other similar devices where required by the Director of Public Works. Signs shall be in conformance with the Department of Public Works standards and the current State of California uniform sign chart. Installation of traffic devices shall be subject to review and modifications after construction. 027 10 . All public improvements shall be covered with a 100% Performance Bond until construction is accepted and by a 10% Maintenance Bond until one year after construction approval. 11 . Offers of dedication to the City of Atascadero for the following street rights-of-way are required: Street Name: Curbaril Avenue Limits : 25 feet from centerline to right of way limits and corner radius. Street Name: Cortez Avenue Limits : 20 foot (min. ) from centerline to right of way. Additional right-of-way shall be_ required to provide a minimum of 10 feet of right-of-way adjacent to the edge of the pavement. 20 foot radius at the north corner of Curbaril and Cortez Avenues. 12 . An offer of dedication to the Public for a Public Utilities Easement at the following location: • a. A 6 foot public utilities easement along all street frontages. 13. Offers of dedication shall be completed and recorded prior to or simultaneously with the recordation of the final map. 14 . Parcel 1 shall have no direct access to Curbaril Avenue. Access shall be by way of Cortez Avenue only. Relinquishment of access rights shall be delineated on the final map. 15 . The fire hydrants located at the intersection of Cortez Avenue and Curbaril Avenue and Cortez and Maleza Avenue shall be upgraded to City standards. All fire hydrant installation and upgrade shall be completed prior to recordation of the final map. 16. A landscaping plan for noise attenuation, including number, location and species of trees and other plants, and irrigation plans, shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval prior to the recordation of the final map. Installation of the required landscaping and irrigation system may be bonded for a period not to exceed one (1) year form the date of final approval of the map. • 17 . A final map drawn in substantial conformance with the approved tentative map and in compliance with all conditions. 028 set forth herein shall be submitted for review and approval • in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City' s Subdivision Ordinance prior to recordation. a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners created and a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor shall indicate, by certificate on the final map, that corners have been set or shall be set by a date specific and that they will be sufficient to enable the survey to be retraced. b. A recently updated preliminary title report shall be submitted for review in conjunction with the processing of the final map. C. A preliminary subdivision guarantee shall be submitted for review in conjunction with the processing of the final map. 18 . Approval of this tentative map shall expire two years from the date of final approval unless an extension of time is granted pursuant to a written request prior to the expiration date. • • �� - n29 PLANNING COMMISSIO MINUTES EXCERPTS • MI S - ATASCADERO PLANNING COMMISSION Regul Meeting Tuesda October 3, 1989 7 :30 p.m. Atascade o Administration Building The regular a eting of the Atascadero Planning Comn ssion was called to orde , at 7 : 30 p.m. by Chairperson Lochr ' ge, followed by the Pledge o Allegiance. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Waage, Brasher, Lo ez-Balbontin, Luna, Hanauer, High l nd, and Chairpe on Lochridge Absent: None Staff Present: Steven Decamp, Seni r Planner; Doug Davidson, Associate Plann r; Karl Schoettler, Assistant Planner; Pat She hard, Administrative Secretary PUBLIC COMMENT • There was no public comment A. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 . Approval o minutes of the regular anning Commission meeting o September 19, 1989 2 . Consid ation of staff report for approv 1 of time extei ion for Tentative Parce Map 23-87 a 13900 Los Alt Road - Tom Vaughan Commi ioner Luna requested that item A-2 be pulle for disc sion. M ION: By Commissioner Luna, seconded by Commissione , Waage and carried 7 :0 to approve Item A-1 of t Consent Calendar. B. HEARINGS, APPEARANCES, AND REPORTS 1 . TENTATIVE PARCEL NAP 17-89 : Application fileil by Nathan Barrett (Twin Cities Engin- eering, agent) to subdivide 6 . 25 acres into four lots • of 1 . 5, 1 . 5 , 1 . 58, and 1 . 66 acres each. Subject site is located at 7550 Cortez Avenue. " " -030 • Doug Davidson presented the staff report which focused on issues involved with the subdivision including road improvements, proximity to the railroad right-of-way, and the site' s location in the 500 year flood zone. Staff is recommending approval subject to 18 conditions. Commission questions and discussion followed relative to drainage and flooding concerns, proper channeling of run- off, effects of possible flooding in this area, etc. Allen Campbell, representing the applicant, stated the property slopes to the northeast and explained that the water would channel toward a bridge opening under the railroad. He explained that percolation rates for this site are good. Since the lots will all be at least 1 1/2 acres, the percentage of coverage on the lots are relatively small compared :-o the area of the lots, so most of the water will percolate into the ground. Mr. Campbell expressed concern with condition #6-b as he felt a safety hazard could result by only widening the road in front of one property as the road would narrow past this point. He asked that this condition be eliminated. He then responded to questions from the Commission. In response to question from Commissioner Luna, Mr. Campbell explained that the road improvements for this subdivision would coordinated with the adjacent Larson property which recently received Council approval for a 4 lot subdivision. Mary McTaggart, 5200 Maleza, stated she is not opposed to the proposed development and spoke on concerns she had. Neither she nor 2 neighbors received notification of this hearing. She expressed concern with the road construction standards as there is a large tree right by the proposed extension. Mrs. McTaggart also spoke on concerns she had that any construction would not add additional water run-off onto her property. Discussion followed concerning road and drainage improvement standards, suitable location for conveyance of the water, adequate tree protection, public notification procedures, etc. Wayne Kasper, 7480 Cortez, asked if development would be limited to one building site and whether "granny housing" would be allowed, and expressed concern that septic systems would percolate into the lower area adding to the drainage problem. Discussion ensued relative to the differences between granny housing versus guest housing. • In response to questions from Commissioner Highland, Mr. Davidson explained the intent of condition 6-a and b was to provide better access to the ultimate development of eight lots along Cortez . Mr. Decamp pointed out that an additional condition needs to be added reflecting the restriction of building within a 100 foot easement adjacent to the railroad tracks . Mr. Campbell noted he had no problem with this addition. MOTION: By Commissioner Highland and seconded by Commis- sioner Waage to approve Tentative Parcel Map 17-89 subject to the Findings and Conditions contained in the staff report with addition of condition f#19 to read: 1119 . A one hundred ( 100) foot non-buildable easement parallel to the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way shall be shown on the final map. " Commissioner Luna stated he could not support the motion as he had concerns about drainage, flooding, pipelines, and noise. ® Commissioner Brasher expressed concern with the possible impacts drainage may have on this subdivision as well as the Larson subdivision. The motion passed 5 : 2 with the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Highland, Waage, Hanauer, Lopez-Balbontin and Chairperson Lochridge NOES: Commissioners Luna and Brasher Chairperson Lochridge declared a recess at 8: 27 p.m. ; meeting Esite at 8 :40 p.m. 2. CONSE PERMIT 13-89 : Applicationiled by Sanders Construction (CN S s and nt) to request a change in th eviously appcriteria for the individ tenants of theess and Longs Drugs sl ing center. Sub ' located at 83 310 El Camino Real . Mr. Davidson presented th- aff report in which approval for a change in sign teria , recommended subject to four conditions . Commissquestions and discussion follow ndy Ballard with CN Signs and Graphics, represen the v•� • REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO ITEM: B-4 Through: Uy-Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 11/26/91 By: Henry Engen, Comm. Devel. Director WE File No: TPM 14-87 SUBJECT: Request for a time extension for Tentative Tract Map 14-87 (request to subdivide 5. 5 acres into 8 lots in which two of the lots will be further subdivided into commercial condominium units) at 9505 E1 Camino Real - Rex Hendrix (Westland Engineering) RECOMMENDATION: Per the Planning Commission' s recommendation, approval of a time extension to August 11, 1992 for TTM 14-87 based on the revised Conditions of Approval contained in the staff report. • BACKGROUND: On November 19, 1991, the Planning Commission considered the above referenced subject on its Consent Calendar and, on a 6:0: 1 vote, approved a one year time extension as reflected in the staff report. There was no public testimony. HE:ps Attachments: Staff Report - November 19, 1991 cc: Rex Hendrix Westland Engineering Vuo_ _ ITEM: A. 5 M E M O R A N D U M • TO: Planning Commission FROM O)D-Doug Davidson, Senior Planner RE: Time Extension for Tentative Tract Map 14-87 - Hendrix DATE: November 19, 1991 The above referenced map was originally approved by the Planning Commission on July 21, 1987 and subsequently approved by the City Council on August 11, 1987. On September 12, 1989, the City Council granted a one year time extension until August 11, 1990. A letter requesting a second time extension was received on August 3, 1990. Staff' s initial response to this second time extension request in 1990 was a refusal to process it, for the Subdivision Ordinance (Section 11-4.203 A) at that time limited time extensions to a period. not to exceed twelve months. Subsequently, the City Attorney reviewed the matter and advised that requests of this type be processed as permitted under the State Subdivision Map Act. The City Attorney relied on the case of Griffis v. County of Mono, in which the County' s one year maximum on time extensions was ruled invalid and in conflict with the Subdivision • Map Act. The Subdivision Ordinance has since been revised to conform with case law and the Map Act and allow up to a maximum of three one year time extensions. The 1990 time extension request was the first to encounter the one year time limit. The item was continued at the Planning Commission hearing in order for the City Attorney to render his opinion on the City's subdivision time limits. No follow-up action was taken on the Map after the City Attorney's opinion was received. If actions are not taken within certain time frames, such requests are deemed approved. Staff' s main intent with this third and final time extension request is to officially notify the applicant that the Tract Map will expire in 1992, unless all required improvements are completed. The Conditions of Approval have been revised slightly to reflect current City condition language and to delete reference to obsolete policies. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of a one year time extension for Tentative Parcel Map 14-87, extending the approval date to August 11, 1992. Attachments: 1. Request for Extension 2. Revised Conditions of Approval 3. Staff Report SLU Westland Engineering Company Consulting Civil Engineering & Surveying 1037 Mill Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 (805) 541-2394 August 7, 1991 City of Atascadero Community Development Planning Department 6500 Palma Ave. Atascadero, CA 93422 Re: Tentative Tract Map 14-87 (Tract 1514)- Hendrix Dear Sirs: We request a one year extension to our Tentative Map as it is taking longer than anticipated to compete and have the improvement plans for the tract approved. It is our understanding from city staff that this tract is eligible for one more time extension. We have enclosed a check for $330.00 to cover the City fee for tentative map time extension. If you have any questions, please contact me at our office. Sincerely, Manuel Palma ccs Rex Hendrix . . enclosure MOP;jc RECEIVED C) • AU ' 199 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT _ _ 0. EXHIBIT D - Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 14-87 (Hendrik/Westland Engineering) REVISED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 19, 1991 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water Com- pany and water lines shall exist at the frontage of each parcel or its public utility easement prior to recordation of the final map. 2. All existing and proposed utility easements, pipelines and other easements are to be shown on the final map. If there are other building or other restrictions related to the easements, they shall be noted on the final map. 3. Prior to recording any final map, a phasing plan for the final map recording sequence shall be submitted for the review and acceptance of the City Engineer and Community Development Director. Said phasing plan shall include the phasing of the construction of the required public improvements. 4. Prior to recording any final map, a map shall be submitted for the review and approval of the Community Development Director verifying that all existing buildings are set back from pro- posed property lines a distance not less than that required by the adopted edition of the Uniform Building Code. 5. The applicant shall establish Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) for the regulation of land use, control of nuisances and architectural control of all buildings. a. These CC&Rs shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Attorney and Community Development Department prior to approval of the final map. b. These CC&Rs shall provide for common ingress, egress, and parking on all driveways and designated parking areas. C. These CC&Rs shall be administered by a Condominium Owners Association. 6. A reciprocal agreement, in a form acceptable to the City Atttorney, shall be recorded with the deed to each parcel at the time it is first conveyed, and a note to this effect shall be placed on the final map(s) covering: a. ingress and egress b. parking C. sewer, water, utilities, and storm water facilities This agreement shall be reflected in the CC&Rs. • (1'x'7 7. A road maintenance agreement, in a form accpetable to the City Attorney, shall be recorded with the deed to each parcel at the time it is first conveyed, and a note to this effect shall be placed on the final map(s) This agreement shall be reflected in the CC&Rs. 8. Submit a drainage plan, prepared by a registered civil engineer, providing for mitigating measures relieving any downstream drainage problems or alternatively a stormwater detention basin. If a detention basin is selected, then the design shall be based upon a 100 year design storm, site developed, with outflow limited to 10 year design storm, undeveloped site. The alternate selected must be acceptable to the Public Works Director. 9. The fire hydrant located at the intersection of Pino Solo and Principal shall be upgraded to City standards prior to record- ing any final map. 10. Wastewater disposal shall be by connection to the public sewer. Obtain a sewer connection permit from the Public Works Department prior to issuance of building permit. Sewer fees in the amount established by City ordinance shall be paid prior to issuance of building permits and with recognition of prior sewer fees which have already been paid. 11. A twenty-five (25) foot building setback shall be established along the frontage of the property along Las Lomas Avenue and Principal east of Pino Solo Avenue. Said building setback shall be delineated on any final map for parcels 5 and 6 as shown on the tentative tract map. 12. All signage on the site shall be brought into conformance with approved Conditional Use Permits, the Zoning Ordinance, and other approved plans prior to filing any final maps. 13. Prior to recording any final map(s) , a public facility improvement plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Community Development and Public Works Directors for the planting of street trees along the entire frontage of the property along E1 Camino Real. Said plans shall be for the installation of trees an average of thirty (30) feet on center with adequate provisions for irrigation. Street trees shall be installed prior to the recordation of the last final map for the site. 14. Enter into an agreement and post securities acceptable to the City Attorney and Public Works Director, to defer the follow- ing improvements: a. Traffic signal improvements at the intersection of Santa • Rosa and E1 Camino Real. The cost of said improvements shall not exceed 25% of the cost of the traffic signal; and ., 038 b. Road improvements along the frontage of the undeveloped lots as specified below. 15. Improve the following streets to City standard as approved by the Director of Public Works, as indicated: a. Principal Avenue: Install curb, gutter, five (5) foot sidewalk and AC pave-out along property frontage. b. Las Lomas Avenue: Install curb, gutter, five (5) foot sidewalk and AC paveout along property frontage. C. Montecito: Install curb, gutter, five (5) foot sidewalk and AC paveout along property frontage. 16. The applicant shall acquire and make an irrevocable offer of dedication to the City of Atascadero for the following rights- of-way: a.. Street Name: Principal Avenue b. Limits: Thirty (30) feet from centerline to right-of-way on an alignment acceptable to the Director of Public Works to allow centerline radius of 150 feet and corner rounding at intersection. C. Street Name: Las Lomas Avenue d. Limits: Thirty (30) feet from centerline to right-of-way on an alignment acceptable to the Director of Public Works to allow for a right angle connection and corner rounding at intersection. e. Street Name: Montecito f. Limits: Twenty (20) feet from centerline to right-of-way and corner rounding at intersection. 17. All offers of dedication shall be completed and recorded prior to or simultaneous with recording any final map(s) . 18. Prior to approval of the improvement plans by the Director of Public Works, either the Subdivider shall acquire sufficient title or interest in the off-site land to allow the improve- ments to be made as required by these Conditions; or the City Council, upon request by and at the expense of the subdivider, shall have made all appropriate findings and adopted a Resolu- tion of Necessity as required by law so that the City may exercise its power of Eminent Domain. 19. Obtain an Encroachment Permit from the City Public works • Department. Sign an Inspection Agreement and a Curb and Gutter and Improvement Agreement, guaranteeing that the work _ - - 0' 9 . will be done and inspections paid for, prior to the issuance of a building permit, and construct improvements as directed by the Encroachment Permit prior to final building inspection. Improvement plans prepared by a Registered Engineer shall be submitted and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to recording of any final map(s) . 20. Prior to recording any final map(s) , a soil investigation (as required by the Map Act) shall be submitted, recommending cor- rective action which will prevent structural damage to each structure proposed to be constructed in the area where soil problems may exist. 21. The open space lots on those parcels where condominiums are to be created shall be designated as Public Utilities Easements and shall be offered for dedication to the public as PUE' s. 22. A final map, or maps, in compliance with all conditions set forth herein, shall be submitted for review and approval in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City Lot Division Ordinance prior to recordation. a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners created and a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor shall indicate, by certificate on the final map, that corners have been set or shall be set by a date • specific and that they will be sufficient to enable the survey to be retraced. b. A recently updated preliminary title report shall be submitted for review in conjunction with the processing of the final map. C. A preliminary subdivision guarantee shall be submitted for review in conjunction with the processing of the final map. 23. Approval of this tentative tract map shall expire two years from the date of final approval unless an extension of time is granted pursuant to a written request prior to the expiration date. 040 City of Atascadero Item: 9-1 STAFF REPORT FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Date: June 16, 1987 8 JULY 211F 1987 BY: Steven L. DeCamp, Senior Planner File No: TTM 14-87 Project Address: 9505 E1 Camino Real SUBJECT: Subdivision of four parcels containing 5.5 acres into eight (8) lots. Two of the lots will be further divided into commercial condominium units. A. SITUATION AND FACTS: 1. Applicant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Rex Hendrix 2. Representative. . . . . . . . . . . . . .Westland Engineering 3. Site Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5. 5 acres 4. Zoning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .CR (Commercial Retail) 5. Existing Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Lots 1,2,3, & 8 - Commercial Lots 4,5,6, & 7 - Vacant 6 . General Plan Designation. . . .Retail Commercial 7. Environmental Status. . . . . . . .Negative Declaration posted May 1, 1987 B. ANALYSIS: The application before the Commission proposes the subdivision of four parcels containing 5.5 acres into eight (8) parcels con- taining between 0. 27 acres, and 0.99 acres. The property pro- posed for subdivision is located in a Commercial Retail (CR) zoning district. There is no minimum lot size specified by the ordinance for parcels in this zone. Minimum lot sizes are deter- mined by market factors and design constraints (e.g. parking re- quirements, site configuration, etc. ) . In addition to the division of the property, this application proposes the creation of twelve commercial condominium units. Lots 1 and 2 contain existing commercial units which will be con- verted to individual ownership. Thus, in each case, the commer- cial units will be individually owned, with parking and other open areas held in common. - - 041 The size, location and complexity of this project raise various issues of concern. First, because this project involves both the subdivision of real property and the creation of airspace condo- miniums, filing the final map will be relatively complex. For this reason, it is anticipated that multiple final maps will need to be filed. Approval of the tentative map will be conditioned to require submittal of a phasing plan to guide the filing of the final maps. The required phasing plan will also address the phasing of public improvements (or suitable securities) . This will be necessary because of the significant improvements that will be required on this site's multiple frontages. The project site abuts property zoned for single family residen- tial development on Las Lomas Avenue and Principal Avenue east of Pino Solo. To mitigate the impact of commercial development on these residential areas, a twenty-five (25) foot building setback should be required along the street frontages of proposed Lots 5 and 6 . With this setback, and a landscaped berm or buffer behind the sidewalk, anticipated effects in the residential areas should be minimized. The setback line will be shown on the final map to insure notification of prospective purchasers/developers. The scale of the tentative map makes it difficult to determine the setbacks between existing buildings and proposed property lines. • To insure conformance with the provisions of the Uniform Building Code, the subdivider will be required to submit a map indicating these proposed setback distances. Minor modifications to proposed lot lines can then be made, if necessary, to avoid costly building modification that might otherwise be required. Finally, the configuration of the proposed lots and access drive- ways requires that reciprocal ingress/egress and parking agree- ments be established between all proposed parcels. This can be accomplished through the CC&R's established for the condominiums and deed restrictions for the other lots. This will insure that the site' s circulation and parking works in a comprehensive man- ner and not as separate, fragmented units. Each parcel will, how- ever, need to provide adequate on-site parking for the condomin- ium units. Attention to these items, along with the standard road improvement requirements, will result in a project that will function properly and can be developed in an appropriate manner. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends conditional approval of Tentative Tract Map 14-87 based on the Findings in Exhibit C and Conditions of Approval in Ex- hibit D. - - - 0,32 SD:ph • Attachments: Exhibit A - Location & Zoning Map Exhibit B - Tentative Tract Map Exhibit C - Findings Exhibit D - Conditions of Approval 0,13 CITY OF ATASCADERO l.-oGa-icon Zoh,KR kms-1,, t 1970-7 _ / COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT -r TM � 87 DEPARTMENT M A (PD ` . /, _♦ %. s ♦ ♦�+►, y 'moi` _ f. ply • \�y� `� r O . d . ♦ SITE � CRT / T r`�S SO S E 1 camin o IZs,a,l �.� Gl` Cf...OVNM1QrI'ri/�rl �T�1�) \ •r go •SC•0640 -`y a� Voft / - - 044 - , � CX►k►61T' 3 ,�.,., ,.. . CITY OF ATASCADERO -��,t�4 a ' �s»-7 ascan :' COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Mae DEPARTMENT TTM 1-4 -s7 rr' 7 r T T! C` 10 —10 T t ~ new-•.tet )E�,jr,r'l,f j � i�er�/•. . �• ..� --•a-... •�.aarswa4wr. I a : 29 Naa;i C-) baa ga i8 :;.F a � � g: f �v I 12r Ul EXHIBIT C - Findings for Approval Tentative Tract Map 14-87 (Hendrix/Westland Engineering) June 16, 1987 FINDINGS: 1. The creation of these parcels conforms to the zoning ordinance and the general plan. 2. The creation of these parcels, in conformance with the recommended conditions of approval, will not have a significant adverse effect upon the environment. The Negative Declaration prepared for the project is adequate. 3. The site is physically suitable for the type of development pro- posed. 4. The site is physically suitable for the density of development proposed. 5. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements will not cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and • avoidably injure fish and wildlife or their habitat. 6. The design of the subdivision and the type of improvement will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision; or that substantially equivalent alternate easements are provided. 7. The proposed subdivision complies , with Section 66474. 6 of the State .Subdivision Map Act as to methods of handling and discharge of waste. EXHIBIT D - Conditions of Approval TTM 14-87 (Hendrix/Westland Engineering) June 16, 1987 (REVISED JULY 21, 1987) CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water Company and water lines shall exist at the frontage of each parcel or its public utility easement prior to recordation of the final map. 2. All existing and proposed utility easements, pipelines and other easements are to be shown on the final map. If there are other building or other restrictions related to the easements, they shall be noted on the final map. 3. Prior to recording any final map, a phasing plan for the final map recording sequence shall be submitted for the review and ac- ceptance of the City Engineer and Community Development Director. Said phasing plan shall include the phasing of the construction of the required public improvements. 4. Prior to recording any final map, a map shall be submitted for the review and approval of the Community Development Director ver- ifying that all existing buildings are set back from proposed • property lines a distance not less than that required by the adopted edition of the Uniform Building Code. 5. The applicant shall establish Covenants, Conditions, and Restric- tions (CC&Rs) for the regulation of land use, control of nuisances and architectural control of all buildings. a. These CC&R's shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Attorney and Community Development Department prior to approval of the final map. b. These CC&R's shall provide for common ingress, egress, and -parking on all driveways and designated parking areas. C. These CC&Rs shall be administered by a Condominium Owners Association. 6. A reciprocal agreement, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney, shall be recorded with the deed to each parcel at the time it is first conveyed, and a note to this effect shall be placed on the final map(s) , covering: a. ingress and egress b. parking C. sewer, water, utilities, and storm water facilities. 7 . A road maintenance agreement, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney, shall be recorded with the deed to each parcel at the V" OA 7 time it is first conveyed, and a note to this effect shall be placed on the final map (s) . 8. Submit a drainage plan, prepared by a registered civil engineer, providing for mitigating measures relieving any downstream drain- age problems or alternatively a stormwater detention basin. If a detention basin is selected, then the design shall be based upon a 100 year design storm, site developed, with outflow limited to 10 year design storm, undeveloped site, and as required by the Detention Basin Policy adopted August 12, 1985. The alternate selected must be acceptable to the Director of Public Works. 9. The fire hydrant located at the intersection of Pino Solo and Principal shall be upgraded to City standards prior to recording any final map. 10. Wastewater disposal shall be by connection to the public sewer . 11. Obtain a sewer connection permit from the Public Works Depart- ment prior to hooking up to the sewer. * 12. Sewer annexation fees in the amount established by City ordinance shall be paid prior to issuance of building permits and with rec- ognition of prior sewer fees which have already been paid. 13. A twenty-five (25) foot building setback shall be established . along the frontage of the property along Las Lomas Avenue and Principal east of Pino Solo Avenue. Said building setback shall be delineated on any final map for parcels 5 and 6 as shown on the tentative tract map. 14. All signage on the site shall be brought into conformance with approved Conditional Use Permits, the Zoning Ordinance, and other approved plans prior to filing any final maps. * 15. Prior to recording any final map(s) , a public facility improvement plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Community Develop- ment and Public Works Directors for the planting of street trees along the entire frontage of the property along E1 Camino Real. Said plans shall be for the installation of trees an average of thirty (30) feet on center with adequate provisions for irriga- tion. Street trees shall be installed prior to the recordation of the last final map for the site. 16. Enter into an agreement and post securities acceptable to the City Attorney and Public Works Director, to defer the following improvements: a. Traffic signal improvements at the intersection of Santa Rosa and E1 Camino Real. The cost of said improvements shall not exceed 25% of the cost of the traffic signal; and 0- - (lag b. Road improvements along the frontage of the undeveloped lots as specified below. * 17. Improve the following streets to City standard as approved by the Director of Public Works, as indicated: a. Principal Avenue: Install curb, gutter, five (5) foot side- walk and AC pave-out along property frontage. b. Las Lomas Avenue: Install curb, gutter, five (5) foot side- walk and AC paveout along property frontage. C. Montecito: Install curb, gutter, five (5) foot sidewalk and AC paveout along property frontage. 18. The applicant shall acquire and make an irrevocable offer of dedi- cation to the City of Atascadero the following rights-of-way: a. Street Name: Principal .Avenue b. Limits: Thirty (30) feet from centerline to wee on an alignment acceptable to the Director of Public Works to allow centerline radius of 150 feet and corner rounding at inter- section. C. Street Name: Las Lomas Avenue d. Limits: Thirty (30) feet from centerline to on an alignment acceptable to the Director of Public Works to allow for a right angle connection and corner rounding at inter- section. e. Street Name: Montecito l OS • f. Limits: Twenty (20) feet from centerline to and corner rounding at intersection. 19. All offers of dedication shall be completed and recorded prior to or simultaneous with recording any final map(s) . 20. Prior to approval of the improvement plans by the Director of Public Works, either the Subdivider shall acquire sufficient title or interest in the off-site land to allow the improvements to be made as required by these Conditions; or the City Council, upon request by and at the expense of the subdivider , shall have made all appropriate finding and adopted a Resolution of Neces- sity as required by law so that the City may exercise its power of Eminent Domain. * 21. Obtain Encroachment Permit from City of Atascadero (Public Works Department) . Sign an Inspection Agreement and a Curb and Gutter and Improvement Agreement, guaranteeing that the work will be done and inspections paid for, prior to the issuance of a Building Per- mit, and construct improvements as directed by the Encroachment Permit prior to final building inspection. Improvement Plans pre- 0 v 0,19 pared by a Registered Engineer shall be submitted and approved by Department of Public Works prior to recordation of any final map(s) . 22. Prior to recording any final map(s) , a soil investigation (as re- quired by the Map Act) shall be submitted, recommending correc- tive action which will prevent structural damage to each struc- ture proposed to be constructed in the area where soil problems may exist. 23. The open space lots on those parcels where condominiums are to be created shall be designated as Public Utilities Easements and shall be offered for dedication to the public as PUE's. 24. A final map, ormaps, in compliance with all conditions set forth herein, shall be submitted for review and approval in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act and the City Lot Division Ordinance prior to recordation. a. Monuments shall be set at all new property corners created and a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor shall indicate, by certificate on the final map, that cor- ners have been set or shall be set by a date specific and that they will be sufficient to enable the survey to be re- traced. b. A recently updated preliminary title report shall be submit- ted for review in conjunction with the processing of the final map. C. A preliminary subdivision guarantee shall be submitted for review in conjunction with the processing of the final map. 25. Approval, of this tentative tract map shall expire two years from the date of final approval unless 'an extension of time is granted pursuant to a written request prior to the expiration date. Revised Conditions • MEETING AGENDA DATE 11/26/91ffEM# a_ MEMORANDUM TO: Ray Windsor, City Manager November 6, 1991 FROM: Henry Engen, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Board of Appeals Composition BACKGROUND: At the October 22, 1991 City Council meeting, the City.•Clerk had placed on the agenda notice of the resignation of David Grummitt and Jim Rogers from the Board of Appeals. The Council paused in the matter of seeking new appointments, and the question was raised as to whether a three member board could be established. The purpose of this memo is to evaluate the options that are available in this matter. ANALYSIS: Attached are the regulations establishing the current five member board and its, mandated composition, i.e. , two general contractors, one structural engineer/architect, one specialty contractor, and one public member. The five member make-up is standard and is derived from the Uniform Building Code.-- With the resignation of David Grummitt, we lost the design professional, and Jim Rogers represented the public member. Members terms on the Board are staggered with expiration dates of May 1992 or April 1994. Mr. Grummitt' s term would have expired in May of 1992, while Mr. Rogers' term would have carried through to April of 1994. The remaining members have terms as follows: John Vial (5/92) Ren Lerno (4/94) Michael Sherer (4/94) Theoretically then, through an amendment of the building regula- tions, membership on the Board could be reduced to three with the remaining members still retaining staggered terms. However, all of the members would be contractor members and there would not be public or design professional representation. 0" -n�l With respect to scheduling, we are looking at comprehensively updating the building code and related ordinances in January of 1992. As indicated at the Council meeting, this would be the convenient time to incorporate any desired changes in the membership. Advantages. Advantages would be that we'd save the need to adver- tise and schedule replacements on the Council agenda. We have been fortunate that there haven't been many appeals over the last year or two, and it could be argued that a three member board - provided all are present - might deal with matters somewhat more expedi- tiously. Disadvantages. The disadvantages include loss of balance in the composition of the Board in that it would be totally comprised of contractors without other parties of interest to this field being represented. Additionally, going down to a three member board raises problems of retaining a quorum. Two members would be a quorum, but this would lead to a strong potential of tie votes if one member doesn't make a meeting. Historically, it has been difficult to get all five members at every appeal that has been scheduled over the years. Moreover, revising the membership standards would mean the paperwork associated with re-writing the Board of Appeals section of the building code, together with re- writing their by laws and bringing both to the City Council for approval. • MY CONCLUSION: The disadvantages outweigh the advantages. HE:ph Encl: Building Regulations - Board of Appeals cc: John Vial - Acting Chairman, Building Construction Board of Appeals Ren Lerno Michael Sherer 0" (1S2 TITLE 8 - BUILDING REGULATIONS 1. When proposed use is other than originally designed and/or inten- ded :. as determined by the Building Official, railroad cars, ca- booses, shipping containers and similar assemblies, etc. , may- not be moved into or relocated within the City limits without his prior approval. 2. Railroad cars, cabooses, shipping containers and similar assem- blies, etc. , do not qualify as conventional construction; there- fore, all design/engineering work, plans, calculations, etc. , must be accomplished by a California licensed architect or engineer. 8-1.104. .Establishment of Board of Ap eals In order to - conduct hearings -: to-- determine : the suitability - of alternate materials and methods •of installation and to provide for reasonable interpretations of the provisions of this Title, a Board of Appeals is hereby estab- lished. The Board of Appeals shall also make interpretations of and hear appeals pursuant to the Housing and Dangerous Building Codes. (a) Membership. The Board of Appeals shall consist of five (5) members, two (2) of whom shall be general contractors, one (1) of whom shall be a structural engineer or architect, one (1) of whom shall be a specialty contractor, all of whom shall be qualified by experience and training, and one (1) of whom shall be a member of the public who is not .. one of the foregoing. Members of the Board of Appeals shall be ap- pointed by and serve .at the pleasure of the City Council. Each member shall comply with applicable provisions of the Political Reform Act of 1974,California Government Section 81000, et seq. The Building Official shall serve as Secre- tary to the Board of Appeals. (b) Eli ibilit A person shall live within the City to be eligible or appointment to the Board of Appeals. (c) Term. Terms of initial appointment shall be a term of two (2) years for two (2) members and four (4) years for three (3) members. Subsequent appointments shall be for a term of four (4) years. (d) Rules and Regulations. The Board of Appeals shall adopt reasonable rules and regulations, subject to approval by the City Council, for conducting its business. The Board shall render all decisions and findings in writing with a copy to the appellant. (e) Appeal Procedure. Any person aggrieved by a decision of the Building Division related to any manner within the pur- view of this Title shall have the right to appeal the deci- sion. The appeal shall be filed with the Building Official within fourteen (14) days after the rendering of the deci- sion affecting the aggrieved person. Grounds for the appeal shall be set forth in writing. -2- 0� nt;3 • REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item: B-6 CITY OF ATASCADERO Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 11/26/91 From: Mark Joseph, Administrative Services Director . SUBJECT: Sales Tax Service RECOM�ADATIOM: Council approve Resolution 106-90, reaffirming its use of Hinderliter, DeLlamas & Associates to provide sales tax forecasting and verification services. BACKQROUND: Council approved a contract with the firm of Hinderliter, DeLlamas and Associates to perform sales tax forecasting and verification services for the City, at a monthly expense of $300. In the process of receiving information from the State, the State has requested an authorizing resolution worded in a specific manner. Passage of the Resolution is a formality and should not delay the compilation of data from the State Board of • Equalization. 0- 0r;4 RESOLUTION NO. 106-91 A RESOLUTION OF THE CIT! COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASRSCADERO AUTHORIZING ACCESS TO SALES AND USE TAX RECORDS PURSUANT TO REVENUE AND TAXATION CODE SECTION 7056 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLONS: Section 1. The following City officials are hereby authorized to receive and review sales and use tax allocation information from the State Board of Equalization: City Manager: Ray Windsor Finance Officer: Mark Joseph Section 2. The following independent contractor for the City of Atascadero is hereby also authorized to receive and review sales and use tax data received from the State Board of Equalization: Hinderliter, de Llamas & Associates: Robert Hinderliter, Principal Lloyd de Llamas, Principal Section 3. The City of Atascadero hereby certifies that Hinderliter,, de Llamas & Associates: A. Has a current confidentiality contract with the City to receive sales and use tax records; and B. Is required by that contract to disclose information contained in, or derived from, those sales and use tax records only to an officer or employee of the City who is authorized by this resolution to examine the information; and C. Is prohibited by that contract from performing consulting service for a retailer during the term of that contract; and D. Is prohibited by that contract from retaining the information contained in, or derived from those sales tax records, after that contract has expired. 0" 0 R Section 4. Information obtained by examination of Board records shall be used only for purposes related to the collection of local sales and use taxes by the Board for municipal revenue forecasting and verification. Section 5. This resolution supersedes all previous authorizations. Section 6. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and forward a certified copy to: State Board of Equalization 2014 "T" Street, Suite 220 Sacramento, CA 95814 Attention: Jim Munekawa On motion by Councilperson , seconded by Councilperson , the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: • ADOPTED: CITY OF ATASCADERO By: • ALDEN F. SHIERS, Mayor ATTEST: - LEE RABOIN, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORK: ARTHER MONTANDON, City Attorney a:salestax 0' oss; REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Meeting Date: 11-26-91 CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: B-7 Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager From: Greg Luke, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Fuel Efficient Traffic Signal Management Program RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution 108-91 authorizing the submittal of an application to the California Department of Transportation for the subject program and designating the Director of Public Works as the person empowered to execute all necessary applications, and documents to implement and carry out this program. BACKGROUND: • This grant program would provide for the timing of 10 signalized intersections in the City of Atascadero. The timing would be engineered to provide the Rost fuel efficient flow of traffic at any given time of day. By establishing efficient traffic flow the number of idling vehicles will be reduced which will improve air quality and fuel consumption. FISCAL IMPACT: The total cost of the project is $14,000 with the State share being 75%, or $10, 500 and the City share 25%, or $3,500. 00 to be paid out of gas tax funds. 0- - or'-7 RESOLUTION NO. 108-91 0 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL OF A FUEL EFFICIENT TRAFFIC SIGNAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM GRANT APPLICATION WHEREAS, the City of Atascadero recognizes that it is in the national interest to promote the conservation of energy resources and to reduce our nation's dependence on costly foreign oil; and WHEREAS, fuel efficient traffic signal management by the City of Atascadero will provide benefits to the local community in the form of improved traffic flow, reduced fuel consumption, reduced vehicle operating costs, reduced air pollutant emissions, and improved safety due to smoother traffic flows; and WHEREAS, funds have been established and are available through the California Department of Transportation for grants to local governments for efficient traffic signal management projects. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Atascadero to authorize submittal of an application to the California Department of Transportation for a Fuel Efficient Traffic Signal Management Grant and the Director of Public Works of the City of Atascadero is hereby authorized and empowered to execute in the name of the City of Atascadero all necessary applications, and documents to implement and carry out the purposes specified in this resolution. On motion by Council and seconded by Council ,the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: ATTEST: CITY OF ATASCADERO LEE RABOIN, City Clerk ALDEN SHIERS, Mayor • 0- Resolution No. 108-91 • page two APPROVED AS TO FORM: MARY REDUS GAYLE Assistant City Attorney APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: GREG LUKE, Dir. of Public Works 0- OF-9 MEETING AGEND& 1 DATE 1/26/91 ITEMS _1 San Luis Obispo Area Coordinating Council Arroyo Grande Atascadero Grover City Morro Bay );!-W! raind Regional Transportation Planning Agency Paso Robles Pismo Beach San Luis Obispo San Luis Obispo County October 23, 1991 Alden Shiers, Mayor City of Atascadero P. 0. Box 747 Atascadero, CA. 93422 Dear Mayor Shiers: SUBJECT: LOCAL UNMET NEEDS HEARINGS The Area Council annually allocates approximately $4.5 million dollars in Transportation Development Act (TDA) funds to cities and the county. The funds are designated for public transit, and local streets and roads providing all transit needs are first satisfied. Two percent of the TDA funds is allocated specifically to jurisdictions to use on bike and pedestrian projects. State law requires the region to conduct a public hearing to receive public testimony identifying or commenting on transit needs that may exist within each jurisdiction. This year, the Area Council will be combining the Unmet Transit Needs Hearing with the recently created Unmet Bicycle Needs Hearing. The hearing is scheduled for December 4, 1991, at 1:30 p.m. in the Board of Supervisors Chambers. This is an opportunity for any concerned citizens to testify on any transit or bicycle facilities deficiencies they experience. The Bicycle Needs Hearing was approved last year by the Area Council and is designed to encourage public testimony for bicycle facility requests. The hearing will be used only to gather information on deficient bikeway facilities. The testimony may be used to help jurisdictions determine useful" bike projects to include in their Circulation Element or bicycle projects budget. Testimonies concerning transit deficiencies will be evaluated to determine which requests are unmet needs, and which needs are "reasonable to meet". The Area Council directs each jurisdiction to set aside funds to meet those needs, then allows the remainder to be programmed for necessary improvements in streets and roads. You can help facilitate the citizen input to this process. Please consider establishing a Local Unmet Transit and Bikeway Needs Hearing to involve fully the residents of your city in transportation planning. Local hearings are strictly optional and if conducted should be done so prior to the December 4th meeting. The benefits of local hearings are: ov - ogo County Government Center, San Luis Obispo, CA 93408 (805) 549-5612 Mayor Alden Shiers October 23, 1991 Page # I. Address problems of transit-disadvantaged people getting to hearings; 2. Allows citizens to directly present transportation concerns to their legislative body rather than a regional body; and 3. Provides an opportunity for all city council members to be directly involved in the unmet needs process. If you are interested in an Unmet Needs hearing, we would provide staff support and assistance for the presentation. Please contact us at 549-5711 if you have questions or would like assistance in this matter. Sincerely, A"r'_ i�. RONALD L. DE CARLI EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR • c: CTAC Members SLOACC Members DH/cl/8861-1 & 8862-1/151 10-23-91 0_ _ 091 DAT�11 26/91 1M _1 • MEMORANDUM To: City Council From: Ray Windsor, City Manager Subject: City Facilities No-Smoking Ordinance Date: November 18, 1991 The attached ordinance is an amended and updated portion of an ordinance adopted by the City in 1982 and is intended to specifi- cally and solely address the unanimous direction of Council at its meeting of October 22nd (please see minutes excerpt of Council' s action, attached) . It should also be noted from said minutes excerpt, a copy of which is attached, that Council wished to have all members present before considering any further hearings with regard to other smok- ing prohibition. In the meantime, while awaiting the return of Councilmember Dexter, staff completed and submitted a "request for grant funds" under the California Smoke-Free Cities Program in order to conduct studies within the community related to public attitudes and educa- tion on smoking. The award of such grants are to be made in December. In light of this action, and until it is known whether the City will receive the subject grant, Councilmember Dexter has sug- gested, and staff will be recommending, that further hearings related to additional regulations on smoking be deferred until such time as, ( 1) the grant award is known, and (2) in the event we re- ceive it, the grant' s purposes related to public input are carried through. Included with this item is a copy of the City's existing No Smoking Ordinance (Code Section 6-6) , which, as indicated previ- ously, was adopted in 1982 but which is dated and misleading in certain respects. For example, under enforcement it references a City Health Officer--a position the City does not have, inasmuch as we have historically looked to the County for such services. The remaining attachments to this memo relate to the request by Councilmember Borgeson for supporting documentation on the effects and/or hazards of second-hand or passive smoking. RW:cw Attachments 0- 06;2 ORDINANCE NO. 235 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE • CITY OF ATASCADERO AUTHORIZING AMENDING TITLE 6, CHAPTER 61 OF THE ATASCADERO MUNICIPAL CODE REGULATING SMOKING WHEREAS, Title 61 Chapter 6 of the Municipal Code of the City of Atascadero was adopted in 1982; and WHEREAS, since the adoption of Title 61 Chapter 61 significant new findings regarding the impacts of smoking and breathing sidestream or secondhand smoke have been issued by the Surgeon General of the United States; and WHEREAS, it is in the interest of the public health, safety and general welfare of the residents and visitors of the City to protect them from the impacts of breathing sidestream or secondhand smoke in facilities owned, managed and operated by the City of Atascadero. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Atascadero does hereby ordain that Chapter 6 of Title 6 of the Municipal Code shall be amended, as follows: Section 1. Ordinance Text 1. A new Section 6-6.01 shall be added which shall read as follows: "Sec. 6-6.01 Findings. Whereas the Surgeon General of the United States has determined and the City Council does find that: (a) Smoking tobacco is a proven danger to the health of human beings; and (b) Breathing sidestream or secondhand smoke is a significant health hazard for certain population groups including without limitation elderly people, those with cardiovascular disease or impaired respiratory functions, asthmatics and those with obstructed air passages; and (c) Tobacco smoke is a major contributor to indoor air pollution; and (d) Health hazards induced by breathing sidestream or secondhand smoke are believed to include lung cancer, respiratory infection, decreased respiratory function, bronchoconstriction and brochospasm. " 0" OV43 Ordinance No. 235 Page 2 2. Section 6-6.01 of the existing Title 6, Chapter 6 shall be renumbered and shall be Section 6-6.02, as amended. The existing language in former Section 6-6.01 shall be numbered as subsection (a) of the new Section 6-6.02 and the following language shall be added to Section 6-6.02, as subsection (b) : " (b) For the purposes of protecting the health and welfare of the public from sidestream or secondhand smoke in publicly owned, operated, managed and leased facilities, it is necessary to specifically prohibit smoking, as defined herein, inside all buildings, structures and indoor facilities owned, operated, leased or managed by the City which are used by or open to the public. " 3. Section 6-6.02 of the existing Title 6, Chapter 6 shall be amended by deleting the existing subsection (b) and inserting in- its place the following: " (b) Smoking as used herein shall mean the inhaling, • exhaling, burning or carrying of any ignited pipe, cigar or cigarette or any other combustible substance or substances, including without limitation tobacco, which are used for the purposes of inhaling or exhaling the smoke therefrom. " and said Section 6-6.02, as amended, shall be renumbered and shall be Section 6-6.03. 4. Section 6-6.03 of the existing Title 6, Chapter 6, shall be amended by deleting former Section 6-6.03(c) and inserting the following in its place: " (c) Within all buildings, structures and indoor facilities owned, operated, leased or managed by the City and which are used by or open to the public, including without limitation public transportation, enclosed areas occupied by City staff, open office areas, shared offices, private offices, hallways, rest rooms, escalators, elevators, stairways, lobbies, reception and waiting rooms, classrooms, meeting or conference rooms and auditoriums, on-site cafeterias, lunchrooms, lounges, and any facility, school or educational institution being used by the City for the purpose of providing classroom instruction, • including without limitation instruction for technical or substantive training or for 0- OCA Ordinance No. 235 Page 3 instruction in dancing, are musical or other cultural skills. " and said Section 6-6.03, as amended, shall be renumbered and shall be Section 6-6.04. 5. Section 6-6.04 of the existing Title 6, Chapter 6 shall be deleted and in its place shall be inserted Section 6- 6.05, which shall read as follows: "Sec. 6-6.05 Posting of Signs. Signs which designate the "no smoking" areas designated by this Chapter shall be conspicuously posted in every room, building, facility or other place so designated by this Chapter. the manner of such posting shall be at the discretion of the City Manager and/or his designee. The City Manager and/or his designee shall determine the manner for posting such signs on the basis of clarity, sufficiency • and conspicuousness are apparent in communicating the intent of this Chapter. " 6. Section 6-6. 05 of the existing Title 6, Chapter 6 shall_ • be deleted and its place shall be inserted Section 6-6.06 which shall read as follows: "Sec. 6-6. 06 The City Manager and/or his designee and/or the ordinance enforcement officer shall have authority to enforce the .provisions of this Code. " 7. Section 6-6.06 of the existing Title 6, Chapter 6 shall be renumbered and shall be Section 6-6.07. Section 2. Publication The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published once within fifteen (15) days after its passage in the Atascadero News, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, published, and circulated in the City in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code; shall certify the adopting and posting of this ordinance and shall cause this ordinance and this certification together with proof of posting to be entered into the Book of Ordinances of the City. Section 3. Effective Date This ordinance shall go into effect in full force at 12:01 a.m. on the 31st day after its passage. Ordinance No. 235 Page 4 On motion by Councilperson and seconded by Council- person , the foregoing Ordinance is approved by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: CITY OF ATASCADERO ATTEST: By: ALDEN SHIERS, Mayor LEE RABOIN, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: MARY REDUS GAYLE, Assistant City Attorney • 0v �)�� MINUTE ORDER DATE OF MEETING: October 22, 1991 COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Borgeson, Lilley, Nimmo and Mayor Shiers COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT : Councilman Dexter SUBJECT: REGULAR BUSINESS ITEM #D-6 NO SMOKING; ORDINANCE CONSIDERATION MOTION: By Councilman Lilley, seconded by Mayor Shiers that staff bring back to the Council for adoption an ordinance on the part of the City of Atascadero prohibiting smoking inside public buildings owned and operated by the City of Atascadero. Discussion of the motion: Councilwoman Borgeson pointed out that staff had also requested direction concerning prohibition in other public areas and asserted that a full hearing would be in order. She added that it would be appropriate to have a full council present. Councilman Lilley clarified that his motion was intended to provide that an ordinance prohibiting smoking in facilities owned by the City be adopted without undue delay. He explained further that the motion was without prejudice to any direction on the part of staff to come back with additional information for consideration of a smoking ban exceeding the bounds of his motion. Mayor Shiers indicated that he understood the intent of the motion and agreed with the necessity of an additional hearing. Vote on the motion: Motion unanimously carried 4:0. CERTIFICATION I, Lee Raboin, City Clerk of the City of Atascadero, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and exact motion made and passed by the Atascadero City Council at their regular meeting of October 22, 1991. Dated: November 18, 1991 011 V LEE RABOIN, C y Clerk City of Atascadero • 0- - 097 6-6.01-6-6.03 CHAPTER 6. NO-SMOKING AREAS ESTABLISHED IN CERTAIN PUBLIC PLACES Sec. 6-6.01. Purpose. Because smoking of tobacco or any other weed or plant is a positive danger to health and a cause of material discomfort and a health hazard to those who are present in confined places, and in order to serve public health, safety and welfare, the declared purpose of this chapter is to establish areas where persons will be free from inhaling smoke by requiring that areas be re- served for nonsmokers in certain public places and by pro- hibiting the smoking of tobacco or any other weed or plant in certain other areas which are used by or open to the public. (Ord. 56 § 6-6.01, 1982) Sec. 6-6-02. Definitions. As used in this chapter the following terms shall have the meanings ascribed to them as follows: (a) "Service line" means an indoor line or area in which persons await service of any kind, regardless of whether or not such service involves the exchange of money. Such service shall include, but is not limited to, sales, giving of information, directions, or advice, and transfers of money or goods. (b) "Smoke" or - "smoking" means and includes the carrying of a pipe, cigar, or cigarette of any kind which is burning, or the igniting of a pipe, cigar, or cigarette of any kind. (Ord. 56 § 6-6.02, 1982) Sec. 6-6.03. Prohibition in certain public places. Smoking shall be prohibited in the following places: (a) Elevators, museums, galleries, public transportation facilities open to the public, and service lines of establishments doing business with the general public: (b) Waiting rooms and public hallways of every private 318 0- og8 6-6.04 • or public health care facility, including but not limited to hospitals; provided further, that this prohibition shall not prevent the establishment of a separate waiting room in which smoking is permitted, as long as there also exists a waiting room in the same facility in which smoking is prohibited; (c) Waiting rooms, meeting rooms, public assembly rooms, libraries, and restrooms located in all buildings owned or leased by the City, except in zones designated for smoking by the Health Officer. Such smoking zones shall not exceed twenty percent (20%) of the seating capacity of each room or area; (d) Within any building not open to the sky which is primarily used for or designed for the purpose of exhibiting any motion picture, stage drama, lecture, musical recital, or other similar performance whenever open to the public, except smoking which is a part of a stage performance, including all restrooms, except that smoking will be allowed in an area commonly referred to as a lobby if such lobby is physically separated from the spectator area; (e) Within all public areas in every retail food market, as defined in Section 6-1.01 ; (f1 All restrooms open for public use; (g) Within every restaurant, as defined in Section 6-1.01, having an occupied capacity of fifty (50) or more persons: provided that this prohibition shall not apply where a part of the dining area sufficient to satisfy all public requests for seating in a nonsmoking area is posted and maintained as such an area. (Ord. 56 § 6-6.03, 1982) Sec. 6-6.04. Posting of signs. Signs which designate smoking or no-smoking areas es- tablished by this chapter shall be conspicuously posted in every room, building, or other place so covered by this chapter. The manner of such posting shall be at the discretion of the owner, 319 0- (ls:q • 6-6-05-6-6.06 t operator, manager, or other person having control of such room, building, or other place so long as clarity, sufficiency, and conspicuousness are apparent in communicating the intent of this chapter. Establishments described in subsection (e) of Section 6-6.03 shall have a no-smoking sign posted at meat and produce counters and checkout lines. (Ord. 56 § 6-6.04, 1982) Sec. 6-6.05. Enforcement. (a) The City Manager shall be responsible for com- pliance with this chapter as to facilities which are owned, operated, or leased by the City. (b) The owner, operator, or manager of any facility, business, or agency within the purview of this chapter shall comply with this chapter. Such owner, operator, or manager • shall post or cause to be posted all no-smoking signs required by this chapter and shall call such signs to the attention of any person who violates this chapter by smoking in a posted no- smoking area. (c) The Health Officer of the City and his duly ap- pointed representatives and the ordinance enforcement officer designated pursuant to Title 9 of this Code shall have authority to enforce the provisions of this chapter. (Ord. 56 § 6-6.05, 1982) Sec. 6-6.06. Violation: Penalty. Any person who violates any provision of this chapter by smoking in a posted no-smoking area or by failing to post or cause to be posted a no-smoking sign required by this chapter is guilty of an infraction and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished as provided by Chapter 1-3 of this Code. (Ord. 56 § 6-6.06, 1982) 320 . . 0- 7n gL a � 3 x-7 y a. �i A •� a O A� :n � 3 � _c c CA a' `e$ �. e� ee a' - c O S ^ o 0a fit a � as c _moo 3 F a' 24 A < o 0 ZA 3 � 3 CM 00 _ eb c m A o a5 3 as 51 A �o o_ n A � o S 0 A ^ a ms' s X, c � ' '?' ? c Sr � � A ^ %3 1 A A A 3 c � O/ C 23 h aa�� _ c " n'- `° �, r3 ro 'A. A s 5. S ao Q g x70 _a > > 43 aeb -O+ � �' A0 � � " = � � � ggp- v=, deo a 700 eb A OQA Q A_ 2 -s -� A A A 0 7_ � � n � al pr � E a o aa � v� A 7 -s a _ _ Vl Al CA S .� _ 3Fet 3 Ns. 3 A Pf "+ n` O B A c nye ✓ i� a n70 as y 72 pr et FS y s z � �A r. �n ��^! � � � � � O_ ,,,- �• � ? a � as � � Lly ElF PA n �i3$ ^ � 70 '� m E c -O aAi = � 3 F`or a' '� G��• f9 >r > =ML W �> - y CD � z n C eco CA A O ASS C A �, m ? eq =m w e3 C Oc o C H ca-pk S �• e9 = �t ytb A • = � y = _� �96 aT.wA,- SRic �, es °1_ A in co y e� ? T' �� p2 an opii LI 3 et sa p p f�J °i y CD .7 Vi m ^ L' y ' F— y C y �' S p S� Ly' L' f9 ^ Ayf° $ � eb MVo Bc er3 _ap c � c Aesacy �- o g5 ? 9 c Ta tep�pa �, SrCASel Az c 2 e'o ? f eb al o .9 M .. _ — _ � z e`'o e3 8vgg, C _ co �° B es 9 eo Ems' S, 3 Ses S °A � 'F'' as o �. ao a cy g' f° N D �gl St R R TA 2 � 3 LIP Q t'io � _- p p iv y _ = ego a S F c ^ G. CJS p3Q �' -� Seo `6' C, B c c oet Boo 'p o o c o c =� Uao c�D 0. �. 3 �v et E ee es = � °o, � = A _ ma. 9 W f�yp9 yy eppi • O A ^ Vl = H N C d OO =n D' hr FF S ei c apo e� o o co ^ vc, a� or le P' v, o a� �c. y� ve° `i .� nJ, Yeo g o �' S? e� � `26' e•' � C 3 E p y S— 7rCC' A p{3 'fl fp y' Ci C Vi gl ' cF �r � � c v'e co Seb �yp s A ee A�i p ep G. fD ` p� Wil. p A ep V+ ..� O ^� y 'O 3 t 2 OT.' ^ H ,I oo y`s o O C LT. A 7 B ftC= a cc a o k A B ? � m C O y A to 0 0 _ . 3 � ... � c A o c `�' =, a R- n0.i s Ac' �' ^ p c 3 '? R= � c s y m es g3 c c m S4 f S o00 — A = A Doo vA- O� "7 e� � � m FF, o 3 c amfD yy G A y 3 � 3 " � � � eSs �. o a � E'• , sS � � e3 eSe P' = 3 y `� o o c Sam v ` m < v o ep c S y t; y o n efl A o OF d. ? 0 0,72 Fact Sheet on Passive Smoking Passive smoking(also called secondhand smoking,sidestream smoking,or involuntary smoking)is the inhalation of the smoke produced by another person's cigarette.The Surgeon General's 1986 Report on Involuntary Smoking documents the proven health hazards of involuntary smoking by non-smokers: Increased Risk of Cancer A A study by the Environmental Protection Agency has estimated that 500 to 5,000 non- smokers die annually of lung cancer caused by others cigarettes.Even if the lower figure is used,this makes passive tobacco smoke the nation's most lethal airborne car- cinogen.The EPA normally regulates air pollution if a substance causes even 20 deaths a year. A Sidestream smoke contains much higher concentrations of toxic and cancer-causing chemicals than the smoke that is inhaled directly.About 75 percent of the nicotine from a cigarette ends up in the atmosphere;only 25 percent enters the smoker's body. 0 A study conducted in Japan in 1984 showed that non-smokers who lived or worked with • smokers inhaled significant amounts of nicotine.According to the study,if a non-smok- er's spouse smokes two packs a day,the non-smoker ends up with the same amounts of cotinine(the breakdown product of nicotine)as someone who smokes up to three ciga- rettes a day.Other studies have shown that non-smoking wives of smokers face four times the expected risk of lung cancer and die an average of four years earlier if their husbands are/were long-time smokers. Other Respiratory Conditions o A study at the University of California/San Diego found that non-smokers exposed to secondhand smoke from their colleagues for 20 years had about the same degree of im- paired lung function as someone who smoked 10 cigarettes a day for 20 years. A Passive smoking among children of smokers has been found to cause a higher incidence of bronchitis,pneumonia and other respiratory illnesses,including slower growth of lung volumes. 0 It is likely that passive smoking in the workplace increases the risk of acute respiratory disease in non-smoking adults. Eye irritation A Eye irritation is the most common complaint of healthy people exposed to secondhand smoke. A Exposure to smoke can impair one's driving because it delays recovery of vision follow- ing glare. U" OP73 Other Smoke-Related Symptoms 0 Passive smokers often experience nasal congestion,headache,cough,sore throat, hoarseness,dizziness,nausea,loss of appetite,fatigue and irritability. Aggravation of Existing Health Conditions • 0 Passive smoking often increases the symptoms associated with angina pectoris,asth- ma,hay fever,emphysema,or other respiratory diseases.A Canadian study found that one-fifth of the population had a health condition that was aggravated by exposure to tobacco smoke. Exacerbated Dangers in Industrial Environments 0 Tobacco smoke exacerbates the harmful effects of dangerous physical and chemical agents that may already be present in industrial companies. 6, Passive smoke may also contribute to fires and explosions involving flammable agents. Forty-one states,the District of Columbia,and more than 400 municipalities now limit or restrict smoking in public places;21 states restrict or ban smoking during public meetings or restrict smoking to certain areas within public buildings.Eleven states require sepa- rate seating for non-smokers in restaurants,and 10 states have enacted laws specifically addressingAmoking in the workplace.Twenty-eight states have laws restricting smoking in health care facilities.Minnesota was the first to enact a statewide law specifically de- signed to protect non-smokers from involuntary exposure to cigarette smoke. • Sources: Bureau of Business Practice,Division of Prentice-Hall,Inc., 1986. American Cancer Society,1986. 0` 014 I NT -'MERICAN LING ASSOCIATION® The Christmas Seal People• IN U S S1 0 I 0 8,P c .B'BtR. 1:0 B,B,R THE PEOPLE VS. SECONDHAND SMOKE The more A m e r i- By Judson Wells,Pk.D. Protection Agency issued a draft "Do you mind if I scatter report declaring that secondhand asbestos dust in your workplace?" In the early 1980s,the tobacco smoke,also known as environmen- These questions may seem out. cans learn about industry conducted a study of Amer- tal tobacco smoke or ETS,is a rageous,but the altogether-too-con icans'attitudes toward cigarette "Group A",that is,a known human mon"Do you mind if I smoke?"me the health effects smoking. In addressing the smol- carcinogen. That draft is now in one day seem no less ludicrous. dering issue of secondhand smoke, revision,but judging from the find- With official designation of Group the study's conclusions were dire:If ings of the Scientific Advisory Board status,secondhand smoke will join of secondhand Americans were allowed to think that has already reviewed it,the the above-mentioned human car- that secondhand smoke posed a final report is almost certain to con- cinogens and a dozen others on th. smoke, the more , danger to nonsmokers,smoking firm the Group A designation. EPA's 15 Least Wanted List. And would eventually become socially Meanwhile,the National Institute of all these substances,tobacco smok likely the are unacceptable. Occupational Safety and Health is by far the most ubiquitous,taus Small wonder,then,that in the (NIOSH)has issued its own report ing more cancer deaths each year intervening decade,tobacco compa- stating that secondhand smoke is a than all the others combined. to join the nies have done everything in their "potential occupational carcinogen," power to deny or distract attention which is the only designation that SOLID E V I D E N C E campaign fora from mounting evidence that sec- NIOSH uses. It's hard to believe that j6 ondhand smoke is an important These announcements should years ago,there was scarcely any cause of preventable illness and mark a major setback for tobacco as research on the potentially fatal smoke-free death in the U.S. a legitimate industry. effects of"passive smoking"— But they continue to lose ground. "Is it okay if I spray a little ben- inhaling the smoke from somebod, In May 1990,the Environmental zene in your face?" (continued on page 8) 0- 0175 . PEOPLE VS. SECONDHAND SMOKE ( rn t ; n u e d from page , ) else's cigarette,pipe,or cigar. But social drinkers;you'd compare both and immature immune systems, in 1981,researchers in Japan and to teetotalers. But in secondhand smoke-exposed children are far less Greece presented evidence that smoke research,it's hard to find any able to cope with this form of pollu- wives of smokers were significantly abstainers;nearly all of us are tion. Consequently,children reared more likely to get lung cancer than exposed to some degree. What most in smoke-filled homes cough more, ,� wives of nonsmokers. Many studies are actually measuring,then, wheeze more,have more middle more studies followed,extend- is the additional risk of heavy expo- ear infections,and spend more �ECOND,HAND�SMOKE. ;, ing the research to smoke- sure over light exposure,not the risk time in the hospital with problems r - r exposed children and looking of heavy exposure vs.no exposure at like bronchitis and pneumonia. THE FACTS,_ at additional risks,such as all. The very pervasiveness of smok Moreover,a recent study indicates Nonsmokers with chronic heavy heart disease and other types ing may be masking the threat it that today's smoke-exposed kids arf i of cancer. poses to nonsmokers. more likely to be tomorrow's lung exposure to secondhand smoke are 30 While results from individ- One reason that so many of us cancer patients,even if as adults aercent more likely to die of.lung cancer ual studies vary,overall the are exposed is that it's hard to effec- they abstain from smoking them- body of disease. I body of evidence is solid. By tively separate smokers from non- selves. These studies are all the •:_ pooling data from numerous smokers.Most homes and buildings more alarming in light of health sur Studies estimate that the increased studies and analyzing it,we have heating and cooling systems veys which suggest that 40 to 50 risk from secondhand smoke causes I can now say with certainty that pick up tobacco smoke and percent of children under 5 live in 3,700 lung cancer deaths each i that secondhand smoke is a carry it from room to room. Recog- homes with at least one smoker. year in the U.S. killer. My own analyses of nizing this fact,NIOSH,in the report In recent years,the tobacco the data and the American referred to earlier,recommended industn has been laboring to make Lung Association-endorsed that employers protect workers from smoking a"rights"issue.But where Secondhand smoke-related heart estimates indicate that: involuntary exposure to secondhand in the Constitution does it say that disease may also kill an estimated ! • Each year about 3,700 smoke by eliminating smoking in the anyone has a right to cause dis 37,000 Americans annually. ` American lung cancer deaths workplace;until that can be ease? The American Lung Associa •' are due to secondhand achieved,NIOSH recommends that tion maintains that smoking is a �inine, a byproduct of nicotine,can smoke. employers restrict smoking to health issue,and one that touches • 12,000 other cancer enclosed areas with separate venti- nearly all of us. As more smokers be used to detect recent exposure to deaths may also result from lation. Now it's up to the Occupa- come to realize the impact their secondhand smoke; .: 11tI Y"",ggests tobacco smoke exposure. tional Safety and Health Administra- smoking can have on those close to that nine in 10 Americans have • About 37,000 Ameri- tion,the federal agency responsible them,I believe that quit rates are cotinine in-t.etr systems ' cans may die of heart dis- for protecting workers,to use the likely to accelerate. In the mean >; ease caused or exacerbated NIOSH report—and the EPA's time,the focus should be on pre- by secondhand smoke. findings=as the basis for finally venting involuntary exposure to sec Children chronically exposed to t Together,that makes a establishing a smoking standard for ondhand smoke wherever it occurs. .Isecondhand'smoke'ha ve ahigher w: cumulative toll of 53,000 the workplace. . incidence of cough, wheeze,middle preventable deaths each Judson Wells,Ph.D., is a special fecs,.b�r,onchfiti ,and ear, r year. In other words,the EFFECTS ON CHILDREN volunteer assistant in the smoking a=pneumonia They may also be more average American may No regulations currently contem- or health department of the Ameri- to develop�lun cancer as adults' have a eater chance of plated will protect those Americans can Lung Association. Dr. Wells 'likely g rE *, b'i P 1� rj dying from secondhand most vulnerable to secondhand has written a number of articles on V.For to 50 ereent ofchildren live smoke than of getting killed smoke. With their growing lungs secondhand smoke. . p «- f m an auto accident. r in homes are osedto 1, =Fsecondhand smoke. Studies suggest that 53,000 Americans die each year from exposure tc t� WE'RE ALL secondhand smoke. Below, how secondhand smoke compares to some EXPOSED other major causes of death in the U.S. The percentage:ofcompanies• ith. In so far as I've seen s workplaces g..polwws•uicrease any flaw in the data,it's from 36`percent�in 1986'to 5 ercen one that would tend to 21,10 ui`1991— stly,in:response to understate the threat from mpioYee col ints;abb Ismo ' g. secondhand smoke. In l 38,53 ' conducting these studies, 0— 0176 it's hard to find good con M ublic oputw isiirv'eys,82 erce it trolsubjects;Le..,people 41,21 f mericans hat smo�kers's who aren't exposed to t mo o mo mokers tobacco smoke. If you 46,73 wanted to know how alco- hol affected human health,you wouldn't compare alcoholics to 99 Pacific Street,Suite 100-E 1160 Marsh Street,Suite 221 Monterey,CA 9394o San Luis Obispo,CA 93401-3331 (408)373-7306 (805)543-4947 Santa Cruz(408)425-0336 Salinas(408)757-5864 0 AMERICANLUNG ASSOCIATION of Monterey, SantaCruz 8, San Luis Obispo Counties The Christmas Seal People November 5 , 1991 Mark Joseph Director of Administrative Services CITY V,G R City of Atascadero PO Box 747 Atascadero, CA 93423 Dear Mr. Joseph: Thank you for calling me back the other day. I appreciate the fact that Atascadero is applying for the Smoke-Free Cities Grant through the Healthy Cities project and I would be most willing to sit on the committee studying issues related to smoking within the City. I have been a resident of Atascadero for the past 24 years and am also the Program Director for the American Lung Association of Monterey, Santa Cruz and San Luis Obispo Counties and am concerned about policy development regarding smoking for the city of. • Atascadero . I recently read articles in both the Atascadero News and Telegram Tribune about a proposal to draft a no-smoking ordinance for Atascadero . As you no doubt know by now, Atascadero does have an ordinance (Health and Sanitation Ordinance #56 ) regulating smoking within certain public buildings, i . e. ," elevators, museums , service lines, health care facilities , theaters , and in restaurants seating more than 50 people . This ordinance has been in existence for several years and needs to be reviewed again for revisions and additions, particularly for City owned buildings and offices, stores , restaurants and worksites, as there is mounting evidence throughout the 1980 ' s and early. ' 90s showing the adverse health effects of second-hand smoke and more and more cities are taking the responsibility for banning smoking in all areas accessible to employees and to the public. I would also like to comment on a few statements which were made at the City Council meeting on October 22 . A few of those who spoke at the meeting expressed skepticism that second-hand smoke is harmful . Enclosed is a sample some of the latest information on second-hand smoke. I also have in my office two thick volumes published by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services which summarize results of studies on the health consequences of • involuntary smoking, and cancer and chronic lung disease in the 0" " (117 It's a Matter of Life and Breath" workplace related to smoking which you are welcome to borrow. Also , the Environmental Protection Agency will soon release a brochure classifying Environmental Tobacco smoke as a Group A carcinogen, a rating given only for substances proven to cause cancer in humans. Just 15 other substances have been rated this deadly, including benzene and asbestos, but ETS is the most common! I 'm sure you and your staff will be looking at other ordinances before considering an upgrade of the Atascadero ordinance. I have also enclosed the first few pages of a document I have in the Lung Association office entitled "Major Local Smoking Ordinances in the United States" published by the U. S . Department of Health and Human Services , which you are welcome to borrow or send for a copy for your files . I also hope your council members and/or staff will take a look at the San Luis Obispo City Smoking Ordinance , which celebrated its first year anniversary in August , 1991 . On October 28th, I called Debbie Hosley, who oversees the ordinance . She stated that for the first six months after the ordinance was implemented the City of SLO received numerous letters and phone calls both pro and con, but that over the months the questions dwindled and the city experienced a very smooth implementation, costing the City little in terms of personnel or money. The City has issued only 4 citations and three warnings. A sample of a letter the City sends to those who inquire is enclosed. The City has also produced a brochure explaining the ordinance for public education purposes . • The greatest amount of time spent by staff is to respond to 50-60 requests per year from other cities hoping to replicate the ordinance. I also talked with Rebecca Berner of the San Luis Obispo Chamber of Commerce. She stated that at the beginning of the implementation period, the, Chamber received letters from hotels and restaurants against the ordinance , but hadn' t received any complaints after the first few months . Ms. Berner felt that the ordinance had been implemented smoothly. Regarding the effect on tourism and revenues in general , Ms . Berner stated that it has been a slow year across the County but not more significantly so in San Luis Obispo . Many restaurant owners and hotel managers feared the ordinance would have a negative impact, but that has not happened. And finally, the stringent San Luis Obispo ordinance has been generally accepted by the community. A Cal Poly survey conducted in October of 1990 found that 75% of the community was in favor of the ordinance and 38% of the smokers were in favor of it . I think one of the real issues for the Council to consider is the appeal Atascadero has for the consumer. One gentlemen commented at the October 22 Council meeting that he won' t eat in San Luis Obispo because he is a smoker and wants to continue that privilege while dining . I would ask that he turn the tables about and consider . that non-smokers (there are now 70-75% in the U.S. ) in Atascadero may be avoiding Atascadero restaurants and indoor recreational opportunities because the air is unhealthful . Again, I am pleased that Atascadero is applying for the Smoke-free Cities Grant and hope that the leaders of Atascadero will consider the overwhelming evidence and come to the conclusion that it is now time to provide a more healthy environment for the citizens of Atascadero . Sincerely, Janet E. Stecher Program Director cc: ,/ Ray Winsor Alden Shiers Robert Nimmo Roland Dexter Bonita Borgeson Robert Lilly • • 0_ _ 011719 Ordinance No. 236 • page four CITY OF ATASCADERO ATTEST: By: ALDEN SHIERS, Mayor LEE RABOIN, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: MARY REDUS GAYLE of Burke, Williams & Sorensen, Assistant City Attorney APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: • GREG LUKE Dir. of Public Works • ll� IIN� REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Meeting Date: 11-26-91 • CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: D-2 Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager via: Greg Luke, Public works Director From: Kelly Heffernon, Administrative Analyst SUBJECT: Proposal of a waterway intrusion ordinance. RECOMMENDATION: That Council review and adopt the proposed ordinance. BACKGROUND: The issue of destructive Human intrusions into areas of Graves Creek, Atascadero Creek and the Salinas River has emerged frequently in the past year. The most recent discussion of these nuisances was during the joint Council-Commission meeting on October 10, 1991 whereby staff received direction to prepare an ordinance, separate from the Zoning Code, regulating waterway intrusions. Attached is a copy of that ordinance for Council's evaluation. • DISCUSSION: The ordinance was prepared with the purpose of identifying human activities causing the most destructive impact on the riparian habitat. These include: 1. Use of motorized recreational vehicles 2. Dumping of pollutants 3 . Confinement of domestic animals 4 . Unauthorized construction 5. Removal, destruction or significant alteration of riparian vegetation Other destructive human activities may occur in the future. They may be added to this list as they are identified. It should be recognized that this ordinance includes the Salinas River, only a portion of which lies within the City limits. The Salinas River area experiences much recreational vehicle use during the weekends. Policing of that corridor would be difficult and Council should evaluate eliminating such use in this area. Council may therefore wish to pass this ordinance without reference to the Salinas River. FISCAL IMPACT: Undefined increase in cost for enforcement. 0- 080 ORDINANCE NO. 236 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO ADDING CHAPTER 8 "WATERWAY INTRUSIONS" TO TITLE 7 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE I. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE, AND DECLARE AS FOLLOWS: A. Riparian corridors Are a Vital Asset to the Community. Riparian corridors are environmentally sensitive areas requiring protection because they are a part of the cultural, historical and archeological heritage and a vital asset of the area serving the larger ecological system of the United States, the State of California, the County of San Luis Obispo and the City of Atascadero by providing shelter and serving as habitat for wildlife and aquatic animals, enhancing water quality, providing open space, transporting and storing floodwaters and protecting the surrounding areas from erosion. B. Specific Intrusions into Riparian Corridors are Destructive. Specific types of intrusions by humans into riparian corridors are destructive to the stream bed and threaten the riparian habitat, water quality and floodwater containment and increase the possibility for erosion of surrounding areas. • C. Restricted Use of Riparian Corridors Necessary to Protect Public Health. Safety and Welfare. Protection of riparian corridors in order to preserve them is necessary to the general welfare, health and safety of the community and the ecological system. Protection of riparian corridors requires that certain uses of those areas by human beings be restricted. II. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE, DECLARE AND ORDAIN THAT: In order to preserve and protect the riparian corridors located within the City of Atascadero, Chapter 8 "Waterway Intrusions" is hereby added to Title 5. "Public Welfare" of the Municipal Code, as follows: "Sec. 5-8.01 Purpose. The purposes of this Chapter shall be to preserve riparian corridors of the City as a vital part of the cultural, historical and archeological heritage of the City and to serve the large ecological system of the City and surrounding area by protecting such corridors in order that they may continue providing shelter and serving as habitat for wildlife and aquatic animals, enhancing water quality, providing open space, transporting and storing floodwaters and protecting the surrounding areas from erosion. 0- OAS Ordinance No. 236 page two Sec. 5-8.02 Definitions. For the purposes of this Chapter the following words shall, unless otherwise defined within the text, have the following meanings: (a) Riparian Corridor shall mean that area encompassing both the waterway reservation and riparian vegetation adjacent to the waterway reservation. (b) Intrusion shall mean any encroachment into the riparian corridor that adversely impacts it's ecosystem. (c) Pollutants shall mean any substance, including without limitation refuse, chemicals, fuels, . lubricants and raw sewage, which would adversely impact the ecosystem and the quality of water through and under a riparian corridor. (d) Domestic• Animals shall mean all animals raised for human use or consumption, including without limitation horses, cows, sheep, pigs, goats, dogs, chickens and turkeys. Sec. 5-8.03 Prohibited Uses and Activities. The following uses and activities are prohibited in the riparian corridors of Atascadero Creek, Graves Creek and the Salinas River: .(a) Use of motorized recreational vehicles, including without limitation dirt bikes, motorcycles, motor homes and four wheel drive vehicles. (b) Dumping or disposing of pollutants. (c) Confinement of domestic animals, provided, however, that agricultural operations involving domestic animals which exist in any riparian corridor as of the date of enactment of this Ordinance shall be exempt from this Chapter so long as that existing use is continued. (d) Construction of any structure whether or not otherwise permitted by this Code. (e) Removal, destruction or alteration of riparian vegetation except upon the following findings by the City for which the burden of proof shall rest upon those responsible for the removal of riparian vegetation: 0- - O)Q2 Ordinance No. 236 page three (1) Removal associated with, and necessary to, an activity permitted by this Code. (2) Removal associated with a resource restoration project. (3) Removal as necessary for flood control purposes. (4) Removal as required for construction or maintenance of an adjacent infrastructure. (5) Removal of trees pursuant which is necessitated for public health and safety; provided that such removal complies with the requirements of Title 9 of this Code. Sec. 508.04 Enforcement. A violation of any provision of this Title shall be a misdemeanor. Penalties for a violation of this Chapter shall be as set forth in Chapter 3•, Title 1 of this Code. " III. PUBLICATION The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published once within fifteen (15) days after its passage in the Atascadero News, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, published and circulated in the City in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code; shall certify the adopting and posting of this ordinance and shall cause this ordinance and this certification together with proof of posting to be entered into the Book of Ordinances of the City. IV. EFFECTIVE DATE This ordinance shall go into effect and be in full force and effect at 12 : 01 a.m. on the 31st day after its passage. On motion by Councilperson and seconded by Councilperson , the foregoing ordinance is hereby adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: 0 nA3 Ordinance No. 236 page four CITY OF ATASCADERO ATTEST: By: ALDEN SHIERS, Mayor LEE RABOIN, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: MARY REDUS GAYLE of Burke, Williams & Sorensen, Assistant City Attorney APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: • GREG LUKE Dir. of Public Works U' (044 • REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO AGENDA ITEM: D-3 Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Mtg. Date: 11/26/91 From: Henry Engen, Community Dev. Director P$ File No: ZC 10-91 SUBJECT: Amendment of the Zoning Ordinance Text to conform to the Downtown Element of the General Plan; specifically to allow for the instal- lation of awnings with integral signs as an alternative to conven- tional signage in the Downtown Zones. RECOMMENDATION Approval and adoption of Ordinance No. 234 on second reading. BACKGROUND: • On November 12, 1992, the City Council conducted a public hearing on the above subject. Upon review, the Council approved Ordinance No. 234 on first reading. HE:ps Attachments: Ordinance No. 234 0' t1A5 ORDINANCE NO. 234 • AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT TO ALLOW AWNINGS AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO CONVENTIONAL SIGNS IN TEE DOWNTOWN ZONES (ZC 10-91; City of Atascadero) WHEREAS, the proposed zoning ordinance text amendment is consistent with the General Plan as required by Section 65860 of the California Government Code; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendment is in conformance with Section 65800 et seq. of the California Government Code concerning zoning regulations; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendment is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality•Act; and WHEREAS, the Atascadero Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 15, 1991 and has recommended approval of Zone Change 10-91 . NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does ordain as follows : Section 1 . Council Findings . • 1 . The proposal is compatible with the surrounding land use and zoning. 2 . The proposal is consistent with the General Plan Land Use and Downtown Elements, - and specifically, policies pertaining to downtown development and revitalization as expressed in the General Plan' s Downtown Element . 3 . The proposal is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act . Section 2 . Zonincx Text The Zoning Ordinance text is hereby amended by the addition of the language shown on the attached Exhibit A. Section 3. Publication. The City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published once within fifteen (15) days after its passage in the Atascadero News, a newspaper of general circulation, printed, published, and circulated in the City in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code; shall certify the adopting and posting of this • 0" (IRS; Ordinance #234 ordinance and shall cause this ordinance and this certification together with proof of posting to be entered into the Book of Ordinances of the City. Section 4 . Effective Date. This ordinance shall go into effect and be in full force and effect at 12 : 01 a.m. on the 31st day after its passage. On motion by and seconded by the foregoing Ordinance is approved by the following role call vote: AYES : NOES : ABSENT: DATE ADOPTED: By: ALDEN SHIERS, Mayor • City of Atascadero, California ATTEST: LEE RABOIN, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO CONTENT RAY WINDSOR, City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: ART MONTANDON, City Attorney PREPARED BY: HENRY ENGEN, Community Development Director • 0 0)RI7 •NOTE: Material to be aaeletred shown struckout . EXHIBIT A Material to be added shown bold. 9-4 . 134 . Sign Design Standards : The following signs are allowed subject to approval of a sign permit (Section 9-4 . 132a) in addition to any exempt signs specified in Section 9-4 . 132b. (a) Commercial and Industrial Zones : The following signs are allowed in the CR, CP, CN, CT, CS, CPK, IP, and I Zones, provided that the aggregate area of signs per site is not to exceed 100 square feet, unless authorized under Subsections d, f, or g of this Section. (1) One wall sign for each business or tenant, with an area equivalent to 15% of the building face, for each building face having a public entrance, up to a maximum of 80 square feet . (2) One suspended sign with a maximum area of 10 square feet for each business or tenant . (3) One free-standing or monument sign for each 300 • lineal feet of site frontage or portion thereof, with a maximum area of 40 square feet and a maximum height not to exceed 10 feet, except for shopping, office and industrial complexes which are subject to Subsection d of this Section. (4) Shopping, office or industrial complex identification signing, where allowed by Subsection d of this Section. (5) Highway identification signing, where allowed by Subsection eg of this Section. (b) Downtown Zones 1 - 4: The following signs are allowed in Downtown Zones 1 through 4. Each business shall be allowed one (1) square foot of sign area per lineal foot of street or alley frontage. Such allowance for signage shall not be utilized on a building face other than the qualifying building face. A minimum of twenty (20) square feet of signage shall be allowed for each building face with street or alley frontage. No building face shall contain more than fifty (50) square feet of signage. (1) Awnings which meet the following standards are allowed in-lieu of wall mounted signs. • Q- (048 a. Awnings may project five (5) feet into the • public right-of-way and must maintain a vertical clearance of eight (8) feet, except for the valance which must maintain a vertical clearance of no less than seven (7) feet. Poles and/or supports for the awning may not be placed in the public right-of-way. An encroachment permit shall be obtained for any awning located over a public right-of-way. b. Awning canopies and valances shall be constructed of suitable fabric. Translucent valances and logo panels may be constructed of other suitable materials. c. Awning canopies shall be a dark forest green color. All sign copy shall also be a dark forest green color. The valance and any logo panel on the canopy shall be cream colored. d. The business name and address may be located on the awning valance only. Letters, numbers, and logos located on the valance shall not exceed 18 inches in height (the address shall not be counted in the computation of sign area) . A business logo may be located on a cream colored panel on the • awning canopy. A business logo so located will be counted in the computation of total sign area. e. Awning canopies shall not extend above the roof line or second floor level of a building. Buildings with more than one floor may have awnings for windows on each floor. Awnings shall not cover significant architectural features of the building. f. Awning canopies shall be designed with good scale and proportion, and correspond to the individual architecture of each building. g. Interior illumination of the awnings with incandescent lighting is encouraged. (2) Wall signs may be approved by Adjustment (see Section 9-1.112) where the installation of an awning is not practical or feasible due to location, visibility, or architectural. features of the building. Wall mounted signs shall meet the following standards: a. Wall signs shall be located below the top of the parapet on single-story buildings and below ® the floor sill' on multi-story buildings. U- (049 b. Wall signs shall: (1) be painted directly on the wall; (2) consist of individual letters; or • (3) consist of a sign panel attached to the wall. Internally illuminated "box" signs are not allowed. c. Only one (1) wall sign per building face with frontage on a public street or alley is allowed. In a multi-tenant building, each tenant may be allowed a wall sign of a size determined by the pro rata share of the each tenant' s street frontage. (3) Projecting signs which do not exceed nine (9) square feet in area per side are allowed. Such signs may extend no more than three (3) feet into the public right-of-way, must maintain a vertical clearance of eight (8) feet, and must not extend above the top of the parapet on single-story buildings or above the floor sill on multi-story buildings. Only one (1) projecting sign per tenant per building face with frontage on a street or alley is allowed. Both sides of the projecting sign(s) are to be counted in the computation of allowable total sign area. (4) Cloth pendants containing the business name or • logo are allowed as an alternate form of projecting sign and may be used in multiples. The size and height standards specified for projecting signs shall apply to pendants. Cloth or paper signs are not allowed as wall signs. '(5) Window graphics which are painted or appliqued directly on a window and which identify services, products, store hours, address, business name and/or logo are allowed. The area of window graphics shall not be counted in the calculation of sign area, but shall not exceed twenty percent (20%) of a store' s total window area per building face. (6) External, incandescent lighting of permitted signs is allowed. Such lighting must conform with the requirements of Section 9-4. 137 of this part. Neon signs and signs consisting of individual letters may utilize internal lighting. (bc) Recreation and Public Zones : The following signs are allowed. . . (no change) (ed) Commercial or Public Assembly Uses in Other Zones : Where commercial or public assembly uses . . . (no change) 0_ 0.40 (eke) Sho in Office or Industrial Com lex Identificatio Signing: Such complexes with five or more separate n uses . . . (no change) (ef) Community Identification Signs ; identification s.igns . . . (no change) ( q) Freeway Identification Signs : In addition to signs allowed. . . (no change) 0` 119 O�IT71261 911�D-4:,... County of San Luis Obispo 1000UNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER,RM.370•SAN LUIS OBISPO,CALIFORNIA■(805)549-5011 i TO: ALL CITY MANAGERS ,(j OFFICE OF THE / 0 ry C' CoUNw ADMINISTRATOR FROM: ROBERT E. HENDRIXCOUNTY ADMINISTRATOR DATE: NOVEMBER 13, 1991 SUBJECT: JOINT BOARD OF SUPERVISORS/CITY COUNCILS' MEETING The Board of Supervisors has requested a combined meeting with all City Councils. The purpose of the meeting will be to identify and discuss issues/problems of mutual concern. The intent of the meeting is also to foster good relationships between the county and the cities. In order to make the joint meeting as productive as possible, I would request that each arty make suggestions concerning possible agenda items. Ideas for potential discussion items could be the Clean Air Plan, development in fringe areas,joint infrastructure needs, etc. The • joint meeting would also be an excellent opportunity to present a brief status report on future issues that may be looming on the horizon. If possible, please forward your suggestions for topics and any back-up material to Paul Hood of my office no later than November 29, 199t. I hope that we can arrange to meet before the end of the year. A Saturday meeting could be a possibility. To aid in this scheduling challenge, an indication from each city of the most convenient meeting dates would be greatly appreciated. I firmly believe that a joint meeting to discuss issues/problems of mutual concern would be extremely beneficial in enhancing the relationships between our agencies. I request your assistance in finalizing an agenda and meeting date. Thank you. • Li J 092