Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 03/10/1992 -___ ._ _._ # WIC REVIEW COPY PLDSL DO NDN R04OVE E8W'UOtKTER # NOTICE: The ,City Council will meet in Closed Session at -6:30 p.m. , 4th Floor Club Roan, for purposes bf discussion regarding potential litigation and pending litigation (Fluitt, et al, and Quidry, 4et al). AGENDA P ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING CITY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 6500 PALMA AVENUE, 4TH FLOOR ROTUNDA ROOM MARCH 20, 1992 7:00 P.M. This agenda is prepared and posted pursuant t& the require- ments of GovernmentCode 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 th4t may be tak- en shall include: A referral to staff with specifirequests for information; continuance; specific direction to staff concerning the policy or mission of the item; discontinuance of onsideration; authorization to enter into negotiations and execu a agreements pertaining to the item; adoption or approval; and, isapproval. Copies of the staff reports or other documentation relating to each item of business referred to on the agenda aren file in the office of the City Clerk (Room 208) and in the Information Office (Room 103) , available for public inspection during City Hall busi- ness hours. The City Clerk will answer any questions ';regarding the agenda. RULES OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: * Members of the audience may speak on any item on the agenda. `' * 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; the 01peaker may respond but, after the allotted time has expireNd, 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: Proclamation: "Camp Fire Birthday Week", 3/15 - 3/21/92 CONNUNITY FORD[: The City Council values and° encourages exchange of ideas and 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. COMITTEE 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 (See Item D-1) 4. Economic Opportunity Commission 5. City/School Committee 6. Traffic Committee 7 County Water Advisory Board 8. Economic Round Table 9. B.I.A. 10. Colony Roads Committee B. CONSENT CAhENDAR: 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 Councilor 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 Calendars 2 C I. >CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 28, 1992 2. RESOLUTION NO. 22-92 - REAPPOINTING .JOHN VIAL Tp THE BUILDING A CONSTRUCTION BOARD OF APPEALS 3. TENTATIVE 'TRACT MAP 14-89, $625 ATASCADERO AVE. Request for time extension for the subdivision of a portion] of two exist- ing lots, 13.9 ac. total, into 23 parcels of one-half ac. each (Iverson/Central Coast Engineering) (4111 RESOLUTION N0. 24-92 - MAKING THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO RESOLU- TION 48-91 THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS RESOLUTION FOR FISCAL YEAR 1991-92 S. GUN PERMIT APPEAL PROCEDURE b. RESOLUTION NO. 27-92 - APPROVING A LEASE/PURC�ASE AGREEMENT WITH VALLEY BANK LEASING FOR FIRE TRUCK/PHOTOCOPIER 7. RESOLUTION NO. 23-92 - ADOPTING REGULATIONS FOR CANDIDATES FOR ELECTIVE OFFICE PERTAINING TO CANDIDATES' STATEI4�KNTS SUBMITTED TO THE VOTERS AT AN ELECTION f C. HEARINGS: 1. ORDINANCE NO. 241 - AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAPS TO CONFORM WITH THE LAND USE MAP OF THE REVISED GENERAL PLAN (Zone Change 01-92, City of Atascadero) (Recommend motion to waive reading in full ajnd approve on first reading, by title only) 2. RESOLUTION NO. 25-92 - ADOPTING MODIFIED ENGINEERING SERVICES FEES D. REGULAR BUSINESS: 1. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 91-009, 9300 CORRIENTE - FINDINGS FOR DENIAL OF PROPOSED DIVISION OF 8.21 ACRE PARCEL INTO TWO 4.1 ACRE LOTS (Young/Cuesta Engineering) (Cont'd from 2/11 and 2/25/92) 2. ECONOMIC ROUNDTABLE - REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL/REQUEST FOR ENDORSEMENT OF STATUS REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 3. RESOLUTION NO. 26-92 - ADOPTING ENGINEERING STANDARDS (Cont'd from 12/10/91) 4. SANTA ROSA/LAREVIEW SEWER - AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED k' w 3 B W 5. QENERAL PLAN 'CONFORMITY STATE WATER PROJECT, NORTH COUNTY LrXTENSION *6. ORDINANCE NO. 240 - AMENDING MAP 4 OF THE OFFICIAL ZONING SLAPS 8Y SEZONING -CERTAIN ILEAL PROPERTY :AT 2200 EL CAMINO MEAL TROK CN to CPR (PD1) (Commercial Park Planned Development No. 1) (Zone Change 09-91 Camino Real Fashion Outlet/Golden West) (Recommend motion to waive reading in full and adopt on second reading, by title only) (Cont'd from 2/25/92) '7. ORDINANCE NO. 238 - AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AND THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION OF THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC ZMPhOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM (Recommend motion to waive reading in full and approve on second reading, by title only) ` (Cont'd from 2/11/92,) a. REQUEST FOR NUISANCE ABATEMENT HEARING 9. LETTER FROM BOARD OF SUPERVISORS RE: JOINT MEETINGS E. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION AND/OR ACTION: 1. City Council - 2. City Attorney 3. City Clerk 4. City Treasurer 5 City Manager 4 P R O C L A M A T I O N "CAMP FIRE BIRTHDAY WEEK" March 15 - 21, 1992 WHEREAS, Camp Fire, the national youth organization, will be celebrating its 82nd birthday on March 15, 1992; and WHEREAS, The Chumash Council of Camp Fire in the City of Atascadero teaches boys and girls self-reliance and good citizenship; and WHEREAS, Through contemporary programs and by speaking out on issues that effect youth and their families, today' s Camp Fire is helping kids cope with their changing world; and WHEREAS, In Camp Fire the choices and opportunities are wide open for boys and girls; and WHEREAS, Through Camp Fire young people are learning to develop confidence and to gain skills needed to become tomorrow' s • leaders; and WHEREAS, Camp Fire is commended for the opportunities its programs offer to young people in the City of Atascadero and throughout the nation and for the many services these young people perform for their communities through Camp Fire; NOW, THEREFORE, I Alden Shiers, Mayor of the City of Atasca- dero, do hereby proclaim March 15 through March 21, 1992, to be "Camp Fire Birthday Week" in Atascadero. ALDEN F. SHIERS, Mayor City of Atascadero, CA March 10, 1992 4tEET1NG AGENDA )ATE 3/10/92 qEM# B-1 NOTE: THE MINUTES FROM THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 28, 1992 WERE NOT AVAILABLE AT THE TIME OF AGENDA DISTRIBUTION. THEY WILL BE PROVIDED ON MONDAY, MARCH 9TH. REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL • CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: B-2 Via: Ray Windsor, City Manager Mtg. Date: 3/10/92 File No: Board of Appeals From: Henry Engen, Community Development Director 4K SUBJECT: Proposed re-appointment of John Vial to Building and Construction Board of Appeals. RECOMMENDATION• Adoption of attached Resolution No. 22-92 re-appointing John Vial to the Building and Construction Board of Appeals. BACKGROUND: The term of the Acting Chairman John Vial, of the Building and Con- struction Board of Appeals, is scheduled to expire in May, 1992 . Mr. Vial is the General Contractor member of the Board and has been diligent in his attendance and active in the North County Contractor's Association. He has indicated willingness to be re- appointed. HE:ph Encl: Resolution No. 22-92 • 000i"10 RESOLUTION NO. 22-92 A RESOLUTION OF THE ATASCADERO CTY COUNCIL • APPOINTING ONE (1) MEMBER TO THE BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION BOARD IF APPEALS WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted Ordinance No. 44 relating to the establishment of a Building and Construction Board of Appeals; and WHEREAS, the term of one member of the Board of Appeals has expired; and WHEREAS, the incumbent member representing the general contracting membership category of membership has served the City well in these capabiities and is willing to continue in this capacity; and NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does resolve to make the following appointment to the Board of Appeals for a four (4) year term beginning March 1, 1992: 1. John Vial NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does further resolve that this resolution shall take effect immedi- ately. On motion by and seconded by , the foregoing resolution is approved by the following role call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: CITY OF ATASCADERO By: ALDEN SHIERS, Mayor • Resolution No. 22-90 Page Two 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 • :IVllll��ti REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: B-3 Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Mtg. Date: 03/10/92 From: Henry Engen, Community Dev. Dir. ,.6, File No: TTM 14-89 SUBJECT• Request for a time extension of tract map (for subdivision of a portion of two existing lots, 13 .9 acres total, into 23 parcels of one-half acre each) at 8625 Atascadero Avenue - Clark Iverson/Cen- tral Coast Engineering RECOMMENDATION: Per the Planning Commission's recommendation, approval of a one year time extension to February 13 , 1993 . BACKGROUND: On February 18, 1992 , the Planning Commission considered the above referenced subject on its consent calendar. On a 7 : 0 vote, the Commission recommended approval of a one year time extension. HE:ps Attachments: Staff Report dated February 18 , 1992 cc: Clark Iverson Central Coast Engineering 0 I 7 7'j M E M O R A N D U M • TO: Planning Commission FROM: D-✓• Doug Davidson, Senior Planner RE: Tentative Tract Map 14-89 - Iverson/Central Coast Eng. DATE: February 18, 1992 The above referenced map was originally approved by the Planning Commission on January 16, 1990 and subsequently approved by the City Council on February 13, 1990. This request for a time extension is to allow the applicant additional time to complete all the Conditions of Approval. The road improvemer plans have been approved and the final map has been checked. -.ie time extension would allow the required road improvements to be constructed prior to recording the map, as called for in the Map Conditions. To recognize the substantial required road improvements and to ensure that the applicant files the map in a timely manner, the map should be extended for one year. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of a one year time extension for Tentative Tract Map 14-89, extending the approval date to February 13, 1993. Attachments: Request for Time Extension Staff Report I*P10TR:�L OAST 30 December 1991 E-557 City of Atascadero Planning Department 6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero, CA 93422 Attn: Doug Davidson Re: Tract 1753 (Iverson) Doug... We are formally requesting our first time extension for the above noted map. Enclosed is a $330.00 filing check and a photocopy of Henry's transmittal notifying us of the tentative approval on 13 February 1990. Thankx for your help and Happy New Year!! emus c mi -t 1 E-557C.wps i REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Item No. A-5 Through: Ray Windsor,. City Manager Meetii7u Date : '2 /i3 /90 File No: TTM 14-89i LLA 2/89 From: Henry Engen, Community Development Director Twao hC SUBJECT: Subdivision of a portion of two existing lots ( 13 . 9 acres totali into 23 parcels one-half acre each. Request includes establish- ment of two new City standard roads to serve the subdivision; Via Tortuga and Calle Refugio . (Also includes approval of LLA 2-89 ) . Subiect site is located at 8625 Atascadero Avenue ( Clark Iverson/Central Coast Engineering) . BACKGROUND : On September 19 . 1989 ; Deceiliber 19 ; 1989 and January 16 . 1990 ; the Planning Commission conducted public hearings on the above referenced subject. On a 5 : 0 vote, the Commission voted to approve the tract map subject to the revised Conditions of Approval ( attached) . There was discussion and public testimony as referenced in the attached minutes excerpts . RECOMMENDATION: Approval of Tentative Tract Map 14-89 per the Planning Commissions recommendation . HE : os Attachments : Memorandum elated 1 /161/90 Memorandum dated 12/19/89 (which includes TTM 14-89 Staff Report and LLA 2-89 Staff Report) Revised Conditions of Approval - i /16190 Minutes Excerut - 1 /16 /90 Minutes Excerot - 12 /19 /89 Minutes EXc:eLUt - 9 /19/89 cam : Clank Iverson Central Coast Engineering 000006 • TEM, : 3-1 M E M O R A N D U M TO: Planning Commission FROM: Doug Davidson, Senior Planner DATE: January" 16, 1990 SUBJECT: Tentative Tract Map 14-89/Lot Line Adjustment 02-89 (Iverson/Johnson/Central Coast Engineering) At the scheduled hearing of December 19 , 1989 , the applicant requested a continuance of the above-referenced item. As the attached letter from the applicant indicates , the affected property owners are in agreement with the proposed adjustment of the lot lines . Staff is now confident that this item can proceed through the review process . • ATTACHMENTS : Letter from Applicant Memorandum dated December 19 , 1989 (includes Tentative Tract Map 14-89 Staff Report & Lot Line Adjustment 02-89 Staff Report) • 0Ut100", ITCM . -I M E M O R A N D U M • TO: Planning Commission FROM: Doug Davidson, Associate Planner DATE: December 19 , 1989 SUBJECT: Tentative Tract Map 14-89/Lot Line Adjustment 02-89 (Iv 'Son/Johnson/Central Coast Engineering) { At the Septembet 19 , 1989 meeting, the Planning Commission granted a cont 'uance for this item to allow the applicant additional time-: to address the concerns of the property owners involved in the:� Lot Line Adjustment. These concerns relate primarily to enuring continued access rights for those property owners with underlying easements. Although Lot Line Adjustment 02-89 was approed in March, 1989 , the revised Tract Map is contingent uponwthe adjustment of the lot lines . The Lot Line Adjustment must record prior to, or simultaneously with, the Tract Map. Thins , staff is recommending that condition #6 be • added to the ap1roval of Lot Line Adjustment 02-89 as follows : 6 . The following notes shall be removed prior to recording the map: 1 . "Elimi ate 50 ' dedication. " 2 . "Propo'sed 20 ' wide private access and utility easement. " The eliminatir)rf� of these notes will clarify that the underlying easement rights of neighboring property owners are not being altered by this, proposal. RECOMMENDAT I OST: Staff recommends approval of Tentative Tract Map 14-89 based on the Findings mad Conditions of Approval contained in the September 19 , 1989 staff report. Lot Line Adjustment 02-89 is recommended for approval based on the Findings and Conditions of Approval contained in the March 21 , 1989 staff report, with the addition of condition #6 , as stated above. ATTACHMENTS : ., Tentative Tract Map 14-89 Staff Report - Lot Line Adjustment 02-89 Staff Report • CITY OF ATASCADERO Item: STAFF REPORT FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Date: September 19, 1989 BY : Doug Davidson, Associate Planner File No : TTM 14-89 SUBJECT: To consider a request to subdivide a portion of two existing lots (13 . 9 acres total) into twenty-three (23)` parcels of one- half acre each. The request includes the establishment of two new City standard roads to serve the subdivision; Via Tortuga and Calle Refugio . RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Tentative Tract Map 14-89 based on the Findings for Approval in Exhibit C and Conditions of Approval in Exhibit D . • SITUATION AND FACTS: 1 . Applicant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Clark Iverson 2 . Representative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Central Coast Engineering 3 . Project Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8625 Atascadero Ave. 4 . Legal Description. . . . . . . . . . . .Lots 27 and 28, Blk. 7 5 . Site Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 . 9 acres 6 . Zoning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .RSF-X (Residential Single Family, minimum lot size one-half acre) 7 . General Plan Designation. . . . .High Density Single Family 8 . Existing Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Single family residential 9 . Environmental Status . . . . . . . . .Negative Declaration posted September 5, 1989 . • 1 ` 10WH19 BACKGROUND: Tentative Tract Map 01-89 (Tract Map 1671) was approved by the Planning Commission on March 21, 1989 and subsequently approved by the City Council on April 11, 1989. The original application requested 22 lots of approximately one-half acre each. Upon review, the map was conditioned to reduce the number of lots from 22 to 21 to protect several heritage trees . Tract Map 1671 proposed and received approval of a fifty (50) foot right-of-way for the interior roads serving the project (Via Tortuga and Calle Refugio) . As stated by the Public Works Director at the March 21st meeting, the City standard right-of- way is forty (40) feet . Hence, the applicant has redrawn the map to reflect the City standard width, resulting in a twenty-three (23) lot subdivision. The applicant and his representative believe that the current proposal provides a better lot configuration and 'street alignment, with building sites outside the dripline of the site' s heritage trees . ANALYSIS: Staff agrees with the applicant that this proposed subdivision is a preferable design to the original tract . The street connecting Atascadero Ave. and Coromar Rd. (Via Tortuga) is a straighter alignment with a forty (40) foot right-of-way. The proposed lot • configurations are also an improvement, particulary the lots served by the cul-de-sac (Calle Refugio) . These lots (lots 14- 20) appear more orderly in shape and now do not exceed the 3 : 1 depth to width ratio . Heritage Oak Trees The Planning Commission' s major concern about the previous tract was the preservation of the heritage oak trees on lots #6 and #8 . This concern resulted in the addition of condition #16, which required the combination of lots #6, 7, 8, and 9 into three lots, as a protective measure for these trees . As Exhibit A shows, the proposed map provides a suitable building site outside the dripline of the two heritage trees on lot #8 . This building site located outside the driplines is at least 6, 000 square feet in size. On the previous map these two trees were located in the center of lot #8 . Although the 60" oak on proposed lot #6 is now more centrally located, a 5, 600 square feet building site exists between the front 25 foot setback line and the dripline . Staff believes that all the native trees on this site will remain undisturbed during construction. With the site' s gentle slopes and the availability of all utilities, minimal grading or trenching will occur. The provision of sewer is particulary important because it eliminates the trenching and space required for septic systems . • 2 ;)00" A0 • CONCLUSIONS: The proposed project is consistent with the City' s Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance and General Plan. Residential Policy #11 merits repeating: "Attention shall be paid to the aesthetic result of land division. Building sites shall be encouraged on natural slopes, with minimal disruption of native vegetation and watersheds, and efficient layout of access and utilities . " Staff believes that this revised map clearly upholds this policy, in fact, it is a better subdivision design than the previously approved tract . The proposed lots are drawn in an orderly fashion and all the building sites are suitable for residential development . The reduced right-of-way allows for a more direct road alignment, while still providing adequate access for residential traffic and safety vehicles . The recommended conditions of approval remain basically the same, with the exception of the deletion of #16 and changes to condition #4 for required road improvements per the Public Works Department . • I ATTACHMENTS : Exhibit A - Tentative Tract Map Exhibit B - Supplemental Development Statement Exhibit C - Findings for Approval Exhibit D - Conditions of Approval Exhibit E - Staff Report for TTM 01-89 (Tract 1671) s 3 ',POW) I 1 �.;• EXHIBIT A CITY C. _ ATASCADERO ;5111- " ;;; TENTATIVE TRACT MAP � � CONIMLINITY DEVELO?MENT TTM 14-39 DEPARTNI ENT cl IT 3-2 Li t jt i I D � j n i r C.?. Al DAM;A;p a ,T• R 0. M. ?-- I TTH-1 r EXHIBIT B L E\' i R A L. CO,-\5T ENGINEERING ,I • ;'Ib fiuci.!�% koaj „une 6, 1989 E557 ; City of Atascadero Planning Department P.O. Box 747 , Atascadero, CA 93423 SUBJECT: TENTATIVE MAP APPLICATION TRACT 1753 At the request of Mr- `'lark Iverson we are submitting the application for ; Tentative Map 1671. The following are enclosed: 1. Application Form 2. Fee $485.00 3. 15 Copies of -Proposed Tentative Map & Grading Plan 4. Environmental Form 5. Preliminary' Title Report • 6. Assessor Maps and Addresses of Adjacent Owner within 300 feet. 7. Labels of Addresses of Adjacent Owners within 300 feet. 8. 8 1/2" x 11" Reduction The proposed subdivision is a slight modification of Tract 1671 approved by the City April 11, 1989 . The proposed Tract 1753 provides a better lot configuration and street al i gnment . Lots 15 , 16 and 17 of the former tract had excess lot depth. This has been remedied . Because the City would accept a 40 foot right -of -way , the lot lines and street alignment would be altered to allow an additional lot. Except for Condition 16, all conditions of the formerly approved Tract 1671 are acceptable to the owner . The tract complies with existing zoning . No trees are disturbed and no lot grading is proposed. • ►UUP► 3 The site has access to sever, ,pater, gas and power . The proposed street • will provide a needed cross tie between Atascadero Road and Coroma Street . The property has been owned by the same family for 57 years . Sincerely, Ben L. Maddalena • City of Atasc./D25 • • EXHIBIT C - Findings for Approval Tentative Tract Map 14-89 8625 Atascadero Rd. (Iverson/Central Coast Engineering) September 19, 1989 ENVIRONMENTAL FINDING: The proposed project will not have a significant impact upon 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 the improvements, will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or the use of property within the proposed subdivision; or substantially equivalent 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 D - Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 14-89 8625 Atascadero Ave. (Iverson/Central Coast Engineering) September 19 , 1989 Revised by Planning Commission January 16 , 1990 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1 . Water shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water Co. Waterlines shall be extended to the frontage of each parcel or -its public utility easement prior to the recording of the final map. 2 . All existing and proposed utility, pipeline, open space, or other easeun nts are to be shown on the final map. If there are buildin4 or other restrictions related to the easements, _:ahey shall be noted on the final map. All relocation .and/or alteration of existing utilities shall be the responsibility of the developer at his sole expense. All utilities , including cable television, shall be placed underground and exist at the frontage of each lot prior to recording -nf the final map. 3 . Grading, `dsainage, and erosion control plans for each proposed lot, prepared by a registered civil engineer, shall be submitted for review and approval by the Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to recording of the final map. Drainage facilities shall be constructed to City of Atascadero standards and completed prior to recording of the final map. 4 . Road improvement plans , prepared by a registered civil engineer, shall be submitted to and approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments prior to recordation of the final map. Plans shall include, but not be limited to the following: a. Paveout on Atascadero Ave. to twenty (20) feet from centerline, including a design for a five (5) foot walkway along the property frontage. The paved half width of Coromar shall be 12 feet. Prior to recording the final map, a contribution of $1 . 75 per square foot of walkway along the frontage of Atascadero Ave. and Coromar Rd. and the linear frontage of Via Tortuga, shall be made to the Routes to School fund. b. Improvement plans shall show the grading necessary to achieve the finish sidewalk grades along Atascadero Ave. and along both sides of the interior streets . During • construction, a five foot wide width shall be graded to the finished sidewalk grades , in order to avoid the undercutting of landscaping and yards when the sidewalks are installed. '.ivlll+ b • C. The new interior roads (Via Tortuga and Calle Refugio) shall contain a paved roadway width between the face of curbs of 28 feet, including two 10 foot wide traffic lanes and one 8 foot wide parking lane, with curb and/or gutter as determined by the City Engineer. The center of the paved width shall be on the centerline of the right of way. The new roads shall be constructed to City standards and shall be accepted into the City maintained mileage after the required one year maintenance period, as determined by the City Engineer. d. The paved cul-de-sac radius shall be 48 feet with a minimum right of way radius of 54 feet. 5 . Construction of the public improvements shall be completed prior to recordation of the final map. 6 . Public improvement plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Fire Department prior to recording the final map. 7 . Sewer improvement plans shall require approval from the • Public, Works Department prior to recording of the final map. All newly created lots shall be connected to public sewer. All annexation fees shall be paid for the newly formed lots prior to recording the map. Any sewer extensions for annexations must be completed within one year after annexation. 8 . The subdivider shall install all street signs , traffic delineation devices , warning and regulatory signs , guardrails , barricades , and other similar devices where required by the Director of Public Works. Signs shall be in conformance with the Public Works Department sign standards and the current State of California uniform sign chart. Installation of traffic devices shall be subject to review and modifications after construction. 9. An encroachment permit shall be obtained from the Public Works Department for all work to be done within the public right-of-way prior to recording of the final map. Applicant shall sign an inspection and curb/gutter agreement, guaranteeing that the work shall be done and inspections paid for prior to the start of public works construction. The construction of these improvements, as directed by the encroachment permit, shall be completed prior to recording the final map. • 10 . Prior to recording of the final map, a soils investigation shall be submitted, recommending corrective measures to prevent structural damage to each structure where soil problems exist. The date of the report, name of the engineer , and the location where the reports are on file shah be noted on the map. • 11 . Parcels 1 and 23 shall have no direct access to Atascadero Ave, while Parcels 10 and 11 shall have no direct access to Coromar Rd. Access to all lots of the tract shall be from the new public roads. Relinquishment of access rights shall be shown on the final map. 12. The applicant shall make an offer of dedication to the City for Via Tortuga and Calle Refugio (40 foot right-of-way) . The offers of dedication shall also include public utility easements . All offers of dedication shall be recorded prior to or simultaneous to the recordation of the final map. 13 . A final map drawn in substantial conformance with the approved tentative map and 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. 14 . The Lot Line Adjustment (ATAL 88-299) shall be recorded prior to or simultaneous with the recording of the final map. 15 . 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. 16 . Tract 1671 is deemed withdrawn and no further processing will occur. • REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item: B-4 . CITY OF ATASCADERO Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 3/10/92 From: Mark Joseph, Administrative Services Director SUBJECT: Adopting Midyear Budget Adjustments. RECOrMENDATION: Adopt Resolution 24-92 approving midyear revenue and appropriation adjustments for FY 91-92. BACKGROUND: At Council' s February 25, 1992 meeting, staff discussed various budget adjustments (see attached report) . Resolution 24- 92 would formally adopt these revisions. Some additional points need to be made. Since we will continue animal services with the County for at least the remainder of the fiscal year, the full amount of $71, 000 needs to be budgeted, which is $26, 000 more than the current $45, 000. Revised revenue estimates are included, based on staff ' s midyear projections. Pavilion costs (and revenues) are shown as a separate fund. This will improve accounting for Pavilion operations, and is the recommended approach by our outside auditors. Council wanted an accounting of legal costs between our regular City Attorney and special litigation. This is included as Exhibit A. Mr. Hanley' s costs are also identified, which are part of our regular legal expenses. Finally, Greg Luke' s memo detailing the drainage improvement projects to be undertaken is attached. It should be noted that no additional appropritions are requested; existing appropriations from the fund will be transferred from other projects, not likely to be completed by year end. a:res24/92 Exhibit A: Legal Cost Breakdown through January, 1992 . (58.3% of the Year) Category Budget Actual Percentacte Dept. 140 - Routine Attorney Services Basic Retainer* 46,216 Roy Hanley 5, 013 Total - Dept. 140** 80, 000 51,229 64. 0 Dept. 145 - Special Litigation 30, 000 22,297 74.3 TOTAL 110, 000 73,526 66. 8 *Includes incidental costs, such as office equipment. **Reflects $30, 000 budget increase at midyear. • 'ft�ili);rU • REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item: 6:00 p.m. Session CITY OF ATASCADERO Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager�i Meeting Date: 2/25/92 From: Mark Joseph, Administrative Services Director/7 SUBJECT: Mid Year Budget Adjustments RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Council review the adjustments highlighted below and if approved, a formal action will be submitted for Council' s consent agenda on March 10. BACRGROUND/ANALYSIS: No new staff, equipment or service enhancements are proposed at this time. In fact, only a number of procedural or state- mandated budget adjustments are offered for Council approval. These are explained below: 1. Action For Animal Rights (AFAR) Budaet - $25,000 was approved by Council in July. The appropriation was approved by Council but never formally adopted by resolution. • 2. North County Women' s Shelter - Matching Grant - $3,300 was approved by Council in January. 3. Recycling Committee Request - As discussed at the February 11 Council Meeting, the Recycling Committee has requested an additional $1,300, some of which would be offset by sales. 4. Customer Service Training- The final cost was $2,300. The training was offered in two segments: a session in December and January. An. executive overview with Department Heads was held earlier. 5. Ambulance Study Review - As noted at Council' s last meeting, a not-to-exceed $1,200 amount was approved to- review the current County Emergency Medical Response System. Actual cost should be about $1, 000. 6. Proceeds from Capital Lease: - A $325,000 line of credit was established last year to help finance capital equipment. Not all of the proceeds were received in FY 90-91. Approximately $110, 000 will be received in this fiscal year. Offsetting this is as appropriation of $100,000 in. the Equipment Replacement Program, which is simply reappropriating the encumbered funds for the budgeted fire truck. 7 . Accrued Leave Payoffs - One of the unknown and therefore unbudgeted expenses last year was leave payoffs. PleaFe see similar reference in my 1990-91 Audit Memo. Because last year saw a number of employee departures, the expense was higher than it normally would be. This fiscal yea.)-- will require an additional appropriation of $25,000. S . Animal Control Adjustments - In order to facilitate the new program, $20, 000 needs to be budgeted both as a revenue and an expense. This will cover the contract expenses for the two positions (half of which will be reimbursed by Paso Robles, which is handling the accounting for the program) . The appropriation will be reflected in the Police Department budget. 9 . Atascadero State Hospital Annexation Expenses - An estimated $10, 000 will be needed to cover engineering and other administrative expenses associated with annexing the State Hospital (and surrounding lands) . This cost is offset by roughly $50, 000 per year in General and Gas Tax revenues, once the annexation is approved. . It is not known at this time at what point in the fiscal year expenditures will occur. 10. Reappropriating Encumbered monies in the Community Development Department - A total of $19,300 was involved, most of which related to finishing the General Plan ( $15, 000) . The rest was for office equipment ordered but not received by June 30, 1991. Only $10,000 will be needed for the General Plan, so the total involved is $14,300. 11. Budgeting for Property Tax Administration Fee (SB2557)__- The County Auditor has informed us that the collection fee bill will be $65,400. This represents a 13 percent increase over last year. 12. Additional Support for the City Attorney' s Office - Based on current projections, at least $30,000 will be needed to assure our legal services stay within budget. Much of the increase stems from defending the City in legal issues, legal costs associated with Code Enforcement and the high cost of rendering well researched legal opinions. Tighter control over the use of legal services is suggested in order to keep these costs down. 13. Adjustments to Public Works Budget - Please see the attached memo from Greg Luke addressing the issues of revising our Engineering Plan Check fee• and budgeting gas tax dollars for drainage improvements. 1 EiJlill..'�: • 14 . Exchange of Capital Improvement Funds - The attached memo from our Interim Fire Chief explains the rationale for this request. Funding for the refurbishing of a Fire Truck is expected to be $10, 000 and that would come from deferring the purchase of an emergency supply container. 15 . Budgeting for the new Pavilion - Based on Andy Takata' s projected operating costs for the Pavilion ($62, 000 annually) , four month' s of operating revenues and expenditures need to be budgeted. The suggested amount is $25, 000, which is slightly higher, to accommodate one-time start-up costs ( such as the dedication ceremonies) . A related issue is whether the Pavilion should be accounted for as a separate fund or included as part of the General Fund. This can; be resolved during Council discussion. The net increase in appropriations is approximately $160, 000. These increases do not include any adjustments for salary and benefit increases as a result of negotiations concluded after the FY 91-92 budget was adopted. It is our intention to absorb these costs within the existing budget of the affected department. However, a second review will be made in May. Based on this review, additional appropriations may be needed, in order to close out the fiscal year. • a:myadjust • +)vt1111;j MEMORANDUM TO: Mark Joseph, Administrative Services Director FROM: Greg Luke, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Augmentation of Minor Road Improvement Projects Fund DATE: March 4 , 1992 RECOMMENDATION: Council approve t 000 from the Road Tax Fund the transfer of 100 f to PP $ ► the Minor Road Improvement Projects Fund, with the projects listed below as candidate projects for construction. BACKGROUND: As a result of the recent rains, a number of local road and flood damage has occurred at various locations around the City. Many of the projects have been chronic problems that have persisted for many years. At the mid-year budget review staff proposed that an additional $100, 000 be allocated from the road tax fund to repair and resolve this damage. The following table indicates candidate projects for repair with the additional appropriation: MINOR ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS EST. COST • 1. Mercedes at Capistrano- 2 inlets + pipe $20, 000 2 . Santa Rosa near lake- 2 inlets + pipe $20, 000 3 . Montecito at ECR- 2 inlets + pipe $30 , 000 4 . Old Morro Road- 30" culvert under road $10 , 000 5. San Marcos north of San Gabriel- inlet + $15 , 000 pipe + paving + berm 6 . Rosario at Alamo- culvert + pipe $10 , 000 7 . Santa Lucia at Llano- culvert + swale $15 , 000 8 . Santa Lucia at Lomitas- culvert + pipe $10, 000 TOTAL 130, 000. 00Il It can be seen that the total estimated cost of all the projects exceeds the $100, 000 requested. Staff recognizes that not all the projects can be completed within this fiscal year. Inevitably unforeseen problems arise that prevent some of the projects from being constructed, such as environmental concerns or insufficient right-of-way. At this time, staff cannot identify which projects will encounter these delays. Consequently, from a practical basis, the $100, 000 augmentation requested is realistically all the money that can be spent this fiscal year. Projects that are delayed will be presented to the Council for consideration in the 1992-93 budget. FISCAL IMPACT: The augmentation requested would encumber the road tax fund by $100, 000. ��o0u J RESOLUTION NO. 24-92 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO MAKING THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO RESOLUTION 48-91 THE .ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS RESOLUTION FOR FISCAL YEAR 1991-92 Section 1. Appropriations are increased by the amounts shown in Exhibit A, made a part of this resolution. Section 2. Revenue projections are revised as shown in Exhibit B, also made a part of this resolution. Section 3. These changes are effective upon adoption of this resolution. On motion by-.Councilperson , seconded by Councilperson , the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted is 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 FORM: ARTHER MONTANDON City Attorney Resolution NO. 24-92 Exhibit A i APPROPRIATION INCREASES BY FUND, BY DEPARTMENT FISCAL YEAR 1991-92 (Per Resolution 24-92) New FUND 001 - GENERAL FUND Original Additional Total City Attorney 80, 000 30, 000 110, 000 Fire 1,066,300 1,200 1, 067,500 P.W. /Engineering & Admin. 346,905 1,300 348,205 Comm'y Dev./Administration 193,062 14,300 207,362 Comm'y Dev./Planning 256,065 10, 000 266,065 Personnel 111,550 21300 113,850 Equipment Replacement 121, 000 100, 000 221,000 Non-Department 362,688 116,400 479,088 Community Group Funding 47,432 28, 300 75,732 TOTAL GENERAL FUND INCREASE 303, 800 FUND 203 - LAKE PAVILION Operations -0- 25, 000 25, 000 • Resolution NO. 24-92 Exhibit B REVISED REVENUE PROJECTIONS*, S GENERAL FUND ORIGINAL REVISED REVENUE ESTIMATE ESTIMATE Property Taxes 2,270, 000 2,220, 000 Sales Tax 1,900, 000 1,700, 000 Property Transfer Tax 50, 000 40, 000 Franchise Fees 360, 000 370, 000 Other Taxes 1,300 300 Construction Permits 361,225 325,225 Motor Vehicle In-Lieu 875, 000 825, 000 Cigarette Tax 42,300 20, 000 Homeowner' s Exemption 48,500 43, 000 Other State In-Lieu 12,400 10, 000 PERS Actuarial Gains 135, 000 353, 000 Other Intergovernmental 122,400 133,400 Recreation Fees 295,500 372,500 Planning & Engineering Fees 265,923 155,923 Fines and Forfeits 12, 050 32, 050 Investments 125,000 65, 000 Transfer from Traffic Safety Fund 100,000 62, 000 Proceeds from Sale of Property 15, 000 80,000 • Proceeds from Capital Lease -0- 110, 000 *Not all General Fund revenues are listed here; only those that have been revised. • i jll • REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: B-5 From: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 3/10/92 SUBJECT: Gun permit appeal procedure DISCUSSION• In light of the City Attorney' s attached memo concluding that there is no appeal procedure with respect to the issuance of gun permits, or more accurately, the denial of such, I am placing the !. item under the Consent Calendar of the agenda as an informational item. RW:cw '�V0f► , M E M O R A N D U M To: Ray Windsor, City M nager�CitFrom: Arther R. MontandoY Attorney Subject: Procedure regarding permits to carry concealed firearms Date: February 27, 1992 Penal Code Section 12050, et seq, sets forth the statutory procedure to apply for and obtain a concealed firearm permit. The authority to grant or deny the permit is vested with the " . . .Sher- iff of a county or Chief or other head of a municipal police department of any city. . . " There is no appeal procedure set forth in these statutes. The applicant must demonstrate "good moral character" and "good cause for the issuance" of the permit. The Chief of Police must investigate the "character" and "good cause" prior to issuing a permit (Salute v. Pitchess ( 1976 ) 61 Cal. App. 3d 557, 132 Cal. Rptr. 345) . The issuance of a permit is not mandatory. Even private licensed investigators do not as a matter of right, have to be 9 , g issued a concealed firearm permit (Guillory v. Orange County (C.A. 1984 ) 731 Fed. 2d 1379, Erdelyi v. O'Brien (C.A. 1982) 680 Fed. 2d 61) . In addition, there is no implied right to a hearing. In Nichols v. County of Santa Clara (Apps. 2 Dist. 1990) 223 Cal. App. 3d 1236 , 273 Cal. Rptr. 84, the court held that a hearing was not required prior to revokation due to the fact that no significant property right was involved. The court went on to state that the license decision was highly discretionary and subjective and did not necessarily turn on a showing of particular contestable facts. Also, to require the Sheriff to conduct an evidentiary hearing would impose a fiscal and administrative burden which would inter- fere with the efficiency of law enforcement' s primary function of fighting crime. Also, worthy of note is Atascadero Municipal Code Section 1- 2. 13, which provides appeal rights to the City Council for staff administrative decisions. This appeal right is only available for staff decisions made pursuant to the Atascadero Municipal Code. A concealed firearm permit is granted, a set forth above, pursuant to State law. ARM:cw 12034.5 CONTROL OF DEADLY WEAPONS 816 Inoperative Part,4 § 12034.5. Inoperative occupation, residence and business address of the appli.t cant, his or her age, height, weight, color of eyes andl hair, and reason for desiring a license to carry the ARTICLE 3. LICENSES TO CARRY weapon. Any license issued upon such application shall CONCEALED WEAPONS set forth the foregoing data and shall,in addition,contain, , Section a description of the weapon or weapons authorized to be 12050. Issuance of license; qualifications of licensee; restrictions or carried,,giving the name of the manufacturer, the serial conditions. number and the caliber. 12051. Application for licenses; contents; uniformity; false statements; Applications and licenses shall be uniform throughout: violations. { 12052. Fingerprints,necessity of taking; report pertaining to applicant; the state, upon forms to be prescribed by the Attorney 4 exception. General. Such forms shall contain a provision whereby 12053. Record of issuance; Ming of copies. the applicant attests to the truth of statements contained 12054. Application fee; disposition. 12060 to 12064. Inoperative. In the application. t.L ` (b) Any person who files an application required by). 6 Cross References subdivision(a)knowing that statements contained thetas; . i Firearms, in are false is guilty of a misdemeanor. Any person; Concealment upon the person, generally, see § 12001. Possession by narcotic addicts and felons, see § 12021. knowingly making a false statement on the applicatiotY, Punishment for possession without a license, see § 12025. regarding the denial or revocation of a concealed weapq, Permits for machine guns, see § 12230 et seq. ons license, a criminal conviction, a finding of not gu tyt Permits for tear gas weapons, see § 12423 et seq. by reason of insanity,the use of a controlled substanee,,k Right to defend life and protect property,see Const.Art. 1, § 1; Civil s Code § 50. dishonorable discharge from military service,a commit- ment to a mental institution,or a renunciation of United I' § 12050. Issuance of license; qualifications of licensee; States citizenship is guilty of a felony. (Added,41 jrestrictions or conditions Stats.1953, c. 36, § 1. Amended by Stats.1953, c..69X4, (a) The sheriff of a county or the chief or other head of § 1; Stats.1977, c. 996, § 1; Stats.1981, c. 945, §-L) a municipal police department of any city or city and Cross References tuvis� county, upon proof that the person applying is of good Licenses to sell firearms, generally, see § 12071. < a {{ moral character, that good cause exists for the issuance, 1, and that the person applying is a resident of the county, § 12052. Fingerprints; necessity of taking; report pain, may issue to such person a license to carry concealed a taining to applicant; exception pistol, revolver, or other firearm for any period of time The fingerprints of each applicant shall be taken and:= not to exceed one year from the date of the license,or in two copies on forms prescribed by the Department of the case of a peace officer appointed pursuant to Section Justice shall be forwarded to the department. U F 830.6, three ears from the date of the license. partm �, t. Y receipt of the fingerprints and the fee as prescribed in s ' (b) A license may include any reasonable restrictions Section 12054,the department shall promptly furnish the or conditions which the issuing authority deems warrant- forwarding licensing authority a report of-all data adt ed, including restrictions as to the time, place, and information pertaining to any applicant of which there is circumstances under which the person may carry a a record in its office. No license shall be issued by anyd t�1; concealed firearm. licensing authority until after receipt of such report from { (c) Any restrictions imposed pursuant to subdivision the department. ' (b)shall be indicated on any license issued on or after the Provided, however, that if the license applicant hai' effective date of the amendments to this section enacted previously applied to the same licensing authority for a' at the 1970 Regular Session of the Legislature. (Added license to carry concealed firearms and the applicant'111y l by Stats.1953, c. 36, § I. Amended by Slats-1969, c. fingerprints and fee have been previously forwarded to 1188, § 1; Stats.1970, c. 1478, § 1; Stats.1977 c. 987, the Department of Justice, as herein provided,. thei § 3.) licensing authority shall note such previous identification, Cross References numbers and other data which would provide positive identification to the files of the Department of Justice on Firearms, the copy of any subsequent license submitted to the, Concealment upon the person, generally, see § 12001. Possession by aliens, narcotic addicts and felons, see § 12021. department in conformance with Section 12053 and no } Punishment for possession without a license, see § 12025. additional application form or fingerprints shall be Permits for machine . guns, see § 12230 el se q L Amended by' g q required. (Added by Stats.1953, c. 36, § "§ Permits for tear gas weapons, see § 12423 et seq. Stats.1953, c. 692, § 2: Stots.1959, e. 1856, § 1; Stats; Right to defend life and protect property,see Const. Art. I, § I; Civil 91.) - Code § 50. 1971, c. 1309, § 3: Stats.1972. C. 1377, § § 12051. Applications for licenses; contents; uniform- § 12053. Record of issuance; filing of copies ity; false statements; violations When any such license is issued a record thereof shag' t (a) Applications for licenses shall be tiled in writing, be maintained in the office of the licensing authority-signed by the applicant, and shall state the name, Copies of each license issued shall be filed immediately' t. llVUI�.�l +�i REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Agenda Item: B-6 • CITY OF ATASCADERO Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 3/10/92 From: Mark Joseph, Administrative Services Director SUBJECT: Capital Lease for Fire Truck/Copier. RECOMMENDATION: Council approve Resolution 27-92, designating the $110, 113 in proceeds as tax exempt for the Calendar year 1992. BACKGROUND• Council authorized a capital lease with Valley Bank Leasing in May, 1991, (Resolution 39-91) . It was in fact a line of credit up to $325, 000 for a five year term (approximately 6. 8 percent interest) . At that time we drew down approximately $185, 000 to either refinance existing equipment or lease-purchase other vehicles and heavy equipment. We now wish to make a second draw down for $110, 113 to cover the cost of a fire truck and the photocopier. The new resolution is required because the old one only covered the 1991 Calendar . year. FISCAL IMPACT The additional proceeds and offsetting appropriations are included in the midyear budget adjustments. The current year interest payments have already been budgeted. • RESOLUTION NO. 27-92 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE • CITY OF ATASCADERO, APPROVING A LEASE/PURCHASE AGREEMENT WITH VALLEY BANK LEASING. RESOLVED, that this Municipality is authorized to enter into a Lease Purchase Agreement (the "Agreement" ) with Valley Bank Leasing, Inc. ( "LESSOR" ) for the acquisition of the use and possession of the equipment described on the attached Exhibit "A" (the "Equipment) for an aggregate cost not .o exceed $325, 000 (not including interest) payable over a period of 5 years, and in the Municipality to (i) terminate and cancel such Agreement and the Municipality' s obligations on one date each year during the term of the Agreement and (ii) acquire the Equipment at such times and on such terms as may be set forth in the Agreement. RESOLVED FURTHER, ;-hat each of the following officers of the Municipality: Ray Windsor, its City Manager and Mark Joseph, its Administrative Services Director are authorized, empowered, and directed to (i) negotiate the terms of and execute and deliver the Agreement and such other documents as may be necessary or appropriate, together with changes therein as such officer shall deem necessary and desirable and (ii) take such other actions as may be necessary or appropriate to consummate the transactions contemplated in the Agreement and to cause the full and timely performance of all of the Municipality' s agreements and obligations in connection with the Agreement: such officer' s execution and delivery of the Agreement and other documents or the taking of such actions to evidence such officer' s approval of the document or action, respectively: RESOLVED FURTHER, that in connection with the foregoing Resolutions, all actions taken by the duly authorized officers of this Municipality with respect to the Agreement or the transactions to be evidenced by the Agreement prior to the date of this Resolution be, and they hereby are, ratified and confirmed as the duly authorized acts of the Municipality: RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Municipality does hereby designate the Agreement as a qualified tax-exempt obligation for purposes of Section 265(b) (3) (ii) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1988, as amended: and • • Resolution No. 27-92 Page 2 RESOLVED FURTHER, that LESSOR may rely on this Resolution until notified of the revocation, amendment, or other modification in writing and all actions taken by the duly authorized officers of this Municipality in accordance with this Resolution prior to the LESSOR' S receipt of such notice shall be the duly authorized actions of and binding and enforcement against the Municipality and relied up on LESSOR. On motion by Councilperson , and seconded by Councilperson , the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety, by the following Roll Call Vote. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: ATTEST: CITY OF ATASCADERO By: LEE RABOIN, City Clerk ALDEN F. SHIERS, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: ART MONTANDON, City Attorney APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: MARK JOSEPH Administrative Services Director • Valley Bank Leasing, Inc. A SuhaiAtary of The Valley National Hank of ^Plzen^ EXH Z B=T A 0 T O CERT 2 F=CAT E 01F ACCEPTANCE AND QUAL=F=EI3 TAX O B L 2 GAT I ON S DESCRIPTION OF EQUIPMENT FIRE-BANN CORP. --------------- ONS (1) NEW 1991 MINI-PULER RESCUE UNIT $ 90,698.00 PER BID SPECIFICATIONS VIN: 2FDLF47GXMCA55989 ADDITIONAL COST FOR LIGHT BAR: 325.00 SUBTOTAL: $ 91,023.00 DEDUCTIONS: FEDERAL SWITCH -135.00 ALUMINUM RIMS -801.87 SUBTOTAL: $ 90,086.13 SALES TAX: 5,630.38 TOTAL: $ 95,716.51 MORE OFFICE SYSTEMS (SACS LEASEBACK) ------------------- ONE (1) NP-9800 COPIER $ 13,423.20 SERIAL NO. CXV00757 ONE (1) POWER LINE FILTER 15 AMP, PRODUCT #TBF12 NIC TWO (2) TONER-BLACK-9800, PRODUCT #F41-7701-000 N/C SALES TAX: 973.18 TOTAL: $ 14,39638 GRAND TOTAL: $ 110,112.89 LESSEE: CITY OF ATASCJIDERO G y By Its strative Services Director By Its :svl�v.?J REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Meeting Date: 3/10/92 • CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item # B-7 Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager,'. i.+ y From Lee Raboin, City Clerk SUBJECT: Regulations regarding candidate statements submitted to voters. RECOMMENDATION- To repeal Resolution No. 11-88 and adopt Resolution No. 23-92 pertaining to regulations regarding candidate statements submitted to the voters for any election. ANALYSIS• Although Section 6 of Resolution No. 11-88 allows the same regulations to apply to future elections, the title and general provisions of the document refer specifically to the election of June 7, 1988. To provide clarity, the City Clerk is requesting that this resolution be repealed and that a new resolution be adopted which would remain in effect for any and all future elections, unless or until amended by the City Council. Attachments: Resolution No. 11-88 Draft Resolution No. 23-92 0 • RESOLUTION NO. ll-8B A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING REGULATIONS FOR CANDIDATES FOR ELECTIVE OFFICE PERTAINING TO CANDIDATES STATEMENTS SUBMITTED TO THE VOTERS AT AN ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY , JUNE 7, 1988 WHEREAS, Section 10012 of the Elections Code of the State of California provides that the governing body of any local agency adopt regulations pertaining to materials prepared by any candidate for a municipal election, including costs of the candidates statement ; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1 . GENERAL PROVISIONS. That pursuant to Section 10012 of the Elections Code of the State of California, each candidate for elective office to be voted for at an Election to be held in the City of Atascadero on June 7, 1988 may prepare a candidate ' s statement on an appropriate form provided by the City Clerk . The statement may include the name, age and occupation of the candidate and a brief description of no more than 200 words of the candidate ' s education and qualifications expressed by the candidate himself or herself and shall be typewritten, double spaced and free of errors, properly punctuated , and use upper and lower case lettering . The statement shall not include party affiliation of the candidate, nor membership or activity in partisan politic:31 organizations . The statement shall be filed in the office or -he City Clerk at the time the candidate.' s nomination papers are filed . The statement may be withdrawn, but not changed , during the period for filing nomination papers and until 5:00 p .m. of the next working day after the close of the nomination period . SECTION 2. ADDITIONAL MATER: VLS. No candidate will be permitted to include additional materials in the sample ballot package. SECTION 3 . PAYMENT. The City Clerk shall estimate the total cost of printing , handling , translating and mailing the candidates statements filed pursuant to the Elections Code and require each candidate filing a statement to pay in advance his or her pro rata share as a condition of having his or her statement included in the voter ' s pamphlet . The City Clerk shall bill each candidate for any cost in excess of the deposit or shall refund within 30 days of the election any unused portion• of the deposit . SECTION 4. That the City Clerk shall provide each candidate or the candidate ' s representative a copy of this Resolution at the time nominating petitions are issued . �tvU(1.�i (Res. No. l '-88, cont 'd) SECTION 5. That all previous resolutions establishi-9 Council policy on payment for candidates statemen'�E are repealer . SECTION o . That this resolution shall apply at the nex = ensuing municipal election and at each municipal election after that time unless superseded by a future resolution of the City Council . SECTION 7. That the City Clerk. shall• certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution and enter it into the book of original resolutions . ON MOTION eY Counci lmember BOURBEAU , seconded by Councilmember ;4ACKEY , the foregoing resolution is heresy adopted in its entirety on the following roll call vote: AYES: COUNCIL`4E:BERS BORGESON, BOURBE.kU, 'HACREY .013 MAYOR NORRIS NOES: NONE ASSENT: COUNCIL-MN HAiVDSITY ADOPTED : 1/26/88 < < BARBARA NORRIS , Mayor 1.. ATTE:3T. 8OYD ,-. -,SHARITZ, Lit C1_rk APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: TREY ! 0F�GENSEN , City attorney MICHAEL SHELTO�N , City Manager i/ RESOLUTION NO. 23-92 • A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA ADOPTING REGULATIONS FOR CANDIDATES FOR ELECTIVE OFFICE PERTAINING TO CANDIDATES STATEMENTS SUBMITTED TO THE VOTERS AT AN ELECTION WHEREAS, Section 10012 of the Elections Code of the State of California provides that the governing body of any local agency adopt regulations pertaining to materials prepared by any candidate for a municipal election, including costs of the candidates statement; NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Atascadero, California, does hereby resolve, declare, determine and order as follows: SECTION 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS. That pursuant to Section 10012 of the Elections Code of the State of California, each candidate for elective office to be voted for at an Election to be held in the City of Atascadero on Tuesday, June 2, 1992 may prepare a candidate' s statement on an appropriate form provided by the City Clerk. The statement may include the name, age and occupation of the candidate and a brief description of no more than two hundred (200) words of the candidate' s education and qualifications expressed by the candidate himself or herself. The statement shall not include party affiliation of the candidate, nor membership or activity in partisan political organizations. The statement shall be filed in the office of the City Clerk at the time the candidate' s nomination papers are filed. The statement may be withdrawn, but not changed, during the period for filing nomination papers and until 5: 00 p.m. of the next working day after the close of the nomination period. SECTION 2. ADDITIONAL MATERIALS. No candidate will be permitted to include additional materials in the sample ballot package. SECTION 3. PAYMENT. The City Clerk shall estimate the total cost of printing, handling, translating, and mailing the candidates statements filed pursuant to the Elections Code, and require each candidate filing a statement to pay in advance his or her pro rata share as a condition of having his or her statement included in the voter' s pamphlet. The City Clerk shall bill each candidate for any cost in excess of the deposit or refund within 30 days of the election any unused portion of the deposit. SECTION 4. That the City Clerk shall provide each candidate or the candidate' s representative a copy of this • resolution at the time nominating petitions are issued. • Resolution No. 23-92 Page 2 SECTION 5. That all previous resolutions establishing council policy on payment for candidates statements are repealed. SECTION 6. That this resolution shall apply at the next ensuing municipal election and at each municipal election after than time. SECTION 7 . That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution and enter it into the book of original resolutions. On motion by Councilmember seconded by the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety on 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: ART MONTANDON, City Attorney • REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: C-1 Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Mtg. Date: 3/10/92 From: Henry Engen, Community Dev. Director i4C File No: 01-92 SUBJECT• Amendment of the Zoning Ordinance Map to insure conformance with the new Land Use Map adopted as part of the General Plan Update. RECOMMENDATION: Per the Planning Commission's recommendation: 1) Waive reading of Ordinance No. 241 in full; and 2) Approval of Ordinance No. 241 on first reading, by title only. BACKGROUND On February 18, 1992 , the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on this matter. On a 7 : 0 vote, the Commission recommended approval of Zone Change 01-92 as reflected in Ordinance No. 241. There was discussion and public testimony as evidenced in the attached minutes excerpt. HE:ps Attachments: Staff Report - February 18 , 1992 Minutes Excerpt - February 18 , 1992 Ordinance No. 241. • "00011 1 CITY OF ATASCADERO Item: STAFF REPORT • FOR: Planning Commission Meeting Date : 2-18-92 BY: 100 Steven L. DeCamp, City Planner File No: ZC 01-92 SUBJECT: Amendment of the Zoning Ordinance Map to insure conformance with the new Land Use Map adopted as part of the General Plan Update. RECOMMENDATION: The Commission should recommend that the City Council adopt the attached Ordinance amending the Zoning Ordinance map to make it consistent with the General Plan Land Use map . SITUATION AND FACTS: 1 . Applicant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .City of Atascadero 2 . Environmental Status . . . . . . . . .EIR previously certified BACKGROUND: On January 14, 1992, the City Council adopted a new General Plan Land Use Element as well as new Open Space and Conservation Elements . As part of this process, numerous changes were made to the land use classifications delineated on the Land Use map. Government Code Section 65860 . (c) requires that the City amend its Zoning Ordinance to maintain consistency with any amendments made to the General Plan. CONCLUSIONS: The amendments to the Zoning Ordinance shown on the attached map are necessary to make the Zoning Ordinance consistent with the General Plan as required by the Government Code . ATTACHMENTS : Exhibit A - Draft Ordinance • '.!UUO �;� ORDINANCE NO. 241 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAPS TO CONFORM WITH THE LAND USE MAP OF THE REVISED GENERAL PLAN (ZC 01-92; City of Atascadero) WHEREAS, the proposed zoning map amendments are necessary to insure consistency with the General Plan as required by Section 65860 of the California Government Code; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendments are in conformance with Section 65800 et seq. of the California Government Code concerning zoning regulations; and WHEREAS, the previously certified Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan Update adequately addresses and mitigates the potential environmental effects of the proposed rezoning; and WHEREAS, the Atascadero Planning Commission held a public hearing on February 18, 1992 and has recommended approval of Zone Change 01-92 . NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does ordain as follows : Section 1 . Council Findings . 1 . The proposals are compatible with the surrounding land uses and zoning. 2 . The proposals are consistent with the General Plan Land Use Element . 3 . The Environmental Impact Report prepared and certified for the General Plan Update is adequate . Section 2 . Zoning Map. The Official Zoning Maps of the City of Atascadero on file in the City Community Development Department are hereby amended as shown on the attached Exhibit A which is hereby made a part of this ordinance by reference . 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 0000,13 -1 ��� � � • PC 2/18/92 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES EXCERPT B. HEARINGS, APPEARANCES AND REPORTS 1, ZONE CHANGE 01-92: Amendment of the Zoning Ordinance Map to insure confor- mance with the new Land Use Map adopted as part of the General Plan Update. Steve DeCamp presented the staff report noting that the Government Code requires that the City amend its Zoning Ordinance to maintain consistency with any amendments made to the General Plan. In response to query by Chairperson Luna, Henry Engen reported that with regard to Location #20 (Atascadero Avenue/Marchant) , the City Council took action in redesignating that area as one-half acre minimum lot size. Mr. Engen further stated that Mr. Watson has indicated that he is working with the neighbors in an attempt to put in a cul- de-sac to try and avoid the concerns expressed by the Planning Commission, i.e. , possible flag lots, etc. Chairperson Luna asked about the status of the proposed Montessori School on Monterey Road. Mr. Engen responded that there is a building permit currently in process for the project; it is anticipated that the permit will be issued shortly. Mr. DeCamp pointed out the note on the map concerning flood hazard overlay zones remaining; along with other planned development overlays that have occured in the past (project on Pine Mountain that resulted in a 4-lot subdivision with a significant open space dedication, and the project at the south end of Atascadero that envisioned a golf course and other recreation space) . It is anticipated that the PD and other overlays will remain. - Public Testimony - Eric Greening, 7365 Valle, expressed his feeling that the large area on Pine Mountain between the PD overlay and the cemetery should not be rural residential or any other type of residential; it is not rural since it is within a mile of downtown, and it is not appropriately residential because there basically are no suitable building sites except perhaps at the extreme northwestern periphery. He added that Pine Mountain is an incredible public asset that the City should take full advantage of with a possible connection to the downtown and Stadium Park. In response to a question by Commissioner Waage, Mr. Greening stated that he would like to see the property designated as open space or public. PC 2/18/92 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES EXCERPT Mr. Decamp discussed various proposals for that property that have been considered in the past (from 9 houses along the . ridge top to a restaurant on the top of Pine Mountain) . None of them have come to fruition partly because of the extremly high development costs of putting in a road. Mr. Decamp further noted that the Rural Residential land use was felt to be an appropriate designation in that it did not remove all economically viable use of that property for the individual property owners, yet would reserve significant portions of that property in an open space status f6 the scenic value. At this time, there is not a zone or district designed for inclusion within the Zoning Ordinance text; the actual text for the Ordinance will be devised as the process continues. Chairperson Luna noted that the Ordinance does not contain an open apace designation. Mr. DeCamp remarked that the closest to that is a recreation designation which can cover anything from a very active recreation area to a more open, passive recreation. Mr. Greening stated that he could see that area as being suitable for a trail that would connect with Stadium Park which could become an asset to the City that could attract nature oriented visitors, etc. Mr. Greening inquired whether the intention is to continue the same idea as existed on the adjacent parcel where some lots at the base would be traded off for an open space designation uphill? Mr. DeCamp replied that this is a possibility; some type of planned development might be appropriate in the future; however, specifics of where houses might be located has not been worked out. In addition, this kind of designation would not preclude trail development along the ridge while still allowing some economically viable use of the property. Discussion continued. Mr. Greening pointed out that the Mountain is used as a trail for off-road vehicles. He would encourage some sort of public easement and use of the property that would be restricted to pedestrians and equestrians only. Robert Oliver, 5355 Barrenda, stated he is a frequent visitor to the Pine Mountain area which gives one an opportunity to view wildlife that is not visible in other parts of the City; He would encourage a "public" designated area which is off limits to off-road vehicles. - End of Public Testimony - Commissioner Highland commented that this is a type of proforma action; legally, the Commission does not have any choice. OU 001.13, Z. PC 2/18/92 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES EXCERPT Mr. Decamp added that the way the General Plan was crafted, the land use designations are more specific in many cases than once would find in typical general plans that talk about a residential area and leave the density decisions to the ordinance. With regard to the proposed changes, it does not appear that there are optional land use designations that would meet the intent of the General Plan language or provide conformity. MOTION: By Commissioner Highland, seconded by Commissioner Johnson and carried 7:0 to recommend that the City Council adopt the ordinance contained in the staff report amending the Zoning ordinance map to make it consistent with the General Plan Land Use Map. O. INDIVIDUAL COMMENT 1. Planning Commission Commissioner Highland pointed out a flooding problem at the corner of E1 Camino Real and Montecito for the` Folkins and :Folkins project. fr` Mr. Decamp reported that there are detention basins on the property. When the landscapers finished the landscaping, they noticed the drainage basins and felt that they looked pretty bad; so they filled those holes with/,wood chips. This has contributed to the flooding proble . The Public Works Department is aware of the situatioz� and is working with the project engineer to resolve the difficulty. Commissioner Johnson inquired"/ about the "used car lot" situation. r Mr. Decamp commented that/he is currently holding Payless, permit for signs and that'^should attract their attention. In response to questions, Mr. Decamp remarked that the signs will be consistent with what is in the rest of the center; it does not appear that the applicant will have to secure a condition- al use permit. commissioner Johnson also pointed out the "used car lot" that is reappearin/ n Atascadero Avenue and Morro Road. F chairperson/Luna observed that the drainage within the City does sees/to be working okay. Commissioner Hanauer asked the status of the Hawkins Plaza. Mr. Decamp stated that building permits are close to issuance. A drainage problem was discovered and the City has been working with the developers to solve that an area-wide drainage problem. ;f ® Ordinance No. 241 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 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 ORDINANCE NO. 241 EXHIBIT A Page of /I �4--' AV KS A 46 40 C� IAC: New Zone="ABC' Old Zone=(XYZ) All Overlay Zones to remain unchanged 000011;) ORDINANCE NO. 241 EXHIBIT A Page of t t • -ea110 caara ��Q ao►°'� t �t FPD-4) f _ ��,� � `TR•FFK �^� --fir- YALDA .c c couu•. J 'I �-r : C RK KAY: New Zone="ABC' Old Zone=(XYZ) All Overlay Zones to remain unchanged 9000,16 ORDINANCE NO. 241 EXHIBIT A Page 3 of /1 -41 73 Ad J �t • t K/ • �� I� » Z `y r KE�C: • New Zone="ABC' Old Zone=(XYZ) All Overlay Zones to remain unchanged ORDINANCE NO. 241 EXHIBIT A Page -4 of�� . t • �,�—✓ i r rt New Zone="ABC' Old Zone=(XYZ) All Overiay Zones to remain unchanged ilUUii�t� ORDINANCE NO. 241 EXHIBIT A Page S of I • �1 i 41 � J � II KEEL • New Zone="ABC' Old Zone=(XYZ) All Overiay Zones to remain unchanged 00001-1!) ORDINANCE NO. 241 EXHIBIT A Page 6 of /I • > 40 ow, oat • T!L'V. New Zone="ABC' Old Zone=(XYZ) All Overlay Zones to remain unchanged ORDINANCE NO. 241 EXHIBIT A Page 7 of 11 • Ed moat CL P LRMF 1�.� i LS ',A New Zone="ABC' Old Zone=(XYZ) All Overlay Zones to remain unchanged UuUt�:�l t ORDINANCE NO. 241 EXHIBIT A Page 8 of • rT vo tam 40 1 /' % � I�3�' � ,� 'I spy► CRs , • KIM New Zone="ABC" Old Zone=(XYZ) All Overlay Zones to remain unchanged !lU00' ORDINANCE NO. 241 EXHIBIT A Page 9 of 11 • NIX J Q �1 Z 44 N O•� 1 I I KIM • New Zone="ABC' Old Zone=(XYZ) All Overlay Zones to remain unchanged ORDINANCE NO. 241 EXHIBIT A Page /0 of 11 AF P ♦r L 9 C i o � s a L Ls) Il � W New Zone="ABC' Old Zone=(XYZ) All Overlay Zones to remain unchanged ORDINANCE NO. 241 EXHIBIT A Page of t l Jill s O N I \ K • New Zone="ABC" Old Zone=(XYZ) All Overlay Zones to remain unchanged REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Meeting Date: 3-10-92 CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: C-2 Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager -�� From: Greg Luke, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Modification of fees for Engineering Services. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Council adopt Resolution 25-92 modifying fees to be charged for engineering services. DISCUSSION• At the mid-year budget review, staff noted that the cost of outside plan checking was an unanticipated expense and the Public Works budget was being impacted by this extra cost. Currently, the fees collected for engineering processing are set to accommodate the normal project: a small multi-family development or a single commercial project. The larger projects, such as a multiple family project or a cluster of commercial buildings, typically involve considerable public improvements and thus a more complex and time consuming plan check. The present fee structure does not allow the City to collect for these extra plan checking costs. Consequently the extra costs are charged to the "engineering services" account which draws on the general fund. Many other cities in this area, including Paso Robles and San Luis Obispo, rely on "full cost recovery" whereby the extra costs associated with the larger projects are passed on directly to the developer. Such a policy seems prudent for the City of Atascadero. The practice of charging a uniform engineering fee regardless of the size and complexity of the project seems unfair to both the smaller project that requires only minimal processing effort and to the public as a whole who is a sense is supplementing the cost of processing a large project. :1VUl►' �i Attached Resolution 25-92 sets new fees to be charged for a variety of services. The new structure will allow for the collection of a standard fee which will cover routine, in-house processing. Those projects which require outside consultants or for which staff involvement is beyond what is considered routine would be charged the standard fee plus the direct cost of any additional processing. FISCAL IMPACT• The extra cost of plan checking would no longer be charged to the general fund. • • RESOLUTION NO. 25-92 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO MODIFYING FEES FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Atascadero: Section 1. Resolution No. 47-91 is hereby modified with respect to Engineering Service Fees as follows: Delete: ENGINEERING SERVICES Final Map (Engineering) $ 250 Encroachment Permit 30 Improvement Review Major 250 Minor 60 Contract Consultants COST Special Inspections 25/hr . Adopt: ENGINEERING SERVICES Final Map (Engineering) $ 200 + DC Encroachment Permit 30 Improvement Plan Review 200 + DC Contract Consultants COST Inspections 25/hr Note: DC (Direct Costs) shall include contract plan checkers, specialized engineering review, contract engineering services (such as soils and materials testing or surveying) , and other special services which exceed the normal and customary processing effort. Section 2 . These new fees shall be effective immediately upon adoption. On motion by Councilperson and seconded by Councilperson , the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety, by the following roll call vote: • Resolution No. 25-92 page two On motion by Councilman and seconded by Councilman 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 APPROVED AS TO FORM: ARTHER MONTANDON City Attorney APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: GREG LUKE Director of Public Works • REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO ITEM• D-1 Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Mtg. Date: 3/10/92 From: Henry Engen, Community Dev. Dir. A, File No: 91-009 SUBJECT: Findings for Denial of proposed Tentative Parcel Map 91-009 at 9300 Corriente. RECOMMENDATION: Adoption of the attached Findings for Denial. BACKGROUND• At the City Council' s hearing of February 11, 1992, the Council, on a 4: 1 vote, acted to uphold the appeal of Robert Cardillo requesting a reversal of the Planning Commission' s approval of the proposed division of this 8.21 acre parcel into two 4. 1 acre lots. Following review of the materials submitted as part of the hearing and testimony at the hearing, the Council was unable to make the necessary findings for approval, and directed that these be brought back at the next Council meeting. Concerns that led to this conclusion included neighborhood compatibility, steepness of the terrain, drainage conflicts with the proposed septic locations, issues of staff interpretation of the application of the density formula of the Suburban Residential Zone, and the pattern of homesite locations in the neighborhood. HE:ps cc: Robert L. Cardillo Deborah Hollowell, Cuesta Engineering Andrew and Traci Young Enclosure: Findings for Denial: TPM 91-009 • 60ko6o FINDINGS FOR DENIAL: TPM 91-009 Tentative Parcel Map 91-009 (Young/Cuesta Engineering) 9300 Corriente Road MAP FINDINGS: 1. The proposed map is not consistent with the General Plan and violates a city ordinance. Evidence:Residential Policy No. 10 states, in part, that "Lot splits shall be thoroughly evaluated and be in accordance with community plans and principles. Strict adherence to the lot sizes defined in this Plan is essential in order to retain the desired character of the community."(P.57).Among the purposes of the city's zoning regulations implementing the General Plan are "...to protect and promote the public health, safety and welfare and provide a regulatory structure which: (a) Provides for the development of land use in a manner that encourages and supports the goals and policies of the General Plan; and, (b) Minimizes adverse effects on the public resulting from the inappropriate creation, location , use or design of building sites, structures or other land uses by providing appropriate standards for development..."(AMC sec.9-1.101). Staff erred in their interpretation of the minimum permitted lot size allowed. The average slope of 30.5 % should have been rounded to 31%, thereby creating a lot size factor for slope of 1.75 acres for an overall minimum lot size requirement for this site of 4.58 acres. (AMC sections 9-1.109{b)[4] and 9- 3.144).Hence, the proposed creation of two lots of 4.1 acres each is not consistent with the General Plan and zoning ordinance. 2. The site is not physically suitable for the type of development proposed. Evidence:For suburban single-family residential areas the General Plan states that: "Determination of appropriate lot sizes shall be based upon such factors as slope of the access road to the building site, availability of services,distance from the center of the community, general character of neighboring lands, percolation and area needed access road to building site."(P.53).Based upon the public testimony, proposed parcel 2 would introduce a home site and septic field in an area with highly questionable drainage/ percolation characteristics.Further, Residential Policy No. 11 states, in part, that " Attention shall be paid to the aesthetic result of land division. Building sites shall be encouraged on natural slopes, with r iimal disruption of native vegetation and watersheds, and efficient layout of access and utilities."(P.57). A second dwelling on this site would look "forced"as the site is very steep and a second dwelling would be out of character with the surrounding neighborhood.Further, a septic system at this location was not proven to be likely to function properly. 3. The site is not physically suitable for the density of the development proposed. Evidence: Refer to findings No.1 and 2. 4. The proposed subdivision design, and/or the type of improvement proposed, may cause serious public health problems. Evidence:The proposed septic leach_field is in a drainage way uphill from an existing residence at 9400 Corriente Road. • ;1v�illhl • REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: D-2 By: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 3/10/92 From: Atascadero Economic Round Table SUBJECT: Report to the City Council: Request for endorsement of status report and recommendations RECOMMENDATION Following review and discussion, (a) accept the Status and Recom- mendations Report of the Economic Round Table, and (b) direct the Round Table to undertake an evaluation of the feasibility and desirability of implementing redevelopment as a planning and financing tool for the revitalization of selected areas of the community. • BACKGROUND: At the September 24, 1991 meeting of the City Council, the Economic Round Table reported on the status of their progress towards ful- filling the mission statement approved by the Council when the Economic Round Table was established. At the conclusion of that presentation, it was the consensus of the Council to request a written report for further evaluation. It is the intent of the Economic Round Table to be assured that the City Council is in agreement with the direction that they are proposing, which draws heavily on Council-adopted plans. This direction is contained in the attached Economic Round Table statement, entitled "Status and Recommendations" . HE:cw Enclosure: Economic Round Table Report Recommendations for the city council: . 1 . That the city place top priority on developing downtown Atascadero following the general outline of the Downtown Master Plan. a. That open solicitation be sent to local restaurant owners and other interested people to establish one or more dinner houses in the downtown area. b. That a redevelopment area as set forth in the DeWeerd Report on Redevelopment in Atascadero (3/14/91) be explored further in order to facilitate the revitalization of downtown and the corridor to the new outlet center location. That the possibility of expanding the area South to Curbaril along the EI Camino/Santa Ysabel corridor be investigated. c. That the Lewis Avenue bridge project be moved along to enhance traffic flow downtown and improve access to businesses there. d. That the city continue to support the downtown awning program, and other enhancements to existing businesses. • e. That additional parking be developed in the downtown area to support projected usage growth. That means of subsidizing this project be studied (e.g. Block Grants, etc.) 2. That the city enhance existing businesses by: a. Reviewing and approving a new sign ordinance, using the Chamber of Commerce draft as a starting point. b. Carefully considering the economic impact of restrictive regulations on local businesses prior to implementation. c. Assisting the Chamber of Commerce and the BIA in promoting and supporting new activities planned to draw people into town. 3. That the city pursue the development of a "Craftsman's Park" incubator project to encourage local business start-ups and expansions that will hire local craftsmen who are in abundance in this area. '. Fit�ltif>;� • 4. That the city pursue a specific plan for a traveller destination/ recreation center adjacent to Hiway 101 that is compatible with the city's image and general plan, in order to bring in business that has a lower impact on the city's infrastructure. 5. That the city help develop an Atascadero Outlook brochure to market the economic potential in Atascadero. This brochure would high-light key elements of the general plan, the Downtown Master Plan as well as on going development. The Chamber of Commerce could do much of the work, with the council and staff providing guidance. 6. That the city update the commercial study of 1987 that shows the current and potential uses of commercially zoned property in order to promote available commercial property in accordance with the general plan. 7. That the city council provide feed back to the Economic Round Table to provide guidance for the next phase of work. • The following efforts have been taken toward Business Enhancement and Retention: a. Visited and evaluated the Bakersfield Small Business Development Center (SBDCV) and worked with Cuesta College staff in preliminary attempts to establish a Development Center in San Luis Obispo County. b. Worked with the Atascadero School District in establishing an education concept called the "Academy" which involves teaching high school students business related topics on site at a business, and allowing the students to work and learn in the business environment in a team approach with the business and the schools. The first academy effort will be with the local banks. c. Through the Chamber of Commerce, working to increase the number of practical business training seminars provided for local owners and business managers, to enhance their business skills and to help ensure their viability. Memorandum for Economic Round Table Members February 18, 1992 Subj: Status and Recommendations From: Sub-committee chairmen As requested by the Round Table, the chairmen of the ERT sub-committees met to discuss recommendations to forward to the city council. Enclosed are the recommendations we recommend along with a status report of efforts already taken place. Much of what has gone on has had a consensus building affect. After the council agrees with the recommendations, more specific efforts can be taken to build consensus across the community to gain support for the recommendations. Mike Kirkwood Jack Stinchfield Ray Johnson vvvut>,) REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Meeting Date: 3-10-92 • CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: D-3 : 1 Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager ; ,'-" From: Greg Luke, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Adoption of City Engineering Standards RECOMMENDATION: Council adopt Resolution 26-92 establishing uniform Engineering Standards throughout the City of Atascadero. BACKGROUND: For the past eight months the Public Works Department and North Coast Engineers have been working on developing Engineering Standards uniquely tailored to the City of Atascadero. The bulk of the work has gone into developing the road standard. However, the final document includes a wide array of public facilities including • drainage, sewerage and other general requirements. Initially a preliminary document containing primarily road standards was distributed for review. On December 10, 1991 Council was presented with a completed document for their review and comment. This draft document was then made widely available for public comment. The notice of preparation was distributed to all engineers that typically do work in the city. Based on Council comments and a good response from the engineering community, a "final draft" version was prepared and distributed on February 19, 1991. ANALYSIS• Very few comments have been received on the final draft. Staff believes the document appropriately blends elements of community character, safety, and good engineering design principles. Every effort has been made to reach a consensus among the groups that will be affected by this document. It is with this level of support and effort that staff feels confident in recommending adoption of this document. FISCAL ANALYSIS• No direct cost to the City, possible savings in plan checking and project review costs. 1 u li i r h�j RESOLUTION NO. 26-92 RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO ADOPTING ENGINEERING STANDARDS WHEREAS, it is necessary to establish uniform design criteria for construction within the public right-of-way; WHEREAS, establishment of Engineering Standards will provide this criteria. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Engineering Standards referred to as "Engineering Department Standard Specifications and Drawings" dated March 10 , 1992 are hereby adopted. On motion by Councilman and seconded by Councilman 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 APPROVED AS TO FORM: ARTHER MONTANDON City Attorney APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: GREG LUKE Director of Public Works • REPORT TO COUNCIL Meeting Date: 3-10-92 • CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: D-- 4 THROUGH: Ray Windsor, City Manager 'il1 i FROM: Greg Luke, Director of Public Works- SUBJECT: Funding for construction of a Wastewater Collection System for Cease and Desist Area "F" (South-East Atascadero Lake Area) . RECOMMENDATION: Approve funding for the construction of a Wastewater Collection System for Cease and Desist Area "F". BACKGROUND: In 1981 the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) identified twelve areas in Atascadero as being Septic tic Tank Problem Areas. The RWQCB then ordered Atascadero to "Cease and Desist" the • pollution of state water resources by "on-site" septic systems in six of these areas designated as areas C, E, F, G, I & K. Two of the six Cease and Desist Areas (C & E) were sewered within mandated time frames. The RWQCB also mandated the development of a plan to "minimize" failing on-site sewage systems in the four remaining Cease and Desist areas. Although a plan for "minimizing" failing "on--site" septic systems in the remaining four areas was never formally developed, area "K" has now been completely sewered and area "F" has been partially sewered. On July 9, 1991 Council directed staff to prepare specific recommendations for Cease and Desist Area "F" and then to present those recommendations to Council. In a letter dated February 5, 1992 the RWQCB directed the City to submit a report by April 8, 1992 which describes the methods by which the City has eliminated or plans to eliminate failing septic systems in Atascadero. The letter asks for a schedule for sewering Areas F, G, and I or justification, including documentation, why these areas can remain unsewered without impairing water quality. A copy of this letter is included as appendix "A" . On February 12 , 1992, a memorandum from the City's Director of Public Works to City Council addressed various concerns which have been aired concerning this project. A copy of this memorandum is • attached as appendix "B" . DISCUSSION• It is staffs recommendation that Cease and Desist Area "F" be sewered, in accordance with the plans developed, for the City of Atascadero, by North Coast Engineering (see attachment "C") . The RWQCB has been surprisingly lenient by having already given the City ten years to sewer the remaining Cease and Desist areas. Further delay could result in the taking of enforcement action, by the RWQCB, against the City. FISCAL IMPACT• $217, 181. 00 (see attachment "B") The initial "up-front" money would be provided by the City using Wastewater Division Facility Account funds. $175, 000 was allotted for this project in the Wastewater Division's five year CIP plan. The remaining $42 , 181 will be taken from savings realized by the construction of a relief sewer system which will enable the City to abandon plans for construction of a more costly pipeline replacement project. Staff recommends that the $217, 181. 00 be repaid to the City by 26 benefitting properties ($8353 . 12 ea. ) via a reimbursement agreement. Each benefitting property will be required to enter into an agreement to repay the City when either their on-site septic system fails or when the property is sold. City Council is encouraged to amend City policy so that recorded liens of this type may be placed upon all private properties which have derived benefit from City projects and which have been required to repay the City under a reimbursement agreement. Such a policy would insure that the City will eventually be repaid for improvements which benefit private properties through the expenditure of public funds. 00069 "ATTACHMENT A". STATE OF CALIFORNIA PETE WILSON, Govemor CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD -- i CENTRAL COAST REGION 81 HIGUERA STREET, SURE 200 SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401.6414 (805) 549-3147 February s, 1992 Mark Markwort - Chief of Wastewater Operations City of Atascadero P. 0. Box 747 Atascadero, CA 93423 Dear Mr. Markwort: CITY OF ATASCADERO CEASE AND DESIST ORDER NO. 81-600, WASTEWATER DISCHARGE VIOLATIONS, AND NONITORING PROGRAM REVISIONS (ORDER NO. 88-84) This letter is to address 'several issues regarding wastewater treatment and disposal in Atascadero. It also- responds to your recent requests for information. Cease and Desist Order No. 81-60 Thank you for responding to our July 11, 1991 Letter regarding • Order No. 81-60. Your report (September 23, 1991 letter) indicates Cease and Desist areas C. E and K have been sewered, but areas F, _G---and-._L.--remain -unsewered. (.at. _least . partially) . Order No. 81-60 specifically requires a workplan and time schedule for providing sewer service to areas F. G and I. Until each problem area is sewered, you must also develop and implement a plan to minimize failing septic systems. However, this plan should be considered interim in nature. If you feel severing of any portions of the Cease and Desist area is unnecessary, you must provide adequate justification and documentation to this office to demonstrate unsewered areas will not pose a threat to water quality. Please submit to this office a report describing methods by which the City has eliminated or plans to eliminate failing septic systems in Atascadero. The report must include a schedule for sewering Areas F, G and I or justification why these areas can remain unsewered without impairing water quality. Your report must include specific tasks accompanied by completion dates. Please submit the report by April 8, 1992. • j 0000 O "ATTACHMENT B" MLMORAPDUM TO: City Council VIA: Ray Windsor, City Manager FROM: Greg Luke, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Proposed Sewer for Lakeview and Santa Rosa (Informational Memo) DATE: February 12, 1992 At the July 9, 1991 Council meeting, Council directed staff to prepare specific recommendations based upon the conceptual proposal presented for the Lakeview/Santa Rosa area. You will recall that this area has been designated as a cease and desist zone by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. We have been receiving periodic inquiries from the Board regarding our progress towards providing sewers for the area, the latest dated February 5, 1992 • (see attached) . Several unresolved issues have prevented staff from completing the conceptual designs specifically, l) possible alternatives to sewering the area (ie, alternative disposal systems) ,, 2) the number of lots to be included in the project area which was impacted by recent amendments to the General Plan which moved the Urban Services Line, and 3) the question of whether to serve the City owned lots. The first two questions have been essentially resolved. The attached letter from the Regional Board states ". . Order No. 81-60 specifically requires a workplan and time schedule for providing sever service to areas p, d and I. .". The Council does have the option of conducting an investigation providing ". . .adequate justification and documentation to this office to demonstrate unsevered areas will not pose a threat to water qualitye" I believe such an investigation would be futile, since we know that septic tank leach lines have not functioned properly during the recent storms. Therefore, in staff's opinion constructing a public sewer system seems the only viable option. 0 9000171 • With regard to the City-owned lots, the Assistant City Attorney has stated that a deed restriction prevents the outright sale of the land. The lots can only be traded for other property around Lake--Park. In light of this restriction, we are proposing not to provide sewer service to the lots boarding the lake itself, but only to the two lots on Santa Rosa. In this way Council would always have the option and flexibility to trade or sell these lots as part of the lake park expansion plans adjacent to Morro Road. The purpose of this memo is to bring you up to date on this matter. The sewering project is in the initial design stages and the Council will be considering the entire matter at a future Council meeting. If there is disagreement with the approach I have presented above, please let me know. • • "ATTACHMENT C" NORTH COAST ENGINEERING INC. PRELIMINARY OPINION AS TO PROBABLE COST • ESTIMATED FOR PROJECT: CITY OF ATASCADERO BY: CAC SANTA ROSA RD.SEWER PROJECT DATE: 9-26-91 ' SERVES 26 LOTS REV.DATE: 1-20-92 8'PVC(6-20'TRENCH DEPTH) LF 1,660 $26.00 $43,160 AVERAGE OVERALL TRENCH DEPTH-12' 4-PVC(SERVER LAT 0-6)LF 334 $12.00 $4,008 4`PVC (SEWER LAT 6-201 LF 496 $17.00 $8.432 AVERAGE OVERALLTRENCH DEPTH-11' 4-PVC FORCE MAIN 710 $12.00 $8,520 T1E-IN EXIST.MH (LS) $500.00 $500 MANHOLES(EA) 8 $1,850.00 $14,800 DROP MANHOLES(EA) 1 $3,500.00 $3,500 ROADWAY REPLACEWENT OVER TRENCHES(SF) 10,600 $1.50 $15,900 BRIDGE CROSSING-FORCEMAIN (LS) $2,000.00 $2.000 UFT STATION (EA) 1 $50,000.00 $50,000 SUBTOTAL $150,820 CONTINGENCY Q 20 96 $30,164 SUBTOTAL $180,984 ENGINEERING&ADMINISTRATION aQ 20 96 - $36,197 TOTAL $217,181 THIS PRELIMINARY OPINION AS TO COSTS IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS A GUARANTEE OF COSTS.N.C.E. HAS NO CONTROL OVER THE COSTS OF LABOR,MATERIALS,EQUIPMENT,FUTURE MARKET CONDITIONS OR CONTRACTOR'S BIDDING METHODS.THE ACTUAL.COST OF CONSTRUCTION MAY VARY FROM THE ESTIMATES AND/OR THE PROJECT BUDGET. 91130D.WQ1 • �vtlo 7,3 N N N • � C=fl 1� X N Dmp r N N D C7 sem, -i74 0, � D 0 op m o m D I � C:J VfJ z 0 >zLn � D @9 ::I C (� z� � O \ ac • c� \ O�c:l O v Do P� O N 0 0 M o P 00 cn ° N A o L OD am) ♦ ci9 QR P ! � `♦ a I CS _ • P ♦♦ rte' \` m x\ N 0(04 ♦ r�r ♦ r REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: D-S Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Mtg. Date: 3/10/92 From: Henry Engen, Community Dev. Dir. y*/C- File No: GPCR 92-01 SUBJECT: Requested General Plan Conformity Finding for the North County Extension of the Coastal Branch of the State Water Project. RECOMMENDATION: That the Council find the North County Extension of the Coastal Branch of the State Water Project to be in conformance with the Atascadero General Plan subject to the following considerations: 1. The specific route of the pipeline right-of-way should be subject to Planning Commission review and comment; and 2 . Future beneficial use of the surface of the pipeline right-of- way should be subject to Planning Commission review and comment. BACKGROUND: On March 3 , 1992 , the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on this subject. On a 3 : 2 :2 vote (Commissioner Waage and Chairperson Luna dissenting, and Commissioners Lochridge and Hanauer absent) , the Commission made the above recommendation. There was considerable discussion and debate on this subject. Both Chairperson Luna and Commissioner Waage expressed concern that without having had the opportunity to review the EIR on the project, how would they know if the mitigation measures are consistent with the General Plan; they did not have adequate information in which to make the necessary Finding. Commissioner Highland noted that this was an exercise in futility since the applicant, the San Luis Obispo Flood Control and Water Conservation District, had the authority to override any decision the Commission or Council were to make. George Gibson, Hydraulic Engineer for SLO County, asked the Commission to focus on whether the concept of a pipeline project is in conformance with the General Plan; that specifics of the project was not the issue of this hearing. Eric Greening provided a background on the process of the EIR on this project noting that a hearing for certification on the Final • EIR is scheduled for the Board of Supervisors on March 25th. He urged that the matter be tabled until such time that full information on the EIR is made available to the Commission and Council. is Fred Frank expressed concern that the Commission is being pressured into making a decision without knowing the facts on the EIR. He noted that the project will cost $2 million for Atascadero residents and asked how the project conforms to the General Plan. He asked several questions such as whether the project will promote the City's economic well being; will it promote stable growth; will it engender periodic water rationing; will the project offer less costly water, etc. Discussion revolved on the project versus the concept of a pipeline. Options offered the Commission included: approving staff recommendation; rejecting the recommendation; take no action; or table the matter due to lack of information. Comments were also expressed by Dorothy McNeil and Dale Cradduck in that this hearing represented the cart being put before the horse; the Commission should not make a decision without knowing all the pertinent information. Commissioners Highland, Kudlac and Johnson discussed their feelings that the issue the Commission was being asked to vote on only involved the concept of a pipeline project being in conformance with the General Plan. Overall, the Commission expressed serious reservations about the State Water Project itself. HE:ps Attachment: Staff Report dated March 3 , 1992 • 0000'76 • CITY OF ATASCADERO Item: B_4 STAFF REPORT FOR: ��j���Planning Commission Meeting Date: 3-3-92 BY://;e ` Steven L. DeCamp, City Planner File No : GPCR 92-1 SUBJECT: Requested General Plan Conformity Finding for the North County Extension of the Coastal Branch of the State Water Project . RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Commission find the North County Extension of the Coastal Branch of the State Water Project to be in conformance with the Atascadero General Plan subject to the following considerations : 1 . The specific route of the pipeline right-of-way should be subject to Planning Commission review and comment; and 2 . Future beneficial use of the surface of the pipeline right-of-way should be subject to Planning Commission review and comment . SITUATION AND FACTS: 1 . Applicant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .SLO County Flood Control and Water Conservation District 2 . Representative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Clint Milne, County Engineer 4 . General Plan Designation. . . . .Various 5 . Zoning District . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Various 8 . Environmental Status . . . . . . . . .EIR in process BACKGROUND: The California Government Code, in Section 65402 . (c) provides as follows : A local agency shall not acquire real property for any of the purposes specified in paragraph (a) [ . . .street, square, park, or other public purpose. . . ] nor dispose of any real property, nor construct or authorize a public building or structure, in any county or city, if such county or city has adopted a general plan or part thereof and such general plan of part o000`77 General Plan Conformity Report 2 RE: State Water Project March 3, 1992 thereof is applicable thereto, until the location, purpose and extent of such acquisition, disposition, or such public building or structure has been submitted to and reported upon by the planning agency having jurisdiction, as to conformity with said adopted general plan or part thereof. Failure of the planning agency to report within forty (40) days after the matter has been submitted to it shall be conclusively deemed a finding that the proposed acquisition, disposition, or public building or structure is in conformity with said adopted general plan or part thereof. If the planning agency disapproves the location, purpose or extent of such acquisition, disposition, or the public building or structure, the disapproval may be overruled by the local agency. Local agency as used in this paragraph (c) means an agency of the state for the local performance of governmental or proprietary functions within limited boundaries. Local agency does not include the state, or county, or a city. The San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District is a "local agency" as defined by the Government Code section quoted above. As such, they are required to seek a General Plan Conformity determination for the North County Extension of the Coastal Branch of the State Water Project for that portion of the project which is proposed to pass through the City of Atascadero . ANALYSIS: Attached to this report is a brief description of the proposed project (see Exhibit A) . The only reference to the State Water Project found in the City' s General Plan is located on page 18 of the Land Use Element . This reference simply indicates that the State Water Project may provide additional water supplies to meet the City' s growing needs . The proposed project is, therefore, in conformance with that General Plan reference . There are obviously significant environmental concerns relative to both the construction of the pipeline through Atascadero and the ultimate delivery of water through that pipeline. These concerns, however, should be addressed within the Draft Environmental Impact Report and are not germane to the current question of General Plan conformity. There are, however, questions regarding the acquisition and future use of the pipeline right-of-way which remain unanswered at this time . If the District is going to obtain the right-of- way in fee, appropriate future use of the surface should be assured (ie . , bicycle path, walking trail, etc . ) . If an easement only is to be obtained, future use of the surface may still be negotiable and should be considered. ?000'78 • General Plan Conformity Report 3 RE: State Water Project March 3, 1992 CONCLUSIONS: The consideration of the conformity of the proposed pipeline route stops short of addressing the environmental consequences of pipeline construction. In addition, the much larger questions relative to the anticipated positive and/or negative affects of the availability of State water are not appropriately answered at this juncture . The proposed pipeline route does not contravene any General Plan policies . The construction of such a pipeline is, in fact, suggested by the General Plan reference noted earlier. The "Finding" of General Plan conformity must, however, be tempered with future consideration of the specific pipeline route right- of-way and future uses of that right-of-way. ATTACHMENTS : Exhibit A - Request for Conformity Finding • • !!00(1'79 Ex�IBti7 A U ENGINEERING S � H OBISPO DEPARTMENT COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER • ROOM 207 • SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA 93408 CLINTON MILNE PHONE (805) 549-5252 FAX (805) 546-1229 County Engineer' GLEN L P°IDDY ,E?UiY CGU^:TY ENGINEER �� NOEL KING ROADS SPECIAL DISTRICTS ADMINSTRATOR TRANSIT FLOOD CONTROL 1997WATER CONSERVATION COUNTY SURVEYOR February 6, 1992 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SPECIAL DISTRICTS City of Atascadero, Planning Commission C/O Henry Engen, Community Development Director 65 Palma Avenue Atascadero, CA 93422 Subject: Request for General Plan Conformity Determination Pursuant to Government Code Section 65402(c); Local Projects Facilities, Coastal Branch of the Sate Water Project. Dear Honorable Planning Commissioners: The San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District is proposing to • take action to approve or disapprove the North County Extension of the Coastal Branch of the State Water Project. Your staff has received a copy of the E.I.R. on this project. The Final E.I.R. is to be presented to your agency on or about March 10, 1992. The purpose of this letter is to request that your Commission find that the North County Extension is in conformity with the City of Atascadero General Plan, as more particularly described in Government Code Section 65402(c). We request that the Planning Commission hearing on this determination be concluded by March 17, 1992. Thank you for your courtesy. Sincerely, 9�� x6tz—, CLINTON MILNE County Engineer Igg\sloplan.itr.cmc Attachments: Project Description Project Map • 'Jl?00HO • LOCAL DISTRIBUTION LINES AND FACILITIES COASTAL BRANCH STATE WATER PROJECT GENERAL OVERVIEW The proposed project includes the construction and operation of local water distribution pipelines and support facilities. These facilities would be located throughout San Luis Obispo County. Local pipelines would be constructed by various agencies that construct for an entitlement with the San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. The District may act as lead agency for pipelines serving various agencies and would act jointly with the Central Coast Water Authorityin the construction and operation of additional P facilities, if the Authority elects to participate in these facilities. The main cities and communities expected to be served by the local facilities are Shandon, Atas cadero, Templeton, Paso Robles, Santa Margarita, Morro Bay, Cayucos, Los Osos, City of San Luis Obispo, Arroyo Grande, Grover City, Oceano, Pismo Beach and Nipomo. Cuesta College, the California Mens Colony and the County Operational Center are also expected to be served. Final decisions regarding which communities will be served will be made by the appropriate jurisdictions. The availability of SWP supplies to these areas may, in part, bridge the gap between demand and supply of water resources in San Luis Obispo County. • As noted above, construction of the proposed pipelines would be undertaken by the various jurisdictions serviced by each pipeline, unless other arrangements are made. These distribution pipelines would be extended from the main SWP Coastal Branch pipeline. The pipelines would be laid in trenches at a depth of approximately 4 feet and the construction corridor would be approximately 50 feet wide. The pipelines would be aligned to avoid to the maximum extent feasible, sensitive environmental resources. The major proposed pipelines are the North County and Chorro Valley Lines. Minor lines are the Shandon, San Luis Obispo, County Club Area, Lopez, Arroyo Grande alternative, and Nipomo pipelines. A proposed water treatment facility would be constructed at Polonio Pass, approximately 10 miles northeast of Shandon near the borders of San Luis Obispo, Monterey and Kern counties. The plant would treat all State Water Project water before it continues through the Coastal Branch. The capacity of this facility would be a maximum of 82 million gallons per day, and the plant would include water treatment units, water storage tanks, backwash recovery, sludge drying beds and related facilities. This regional plant would preclude the need for numerous individual plant throughout San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara counties, and would be jointly operated by the SLOFCWCD and the Santa Barbara Water Purveyor's Agency. To hydroelectric plants would be constructed to generate electricity from the energy expended by SWP. The Chorro Valley Plant, to be operated by participates in the Chorro Valley pipeline project, would be located in Chorro Valley, approximately 1,000 feet southeast of the Chorro Reservoir. A similar plant would be located within the City of San Luis Obispo's Reservoir site • near Cuesta Park. The plants would include additional facilities such as elevated transformer containers and associated utility cables and poles. 000011111 i NORTH COUNTY PIPELINE Construction of the North County pipeline would have significant impacts on several environmental resources. Geology and soils would be effected in terms of the potential for - landslides, ground shaking, and liquefaction. Nitrous oxides and particulate matter generated during construction activity would likely exceed thresholds of significance for air quality. Significant biological impacts would include effects upon oak woodlands, wetlands, and the American Badger, and water quality changes resulting from pipeline rupture could impact sensitive fish species. Significant traffic impacts:would occur with respect to vehicle delays at the intersection of Highway 41 and the railroad crossing in Atascadero. Numerous cultural resources have been identified along the pipeline route, and local agricultural resources would be affected in terms of safety of cattle grazing in the pipeline alignment and disturbance of pasture land. Significant noise impacts would occur in Atascadero and Templeton during construction of the pipeline. As noted above, impacts of all resources except air quality could be mitigated to insignificant levels. Igg\stattach.cmc • PASO ROBLES I , D E I R 0 B L � S qg � i Templeton I rt.niJOJ .o - NORTH COUNTY PIPELINE •~ A S U I N 3 am r.r J !� ATASCADERO �\ 1 w. y STATE WATER PROJECT P COASTAL BRANCH PHASE 11 PIPELINESLO COUNTY N LOCAL DISTRIBUTION • SCALE — — WATER PIPELINE SERVICE DISTRICT '2000 /Eek BOUNDARY F I G U R E ASP NORTH COUNTY PIPELINE, NORTHERN SECTION ERCE (ATASCADERO TO PASO ROBLES) E-3-3 i0Wits 3 • REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: D-6 Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Mtg. Date: 03/10/92 From: Henry Engen, Community Dev. Dir. V% File No: ZC 09-91 SUBJECT: Zone Change 09-91 - Amendment to Map 4 of the Official Zoning Maps by rezoning certain real property at 2100 E1 Camino Real from CN to CPK(PD1) (Commercial Park Planned Development No. 1) (Camino Real Fashion Outlet/Golden West) RECOMMENDATION: Approval and adoption of Ordinance No. 240 on second reading. BACKGROUND: On February 25, 1992 , the City Council conducted a public hearing on the above referenced subject, and approved Ordinance No. 240 on • first reading. HE:ps Attachment: Ordinance No. 240 • 0000S11 ORDINANCE NO. 240 • AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AMENDING MAP 4 OF THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAPS BY REZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY AT 2100 EL CAMINO REAL FROM CN TO CPK (PD1) (COMMERCIAL PARK PLANNED DEVELOPMENT NO. 1) (ZC 09-91: CAMINO REAL FASHION OUTLET/GOLDEN WEST) WHEREAS, the proposed zoning map amendment are consistent with the General Plan as required by Section 65860 of the California Government Code; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendment are in conformance with Section 65800 et seq. of the California Government Code concerning zoning regulations; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendment will not have a significant adverse impact upon the environment. The Environmental Impact Report prepared for the project is adequate; and WHEREAS, the Atascadero Planning Commission held a public hearing on February 4, 1992 and has recommended approval of Zone Change 09-91. NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Atascadero does ordain as follows: . Section 1. Council Findings. 1. The Final Environmental Impact Report is certified as an adequate document under the provisions of CEQA. 2. The proposal is compatible with the surrounding land use and zoning. 3. The proposal is consistent with the General Plan Land Use element. 4. The proposal will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts. Changes or alterations have been required or incorporated into the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects as identified in the final EIR. 5. Modification of development standards or processing requirements is warranted to promote orderly and harmonious development. 6. Modification of development standards or processing requirements will enhance the opportunity to best utilize special characteristics of an area and will have a beneficial effect on the area. • ;vvfif�+ • Ordinance No. 240 7 . Benefits derived from the overlay zone cannot be reasonably achieved through existing development standards or processing requirements. 8. The proposed plans offer certain redeeming features to compensate for requested modifications. Section 2. Zoning Map. Map number 4 of the Official Zoning Maps of the City of Atascadero on file in the City Community Development Department is hereby amended to reclassify the parcels listed below and as shown on the attached Exhibit A which is hereby made a part of this ordinance by reference. • Lots 12, and a portion of Lot 13 of Block 23; Atascadero Colony. Development of said parcels shall be in accordance with the standards of the Planned Development Overlay No. 1, and consistent with attached Exhibit B. 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 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 roll call vote: AYES: 0005 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: ARTHER MONTANDON, City Attorney PREPARED BY: HENRY ENGEN, Community Development Director • •:ivU(iN'� \ EXHIBIT A CITY OF ATASCADERO ZONING MAP left-7 -. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE NO . 240 • �� DEPARTMENT RS 6 � Z W Q f v `0 q A4,N o N ZONE (-14AtiGr- CN T b i G F K F 0 I) 1 /o, Q� o Moar__ —AaO �J \:-� ao,►o c 0 • I bol- 1 1 EXHIBIT 3 �1 CITY OF ATASCADERO ITE PLAN ORDINANCE NO . 240 CAD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT i4 DEPARTMENT • iL J --- L L —C A A f Y 0 R L A L— ^_--------:�w.1. ------- --------------- ----------�i.�.�--- �,� - i Ui} l i•i't :�?'" I I+H� !I I I I I 1 191111 1 11 11111 111 111 111 IJ-- I I I I I I i I I I I I I l l.:;i-g-. f fEi it a iii_—"' �i ~rTi.:� -i73�::L= J �:y ate' �.. 4 -�•. • �_. — — — — EE — — — _ — E .mss i i " '',� _ r=-=-`t tt ItFtf1!+IIH i H H FtMT� 'T�i` R t Y 1 0 1 PROJECT STATiST1C5 Rr.raw - a(eeo4er Wwseeu - ._' o.(cors•we - _•.f &".a& A"a omas M rnsr W R.rYr.��rl 4. wft—AAr)w....V. ff"".wA Rw.w. Y �y �.j1.1w7� %i. r.wowRass" (MKllt•�•rYw• -- (. •.O r.�elw PoWom n .Al Mw C.wlr W Gtr _ " l.w.Grti.w. VA09 V. .as ee.wwtiwaaw.w..w • • REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ATASCADERO Agenda Item: D-7 Through: Ray Windsor, City Manager Meeting Date: 3/10/92 From: Alicia Lara, Personnel Coordinator!( SUBJECT: Amendment adding the Military Service Credit Benefit to the Public Employees ' Retirement System (PERS) Contract RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Council adopt the attached ordinance amending the PERS contract to include the Post-Retirement Survivor Benefit for Miscellaneous employees and Safety employees. BACKGROUND: • Ordinance 238 was approved on first reading by the City Council at your meeting of February 11, 1992, and appears for second reading. AL:cw Attachment: Ordinance No. 238 • E M UUaU ORDINANCE NO. 238 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO • AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ATASCADERO AND THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION OF THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM The City Council of the City of Atascadero does ordain as follows: Section 1. That an amendment to the contract between the City Council of the City of Atascadero and the Board of Administration, California Public Employees ' Retirement System is hereby authorized, a copy of said amendment being attached hereto, marked Exhibit, and by such reference made a part hereof as though herein set out in full. Section 2. The Mayor of the Atascadero City Council is hereby authorized, empowered and directed to execute said amendment for and on behalf of the City of Atascadero. Section 3. • This Ordinance shall take effect thirty-one (31) days after the date of its adoption, and prior to the expiration of fifteen ( 15) days from the passage thereof shall be published at least once in the Atascadero News, a newspaper of general circulation, pub- lished and circulated in the City of Atascadero, and thenceforth and thereafter the same shall be in full force and effect. On motion by Councilmember , seconded by Council- member , the foregoing Ordinance is approved by the following roll-call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ADOPTED: CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA ATTEST: By: ALDEN F. SHIERS, Mayor LEE RABOIN, City Clerk • '00091 Ordinance No. 238 Page 2 APPROVED AS TO FORM: ARTHER R. MONTANDON, City Attorney • - - an RESOLUTION NO. 16-92, EXHIBIT- 'u4 AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT 100 BETWEEN THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION OrSv OF THE �iA, PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM ,Y AND THEiy/� CITY COUNCIL OF THE O�lf�►. CITY OF ATASCADERO The Board of Administration, Public Employees' Retirement System, hereinafter referred to as Board, and the governing body of above public agency, hereinafter referred to as Public Agency, having entered into a contract effective April 19, 1980, and witnessed March 19, 1980, and as amended effective July 1, 1980, April 30, 1983, January 7, 1984, July 14, 1990 and November 9, 1991, which provides for participation of Public Agency in said System, Board and Public Agency hereby agree as follows: A. Paragraphs 1 through 13 are hereby stricken from said contract as executed effective November 9, 1991, and hereby replaced by the following paragraphs numbered 1 through 13 inclusive: 1. All words and terms used herein which are defined in the Public Employees' Retirement Law shall have the meaning as defined therein unless otherwise specifically provided. "Normal retirement age" shall mean age 60 for local miscellaneous members and age 50 for local safety members. S 2. Public Agency shall participate in the Public Employees' Retirement System from and after April 19, 1980 making its employees as hereinafter provided, members of said System subject to all provisions of the Public Employees' Retirement Law except such as apply only on election of a contracting agency and are not provided for herein and to all amendments to said Law hereafter enacted except those, which by express provisions thereof, apply only on the election of a contracting agency. 3. Employees of Public Agency in the following classes shall become members of said Retirement System except such in each such class as are excluded by law or this agreement: a. Local Fire Fighters (herein referred to as local safety members); b. Local Police Officers (herein referred to as local safety members); C. Employees other than local safety members (herein referred to as local miscellaneous members). 4. In addition to the classes of employees excluded from membership by said.Retirement Law, the following classes of employees shall not become members of said Retirement System: NO ADDITIONAL EXCLUSIONS • '►()O()(a3 (AW-t., i z- l.fASE ,0 N©;' ''"XHtBtl OtrtEY' . 5. This contract shall be a continuation of the benefits of the contract of the Atascadero Fire Protection District, hereinafter referred to as "Former Agency", pursuant to Section 20567.2 of the Government Code, Former Agency having ceased to exist and having been required by law to be succeeded by Public Agency on July 1, 1980. Public Agency, by this contract, assumes the accumulated contributions and assets derived therefrom and liability for prior and current service under Former Agency's contract with respect to the Former Agency's employees. Legislation repealed said Section effective January 1, 1988. a. Service performed for the former agency prior to July 1, 1980 shall be subject to the terms and conditions of the former agency's contract as it was in effect at that time. Service performed after July 1, 1980 shall be subject to the terms and conditions of this contract. For purposes of computing retirement allowances, separate calculations shall be made for service performed under each contract. 6. The percentage of final compensation to be provided for each year of credited prior and current service as a local miscellaneous member shall be determined in accordance with Section 21251.13 of said Retirement Law (2% at age 60 Full). 7. The percentage of final compensation to be provided for each year of credited prior and current service as a local safety member shall be determined in accordance with Section 21252.01 of said Retirement Law (2% at age 50 Full). • 8. Public Agency elected to be subject to the following optional provisions: a. Sections 21380-21387 (1959 Survivor Benefits) including Section 21382.2 (Increased 1959 Survivor Benefits) for local safety members only. b. Sections 21263, 21263.1 and 21263.3 (Post-Retirement Survivor Allowance) for local miscellaneous members only. C. Section 20930.3 (Military Service Credit as Public Service), Statutes of 1976. 9. Public Agency, in accordance with Government Code Section 20759, shall not be considered an "employer" for purposes of the Public Employees' Retirement Law. Contributions of the Public Agency shall be fixed and determined as provided in Government Code Section 20759, and such contributions hereafter made shall be held by the Board as provided in Government Code Section 20759. 10. Public Agency shall contribute to said Retirement System the contributions determined by actuarial valuations of prior and future service liability with respect to local miscellaneous members and local safety members of said Retirement System. 11. Public Agency shall also contribute to said Retirement System as follows: a. A reasonable amount, as fixed by the Board, payable in one installment within • 60 days of date of contract to cover the costs of administering said System as it affects the employees of Public Agency, not including the costs of special valuations or of the periodic investigation and valuations required by law. ' 0L011 b. A reasonable amount, as fixed by the Board, payable in one installment as the occasions arise, to cover the costs of special valuations on account of employees • of Public Agency, and costs of the periodic investigation and valuations required by law. 12. Contributions required of Public Agency and its employees shall be subject to adjustment by Board on account of amendments to the Public Employees' Retirement Law, and on account of the experience under the Retirement System as determined by the periodic investigation and valuation required by said Retirement Law. 13. Contributions required of Public Agency and its employees shall be paid by Public Agency to the Retirement System within fifteen days after the end of the period to which said contributions refer or as may be prescribed by Board regulation. If more or less than the correct amount of contributions is paid for any period, proper adjustment shall be made in connection with subsequent remittances. Adjustments on account of errors in contributions required of any employee may be made by direct payments between the employee and the Board. B. This amendment shall be eff�eec� a on the day of A BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION `b~ CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIRE SYSTEM OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO BY 10 A,' BY CHIEF, CONTRAC RVICES DIVISION Presiding Officer PUBLIC EMPLOY' RETIREMENT SYSTEM Witness Date Q'``• Attest: 4" Clerk PERS-CON-702 (AMENDMENT) (Rev. 1/92) • 'AEETING AGE14DA )ATE 3/10/92 ;TEM# D-8 M E M O R A N D U M DATE: March 3, 1992 TO: Ray Windsor, City Manager FROM: Bill Wittmeyer, Compliance Official SUBJECT: Nuisance: Band Practice @ 9144 Palomar File Number 92-033.001 As you are aware, this office has been attempting to address complaints submitted by some of the neighbors of the subject residence. These individuals assert that the bass, or percussion, element of the bands'' music is affecting their quality of life and health in a malevolent manner. (*: There are reportedly two bands which alternate use/practice time.) The police have responded repeatedly to calls in this regard; there are six log entries for the month of January (01/10/92 thru 02/03/92). The unique characteristics of this nuisance has put it beyond the prescriptive nature of the "Noise Ordinance" ("x" number of decibels measured at the property line) as well as guidelines for "disturbance of the • peace" determinations. I was able to "witness" the sound when I went to the neighborhood, February 11th, 1992. I was there from 8:00 to 9:00 PM. The sound was perceptible outside, and inside the complainant's house even though it was rainy and windy. (The house was recently built and had dual-pane windows and extra insulation in the walls.) I have been credited with above- average hearing; however, I felt vibrations through the structure as well as heard the sound. I have solicited informal input from a licensed,psychologist in this matter. He has advised me that it is entirely likely that exposure to an unwelcome and/or un-accepted stimuli,even low volume, over time could result in negative health effects. It is my observation that the effect experienced by the complainants is a result of a combination of factors somewhat specific and unique to the locale. The tackroom is a separate structure at the subject address, sitting in an open field or dale. There are few obstructions between this building and the homes of the complainants. Additionally, the complainants' homes are on the crest of a hill,overlooking (and listening) the valley. These factors create an "amphitheater effect". The type of music does not appear to be a major consideration other than the heavy bass/percussion element; I would expect that Country Western "foot-stomping",Sousa marches,and Tchaikovsky("Overture of 1812")would create the same effect (perhaps even indistinguishable one from another at the complainants' • point of perception). I believe that a nuisance exists. I see no way to accomodate the bands' continued practice until proper audio baffling/mitigation measures (professionally designed) are installed. 0000,%) February 18 , 1992 Ray Windsor City Manager, City of Atascadero 6500 Palma Avenue Atascadero , CA 93423 Dear Mr . Windsor, This letter is written as a follow up to my first letter regarding the continuing disturbance caused by the band at 9144 Palomar. My neighbors and I received copies of the February 4 , 1992 letter written to the occupant by Bill Wittmeyer, City Compliance Official . I am not pleased to report that the band continues to play and the number of disturbances are significant and ongoing. Records have been kept of those disturbances and ( 8 ) have been logged since February 4 , most were reported to police and logged in their ra: :)rds . Since the band plays for hours at a time , each disturbance results in multiple hours of subjection to this problem for us . On occasion I have left my home and have rented a motel room for relief . To elaborate on one recent instance of record. My neighbor, Mrs . Sherry Evans , called the police and a unit was dispatched to 9144 Palomar. The police came to the Evans home after responding and • said band members told them that a "cutting session" had been scheduled, that they had invested money to "cut a demo tape" , that they were doing that and would be playing until the tape was completed. The police said there was no law being broken, therefore they could do nothing. Consequently, we were "thumped" by the resound of the band well into the evening. Since we are left no choice , and since our homes were pelted with this " thumping" as recent as last weekend for hours on end, please consider this our request to proceed with a formal hearing through the City on this matter. I will be out of town on business from March 20 through March 24 but will be available any time other than those dates . Please schedule the hearing accordingly so that I am able to attend and present information. Sincerely , Carol Ashton Mailing Address: 9139 Palomar P.O. Box 3096 Atascadero , CA 93423 Atascadero, CA 93423-3096 cc : Mrs . Sherry Evans • Mr . Bill Wittmeyer File Nw-e CITY OF ATASCADERO to • ,� Community Development Department 6500 Palma Avenue♦ Atascadero, CA 93422 March 2, 1992 NOTICE OF NUISANCE Anthony L. Costa, Jr. CERTIFIED MAIL: P 351 194 863 1407 Toro Creek Road Morro Bay, CA 93442 SUBJECT: Nuisance: Band Practice File Number 92-033.001 ADDRESS: 9144 Palomar - 030-381-006 (APN) LEGAL: CY ATAS RHO ASUN ATAS PM 25/28 PAR 4 Dear Mr. Costa: The nuisance indicated in previous correspondence (February 4, 1992 - cc to you Certified Mail Receipt: P 351 194 860) continues. Specifically, perceptible levels of sound in the • lower frequency ranges ("bass" and/or percussion), originating from a structure on the above-noted property, have been repeatedly and consistently reported by residents in the area of the property. In these reports it is alleged that the sound is pervasive and distracting to the point where it not only infringes on the comfort and privacy of these individuals, but also affects their health and well-being. You are hereby directed to abate this nuisance within thirty days of receipt of this notice. Specifically, the band practice and performance is to cease at this address until such time as it can be demonstrated that adequate mitigation measures have been taken. Documentation by an audiology specialist, recognized and accepted by the Director of the Community Development Department must be submitted for approval prior to resumption of the band practice and/or performance. In accordance with the provisions of Section 9-8.107(a)(1)(iv) of "Title 9" of the City of Atascadero Municipal Code, you are advised that "...if the nuisance is not corrected as specified, a hearing will be held before the Atascadero City Council to consider whether to order abatement of the nuisance and levy a special assessment, which may be collected at the same time and in the same manner as is provided for the collection of ordinary taxes pursuant to Section 25845 of the Government Code. Special assessments shall be subject to the same penalties, interest and procedures of foreclosure and sale in the case of delinquency as is provided for ordinary taxes: • Sincerely, Wm B Wittmeyer 11 O 11`� Compliance Official a . �- n i. rCITY OF ATAS CAD E RO Community Development Department 6500 Palma Avenue♦ Atascadero, CA 93422 February 4, 1992 Tenant/Occupant 9144 Palomar Atascadero CA 93422 SUBJECT: 9144 Palomar - Noise/Nuisance File Number 92-033.001 Dear Sir or Madam: The City continues to receive numerous complaints, including a petition filed with the City Manager, alleging serious disruption of the public health of the citizens residing in the neighborhood of the subject residence due to regular "band practice" in a structure, "an outbuilding", at that same address. Ci staff has confirmed in substance that a nuisance City exists. The Ci hCouncil sits as the hearing body for the purpose of addressing nuisance abatement once these proceedings are initiated by the Enforcement Officer (Compliance Official). The primary purpose of this letter is to notify you of intent to pursue this course of action, • absent cessation of the subject nuisance. I invite you to contact me for the purpose of discussing alternatives to this action, and/or the potential consequences if it becomes necessary to continue through the nuisance abatement process. I have included an excerpt for the City of Atascadero Zoning Ordinance which defines "nuisance". From my preliminary research, items "(b)" and "(c)" are readily applicable. Item "(d)" may also be applicable, depending on the results of further research. Additionally, alterations to any structure, or the structure systems (electrical, mechanical, or plumbing) without benefit of the proper permits is a violation of the Building Regulations. Finally, it has been suggested that the band may be able to find a more suitable location to practice. Please advise me if this is to be the case; it would be best if this were at once. I am usually available between 8:30Am and 11:30Am (or there will be an answering machine) at 461-5034. Sincerely, Wm B Wittmeyer • Compliance Official cc: Anthony Costa (owner per A.P.N. records) 900099 • 9-8 . 106 . NUISANCE DEFINED : A NUISANCE IS ANY OF THE FOLLOWING : (A) ANY CONDITION DECLARED BY A STATUTE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA OR ORDINANCE BY THE CITY OF ATASCADERO TO BE A NUISANCE . (B) ANY PUBLIC NUISANCE KNOWN AT COMMON LAW OR EQUITY . (C) ANY CONDITION DANGEROUS TO HUMAN LIFE , UNSAFE , OR DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH OR SAFETY . (D) ANY USE OF LAND , BUILDINGS , OR PREMISES ESTABLISHED , OPERATED , OR MAINTAINED CONTRARY TO THE PROVISIONS OF THIS TITLE . 000100 January 24 , 1991 • RECEIVE Mr. Ray Windsor AN '� v _,/ City Manager r_�I T.v MGR City of Atascadero 6500 Palma Ave. Atascadero, CA 93422 Dear Mr. Windsor, Pursuant to our conversation the purpose of this letter is to report a continuing problem to the City of Atascadero and ask that this be abated as a public nuisance. Several months ago a band began playing on a regular basis in an out- building located at 9144 Palomar. Mrs. Ashton twice contacted the residents to ask that the noise stop and to let them know that the sound and reverberation of the band was traveling up the canyon, bothering her and other neighbors. On the second contact the occupant stated that the police department had been contacted and that they were told as long as the playing was stopped at 10 :00 p.m. they were not violating any ordinance and that they intended to continue playing. I believe the person was the mother of one of the band members. She also said that she had received other complaints , and that the young men playing would attempt to soundproof around the door of the building with pillows . Since that time the band has continued to play on a regular basis, and continues to adversely affect the quality of life in this neighbor- hood. Some of the affects experienced by residents at the Ashton residence and the Evans residence are; . . Stress headaches due to the reverberation of the band. . . Being awakened by the "thumping" reverberation of the band, resulting in sleeplessness, stress and fatigue. . . The inability to use our outside patios . . . Having company literally leave because they couldn' t stand the reverberation pounding in the ears. . . Dogs that normally are not problem barkers , bark when the band plays . A local veterinarian indicated that the barking could be caused from the reverberation bothering the dogs sensitive hearing. . . Although this can' t be confirmed, it' s an unhappy circumstance • that before the band began playing the hillside teemed with bird- life. Since the band began playing we have noticed a remarkable decrease in birds on the hill. 000101 • Anyone can understand, and in fact expect, the occasional neighborhood party, however, a band playing for practice or pleasure in a residential neighborhood is totally another matter. Not the least of our concerns, aside from the annoyance factor, is our property values. No one interested in buying or renting a house would knowingly purchase or rent where a situation like this exists . Mrs. Ashton contacted a company experienced in the sale of music instruments and acoustical sound control for an opinion as to what would contain the sound. The opinion was that first, the building would have to be built to studio code. Second, it would need to be soundproofed according to recording studio specifications. In summary, the continous pAAying of a band in a residential neighbor- hood is incompatable with the quality of life one would, and should, be able to enjoy. The City has taken exceptional steps to maintain the quality of life in residential Atascadero, ie the tree ordinance and others to protect the environment. Keeping with this commitment residents should not be subjected to this type of activity in a residential neighborhood and should be able to enjoy peace and quiet. If we had wanted to hear a band, we would have purchased homes next to a night club. • Also this issue goes beyond the actual "sound" of music. The impact from the reverberation is known to anyone familiar with band music or artillery. In fact a recent visitor to the Ashton home remarked that they now felt fortunate to have Camp Roberts wargames as a neighbor after an evening at the Ashton house. We are appealing to the City for help in abating this problem, to eliminate the unnecessary noise and reverberation penetrating our airspace. The police have made several calls to 9144 Palomar, to no avail. However, the police have always been responsive -to -our calls--and and- their concern and diligence is appreciated. Sincerely, Carol Ashton Sherry Evans 9139 Palomar 9075 Junipero Mailing: / P.O. Box 3096 Atascadero, CA 93423-3096 (supporting signatures are attached) 00010 JANUARY 24 , 1992 • THE UNDERSIGNED SUPPORT THE PETITION TO PREVENT THE PLAYING OF THE BAND LOCATED AT 9144 PALOMAR AND ASK THAT THE CITY ABATE THIS PROBLEM. NAME AND ADDRESS TELEPHONE NUMBER 4 4, and eal( Akiderso n �(,o,A,rhA4,o*x,., a o 0Q :2y • 000103 Fit M EMO RAN D U M J; DATE: January 22, 1992 TO: Ray Windsor, City Manager THRU: Henry Engen, Director, Community Development Department FROM: Bill Wittmeyer, Compliance Official SUBJECT: Band Practice @ 9144 Palomar Causing Neighborhood Nuisance I have been aware of concern over the subject problem for perhaps the past two months when Carol Ashton and I discussed it in November as a peripheral to her formal complaint regarding inaction on the part of Animal Regulation to a year-long problem of barking dogs in the neighborhood. Ms Ashton asked about the provisions of the noise element of the "Zoning Ordinance"; we talked about decibel meters and such, but nothing more was said at that time. • The current noise element of the "Zoning Ordinance" does not readily appear to address the particular concerns relative to the subject site refer to the "percussion" portion of the sound and the penetrating, long-travelled nature rather than the dB. While the changes proposed to the noise element will provide for more "enforceability", it will still be focused on a measured noise level, not a subjective, or common sense, recognition that a particular element (ie., the percussion/bass frequencies) may be just as annoying. More recently, I talked with Jeff Fredericks, Sgt., APD, regarding possible applicable ordinances and definitions which might be applied. Sgt. Fredericks asked to borrow the CDD's dB meter. I included a "Typical Sound Levels" comparative noise/dB chart. I had suggested that there may be a violation of the home occupancy provisions if it can be found that the band exists as a business (ie., do they perform for $$?); however, this would be very difficult to verify, and perhaps difficult to pursue through prosecution. We also discussed the possibility of declaring this a"nuisance" as defined in Chapter 8 of Title 9: 9-8.106. Nuisance Defined: A nuisance is any of the following: (a) Any condition declared by a statute of the State of California or ordinance by the City of Atascadero to be a nuisance. (b) Any public nuisance known at common law or equity. • (c) Any condition dangerous to human life, unsafe, or detrimental to the public health or safety. (d) Any use of land, buildings, or premises established, operated, or maintained contrary to the provisions of this Title. 000 1011 As you know, under our existing code, "nuisance abatement hearings shall be held before the City Council" (9-8.104(a)). However, at the present time this would appear to be the • only feasible way of addressing Ms Aston's complaint. Perhaps this particular issue is a way to introduce an alternative proposal to establish a three-member, nuisance hearing board, consisting of a representative from the Planning Commission, a City department head, and a citizen at large. The Council would then hear only those cases appealed from this level. enclosures: "Typical Sound Levels" Comparative noise/dB chart Excerpt from 9-6.105 (Home Occupancy) Excerpt from 9-4.163 (Noise) "San Francisco Examiner" article (Noise Pollution...) B:\FILE\MEMO\BAND • 900 If ' O Q O • c • h O alk O Q Alk H m ` O IO ` Q1 I I O m O n I • O Ah I tD 1 I I O N O • Q . I 1 I O O C4 I O qw I O N _ J U W J U U p W Q N Z O W = _p W O O N N U O p N W O Q cc Z LU Z W W W p O = ti F- LL U W Q W N = U N S Q' LL WW O O O Q Q Q = Z 2 ZAL d Z W _ Q O. > Z Q > p Z W 1Off Q Q f' Q N O ''' Typical sound levels. 0 1`'t' • 9 - 6 . 105 ( D) ( D) HOURS OF OPERATION : HOURS O F O P E R A T I O N A R E UNRESTRICTED EXCEPT THAT HOME OCCUPATIONS WHICH GENERATE SOUNDS AUDIBLE FROM OFF - SITE SHALL BE LIMITED TO THE HOURS FROM 7 : 00 A . M . TO 7 : 00 P . M . , PROVIDED THAT SUCH HOME OCCUPATION COMPLIES WITH THE STANDARDS OF SECTION 9 - 4 . 163 ( EXTERIOR NOISE STANDARDS) . 0001017 9-4.163. Exterior Noise Standards: This Section establishes standards for acceptable outdoor noise levels and specifies how noise is to be measured. (a) Maximum Permitted Sound Level Standards (dba) . The following sound levels are established: ZONING DISTRICT 7 a.m. 7 p.m. WHERE MEASURED 7 p.m. 7 a.m. RSF, RMF, LSF, L, 65 55 At property line A, LS of noise source CR, CN, CP, CT, P 75 75 At property line of noise source CS, IP, I, CPK 80 80 At property line of noise source 1. Decibels on the A-weighted scale. 2. No commercial or industrial use located adjacent to a residential zone shall produce noise greater than that allowed in the residential zone measured at the property line of the noise source or at any place on the residential property. 3. Measured at property line of noise source, or at any other point outside the boundary of the noise source site. 4-76 69 i 000i h- operated any source of sound to be op of any noise cause allow the creation such shall operate or controlled by such (1) No person within the City °r or otherwise ther at any location leased, occupied el when measured on on property owned leased, the noise lev Person, which as specified in property to exceed: district that zom n9 any hour; The noise standard for or a than 30 minutes in (�) Section 9-4.163(x)eriod of more cumulative p or a cumulative period of more standard plus 5 db for The n 15 minutes in any hour; or Period of more than a cumulative p The noise standard plus 10 db for any hour;ur; or eriod of more than 5 minutes cumulative P The noise standard plus 15 db for a OV) than five minutes in any hour; or or the maximum measured ambient The noise standard plus 20. db (v) period of time. level for any P that permissible within from the allowable ach noise limit categories above, the measured ambient level differs ted in 5 db incrementsi noise (2) If first fou adJus any of the a to encompass or reflect said ambient the fifth noise th e noise exposure standard shall be noise level eXceeds vel under as aPPrOp noise le category ln the event the ambient allowable ambient no qp level . the maximum the maximum limit category, increased to reflect category shall be at the same level . shall be measured163(a)(1) with noise in Section 9"4• the ambient the ambient line used shut dOWn' the same (3) if possible, the property cannot be that location along noise source a measurement �n such ed offending erformin9 distance the alleg estimated by P sufficient the ambient in noise must be source but at least IOdb below differencE area °f the is at measured• If thdb, then th` general from the source level be to 10 b' the noise onlY .the ambient source is 5 determined order that and the not a be reasonablYthe contributio between the amb ant bient itself of the decibel correction to account for level a one subtracso grce. of the 70 • 000 A 011) Noisepollution woes • finally being faced lBy Lisa X Krieger hours,walling on a beach or staring San Francisco Examiner out a window, even daydreaming while gazing at a TV screen. Fifty times a day, San Franciscans Quiet is a condition of inner tran- call noise cop Bill Arieta to beg for quility where distractions are swept peace and quiet. away and the mind can be focused on He drives to the problem—usually a point with laser-like intensity. a dance club, construction site or a "It's common to hear people say,'I neighbor who refuses to turn down get the best ideas while shaving,"' the TV then sets up his computer said Donald Schuenke,CEO of North- and waits for the needle to measure the noise level If it registers more than be `Noise is where cigarette decibels over the neighborhood's am- bient sound level, the violator gets a warning. If it continues, they get a ago. I think we're going to ticket or lose their club permit. realize that itis more I have so much work I dont ever have to go look for it. Everybody is harmful than we've been getting more conscious of the envi- ronment now—including noise,"said treating it. j Arieta of the Noise Abatement Unit of — Arline Bronzaft, the San Francisco police department. San Francisco isn't alone in its psychologist noise problems. From the TIDO wall- of-sound movie theaters to the din of Sonic Youth rock concerts,the world western Mutual Life. "I think it's is getting louder and louder. because when you are shaving, you It's the sound of progress: Air- don't want to cut yourself.So you shut j planes, ambulances, electric mixers, out noise and really concentrate." motorcycles, telephones and other The problem is that ears are tools of the 20th century have created natural amplifiers; they are designed an ear-ringing din. to boost sound. By the time a sound Large modern offices in which has passed through the bones in the workers are separated only by partial middle ear, it has been multiplied 30 dividers are plagued by noise of times. typewriters,copying machines,calcu- Sounds over 85 decibels—such as lators, phones and electric pencil, the growl of a power mower — are sharpeners. safe for a couple of minutes. But A study of remote African tribes on exposure to sounds of 85 decibels the Sudanese-Ethiopian border found eight hours a day, five days a week, that men in their 70s could hear can cause permanent damage.At 120 sounds as faint as a whisper across decibels—an auto horn,rock concert the distance the length of a football or chain saw — damage can be done field. in less than half an hour. At 140 In contrast,one in three Americans decibels—a gun blast or the roar of a I over 65 suffers enough hearing loss to jet engine — even brief exposure interfere with communication. hurts unprotected ears. "Noise is where cigarette smoking Even when the volume itself isn't was 30 years ago,"said Arline Bron- loud enough to cause actual damage i zaft, a psychology professor of the to the ears, noise causes other City College of New York. "I think physiological problems, says Bron- we're going to realize that it is more zaft. harmful than we've been treating it." For instance,a stereo doesn't have Noise isn't the cheers of a crowd to be loud to keep you from falling when your team scores a touchdown, asleep.You can't control it end can't the happy screaming of children on a turn it off—so it becomes upsetting. playground,the blast of the cannon in Uncontrollable noise from passing • Tchaikowsky's 1812 Overture. trucks and trains is also stressful Noise is intrusive, injecting, and The body's "fight-or-flight" hor- interfering. mones, such as adrenaline, are se- In contrast, quiet is listening to creted, causing the heart rate to music, walling in woods, hearing a climb,blood pressure to increase,and stream or the sounds of birds.It can the level of cholesterol in the blood to be discovered commuting by plane or rise briefly. train, at brisk dawn or tranquil night -Scripps Howard News Service 0001 l0 MEETING AGENDA GATE3/10/92 ITEM# D-9 1850 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS -' �i ('(WVVY CY(WERNIIENT CENTER • SAN LCIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA 934118 • 81)5-5.19-5.150 t..S_ February 24, 1992 ;p .-• LAURENCE L. LAURENT DISTRICT TWO Alden Shiers, Mayor City of Atascadero - 6500 Palma C1 Atascadero, CA 93422 Dear M/r/Shiers: I would again like to express the appreciation of the Board of Supervisors for your participation in the recent meeting of the Board of Supervisors and the various City Councils. I believe it was most important and productive from the perspective of opening up a vehicle for on-going dialogue and an exchange of ideas between our elected bodies and agencies. Perhaps the most satisfying aspect of our meeting was the sense of collegiality and optimism expressed by most of the participants. Attached you will find the summary of the meeting which was put together by the meeting facilitator, Mr. Ray Johnson. As you will note on the last page of Mr. Johnson's report, the first step in the action plan formulated at our meeting was to establish a steering committee to keep this process going. I believe this is most important, as it will enable us to determine what specific issues we need to address and in what order. In this regard I would like to offer, as a suggestion, that this steering committee be comprised of the cities' Mayors and the Chairman of the Board or Supervisors. Since this group already meets regularly on a bi-monthly basis, it could include this new "steering function' as a part of its normal agenda. I would appreciate it if you could get back to me at your earliest convenience with your thoughts on this suggestion for a steering committee, and any other comments you might wish to make on the meeting or the attached report. Again, on behalf of the Board of Supervisors, I greatly appreciate your participation, and look forward to our next meeting. Sincerely, LAURENCE L. LAURENT, CHAIRMAN BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Attachment hrd\jmtmt,5 000 A. Joint Meeting of the San Luis Obispo County City Councils and Board of Supervisors February 1 , 1992 Action Planning Associates 5405 La Uva Lane Atascadero, CA 93422 (805) 461-9288 . ooO) �: Part I • Process of Communication and Cooperation 1 a. In your opinion, what are the most critical areas of coordination and cooperation between the county and the cities ? • Border land use issues. • Fee pass down issues. • Need to look at inter-agency overlap. • Implementation of mandated programs. • Cost/efficiency of services. • Integrated health management overlaps. • Homeless • Better coordination/cooperation an agreement on vision. • Transportation. • Jobs/housing • Traffic management • Financing local government • Economic development • Environmental issues • California legislature and state/federal bureaucracy. • Lack of channels • Conflict of values and vision • Functional separation of duties. • Provincialism • Personal agendas 1 b. Where do we lose the most if we don't communicate/ cooperate? • People lose if we don't cooperate. • People contiguous to cities won't know what they can do with their land. • There are majorities and minorities in cities. At some point minorities want to be bailed out. • We lose local control without cooperation. • Inconsistent regulations; cities vs. county. • Lack of work experience (working together.) • Not enough process (for cooperation/communication.) 2. 2 . What are the two most critical things that impede communication and cooperation between the cities and r-Qunty staffs and leadership? • Misinformation • Lack of respect • Posturing • Passing the buck. • Competing for dollars. • Lack of participation • Profit motive • Lack of early communications at staff level. • Use and misuse of media. 3 . What specific actions would you recommend to improve communication and cooperation between the county and the cities. • Staff/board: reasonable expectations of outcomes. • More meetings to arrive at group vision. • Monthly meetings • Cooperative governmental task force. • Get personal - meet everyone. • Focused meetings • Improve trust and respect. • Improve credibility. • Coordinate city/county land use planning. • ACC involvement needs to be communicated to the cities. (Delegates). • Need city/county staff communication improvements. • Staff vs. elected officials - heading different directions. • Develop code of ethics for conflict resolution. • Develop process for quick action in emergencies. • Better education for newly elected officials ( improved orientation.) 3. 000 • Part II Roles and Responsibilities 4 . What critical areas of mutual interest do you see that affect most or all the cities and the county? • State initiatives and mandates. • Economic feasibility. • Traffic and air quality. • Privatization • Water • Growth • S 52557 • Facility fees/financing • Infrastructure • EPA issues • Homeless issues • TV-Cable issues • Physical/mental health issues. • State vs. local orientation of county. • Proposition 13 issues. • Implementation of American Disability Rights Act. 5 . What areas of interest do you see that overlap between the cities and the county that have potential for cooperative efforts? (Where each agency expends resources independently or there is dual responsibility.) • School services, emergency services and social services. • Pool • Investigating commonly used resources like cable TV. • Recreation • Transit • Solid waste • Mutual aid/Joint Power Agreements • Cities involved in mandated services. • Legislation • Air quality • Homeless • G.I.S. data base • Are we creating more bureaucracy by this process? • Emergency response • Regional jobs, housing and transport; especially law income housing. 4. 9001.. i 6 . What critical specific bilateral areas of interest does your . agency have in the city/county relationship? • City to city agreements need to be recognized. (Atascadero) • Lead agency- inspection of mines. (Atascadero) • Recreation (golf, lake, etc.) (Atascadero) • North County Government Center (Atascadero) • Solid waste disposal. (Atascadero) • Special districts (County) • Coastal Commission (County) • Interaction of other agencies (County) • Consistent policies across region. (County) • Extended Morro Bay Task Force. (County) • Stable economic system - sustainable by cities and county. (County) • SB2557 (Morro Bay) • Green belt/estuary; open space. (Morro Bay) • Morro Bay High School (Morro Bay) • Animal regulation (Morro Bay) • Off shore oil development (Morro Bay) • Library (Paso Robles) • Recreation by non-citizens at Barney-Schwartz Park (Paso Robles) • • Sphere of influence on land borders. (Pismo Beach) • Solid waste sites. (Pismo Beach)- Inter-changes; traffic. (Pismo Beach) • Urban reserve area. (San Luis Obispo) • Long range land fill and recycling. (San Luis Obispo) 7 . What are the top two or three issues you would like to see the cities and county work on to improve cooperation? Where would we collectively gain the most by cooperating? • Cable TV (Good issue for attaining cooperation. May not be, most critical issue to region.) • Economic development (e.g. tourism) • Planning in the urban fringe area. • Rural buffer zones • Enhancement of cooperation and programs. • Jobs/housing balance • Vision consensus • Transportation • Improved communication in areas like water and growth. • Disaster preparedness. . 5. 0001 16 • Bridge the credibility gap. • Regional planning in economic and environmental areas. • Alternative transportation such as bikes, rail and transit. • Consistent legislative platform. Advocate direction and cooperation. • Land use planning consensus. • Policy consensus in dealing with other state agencies. • Seeing/determining economic impact from the implementation of programs. • Collective fiscal responsibility. • Balancing local vs. regional issues. 6. lite i V7 Part III Action Plan 8 . If you could only chose one issue or action to take at this time, which one would be most critical to you? 9 . Rate how critical you see the listed issues/actions. (5= very critical; 1 = not very critical.) 1 2 3 4 5 A. Cable TV B. Build trust. v i mm i n process, 0 1 1 9 1 C. Informal r iml2rove communication. 14 a Rural development strategy including borderland use and 2 0 3 9 9 urbanfin E. Solve water problem 0 1 1 6 1 F, Develog a Iona term vision for county. 0 0 4 7 1 G. Oualety of life (including county mission statement.) 0 2 13 4 H 1 I J. Balancing regional vs. local issues (including economic and 0 0 11 6 5 environmental issues, K 1 2 3 5 4 for land use issues, 6 7 9 1 1 • M 4 N. Reduction of overlapping regulations, 2 1 Q Identify improved means of communication, including 1 4 7 4 7 inventorying, enhancing and streamlining existing cooperativ r R. Jobs/housina concerns that drivein 1 5 1 1 0. Natural resource m manaoement, 1 4 7 1 7. Weighted rating summary: Issue Rank Ratina ava, Issue Rank Ratinn avo. Issue Rank Ratina ava, 1 4,54 J. 7 3.73 L. 14 2.33 B. 2 4,42 P. 8 3.72M 15 2.27 F. 3 4.35 K 16 1 ,70 4 4 D. 5 4 11 3.50 I. 5 4 12 2.92 H. 6 3.79 N 13 2.71 10 . Action Plan: A. Establish a steering committee to keep process going. B. Cross pollinate between cities. C. Schedule another city/county meeting. a Invite Arroyo Grande to participate in the already defined issues. E The county will follow-up with next meeting and minutes of this meeting. 8.